*Thames Tunnel (Tideway Tunnel)*

Thames Water are now in the planning application and consultation stage of this project to improve the sewerage tunnels in London.

If it goes ahead it will capture the flows from the 34 most polluting combined sewer overflows that discharge untreated sewage to the River Thames.

The link to more information is here LINK

For the latest updates from TW on the project LINK

Information from DEFRA about the project LINK

We will be following this up again shortly. How has the new goverment funding cuts affected the project, we will see.

Shouldn't do Dave, it will be Thames Water customer's that will foot the bill to an increase of £40 per annum each...


Richard

The tunnel has the go-ahead.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23876028-green-light-for-pound-36bn-thames-super-sewer.do

Cheers for posting this Steve

Before we all start hanging out the bunting, I think it should be qualified slightly.

From the report:

'Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said: “A tunnel continues to offer by far the most cost-effective solution to the unacceptable problem of raw sewage being regularly discharged into the Thames. I will ensure [environment department] Defra and [regulator] Ofwat continue to scrutinise the costs and options to ensure ... proper value for money.” '

They will scrutinse the costs and options so what they effectively saying is that they agree in principle to the tunnel but will wait to see further information. The planning application is submitted in 2012, then all the real conversations will begin.

I do sincerely hope that TW gets this done but fear it is a long road ahead.

TW continue to be the biggest polluter and will readily accept responsibilty for that, just look at the recent incident with the River Ash.

It is groups like oursleves who need to keep the pressure up. Remember just taking Novemember 2009 alone, 9.2 million tonnes of combined rainwater and sewage pumped into the Thames and will continue to happen for a long while yet.

Even though I'm fully supportive of the need to build the tunnel (obviously!)... the cost has more than doubled since the proposal was first released to the public 3 years ago? What has changed in as much that Thames Water initially said that it would cost £1.5bn (not the £2bn stated in the article linked above, that was the figure after they re-assessed from £1.5bn) costing each Thames Water customer well under £30pa, to the project suddenly becoming £3.6bn, costing the TW Customer's £60-65pa???

What sort of costing has now been carried out to see such a rise? 8.5 million customers (13 million users...)

Whilst I fully support the need for the tunnel there doesn't appear to be any answers in this regard... and how much will it ACTUALLY cost TW Customers on completion (considering the rise in the projected cost with barely a hammer raised as yet)... £5bn? £6bn? Will that mean that we are creaping ever closer to an additional £100 a year on OUR bills, on top of the above inflation rises that they've made this year... this without factoring in the cost of the tunnel that we will now be paying for?

Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said: “A tunnel continues to offer by far the most cost-effective solution to the unacceptable problem of raw sewage being regularly discharged into the Thames. I will ensure [environment department] Defra and [regulator] Ofwat continue to scrutinise the costs and options to ensure ... proper value for money.”

Bit late for that love!

If my 2 hours of googling is correct (and I would welcome correction), the company that "owns" Thames Water is called Kemble Water Ltd, who are owned by Kemble Water Holdings Ltd... who in turn are owned by an Australian listed Consortium of investors called the Macquarie Group (investment bankers) and they earnt £435mn profit last year through Thames Water and that was TW's best annual profit margin to date. Macquarie had an asset base valued at over £140bn (Sept 2009), and their half yearly profit at this point was over £280mn (seemingly quite a fair proportion of it due to TW?), but it looks as though the vast majority of this project (and more?) will be paid by us directly through our water bills, the customers? Put your hand in your pocket Thames Water (or whatever you call yourself), instead of patting each other on your respective backs (and paying healthy bonuses) for making a few quid!

By my loose maths (and I would love to see TW give me their actual figures please?) 8.5 million customers paying £60 a year equates to £500mn per year +, that's half a billion per annum... guess who is paying for this project, every last rivet and bolt by the looks of it over the next 9-10 years, while Thames Water 'boast' of their efforts to sort out a sewer system that they have watched deteriorate for the past 21 years (period of stabilisation?), earning billions of pounds for their owners in the meantime...

I'm sorry Thames Water, but it is patently obvious that you are taking every one of your customer's for a ride, and it doesn't appear as though you give two monkey's about the environment and are more concerned with ensuring that you continue to line your own pockets.

Prove me wrong, I'm more than willing to talk real numbers and figures, let's see them please.


