§ LORD BRABAZOX OF TARA rose to call attention to the possibility of tidal harnessing for the generation of electric power, and in particular to the recommendations of the Report of the Brabazon Committee on the Severn Barrage of 1933; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am taking the opportunity to-day of moving the Motion standing in my name calling attention to the Report of a Committee of which I happened to be Chairman some years ago. I was then a junior Minister, and I suppose that that was the reason I was made Chairman. The Prime Minister at that time asked us to report upon the practicability of the Severn Barrage, and I want your Lordships to understand that this was an entirety new conception of harnessing power. It was not like the damming of a river, storing up water and using it when you wanted it. This was a matter of intermittent power by virtue of tidal forces. That Committee was set up in 1925 and it had an immense work to do. It reported in 1933. That fact, I think, indicates what an immense investigation of a physical type had to be carried out. Many problems which had never been faced before were introduced and had to be explored, such as the harnessing of water power of very low heads.
§ I think that just one word on tides, I which constitute the basis of the whole barrage scheme, would not be out of place. We associate tides always, of course, with the attraction of the sun and the moon, and it is interesting, I think, to remember that the actual pull of the sun and moon upon the Atlantic Ocean raises that ocean four feet in the middle. If the coast were, so to speak, normal to the line of approach of that hump the tides everywhere would be four feet high. But what happens is that that hump rolls 704 up against varying shapes of coasts, and the most convenient shape of coast on which to get a high tide is a V-shaped estuary. The Bristol Channel, therefore, is an ideal shape for getting an accumulation of this hump, and consequently at the English Stones, a few miles above Bristol, where it was contemplated that the barrage should be put, there is a rise of 23 feet at spring tides. There is a mean tide of 18 feet, and the neap tides figure is 12 feet. At every tide of the spring type there flows past the English Stones no less than 24,000,000,000 gallons twice a day. That is the power which is going to waste in that particular locality. This investigation was one of very great technical scope, and a sub-committee was formed, consisting of Sir John Snell, Admiral Douglas, Professor Gibson and Sir Basil Mott. Although little praise or thanks has been given to them, we do owe them an immense debt of gratitude for the work they did in this very pioneering piece of investigation.
§ One of the first things that had to be decided was whether such a barrage, stopping such an immense flow of water, would have a deleterious effect on navigation on the lower part of the river. Professor Gibson, of Manchester, took the solution of that problem in hand, and at Manchester he built a model of the whole of the Severn estuary. That model was based on soundings made by the Admiralty in 1849. He built that model, and he then proceeded to flood it with tides—ordinary water with a certain amount of silt in it. He imitated the tides, every tide taking about 30 seconds to come in on the model, and, so to speak, he brought 1849 up to the present day. If he had got his silt right, and all the other factors correct, then the soundings after that time should correspond with present-day soundings. At the first attempt he got his silt slightly wrong, but at his second attempt, on bringing the position up from 1849 to the present day, the model corresponded exactly with the present-day position. So extraordinary was the model that at the particular times of spring tides we did get, even on the model, the bore in the upper regions of the Severn. That showed how remarkable the model was. The barrage was then put in place in the model, and we went on from the present day to a hundred years in the future, swilling the tides out and working the barrage to see 705 whether it would have an effect on the ports of Bristol and Avonmouth. The results were quite satisfactory and no trouble arose, which meant that one of the difficulties had been cleared away. It is of interest to remark, in passing, that models of this sort have been extremely accurate. After this one, a model was made to show the effect of putting a dam across the River Dee in Cheshire, and that showed that, if this was done, it would silt up the whole estuary of the Dee in six months.
§ Having dealt with the question from the navigational point of view, we then turned to the electrical side of the matter. This is quite a complicated business. I am always very meek when I speak about electricity; I take the view of Stephen Leacock who, in his Manual of Education on Natural Science, tells us that electricity is of two kinds, positive and negative. The difference, he says, is that the positive is more durable but more expensive, whereas the negative is cheaper but liable to get the moth in it. I always think that one should go back to that definition when exploring electricity, because one is liable to end with formulae only which mean nothing at all when related to reality. This electrical plant was of a pioneer type, harnessing water of a very low head. It was proposed to put in 72 turbines, each of 17,000 horse-power and that plant would have delivered no less than 2,200,000,000 units a year and, when working on spring tides, with all the generators going, the station would have developed over 1,000,000 horse-power. It was therefore an extensive scheme. After paying compound interest while the plant was being installed and all charges, and wiping the capital off, the cost of current came out at 18d. per unit.
