| Topic: | Re:More on Mogden. | |
| Posted by: | Nick Tennant | |
| Date/Time: | 14/03/11 23:27:00 |
| Roland, I sense I am not going to convince you... - There was a ministerial statement from Defra in September 2010. We could not have begun our consultation without it. And it genuinely is a consultation.... - Whatever the source, the line on the tunnel emptying only four times a year is completely duff. If you are clear it came from us, I will investigate. It shouldn't have. The tunnel would empty within 48 hours of filling, typically when a storm has passed. - We all agree, the ideal would be no sewage in the Thames at all. Bringing the amount down is why the Thames Tunnel, Lee Tunnel and sewage works upgrades are all so important. But we have to be realistic. Given your concerns about rising bills, you have to accept that there must be a balance - ending all discharges, even if technically possible, would be hugely expensive. - The idea of creating a completely separate system for foul water and rain would be the perfect solution, in an ideal world, if we had a blnak sheet of paper, which we don't. It was considered by the Thames Tideway Strategic Study (an independently chaired group). The problem is the estimated cost of approx £15 billion plus (many times more than the cost of the Thames Tunnel, and also excluding the disruption that digging up every street in London would cause. - Not sure if you are suggesting that Mogden should be connected to the tunnel full stop? If the fully treated discharges form Mogden also went into the tunnel, there would be much less water in the Thames in summer months. The water would have to be pumped back up from Beckton to maintain river flows - hardly a sustainable solution. |