Games Monitor

Skip to main content.

Olympic Stink on the River Lea

By Mike Wells

. Recent dredging of the Lee Navigation. Recent dredging of the Lee Navigation

The Lea is a largish river, it flows from Luton through north east London, and into the river Thames at Leamouth. All is not well with the Lea, as Simon Bamford, General Manager, of British Waterways (BW) in London, comments the …

“[water] quality on the River Lee Navigation has been an issue of concern for many years, affecting local residents, wildlife, boaters and other waterway users … “in hot weather the silt on the bottom of the river sometimes rises into huge slick's' which are both unsightly and smell foul.”

The problem of poor water quality in the river is not surprising because Deephams Sewage Works in north London pumps almost a quarter of a million cubic metres of treated sewage per day into the Lea. The environment agency do not have figures for untreated sewage discharged into the river. However it is well known locally that raw sewage overflows are discharged from Deephams into the Lee Navigation every time it rains heavily in the catchment area. About eight years ago after an exceptionally heavy downpour the Lea Navigation was awash with dead fish because of the scale of the raw sewage discharge.

Sewage from Deephams enters the Lea via Pymme’s Brook at Tottenham. Above Tottenham (away from the sewage) water quality is good, you can often see the sandy riverbed though the river’s clear water. Below Tottenham the riverbed consists of black rancid stinking slurry. Opposite Pymme’s Brook at the point sewage enters the Lea it is not uncommon for boats to become stuck in the fetid matter discharged from Deephams.

According to Del Brenner, a member of the London Waterways Commission, sewage is not the only problem causing the lower Lea’s summer time blues. He argues that the huge quantity of drinking water extracted from the Lea by Thames Water reduces the flow in the river, and this combined with the sewage causes stagnation. (Environment Agency (EA) figure for water abstraction,120 million cubic metres per year).

The EA’s answer to the lower Lea’s problems is to dredge the stinking sediment from the river and send it for landfill at a cost of over £7 million. But the EA have no plans to reduce water extraction or to reduce the amount of sewage discharged into the river and so the dredging is likely to prove only a short-term solution: until the sewage residue builds up again.

But why after years of neglect is money being spent on the Lea now? The answer to this question lies in the fact that Lea and its tributaries run smack through the Olympic Park (OP). The risk that dignitaries visiting the Games might smell genuine London shit, doesn’t sit comfortably with the Olympic brand. And as if to demonstrate this point the waterways downstream of the Olympic Zone are not being dredged despite the fact that they also stagnate during the summer months?

Prescott Lock: .Prescott Lock .
Now well under way is the construction of a new lock across the Prescott Channel, a waterway close to the Lea. The project was presented as giving access for freight barges to the waterways of the OP, and was pushed through despite the fact that other routes for barge access already existed. Before work on the Lock began Del Brenner and others were arguing the £19 million project was flawed. No one listened, and even before completion it has been announced that there is insufficient depth of water for the cargo barges to operate.

But that may not matter to Olympic bosses, as the new lock has the effect of reducing the tidal rise and fall on the OP waterways. This eliminates both the sight and smell of mud at low tide, adding value to waterside properties. Del Brenner comments that the rationale behind this work appeared to be …

“ the encouragement and promotion of building development”.

He also notes that …

“[British] Waterways present prime role in London … seems to be a concentration on property development rather than as a navigation authority.” (the Lea in Good Hands page 4).

The risk of olfactory offence to dignitaries visiting the Games is bad enough but after the 5 ringed circus has left town one can imagine an attractive couple, like those in the shiny photos plastered over the hoardings of construction sites. They are on a show-flat balcony over looking the River Lea, looking happy, imagining the lovely life they will have in this gorgeous riverside apartment, then a stinking island of riverbed bubbles its way to the surface. The estate agents smile vanishes.

Dredging of the Lea is certainly required in some places for navigational purposes. However as recent research from the United States points out there is an argument that dredging will stir up years of industrial contamination to the detriment of wildlife and plants (see 'Sediment Dredging at Superfund Megasites'). Furthermore, a long-term solution would include effective policing of industrial pollution, a reduction in the extraction of drinking water, and the elimination of sewage discharge. A fact acknowledged in the EA’s own Water Quality Framework Directive. However there are no plans to implement any of these solutions within the next decade.

Olympic bosses argue that the Games provide a “unique” opportunity to find money for projects which otherwise would have been impossible to fund. While there maybe some justification for non-Olympic agencies picking up the tab for some Games related schemes, the enormity of the Olympic budget is an embarrassment, and sets the stage for a bit of creative accounting; perhaps shifting Olympic related costs onto different institutions’ balance sheets. A number of agencies are paying for the Presott Lock, while the dredging of the Lea is shared between the EA and the Olympic Delivery Authority.

So what if costs show on different agencies’ accounts? The so what is the fact that the Olympics has an opportunity cost. In other words if public bodies are spending on the Olympics they can’t spend on their core commitments. Dredging sediment from the Lea is a highly visible, and smellable, operation. Less visible, but equally stinky, is the dredging of the public purse to pay for the scheme. If work on the Lea and the Prescott Lock are anything to go by, in return for these raids on public funds, we end up with rushed poorly thought out projects which don’t fulfil their stated aims. Projects, which in reality are designed to boost the profits of developers. A situation, which will no doubt eventually create a stink of its own.

All photos: © Mike Wells

.: ..: .


|

Construction material still going by road

Completion costs for the Prescott Channel 'Water Control System' (two locks for 350 tonne barges and a barrage to control the river levels) have now more than doubled from the original British Waterways estimate of £10million to the latest total of £21.5million.

