Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufty  To be fair, they do have a point. If they start naming places then the nay-sayers will be in of a shot with shots of, "My rights! They're trying to impose a power station on us!!!" They are looking for national support for the idea so alienating communities and giving the skeptics an audience to target/scaremonger is the last thing they'd want to do.
There is technical info on the site and as I said previously on this thread, the numbers do seem to add up. (Although I'll be reserving my final judgment until the whole thing is infront of me and I've time to pour over the finer points). Also the names and qualifications/experience of those involved (the driving force anyways) are all listed there for you. |
"Over 50 team members are now working on the project with expertise in Construction, Planning, Hydrology, Environment, Finance, Economics, Communications and other disciplines. We have received advice from major companies and consultancies."
Who are they?
The description of how build rock walls with the excavated rocks, and how hold the water in the resevoirs is still vague.
Nothing on consequences for the existing environment.
They will have to deal with the sceptics sooner or later.
Their tactic seems to be to convince us that they have a gift horse for us all, and
""No man ought to looke a geuen hors in the mouth."?