4.1.1
This
section presents an air quality impact assessment for the construction and
operation phases of the Kai Tak Development – Roads D3A & D4A Project. Air sensitive receivers in the vicinity
of the study area have been determined and the potential air quality impacts
associated with the Project have been assessed accordingly.
4.2 Environmental Legislation, Policies, Plans, Standards and Criteria
4.2.1
The
criteria for evaluating air quality impacts and the guidelines for air quality
impact assessment are set out in Annex 4 and Annex 12 of the Technical
Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM).
Air Quality Assessment Criteria
4.2.2
The
Air Pollution Control Ordinance (APCO) provides the statutory framework for
controlling air pollutants from a variety of sources. The Hong Kong Air Quality Objectives
(AQOs), which must be satisfied, stipulate the maximum allowable concentrations
over specific periods for a number of criteria air pollutants. The relevant AQOs are listed in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 Hong Kong Air Quality Objectives
|
Pollutant |
Maximum Concentration (µg m-3) (1) |
||||
|
Averaging Time |
|||||
|
1 hour (2) |
8 hour (3) |
24 hour (3) |
3 months |
Annual (4) |
|
|
Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) |
- |
- |
260 |
- |
80 |
|
Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP) (5) |
- |
- |
180 |
- |
55 |
|
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) |
800 |
- |
350 |
- |
80 |
|
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) |
300 |
- |
150 |
- |
80 |
|
Carbon Monoxide (CO) |
30,000 |
10,000 |
- |
- |
- |
|
Photochemical Oxidants (as Ozone, O3)
(6) |
240 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
Lead (Pb) |
- |
- |
- |
1.5 |
- |
Notes:
(1) Measured
at 298 K and 101.325 kPa.
(2) Not
to be exceeded more than three times per year.
(3) Not
to be exceeded more than once per year.
(4) Arithmetic
mean.
(5) Suspended
particulates in air with a nominal aerodynamic diameter of 10 mm
or smaller.
(6) Photochemical
oxidants are determined by measurement of ozone only.
4.2.3
The
EIAO-TM stipulates that the hourly TSP level should not exceed 500 mgm-3 (measured at 25°C and one atmosphere) for
construction dust impact assessment.
Standard mitigation measures for construction
sites are specified in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust)
Regulation.
Air
Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation
4.2.4
Notifiable
and regulatory works are under the control of Air Pollution Control
(Construction Dust) Regulation.
Notifiable works are site formation, reclamation, demolition, foundation
and superstructure construction for buildings and road construction. Regulatory works are building
renovation, road opening and resurfacing slope stabilisation, and other activities
including stockpiling, dusty material handling, excavation, concrete works,
stockpiling, dusty material handling etc.
This Project is expected to include both notifiable works and regulatory
works. Contractors and site agents
are required to inform the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) on
carrying out construction works and to adopt dust reduction measures to reduce
dust emission to the acceptable level.
4.3 Description of the Environment
4.3.1
The
Kai Tak Development – Roads D3A & D4A Project is located in the runway area
of the former Kai Tak Airport.
There is no air quality monitoring station located in the proximity of
the Project area. EPD’s Kwun Tong
air quality monitoring station is the nearest station to the Project area.
4.3.2
Table 4.2 summarizes the annual average concentrations of the air pollutants
recorded at the monitoring station from Year 2007 to Year 2011.
Table 4.2 Annual Average Concentrations of Pollutants from Year 2007 to Year 2011 at EPD’s Kwun Tong Air Quality Monitoring Station
|
Pollutant |
Annual Average AQO (µg m-3) |
Annual Average Concentration (µg m-3) |
||||
|
Year 2007 |
Year 2008 |
Year 2009 |
Year 2010 |
Year 2011 |
||
|
TSP |
80 |
82 |
72 |
70 |
67 |
74 |
|
RSP |
55 |
53 |
47 |
48 |
47 |
49 |
|
SO2 |
80 |
19 |
17 |
11 |
10 |
12 |
|
NO2 |
80 |
63 |
59 |
58 |
59 |
63 |
Notes:
Monitoring
results exceeded AQO are shown as underlined characters.
4.4.1
In accordance with Annex 12 of the EIAO-TM, any domestic premises, hotel,
hostel, hospital, clinic, nursery, temporary housing accommodation, school,
educational institution, office, factory, shop, shopping centre, place of
public worship, library, court of law, sports stadium or performing arts centre
are considered to be an air sensitive receiver (ASR). Any other place with which, in terms of
duration or number of people affected, has a similar sensitivity to the air
pollutants as the aforelisted places are also considered to be an ASR, for
example, playground, sitting area of parks / promenade.
4.4.1 The air quality impact assessment area is defined by a distance of 500m expanded from the boundary of the Project. The study area of air quality impact assessment is shown in Figure 4.1.
4.4.2
The
identified representative ASRs are listed in Table 4.3 and the corresponding locations are shown in Figure 4.1. The assessment heights were taken as
1.5m, 5m, 10m, 20m above ground and so on up to the maximum building height of
the respective ASRs.
Table 4.3 Summary of Representative Air Sensitive Receivers
|
Location |
Planned Land Use |
Max. Building Height, m (1) |
Horizontal Distance to Alignment, m |
|
|
A1 |
Site 4A1 |
Residential |
65 |
11 |
|
A2 |
Site 4A1 |
Residential |
65 |
12 |
|
A3 |
Site 4A1 |
Residential |
80 |
14 |
|
A4 |
Site 4A1 |
Residential |
80 |
35 |
|
A5 |
Site 4A2 |
Commercial |
45 |
9 |
|
A6 |
Site 4B1 |
Residential |
55 |
10 |
|
A7 |
Site 4B1 |
Residential |
55 |
15 |
|
A8 |
Site 4B2 |
Residential |
55 |
13 |
|
A9 |
Site 4B3 |
Residential |
65 |
13 |
|
A10 |
Site 4B4 |
Residential |
55 |
14 |
|
A11 |
Site 4B5 |
Residential |
45 |
16 |
|
A12 |
Site 4B5 |
Residential |
45 |
15 |
|
A13 |
Site 4C1 |
Commercial |
45 |
10 |
|
A14 |
Site 4C2 |
Commercial |
55 |
9 |
|
A15 |
Site 4C3 |
Commercial |
45 |
9 |
|
A16 |
Site 4C4 |
Commercial |
45 |
9 |
|
A17 |
Site 4C5 |
Commercial |
45 |
8 |
|
A18 |
Site 4C5 |
Commercial |
45 |
10 |
|
A19 |
Site 3C1 |
Hospital |
60 |
262 |
|
A20 |
Site 3C1 |
Hospital |
60 |
285 |
Notes:
(1) The
maximum height for Planned ASR was made reference to the OZP.
