|
|
|
Tidal Energy: questions that need answers |
|
|
|
We applaud the County's interest in exploring how tidal energy in the
Severn estuary could be harnessed - in view of the Government's energy
review it is important to know about all possibilities. We hope some of
the issues we raise below will be useful for your discussions. We
enclose key questions that need to be answered and statements by
Friends of the Earth Cymru and RSPB.
Cllr. Philip Booth
Stroud District Green party
Update: 18th November 2006: See report of Symposium on barrage.
Open letter to all Gloucestershire County Councillors re tidal energy possibilities:
Introduction
The threat of catastrophic climate change is real and recognised by all
the main parties: all the evidence points to the fact that our current
targets are now inadequate and are in urgent need of revision. On top
of that there is increasing evidence, not least from oil companies and
geologists around the world, that we may have reached already reached
or will soon reach what has been called 'Peak Oil' - the point when
growing demand for oil outstrips falling supply. Oil won't run out as a
significant energy resource until around 2050 but Peak Oil will have a
profound effect on oil prices and a huge impact on businesses and
communities in the South-west and indeed right across the world.
The Council is right to take action now. Below we look first at the
proposals, then some of the key questions that need answering.
1. The Severn Barrage Proposal
Interest is growing in proposals to build the barrage between Brean
Down, near Weston-super-Mare, and Lavernock Point, near Cardiff. A
scheme to harness the world's second highest tidal flow and produce
hydro-electric power is not new. It has been discussed on and off for
the past 150 years and over £8 million has been spent on research.
Climate change and the need for better energy security has put the
scheme back on the agenda. It is estimated that the tidal energy in the
estuary could provide up to seven per cent of the country's electricity
and although the barrage would be many miles from Gloucestershire's
borders, its effects on the county's wildlife and economy would be
massive.
One virtue of the Barrage, widely mentioned is, in
preventing inundation as sea levels rise; first storm surges, then
later acting as the dykes in the Netherlands. Although we understand
that energy production will very likely cease when the barrage takes up
this role.
The biggest problem in forming a policy on the
barrage is lack of access to the proposal. The Green party has not
received replies to a letter or emails to the members of the Severn
Power Tidal Group (SPTG), they do not have a website and we have not
been able to find any the barrage proposal online. We have spoken to
other researchers who have the same problem. We understand from people
who have had contact with SPTG that there is disagreement within the
group over different aspects of the proposal.
2. Other tidal energy possibilities
The lack of engagement of the SPTG contrasts strongly with the approach
taken by the companies developing other methods for harnessing tidal
power. The proponents of tidal lagoons and tidal streaming are open and
communicative. Their detailed proposals and subsequent independent
research and assessment is all easily available.
From this
available information it would appear that tidal lagoons are by far the
most cost efficient and least environmentally damaging of the proposals
that are suitable for the Severn Estuary (Tidal Streaming technology
would only be appropriate further off the coast). Developers of
offshore tidal lagoons, say that a number of lagoon schemes in the
Severn could generate as much if not more than a barrage at
significantly lower environmental impact and cost.
One other
aspect worth mentioning is that both barrage and lagoons can double as
platforms for wind turbines and wave power designs.
Conclusions
The Green party remain open to the best proposal for harnessing energy
from the Estuary, but are very concerned by the lack of useful
information about the barrage proposal (i).
The proposal
will have to answer various questions in order to be accepted as
viable. They fall into three broad categories; technical, financial and
environmental. We anticipate that research has been done to answer the
technical questions and this will need to be made available and face
close examination by independent experts. However from the current
information about the proposals’ financial and environmental viability
we have some important questions that raise some very serious concerns
about a barrage.
Some key questions:
1. How
will the £15 billion project be funded (ii)? Will public money be
required? As recently as 2004 Lord Sainsbury stated: ‘The case
for a Severn barrage has been re-examined fairly recently and the
Government have reached the same conclusion: that the project is not
attractive compared with other options.’ Has the barrage proposal
received any indication from the Government that it may change its mind
and support the scheme with public money?
2. If public money
is not going to be given to build a barrage, can the supporters of the
barrage provide any statements of intent to finance the project? Some
indication of at least potential sources of funding really do need to
be provided at this stage.
3. One of the justifiable
criticisms of nuclear power is that it would take at least 10 years and
would make no contribution to short term CO2 targets and minimal
contribution to 2020 targets. Long build times also lock up investment
capital which would otherwise be spent much sooner on alternative
projects like offshore windfarms which could be operational within a
few years. How soon could the barrage proposal be completed?
4. We have, from many a number of examples, concerns that private
capital could hold the government to ransom and effectively demand tax
payers money to finish, maintain and provide profit in running the
structure. Who would own the barrage and run it?
5. If
the £15 billion were to be found and the project completed what would
be the required per Kilowatt hour cost of the electricity produced in
order to make it a viable scheme? Some reports in the media have placed
the cost at 6 – 7 pence p/KWhr, yet an independent finance specialist
has estimated a cost of 20 –22 pence p/KWhr on an investment of £15bn.
We request a firm estimate of the cost of the electricity backed up by
independent research and assessment (iii).
6. The planning
application for a barrage will be subject to several directives of the
Habitats Regulations under U.K and E.U. law. The barrage proposal could
not be permitted if the directives are adhered to. How do the
supporters of the barrage proposal plan to overcome this legal
protection of the Severn Estuary?
7. If, somehow, planning
permission is obtained there will certainly be a legal challenge that
will be vigorously pursued by a coalition of well funded NGOs. This
legal challenge would be taken all the way to the European Court if
necessary. Does the barrage proposal take account of the monetary cost
and time delay that these legal challenges will cause?
8. The
idea that the barrage could be some kind of flood protection device has
been mentioned in some media articles recently. This seems to go
against contemporary practice in flood defence that advises letting the
water go into flood plains rather than channelling flood water along
the coast to inundate another area. Can the supporters of the barrage
offer any research into flooding in the Estuary that supports building
a barrage?
9. Would the supporters of the barrage be willing
to take part in a strategic comparative assessment of energy generating
technologies in the Severn, comparing the costs and benefits of the
barrage, tidal lagoons and other proposals?
Christopher Brain and Cllr. Philip Booth, Stroud District Green party
June 14th 2006
For more information read "Harnessing the Severn tides " by Jon Lucas, Bristol East Green Party
Notes:
(i) The Green Party of England and Wales' Manifesto for a Sustainable
Society states "barrage schemes to be tried on a small scale initially,
and only extended if found to be ecologically acceptable."
(ii)
Friends of the Earth note that David Kerr, ex McAlpine / STPG now
chair of the ICE energy group did not contest the £15 billion price tag
or the 6-7 p/kWh generating cost at a meeting.
(iii) In 1988 the
capital cost of the Severn Barrage was £8.2b and the cost of power (10%
discount, 30 years) was 8.19p. Recent figures cite the updated capital
cost as £15b but the cost of power has gone DOWN to 6p. Clearly
there is something missing. The press says a STPG spokesperson cited
the cost of gasoline and the need for emissions reductions as a
reason, both true but these do not have nothing to do with the cost of
the barrage. So how is this explained? A PhD finance specialist from
Imperial College has said that more likely the cost is around
20-22p/kWh if the capital cost has almost doubled.
Appendices:
1. FRIENDS OF THE EARTH CYMRU STATEMENT - June 2006
The Welsh Assembly Government recently asked for another feasibility
study into a £15 billion Severn barrage in its response to the UK
government's current energy review. Supporters cite the barrage's
zero-carbon electricity output, its transport link to Somerset, and its
flood defence benefits as far as Gloucestershire. Ecological concerns
are countered by claims that habitat changes would benefit some species
and balance out detrimental ones, and that sea-level rise will
change habitats anyway. So why should Friends of the Earth Cymru
maintain its opposition to the barrage?
Principally we believe
that, all things considered, the scheme would cause serious damage to
an internationally protected site. The Severn comprises 7% of the UK's
estuary habitat, and over-wintering for about 65,000 water birds. The
barrage would significantly reduce the area of the inter-tidal
feeding grounds and cause other adverse changes to important species
and habitats. Such changes would also be far in excess of any
damaging effects due to sea level rise.
The barrage's power
output, which has been widely overstated, should not overrride such
protection. Indeed, the barrage would generate 4.3% of UK
electricity demand which is 0.75% of current UK energy consumption. In
comparison, by 2020 the increasing number of onshore wind farms in the
UK may average approaching twice the barrage's annual output at
less than half its estimated 7 p/kWhr generating cost. Developers of an
alternative technology, offshore tidal lagoons, say that a number of
lagoon schemes in the Severn could generate as much if not more than a
barrage at significantly lower environmental impact and cost. Friends
of the Earth Cymru is trying to obtain what we believe are flawed
DTI assessments of tidal lagoons under Freedom of Information requests.
But so far the DTI has been unwilling to release them.
Flood
defence afforded by the barrage could be provided for in less costly
ways and a road link would generate its own detrimental impacts
for dubious 'benefits'. Recent discussions about a new rail link across
the Severn near Chepstow could consider the incorporation of a
flood defence scheme for the river's upper reaches.
Consequently we along with other NGOs have been calling for a
strategic comparative assessment of energy generating technologies
in the Severn. Conspicuously, the Assembly Government has
focussed on a barrage.
2. RSPB POSITION STATEMENT - May 2006
THE SEVERN BARRAGE
The RSPB supports energy generation in ways that minimise greenhouse
gas emissions, because climate change is the greatest long-term threat
to biodiversity. As a source of renewable energy, tidal power
generation has a potential role in containing the production of
greenhouse gases.
The Severn Estuary is unique in Europe, with
a tidal range of more than 12.5 metres, the second largest in the world
after the Bay of Fundy. It is of international importance for
wildlife, including waterfowl, migratory fish, invertebrates and
plants; riverine, estuarine and intertidal habitats; and
geomorphological features.
The Severn Estuary currently
accommodates an annual average of around 65,000 internationally
important water-birds. Important species present include:
Bewick’s swan, curlew dunlin, pintail, redshank and shelduck. A tidal
barrage would reduce the tidal range in the estuary and hence the inter
tidal area available for feeding birds and while also reducing the
exposure time of the remaining inter-tidal areas, due to increased high
water stand. At barrage closure, considerable numbers of birds are
likely to be displaced. Changes in the sediment regime are also likely
to affect the extent and persistence of saltmarsh, leading to
dehydration or conversion to freshwater marsh.
The RSPB is
concerned that construction of a traditional barrage in the Severn,
would have an irreversible, serious adverse impact on the wildlife of
the Estuary. It would have a direct impact on four sites
protected under European conservation legislation: the Severn Estuary
Special Protection Area, and possible Special Area of Conservation, and
the rivers Wye and Usk SACs. Once destroyed, this huge natural
asset cannot be recreated.
Governments in both England and
Wales are committed to sustainable development, a key objective of
which is the protection and enhancement of biodiversity. The
designation of the Severn under the EU Birds and Habitats Directives
imposes a series of stringent tests upon any proposed developments and
helps to ensure their sustainability. If as we believe, an
appropriate assessment were to conclude that such a project would have
a damaging impact the project could only proceed if it could be shown
that there were no alternatives solutions and there were ‘imperative
reasons of over-riding public interest’. We believe that it would be
simple to demonstrate that there alternatives to this project, but even
if these tests were considered to have been passed, then compensatory
habitat would have to be provided in order to maintain the coherence of
the Natura 2000 network. Notwithstanding the irreplaceability of
the ecosystem as a whole, this last requirement is likely to prove
especially difficult to meet in the context of the Severn.
The
RSPB fears that construction of a barrage may facilitate further
development that would damage protected wildlife sites, on land
upstream of the barrage, as it would enjoy enhanced protection from
flooding as a by-product of barrage construction. The Gwent
Levels Sites of Special Scientific Interest, on the Welsh side of the
estuary, is at especial risk.
The RSPB is also concerned about
the considerable wider environmental impacts associated with
construction of a traditional barrage, including sourcing of
construction materials, and CO2 emissions associated with its
construction and from production and use of construction materials,
such as cement. We consider the project should be subject to a
full sustainability appraisal, especially as it is likely to be
presented to the public as an otherwise “green” project making a
substantial contribution to the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions. Its overall cost-effectiveness, and eco-efficiency in
terms of CO2 balance, and its impact on biodiversity and the wider
natural environment should also be fully assessed against other
renewable energy options.
It is possible that other forms of
tidal power generation could make a significant contribution to
renewable energy generation, with less impact on the wildlife of the
Severn Estuary.
In summary, the RSPB remains sceptical of the
overall benefits that would be derived from a traditional barrage. Its
construction would result in irreversible environmental damage to an
estuary unique to Europe.
Contacts
RSPB
Wales: Katie-jo Luxton, Conservation Policy & Advocacy
Manager, RSPB Cymru Headquarters, Sutherland House, Castlebridge,
Cowbridge Road East, Cardiff CF11 9AB. 029 2035 3001
katie-jo.luxton@rspb.org.uk
RSPB SW England: Mark
Robins, Regional Policy Officer, RSPB, Keble House, Southernhay
Gardens, Exeter, EX1 1NT. 01392 432691, mark.robins@rspb.org.uk
RSPB UK Headquarters: Gwyn Williams, Head of Countryside
Conservation, RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy Beds SG19 2DL. 01767 680551.
gwyn.williams@rspb.org.uk
Ends
|
|
|
Home 
Reports 
