1.1 Background
1.2 Purpose
& Nature of Project
1.3 Purpose
and Objectives of the EIA Study
2 Objectives and Benefits of the
Project and Consideration of Alternatives
2.1 Objectives
and Benefits of the Project
2.2 Consideration
of Alternative Options for Electricity Generation
2.3 Consideration
of Siting and Layout Options
2.4 Scenarios
With and Without the Project
4 Legislative Requirements,
Evaluation Criteria AND Sensitive ReceiverS
4.1 Air
Quality
4.2 Hazard
to Life
4.3 Noise
4.4 Water
Quality
4.5 Waste
Management
4.7 Ecology
4.8 Fisheries
4.10 Cultural
Heritage
4.11 Health
5 Summary of Environmental
Impacts
5.1 Introduction
5.3 Air
Quality
5.4 Hazard
to Life
5.5 Noise
5.6 Water
Quality
5.7 Waste
Management
5.9 Ecology
5.10 Fisheries
5.11 Landscape
& Visual
5.12 Cultural
Heritage
5.13 Health
5.14 Environmental
Monitoring and Audit
1
Introduction
1.1
Background
CLP
Power Hong Kong Limited (CLP) and Castle Peak Power Company Limited (CAPCO) are
responsible for providing a safe, highly reliable and clean supply of
electricity to over 80% of Hong Kong’s population at reasonable cost. Within Hong Kong, CLP operates three
power stations, namely the Castle Peak Power Station (CPPS), Black Point Power
Station (BPPS) and Penny’s Bay Power Station (PBPS), all owned by CAPCO, a
joint venture between CLP and China Southern Power Grid Company Limited, in
which CLP holds a 70% interest.
CLP and CAPCO support the HKSAR Government’s
objective of improving air quality and environmental performance in Hong
Kong. Consistent with the HKSAR
Government’s medium-term strategy of increasing the use of natural gas for
local power generation, and reducing carbon intensity of local electricity
generation, provision for additional local gas-fired generation capacity is
considered by CLP and CAPCO to be the preferred choice. This also provides sufficient
generation capacity to meet load demand which is vital to a reliable
electricity supply, helps maintain appropriate reserve margins to cater for
unplanned outages, and prepare for gradual retirement of existing coal-fired
generation units in CPPS.
The purpose of CAPCO’s current proposal is to consider the installation
of up to two additional gas-fired generation units in phases at the BPPS
(hereafter referred to as “the Project”).
The
proposed additional gas-fired generation unit(s) will adopt combined cycle gas
turbine (CCGT) configuration using natural gas as the primary fuel. Such configuration is aimed at reducing
emissions as compared with coal-fired generation, thereby providing a
relatively clean source of electricity for Hong Kong. When the additional CCGT unit(s) are commissioned, they will be operated as a
priority plant and topped up by BPPS and CPPS plants to meet the future
electricity generation demand. The
sent-out from the additional CCGT unit(s) will normally displace the sent-out
from the existing CAPCO generation units of CPPS and BPPS. In this circumstance the implementation
of additional CCGT unit(s) would allow for a reduction in the total quantities
of air pollutants emitted from CAPCO power generation system (up to 19%
reduction in NOx emissions for one additional CCGT unit scenarios and up to 33%
reduction in NOx emissions for two additional units scenarios assessed in this
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study). The implementation of this Project is
therefore a critical step for supporting long term air quality improvement in
Hong Kong.
The submission of and
content described in this EIA Report does
not amount to a commitment by or on behalf of CLP and/or CAPCO to proceed with
the Project.
1.2
Purpose & Nature of Project
The scope of the Project
involves the construction and operation of up to two 600 MW class additional gas-fired
generation units in phases at the BPPS to both increase local gas-fired
electricity generating capacity and accommodate growth in electricity demand.
