| Tidal lagoon 18:41 - Dec 19 with 27891 views | Nogginthenog |
Finished by the looks. |  | | |  |
| Tidal lagoon on 09:18 - Jun 2 with 3213 views | peenemunde |
| Tidal lagoon on 09:15 - Jun 2 by exhmrc1 |
It isnt the WAG that is causing this problem but the Tory government who have reneged on their promises on rail electrification and now the Tidal Lagoon. Will they pull the plug on the City deal as well. Much of our difficulties go back to the Tory government in the 80s. They close the pits and steelworks which were large employers and successive governments have brought in lots of call centres but no manufacturing jobs. |
Manufacturing jobs have been sacrificed not just in Wales, but in the whole of the U.K. on the alter of globalisation.
So leaving the Eu will be a step in the right direction. |  | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 09:34 - Jun 2 with 3201 views | moonie |
Potential indeed.
Jobs, hope , a bright future. It's what kids need ,not the negative nimby crap by those who ve made it in life .
One of the poorest parts of the whole UK needs a kick start and there is no evidence at al this scheme could not provide it |  | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 13:54 - Jun 2 with 3140 views | Jonathans_coat |
| Tidal lagoon on 09:15 - Jun 2 by exhmrc1 |
It isnt the WAG that is causing this problem but the Tory government who have reneged on their promises on rail electrification and now the Tidal Lagoon. Will they pull the plug on the City deal as well. Much of our difficulties go back to the Tory government in the 80s. They close the pits and steelworks which were large employers and successive governments have brought in lots of call centres but no manufacturing jobs. |
What’s most galling for me is that all this money “saved” from not investing in these projects, will not be used for something else here. It will be used elsewhere in the UK, as admitted by Grayling for example with rail electrification.
Apparently Cardiff - Swansea electrification would cost around £500m, and “only” reduce journey times by 15 mins. You can argue that this isn’t worth it. What you can’t do is then argue that spending £56 BILLION in reducing journey times from London to Birmingham by 40 minutes IS worth it!
Same with lagoon. Strike price of about 89p per MWh is too expensive for the lagoon, but 92p per MWh is fine for a nuclear power plant!
Can anyone make more sense of this logic than me? [Post edited 2 Jun 2018 14:15]
|  | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 13:58 - Jun 2 with 3136 views | westside |
There are no tory votes in this part of the world so a tory government don't care |  | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 15:32 - Jun 2 with 3104 views | peenemunde |
| Tidal lagoon on 13:58 - Jun 2 by westside |
There are no tory votes in this part of the world so a tory government don't care |
Are you saying had labour being in power, this project would have gone ahead ?. | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 17:48 - Jun 2 with 3058 views | Jonathans_coat |
| Tidal lagoon on 15:32 - Jun 2 by peenemunde |
Are you saying had labour being in power, this project would have gone ahead ?. |
I’m pretty sure that’s not what he said, because the words he used are different and have a different meaning. | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 17:54 - Jun 2 with 3049 views | Private_Partz |
| Tidal lagoon on 13:54 - Jun 2 by Jonathans_coat |
What’s most galling for me is that all this money “saved” from not investing in these projects, will not be used for something else here. It will be used elsewhere in the UK, as admitted by Grayling for example with rail electrification.
Apparently Cardiff - Swansea electrification would cost around £500m, and “only” reduce journey times by 15 mins. You can argue that this isn’t worth it. What you can’t do is then argue that spending £56 BILLION in reducing journey times from London to Birmingham by 40 minutes IS worth it!
Same with lagoon. Strike price of about 89p per MWh is too expensive for the lagoon, but 92p per MWh is fine for a nuclear power plant!
Can anyone make more sense of this logic than me? [Post edited 2 Jun 2018 14:15]
|
Excellent post. It is a mystery to me as well. |  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 17:57 - Jun 2 with 3040 views | peenemunde |
| Tidal lagoon on 17:48 - Jun 2 by Jonathans_coat |
I’m pretty sure that’s not what he said, because the words he used are different and have a different meaning. |
He used the words “Tory government”.
