Wash Barrier,

[Stonepark]

Goes back even further than most realise....

 

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1967-07-25/debates/c02d1c95-49f0-4050-aed4-d3a394568ef0/WashBarrage

Though the primary purpose then was to hold back water for agriculture and and as a side effect wreck the intertidal area for wildlife by converting it to fresh water.

[udderlyoffroad]

32 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

12 modern 2500MW nuclear power stations (totaling 30,000MW) taking up 100ha each (total 1200ha) would do a lot less damage than just one of these and the paltry 300MW it would produce and supply all the baseload for UK electricity use, with wind, solar and gas for peaking.

God good, don't use figures to back up your position!

And speaking of;  The reason tidal barrages have been talked about, but not built, since Archimedes was a boy, is that although the tide is predictable on heights+times type scale, how this translates into MW produced certainly isn't. 

A friend has his PhD in modelling this, and it is horrendously complex stuff.  You can't just build scale models and expect it to 'scale up', which makes validating computer models...somewhat challenging.

This, combined with the fact nobody wants to be the 'launch customer', and the accountants invariably stop these projects in their tracks.

[oowee]

5 hours ago, Stonepark said:

12 modern 2500MW nuclear power stations (totaling 30,000MW) taking up 100ha each (total 1200ha) would do a lot less damage than just one of these and the paltry 300MW it would produce, and supply all the baseload for UK electricity use, with wind, solar and gas for peaking.

 

I guess its about balance cost and benefit. A barrage is likely needed to protect Kings Lynn, the wash is likely to be lost to wildlife in its current form with sea level rises, 2bn is a lot less than the 21bn of a N Power plant not sure what the mw to £ ratio is like. The barrage comes with lots of additional  jobs through the deep water port and of course its a much greener option.  

[Stonepark]

3 hours ago, oowee said:

, the wash is likely to be lost to wildlife in its current form with sea level rises, .  

What sea level rise... 1mm a year, it would take 1000 years to rise 1m.... If we don't go back into a major cooling period which we are due

Another climate alarmism fiction based on biased and inaccurate models....

[ditchman]

bit scepticle about sea levels going up because of climate change.................my (or part of my limited understanding) of plate tectonics....is scotland was severly compressed by the thick ice sheet.......and ifact scotland is actually rising as the ice sheet has gone and a massive weight lifted...the knock on effect is southern england is sinking.....the earth is not actually round...infact its quite a strange lumpy shape..........

this point has been PROVED by a scandnavian science project that has been monitoring the rise of the north that was preloaded with glasier's the project has been ongoing for well over 100 years..

[oowee]

5 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

What sea level rise... 1mm a year, it would take 1000 years to rise 1m.... If we don't go back into a major cooling period which we are due

Another climate alarmism fiction based on biased and inaccurate models....

If only it were 1mm. 100mm over the last 30 years. Data (not models) now indicates 3.4mm a year*. Sea level rise impacts are not even across the world. 

* NASA Mass and Thermal expansion data . 

[Stonepark]

11 hours ago, oowee said:

If only it were 1mm. 100mm over the last 30 years. Data (not models) now indicates 3.4mm a year*. Sea level rise impacts are not even across the world. 

* NASA Mass and Thermal expansion data . 

But we know NASA's data is based on the IPCC models which are complete ********, where even the lowest estimate in their models is too high and medieval and Roman warm periods (both of which were warmer than today) have disappeared.

[Duck all]

On 25/11/2022 at 19:07, oowee said:

I guess its about balance cost and benefit. A barrage is likely needed to protect Kings Lynn, the wash is likely to be lost to wildlife in its current form with sea level rises, 2bn is a lot less than the 21bn of a N Power plant not sure what the mw to £ ratio is like. The barrage comes with lots of additional  jobs through the deep water port and of course its a much greener option.  

So basically it’s not about saving the environment it’s about greed and making money. 

[oowee]

1 minute ago, Duck all said:

So basically it’s not about saving the environment it’s about greed and making money. 

🙂 how do you work that out?

[Duck all]

On 25/11/2022 at 19:07, oowee said:

I guess its about balance cost and benefit. 2bn is a lot less than the 21bn of a N Power plant not sure what the mw to £ ratio is like.  

You said it 

[oowee]

11 minutes ago, Duck all said:

You said it 

🙄 I guess its about balance cost and benefit. 

[Xtreme]

I recall some years back, reading about a plan to build a sea wall from Norfolk to North Lincolnshire, drain the enclosed land and name the new area the county of Victoria.

[bishop]

 when i were a lad😁  Ok when I was young my old man any myself were ferreting the sea wall out the Eden estuary in Fife when the landowner arrived up the wall with two others with maps and lots of fingers pointing out over the mud up to the end of St Andrews Golf course. Long story short it was pre LNR days and this "consortium" had ambitions to fill in a large section of the bay for yet another fekin golf course. Letters were written by my old man and the right people notified of the money-making venture. It didn't happen of course. Shows you though, the mud can be seen as nothing but an area for profit making, and wildlife not given a second thought.

[marsh man]

49 minutes ago, bishop said:

 when i were a lad😁  Ok when I was young my old man any myself were ferreting the sea wall out the Eden estuary in Fife when the landowner arrived up the wall with two others with maps and lots of fingers pointing out over the mud up to the end of St Andrews Golf course. Long story short it was pre LNR days and this "consortium" had ambitions to fill in a large section of the bay for yet another fekin golf course. Letters were written by my old man and the right people notified of the money-making venture. It didn't happen of course. Shows you though, the mud can be seen as nothing but an area for profit making, and wildlife not given a second thought.

We had something very similar , years ago when the Broads boating holidays were at there peak there was a lot of talk about dredging a big marina down the bottom end of the estuary which would have been just outside of the town , the area is the last piece of salting that is above water on a normal tide and in the height of the Winter you can see wildfowl and waders in there 1000s and sometimes in there 10 of 1000s , this never really got off the ground as so many different bodies objected against it , and now I very much doubt we will ever see any major , or even minor changes to the estuary , leave well alone is what I say .