comment by Ttliv87 (U11882)
HS2 is a massive waste of money that will only benefit a select few people.
*****************************
But it could allow you to commute daily to a job in London.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Seeing as we borrowed 50bn from the Chinese to build the ridiculous hs2 then we should scrap it and give the fecking money back.
Alternatively as Arouna said invest that money in the prototype tidal dam, the first one is expensive, but from then on in it becomes cheaper per Mwh than nuclear, and much much safer!
Not to mention that the lagoons can be used for a variety of purposes too to generate wealth, from sports yo farmed fish.
Once the company here has the technology sorted we can export it around the world.
8% of our power will be produced by the proposed lagoons so far, at least use that 50bn dave took from the Chinese and use it to generate a bit more wealth for society
comment by Ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 2 hours, 21 minutes ago
HS2 is a massive waste of money that will only benefit a select few people. Awful waste of tens of billions of pounds. Well done to UKIP and Greens for making a stand against it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I intend to vote for the greens at this election,
Some will say it's a wasted vote, but evening they don't get in the fact they have gone from 1% of the vote at the last election. To potential 6% + at this one shows there is a movement towards their fair society, and environmental policies (some of which are wrong, such as opposing the Badger cull)
IRU
That's a noble thing. No such thing as a wasted vote
We borrowed £50bn for HS2? Didn't know that.
Yup give it back.. what stupidity was that to ask the Chinese for a loan!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
i believe labour have a good chance at getting into power this year.
i cannot see an outright winner meaning there will be a coalition, which is generally the case across europe! coalitions can be good, because they balance policies
remember the tories said they couldnt raise the tax free allowance? the lib dems wanted it raised, its gone up 3k now? for lower rate tax payers thats £600 a year more to spend, and "double" that for higher rate taxpayers.
imagine how much worse off we would all be with a tory majority
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 5 hours, 32 minutes ago
We borrowed £50bn for HS2? Didn't know that.
Yup give it back.. what stupidity was that to ask the Chinese for a loan!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
oh, and they are currently keeping a nuclear leak at one of their french stations (they are decomissioning them in france for being unsafe) under reported, which they are coming under some heat for
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 5 hours, 1 minute ago
i believe labour have a good chance at getting into power this year.
i cannot see an outright winner meaning there will be a coalition, which is generally the case across europe! coalitions can be good, because they balance policies
remember the tories said they couldnt raise the tax free allowance? the lib dems wanted it raised, its gone up 3k now? for lower rate tax payers thats £600 a year more to spend, and "double" that for higher rate taxpayers.
imagine how much worse off we would all be with a tory majority
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not if it means a coalition with the SNP!
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
Where will we be able to build a hydro dam, where will we flood to provide a head of water high enough. Or will we produce something like dinorwig and store grid excess in a pumped storage pond?
Maybe you should look at swansea bay tidal lagoon and the potential in the tidal ranges here in the UK as a way to reduce the reliance on gas turbines.
Maybe even think about the potential of the proposed Severn tidal barrage.
I know I am working on some tubine stuff for both now
Wind is not vialble, solar is not cheap/efficient to produce at the moment
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 4 hours, 11 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
Where will we be able to build a hydro dam, where will we flood to provide a head of water high enough. Or will we produce something like dinorwig and store grid excess in a pumped storage pond?
Maybe you should look at swansea bay tidal lagoon and the potential in the tidal ranges here in the UK as a way to reduce the reliance on gas turbines.
Maybe even think about the potential of the proposed Severn tidal barrage.
I know I am working on some tubine stuff for both now
Wind is not vialble, solar is not cheap/efficient to produce at the moment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pumped storage
As for the tidal lagoons ive covered that on this article already, impatient about the lead in time for the projects (up to two years!!) wish they could get it going faster
Severn tidal barrage is a no go, however, the tidal ranges at the mouth of the severn are some of the highest around the uk, and could be used to create up to 7 lagoons!
solar power is relatively cheap and is only becoming more so! as well as leaps in efficiency of the panels, as high as 50% in some tests now, not to mention the students at yale university who have created a method to harness heat as well as light which will revoloutionize installations, especially on buildings, where they should be - rather than fields! energy is used for heat as much as electricity, and we need to cut emissions from both, this has the potential to do so, on an enormous scale
wind is overly expensive for what it provides, but is easy to turn off
Nuclear is not the safest form of energy out there, it depends which statistics you look at, 20k yers before the area around chernobyl is habitible, people still dieing from increased radiation, increased number of birth defects etc, Fúkishima, radiation levels in west coast us milk still 500 times higher than before the disaster, 5k years before the pacifics radiation levels are within 5% of pre disaster levels.
the recent leak at a french reactor, the leak at an american reactor brushed under the carpet during the fúkishima issues.
fission is too dangerous, why risk it when there are far safer ways of generating the electricity and in the case of tidal lagoons - cheaper ways
I didn't see your earlier posts on renewables.
However where to build pumped storage, that and it only stores grid excess
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
-------
No. Having the 21st century Nuclear technology plays a vital role in a trade with developing countries such as, china, india and Brazil.
We can trade these technologies for a better economic trade deals with these countries.
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
-------
No. Having the 21st century Nuclear technology plays a vital role in a trade with developing countries such as, China, India and Brazil.
We can trade these technologies for a better economic trade deals with these countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this is a short term solution.
the whole idea of the tidal lagoons is that we will be able to export it to the rest of the world, hence why the first one is twice the price of nuclear, and all the rest come in cheaper, we will be the only country in the world exporting this tech,instead of competing with other countries.
the 5 proposed around wales could provide 8% of the power needed in this country, the ones proposed around the severn could provide 1/3rd of the countrys energy needs, solar is rapidly eating in to requirements of other energy forms too
As other countries ramp up their renewables they are taking nuclear OFFLINE, Brazil are building a hydro dam on several branches of the amazon, enough in theory to power the majority of their country, adding in solar! Nuclear technology will become less and less of a currency, japan shut down all its nuclear reactors, germanys are coming offline, france too, America as well
Times are changing we are joining a race that has run, Solar played a massive part in Chinas economic boom, most panels are made there, Germanys economy is based on renewables and they have the strongest economy in Europe, they powered their whole country for an hour just off renewables last year.
and as i said earlier, solar panels are being developed now that absorb the heat as well as the light from the sun, and can get hot enough even to drive a steam turbine using a compressor.
Central heating systems will be able to be retrofitted for daytime solar use, heat storage for night use, the tech is all there and being developed, and they are all the next big trade item, nuclear is done.
http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/AreaRequired1000.jpg
thats assuming 20% solar efficiency and doesnt include the reductions possible through using the panels for heating too.
panels are being produced now that are 40% efficient, halving the necessary area, why put lives at risk with nuclear when 1/36th (based on modern panels) of the sahara desert could power the entirety of Europe and North Africa
alternatively we could all just have solar panels on our roofs, which would probably be a better use of space.
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
I didn't see your earlier posts on renewables.
However where to build pumped storage, that and it only stores grid excess
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are a few proposed sites in scotland, the areas actually needn't be huge, and grid excess already isnt hard to come by, a lot of wind turbines get shut off in the day because its cheaper than shutting down a coal plant, that could all be used for night energy storage
Germany burn more brown coal than other nations.
The technology for tidal lagoon turbines is just a development of low head river turbines.
If silicon wafers are used for the panels, they consume massive amounts of energy to produce
the whole idea of the tidal lagoons is that we will be able to export it to the rest of the world, hence why the first one is twice the price of nuclear, and all the rest come in cheaper, we will be the only country in the world exporting this tech,instead of competing with other countries.
-----
Maybe. But, you can't sell this technology to countries who don't have sea coast.
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 2 minutes ago.
The technology for tidal lagoon turbines is just a development of low head river turbines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
theres a lot more to it that that, especially structurally and proving the math on placement and tidal head.
there is also development on what to use the lagoons for otherwise and effective use of the stone structure, proving its provides other eco benefits, such as fish breeding grounds, which has an environmental benefit in itself !
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 2 minutes ago.
The technology for tidal lagoon turbines is just a development of low head river turbines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
theres a lot more to it that that, especially structurally and proving the math on placement and tidal head.
there is also development on what to use the lagoons for otherwise and effective use of the stone structure, proving its provides other eco benefits, such as fish breeding grounds, which has an environmental benefit in itself !
------u----------------------------------------------------------------
Structural engineering is something all developing nations have. The only benefit of the Swansea bay project is the build of the turbines is done mainly in the UK. But assembled at an Andritz site, possibly Austria or Sweden who have the facility to assemble.
Not that I have been involved. I will say Sweden in Ostersund, I hope so as the skiing is good
Sign in if you want to comment
Maglev v stupid HS2
Page 2 of 2
posted on 21/4/15
comment by Ttliv87 (U11882)
HS2 is a massive waste of money that will only benefit a select few people.
*****************************
But it could allow you to commute daily to a job in London.
posted on 21/4/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/4/15
Seeing as we borrowed 50bn from the Chinese to build the ridiculous hs2 then we should scrap it and give the fecking money back.
Alternatively as Arouna said invest that money in the prototype tidal dam, the first one is expensive, but from then on in it becomes cheaper per Mwh than nuclear, and much much safer!
