This section summarises the key environmental
outcomes arising from the assessments completed in this EIA Report for the LNG
terminal at Black Point. For each of the
environmental components assessed, a summary of key environmental sensitive
receivers is completed, together with an overview of the key potential
environmental impacts and key mitigation measures, highlighting their benefits
where necessary.
The summary of each of the components is structured
as follows:
·
List
of sensitive receivers;
·
Key
Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes;
·
Assessment
Methodology and Criteria;
·
Construction
Impacts;
·
Operational
Impacts;
·
Key
Mitigation Measures;
·
Residual
Impacts; and
·
Compliance
with the guidelines and criteria of the Environmental
Impact Assessment Ordinance - Technical Memorandum (EIAO-TM).
Table 15.1 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to air quality as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
Full details of the assessment are presented in Section 4 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.1 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Air Quality
|
- AIR QUALITY - |
|
|
Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) |
Air Sensitive
Receivers (ASRs) were identified in accordance with the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 12. Within 500 m of
the Project site boundary, no ASR was identified. The nearest identified ASRs are: ·
A1: Sheung Pak Nai at 7,500 m.
Residential. Max height: 10 m; ·
A2: EPD Office at WENT Landfill at 3,200 m.
Office. Max Height: 10 m; ·
A3: Black Point Power Station – ·
A4: Proposed Karting Track (ASR which is
expected to be in operation during the construction of the LNG Terminal) at
1,700 m. Recreational; ·
A5: Concrete Batching Plant - Site Office at
1,050 m. Office. Max Height:
6 m; ·
A6: Open Storage at 1,170 m; ·
A7: Hong Kong Oil - Site Office at 1,300
m. Office. Max Height: 6 m; and ·
A8: Open Storage at 1,500 m. |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes |
·
The location of the site is remote
from inhabited areas avoiding extensive impacts on air sensitive receivers |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
An air dispersion model, Industrial
Source Complex (ISCST3), recommended in the EPD’s Guideline of Choice of
Models and Model Parameter, was employed to predict the air quality
impacts. The “rural” dispersion mode
was used in the model run. In
addition, the local terrain has also been incorporated into the model to
account for terrain-induced impacts to dispersion. ·
A highly conservative approach was
adopted during the air quality impact assessment modelling exercise by
assuming that the emissions from the submerged combustion vaporiser (SCVs),
LNG carrier generators and pipeline gas heaters were continuous, when in
reality total emissions will, on average, be significantly lower. ·
The total emission rates indicated that
NO2 is the critical air pollutant in this Study; therefore,
isopleths of predicted maximum hourly, daily average and annual average
concentrations of NO2 at 1.5 m and 10 m above ground level were
plotted. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
·
Potential dust nuisance from dust
generating activities and gaseous emission from construction plant during
construction of the LNG terminal have been considered. ·
The dust and gaseous emissions from the
construction activities were found to be minimal and an impact on air quality
at the ASR is not anticipated. |
|
Key Operational Impacts |
LNG Terminal Impacts: ·
The emission of key pollutants at all
identified ASRs are well within the respective AQO criteria, even allowing for
the very conservative assumptions used for the project-related emissions and
background levels of ozone. Cumulative Impacts (LNG terminal and BPPS): ·
Short-Term
(hourly) Cumulative NO2 Impact: For ASRs A1 and A2, the worst case wind
angles for emissions from the LNG terminal and the BPPS are similar and hence
cumulative NO2 impact is expected.
A3 is located within the BPPS site and a short-term cumulative NO2
impact is not expected. Cumulative
maximum hourly NO2 impacts at Ha Pak Nai and Sheung Pak Nai are
within the hourly NO2 criterion.
It should be noted that the maximum hourly NO2
concentrations at A1 and A2 attributable to the LNG terminal emissions are
predicted using a very conservative approach, assuming continuous emissions
from all resources ·
Cumulative
Daily and Annual NO2 Impacts: The results indicate that the cumulative
daily and annual NO2 impacts at all identified ASRs are well
within the Air Quality Objective (AQO).
The contribution from the LNG terminal emissions is very minor even under
the worst case scenario that has been modelled. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
Construction Phase: ·
Dust control measures stipulated in the
Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation will be implemented
during the construction of the LNG terminal to minimize the potential
fugitive dust emissions and also gaseous emission from construction plant. Operational Phase: ·
No exceedances of the AQO criteria are
anticipated at the ASRs and therefore no mitigation measures are required. |
|
Residual Impacts |
Construction Phase: ·
With the implementation of the
recommended dust control measures, no residual impacts are anticipated. Operational Phase: ·
No adverse residual operational air
quality impact is anticipated. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are
acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 4 and 12 and applicable
assessment standards/criteria. |
Table 15.2 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to ambient noise as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
Full details of the noise assessment are presented in Section 5 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.2 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes - Noise
|
- NOISE - |
|
|
Noise Sensitive Receivers (NSRs) |
·
The nearest NSR is identified as the
village house at Lung Kwu Sheung Tan (N1) which is located at approximately
1.6 km away from the site. No planned
NSR is identified within 2 km from the site.
