HOME
The Info List - Severn Barrage


--- Advertisement ---



The Severn
Severn
Barrage refers to a range of ideas for building a barrage from the English coast to the Welsh coast over the Severn
Severn
tidal estuary. Ideas for damming or barraging the Severn
Severn
estuary (and Bristol
Bristol
Channel) have existed since the 19th century. The building of such a barrage would constitute an engineering project, comparable with some of the world's biggest. The purposes of such a project has typically been one, or several of: transport links, flood protection, harbour creation, or tidal power generation. In recent decades it is the latter that has grown to be the primary focus for barrage ideas, and the others are now seen as useful side-effects. Following the Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Feasibility Study (2008–10), the British government concluded that there was no strategic case for building a barrage but to continue to investigate emerging technologies.[1] In June 2013 the Energy and Climate Change Select Committee[2] published its findings after an eight-month study of the arguments for and against the Barrage. MPs said the case for the barrage was unproven. They were not convinced the economic case was strong enough and said the developer, Hafren Power, had failed to answer serious environmental and economic concerns.[3]

Contents

1 History

1.1 Early projects 1.2 Bondi Committee—1981 1.3 Hooker or Shoots Barrage—1987 1.4 Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group—1989 1.5 Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Reef—2007 1.6 Sustainable Development Commission—2007 1.7 UK Government
Government
study announced—2007 1.8 Corlan Hafren—2011

2 Economic impact

2.1 Power generation potential 2.2 Construction costs 2.3 Local impact

3 Environmental impact

3.1 Tidal
Tidal
lagoon alternative 3.2 Tidal
Tidal
Fence 3.3 Effects of different site locations

4 Trans-barrage transport links 5 Opinions

5.1 Backers 5.2 Opponents

6 See also 7 References 8 External links

History[edit] There have been numerous proposed projects over the years, initially to provide a safe harbour and more recently to generate electricity. Early projects[edit]

Thomas Fulljames's own impression of his proposed Barrage

In 1849 Thomas Fulljames, a civil engineer and the county surveyor for Gloucestershire
Gloucestershire
proposed a barrage from Beachley
Beachley
to Aust
Aust
(now the site of the first Severn
Severn
Bridge), a span of just over 1 mile (1.6 km). Since this was before commercial electricity production, the first proposals were based on the desire for a large shipping harbour in the Severn
Severn
Estuary, road and railway transport, and flood protection.[4]

Diagram of a plan to harness tidal power on the River Severn
Severn
circa 1921. Caption from Popular Mechanics
Popular Mechanics
Magazine 1921

No action was taken on Fulljames's proposals and three quarters of a century later, in 1925, an official study group was commissioned. An awareness of the large tidal range of 14 metres (46 ft),[5] second only to Bay of Fundy
Bay of Fundy
in Eastern Canada,[6][7] led to a proposal to generate 800  Megawatt
Megawatt
(MW) of electricity at English Stones and although considered technically possible, it was prevented on economic grounds (then costing £25 million).[8] The viability was tested a few years later in 1931 when Paul Shishkoff,[9] a Russian immigrant, demonstrated a 300 horsepower (220 kW) prototype tidal generator at Avonmouth.[10] It included a novel mechanism for spreading the power output over 24 hours. The full barrage was estimated at £5 million at the time.[11] In 1933 the Severn
Severn
Barrage Committee Report (HMSO) from a committee chaired by Lord Brabazon recommended that an 800 MW barrage across the English Stones
English Stones
area would be the best option.[12] The work was interrupted by World War II
World War II
and then revived in 1945 when engineers predicted an output of 2.2 terawatt hours (TWh) per year.[13] A further government study looked at barrage options in 1948 and estimated the construction costs at £60 million.[10] By the time of the next study in 1953 the estimated cost had risen to £200 million. In 1971 a report by Dr Tom Shaw, a tidal Power expert and advocate proposed a barrage from Brean Down
Brean Down
to Lavernock Point. The scheme was estimated to cost £500 million.[14] In 1975 the Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB), published a study with evidence from Bristol and Salford universities for the Secretary of State’s Advisory Council on Research and Development for Fuel and Power.[15] As this was the era of cheap oil, the council established that a barrage could not be economically viable unless the energy situation deteriorated significantly. Bondi Committee—1981[edit]

Proposed location of Bondi Committee Barrage

After just such a deterioration (due to the Iranian Revolution and 1979 energy crisis) the plans were reinvestigated by the Severn Barrage Committee in 1981. This committee was known as the "Bondi Committee" (after Professor Sir Hermann Bondi). The committee investigated 6 possible barrage locations, from English Stones
English Stones
at the top of the estuary, down to a location largely at sea in the Bristol Channel between Lynmouth
Lynmouth
in North Devon and Porthcawl
Porthcawl
in South Wales. It produced a major energy paper,[16] which recommended a 10 miles (16 km) long barrage of concrete powerhouse between Brean Down and Lavernock Point, sluice and plain caissons together with sand and rock-fill embankments. It would have generated 7,200 MW on the flow of the tides (the largest barrage considered could have produced double that power output). This set of plans was strongly built on a few years later by the Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group. In 1984 Wimpey Atkins proposed a smaller barrage at English Stones, in the hope of creating a smaller more economically viable project that would avoid the environmental impact of a large barrage.[17] Hooker or Shoots Barrage—1987[edit]

Cross section of Shoots Barrage turbine housing

This Wimpey Atkins 1984 study was criticised because it did not tackle the issue of silting[18] and in 1987 Arthur Hooker OBE (a former partner of WS Atkins) in conjunction with Parsons Brinckerhoff prepared a revised barrage proposed at English Stones
English Stones
to better tackle this issue. Parsons Brinckerhoff
Parsons Brinckerhoff
further updated their earlier proposal in 2006 and current estimates for this barrage (now known as the "Shoots Barrage") would cost £1.4 to £1.8 billion to build, and generate 2.75  TWh
TWh
of power per year.[19] At the highest tidal range, it would develop a peak output of 1,050 MW, and 313 MW output on average throughout the year.