§ If it had been an ordinary dam the scheme would have been too attractive for words, but the trouble with the tides is that they are intermittent, and in the generation of electricity there is one disadvantage: it is not possible to store alternating current electricity, and therefore, whatever the peak load is going to be, there must be plant available to reach that peak should it be wanted. It was obvious that at many times when the maximum peak load was required the tide would not be working, and it would not be possible to get the current, so that 706 the scheme would not save the capital cost of steam-generating plant, which would have to be put down to meet the maximum load at peak hours. That was a grave disadvantage, and consequently an auxiliary and ancillary scheme was introduced by which the surplus power at the peak tides was used to pump water up into the hills near by and fill a reservoir there, from which power could be derived at any time desired. Doing that reduced the number of units available per year from 2,200,000,000 to 1,600,000,000, and the extra capital cost raised the price of electricity to .237d. per unit, but the advantage of it is that you can take current when you want it to supplement the Grid at the peak load hours.
§ In the investigation of the scheme the price of electricity ruling at the most efficient thermal stations at the time was put at .375d. per unit, and as the scheme produced current at .237d. you will see that there is a very big difference in favour of this scheme, and it showed a saving per year of £1,250,000. They did say in the Report that current would become cheaper as time went on. I have been at pains to find out exactly whether their prophesy would come right, and it has not come right, for the reason of course that the price of coal has gone up enormously, and instead of the price of current being .3d. per unit as was expected, the price of current to-day at the most efficient thermal stations and at the same load factor is .39d., so that there is an even bigger reason for making this barrage than there was at that time.
§
The capital figures are big—I would not like to disguise that from your Lordships, The barrage power machinery would cost £25,000,000, the extra reservoir into which Severn water would be pumped £11,000,000, transmission lines, £1,500,000; and then it was proposed to take advantage of the barrage to put a road across the Severn at this very convenient point and also to make a railway across it too, which would supplement the Severn Tunnel. The scheme would have taken fifteen years to complete, and the capital arrangements were based upon 4 per cent. interest. But, as I say, the scheme showed a net gain of £1,250,000 a year. That Report was published in 1933, and I hoped, and I envisaged, that it would be accepted with acclamation because it was a time when we were very
707
short of work; but, to adapt the words of the Jackdaw of Rheims,
What gave rise to no little surprise
Nobody seemed one penny the better.
Nobody took any notice of it at all. I think the reason was that the building of such an imaginative and expensive scheme to make electricity saved the consumption of over a million tons of coal a year and from an area like South Wales, where there was a tremendous amount of unemployment at that time; so it had no friends at all. And, although it is some time ago, it has passed into a sort of oblivion which I do not think it in any way deserves.
§ But I raise this question because new factors have come in and these factors are things which bear very considerably upon the whole economic structure of this vast, imaginative enterprise. At that time the cost of coal varied from us. to 18s. per ton. The cost of coal to-day varies from 30s. to 40s. And there is this point to be remembered, that after the war there may be a very great disinclination among the young men to go down and devote their lives to mining. That is already being shown. People would rather indulge in other forms of activity than in mining. Consequently it would appear that the high price of coal will still remain. Then there is the prestige of British engineering. Tides exist all over the world. There are no examples of tidal harnessing anywhere in the world, and if we in this country could show a successful scheme for the harnessing of tides, it would be copied throughout the world, and, I hope, orders would be given to English firms. There is yet another point, which is that the civil engineering works which bulk so largely in this scheme have now been improved out of all knowledge, and there are many new ways of dealing with this vast earthwork which were not known at that time. The experts tell me that the long time required in the original plan—fifteen years—could now be reduced to eleven years. That would, of course, save a lot of capital cost, because over those fifteen years the loan was carrying compound interest at the rate of 4 per cent.
