On 21/02/2022 12:27, Recliner wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb
> .
>>
>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>> clearance.
>>
>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>
>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>> fully fledged off-roader.
>>
>
> Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
> had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
> Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.
>
> If you do some research, you'll discover that the Freelander 1 was actually
> based on the Morris Maestro van. Try looking up the history of the
> Pathfinder, Oden and CB40 projects.
>
> So, F1 was a Maestro on stilts, and F2 a Mondeo on stilts.

The disco 1 was also Maestro derived I believe. TVS had, allegedly, the
first 6 discos off the assembly line as news vehicles fitted with radio
links. I had a Maestro (MG) at the time and the cockpit was identical.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>
>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at 12:37:51 on
>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in Northumberland
>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle more than
>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of their
>>>>> own
>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no wind/sun,
>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>> perhaps
>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>
>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>
>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>
>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water levels
>> in such a way that it should always be able to generate some power.
>> With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East London,
>> I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the Royal Docks
>> as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have plenty of
>> volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach ought to allow
>> for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>
>
> Aren't they all being repurposed as marinas for Russian Oligarchs to
> park their yachts?
>
>

No, Boris had one of his mayoral Grands Projets there. He essentially sold
them to a Chinese property developer, who was going to create a Chinese
zone of offices, housing and support facilities. The idea was to create a
cluster of Chinese businesses that would seed a whole new business district
(a far eastern version of Canary Wharf). But it went the way of most of his
grand schemes:

<https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/behind-the-story-how-did-boriss-business-park-become-a-ghost-town>

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 12:27, Recliner wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb
>> .
>>>
>>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>>> clearance.
>>>
>>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>>
>>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>>> fully fledged off-roader.
>>>
>>
>> Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
>> had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
>> Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.
>>
>> If you do some research, you'll discover that the Freelander 1 was actually
>> based on the Morris Maestro van. Try looking up the history of the
>> Pathfinder, Oden and CB40 projects.
>>
>> So, F1 was a Maestro on stilts, and F2 a Mondeo on stilts.
>
> The disco 1 was also Maestro derived I believe. TVS had, allegedly, the
> first 6 discos off the assembly line as news vehicles fitted with radio
> links. I had a Maestro (MG) at the time and the cockpit was identical.
>

No, the Disco wasn't based on any Rover, but it obviously borrowed parts
from other Rover Group vehicles. Unlike the Maestro, it had a separate
chassis, and was based on the 1970 Range Rover. That was the norm with the
Disco, which filled the Range Rover's original utilitarian slot, while the
RR went steadily upmarket, becoming ever more expensive and luxurious. So
Discos tended to be based on previous generation RRs.

On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>
>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at 12:37:51 on
>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in Northumberland
>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle more than
>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>
>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>> energy.
>>>>
>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of their
>>>> own
>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no wind/sun,
>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>> perhaps
>>>> five hours a day.
>>>
>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>
>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>
> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water levels
> in such a way that it should always be able to generate some power.
> With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East London,
> I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the Royal Docks
> as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have plenty of
> volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach ought to allow
> for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>

Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes only
one or two at a time would not be producing power.

On 21/02/2022 12:39, Recliner wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>
>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at 12:37:51 on
>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in Northumberland
>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle more than
>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of their
>>>>>> own
>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no wind/sun,
>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>>> perhaps
>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>
>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>
>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water levels
>>> in such a way that it should always be able to generate some power.
>>> With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East London,
>>> I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the Royal Docks
>>> as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have plenty of
>>> volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach ought to allow
>>> for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>>
>>
>> Aren't they all being repurposed as marinas for Russian Oligarchs to
>> park their yachts?
>>
>>
>
> No, Boris had one of his mayoral Grands Projets there. He essentially sold
> them to a Chinese property developer, who was going to create a Chinese
> zone of offices, housing and support facilities. The idea was to create a
> cluster of Chinese businesses that would seed a whole new business district
> (a far eastern version of Canary Wharf). But it went the way of most of his
> grand schemes:
>
> <https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/behind-the-story-how-did-boriss-business-park-become-a-ghost-town>
>

Love this quote:

Royal Albert Docks is a quintessential Johnson project: a bombastic
elevator pitch, short on detail, questionable and poorly conceived,’
says Tom Holbrook, whose practice 5th studio drew up an urban realm
framework for the GLA’s Royal Docks team. ‘Ironically the roots of its
apparent downfall lie in another Johnson project: Brexit.’

