Micro Hydro schemes

Anyone got any news on the Hydro schemes that were planned for the Sheffield area at Kelham Island and Jordan Dam. It seems to have gone very quiet for the last 3 years since they were 'almost ready' for implementation - Most of the googleable info on them appears to be out of date, too!

The one that was planned for the local Irwell seems to have run into trouble and reputedly been abandoned. The EA have been less than forthcoming with information, too.

Given there were many concerns for the impacts for local angling and longer term effects on fish migration for a number of hydro-projects around the country - I'm surprised at the way it's gone quiet!

Have the Sheffield schemes been implemented / abandoned / being re-appraised?

I couldn't tell you about the Sheffield schemes. I do know a little about the Topcliffe one. Last I heard, around November, it had gone back to the district planning department. Supposedly we were going to hear something a month or so later. As far as I'm aware, nothing has been heard since.

sam vimes said:

...... As far as I'm aware, nothing has been heard since.

Click to expand...

Another one that's gone quiet, then!

I was upset when I saw pics like this - allegedly as a result of a hydro scheme:

greenie62 said:

Another one that's gone quiet, then!

I was upset when I saw pics like this - allegedly as a result of a hydro scheme:

Click to expand...

I am not convinced of the veracity of that pic , ie the blades which will be used these days are much less likely to inflict that kind of damage , as far as I understand it that pic was from a Dutch scheme.

feed in tariffs seem to be dropping too wonder whether that has had an effect I thought the fits were fixed at the hydro scheme inception but I may be wrong.

bennygesserit said:

I am not convinced of the veracity of that pic , ie the blades which will be used these days are much less likely to inflict that kind of damage , as far as I understand it that pic was from a Dutch scheme.
.....

Click to expand...

The damaged Perch pics were derived from this video - Kelham Island Hydro on Vimeo - on the Hydro scheme where they are attributed to the Angling Trust! It also includes pics of damaged eels and other coarse fish - all supplied by ATr.

I guess it depends on Trusting the Trust's veracity!

Interesting video - just a shame the audio and video go so badly out of sync - doesn't help the watchability!

The local rivers of any size all have weirs situated every couple of kilometers or so. Originally they were built to power water wheels. Every village had a flour mill and many larger villages and towns also had steel forges powered by water wheels. A lot of these weirs are now redundant, but some have been converted to micro hydro schemes. I was stood by one the other week, as you do, and suddenly some motor burst into life and an automatic cleaning process went into action to clear weed and other debris from the grills protecting the turbines. All the water going through the generator passes through a steel grill that would prevent any fish of any size passing through and it is only water from the upper layer that goes through. There is also a fish pass alongside the hydro plant.

---------- Post added at 22:18 ---------- Previous post was at 22:11 ----------

greenie62 said:

The damaged Perch pics were derived from this video - Kelham Island Hydro on Vimeo - on the Hydro scheme where they are attributed to the Angling Trust! It also includes pics of damaged eels and other coarse fish - all supplied by ATr.

I guess it depends on Trusting the Trust's veracity!

Interesting video - just a shame the audio and video go so badly out of sync - doesn't help the watchability!

Click to expand...

I've found the photos in the Angling Trust library. But no mention of where they were taken.

nicepix said:

...... All the water going through the generator passes through a steel grill that would prevent any fish of any size passing through and it is only water from the upper layer that goes through. There is also a fish pass alongside the hydro plant......

Click to expand...

Thanks Clive,
We have a number of historical industrial weirs along the Irwell & Croal - from 1-5m high. One is being converted to a micro Hydro Plant. There is also a study published reccommending the removal / modifications of most of these weirs to enable fish migration in either direction - currently they act as one-way valves to fish movement - where fish can be swept downstream following spates with no hope of regaining their previous feeding zones.
No fish passes were built into any of these weirs originally and none are planned for the Hydro Plant! mg:
Great bit of Environmental Impact Assessment there!mg:
Another of the points of controversy is the mesh size of filters on the turbine intake - sounds like the ones you've seen are made to a more sensible standard!
Tight Lines!

How much success will the Angling Trust have in opposing these hydro schemes in the long run? Are they throwing a lot of money at something that they wont be able to change much in the long run? Would they have more success in going for massive compensation.?

markg said:

How much success will the Angling Trust have in opposing these hydro schemes in the long run? Are they throwing a lot of money at something that they wont be able to change much in the long run? Would they have more success in going for massive compensation.?