The following elements of
the Project are classified as Designated Projects under the Environmental Impact
Assessment Ordinance (EIAO)
(Cap. 499):
·
Installation
of additional gas-fired generation unit(s) in phases at the BPPS (Schedule 2,
Part I, Item D.1 - Public utility electricity power plant); and
·
If
a second unit is to be installed, a dredging operation less than 100 m from the
existing BPPS seawater intake location would be required (Schedule 2, Part I,
Item C.12(b) - A dredging operation which is less than
100 m from a seawater intake point).
1.3
Purpose
and Objectives of the EIA Study
This EIA Report is prepared by ERM-Hong Kong, Ltd (ERM) for CLP in
accordance with the EIA Study Brief No.
ESB-286/2015 (“the EIA Study Brief”),
issued in June 2015, and the Technical
Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM).
The purpose of this EIA
Study is to provide information on the nature and extent of environmental
impacts arising from the construction and operation of the Project and
associated works that will take place concurrently in accordance with the
requirements described in the EIA Study
Brief. This information will
contribute to decisions by the Director of Environmental Protection on:
·
The
overall acceptability of any adverse environmental consequences that are likely
to arise as a result of the Project;
·
The
conditions and requirements for the detailed design, construction and operation
of the Project to mitigate against adverse environmental consequences wherever
practicable; and
·
The
acceptability of residual impacts (if any) after the proposed mitigation
measures are implemented.The
detailed requirements of the EIA Study are set out in Clause 3 of the EIA Study
Brief. As specified in the EIA Study Brief, the EIA Study has addressed the key environmental
issues associated with the construction and operation of the Project.
2
Objectives
and Benefits of the Project and Consideration of Alternatives
2.1
Objectives
and Benefits of the Project
The objectives, needs and
benefits of the Project are considered in detail in the EIA Study and are
summarised as follows:
·
Supporting Government’s Objective
of Improving Air Quality:
Revamping the fuel mix for power generation is the only practicable way to
significantly reduce air emissions from power companies in the short to medium
term future. Following a public
consultation the Government has set a policy direction to increase the
proportion of natural gas-fired electricity generation in Hong Kong. The Government has also envisaged that a
small number of additional gas units would need to be built in order to
increase the use of natural gas.
This project is therefore proposed to support Government towards meeting
such additional gas-fired electricity generation capacity needs.
·
Meeting Increasing
Electricity Demand and Maintaining Adequate Reserve Margin: Despite CLP putting
increasing effort on demand side management, the latest outlook for economic
and population growth as well as infrastructure development in Kowloon and New
Territories means that CLP’s system demand is anticipated to grow
gradually. The current reserve capacity will reduce further if no
additional electricity
generation
capacity is installed to meet future demand growth. Having a reserve capacity is
particularly important to Hong Kong because of the very high economic and
social costs of any general system failure. Hence, provision of additional
electricity generating unit(s) to increase the electricity generation capacity
is therefore necessary.
·
Preparation for Retirement
of Existing Coal-fired Generation Units and Supporting Long Term Air Quality
Improvement:
Many of the generation units in CPPS are getting towards the end of their
design lives in the next decade and they will be phased out eventually. For environmental reasons, the
Government has not allowed power companies to build new coal-fired electricity
generation units since 1997. In
order to ensure a secure and stable electricity supply, it is important to have
sufficient gas-fired generation capacity to replace the coal-fired generation
capacity retired from CPPS and also to meet long term demand growth. In the long run, the gradual replacement
of power generation from coal-fired units to gas-fired units will help to lower
emissions from power generating activities. Hence, there will be long term benefits
to air quality from the installation of the proposed additional gas-fired
generation unit(s).
2.2
Consideration
of Alternative Options for Electricity Generation
Different options have been
explored to meet the requirement to increase electricity generation within the
emission allowances and to support the HKSAR Government’s target of increasing
electricity generation in 2020 by gas-fired unit(s). The options considered include:
·
converting
coal-fired units to gas-fired units;
·
constructing
additional gas-fired unit(s);
·
importing
more power supply from Mainland; and
·
use of more renewable energy.
The construction of
additional gas-fired unit(s) using combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) technology
is considered the most practicable and preferred option to pursue given its
high performance efficiencies and low emissions, impracticality and
uncertainties in adopting the other options. This option is considered practicable to
pursue to meet both the short-term and long-term needs of CLP.
