Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen Navigation-related issues of affordability and extended deadlines. Consideration of residual life and construction mobilisation costs Jan Brooke Chair, WFD Navigation Task Group

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 2 Scope of presentation Introduction to issues and relevance to Water Directors’ request Overview of pressures, impacts and measures Case study examples: Bank protection Vessel design Fish passes Key conclusions

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 3 Introduction Main methodological issues tackled Residual asset life as a consideration in setting an extended deadline Construction mobilisation costs as a consideration in setting an extended deadline Relevance to Water Directors’ request Reasons for setting an extended deadline Affordability considerations

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 4 Overview of the case study Pressures and impacts Physical modifications potentially affecting aquatic flora, benthic invertebrate fauna and/or fish fauna; also hydromorphological supporting elements (eg. structure of intertidal zone) Possible measures Environmentally-friendly river bank protection Low-wash vessel design Fish passes around navigation structures

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 5 Bank protection (1) Banks of some river navigations historically protected against erosion by steel sheet piling Where vertical wall not required (eg. for mooring vessels) best improvement in ecological status or potential obtained by removing piling and replace- ment with environmentally friendly bank protection Steel sheet piling typically designed and costed to last 50 years ‘Green engineering solutions’ typically have much shorter design life (say years)

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 6 Steel sheet piling

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 7

8 Willow spiling

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 9 Coir rolls

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 10 Established environmentally friendly bank

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 11 Bank protection (2) Steel sheet piling installation costs €1,000 to €6,000 per linear metre (€1 million to €6 million/km) Removal costs typically 50% of installation costs Options to improve appearance of existing piling from €50 per linear metre upwards, but questionable improvement in ecological function Options which improve ecological functionality of riparian zone cost from €200 to €2000 per linear metre plus cost of removal of piling (average, say, €2.5 million per km including removal of piling) Projected asset life is also important

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 12 Bank protection (3) May thus be disproportionately costly to remove and replace steel sheet piling which still has, say, 10 years residual life However when that asset reaches the end of its useful life, something needs to be done anyway At this point in time, the option that was previously disproportionately costly may become no longer disproportionately costly and affordable (ie. budget is now available) So, extending the deadline allows an ecologically better solution

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 13 Vessel design (1) Certain types of vessel can generate excessive wash leading to bank erosion and habitat loss Speed limits not always practical as reduced speed affects vessel manoeuvrability and/or functionality Modified hull design can help to reduce wash but Often difficult to exert control over visiting craft: right of innocent passage (UNCLOS) and Retro-fitting to an existing vessel prohibitively expensive (eg. retrofit ‘eco-hull’ to existing canal vessel costs between €10,000 and €35,000)

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 14 Vessel design (2) Broads Authority (UK) grant-aided development of mould for new hull to minimise additional costs to vessel owners/operators when replacing redundant craft (ie. make low wash hull affordable) Port of London Authority patrol craft must respond quickly to incidents, etc. thus need to reduce wash at normal and emergency speeds. New Ecocat patrol launches operate with almost no wash at 6-8 knots and with only 20% of wash wave energy when compared to old-style vessels. Also 65% reduction in fuel consumption and emissions.

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 15 EcoCat patrol vessel

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 16

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 17 Vessel design (3) Where it is possible to influence vessel design, consideration of the residual life of the existing asset is important When the vessel reaches the end of its useful life, an option that was previously disproportionately costly, potentially becomes no longer disproportionately costly and affordable (ie. budget is now available) So, extending the deadline enables ecological improvements to be achieved

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 18 Newly constructed fish pass

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 19

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 20

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 21 Fish passes (1) British Waterways owns/operates 140 river weirs which are required to maintain navigable depth Most do not have fish passes Mobilisation/set up/demobilisation costs often represent a disproportionately high proportion of construction costs British Waterways has a limited budget, thus installing large numbers of fish passes by 2015 would detrimentally affect its other services However, if works are carried out whilst construction plant is on site for other reasons …..

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 22 Fish passes (2) Large river weir fish pass €450,000 including mobilisation, site costs, installation and removal of cofferdam Additional cost to install same size fish pass as part of an ongoing project €90,000 Small river weir fish pass €180,000 including mobilisation, site costs, installation and removal of cofferdam Additional cost to install same size fish pass as part of an ongoing project €30,000

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 23 Fish passes (3) Mobilisation, site costs, coffer dam installation and removal, and demobilisation can represent up to 80% of costs of fish pass installation, potentially making the measure disproportionately costly Extending the deadline to allow fish pass to be installed at time of other planned activities on site enables ecological improvements to be achieved more cost-effectively as well as affordably With extended deadlines, British Waterways could have five or six fish passes ‘for the price of one’!

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 24 Key conclusions (1) Environmentally preferred hydromorphological measures are not always practicable, however….. Where they are practicable, and physical assets and/or construction works are involved, residual life and project mobilisation/site management costs are important considerations

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 25 Key conclusions (2) Costs can be high, therefore significant benefits are required to justify expenditure Extending deadlines can help to facilitate delivery of win-win solutions - ecological improvements which would otherwise be disproportionately costly or not affordable This principle is likely to apply more widely especially to hydromorphological measures

Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen 26 Thank you for your attention Contact for further details on the Navigation Case Study