Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Thames sewage tunnel defended


BACKERS OF Thames Water's £2bn Thames Tideway Sewage Tunnel this week hit back at claims that the scheme is a white elephant and should be scrapped.

Last week Shefeld University professor of urban drainage Richard Ashley told the ICE's evidential hearing on climate change that there had to be better alternatives to dealing with stormwater overow than building a 32km long, 7.2m diameter tunnel (News last week).

But former chairman of the Thames Tideway Strategy Steering Group, Chris Binnie, this week insisted that all options had been considered as part of a ve year, £4M study that concluded the tunnel was the least cost solution.

Binnie dismissed Ashley's suggestion of retrotting storm water management systems, adding that separating London's combined sewer system by installing a second pipe system would cost £12bn.

Binnie said SUDS in ltration systems had also been ruled out because most of London is underlain by impermeable London clay and that there were insuf cient sites for ood detention ponds. He added that putting screens on the current combined sewage overows would do little to reduce dissolved oxygen levels.

'Yes the scheme is large and expensive, ' said Binnie. 'But any scheme which will be used on a weekly basis, will protect the River Thames through London from about weekly sewage over flows, and allows the UK to avoid large fines for breaching a European Directive can hardly be described as unnecessary.' See Viewpoint page 15

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.