2.3
Consideration
of Siting and Layout Options
The benefits and
dis-benefits of siting the new CCGT unit(s) at the existing three power
stations of CLP/ CAPCO are further discussed in Section 2.3 of the EIA Report. As the PBPS does not provide sufficient
land to accommodate the CCGT unit(s) of the planned scale, locating sites at
CPPS and BPPS were considered. A
number of factors were considered during site selection, including:
·
Site
condition;
·
Space
adequacy;
·
Existing
cooling water intake and outfall culverts;
·
Electrical
connection;
·
Brownfield
concerns; and
·
Environmental
considerations.
Given cost, programme,
spatial constraints, technical complexity, environmental impacts, and relative
distance to sensitive receivers, the preferred location to develop the
additional CCGT unit(s) is at the BPPS.
Site layout options were also examined in order to optimise the
preferred layout.
2.4
Scenarios With and Without the Project
With the Project in place,
CLP could support the HKSAR Government to meet the target of increasing
electricity generation from gas-fired units in 2020. The Project will also help to further
reduce the air pollutant emissions from CLP’s power generation system and
improve air quality, and help to provide adequate reserve capacity to ensure a
reliable electricity supply.
Without the Project, CLP will not be able to support the Government’s
2020 fuel mix targets, and CLP’s adequate and stable supply of electricity will
be put at risk. The long-term plan
for gradual replacement of power generation from coal-fired units to gas-fired
units helping to further lower emissions from power generating activities could
also be impacted.
3
Project Overview
3.1
Site
Location and History
Black Point, where the BPPS
is situated, is located in the western-most part of the New Territories. It comprises a headland extending from
the east (land) to the west (sea) with granitic soil underneath, typical of the
Tuen Mun and Castle Peak
areas. The major development at
Black Point is the BPPS, which is the first natural gas-fired power plant in
Hong Kong. The BPPS is located to
the north of the headland on reclaimed land. BPPS is surrounded by mountain to the
east and south while to the immediate north and west is the mouth of Deep Bay.
The proposed location for
the Project is within the existing boundaries of the BPPS site as illustrated
in Figure 3.1.
3.2
Project
Components
The Project is comprised of
the following key components which are discussed in detail in Section 3.2 of the EIA Report:
·
CCGT
unit(s) - with an installed capacity of up to 600 MW for each unit and a stack
of 80 m to 100 m high, supported by associated facilities such as power
generation equipment enclosed in buildings, outdoor pipe racks and underground
pipes and cables. A Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR) system will be installed to reduce NOx
emissions;
·
Cooling
water intake facility - including a newly constructed cooling water pumping
station and underground water pipelines for CCGT Unit No.1. Should the CCGT Unit No.2 be installed,
a new pumping station, an electrochlorination facility and cooling water intake
will be required with new underground water pipelines; and
·
Cooling
water discharge facility – including a new seal pit and the underground water
pipelines for CCGT Unit No.1, and a new seal pit and culvert or a newly
constructed outfall for CCGT Unit No. 2, should it be installed.
The location of these
components is shown in Figures 3.2a and 3.2b. Infrastructure for making connection with
existing plants and equipment of the BPPS, such as fuel pipes, pipe racks,
utility pipes and 400 kV cables, will also be required for the additional CCGT
unit(s).The EIA Study also identified a list of committed or planned projects
surrounding the BPPS which may potentially interface with the construction and
operation of this Project.
4
Legislative Requirements,
Evaluation Criteria AND Sensitive ReceiverS
4.1
Air
Quality
This EIA Study has examined
the construction and operation phase impacts to air quality. The impacts have been identified and
analysed for compliance with the prevailing Air Quality Objectives (AQOs)
stipulated under the Air Pollution
Control Ordinance (APCO) and the
criteria and guidelines stated in the EIAO-TM
Annexes 4 and 12 respectively.
