This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
M396 – Tidal Energy Motion 2016, TSR Labour Party
This House believes that the Government should invest more money into tidal energy technologies to prepare for the future.

The UK has one of the largest marine energy resources in the world and the largest in Europe with 10 gigawatts of resources about 10 gigawatts, approximately 50% of Europe's capacity. This is an impressive statistic but we need to develop further. There are only 20 possible sites in the world that have been identified for tidal stations and 8 of these are in the UK. We need to embrace this fact and become the leading country for tidal power.

The current Government needs to carry on the work of the previous Labour Government who started to make progress on tidal energy. Just 7 tidal fences have the potential to produce 26% of the UKs entire annual energy needs, create 40,000 jobs and revive the Northern industrial Heartland.

Although new oil and gas reserves are constantly being found, there will be a time when these finite resources run out. We need to start making preparations now to ensure that the transition from non-renewables to renewables is as smooth as possible. We believe that tidal energy is the main renewable to focus on at the moment. It is a green and reliable source of energy that costs little money to maintain.Furthermore, tidal energy has no impact on marine life.

Each tidal fence will cost approximately £1.5bn to build but it will definitely be worth the investment in the long run as the total output of each one will be a staggering 5.2TWh of energy. Each fence should last for at least 100 years, create approximately 2150 jobs and provide 1.7% of the UK's energy. The Government will decide how many tidal fences it would like to build but 7 would be ideal. The Government may decide it doesn't want to install any tidal fences and may decide to create tidal lagoon power plants instead. Not all tidal projects have to be that expensive though. A small project built in the Sound of Islay powered more than 5,000 homes and only cost £40 million.

On a bigger scale, a £1bn tidal lagoon power plant in Swansea has been a big success story. 155,000 homes will be powered by the project and it has set a precedent for future tidal projects.The strike price for the tidal lagoon will be £96.50, only a few pounds more than Hinkley Nuclear Power Station's strike price of £92.50 but the extra £4 is a small price to pay for an energy source which is far more predictable, safe and efficient.

We must follow the lead of countries such as Denmark, Germany and South Africa by investing more money in renewable energy. If the Government invests more money in renewable enegy now, the negative impact of fossil fuels running out on the country will be significantly reduced. 25% of the UK's fossil fuel power generation is to come offline by 2020, so we need to start to build now to cope with the higher demand.


Signed,

The Hon. SoggyCabbages MP
Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Energy, Agriculture and Natural Resources


Sources:
http://www.marineturbines.com/Tidal-Energy
http://www.marineturbines.com/sites/...nal-Report.pdf
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...php?p=60538509
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-12767211
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-31927779
http://www.infrastructure-intelligen...ing-permission
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
I welcome the Labour Party's commitment to renewable energy. *Aye.
0
SakuraCayla
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
Looks good to me aye
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
What is the obsession with labour forgetting what has already been done? I know James is our incompetent now rather than yours but this is the second item labour has out forwards saying "do this thing we did last term"

Good joke too saying tidal is so much safer, more efficient, and predictable than nuclear and that it's worth such a large price increase.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
SoggyCabbages
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
What is the obsession with labour forgetting what has already been done? I know James is our incompetent now rather than yours but this is the second item labour has out forwards saying "do this thing we did last term"

Good joke too saying tidal is so much safer, more efficient, and predictable than nuclear and that it's worth such a large price increase.

Posted from TSR Mobile
The projects quoted in the motion have had reports done on environmental impact and have resulted in there being no threat to the local environment where they are based.

Tidal patterns are also incredibly predictable.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
(Original post by SoggyCabbages)
The projects quoted in the motion have had reports done on environmental impact and have resulted in there being no threat to the local environment where they are based.

Tidal patterns are also incredibly predictable.
Can't be more predictable and certainly isn't as controllable than nuclear, and isn't as reliable either

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
McRite
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
Aye.
0
PetrosAC
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
Nay....a shame Labour are already forgetting what we did in Government together.

I feel that there is no need.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
SoggyCabbages
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by PetrosAC)
Nay....a shame Labour are already forgetting what we did in Government together.

