Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Tidal Lagoons.
Page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects
Author 
 Message
tahir



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 44142
Location: Essex
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 11:46 am    Post subject:  Reply with quote    

What? Are you the man standing on the wall?

Nick



Joined: 02 Nov 2004
Posts: 33850
Location: Hereford
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

I think anyone who uses Family Guy in a public consultation or PR document deserves a prize. I imagine they show Homer running Hinkley C in other brochures.

tahir



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 44142
Location: Essex
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Ah, don't watch peurile stuff like that, I'm mature and sensible; Yogi Bear, TopCat, stuff like that...

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34188
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

if the lagoon system becomes carbon 0 compared to lower input ,higher output during its useable life span tis better than burning fossil stuff .

decommissioning issues are always hidden by mr burns(the ponds ,tanks and assorted "oozes"at sellafield ,hanford etc etc are still providing surprises for instance)dont even think about the former soviet union .
ps the beach at dounray still has quite a few metal particles and the many tons of plutonium have been hidden away from reprocessing and the fast breeder experiments is ,at a guess, enough to keep a death star in bombs for ever(500 tons is a educated lower end estimate)a 5 meg bomb needs maybe 20 kg if you have a few other exotic substances .

compared to fukashima or tank b37 a few minced fish and some changes of river/estuary hydrology/ecology is fine by me

extracting energy from moving water is very green compared to everything else

vegplot



Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21297
Location: Ynys Môn
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 12:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

tahir wrote:
Ah, don't watch peurile stuff like that, I'm mature and sensible; Yogi Bear, TopCat, stuff like that...


Top Cat certainly.

Ty Gwyn



Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 4007
Location: Lampeter
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Interesting info there on the Swansea project,which is the small child in this lagoon family,the Bridgewater project is a whopper.

As i mentioned earlier the report on Radio Wales[not the Miner`s Arms]lol.stated that this company had acquired a quarry in Cornwall for its stone,which the above info said would be delivered by sea,
Whether the other projects would also be acquiring the stone from this quarry as well is not clear,but the amount of stone needed for the Swansea project alone was estimated at near on 200,000,000 by an engineer who had previously worked on a local break water ,that is some big chunk out of Cornwall without the other projects .

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34188
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

200 mil t is a moderate sized mountain

like this one

tis quite a nice ex industrial area but i can see the advantages of the location and the geology is ideal.

if it was for swimming pool curbstones for california or fancy facings for portcullis house from a scheduled ancient monument i might disapprove but this big hole could be made nice by the time they finish perhaps even becoming a feature that brings a long term benefit to the area

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34188
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

a primary driving force behind the national infrastructure plan is foundation x as mentioned in hansard .the probable identity of fx is chas windsor which sort of fits with the quarry location

i can get the references for that column 1536 onwards

here

the possible identities of F x is a very short list if these characteristics extracted from hansard are true;
it has historical longevity
it is very well resourced in terms of transferable assets
it is very private
it takes a long term view as to britain’s best interests

imho the most plausible candidate is the royals , especially if the “firm”was under the influence of chas.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34188
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

that might also explain the considerable effort being put into undermining chas as mr burns and the fracking sisters would have good reason to try to avoid a major switch to tidal schemes.

Nick



Joined: 02 Nov 2004
Posts: 33850
Location: Hereford
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 2:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Ty Gwyn wrote:
Interesting info there on the Swansea project,which is the small child in this lagoon family,the Bridgewater project is a whopper.

As i mentioned earlier the report on Radio Wales[not the Miner`s Arms]lol.stated that this company had acquired a quarry in Cornwall for its stone,which the above info said would be delivered by sea,
Whether the other projects would also be acquiring the stone from this quarry as well is not clear,but the amount of stone needed for the Swansea project alone was estimated at near on 200,000,000 by an engineer who had previously worked on a local break water ,that is some big chunk out of Cornwall without the other projects .


The Bridgwater bay one is bigger, to the tune of about ten times, in terms of production, but I'm not sure how much more structure is needed, because the Swansea one is essentially a five mile long loop, but the Bridgwater one links two corners of land, perhaps 12-15 miles apart. So, yes, much more stone, but much, much more electricity. And it'll stop Bridgwater flooding. Still,can't have everything.

tahir



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 44142
Location: Essex
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Nick wrote:
Still,can't have everything.


Why not?

vegplot



Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21297
Location: Ynys Môn
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

dpack wrote:
200 mil t is a moderate sized mountain

like this one

tis quite a nice ex industrial area but i can see the advantages of the location and the geology is ideal.

if it was for swimming pool curbstones for california or fancy facings for portcullis house from a scheduled ancient monument i might disapprove but this big hole could be made nice by the time they finish perhaps even becoming a feature that brings a long term benefit to the area


Let us not forget Stonehenge.

Return of the stone plus backdated interest.

john of wessex



Joined: 18 Jun 2007
Posts: 2126

PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 15 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Will they find Terry Walsh's body?

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34188
Location: yes
PostPosted: Tue Mar 03, 15 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

more info and links

about the quarry for the stone

the locals have some points and a fair bit of understandable nimby concerns,it is a nice but if they had drax in the petcoke days or sellafield on their doorstep they would be even less happy

they seem to have missed several interesting field marks that are worth running geophys over and perhaps digging while they can be dug

if it was not for the greater good i might give em a hand objecting but i approve of tidal and it is basically a few fields and a wood,nice fields and wood but not unique afai can tell.

once the job is done and a few decades have passed they will have a nice lagoon and some interesting cliffs,short term it will be messy .

maybe if they got free leccy for ever or a good price for their home they might cheer up a bit about the idea .i recon there is scope to pay the locals quite well out of 200 mil tons which is a possible yield from inside the big red line .

i do know me quarries and some need stopping ,
some are the least awful solution to a problem .

i spose the alternative is to fetch a scottish or scandinavian island but the same sort of things apply and it is a longer journey.

the anti campaign will have to find a more compelling set of reasons than they have before i change my mind about this quarry .

i would prefer if the barrages were
owned by the citizens but i spose we could nationalise em once they are built

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34188
Location: yes
PostPosted: Tue Mar 03, 15 1:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

it would seem that quite a few objections are from holiday home owners but the locals might be disappointed as that sort of quarry needs few unskilled workers or even skilled ones as they do use really huge machines .
there will probably be a couple of hundred on site jobs ranging from manager to grease boy and most of those will be specialists in using big quarry equipment and technical ones like bang men and geologists.i estimate about 50 non specialist admin and service jobs that might employ some locals.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright © 2004 marsjupiter.com