OXFORDSHIRE will start to run dry in six years unless moves are made towards building a £1bn reservoir near Abingdon, Thames Water warned.
As the company unveiled its management plan, it said water restrictions would be in place from 2014 if its measures were not implemented.
These include fixing leaks, installing meters and having the reservoir 'on stream' by 2021.
Opponents of the reservoir said Thames Water had not proved the need for it.
Nick Thompson, a spokesman for pressure group Gard (Group Against the Reservoir Development), said: "There is absolutely no need for this reservoir if there is a much more sustainable approach to water supply.
"We are confident the Thames Water proposal for the reservoir is not the most sustainable, or in the best interests of the customer. If it was unavoidable then we would not be resisting the reservoir."
Sue Rees, a member of group Reservoir Affected Parishes, said: "I still don't think Thames Water has demonstrated or provided a good reason for this particular thing."
Thames Water spokesman Don Sharples said: "We are trying to reduce the risk of hosepipe bans or other restrictions.
"If these proposals go ahead, the level of service we should achieve would mean there would be no more than one hosepipe ban every 20 years."
The report estimates that if water use continued at its current rate, there would be a deficit of more than 39 million litres a day in Oxfordshire and Swindon by 2014.
People now have 16 weeks to respond to the plan. Environment Secretary Hilary Benn will ultimately decide whether the reservoir should go ahead.
Thames Water chief executive David Owens said: "New resources, such as the reservoir proposed in Oxfordshire, will be essential."
The reservoir would cover 3.9 square miles, hold an estimated 150 billion litres (33 billion gallons). It would provide 307 million litres-a-day to customers
8:39am Thursday 8th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Dan, Oxford on 9:03am Thu 8 May 08
They have been promising to repair leaks for years - do it; restrict the amount of water business concerns can draw from the aquifer - or charge them more which would help pay for leak repairs. Most of the factories in the area have shut, the water demand should be less. Some years ago they were fitting meters for free - they should encourage this, but of course they will then put up the charges even more.
They have been promising to repair leaks for years - do it; restrict the amount of water business concerns can draw from the aquifer - or charge them more which would help pay for leak repairs. Most of the factories in the area have shut, the water demand should be less. Some years ago they were fitting meters for free - they should encourage this, but of course they will then put up the charges even more.
Posted by: Adrian, ex-Drayton on 9:12am Thu 8 May 08
I appeal to everyone in the Vale of the White Horse and beyond - dont sit idly by and let this gross proposal destroy a beautiful area of landscape - the need for the Reservoir has not been proven! Generations to come will not thank us if we let Thames Water press on with this... the obvious answer is for TW to stop wasting water and also make better use of the reservoirs it already has - for instance why not make them deeper and wider - where possible? Why not make better use of reservoirs which have previously been abandoned ? For instance I understand that some coal mines in Wales - previously declared unviable in Mrs Thatcher's days are now likely to be reopened now that demand for cheaper energy is rocketing.. so appky the same principle here.
And if the natural resources arent available in a specific area to serve a growing population - then introduce housing policies which dont build in areas where water is scarce! Having said that there is plenty of water in Wales and Scotland - so why not make better use of that?
I appeal to everyone in the Vale of the White Horse and beyond - dont sit idly by and let this gross proposal destroy a beautiful area of landscape - the need for the Reservoir has not been proven! Generations to come will not thank us if we let Thames Water press on with this... the obvious answer is for TW to stop wasting water and also make better use of the reservoirs it already has - for instance why not make them deeper and wider - where possible? Why not make better use of reservoirs which have previously been abandoned ? For instance I understand that some coal mines in Wales - previously declared unviable in Mrs Thatcher's days are now likely to be reopened now that demand for cheaper energy is rocketing.. so appky the same principle here.
And if the natural resources arent available in a specific area to serve a growing population - then introduce housing policies which dont build in areas where water is scarce! Having said that there is plenty of water in Wales and Scotland - so why not make better use of that?