Construction Phase (Construction
Dust)
4.5.1
Potential
air quality impacts during the construction phase are primarily due to fugitive
dust emission. Typical dust generating construction activities include surface
excavation, roads construction, superstructure construction of landscaped deck
and installation of noise barrier panel.
4.5.2
The
construction activities for this Project would be commenced in the Year 2014
for completion in Year 2016. The
major construction activities for the Project with air quality concern include
surface excavation and roads construction. In general, it is expected that no extensive underground construction
work would be conducted throughout the construction phase, but mainly at-grade
road pavement construction and pre-cast elements for on-site installations of the
landscaped deck. All the above
activities are not expected to generate significant amount of construction
dust. Therefore, no adverse dust impact would be
expected at the nearby ASR.
4.5.3
Under
the APCO, dust suppression measures stipulated in the Air Pollution Control
(Construction Dust) Regulation should be implemented. In addition, control measures stipulated
in the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report will be strictly followed. With effective implementation of these
mitigation measures, as shown in detail in Section 4.8, adverse construction dust impacts are not
expected at the nearby ASR. Quantitative assessment is therefore considered not necessary.
4.5.4
Potential
air quality impacts during the operation phase of the Project would be
associated with the following pollution sources:
Ÿ
Background pollutant concentrations
(estimated based on five years averaged monitoring data from EPD’s Kwun Tong
air quality monitoring station);
Ÿ
Vehicle emissions from open sections
of existing and proposed road networks within 500m from the project site
boundary;
Ÿ
Portal emission from Trunk Road T2
Tunnel Northbound;
Ÿ
Emission from Trunk Road T2
Ventilation Building inside Kai Tak Development (KTD) site;
Ÿ
Emission from the proposed hospital
within KTD;
Ÿ
Cruise ship emissions from the
proposed cruise terminal at Kai Tak;
Ÿ
Emission
from the existing Typhoon Shelters; and
Ÿ
Planned
heliport emission at the end of runway.
Background Pollutant Concentrations
4.5.5
The
background pollutant values adopted for this assessment are derived based on
EPD’s “Guideline on Assessing the ‘TOTAL’ Air Quality Impacts”. EPD’s Kwun Tong air quality monitoring
station is the nearest station to the Project area. The mean annual average concentrations
of the pollutants measured at this station based on the latest available five
years (year 2007 to 2011) data are adopted as the background air quality.
4.5.6
Table 4.2 summarises the annual average
concentrations of the pollutants recorded at the Kwun Tong monitoring
station. For the purpose of this assessment,
RSP and NO2 concentration of 48.8 and 60.4 mg/m3 respectively were taken as background concentrations for
the operation phase assessment.
Identification of Key/Representative Air
Pollutants of Vehicle Emissions from Open Road
4.5.7
Vehicular emission comprises a
number of pollutants, including Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Respirable Suspended
Particulates (RSP), Sulphur Dioxides (SO2), Carbon Monoxide
(CO), Lead (Pb), Toxic Air Pollutants (TAPs) etc. Accordingly to “An Overview on Air Quality
and Air Pollution Control in Hong Kong”[1] published by EPD, motor
vehicles are the main causes of high concentrations of respirable suspended
particulates (RSP) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) at street level in Hong Kong and are considered as key air quality pollutants for road projects. For other pollutants, due to the low
concentration in vehicular emission, they are not
considered as key pollutants for the purpose of this study.
(i)
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
4.5.8 Nitrogen oxides (NOx) is a major pollutant from fossil fuel combustion. According to the 2011 Environmental Performance Report published by EPD, electricity generation is the dominant contributor to NOx generation in Hong Kong, accounted for 45% of NOx emission in 2009. Road transport is the second largest NOx contributor which accounted for 22% of the total in the same year.
4.5.9
In the presence of O3
and VOC, NOx would
be converted to NO2.
Increasing traffic flow would inevitably increase the NOx emission and
subsequently the roadside NO2 concentration. Hence, NO2
is one of the key pollutants for the operational air quality assessment of the
Project. 1-hour, 24-hour and annual averaged NO2 concentrations at
each identified ASRs would be assessed and compared with the relevant AQO to
determine the compliance.
(ii)
Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP)
4.5.10
Respirable Suspended
Particulates (RSP) refers to suspended particulates with a nominal aerodynamic
diameter of 10um or less. According
to the 2011 Environmental Performance Report published by EPD, electricity generation is the
dominant contributor to RSP generation in Hong Kong, accounted for 31% of RSP
emission in 2009. Road transport is
the second largest RSP contributor which accounted for 29% of the total in the
same year. Increasing traffic flow
would inevitably increase the roadside RSP concentration. Hence, RSP is also
one of the key pollutants for the operational air quality assessment of the
Project. The 24-hour and annual averaged RSP concentrations at each identified
ASRs would be assessed and compared with the relevant AQO to determine the
compliance.
(iii)
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)
4.5.11 Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is formed primarily from the combustion of sulphur-containing fossil fuels. In Hong Kong, power stations and marine vessels are the major sources of SO2, followed by fuel combustion equipment and motor vehicles.[2] SO2 emission from vehicular exhaust is due to the sulphur content in diesel oil. According to EPD’s “Cleaning the Air at Street Level”[3], ultra low sulphur diesel (ULSD) with a sulphur content of only 0.005% has been adopted as the statutory minimum requirement for motor vehicle diesel since April 2002, which is 3 years ahead of the European Union. With the use of ULSD, According to the 2011 Environmental Performance Report released by EPD, road transport is the smallest share of SO2 emission sources in 2009 and only constitutes 0.5% of the total SO2 emission. From 1 July 2010, EPD has tightened the statutory motor vehicle diesel and unleaded petrol specifications to Euro V level, which further tightens the cap on sulphur content from 0.005% to 0.001%.