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message <sv01fm$gqg$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:44:38 on Mon, 21 Feb
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 12:27, Recliner wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb
>>>>
>>>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>>>> clearance.
>>>>
>>>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>>>
>>>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>>>> fully fledged off-roader.
>>>
>>> Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
>>> had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
>>> Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.
>>>
>>> If you do some research, you'll discover that the Freelander 1 was actually
>>> based on the Morris Maestro van. Try looking up the history of the
>>> Pathfinder, Oden and CB40 projects.
>>>
>>> So, F1 was a Maestro on stilts, and F2 a Mondeo on stilts.
>>
>> The disco 1 was also Maestro derived I believe. TVS had, allegedly, the
>> first 6 discos off the assembly line as news vehicles fitted with radio
>> links. I had a Maestro (MG) at the time and the cockpit was identical.
>
>No, the Disco wasn't based on any Rover, but it obviously borrowed parts
>from other Rover Group vehicles. Unlike the Maestro, it had a separate
>chassis, and was based on the 1970 Range Rover. That was the norm with the
>Disco, which filled the Range Rover's original utilitarian slot, while the
>RR went steadily upmarket, becoming ever more expensive and luxurious. So
>Discos tended to be based on previous generation RRs.

The problem with the first generation Disco was people bought them
thinking they were a budget Range Rover, when in fact they were a
tarted up LWB Land Rover. That's why so many found their way onto the
secondhand market in under a year.

I had a late[1] first-generation Range Rover[3], and five years
afterwards loaned someone's series 1 Disco (while he was posted
abroad)[2]. The latter was significantly less sophisticated. My
colleagues at the time nick-named it "Roland's tractor".

My Freelander 2 is a vast improvement on that Disco, and is probably on
a par with second-generation Range Rovers for comfort. Although they've
much improved the transmission in the mean time.

[1] I forget how old it was, maybe three years, but almost certainly a
trade-in by someone buying one of the first 2nd-gen Range Rovers.

[2] He had worked mainly abroad, which was why it was LHD, and the
market for them in the UK was poor, which is why I baby-sat it for
him, while he decided what to do.

[3] Useful for a couple of Winters, when anything but 4x4 were from time
to time snowed into the village I was living.
--
Roland Perry

In message <sv00fa$9ej$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:27:22 on Mon, 21 Feb
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb

>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>> clearance.
>>
>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>
>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>> fully fledged off-roader.
>
>Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
>had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
>Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.

It started as a joint development with Honda, but the teams soon split,
and while the CRV got to market earlier, the Freelander 1 was much more
of a shrunken Discovery, than a Honda Civic [Rover 400] on stilts.
because they wanted to get it right, rather than sooner.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 14:13:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <sv01fm$gqg$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:44:38 on Mon, 21 Feb
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2022 12:27, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb
>>>>>
>>>>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>>>>> clearance.
>>>>>
>>>>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>>>>
>>>>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>>>>> fully fledged off-roader.
>>>>
>>>> Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
>>>> had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
>>>> Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.
>>>>
>>>> If you do some research, you'll discover that the Freelander 1 was actually
>>>> based on the Morris Maestro van. Try looking up the history of the
>>>> Pathfinder, Oden and CB40 projects.
>>>>
>>>> So, F1 was a Maestro on stilts, and F2 a Mondeo on stilts.
>>>
>>> The disco 1 was also Maestro derived I believe. TVS had, allegedly, the
>>> first 6 discos off the assembly line as news vehicles fitted with radio
>>> links. I had a Maestro (MG) at the time and the cockpit was identical.
>>
>>No, the Disco wasn't based on any Rover, but it obviously borrowed parts
>>from other Rover Group vehicles. Unlike the Maestro, it had a separate
>>chassis, and was based on the 1970 Range Rover. That was the norm with the
>>Disco, which filled the Range Rover's original utilitarian slot, while the
>>RR went steadily upmarket, becoming ever more expensive and luxurious. So
>>Discos tended to be based on previous generation RRs.
>
>The problem with the first generation Disco was people bought them
>thinking they were a budget Range Rover, when in fact they were a
>tarted up LWB Land Rover.

