Water Companies Propose Pipelines to Divert Treated Sewage to Less Protected Waterways

A network of pipelines is being planned by water companies to redirect treated wastewater from legally protected conservation zones into rivers, lakes, and seas that lack comparable legal safeguards. This undertaking is slated for customer funding, with the water industry regulator, Ofwat, having tentatively indicated an average annual increase of £19 on bills from 2025 to 2030. These national initiatives, which include ten projects by Severn Trent Water, could entail expenditures amounting to billions of pounds. Water companies assert that this investment forms part of their strategy to decrease sewage discharge into waterways and ensure the continuity of drinking water provisions. Ofwat is scheduled to issue a decision on these proposals from the water companies before the end of the current month. Residents and workers situated along the planned pipeline paths have expressed profound distress, with farmer George Rowe remarking: “It will be as bad as HS2 for the countryside.” A single pipeline is projected to traverse a minimum of 15 miles (24km) across the landscapes of Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and Leicestershire. Severn Trent Water’s £80 million initiative intends to circumvent the River Mease, discharging treated wastewater directly into the River Trent. The Mease holds the designation of a special area of conservation, harboring protected species including otters, white-clawed crayfish, bullhead, and spined loach. The Trent, in contrast, lacks this equivalent legal protection. While water companies possess the legal right to release treated sewage into rivers, lakes, and seas, the Environment Agency (EA) imposes restrictions on the frequency of such discharges into conservation zones. Dave Rowe and his nephew George, who operate as farmers and contractors in Harlaston, near Lichfield, indicated that the pipeline would impact 30 acres (12.1 hectares) of their potato-cultivating land. “We are concerned that we may no longer be able to plough the area where the pipe is laid and if we can plant a crop for 2026,” George stated. His uncle further commented, “A wildflower meadow on the farm will be destroyed and we may no longer be able to extract water for irrigating our crops.” Phillip Busby, who cultivates fruit and vegetables in Swadlincote, Derbyshire, and serves as chairman of the local National Farmers’ Union (NFU) branch, remarked: “The overall environmental impact of the pipeline is going to be huge and we’ve seen no data to show us what the benefits will be.” He added, “There’s been no consultation with us – we’re the insignificant other.” The sewage treatment process involves an initial separation of waste from water, followed by the injection of oxygen to foster beneficial bacteria that consume detrimental bacteria. Subsequent to this, particles are extracted prior to the water’s release. Additionally, water companies are permitted to discharge raw sewage during periods of heavy rainfall to prevent residential flooding. Sewage overflow incidents reported by water companies more than doubled in 2023. Water companies are exempt from requiring planning permission to lay pipes on private property, needing only to provide one week’s advance notice before commencing operations. Amy Wheelton, a farmer and local councillor from the adjacent Walton on Trent, urged the secretary of state to halt the pipeline project. She stated: “Spades could be in the ground as soon as March, yet farmers only started hearing rumours about the plans in August.” She further commented, “It’s going through hedges, across farmlands, across roads, it will do massive ecological damage.” In October, Environment Secretary Steve Reed declared the most extensive review of the water industry since its privatization in 1989. He indicated that water companies would be subjected to “special measures” via the Water Bill, encompassing “new powers to ban the payment of bonuses for polluting water bosses and bring criminal charges against persistent law breakers.” Steve Hill, a dairy farmer based in Tamworth, expressed a perception of disrespect towards the community and local enterprises. He remarked: “We’re not allowed to pull hedges and trees out, but Severn Trent can.” He concluded, “It’s one rule for them and another for us.” Severn Trent reported that its personnel had engaged with local Members of Parliament and landowners, and had organized two public forums concerning the proposals. A company spokesperson stated: “The Environment Agency has asked us to reduce flows on the River Mease to a more natural state and to do this we’ll be diverting the fully treated water from our Packington and Measham treatment works.” They added, “We have taken on board feedback around the engagement process and, in discussion with the NFU, have updated our consultation approach.” A comparable undertaking is envisioned for the Clun Valley in Shropshire, where Severn Trent intends to construct a new pipeline measuring a minimum of five kilometres (3.1 miles) in length. This pipeline will transport treated wastewater, presently released into the River Clun, and discharge it into the River Onny, a natural environment for salmon, grayling, and trout. Local anglers and environmental conservationists have expressed their dismay. Andy Boak, representing the Onny Preservation Trust, questioned: “How would you feel if I was chucking my rubbish into your garden, every day, in perpetuity?” He continued, “It’s the same thing. The fish, the invertebrates, the insects, the otters, the dippers, the kingfishers. What is going to be the implication for them?” Penny Gane, a lawyer affiliated with Fish Legal, an organization that employs legal means to address polluters on behalf of anglers, is acting for the Plowden Fishing Club. She asserted: “Water companies in this country were asked to innovate when it came to sewage treatment and moving a problem of pollution in one river to another is not innovation.” She added, “We cannot understand how the environmental regulators would have sanctioned this.” A spokesperson for Severn Trent indicated that redirecting fully treated water to the Onny could “support the river [Clun’s] environmental targets.” The Environment Agency (EA) establishes limits for the volume of wastewater that can be returned to rivers, lakes, and seas. It noted that, in certain instances, water companies opt to move treated sewage effluent to a different watercourse and seek a new discharge permit. The EA further stated: “We are liaising with Severn Trent on their proposals for approximately 10 treated effluent transfers to alternative watercourse locations.” It concluded, “We will ensure the water environment is protected and enhanced by any scheme approved.” Water companies across England and Wales intend to allocate £108 billion over the forthcoming five years to a range of pollution reduction initiatives, including these pipeline constructions. This funding will be sourced from customers. In July, Ofwat tentatively announced that bills would increase by an average of £19 annually between 2025 and 2030, culminating in a £94 rise, or a 21% increment, over that half-decade. This projected increase does not account for inflation. Proposals to extract water from the Thames at Teddington and subsequently reintroduce treated waste downstream into the river have drawn criticism from rowers, politicians, and local residents. A Thames Water spokesperson explained: “The project is designed to protect Greater London’s drinking water supplies during periods of drought.” They further elaborated, “To replenish what is taken and balance water levels and flows, highly treated recycled water would then be transferred via a new tunnel and pipeline from Mogden sewage treatment works back into the River Thames.” In Cumbria, United Utilities is constructing a 3.4-mile (5.5km) pipeline for the transfer of treated sewage. A spokesperson stated: “Instead of the storm overflow discharging into Morecambe Bay it is now diverted to Barrow and treated there before being discharged into the Walney channel.”