Richard

Macquarie also own the bus company I worked for, and they made a right mess of that, so much so that it's now back up for sale. If profits don't meet their targets they look to ditch the failing companies. With Thames water under the Macquarie umbrella there is little hope of them picking up even the smallest part of the bill. So the customers will be left with little choice but to empty their pockets to pay for the tunnel.

wot it comes down to is pants, at the moment we have the european government taking our government to court, why I have to rely on some senorita or portugeezer, to take my government to court for allowing an australian company to put my pooh, in my river beggars belief
I do not, and never will understand, why the neccesities of life aren't in public hands and profit free

Not sure if I have missed something or it is a change of tack from TW but lots of comment now quoting '39 millions tonnes of sewage' . They also have a video of the sewage outflow on their website.

I can only assume that with TW needing the support and upcoming consultations, they are highlighting the problem. Can only be good and do wonder how much of the TAC campaign has caused this, a question for My Aylard I think. Hmmmm.

TW Video

TAC Video

Here's the consultation!!!!!

Thames Tideway Tunnel - Consultation Documents

Has to be finished just before Christmas, so once I've finished the Defra Natural Environment paper due in at the end of this month, it'll be on to this one!


Richard

m8, what you're doing is a mare of a job, most of our members will be ignorant of how much you do, let alone understand it, so a big thankyou from us all buddy

Richard Crimp wrote:

Here's the consultation!!!!!

Thames Tideway Tunnel - Consultation Documents

Has to be finished just before Christmas, so once I've finished the Defra Natural Environment paper due in at the end of this month, it'll be on to this one!


Richard

The consultation is due on the 14th of January and I've nearly completed the TAC's. Naturally it will be posted on the site for all to read once it is submitted.


Richard

From the Guardian 3rd Feb


Rosalind Dallas The Guardian, Thursday 3 February 2011

John Vidal's articlewas encouraging but – apart from quoting Thames Water's hollow reassurance to replace our local "scout hut" – no mention was made of the impact the Thames "super sewer's" construction will have on south-west London (Londoners kick up a stink over £3.6bn super sewer, 14 January).

Here the "tunnel" will not "snake 75 metres below the river" but 30 metres under the Thames towpath (a site of special metropolitan interest and part of south-west London's bat corridor) to bore through a much used children's park and our vital flood defences.

Of the 22 proposed drilling sites, you report that "Thames Water said disruption was inevitable, but only three greenfield sites were chosen". One, not identified in your article, is Wandsworth and Richmond's Barn Elms playing fields, on which is planned the construction of one of the three main drive shafts. This site will be operational for seven years, mostly round the clock, seven days a week. Residents were given only three months to understand the ramifications of using this beautiful area for part of the biggest construction project planned for Britain this century.

This site will require an area equivalent to three or four football pitches on land, with a huge jetty jutting into the centre of the river, loading barges to transport excavated spoil on every tide for seven years. Tides do not always occur conveniently during daylight hours. This is an important stretch of river: rowers in training often use the river during darkness, and the possibility of collision is a very real fear.

The jetty will be next to Barn Elms Boathouse – the only such club in Britain run by a council – which teaches schools, universities and community groups as well as international competitors – and four other school or university boat houses. The impact on future British and Olympic rowing could be devastating. And this section of river is part of the Oxford and Cambridge boat race course. Barn Elms playing fields is used by 10 local schools whose activities will be massively disrupted. Turning these sports facilities into a vast building site is folly.

Some 120 32-ton trucks will service the site each day through suburban residential streets. The proposed site access includes part of the London Cycle Network and the entrance to the London Wetlands Centre. For much of the seven years, construction work will be floodlit at night; birds, many of which are migrants and rely on this haven for rest, will abandon the wetlands due to noise, light and disruption. The 25-metre-diameter borehole will be only 20 metres from Wandsworth council's Ranelagh Estate, which houses 2,000 people. This is why, as you report, there have been "vociferous meetings and marches on the streets", with the formation of local groups down the Thames, liaising with each other in joint protest.

Nor will the tunnel "solve the problem of pollution in the Thames", as Phil Stride, Thames Water's engineer in charge, claims. The super sewer will still overflow into the river during heavy rainfall and its legacy will be a series of ugly ventilation shafts spewing out fetid air. Thames Water must rethink its plans.