Cross section of embankment

The barrage would be located just below the Second Severn Crossing—i.e. above Cardiff
Cardiff
and Bristol
Bristol
on the estuary—and so much smaller locks would be needed for upstream access to Sharpness
Sharpness
and Gloucester
Gloucester
docks as the large ports of Portbury
Portbury
and Avonmouth
Avonmouth
would be unaffected. Like the STPG proposal, Hooker generates only on the ebb tide. Construction time would be four years. It would be built of rock fill embankment at the coastal sides (more like the proposals for "Tidal Lagoons"), but like the STPG would be sluice caissons and turbines with powerhouse in the middle section. In April 2009 the Liberal Democrats produced a report called "A Tidal Solution—The Way Forward" that backed the Shoots Barrage along with a number of additional measures for power generation in the Severn Estuary. In September 2009 the report was adopted by the Lib Dem party conference as official party policy.[20] Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group—1989[edit] The £4.2 million study by Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group (STPG) built on the work of the Severn
Severn
Barrage Committee, but also examined other possible barrages, and produced another major energy paper.[21] Its members comprised Sir Robert McAlpine, Balfour Beatty, Taylor Woodrow and Alstom.[22] They concluded that the 1981 plans were the best location for a barrage, but calculated that the power output could be larger, at 8,640 MW during flow, or 2,000 MW average power. This would provide 17  TWh
TWh
of power per year (about 6% of UK consumption), equivalent to about 18 million tons of coal or 3 nuclear reactors. The cost in 1989 was calculated to be about £8 billion (£12 billion in 2006 money—about the same as six nuclear reactors, but different lifespan), and running costs would be £70 million per year (about the same as 1.5 nuclear reactors).[23]

Diagram of the STPG Barrage

The barrage would use existing technology as used in the Rance tidal barrage in France, the Annapolis Royal Generating Station
Annapolis Royal Generating Station
in Canada and the Netherlands sea barrages. Power would be most efficiently generated only in the flow direction, and this effect on tidal range would mean that the tidal extent would be halved by losing the low tide rather than the high tide. That is, that the tide would only go out as far as the current tidal midpoint, but high tides would be unaffected (unless the barrage was deliberately closed to prevent flooding).

Construction in prefab caissons

The barrage would contain 216 turbines each generating 40 MW for the 8,640 MW total. Arrays of sluices would let the tide in and then close to force it out through the turbines after the tide has gone out some distance outside the barrage. This deliberate building of a head on the water builds pressure that makes the turbines more efficient.[23] The barrage would contain a set of shipping locks, designed to handle the largest container vessels. Construction would take about eight years and would require 35,000 employees at peak build time. The minimum lifespan of the barrage would be 120 years (about three times that of a nuclear reactor), but could easily be 200 years if decent maintenance was performed.[23] The STPG appraisal concluded that the electricity generated from the barrage would make the scheme economically viable if given certain "green" advantages, and that the environmental impact was acceptable.[23] Margaret Thatcher's government did not accept this, and shelved the plans. However, since then global warming has radically altered the public perception of environmental damage; and soaring oil, gas and energy costs have made the economics of the barrage much more favourable. The advent of renewable energy discounts favours electricity generated from "green" sources; and in addition, much lower interest rates make the cost of loans much lower, and long-term financing of such massive projects is now more viable. Consequently, there have been renewed calls for these plans to be re-appraised. Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Reef—2007[edit] Evans Engineering have released plans for what they call a Severn Tidal
Tidal
"Reef".[24] This is a novel structure which aims to overcome the environmental side-effects of a barrage, and can be conceptualised as being half-way between a barrage and a tidal "fence" (a linked string of tidal-stream turbines). The designer, Rupert Evans, had previously worked on a tidal fence proposal, but since dismissed it as unworkable. The reef reduces environmental impact by working with a much smaller "head" of water—just 2 metres (6.6 ft)—thereby reducing the impact of the structure on the estuary water and flow. The smaller head means that the water velocity is much lower and more lower power turbines are required. The load factor will be higher, partly because of the generation being both ebb and flow and the total energy output should (according to a recent report by W.S. Atkins commissioned by the RSPB) be significantly greater than for the Cardiff-Weston Barrage, and is in part a result of siting the structure at the "outer" Minehead
Minehead
to Aberthaw
Aberthaw
line, which roughly doubles the volume of tidal water available.[25] Sustainable Development Commission—2007[edit] On 1 October 2007, the UK's Sustainable Development Commission
Sustainable Development Commission
(SDC) published a report looking at the potential of tidal power in the UK,[26][27] including proposals for a Severn
Severn
barrage. The report draws on a series of five evidence-based reports, one of which summarises all the available evidence from previous studies on a number of Severn barrage options, but focusing on the Cardiff-Weston and the Shoots schemes. The SDC also commissioned a programme of public and stakeholder engagement, which included a national opinion poll and a series of local and regional workshops.[28] The SDC gave its support to the building of a Severn
Severn
barrage, providing a number of strict conditions were met. These include:

A Severn
Severn
barrage should be publicly led as a project and publicly owned as an asset to avoid short-term decisions and ensure the long-term public interest Full compliance with the EU Habitats and Birds Directives is vital, as is a long-term commitment to creating compensatory habitats on an unprecedented scale Development of a Severn
Severn
barrage must not divert Government
Government
attention away from much wider action on climate change