4.5.12
In addition, the measured 1-hr average, daily average and annual average
SO2 concentration at all EPD air monitoring stations are all less
than 40% of the respective AQO. In view that road transport only contributes a
very small amount of SO2 emission, relatively low measured
concentrations and the adoption of low-sulphur and ultra-low-sulphur fuel under
the existing government policy, SO2 would not be a critical air
pollutant of concern.
4.5.13
Moreover, cumulative SO2 emission impacts have been predicted
in the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report, with assessments on SO2 emissions from cruise ships at the cruise terminal at Kai Tak, vehicular
emissions, and all the other sources in the study area. The assessment results
indicated that the dominant source
of SO2 emission are cruise vessels, which may have adverse impact on ASRs at high
levels. For
mitigation, the maximum building heights of
the adjacent sites from the cruise terminal have been restricted via planning control according to the approved KTD
Schedule 3 EIA Report. Due to the negligible contribution of vehicular emission
of SO2 from this Project, insignificant change in the cumulative
results of SO2 concentrations from the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA
Report is expected. SO2 is therefore not considered as a key pollutant for
quantitative assessment for this road project.
(iv)
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
4.5.14
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a
typical pollutant emitted from fossil fuel combustion and comes mainly from
vehicular emissions. With reference to the “Air Quality in Hong Kong 2011”, measured the highest 1-hour average
(4030µg/m3) and the highest 8-hour average (3309 µg/m3)
were both recorded at the Causeway Bay roadside station; these values were
around one seventh and one third of the respective AQO limits. In view that there is still a large
margin to the AQO, CO would not be a critical air pollutant of concern.
(v)
Ozone (O3)
4.5.15
Ozone (O3) is
produced from photochemical reaction between NOx and VOCs in the presence of
sunlight, which will not be generated by this project. Concentration of O3 is
governed by both precursors and atmospheric transport from other areas. When precursors transport along under
favorable meteorological conditions and sunlight, ozone will be produced. This explains why higher ozone levels
are generally not produced in the urban core or industrial area but rather at
some distance downwind after photochemical reactions have taken place. In the presence of large amounts of NOx
in the roadside environment, O3 reacts with NO to give NO2
and thus results in O3 removal. O3 is therefore not
considered as a key air pollutant for the operational air quality assessment of
a road project.
(vi)
Lead (Pb)
4.5.16
The sale of leaded petrol has
been banned in Hong Kong since April 1999.
According to the “Air Quality in Hong Kong 2011”, the measured
ambient lead concentrations were ranging from 20ng/m3 to 104 ng/m3. The measured concentrations were well
below the AQO limits. Therefore,
lead is not considered as a critical air pollutant of concern.
(vii)
Toxic Air Pollutants (TAPs)
4.5.17
Vehicular exhaust is one of
the emission sources of Toxic Air Pollutants (TAPs), which are known or
suspected to cause cancer or other serious health and environmental effects. With
reference to EPD’s Assessment of Toxic Air Pollutant Measurements in Hong
Kong Final Report [4], monitored TAPs in Hong
Kong include diesel particulate matters (DPM), toxic elemental species,
dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), carbonyls, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). According
to the results of Assessment of Toxic Air Pollutant Measurements in Hong
Kong Final Report and Sources of PCB emissions[5], vehicular emission is not
considered as primary source of dioxins, PCBs, carbonyls and most toxic
elemental species in Hong Kong. Therefore, these pollutants are not considered
as key pollutants for quantitative assessment for the operation phase of a road
project.
Diesel Particulate Matters (DPM)
4.5.18 Diesel Particulate Matters (DPM), as part of the overall Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP), is one of the most important parameter contributing to the overall health risk of the population. Local vehicular emission is one of the major sources of DPM.
4.5.19 EPD has embarked on the following three key programmes to reduce the diesel particulate level at the roadside[6]: (a) the LPG taxi and light bus program; (b) the introduction of an advanced test to check diesel vehicle smoke emission; and (c) the retrofit of pre-Euro diesel commercial vehicles with diesel oxidation Catalysts (DOCs). According to EPD’s website[7], franchised bus companies have also retrofitted their Euro I buses with diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs) and Euro II and III buses with diesel particulate filters (DPFs). A DPF can reduce particulate emissions from diesel vehicles by over 80%.
4.5.20 As recommended by EPD’s Assessment of Toxic Air Pollutant Measurements in Hong Kong Final Report, elemental carbon (EC) is used as a surrogate for DPM, and with reference to Measurements and Validation for the 2008/2009 Particulate Matter Study in Hong Kong[8], EC showed a significant decrease in concentration from 2001 to 2009 in Hong Kong, i.e. -47.5%, -30.0% and -28.3% at Mong Kok, Tsuen Wan and Hok Tsui Monitoring Sites, repectively. With the continual efforts by EPD to reduce particulate emission from the vehicular fleet, a discernible decreasing trend is noted in the level of particulate matter. Therefore, DPM is not selected as representative pollutant for quantitative assessment for this project.
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
4.5.21 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) are organic compounds of two or more fused benzene rings, in liner, angular or cluster conformations. Local vehicular traffic is also an important source of PAHs. For this group, the most important TAP is Benzo[a]pyrene, and it is often selected as a marker for the PAHs[9]. The EU Air Quality Standards for PAHs (expressed as concentration of Benzo[a]pyrene) is 1 ng/m3 for annual average[10]. With reference to “Air Quality in Hong Kong 2011”, annual average concentrations of PAHs (Benzo[a]pyrene) measured at EPD’s TAP monitoring stations (Tsuen Wan and Central/Western) were 0.22ng/m3, which is far below the EU Standards. Thus, PAHs are not considered as key pollutants for quantitative assessment for this project.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
4.5.22
Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOCs) are of great concern due to the important role played by them in a range
of health and environmental problems. The US EPA has designated many VOC,
including those typically found in vehicular emission, as air toxic. According
to Assessment of Toxic Air Pollutant Measurements in Hong Kong Final
Report, among the VOC compounds, benzene and 1,3-butadiene are the most
significant ones for Hong Kong The UK Air Quality Standards for benzene and
1,3-butadiene are 5.0µg/m3 and 2.25 µg/m3 respectively[11]. Accordingly to “Air Quality in Hong
Kong 2011”, annual average concentrations of benzene and 1,3-butadiene at
EPD’s TAP monitoring stations (Tsuen Wan and Central/Western) were 1.53 - 1.62
µg/m3 and 0.13 µg/m3, respectively, which is far below the UK Standards. Thus, VOCs are not considered as key
pollutants for quantitative assessment for this project.
