Hydropower and the Environment Agency

Transcription

1

2 Hydropower and the Environment Agency What are we doing? Stephen Naylor Flood and Coastal Risk Management Environment Agency South East

3 Summary of presentation Hydropower development on the Thames. Romney Weir Hydropower scheme. Good Practice Guidelines. Hydropower development process. Environmental concerns with Hydropower. Evidence and Monitoring. Conflicts.

4 Hydropower on the River Thames The level of the River Thames is controlled for navigation purposes by the operation of 44 weirs. We own, maintain and operate all of them. There has been hydropower on the Thames for centuries. Mills powered the industrial revolution and later many estates generated electricity before National Grid took over in the 1950 s. Each River Thames weir site we own has been screened for hydropower potential, looking at head, flow and environmental issues.

5 Development of our assets We only consider developing our weirs where there is a good potential for electricity generation and environmental impacts can be considered negligible, be mitigated or improvements made. In all cases where development on our weirs is proposed we require the developer to engage with the public to listen to concerns. Lease includes a market value rental payment.

6 Romney Weir scheme

7 Romney Weir scheme First proposed in Original scheme approved in The developer npower pulled out in New proposal and design approved New proposal and design approved Construction started in September Works in progress, completion due Mar Pre and post environmental monitoring programme in place.

8 Regional Fisheries, Ecology and Recreation Advisory Committee (RFERAC) In 2008 at RFERAC we said no development of further sites until Romney Weir was evaluated. The Romney scheme suffered repeated delays. In 2009 we published our Good Practice Guide. In 2009 we published our Good Practice Guide. We felt that with the GPG we were able to proceed at other sites with confidence. In 2010 and again in 2011 we advertised for Expressions of Interest to develop a number of weirs on the Thames.

9 Good Practice Guidelines v2 Literature review international. Update of guidance based on evidence. On 21 January 2013 we launched a formal consultation on options for revised river flow and abstraction standards. The consultation runs for 10 weeks from 21 Jan to the 1 Apr The consultation documents are available on our website from 21 Jan at: The revised Good Practice Guidance is expected later in No date has been set!

10 Good Practice Guidelines v2 There are two parts to the consultation. Firstly we have set out four options. These are: 1. A development from current standards; 2. An ecological sensitivity scoring approach; 3. General standards for water abstraction; and 4. General abstraction standards (as 3 above), with some 4. General abstraction standards (as 3 above), with some provision for modification. From one or more of these we will develop a revised set of standards. The second part considers schemes in the process of being permitted or in development.

11 Hydropower Licensing and approvals It takes time to investigate proposals and safeguard the environment that we regulate. Impoundment Licence authorises the licence holder to obstruct or impede the flow. schedule of conditions, eg. Hands off flow, maximum flow, intake screens. Flood Defence Consent Approval of construction including temporary works with regard for environmental protection. Planning Permission Local Authority application, EA as statutory consultee. Fish pass approval from National Panel.

12 Hydropower scheme decision points What is the impact? Fish, ecology, invertebrates, other abstractors, flood risk, channel morphology How far can this be mitigated? Residual flows, fish passes, screens, pool design, operating rules What is the residual risk? Effectiveness of mitigation Is this acceptable? Damage vs social and economic benefits

13 Teddington Photomontage

14 Key environmental concern There are four main concerns related to hydropower and impacts on fish populations. Direct fish mortality from turbine operation, Delay to fish passage, Damage to spawning grounds, Cumulative effects on a river system. Proposals on the Thames generally provide additional facilities for fish passage. The Thames weirpools, especially the gravels, are recognised as a valuable habitat.

15 Hydropower and the application of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) WFD prohibits any activities that cause a deterioration in waterbody classification or prevents a waterbody from reaching Good class (unless there has been a special assessment carried out). A WFD assessment is required of all hydropower developments. This must include a consideration of the likely impacts on class and the cumulative impacts. (some earlier schemes did not require this)

16 Damage to spawning grounds The artificial habitat created by the weir pool is colonised by a variety of aquatic life. The gravel shoals that develop downstream are vitally important for fish spawning. Concern that changes to flow patterns and reduced velocities may increase silt on the clean gravel beds. Desktop studies have concluded that due to sediment transport theory this should not happen. Some schemes could cause depleted weirpools. Opportunities exist at our weir sites to alter the operational regime.

17 Cumulative Impact Spawning grounds Reduced breeding success Lower River Thames has a limited number of good breeding areas for coarse fish. Does the removal of energy from the water by the turbines reduce the quality and quantity of the breeding areas? Loss or deterioration in one breeding area within a waterbody could impact on the whole status of the waterbody, with knock on effects for the catchment.

18 Cumulative effects on a river system This is the most difficult to assess. Local impact might be minimal, even negligible but changes over years may occur. The cumulative effect could impact on fish populations in a whole watercourse. It is possible that some of the changes improve the situation eg. better fish passes. Many factors impact on the environment, we can only assess some of the potential changes.

19 Photomontage of Goring weir

20 Evidence and Monitoring National project Work Project on cumulative impacts will review and identify the range of impacts (and benefits) caused by hydropower schemes that we might need to manage on a cumulative basis. The second will describe a method for dealing with the management of migratory fish such as salmon and eels. Specific project looking at describing and managing the cumulative impacts on salmon and eel resulting from passage through Archimedes Screw hydropower turbines. Other work will look at mortality, delay, fish pass efficiency, weirpool impacts.

21 Romney weir monitoring New fish pass being monitored by video recording. Analysis of weirpool bathymetry to assess the impact of a change in operating regime. Developer will trial the direct impact of the turbines on fish mortality. Similar monitoring regime for Bray weir without a proposed hydropower. Comparison of data will provide information on impacts of hydropower. This can then be used to help with the development of other schemes on the Thames to ensure that they are developed in a sustainable way.

22 Monitoring at other sites All new proposals require a full suite of surveys carried out to inform Water Framework Directive and hydromorphological assessments. These will create a baseline of conditions prior to development. The Environment Agency will look at opportunities to fill gaps in evidence. Other schemes on the Thames may be brought into the monitoring programme if suitable.

23 EA promoted schemes Romney Licensed Teddington Licence in progress Sunbury Pre-application made Goring Licence in progress Osney Licence in progress Boulter s Pre-application made Marlow Pre-application made Bell Pre-application made

24 Development on our assets costs money Our standards Best practice as a minimum. Water Framework Directive Compliance Assessment Good Environmental Potential. Developing on our asset means commitment to delivering the highest environmental standards. There are no shortcuts in Regulatory process. We are not funding or subsidising schemes. All environmental monitoring and assessment costs required for environmental approvals must be borne by developers.

25 Internal and external conflict Hydropower on our assets - Not core business. Government expectation to maximising income. Recreation fisheries, boaters, walkers. Project benefits cost/benefit assessment. Risk to asset, future operation and flood management. Fisheries staff concerns on scheme impacts. Relationship with stakeholders the Public expect! Achieving market value for rental agreement. Impacts on weir replacement programme. Impartiality Landlord and Regulatory role Access rights What if environmental damage is recorded?

26 Where to go for help? Is it an Environment Agency asset in the South East? The Environment Agency website holds all you need. Community groups are getting together Low Carbon Hub. Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) British Hydropower Association

27 Any questions?