Whitehaven’s on and off orange harbour has been a talking point for nearly two years.
Often compared to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’s chocolate river – the water has been intermittently turning a bright or burnt orange after periods of heavy rainfall since November 2022.
In the year following its first appearance, the cause of the unusual colour change remained unknown despite investigations and several tests.
Eventually, last October, tests finally pointed at historic mine workings as the likely cause, however, pinpointing the actual source of the contaminated water has remained a problem.
It’s a situation that has been both the butt of jokes and the subject of major public criticism, but it’s left everyone with the same burning question – when will the harbour return to normal?
We spoke with Deanne Shallcross, CEO of Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners, to create a straight-to-the-point Q and A about what is happening with the water, if we should be worried and how much longer we can expect to see the vibrant builders’ tea-esque water.
What is actually causing the colour change?
Iron ochre floodwater – a byproduct of historic mine workings – is the cause of the colour change, but the actual source of the contaminated water remains unknown.
The contaminated water is entering the central harbour area via a culvert in Queen’s Dock, which has been confirmed to connect to the Bransty rail tunnel drainage system.
As a result organisations including the Environment Agency, Coal Authority and Network Rail are helping with testing and investigation as part of a wider task force.
This task force also includes: Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners, Whitehaven Marina Limited, Cumberland Council, Whitehaven Town Council, MP Josh MacAlister, Clean Rivers Trust, Co-Lab Engineering, Forth Engineering and Sellafield Ltd.
Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners have been spearheading the investigation into the cause of the colour change since November 2022.
While the organisation does own the land, the pollution is contaminating the harbour from a source – likely one out of hundreds of historic mines in the area – that they do not and cannot control or find.
What is happening right now to address the water colour?
The harbour task force is currently involved with testing and investigations.
It was initially set up by MP Trudy Harrison in March this year in a bid to speed up and streamline communications between involved parties, after initial delays set fixing the problem back.
The group is now led by Whitehaven and Workington’s new MP Josh MacAlister and involves both
Investigations are currently looking into finding a way to clean or filter the water running out of the tunnel. Research has now identified some potential treatment options.
But researchers will need to conduct further studies to understand if they will work and any potential treatment could need government approval and possibly licences. This includes where any waste is taken after treatment.
Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners said to make this happen, more data will need to be gathered and the evidence looked at by experts, which will take more time.
The organisation added: “The geology of West Cumbria is complex. Any water running through it (in a tunnel, drain or similar) may pick up metals and colour. This means we may never fully understand why this is happening now.
“We know the contaminated water is coming from Bransty railway tunnel.
“One possible explanation is that water has been getting in there for a long time. Experts believe that the stones used in the railway, called ballast, might have helped filter the contaminated water. But after a while, the ballast got blocked and worn, making it less effective.
“Network Rail has been exploring ways to help fix this by replacing the ballast. Regulators have warned against this. Moving the ballast could disturb even more contaminated water and make things worse.”
Network Rail, the Environment Agency, and the Coal Authority have investigated how and where water is entering the Bransty railway tunnel. So far, these investigations have been inconclusive.
Deanne said: “Network Rail is currently working with the Environment Agency and the Coal Authority to establish the flow and composition of the water through the placement of water quality monitors.
“For a long time we as landowners couldn’t see anything happening, but it turned out people were working hard behind the scenes and testing the water.
“People have tried to help by suggesting other areas of orange water that could be the source but the relevant agencies have tested those and tell us they’re a different composition, which has so far ruled out locations of where it may have been coming from.
“So now they’ve realised that it’s a bigger task than first thought and we have to temporarily stop looking for the source and start looking at treating the effect to buy time and allow people to find the cause.
“This would mean looking at diverting the water away from the harbour or treating it, but the downside of both of those options is that it all requires monitoring of flow and composition over more than just a few days so they can confidently find the best solution.”
Deanne added that the Environment Agency is now gathering regular data from the water quality monitors to make progress on finding a way to treat the water.
She explained that tests so far had been piecemeal and that more substantial data was needed to make progress.
It is hoped a solution will be agreed on and delivered within months.
Why can’t Network Rail stop the water coming into Bransty tunnel?
Network Rail is only funded to deal with the impact of the contaminated water on the railway.
Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners said Network Rail was focused on delivering a safe and reliable railway for Whitehaven, and not making the situation worse when work was carried out.
Network Rail is focused on making sure the railway can continue to run, and is planning a full renewal of the track and drainage system in 2025 and 2026.
Why is it taking so long to fix the water?
Initially, Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners said communications between involved organisations were ‘shockingly poor’.
While all agencies involved have worked to get answers – there had previously been no real communication between the parties of what each agency has been doing.
Cumbria’s unitary council shake-up is also thought to have delayed the process while new staff came into post – which resulted in Mrs Harrison setting up a task force made up of involved organisations in a bid to improve communications.
Deanne said that the harbour commissioners have now been assured this will change and that all results from testing and investigation will be fed into one main ‘information pot’ to support the options for solutions.
Funding must now also be found in order to finance any potential treatment solutions while the root cause is still investigated.
Any potential treatment solutions will also require licencing or Government approval and Deanne said that the harbour commissioners were working with the Environment Agency to find ways to speed this process up.
She added: “We share everyone’s frustrations that there is still no agreed solution in place. As the landowners, we completely understand the community looking to us for answers.
“Frustratingly, we cannot control what comes out of the culvert into our dock and are victims of the contaminated water ourselves – as are all the harbour users. It’s hard to provide answers when the circumstances are out of our hands.
“Communications in 2023 between agencies were shocking. Things started quite well with Mike Starkie working with our former CEO John Baker to bring organisations together, but the switch to the unitary authority arrested everything and made it difficult to get everyone around the table.