Baseline condition within
the Assessment Area, which is defined as an area within 15 km from the Project
Site boundary, is primarily influenced by traffic emissions and industrial
emissions from the existing BPPS, CPPS and other industrial facilities. The potential impacts arising from the
construction and operation phases of this Project to a total of 74
representative Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) located in Lung Kwu Tan, Lung Kwu Sheung Tan, Ha
Pak Nai, Sheung Pak Nai, Lau Fau Shan, Tin Shui Wai, Yuen Long, Tuen Mun North, Hung Shui Kiu, Tuen Mun
South, So Kwun Wat, Siu Lam, Tai Lam, Tung Chung and
Siu Ho Wan, have been evaluated.
4.2
Hazard
to Life
The potential hazards
arising from the construction and operation phases of this Project have been
evaluated for compliance with Section 2 of Annex
4 of EIAO-TM which specifies the
individual risk guidelines and societal risk guidelines. The BPPS area is generally remote with
very low population density in the vicinity. All surrounding population, including
land, road traffic and marine vessel population was considered in this
assessment.
4.3
Noise
The potential impacts of
noise caused by construction and operation activities of this Project have been
assessed in this EIA Report. The impacts have been identified and
analysed for compliance with the criteria and guidelines stated in the EIAO-TM Annexes 5 and 13 respectively
and the applicable criteria stipulated under the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO).
The Project Site is located within the BPPS which is surrounded by
natural terrain with an open sea in the north-west. Background noise is dominated by the
operation of the existing BPPS. No
existing or planned Noise Sensitive Receiver (NSR) was identified within the
Assessment Area which covered a distance of 300 m from the Project Site
boundary.
4.4
Water
Quality
The EIA Study has described
the potential impacts associated with the construction and operation of the
Project on water quality. The
impacts have been identified and analysed for compliance with the prevailing
Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) stipulated under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO) and the criteria and
guidelines stated in the EIAO-TM Annexes 6 and 14 respectively.
The Assessment Area for the
water quality assessment covers the Deep Bay Water Control Zone (WCZ) and the
North Western (WCZ). Baseline
condition within the Assessment Area is heavily influenced by discharges from
the Pearl River and some local discharges and surface run-off from the
Northwest New Territories as well as north Lantau, with relatively low dissolved oxygen level and high
nutrient levels, organic loading and bacterial levels. The key Water Quality Sensitive
Receivers (WSRs) identified in the Assessment Area include:
·
Fisheries Resources: oyster production area at Sheung Pak Nai, recognised
spawning grounds of commercial fisheries resources in North Lantau, and
artificial reef deployment area at Sha Chau and Lung Kwu
Chau;
·
Marine Ecological Resources: mangroves in Sheung Pak Nai and Ngau Hom Shek,
Sha Chau and Lung Kwu
Chau Marine Park, intertidal
mudflats in Ha Pak Nai, seagrass beds in Ha Pak Nai and Sheung Pak Nai, horseshoe crab nursery grounds in Ha Pak Nai, Lung Kwu Sheung
Tan and Ngau Hom Shek, and coral colonies on the BPPS seawall;
·
Non-gazetted beaches: Lung Kwu
Sheung Tan and Lung Kwu
Tan;
·
Secondary
Contact Recreation Subzone; and
·
Seawater
intakes of the BPPS, CPPS, Tuen Mun
Area 38, Shiu Wing Steel Mill, and Sludge
Treatment Facilities.
The potential impacts
arising from the construction and operation phases of this Project to these
WSRs have been evaluated.
4.5
Waste
Management
The potential waste
management implications caused by construction and operational activities of
this Project have been assessed in this EIA
Report. The impacts have been
identified and analysed for compliance with the criteria and guidelines stated
in the EIAO-TM Annexes 7 and 15 respectively.
Sediment sampling and testing was conducted under this EIA Study to
identify the level of sediment contamination within the marine construction
works area for CCGT Unit No.2. The
sediment testing results are compared against the relevant sediment quality
criteria specified in ADV-21 Management
Framework for Disposal of Dredged/Excavated Sediment, which show compliance
with the Lower Chemical Exceedance Levels for all parameters except Arsenic in
all sediment samples. This is consistent with the results of the nearby EPD
sediment quality monitoring data and the general pattern all over western Hong
Kong, indicating a mild
level of sediment contamination in the vicinity of the Project.