§ I base the plea for re-examination of this subject, not of course as a thing that can be proceeded with to-morrow, but as something that must not be forgotten, and which must be fitted into our reorganization after the war. What a dreadful waste it would be to think that in a part of 708 England one million horse-power is available for the good of our country people and for our towns and our industries, and yet we are going to throw that away and compel the youth of the country to work in mines instead. I do not hope that the Minister who is going to reply can say anything very definite to-day, except to give a vague promise of how perhaps this scheme may be fitted into the future. But I would like to tell him that there are one or two technical matters which still want investigation. I hope he will be able to say in reply that he will give an assurance that these technical investigations will be proceeded with even now in order that we may be ready with this pioneer and imaginative effort. I beg to move.
§ VISCOUNT BLEDISLOEMy Lords, I make no apology for intervening in this debate, although I do not profess to have any technical knowledge whatever of this extremely interesting but somewhat abstruse problem. But I live in the neighbourhood where this immense engineering scheme was contemplated and within twelve miles of what is known as the English Stones from which the barrage would cross the estuary of the Severn, (I am not quite sure whether it is estuary or Bristol Channel at that point, but I think it is estuary), reaching across to that part of Gloucestershire that is situate in the neighbourhood of Avonmouth. I may say that for many years past we, in that area, comprising a large part of Gloucestershire, Monmouthshire and Glamorganshire, not to mention what I may call the hinterland counties, have been talking about the possibility of something in the nature of a Severn Barrage for the generation of electric power, coupled, as we have always hoped, with a more effective means of crossing the estuary by road and rail than exists at the present time.
I think I am right in saying that a Private Bill was brought forward some seven or eight years ago in another place with a view at any rate to carrying out that part of this scheme which would improve the road and rail transport across the estuary, enabling those who live and work and are industrially interested in South Wales to have easier access both to the Midlands and to London. I for my part cannot help thinking that, whatever impediment there may have been to the carrying out of this gigantic scheme in days gone by—and I believe it was due 709 very largely to what I may call vested interests so far as colliery undertakings are concerned in particular—taking the long view, even if vast millions had to be extended upon this scheme, it would be undoubtedly in the national interest, and incidentally would enable a large number of lucrative industries to be established in that part of the country for which there is a serious need, and which cannot be established to-day largely owing to the cost of power. My noble friend Lord Brabazon has with great lucidity and with a good deal of picturesque illustration adumbrated a scheme, the practicability and economic justification of which, according to him, were beyond doubt. That, of course, I know nothing about; but at the end of his speech he did indicate that there were certain technical problems which would have to be solved before it would be wise, prudent, or safe to embark upon so vast an undertaking.
I do not know what these technical troubles are, but what I do want to say is that I cannot help thinking that this Old Country is a little short-sighted, somewhat myopic, in embarking with confidence—always assuming that practicability can be proved and justified in the minds of experts—upon really big schemes of industrial development. The late Joseph Chamberlain perpetually reminded us that we ought to "think imperially." I am not at all convinced whether, in relation to our Colonial administration and to our home agriculture and other problems, we have shown ourselves in the past to be "thinking imperially," that we have taken a sufficiently long view, indicating both vision and convinced judgment Surely if we claim, as we do, to be predominant in industrial matters, we ought to "think imperially" in regard to the future of British industry. In the district whence I come I see one coalfield gradually disappearing. The Forest of Dean coalfield, upon the borders of which I live, will, as far as we can estimate, in the course of the next twenty years cease to exist in any sense as a paying proposition. Over all the Welsh valleys not very far away we have seen, prior to the war, very serious unemployment, and we have seen the appalling effect of adverse conditions on a large proportion of our industrial population.
