Case study:Mill house private hydroelectric power generation scheme and fish pass
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Fisheries, Hydropower |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Ash |
Main contact surname | Girdler |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | AGA Group |
Contact organisation web site | http://http://www.agagroup.co.uk/ |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
Mill House is situated on the banks of the River Wey in Surrey. The wheel house, which is still part of Mill House, had historically held a 15 ft. breast shot water wheel. The aim of the project was to once again put the River Wey to use producing energy, via the installation of an Achilles screw turbine. The scheme also incorporated a geo-thermal heating system installed within the structure for the turbine, with a heat pump to transfer hot water to the domestic quarter's central heating system.
The old wheel house was reinforced and refurbished to accommodate the new hydraulic sluice gate housing and the controls to regulate water levels and flow rates to the turbine channel. A requirement of planning permission was to incorporate a fish pass into the design to ensure the protection of migratory and course fish populations. A reinforced concrete fish pass was construction 200m upstream clear of the turbine channel. One of the key elements to the successful operation of the fish pass channel is the installation of artificial plastic reeds referred to as "fish brushes". These fish brushes slow the water flow down and create eddies and back currents to enable fish to swim up the pass.
A range of bioengineering systems were used to prevent erosion and undercutting of the banks along 200m of the clients bank. Products included unplanted and pre-vegetated coir rolls, A.G.A. Span vertical revetment, rock rolls and hardwood fagots, each used according to the dictates of the site conditions and habitat creation required. As a result of these activities new habitat has been created, water meadows restored and the bio-diversity of the project site enhanced.
Picture reference:
A. Reinforced concrete hydro channel 300mm thick walls with 500mm deep base for turbine
B. Reinforced concrete fish pass
C. Hydraulic sluice gates
D. Waterside decking
E. Two steel and oak bridges
F. Restored iron footbridge
G. Bank erosion control
H. Vegetation and turf reinforcement
I. Water meadow reinstatement
The RRC would like to thank A.G.A Group for providing the information and photographs for this case study.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Site
Project background
Cost for project phases
Reasons for river restoration
Measures
MonitoringHydromorphological quality elements
Biological quality elements
Physico-chemical quality elements
Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic
Monitoring documents
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
Supplementary InformationEdit Supplementary Information
|