I READ again that one of the groups opposed to the Severn Barrage proposal has reiterated its claim that it will cause flooding, and has added a hint of veracity by quoting the area which would be affected but still without any supporting evidence.

I READ again that one of the groups opposed to the Severn Barrage proposal has reiterated its claim that it will cause flooding, and has added a hint of veracity by quoting the area which would be affected but still without any supporting evidence.

This is totally contrary to the true situation and if they believe it they show an abysmal lack of understanding of what is involved. We are considering a barrage not a dam.

Adding rising sea levels to a high spring tide and a major storm surge, or worst still, a tsunami, it is not difficult to see that much of North Somerset and The Severn Vale would be flooded by sea water. Of all the generating schemes only a suitably designed and operated barrage can prevent this.

My professional interest in a barrage for power generation goes back more than 60 years, but I now see the barrage as an essential part of the protection of our low lying areas with the advantage of power generation included.

The only valid argument against the barrage is cost as raised by MP John Penrose but although probable building costs has been estimated no mention has been made about the cost of not building it.

What will be the cost in human lives and livestock in the Vale, the cost of property damage, the cost in the loss of arable land and the cost of all the nuclear power stations and nuclear waste storage which will be the alternative and concentrated into his area?

The villages of Cowhill and Oldbury among others may be totally obliterated, the whole of Kenn Moor may be rendered useless and the existing nuclear power stations at Oldbury and Berkeley could be affected.

If the barrage is not built, take to the hills, for this area may return to what it was in pre-Roman times.

KENNETH F TUCKER

Milton Road

Weston