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

Tunnel division


You reported Thames Water's plan to spend £2bn on a tunnel which reaches depths of 80m (NCE, 29 March).

As a practicing sewerage engineer for over 30 years I have always hated the idea of pumping large volumes of flow on the grounds of cost.

Now, however, we have another even more pressing reason to avoid this. Has anyone, I wonder, assessed the whole-life carbon footprint of such a scheme? As OFWAT apparently believes it is unnecessary I expect to see much debate taking place on your pages or reported in them before the scheme gets the go-ahead.

On another point, regarding last week's headline 'Yorkshire closes sewage works', as a resident of Yorkshire I sincerely hope that Yorkshire Water's project manager knows the difference between a sewage works and a water treatment works more thoroughly than you do!

Howard Glenn, Howard.Glenn@calderdale. gov. uk

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.