The Telegraph, on Climate, 12 September 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Net zero dam threatens waterfall at Welsh beauty spot

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.1 finding

Plans to convert a famed Welsh waterfall into a hydroelectric power station have triggered a fierce backlash from campaigners. The Snowdonia Society charity is poised to launch a legal challenge to stop the conversion of the Rhaeadr y Cwm waterfall , which has long inspired poets and artists. The judicial review aims to halt plans to redirect water from Rhaeadr y Cwm, which is located in Snowdonia National Park, into nearby hydroelectric turbines to generate low-carbon power.

It comes after farming brothers Moi Dafydd and Elis Dafydd recently secured planning permission for the project from Snowdonia National Park . Graeme Cotterill, the director of the Snowdonia Society, warned that the project risked ruining the beauty spot, which inspired a 1836 painting of the mist-shrouded gorge by Victorian landscape artist David Cox and which hangs in the British Museum. He said: “This scheme will damage one of the National Park’s most iconic waterfalls.

“Nearly 70pc of the water would be diverted away from the waterfall into a plastic pipe, threatening the sensory experience and unique environment associated with this special place.” The Rhaeadr y Cwm waterfall is renowned for the 122 metre multi-tiered drop, with water creating a thunderous roar as it cascades over each successive rock shelf, shrouding the area in mist. Under the Dafydds’ scheme, the river above the waterfall would be dammed before water is diverted into a mile-long plastic pipe buried in a trench dug or drilled into the surrounding rocky landscape.

The trench, up to four metres deep in places, would take the water downhill into a turbine house to generate low-carbon power but . The waterfall has multiple forms of protection. As well as lying in a national park, it is also a site of special scientific interest and part of a “special protection area” designated for its rare plants and animals. Such sites are protected by planning law that says that developments should only be permitted in “wholly exceptional circumstances”.

However, Snowdonia National Park has deemed that climate change and the need to reach net zero should be classed as an exceptional circumstance – opening the way for many more energy developments in protected areas. An environmental impact assessment by the applicants argued that the project was justified by the green energy it would produce. “The proposal represents a unique opportunity to provide clean, renewable energy which respects the special qualities of the national park contributing towards strong ecosystems, and improving the health and well-being of our communities,” they said.

Lily Hartley-Mathews, a solicitor for the society, said: “At its heart this action is about ensuring that decisions to approve major developments in a National Park are taken lawfully in accordance with the national and local planning policies that protect places of such significance.” William Gallimore, of the British Hydropower Association, said: “The UK needs new renewable generation, including new hydropower. Each proposal must be assessed on its individual merits, balancing the need for clean, reliable electricity with the protection of the local environment.”

Read the original article on telegraph.co.uk (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

The Telegraph reports a legal challenge to a farm hydro scheme at Rhaeadr y Cwm and gives space to the objectors, the applicants and a hydropower body. In its own voice it says the scheme would leave "little water" in the river, when the article's only figure leaves about 30 per cent. This is a minor slant, and nothing in the piece misstates the science or the record.

The model scored this article automatically, as part of a NewsCord staff review of this reporter's recent articles. Staff did not tell it where to look.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “leaving little water in the river”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the Telegraph says the scheme would leave "little water in the river".
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes the river below the intake would be left nearly dry.
    The context
    The only figure in the article comes from the objectors. It says nearly 70 per cent of the water would be diverted, which leaves roughly 30 per cent in the river. The outlet states a stronger effect than its own sourced figure supports.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Nearly 70pc of the water would be diverted away from the waterfall”

    Show it in the article

What it gets right

  • “into nearby hydroelectric turbines to generate low-carbon power”

    The article says plainly what the scheme is for, so readers know the project produces clean electricity and is not only a threat.

  • “The proposal represents a unique opportunity to provide clean, renewable energy”

    The Telegraph gives the applicants their own words, not just the objectors' case.

  • “balancing the need for clean, reliable electricity with the protection of the local environment”

    It closes on a voice that sets the need for renewable power against the environmental cost, rather than leaving the objectors with the last word.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from The Telegraph

  1. 12 OctHeat pump subsidies to be scaled back to fund defence6.0
  2. 7 OctBroken fridges and freezers pile up after heatwaves6.0
  3. 1 OctUK scraps climate change reporting rules for the City6.0
  4. 28 SeptSummer heatwave causes porcini mushroom shortage0.0
  5. 28 SeptNet zero rules in public contracts ‘costing taxpayers money’3.0

Everything we scored from The Telegraph