Pollution in our rivers.

Bill Walker said:
Yes
Privatisation, the death knell, where profits are above everything.
Click to expand...
True, but I remember in the late 60s and early 70s when Manchester was the world capital of holes in the road. 100 year old sewers had never been maintained. They now were assailed by HGVs as opposed to horse and cart.
Things were so bad, a new technology was needed to rectify the situation. As I said earlier people have votes and politicians would not risk them by upping bills to pay for investment. The local consortia of councils had no power to raise finance, so pay big bills or privatise was the choice. (No money available at the Treasury).The equity model was wrong, though. I think the EU has spotted this and limited divis by regulation. (Unresearched factoid from memory.) Ah, it’s Brexit‘s fault again.
Headline: Brexit dumps raw sewage into rivers.
 
KS55 said:
I agree with most of what you say about the environmental issues, but I was writing about the finances to balance out phrases used like ‘billions of profits‘ but with no numbers! I suspect that there are rather less deliberate discharges for profit reasons than careless ones and ones caused by lack of investment as Thames recently admitted. Which brings us full circle.
Click to expand...
Last word on this from the government (or prof whitty)

www.gov.uk

Sewage in water: a growing public health problem

A joint opinion piece from Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer for England, Jonson Cox, Ofwat chair and Emma Howard Boyd, Environment Agency chair.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

Of course once they have dealt with the issues of sewage they will also need to do more to address the impact of intensive farming and run offs which at present is killing that most beautiful river, The Wye.
 
KS55 said:
True, but I remember in the late 60s and early 70s when Manchester was the world capital of holes in the road. 100 year old sewers had never been maintained. They now were assailed by HGVs as opposed to horse and cart.
Things were so bad, a new technology was needed to rectify the situation. As I said earlier people have votes and politicians would not risk them by upping bills to pay for investment. The local consortia of councils had no power to raise finance, so pay big bills or privatise was the choice. (No money available at the Treasury).The equity model was wrong, though. I think the EU has spotted this and limited divis by regulation. (Unresearched factoid from memory.) Ah, it’s Brexit‘s fault again.
Headline: Brexit dumps raw sewage into rivers.
Click to expand...
No it hasn't but it has caused shortages in the chemicals needed to treat sewage :-)
 
Saddleworth2 said:
Last word on this from the government (or prof whitty)

www.gov.uk

Sewage in water: a growing public health problem

A joint opinion piece from Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer for England, Jonson Cox, Ofwat chair and Emma Howard Boyd, Environment Agency chair.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

Of course once they have dealt with the issues of sewage they will also need to do more to address the impact of intensive farming and run offs which at present is killing that most beautiful river, The Wye.
Click to expand...
Good article from Whitty. I notice he does not go a bundle on illegal discharges.
Farming: surely the answer is less fertiliser and better yielding crops from genetic modification. Oh dear! Brexit allows this, EU is reluctant.
 
KS55 said:
Good article from Whitty. I notice he does not go a bundle on illegal discharges.
Farming: surely the answer is less fertiliser and better yielding crops from genetic modification. Oh dear! Brexit allows this, EU is reluctant.
Click to expand...
It depends on the interpretation (and you do seem to be in denial about illegal discharge). He says this: 'After the Environment Agency required the water industry to install monitors on overflows (shared storm and sewage), data shows that their use is now not exceptional. In some cases, up to 200 discharges a year are occurring (interpret that as you will; does it mean by Water provider or by storm drain? Based on the stats I have seen its storm drain). This is obviously unacceptable on public health grounds.

The farming solution is obvious, there will be none left following withdrawal of CAP.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
It depends on the interpretation (and you do seem to be in denial about illegal discharge). He says this: 'After the Environment Agency required the water industry to install monitors on overflows (shared storm and sewage), data shows that their use is now not exceptional. In some cases, up to 200 discharges a year are occurring (interpret that as you will; does it mean by Water provider or by storm drain? Based on the stats I have seen its storm drain). This is obviously unacceptable on public health grounds.

The farming solution is obvious, there will be none left following withdrawal of CAP.
Click to expand...
He doesn’t classify these as illegal or legal.
 
I got the feeling in the Whitehouse documentary that the regs are far too ambiguous and lax.
 
denislawsbackheel said:
I got the feeling in the Whitehouse documentary that the regs are far too ambiguous and lax.
Click to expand...

Water companies are allowed to discharge untreated sewage into rivers, lakes and seas only at times of exceptional rainfall and only then if they are already treating a specified volume of sewage, known as “flow to full treatment” (FtFT).

The Environment Agency (EA) regulates discharges from storm overflows by issuing environmental permits for individual storm overflows. The permits outline when they can be used, as well as how they should be monitored and managed. The EA has a range of enforcement duties, including civil sanctions such as fixed monetary penalties and compliance notices. The EA can also prosecute a water company if it believes the company has breached legislation that it enforces. Ofwat is the independent economic regulator of the water companies. It can issue enforcement orders to ensure storm overflow discharges comply with the law. Ofwat can also impose financial penalties on water companies to a maximum of 10% of their turnover (in a relevant year) if they are in breach of their statutory duties or licence conditions. Financial penalties are borne by shareholders and not customers.

so my understanding of that is that there are instances when discharges caused by storms and significant rainfall are legal because certain criteria has been reached. Anything other than that is illegal and can be punished by EA.
 
There are discharges of raw sewage going in the Wye in drought conditions. I have seen it myself at night time.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
Every one of us is paying our water companies to pollute our rivers and lakes whilst paying their CEO’s millions in salary and bonus and shareholders £billions in dividends.

watch a two part documentary by Paul Whitehouse on BBC2 tonight. Manchester rivers have the greatest pollution of micro plastics IN THE WORLD.

it’s nothing short of a fucking disgrace.
Click to expand...
Very interesting programme. Wasn’t really surprised that a river in a heavily industrialised City was polluted. I remember the Irwell stinking when I was a kid. I was more shocked about the River Wharfe in Ilkley… a designated bathing area they said. FFS
 
Saddleworth2 said:
Water companies are allowed to discharge untreated sewage into rivers, lakes and seas only at times of exceptional rainfall and only then if they are already treating a specified volume of sewage, known as “flow to full treatment” (FtFT).

The Environment Agency (EA) regulates discharges from storm overflows by issuing environmental permits for individual storm overflows. The permits outline when they can be used, as well as how they should be monitored and managed. The EA has a range of enforcement duties, including civil sanctions such as fixed monetary penalties and compliance notices. The EA can also prosecute a water company if it believes the company has breached legislation that it enforces. Ofwat is the independent economic regulator of the water companies. It can issue enforcement orders to ensure storm overflow discharges comply with the law. Ofwat can also impose financial penalties on water companies to a maximum of 10% of their turnover (in a relevant year) if they are in breach of their statutory duties or licence conditions. Financial penalties are borne by shareholders and not customers.

so my understanding of that is that there are instances when discharges caused by storms and significant rainfall are legal because certain criteria has been reached. Anything other than that is illegal and can be punished by EA.
Click to expand...
As Whitehouse showed they water companies disregard those rules with apparent impunity.
 
I used to fish the river Ebro in Spain and every village had a raw sewerage outlet going into the river. Mullet used to feed on the shite coming out and the shoals of mullet attracted the far bigger Wels catfish. My personal best of 115lb was caught just downstream from a sewer pipe. Just saying......
P.S. Local Morrocans used to eat the bloody things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top