Figure 4.1
|
Locations of Air Sensitive
Receivers
|
Figure 4.2
|
Indicative Stack Locations of
Proposed CCGT Units
|
Figure 4.3
|
Locations of Representative Air
Sensitive Receivers in Butterfly Estate AoI
|
Figure 4.4
|
Locations of Representative Air
Sensitive Receivers in Tin Shui Wai AoI
|
Figure 4.5
|
Locations of Representative Air
Sensitive Receivers in Tuen Mun AoI
|
Figure 4.6
|
Locations of Representative Air
Sensitive Receivers in Yuen Long AoI
|
Figure 4.7
|
Locations of Representative Air
Sensitive Receivers in Tung Chung AoI
|
Figure 4.8
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Butterfly Estate AoI for Normal Operation (One Additional 600MW
CCGT Unit)
|
Figure 4.9
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tin Shui Wai AoI for Normal Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT
Unit)
|
Figure 4.10
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tuen Mun AoI for Normal Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT
Unit)
|
Figure 4.11
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Yuen Long AoI for Normal Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT
Unit)
|
Figure 4.12
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tung Chung AoI for Normal Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT
Unit)
|
Figure 4.13
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Butterfly Estate AoI for Normal Operation (Two Additional 600MW
CCGT Units)
|
Figure 4.14
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tin Shui Wai AoI for Normal Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.15
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tuen Mun AoI for Normal Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.16
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Yuen Long AoI for Normal Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.17
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tung Chung AoI for Normal Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.18
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Butterfly Estate AoI for Backup Operation (One Additional 600MW
CCGT Unit)
|
Figure 4.19
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tin Shui Wai AoI for Backup Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT
Unit)
|
Figure 4.20
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tuen Mun AoI for Backup Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT
Unit)
|
Figure 4.21
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground
in Yuen Long AoI for Backup Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT Unit)
|
Figure 4.22
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tung Chung AoI for Backup Operation (One Additional 600MW CCGT
Unit)
|
Figure 4.23
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground
in Butterfly Estate AoI for Backup Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.24
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tin Shui Wai AoI for Backup Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.25
|
Contour of
Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tuen Mun AoI for Backup Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.26
|
Contour of
Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Yuen Long AoI for Backup Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.27
|
Contour
of Cumulative 19th Highest 1-hour Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above
Ground in Tung Chung AoI for Backup Operation (Two Additional 600MW CCGT
Units)
|
Figure 4.28
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Butterfly Estate
AoI for Scenario 1
|
Figure 4.29
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Tin Shui Wai AoI
for
Scenario 1
|
Figure 4.30
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Tuen Mun AoI for
Scenario 1
|
Figure 4.31
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Yuen Long AoI for
Scenario 1
|
Figure 4.32
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Tung Chung AoI for
Scenario 1
|
Figure 4.33
|
Contour of Annual
Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Butterfly Estate AoI for
Scenario 2a
|
Figure 4.34
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Tin Shui Wai AoI
for Scenario 2a
|
Figure 4.35
