Southern, Thames and Wessex Water together discharged sewage for more than 3,500 hours last year when it was not raining, according to the BBC. This is not allowed under their permits.
England’s other private wastewater firms refused to release figures, citing a criminal investigation by the Environment Agency.
Adam Vaughan www.thetimes.co.uk
Labour has called for an immediate investigation into apparent illegal dry sewage spills by three water companies.
Southern, Thames and Wessex Water together discharged sewage for more than 3,500 hours last year when it was not raining, according to the BBC. This is not allowed under their permits.
The companies released data on the start and stop times of sewage spills from storm overflows, which BBC journalists cross-referenced with rainfall data. England’s other private wastewater firms refused to release figures, citing a criminal investigation by the Environment Agency.
Companies are allowed to release sewage from storm overflows, designed as the sewer network’s relief valves, at times of heavy rainfall when the capacity of treatment works is overwhelmed. Swimmers, paddleboarders and other river users typically know to avoid using rivers or take extra care after downpours.
However, the new analysis suggests that last year Wessex Water released 215 spills, Thames Water 110 and Southern Water 63. The apparent spills occurred at a variety of sites, including the River Chew in north Somerset, the River Lavant near Chichester and a river in a park in Dagenham, east London.
“There must be an immediate investigation into both the breach of the licence and the environmental damage caused. Only then can we expose this illegal pollution and bring those responsible to justice,” said Steve Reed, Labour’s shadow environment secretary. Southern and Thames did not dispute the spills, although Wessex said it had doubts about the accuracy of its own data.
The investigation is not the first evidence of dry spills but is the first analysis of its extent last year. The water industry had proudly boasted that the total number of spills last year had fallen by almost a fifth in 2022, although there were still more than 300,000 reported by the Environment Agency.
‘Bad for humans, bad for rivers’
The charity Surfers Against Sewage has used public data to calculate that between October 2021 and September 2022 there were 143 dry spills. However, the BBC analysis suggests the true picture is much bigger, especially given that most of the wastewater companies did not disclose their figures.
“It’s depressing if not surprising to hear that dry spills are occurring so often. Discharging untreated sewage in dry weather is bad for both human health and river health — lower river flows mean more concentrated pollutants,” Tessa Wardley, director of communications and advocacy at The Rivers Trust, said.
The trust described the sewage discharges as the “canary in the coalmine” that pointed to wider problems in the water industry, including groundwater seeping into broken pipes and blockages in the sewer network. The trade body Water UK said the spills should be investigated.
Separately, lawyers and air quality experts have written to the environment secretary, Thérèse Coffey, asking her to ensure air pollution rules are not ditched later this year following the Retained EU Law Bill (REUL), which seeks to revoke certain EU laws.
The environmental law charity ClientEarth and academics at Imperial College London, University College London and the University of York said the National Emission Ceilings Regulations 2018 should be taken off a “kill list” to ensure they are not removed from statute books.
The government’s green watchdog, the Office for Environmental Protection, has also recently written to Coffey urging her not to renege on air quality protections.
“Despite repeated warnings from its own environmental watchdog, the UK government is set to do away with critical clean air laws in the middle of a public health and biodiversity crisis,” Emily Kearsey of ClientEarth said. “This government reassured the public that the UK would not be backsliding on environmental protections as a result of the REUL Act, but it is doing just that.”