So I’m just asking would it have been different under a labour government ?. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Tidal lagoon on 17:59 - Jun 2 with 3040 views | Jonathans_coat |
| Tidal lagoon on 17:54 - Jun 2 by Private_Partz |
Excellent post. It is a mystery to me as well. |
All I get from it, is that Swansea’s not worth it to the Gov, but other places are. | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 18:01 - Jun 2 with 3036 views | Private_Partz |
| Tidal lagoon on 09:15 - Jun 2 by exhmrc1 |
It isnt the WAG that is causing this problem but the Tory government who have reneged on their promises on rail electrification and now the Tidal Lagoon. Will they pull the plug on the City deal as well. Much of our difficulties go back to the Tory government in the 80s. They close the pits and steelworks which were large employers and successive governments have brought in lots of call centres but no manufacturing jobs. |
Westminster plays a massive part in this. I accept that completely. WAG cannot be exonerated though for the massive discrepancy between the Cardiff bubble and the rest of Wales.
There is absolutely no fight for anything outside of Cardiff.
Look at the political reaction to MTC and the Lagoon. Dai Lloyd being the exception. | |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 19:48 - Jun 2 with 2999 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
| Tidal lagoon on 13:54 - Jun 1 by Jonathans_coat |
Maybe gullible to believe that the UK gov or WAG would invest in a multi-million pound development in Swansea. Nothing but bluster, bullshit and broken promises. It f*****g stinks. |
A car park or some houses are a multi million pound development. This was close to or even in the billions wasn't it?
You're gullible because you believe the man and company set to make millions off of the project, where as independent parties, such as the government who will be risking our money, think it is a bad idea.
Try to get this around your head, they chose Swansea, not Cardiff for a reason. They know that the people and government in Cardiff wouldn't risk their bay with an unknown quantity that is irreversible.
I assure you Cardiff will not be racing to take this, not until it has proven to be a success elsewhere, and quite rightly too.
It is embarrassing watching the people of Swansea kick up a fuss over this, it reminds me of the fans who welcomed the American investment into the football club.
Not all investment into our city is good for our city. Just like the city will not see any return from the Americans, it certainly wouldn't be the people of Swansea who would be made better off with this lagoon. |  |
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 20:28 - Jun 4 with 2871 views | jack_lord |
| Tidal lagoon on 19:48 - Jun 2 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
A car park or some houses are a multi million pound development. This was close to or even in the billions wasn't it?
You're gullible because you believe the man and company set to make millions off of the project, where as independent parties, such as the government who will be risking our money, think it is a bad idea.
Try to get this around your head, they chose Swansea, not Cardiff for a reason. They know that the people and government in Cardiff wouldn't risk their bay with an unknown quantity that is irreversible.
I assure you Cardiff will not be racing to take this, not until it has proven to be a success elsewhere, and quite rightly too.
It is embarrassing watching the people of Swansea kick up a fuss over this, it reminds me of the fans who welcomed the American investment into the football club.
Not all investment into our city is good for our city. Just like the city will not see any return from the Americans, it certainly wouldn't be the people of Swansea who would be made better off with this lagoon. |
I have plenty of scientist/environmental friends who have been screaming how bad an idea this is for Swansea.
I love the idea of tidal energy but can seen how sticking a big sticky outy thing in the bay would affect wildlife amongst more aesthetic concerns.
The problem is, for us westies, that being in Wales hasn't affected Cardiff as another great big crane rolls in to further develop the golden egg but we have not grown since the Assembly got its hands on the keys to decision making with the money. |  |
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 22:24 - Jun 4 with 2810 views | Badlands |
| Tidal lagoon on 20:28 - Jun 4 by jack_lord |
I have plenty of scientist/environmental friends who have been screaming how bad an idea this is for Swansea.
I love the idea of tidal energy but can seen how sticking a big sticky outy thing in the bay would affect wildlife amongst more aesthetic concerns.
The problem is, for us westies, that being in Wales hasn't affected Cardiff as another great big crane rolls in to further develop the golden egg but we have not grown since the Assembly got its hands on the keys to decision making with the money. |
Where the big sticky out thing was going is of virtually no environmental significance because of a couple of hundred years of industrial spoil being dumped in the area.
The initial studies suggested the area within would have become a haven for wildlife and offer huge leisure and tourist opportunities.
Aesthetic concerns??? We are talking about the bit of shitty shoreline between St Thomas and Port Talbot!
