Peter Burgess
New member
You know, Wookey, you are absolutely right. :bow:
I have an idea Hughie,Hughie said:Rob said:...and i think the possible climate changes due to global warming would mess species around considerably more.Hughie said:I would imagine a rise in sea level would have a similar effect to both wildlife and Otter Hole ........
Surely a tidal barrage would not have that drastic effects, i mean it only slows down the rate of change of the tide, it doesn't flood any extra land does it?
No, I wasn't implying that any extra land would be flooded due to a barrage being built. I was trying to suggest, as you, that if these ideas aren't given due consideration, on the grounds of a small (comparatively) environmental cost, then the cost of the national & global implications become huge. Having said that, obviously one barrage in one tidal estuary wont make a whole heap of difference. If the figures are right and there is potential to generate the equivalent of three nukes then, in my opinion, it has to be considered.
There are many downsides though - sure the current ecology also has to be considered - as Peter said - a good chunk of the Mendips would disappear into it. Also the future of Bristol as a port would be in doubt. However there are many coastal cities, including Bristol, that would become somewhat soggy if global warming continues.
Cutting consumption is an excellent idea - probably not one our political lords and masters really adhere to - consumption usually means spending that results in taxation.
Chris - only a third of my fields are likely to get flooded in the near future -and they're rented! Also they're also in an ESA, SSSI and Ramsar site which makes them comparably unproductive. So as sea levels rise these environmental areas will gradually be lost - to us and it's current flora and fauna.
Food for thought - in 50 years time the global demand for food is predicted to have trebled. I think our descendants will have a different view on the environment then. Watch the Brazilians 'slash and burn'. Sorry - off topic.
You should embrace the future Gussgus horsley said:It's never going to go away is it? Another example of putting out an outrageous proposal, apparently allowing it to crumble under pressure, then trying to slide it in again through the back door. Multiple times in this case.
whitelackington said:You should embrace the future Guss
Only renewable can have a future
Les W said:This is excellent as ideas go, let's spend billions on protecting against such a credible risk as tsunami's. When was the last one? :-\
Why not spend loads of money on preventing earthquakes and volcanoes as well? They have happened in the past as well you know.
cavermark said:But who's protecting us from dinosaurs - that's what I want to know!
Les W said:This is excellent as ideas go, let's spend billions on protecting against such a credible risk as tsunami's. When was the last one? :-\
Why not spend loads of money on preventing earthquakes and volcanoes as well? They have happened in the past as well you know.
JohnMCooper said:I think the last tsunami to hit Somerset was about 400 years ago.
Andy Farrant said:But energy efficiency is a far cheaper and simpler option - start acting now and maybe we won't need a barrage.
whitelackington said:Another massive advantage of a Severn Barrage could be a new road link between Somerset and Wales, bloody handy for cavers,