Forty million tons of sewage per year...

[geoffmaynard]

... are what enters the Thames on an AVERAGE year. "On wet years this can easily double."
Quotes from a BBC Radio 4 Costing the Earth podcast which I only just got around to listen to. A fascinating programme for those of you who are interested, with contributions from the TAC too.

40,000,000 tons. That's a lot of Matts favourite shoebox filler

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01c7pqq

 

[Paul Boote]

40,000,000 tons. That's a lot of Matts favourite shoebox filler

That's also a lot of wonga in the pockets of the Aussie bank and Chinese 9%-ers that own it.

 

[tuolumne fisher]

aha, but in a bad year they admit to over 90 million tons
I would much prefer the figures to be in litres, as they'd be easier to comprehend
I think keith arthur put the figures for one year at 60 billion litres

it seems thames water aint much good planning for a drought
and aint much good at treating sewage

as ray walton said, if you aint treating the sewage, where's the rebate on the bill

 

[barbelboi]

aha, but in a bad year they admit to over 90 million tons
I would much prefer the figures to be in litres, as they'd be easier to comprehend
I think keith arthur put the figures for one year at 60 billion litres

it seems thames water aint much good planning for a drought
and aint much good at treating sewage

as ray walton said, if you aint treating the sewage, where's the rebate on the bill

To put it into perspective, the 39 million cubic metres (one cubic metre = 1000 litres) of untreated sewage (official figures for a typical year) would fill the Royal Albert Hall 450 times. Mixed with rainwater, the sewage content of the discharges ranges from 10% to 90% depending upon conditions - as little as 2mm of rain can now trigger a discharge.
Jerry

 

[dezza]

To put it into perspective, the 39 million cubic metres (one cubic metre = 1000 litres) of untreated sewage (official figures for a typical year) would fill the Royal Albert Hall 450 times. Mixed with rainwater, the sewage content of the discharges ranges from 10% to 90% depending upon conditions - as little as 2mm of rain can now trigger a discharge.
Jerry

The simple truth is that Thames Water does not have the capability of treating all the sewage London produces. It also does not have the revenue to build and update sewage plants. Thames Water is an extremely poor organisation with little spare wealth to throw around.

On the other hand, Yorkshire Water are spending in the next two years close to £100,000,000 on updates and modifications to its Blackburn Meadows sewage works which will give vastly improved water quality to the River Don. A spokesman on the phone to myself told me that raw sewage overspills during times of heavy rain would become a thing of the past and that the Don could become one of the UKs finest angling rivers in due course.

It's not bad now.

 

[barbelboi]

Ron,the construction of the proposed Thames tunnel (which should see the fall of an average 60 CSO discharges a year to four or less) will hopefully be underway sometime next year if the squabbling between local residents of some of the planned routes (not it my backyard) is solved. The current network of sewers, founded 150 years ago, was designed for a city of four million people - this, together with the loss of permeable surfaces able to soak up rainfall means, as I stated earlier, as little as 2mm of rainfall can now trigger a sewage discharge.
Jerry

PS Although separate systems for rainwater and foul sewage are now required for all new developments retrofitting such systems across densely developed London already congested with infrastructure both above and below the ground would be prohibitively expensive and impractical.

 

[dezza]

was designed for a city of four million people - this, together with the loss of permeable surfaces able to soak up rainfall means, as I stated earlier, as little as 2mm of rainfall can now trigger a sewage discharge.

That's an enormous difference Jerry compared with Sheffield with a population of only 800,000 and Rotherham with approx 200,000.

My Dad before he died used to tell me that Sheffield and district had the best water quality, and sewage treatment equipment in Europe. Mind you I suppose he was biased, he worked for Yorkshire Water for most of his life.

 

[geoffmaynard]

My Dad before he died used to tell me that Sheffield and district had the best water quality, and sewage treatment equioment in Europe. Mind you I supposed he was biased, he worked for Yorkshire Water for most of his life.

Probably received wisdom Ron. They told us the same in the East End - and in the same breath proudly declared that every drop that came out the tap had already been through the water-treatment system seven times.

 

[thames steve]

Many think the sewage spills are confined to the tidal London reaches - not so.

There's 92 discharge sites on the Upper, Mid and Lower non-tidal Thames, with many in genteel places like Marlow, Henley, Goring etc. There's even one up in Cricklade.

 

[watatoad]

It just makes my want to cry and put concrete boots on anyone involved with letting it happen and ALL the politicians and pseudo 'Greenies', then toss them all in the Thames or force them all to just drink Thames water for a year and nothing else.

 

[tuolumne fisher]

nice one barbelboi, crikey 92, nice one steve, aint never heard that before, just goes to prove what we all dont know
seems to me that with the increase in population since the sewers construction, successive governments failed to keep up with population growth, then it was decided to flog it, another thirty years of minimum investment and selling of prime real estate, and here we are now, the owners of TW bought the company fully aware of the past and fully aware of the problems, either government failed to draw up the right contracts, or TW is ripping us of, or perhaps its both

 

[stu_the_blank]

PS Although separate systems for rainwater and foul sewage are now required for all new developments retrofitting such systems across densely developed London already congested with infrastructure both above and below the ground would be prohibitively expensive and impractical.

Although the sewers on the new developments may be separate, they are then connected to Londons combined sewers. When Bazalgette built the Sewers we used little water therefore to power the system rainwater was used (indeed some of Londons lost rivers were diverted into the system to flush the muck down to the two outflows). So, unless the Govt fancies spending money beyond their dreams (TWA aren't going to), the system will stay combined. To separate foul and surface water would mean renewing the entire system.

Stu

 

[little oik]

Might be a bit controversial here. Surely some Sewage is a good thing (if it is the right type of course). Although it is not nice to think about but it does fertilize plant life and also all sorts of micro organisms will feed on it .Therefore giving fish more food in the long run. Also it colours the water and gives fish more confidence .Sitting on the fence here .Is this one of the reasons that large roach are getting rarer as rivers are being cleaned up .
Just a bit of devils advocate here by the way

 

[tuolumne fisher]

I dont think sewage in itself is bad for fish, its more to do with how much and when, is it mullet that has a rep for areas of pre-digested sweetcorn
mega amounts of money to remedy the situation, that sounds akin to 30 years of profit by TW, or half a nuclear sub, obviously those that make the decisions, deem it more important to protect 3000 falkland islanders, rather than the millions that live in london

 

[Jeff Woodhouse]

Therefore giving fish more food in the long run. Also it colours the water and gives fish more confidence .Sitting on the fence here .Is this one of the reasons that large roach are getting rarer as rivers are being cleaned up

There could be a lot of truth in that! Although the EA would deny every word!