[NotAnOtter]

How are concerns about ecological impact misplaced when discussing solutions to ecological problems. It feels pretty relevant to me.

And from everything I've seen/heard, tidal based solutions are just fundamentally incompatible with their product. Keeping sensitive metalic moving parts in saline solution exposed to the sun for years on end - paired with other random things like boating accidents or marine life - it's a non-starter. Constructing these things creates pollution. If it's lifecycle impact is less than oil's, great, I just don't believe we'll ever get to a state where it's better than oil AND (solar/geo/wind) + Batteries.

[IshKebab]

Because the amount of pollution these things generate is clearly totally negligible. Metal in the sea does not matter. And they are an alternative to burning fossil fuels which is clearly far worse.

They may not be a good commercial idea due to the maintenance cost (hence this article) but the idea that they would pollute the seas and therefore we should burn oil & gas instead completely idiotic.