2.1.1.1 The Project is to construct and operate a modern Integrated Waste Management Facilities (IWMF) for managing municipal solid waste (MSW) under a design-build-operate (DBO) contract arrangement. The IWMF comprises: (a) an advanced thermal incineration plant with design capacity of 3,000 tonnes per day (tpd) and (b) a mechanical sorting and recycling plant with design capacity of 200 tpd. The non-recyclables sorted from the mechanical plant will be sent to the thermal incineration plant for further treatment. Under any conditions, the total MSW feeding to the thermal incineration plant and the mechanical plant will not exceed 3,000 tpd.
2.1.1.2
Over the past years, the
quantity of MSW generated in
2.1.1.3 Compared with other major cities in the world that have diverse means of disposing of waste, Hong Kong relies solely on three strategic landfills, including the South East New Territories (SENT) Landfill, the North East New Territories (NENT) Landfill and the West New Territories (WENT) Landfill for the disposal of its MSW. Consequently, the three strategic landfills are now projected to approach their capacities in 2014, 2016 and 2018 respectively; hence there is a pressing need for adoption of advanced waste treatment technologies to reduce unavoidable MSW volumes so as to extend the life span of the strategic landfills and their future extensions.
2.1.1.4 To address this imminent waste problem in a holistic manner, the Government has reviewed the action agenda outlined in the “Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014)” (the Policy Framework) published in 2005 against the latest development in January 2011. To ensure solid waste can continue to be handled properly without causing environmental problems, the Government will:
(a) revise upward the MSW recovery target to 55% by 2015 by stepping up publicity and promotional efforts on waste reduction and recycling;
(b) expedite legislative proposals to introduce new Producer Responsibility Scheme (PRS) and extend current PRS to encourage waste reduction;
(c) engage the public in continued discussions on possible options to introduce MSW charging as a direct economic disincentive to reduce waste at source; and
(d) seek funding approval from the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council (LegCo) in early 2012 so that advanced waste treatment facilities (including an IWMF with a treatment capacity of 3,000 tonnes of MSW daily, two organic waste treatment facilities with total capacity of 500 tonnes of food/ organic waste daily), and extension to the existing landfills will be commissioned in time to ensure continual and more sustainable management of solid waste.
2.1.1.5
2.1.1.6 There are a number of benefits with the implementation of the first IWMF, including:
· Substantial Bulk Reduction for Landfill Disposal - The amount of MSW to be disposed of at landfills will substantially decrease as the volume of waste remained after the thermal treatment process would only be about 10% of the original volume. Hence, the existing landfills and their extensions can serve for a longer period of time.
· Energy Recovery - The IWMF could generate and export electricity for gainful uses by the community.
·
Greenhouse Gas Reduction - The
production of greenhouse gases due to landfilling of MSW will be reduced. The
IWMF will also generate and export electricity for the community’s gainful uses
thus replacing fossil fuel use for power generation, leading to overall
reduction of greenhouse gas emission in
2.2.1 Identification of Potential Sites
2.2.1.1 A site search exercise was conducted in 2008 under the study Site Search for Integrated Waste Management Facilities in Hong Kong for Municipal Solid Waste to identify the potential sites for the development of the IWMF. The Legislative Council, the Tuen Mun and Islands District Councils and the Advisory Council on the Environment were briefed on the findings of the site search in 2008.
2.2.1.2 The Government formed an Advisory Group (AG) and five AG sub-groups comprising 24 non-official members from the professional bodies, green groups, academic and business sectors. Based on the recommendations from the Advisory Group on Waste Management Facilities, the following 23 types of areas were excluded from the preliminary search for potential sites:
· All areas for Residential and Commercial Use;
· All 23 existing or potential Country Parks;
·
All existing or potential
· All Special Areas (outside Country Parks);
· All Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) (including buffer areas);
· All Restricted Areas (Wildlife);
· The RAMSAR Site (including buffer area);
·
All Green Belt (GB) and Urban
· All Conservation Areas (CA);
· All Coastal Protection Areas (CPA);
· All Water Gathering Grounds;
· All Wetlands Areas;
· All Fish Culture Zones;
· All Proposed Fisheries Protection Areas;
· All Gazetted Beaches;
· All Declared Monuments, Graded Historical Buildings and Structures, Deemed Monuments and Archaeological Sites;
· All Cemeteries, Burial Grounds or Grave Zones;
· All Fairways and Shipping Lanes and Port Areas;
·
All Airports and Restricted
Areas around them (including the
· All Tunnels and Roads, existing and proposed Railways;
·
All Other Major Infrastructure
(including
· All Major Tourism Development Areas; and
· All Priority Sites for Enhanced Conservation promulgated under the New Nature Conservation Policy.
2.2.1.3
Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the
existing or potential
2.2.1.4
2.2.1.5 Apart from the above recommendations of the AG, the following factors were also taken into account in identifying the potential sites:
· The IWMF should be located in areas compatible with neighbouring activities;
· It should have marine access; and
·
It should be less exposed to
waves or typhoons in case outlying islands are chosen.
2.2.1.6
The islands in Sai Kung (e.g. Kau
Sai Chau,
2.2.1.7 The above has resulted in forming an initial list of 21 sites, comprising of 13 closed landfills as follows:
Outlying
·
Ex-Lamma Quarry,
·
· Siu Ho Wan;
·
Ha Mei Wan,
Large Scale
Artificial
· Eastern Waters;
· Lamma South West;
·
· South Cheung Chau;
· South East Offshore;
· Tai Long Wan Offshore.
Other Regions
· Ha Pak Nai;
· NENT Landfill Extension B;
· Nim Wan;
·
·
· Tseung Kwan O Area 137;
· Tuen Mun Area 38;
·
· WENT Landfill Extension A;
· WENT Landfill Extension B;
· Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons.
2.2.1.8 The initial list of potential sites was then subject to further consideration with respect to their site characteristics, latest development status, prevailing wind directions and the dominant environmental conditions to form a site proposal.
2.2.1.9 All the 13 closed landfill sites were considered not suitable due to the lack of large flat platforms, unstable foundations and commitment to other uses.
2.2.1.10 Under the study of “Extension of Existing Landfills and Identification of Potential New Waste Disposal Sites”, some sites were identified and assessed for the feasibility to be developed as large scale artificial islands for landfill purpose. These large scale artificial islands could be the potential locations for the development of the IWMF. However, since these sites were not selected for the development of new landfills, the development of the IWMF at these sites were not considered.