4.6
Land
Contamination
This EIA Study has examined
the potential of land contamination at the Project Site. A land contamination assessment was
completed in accordance with the guidelines stated in the EIAO-TM Annex 19 and
other relevant guidance note and practice guide.
No land contamination
hotspots were identified during a site walkover and a desktop review of current
and historical land uses. Site
investigations conducted in accordance with the Contamination Assessment Plan endorsed by the EPD supplemented by
desktop data indicate that soil and groundwater samples do not exceed the
relevant standards for Industrial land use. The potential land contamination impacts
arising from the construction and operation phases of this Project have been
evaluated.
4.7
Ecology
The potential impacts of
construction and operation activities of this Project on terrestrial and marine
ecology have been assessed in this EIA
Report. The impacts have been
identified and analysed for compliance with the criteria and guidelines stated
in the EIAO-TM Annexes 8 and 16 respectively.
A series of detailed field
surveys, which include intertidal, subtidal, marine mammal, terrestrial habitat
and wildlife surveys, were conducted during the dry and wet seasons of 2015 to
update the baseline conditions of the terrestrial and marine habitats and
assemblages within and around the Project’s footprint. Findings of the field surveys confirmed
the findings of the literature review that waters around Black Point did not
report large numbers of dolphin sightings and are considered as marginal
habitat of the dolphins in Hong Kong, while the coverage of coral was low and
generally affected by the heavy sedimentation in the western waters. Terrestrial
species of conservation importance were identified within the Assessment Area
but none are anticipated to be directly affected.
Marine and terrestrial ecological resources and habitats in the Project
Site and its vicinity are considered as of negligible to low ecological values.
There are no terrestrial
ecological sensitive receivers identified within the Assessment Area which
covered a distance of 500 m from the Project Site boundary. The Assessment Area for marine ecology
covers the Deep Bay WCZ and the North Western WCZ and the marine ecological
sensitive receivers identified in this area are described in Section 4.4. The potential impacts arising from the
construction and operation phases of this Project to these sensitive receivers
have been evaluated.
4.8
Fisheries
The potential impacts to
fisheries caused by construction and operational activities of this Project
have been assessed in this EIA Report. The impacts have been identified and
analysed for compliance with the criteria and guidelines stated in the EIAO-TM Annexes 9 and 17 respectively.
The Assessment Area for
fisheries covers a distance of 500 m from the Project Site boundary. Findings of the desktop review of
baseline conditions of commercial fisheries resources and fishing operations
suggest that this area is of low importance to the Hong Kong fishing
industry. No fisheries sensitive
receivers were identified in this area and the fisheries sensitive receivers
located in the Deep Bay and Black Point areas are described in Section 4.4. The potential impacts arising from the
construction and operation phases of this Project to these sensitive receivers
have been evaluated.
4.9
Landscape
& Visual
The EIA Study has described
the landscape and visual impacts associated with the construction and operation
of this Project. The purpose of the
assessment was to evaluate the predicted impacts to landscape resources and
visual sensitive receivers as per EIAO GN
8/2010 and the criteria and guidelines
stated in the EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 18 respectively.
The EIA Study has
identified the following Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSRs), Landscape
Resources (LRs) and Landscape Character Areas (LCAs):
·
Six
VSRs including recreational, occupational and travelling users;
·
Nine
LRs: Artificial Rocky/ Hard Shoreline, Natural Rocky Shore, Highly Modified
Area, Plantation, Rocky Grassland/ Shrubland Slopes,
Mixed Shrubland, Vegetated Modified Slopes, Water
Channel and Seascape; and
·
Four
LCAs: Inshore Landscape, Power Station Landscape, Headland Landscape and
Hillside Landscape.
The potential landscape and
visual impacts from the construction and operation phases of this Project to
these sensitive receivers have been evaluated.