The SDC also raised the challenge of viewing the requirement for compensatory habitat as an "environmental opportunity", through the potential to combine a climate change mitigation project with the adaptation that will be required to respond to the effects of climate change. A publicly led project would enable the use of a low discount rate (2%), which would result in a competitive cost of electricity, and would limit the economic impact of even a very large-scale compensatory habitats package. Electricity
Electricity
production costs are not competitive if a commercial discount rate is applied. UK Government
Government
study announced—2007[edit] Main article: Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Feasibility Study A two-year feasibility study was announced in late 2007,[29] and the terms of reference were announced on 22 January 2008,[30] following the publication of the Turning the Tide
Tide
report from the Sustainable Development Commission. This study builds upon past studies and focuses on a variety of tidal range technologies including barrages and lagoons, and innovative designs such as a tidal fence and a tidal reef in the Severn
Severn
estuary. The study, initially led by John Hutton, Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, was then led until the 2010 General Election by Ed Miliband, who was at that time the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. The study aims to gather and assess evidence to enable the Government to decide whether it could support a tidal power scheme in the Severn Estuary
Estuary
and if so on what basis. Key work areas involved are:

The environmental impacts on biodiversity and wildlife; flood management; geomorphology; water quality; landscape and compensatory habitat; Engineering and technical areas such as options appraisal; costs; energy yield, design and construction, links to the National Grid and supply chain; Economic considerations—financing; ownership and energy market impacts; The regional social, economic and business impacts; Planning and consents—regulatory compliance; and Stakeholder engagement and communication.

The feasibility study concluded its first phase when a public consultation was launched on 26 January 2009. The consultation covered a proposed short-list of potential tidal power project options from an initial list of 10 schemes, processes that were undertaken during shortlisting and the proposed scope of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The SEA is a formal environmental assessment of plans or programmes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment.[31] A consortium led by Parsons Brinckerhoff
Parsons Brinckerhoff
(PB) and Black & Veatch (B&V) has been appointed to manage this part of the project. The process is guided by a stakeholder steering group. The study will culminate in a full public consultation in 2010.[32] In July 2009 the Government
Government
response to consultation confirmed detailed study would be carried out in the second phase on the five schemes that were proposed for short-listing in January. It also announced work to bring forward 3 further schemes that are in the very early stages of development. In September 2010, The Observer reported that the government intended to rule out the possibility of public funding for a complete barrage, while recommending that further feasibility studies be carried out on smaller projects.[33] On 18 October the government announced that the project was being abandoned.[34] Corlan Hafren—2011[edit] In December 2011 it was reported that the government was talking to Corlan Hafren, a private sector consortium,[35] about a proposal to build a privately financed barrage from Lavernock Point
Lavernock Point
to Brean Down.[36] The Department for Energy and Climate Change said it had received the first draft of a business case for the scheme, and that it was an "interesting proposition".[35] The campaign was led in 2012 by politician Peter Hain.[37] It has been suggested by Atkins that similar schemes could be trialled on smaller estuaries in advance of the Severn, for example the Mersey and Duddon.[38] However the Hafren Power plan collapsed after it was rejected by three independent committees of MPs and by the Government. On 14 January 2014 it was announced that the Chairman and Chief Executive of Hafren Power had resigned, putting an end to the Severn
Severn
Barrage project.[39] Economic impact[edit] Power generation potential[edit] The Severn
Severn
Barrage plans would provide a predictable source of sustainable energy during lifetime of the scheme, with claims of up to 5% of the UK's electricity output from the 10-mile version.[40] This could reduce the cost of meeting UK’s renewable energy targets, and help the UK to meet such targets, including those to tackle climate change.[26] This is because of the few carbon emissions associated with the plan, because unlike conventional power generation, the Severn
Severn
Barrage plans do not involve the combustion of fossil fuels. A consequence of this plan is that the carbon payback time—the time it takes for saved carbon emissions (those produced by generating the same amount of power in other ways) to outstrip those produced during construction— could be as little as four-and-a-half months, although likely to be around six.[41] It could continue to operate for around 120 years,[26] compared with 60 years for nuclear power plants.[42] An additional benefit would be to improve energy security.[26] However, although power supply is predictable, peaks in generation from the barrage do not necessarily coincide with peaks in demand. There are two major tidal cycles affecting power output:

semi-diurnal cycle: the familiar daily rise and fall of the sea with a full cycle every 24 hours and 50 minutes, with two high and low tides, giving maximum power generation opportunities a few hours after each of the two high tides; spring-neap cycle: a 29.5 day tidal range cycle with the lowest power days producing about 25% of the power of the highest power days.[43]

