The trees lining London's South Bank are to show off a luminous new wardrobe of colour, mist and light.

The internet was buzzing with websites and chat rooms bemoaning the demise of Concorde yesterday, showing just what an icon it has become. If you tuned in to the television coverage or turned up at Heathrow to watch, you could see why. One of the great engineering triumphs of the past century is now reduced to the status of a curiosity. But it was eye-catching to the end and it was a perfect autumn day as, one by one, the three Concordes followed the glistening path of the Thames before landing. This time, the famous drooping nose cones looked rather sad.

Of course, the great bird never made any economic sense and burnt its way through the equivalent of £20 billion of public money in order to get airborne. The 200-or-so orders disappeared because of one of the first global protest movements. It was called Ban the Bang and was run by an eccentric couple from the Midlands. But they successfully caused overfly rights to be withdrawn, not least by India, which resented the idea of being woken up every night by an unwelcome sonic boom. But whatever its critics say, Concorde is a reminder that the death of British engineering is exaggerated. The aircraft's glorious shape and amazing specification are in the fine tradition of all our national engineering follies, such as Brunel's Great Eastern or even Formula One racing.

Now, just the kind of popular protest movement that originally did for the project is trying to keep Concorde flying. British Airways claims it is going to put its five aircraft in a museum, although one might be kept airborne for shows and anniversaries. That is the least the airline can do, given that it effectively received the aircraft for free. And Richard Branson is still trying to persuade BA to let him have a stab at operating a service commercially. If you don't want to see the beautiful bird grounded - it was, after all, funded by the taxpayer - you can sign a petition at www.saveconcorde.co.uk.

Arguments about the size of the new jetty and its effects on the Thames have dominated the fourth week of the public inquiry into plans for a giant incinerator in Belvedere. LINDA PIPER reports …

SUPPORTERS of plans to build the biggest incinerator in Britain on a riverside site in Bexley, say one of its biggest pluses is all the rubbish to be burned can be brought to the site by river.

But the proposal by Riverside Resource Recovery Ltd (RRRL), to build a jetty 270m out into the river, where it will stand in deep water, has provoked suspicion among pressure groups and Bexley Council.

They fear the jetty will enable RRRL to bring in rubbish on large ships from much further afield than London.

Master mariner Captain Kim Milnes, who runs river barge operations for Cory Environmental, one of the partners in RRRL, said the deep water was needed to make sure barges could unload, even at low tide, without the danger of going aground.

He said it would give the barges flexibility to be able to avoid other river users who need to move on high tides because of the size of their vessels.
advertisement

The Cory Environmental barges would still be able to dock at lower tides without disturbing marine life on the river bed, he explained.

Capt Milnes said closing the  Thames Barrier would not affect operations at the proposed incinerator and the chances of the jetty being put out of commission by a mid-river collision would be less than once in 100 years.

But under cross examination from John Mankerty, a former naval commander representing the pressure group Badair (Bexley and District Against Incinerator Risks), which opposes the proposal, Capt Milnes admitted the deep water jetty would enable coasters from other parts of the country to travel up the Thames and unload at the incinerator.

FEARS ABOUT EFFECTS ON RIVER THAMES FLOOD DEFENCES

THERE are worries about RRRL's plans to drive piles through the flood defences for the River Thames to build its new jetty.

People fear the increasing need to use the Thames Barrier as water levels rise could see the work destabilising the flood defences.

The Environment Agency, which has responsibility for the flood defences, has withdrawn its objections but has had someone at the inquiry listening to the evidence.

RRRL's expert witness John Eggett told the inquiry at the Marriott Hotel, Bexleyheath, the jetty would consist of a reinforced concrete deck supported by tubular steel piles. He explained the 55m-wide flood defences in the area consisted of a clay bank and a reinforced concrete flood wall with steel pile foundations.

He said a breach in the flood defences in the Norman Road area, where the incinerator site is located would “cause considerable damage over a large area”.

Mr Eggett said precautions would be taken to make sure the clay bank was not made unstable by the construction work.

The completed jetty will pass over the top of the defences and the weight of lorries carrying rubbish from the barges to the incinerator building would be carried through the piles to the ground below the flood embankment.

The next evening session of the inquiry will be held at the Lakeside Complex in Belvedere Road, Abbey Wood, on August 14 from 7pm to 10pm.

Badair is still appealing for donations to pay for two expert witnesses to appear at the inquiry to oppose the incinerator. It needs another £500 to meet the cost. If you can help, send donations to Badair at 29 Berkhampstead Road, Belvedere, Kent, DA17 5EA.

LENGTH OF JETTY UNDER SCRUTINY

BEXLEY Council's expert David Close argued the jetty's length could be limited to 165m without any danger of the rubbish barges running aground, even at low tide.

He pointed out such a deep water jetty would give access to much larger ships.

Mr Close also suggested the addition of two extra cranes at the jetty and increasing the size of the rubbish containers would enable RRRL to handle more than 2.3 million tonnes of rubbish a year — which was four times the amount currently being proposed.

He said the proposed new jetty could affect the movement of vessels at the neighbouring Ford and Belvedere jetties and could also increase the likelihood of a collision.

The RRRL proposal is supported by the Port of London Authority.

Stansted, Heathrow and Birmingham are to get extra runways under the UK's new 30-year plan for air travel.