Benefits of tidal lagoon would be felt across Britain
A year on from the publication of his report on the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon, former energy minister Charles Hendry still believes it’s a ‘no-regrets’ option
IT’S been a year since I published the findings of my independent review of tidal lagoons and the role they could play in helping to ensure a clean, green, secure source of energy, while making us a global leader in this field.
My report concluded that building a pathfinder project in Swansea Bay, one that could pave the way for much larger tidal lagoons, was a “no-regrets” option.
I have not read or seen anything in the past 12 months that has changed my opinion and I still believe the case for the Swansea tidal lagoon is a compelling one. I said last January that it would take the Government time to reflect on and assess my recommendations.
I still remain hopeful that a positive decision will be made soon. This is now particularly the case, given the Welsh Government’s offer to invest in the lagoon, which is a very positive development.
Much is being made of the strike price, the price the private developers would be guaranteed for the energy produced. This must represent value for money and this was a central part of my report. At current prices, the cost of the Swansea project would be about 30p per household per year over the first 30 years – the cost of a pint of milk.
The lagoon has a projected lifespan of 120 years so for the remaining 90 years the price would be at the going market rate.
This year we have seen historic low prices for offshore wind, which is great news. There will be a temptation by some to say that we should now forget about tidal lagoons, because the costs of offshore wind are much cheaper. I think that is the wrong conclusion!
What the low price shows is that where there is real leadership and focus, the costs can be brought down dramatically. If we had not paid those higher costs for the early offshore wind farms, we would not have seen the fall in costs now.
This shows the potential for future, much larger tidal lagoons to significantly decrease generation costs following what would be learned from the Swansea project.
But lagoons offer the UK opportunities that go far beyond low-carbon, long-term, cheap, indigenous power. Like offshore wind, lagoons could be a secure supply of electricity free from the challenges future generations will face in finding new sources of oil or gas.
There’s also the potential to build a new industry, create new jobs, safeguard existing ones, and export this knowledge and technology around the world.
While I was conducting my review, I spoke with many UK companies who describe the potential lagoon programme as a “lifeline”.
Given the challenges facing the UK steel, manufacturing and construction industries, this is probably no understatement.
The financial backers of the Swansea tidal lagoon have strongly signed up to the ambition of developing a supply chain in the UK.
Potential locations would be in Wales, the north-west of England and the west coast of Scotland, spreading the economic benefits to many different parts of the country.
I don’t believe there will be any debate in the decades to come about whether this was the right thing to do, even if the Swansea tidal lagoon ended up being the only one constructed.
I believe lagoon technology not only has the potential to significantly decarbonise the power sector in a cost-effective way, it is also about long-term and cheap power, the creation of an industry and the economic regeneration it could bring in its wake.
Who could find fault in demonstrating such ambition?