Click to expand...

With respect Mark, if "massive compensation" were attainable how does that possibly compensate?

Does the riparian owner get a load of cash?

Does the club leasing a stretch of affected water get a load of cash?

If compensation were attainable it would highly unlikely be set or paid out until an impact assessment had been carried out to determine the level of compensation required.

So... Let's say a significant impact has been established, would you be happy to sit on a river catching far less than you used to because the eco system has been damaged far beyond the implications to angling, where spawning grounds in oxygenated weir pools have become slack areas of water due to being bye-passed in order to provide the flow for the hydro plant?

Let's say some of that compensation even works its way back to you via a club rebate, are you happy to fish a declining waterway safe in the knowledge that you might be twenty quid better off?

I know I certainly wouldn't.

I think the ATr are right to pursue this as there was a widespread feeling of betrayal by the EA over the Teddington Weir proposal where the EA even consulted paddlers but not paying anglers.

If you also consider that some countries which are way further down the line with hydro power which was installed many years ago are now undergoing a programme of removal coupled with the fact that hydro power in the UK is being reported as having the potential to supply as little as 0.2% of the power requirement then I think you have to look long and hard to see what possible long term environmental and economical benefits it could possibly bring.

In short the bang really isn't worth the buck and I think the more people that stand up against hydro power the better, regardless of who they are.

Abingdon was the subject of a massive thread on here , I was looking through it to see if I could find the origin of that photo ( I can't ) , but the website appears to have gone so I wonder if that project , at least , has been abandoned ?

Like I said the FIT tariff changes and the international angling cartel that Paul Boote used to talk about might have had an effect.

binka said:

...In short the bang really isn't worth the buck and I think the more people that stand up against hydro power the better, regardless of who they are.

Click to expand...

A very good point Binka,
Unfortunately the ability to object to Hydro schemes like those referenced is dependant on being able to find out about them; The ATr site on 'Fighting Hydropower' has the following:

Make your voice heard and express your concerns and object to as many schemes as you can. It’s easy to do if you follow this Angling Trust guide:

Find out who your catchment fishery officer is at the Environment Agency and ask him or her to tell you of possible schemes before they go too far so you can register your objection early in the process.
The developer has to apply to the Agency for an abstraction licence and/or an impounding licence before schemes can be approved. This licence application has to be advertised on the Agency website for 28 days, and you must object within that period. So keep an eye on the list of applications here (this will open in a new window, so you can keep this guide open).
You will see a list of sites. Most have the name of the river in the title, but some don’t; in which case you’ll have to click on the scheme name to see more details.
If the scheme is on your river and you want to know more, the site advises that you can view the details at the local Environment Agency office. Unless you have time to spare, ask for an electronic copy of the scheme specifications and environmental information by email, either by clicking on the envelope next to “Permitting Support Centre” or direct to PSC-WaterResources@environment-agency.gov.uk. Quote the reference number (which begins NPS/WR/ ) and the applicant’s name. If they try and fob you off, insist that they send you the information.

The information you get back varies from non-existent to quite complex. If it is non-existent, object to the proposed development on the grounds of insufficient information. If it is complex you might want to discuss it with your Agency catchment officer, or e-mail it to the Angling Trust. If you have any doubts, object!

Click to expand...

The link to the EA site points to an archived page which unfortunately is nearly 12 months old - a bit tricky to get your objection in within the 28 days!

Alternately trying to route via the EA River Catchment Plan and their Beta -Testing Explorer tool doesn't seem to bring up any Hydro Scheme applications or references to where they may be found!

Getting a bit difficult to object to Hydro Schemes if you can't find them! mg:

[/COLOR]

bennygesserit said:

Abingdon was the subject of a massive thread on here , I was looking through it to see if I could find the origin of that photo ( I can't ) , but the website appears to have gone so I wonder if that project , at least , has been abandoned ?

Like I said the FIT tariff changes and the international angling cartel that Paul Boote used to talk about might have had an effect.

Click to expand...

Another one that's gone quiet! - The project that is! mg:

Just an aside, on the river Sheaf that flows into the river Don near the town centre there is a recantly constructed fish pass so maybe some pre planning????.

flightliner said:

....there is a recantly constructed fish pass so maybe some pre planning????.