"From its inception, there were inexplicable flaws in the project as a serious freight transport proposal, examined in depth in the Regents Network report 'Are the Waterways of the Lea In Good Hands?' . Additionally the project has gradually fallen behind schedule - it was originally due to be completed in summer 2008 and now won't be completed before March 2009 - apparently due to 'unexpected quantities of contaminated soil'.

Didn't they do any surveying before embarking on the project? An extra £2m government funding was announced by Waterways Minister Huw Irranca-Davies in November in a desperate attempt to keep the project on track, but the predicted quantities of materials that could be transported always looked hopelessly optimistic."
From: Prescott Lock project runs aground

Now we read stories in our local papers such as;

"Community campaigner Lisa Pontecorvo died after being crushed under
the wheels of a cement lorry - after a safety mirror that might have
saved her had been removed.... The lorry, which was on the way from
the Olympic site in east London, was owned by contractors Hanson."

From; Islington Gazette

See also: Moving Target

Despite: Olympic Delivery Authority takes action to reduce lorry deaths (Moving target 2 oct 08)

Thanks for story to Tim Evans

See also: Olympic Development Authority re-brand Transport for London lorry safety initiative


Cycle accident maps

Lea dredging - what do they think they're doing?

In response to an FOI back in November 2008, BW said they were anticipating removing 11,000 m3 of hazardous silt downstream of Tottenham lock - however in the letter to local residents and press releases this had increased to 'up to 16,000 m3', to be completed by May 2009. In their publicity they make no mention of it being hazardous.

It is simply impossible to remove these kind of quantities in this timescale with a guy in an excavator randomly scooping up mud and dumping it in a barge (much of it getting mixed back into the water on the way to the surface). 16,000m3 is equivalent to a 4m wide channel, dredged to a depth of 50cm all the way from Tottenham down to Old Ford.
It's also a questionable way to handle material that BW described as 'hazardous and extremely difficult to break down and dispose of due the presence of long chain hydrocarbons, organic matter and heavy metals'.

If they were going to do a thorough job of silt removal it would have to be done across the full width of the waterway, and use a proper dredging machine that pumps the silt directly from the bed through a pipe. I've seen no sign of this so far.

But as the article points out, this contaminated silt is being continually replenished - so it's a futile and wasteful exercise. It is also being conducted during the waterfowl breeding season and disturbing their nesting sites, and contaminants previously trapped down in the silt are being churned up into the water where they present a greater risk to waterway users and the ecology.


River Lea/Lee

As a constant cruiser on the River Lee I have witnessed the continuing saga surrounding the stinking islands and polluted water. There are various contributing factors concerning these issues and the blame cannot be solely laid at the door of BW. Blooms of algae build up in the shallows over flow channels that feed into the Lee at two points opposite the feed from Pymmes and Salmons Brook. When this dies off it floats down stream rotting.

Pymmes Brook and Salmons Brook take all the rain water run-off from most of the roads in N.E. London. After periods of dry spells the roads and sumps are washed clean of all of this diesel, engine oil and restaurant grease etc. that has been poured down drains. It all ends up downstream. The last heavy rainfall caused the river to be closed to traffic for 4 days while a cack-handed and underfunded attempt to clean up a huge oil slick was undertaken.

Tescos at Edmonton has a lot to answer for as their huge grease traps are always overflowing into the rainwater drains. This is compounded by the fact that a lot of illegal building work has taken place over the past decade with effluent being wrongly plumbed in and a lot of untreated waste is ending up in the grey water system which also runs into the Lea. These issues have to be tackled by all concerned; ie the Environment Agency, BW, Haringey Council, Lea Valley Parks, and the general public.

Without a blanket effort by all concerned; ie educating the public and imposing fines, highlighting all the facts and allocating each particular clean up simultaneously, will the problem get any kind of practical solution?

If the parents of the children that use the various boating facilities knew what their kids were swimming in I doubt very much if they would continue letting them train here. I have a lot of issues regarding the expense of the Olympic games but the fact that the river is getting some kind of attention can only be a good thing otherwise I am certain it would just be left to rot.

In the past 7 years of using the river I have never once seen a working BW barge undertaking any kind of clean up duties. All remain moored up at Old Ford lock.

Maybe someone should give me a job I'll sort it.


Health hazards

"If the parents of the children that use the various boating facilities knew what their kids were swimming in I doubt very much if they would continue letting them train here."

From: Mark Cheeseman's comment above

David Akinsanya was first attracted to the River Lee because of its tranquillity and beauty. He's moored his boat there for the last three years.

But since then, things have changed as David explains: "Now the River Lee quite literally stinks! "The water has got murky, the air seems stale and I'm not the only one that's noticed the change."

David was convinced that something suspicious is causing the river to be in such a poor state so he decided to investigate. He sent a sample of the water to a microbiologist and met up with an ecologist from British Waterways.

The research revealed something rather disturbing. The problem with the river is raw human sewage. The investigation became even more disgusting when David looked at the bigger picture.

The sewage works at Deepham, three miles up river, releases treated effluent into the Lea when heavy rain pushes the tanks over capacity.

David is horrified by the findings: "Basically this waterway is becoming a communal lavatory and I'm living on it! "I'm worried not just for myself but for other people. "I see canoeists and swimmers on this river, and I'm sure there must be a health hazard."

Excerpts from: BBC Inside Out