Just under eight hours per day of generation time is expected.[43] Construction costs[edit] Estimated costs for existing plans could be as low as £10bn and as high as £34bn. Recent studies[44] have suggested that the smaller short-listed options could be privately financed, and so in effect the matter of cost and risk becomes a private one between the building consortium and their banks. Schemes of the scale of Cardiff-Weston are likely to require significant Government
Government
involvement. If the banks feel that a smaller project is viable and decide to lend the money at an acceptable cost of finance then the projects will go ahead (subject to planning and other approvals). None of this cost would directly fall on the tax-payer but any support mechanism for the tidal power would be likely to fall on consumers. There would, though, be secondary knock-on costs from the tidal power project that might be met by the tax-payer, such as modifying existing ports, provision of compensatory habitat and dealing with environmental change. However, these would be offset by the positive knock-on effects, such as flood protection – which would have otherwise also cost tax-payer money. Whether the parties actually decided to exchange money for these knock-on effects would be a matter for Government
Government
negotiation. As a cost comparison, Hinkley Point C nuclear power station
Hinkley Point C nuclear power station
(also being built on the Severn
Severn
Estuary) will cost £25bn, and deliver 3.2GW of power sold at £92.50 per megawatt hour (MWh) of electricity generated for the 35 years of the contract.[45] The Hafren scheme proposers state they would require £25 billion capital investment, and power costs would be £160 per MWh for the first 30 years, and £20 per MWh thereafter. Other schemes have been costed at between £150 and £350 per MWh.[2] Local impact[edit] Some say that a large-scale barrage would create leisure-friendly water conditions behind it but with around 10 m rise and fall this would still be one of the largest tidal ranges in the UK bringing with it significant danger to any leisure users. Flood
Flood
protection would be provided by the barrage, covering the vulnerable Severn estuary from storm surges from the sea but drainage from land upstream would be impeded causing worse flooding there. Also higher water levels downstream of the barrage could cause flooding on the Somerset Levels. New road and/or rail transport links could be built across a barrage if demand rises in the future, as outlined below. Any barrage could provide a boost to the local economy – construction industry in the short term, tourism and infrastructure in the long term.[46] However, shipping would have to navigate locks and the reduced depth of water would prevent much existing shipping from being able to access docks in Wales
Wales
and Bristol
Bristol
putting thousands of jobs at risk.[47] Other existing estuary industries, including fisheries, would be damaged and jobs lost.[48] All industrial discharges into the River Severn
Severn
(e.g. from Avonmouth) would have to be reassessed.[49] Environmental impact[edit] The Severn
Severn
Estuary
Estuary
is a Special Area of Conservation
Special Area of Conservation
due to the European importance of its ecology. The inter-tidal area provides food for over 85,000 migratory and wintering water birds, and represents 7% of the UK's total estuaries.[50] There are nature reserves and Site of Special
Special
Scientific Interest (SSSI) on the islands of Flat Holm[51] and Steep Holm.[52] The Barrage was not supported in the 2003 Energy Review due to "strong environmental concerns" (The same paper also described nuclear power as "an unattractive option").[53] The RSPB
RSPB
opposes any Severn
Severn
Barrage because of the effect it will have on the feeding grounds that 85,000 birds depend on, stating "The impact a barrage would have is huge. This is one of the most important sites in the UK for wild birds and the chances of them surviving if it went ahead are fairly slim. There would not be enough room left for all the birds and there would not be enough food for those that remained. The estuary is one of the UK's most important sites for water birds and its wildlife value must be taken fully into account."[54]

Possible effect of turbidity reductions in Severn
Severn
Estuary

The present strong tidal currents in the estuary serve to lift up silt sediment and so keep the water thick with fine particles—around 30 million tonnes of suspended sediment move in the Estuary
Estuary
on a high Spring tide. This blocks light-penetration and means that the Severn Estuary
Estuary
marine environment is actually a relative desert, in terms of both plant and fish life.[55] The zone of maximum turbidity is confined to the inner Severn
Severn
and does not extend westwards into the Bristol
Bristol
Channel.[56] An estimated 6.4 million tonnes/year of sand moves up and down the Bristol
Bristol
Channel[57] which would be blocked by a tidal barrage; the potential environmental consequences of interrupting this flux of sand include local coastal erosion and loss of coastal habitats. The barrage will not create a "lagoon"—as both opponents and supporters have sometimes claimed. Tidal
Tidal
power stations by definition require that the tide flows through the barrage, but the tidal range in the Severn
Severn
would be halved.[54] There are claims that the migration of fish would be hampered, but these are contested. The Severn
Severn
bore would also be eliminated. Any barrage would be likely to stimulate coastal erosion in some areas, and create a negative visual impact upon the landscape (subjective, similar to wind turbines). There would also be negative consequences of the huge amount of concrete (and other materials) needed, with the quarrying of stone likely to impact on other areas. DEFRA
DEFRA
claims that the environmental effects of the barrage still need more analysis before final conclusions can be drawn. The Sustainable Development Commission is investigating UK tidal resources, including tidal power in the Severn
Severn
Estuary
Estuary
and its environmental impact, and should report mid-2007.[58] Tidal
Tidal
lagoon alternative[edit] Friends of the Earth
Friends of the Earth
support the idea of tidal power, but oppose barrages because of the environmental impact. They have proposed their own plans based on the concept of tidal lagoons,[59] whereby man-made lagoons in the estuary would fill and drain through turbines. Their proposals would include lagoons covering up to 60% of the area covered by the barrage, which in some smaller configurations would not impound water in the ecologically sensitive inter-tidal areas of the estuary. The lagoons could be sub-divided so power would be generated at more states of the tide than a barrage, with lower peak output, giving economic advantages to set against the higher construction cost of longer barriers. This idea is based on a prototype now being proposed at Swansea bay. However leading figures in the construction industry are sceptical that the lagoons can be economic.[60][61][62] A set of Tidal
Tidal
lagoons known as the "Russell Lagoon
Lagoon
concept" were studied and dismissed by the 1981 Bondi Committee report, rejected on the grounds of both economics and environmental damage. Studies suggested that tidal currents around and between the lagoons would become extremely fierce and damaging. Tidal
Tidal
Fence[edit] Another possibility is to construct one or more tidal fences across the Severn
Severn
estuary which would generate power using tidal stream generators. This has been put forward by the Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Fence Consortium, and groups including IT Power and a number of industry and academic groups.[63] This would attempt to maximise the potential power generated whilst allowing for shipping to reach Cardiff
Cardiff
and Bristol
Bristol
without hindrance (through gaps at least 650 m wide) and wildlife to maintain their existing habitats. The group has now been contracted by the UK government to investigate the idea under the Severn
Severn
Embryonic Technology Scheme (SETS).[64] The group estimates that it would cost £3.5bn to construct an outer fence from Aberthaw
Aberthaw
to Minehead
Minehead
which would generate 1.3GW or 3.5TWh/year. It is also investigating an inner fence from Lavernock Point to Brean Down
Brean Down
including Flat Holm
Flat Holm
and Steep Holm
Steep Holm
islands. Both fences could possibly be built. The fence would permit the migration of salmon and would only slightly affect the mudflats used by migrating birds. In addition it could significantly reduce the flood risk in the Severn
Severn
estuary.[65] A second approach to a tidal fence being explored by VerdErg uses a different way of generating electricity called the Spectral Machine Energy Converter (SMEC).[66] This uses the flow past Venturi tube sections as a pump without moving parts to create a large secondary flow which drives turbines on the sea bed.[67] Verderg estimate that they could produce output of 13.7TWh/yr at a cost of £9.9bn using the Lavernock Point/ Brean Down
Brean Down
connection. Some simulations have also been done on the partial barriers envisaged by Dynamic tidal power
Dynamic tidal power
which have similar advantages. Effects of different site locations[edit] One of the complicating factors in assessing the impacts of a barrage is the large number of possible locations and sizes for the barrage. Generally, the larger the barrage the bigger its environmental impact, and the greater the amount of energy it could transfer—and therefore the bigger carbon offset it could have by way of its renewable power generation. The largest barrages (sited beyond Hinkley Point
Hinkley Point
and towards Minehead on the English side and Aberthaw
Aberthaw
on the Welsh side) would significantly affect the entire Severn
Severn
Estuary
Estuary
and much of the Bristol Channel, but could generate 15 GW peak power and protect the whole of the Somerset levels against flooding and sea-level rise caused by Global Warming. The smallest barrages (sited at Aust/Chepstow) would affect only the river and estuary in Gloucestershire, but would also only generate perhaps 0.75 GW peak power. A 2009 Paper by Atkins[68] re-evaluated the potential energy which could be generated from the various locations, and concluded that, contrary to earlier studies and computations, the maximum power potential would come from an Ilfracombe- Gower
Gower
barrage, much further west even than the earlier Minehead- Aberthaw
Aberthaw
proposals. This was attributed by the study to several calculation elements which were neglected in previous numerical models. Trans-barrage transport links[edit] It is possible that some types of barrage could be used for transport links between southern England
England
and southern Wales, and more specifically the areas around Weston super Mare
Weston super Mare
and Cardiff
Cardiff
but no demand surveys have been carried out to show whether such a link would be useful to commuters or businesses. The east-west position of any future barrage will impact the utility of any transport links across it. Various proposals include a dual carriageway road giving a further crossing in addition to the Second Severn
Severn
Crossing and the Severn Bridge. The road would have to be taken over the sea locks on a bridge at a height of the Bridge of the Americas
Bridge of the Americas
(i.e. with a clearance of 61.3 m) if the locks are Panamax-sized. Some proposals also include a double track railway line across the barrage. A railway would have a longer approach up to a fixed bridge over the locks. The approach would be greatest for non-electrified heavy railway capable of taking freight, slightly less for non-electrified passenger line, and less still for electrified passenger line. There is no electrification presently in the Bristol or Cardiff
Cardiff
areas, but this would change with the electrification of the Great Western Main Line. An alternative to a fixed bridge would be a swing bridge, though there is concern expressed at this reducing capacity through the locks and on the railway. However, two swing bridges, one at either end of the lock would mean that one bridge could be kept open to railway traffic at all times. The double track could be reduced to single track at this point without creating too much of a bottleneck, or if double track is required this could be worked around by grade separating the two lines and having double-decked bridges. The line could then be used to partially relieve the Severn
Severn
Tunnel. The option for a new fixed rail link has implications for several wider transport proposals. One of the proposed routes for an Irish Sea Tunnel is from Fishguard, which would generate large amounts of extra freight traffic which the current Severn
Severn
tunnel—already operating at capacity—could not handle. Additionally, a new high-speed rail route has been suggested between London, Bristol, and Cardiff, which faces similar capacity constraints. If the barrage is built further west, any transport connection would instead link more isolated areas of the Devon-Cornwall peninsula with the cities of South Wales
Wales
and the ports of Pembrokeshire. Opinions[edit] Backers[edit]