Not to mention that the lagoons can be used for a variety of purposes too to generate wealth, from sports yo farmed fish.
Once the company here has the technology sorted we can export it around the world.
8% of our power will be produced by the proposed lagoons so far, at least use that 50bn dave took from the Chinese and use it to generate a bit more wealth for society
posted on 21/4/15
comment by Ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 2 hours, 21 minutes ago
HS2 is a massive waste of money that will only benefit a select few people. Awful waste of tens of billions of pounds. Well done to UKIP and Greens for making a stand against it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I intend to vote for the greens at this election,
Some will say it's a wasted vote, but evening they don't get in the fact they have gone from 1% of the vote at the last election. To potential 6% + at this one shows there is a movement towards their fair society, and environmental policies (some of which are wrong, such as opposing the Badger cull)
posted on 21/4/15
IRU
That's a noble thing. No such thing as a wasted vote
posted on 21/4/15
We borrowed £50bn for HS2? Didn't know that.
Yup give it back.. what stupidity was that to ask the Chinese for a loan!
posted on 21/4/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/4/15
i believe labour have a good chance at getting into power this year.
i cannot see an outright winner meaning there will be a coalition, which is generally the case across europe! coalitions can be good, because they balance policies
remember the tories said they couldnt raise the tax free allowance? the lib dems wanted it raised, its gone up 3k now? for lower rate tax payers thats £600 a year more to spend, and "double" that for higher rate taxpayers.
imagine how much worse off we would all be with a tory majority
posted on 21/4/15
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 5 hours, 32 minutes ago
We borrowed £50bn for HS2? Didn't know that.
Yup give it back.. what stupidity was that to ask the Chinese for a loan!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
oh, and they are currently keeping a nuclear leak at one of their french stations (they are decomissioning them in france for being unsafe) under reported, which they are coming under some heat for
posted on 21/4/15
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 5 hours, 1 minute ago
i believe labour have a good chance at getting into power this year.
i cannot see an outright winner meaning there will be a coalition, which is generally the case across europe! coalitions can be good, because they balance policies
remember the tories said they couldnt raise the tax free allowance? the lib dems wanted it raised, its gone up 3k now? for lower rate tax payers thats £600 a year more to spend, and "double" that for higher rate taxpayers.
imagine how much worse off we would all be with a tory majority
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not if it means a coalition with the SNP!
posted on 23/4/15
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
posted on 24/4/15
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
posted on 24/4/15
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
Where will we be able to build a hydro dam, where will we flood to provide a head of water high enough. Or will we produce something like dinorwig and store grid excess in a pumped storage pond?
Maybe you should look at swansea bay tidal lagoon and the potential in the tidal ranges here in the UK as a way to reduce the reliance on gas turbines.
Maybe even think about the potential of the proposed Severn tidal barrage.
I know I am working on some tubine stuff for both now
Wind is not vialble, solar is not cheap/efficient to produce at the moment
posted on 24/4/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 24/4/15
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 4 hours, 11 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
Where will we be able to build a hydro dam, where will we flood to provide a head of water high enough. Or will we produce something like dinorwig and store grid excess in a pumped storage pond?
Maybe you should look at swansea bay tidal lagoon and the potential in the tidal ranges here in the UK as a way to reduce the reliance on gas turbines.
Maybe even think about the potential of the proposed Severn tidal barrage.
I know I am working on some tubine stuff for both now
Wind is not vialble, solar is not cheap/efficient to produce at the moment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pumped storage
As for the tidal lagoons ive covered that on this article already, impatient about the lead in time for the projects (up to two years!!) wish they could get it going faster
Severn tidal barrage is a no go, however, the tidal ranges at the mouth of the severn are some of the highest around the uk, and could be used to create up to 7 lagoons!
solar power is relatively cheap and is only becoming more so! as well as leaps in efficiency of the panels, as high as 50% in some tests now, not to mention the students at yale university who have created a method to harness heat as well as light which will revoloutionize installations, especially on buildings, where they should be - rather than fields! energy is used for heat as much as electricity, and we need to cut emissions from both, this has the potential to do so, on an enormous scale
wind is overly expensive for what it provides, but is easy to turn off
Nuclear is not the safest form of energy out there, it depends which statistics you look at, 20k yers before the area around chernobyl is habitible, people still dieing from increased radiation, increased number of birth defects etc, Fúkishima, radiation levels in west coast us milk still 500 times higher than before the disaster, 5k years before the pacifics radiation levels are within 5% of pre disaster levels.
the recent leak at a french reactor, the leak at an american reactor brushed under the carpet during the fúkishima issues.
fission is too dangerous, why risk it when there are far safer ways of generating the electricity and in the case of tidal lagoons - cheaper ways
posted on 24/4/15
I didn't see your earlier posts on renewables.