|
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes |
·
The location of the site is remote from
inhabited areas avoiding extensive impacts on noise sensitive receivers |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
Construction
Phase: ·
The methodology for the noise impact
assessment is in accordance with the procedures outlined in the GW-TM, which
is issued under the NCO and the EIAO-TM. ·
Using a conservative approach, each work
activity has been assumed to operate simultaneously. Based on the construction programme,
cumulative noise impact throughout the construction phase has been assessed. ·
The construction noise assessment for
construction works carried out during restricted hours (e.g. night-time
works) has been carried out in accordance with the requirements of the GW-TM. Operational Phase: ·
The methodology for the noise impact
assessment is in accordance with the procedures outlined in the ISO 9613(2)
and IND-TM, which is issued under the NCO and the EIAO-TM. ·
Assessment results have been predicted in
a conservative approach without other attenuations due to foliage of trees
and shrubs, ground effects and buildings in which the equipment is
placed. In addition, the corrections
of tonality, impulsiveness and intermittency, if any, have been omitted from
the assessment due to the large separation between the equipment and the
NSRs. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
Normal Working Hours: ·
The unmitigated construction noise levels
at the NSR N1 have been predicted and are in the range of 35 - 44 dB(A),
which are below the daytime construction noise criterion of 75 dB(A)
throughout the construction period. It must be noted that a conservative set
of assumptions has been adopted in the analysis. Restricted Hours: ·
The predicted noise levels are within the
ANLs stipulated in GW-TM throughout the restricted hours. |
|
Key Operational Impacts |
·
The most conservative case noise levels at
the NSR N1 during the operational phase of the LNG terminal have been
predicted to be 33 dB(A) which is below the stipulated noise criterion during
daytime and night-time period. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
Construction Phase: ·
The predicted noise levels are low and
below the daytime and night time criteria as a result of the considerable
separation distance plus a hill located between the NSR and the Project. Mitigation measures are not required. Operational Phase: ·
The predicted noise levels are below the
daytime and night time criteria as a result of the considerable separation
distance between the NSR and the Project.
Mitigation measures are not required. |
|
Residual Impacts |
·
No adverse residual construction or operational
noise impact is anticipated. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are
acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 5 and 13 and applicable
assessment standards and criteria. |
Table 15.3 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to water quality as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
Full details of the assessment are presented in Section 6 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.3 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Water Quality
|
- WATER QUALITY- |
|
|
Sensitive Receivers (SRs) |
Fisheries Resources: ·
Spawning/Nursery Grounds: Fisheries Spawning Ground in ·
Artificial Reef Deployment Area: Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau, Airport; and ·
Fish Culture
Zone: Ma Wan. Marine Ecological Resources: ·
Seagrass Beds: Pak Nai; ·
·
Intertidal Mudflats: Pak Nai; ·
Mangroves: Pak Nai; ·
Horseshoe Crab Nursery Grounds: Pak Nai, Sham Wat Wan, Sha Lo Wan, ·
Protection Zone: Chinese White Dolphin Protection Zone in
Mainland Waters; and, ·
Marine Mammal Habitat in NW Lantau. Water Quality SRs: ·
Gazetted Beaches: ·
Non-gazetted Beaches: Lung Kwu Sheung Tan, Lung Kwu Tan;, ·
Seawater Intakes: Black Point Power Station, Castle Peak
Power Station, Tuen Mun Area 38, Airport. |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes |
·
Water quality impacts have been avoided
by positioning the LNG terminal adjacent to the BPPS, hence avoiding the
installation of the subsea pipeline. ·
Potential layouts were examined on
the basis of their potential environmental impacts. In the preferred layout dredging volumes
have been reduced to approximately 3.15 Mm3, thus reducing impacts
to water quality of Black Point. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
The potential impacts due to the
construction and operation of the Project and associated developments were
assessed following the EIAO-TM Annex 6
guidelines and the impacts evaluated based on the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 14. ·
Impacts due to the dispersion of
fine sediment in suspension during the construction of the proposed LNG
terminal and associated facilities have been assessed using computational
modelling. ·
The simulation of operational
impacts on water quality has also been studied by means of computational
modelling. The models have been used
to simulate the effects of cooled water discharges on temperature and water quality
(due to antifoulants). ·
Analysis of EPD routine water
quality data from the years of 1998 to 2004 has been undertaken to determine
the allowable increase in suspended solids concentrations. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
·
Suspended
Sediments (SS): Potential impacts arising from the proposed
dredging or jetting works are predicted to be largely confined to the
specific works areas. The predicted
elevations of suspended sediment concentrations are transient in nature and
not predicted to cause adverse impacts to water quality at the sensitive
receivers. ·
Water
Quality (Dissolved Oxygen, Nutrients, and Heavy Metals): The effects of increased SS concentrations
as a result of the proposed works on levels of dissolved oxygen, biochemical
oxygen demand and nutrients (as unionised ammonia) are predicted to be
minimal. Where such effects exist,
they will be transient, localised in extent and of a small magnitude. ·
Hydrotest
Water: Should hydrotest water, from tanks and
the gas pipeline, be discharged in the vicinity of Black Point, dispersion
would be rapid and concentrations of antifoulants would rapidly
diminish. No adverse impacts to water
quality would, therefore, be expected to occur. ·
Other
Discharges: Wastewater discharges, land based construction
activities, vessel discharges and contaminants are not predicted to cause
unacceptable impacts to the water quality sensitive receivers. |
|
Key Operational Impacts |
·
Hydrodynamics: Modelling results show that the presence of
the reclamation is likely to alter tidal currents and introduces a localised
sheltering effect in the vicinity of the existing intake of the Black Point
Power Station. The impact to the
flushing capacity of the whole ·
Suspended
Sediments: Maintenance
dredging requirement is expected to be required once every five years and
will be restricted to specific areas.