Your Lordships will forgive me if, comparing large things with small, I refer to New Zealand. Members of this House 710 rather smile when I mention New Zealand, but I will say this, that nothing surprised me more in New Zealand than the fact, first of all, that 93 per cent. of the milking of cows was done by machinery and not by hand, and that the greater part of it was due entirely to the availability of cheap electric current. I use electric current on my own farm in Gloucestershire, but I have to pay something like four times as much per unit as any farmer in New Zealand has to pay, through the harnessing, not of tides, but of river water in the generation of electricity with the help of turbines. In spite of the sparse population and consequently of the relatively high transport costs in the matter of conveying electric current, it is quite easy for any farmer over the greater part of the agricultural areas of New Zealand, both in the South Island and in the North Island, to obtain current at rather less than one penny per unit. The average cost was about one halfpenny per unit. The same thing I found years ago in Czechoslovakia. The waters of the Elbe had been harnessed in a similar way, and in certain villages in Bohemia to-day you will find every sort of activity, both domestic and industrial, carried on thanks to the fact that current is available at something between one farthing and one half-penny per unit.
What occurs to me is that this problem is worth much more exploration than has so far been given to it, and careful consideration as to whether it would not be, in all human probability, a perfectly sound proposition to embark on a scheme involving many millions of money if, in the long run, you are going to establish far more industries with far lower cost of working and overhead costs, thereby rendering them much more prospectively profitable than they would appear to be to-day. In my own county we have a very effective county planning committee, and already we are contemplating establishing in this very area, within twelve miles of the English Stones, from which the barrage was expected to be constructed, something like fifteen or twenty new industries in order to provide some outlet for the labour now employed in the Forest of Dean which, ere long, will find itself idle owing to the disappearance of that coalfield as a working proposition.
I have not enough knowledge to develop this theme further, but there is one idea that has struck me, and it is 711 this. If a country like Russia can spend an enormous amount of money and labour upon that vast hydro-electric scheme in Southern Russia, at a place with a quite unpronounceable name, which has been so ruthlessly destroyed, surely this rich industrial country of ours can, with confidence, embark on a similar scheme, always assuming that intermittent tidal power can be dealt with in the manner in which my noble friend Lord Brabazon assures us it can. I hope that, if the Minister cannot tell us anything else, he will be able to tell us that the matter has not been lost sight of. Speaking for the neighbourhood from which I come, where we are badly in need of new industries—that is the County of Gloucester—I assure him we shall give this scheme a very warm welcome, especially if it involves the crossing of the river by road or rail which Lord Brabazon assures us. will be a concomitant of it.
LORD SEMPILLMy Lords, I would like to support the noble Viscount who has just spoken and add a few words to his recommendation. It is to be hoped that your Lordships will give strong support to the Motion of my noble friend Lord Brabazon. Lord Brabazon told us a little of the work of his Committee, work that was extremely valuable and stretched over; a number of years. But I think your Lordships will remember that this question of harnessing the tides goes back to the end of the last century when one or two engineers from this country went over to France to Fécamp to see the small tidal harnessing scheme that was working there. While that was a small scheme, none the less it was working well in the development of electrical energy. That inspired them to think of the possibility of harnessing tidal power in these islands, and one or two thought of possibilities in relation to the River Severn. It was not, however, until, I think, the year 1920 that the late Sir Eric Geddes, whose brother is so very active to-day in your Lordships' deliberations, set up a Committee to go into this matter in the first instance. He employed Sir Alexander Gibb to get out a scheme for a Severn Barrage in the year 1920. That scheme was, as my noble friend Lord Brabazon has mentioned, to provide electrical energy, to provide also a further railway into Wales, and, as the noble Viscount 712 has just said, a bridge for road traffic. The whole scheme without the cost of the rail and the road was to cost some £29,500,000; but nothing was done.
Then my noble friend Lord Brabazon in 1925 was made Chairman of a Committee. He has told us a little but not as much as he might have done about the work of that Committee, which was exceedingly valuable and stretched over many years, until 1933. The scheme got out by the noble Lord's Committee was to cost, I think, something like another £20,000,000 over that originally proposed, but no doubt it had advantages over the first scheme. In that connexion and following up Lord Brabazon's plea, would it not be very suitable for His Majesty's Government to ask Sir Alexander Gibb, who is very active in these affairs, to go into the matter afresh, taking into view the technical developments in the generation of electricity and the distribution of electricity, and to get out a fresh scheme along the lines of present-day requirements to give effect to the noble Lord's suggestion? The noble Lord, Lord Brabazon, talked in terms of horse-power, but I submit the matter to you in terms of man-power. The potential man-power that this scheme when implemented would bring to the country would be equivalent to the addition of 7,000,000 men. Therefore that is a very big factor indeed in our plans for the future, and I hope most sincerely that full support will be given to the suggestions submitted by my noble friend Lord Brabazon.