2.2.1.11
For the remaining sites,
commitments have been made to reserve some of them for other developments (e.g.
Siu Ho Wan for Organic Waste Treatment
Facilities and
2.2.1.12 As a result, eight potential sites (as shown in Figure 2.2) were shortlisted as follows:
· S1 - Tseung Kwan O Area 137
·
S2 - Ex-Lamma Quarry,
·
S3 - Ha Mei Wan,
·
S4 - Artificial
· S5 - Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons
· S6 - Tuen Mun Area 38
· S7 - Ha Pak Nai
·
S8 -
2.2.1.13
With due consideration of site
availability, land use, traffic, environmental, social and other relevant
aspects, it was concluded that the last two of the above sites, Ha Pak Nai (S7)
and Tuen Mun Port (S8), be
dropped from further consideration. The reasons for dropping the Ha Pak Nai
site are that it is located
at the ecologically sensitive coastal area at
2.2.1.14 The remaining six sites were the shortlisted sites for further site selection assessment.
2.2.2.1 The six shortlisted sites were further evaluated based on the following criteria. They were grouped into the following 5 main categories:
Environmental
· Air Quality
· Noise
· Visual and Landscape
· Terrestrial Ecology
· Drainage, Water Quality, Marine Ecology & Fisheries
· Hazard to Life
Engineering / Technical
· Ease of Integration with Existing or Planned MSW Infrastructure
· Site Access
· Constraints to Site Layout
· Utilities
· Construction Duration
· Construction Risk
· Operational Risk
Economics
· Capital Cost
· Operating Cost
·
Social
· Land Use
· Land Ownership
· Traffic Impact
Consumer & User
· Community Impacts
2.2.3 Evaluation of Shortlisted Sites
S1 - Tseung Kwan O Area 137
2.2.3.1 The proposed site is located at the southwest edge of Area 137 reclamation near Tit Cham Chau in Tseung Kwan O. It has been reserved for the use of “Potentially Hazardous Installations (PHIs)”.
2.2.3.2
This site is currently the only
available site in
2.2.3.3
In addition, as the site is
directly facing Siu Sai Wan, Chai Wan, and Heng Fa Chuen on the eastern side of
S2 - Ex-Lamma
Quarry,
2.2.3.4
The proposed site is located at
the ex-Lamma Quarry at the northeast side of the island. It is directly facing
a popular tourist spot, Sok Kwu Wan where seafood restaurants and a mariculture
zone exist, and is in proximity to various indigenous villages such as Luk Chau
village. The overall planning intention for
2.2.3.5
The IWMF development would be
incompatible with the planning intention of the remaining portion of the
ex-Lamma Quarry site which is proposed for tourism and recreation purposes, and
the adjoining “Comprehensive Development Area” (CDA) site which is planned for
comprehensive low-rise residential development. The Planning and Development
Study on Hong Kong Island South and
2.2.3.6
As the site is directly facing
Wah Fu,
S3 - Ha Mei Wan,
Lamma Island
2.2.3.7
The proposed site is an
artificial island to be reclaimed at the west end of
2.2.3.8
Like the Ex-Lamma Quarry site,
should the IWMF be built here, it would cause significant visual impact on the
substantial population residing in Wah Fu,
S4 - Artificial
2.2.3.9
The site is to be formed by
reclamation at the south-western side of the Shek Kwu Chau which is located to
the south of Chi Ma Wan Peninsula of Lantau
· It is located far from any major population clusters. There is only a very light population of about 300 persons living in a rehabilitation centre managed by the Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drugs Addicts (SARDA). As such, any visual impact could be insignificant due to the small number of sensitive receivers.
· Regarding air quality impact, the only major air sensitive receivers are residents in Cheung Chau, however the impact should be minimal meeting the air quality requirements. Moreover, the residents in Cheung Chau are not located at the prevailing downwind direction. Since no other emission sources exist in the nearby areas, there are no concerns on the cumulative air quality impact.
· Due to its relatively central location with respect to the refuse transfer stations throughout Hong Kong Island and the outlying islands, the aggregate refuse vessel transfer trip length associated with an IWMF at the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau would be less than the existing operation of refuse transfer to the WENT Landfill. This would offer more environmental and cost-effective marine transportation over reasonable trip length without undue impact on the marine traffic.
· Since the proposed IWMF would be developed on reclaimed land without encroachment onto the existing island, impacts on the terrestrial habitat on the existing island would be minimal.
2.2.3.10 However, the construction of an IWMF on this site would involve reclamation which might affect the natural coastline, statutory gazetting procedures, and installation of power lines and the utilities, which might impact on the natural landscape and would result in longer construction time, higher cost and the development time table may be subject to greater uncertainty due to more complex technical requirements and statutory procedures. There are also some concerns:
· The nearby marine area is a fish spawning and nursery ground, where Chinese White Dolphin and Finless Porpoise have been sighted.
· The compatibility of the IWMF with the adjacent rehabilitation centre will need to be carefully studied.
S5 - Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons
2.2.3.11
The Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons are
situated at the northwest
· Being located right next to the WENT Landfill, the site has an operational advantage of sharing the existing infrastructures (e.g. berthing facilities and waste container storage area etc.) and efficient disposal of the ash residues generated by the IWMF to the WENT Landfill. Because of the above synergy effect, the IWMF could occupy a smaller site area, thus translating into both land and cost saving.
· It is also close to the existing power plant. Surplus energy generated from the IWMF can easily be connected to the power grid.
· Unlike the island options, both marine and land transport of waste and ash are possible, and no reclamation is required.
·
As there are no major population
clusters in the vicinity, the IWMF should not have significant visual impact on
the immediate local community.
2.2.3.12 Regarding air quality impact, preliminary assessment has found that the cumulative air quality impact arising from the IWMF and the existing and proposed emission sources nearby, such as the Black Point and Castle Peak Power Stations, as well as the proposed Sludge Treatment Facilities etc. on the nearby sensitive air receivers should meet the air quality requirements. Detailed assessment would need to be carried out to confirm the cumulative air quality impact should this site be selected for the IWMF development.