I also believe that benefits to people sometimes are more important than spurious environmental considerations. Saving Red Kites for Mid Wales - worth a bit of effort. Saving the barnacle that also thrives 5 miles down the road - not so much.
The reason it wen to ff the rails was purely short terms. Subsidy requests were too high in its early years - long term far cheaper than projected costs of other renewables.
But, IMO the really big questions are;
1) what will happen to their proposals fro a larger lagoon near Cardiff and Rhyl which would have been far cheaper as machined technology would already have been set up and as a group of three lagoons would be producing power cheaply.
&
2) what does this say to the world and investors in particular about our area? |  |
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 22:56 - Jun 4 with 2791 views | Private_Partz |
| Tidal lagoon on 22:24 - Jun 4 by Badlands |
Where the big sticky out thing was going is of virtually no environmental significance because of a couple of hundred years of industrial spoil being dumped in the area.
The initial studies suggested the area within would have become a haven for wildlife and offer huge leisure and tourist opportunities.
Aesthetic concerns??? We are talking about the bit of shitty shoreline between St Thomas and Port Talbot!
I also believe that benefits to people sometimes are more important than spurious environmental considerations. Saving Red Kites for Mid Wales - worth a bit of effort. Saving the barnacle that also thrives 5 miles down the road - not so much.
The reason it wen to ff the rails was purely short terms. Subsidy requests were too high in its early years - long term far cheaper than projected costs of other renewables.
But, IMO the really big questions are;
1) what will happen to their proposals fro a larger lagoon near Cardiff and Rhyl which would have been far cheaper as machined technology would already have been set up and as a group of three lagoons would be producing power cheaply.
&
2) what does this say to the world and investors in particular about our area? |
Pretty much as I see it.
There is a lot of support for the Lagoon and it is not just political.
The sad thing is a clean energy project such as this will get binned whilst a bloody big nuclear power station will get the go ahead.
It's very shortsighted. I suspect it is not the technology that affects the decision though but the fact it is not in England.
Expect the first one to be in the Thames estuary followed by one on the Severn. | |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 00:14 - Jun 5 with 2738 views | Brynmill_Jack |
| Tidal lagoon on 22:56 - Jun 4 by Private_Partz |
Pretty much as I see it.
There is a lot of support for the Lagoon and it is not just political.
The sad thing is a clean energy project such as this will get binned whilst a bloody big nuclear power station will get the go ahead.
It's very shortsighted. I suspect it is not the technology that affects the decision though but the fact it is not in England.
Expect the first one to be in the Thames estuary followed by one on the Severn. |
It's cheaper for the government because as usual they don't have to put any thought, effort or money into it. They'll just lie back and allow the chinese to do all the hard work, and hold us to ransom as we the consmers pay it back 50 times over in inflated energy bills. It's like PFI, only even more expensive to the tax payer. |  |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 08:41 - Jun 5 with 2673 views | Scotia |
| Tidal lagoon on 22:24 - Jun 4 by Badlands |
Where the big sticky out thing was going is of virtually no environmental significance because of a couple of hundred years of industrial spoil being dumped in the area.
The initial studies suggested the area within would have become a haven for wildlife and offer huge leisure and tourist opportunities.
Aesthetic concerns??? We are talking about the bit of shitty shoreline between St Thomas and Port Talbot!
I also believe that benefits to people sometimes are more important than spurious environmental considerations. Saving Red Kites for Mid Wales - worth a bit of effort. Saving the barnacle that also thrives 5 miles down the road - not so much.
The reason it wen to ff the rails was purely short terms. Subsidy requests were too high in its early years - long term far cheaper than projected costs of other renewables.
But, IMO the really big questions are;
1) what will happen to their proposals fro a larger lagoon near Cardiff and Rhyl which would have been far cheaper as machined technology would already have been set up and as a group of three lagoons would be producing power cheaply.
&
2) what does this say to the world and investors in particular about our area? |
That is exactly what the lagoon company would like everyone to believe but is unfortunately a long way from the truth.
1. It would indeed be built on an area highly contaminated by the remnants Copperopolis. Building the lagoon on top of this would send this contamination all over the Bay and beyond, Gower beaches would be impacted, possibly losing blue flag status. It, as a whole, would greatly impact water quality.