Identification
of Assessment Years
4.5.23
According
to the construction programme, the completion of the Project would be in Year
2016. Based on the findings of the
traffic impact assessment that have taken into account the future changes of
road network in the surrounding area, the predicted traffic flow on the
proposed Roads D3A & D4A will continue to grow upon road commissioning in
2016 till year 2031 due to the considerable amount of traffic generated by the
intake of the developments in the Runway Precincts during this period including
the commercial/hotel developments, residential developments and the Tourism
Node. In other words, the predicted
traffic flow on the proposed Roads D3A & D4A within the next 15 years upon
commencement of operation in 2016 would be highest at 2031.
4.5.24
With
regards to the vehicular emission factors, taking into account solely the
natural retirement of aged vehicles and the replacement with newer vehicles
with better exhaust technologies, the vehicular emission factors would be under
a decreasing trend. In other words,
the vehicular emission factors at 2016 would represent the highest vehicular
emission factors within 2016 to 2031.
4.5.25
Therefore,
as a conservative approach for this assessment, the highest emission scenario
given the combination of vehicular emission factors and traffic flow within the
entire 15 years period (year 2016 to 2031) is taken as the combination of the
year 2016 vehicular emission factors together with the highest predicted
traffic flow (i.e. at year 2031) within 15 years upon the commissioning year of
the Project.
Vehicle Emissions from Open Road
4.5.27
The predicted 24-hour traffic flows and vehicle
mixes for the road network within the next 15 years upon commencement of
operation of the proposed road at Year 2016 were taken to assess the worst-case
air quality impacts.
4.5.28
Due
to the traffic growth, the highest predicted traffic flow within 15 years after
completion of the Project has been projected, and the projected 24-hour traffic flows
and vehicle compositions were adopted in this air quality assessment and are
attached in Appendix 4.1. The methodology to produce the traffic data (include 24-hr traffic
flow, trips, daily vehicle-kilometer-travelled (VKT) & speed fraction) and
the traffic data adopted for this
EIA study has been agreed by the Transport
Department (TD) (Appendix 4.2).
4.5.29
EMFAC-HK model was adopted to
estimate the vehicle emission rates of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.
4.5.30
The
“vehicle fleet” refers to all motor vehicles operating on roads within this
Study Area. The modelled fleet was
broken down into 16 vehicle classes based on the information as shown on Table 4.4 (Registration and Licensing of
Vehicle by Fuel Type) of the Transport Monthly Digest and vehicle
population provided by EPD. The
vehicle group classification was based on the definition in The Annual Traffic Census 2011 – Appendix F
Vehicle Classification System. Detailed methodology of conversion between
the vehicle types used in the forecast traffic and the 16 classes defined in
EMFAC-HK Model is presented in Appendix 4.2.
4.5.31
Referring to EPD’s Guideline on Modelling
Vehicle Emissions Appendix 1 “EMFAC-HK: Vehicle Class Details”, the
16 vehicle classes modelled in EMFAC-HK are summarized in Table 4.4. The working example illustrating the
conversion process is available in Table 1a and Table 1 of Appendix 4.7.
Table 4.4 Vehicle Classes in EMFAC-HK Model
|
Index |
Vehicle
Class Description |
Gross
Vehicle Weight (tonnes) |
|
1 |
Private Cars (PC) |
all |
|
3 |
Taxi |
ALL |
|
4 |
Light Goods Vehicles (<=2.5t) |
<=2.5t |
|
5 |
Light Goods Vehicles (2.5-3.5t) |
>2.5-3.5t |
|
6 |
Light Goods Vehicles (3.5-5.5t) |
>3.5-5.5t |
|
7 |
Medium & Heavy Goods Vehicles (5.5-15t) |
>5.5-15t |
|
8 |
Medium & Heavy Goods Vehicles (>=15t) |
>15t |
|
11 |
Public Light Buses |
all |
|
12 |
Private Light Buses (<=3.5t) |
<=3.5t |
|
13 |
Private Light Buses (>3.5t) |
>3.5t |
|
14 |
Non-franchised Buses (<6.4t) |
<=6.36t |
|
15 |
Non-franchised Buses (6.4-15t) |
>6.36-15t |
|
16 |
Non- franchised Buses (>15t) |
>15t |
|
17 |
Single Deck Franchised Buses |
all |
|
18 |
Double Deck Franchised Buses |
ALL |
|
19 |
Motor Cycles |
all |
4.5.33
The
latest model version EMFAC-HK v2.1 provided by EPD was employed in this
Study. The input parameters and
model assumptions made in EMFAC-HK model are summarized as follows.
4.5.34
Referring
to the EPD’s Guideline on Modelling
Vehicle Emissions, the EMFAC-HK has two models – “EMFAC-HK V2.1 (BC)” and
“EMFAC-HK V2.1 (I and M)”. The former has no I/M program and works only for
calendar years from 1997 to 2012 while the latter has taken into account the
effect of the I/M program using remote sensing and dynamometer testing for
petrol/LPG vehicles and works for calendar years from 2013 to 2040. The model
year of this Project is Year 2016, therefore, “EMFAC-HK V2.1 (I and M)” was
chosen.
4.5.35
According
to EPD’s guideline, “Burden mode” is used for calculating area-specific
emission inventories. It was selected for this Project, since it can provide
hourly vehicular emissions, taking into account of ambient conditions and
speeds combined with vehicle activity, i.e. the number of vehicles, the
kilometers driven per day and the number of daily trips. Both CSV and MVE17G (BCD) CSV output
file formats were produced.
4.5.36
Each
vehicle class has diverse technological factors in different years. According to the underlying assumption
in EMFAC-HK model, each vehicle class can be modelled by the individual
behaviour of unique technology groups.
Each technology group represents the vehicles from the same class but
have distinct emission control technologies, have similar in-use deterioration
rates and respond the same to repair.