S6 - Tuen Mun Area 38
2.2.3.13
The site is located in an
industrial setting adjacent to the EcoPark and is not far from the WENT
Landfill. It is in close proximity to the air sensitive receivers at Tuen Mun
New Town, in particular the
2.2.3.14 Another major constraint of this site is its relatively small size. The site in question is currently reserved for another waste management facility and is only about 5.75 hectares, which is not enough to accommodate an IWMF of capacity of 3,000 tpd and of around 10 hectares. Even if developing the IWMF alone, additional land would need to be acquired from the nearby sites. However, other areas in Tuen Mun Area 38 have been planned for other land intensive facilities including EcoPark, construction and demolition handling facilities and permanent aviation fuel facility, etc. such that there is no surplus land available. In addition, transfer of waste to this site by marine vessels will be constrained. This is because there is limited space for the development of berthing facilities along the waterfront in Tuen Mun Area 38 as the waterfront area has already been reserved to meet the operational requirements of other planned uses.
2.2.4.1 The outcomes of the assessment indicated that the Tseung Kwan O Area 137 (S1), Ex-Lamma Quarry, Lamma Island (S2), Ha Mei Wan, Lamma Island (S3) and Tuen Mun Area 38 (S6) had some major constraints and were not recommended for further engineering and EIA studies.
2.2.4.2 An artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau (S4) and Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons (S5) are worth taking forward for detailed studies and further consideration as potential sites for the IWMF. From an air quality aspect, the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau is comparatively more favourable. However, its potential impacts on the natural coastal landscape, marine ecology, water quality, and fishery would need further study and detailed assessment. In addition, the compatibility of the IWMF with the adjacent rehabilitation centre would need to be reviewed and carefully considered. Regarding the Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons site, it has relative overall merits because of the ease of integration with the existing landfill and waste reception facilities, much less impact on local ecology, shorter construction time, and lower construction cost. However, the cumulative air quality impact on the air sensitive receivers would still need to be carefully and thoroughly studied and assessed to confirm its acceptability.
2.3.1 Identification of Potential Technologies
2.3.1.1
To identify suitable MSW
treatment technologies, the Government conducted an Expression of Interest
(EoI) exercise in
2.3.1.2 Based on the AG’s recommendations, a review of the latest development of the moving grate, fluidized-bed, rotary kiln incineration technologies, eco-co-combustion system, gasification, plasma gasification and pyrolysis technologies was conducted in 2009 under this Study. It reconfirmed the recommendations of the EoI exercise, including:
· Incineration technology (i.e., moving grate incineration technology) could play a core role in the IWMF for MSW treatment;
· The key issues of the eco-co-combustion including its technical feasibility, environmental performance, proprietary/ monopoly issue and long-term commercial viability have still not been satisfactorily solved; and
· Application of the plasma gasification and pyrolysis technologies for untreated MSW treatment is still limited and are of small-scale. These technologies are not able to meet the criteria in the EoI exercise for forming the core technology of the IWMF for treating 3,000 tpd of mixed MSW.
2.3.1.3 Although no proposal on rotary kiln incineration technology was received during the EoI exercise in 2002, a review of its latest development was also carried out in 2009 under this Study because of the reported application for MSW treatment. The review results indicate that most of the rotary kiln incineration systems installed are used for sludge, industrial or hazardous waste treatment; whereas their applications for MSW treatment are uncommon and limited to relatively small scale, and therefore is not well proven for the IWMF. Hence, rotary kiln incineration technologies, eco-co-combustion system, plasma gasification and pyrolysis technologies have not been included for further evaluation.
2.3.1.4 There may be development in the fluidized-bed incineration technology and gasification technology since the EoI exercise in 2002, which may prove them to be as effective as the moving grate incineration technology for mixed MSW treatment. Therefore, these two technologies were further comparatively evaluated with the moving grate incineration technology in order to select the most suitable core technology for the IWMF.
2.3.2 Technology Evaluation Criteria
2.3.2.1 The three thermal treatment technologies, including moving grate incineration, fluidized-bed incineration and gasification technologies are evaluated based on the criteria shown in Table 2.1 below.
Table 2.1 Criteria for Selection of Thermal Treatment Technology
|
Main Criteria |
Sub-criteria |
Assessment
Measures |
|
Environmental
Factor |
Air Emission |
The volume of flue gas produced from the furnaces required for
treatment and the amount of gas pollutants generated. |
|
Engineering
Factors |
Flexibility |
Are there any
special requirements on the quality of feedstock? How capable is the process of adapting to short term and long term
variations in the characteristics of the input waste? |
|
Electricity Production Efficiency |
- |
|
|
Reliability |
What is the maximum demonstrated capacity of a fully commercial plant?
What is the scale
up risk? The numbers of suppliers which can provide the system for MSW
treatment. |
|
|
Land Requirement |
Footprint of the process, which refers to number of incineration/
gasification unit required for treating 3,000 tpd of MSW. |
|
|
Operating Experience for Mixed MSW Treatment |
How long have the incineration/ gasification systems been adopted for
MSW treatment? |
|
|
Costs |
Capital Cost and Operating Costs |
- |
2.3.2.2 The selection criteria focus on the environmental, engineering and cost considerations. Other considerations, such as visual impacts, employment opportunities and public acceptance, for moving grate incineration, fluidized bed incineration and gasification are considered to be almost the same since all these treatment technologies are thermal treatment technologies. Public health is also not compared since the most advanced flue gas treatment system will be adopted for all the three technologies to meet the most stringent air quality standards in the world. Thus, all the three technologies should pose very low or insignificant risk to public health.
2.3.3 Evaluation of Thermal Treatment Technologies
2.3.3.1 Table 2.2 summarizes the option evaluation for the three thermal treatment technologies based on a qualitative assessment of the criteria.
Table 2.2 Summary of Option Evaluation for Thermal Treatment Technologies(1)
|
Criteria |
Moving
Grate Incineration |
Fluidized-bed
Incineration |
Gasification |
|||
|
Environmental
Factors |
||||||
|
Air Emission(2) |
Medium |
△ |
High |
X |
Low |
O |
|
Engineering
Factors |
||||||
|
Flexibility(3) |
High |
O |
Low |
X |
Low |
X |
|
Electricity Production Efficiency |
Medium |
△ |
Medium |
△ |
Medium to High(7) |
△/O |
|
Reliability - Unit
Capacity |
10-920 tpd |
O |
10-80 tpd |
X |
20-150 tpd |
△ |
|
Reliability - Plant
Capacity |
20-4,300 tpd |
10-200 tpd |
30-405 tpd |
|||
|
Reliability - Key
Suppliers for Mixed MSW Treatment(4) |
Many, including B&W Volund, CNIM,
Fisia, Inova |
Limited, including |
Limited, including Ebara(5), |
|||
|
Land Requirements and
System Complexity(6) |
Low |
O |
Large |
X |
Large |
X |
|
Operating Experience for Mixed MSW Treatment |
Longest track
record |
O |
Limited Experience |
△ |
Limited Experience |
△ |
|
Cost
Factors |
||||||
|
Capital Costs |
Low |
O |
High |
X |
High |
X |
|
Operation Costs |
Low |
O |
High |
X |
High |
X |
|
Overall |
Most Favorable |
Least Favorable |
Less Favorable |
|||
Note:
(1) O, △and X represent the most favourable, medium favourable and the least favourable to the IWMF, respectively. Please note that the ranking shown in each criterion represents comparative rather than absolute ranking.