2. Some creatures would live on the structure. Unfortunately the turbines would be a giant mincer too. Salmon, Sea Trout, Shad and marine fish would be killed not to mention other marine life. The noise of the operation would disturb cetaceans. The disruption to tidal patterns in the bay would destroy invertebrate life on Swansea beach and have knock on impacts to the food chain. Blackpill SSSI would be lost.
3. A bit of shitty shoreline which residents of Port Talbot and East Swansea look towards Gower and Mumbles over. Also it would extend over 3 miles out to sea. Clearly obtrusive from all around the bay area.
Other impacts:-
Increased flood risk along around Swansea Bay from wave refection, loss of Monkstone Marina as a facility due to siltation, build up of sand around Kenfig and Aberavon, loss of sand in Swansea Bay, increased risk to navigation in to Swansea docks etc, etc.
All potentially for very little reward to those in the area. I genuinely think apart from some construction jobs it would generate little long term local employment. The recreation facilities were completely impossible to deliver at any scale to replace those lost and the visitor centre could not of been where it was planned and I don't think would have attracted much in the way of tourism.
These are some of the reasons it went off the rails, it could not satisfy these totally independent requirements. Ultimately the decision is based on "Is the juice worth the Squeeze". In this case the lagoon company could not demonstrate it would so put all their efforts in to getting public support.
Swansea lagoon was an experiment. They were hoping to test their proposals here, if it had worked then they'd have gone on to build more. If it hadn't then I honestly think they'd have just let if get destroyed by the sea. Cardiff won't happen and neither will any on the others in the UK. There is already small, but organised, opposition to Cardiff and it is in a more environmentally sensitive area.
I understand the company are now looking abroad, possibly in India. They may come back if the technology gets proven, and I'd be fine with that.
I think it says to the world and other investors - come to the UK with a viable plan and we'll get behind it. Come to us asking for billions of pounds to support something that you can't demonstrate will be worthwhile, at all, and we won't. | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 10:35 - Jun 5 with 2612 views | A_Fans_Dad |
There is a great deal of emotion around this subject with very few actual facts.
The idea that the Electricity produced 4 times a day and not produced 4 times is going to be "cheap" is absurd, the Subsidies will last longer than the Turbines are likely to due to continual silting up of the Lagoon itself.
Comparing it to Nuclear is also ridiculous, Nuclear produces GWs of energy 24 hours a day 7 days a week for an average of 340 days a year with planned outages for maintenance and refuelling.
The requirement of Subsidies is because of Renewable Energy, the subsidies given to them means it is no longer a level playing field for investment in any other form of generation without it.
When Renewables get "first choice" and subsidies other generators can't compete and that is deliberate, the whole point was to make Coal too expensive to continue production.
For an critical analysis of the actual production of the Lagoon see
http://euanmearns.com/swansea-bay-tidal-lagoon-and-baseload-tidal-generation-in-
or
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/02/24/swansea-bay-tidal-lagoo | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 10:54 - Jun 5 with 2587 views | Batterseajack |
| Tidal lagoon on 10:35 - Jun 5 by A_Fans_Dad |
There is a great deal of emotion around this subject with very few actual facts.
The idea that the Electricity produced 4 times a day and not produced 4 times is going to be "cheap" is absurd, the Subsidies will last longer than the Turbines are likely to due to continual silting up of the Lagoon itself.
Comparing it to Nuclear is also ridiculous, Nuclear produces GWs of energy 24 hours a day 7 days a week for an average of 340 days a year with planned outages for maintenance and refuelling.
The requirement of Subsidies is because of Renewable Energy, the subsidies given to them means it is no longer a level playing field for investment in any other form of generation without it.
When Renewables get "first choice" and subsidies other generators can't compete and that is deliberate, the whole point was to make Coal too expensive to continue production.
For an critical analysis of the actual production of the Lagoon see
http://euanmearns.com/swansea-bay-tidal-lagoon-and-baseload-tidal-generation-in-
or
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/02/24/swansea-bay-tidal-lagoo |
Yes the power is only generated when the tide is moving (4 times daily) but this is very predictable and was always proposed to work in conjunction with other power plants. The lagoon would have just taken big chunks out of the daily grid demand and the close matching of the power generated to power being used by the consumers would be met by smaller gas / coal power plants or that hydro plant in north wales which have better load matching control.