Posted by: Anon, Didcot on 9:15am Thu 8 May 08
I don't see how Thames Water can justify this reservoir - They've already said that most of the water from it will go to London, where it will just leak out of the old pipes quicker than it can be pumped up there. They also say in the story above that "Oxfordshire will run dry" - If they've already said the majority of the reservoir water will be going to London how will building it stop Oxfordshire "running dry"? They should be made to fix all their leaky pipes before being allowed to build this reservoir.
I don't see how Thames Water can justify this reservoir - They've already said that most of the water from it will go to London, where it will just leak out of the old pipes quicker than it can be pumped up there. They also say in the story above that "Oxfordshire will run dry" - If they've already said the majority of the reservoir water will be going to London how will building it stop Oxfordshire "running dry"? They should be made to fix all their leaky pipes before being allowed to build this reservoir.
Posted by: Ed, Oxford on 9:15am Thu 8 May 08
This is just spin from Thames Water.
The proposed reservoir will feed London more than Oxfordshire, so using threats to cajole Oxon residents to agree to the scheme isn't going to work.
It TW pull their finger out and fix the leaks in their system, they might not need such a huge pond. It may well provide 307m litres a day but 250 of this will be lost en route to customers!
Renationalise TW!
This is just spin from Thames Water.
The proposed reservoir will feed London more than Oxfordshire, so using threats to cajole Oxon residents to agree to the scheme isn't going to work.
It TW pull their finger out and fix the leaks in their system, they might not need such a huge pond. It may well provide 307m litres a day but 250 of this will be lost en route to customers!
Renationalise TW!
Posted by: David, Didcot on 10:49am Thu 8 May 08
Thames Water are a very clever company. They'll hit us with the big whammy - a reservoir half the size of lake windermere but then back down if the proposal gets refused. A new proposal will be forwarded at about 3/4 the size which will win more people round but if not enough to get approval they can reduce the size again to half. Thames Water doesn't need such a huge reservoir but they do want something to make up for the leakage problems.
So why not spend the £1billion plus pounds it would otherwise cost to build a reservoir on fixing leaks, supplying households with rain water butts, investing in rain water harvesting, and so on?!
Does the math make sense? The prediction is Swindon and Oxfordshire will suffer a shortfall of 39 million litres a day buy 2014, but by 2020 Thames Water will still be losing over 500 million litres a day through leakage?? A reservior would only be a sticking plaster over a continuously leaking wound.
I hope that our local councils and agencies are able and competent enough to realise this and protect the interests of the local communities and the long term regional sustainability for water supply.
Thames Water are a very clever company. They'll hit us with the big whammy - a reservoir half the size of lake windermere but then back down if the proposal gets refused. A new proposal will be forwarded at about 3/4 the size which will win more people round but if not enough to get approval they can reduce the size again to half. Thames Water doesn't need such a huge reservoir but they do want something to make up for the leakage problems.
So why not spend the £1billion plus pounds it would otherwise cost to build a reservoir on fixing leaks, supplying households with rain water butts, investing in rain water harvesting, and so on?!
Does the math make sense? The prediction is Swindon and Oxfordshire will suffer a shortfall of 39 million litres a day buy 2014, but by 2020 Thames Water will still be losing over 500 million litres a day through leakage?? A reservior would only be a sticking plaster over a continuously leaking wound.
I hope that our local councils and agencies are able and competent enough to realise this and protect the interests of the local communities and the long term regional sustainability for water supply.
Posted by: A., Wallingford on 11:21am Thu 8 May 08
I'm against the idea of the new reservoir, but having worked in the water industry for many years, I know that there is no way this proposal will not go ahead. All reservoirs are met with opposition and this one has been in the planning for many many years. I've seen the amount of paper work involved for other reservoir proposals and I'm not exaggerating when I say a small warehouse is required to house it all. Opposition from locals is always factored into the planning process. Once the 'ideal' location has been chosen, the proposal WILL go ahead whether it takes 10, 15 or even over 20 years to sort it all out.
