David Levy – It Takes Years – April 2021

Back in 2015 Marinet went on record whilst the issue of MCZsMCZ Marine Conservation Zone were being discussed that people should get behind the concept of co-location as being a way forward for identifying potential MCZMCZ Marine Conservation Zone sites.

To remind you, the concept of co-location was to use sites such as areas like the Dogger Bank as not just sites for wind farm technology but at the same time for the sea bed to be protected for fish spawning and nursery grounds.   Just recently a well known NGO put forward in writing that co-location should be considered in the same site for wind farms as well as sea bed oyster farms.   They did so as if it is a new concept and their own idea.

Now where I take issue with them is they were around at the same time Marinet was trying to promote co-location and they gave no support for this idea and they have made us wait six years later before they finally consider it viable.

Marinet has also promoted recycling of quarry waste by using existing technology to produce sands and gravel for the building industry.   This technology can produce sands and gravel up to technical specification required by the building trade.   Yet to date there has been a true reluctance to recycle and still dredgers plunder the sea/ocean floors for virgin aggregates, often when these sites are valuable to the eco-systems of the marine world.

So why have the marine aggregate companies been so reluctant to change their practices?

I am sorry to say that, like many decisions, they were made before a proper evaluation of the options were made — the result: £ hundreds of thousands were invested in aggregate dredging ships and port facilities instead.

I feel that many of us as consumers are being herded into the electric car corral without a proper evaluation of this technology against, say, the production of hydrogen based car production and technology.

If we follow the herd and buy battery based cars the pollution event waiting in the wings is evident if not promoted into our purchasing choices.

The big money fuel producers are investing in hydrogen technology, whilst the car manufacturers appear to be going the opposite way.   It’s difficult to predict whether they will see the error of their ways before waste mountains of spent batteries pollute our environment.

Surely the same discussion had to be considered before opting for nuclear power plants?

The costs of commissioning, storage of waste fuel rods and the decommissioning of the plant after forty years way more expensive than developing our natural wind, wave, tidal, hydroelectric, thermal heating and solar options — but maybe the reasons reside in the production of nuclear weapon grade fuel and not cheap power when we were sold this technology.

If it doesn’t make sense then you can be sure you are being sold a dud.

Until people with an interest, but no financial strings, are included in the Governmental think-tank then commercial interests will forever steer our decision making into cul-de-sacsSAC Special Areas of Conservation that stifle rapid responses to desperate situations.

The industry-based experts lead the Government Ministries by the nose; and MPs have lost the balls to stand up for their constituents having allowed themselves to be whipped to extinction.

It seems the only sane, relatively unbiased people left are us — the people.   But will we really be allowed to decide!