tidal lagoons rather than barrages ?

[Moxi]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/t ... ae1&ei=159

An apparent preference to lagoons again over barrages.

Moxi

[Mart]

That all sounds good and promising. I wonder if anything will come of it? I will remain optimistic and hopefull, but perhaps waning a bit as we approacj 2030.

[AE-NMidlands]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/t ... ae1&ei=159
An apparent preference to lagoons again over barrages.
Moxi

I'm afraid barrages are out (on estuaries anyway) if we are going to do anything more than pay lip-service to protecting wildlife in the environment... but I do like the idea of a clover-leaf of lagoons which can be flooded or drained in turn, hopefully able to be managed to provide mud flats in some of it some of the time.
A

[Moxi]

They don't seem too worried about the birds, the fish or the farmers and people living in the Sommerset flats for Hinckley C sea water coolant inlets either - but there doesn't seem to be quite so much uproar about that.

Out of interest what would a tidal barrage do to the wading birds habitat and the estuarine ecology ?

Moxi

[dan_b]

Thought Tidal Lagoons were also out of favour - remember the failure to get funding for the Swansea Bay project?

[AE-NMidlands]

They don't seem too worried about the birds, the fish or the farmers and people living in the Sommerset flats for Hinckley C sea water coolant inlets either - but there doesn't seem to be quite so much uproar about that.
Out of interest what would a tidal barrage do to the wading birds habitat and the estuarine ecology ?
Moxi

I thought that the cooling water inlets were supposed to be 3km out or something like that in permanent deep water and that there were to be acoustic fish scarers to keep them away from the inlets, but HPC have decided that is too difficult or too expensive so they want to forget the several tonnes of fish a day that will be killed and instead undo the harm by making a wetland instead - out of people's farms!

The thing about a barrage is that instead of alternate high and low tides - which vary with the moon too - you get a big smoothing out of the water depth and loose the extremes, especially low tide I think. Upstream becomes much fresher water than it was and also because it isn't a river emptying out completely any more you get lots more sediment settling out which will blanket out the things which live on the bottom. If mud banks don't dry out the waders can't feed around their edges any more.

I think the Swansea bay lagoon failed because it was private enterprise promoted by an individual who owned the quarry that most of the stone was going to come from... (and wasn't multiple to let water go round the circuit)

[Stinsy]

I think all these schemes are a waste of time and money. Nothing ever comes of them and money that could be spent on proven wind/solar is diverted...

[AE-NMidlands]

I think all these schemes are a waste of time and money. Nothing ever comes of them and money that could be spent on proven wind/solar is diverted...

but you must admit that lagoons a) are renewables, b) work when wind and solar can't and c) (if you had a cluster of lagoons) could help with storage...

[Stinsy]

I think all these schemes are a waste of time and money. Nothing ever comes of them and money that could be spent on proven wind/solar is diverted...

but you must admit that lagoons a) are renewables, b) work when wind and solar can't and c) (if you had a cluster of lagoons) could help with storage...

Lagoons do one thing: transfer money from the taxpayer to the consultants and surveyors. Sure they might PROMISE to do a, b, and c, but those promises exist only to line the pockets of the con artists. Solar and wind are here now.

[Moxi]

I think all these schemes are a waste of time and money. Nothing ever comes of them and money that could be spent on proven wind/solar is diverted...

but you must admit that lagoons a) are renewables, b) work when wind and solar can't and c) (if you had a cluster of lagoons) could help with storage...

Lagoons do one thing: transfer money from the taxpayer to the consultants and surveyors. Sure they might PROMISE to do a, b, and c, but those promises exist only to line the pockets of the con artists. Solar and wind are here now.

Well not at the moment they don’t because no one is building them. Yes we have wind and solar and we have recent evidence that once in a while the sun don’t shine and the wind don’t blow so either more nuclear, burn gas or maybe make use of the gravitational pull from the moon. We did it way back pre industrial times on a small scale, the Dutch do it with consummate ease so why can’t we ? I’d rather build some lagoons / barrages than more nukes myself but that’s because I spent a lot of my time cleaning up after the first two generations of uk reactor and the plants that fuelled and recycled fuel from those stations. If you wanted to discuss wasted money that’s probably a much better place to start.

In terms of ecology I think we’ve discussed margins before and if the barrage is run to provide power in consideration of the ecology then you can generate around an hour of top and bottom water before you open the bypass penstocks to flush the deep water channels and meet ghe natural low water ebb. Same on filling generation starts around an hour after the tide reverses and the estuarine area refills back to its natural level.

Its eminently practical to build retaining walls and frames for inserting penstocks and turbines, civil structures should be viable for around 120 years with general maintenance and the MEICA plant and equipment would be swapped out every twenty to thirty years as required. Done right it can be an asset and sympathetic to the environment it’s situated in.

Moxi