Criticism of Government’s Sewage Plans for Windermere
Plans announced by ministers to eliminate sewage discharges into Lake Windermere have faced significant backlash from environmental campaigners. They have described the initiative as mere “soundbites” and “rhetoric”, emphasizing that such promises need to be supported by concrete financial commitments and substantial legal reforms.
On Monday, Environment Secretary Steve Reed unveiled a vision to ensure that only “rainwater” will flow into Windermere in the future. This announcement was met with approval from local advocacy groups who have long fought against the pollution of England’s largest lake. However, they insisted that Reed’s pledge must be solidified through a “legally binding agreement” to ensure accountability.
Some experts have raised concerns regarding the practicality of these proposals, labeling them as “aspirational”.
Government’s Proposal for Windermere
The government has articulated a “long-term ambition” to guarantee that only rainwater enters Lake Windermere, which has been heavily affected by sewage contamination. In the past year, untreated sewage was discharged into Windermere for an alarming 6,327 hours, equivalent to 263 days.
Realizing this goal would mean a complete cessation of untreated sewage spills, which typically occur during rain when the infrastructure of water companies is overwhelmed. More crucially, this initiative aims to halt the influx of treated sewage from the nine wastewater treatment facilities surrounding the lake. Although public attention has largely focused on untreated discharges, campaigners have voiced concerns that even treated sewage is detrimental to Windermere’s ecosystem.
Matt Staniek, the founder of the Save Windermere campaign, hailed the announcement as a “historic” moment, one that could inspire innovative solutions for restoring Britain’s polluted water bodies.
Feasibility of Stopping Sewage Discharges
While it is technically feasible to prevent sewage discharges into Lake Windermere, implementing such solutions could be both time-consuming and financially burdensome. Currently, the government lacks a definitive plan to ensure that only rainwater flows into the lake. Instead, it aims to conduct a “thorough feasibility study” in collaboration with campaigners, the Environment Agency, and the regional water provider, United Utilities.
Dr. Ben Surridge, a Senior Lecturer in Environmental Science at the University of Lancaster, indicated that achieving these goals may necessitate the construction of a “super sewer” akin to the Thames Tideway Tunnel in London, which would collect all wastewater within the Windermere catchment area. This wastewater would then be transported approximately 30 miles to Morecambe Bay for treatment and discharge at a specialized facility.
Save Windermere has urged the government to take cues from a successful project from the 1960s at Lake Annecy in France, where sewage was redirected away from the lake through a network of pipes, leading to its recognition as one of Europe’s cleanest lakes.
Additionally, Alastair Chisholm, Director of Policy at the Chartered Institute of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM), suggested exploring the installation of “thermal destruction toilets” in buildings within the catchment area. This innovative technology incinerates waste, but it would require extensive retrofitting.
Cost Implications
Without a concrete plan in place, the exact cost of completely eliminating sewage discharges into Windermere remains uncertain. In February of last year, United Utilities conducted a preliminary feasibility study on rerouting wastewater away from the lake, estimating that such an endeavor could cost between £3.5 billion and £6.4 billion. However, Staniek has contested these figures.
Dr. Surridge noted that he could not provide a precise estimate until more research is conducted but speculated that the cost would likely be in the hundreds of millions. Meanwhile, United Utilities is investing £200 million until 2030 to enhance the existing treatment plants surrounding Windermere, although these upgrades alone are insufficient to completely eradicate sewage discharges.
Likelihood of Implementation
While Staniek welcomed the government’s ambitious goals, he stressed that these must be accompanied by a “legally binding commitment”. He remarked, “We know what politicians are like. We know they enjoy delivering grand statements, but we want to see a day when it is illegal to discharge any sewage into the lake.”
Chisholm described the government’s proposals as “aspirational” and somewhat superficial, suggesting that resources might be more effectively allocated towards upgrading existing sewage treatment plants to improve the quality of treated sewage being released into the lake.
As previously reported by The i Paper, some treatment plants discharging into Windermere are operating under permits that are decades old and fail to remove key nutrients, such as phosphorus, which contribute to the lake’s pollution. He cautioned that it could take decades to fully eliminate sewage discharges, stating, “There needs to be an honest conversation from the government about the extent of this initiative. We aim to restore Windermere to a healthy state, which is achievable, but using phrases like ‘only rainwater’ is unnecessary.”
For Staniek, the only viable path to restoring Windermere to its pristine condition is to entirely eliminate sewage discharges. He asserted, “We want this ambition to be a commitment that ensures Windermere is never again exploited.”