The former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Tony Blair[69] (who backed it in the last weeks of his tenure) The Chairman of the Climate Change Committee, Lord Deben, formerly John Selwyn Gummer (who has shares in a company bidding for the project)[70] The Welsh Assembly Former Welsh First Minister Rhodri Morgan[71] The South West Regional Assembly Weston Super Mare MP John Penrose[72] Former Cardiff
Cardiff
Central MP Jenny Willott[73] Northavon MP Steve Webb[74][75] Ogmore MP and Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Wales
Wales
Huw Irranca-Davies[76] Kingswood MP Roger Berry[77] Gower
Gower
MP Byron Davies [78] Scientist and "Gaia" theorist Dr. James Lovelock
James Lovelock
CBE[71] Former Welsh Secretary The Lord Hain

Opponents[edit]

The Commons Welsh Affairs Select Committee The Commons Energy and Climate Change Select Committee Former UK Science Minister Lord Sainsbury North Somerset MP and International Trade Secretary Liam Fox The Bristol
Bristol
Port
Port
Company RSPB
RSPB
Wales[79] Friends of the Earth
Friends of the Earth
Wales[79] World Wildlife Fund
World Wildlife Fund
Wales[80] Gwent Wildlife Trust[81] Avon Wildlife Trust[82] Political commentator George Monbiot[83]

See also[edit]

England
England
portal Energy portal

Cardiff
Cardiff
Bay Barrage Energy policy of the United Kingdom Energy use and conservation in the United Kingdom Tidal
Tidal
power Tidal
Tidal
resonance List of tidal power stations Saint Petersburg Dam

References[edit]

^ " Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Feasibility Study Conclusions". Retrieved 25 December 2010.  ^ a b "Energy and Climate Change – Second Report". Parliament UK. Retrieved 21 April 2014.  ^ Energy & Climate Change Select Committee. "MPs say case for Hafren Power barrage scheme unproven". A Severn
Severn
Barrage?.  ^ Carne, Brian (1995). "Thomas Fulljames 1808–74" (PDF). Transactions of the Bristol
Bristol
& Gloucestershire
Gloucestershire
Archeological Society. CXIII: 16–17.  ^ " Severn
Severn
Estuary
Estuary
Barrage". UK Environment Agency. 31 May 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 September 2007. Retrieved 3 September 2007.  ^ Chan, Marjorie A.; Archer, Allen William (2003). Extreme Depositional Environments: Mega End Members in Geologic Time. Boulder, Colorado: Geological Society of America. p. 151. ISBN 0-8137-2370-1.  ^ "Coast: Bristol
Bristol
Channel". BBC. Retrieved 27 August 2007.  ^ "£650 Million barrage plan unveiled". Burnham on Sea.com. 4 March 2006. Retrieved 10 August 2008.  ^ Pavel Aleksandrovich Shishkov (1887–1958) (Biographical information in Russian.) ^ a b "The Severn
Severn
Barrage" (PDF). Royal Academy of Engineering. Retrieved 10 August 2008.  ^ "How Continuous Power Is Produced By Tide", November 1931, Popular Mechanics article detailed drawing of how unique 24-hour tidal system worked ^ "Research Report 3— Severn
Severn
Barrage Proposals" (PDF). Sustainable Development Commission. p. 17. Retrieved 10 August 2008.  ^ "The Severn
Severn
Barrage" (PDF). Friends of the Earth. September 2007. p. 27. Retrieved 10 August 2008.  ^ Brooke, Gerry (4 August 2008). "Back to the drawing board". Western Daily Press. This is Bristol. Retrieved 12 December 2009.  ^ Bryant, Paul. "History of Severn
Severn
Barrage proposals". r-energy. Retrieved 8 December 2010.  ^ Tidal
Tidal
power from the Severn
Severn
Estuary—Volume 1. Energy Paper 46. HMSO. 1981.  ^ Institution of Civil Engineers (Great Britain) (1990). Developments in Tidal
Tidal
Energy. Thomas Telford. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-7277-1571-5.  ^ HL Deb, 7 March 1984 vol 449 cc263-5 ^ McKenna, John (3 October 2007). "Will the new fesibilty study into the Severn
Severn
Barrage be the first steps towards construction or another false dawn?". New Civil Engineer. Retrieved 12 December 2009.  ^ "Lib Dems back small-scale Severn
Severn
Shoots barrage proposal".  ^ The Severn
Severn
Barrage Project: General Report. Energy Paper 57. HMSO. 1989.  ^ Excell, Jon (19 June 2006). " Severn
Severn
barrage could meet five per cent of UK energy needs". The Engineer. Retrieved 18 September 2012.  ^ a b c d "Energy Review Consultation Response by Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group" (PDF). Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 November 2007. Retrieved 8 December 2010.  ^ "Joseph Evans & Sons Ltd".  ^ " Severn
Severn
reef plan is 'more green'". BBC News. BBC. 26 November 2008. Retrieved 8 March 2010.  ^ a b c d " Tidal
Tidal
Power". Sustainable Development Commission. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ Kinver, Mark (1 October 2007). "Advisers endorse tidal power plan". BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ "Engagement report—Public and stakeholder engagement programme" (PDF). Sustainable Development Commission. October 2007. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ "John Hutton calls for open minds on the future of the Severn barrage". BERR. Archived from the original on 24 July 2011. Retrieved 1 December 2010.  ^ " Severn
Severn
tidal power study could unlock massive renewable potential". BERR. 22 January 2008. Retrieved 8 December 2010.  ^ "Strategic Environmental Assessment". BERR. Retrieved 27 August 2008.  ^ " Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Q&A" (PDF). Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ Webb, Tim (5 September 2010). " Severn
Severn
green energy project loses government funding". The Observer. London. Retrieved 10 September 2010.  ^ " Severn
Severn
barrage tidal energy scheme scrapped by Huhne". BBC News. 18 October 2010. Retrieved 21 April 2014.  ^ a b "New talks on Severn
Severn
barrage plan from Cardiff
Cardiff
to Weston". BBC News. 7 December 2011. Retrieved 19 January 2012.  ^ Hutchinson, Clare (19 October 2010). "'Real cost' of Severn
Severn
Barrage £34bn". WalesOnline. Retrieved 18 September 2012.  ^ Evans, Bethan (9 September 2012). "Barrage bid to be looked at – again". The Weston & Somerset Mercury. Retrieved 17 September 2012.  ^ OConnell, Dominic (27 March 2011). " Severn
Severn
barrage awaits the right time and tide". The Sunday Times. Retrieved 18 September 2012.  ^ Shipton, Martin. "Four key figures in Hafren Power resign". Wales Online. Retrieved 8 October 2015.  ^ BBC (26 January 2009). "Shortlist for Severn
Severn
energy plans". BBC News. Retrieved 5 March 2010.  ^ " Severn
Severn
Barrage will pay back carbon in less than six months, says study". 2 March 2009. Retrieved 8 March 2010.  ^ "Extending the Operational Life Span of Nuclear Plants". IAEA.org. International Atomic Energy Agency. 8 March 2010. Retrieved 8 March 2010.  ^ a b Turning the Tide, Tidal
Tidal
Power in the UK (Report). Sustainable Development Commission. 30 September 2007. pp. 25,77–79. Retrieved 8 March 2010.  ^ DECC Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Consultation Supporting Documents (Report). DECC. 23 April 2009. Retrieved 25 May 2009.  ^ Syal, Rajeev (4 August 2015). "Deal to build UK nuclear plant should be finalised within weeks". Guardian. Retrieved 8 October 2015.  ^ "£14 Billion Tidal
Tidal
Barrage Proposed for Severn
Severn
Estuary". Earth toys. 28 October 2008. Retrieved 28 October 2008.  ^ " Severn
Severn
Barrage 'would destroy port jobs'". SouthWest Business. Retrieved 30 August 2017.  ^ A Severn
Severn
Barrage: second report of session 2013-14, Vol. 1: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. The Stationery Office. 2013. p. 35. ISBN 9780215058843.  ^ "The Severn
Severn
Estuary: Occasional Paper No 13" (PDF). Marine Biological Association. Retrieved 8 December 2010.  ^ " Severn
Severn
Barrage is not the answer". Press Release. Friends of the Earth. 11 April 2006. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ "Flat Holm—About the island". BBC. 3 April 2008. Retrieved 12 April 2008.  ^ "Steep Holm" (PDF). English Nature. Retrieved 6 September 2007.  ^ "Energy White PaperOur Energy Future—creating a low carbon economy" (PDF). Department of Trade and Industry. February 2003. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 August 2010. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ a b "Barrage bad for birds". (Environmental Data Interactive Exchange). Retrieved 10 August 2008.  ^ Kirby, R.; Shaw, T (March 2005). " Severn
Severn
Barrage, UK–environmental reappraisal". Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers 2005: Engineering Sustainability. Institution of Civil Engineers. 158 (3): 31–39.  ^ Collins, M.B., 1987. Sediment
Sediment
transport in the Bristol
Bristol
Channel: a review. Proceedings of the Geological Association 98, 367-383. ^ Harris, P.T., Collins, M.B., 1988. Estimation of annual bedload flux in a macrotidal estuary, Bristol
Bristol
Channel, U. K. Marine Geology 83, 237-252. ^ Bradshaw, Ben (15 March 2007). "Speech by Ben Bradshaw MP to the Wave and Tidal
Tidal
Conference of the British Wind Energy Association". Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ "A Severn
Severn
barrage or tidal lagoons? A comparison" (PDF). Friends of the Earth Cymru. January 2004. Retrieved 1 October 2007.  ^ " Tidal
Tidal
Lagoon
Lagoon
Power Generation Scheme in Swansea Bay" (PDF). Department of Trade and Industry and the Welsh Development Agency. April 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 June 2007. Retrieved 1 October 2007.  ^ "Research Report 2— Tidal
Tidal
technologies overview" (PDF). Sustainable Development Commission. October 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 May 2009. Retrieved 11 August 2008.  ^ Jonathan Ford (15 January 2017). " Tidal
Tidal
power swamped by dubious mathematics". Financial Times. Retrieved 15 January 2017.  ^ " Tidal
Tidal
Fence instead of Severn
Severn
Barrage".  ^ "IT Power to lead Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Fence Consortium
Consortium
with potential alternative to the Severn
Severn
Barrage".  ^ " Severn
Severn
tidal 'fence' idea floated". BBC. 16 July 2008.  ^ " Severn
Severn
Embryonic Technologies Scheme". Retrieved 25 December 2010.  ^ "SMEC Technology Basic Principles". Retrieved 25 December 2010.  ^ Atkins, R Rainey. "Technical Note: The optimum position for a tidal power barrage in the Severn
Severn
estuary, Reference CJ0040.6680/TN-001r3" (PDF). Atkins. Retrieved 20 May 2012.  ^ "BLAIR BACKS SEVERN BARRAGE".  ^ Brooker, Christopher (25 August 2012). "The tangled tale of Lord Deben and a dodgy Severn
Severn
barrage". Telegraph. Retrieved 5 September 2016.  ^ a b Jones, Gareth (2 June 2006). "Experts disagree on river barrage". BBC News. Retrieved 6 April 2010.  ^ "ePolitix.com – John Penrose".  ^ "UK Parliament – Early Day Motions By Details".  ^ "thisisbristol.co.uk".  ^ "The Webb log: Time to put some energy into power from the Severn".  ^ "House of Commons Hansard Debates for 4 Feb 2003 (pt 5)".  ^ "BACKING FOR £14BN TIDAL BARRAGE BID".  ^ "Byron Meets with Chancellor over Tidal
Tidal
Lagoon". byrondavies.org.uk. Retrieved 21 November 2016.  ^ a b Estuary
Estuary
energy plan makes waves, The Guardian, 26 April 2006 ^ "Concern over Severn
Severn
barrage plan". BBC News. 11 April 2006. Retrieved 6 April 2010.  ^ " Severn
Severn
Barrage—Gwent Wildlife Trust".  ^ "The Severn
Severn
Estuary
Estuary
a very special place".  ^ Jones, Gareth (27 May 2007). "Monbiot attacks Welsh energy plan". BBC News. Retrieved 6 April 2010. 

