The ocean tides are constant and have been for 100s millions of years, billions for all we know.
The wind sometimes blows and sometimes it doesn't, once again a pattern that has been going on for about the same duration.
Perhaps, for this reason when wind power is pitted against tidal power one has to ask, what's the big deal with wind generation; water is 750 times denser than air, thus, it has much more energy potential.
Some might argue that mankind has been using wind power for 1,000s of years, with windmills, sails for boats, etc.
and yes, while this is true, we might also realize that the Archimedes Screw is not exactly new either, nor is mankind's efforts in hydro-electric power, which makes up a whopping 16% of our nation's energy generation.
Wind appears silly to me except in specific areas, as it seems to be unreliable elsewhere when the wind does not blow.
Tidal Energy makes sense, but I was rather interested in why Obama Administration cut the innovation initiative funding there.
It seems to be tied to the political following garnered by T.
Boone Pickens who claims Wind Power is the way; it isn't that is simply false, too his concept of using natural gas is nonsense too, our natural gas reserves will run out, and then the cost for natural gas will hit the roof, good for Pickens, a disaster for the US economy.
It is interesting that the potential for tidal power has been proven, and the problems with wind power are known, and yet, we pursue an unreliable energy source over a viable one.
It's all politics and it's all a mess.
Please think on this.