Click to expand...

Hooray - makes a change then, eh?
:thumbs:

flightliner said:

Just an aside, on the river Sheaf that flows into the river Don near the town centre there is a recantly constructed fish pass so maybe some pre planning????.

Click to expand...

Many of the weirs on Yorkshire rivers have been subject to improvements over the last year. As far as I'm aware, they've been done by contractors under the auspices of the EA. This is definitely the case with the weir at Crakehill on the Swale. In that case it almost definitely has nothing to do with any impending hydro scheme.

sam vimes said:

Many of the weirs on Yorkshire rivers have been subject to improvements over the last year...... it almost definitely has nothing to do with any impending hydro scheme.

Click to expand...

Thanks Sam,
There is an intention supported by the EA for the removal/reduction of weirs on the Croal and Irwell to improve fish migration, but unfortunately no clear timescale/schedule for this.
Ironically, the draft Hydro schemes would require work on the weirs, but don't include fish passes! mg:

greenie62 said:

Thanks Clive,
We have a number of historical industrial weirs along the Irwell & Croal - from 1-5m high. One is being converted to a micro Hydro Plant. There is also a study published reccommending the removal / modifications of most of these weirs to enable fish migration in either direction - currently they act as one-way valves to fish movement - where fish can be swept downstream following spates with no hope of regaining their previous feeding zones.
No fish passes were built into any of these weirs originally and none are planned for the Hydro Plant! mg:
Great bit of Environmental Impact Assessment there!mg:
Another of the points of controversy is the mesh size of filters on the turbine intake - sounds like the ones you've seen are made to a more sensible standard!
Tight Lines!

Click to expand...

Don't underestimate a fish's ability to negotiate a weir.......





Minnows clearing a 12" weir on their spawning run.

flightliner said:

Just an aside, on the river Sheaf that flows into the river Don near the town centre there is a recantly constructed fish pass so maybe some pre planning????.

Click to expand...

Flight' - those weirs might be more to do with helping silver tourists on their way

As an aside; The Angling Trust photo shows perch chopped by a hydro scheme. Have you ever caught a perch in the Kelham Island area? Because I haven't. It is all grayling andtrout up there. A few dace, chub and barbel lower down, the other side of Hillsborough, but I haven't had a perch out of there in over twenty years of fishing.

nicepix said:

Don't underestimate a fish's ability to negotiate a weir........

Click to expand...

[/URL][/IMG]

Some of our weirs are a bit more than 12" High! and have a welcoming committee on them!

Apart from delays. injunctions etc, how many of these hydro schemes have actually been scrapped through the efforts of the AT or other groups so far? And what has it cost so far?

I am not anti, far from it; I am just trying to establish whether anyone is weighing this up with a detached mind. I dont know the answer to that question, are we in a + or a - situation.

My fear is, will it be the same as my local by-pass and many other government projects, despite many court cases, injunctions, people siting in trees etc, its being built and is half way finished despite a lot of enviromental damage it is causing.

Nice pictures by the way Nicepix and Greenie. I wouldn't mind them hanging up on my wall..

markg said:

.....My fear is, will it be the same as my local by-pass and many other government projects, despite many court cases, injunctions, people siting in trees etc, its being built and is half way finished.

Click to expand...

Hi Mark,
That was really the point of the OP - there seems to have been a number of these schemes planned / permitted / started but have then 'gone quiet' - with little available information on their progress.
As previously mentioned, the EA site which the ATr referenced as being the point at which to check any plans and raise objections seems to have been made 'invisible'. Checking on t'Interweb only seems to bring up 2-3 yr old reports!
I'm trying to find out whether any of the schemes have been implemented and what the results / effects are. But it seems a case of "It's all gone quiet over there"!

markg said:

Apart from delays. injunctions etc, how many of these hydro schemes have actually been scrapped through the efforts of the AT or other groups so far? And what has it cost so far?

Click to expand...

The ATr has had little or nothing to do with the Topcliffe proposal. It has been put forward by the development company in conjunction with the angling club. As the angling club concerned is an ATr member, it was a little difficult for them to get involved. As far as I'm aware, the main objections have come from the local residents groups and individual anglers. As to what it has cost anyone, I doubt it will have cost anyone over and above their normal expectations. So far it's just been a normal planning application process.