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Severn
Severn
Barrage.

Department of Energy and Climate Change Welsh Assembly Government Severn
Severn
Estuary
Estuary
Partnership: Tidal
Tidal
Power Resource Page" SDC paper " Tidal
Tidal
Power in the UK: Research Report 3 – Severn barrage proposals" Friends of the Earth
Friends of the Earth
" Tidal
Tidal
Lagoons" Plans

Independent report on " Tidal
Tidal
Lagoons" for the DTI and the Welsh Development Agency

BBC Gloucestershire
Gloucestershire
background videos and information Severn
Severn
Lake Official Website World Wildlife Fund
World Wildlife Fund
"Turning the Tide" Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group report for UK Government
Government
DTI

Appendices to – Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group report for UK Government
Government
DTI

Institute of Civil Engineers Severn
Severn
Barrage environmental reappraisal Estuary
Estuary
energy plan makes waves The Guardian 26 April 2006 Institute of Electronic Engineers Severn
Severn
Barrage Tidal
Tidal
power appraisal Memorandum by the Severn
Severn
Tidal
Tidal
Power Group to Parliamentary Committee Standing Conference on Severnside Local Authorities (SCOSLA) Westminster Hall Debate on the Severn
Severn
Barrage Sustainable Development Commission
Sustainable Development Commission
project looking at ' Tidal
Tidal
Power in the UK'

v t e

Electricity
Electricity
generation in South West England

Power stations

Coal

Closed

Carn Brea Castle Meads East Yelland Exeter Hayle Newton Abbot Plymouth Poole Portishead A + B