I don't think that's correct. It was definitely a cut-price RR, based on the original model.

<https://www.landroversanantonio.com/history-of-the-land-rover-discovery/>

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 14:49:59 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <sv00fa$9ej$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:27:22 on Mon, 21 Feb
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb
>
>>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>>> clearance.
>>>
>>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>>
>>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>>> fully fledged off-roader.
>>
>>Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
>>had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
>>Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.
>
>It started as a joint development with Honda, but the teams soon split,
>and while the CRV got to market earlier, the Freelander 1 was much more
>of a shrunken Discovery, than a Honda Civic [Rover 400] on stilts.
>because they wanted to get it right, rather than sooner.

No, I'm afraid you're wrong, yet again. It was based on the older Maestro, not any Honda chassis.

In message <3k971hdrirve6d1cfpo53tbfpe3ej7bhvs@4ax.com>, at 14:53:18 on
Mon, 21 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 14:13:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <sv01fm$gqg$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:44:38 on Mon, 21 Feb
>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 21/02/2022 12:27, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>>>>>> clearance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>>>>>> fully fledged off-roader.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
>>>>> had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
>>>>> Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you do some research, you'll discover that the Freelander 1 was
>>>>>actually
>>>>> based on the Morris Maestro van. Try looking up the history of the
>>>>> Pathfinder, Oden and CB40 projects.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, F1 was a Maestro on stilts, and F2 a Mondeo on stilts.
>>>>
>>>> The disco 1 was also Maestro derived I believe. TVS had, allegedly, the
>>>> first 6 discos off the assembly line as news vehicles fitted with radio
>>>> links. I had a Maestro (MG) at the time and the cockpit was identical.
>>>
>>>No, the Disco wasn't based on any Rover, but it obviously borrowed parts
>>>from other Rover Group vehicles. Unlike the Maestro, it had a separate
>>>chassis, and was based on the 1970 Range Rover. That was the norm with the
>>>Disco, which filled the Range Rover's original utilitarian slot, while the
>>>RR went steadily upmarket, becoming ever more expensive and luxurious. So
>>>Discos tended to be based on previous generation RRs.
>>
>>The problem with the first generation Disco was people bought them
>>thinking they were a budget Range Rover, when in fact they were a
>>tarted up LWB Land Rover.
>
>I don't think that's correct. It was definitely a cut-price RR, based
>on the original model.
>
><https://www.landroversanantonio.com/history-of-the-land-rover-discovery/>

They may have wanted people to see it that way, but what they produced
fell very short of what company-car-man wanted.

An almost killer feature was the two extra seats in the back for
toddlers, but on balance a Volvo Estate with the same add-on was much
more comfortable for all concerned.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <3k971hdrirve6d1cfpo53tbfpe3ej7bhvs@4ax.com>, at 14:53:18 on
> Mon, 21 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 14:13:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <sv01fm$gqg$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:44:38 on Mon, 21 Feb
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 21/02/2022 12:27, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <suvp1a$j88$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:27 on Mon, 21 Feb
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Our other big problem with the Freelander was the poor ground
>>>>>>>> clearance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That was a criticism of the Freelander 1 (fixed in the Freelander 2).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The F1 was a fork from the Honda CRV, and not really intended to be a
>>>>>>> fully fledged off-roader.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you quite sure of that? I didn't think that the original Freelander
>>>>>> had nothing to do with any Honda. I think you're demonstrating your New
>>>>>> Scientist 'little knowledge' syndrome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you do some research, you'll discover that the Freelander 1 was
>>>>>> actually
>>>>>> based on the Morris Maestro van. Try looking up the history of the
>>>>>> Pathfinder, Oden and CB40 projects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, F1 was a Maestro on stilts, and F2 a Mondeo on stilts.
>>>>>
>>>>> The disco 1 was also Maestro derived I believe. TVS had, allegedly, the
>>>>> first 6 discos off the assembly line as news vehicles fitted with radio
>>>>> links. I had a Maestro (MG) at the time and the cockpit was identical.
>>>>
>>>> No, the Disco wasn't based on any Rover, but it obviously borrowed parts
>>>> from other Rover Group vehicles. Unlike the Maestro, it had a separate
>>>> chassis, and was based on the 1970 Range Rover. That was the norm with the
>>>> Disco, which filled the Range Rover's original utilitarian slot, while the
>>>> RR went steadily upmarket, becoming ever more expensive and luxurious. So
>>>> Discos tended to be based on previous generation RRs.
>>>
>>> The problem with the first generation Disco was people bought them
>>> thinking they were a budget Range Rover, when in fact they were a
>>> tarted up LWB Land Rover.
>>
>> I don't think that's correct. It was definitely a cut-price RR, based
>> on the original model.
>>
>> <https://www.landroversanantonio.com/history-of-the-land-rover-discovery/>
>
> They may have wanted people to see it that way, but what they produced
> fell very short of what company-car-man wanted.