4.10
Cultural
Heritage
The potential impacts to
cultural heritage, marine archaeological and historic resources caused by
construction and operational activities of this Project have been assessed in
this EIA Report. The impacts have been identified and
analysed to be in compliance with the criteria and guidelines stated in the EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19 respectively.
There is no built heritage or
sites of archaeological interest located within 500m from the proposed Project
Site. Therefore, the proposed
Project Site is of no terrestrial built heritage and archaeological potential. A Marine Archaeological Investigation
has been undertaken and it confirms that the Project Site has no marine sites
of cultural heritage / archaeological value present and has no archaeological
potential. The potential impacts on
cultural heritage arising from the construction and operation phases of this
Project have been evaluated.
4.11
Health
This EIA Study has examined
potential impacts to human health related to emission of toxic air pollutants
(TAP) from Project operation. The
impacts have been identified and analysed in accordance the technical requirements
set out in Section II of Appendix A of the EIA
Study Brief. Acute and chronic
(both non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic) health risks to a total of 74
representative Human Sensitive Receivers (HSRs) located within a 15 km
Assessment Area have been evaluated.
5
Summary of Environmental
Impacts
5.1
Introduction
This Part of the Executive Summary describes construction
and operational activities associated with the Project and
addresses the related key environmental issues.
5.2
Project
Description
The scope of the Project
involves the phased construction and operation of up to two additional CCGT
units (with an installed capacity of up to 600 MW each) at the BPPS. The proposed location for the additional
CCGT units (“CCGT Unit No.1” and “CCGT Unit No.2”) is illustrated in Figure 3.2a and 3.2b.
5.2.1
Construction
& Operational Activities
No major earthworks or site
formation works will be required during the construction of the Project. Marine dredging works would not be
required for the construction of CCGT Unit No.1. Minor marine dredging works adjacent to
the existing BPPS seawall are anticipated to be required for CCGT Unit
No.2. Key activities for the
construction and operation of CCGT Unit No. 1 and CCGT Unit No.2 are summarised
in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Summary of Key Project
Details
|
Item |
Detail |
|
CCGT Unit No.1 and Associated
Facilities (Figure 3.2a) |
|
|
Project
Scope |
Ÿ Clearance
activities within the Project Site, including alternation of temporary warehouse Ÿ Civil works and
electrical / mechanical works for
installation of one CCGT unit (with an installed capacity of up
to 600 MW), its associated auxiliary equipment and supporting facilities
which include four buildings of about 30m high (subject to final design) to
house power generation equipment such as turbines, generators, transformers,
etc., outdoor pipe racks and equipment, an exhaust stack of about 80m to 100m above ground,
infrastructures for making utilities connections (e.g. 400 kV cables,
electrical and control cables, pipes for fuel gas, fuel oil, water supplies,
auxiliary gas supplies, etc.) from existing plant equipment in BPPS to the
CCGT unit and necessary works for enhancement/expansion of existing plant
equipment. Ÿ Installation
of cooling water intake facility which includes a newly constructed cooling
water pumping station, enhanced electrochlorination system and underground
water pipelines. Ÿ Installation
of cooling water discharge facility which includes underground water pipelines, a new
seal pit, and connection between the seal pit and the existing outfall. |
|
Construction Activities |
Ÿ Relocation or demolition of
existing facilities/ utilities within the Project Site by typical equipment
such as hydraulic crusher, flame cutting, excavators, etc. Ÿ Site
construction, excavation, trenching, modification of existing box culvert
supplementary seawater intake, and equipment installation by typical
equipment such as excavators, mobile cranes, welding machines, cutting
equipment, powered mechanical hand tools, micro-tunnel boring machine,
etc. |
|
Operational Activities |
Ÿ CCGT
unit and its associated supporting facilities will normally be operated
except closing for general maintenance works. Ÿ Discharge
of cooling
water. |
|
