On June 25, the very day British MPs approved the construction of a third runway at Heathrow airport, the government scrapped plans to support a £1.3-billion tidal power lagoon in Wales, effectively putting an end to a project that could have powered over 1,50,000 homes for around 120 years.
The project, which included plans to build a network of six lagoons, had steadily gained the necessary go-aheads, with an independent review by a former Minister concluding that it should be given the greenlight as a ‘pathfinder project’, one that could help Britain become a “global leader” in marine technologies. Tidal Lagoon Power, the company behind the project, had previously highlighted its eagerness to invest in more such projects, including in India. It was hoped that beyond the positive environmental consequences for the region, the project would catalyse investment in more renewable energy efforts. Britain is estimated to have half the tidal energy resources of Europe, according to a recent parliamentary briefing paper, up to 20% of Britain’s current electricity needs can be met through this route.
Cross-party support
The project had garnered considerable cross-party support – over a 100 MPs from across the parties had written to the government urging its adoption. The Welsh government, offering strong financial support, had earlier said that the project gave an opportunity to bring “economic revolution [to] the region”.
However, Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Minister Greg Clark insisted that while the government was committed to low carbon power, this could not be achieved at “any price”. “However novel and appealing the proposal that has been made… the costs that would be incurred by consumers and taxpayers would be so much higher than alternative sources of low-carbon power that it would be irresponsible to enter into a contract with the provider,” he said. He sought to position it against the costs of a nuclear power project, recently given the go-ahead. The tidal project would cost three times the amount.
Nevertheless, the project’s rejection has compounded concerns about the Conservative government’s pledge — made under the previous Prime Minister David Cameron — to be the “greenest government ever”.
“Today is a day of government-induced environmental disaster,” said the Green Party’s Caroline Lucas. “This is a short sighted move… bold action is needed to tackle climate change — and this means investing in innovative new technologies, such as tidal lagoons,” said Haf Elgar of Friends of the Earth, an environmental group.
Others contrasted it with the proposed expansion of Heathrow airport — a project which has raised concerns due to the impact it would have on Britain’s air and noise pollution levels. “One very good way of offsetting the impact on climate change of expanding airport capacity would be to expand renewable energy production,” said Labour’s Bill Esterson during a parliamentary debate on June 25. Still others questioned the length of time it had taken to get to this point. The rejection came nearly one and a half years after a government-commissioned review recommended that the project be given the go-ahead.
For others, it pointed to a missed opportunity to champion an industrial strategy — the project meant good business for the nearby Tata Steel plant at Port Talbot, given the estimated 1,00,000 tonnes of steel that it would have required.
Vidya Ram works for The Hindu and is based in London.