(2) Air emission criterion refers to the volume of flue gas produced from the furnaces required for treatment and the amount of the air pollutant generated.
(3) Flexibility refers to the applicability of the technology for MSW treatment and the ability to tolerate a fluctuation of the MSW characteristics.
(4) B&W Volund, CNIM, Ebara, Fisia, Hitachi, IET, JFE, Kawasaki, Lentjes, Seghers, Lurgi, Mitsubishi, Nippon Steel, and Takuma refer to Babcock & Wilcox Volund, CHIM/Martin, Ebara Corporation, Fisia Babcock Environment GmbH, Hitachi Zosen, IET Energy, JFE Engineering Corporation, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd, Lentjes UK Limited, Képpel Seghers, Lurgi Envirotherm GMBH, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd., Nippon Steel Engineering, and Takuma Co. Ltd, respectively.
(5) The systems are incorporated with ash melting systems.
(6) Land requirement and complexities are compared based on the number of the incineration/ gasification units required for treating 3,000 tpd of mixed MSW.
(7) Electricity production efficiency of gasification is ranked as high if a more efficient approach for converting the chemical energy in syngas to electrical energy is used such as combustion of the syngas after cleaning in a more efficient internal combustion engine or combustion of the syngas after significant cleaning in a gas turbine with further energy recovery though raising steam and generating power in a steam tubine. If the sygnas is combusted in a close coupled combustion chamber, there is no real energy benefits since the electrical energy would be generated from a steam turbine generator similar to conventional incineration plants.
2.3.3.2 As shown in Table 2.2, moving grate incineration is more favorable to be adopted as a core technology of the IWMF for treating 3,000 tpd of mixed MSW. The advantages of moving grate incineration over the gasification and fluidized-bed incineration technologies in terms of reliability, operating experience, flexibility, land requirements, and capital and operating costs are summarized as follows:
· It is the only thermal technology which has been adopted for treating over 3,000 tpd of mixed MSW, whereas fluidized bed incineration and gasification technologies for mixed MSW treatment are of much smaller scale;
· It has the least scale-up risks, whereas the other two will suffer higher scale-up risk when being adopted in the IWMF for mixed MSW treatment;
· It has the longest track record of operation (over 100 years of operation experience), whereas the other two have little or limited track record for mixed MSW treatment;
· It shows the highest capability to tolerate the fluctuation of MSW characteristics with robust/ forgiving nature when handling mixed MSW, whereas the other two are less robust and usually require pretreatment of MSW;
· It requires the least land area for the treatment units, whereas the other two have larger land requirement because of the requirement of more treatment units;
· It possess over 10 suppliers and thereby ensure adequate tender competition, whereas there are 5 – 6 suppliers of gasification/ fluidized bed technologies and a key gasification supplier is retreating from the MSW market;
·
There is a concern for
operation failure of the gasification technology due to unpleasant experience
in
· It possesses the least operation complexity in comparison to fluidized bed incineration and gasification technologies; and
· It requires the least capital and operating costs in comparison to fluidized bed incineration and gasification technologies.
2.3.3.3 Theoretically, gasification technology generates less volume of flue gas and less amount of gas pollutants than the incineration technologies. Since gasification requires just a fraction of the stoichiometric amount of oxygen, the volume of process gas flow is smaller. It is however important to note that the quantity of air emission is not the dominating factor. By applying necessary flue gas treatment systems, the quality of air emissions from the moving grate incineration system can be regulated to meet the most stringent international air emission standards.
2.3.3.4 While extensive information on the types and levels of pollutants generated from incineration is available, there is very little published data on emissions from full-scale gasification process. If available, much of the published data for gasification process is from small scale or pilot operations. Hence comparison of the types and levels of flue gas pollutants generated by different types of thermal treatment technologies based on currently available data is rather difficult, bearing in mind also that a meaningful comparison could only be made provided that the different technologies treated similar type of wastes and employed similar energy recovery system.
2.3.3.5 It was recommended in the EoI exercise that incineration could play a key role in the overall IWMF strategy since it had a favorable treatment cost and was the most cost-effective technology to divert MSW from landfills amongst the other strategy options. Land requirement of incineration is also low. The evaluation result arrives at the same conclusion as the EoI exercise, whereby moving grate incineration technology is the most suitable technology for the IWMF in terms of environmental, engineering and cost factors. It is therefore recommended to adopt moving grate incineration as the core technology for the IWMF for treating of 3,000 tpd of mixed MSW.
2.3.3.6 At the Meeting of Advisory Council on the Environment (ACE) held on 14 December 2009, the Council discussed the findings of the technology review and had no objection to employing moving grate incineration technology as the core thermal treatment technology for the development of the IWMF.
2.3.4 Evaluation of Sorting and Recycling Technologies
2.3.4.1 As highlighted in the EoI exercise, mechanical-biological treatment (MBT) was considered to be a potential sorting and recycling technology to be adopted in the IWMF than the other technologies. This was because MBT could potentially recover both materials and energy from the mixed MSW, whereas the others could only recover recyclables. Due to its ineffectiveness in waste volume reduction and requirement of relatively large footprint than thermal treatment technologies, MBT technology was recommended to be adopted at a small scale in the IWMF.
2.3.4.2 A review of the latest development of the sorting and recycling technologies was conducted in 2009 under this Study. The sorting and recycling technologies considered include the following:-
·
Mechanical Treatment alone (MT)
- MT adopts various mechanical equipment such as magnets, screen and trommels,
etc. to separate mixed MSW into different fractions according to their physical
properties.
