Mersey Barrage

Mersey Barrage #1085314 Yesterday at 10:43 AM
Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,863 Likes: 3 wirral Excoriator OP Forum Addict
OP Excoriator Forum Addict Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,863 Likes: 3 wirral	Why is Steve Rotheram so keen to spend an estimated £6 billion damming the Mersey, causing massive disruption, to generate the same amount of energy that a medium sized wind arm in the Irish sea would produce at only £2 billion? This would involve no disruption and would be built in a fraction of teh time. Has he lost his mind?

Google Ads

Re: Mersey Barrage Excoriator #1085315 Yesterday at 02:34 PM
Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 14,397 Likes: 24 Wirral diggingdeeper Wiki Master
diggingdeeper Wiki Master Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 14,397 Likes: 24 Wirral	Because it generates employment and income for the region which is his job. I'm totally against it, the Mersey will silt up much more than it is now, I don't believe their dredging plan will be anywhere near enough. They need to put tidal turbines in the area of the existing offshore wind turbines instead of destroying the Mersey. But most of all they need to create mechanical storage, we already have the facilities to produce more than enough power, we just can't distribute it to the right places at the right time. Cheap mechanical storage in the correct locations will get energy to the right places at the right time without have to rebuild much of the the national grid which is part of the current plan. We are in the ridiculous position of paying electricity generators huge sums of money not to generate electricity, storage will reduce that waste. We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn https://ddue.uk

Re: Mersey Barrage Excoriator #1085316 Yesterday at 10:08 PM
Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,863 Likes: 3 wirral Excoriator OP Forum Addict
OP Excoriator Forum Addict Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,863 Likes: 3 wirral	I asked the chief engineer of the last barrage project how much siltation he expected . His answer was that they'd lose 30% in ten years, even with constant dredging. Storage is needed, but it needs to be in huge quantities. Terawatt hours, and many of them. Mechanic storage is useless on this scale . The biggest pumped scheme in the world is in China and it manages only 40 GW. about one twenty fifth of just one TWh. Hydrogen is the ONLY way to store that quantity, held at high pressure in solution mined caverns in deep salt strata. This is widely used for natural gas A single caver of a million cubic metres capacity is possible and at 350 bar it would hold the best part of a TWh. There is good information on one near us at stublack in Cheshire. You'll find details of it on the internet easily enough.