Although increases in suspended solids in the water column may occur,
these would be expected to be compliant with applicable standards, hence, any
associated impacts are expected to be of a relatively low scale, temporary
and localised to the works area. ·
Cooled
Water Discharge: No non-compliance with the WQO has been
predicted. The results indicate that
the dispersion of cooled water is rapid and not expected to cause an
unacceptable impact. ·
Residual
Chlorine Dispersion: Due to the low total residual chlorine
concentration at the outfall (0.3 mg L-1), the small extent of the area affected
(calculated through computational modelling) and the fact that no sensitive
receivers would be affected, no unacceptable impacts from residual chlorine
discharge to water quality are expected to occur. ·
Other
Discharges: On-site
wastewater discharges, vessel discharges, accidental spill of LNG,
contaminated site run-off are not predicted to cause unacceptable impacts to
the water quality sensitive receivers. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
The water quality
modelling works have indicated that the works can proceed at the recommended
working rates without causing unacceptable impacts to water quality sensitive
receivers. In instances where there
are exceedances of the applicable standards, they have been predicted to be
transient and therefore not of concern. Unacceptable
impacts to water quality sensitive receivers have largely been avoided
through the adoption of the following measures: ·
Siting: A number of locations were studied for the
LNG terminal and the associated pipeline, water main and cable routes, with
the principal aim of avoiding direct impacts to sensitive receivers. ·
Reduction in Indirect Impacts: The LNG
terminal and the associated pipeline, water main and cable routes are located
at a sufficient distance from water quality sensitive receivers so that the
dispersion of sediments from the construction works does not affect the
receivers at levels of concern (as defined by the WQO and tolerance
criterion). ·
Adoption of Acceptable Working Rates: The
modelling work has demonstrated that the selected working rates for the
dredging and jetting operations will not cause unacceptable impacts to the
receiving water quality. Aside from these
pro-active measures that have been adopted, a number of operational
constraints and good site practice measures for dredging and construction
run-off are also recommended. |
|
Residual Impacts |
·
No unacceptable residual impacts have
been predicted to occur during the construction phase. Given the immediate dilution of the cooled
water discharges from the terminal outfall and that the limited volume of
sewage generated would be treated on site before being discharged in
accordance with the EPD’s required standards, residual environmental impacts
during the operation phase are not expected. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are
acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 6 and 14 and applicable
assessment standards/criteria. |
Table 15.4 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to waste management as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
The details of the assessment are presented in full in Section 7 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.4 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Waste Management
-
WASTE MANAGEMENT - |
|
|
Assessment
Methodology and Criteria |
The potential environmental impacts associated with the
handling and disposal of waste arising from the construction and operation of
the LNG terminal at Black Point are assessed in accordance with the criteria
presented in Annexes 7 and 15 of the EIAO-TM: ·
Estimation of the types and quantities of
the wastes to be generated; ·
Assessment of the secondary environmental
impacts due to the management of waste with respect to potential hazards, air
and odour emissions, noise, wastewater discharges and traffic; and ·
Assessment of the potential impacts on the
capacity of waste collection, transfer and disposal facilities. |
|
Key Environmental
Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes |
·
Potential
layouts were examined on the basis of their potential environmental
impacts. The resultant layout has a
reduction in dredging volumes which has brought about an overall reduction in
waste management impacts. |
|
Key Construction
Impacts |
The key
potential impacts during the construction phase are related to wastes
generated from site clearance, site formation, blasting, dredging,
reclamation, seawall construction, filling and concreting. ·
It is estimated that a total of
approximate 3.15 Mm3 of marine sediment will be dredged. It is estimated that about 87% of the
sediments are uncontaminated and could be disposed of at open sea disposal
site. About 9% of the sediment will be
disposed of open sea dedicated site.
