Thames Tunnel Commission call for evidence

Skip Navigation

Thames Tunnel Commission call for evidence

Tuesday July 26, 2011

The Thames Tunnel Commission has issued a call for evidence as part of its examination into Thames Water’s multi-billion pound ‘super-sewer’.

Led by Commission Chairman Lord Selborne, the team of renowned experts are examining the case for the massive 20-mile long sewer.

Thames Water claim the tunnel is needed to avoid EU fines and clean up the River Thames but, building on issues raised by residents, local councils and the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee, the Commission will address whether the Thames Tunnel is the best solution to making the river cleaner or whether there are sensible alternatives that are cheaper, greener and less disruptive.

The Commission, which was launched on July 4, is seeking evidence from Thames Water’s list of statutory and community consultees as well as a wide range of engineering consultancies and other organisations.

Lord Selborne said: “I welcome the opportunity to pose the questions that millions of water bill payers are starting to ask and the commission is now seeking input from the affected councils, water industry experts and a wide range of interested groups.

“The key question is whether this multi-billion pound project is the best solution to making the Thames cleaner or whether there are sensible alternatives that are cheaper, greener and less disruptive.”

The Thames Tunnel Commission is supported by a number of Local Authorities and is sponsored by the London boroughs of Hammersmith & Fulham, Southwark, Richmond and the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea.

Written evidence should be submitted by Friday 12 August, 2011 to Peter Smith, clerk to the Commission, at Hammersmith & Fulham Council. Submissions should be addressed to him at Room 39, Hammersmith Town Hall, London W6 9JU or sent to peter.smith@lbhf.gov.uk quoting Thames Tunnel Commission call for evidence.

» Send us your comments now

These days everybody talks about sustainability. Sustainability in the surface water drainage design involves engineering techniques that deal with surface water at the source. The proposed tunnel is against the current guidance that the Government, Local Authorities and the Environment Agency promotes, as it is based on a drainage system that deals with surface water at the discharge point.Surface water flooding currently affects a large area in London and the new Tunnel will be unable to mitigate this problem. Therefore, the Local Authorities will be forced to construct new surface water sewer at some stage in the near future. The new multibillion pound Tunnel will offer no benefits to the drainage system when the new surface water sewers are constructed, limiting the surface water run-off rate into the existing public sewers that currently is responsible for contaminating the river. The new Tunnel will benefit the minority of the engineering companies and contractors in the country, as it requires specialist's skills. It is therefore unsustainable for the weak economy of the country considering that a more practical design will benefit numerous consultancies and contractors
From Dimitris on 12/09/2011 at 10:25
The Tunnel is not the answer but merely a vanity project for Thames Water which will end up with a multi-billion pound asset courtesy of their customers. There are cheaper and, most importantly, more sustainable options. Water bills payers will be charged for Thames Water''s own inefficiency and their failure to update the system (especially the pumping stations). That is THEIR job and they have not done it. Instead they have made mega-bucks for themselves and their parent company, Macquarie Bank (currently cashing 1 of every 5 we pay to TW!!!)bysellin a natural resource that should be FREE! They are responsible for the mains and for the rest of the system and clearly their are not capable of looking after it (the recent landslide is but 1 example). London cannot be put through the destruction entailed by this Tunnel. Thames Water has targeted green spaces all along the river and at the same time they claim they are acting out of environmental concerns. Hope the Commission can stop this madness.
From Krueger on 12/08/2011 at 15:04
I''ve just read a short article in Tunnels & Tunnelling in which you expressed a desire to appoint a non-biased engineer on to your commission. My interest could well be too late but the challenge sounds of great interest. I am an FICE and have been a civil engineer for over 40 years and am independent. Please let me know if my message is if interest to Lord Selbourne. Thanks
From John on 11/08/2011 at 13:01
The disgrace of the millions of tons of sewage pumped deliberatly into London's River has got to stop. The Tunnel is the only option on the table and the only one even possibly likely to be built. Relying on a system built in the mid 1800's is laughable. When the tunnel is built we mustn''t stop there. The river can be and should be clean, an asset to the Londoners who use it, not a health hazard
From Stuart B on 03/08/2011 at 20:08
What I would like to know is, once the tunnel is up and running, will Thames Water do the decent thing and re-stock the river to replace the fish that they have killed
From james annear on 01/08/2011 at 18:26
The tunnel is certainly needed very badly, preferably using brown field sites - my only concern is that TW will use the tunnel to pump untreated sewage and storm water to East London, where it COULD be pumped into the Thames, still untreated, and less likely to be detected this far down the river........
From Barry K on 01/08/2011 at 16:23

Comments

Your comments

Name:*
Display name:*
E-mail:*
Comment:*
 
characters
 
Enter the code shown above:*

                      I accept the terms and conditions of posting to this site*
 

* denotes mandatory field