Teddington & Ham Hydro What is it? Empowers and Powers the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Teddington & Ham Hydro – What is it?

 Empowers and Powers the local community – 5-600 homes

powered from an otherwise wasted resource.

 Complements and enhances the current weir structure,

without adding to noise.

 Technically robust and proven.  Financially viable - Proven to meet the stringent commercial

hurdles required.

 Commercial benefits are kept within the community.

Where are we in the process?

 Just submitted new planning application

• We hope to be heard within 8 weeks!

 First stage community share offer

• Raised £110k to develop the project

 Second stage community share issue

• Aim to raise £4.1mn!
• Open once planning has been secured
• Close December, 2014
• Offer investors attractive tax breaks and an inflation link yield

 Operational by end 2015

The planning context

 The Core Strategy sets out a vision for the Community Plan to see

the Borough; ‘inclusive, green, safe and responsive’.

 Priority 2 – ‘Being the greenest borough in London’.  Local Plan Agreement – ‘we want to continue to build on the

sustainability of our communities and to protect our environment for the future’.

 Local Development Framework Vision

• The Borough’s responsibility to global sustainability’.
• ‘Energy use minimised and renewable energy maximised’.

 ‘Climate change is the most important factor facing the World

• The Borough aims to become a leader in the development
• f sustainable lifestyles.
• Opportunities for de-centralised energy production will

be considered’.

 ‘All new buildings to include the use of renewable energy sources’.

Sustainability and the environment

 The National Physical Laboratory has conducted a streamlined

Lifecycle Sustainability Assessment of the project, involving an analysis of the environmental, social and economic impacts of the project. The result: the project has a 9-month ‘carbon payback’ time.

 1000 tonnes of C02 reduced.  Improvement of fish pass.  Improve bat lighting.  Addition of an eel pass.

EA and LBRuT view on the Impact on the environment

Full environmental impact assessment not required

“I can confirm that the local planning authority is of the view that the proposal does not fall within Schedule 1 of the Regulation and as such an EIA is not mandatory.” Jon Freer, Assistant Director of Environment, 23rd February, 2011 Document: 14 Environmental Assessment Screening Opinion

Water Frame Work Directive

Study of key flora and fauna Key condition from the EA

Environment Agency supportive of our scheme

“As stated in our previous letter dated 24 February 2012, we are supportive of renewable energy proposals. We are generally supportive of this scheme which offers community benefits, subject to the planning conditions provided in the appendices concerning the following environmental issues; • Fish and biodiversity • Flood risk management • Groundwater protection” Mr Steve Swain Major Projects Officer, The Environment Agency, 3rd July, 2013 Document: 26 EA planning advice to LBRuT July 2013

Development Control Manager, Richmond Council, Robert Angus, agrees:

“…on advice from the Environment Agency, I consider suitable conditions can safeguard these important matters…” Robert Angus, Development Control Manager, 15th November 2013

Community energy, decentralised power and energy security

 Brown and blackouts are a very real risk. By 2016, it is expected

the UK’s capacity margin will drop below 5%, triggering demand control measures from the National Grid.

 25% of energy capacity is expected to close in the next decade  The UK’s demand for electricity could double by 2050.  National Grid estimates that wholesale base load power prices

could increase by 60% by 2030.

 The Government is leaning towards a system with very little

• headroom. However, we can reduce the impact by developing

new, clean generation sources.

How will it work?

 Archimedean Screws have been used for 1,000s of years but until

recently their purpose has always been to raise water. By reverse engineering the screws and installing it on a river it is possible to utilise the energy generated by the flow of the river. This is amplified when sited at a weir as the drop in water level can also be exploited.

 Water passes from

upstream of the installation into the screw channel. It then passes through the screw and the force from the flow turns the

• screw. The turning of the screw is used to generate clean

electricity which can then be used or sold on.

Proven Technology

 Archimedean screws have been shown to be the most ecologically

safe hydro power technology and are the preferred technology

• f the UK Environment Agency.

 The application of this technology is not new

• many working schemes currently operating in the UK.

 Semi-tidal nature is not a concern

• The only nuance is that the weir is tidal for 8 of the 24 hours each
• day. The only impact this has is that the head (or drop) is variable

for these hours and so production of electricity may be reduced during this time.

• This is a financial consideration and has been built in to the

financial forecasts.

• The technology used is in no way experimental. Moreover, there

is no impact on noise, environmental or other sustainability issues resulting from siting the scheme at a semi-tidal section.

Where will it be built?

Proposed Hydro Scheme

Positioned on Teddington Side of the Weir

Zoomed in view from the Bridge

Development constraints

The specific location of the scheme has been determined by the Environment Agency statutory requirements for fish passage and flood relief. The flow capacity of the section of the weir to be replaced must be replicated by the scheme without any adverse impact on flow management or flood relief, or diminishment of habitats.