The remaining 4% will have to be disposed of at the confined marine
disposal site. ·
Other wastes produced during the
construction phase are of small quantity and will be disposed of accordingly
to their nature and relevant regulations, avoiding any potential adverse
impact. |
|
Key Operational
Impacts |
·
Industrial waste, chemical waste, sewage and
general refuse will be produced during the operational phase of the LNG
terminal. The potential environmental
impacts associated with the storage, handling, collection, transport and
disposal of these will meet the criteria specified in the EIAO-TM, thus no unacceptable
operational waste management impact is anticipated. |
|
Key Mitigation
Measures |
·
A number of mitigation measures have been
proposed to avoid or minimize potential adverse environmental impacts
associated with handling, collection and disposal of waste arising from the
construction and operation of the proposed LNG terminal. ·
Proposed measures are based on good
management, control and good site practices. |
|
Residual Impacts |
·
With the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures, in particular the establishment and implementation of
the Waste Management Plan, minimal residual impacts are anticipated from the
construction and operation of the LNG terminal. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are
acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 7 and 15 and applicable
assessment standards/criteria. |
Table 15.5 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to terrestrial ecology as a result of the construction
and operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point. The details of the assessment are presented
in full in Section 8 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.5 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Terrestrial Ecology
|
- TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY - |
|
|
Flora and Fauna of Ecological Interest |
A number of floral
and faunal species of conservation interest have been identified within the
Study Area: ·
Two locally protected plant species,
i.e., Pitcher Plant Nepenthes mirabilis
and Bamboo Orchid Arundina graminifolia,
were recorded in shrubland at the west of the headland. ·
Three bird species of conservation
interest, the Black Kite, ·
Two uncommon (Yellow Pansy and Tailed
Sulphur) and two rare (Spotted Sawtooth and Red Lacewing) butterfly species
were recorded within the Study Area.
None of these butterfly species were sighted within habitats to be
directly affected by the Project. ·
A Lesser Spiny Frog was found in the
seasonal stream, which is a habitat that would not be directly affected by
the Project. A protected snake species
(Burmese Python Python molurus) was
recorded in the drainage channel next to the power station area. ·
A Japanese Pipistrelle, the most common
bat species in |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes |
·
Disturbance to terrestrial ecological
resources of acknowledged conservation significance has been avoided as a
result of the site selection process of the LNG terminal. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
Following a literature review of
available ecological information characterising the Study Area, surveys were
conducted over a period of 6 months to update and field check the validity of
the information gathered in the review and to fill information gaps. ·
All habitats were surveyed for
vegetation, mammals, birds, herpetofauna and aquatic fauna. ·
The potential impacts due to the
construction and operation of the proposed LNG terminal were assessed
following the EIAO-TM Annex 16 guidelines and the impacts
evaluated based on the criteria in EIAO-TM
Annex 8. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
·
Permanent loss (approximately 4.2 ha) and
temporary loss (approximately 0.7 ha) of shrubland due to the construction of
the tanks of the LNG terminal, including a temporary haul road and slope
stabilization. ·
Permanent loss of developed area
(approximately 1 ha) due to the construction of the administrative buildings.
135 m of drainage channel. ·
Need to transplant floral species of
conservation interest (Pitcher Plant and Bamboo Orchid) and of foraging/
feeding habitat for the associated wildlife. ·
Potential loss of foraging and feeding
ground of the associated wildlife. |
|
Key Operational Impacts |
·
Given the generally low level of human
activity required to operate the terminal it is not expected that operational
phase impacts will occur. ·
In the unlikely event of leakage of LNG, the
fire prevention system will be implemented and consequently impacts to the
terrestrial ecological resources through the spread of fire will be
prevented. |
|
Mitigations |
·
The general policy for mitigation of
significant ecological impacts has been addressed on the basis of Annex 16 of the EIAO-TM. · Avoidance: Disturbance to terrestrial ecological
resources of acknowledged conservation significance has been avoided as a
result of the site selection process of the LNG terminal. · Minimisation: The impacts on ecological resources due to
the construction and operation of the LNG terminal are generally expected to
be low and acceptable. The following
appropriate measures will be taken to further reduce impacts to terrestrial
ecological resources: -
Vegetation Loss: The Pitcher Plants and Bamboo Orchids (both
< 10 individuals) recorded within the Project Area will need to be
transplanted to a similar habitat -
Appropriate Construction Practice: Erect fences along the boundary of the
works area before the commencement of works to prevent vehicle movements, and
encroachment of personnel, onto adjacent areas; avoid damage and disturbance
to the remaining and surrounding natural habitats; and reinstate temporarily
affected areas. · Compensation: To compensate for the loss of 4.9 ha of
shrubland for the construction of the terminal, haul road and storage tanks
on the existing shrubland, at least 0.7 ha of shrubland will be planted at
the newly formed slope within the Project Area along with 6 ha of enhancement
shrubland planting. |
|
Residual Impacts |
·
The Project will involve the permanent
loss of approximately 6.4 ha of shrubland.