·
Mechanical Biological Treatment
(MBT) - MBT
employs mechanical sorting and size classification to extract recyclables
alongside biological processes (either composting or anaerobic digestion plus
composting) to stabilize the biological component of the waste.
·
Biological Mechanical Treatment
(BMT) - BMT
involves biological treatment of waste by composting, followed by mechanical
sorting and size.
·
Mechanical Heat Treatment (MHT)
- MHT involves a series of thermal (heat) and mechanical (separation) treatment
of waste. The heat treatment reduces the materials to what is known as a
‘flock’. The heat process partially cleans metals and glass, and deforms plastics.
After the heat treatment, mechanical separation processes are applied to allow
recyclables to be extracted from the waste.
2.3.4.3
The
review of these sorting and recycling facilities indicated that the EoI
recommendation on adopting a small-scale MBT plant in the IWMF for
demonstration purpose remained valid. There is no
noticeable advancement in the MBT technology
in terms of volume reduction and land requirement since the EoI exercise. The
land requirement for MSW treatment, despite being subject to the technology
approach selected, odour management adopted, output requirement, waste input characteristics
etc, typically ranges from 60 to
2.3.4.4
At the Meeting of the Waste Management Subcommittee (WMSC) of ACE on 26 January 2010, the WMSC discussed the proposal of whether a sorting and recycling plant should be
incorporated in the IWMF project. The WMSC considered the proposal in detail,
taking into account previous advice and recommendations by the Advisory Group on Waste Management
Facilities in mid 2005 and by the ACE after the delegation’s visit to
2.3.5.1 Based on the results of the evaluation of the shortlisted treatment options and the recommendations of ACE, it was concluded that moving grate incineration would be the most preferable option and would be adopted as the core treatment technology, supplemented with demonstration-scale mechanical treatment facilities, in the IWMF.
2.4.1.1
As shown in Figure 1.1, the TTAL site is located at the existing ash lagoons in Nim Wan, Tuen Mun,
overlooking
2.4.1.2
The artificial island near SKC as
shown in Figure 1.2 will be formed by
reclamation at the south-western coast of Shek Kwu Chau, an island located to
the southwest of Cheung Chau and to the south of Chi Ma Wan Peninsula,
2.4.1.3 Shek Kwu Chau is granted to the Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts (SARDA) for use as a rehabilitation centre, which presently has a population of about 300 rehabilitators and staff. There is no other existing or planned residential, commercial or industrial development on the island.
2.4.2.1 The infrastructure for this Project would comprise an advanced incineration plant, a mechanical sorting and recycling plant, and ancillary & supporting facilities. The facilities of the IWMF mainly include the following:
Incineration Plant
· MSW receiving, storage and feeding system
· Moving grate incineration furnaces
· Waste heat recovery and power generation system
· Boiler feedwater treatment system
· Flue gas treatment system
· Flue gas discharge system with stack
· Ash storage and handling system
· Reagent reception and storage system
· Odour control system
·
Process control and monitoring
system
Mechanical Treatment (MT) Plant
· MSW receiving, storage and feeding system
· Mechanical treatment system including shredding and sorting facilities
· Products and by-products storage and handling system
· Odour control system
· Process control and monitoring system
Ancillary & Supporting Facilities
· Weighbridge
· Site security
· Administration building / Visitors and environmental education centre
· Vehicle washing facilities
· Maintenance workshop
· Fuel storage tanks
· Water treatment plant
· Wastewater treatment plant
· Electricity supply and export system
· Utilities
· Berthing area for marine vessels and storage of refuse containers (for the artificial island near SKC only)
2.4.2.2 Design-Build-Operate (DBO) contract arrangement would be adopted for the Project and the operation period would be 15 years. Under this contract arrangement, a DBO contractor would be engaged to conduct the detailed design, construction and operation of the IWMF.
2.4.2.3 For the purpose of the EIA Study, a reference design for the IWMF was prepared. The preliminary layouts showing the IWMF facilities at the TTAL site and the artificial island near SKC are presented in Figures 2.3 and 2.4 respectively.
2.4.2.4
The incineration plant is
designed to meet the target emission limits as shown in Table 2.3. Apart
from nitrogen oxides (NOx) standard, these target emission limits are based on
the internationally most stringent European Union (EU) standard for MSW
incinerators and the Hong Kong Best Practicable Means for Incinerators. For
NOx, as it is the most critical parameter in
2.4.2.5
In the reference design, the incineration plant consists of six incinerator units, each with a design capacity of 600 tpd. Most
of the facilities of the IWMF would be housed inside buildings. The Incineration Plant and Administrative & Mechanical Treatment (MT)
Table 2.3 Air Emission Limits for the IWMF
|
Air Pollutants |
Emission Limits (mg/m3) (1) |
Monitoring Requirements |
|
|
Daily |
Half -
Hourly |
||
|
Particulates (2) |
10 |
30 |
Continuous |
|
Organic Compounds |
10 |
20 |
Continuous |
|
Hydrogen Chloride
(HCl) |
10 |
60 |
Continuous |
|
Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) |
1 |
4 |
Continuous |
|
|
50 |
200 |
Continuous |
|
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
(3) |
50 |
100 |
Continuous |
|
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
as Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)(7) |
100 |
200 |
Continuous |
|
Mercury |
0.05 (4) |
- |
Intermittent |
|
Total Cadmium & Thallium |
0.05 (4) |
- |
Intermittent |
|
Total Heavy Metals (5) |
0.5 (4) |
- |
Intermittent |
|
Dioxins & Furans (6) |
1´10-7 |
- |
Intermittent |
Notes: (1) The emission limit is expressed at reference conditions of 0oC temperature, 101.325 kPa pressure, dry and 11% oxygen content conditions.
(2) The particulate emission limit is assumed to be respirable suspended particulates (RSP).
(3) CO emission limits do not apply to the start-up and shut-down periods.
(4) Average values over a sampling period of a minimum of 30 minutes and a maximum of 8 hours.
(5) Including Sb, As, Pb, Co, Cr, Cu, Mn, V and Ni.
(6) The unit is I-TEQ (The emission limit is equal to 0.1 ng I-TEQ m-3), according to the BPM 12/1(08), the averaging time for dioxin is 6 to 8 hours.
(7) The emission levels for NOx are half of that stipulated in European’s Emission Limits in EC’s Waste Incineration Directive.
