Here's the annotation you're reporting. Please enter a brief reason why you think it should be deleted in the form beneath. Thanks for your help!
Posted on 21 May 2008 6:45 pm
I don't know why the UK is not using more suitable alternative systems, such as 'Submersible Tunnel Turbines' as Britain is laced with a great many rivers, therefore Submersible Tunnel Turbines could be used to replace Eyesore Wind Turbines.
These could be used in Rivers and in Streams, and the cost is a fraction of alternative systems, also far more reliable than waiting for a Windy Day to gain energy.
They want to place these monster 'Wind Turbine' in Gillingham yet 'The River Stour' wraps its self around the centre of Gillingham hence there is absolutely no reason why you cannot deploy these 'Submersible Tunnel Turbines' which could give Clean Free Energy 24/7. and remain out of sight.
Why should this annotation be deleted?
Check our House Rules and tell us why the annotation breaks them.
Making it easy to keep an eye on the UK’s parliaments. Discover who represents you, how they’ve voted and what they’ve said in debates – simply and clearly.
Get insights on TheyWorkForYou and other mySociety sites, in our popular newsletter
Your donations keep this site and others like it running
mySociety is a registered charity in England and Wales (1076346) and a limited company (03277032). We provide commercial services through our wholly owned subsidiary SocietyWorks Ltd (05798215).