It means that the vehicles from the same class have the same emission
standards or specific equipment installed on them (e.g. multi-port fuel
injection, three-way catalyst, adaptive fuel controls, etc) which made them
have the same performance.
4.5.37
The
“2010 Licensed Vehicle by Age and Technology Group Fractions” provided
in EPD’s website was adopted in this assessment. Since the provided exhaust technology
fractions are only up to Year 2010, for those after Year 2010 were projected in
accordance with EPD’s Guideline on Modelling Vehicle Emissions – Appendix 2
“Implementation Schedule of Vehicle Emission Standards in Hong Kong (Updated as
at 2 April 2012)” and Appendix 3 “EMFAC-HK V2.1 Exhaust Technology Group
Indexes”.
4.5.38
According
to EPD’s Guideline on Modelling Vehicle Emissions - Appendix 2, the
implementation schedules of Euro V and Euro VI standards are in the middle of a
year for some vehicle classes or fuel types. Since the detailed fraction data is not
available after Year 2010, as a conservative approach, the exhaust technology
fractions of these vehicle classes or fuel types were assumed to be kept as the
previous standards fully for the scheduled year, while upgraded to the higher
standards fully at the following year.
The adopted exhaust technology fractions are presented in Appendix 4.3.
4.5.39
Evaporative
technology fraction in the model was based on the default value.
4.5.40
As
recommended in the EPD’s Guideline on Modelling Vehicle Emissions,
default vehicle populations forecast in EMFAC-HK was used.
4.5.41
The
default accrual rates in EMFAC-HK were estimated from the local mileage data
adjusted to reflect the total VKT for each vehicle class. The default value was used.
4.5.42
The diurnal variation of daily trips was used
to estimate the start emissions of petrol and LPG vehicles, thus the trips of
diesel vehicles would be zero. The
number of trips per day of petrol and LPG vehicle was equal to the number of
cold starts per day. The cold start
is only allowed at the middle in some of the local roads with speed of 50kph. Detailed list of the roads with cold
starts (local roads) is shown in Appendix 4.1.
4.5.43
For those roads with cold starts, the diurnal
variation of daily trips in the Study Area for the highest predicted traffic flow within 15
years upon the commissioning year of the Project applied in the
EMFAC-HK model was provided by the traffic consultant has been agreed by the
TD. The adopted daily trips are summarized
in Appendix 4.3. The
working example illustrating the estimation is available in Table 2 of Appendix 4.7.
4.5.44
Vehicle-kilometer-travelled
(VKT) represents the total distance travelled on a weekday. The VKT was calculated by multiplying
the number of vehicle which based on the highest predicted hourly traffic flow
within 15 years upon the commissioning year of the Project, and the length of
road travelled in the Study Area. The
diurnal variation of VKT in the Study Area was provided by the traffic
consultant, and the input in the model was by vehicle/fuel/hour. The adopted daily VKT are summarized in Appendix 4.3.
4.5.45
Speed
fraction represents the percentage in different speed ranges of each vehicle
type weighted by VKT. The speed limits of
existing road were made reference to the Traffic AIDs (plan marked the road marking,
traffic sign and speed limits) from TD, while the
speed limits of proposed road were provided by traffic consultant. Design speeds of all existing and
proposed roads are presented in Appendix 4.1.
4.5.46
In
accordance with the Road Traffic Ordinance, for any road with design speed
limit of 70kph or above, the maximum speed limit for medium goods vehicles,
heavy goods vehicles, buses and buses shall be limited to 70kph. Thus, the speeds of medium goods
vehicles, heavy goods vehicles and buses from the flow speed of 70kph,
whichever is lower, are adopted. For the public light buses, the
maximum speed limit should be limited to 80kph. Thus, the speeds of public
light buses from the flow speed or 80kph, whichever is lower, are adopted.
4.5.47
The
24-hour speed fraction of each vehicle type was based on traffic data
provided by the traffic consultant. The adopted speed fraction is summarized in
Appendix 4.3. The working example illustrating the
calculation of speed fractions is available in Table 3 of Appendix 4.7.
4.5.48
According
to the information provided by Hong Kong Observatory (HKO), Kai Tak Weather
Station is the nearest station of the Project. However, this station only records the
wind direction and stability class.
Thus, data recorded at King’s Park meteorological station, which is the
second nearest station to the Project site, were adopted for the model input, and summarized in Appendix 4.3.
4.5.49
The
hourly emissions of NOx and RSP for this highest emission scenario were divided
by the number of vehicles and the distance travelled to obtain the emission
factors in gram per miles per vehicle.
The calculated 24-hour emission factors of 16 vehicle classes
for three road types were adopted in this air quality impact assessment and are
presented in Appendix 4.4.
4.5.50
The
forecast traffic flow, diurnal variation of daily trips and daily VMT and speed
fraction with 16 vehicle classes have been submitted to the TD. The response from TD is attached in Appendix 4.2 for
reference.
4.5.51
The
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) approved CALINE4
dispersion model was used to assess traffic emissions impact from existing and
planned road network. Surface
roughness coefficient of 100cm was taken in the CALINE4 model.
4.5.52
Since
Kai Tak Weather Station is the nearest station of the Project, hourly
meteorological data for the Year 2011 (including wind speed, wind direction,
air temperature, Pasquill stability class and mixing height) of the Kai Tak
Weather Station was employed for the model run. As Kai Tak Weather Station does not
record temperature data, the ambient temperature data recorded at the King’s
Park Weather Station were adopted.
4.5.53
Secondary
air quality impacts arising from the landscaped deck over the proposed Road D3A
and the full height vertical noise barrier (connected to the deck) of south
bound of the proposed Road D3A were also incorporated into the air quality
model. It was assumed that
dispersion of the traffic pollutants would have an effect similar to shifting
the road outside of the western edge of the landscaped deck at ground level.
4.5.54
The
locations of open road emission sources, 24-hour traffic flows and emission
factors for each road link are presented in Appendix 4.4.
4.5.55
For
the calculation of NO2 concentrations, the conversion factor from
NOx to NO2 was based on the Ambient Ratio Method (assuming 20% of
NOx to be NO2) which is an acceptable approach as stipulated in
EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters.