Adrian ex Drayton has hit the nail on the head when he points out that TW sold off all there old Victorian reservoirs for profit purposes, and this is why I'm against the new reservoir. They should have made the best of what they already had before upsetting so many people.
I'm against the idea of the new reservoir, but having worked in the water industry for many years, I know that there is no way this proposal will not go ahead. All reservoirs are met with opposition and this one has been in the planning for many many years. I've seen the amount of paper work involved for other reservoir proposals and I'm not exaggerating when I say a small warehouse is required to house it all. Opposition from locals is always factored into the planning process. Once the 'ideal' location has been chosen, the proposal WILL go ahead whether it takes 10, 15 or even over 20 years to sort it all out.
Adrian ex Drayton has hit the nail on the head when he points out that TW sold off all there old Victorian reservoirs for profit purposes, and this is why I'm against the new reservoir. They should have made the best of what they already had before upsetting so many people.
Posted by: Helen, Oxon on 1:01pm Thu 8 May 08
The consultation paper is now available to view on line through Thames Water's own website. If you register with them, you can comment on the proposals. The registration process is quite easy and although there is a lot of information to download at least we can get a chance to speak out.
The consultation paper is now available to view on line through Thames Water's own website. If you register with them, you can comment on the proposals. The registration process is quite easy and although there is a lot of information to download at least we can get a chance to speak out.
Posted by: Ed, Oxford on 2:33pm Thu 8 May 08
It is also CRITICAL that people visit the TW consultation days in their area (Drayton, Didcot, and other places) and give them both barrels.
This is OXLON airport mark 2 - that was squashed and this needs to be likewise.
It is also CRITICAL that people visit the TW consultation days in their area (Drayton, Didcot, and other places) and give them both barrels.
This is OXLON airport mark 2 - that was squashed and this needs to be likewise.
Posted by: Gimmerman, NOT Abingdon on 3:45pm Thu 8 May 08
Its a shame that the planned reservior could not be moved slightly a bit more south and covered the sorry site of Abingdon itself. I managed to escape the place years ago and visiting it recently to see it changed into a massive housing estate with a few charity shops made my heart bleed. I suggest that all the residents of Abingdon are moved to the new ECO town outside of Weston on the green (when its built) and that abingdon is wiped off the face of the earth!It would also stop any flood worries in the yeats to come and it has the added bonus of a new fishing venue which is much needed in Oxfordshire.
Its a shame that the planned reservior could not be moved slightly a bit more south and covered the sorry site of Abingdon itself. I managed to escape the place years ago and visiting it recently to see it changed into a massive housing estate with a few charity shops made my heart bleed. I suggest that all the residents of Abingdon are moved to the new ECO town outside of Weston on the green (when its built) and that abingdon is wiped off the face of the earth!It would also stop any flood worries in the yeats to come and it has the added bonus of a new fishing venue which is much needed in Oxfordshire.
Posted by: Boris Von Heinekin, Abingdon on 5:18pm Thu 8 May 08
B*LLOCKS! What a scheming mob of liars!
Thanks for the ridiculous headline Abingdon Herald.
B*LLOCKS! What a scheming mob of liars!
Thanks for the ridiculous headline Abingdon Herald.
Posted by: Ed, Oxford on 8:17pm Thu 8 May 08
Ahh Gimmerman...it's not that bad. Yes it's full of fat people and chavs but it's not on a par with the scummy places in larger urban areas.
Build it over Didcot power station.
Ahh Gimmerman...it's not that bad. Yes it's full of fat people and chavs but it's not on a par with the scummy places in larger urban areas.
Build it over Didcot power station.
Posted by: Alex, East Hanney on 11:09pm Thu 8 May 08
I learnt some things about this development can any one verify then:
Fixing leaks must be paid for out of profit funds
and therefore from the shareholders profits, the law requires business's to make as much money for shareholders as possible,therefore no incentive to fix leaks.
building a reservoir can be paid for by putting up the cost of water to the public.
and if the reservoir gets refused again my understanding is LOX airport may very well not be. it was entered in a government white paper in 2003 as the future of air travel in the south of England.
I learnt some things about this development can any one verify then:
Fixing leaks must be paid for out of profit funds
and therefore from the shareholders profits, the law requires business's to make as much money for shareholders as possible,therefore no incentive to fix leaks.
building a reservoir can be paid for by putting up the cost of water to the public.
and if the reservoir gets refused again my understanding is LOX airport may very well not be. it was entered in a government white paper in 2003 as the future of air travel in the south of England.
Posted by: Brian, Abingdon on 4:51pm Fri 9 May 08
Ed is absolutely right: the reservoir is primarily needed for London. The water will be released down the Thames to supply London reservoirs, and NOT Oxfordshire taps.
Ed is absolutely right: the reservoir is primarily needed for London. The water will be released down the Thames to supply London reservoirs, and NOT Oxfordshire taps.
Posted by: Brian, Grove on 6:57pm Fri 9 May 08
I went along to the launch presentation this morning given by Thames Water re the new Water Resources Management Plan. DO go to the various exhibitions planned in the near future, look at the plans, grab a CD rom, or go online and make your comments. Go to the website and look at the plan ( It covers 6 large volumes of files)
Whilst I would prefer not to see the loss of a vast area of open countryside ..I also wish to be sure that in 30 years time we will be able to turn on the taps through the year and get a steady supply of water..Part of the issue here is the "planned" populations growth in the South East..including 4000 houses here in Grove, they will need to be serviced somehow. Part of the problem is also climate change. I am not at all convinced by greywater schemes. Yes most of the water is needed for London but 49 million litres a day is needed to fill the estimated deficit by 2020 for Oxon and Swindon.
That's enough for now!
I went along to the launch presentation this morning given by Thames Water re the new Water Resources Management Plan. DO go to the various exhibitions planned in the near future, look at the plans, grab a CD rom, or go online and make your comments. Go to the website and look at the plan ( It covers 6 large volumes of files)
Whilst I would prefer not to see the loss of a vast area of open countryside ..I also wish to be sure that in 30 years time we will be able to turn on the taps through the year and get a steady supply of water..Part of the issue here is the "planned" populations growth in the South East..including 4000 houses here in Grove, they will need to be serviced somehow. Part of the problem is also climate change. I am not at all convinced by greywater schemes. Yes most of the water is needed for London but 49 million litres a day is needed to fill the estimated deficit by 2020 for Oxon and Swindon.
That's enough for now!
Posted by: anon, abingdon-ish on 3:54pm Mon 12 May 08
Brian from Grove....I admire tje fact you went along and have let your opinions be known to thames water and the council. Yes it is a worry about oxfordshire running out of water, but the reservoir planned here is for London...not us....good huh? so we get all the agro and missing land with none of the benefits.
Brian from Grove....I admire tje fact you went along and have let your opinions be known to thames water and the council. Yes it is a worry about oxfordshire running out of water, but the reservoir planned here is for London...not us....good huh? so we get all the agro and missing land with none of the benefits.
Posted by: Botley Man, Osney on 7:36am Tue 13 May 08
The new reservoir will be fantastic. Lovely setting, beautifully landscaped, watersports, new wildlife habitats.
If there is one thing that Oxfordshire suffers from, its the backward looking NIMBYS.
Go Thames Go, and don't pay attention to the small town charlies on here
The new reservoir will be fantastic. Lovely setting, beautifully landscaped, watersports, new wildlife habitats.
If there is one thing that Oxfordshire suffers from, its the backward looking NIMBYS.
