Sir – The suggestion that the proposed Abingdon reservoir might serve to improve a landscape which local people already value is pie in the sky (letters, June 24).

This is a commercial development proposal by Thames Water envisaging a massive hole in the ground ten metres deep, using the excavated material to create a bund 25 metres high round the circumference to retain the water.

It would destroy an area of excellent farmland the size of Gatwick airport.

There is no other reservoir of such scale in the UK which does not lie in a natural valley with the water retained by a dam.

As to landscaping, Thames Water have provided some artist’s impressions which cannot hide the scale and artificial nature of the structure. The cost would be £1bn of water consumers’ money and the aim is to supply London in the event of severe drought.

In the public inquiry, currently taking place in Oxford, Thames Water claim they need the reservoir to meet a forecast demand deficit of 60m litres a day by 2036.

Their current leakage is well over ten times this amount and they plan to reduce it by only a modest pipe replacement programme. Added to this, there is doubt that in the long term the Thames will have sufficient flow to fill this monstrosity reliably.

It has been put to Thames Water by the inspector that the scheme is only a contingency, and Thames Water have admitted that alternative schemes such as Severn to Thames water transfer have not been properly researched.

GARD will show in evidence that water transfer is half the cost, more sustainable and far less damaging to the environment.

Both water transfer and the full range of water re-use treatment options must be considered before the Abingdon reservoir is allowed to channel even greater profits to Macquarie Bank and their Australian owners’ pension and other funds.

Nick Thompson Hon chairman, GARD Steventon