Table 2.4 Dimensions of Major Building Structures of IWMF
|
Major Building
Structures of IWMF |
Area (ha) |
Height |
|
|
(m) |
(mPD) |
||
|
Stack |
- |
150 |
+155mPD |
|
Incineration Plant |
2.2 |
50 |
+55mPD |
|
Administrative & MT |
1.2 |
15 |
+20mPD |
2.4.2.6 An on-site desalination plant will be provided for supplying water to the IWMF. The desalination plant would involve membrane separation of dissolved ions such as chloride ions from seawater, and would not involve any boiling or burning processes.
2.4.2.7 An on-site wastewater treatment plant will be provided to treat the wastewater generated from floor/vehicle washing and from staff/visitors. The treated effluent will be reused in the incineration plant or mechanical treatment plant or for washdown and landscape irrigation within the IWMF. No effluent would be discharged to the nearby water body or the existing sewerage or drainage systems.
2.4.2.8 The heat produced during the incineration process will be recovered and used for electricity generation. The electricity generated from the incineration process will be used to support the normal operation of the facilities within the IWMF. Surplus energy will be exported to other users via the existing electricity grids maintained by power companies.
2.4.2.9
For exporting the surplus
electricity from the TTAL site, no installation of submarine cables will be
required as laying underground cables to the nearby CLP’s Black Point Power
Station is the only option. For exporting the surplus electricity from the artificial
island near SKC, various energy export options have been explored, all of which
involve installation of submarine cables. The options involve exporting energy
from the artificial island near SKC to the CLP’s power grid in Lantau or to the
HEC’s Lamma Power Station in
2.4.3 Construction of the IWMF
TTAL Site
2.4.3.1 The Project would require decommissioning of the Middle Lagoon, formation of about 1.2 hectares of pond habitat for Litter Grebe and about 9.8 hectares of land and associated roads and drains, followed by foundation works, construction of superstructures and installation of plants and equipment for the various systems of the IWMF.
2.4.3.2 Currently, the land is largely formed by PFA that was filled to this site in previous years. As there are no existing structures in the site area, the works related to the decommissioning of the lagoon would be minimal.
2.4.3.3 The finished ground level of the IWMF will be at a level higher than the average ground level of the existing Middle Lagoon. Therefore, the formation of land for the IWMF would involve mainly filling and levelling work. No disposal of PFA will be required during the construction phase.
2.4.3.4 The construction of the IWMF will include the following stages:
· Site drainage;
· Site formation;
· Foundation piling;
· Civil and building works;
· Mechanical & electrical plant installation;
· Roads, utilities, services and landscaping; and
· Ancillary instrumentation and control works.
Artificial Island near SKC
2.4.3.5 Reclamation will be needed to form about 11.8 hectares of land for the IWMF. Due to occasionally rough sea condition in the vicinity of the artificial island near SKC, breakwater will be provided to ensure safe loading and unloading operation at the berth area of the IWMF. The locations of the reclamation area, cellular cofferdam and breakwater are shown in Figure 2.6. The approximate area of the reclamation area, cellular cofferdam, berth and breakwater are as follows:
·
Reclamation area, berth and
cofferdam = about
·
Breakwater = about
·
Total area enclosed by the
breakwater (including the breakwater) = about
2.4.3.6 The reclamation will be formed with filling materials supported on the insitu marine deposits with suitable geotechnical ground treatment (such as surcharge loading, installation of vertical band drains, etc.) at a finished ground level of about +5mPD high. Seawalls will be constructed to confine the reclamation area and breakwaters will be provided to protect the water basin. To minimize dredging and filling activities and the associated environmental impacts, vertical cellular structure consisting of circular cells instead of sloping gravity structure is proposed to be adopted for the construction of the seawalls and breakwaters. The cellular breakwater protecting the reclamation area and the water basin would be about +9mPD high for resisting waves with significant heights.
2.4.3.7 Cellular cofferdams are self-supporting gravity structures consisted of circular cells constructed using straight web sheet piles. The piles are interlocked and driven to form closed cells (or circular cells) which are then filled with filling materials as shown in photos (a) and (b) of Figure 2.7. To achieve continuity of the wall, the circular cells are connected together using fabricated junction piles and short arcs as shown in photo (c) of Figure 2.7.
2.4.3.8 The installation of cellular cofferdams involves driving of sheet piles in place using vibratory hammer or hydraulic impact hammer. To guide the placement of the sheet piles at correct position and to stabilize the circular cell during backfill, “templates” are required during the installation of cellular cofferdams (see photo (d) of Figure 2.7). A template is first placed at the target location of the circular cell. All piles are then temporarily fixed on the template. After fixing the piles on the template, the sheet piles are driven into the seabed. Circular cells are backfilled after the sheet piles reach the design depth. To ensure the stability of the cell, the template remains in place during backfilling. After completion of two circular cells, the arcs connecting the two cells will be installed as shown in photo (c) of Figure 2.7.
2.4.3.9
As a preventive measure to
reduce the loss of fine from the filling of circular cells as well as arc
cells, silt curtain would be applied around the circular cell or arc cell
during the filling process. The loss of fine during the filling of circular
cells would be minimal as the filling would be carried out within completed
sheet pile cell, which would be further surrounded by silt curtain. Further
discussion will be provided in Section
5b.
2.4.3.10 The berth area, which will be extended from the seawall at the northwest side of the reclaimed area, will be formed by a piled deck structure with precast slab. Tubular piles are proposed to form the foundation of the berth. Non-percussive bore piling method would be adopted for the installation of tubular piles.
2.4.3.11 The construction of the IWMF will include the following stages:-
· Construction of cofferdam surrounding the reclamation area;
· Site filling for reclamation;
· Surcharge loading for reclamation area;
· Construction of breakwater;
· Pilling for berth area;
· Site drainage;
· Foundation (spread footing);
· Civil and building works;
· Mechanical & electrical plant installation;
· Roads, utilities, services and landscaping; and
· Ancillary instrumentation and control works.
2.4.3.12 The submarine cables would be installed by burying method using water jets. A cable burying machine would include an injector lowered to the seabed. The injector fluidizes a trench using high pressure water jets and a cable is immediately laid within the trench. The sides of the trench slip around the cable, burying it and leaving a small depression in the seabed.
2.4.4 Operation of the IWMF
2.4.4.1 The IWMF will be operated on a 24-hour basis daily, while the reception of MSW would be limited from 8 am to 8 pm.