Hmm, don't see Rosalind Dallas offering an alternative, do you?


Richard

Best to read some of the 131 comments (so far) on the page.

This one made admin chuckle..

'But don't you people realise, this is BARNES, for God's sake. South West London's twee little media village. Nothing must be allowed to upset its smug calm. This project is even going to disturb the London Cycle Network - how dreadful!

And as for suggesting its inhabitants actually excrete, Mr Joe, you should be ashamed of yourself.

And will no-one think of the bats?

Tideway Times from Thames Water

http://www.thameswater.co.uk/cps/rde/xchg/corp/hs.xsl/8720_11329.html

Propsed Tunnel change


richmondand twickenham times

it seems people are waking up to the falsehoods perpetuated by TW

New Thames Tunnel option under consideration

Three adjacent plots of land facing the river in Fulham are under consideration by Thames Water as an alternative to using part of Barn Elms Playing Fields for construction of the Thames Tunnel.
Following a review of all potential sites and tunnelling strategy after phase one public consultation – Whiffin Wharf, Hurlingham Wharf and Carnwath Business Park – which were previously considered too small - could now be a viable option viable option for constructing the project, often dubbed the ‘Supersewer’.

The project is urgently needed to help tackle the 39 million tonnes of untreated sewage which overflows into the River Thames in an average year, when London's Victorian sewerage network becomes overloaded.

Phil Stride, Head of London Tideway Tunnels at Thames Water, said:
"As we refine the options for the tunnel, the size and potential locations for construction sites are subject to change. We are also listening and responding to feedback received to date.

"Both options have their advantages and disadvantages.

"Unlike Barn Elms Playing Fields, Carnwath Road Riverside is brownfield, not greenfield, and is already designated for regeneration or industrial use. It is not important for recreation, would not require any tree felling and is not Metropolitan Open Land. The site’s existing jetty, combined with the greater width of the river at this point, would also allow us to use fewer, larger barges to remove soil excavated during construction of the main tunnel and bring in materials.

"On the other hand, more residents and businesses would be directly affected at Carnwath Road Riverside than at Barn Elms Playing Fields. Using Carnwath Road Riverside for the construction period would potentially also be in conflict with Hammersmith and Fulham Council’s own plans to regenerate the area.

"I must stress that we have not discounted Barn Elms Playing Fields as a possible major construction site for the Thames Tunnel. Before we make any final decisions, we will need to carefully evaluate the suitability of the Carnwath Road site in more detail and potential impacts on nearby residential properties and businesses."

Thames Water has arranged two drop-in sessions so Carnwath Road locals can find out more and raise any concerns with the project team. These will be held at Hurlingham and Chelsea Secondary School, Peterborough Road, SW6 3ED on Wednesday 6 April and Thursday 7 April from 4pm until 8pm.

In any event there will still need to be a construction site in or near Barn Elms Playing Fields to intercept the West Putney Combined Sewer Overflow, which discharges sewage into the nearby Beverley Brook.

The project team will now carry out technical assessments to understand the suitability of the Carnwath Road sites. The next phase of consultation, due to start in September 2011, will provide an opportunity for the public to comment on the revised preferred scheme and sites for the whole project, before they are finalised.

Thames Water is due to publish its feedback report on the first phase of the public consultation by early April. During the consultation more than 4,750 people attended 25 public exhibitions and 3085 people submitted formal feedback. Thames Water also attended over 50 other public meetings to discuss the project with local communities who might be affected.

And more from the BBC

Fears over Fulham riverside 'super-sewer' plans

Result of the consultation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12928601

Tideway Times Newsletter April 2011

http://www.thameswater.co.uk/cps/rde/xbcr/corp/newsletter-tideway-times-april-2011.pdf

nice one dave

its good to see thames water can be swayed by public opinion

Just wanted to bring this up again as this time of year can show exactly why we need the tunnel to be built.

In 2004 after a long dry spell, an large amount of rain fall caused a huge fish kill. Let's hope we never see the like again but we discussed last week, the potential risk is there.

News from 2004

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1468681/100000-fish-die-as-storms-cause-Thames-pollution.html

There are many other incidents of this type

The EA are more equipped now to get out with bubbler boats and ready with Hydrogen peroxide. Water quality is constantly monitored including by Thames Water.