§ LORD TEMPLEMOREMy Lords, my noble friend Lord Brabazon has made a very interesting and excellent speech, as he is so well able to do on this and kindred subjects, and I have to say at the outset that His Majesty's Government welcome the opportunity which the noble Lord's Motion affords for discussion on a matter of the greatest interest to the country as a whole in relation to the problem of postwar development. Your Lordships may remember—I do not know that it is very well known to some of your Lordships—that the terms of reference of the Committee of which the noble Lord who has moved this Motion was Chairman, were simply "to inquire into, and report upon, the practicability of a Severn Barrage." My noble friend has given your Lordships a short account of the proceedings of the Committee, but I think I would do well 713 perhaps to go into a few details about the matter.
The Committee was appointed in October, 1925, and made its Report in January, 1933. During the course of its work the Committee reviewed a number of tentative schemes for a barrage across the River Severn. Under the Committee's supervision a hydrographic survey was carried out by the Admiralty of the English Stones, the point on the River Severn which appeared to offer the best site for a barrage. In addition to this, as my noble friend has described in a very interesting part of his speech, Professor Gibson, who was a member of the Committee, constructed a model of the Severn estuary at the Victoria University, Manchester, and conducted a series of experimental investigations on it. As a result of these investigations the Committee recommended the preparation of a complete tidal power scheme with estimates of cost and of the total amount of electricity that might be expected to be generated, together with the approximate cost of such electricity. This investigation was carried out by consulting engineers and was extremely thorough. It will be seen, therefore, that the Committee's Report and recommendations were the result of a very long period of careful and expert inquiry. In fact the whole thing took over seven years.
During the ten years that have elapsed since the Committee's Report, and particularly during the war years, there have been certain fundamental changes in the bases upon which the Committee's estimates were founded. Indeed, it is not possible at the present time to estimate exactly what the adjusted figures would be under present conditions, and much less what they would be under post-war conditions, but I have a few figures which I think may be interesting to your Lordships. Among the most important of these basic changes are, first, the rise in the price of coal which in 1938 was 33 per cent. and in 1942 had risen to 112 per cent. above the price of 1932. Secondly, the approximate cost of coal per unit of electricity which was 15d. in 1932 rose to 16d. in 1938, but jumped to 26d. in 1942. It will be seen, therefore, that up to 1938 the reduction in heat consumption per unit had practically cancelled out the increased cost of coal, but since that date there has been a very 714 material rise in the cost of coal per unit. I am afraid my advisers are not able at present to say at what level coal prices may be stabilized after the war, which is natural, but it does not seem likely—and indeed my noble friend Lord Brabazon said the same I think—that there will be a return to pre-war standards. Another important field in which there have been great changes is that of electrical equipment and engineering constructional work. It is quite impossible at the present time to say what advance in price would be necessary to cover the civil engineering work under post-war conditions. On the one hand, of course, great improvements in methods of construction have taken place in recent years and there has been also simplification in the design of electrical plant. On the other hand, there have been large rises in costs of wages and of raw materials.
Another important factor in the problem is the possibility of absorbing the maximum output from the barrage at times of spring tides which is, I am informed, nearly 800,000 kilowatts. To absorb the full amount of this output. under all conditions would involve closing down most of the existing stations in the southern part of England at some period. If the barrage scheme were to be supplemented by a storage scheme, so as to enable electricity to be produced whenever it was required, and at a price which would compare favourably with the overall cost in steam stations, this would involve, on the Committee's estimates, an additional capital expenditure of £11,500,000. A further change which has taken place since the Committee's Report, and which operates in favour of the scheme, is the reduction in the interest rate. The Committee based their estimates on an average rate of 4 per cent. per annum, but it is probable that the necessary capital could now or after the war be raised at a lower rate. Here again therefore there is a considerable field for conjecture.