The affected habitats are considered to be of moderate ecological
value. ·
No adverse residual impact due to the construction
and operation of the LNG terminal is expected after the implementation of the
proposed mitigation measures including provision of 0.7 ha of compensatory
planting and 6 ha of enhancement planting of shrubland, reinstatement of the
temporary haul road and transplantation of Pitcher Plants and Bamboo Orchids. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are
acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 8 and 16 and applicable
assessment standards/criteria. |
Table 15.6 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to marine ecology as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
The details of the assessment are presented in full in Section 9 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.6 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Marine Ecology
|
- MARINE ECOLOGY - |
|
|
Marine Ecology Sensitive Receivers |
The following ecological sensitive
receivers were identified: ·
Habitats of the Indo-pacific
Humpback Dolphin, ·
Seagrass Beds: Pak Nai, ·
·
Intertidal Mudflats, Mangrove and
Horseshoe Crab Nursery Grounds: Pak
Nai, ·
Protection Zone: Chinese White Dolphin Protection Zone in Mainland
Waters. |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes |
·
Disturbance to marine ecologically
sensitive habitats has been avoided as a result of the site/route selection
process of the LNG terminal. ·
Impacts to marine ecology have been
avoided by positioning the LNG terminal adjacent to the BPPS, hence by
avoiding the installation of a submarine pipeline. ·
Potential layouts were examined on
the basis of their potential environmental impacts. In the preferred layout dredging volumes
have been reduced to approximately 4 Mm3, thus reducing impacts to
the marine ecology of Black Point. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
A literature review was
supplemented by detailed all season field surveys for intertidal and subtidal
benthic assemblages, as well as marine mammals (land and vessel based
surveys). ·
The potential impacts due to the
construction and operation of the proposed LNG terminal were assessed
following the EIAO-TM Annex 16 guidelines and the impacts
evaluated based on criteria in EIAO-TM
Annex 8. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
·
Potential construction phase impacts to
marine ecological resources, as well as impacts to marine mammals, may arise
from the permanent loss of marine habitat due to reclamation, disturbances to
benthic habitats in the turning basin and approach channel, or through
changes to key water quality parameters, as a result of the dredging and
reclamation. ·
Impacts arising from the proposed
dredging or jetting works are predicted to be largely confined to the
specific works areas and the predicted elevations of suspended sediment due
to the Project are not predicted to cause large areal exceedances of the
Water Quality Objectives (WQO), adverse impacts to water quality, and hence
marine ecological resources or marine mammals, are not anticipated. ·
Irreversible and permanent loss of 16 ha
of marine mammal habitat of medium ecological value would constitute an
adverse impact of relatively high magnitude.
Given the large areas of higher value
surrounding marine mammal habitat the impact is not considered to be
unacceptable. |
|
Key Operational Impacts |
·
Potential operational phase impacts to
marine ecological resources, as well as impacts to marine mammals, may arise from
the discharge of cooled water (reduction of ambient temperature and discharge
of antifoulants), impingement and entrainment of marine life within the
cooling system. ·
Operational phase adverse impacts to
marine ecological resources are not expected to occur. Unacceptable impacts from discharges of
cooled water and antifoulants are not anticipated to occur as the effects
from these discharges will be localised to the direct vicinity of the
outfall. |
|
Key Mitigation and Precautionary Measuress |
·
Impacts have largely been avoided during
the construction and operation of the Black Point terminal through the
following measures (in accordance with the EIAO-TM): · Avoid Direct Impacts to Ecologically
Sensitive Habitats:
Disturbance to marine ecologically sensitive habitats has been avoided
as a result of the site selection process of the LNG terminal. · Adoption of Acceptable Working Rates: The modelling work has demonstrated that
the selected working rates for the dredging will not cause unacceptable impacts
to the receiving water quality.
Consequently, unacceptable indirect impacts to marine ecological
resources have been avoided. ·
Mitigation measures specific to marine
ecology include the provision of rubble mound/armour rock seawalls on the
edges of the reclamations to facilitate colonisation by intertidal and
subtidal organisms. ·
Specific mitigation measures have been
designed to reduce impacts to the population of marine mammals which include
restrictions on vessel speed, the use of pre-defined and regular routes by
construction traffic,, and the reduction of the impacts to water quality to
acceptable levels (compliance with Water Quality Objectives - WQOs). ·
Additional (precautionary) measures have
been identified to assist the protection of marine mammals such as the
inclusion of an exclusion zone around the marine works areas during marine
percussive piling. ·
The use of bubble curtains may also
attenuate a limited amount of the mid range frequency sound generated during
percussive pile driving. |
|
Residual Impacts |
·
The loss of approximately 600 m of
natural rocky shore/intertidal habitat and approximately 120 m of artificial
shoreline which are of low ecological value.
The residual impact is considered to be acceptable, as the loss will
be compensated by the provision of approx. 1.1 km of sloping rubble
mound/rock or concrete armour seawalls that have been demonstrated to become
recolonised by assemblages of a similar nature after construction; ·
The loss of approx. 16 ha of subtidal
soft bottom assemblages within the reclamation sites. The residual impact is considered to be
acceptable as the habitat is of low ecological concern and relatively small
in size in the context of surrounding similar habitat. ·
The loss of approx. 16 ha of marine
waters within the reclamation sites.