That may well be true. It certainly was based on the original Range Rover
platform, but was deliberately pitched to be a more utilitarian vehicle,
with less luxury. LR didn't want it to be stealing sales from the current,
more profitable, Range Rover.

In time, of course, both the Disco and Range Rover moved upmarket in
lockstep.

On 21/02/2022 13:16, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>
>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at
>>>>> 12:37:51 on
>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in Northumberland
>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle more
>>>>>> than
>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of
>>>>> their own
>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no wind/sun,
>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>> perhaps
>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>
>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>
>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>
>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water
>> levels in such a way that it should always be able to generate some
>> power. With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East
>> London, I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the
>> Royal Docks as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have
>> plenty of volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach
>> ought to allow for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>
>
> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes only
> one or two at a time would not be producing power.

Absolutely. Here the tides at Scalloway (west side of Shetland) and
Lerwick (east side of Shetland) are about 2 hours apart, despite being
only some 4.5 miles apart.

--
Colin

On 20/02/2022 13:30, MB wrote:
> On 18/02/2022 14:51, ColinR wrote:
>> They are permitted. However, there should be fencing or a suitable
>> alternative. This could be a safety harness and appropriate lifeline or,
>> in the case of ports, self-inflating lifejackets.
>
> And often / usually a safety boat for any work over water.

Not so with many routine jobs such as mooring ships etc.

--
Colin

On 21/02/2022 22:13, ColinR wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 13:16, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>
>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>> 12:37:51 on
>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in
>>>>>>> Northumberland
>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle more
>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of
>>>>>> their own
>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no wind/sun,
>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>>> perhaps
>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>
>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>
>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water
>>> levels in such a way that it should always be able to generate some
>>> power. With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East
>>> London, I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the
>>> Royal Docks as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have
>>> plenty of volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach
>>> ought to allow for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>>
>>
>> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes
>> only one or two at a time would not be producing power.
>
> Absolutely. Here the tides at Scalloway (west side of Shetland) and
> Lerwick (east side of Shetland) are about 2 hours apart, despite being
> only some 4.5 miles apart.
>

Southampton has a similar situation with the east and west bound flows
in the channel contributing to four tides a day in Southampton Water.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 22/02/2022 09:19, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 22:13, ColinR wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 13:16, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>>
>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>> 12:37:51 on
>>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in
>>>>>>>> Northumberland
>>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle
>>>>>>>> more than
>>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of
>>>>>>> their own
>>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no
>>>>>>> wind/sun,
>>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>>>> perhaps
>>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>>
>>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water
>>>> levels in such a way that it should always be able to generate some
>>>> power. With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East
>>>> London, I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the
>>>> Royal Docks as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks
>>>> have plenty of volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that
>>>> reach ought to allow for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes
>>> only one or two at a time would not be producing power.
>>
>> Absolutely. Here the tides at Scalloway (west side of Shetland) and
>> Lerwick (east side of Shetland) are about 2 hours apart, despite being
>> only some 4.5 miles apart.
>>
>
> Southampton has a similar situation with the east and west bound flows
> in the channel contributing to four tides a day in Southampton Water.
>