However where to build pumped storage, that and it only stores grid excess
posted on 24/4/15
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
-------
No. Having the 21st century Nuclear technology plays a vital role in a trade with developing countries such as, china, india and Brazil.
We can trade these technologies for a better economic trade deals with these countries.
posted on 24/4/15
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 11 hours, 28 minutes ago
we also borrowed money from them to build the new nuclear powerplant in bristol, which will be run by EDF, generating profits for the french government
----
No offence to British engineering, but there isn't a British company that is capable of managing a nuclear power plant efficiently with 21st century technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is why we shouldnt have another nuclear power plant
Instead that money could have been put towards another hydro dam, invested in a lot of solar/wind energy, safe energy
-------
No. Having the 21st century Nuclear technology plays a vital role in a trade with developing countries such as, China, India and Brazil.
We can trade these technologies for a better economic trade deals with these countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this is a short term solution.
the whole idea of the tidal lagoons is that we will be able to export it to the rest of the world, hence why the first one is twice the price of nuclear, and all the rest come in cheaper, we will be the only country in the world exporting this tech,instead of competing with other countries.
the 5 proposed around wales could provide 8% of the power needed in this country, the ones proposed around the severn could provide 1/3rd of the countrys energy needs, solar is rapidly eating in to requirements of other energy forms too
As other countries ramp up their renewables they are taking nuclear OFFLINE, Brazil are building a hydro dam on several branches of the amazon, enough in theory to power the majority of their country, adding in solar! Nuclear technology will become less and less of a currency, japan shut down all its nuclear reactors, germanys are coming offline, france too, America as well
Times are changing we are joining a race that has run, Solar played a massive part in Chinas economic boom, most panels are made there, Germanys economy is based on renewables and they have the strongest economy in Europe, they powered their whole country for an hour just off renewables last year.
and as i said earlier, solar panels are being developed now that absorb the heat as well as the light from the sun, and can get hot enough even to drive a steam turbine using a compressor.
Central heating systems will be able to be retrofitted for daytime solar use, heat storage for night use, the tech is all there and being developed, and they are all the next big trade item, nuclear is done.
http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/AreaRequired1000.jpg
thats assuming 20% solar efficiency and doesnt include the reductions possible through using the panels for heating too.
panels are being produced now that are 40% efficient, halving the necessary area, why put lives at risk with nuclear when 1/36th (based on modern panels) of the sahara desert could power the entirety of Europe and North Africa
alternatively we could all just have solar panels on our roofs, which would probably be a better use of space.
posted on 24/4/15
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
I didn't see your earlier posts on renewables.
However where to build pumped storage, that and it only stores grid excess
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are a few proposed sites in scotland, the areas actually needn't be huge, and grid excess already isnt hard to come by, a lot of wind turbines get shut off in the day because its cheaper than shutting down a coal plant, that could all be used for night energy storage
posted on 24/4/15
Germany burn more brown coal than other nations.
The technology for tidal lagoon turbines is just a development of low head river turbines.
If silicon wafers are used for the panels, they consume massive amounts of energy to produce
posted on 24/4/15
the whole idea of the tidal lagoons is that we will be able to export it to the rest of the world, hence why the first one is twice the price of nuclear, and all the rest come in cheaper, we will be the only country in the world exporting this tech,instead of competing with other countries.
-----
Maybe. But, you can't sell this technology to countries who don't have sea coast.
posted on 24/4/15
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 2 minutes ago.
The technology for tidal lagoon turbines is just a development of low head river turbines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
theres a lot more to it that that, especially structurally and proving the math on placement and tidal head.
there is also development on what to use the lagoons for otherwise and effective use of the stone structure, proving its provides other eco benefits, such as fish breeding grounds, which has an environmental benefit in itself !
posted on 24/4/15
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 2 minutes ago.
The technology for tidal lagoon turbines is just a development of low head river turbines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
theres a lot more to it that that, especially structurally and proving the math on placement and tidal head.
there is also development on what to use the lagoons for otherwise and effective use of the stone structure, proving its provides other eco benefits, such as fish breeding grounds, which has an environmental benefit in itself !
------u----------------------------------------------------------------
Structural engineering is something all developing nations have. The only benefit of the Swansea bay project is the build of the turbines is done mainly in the UK. But assembled at an Andritz site, possibly Austria or Sweden who have the facility to assemble.
Not that I have been involved. I will say Sweden in Ostersund, I hope so as the skiing is good
Page 2 of 2