CCGT Unit No.2 and Associated
Facilities (Figure 3.2b) |
|
|
Project
Scope |
Ÿ Clearance
activities within the Project Site, including alternation of temporary warehouse Ÿ Civil works and
electrical / mechanical works for
installation of one CCGT unit (with an installed capacity of up
to 600 MW), its associated auxiliary equipment and supporting facilities
which include four buildings of about 30m high (subject to final design) to
house power generation equipment such as turbines, generators, transformers,
etc., outdoor pipe racks and equipment, an exhaust stack of about 80m to 100m above ground,
infrastructures for making utilities connections (e.g. 400 kV cables,
electrical and control cables, pipes for fuel gas, fuel oil, water supplies,
auxiliary gas supplies, etc.) from existing plant equipment in BPPS to the
CCGT unit and necessary works for enhancement/expansion of existing plant
equipment. Ÿ Installation
of cooling water intake facility which includes a newly constructed cooling
water pumping station, new electrochlorination
facility and building, a new intake culvert, and underground water
pipelines. Ÿ Installation
of cooling water discharge facility which includes a newly constructed seal pit, a new
outfall culvert, and underground water pipelines. |
|
Construction Activities |
Ÿ Relocation or demolition
of existing facilities/ utilities within the Project Site by typical
equipment such as hydraulic crusher, flame cutting, excavators, etc. Ÿ Site
construction, excavation, trenching, and equipment installation by typical
equipment such as excavators, mobile cranes, welding machines, cutting
equipment, powered mechanical hand tools, micro-tunnel boring machine,
etc. Ÿ Minor
marine dredging for cooling
water intake and discharge facilities by one closed grab dredger supported by
hopper barge and tug boat Ÿ Seawall cofferdam
construction, installation of cooling water intake and outfall culverts and
temporary seawall removal and reinstatement by piling rig-mounted/ jack-up
barge, derrick lighter and crane barge |
|
Operational Activities |
Ÿ CCGT
unit and its associated supporting facilities will normally be operated
except closing for general maintenance works. Ÿ Discharge of cooling
water. Ÿ
Maintenance dredging near the cooling water intake
and discharge facilities, expected to be at about once every 4 to 5 years. |
|
Area
of Seabed Affected by the installation of Cooling Water Intake and Discharge
Facilities |
Ÿ
Two areas of about 100m x 100m each |
|
Length
of Existing Artificial Seawall affected by the installation of Cooling Water
Intake and Discharge Facilities |
Ÿ
~150 m of seawall to be reinstated as sloping
artificial seawall Ÿ
~50 m of seawall to be transformed as intake/
outfall culverts |
|
Dredging
Volumes (in situ volume) from the
installation of Cooling Water Intake and Discharge Facilities |
Ÿ
From two areas of about 20,000 m3 each |
|
Dredging
Volumes (in situ volume) from
Maintenance Dredging |
Ÿ
~6,600 m3 for each facility |
5.2.2
Tentative
Implementation Programme
Subject to obtaining HKSAR
Government approval of the Project and a final investment decision on the Project
being taken by CLP/CAPCO, it is anticipated that the construction of the
Project would be implemented in phases with CCGT Unit No.1 commencing in the
second half of 2016. Commercial
operation of CCGT Unit No.1 is anticipated by the end of 2019. The commencement date for construction
of CCGT Unit No.2 is expected to be after 2019. An indicative construction programme is
shown in Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1 Preliminary
Construction Programme of the Project
5.3
Air
Quality
5.3.1
Construction
Phase
Potential
nuisance from dust generating activities during construction of CCGT Unit No.1
and No.2 have been considered. The Project construction
site is small, with relative small quantities of construction and demolition
materials and excavated materials generated from construction activities. The minor marine dredging works for CCGT
Unit No.2 are not dust generating.
Due to the large separation distance between the worksite and the
nearest ASR (> 1 km), adverse dust impact arising from the construction
activities of the Project is not anticipated. With
the implementation of standard mitigation measures, no unacceptable dust impact
is anticipated.
Due to the small quantities
of C&D materials and excavated materials that require off-site disposal,
the number of additional truck trips generated per day will be limited (about
23 truck trips per day).