2.4.4.2 For the artificial island near SKC, about 3,000 tpd MSW would be delivered by marine vessels from the existing refuse transfer stations, including Island East Transfer Station, Island West Transfer Station and West Kowloon Transfer Station. For TTAL site, about 3,000 tpd MSW currently delivered to the berth of WENT Landfill by marine vessels or delivered directly to the WENT Landfill or its extension by land transport will be diverted from the WENT Landfill to the adjoining TTAL site by land transport.
2.4.4.3 At the reception hall of the incineration plant, MSW from the containers will be discharged to a bunker. The MSW will then be fed into incineration furnaces for combustion. The heat energy released will be recovered to generate electricity through waste heat boilers and steam turbine generators. Flue gas generated from the incineration furnaces will be treated before discharging to the atmosphere. Bottom ash, fly ash and air pollution control (APC) residues produced from the incineration process will be collected and disposed of at the WENT Landfill or its extension if they have met the disposal requirements or will be reused if possible.
2.4.4.4 MSW delivered to the MT plant will be discharged to a bunker. A grab bucket will cut the plastic bags commonly used for household waste collection and convey the MSW to the hopper of the mechanical treatment facilities. Large-size MSW will first be cut into smaller pieces by a shredder. The well-prepared MSW will then run through a series of mechanical treatment processes and separate into different types of outputs, including recyclable materials (e.g. metals, papers and plastics) to be collected by recyclers, sorted combustible MSW to be sent to the incineration plant for treatment with other MSW, and non-combustible MSW to be disposed of at the WENT Landfill or its extension.
2.4.5.1 The tentative construction programmes for the TTAL site and the artificial island near SKC are shown in Table 2.5 and Table 2.6 respectively.
Table 2.5 Construction Programme of the IWMF at the TTAL Site
|
Description |
Date |
|
Award of Contract |
March 2013 |
|
Site Clearance & Backfilling |
March 2013 – August 2013 |
|
Foundation (Pilling) |
June 2013 – February 2015 |
|
Civil
and E&M Works |
November 2013 – May 2016 |
|
Testing
and Commissioning |
June 2016 – August 2016 |
Table
2.6 Construction
Programme of the IWMF
at the
|
Description |
Date |
|
Award
of Contract |
March 2013 |
|
Construction
of Cofferdam Surrounding Reclamation Area Phase 1 |
June 2013 – November 2013 |
|
Construction
of Breakwater Phase 1 |
June 2013 – November 2013 |
|
Construction
of Cofferdam Surrounding Reclamation Area Phase 2 |
June 2014 – July 2014 |
|
Site
Filling for Reclamation |
January 2014 – October 2014 |
|
Surcharge
Loading for Reclamation Area |
May 2014 – July 2015 |
|
Construction
of Breakwater Phase 2 |
June 2014 – October 2014 |
|
Installation
of Anti-scouring Layer |
November 2014 |
|
Pilling
for Berth Area |
June 2014 – November 2014 |
|
Construction
of Submarine Cables |
June 2015 |
|
Foundation
(Spread Footing) |
May 2015 – October 2015 |
|
Civil
and E&M Works |
August 2015 – February 2018 |
|
Testing
and Commissioning |
March 2018 – May 2018 |
2.5 Consideration of Alternatives
2.5.1.1 In addition to the consideration of alternative site and technology for the development of the IWMF, the following alternatives have also been considered in the Study.
2.5.2.1
A review of the existing
incineration plants in the world was conducted. Based on the existing installations in the
world, most of the incineration plants have a treatment capacity ranging from
less than 1,000 tpd to 4,000 tpd. Selection
of plant capacity is normally dependent on local requirements and
constraints. Localized small scale
incineration plants are likely have less traffic impact when compared to
centralized large scale incinerations.
The advantages of large scale incineration plants are that they are more
efficient in cost and land utilization when compared with small scale
incineration plants. With due
regard to the scarcity of suitable land in densely populated cities and
considerations of economy of scale, there is a tendency to maximize the
potential of a site and to plan for an incineration plant with higher treatment
capacity. Some overseas examples
with installed treatment capacity larger than 3,000 tpd are listed below:
·
Tuas South Incineration Plant and
Senoko Incineration Plant in
·
Afval Energie Bedrijf (AEB)
Incineration Plant in
2.5.2.2
In
2.5.3.1
With reference to the “A Guidance
Note on the Best Practicable Means for Incinerators (Municipal Waste
Incineration) BPM 12/1(08)”, EPD, the design of the chimney height shall be
determined by mathematical or physical dispersion modelling techniques. Therefore, wind tunnel tests (physical
dispersion modelling technique) were conducted to determine and verify that the
stack height for the IWMF would not result in adverse terrain and building wake
effects at the TTAL site and the artificial island near SKC. The wind tunnel tests consisted of plume
visualization for
2.5.3.2
Visualization of stack plume
behaviour under various wind directions and speeds has been conducted to
provide a qualitative understanding of the effect of the immediate terrain and
building structures on the dispersion of the plume
emitted from the IWMF stack. The
visualization also serves to check whether the plume from the IWMF stack will
hit the critical Air Sensitive Receivers in close proximity to the TTAL site
and the artificial island near SKC.
The findings of the wind tunnel tests verified that both
2.5.3.3
Besides, a Good Engineering
Practice (GEP) stack height requirement has been established in the
2.5.3.4
With a view to further
alleviate the potential air quality impacts at critical air sensitive receivers
(ASRs) but at the same time to minimize potential
visual impact associated with a tall stack,
2.5.4.1
With a view to minimize the
land use and the associated environmental impacts at the two sites, in
particular at the artificial island near SKC, the layout for the IWMF is
considered appropriate taking into consideration the functional need for
operation of the IWMF, reasonable flexibility in design for future DBO
contractor and allowance of suitable size of land for provision of visitors and
community facilities. Based on the
proposed layouts, the footprint requirement for treating per tonnage of MSW daily
is approximately
2.5.4.2
The unit footprint requirement
of the IWMF is comparable with other overseas incineration plants, including Afval
Energie Bedrijf (AEB) Incineration Plant with design capacity of 4,000 tpd in
Netherland and Tokyo Edogawa Incineration Plant with design capacity of 600 tpd
in
2.5.4.3
At the artificial island near
SKC, the artificial island for construction of the IWMF was designed to be
apart from the existing
2.5.4.4 Furthermore, the breakwater at the artificial island near SKC was designed to provide protection to the marine vessels and to maintain the loading and unloading needs even during typhoon signal no. 3.
2.5.5.1 Alternative sequences of construction, including concurrent construction sequence and phased construction sequence, were considered.
2.5.5.2
Concurrent construction
sequence involves various construction activities occurring at the same time. The environmental benefit of this
construction sequence would be the reduction of the
construction period and hence the duration of impact due to the
construction. However, the
magnitude of the overall environmental impact could be larger.
2.5.5.3
Phased construction sequence
involves construction activities being carried out one after another. This construction sequence would help in reducing the magnitude of the overall impacts, but the
construction period would be longer.
2.5.5.4 As the two approaches have their environmental benefits and dis-benefits, a balancing approach which involves a combination of concurrent and phased construction sequences at different stages of the construction has been adopted to alleviate the potential environmental impact and to meet the target commissioning date. For instance, at the artificial island near SKC, the construction of the breakwater and berth area would start off after completion of the cellular cofferdam installation surrounding the reclaimed area so as to minimize magnitude of the overall environmental impact.
2.5.6.1 To minimize the potential environmental impacts, alternative construction methods were considered. For the piling works at the TTAL site, percussive piles and socketted H-piles were considered. Percussive piles would cause substantial noise and vibration impacts, whereas the noise and vibration impacts due to the construction of socketted H-piles would be significantly lower. Considering the environmental benefits and dis-benefits of the alternative piling methods, socketted H-piles is recommended for this Project to minimize the potential noise impact during the construction.
2.5.6.2
Sloping seawall was originally
proposed to be used at the artificial island near SKC. The width of the sloping
seawall at the seabed level would be about
2.5.7.1 The heat energy of the air getting out from the furnace is transmitted to water, converting the water to high pressure steam. The high pressure steam is used to rotate a steam turbine and generate electricity. After the electricity generation process, the high pressure steam becomes low pressure steam, which is further cool down by a cooling system. Alternative cooling systems, including water-cooled condenser and air-cooled condenser, were considered. A water-cooled condenser involves exchange of the heat of the low pressure steam to water, which is then discharged to the nearby water body. An air-cooled condenser involves exchange of the heat of the low pressure steam to air, which is then discharged to the atmosphere. To minimize the potential impact to the nearby water bodies due to discharge of cooling water, air-cooled condenser was adopted in the IWMF. Another advantage of air-cooled condenser is water consumption will be greatly reduced.
2.6 Interfaces with Other Projects
WENT Landfill Extension
2.6.1.1
This project involves development
of the WENT Landfill Extension (about 200 hectares with capacity of
2.6.1.2 The proposed WENT Landfill Extension will be located to the west of the existing WENT Landfill. It will occupy the West Lagoon and the southern part of the Middle and East Lagoon as well as the area between the Black Point Power Station and the WENT Landfill. The preliminary site boundary of the proposed WENT Landfill Extension is shown on Figure 1.1. The WENT Landfill Extension will be developed under six phases to allow progressive use of the overall landfill area. The site formation of the Phase 1 is tentatively scheduled to commence in 2016/17.
2.6.1.3 As the construction of the IWMF at the TTAL site is scheduled for completion in 2016, the construction works for the IWMF would not be concurrent with the proposed WENT Landfill Extension. No cumulative construction impact due to construction of the IWMF and the WENT Landfill Extension is expected.
Sludge Treatment Facilities (STF)
2.6.1.4 The proposed Sludge Treatment Facilities (STF) are designed to treat 2,000 wet tonnes/day of the dewatered sludge generated after the sewage treatment process in the Stonecutters Island Sewage Treatment Works (STW) and 10 other regional sewage treatment works, by fluidized bed incineration technology to substantially reduce the volume of sewage sludge for disposal to landfills.
2.6.1.5 The STF will be located in the northern part of the East Lagoon, adjacent to the TTAL site for the IWMF. The proposed location for the STF is shown in Figure 1.1.
2.6.1.6 The construction period is anticipated to commence in 2010 for completion in 2013. The construction works for the IWMF and STF would occur concurrently.
2.6.1.7 As the operation phase of the IWMF and STF will overlap, the cumulative environmental impacts associated with the operation of the IWMF and the STF, as well as other concurrent projects, have be examined in accordance with the EIAO-TM requirements.
2.6.2 Artificial Island near SKC
Outlying Islands Sewerage Stage 2
-
2.6.2.1
The project would involve the
construction of a sewage treatment works (STW) at San Shek Wan. Although the STW building would be located
outside the study area of the IWMF at Cheung Sha, its associated submarine
outfall would extend from the
2.6.2.2 The construction works is tentatively scheduled to commence in September 2013 with a view to completion by September 2017, which may overlap with the construction of the IWMF.
Improvement of Fresh Water Supply to Cheung Chau
2.6.2.3
Under this project, a submarine
water main would be constructed across the Adamasta Channel, between Northern
Channel of Cheung Chau and
2.6.2.4 The tentative schedule of the concurrent project is 2010 to 2013, which may overlap with the construction of the IWMF for a short period of time.
2.7 Assessment Areas of the EIA Study
2.7.1.1 The assessment areas for the purpose of this EIA Study, as specified in the Brief, are specified in Table 2.7 below.
Table 2.7 Areas Covered by the EIA Study
|
Type of Impact Assessment |
Assessment
Area |
|
|
Tsang Tsui
Site |
SKC |
|
|
Air Quality & Health Impact |
Affected zone defined by the territory wide scale
model |
Affected zone defined by the territory wide scale
model |
|
Noise |
Area within |
Area within |
|
Water Quality
& Aquatic
Ecology |
Area within |
Southern, Southern Supplementary, Second Southern Supplementary, North
Western, North Western Supplementary, and Western Buffer Water Control Zones |
|
Waste management |
Areas within the
boundary of the Project |
Areas within the
boundary of the Project |
|
Terrestrial Ecology |
Areas within |
Areas within |
|
Fisheries |
North Western and Deep Bay Water Control Zones |
Southern, Southern Supplementary, Second Southern Supplementary, North
Western, North Western Supplementary, and Western Buffer Water Control Zones |
|
Landscape |
Area within |
Area within |
|
Visual |
Zone of visual
influence defined by the visual envelope of the Project |
Zone of visual
influence defined by the visual envelope of the Project |
|
Landfill Gas Hazard |
Areas within the
boundary of the Project |
Areas within the
boundary of the Project |
|
Cultural Heritage |
Area within |
Area within |