Gas

Active

Chickerell Chippenham Cranbrook Indian Queens Langage Seabank

Closed

Princetown

Geothermal

Closed

Rosemanowes Quarry

Future

United Downs

Tidal

Proposed

Severn
Severn
Barrage

Nuclear

Active

Hinkley Point
Hinkley Point
B

Closed

Berkeley Hinkley Point
Hinkley Point
A Oldbury Winfrith

Future

Hinkley Point
Hinkley Point
C

Oil

Closed

Portishead B

Wave

Active

Wave Hub

Wind

Active

Carland Cross Cold Northcott Delabole Forrest Moor Goonhilly Downs

Organisations

Ecogen Ecotricity Geothermal Engineering Good Energy Infralec Marine Current Turbines Mendip Power Group Npower Nuclear Electric Ovo Energy Pre-nationalisation electric power companies South Somerset Hydropower Group SWEB Energy Western Power Distribution Wind Prospect

v t e

Energy in the United Kingdom

Companies

Coal

Anglo American Asia Energy BHP ENRC Glencore Rio Tinto UK Coal

Oil and gas

Integrated

BP Royal Dutch Shell

Exploration and production

Afren BHP Cairn Energy Centrica Dana Petroleum Desire Petroleum Emerald Energy EnQuest Essar Energy Hardy Oil and Gas JKX Oil & Gas Melrose Resources Ophir Energy Perenco Premier Oil Regal Petroleum Rockhopper Exploration SOCO International Star Energy Tullow Oil

Supply

Greenergy Murco Petroleum

Support

Abbot Group AMEC Ensco Expro Hunting Petrofac Qserv Score Group Weir Group WesternGeco1 Wood Group

Utilities

Generation and supply

Integrated

Centrica EDF Energy1 E.ON UK1 RWE npower1 Scottish Power1 SSE

Generation

Drax Group Falck Renewables Horizon Nuclear Power1 International Power Vattenfall United Kingdom1 Vedanta Resources

Supply

The Co-operative Energy Ecotricity ESB International Extra Energy Firmus Energy First Utility Good Energy Green Energy LoCO2 Energy Opus Energy Ovo Energy Phoenix Natural Gas Telecom Plus

Distribution

Electricity

Electricity
Electricity
North West1 Northern Powergrid1 SP Energy Networks1 SSE Power Distribution UK Power Networks1 Western Power Distribution1

Gas

Cadent Gas Firmus Energy Northern Gas Networks Phoenix Natural Gas SGN Wales
Wales
& West Utilities1

Transmission

Electricity

National Grid2 Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission SP Energy Networks1

Gas

National Grid

Other

Aggreko APX Group Aquamarine Power Ecogen EnServe Geothermal Engineering Hi-Gen Power Mark Group Wavegen

Companies with headquarters and/or registered office in the UK but no applicable energy operations within the country shown in italics 1Ultimate parent company is not UK-based 2Integrated in the United States, no generation or supply activities in the UK

Energy sources

Coal

Coal
Coal
Authority Coal-fired power stations Coal
Coal
mines Coal
Coal
mining regions Confederation of UK Coal
Coal
Producers Greenhouse gas emissions History

Miners' strike National Coal
Coal
Board

Open-pit coal mining

Electricity

Association of Electricity
Electricity
Producers BritNed East–West Interconnector Energy switching services Economy
Economy
7 Economy
Economy
10 Electricity
Electricity
billing Green electricity Grid Trade Master Agreement HVDC Cross-Channel HVDC Moyle HVDC Norway–UK Isle of Man to England
England
Interconnector National Grid

Control Reserve Service

New Electricity
Electricity
Trading Arrangements Power stations Timeline of the electricity supply industry

Nuclear

Advanced gas-cooled reactor Franco–British Nuclear Forum Magnox National Nuclear Laboratory Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Nuclear Liabilities Fund Nuclear power
Nuclear power
stations Office for Nuclear Regulation Sellafield United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority

Oil and gas

BBL Pipeline Dash for Gas Forties pipeline system Fuel protests Gas infrastructure Greenhouse gas emissions Hydrocarbon Oil Duty Oil and Gas Authority National Transmission System Natural gas
Natural gas
fields Natural gas-fired power stations North Sea oil Oil & Gas UK Oil fields Oil-fired power stations Oil infrastructure Oil refineries Petroleum
Petroleum
revenue tax

Renewables

Biofuels

Biodiesel Biofuel power stations National Non-Food Crops Centre Renewable Fuels Agency Renewable Transport
Transport
Fuel Obligation

Geothermal

Geothermal power
Geothermal power
stations

Hydroelectricity

Hydroelectric power stations Severn
Severn
Barrage Wave farms

Solar power

 

Wind power

List of offshore wind farms List of onshore wind farms North Sea Offshore Grid Wind power
Wind power
in Scotland

Government
Government
and regulation

Organisations

Carbon Trust Cenex Committee on Climate Change Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Department of Energy and Climate Change Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Energy Saving Trust Environment Agency Office of Gas and Electricity
Electricity
Markets

Legislation and initiatives

Carbon Emission Reduction Target Climate Change Act 2008 Climate Change Agreement Climate Change Levy Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act 2006 CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme Display Energy Certificate Energy Act 2013 Energy Performance Certificate Fossil Fuel Levy Low Carbon Building Programme National Industrial Symbiosis Programme Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation Planning Act 2008 Renewable Heat Incentive Renewables Obligation United Kingdom Climate Change Programme

Non-governmental organisations

Charities and pressure groups

Ashden Award BioRegional Campaign against Climate Change Centre for Alternative Technology National Energy Action Stop Climate Chaos Tyndall Centre

Industry bodies

Combined Heat and Power Association Energy Institute Energy Networks Association Energy Retail Association Green Power Forum RenewableUK Utilities Intermediaries Association

Research

Centre for Renewable Energy Systems Technology Energy Technologies Institute Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research NaREC Oil Depletion Analysis Centre Sunbury Research Centre UK Energy Research Centre

Energy conservation

Association for the Conservation of Energy British Energy Efficiency Federation Close the Door campaign Code for Sustainable Homes Double Glazing & Conservatory Ombudsman Scheme EcoHomes Energy efficiency in British housing Energy Saving Trust

Energy Saving Trust Recommended

Greenhouse gas emissions HTB National Home Energy Rati

.