Hi - in line with a similar case in Bakewell that Warren has highlighted. Please take a moment to look at the proposed scheme at Kelham Island in Sheffield. The scheme will destroy the currently very rich fauna and flora in the mill Goit as well as increasing the impoundment (reducing habitat quality upstream) and also take the majority of any flows above base flow level. It will generate a maximum of 20 houses-worth of electricity for the Museum (and this requires taking the majority of the flow in a good rainfall year). The ecological costs of this one make it a very poor option - and yet it is being sold to investors as ethical/green option for "renewable" energy generation.

Kelham Island Hydro » Sheffield Renewables

The group also have a second proposal (for Jordan's Dam) but that one should, at least, generate a bit of electricity.


Make your views known to the local green party here following their visit (using the "contact" tab):
Green Party | Adrian Ramsay to do walking tour of Sheffield

and the Central Assembly councilors here:
Sheffield City Council - Central Community Assembly

---------- Post added at 11:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 AM ----------

Here is the text of my response to the public consultation on the Kelham Island proposal:

Thanks for engaging in discussion during your recent Q and A session at Kelham Island. I've attached some of the information I promised during our meeting. This includes our (the Wild Trout Trust's) input into the consultation process on the updating of the Good Practice Guidelines for hydropower. I have also included an introductory reference to safeguarding ecologically minimally acceptable flows here (Stream hydrology: an introduction ... - Nancy D. Gordon - Google Books) e.g. one system widely adopted in the US and adopted by Germany is the “Montana method” (D. L. TENNANT, Fisheries 1(4): 6-10 (1976)). This specifies a “hands-off” flow of between 40 and 60% of the annual mean. 40% provides “good” instream habitat, 50% “excellent” and 60% “outstanding”.). In addition, I promised some information on impounded flows. A very good overall reference text for salmonid river habitat ecology is O'Grady, M.F. 2006 "Channels and Challenges. Enhancing Salmonid Rivers". Irish Freshwater Fisheries Ecology & Management Series: Number 4, Central Fisheries Board, Dublin, Ireland.
On page 36 of this book the author highlights the typical 10-fold depletion of salmonid (i.e. Trout, Salmon and Sea Trout) biomass within impounded reaches upstream of weirs due to habitat homogenisation. The "drowning out" effect of many micro habitats required for good invertebrate and plant diversity is also a result of impoundment.
Clearly, the effects of the many weirs present on the River Don system extend far beyond acting as simple barriers to fish movement. Dramatic improvements to biodiversity could be achieved by various degrees of notching, lowering or completely removing these structures. The societal benefits of improving and safeguarding biodiversity have recently been documented in the Government White paper: http://www.official-documents.gov.uk.../8082/8082.pdf
Finally, although fish passes can offer a degree of amelioration of the "migratory barrier" effect of weirs; their efficacy requires a huge ongoing committment - both to maintenance and optimal design. Many fish passes are either ineffective from the outset (often by poor siting of the "attraction flow" outlet) or become obsolete due to lack of maintenance. I am sure that, as a community-focussed organisation committed to sustainable energy solutions, you will consider very carefully whether the energy to be generated for this scheme can genuinely be considered a sustainable and justifiable option in the case of the recovering river Don.

Please do satisfy yourselves that you can recommend this as a justifiable and genuinely "green" measure to the local community and whether your supporters are fully appraised of the ecological downsides against which the relatively low projected energy returns. The projection of the image of sustainable and ecologically responsible energy generation is central to your advertised ethos - please do ensure that this is not misleading to your local community supporters. The scheme, as currently proposed, will do more ecological damage than good. Particularly with the existing alternative options for passive increases in vegetation to combat climate change and promote greater biodiversity (including natural river narrowing via weir removal or modification).

Best regards

Paul Gaskell (Wild Trout Trust conservation officer)

Here's my comment but it is awaiting moderation:

richard ward says:Your comment is awaiting moderation.

25/10/2011 at 10:49
Please scrap the idea and instead remove the weir. The damage being done by hydro power schemes across the country is cumulatively enormous. The loss of species and resulting lack of biodiversity is a tragedy. The Don is recovering from hundreds of years of industrialisation. The right thing to do is to remove the man-made structures (the weirs) originally built for profit only and with no consideration at all for the life in the river, which simply wouldn’t be allowed in these enlightened days. Now is your chance to do some good instead of extending the life of these weirs. If you want to produce electricity for 20 homes without harm to the ecology of the river Don put voltaic solar panels on the roofs of the houses. Be decent about this please, by turning your backs on the chance to take some taxpayer-funded grant money and profit from the artificially high feed-in tarrifs. Please do the right thing not the lucrative thing. Get the weir out and let the river continue to recover.

Thank you

Richard Ward

__________________
Who resides on the right bank of the Derbyshire Wye and is lulled to sleep each night by the mutterings of a weir, dreaming that "When the rivers and their inhabitants come first, we ALL win..."

Local share offer, Industrial/Provident company and regulated by FSA.

'My money is making nothing at the bank, why dont I buy some shares in this hydro and feel better about being green. I can take my grandchildren up there when its running and tell them I own a bit of it.'

This is where true disclosure from the Torrs IPC and the people of New Mills would head this off. I have a new friend who overlooks the Torrs and wants to tell the world how bad the Hydro project is/was. He is willing to travel and loves talking over people. Where do I take him to have the greatest effect?

__________________
http://141207.blogspot.com/
http://www.haddonestate.co.uk/rivers/rivers.php
http://www.thepeacockatrowsley.com/fishing.html

I'm guessing the Sheffield City Council Central Assembly would be a great forum for that.