The residual impact is considered to be acceptable as the habitat
forms only a small portion of the extensive home range of affected animals
(typically over 100km2) and will not result in biologically
significant impacts on vital rates or fitness of individual animals.. ·
Maintenance dredging of small specific
areas of the approach channel and turning is expected to be required once
every 4-5 years. Since impact to water
quality is expected to be compliant with current WQO standards, the residual
impact is considered to be acceptable. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the residual impacts
are acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 8 and 16 and applicable
assessment standards/criteria. |
Table 15.7 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to fisheries as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
The details of the assessment are presented in full in Section 10 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.7 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Fisheries
- FISHERIES - |
|
|
Fisheries Sensitive Receivers |
·
Spawning ground of commercial
fisheries resources in north Lantau (2.7 km from the LNG terminal); ·
Oyster Production Area at Pak Nai; ·
Artificial reefs in the |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes/
Environmental Outcomes |
·
Impacts to commercial fisheries
have been avoided by positioning the LNG terminal adjacent to the BPPS, hence
by avoiding the installation of a submarine pipeline. ·
Potential layouts were examined on
the basis of their potential environmental impacts. In the preferred layout dredging volumes
have been reduced to approximately 3 Mm3, thus reducing impacts to
commercial fisheries Black Point. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
A literature review was conducted to
establish the fisheries importance of the area surrounding the proposed ·
The potential impacts due to the
construction and operation of the Project and associated developments were
assessed following the EIAO-TM Annex 17
guidelines and the impacts evaluated based on the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 9. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
·
Potential construction phase impacts to
fisheries may arise from the permanent loss of marine habitat due to
reclamation, disturbances to benthic habitats in the turning basin and
approach channel, or through changes to key water quality parameters, as a
result of the dredging and reclamation.
·
Adult capture fisheries resources are
unlikely to be adversely impacted by the LNG terminal as they will likely avoid
the works areas. Although impacts to
fish fry may occur through the permanent loss of habitat, the small size of
the reclaimed area and the low fisheries and fish fry value of the habitat
lost greatly reduce the significance of the impact to a level that is
acceptable. ·
Impacts arising from the proposed
dredging works are predicted to be largely confined to the specific works
areas and to be temporary in nature.
The predicted elevations of suspended sediment concentrations due to the
Project are not predicted to exceed the assessment criteria over large areas
or at sensitive receivers and they are not expected to cause adverse impacts
to water quality or to any fishing grounds or species of importance to the
fishery. |
|
Key Operational Impacts |
·
Potential operational phase impacts to
fisheries resources may arise from the discharge of cooled water (reduction
of ambient temperature and discharge of antifoulants), impingement and
entrainment of fish and fish eggs within the cooling system. ·
Significant operational phase impacts to fisheries
resources and fishing operations are not expected to occur. Entrainment of fisheries resources will be
reduced through the appropriate design of the intake screens. Unacceptable impacts from discharges of
cooled water are not anticipated to occur as the effects from these
discharges will be localised. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
·
Construction impacts to fisheries
resources and fishing operations have largely been avoided through the
planning and design of the works; in particular those associated with the
backfilling and dredging. The main
works have been designed to control water quality impacts to within
acceptable levels and hence are also expected to control impacts to fisheries
resources. No fisheries-specific
mitigation measures are required during construction. ·
Compliance with the relevant discharge
standards to control water quality impacts to within acceptable levels is
expected to control impacts to fisheries resources during the operational
phase. Furthermore, entrainment of
fisheries resources will be reduced through the appropriate design of the
intake screens on the seawater intake.
No additional fisheries-specific mitigation measures are required
during operation. |
|
Residual Impacts |
·
The identified residual impact occurring
during the construction phase is the permanent loss of approximately 16 ha of
seabed required for the LNG terminal reclamation. ·
The combination of very limited habitat
loss, the small-scale nature of fishing operations and the potential
environmental benefits of the seawall combine to reduce the magnitude of this
residual impact to within acceptable levels.
|
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are
acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 9 and 17 and applicable
assessment standards/criteria. |
15.9
Landscape and
Visual Impact
Table 15.8 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to the landscape and visual environment as a result of the
construction and operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point. The details of the assessment are presented
in full in Section 11 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.8 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Landscape & Visual
- LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL - |
|
|
Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSRs), Landscape Resources (LRs) and Landscape Character Areas (LCAs) |
·
Public Areas (VSR1 and VSR6); ·
Road Network; (VSR3, 4 and 5); these
include views seen by visitors and the local community when traversing though
roads. ·
Ocean viewpoints (VSR 2); these include
views seen by people on ferries and local boats • It must be noted that there are no views
from villages ·
Plantation (LR1), shrubland (LR2),
shrubby grassland (LR3), stream / channel (LR4), developed area (LR5), rocky
shoreline (LR6), power station edge (LR7) ·
Black Point coastal uplands (LCA1), Black
Point industrial urban landscape (LCA2), offshore waters landscape (LCA3),
inshore waters landscape (LCA4). |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided / Environmental Outcomes |
·
Sensitive VSRs have been avoided by
choosing a location for the LNG terminal away from densely populated areas. ·
In the selected
layout, the positioning of the tanks has been identified to avoid significant
visual impacts. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
The methodology of the LVIA is based on Annexes 10 and 18 in the EIAO-TM)
under the EIA Ordinance (Cap.499,
S16) and applicable guidance notes. ·
The landscape assessment considers the
impact of the proposed development on the existing landscape and particularly
on the landscape character units within 500 m of the development site. ·
The visual assessment analyses the impact
of the proposed development on the existing views and the visual amenity,
particularly from the Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSR) within the viewshed.