Actually Southampton is a poor area for tidal turbines. If you look at
the tidal atlas you will see that the commercial advantage of
Southamton's tides are that there is a high water, a small drop and then
the tidal height stands for quite a while (giving the impression of a
double high tide) and then a dramatic fall to low water. Tidal turbines
are better where there is a regular sine wave type of tide.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/62

Even the Solent has odd shaped tides:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/40

--
Colin

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>
>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at 12:37:51 on
>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in Northumberland
>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle more than
>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of their
>>>>> own
>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no wind/sun,
>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>> perhaps
>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>
>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>
>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>
>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water levels
>> in such a way that it should always be able to generate some power.
>> With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East London,
>> I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the Royal Docks
>> as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have plenty of
>> volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach ought to allow
>> for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>
>
> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes only
> one or two at a time would not be producing power.

Yes, but that doesn’t match with the idea that Northfleet should use tidal
power because it’s near the coast. Either it needs local storage to match
supply and demand, or it needs long distance transmission to use non-local
supply, in which case being near the coast is irrelevant.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 22/02/2022 10:02, Sam Wilson wrote:
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>
>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at 12:37:51 on
>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in Northumberland
>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle more than
>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of their
>>>>>> own
>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no wind/sun,
>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>>> perhaps
>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>
>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>
>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water levels
>>> in such a way that it should always be able to generate some power.
>>> With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East London,
>>> I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the Royal Docks
>>> as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have plenty of
>>> volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach ought to allow
>>> for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>>
>>
>> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes only
>> one or two at a time would not be producing power.
>
> Yes, but that doesn’t match with the idea that Northfleet should use tidal
> power because it’s near the coast. Either it needs local storage to match
> supply and demand, or it needs long distance transmission to use non-local
> supply, in which case being near the coast is irrelevant.
>

Agree, but a newbuild site could easily incorporate a pond type of
storage to even out generation across the day.

--
Colin

On 22/02/2022 10:16, ColinR wrote:
> On 22/02/2022 10:02, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>>
>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>> 12:37:51 on
>>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in
>>>>>>>> Northumberland
>>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle
>>>>>>>> more than
>>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and solar
>>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of their
>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no
>>>>>>> wind/sun,
>>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>>>> perhaps
>>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>>
>>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water
>>>> levels
>>>> in such a way that it should always be able to generate some power.
>>>> With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in East London,
>>>> I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something like the Royal Docks
>>>> as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal Docks have plenty of
>>>> volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in that reach ought to allow
>>>> for a reasonable amount of energy to be produced.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes only
>>> one or two at a time would not be producing power.
>>
>> Yes, but that doesn’t match with the idea that Northfleet should use
>> tidal
>> power because it’s near the coast.  Either it needs local storage to
>> match
>> supply and demand, or it needs long distance transmission to use
>> non-local
>> supply, in which case being near the coast is irrelevant.
>>
>
> Agree, but a newbuild site could easily incorporate a pond type of
> storage to even out generation across the day.
>

Modern day tide mill!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 22/02/2022 10:02, ColinR wrote:
> On 22/02/2022 09:19, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 22:13, ColinR wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2022 13:16, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>> 12:37:51 on
>>>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in
>>>>>>>>> Northumberland
>>>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle
>>>>>>>>> more than
>>>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and
>>>>>>>>> solar
>>>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of
>>>>>>>> their own
>>>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no
>>>>>>>> wind/sun,
>>>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for only
>>>>>>>> perhaps
>>>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>>>
>>>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water
>>>>> levels in such a way that it should always be able to generate some
>>>>> power. With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks in
>>>>> East London, I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something
>>>>> like the Royal Docks as a tidal energy storage facility.  The Royal
>>>>> Docks have plenty of volume, and the tidal range of the Thames in
>>>>> that reach ought to allow for a reasonable amount of energy to be
>>>>> produced.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes
>>>> only one or two at a time would not be producing power.
>>>
>>> Absolutely. Here the tides at Scalloway (west side of Shetland) and
>>> Lerwick (east side of Shetland) are about 2 hours apart, despite
>>> being only some 4.5 miles apart.
>>>
>>
>> Southampton has a similar situation with the east and west bound flows
>> in the channel contributing to four tides a day in Southampton Water.
>>
>
> Actually Southampton is a poor area for tidal turbines. If you look at
> the tidal atlas you will see that the commercial advantage of
> Southamton's tides are that there is a high water, a small drop and then
> the tidal height stands for quite a while (giving the impression of a
> double high tide) and then a dramatic fall to low water. Tidal turbines
> are better where there is a regular sine wave type of tide.
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/62
>
> Even the Solent has odd shaped tides:
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/40
>

