Thames super sewer encounters more opposition |
 

 

Thames super sewer encounters more opposition

Sunday, May 27th, 2012

Thames Water has been slammed by Hammersmith and Fulham Council for their plans to press ahead with the Thames super sewer. The twenty mile long sewer is needed to stop waste water flowing into the River Thames at times of heavy rainfall. The council says the scheme will disrupt land earmarked for a new housing development.

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson has called for an independent review of the project after concerns were raised from public groups.

Hammersmith and Fulham council say that they have received a number of complaints about the use of Fulham Riverside as part of the project. Residents don’t want the sewer excavation work to swallow up land which had been assigned for new houses and jobs.

The Hammersmith and Fulham council deputy leader Nick Botterill said:

“The super sewer is a prime example of the failure of sustainable water management in the UK. Instead of capturing the fresh rainwater and using it productively, Thames Water is allowing it to flow into the sewer network where it mixes with sewage causing problems for the River Thames. Thames Water’s solution is to charge customers £100 a year extra forever to raise billions of pounds to dig a massive concrete pipe. This massive sewer will divert the combined rainwater and sewage 20 odd miles to east London – only for it to be treated and put back into the river.”

A spokesperson for Thames Water commented:

“We’ve got to put in place a sewer system fit for purpose. It isn’t at the moment. From the recent consultation feedback we had we were instructed to use brownfield land and to use the river as much as we can which made the Carnwath site suitable.”

The head of London Tideway Tunnels at Thames water Phil Stride said that the company had

“worked extremely hard to consult people potentially affected”,

“Unfortunately, there are no easy or disruption-free options for building this much-needed piece of infrastructure, but we remain as determined as ever to reduce the impacts at the proposed sites as much as possible, whilst ensuring we deliver value for money.”

Previous Post || Next Post

Back To Top