Other
Emission Sources within the Study Area
4.5.56
Other
emission sources within the study area including portal emission from the
enclosed section of Road D4A, emission from Trunk Road T2 ventilation building
and portal within KTD site, portal emission from Slip Road A Portal, emission
from the proposed hospital within KTD, cruise ship emissions from the proposed
cruise terminal at Kai Tak, emission from the existing typhoon shelters, and
planned heliport emission at the end of runway were predicted using the
Industrial Source Complex Short Term (ISCST3) dispersion model. Locations of these emission sources are
shown in Figure 4.2. According to the
information provided by Trunk Road T2 consultant, 90% of the emissions from
Trunk Road T2 tunnel were assumed to be from ventilation building and 10% from
the portal. The emissions from
other sources were made reference to the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report.
Ÿ
Chimney emission from nearby
industrial areas and proposed hospital within KTD – S6.5.12 to S6.5.14 at Page
6-12 of the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report;
Ÿ
Emission from proposed heliport –
S6.5.15 to S6.5.17 at Page 6-13 of the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report;
Ÿ
Cruise vessel emission from the cruise
terminal at Kai Tak – S6.5.32 at Page 6-14 of the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA
Report. It is noted that there is an update in the methodologies in preparing
mobile source port-related emission inventories by USEPA in April 2009. A qualitative review for comparison on
the methodologies adopted in the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report and the
updated methodologies of USEPA for the calculation of maritime emission factors
was conducted and is presented in Appendix 4.8.
The review results indicated negligible change in the emission factors, and the adoption of the cruise
vessel emission presented in the KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report is therefore
considered valid;
Ÿ
Emission from the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter
and To Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter – S6.5.39 to S6.5.40 at Page 6-19 of the
approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report.
4.5.57
The
emission inventory for ISCST3 Model is presented in Appendix 4.5.
4.5.58
Portal
emissions were modelled in accordance with the Permanent International
Association of Road Congress Report (PIARC, 1991). Pollutants are assumed to eject from the
portal as a portal jet such that 2/3 of the total emissions were dispersed
within the first 50 m of the portal and 1/3 of the total emissions within the
second 50 m.
4.5.59
Diurnal
variation profile of emission from open road source of Road D4A, Trunk Road T2
and Slip Road A was also applied to the corresponding portal and ventilation
building emissions.
4.5.60
Since
Kai Tak Weather Station is the nearest station of the Project, hourly
meteorological data for the Year 2011 (including wind speed, wind direction,
air temperature, Pasquill stability class and mixing height) of the Kai Tak
Weather Station was employed for the model run. As Kai Tak Weather Station does not
record temperature data, the ambient temperature data recorded at the King’s
Park Weather Station were adopted. The
urban dispersion mode in ISCST3 model was selected.
4.5.61
For
the calculation of NO2 concentrations, the conversion factor from
NOx to NO2 was based on the Ambient Ratio Method (assuming 20% of
NOx to be NO2) which is an acceptable approach as stipulated in EPD
Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters.
Cumulative Impact of Criteria Air
Pollutants
4.5.62
As
mentioned above, background pollutant levels within and adjacent to the Study
Area, vehicle emissions from open sections of the existing and planned road
networks, and tunnel portal and ventilation building emissions etc will all
contribute to the cumulative impact.
4.5.63
Besides
the vehicular emissions, emissions from the cruise vessels using the proposed
cruise terminal at Kai Tak, emission from proposed hospital at Kai Tak, the
proposed heliport, and typhoon shelters within 500m from the project site boundary would also contribute to the
cumulative air quality impact.
4.5.64
The
pollutant concentrations at the ASRs was predicted by both CALINE4 and ISCST3
models, where
Ÿ
the CALINE4 model was used to
predict the open road emissions from the existing and planned road networks;
and
Ÿ
the ISCST3 model was used to predict
all the portal emissions and ventilation shaft emissions, emission from
hospital, cruise ship, proposed heliport
and typhoon shelters.
4.5.65
To
obtain the cumulative pollutant concentration at each receptor, the predicted
values from the CALINE4 and the ISCST3 models are added together with the
background pollutant concentrations on an hour-by-hour basis.
4.6 Identification of Environmental Impacts
Construction
Dust
4.6.1
The
construction activities for the Project would be commenced in the Year 2014 for
completion in Year 2016 and major civil work will be completed in end 2015. The major construction
activities for the Project with air quality concern include:
Ÿ
surface excavation
Ÿ
roads construction
Ÿ
construction
of landscaped deck
Ÿ
installation
of noise barrier panel
4.6.2
Potential
air quality impacts arising from the construction of the Project would mainly
be related to dust nuisance from excavation, material handling and wind erosion
of the site. In general, it is expected that no extensive excavation
works would be conducted throughout the
construction phase and maximum 3 trucks per hour to be operated, but mainly at-grade road pavement
construction and pre-cast elements for on-site installations of the
landscaped deck. All the above
activities are not expected to generate significant amount of construction
dust. Furthermore, the separation distance
between the nearest ASR namely Kowloon Bay Dangerous Goods Godown and the
Project boundary is more than 400m.
Therefore, no
adverse dust impact would be expected at the nearby ASR.
4.6.3
Based
on the latest available information, the construction of the proposed Trunk
Road T2 would likely commence in end 2015 and be completed by end 2019. The proposed Trunk Road T2 is located
400m away from the Project boundary and would not overlap with the major construction civil works of the Project and thus cumulative dust impact
from Trunk Road T2
project is not
expected.
4.6.4
Under
the APCO, dust suppression measures stipulated in the Air Pollution Control
(Construction Dust) Regulation should be implemented. In addition, control measures stipulated
in the approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report will be strictly followed. With effective implementation of these
mitigation measures, as shown in detail in Section 4.8, adverse construction dust impacts are not
expected at the nearby ASR.
Operation
Phase
4.6.5
The
major air pollutant sources during operation phase of the Project would be
vehicular emissions from open sections of the existing and planned road
networks, portal emission from the enclosed section of Road D4A, emission from
Trunk Road T2 ventilation building and portal within KTD site, and portal
emission from Slip Road A Portal.
4.6.6
Besides vehicular emissions, emissions from the cruise vessels, emission
from proposed hospital, proposed heliport and typhoon shelters within 500m from the
project boundary would
also contribute to the cumulative air quality impact. The locations of emission sources are presented
in Figure 4.2.