·
In order to illustrate the visual impacts
of the proposed LNG Terminal, photomontages prepared from selected viewpoints
compare the existing conditions with the view after construction. The residual impacts are evaluated
qualitatively, in accordance with the requirements of Annex 10 of the EIAO-TM. |
|
Key Outcomes |
·
The installation of the LNG terminal will
have a slight overall residual negative impact on the existing Landscape
Character of Black Point, particularly the hill slope area. ·
As most of the Visually Sensitive
Receivers (VSRs) within 1260m are located in ocean areas, the impact is
greatly reduced as all visitors will experience this impact from marine
vessels. No VSRs located in residential areas, on public roads, or in
publicly accessible lookouts or Country Parks will experience this impact on
the Landscape Character. ·
The LNG terminal will have the potential
to result in: significant landscape impacts on rocky shoreline; moderate
landscape impacts on shrubland and stream / channel; slight/moderate
landscape impacts on power station edge; slight landscape impacts on
developed areas; and negligible landscape impacts on plantation and shrubby
grassland. ·
There will be moderate significant
impacts on the existing Landscape Character of Black Point.
The LNG will result in medium – significant impact on offshore waters,
medium impacts on upland coastal areas, low impacts on industrial urban
landscape and negligible impact on inshore waters. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
·
The analysis
has shown that from nearly all of the VSRs there will be a low or negligible
visual impact. However for those few
VSRs that may experience an impact, the following Visual Mitigation Measures
(VMM’s) are proposed: ·
VMM 1 Design of Structures: Where possible, building
structures will utilise appropriate design to complement the surrounding landscape.
Materials and finishes will be considered during detailed design. ·
VMM 2 Colours: Colours for the terminal can be used to
complement the surrounding area to the extent possible. Colours such as shades of light grey, and
light brown may be utilised to reduce the visibility of the terminal where
technically feasible. ·
VMM 3 Plantings: Appropriate plantings will be
installed where possible, to help integrate the new structures into the
surrounding landscape. ·
To reduce the
potential impacts on the existing Landscape Resources and provide a potential
enhancement of the existing landscape quality, Landscape Mitigation Measures
(LMM) are proposed and will be installed progressively throughout the
construction of the LNG terminal in accordance with future Landscape
Specification and relevant best practice guidelines: ·
LMM 1 –
Cultivation of areas compacted during construction. Areas compacted during the construction phase that are
not required during the operations phase, are to be cultivated to a depth of
up to 300mm in accordance with the future Landscape Specification. ·
LMM 2 – Soil
stabilisation and embankment planting. During the design process a soil stabilisation and embankment
planting strategy will be developed to ensure that all land affected by slope
excavation can be replanted. All soil
preparation and the selection and provision of suitable growing medium will
be completed in accordance with the relevant best practice guidelines. ·
LMM 3 – Tree
and shrub planting. Planting of
trees and shrubs is to be carried out in accordance with the Landscape
Details and the relevant best practice guidelines. Plant densities will be provided in future
detailed design documents and will be selected so as to achieve a finished
landscape that matches the surrounding, undisturbed, equivalent landscape
types. ·
LMM4 –
Utilising natural rock for reclamation. The reclamation areas shall utilise natural rocks for the engineered
sea-walls. ·
LMM5 – Cut Stabilisation. Areas of cut to be stabilised for
operational requirements. Materials and finishes of stabilisation to be
selected to complement the surrounding landscape where technically feasible.
This includes the addition of pigments and aggregates in the finished slope
that complement the existing geology of the area. ·
LMM6 – Bench
Plantings. Cut Slopes to have benches
created to allow for plantings. Plantings will include Shrubs and climbers to
minimise the visual impact of the slope and mitigate impact on vegetation. ·
LMM7 – Early
Planting Works. Where technically feasible, new
plantings are to be installed during the construction works. ·
LMM8 – Site
hoardings to be compatible with the surrounding environment. Where possible site hoardings to be coloured to complement
the surrounding areas. Colours such as green and light brown are recommended.
|
|
Residual Impacts |
·
The proposed LNG terminal would be only
visible from limited viewpoints, including the small number of visitors on
the remote ·
Potential glare and lighting impacts will
be low due to the distances between the site and VSRs and careful lighting
selection and placement. ·
There will be an impact on the landscape character
of Black Point (i.e. loss of shrubland), however this is considered
acceptable. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are
acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 10 and 18 and applicable
assessment standards/criteria. |
Table 15.9 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to cultural heritage as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
The details of the assessment are presented in full in Section 12 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.9 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Cultural Heritage
|
- CULTURAL HERITAGE - |
|
|
Sensitive Receivers |
Three terrestrial
sites of cultural heritage importance have been identified: ·
Two building structures at Terrace
1; ·
A WWII cave at Terrace 2; and ·
A stone structure at Terrace 3. |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided /
Environmental Outcomes |
·
None specific. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
The study methodology follows the
criteria and guidelines as stated in Annexes
10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM and the criteria for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment (CHIA)
and Guidelines for Marine Archaeological
Investigation (MAI) as stated EIA
Study Brief No. ESB-126/2005. ·
The baseline study included a
desktop literature review and field surveys, namely: Historical Buildings and Features Survey,
Terrestrial Archaeological Survey and a Marine Archaeological Investigation. |
|
Key Impacts |
·
No ·
Direct loss of
two building structures at Terrace 1, a WWII cave at Terrace 2 and a stone
structure at Terrace 3 is expected due to the site formation works for the
development within the Project Boundary.
