HWA responds to Thames Water plans to pump sewage into the Thames.
Monday 18th August 2025
The HWA has written to Thames Water expressing its grave reservations over plans to pump sewage into the Thames at Teddington. The scheme, officially known as the Teddington Direct Water Abstracton (TDRA) has become known locally as the Thames Sewage Pump.
The HWA has now responded to the Thames Water consultation on the scheme. Please see our full response below.
Click here for additional useful information from The SOLAR campaign group.
Please note the Thames Water consultation is due to end on 26th August 2025. Click here to see the consultation.
HWA letter to Thames Water
The Hampton Wick Association objects to Thames Water’s proposed Teddington Direct River Abstraction scheme (“TDRA”).
The consultation documents provide no evidence as to why TDRA is the “right scheme” or how it represents “best value”. Instead, the consultation focuses on practical issues raised in the event that TDRA were to be implemented.
It is vital that questions such as whether TDRA is the “right scheme” and/or represents “best value” are addressed properly having regard to the very obvious impacts of the scheme. These include:
• Permanent impacts on the river and riverside: these are recognised in the consultation documents as being adverse. There is no evidence that any improvements to the local environment will result from TDRA.
• Damage to special character of riverside and river: both the new TDRA abstraction plant and the outfall (with associated fencing and in-river defences, along with a very large kiosk) are negative changes and are recognised as such in the consultation documents.
• Adequacy of treatment of effluent: notwithstanding the “tertiary treatment” mentioned in the consultation documents, there is no evidence that the river will be protected from bacteria (e.g. E Coli) or chemical contaminants (e.g. PFAS./“forever chemicals”) contained in the treated effluent to be pumped into it.
These points carry even greater weight because of the special nature of the proposed location of TDRA. This is a stretch of the river where people swim, row, kayak, paddle board etc, including as part of activities organised by local youth groups and sports clubs. It also provides habitats and feeding opportunities for kingfishers in addition to other birds and insects, with eels present alongside a wide range of other riverine wildlife. It is also an area which the Government has prioritised to make clean and safe for wild swimming. Yet TDRA rides roughshod over all of that.
In addition, we have seen no evidence that alternatives to TDRA have been considered properly in deciding to proceed with TDRA. Without such evidence, it is impossible to evaluate whether TDRA is the “right scheme” or whether it represents “best value”.
Obvious alternatives which should be considered include:
• faster reduction of leaks to improve supply;
• education programmes relating to water use;
• alternative schemes.
There are evidently alternatives to TDRA. An example is the Beckton Reuse scheme. We note that there is a body of opinion that some of these alternatives could bring greater long-term benefits to London – but it is not clear from the consultation documents how these alternatives have been assessed.
The lack of relevant evidence is obvious from the consultation documents themselves. For example:
• They state that Thames Water has “explored over 1,400 supply and demand options to address the regional water shortfall” – but no detail of those options or how they have been explored is provided.
• They state that “TDRA is one of several resource options . . . selected for further development” – but no detail of those options or how TDRA was selected is provided.
• They assert that TDRA has been “chosen for its best value in water output” – but without any real explanation.
• They assert that “the project is a cost-effective scheme” – but, for the reasons already set out, it is hard to understand why that is so.
In fact, we note that TDRA will cost hundreds of millions of pounds to implement but will be used only every two years. Particularly given the financial situation of Thames Water, it is not clear why TDRA is the “right scheme” or how it represents “best value”.
By including my full name, address and postcode, I expect this objection to be formally registered and passed to the Planning Inspectorate.
Yours faithfully