Furthermore, major equipment for the Project will be transported to the
Project site by barges, as far as practicable, in order to minimise the number
of additional truck trips on the roads due to the construction of the
Project. The potential air quality
impact due to vehicular emissions from additional trucks during the construction
phase of the Project is minimal.
5.3.2
Operation
Phase
When the additional CCGT unit(s) are commissioned, they will be operated as a
priority plant and topped up by BPPS and CPPS plants to meet the future
electricity generation demand. The
sent-out from the additional CCGT unit(s) will normally displace the sent-out
from the existing CAPCO generation units of CPPS and BPPS. The assessment scenarios for the
long-term impacts covered the potential operation scenarios with the Project,
including displacement of generation from the existing coal-fired plants and
gas-fired plants by the additional CCGT unit(s). The assessment has considered the
installation of one or two CCGT units at 440 MW or 600 MW. This allows an evaluation of the
magnitude of impacts from the operation of CCGT units in the range of 440 MW
and 600 MW. The total annual
sent-out from the CAPCO plants have been assumed to remain unchanged in all the
long-term impact assessment scenarios.
Implementation of
additional CCGT unit(s) would allow for a reduction in the total quantities of
air pollutants emitted from CAPCO power generation system. Substantial reductions in total annual
emission loading are demonstrated in the displacing both coal-fired and
gas-fired generation scenarios when comparing with the 2020 emission cap. For the one additional CCGT scenarios,
significant reductions in NOx emissions of up to 16% and 19% are predicted for
440MW CCGT and 600MW CCGT, respectively.
Further reductions in NOx emissions are shown in the two additional CCGT
scenarios, up to 26% and 33% for 440MW CCGT and 600MW CCGT, respectively. For the displacing gas-fired generation
only scenarios, reductions in NOx emissions are still demonstrated under worst
case situation with least reduction of up to 2% for one 440 MW CCGT.
Assessment of potential
impacts to ambient air quality from the proposed installation of the additional
CCGT units indicated that whilst the contribution from the proposed additional
generation capacity was minimal, current monitoring indicated that ambient
nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations already exceeded the AQO
standard in certain areas.
Further modelling and
analysis of cumulative air quality impacts from emission sources in the Areas of
Influence by the Project at the opening year (2020) were completed considering
a number of operating scenarios which are summarised in Table 5.2 and Table 5.3. For the operation of one or two
additional CCGT units, it is concluded that for short-term impacts, the
predicted pollutant concentrations at the ASRs contributed from the additional
CCGT units are insignificant and the predicted cumulative 1-hour NO2,
10-minute SO2, 24-hour RSP (PM10), 24-hour FSP (PM2.5)
and 24-hour SO2 at the concerned ASRs comply with their relevant
ambient air quality criteria. For
long-term impacts, the annual average concentrations for NO2, RSP
(PM10) and FSP (PM2.5) were below the assessment criteria
at all locations with the exception of NO2 at Parkview Court in Tuen Mun. The exceedance at Parkview Court is due
to background and road traffic contributions, while the annual average NO2
contribution from the CAPCO power generation facilities at this ASR is
insignificant (a maximum of 0.12 µg m-3 at the height of 100m for
“without Project” scenario, which is about 0.3% of the annual average NO2
criterion). When the background and
road traffic contributions are removed, the modelling results showed that there
would be a reduction in NO2 concentration at this ASR with the
implementation of either one or two additional CCGT units. Furthermore, the maximum annual NO2
contribution at the concerned ASRs due to the operation of the additional CCGT
unit(s) is insignificant (from 0.02% of total concentration for the installation
of one 440MW CCGT unit displacing gas-fired generation only to 0.06% of total
concentration for the installation of two 600MW CCGT units displacing both
coal-fired and gas-fired generation).
The potential change in ambient ozone levels due to the operation of the
additional CCGT units would be minimal.
Overall, it is concluded that the contribution from the Project emission
to ambient air quality at the identified representative ASRs is insignificant and
hence acceptable.