As these features are considered to have low heritage value, their
loss is acceptable and no impact is expected. ·
One potential
marine archaeological site (SC086) was identified from a review of geophysical
data and magnetometer data review. A
ROV survey and further detailed side scan sonar and multi beam survey was
undertaken to inspect the nature and age of the site. The surveys indicated that SC086 is a
motorized sampan. It is, therefore,
considered to have no archaeological value.
Since no marine archaeological resources were identified within the
marine area of the proposed development, no impact is expected. |
|
Mitigations |
Terrestrial
Cultural Heritage Resources: ·
A photographic and cartographic recording
of the two building structures at Terrace 1, of the WWII cave at Terrace 2
and the stone structure at Terrace 3 will be undertaken following AMO’s
requirements. Marine
Archaeological Resources: ·
As no marine archaeological interest
sites have been identified, no impact is expected and thus no mitigation
measures are considered necessary |
|
Residual Impacts |
·
With the implementation of the mitigation
measures, no residual impact is expected.
|
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the residual impacts
are acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM
Annexes 10 and 19 and
applicable assessment standards and criteria. |
15.11
Quantitative Risk
- Marine
Table 15.10 presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to quantitative risk as a result of the marine transit of
the LNG carrier to the LNG terminal at Black Point. The details of the assessment are presented
in full in the Black Point and South Soko
LNG Terminal Marine Quantitative Risk Assessment - MQRA (DNV, 2006).
Table 15.10 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Quantitative Risk –Marine
- QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT –MARINE - |
|
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
The MQRA calculated the risks from
potential carrier-related incidents to the land-based and transient marine
human populations along the carrier route. ·
The methodology involved four main
components: quantitative risk assessment, release frequency calculation,
consequence assessment, and risk assessment. |
|
Key Environmental Problems Avoided /
Environmental Outcomes |
·
The jetty, approach channel and turning
basin have been located sufficiently far away from vessel fairways to avoid interference
and additional risk potentially caused by existing shipping activities. |
|
Key Outcomes |
·
The results of the Marine Quantitative
Risk Assessment of the LNG terminal at Black Point indicated that the
individual risk for marine transit is acceptable whilst the societal risk of
the marine transit is As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) for some areas
of the marine transit as set out in HKSARG risk guidelines presented in Annex 4 of the EIAO TM. Access to Black
Point site today requires marine transit through busy harbour traffic, and
along densely populated areas, of: ·
·
Ma Wan Island and ·
New Territories; Shame Tseng, Tsing Lung
Tau, Gold Coast, Tuen Mun. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
·
Measures to mitigate the marine societal
risk through these areas from ALARP to Acceptable are not considered to be
implementable at this time by the relevant Authority due to their impact on
other marine traffic in the busy |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are in
compliance with the EIAO-TM Annex 4. |
15.12
Quantitative Risk - Terminal
Table 15.11presents a summary of the findings of the
assessment of impacts to quantitative risk as a result of the construction and
operation of the LNG terminal at Black Point.
The details of the assessment are presented in full in Section 13 of this EIA Report.
Table 15.11 Summary
of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Quantitative Risk - Terminal
- QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT - TERMINAL |
|
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
Relevant data on the proposed
facilities such as their preliminary layout drawings and design basis as well
as population data in the vicinity were collected and reviewed. ·
Quantitative Risk Study was
conducted to identify risks, both generic and site specific risks. Review of
literature and accident databases were also undertaken. These formed the
basis for identifying credible scenarios for the HA Study. ·
The frequencies, or the likelihood,
of the various outcomes resulting from an LNG/gas release scenario were
derived from historical databases and, where necessary, these were modified
to take into account local factors. ·
The consequences of each release
were modelled using the PHAST consequence modelling package developed by Det
Norske Veritas, Inc. (DNV). ·
The consequence and frequency data
were subsequently combined using ERM’s proprietary software RiskplotTM
to produce the required risk calculations. ·
The results from the risk assessment
were compared with the HKRG and, mitigation measures identified and assessed
where appropriate. ·
The HA study includes all planned
facilities at the site, unloading operations at the jetty, LNG storage tanks,
sendout pumps, LNG vaporisers and the boil-off gas system. |
|
Key Problems Avoided |
·
The LNG terminal has been located in a
remote location avoiding densely populated areas. The closest villages are located at Lung
Kwu Sheung Tan (approximately 2 km from the site) where the population is approx.
1,800. The closest developments to the
site, other than BPPS, are small scale industrial complexes at Lung Kwu
Sheung Tan. |
|
Key Outcomes |
·
The results indicate that the societal
risks from the LNG terminal at Black Point are within the Acceptable Region
of the HK EIAO-TM. The individual
risks also meet the requirements of the HKRG. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
·
The assessment and the impacts are in
compliance with the EIAO-TM Annex 4 |