I feel that there is no need.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Sorry I'm quite new here, what kind of stuff like this has been done before?
0
PetrosAC
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by SoggyCabbages)
Sorry I'm quite new here, what kind of stuff like this has been done before?
Lime-man (when he was still James Milibanter and Labour Energy Secretary) passed a Statement of Intent massively funding and increasing tidal power as well as Nuclear power
0
Quamquam123
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by PetrosAC)
Lime-man (when he was still James Milibanter and Labour Energy Secretary) passed a Statement of Intent massively funding and increasing tidal power as well as Nuclear power
He did indeed and we included a link to that in the motion itself. He got the ball rolling on tidal energy but now we want to take it to the next level and ensure that the current Government continues the work of making more of our energy renewable and sustainable.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
(Original post by Quamquam123)
He did indeed and we included a link to that in the motion itself. He got the ball rolling on tidal energy but now we want to take it to the next level and ensure that the current Government continues the work of making more of our energy renewable and sustainable.
Pretty sure we intend to further pursue nuclear as necessary

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Quamquam123
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Pretty sure we intend to further pursue nuclear as necessary

Posted from TSR Mobile
Exactly. That's one of the reasons behind creating this motion.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(Original post by Quamquam123)
Exactly. That's one of the reasons behind creating this motion.
I think most people would rather have power that is cheaper and more reliable than more expensive and less consistent

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Quamquam123
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
I think most people would rather have power that is cheaper and more reliable than more expensive and less consistent

Posted from TSR Mobile
As the motion proves, it is possible for tidal energy to be offered at a very similar price to nuclear energy. Nuclear energy can be very dangerous and is not a sustainable source of energy.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by Quamquam123)
As the motion proves, it is possible for tidal energy to be offered at a very similar price to nuclear energy. Nuclear energy can be very dangerous and is not a sustainable source of energy.
4% is not inconsiderable. And if you think it's so dangerous maybe you want to go and have a look at the records, there have only been two major incidents, one was due to a natural disaster whereby nuclear energy issues would be the least of our worries if it hit the UK, and the other is soviet operators not following procedure with a poor reactor design. Nuclear power plants also have next to no radiation release and common natural sources are much much worse.

As for renewability, even just the known cheap extraction reserves could last until the end of Earth.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Quamquam123
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
4% is not inconsiderable. And if you think it's so dangerous maybe you want to go and have a look at the records, there have only been two major incidents, one was due to a natural disaster whereby nuclear energy issues would be the least of our worries if it hit the UK, and the other is soviet operators not following procedure with a poor reactor design. Nuclear power plants also have next to no radiation release and common natural sources are much much worse.

As for renewability, even just the known cheap extraction reserves could last until the end of Earth.

Posted from TSR Mobile
There have only a handful of major incidents but even so, nuclear energy can be extremely dangerous.

It's not just the release of radioactive particles from major incidents though. Disposing of radioactive waste is unsafe.

Believe it or not, tidal energy cannot kill you.
1
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by PetrosAC)
Nay....a shame Labour are already forgetting what we did in Government together.

I feel that there is no need.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Did you read up to the third paragraph?

Changing the structure of energy consumption in a country requires the commitment of successive governments and this government has given no indication that it can be trusted to continue the good work of previous ones when it comes to energy and the environment. The relevant Minister certainly hasn't shown any interest in renewables - or anything related to his role. Though he may redeem himself now by voting in favour of the motion. (banterboy)

If you believe what we did together was good - vote to make sure it continues.
0
PetrosAC
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
(Original post by RayApparently)
Did you read up to the third paragraph?

Changing the structure of energy consumption in a country requires the commitment of successive governments and this government has given no indication that it can be trusted to continue the good work of previous ones when it comes to energy and the environment. The relevant Minister certainly hasn't shown any interest in renewables - or anything related to his role. Though he may redeem himself now by voting in favour of the motion. (banterboy)

If you believe what we did together was good - vote to make sure it continues.
With the passing of the SOI did we not have those 7 tidal fences built?


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
(Original post by Quamquam123)
There have only a handful of major incidents but even so, nuclear energy can be extremely dangerous.

It's not just the release of radioactive particles from major incidents though. Disposing of radioactive waste is unsafe.

Believe it or not, tidal energy cannot kill you.
It's worth noting that Britain has not only had advanced weapons research for nearly 70 years, and the first commercial nuclear station 60 years ago, but also one of the biggest waste processors in the world, we had to close facilities after Fukushima because of lost Japanese contracts, and no nuclear accidents since Thatcher came to power.

Also we get Gen IV reactors expected in about 20 years that are even cheaper, safer, produce less waste, and the waste they do produce cannot be used for nuclear proliferation, and there is one Russian design ready for deployment NOW (would be completed next year if it hadn't been scrapped last year, probably due to our sanctions). Thorium better still, but research on that didn't last long in the 60s and has only restarted recently, it's no good for making bombs.

And you still don't have a solution to tidal not being able to guarantee the energy you want, you have no control over production.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

With HE fairs postponed, would a virtual HE fair be useful?

Yes (68)
61.82%
No (42)
38.18%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed