Thames Anglers' Conservancy Members Forum
TAC Members Forum
If you have arrived here and not yet signed up as a member,
please register below using your real name.

Please create a Username that is your First Name and Surname eg. "Joe Bloggs"
(This will ensure quicker activation and save us the need to contact you about changing it)

Our Forum Membership uses Real Names only.
Aliases, Handles, Pseudonyms or any other types of made-up name are not allowed.
This helps to keep it an open and friendly place. Thanks!

www.rivertac.org
Thames Anglers' Conservancy Members Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.


Thames Anglers' Conservancy Members Forum
 
HomeHome  TAC Home PageTAC Home Page  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log in  
Navigation
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 
Rechercher Advanced Search
Latest topics
» Feargal Sharkey accuses Thames Water of sewage 'dumping'
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyFri Sep 04, 2020 4:24 pm by Ed Randall

» COVID-19 - Get Fishing Again
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySun Jun 07, 2020 1:04 pm by Julian Jones

» Eel Trap Molesey - 2019
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyTue May 05, 2020 12:29 pm by Glyn Jones

» GAS STOVES
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyWed Apr 15, 2020 7:13 am by Keith Collett

» Man missing in Thames at Shepperton
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyTue Jan 21, 2020 3:27 pm by Ed Randall

» Semi-Tidal Draw off 2019
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyMon Oct 28, 2019 9:55 pm by Ed Randall

» Citizen Science forum at ZSL ~ 29th October 2019
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Sep 28, 2019 4:19 pm by Ed Randall

» Citizen Crane Forum ~ 16th and 29th October 2019
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Sep 28, 2019 4:16 pm by Ed Randall

» Tidefest match result 2019
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyTue Sep 10, 2019 8:50 am by Ed Randall

» Closed season retained following public consultation
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyThu Aug 22, 2019 12:20 pm by Ed Randall

» Houseboat destroyed by fire in Hampton
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyMon Aug 12, 2019 9:30 am by Ed Randall

» Local tackle shops
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyFri Jul 05, 2019 1:16 pm by Trevor Rowe

» New Season, New Licence...
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyFri Jun 14, 2019 12:24 am by Julian Jones

» FORCE Clean-Up in Donkey Wood ~ Sun 14th April 2019
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySun Apr 21, 2019 8:19 am by Ed Randall

» The Big one - Farnborough 23rd-24th March 2019
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySun Feb 10, 2019 11:30 am by Keith Collett

» Thames So Full Of Cocaine It’s Pranging Out London’s Eels
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyTue Jan 22, 2019 9:27 am by Trevor Rowe

» "Citizen Crane" project - sampling dates
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyThu Jan 10, 2019 8:51 am by Ed Randall

» New Members: Real Names please
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyThu Jan 10, 2019 8:36 am by Ed Randall

» Semi-Tidal draw-off 2018
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Oct 27, 2018 5:44 pm by Ed Randall

» Thames Water Blitz - 19th/20th October 2018
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyTue Oct 02, 2018 7:21 pm by Ed Randall

» Citizen Crane Forum ~ 26th October 2018
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Aug 25, 2018 7:41 pm by Ed Randall

» Invitation to the 2018 Eel forum ~ 15th October
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Aug 25, 2018 7:38 pm by Ed Randall

» Mystery of dead eels found in rivers
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Aug 25, 2018 6:43 pm by Ed Randall

» Eel Trap Clean Up/ training 5th May 2018 10am
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Aug 25, 2018 6:40 pm by Ed Randall

» A new address for 2017 ~ forum.rivertac.org
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySun Aug 19, 2018 12:48 pm by Admin

» Hampton Riviera removed
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyThu Aug 16, 2018 10:41 pm by Ed Randall

» Roads closed everywhere ~ July 29th/30th ~ bike race
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyMon Aug 06, 2018 10:14 am by John LeSurf

» *Thames Tunnel (Tideway Tunnel)*
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyWed Jul 18, 2018 9:56 am by John LeSurf

» new hotel at hampton court means loss of fishing
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyWed Jul 04, 2018 1:26 pm by Ed Randall

» FORCE clean-up in Donkey Wood ~ Sun 13th May 2018
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptyThu May 17, 2018 10:16 am by JeffHowe

Angling Data View
River Levels
UK Map

Thames Tides

 

 Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both.

Go down 
2 posters
AuthorMessage
David Harvey

David Harvey


Male Posts : 5381
Join date : 2010-01-21
Age : 107
Location : Surrey,

Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. Empty
PostSubject: Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both.   Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySat Dec 01, 2012 10:24 pm

Richard Aylard, Thames Water’s Director of External Affairs and Sustainability, explains in Thames Estuary Partnership’s magazine ‘Talk of the Thames’ why the proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel and Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) each have a vital role to play in tackling sewage discharges to the River Thames.

The Sir Joseph Bazalgette memorial, tucked away on The Victoria Embankment at the bottom of Northumberland Avenue, rewards close inspection. Sadly overlooked by the majority of passers-by, it provides an intriguing insight into the debate about whether SuDS could provide an alternative to the Thames Tideway Tunnel. Although he is justly credited as the founder of London’s modern sewer network, the great man’s memorial, like his own drawings, actually refers to ‘London’s main drainage system’.

Sir Joseph’s enduring achievement was to mastermind a solution that accommodated the practical reality that, by the 1850s, the city’s natural drainage had effectively long been requisitioned as an early sewer system, to facilitate Georgian and Victorian London’s property explosion. The accompanying vast increase in both population and impermeable surfaces in the north of the city led to much higher combined flows, causing serious problems for drainage, public health and the cleanliness of the Thames. Bazalgette’s visionary yet pragmatic drainage plan dealt with those problems and had benefits south of the river too, where development had been held back by the low-lying, marshy landscape.

Just like the team planning the Thames Tideway Tunnel today, Bazalgette did not have the luxury of a blank piece of paper. He had to deal with the fact that the city’s drainage and sewage systems had been evolving together over many years to keep pace with development. There was no practical way of reversing that situation. That is why he perpetuated the combined system, with Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) discharging to the river when volumes became too great. 150 years later, another six generations of development have made the situation even more intractable and the CSOs discharge ever more frequently.
The development of the Thames Tideway Tunnel will solve this problem. Many of the design team cut their professional teeth on successful schemes, combining tunnels and SuDS, which have been completed and provide models for London to follow, such as those in Portland and Milwaukee. In Portland, SuDS, are a key component of the ‘Cornerstone Projects’ that complement improvements to treatment works and ‘storage and transfer’ tunnels to achieve control of damaging discharges to their rivers. Other cities, such as Philadelphia, have ambitious and well-publicised long-term plans for SuDS but may yet also need to incorporate similar tunnels in order to achieve the required degree of control over discharges.

At Thames Water we are enthusiastic about the potential of local or targeted SuDS, which is why they feature in our proposals to tackling sewer flooding to customers’ properties in the Counter’s Creek catchment in west London. We expect that SuDS will increasingly be a part of other retrofit schemes and will play a key role in ensuring that new developments do not add to existing problems. However, the idea that SuDS might, on their own, somehow provide a solution to the modern day scandal of sewage discharges to the River Thames is a very different matter, and one that literally doesn’t hold water in modern London, any more than it did in the 1850s.

Nevertheless, the questions about whether London needs a tunnel at all require an answer. Surely, we are told, we should separate the sewage from the rainwater, or ensure they don’t mix in the first place, and then capture the rain water to meet growing demand for drinking water? Well, if a new city was being built, of course we would provide separate sewers and drainage. But we are dealing with a very old city and the opportunities for water sensitive urban design on a large scale are strictly limited.

The principal problem is one of sheer scale, with immense volumes of heavily polluted rainwater needing to be managed. I was inside the Lee Tunnel recently. This is the same diameter as the proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel and will connect to it. I can tell you it is awe-inspiring; wide enough to accommodate three London buses side by side. When the tunnels are combined they will stretch for 20 miles, collect the discharges from 34 CSOs and have a storage capacity of 1.5 million tonnes. What struck me most forcibly was the realization that this huge space would fill many times each year and from single storm events. How else could that immense volume be captured and managed in a densely developed city?

The capital self-evidently lacks sufficient areas of open land to capture such volumes of water. Even if that were not the case, the clay and saturated gravels that underlie much of London mean that any storage would take a very long time to drain. And storage that is full from one rainstorm is no use when the next one arrives. That is why the tunnel has been designed to be emptied, and its contents treated, in less than 48 hours, ready to absorb the next storm.
Yet surely this volume of water would be a huge benefit to our thirsty city? Well, let’s look at that. In a typical year, 18 million tonnes of sewage – or heavily polluted rainwater, if you prefer – enters the river through the CSOs that the Thames Tideway Tunnel will intercept. Assuming we could instead somehow capture and collect all of this with a new network of pipes, it could be pumped underground to replenish the aquifers, but it would first need to be treated – even if it were not contaminated with sewage – to comply with groundwater legislation. If we could do all that, and then re-abstract it from the aquifer and then re-treat and put it into supply, all in the centre of London, the volume of drinking water would amount to just under 50 million litres per day.

We currently supply around 2,000 million litres to London every day, so the benefit would be an increase of around 2.5 per cent. That is worth having, but achieving it would require sufficient space for collection, transfer, storage, treatment and pumping, distributed around London. That’s a lot of very expensive and disruptive new infrastructure. Replacing more Victorian water mains and retrofitting water efficient equipment would provide additional sustainable resource at a fraction of the cost.
London does not give his memorial due prominence, but our modern city owes Sir Joseph Bazalgette a huge debt. Without him it would not be the city it is today. Yet look back in the archives and you will see he was told his plans were unnecessary, not practical, too expensive and too disruptive. As his great-great-grandson, Sir Peter Bazalgette, observed recently, some things don’t change.

The problem of combined sewage discharges to the River Thames needs practical solutions that reflect London’s conditions, will achieve the required standards, and can be implemented quickly. The river and London as a whole urgently need the Thames Tideway Tunnel and also, over time, to implement SuDS to prevent the existing problems growing worse. The two approaches are complementary and we need to utilise both of them.

We are working hard to deliver the first half of the equation as fast as we can, with minimum cost and disruption. The SuDS dimension is more complex and will take longer. The Flood and Water Management Act was a big step forward. But subsequent progress has been slower than we would have liked, and the final pieces in the SuDS jigsaw of responsibilities are not yet in place.

As soon as they are, we will work with Councils, businesses and individual Londoners to achieve the benefits of SuDS, as a complement to the proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel.
Back to top Go down
http://Rivertac.org
Richard Crimp
Admin
Admin
Richard Crimp


Male Posts : 1875
Join date : 2010-01-20
Age : 55
Location : London

Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both.   Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both. EmptySun Dec 02, 2012 1:24 am

In the Thames Estuary Partnership's mag... at last!


Richard Rolling Eyes
Back to top Go down
 
Sustainable drainage and the ‘Supersewer’ It’s not a choice. London needs both.
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Supersewer 'vital to protect the Thames'
» RIVERS IN LONDON FULL OF POO
» *Thames Tunnel (Tideway Tunnel)*
» Port of London Authority meeting
» Eel pass on BBC1 London news

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Thames Anglers' Conservancy Members Forum :: Open Section :: Conservation Issues :: Thames Pollution-
Jump to: