AS plans for a hydro-electric system on a tributary of the River Wear are given planning permission, Duncan Leatherdale looks at the arguments for and against the stream scheme.

WITH a new found zest to let Mother Nature provide our power, it was only a matter of time before we turned to our waterways for energy.

The owners of Cragside Caravan Park in Eastgate, in Weardale, County Durham, have now been given planning permission by Durham County Council to install a hydro-electric scheme on the western bank of Rookhope Burn, a tributary of the River Wear that borders the site.

That part of the burn consists of a series of small waterfalls, and the scheme would see water taken from a natural pool 300m north of the caravan park into a 1.2m diameter underground pressure pipe (a penstock) into a turbine on the site.

The water would then flow through the system and rejoin the beck, with power generated by the turbine being carried away through underground cables.

In a report prepared for the caravan park owners, Colin Holmes of Bluenergy said the scheme should generate enough power to match 132 per cent of Cragside's current and projected annual electricity needs.

Using fossil fuels to generate the same power would create 112-tonnes of carbon dioxide, the report said.

But the plan has caused concern with angling groups further downstream who fear it could damage fish stocks, particularly brown trout, either through baby fish being “minced” in the turbine or through the amount of water being pulled out of the stream to feed the generator.

Stanhope Parish Council also objected saying the scheme would not be in keeping with Eastgate Conservation Area and could affect visitor’s enjoyment of the Eastgate falls.

David Reay from Stanhope Angling Society said: “If these plans are passed it could spell the end of the River Wear as a top trout river and with this the loss of income to angling clubs and landowners alike.”

Mr Reay also feared that approving the plan would set a precedent, adding: “We could eventually end up with more water turbines than windmills.”

Those concerns are shared by clubs along the Wear including in Willington, more than 17 miles downstream, but the energy consultants said the fears are unfounded.

In response to the angling clubs’ concerns, Ed Henshaw from Bluenergy said measures will be taken to avoid causing harm to the “small population of brown trout”.

Mitigation will include screens across the entrances to the pipes and an assurance that the water flowing through the burn will be kept at a certain level consistent for healthy fish populations.

Mr Henshaw also said the burn is not used by migrating sea trout for breeding due to an impassable waterfall 70m downstream.

Tammy Morris-Hale, the council’s ecologist agreed that the scheme would be unlikely to harm local wildlife, including otters, with proper mitigation measures proposed by the applicants.

Durham County Councillor for Willington Joe Buckham said a full strategy on such schemes needs to be established before projects are given the go ahead.

He said questions needed to be answered about the effects such schemes would have on other parts of the river and that an overall picture should be produced rather than each plan being looked at individually.

He likened the problem to that of the large wind turbines that have been popping up over the area and called for a full discussion on the overall impact of hydro-electric schemes.

Councillor Buckham said: “We simply do not know what affect these schemes will have.

“Ok we are talking about one scheme at the moment but in theory we could end up with dozens of applications for similar projects, we need a strategy now to work out what the best way to go forward is.”

Although planning permission has been given, the owners will now have to apply to the Environment Agency for a hydropower permit.