Go Thames Go, and don't pay attention to the small town charlies on here
Posted by: Boris Von Heinekin, Abingdon on 2:20pm Wed 14 May 08
BOTLEY MAN, YOU MORON, THERE IS NO CASE FOR A RESERVOIR!!NO ECOLOGICAL BENEFIT, NO NEED FOR THE TOURIST ATTRACTION, NO NEED IF THEY FIXED THE DAM LEAKS! GRRRRRR! I AM NOT A BACKWARD LOOKING NIMBY. WHAT WOULD YOU SAY IF IT WAS IN SIGHT OF YOUR LOUNGE/?DO YOUR RESEARCH BEFORE YOU MAKE SUCH RIDICULOIUS COMMENTS.
BOTLEY MAN, YOU MORON, THERE IS NO CASE FOR A RESERVOIR!!NO ECOLOGICAL BENEFIT, NO NEED FOR THE TOURIST ATTRACTION, NO NEED IF THEY FIXED THE DAM LEAKS! GRRRRRR! I AM NOT A BACKWARD LOOKING NIMBY. WHAT WOULD YOU SAY IF IT WAS IN SIGHT OF YOUR LOUNGE/?DO YOUR RESEARCH BEFORE YOU MAKE SUCH RIDICULOIUS COMMENTS.
Posted by: ady, crapingdon on 11:52pm Fri 16 May 08
as i said b4. terroist target , 85 ft wall 22 mile circumfrance lots of water,big bang bang,big hole,lots of water spilt. lot and lot of houses washed away , and thousands die,all because tw pay the right council members to have their **** wishing well.sod everyone else.
as i said b4. terroist target , 85 ft wall 22 mile circumfrance lots of water,big bang bang,big hole,lots of water spilt. lot and lot of houses washed away , and thousands die,all because tw pay the right council members to have their **** wishing well.sod everyone else.
Posted by: WaterBoardman, Not in the reservoir on 6:39am Sun 18 May 08
yes,a lake the size of Nebraska is already a fake proposition that will be downsized so its accepted.There never was going to be an airport.That scam just made our 'lake' acceptable.This things going to take 12 years to construct and will be so big that all of Drayton and sometimes south Drabingdon-scum-town will be permanently shrouded in fog.Your gardens won't grow any more.You'll awake in the morning to the permanent smell of damp like you've lagged the bed.No point moaning about it.We live in a sh*t capatalist country.alays have,where the $ comes first.You've got,say,7 years to sell up,cash in your Thames water shares and mive out.
Theyre never gonna disrupt "£th square mile" in London to repair leaks when we can just move a nothing load of muppets like you out of the way for the sake of this project.Its called Capitalism.Whil;e you sit around feeling smug about "how much my house is worth" you gotta wake up to the fact that if you live by the $,you die by the $.
yes,a lake the size of Nebraska is already a fake proposition that will be downsized so its accepted.There never was going to be an airport.That scam just made our 'lake' acceptable.This things going to take 12 years to construct and will be so big that all of Drayton and sometimes south Drabingdon-scum-town will be permanently shrouded in fog.Your gardens won't grow any more.You'll awake in the morning to the permanent smell of damp like you've lagged the bed.No point moaning about it.We live in a sh*t capatalist country.alays have,where the $ comes first.You've got,say,7 years to sell up,cash in your Thames water shares and mive out.
Theyre never gonna disrupt "£th square mile" in London to repair leaks when we can just move a nothing load of muppets like you out of the way for the sake of this project.Its called Capitalism.Whil;e you sit around feeling smug about "how much my house is worth" you gotta wake up to the fact that if you live by the $,you die by the $.
Posted by: ady horner, shittyabingdon on 10:30pm Sun 18 May 08
well fooking said waterboardman ,i agree, what a fukin liberty , thames water and council ****
well fooking said waterboardman ,i agree, what a fukin liberty , thames water and council ****
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