Yes. The Channel Islands and Seven Estuary would be ideal areas for
tidal power stations.

In message <sv2fqc$80o$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:01:32 on Tue, 22 Feb
2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:

>The Channel Islands and Seven Estuary would be ideal areas for tidal
>power stations.

Apart from the length of cable required from the Channel Islands.

Although iirc one of the beefs they have is staring across a relatively
short stretch of water at a French nuclear station without being able to
benefit from its output.

Maybe if the had some excess tidal power they could send it across to
there.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sv2fqc$80o$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:01:32 on Tue, 22 Feb
> 2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>
>> The Channel Islands and Seven Estuary would be ideal areas for tidal
>> power stations.
>
> Apart from the length of cable required from the Channel Islands.
>
> Although iirc one of the beefs they have is staring across a relatively
> short stretch of water at a French nuclear station without being able to
> benefit from its output.

But they do:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Islands_Electricity_Grid>

On 22/02/2022 11:01, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
> On 22/02/2022 10:02, ColinR wrote:
>> On 22/02/2022 09:19, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2022 22:13, ColinR wrote:
>>>> On 21/02/2022 13:16, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>> 12:37:51 on
>>>>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in
>>>>>>>>>> Northumberland
>>>>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle
>>>>>>>>>> more than
>>>>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and
>>>>>>>>>> solar
>>>>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of
>>>>>>>>> their own
>>>>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no
>>>>>>>>> wind/sun,
>>>>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for
>>>>>>>>> only perhaps
>>>>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water
>>>>>> levels in such a way that it should always be able to generate
>>>>>> some power. With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks
>>>>>> in East London, I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something
>>>>>> like the Royal Docks as a tidal energy storage facility.  The
>>>>>> Royal Docks have plenty of volume, and the tidal range of the
>>>>>> Thames in that reach ought to allow for a reasonable amount of
>>>>>> energy to be produced.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes
>>>>> only one or two at a time would not be producing power.
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely. Here the tides at Scalloway (west side of Shetland) and
>>>> Lerwick (east side of Shetland) are about 2 hours apart, despite
>>>> being only some 4.5 miles apart.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Southampton has a similar situation with the east and west bound
>>> flows in the channel contributing to four tides a day in Southampton
>>> Water.
>>>
>>
>> Actually Southampton is a poor area for tidal turbines. If you look at
>> the tidal atlas you will see that the commercial advantage of
>> Southamton's tides are that there is a high water, a small drop and
>> then the tidal height stands for quite a while (giving the impression
>> of a double high tide) and then a dramatic fall to low water. Tidal
>> turbines are better where there is a regular sine wave type of tide.
>>
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/62
>>
>> Even the Solent has odd shaped tides:
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/40
>>
>
>
> Yes.  The Channel Islands and Seven Estuary would be ideal areas for
> tidal power stations.

