economic - energy gap. The case for and against tidal power, nuclear power and wing power

1. TIDAL BARRAGE FOR Already successful in France at the Rance estuary in Brittany Water is held back at the ebb and flow of tides providing intermittent yet reliable electricity production. Tides are very predictable Renewable; no pollution, no waste, no increase in carbon dioxide, no increase in global warming Very low cost electricity. Massive 1000MW production possible. Lasts 100 years at least Protects coastline behind barrage from erosion and flooding 1000’s of construction jobs created for 10 years and 100’s of jobs once on stream Improved tourism, safer for marinas and water sports Improved transport links if barrage has road

2. TIDAL BARRAGE AGAINST An 8 km long barrage is needed at enormous cost, taking perhaps 10 years to build Electricity is only produced during tides, approximately 10 hours a day Limits shipping and size of vessels above the barrage. Having a negative impact on Hull and Immingham May have a negative effect on tourism due to visual pollution Negative impact on habitats, wildlife; ecosystems and food chains affected Cuts off sediment supply to lower estuary which increases erosion and makes flooding more likely Makes sewage disposal more difficult and more expensive Negative impact on inshore fisheries and fish migration

3. NUCLEAR POWER STATION AGAINST Produces radioactive materials that can trigger cancers and other serious illnesses Radioactive leaks can affect ecosystems, causing contamination lasting 100’s of years. Possible security and terrorism issues Nuclear waste is difficult to deal with. It needs storing for 100’s if not 1000’s of years The UK has no commercial uranium. We are reliant on imports of foreign fuel Nuclear power produces no carbon, but mining and enrichment of uranium do produce emissions Power station cannot respond to peaks and troughs in demand, it must be run continuously Construction and decommission are very expensive The Chernobyl disaster clearly showed the inherent dangers

4. NUCLEAR POWER STATION FOR 20 % of our existing energy needs are produced by nuclear power stations. We have the technology France produces 70 % of its energy from nuclear, Sweden nearly 50 %, and other countries are looking to expand this sector Nuclear electricity is very cheap and only very small amounts of uranium are needed No carbon emissions are produced. The technology does not add to global warming Nuclear power stations can be made leak free and secure from terrorism We have never had problems with our nuclear power stations. We are very experienced with the technology We have our own stockpile of plutonium There is a plentiful world supply of uranium in stable countries such as Canada

5. WIND TURBINES /FARMS FOR Wind is a free, renewable source of energy. The UK is well endowed with wind Wind farms can be onshore or offshore, using simple technology they produce low cost electricity Offshore sites have little environmental impact, and have access to stronger more reliable winds No carbon emissions are produced by wind turbines, reducing our impact on global warming There is minimal environmental / visual impact and little bird damage Wind farms can be confined to less beautiful, less sensitive areas. Not in National Parks or SSSI’s More power will be produced on cold windy winter days when it is needed Wind turbines /farms are easy to dismantle after 25 year life and sites can be restored

6. WIND TURBINES /FARMS AGAINST Wind farms cover large areas with 50 to 60 m towers and turbines, each producing only 1 MW of electricity Winds are unpredictable and unreliable. Turbines need a 10 mph wind to operate and must be shut down at 50 mph Wind turbines interfere with TV and may have an adverse effect on health Turbines have a negative impact on the beauty of the countryside. Some of our best views have already been spoilt Bird damage can be great. The RSPB calls the turbines ‘bird mincing machines’ Wind farms built in coastal areas and areas of outstanding beauty such as the Wolds have negative effects on tourism Offshore sites affect seabed ecology and fishing areas Offshore farms are more costly to build, use more complex technology and are costlier to maintain