Not sure about the silting to be honest, but there isn’t a river emptying sediment into the lagoon, so the only silt would be carried in by the sea water through the turbines. It wouldn’t be much, but will obviously build up over time. This would need a team of people (job) to monitor that and dig it out when necessary. [Post edited 5 Jun 2018 11:08]
| | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 11:01 - Jun 5 with 2582 views | TailGunner |
We should have had outline planning permission granted subject to full environmental impact investigations. The fact it is being thrown out on cost is just a kick in the nuts for the area again..
Planet Swans 'experts' either side of the argument posting as facts is ridiculous.
There are huge manmade harbours reaching out to sea all over the world - to take Giant Cruise liners.
One planned for Dubai is 20 million square feet. | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 11:24 - Jun 5 with 2563 views | Dyfnant |
| Tidal lagoon on 00:14 - Jun 5 by Brynmill_Jack |
It's cheaper for the government because as usual they don't have to put any thought, effort or money into it. They'll just lie back and allow the chinese to do all the hard work, and hold us to ransom as we the consmers pay it back 50 times over in inflated energy bills. It's like PFI, only even more expensive to the tax payer. |
It’s going to be funded out of public coffers, no pfi type stuff on this one |  |
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 11:49 - Jun 5 with 2542 views | Badlands |
| Tidal lagoon on 08:41 - Jun 5 by Scotia |
That is exactly what the lagoon company would like everyone to believe but is unfortunately a long way from the truth.
1. It would indeed be built on an area highly contaminated by the remnants Copperopolis. Building the lagoon on top of this would send this contamination all over the Bay and beyond, Gower beaches would be impacted, possibly losing blue flag status. It, as a whole, would greatly impact water quality.
2. Some creatures would live on the structure. Unfortunately the turbines would be a giant mincer too. Salmon, Sea Trout, Shad and marine fish would be killed not to mention other marine life. The noise of the operation would disturb cetaceans. The disruption to tidal patterns in the bay would destroy invertebrate life on Swansea beach and have knock on impacts to the food chain. Blackpill SSSI would be lost.
3. A bit of shitty shoreline which residents of Port Talbot and East Swansea look towards Gower and Mumbles over. Also it would extend over 3 miles out to sea. Clearly obtrusive from all around the bay area.
Other impacts:-
Increased flood risk along around Swansea Bay from wave refection, loss of Monkstone Marina as a facility due to siltation, build up of sand around Kenfig and Aberavon, loss of sand in Swansea Bay, increased risk to navigation in to Swansea docks etc, etc.
All potentially for very little reward to those in the area. I genuinely think apart from some construction jobs it would generate little long term local employment. The recreation facilities were completely impossible to deliver at any scale to replace those lost and the visitor centre could not of been where it was planned and I don't think would have attracted much in the way of tourism.
These are some of the reasons it went off the rails, it could not satisfy these totally independent requirements. Ultimately the decision is based on "Is the juice worth the Squeeze". In this case the lagoon company could not demonstrate it would so put all their efforts in to getting public support.
Swansea lagoon was an experiment. They were hoping to test their proposals here, if it had worked then they'd have gone on to build more. If it hadn't then I honestly think they'd have just let if get destroyed by the sea. Cardiff won't happen and neither will any on the others in the UK. There is already small, but organised, opposition to Cardiff and it is in a more environmentally sensitive area.
I understand the company are now looking abroad, possibly in India. They may come back if the technology gets proven, and I'd be fine with that.
I think it says to the world and other investors - come to the UK with a viable plan and we'll get behind it. Come to us asking for billions of pounds to support something that you can't demonstrate will be worthwhile, at all, and we won't. |
All power stations have negative impacts but procedures are put in place to minimise the problems.
The silts that have built up in the area would be dredged and removed and reduce the current level of leaching. It would effectively clean up much of the background pollution.
I would dispute any claim of tidal disruption as, in the context of the area, this is a blip. For a couple of hundred years this part of the UK was one of the busiest and heavily industrials sections of coast yet we still have the wonderful coastline we enjoy today.
It's height it would be barely notable given the bland to industrial (via built up - university) views currently enjoyed it. Wind turbines, coal / oil / gas / nuclear / powered stations all have a visual impact.
The huge cost wasn't't just to plonk concrete and turbines in the sea.