As you obviously know there have been a number of proposals for one in
Cardiff Bay.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 22/02/2022 11:01, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>> On 22/02/2022 10:02, ColinR wrote:
>>> On 22/02/2022 09:19, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>> On 21/02/2022 22:13, ColinR wrote:
>>>>> On 21/02/2022 13:16, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>>> On 21/02/2022 10:31, Bob wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-02-18 17:58:36 +0000, Sam Wilson said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 16/02/2022 14:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <aurp0h9jjfks9al53ao5j4rm0b0mjdbqco@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 12:37:51 on
>>>>>>>>>> Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Britishvolt, which is also planning a "gigafactory" in
>>>>>>>>>>> Northumberland
>>>>>>>>>>> to make electric car batteries, has set out plans to recycle
>>>>>>>>>>> more than
>>>>>>>>>>> 10,000 tonnes of battery packs a year.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It aims to power the new centre, in Northfleet, with wind and
>>>>>>>>>>> solar
>>>>>>>>>>> energy.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not exclusively, though, unless they install a very big set of
>>>>>>>>>> their own
>>>>>>>>>> batteries. Sometimes we have a whole week with virtually no
>>>>>>>>>> wind/sun,
>>>>>>>>>> and this time of year just no-wind would mean operating for
>>>>>>>>>> only perhaps
>>>>>>>>>> five hours a day.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Northfleet is near the coast - use reliable tidal power instead.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> … which drops to zero (locally) approximately 4 times a day.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A tidal barrage with two separate storage pounds can manage water
>>>>>>> levels in such a way that it should always be able to generate
>>>>>>> some power. With the demise of actual shipping uses for the docks
>>>>>>> in East London, I'm surprised nobody has suggested using something
>>>>>>> like the Royal Docks as a tidal energy storage facility.  The
>>>>>>> Royal Docks have plenty of volume, and the tidal range of the
>>>>>>> Thames in that reach ought to allow for a reasonable amount of
>>>>>>> energy to be produced.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tides rotate around the country and with a number of tidal schemes
>>>>>> only one or two at a time would not be producing power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Absolutely. Here the tides at Scalloway (west side of Shetland) and
>>>>> Lerwick (east side of Shetland) are about 2 hours apart, despite
>>>>> being only some 4.5 miles apart.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Southampton has a similar situation with the east and west bound
>>>> flows in the channel contributing to four tides a day in Southampton
>>>> Water.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Actually Southampton is a poor area for tidal turbines. If you look at
>>> the tidal atlas you will see that the commercial advantage of
>>> Southamton's tides are that there is a high water, a small drop and
>>> then the tidal height stands for quite a while (giving the impression
>>> of a double high tide) and then a dramatic fall to low water. Tidal
>>> turbines are better where there is a regular sine wave type of tide.
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/62
>>>
>>> Even the Solent has odd shaped tides:
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/8/40
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes.  The Channel Islands and Seven Estuary would be ideal areas for
>> tidal power stations.
>
> As you obviously know there have been a number of proposals for one in
> Cardiff Bay.
>

And now more or less abandoned, mainly because of the enormous subsidy
they'd require. The environmentalists don't much like the idea, either.

<https://www.thenational.wales/environment/19819728.severn-tidal-energy-barrage-scrapped-last-time/>

In message <sv2h9p$iv8$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:49 on Tue, 22 Feb
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sv2fqc$80o$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:01:32 on Tue, 22 Feb
>> 2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>>
>>> The Channel Islands and Seven Estuary would be ideal areas for tidal
>>> power stations.
>>
>> Apart from the length of cable required from the Channel Islands.
>>
>> Although iirc one of the beefs they have is staring across a relatively
>> short stretch of water at a French nuclear station without being able to
>> benefit from its output.
>
>But they do:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Islands_Electricity_Grid>

Alderney's not connected yet, and the Jersey/Guernsey ones are quite
recent, and not big enough to feed anything useful in the opposite
direction.
--
Roland Perry

On 22/02/2022 11:07, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <sv2fqc$80o$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:01:32 on Tue, 22 Feb
> 2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>
>> The Channel Islands and Seven Estuary would be ideal areas for tidal
>> power stations.
>
> Apart from the length of cable required from the Channel Islands.

A 140-mile cable to Exeter is already planned.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAB_Link>
Shorter crossings are available.

Ideally, tidal generators between the islands would have the side-effect
of connecting Alderney, Guernsey and Jersey. That would improve
resilience and give Jersey access to the FAB link, defusing French
threats to turn off the lights until we give them more of our fish.

> Although iirc one of the beefs they have is staring across a relatively
> short stretch of water at a French nuclear station without being able to
> benefit from its output.
>
> Maybe if the had some excess tidal power they could send it across to
> there.