Quote from: AtomicRex;740192
Ive not yet understood why the seven estuary unit was canned...it seemed to be a great source of free energy that is completely guaranteed!
There were a number of reasons, the biggest being the ecological impact on the wetland areas upstream which are breeding and nesting grounds for a hug population of waterfowl. The area is also designated an SSSI under UK and EU law. The consultants brought in to do a feasibility study calculated that the construction costs + the mitigation costs for habitat creation for the bird population would make the project a non-starter.
While I am not either an engineer or an environmental scientist, I have worked to support the sector for 10 years. The whole CO2 debate is often taken out of context (particularly by the nay-sayers) and there is a lot of misquoting on both sides of the arguement.
That CO2 levels are increasing is a given, that since the industrial revolution CO2 output has increased dramatically is also widely accepted, that we are reducing the planet\'s ability to remove CO2 from the atmosphere by deforestation is also pretty obvious.
Now the question is what is the effect of this CO2 on climate? As Prof says, it is likely that there is some data missing from the computer models, but I would suggest that the overall premise that climatic shift can be affected by increases in CO2 has some merit.
The problem is that the zealots on the AGW side have made a rod for their own back by implying that man-made CO2 emmissions are wholly responsible for climate change, rather than an additional influencer. So if we continue to push CO2 into the atmosphere at the rate we are, it will speed up an already existing process.
H2O Vapour is always raised by the AGW deniers as some sort of "proof" that CO2 is not the culprit, but while water vapour is certainly a more efficient Greenhouse Gas than CO2, we are still adding to the overall greenhouse and that wil increase the greenhouse effect. Additionally, as the global temps rise (albeit slowly) more water vapour is released into the atmosphere increasing the greenhouse effect further. There is evidence to suggest (as Prof mentioned) that actually we are masking the true greenhouse effect by the pollutants and particulates we have released so as these reduce thanks to improvements in filtration and clean-burning technologies the true effects of CO2 will be seen.
re: renewables, I have actually been one of those to have benefitted from the wind industry, but the problem remains that without a huge amount of research into energy storage techniques we are in a situation where we are trying to create an energy industry based on intermittent power sources! Tidal power is probably the most promising renewable energy source, but for some strange reason the powers that be seem to have nailed their flag well and truly to the wind power camp.