“But Trudy had the clout to do that and get everyone back around a table and we had some full and frank discussions as a collective and it was clear that everyone wanted the best for the community of Whitehaven.
“There was no ‘it wasn’t me’, ‘it’s not our fault’, or ‘I’m not paying for it’ – it was more than non of us should or can pay for it, but that as a collective we have the power to unlock funding as a group and put pressure on to fast-track any licences we need for putting a solution in place.
“Not only is it going to require a lot of funding to create a diversion or treatment plan, but it’s also a lot of licensing and red tape. So we’re really hoping the EA will find a way for us to overcome that much quicker.
“But we are wanting something to happen this year. We’re now nearly two years in to this, should something have happened a lot sooner? Yes. But are we relieved something finally now is? Absolutely.
“My biggest fear is that we’re still sitting here in another 12 months, but the data is now actively being gathered and worked on properly, which is positive.
“What we can now do as a collective is identify our options with the EA, look for ways to fast-track licensing and keep communicating with the community as much as possible.”
So, when will the water return to normal?
The task force said it was doing everything it could – but any solution will be complex and take time to develop.
Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners said: “We know this is a challenging situation. We realise it will take time to find the right answer. Getting funding and permissions will also take time, and we can’t change or control that.
“But guided by experts with the necessary experience, we are confident it’s possible to solve this. We will be pushing to see a working solution in place by next year.”
Why can’t they just divert the water straight into the sea?
Diverting the water into the sea or blocking off the culvert where the polluted water is entering the harbour are both more problematic ideas than they may initially seem.
The culvert carries a natural watercourse from Bransty Beck. Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners said it cannot be blocked, as this would cause flooding elsewhere.
The organisation added that diversion of the water would need a lot of engineering and treatment. It would also be expensive and need regulatory approval and/or licences and would take a long time to set up.
Deanne said: “We are conscious that at the moment the pollution is going out to sea whenever the sea lock is opened.
“The Environment Agency are accepting of that at the moment, as it is an accidental event and nobody is at fault or manually polluting the sea.
“But the minute someone goes in and manually does something, it is then classed as intervening and manually polluting the sea.
“The Environment Agency would then hit us with a penalty and the equivalent of a cease and desist.
“Network Rail is in the exact same situation as us, as they can’t clear the tunnel out without the contaminated water going into our harbour.
“But I completely understand people’s frustration towards it all. Twelve months ago before I came into post I was a person thinking ‘you can get a water sample back in 24 hours, so what is the problem?’
“But the difficulty is the red tape and we are trying to explain all of this a lot more to the community. But it’s worth it because the more people that understand what is happening, the better, as they can see why things are taking so long and that we’re just as frustrated as they are.”
How will they fix the colour change and when will it return to normal?
Investigations are looking into finding a way to clean or filter the water running out of the tunnel. Research has now identified some potential treatment options.
But researchers will need to conduct further studies to understand if they will work and any potential treatment could need government approval and possibly licences. This includes where any waste is taken after treatment.
These solutions are being considered as a temporary measure to buy time for involved organisations to find the root cause of the contamination.
Deanne said: “We’ve been looking into similar situations, but they’ve all involved something like an open working cast mine where the Coal Authority dealt with it promptly.
“But where we are, it’s all historic mine workings, so the coal authority are not immediately liable.
“Other areas who have dealt with historic mine workings are in the middle of nowhere, with lots of land around which allows them to use reed beds and a lagoon in a similar size to several football pitches and we don’t have that.
“We’re in a town next to the sea, so any diversions would have to be fairly big and treatment plants would have to be fairly compact.
“But everyone is doing everything they can to get this to a resolution by autumn this year. I would love to see something in place for summer season, we certainly don’t want to be opening the edge with still grotty water.”
Is the water toxic? Should we be worried about it?
While the bright orange appearance of the water is alarming – it is not thought to be toxic.
But the Clean Rivers Trust has now said the contaminated water is harmful to the crustaceans that live in the sediments and that over time this will be a problem for the fish in the harbour as it removes their food source.
They have also warned that the iron hydroxides coating the harbour floor – although not poisonous to humans – should not be paddled in or ingested.
Mussels found on the hulls of the boats in the harbour should also not be eaten.
Regulators are still monitoring the situation. Experts say the contaminated water won’t harm the wider water quality or the flora and fauna.
Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners said: “The usual wildlife still visits. There are fish in the water. Those that feed on them seem to be coping with the conditions.
“Whitehaven Harbour Commissioners are not experts in this area. We are guided by information and advice from government agencies and experts.
“We worry about the long-term effects on the environment, the community, and the town’s prosperity. So, we continue to push for the urgent implementation of a permanent solution.”
Testing conducted by the Environment Agency in December 2022 found increased levels of metals in the water, but this was found to not be harmful due to its dilution in the harbour and estuary.
Deanne said: “We are assured from testing that it is not toxic to health. But we are concerned about longer term damage to flora, fauna, the harbour walls and material damage to boats that sit in our harbour.
“The appearance of our gem of a harbour and the reputation of our Georgian town is being blighted by the ongoing discolouration. It is having an impact on all harbour users – both recreation and commercial – and the town as a whole.
“It has caused significant material, financial and reputational damage to many individuals, organisations and businesses.
“When we raised this issue with the Environment Agency we asked if we should be delaying the opening of The Edge if we can’t guarantee water quality, as we don’t want people exposed to a certain extent.
“So that’s when with Trudy we decided that the absolute latest we want a solution by is the opening of The Edge in the autumn and we’re keeping everything crossed that will be the case.”
