Outspoken Poet's Blog

“History is a guide to navigation in perilous times.
No harm's done to history by making it something someone would want to read.”
David McCullough


The Severn Barrage Tidal Energy Scheme is a project proposal for the building of a barrage between the coasts of the river Severn’s estuary. It shall be a source of carbon free energy and could cater for up to 7 percent of the UK’s needs. Despite those facts the projects has been delayed and opposed by conservationists and scientists alike as it will destroy the habitats of thousands of birds and marine species as well as obliterating vast amounts of potential archaeological sites, some of which have provided the best preserved organic materials in the UK, and range in date from the Mesolithic, through the Roman and Medieval periods and all the way to the 20th century. It is an important debate and a delicate balance must be struck so that future generations can benefit from the Severn Barrage with out having to loose valuable pieces of their ancestor’s history.

Though not a new idea (firstly proposed in 1984), the Severn Barrage Tidal Energy Scheme is once again on the forefront of discussion as global warming concerns deepen and energy supplies are reaching their peak. Further more, the EU requires that 15% of the total power supply in the UK should come from renewable sources by 2020. The project is headed by the Severn Tidal Power Group (STPG), which formed in 1981 with a goal of making this idea a reality. At current there are five schemes for renewable energy using tidal waves that have been put forward for consideration. Those include the GW Severn Barrage, shoot and semi barrages, lagoons and tidal reefs. The Severn Estuary has the second or third largest tidal range in the world and is the most significant tidal range resource in the UK by some distance. In addition, the Severn Estuary tides represents one of the largest low carbon energy resources with estimates of up to 7% contribution of the UK’s total electricity demand. This can be achieved at costs in the range of 20 billion, producing electricity at a rate between 20-25TWh/a at a price around 14-15p/kWh. Even grater is the potential for the local economy as up to 20,000 sustainable jobs can be created as well as opportunities for investment.

As great as the potential benefits from this project maybe, there has been growing concern about the effects of this project, and whether they outweigh the benefits of its realisation. Even studies done by appointment of the projects proponents conclude that all options would impact inter-tidal flora and fauna while at the same time affecting dozens of potential historical evidence sites. The ecological impact of the Severn Barrage would be felt on all levels. According to Richard Boud, currents will change direction, speed and temperature as well as changing the density of seabed sediments in the area, thus permanently altering water quality and sea life, as many species will go extinct. This particular effect is argued by proponents of the Barrage to have the opposite effect. A report on the Severn estuary, commissioned by the DECC (Department of Energy And Climate Change) have concluded that although diminishing some of the existing flora and fauna, the reduced currents and halved tidal wave length would reduce turbidity and stimulate biodiversity. There are also arguments that the construction of the tidal range will affect population, feeding and migration patterns of all birds associated with the Severn estuary areal, though evidence for this claim is scarce.

In the same report another potential effect is stressed out, one of cultural and historical importance. This is the consequences that the construction that the Severn Barrage Tidal Energy Scheme project will have on the archaeological sites of the area. According to the report “the effects of tidal power schemes on marine archaeology are likely to be negative and permanent. Those concerns were already existent and would not have been assigned weight if they were only addressing a limited number of scientific evidence. This however is not the case, as the area proved to be very rich in archaeological sites. A Survey of the Severn Estuary, commissioned by the English Heritage foundation and published in 2008, recorded a staggering number of 928 new monuments, ranging from the Neolithic all the way up to the 20th century. If the Severn Barrage Renewable Energy project is to be undertaken a big percentage of those potential sites will be damaged or lost permanently. The intertidal sites provide some of the best preserved evidence, including preserved biodegradable materials, which have survived due to the anaerobic conditions.Those circumstances cannot be overlooked and place paramount scientific importance on the Severn Estuary area, calling for deeper study and debate of the situation.

With the government pushing for a final decision voices of concern also increase. In an article for the South Wales Argus, reporter Andy Rutherford presents the standpoint of Professor Simon Haslett, director of the Centre of Excellence for Learning and Teaching ate the University of Wales Newport. Professor Haslett warns that “The Severn Estuary is a rich archaeological treasure trove and one that has unearthed internationally important finds, such as preserved Stine Age footprints”. He goes further to claim that model simulations have shown that the construction of a Barrage would raise the upstream sea level by three meters and in effect submerging all archaeological sites permanently. Other areas affected by the changing sea levels will suffer quite the opposite effects, as the range of the tide will be cut in half, leaving the upper area of the estuary completely dry, affecting not only biological species but also the most important archaeological sites which provide for the unique organically preserved material finds, that will then dry out and be lost forever. Mark Horton, form Bristol University’s Archaeological Department, describes this as “probably the largest acreage of loss of an archaeological resource ever to have taken place in this country”.

Within the scientific community there is a unified opinion that the barrage would cause great damage to archaeological and historical sites and monuments that rival only the paramount effects the Severn Barrage Tidal Energy Scheme would have on the Estuary’s habitat. Similar unity is to be found amongst governmental bodies and officials, though on the other side of the debate. Though initially the barrage was not supported due to “strong environmental concerns” (Energy White Paper, 2003), and despite of the DECC’s conclusion that “all options would impact inter-tidal habitats there has been growing impatience on the side of politicians and parties who support the project and are pushing for a decision. This decision was supposed to be announced by the Government in early 2010 but is at current postponed. One of the reasons for this might be the protests and movements by organisations like Severn Estuary Partnership (SEP), “Save Our Severn”, “Stop The Barrage Now” and the British Birds Rarities Committee (BBRC), which have over the past few years raised awareness for this problem.

The Severn Barrage Tidal Energy Scheme has proven to be controversial and as an opponent of any extremity I take a standpoint that strives for balance and would draw the most from this situation whilst limiting the damage done. Knowing all the circumstances surrounding this project, it is my opinion that to stop the project would be hard and probably unsuccessful. After all if we were so concerned about living green and preserving nature, we would all ride bicycles and light our nights with candles. And we don’t. What we do is to consume more energy than ever. Our energy needs must be met and with the threat of global warming and indications that the biggest oil field in Saudi Arabia has reached it’s peak they need to be met in a less damaging manner. Renewable energy is one alternative, and whether we like it or not the Severn Barrage Tidal Energy Scheme has great potential, and we cannot shut our eyes to its potential benefits. Still, this potential cannot and must not be realised at the cost of taking lives and destroying history. If the construction of the Barrage is to be undertaken, extensive research should be done and full compensatory systems and projects should be launched to save the species, dependant on the estuary and compensate all affected parties. The Archaeology of the area must not be destroyed and the community should push for full compensations. Those should take the form of funding for the excavation of all potentially important sites. Furthermore the turning the first sod should be delayed for a reasonable amount of time. Just as nature manages to balance all its elements so must we.


It is ironical that a project intended to reduce global warming and CO2 emissions by exploiting renewable sources of energy will at the same time have such paramount negative effect on the environment surrounding it. The Severn Barrage Tidal Energy Scheme shall destroy one of the richest areas of archaeological interest and forever alter a unique and diverse natural habitat. It is our responsibility to look after our blue host and if we are to accept the construction of the barrage, we should do so only when the Government and the EU take responsibility and work together to limit or compensate the damage that will surely be done. If we perceive ourselves as rulers of our planet we must respect and protect all that inhabit it and all that walked the Earth and left their traces before us.

(c)Outspoken Poet