As I have said, the Government welcome the opportunity for discussion of this most important matter. In view, however, of the reasons I have given, and generally of the difficulties attendant upon making any precise declaration of policy on matters of such importance as this during the war conditions, I think that your Lordships will agree that the Government 715 cannot be expected to do more at the present time than to give an undertaking that the recommendations of the Committee of which my noble friend was chairman will receive the most careful consideration in connexion with the postwar reconstruction schemes as a whole. The scheme is of immense magnitude and would require so much capital resources for such a long period of time that it must inevitably compete with other claims upon national resources. As it is very much a long-term project, it would be unwise to embark upon it until there were much clearer indications of what was likely to be the level of post-war prices At this point I should like to comment upon a suggestion made by my noble friend Lord Sempill. I understood him to say that he thought it would be a good thing if the Government invited Sir Alexander Gibb to be chairman of a fresh Committee to inquire into the matter. I have not been instructed upon that point and I do not know how such an idea as that would commend itself to my noble friend opposite, Lord Beaverbrook. I think he said recently that there were far too many Committees in existence during this war. I do not think this attempt to set up a fresh Committee would commend itself to everyone.
LORD SEMPILLMay I interpose one remark? I did not suggest that a fresh Committee should be appointed, but that Sir Alexander Gibb, who was the technician previously employed, should be asked to look into the matter again.
§ LORD TEMPLEMOREThat suggestion will certainly be conveyed, with other suggestions made in this debate, to my right honourable friend. Here also I would like to refer to the very interesting speech made by my noble friend Viscount Bledisloe who delighted us, as he always does when he speaks. I think he has said that mention by him of New Zealand sometimes raises a smile. It does not make me smile, because I think it is extraordinarily interesting to hear of his experiences out there. I often say, and I have said in public, that I think it would be a very good thing for our Dominions if we had a few more Governors like my noble friend Lord Bledisloe. I was interested to hear from him that the County of Gloucester would welcome the scheme, though I am not quite sure that the people 716 of that County would welcome it only because of the good the barrage would do. I rather think they would welcome it also because it might improve the communications between Gloucestershire and other parts of England. But whether or not I am right about that, the scheme turns not only upon general questions of national policy, such as the level of prices and the use of the country's fuel resources as a whole, but also on detailed technical considerations which must be treated as part of the general question of electricity supply for the country as a whole after the war.
I think we are all agreed that a cheap and abundant supply of electricity is one of the most important essentials to national reconstruction and post-war prosperity. Whether, having regard to all the circumstances, this electricity can be most economically and efficiently generated from coal, or whether, and if so to what extent, it can be produced from water power, is one of the most important and complicated problems which we shall have to face. It is often said that Reports such as those of the Committee presided over by my noble friend, when once they get into Government offices, are put away into pigeon holes and forgotten. That may be so, and I dare say it is so in many cases, but it is not so in this case. I can assure my noble friend—and I have the authority of my right honourable friend the Minister for saying this—that the Report of his Committee, and the mass of valuable information which was acquired during the course of that investigation holds an unchallenged place as a classic in the field of hydro-electric literature in this country, and will be constantly in the minds of the Government in relation to all major problems of fuel and power production and utilization in the post-war years. My noble friend asked me if I could give an undertaking that all technical matters in connexion with this scheme would be considered by the Government along with other matters. I can most certainly give that undertaking. I think I have dealt with all the points that have been raised and I hope that, even if my noble friend is not entirely satisfied, he will be sufficiently satisfied with my answer to withdraw his Motion for Papers.
§ LORD BRABAZON OF TARAMy Lords, it is very stimulating to find a Minister not taking the role of an inverted 717 Micawber end waiting for things to turn down. I shall be satisfied as long as the Government, although the scheme may be pigeon-holed for the moment, do regard it as a scheme which may be gone on with at some time. I do not ask that it should be done now. As long as it is kept in mind together with other schemes after the war, I shall be happy. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
§ Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.