I believe this and the electrification of rail only as far as Cardiff will have a very damaging effect on the region. Had we had this attitude in the 1700s Swansea would now be on par with Tenby.
You don't make cakes without breaking eggs. | |
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 11:58 - Jun 5 with 2536 views | Scotia |
| Tidal lagoon on 11:01 - Jun 5 by TailGunner |
We should have had outline planning permission granted subject to full environmental impact investigations. The fact it is being thrown out on cost is just a kick in the nuts for the area again..
Planet Swans 'experts' either side of the argument posting as facts is ridiculous.
There are huge manmade harbours reaching out to sea all over the world - to take Giant Cruise liners.
One planned for Dubai is 20 million square feet. |
A detailed development consent order has been issued. That is full planning consent, subject to them getting a marine licence and fulfilling other requirements. They haven't got a marine licence or managed to fulfil other requirements, because they aren't very good, they haven't employed very good consultants and the impacts could be massive.
Every thing I have posted on the impacts of this is fact. All available to the public.
The only educated guesses I've made are about the tourism and employment aspects.
They plan a visitor centre 3 miles out to sea - have you stood in Bracelet Bay at low tide on a moderately SW windy day and seen the waves hitting the Mixon sand bank? They would basically hit the visitor centre and lagoon wall where they have shown people cycling in their PR video.
They say the turbines will be manufactured in Swansea. They are planning on using GE turbines, they have a huge base just outside Cardiff. The next lagoon is planned to be in Cardiff. Do you really think they'd move 40 miles away from the next even bigger lagoon? Not to mention the other planned ones in Newport, Rhyl and down the Somerset coast.
This is a very different project in a very different environment to anything else. | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 12:08 - Jun 5 with 2532 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Tidal lagoon on 10:54 - Jun 5 by Batterseajack |
Yes the power is only generated when the tide is moving (4 times daily) but this is very predictable and was always proposed to work in conjunction with other power plants. The lagoon would have just taken big chunks out of the daily grid demand and the close matching of the power generated to power being used by the consumers would be met by smaller gas / coal power plants or that hydro plant in north wales which have better load matching control.
Not sure about the silting to be honest, but there isn’t a river emptying sediment into the lagoon, so the only silt would be carried in by the sea water through the turbines. It wouldn’t be much, but will obviously build up over time. This would need a team of people (job) to monitor that and dig it out when necessary. [Post edited 5 Jun 2018 11:08]
|
Big Chunks out of the daily grid demand, you jest surely?
320MW at it's peak out of 39,000MW and that is only the summer requirement. | | | |
| Tidal lagoon on 12:14 - Jun 5 with 2528 views | Badlands |
| Tidal lagoon on 11:58 - Jun 5 by Scotia |
A detailed development consent order has been issued. That is full planning consent, subject to them getting a marine licence and fulfilling other requirements. They haven't got a marine licence or managed to fulfil other requirements, because they aren't very good, they haven't employed very good consultants and the impacts could be massive.
Every thing I have posted on the impacts of this is fact. All available to the public.
The only educated guesses I've made are about the tourism and employment aspects.
They plan a visitor centre 3 miles out to sea - have you stood in Bracelet Bay at low tide on a moderately SW windy day and seen the waves hitting the Mixon sand bank? They would basically hit the visitor centre and lagoon wall where they have shown people cycling in their PR video.
They say the turbines will be manufactured in Swansea. They are planning on using GE turbines, they have a huge base just outside Cardiff. The next lagoon is planned to be in Cardiff. Do you really think they'd move 40 miles away from the next even bigger lagoon? Not to mention the other planned ones in Newport, Rhyl and down the Somerset coast.
This is a very different project in a very different environment to anything else. |
Marine concerns had very little to do with the decision which was political and (short term) financial.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/senior-figures-whitehall-dont-want-1
The only serious objection came from the angling community.
Grave-yard of ambition is indeed apt. | |
| |
| Tidal lagoon on 12:15 - Jun 5 with 2526 views | BarrySwan |
| Tidal lagoon on 13:58 - Jun 2 by westside |
There are no tory votes in this part of the world so a tory government don't care |
Hmm..... the area seems to have done really well out of Labour councils and a Labour run Welsh assembly as well hasn't it? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