Fish Passage

The turbines must co-terminate with the new fish pass to be installed as part of the scheme. The key reason for this position is this gives fish the best chance to find it and use it to pass upstream. The section of weir adjacent to the Middlesex bank is the highest point in the weir pool and is the point fish will move towards as they look for a place to pass over the weir. This is because the flow out of the turbines creates an attraction to fish. This arrangement is a licensing requirement based on best practice design guidelines produced by EA for developers, which our design adheres to.

Flood Relief

The amount of water flowing into the weir pool must be unchanged following the construction of the scheme. If the scheme were sited elsewhere, potentially two non-adjacent sections of weir would need to be demolished, which would increase risk, costs and disturbance during the construction process.

Other considerations

The scheme will also be placed away from the main navigation route and will mean least disruption for river users during construction and operation of the scheme – Health and Safety issues have played a big part in the siting of the scheme. Furthermore, The Environment Agency does not want to demolish any of the “Zig Zag” section of the weir as this could affect its overall integrity. The section chosen has the advantage of being able to be treated as a single, unitary section.

Position?

Where would the rest go? Building in two places! Very expensive! Why not here? The Scheme uses 27 Cumecs

• f flow

Impacts the navigation channel Why not here? Each gate takes 30 cumecs Away from the navigation channel Only 3 cumecs of flow to put elsewhere – very easy to do at the same site

63??? 30 30 30 30

Has the heritage of the weir been considered?

The weir in 1890 The weir in 1902 The weir in 1957 The current incarnation was built in 1992 – Note the removal of the roof

Present day

Engineering drawing from the 1930’s

Heritage & Visuals

 The wall of the structure facing the

Lensbury grounds will be faced with blue engineering brick to echo the brickwork

• f the gauge house.

 Turbine channel sluice gates and intakes

will be arched to harmonise with the roller sluices.

 The plant room structure will harmonise

with the roller sluices.

 The shape of the generator housings echoes

the Thames Barrier , thus “book-ending” the tidal stretch of the river.

 The proposed structure is smaller than many

elements of the current weir structure.

What will it look like?

The view from the Lensbury Terrace

From Teddington bridge

From the Lensbury lawns, close up

Will it be noisy?



• No. Our noise consultants have produced

several reports to show that with the acoustic insulation they recommend, the project will not generate any more noise than that currently produced by the weir at various key sites.



The allowable noise levels vary depending

• n where you are standing. However, in most

cases the noise levels are not allowed to be above 50-60 dB.



In all cases, the noise from the turbines is lower than that of the allowed level. We also provide an infographic on what these permitted levels of noise actually mean in real life.

Noise

Peter Brett, noise consultants concluded: “A noise impact assessment has been undertaken for the proposed hydropower scheme at Teddington Weir. The results of the assessment indicate that the requirements of the Local Authority should be achieved when the various noise sources are placed inside suitable acoustic enclosures. An acoustic specification for these enclosures has been provided alongside a list of suitable suppliers.” These have been incorporated into our designs.

A graphical representation of noise

LBRuT are satisfied on noise levels

The Council has assured us that, while there is residual concern, this area has been adequately provided for by setting operating conditions. “There is a significant concern over noise, but having assessed this in some detail with external consultants I also consider this may be covered by condition.”

Robert Angus, Development Control Manager, 15th November 2013.

Health and safety

 Stringent requirements from the EA.  Consultation with river users group including RNLI and key rowing,

boating and sailing clubs.

 Extensive flow modelling carried out. “Negligible” impact on flow

in its vicinity.

 “Man in the water” analysis carried out – Negligible increased risk.  Based on feedback, detailed design will include enhanced safety

• features. An improvement on the current situation.

Teddington and Ham Hydro…

 Created by members of Ham United Group (HUG) in early 2010,

but now comprises residents from Richmond, Teddington, Ham, T wickenham and Kingston.

 The objectives of the company are to generate electricity from

renewable sources and…

 …use the income generated to promote and develop low-carbon

solutions in the local area, and support the local community.

We want to act locally. We believe renewable energy is part of the solution. We want to have ownership of the project. We want to see the benefits retained locally.

Title

HLM Architects

Support us and tell your friends…

 Website: www.hamhydro.org  Email: invest@hamhydro.org.uk  Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TeddingtonHamHydro)  T

witter: @hamhydro (https://twitter.com/hamhydro)

“This is a really imaginative, practical initiative that will provide environmental benefits with community gain... They have my full support.” Vince Cable MP “This is a hugely exciting local project, but it is also important nationally. Small-scale, decentralised clean energy is the future, and Ham is right at the cutting edge.” Zac Goldsmith, MP