4.7 Prediction and Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Construction
Dust
4.7.1
Construction activities of the
Project will involve surface excavation and roads construction. Extensive excavation works is not
expected. All the above activities
are not expected to generate significant amount of construction dust.
4.7.2
Potential
air quality impacts arising from the construction of the Project would mainly
be related to dust nuisance from excavation, material handling and wind erosion
of the site. In general, it is expected that no extensive excavation
works would be conducted throughout the
construction phase and maximum 3 trucks per hour to be operated, but mainly at-grade road pavement
construction and pre-cast elements for on-site installations of the
landscaped deck. All the above
activities are not expected to generate significant amount of construction
dust. Furthermore, the separation
distance between the nearest ASR (Kowloon Bay Dangerous Goods Godown) and the
Project boundary is more than 400m.
Therefore, no
adverse dust impact would be expected at the nearby ASR.
4.7.3
Control measures stipulated in
the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation of Air Pollution
Control Ordinance (APCO) should be implemented to ensure that construction
impacts are controlled within the relevant standards described above. In addition, control measures stipulated in the
approved KTD Schedule 3 EIA Report will be strictly followed. An environmental audit
programme for construction phase has been devised to verify the effectiveness
of the control measures so as to ensure proper construction dust control. With proper implementation of dust
control measures, as shown in Section 4.8, significant construction dust impacts at ASR
during the construction phase of the Project is not anticipated.
Operation
Phase
4.7.4
Taking
into account vehicle emissions from open road networks, portal emission from
the enclosed section of Road D4A, portal and ventilation building emissions
from Trunk Road T2, portal emission from Slip Road A Portal, emissions from the
cruise ships, proposed hospital, proposed heliport, and existing typhoon
shelters, and the background pollutant concentration, the cumulative 1-hour average NO2,
24-hour average NO2 and RSP, and annual average NO2 and
RSP concentrations were predicted and the highest pollutant concentrations at
each ASR under the highest emission scenario are presented in Appendix 4.6.
4.7.5
Based
on the prediction, no exceedance of the 1-hour average NO2, 24-hour
average NO2 & RSP and annual average NO2 & RSP
would occur at any representative ASRs in the Study Area.
4.7.6
From
the results, it is found that the maximum pollutant concentrations from the
Project would occur at 1.5m above ground (the lowest assessment height), and
the maximum cumulative concentrations would occur at the highest assessment
height of some ASRs due to the impact from cruise emission. The predicted
cumulative maximum hourly and/or daily and annual average contour plots for NO2
and RSP at 1.5m, 40m and 95m above ground are presented in Figures 4.3 to 4.7 (the bolded contours
represent the respective AQOs).
4.7.7
From the contour plots, localised exceedances of
1-hour average NO2 and annual average RSP at 1.5m, 40m & 95m
above ground, daily average NO2 & RSP at 95m above ground and
annual average NO2 at 1.5m and 95m above ground were found. However, no
existing or planned ASR (except Site 4D2 - planned Tourism Node) is identified
within these predicted exceedance areas at the relevant heights. The detailed
discussion on localised exceedance are summarised below. With reference
to the S6.8.2 of the approved Schedule 3 Kai Tak Development EIA Report, the
fresh air intake for the Site 4D2 (Tourism Node) would be located below 40m
above ground. Therefore, adverse
air quality impact for the Tourism Node at Site 4D2 is not expected. The modeling results indicated that the
predicted cumulative concentrations of NO2 and RSP at all
representative ASRs would comply with the respective AQO.
|
Exceedance
Area |
Remarks |
|
1-hr NO2
concentration |
|
|
Figure
4.3a - Over Kai Fuk Road (Exceedance
area found at 1.5m above ground) |
Exceedance area mainly found on Kai Fuk Road. No ASRs
are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air quality impact is not
expected. |
|
Figure
4.3b - Site 3A3 and Proposed Ventilation Building
for Road T2 within KTD area (Exceedance
area found at 40m above ground) |
With
reference to the latest design of DSD desilting compounds, the maximum height
of this desilting compound at Site 3A3 is +14mPD (i.e. ~9m above
ground). No ASRs are identified
within the exceedance area, adverse air quality impact is not expected. |
|
Figure
4.3c - Sites 4B5, 4C3, 4C4 and 4C5 (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
Since the
proposed maximum building height of Sites 4B5, 4C3, 4C4 and 4C5 is +45mPD
(i.e. ~40m above ground), no ASRs are identified within the exceedance area,
adverse air quality impact is not expected. |
|
Figure
4.3c - Site 4D2 - planned Tourism Node (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
With
reference to the S6.8.2 of the approved Schedule 3 Kai Tak Development EIA
Report, the fresh air intake for the Site 4D2 (Tourism Node) would be located
below 40m above ground.
Therefore, adverse air quality impact for the Tourism Node at Site 4D2
is not expected. |
|
24-hr NO2
concentration |
|
|
Figure
4.4c - Sites 4B5, 4C4 and 4C5 (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
Since the
proposed maximum building height of Sites 4B5, 4C4 and 4C5 is +45mPD (i.e.
~40m above ground), no ASRs are identified within the exceedance area,
adverse air quality impact is not expected. |
|
Figure
4.4c - Site 4D2 - planned Tourism Node (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
With
reference to the S6.8.2 of the approved Schedule 3 Kai Tak Development EIA
Report, the fresh air intake for the Site 4D2 (Tourism Node) would be located
below 40m above ground.
Therefore, adverse air quality impact for the Tourism Node at Site 4D2
is not expected. |
|
Annual NO2 concentration |
|
|
Figure
4.5a - Over Kai Fuk Road and other proposed roads
in KTD area (Exceedance
area found at 1.5m above ground) |
Exceedance area mainly found on Kai Fuk Road. No ASRs
are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air quality impact is not
expected. |
|
Figure
4.5a - Over typhoon shelters (Exceedance
area found at 1.5m above ground) |
No ASRs
are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air quality impact is not
expected. |
|
Figure
4.5c - Site 4C5 (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
Since the
proposed maximum building height of Site 4C5 is +45mPD (i.e. ~40m above
ground), no ASRs are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air
quality impact is not expected. |
|
Figure
4.5c - Site 4D2 - planned Tourism Node (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
With
reference to the S6.8.2 of the approved Schedule 3 Kai Tak Development EIA
Report, the fresh air intake for the Site 4D2 (Tourism Node) would be located
below 40m above ground.
Therefore, adverse air quality impact for the Tourism Node at Site 4D2
is not expected. |
|
24-hr RSP
concentration |
|
|
Figure
4.6c - Site 4C5 (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
Since the
proposed maximum building height of Site 4C5 is +45mPD (i.e. ~40m above
ground), no ASRs are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air
quality impact is not expected. |
|
Figure
4.6c - Site 4D2 - planned Tourism Node (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
With
reference to the S6.8.2 of the approved Schedule 3 Kai Tak Development EIA
Report, the fresh air intake for the Site 4D2 (Tourism Node) would be located
below 40m above ground.
Therefore, adverse air quality impact for the Tourism Node at Site 4D2
is not expected. |
|
Annual RSP
concentration |
|
|
Figure
4.7a - Over Kai Fuk Road and other proposed roads
in KTD area (Exceedance
area found at 1.5m above ground) |
Exceedance area mainly found on Kai Fuk Road. No ASRs
are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air quality impact is not
expected. |
|
Figure
4.7a - Over typhoon shelters (Exceedance
area found at 1.5m above ground) |
No ASRs
are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air quality impact is not
expected. |
|
Figure
4.7b - Over sea near cruise terminal (Exceedance
area found at 40m above ground) |
No ASRs
are identified within the exceedance area, adverse air quality impact is not
expected. |
|
Figure
4.7c - Sites 4B5, 4C3, 4C4 and 4C5 (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
Since the
proposed maximum building height of Sites 4B5, 4C3, 4C4 and 4C5 is +45mPD
(i.e. ~40m above ground), no ASRs are identified within the exceedance area,
adverse air quality impact is not expected. |
|
Figure
4.7c - Site 4D2 - planned Tourism Node (Exceedance
area found at 95m above ground) |
With
reference to the S6.8.2 of the approved Schedule 3 Kai Tak Development EIA
Report, the fresh air intake for the Site 4D2 (Tourism Node) would be located
below 40m above ground.
Therefore, adverse air quality impact for the Tourism Node at Site 4D2
is not expected. |
4.8 Mitigation of Environmental Impacts
Construction
Phase
Ÿ
Stockpiling site(s) should be lined
with impermeable sheeting and bunded.
Stockpiles should be fully covered by impermeable sheeting to reduce
dust emission.
Ÿ
Misting for the dusty material
should be carried out before being loaded into the vehicle.
Ÿ
Any vehicle with an open load
carrying area should have properly fitted side and tail boards.
Ÿ
Material having the potential to
create dust should not be loaded from a level higher than the side and tail
boards and should be dampened and covered by a clean tarpaulin.
Ÿ
The tarpaulin should be properly
secured and should extend at least 300 mm over the edges of the sides and
tailboards. The material should
also be dampened if necessary before transportation.
Ÿ
The vehicles should be restricted to
maximum speed of 10 km per hour and confined haulage and delivery vehicle to
designated roadways inside the site.
On-site unpaved roads should be compacted and kept free of lose
materials.
Ÿ
Vehicle washing facilities should be
provided at every vehicle exit point.
Ÿ
The area where vehicle washing takes
place and the section of the road between the washing facilities and the exit
point should be paved with concrete, bituminous materials or hardcores.
Ÿ
Every main haul road should be
scaled with concrete and kept clear of dusty materials or sprayed with water so
as to maintain the entire road surface wet.
Ÿ
Every stock of more than 20 bags of
cement should be covered entirely by impervious sheeting placed in an area
sheltered on the top and the three sides.
Ÿ
Every vehicle should be washed to
remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels before leaving the
construction sites.
Operation
Phase
4.8.2
According
to the assessment results, all the representative ASRs would comply with the
AQO limit and thus no further mitigation measure would be required.
4.9 Residual of Environmental Impacts
Construction
Phase
4.9.1
With
the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and the dust suppression
measures stipulated in Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation
during the construction phase, no adverse residual air quality impact would be
expected.
Operation
Phase
4.9.2
No
adverse residual air quality impact due to the KTD Roads D3A & D4A Project
is expected.
4.10 Environmental Monitoring and Audit
Construction
Phase
4.10.1
With
the implementation of the proposed dust suppression measures & good site
practices, no unacceptable dust impact would be expected at the ASRs. No air quality monitoring during the
construction phase is considered necessary. However, regular inspections of the
construction activities and works areas should be conducted during the
construction phase to ensure proper implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures.
Operation
Phase
4.10.2
According
to the assessment results, all the representative ASRs would comply with the
AQO limit and thus no further mitigation measure would be required. Air quality monitoring and audit
during the operation phase is considered not necessary.
Construction
Phase
4.11.1
Air
quality impacts from the construction works for the Project would mainly be
related to construction dust from excavation, material handling and wind
erosion. With the implementation of
mitigation measures specified in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust)
Regulation, dust impact on air sensitive receivers would be minimal.
Operation
Phase
4.11.2
The
cumulative air pollutant concentrations associated with the vehicle emissions
from open road network of existing and proposed roads, portal and ventilation
building emissions and emissions from other sources within 500m from the
project site boundary have been assessed.
The cumulative air quality impact assessment result shows that all the
air sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the Project site would comply with
the Air Quality Objectives.
[1]
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/air/air_maincontent.html
[2] Air Quality in Hong Kong 2011
[3]
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/air/prob_solutions/cleaning_air_atroad.html
[4] http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/air/studyrpts/assessment_of_tap_measurements.html
[5]
http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/EMEPCORINAIR5/Sources_of_PCB_emissions.pdf/view
[6]
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/news_events/legco/files/EA_Panel_110526a_eng.pdf
[7]
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/air/prob_solutions/cleaning_air_atroad.html
[8]
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/air/studyrpts/files/HKEPDFinalReportRev_11-29-10_v2.pdf
[9] Assessment of Toxic Air Pollutant
Measurements in Hong Kong Final Report
[10]
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/quality/standards.htm
[11]
http://www.medway.gov.uk/environmentandplanning/environmentalhealth/airquality/airqualityfordevelopers.aspx