undefined | Better HN

0 pointstome6mo ago0 comments

I'm inclined to agree that privatisation is bad for long term planning, but the history of the Abingdon Reservoir proposal seems to be counter evidence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abingdon_Reservoir

Looks like Thames Water (a private company) proposed the development nearly 20 years ago, but it was turned down by the Environment Agency, a government body.

> Plans for a £1bn reservoir in Oxfordshire to supply more than eight million people over the next 25 years have been rejected by the government.

> Thames Water wants to build a site on four square miles of land near Abingdon to help ensure future demand is met.

> The bid went to a public inquiry but the secretary of state said there was "no immediate need" for such a site.

"Abingdon £1bn reservoir plan rejected by government"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-12651131

0 comments

zarzavat6mo ago

Good find, I admit I had jumped on the Thames Water is Evil bandwagon, and for the record they are evil, but in this case they have been out-eviled by that other driver of British societal regression:

> Campaigners had fought the plan, claiming there was no need for such a large reservoir and that it would damage the environment.

> Leader of the Vale of White Horse Council Tony de Vere said: "We are delighted with this decision.

> "Local residents were very worried about the impact of such a large reservoir and we share their relief that the plan has been axed."

AussieCoder6mo ago

I have friends in the Abingdon area and the primary objection, from what they've told me, is that locals objected to a reservoir that would mainly be used to supply London. Little Englanders at their worst.

KoolKat236mo ago

And that's when parliament should step in and pass it as standalone infrastructure under its own bill.

1 more reply

Earw0rm6mo ago

They don't object to London subsidising their "rural" lifestyle and paying their pensions though. I despise these people.

blitzar6mo ago

> Local residents were very worried about the impact of such a large reservoir

Was it the crocodiles or the immigrants in small boats in the reservoir they worried about most?

tpoacher6mo ago

Snarkiness aside, this is Oxfordshire. One of 'the' most unlikely areas to have been concerned about that as the primary opinion driver.

hermitcrab6mo ago

Reservoirs are nice, aren't they? Nice to look at, swim in, kayak on, walk around etc. Unless your house is going to be flooded, of course.

jspash6mo ago

Agreed! I have a few around me, and to be honest I didn't even realise they were there for a few years until I really started exploring the area on foot. They are lovely.

So I don't know what the objections were about. You can easily ignore them, and just as easily enjoy them. But they are hardly going to "destroy the environment".

That said, they would of course destroy "some" environment. I'm not aware of the specific objections in this case. So I'll leave an open mind until I do.

jamessb6mo ago

The Oxford Clarion has had several posts about the proposed Abingdon damn:

https://oxfordclarion.uk/water-why-abingdons-mega-reservoir-...

https://oxfordclarion.uk/abingdon-reservoir-is-there-an-alte...

https://oxfordclarion.uk/abingdon-reservoir-what-are-the-ris...

https://oxfordclarion.uk/abingdon-reservoir-how-much-will-it...

joshuaissac6mo ago

Privatisation should be accompanied with legal responsibility to build/maintain infrastructure for the future. If a government agency blocks the development, this liability should shift to them, to disincentivise unnecessarily blocking development.

But for something like water supply, there should be more competition via legally mandated unbundling, like with Internet service providers and energy suppliers who use the same delivery infrastructure while competing with each other.

blitzar6mo ago

> Thames Water's computer-generated image of how the reservoir would look

We have come a long way in computer generated images in 14 years.

Yeul6mo ago

Ah but this is an argument against private ownership.

The ultimate power, including violence, lies with the federal government. Thames water can't shoot dead protesters or council members but the government definitely can and will.

ajmurmann6mo ago

Not surprised by this since the parent comments "30 years" in general seem to coincide with the timeframe when we stopped building in the west in general.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointstome6mo ago0 comments

I'm inclined to agree that privatisation is bad for long term planning, but the history of the Abingdon Reservoir proposal seems to be counter evidence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abingdon_Reservoir

Looks like Thames Water (a private company) proposed the development nearly 20 years ago, but it was turned down by the Environment Agency, a government body.

> Plans for a £1bn reservoir in Oxfordshire to supply more than eight million people over the next 25 years have been rejected by the government.

> Thames Water wants to build a site on four square miles of land near Abingdon to help ensure future demand is met.

> The bid went to a public inquiry but the secretary of state said there was "no immediate need" for such a site.

"Abingdon £1bn reservoir plan rejected by government"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-12651131

0 comments

zarzavat6mo ago

> Campaigners had fought the plan, claiming there was no need for such a large reservoir and that it would damage the environment.

> Leader of the Vale of White Horse Council Tony de Vere said: "We are delighted with this decision.

> "Local residents were very worried about the impact of such a large reservoir and we share their relief that the plan has been axed."

AussieCoder6mo ago

KoolKat236mo ago

And that's when parliament should step in and pass it as standalone infrastructure under its own bill.

1 more reply

Earw0rm6mo ago

They don't object to London subsidising their "rural" lifestyle and paying their pensions though. I despise these people.

blitzar6mo ago

> Local residents were very worried about the impact of such a large reservoir

Was it the crocodiles or the immigrants in small boats in the reservoir they worried about most?

tpoacher6mo ago

Snarkiness aside, this is Oxfordshire. One of 'the' most unlikely areas to have been concerned about that as the primary opinion driver.

hermitcrab6mo ago

Reservoirs are nice, aren't they? Nice to look at, swim in, kayak on, walk around etc. Unless your house is going to be flooded, of course.

jspash6mo ago

Agreed! I have a few around me, and to be honest I didn't even realise they were there for a few years until I really started exploring the area on foot. They are lovely.

So I don't know what the objections were about. You can easily ignore them, and just as easily enjoy them. But they are hardly going to "destroy the environment".

That said, they would of course destroy "some" environment. I'm not aware of the specific objections in this case. So I'll leave an open mind until I do.

jamessb6mo ago

The Oxford Clarion has had several posts about the proposed Abingdon damn:

https://oxfordclarion.uk/water-why-abingdons-mega-reservoir-...

https://oxfordclarion.uk/abingdon-reservoir-is-there-an-alte...

https://oxfordclarion.uk/abingdon-reservoir-what-are-the-ris...

https://oxfordclarion.uk/abingdon-reservoir-how-much-will-it...

joshuaissac6mo ago

blitzar6mo ago

> Thames Water's computer-generated image of how the reservoir would look

We have come a long way in computer generated images in 14 years.

Yeul6mo ago

Ah but this is an argument against private ownership.

The ultimate power, including violence, lies with the federal government. Thames water can't shoot dead protesters or council members but the government definitely can and will.

ajmurmann6mo ago

Not surprised by this since the parent comments "30 years" in general seem to coincide with the timeframe when we stopped building in the west in general.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse