Water & Wastewater Treatment Magazine
Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/1040774
8 | NOVEMBER 2018 | WWT | www.wwtonline.co.uk The Talk: opinion WILLIAM WILSON DIRECTOR, WYESIDE CONSULTING LTD Nationalisation plans would shake up water sector The Labour Party's plans to nationalise the water industry, outlined at its party conference, envisage a whole new model of ownership and management I n his speech at the Labour Party conference on 24 September 2018, Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell outlined the party's plans for the re- nationalisation of the water industry in England, saying: "We are extending economic democracy even further by bringing water, energy, Royal Mail and rail into public ownership… public ownership has proved its popularity in opinion poll a‡er opinion poll. It's not surprising, look at the scandal of the privatisation of water. Water bills have risen 40% in real terms since privatisation. £18 billion has been paid out in dividends. Water companies receive more in tax credits than they pay in tax. Each day enough water to meet the needs of 20 million people is lost due to leakages. With figures like that, we can't afford not to take them back." In the policy paper that provides details of these proposals, 'Clear Water ● Labour's Vision for a Modern and Transparent Publicly-Owned Water System', the party makes clear that it envisages a network of regional publicly- owned water companies run by local councils, trades union and worker representatives and customers, operating with "unprecedented levels of openness and transparency". As the Labour Party has, in the context of debates on Brexit, promised a "radical extension of devolution", it is assumed that these proposals relate to the privatised water companies in England. Ownership structures at, for example, Scottish Water and Glas Cymru's ownership of Dwr Cymru Welsh Water might in fact be consistent with the structure that Labour would like to see across England. The Clear Water policy paper envisages legislation to establish: ● Regional Water Authorities, with boards made up of councillors, trades unions and customer representatives; ● A new National Water Agency to oversee economic and performance standards, with regulatory responsibility absorbed into Defra; ● Financial management of water authorities to be based upon the model of Transport for London; ● Staff transfers on a TUPE basis, except for senior executives and directors, whose jobs would be re-advertised on "dramatically reduced" salaries, respecting Labour's 20:1 rule ● Shareholders would be compensated by the issuance of debt, but with scope for reducing payments where there was evidence of asset-stripping, pension fund deficits or state subsidies since SPONSORED BY SIMON COTTINGHAM, MAJOR PROJECTS DIRECTOR, SAINT- GOBAIN PAM UK Support needed for pipeline projects Upgrading existing wastewater assets can present a 'perfect storm' of challenges, but technical support from suppliers can help provide the answer A n increasing number of major upgrade and expansion works at Wastewater Treatment Plants is providing the industry with a long list of challenges that need to be overcome. Careful planning is essential to reducing the impact of these factors, and pipeline suppliers need to be supporting clients to ensure successful project delivery. So, what measures should we be taking to ensure the successful delivery of wastewater projects? To demonstrate the challenges that can arise from these works, we've selected a project from a major treatment works in the North-West of England. The project involved the creation of a new process stream at the plant, which could handle a peak capacity flow rate of 5,500 litres of raw sewerage per second. The project required a variety of products, including pipework diameters of 200mm up to 1800mm, a range of anchorage systems and a number of coating provisions. These were selected due to the range of challenges that faced the project's delivery, including a need to work around existing systems and numerous changes in the level and direction of the system. This project is a great example of the challenges faced by contractors and clients in wastewater treatment projects. Extensions or upgrades to such works by definition are located on the site of existing works. These sites have o‡en been built on, extended or renovated over many decades. All of the challenges a contractor might encounter on a multi-kilometre pipeline are condensed within the boundaries of the works and typically over 50m – 100m pipe runs. Contractors find themselves dealing with a 'perfect storm' of existing services and buildings, pipelines required above ground on plinths or at extreme depth, contaminated and aggressive soil as well as changes to design as work progresses and unforeseen challenges present themselves. All of this means a far higher level of day- to-day technical support is required from pipeline suppliers than would normally be required. This support, if sought at the early stages of design, can head off issues before they become major problems. Socket spigot systems are ideal for the relatively short pipe runs that typically navigate around the services of existing buildings typically found at wastewater treatment sites. They offer the flexibility to cut on site to required lengths to adjust the position of fittings and to accommodate design changes. In order to provide thrust restraint for socket spigot pipelines most designers specify concrete blocks. As a pipe diameter increases, so does the size and cost of concrete thrust blocks, and this can become a deterrent to specifying socket spigot systems. Occasionally, flange pipe and fittings are specified as a way of negating the need for thrust blocks, but the lack of flexibility of a flange joint in buried applications will almost certainly result in premature failure. Boltless mechanical anchorage systems such as our Universal and PAMLOCK anchored joints are flexible, simple and quick to install and are a cost-effective alternative to concrete thrust blocks. Since they do not require external bolts to lock the system together there is no requirement for post-installation wrapping to protect the integrity of the bolts. On a recent project a contractor installing a 1200mm diameter Universal anchorage system took on average 15 minutes to complete the installation of each joint, which is 75% faster than the typical installation time of a traditional bolted anchor system. The idea that anchorage is required at every joint is also a common misconception. This is rarely the case. Using our Pipespec anchorage calculation tool our technical team can consider all of the parameters relevant to minimise the number of joints requiring anchorage. In many cases water and wastewater is not being transported at high pressures within the confines of a treatment works and the mechanical anchorage required can be minimal.