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Tuen Mun AoI for
Scenario 2a
|
Figure 4.36
|
Contour of
Annual Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Yuen Long AoI for
Scenario 2a
|
Figure 4.37
|
Contour of Annual
Average NO2 Concentration at 1.5m above Ground in Tung Chung AoI for
Scenario 2a
|
Figure 5.1
|
Societal Risk
Guidelines for Acceptable Risk Levels
|
Figure 5.2
|
Schematic Diagram of QRA Process
|
Figure 5.3
|
Grid Cell Numbering Scheme
|
Figure 5.4
|
Dangerous Goods Associated Delivery
Routes
|
Figure 5.5
|
Alternative Dangerous Goods Associated
Delivery Routes
|
Figure 5.6
|
Flight Paths of Hong Kong International
Airport
|
Figure 5.7
|
Aircraft Crash Coordinate System
|
Figure 5.8
|
Bund Overtopping Considerations
|
Figure 5.9
|
Event Tree Analysis for Natural Gas
Facilities
|
Figure 5.10
|
Event Tree Analysis for Hydrogen
Facilities
|
Figure 5.11
|
Event Tree Analysis for Distillate Oil
Facilities
|
Figure 5.12
|
Event Tree Analysis for Carbon Dioxide
Facilities
|
Figure 5.13
|
Event Tree Analysis for Carbon Dioxide
Facilities
|
Figure 5.14
|
Presentation of Consequence Results
|
Figure 5.15
|
Cumulative Risk – Individual Risk
Contours for the Project in 2016
|
Figure 5.16
|
Cumulative Risk – Individual Risk
Contours for the Project in 2019
|
Figure 5.17
|
Cumulative Risk – Individual Risk
Contours for the Project in 2020
|
Figure 5.18
|
Cumulative Risk – Individual Risk
Contours for the Project in 2034
|
Figure 5.19
|
Cumulative Risk – Individual Risk Contours
for the Project in 2035
|
Figure 5.20
|
Cumulative Risk – FN Curves
|
Figure 5.21
|
FN Curves Breakdown by Types of DGs in
2016
|
Figure 5.22
|
FN Curves Breakdown by Types of DGs in
2019
|
Figure 5.23
|
FN Curves Breakdown by Types of DGs in
2020
|
Figure 5.24
|
FN Curves Breakdown by Types of DGs in
2034
|
Figure 5.25
|
FN Curves Breakdown by Types of DGs in
2035
|
Figure 6.1
|
Locations of Noise Sensitive
Receivers
|
Figure 6.2
|
Topography
of the Black Point Headland, BPPS and Potential Sensitive Receivers at the
Proposed Lung Kwu Tan Reclamation Area
|
Figure 6.3
|
Section Plan
|
Figure 7.1
|
Water Quality Sensitive Receivers
and EPD Routine Water / Sediment Quality Monitoring Stations in the
Vicinity of the Proposed Project at Black Point
|
Figure 7.2
|
Sediment
Sampling Stations for this EIA
|
Figure 8.1
|
Indicative
Location of Temporary Stockpile Area
|
Figure 9.1
|
Project Components and Works
Areas of the Land Contamination Assessment
|
Figure 10.1
|
Intertidal
Habitats Identified within the Assessment Area at Black Point
|
Figure 10.2
|
Terrestrial
Habitats Identified within the Assessment Area at Black Point
|
Figure 10A.1
|
Assessment
Area for Marine Ecological Impact Assessment
|
Figure 10A.2
|
Sampling
Location and Survey Transects for Terrestrial Ecological Baseline Survey
within Assessment Area
|
Figure 10A.3
|
Black
Point Intertidal Sampling Transect Locations (Reproduced from ERM (2006
& 2009))
|
Figure 10A.4
|
Black
Point Subtidal Hard-Bottom Sampling Transects (Reproduced from ERM (2009))
|
Figure 10A.5
|
Black
Point Subtidal Soft-Bottom Sampling Stations (Reproduced from ERM (2006
& 2009)
|
Figure 10A.6
|
Distribution
of Chinese white dolphin sightings in Deep Bay survey area (2010-2014)
|
Figure 10A.7
|
Range
Use Patterns of 12 Identified Individuals Occurred in Deep Bay Survey Area
during 2010-2014 (Reproduced from AFCD 2010-2015)
|
Figure 10A.8
|
Sighting Density
of Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphins Normalized by Survey Effort per km2 in
Waters around Lantau Island in 2009-2013 (SPSE = no. of on-effort dolphin
sightings per 100 units of survey effort) (Reproduced from AFCD (2014))
|
Figure 10A.9
|
Density of Indo-Pacific
Humpback Dolphins Normalized by Survey Effort per km2 in Waters around
Lantau Island in 2009-2013 (DPSE = no. of dolphins per 100 units of survey
effort) (Reproduced from AFCD (2014))
|
Figure
10A.10
|
Sighting Density of
Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphins Normalized by Survey Effort per km2 in
Waters around Lantau Island in 2014 (SPSE = no. of on-effort dolphin
sightings per 100 units of survey effort) (Reproduced from AFCD (2015))
|
Figure
10A.11
|
Density of
Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphins Normalized by Survey Effort per km2 in
Waters around Lantau Island in 2014 (DPSE = no. of dolphins per 100 units
of survey effort) (Reproduced from AFCD (2015))
|
Figure
10A.12
|
Information
on Baseline Conditions on Terrestrial Ecology from Previous LNG EIA 2006
|
Figure
10A.13
|
Black
Point Intertidal Sampling Transect Locations for Seasonal Survey in 2015
|
Figure
10A.14
|
Subtidal
Soft-Bottom Sampling Stations for Seasonal Survey in 2015
|
Figure
10A.15
|
Subtidal
Dive Survey Transects in 2015
|
Figure
10A.16
|
Representative
Photographic Records of the Seabed and Artificial Seawall taken during the Subtidal
Dive Survey
|
Figure
10A.17
|
Representative
Photographic Records of Corals taken during the Subtidal Dive Survey
|
Figure
10A.18
|
Shore-based
Theodolite Tracking Station for Marine Mammal Monitoring in 2015
|
Figure
10A.19
|
Terrestrial Habitat Map
and Location of Terrestrial Species of Conservation Importance
|
Figure 11.1
|
Fisheries
Sensitive Receivers in the Assessment Area
|
Figure 11.2
|
Distribution
of Fishing Operations (All Vessels) in Hong Kong Water as Recorded by
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department in Port Survey 2006
|
Figure 11.3
|
Distribution
of Fisheries Production (Adult Fish) in terms of Weight (kg/ha) in Hong
Kong Water as Recorded by Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation
Department in Port Survey 2006
|
Figure 11.4
|
Distribution
of Fisheries Production (Adult Fish & Fish Fry) in terms of Value (HK$/ha)
in Hong Kong Water as Recorded by Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation
Department in Port Survey 2006
|
Figure 11.5
|
Distribution
of Fisheries Production (Fish Fry) in terms of Density (Tails/ha) in Hong
Kong Water as Recorded by Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation
Department in Port Survey 2006
|
Figure 11.6
|
Fisheries
Surveys from Previous Studies between 1998 and 2014 in the Assessment Area
and its Vicinity
|
Figure 12.1
|
Aerial
Photograph of the Assessment Area
|
Figure 12.2
|
Planning &
Development context of the Project
|
Figure 12.3
|
Landscape Resources
|
Figure 12.4
|
Representative
Photographs of LRs (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure 12.5
|
Landscape Character Area
|
Figure 12.6
|
Representative
Photographs of LCAs
|
Figure 12.7
|
Predicted Visual Envelope
|
Figure 12.8
|
Locations of Predicted
Visual Sensitive Receivers (VSRs) and Vantage Points (VPs)
|
Figure 12.9a
|
Significance of Residual
Impact on Landscape Resources from the Installation of CCGT Unit No.1
|
Figure 12.9b
|
Significance of
Residual Impact on Landscape Resources from the Installation of CCGT Unit
No.1 and No.2
|
Figure
12.10a
|
Significance of
Residual Impact on Landscape Character Area from the Installation of CCGT
Unit No.1
|
Figure
12.10b
|
Significance of
Residual Impact on Landscape Character Area from the Installation of CCGT
Unit No.1 and No.2
|
Figure
12.11a
|
Photomontage from VP1 –
View to Project Site from Urmston Road (Sheet 1 of 2)
|
Figure
12.11b
|
Photomontage from VP1 –
View to Project Site from Urmston Road (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.12a
|
Photomontage from VP2 –
View to Project Site from near shore (Sheet 1 of 2)
|
Figure
12.12b
|
Photomontage from VP2 –
View to Project Site from near shorec(Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.13a
|
Photomontage from VP3 –
View to Project Site from trail on Black Point headland (Sheet 1 of 2)
|
Figure
12.13b
|
Photomontage from VP3 –
View to Project Site from trail on Black Point headland (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.14a
|
Photomontage from VP4 –
View to Project Site from just off Nim Wan Road (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.14b
|
Photomontage from VP4 –
View to Project Site from just off Nim Wan Road (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.15a
|
Photomontage from VP1 –
View to Project Site from Urmston Road (Sheet 1 of 2)
|
Figure
12.15b
|
Photomontage from VP1 –
View to Project Site from Urmston Road (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.16a
|
Photomontage from VP2 –
View to Project Site from near shore (Sheet 1 of 2)
|
Figure
12.16b
|
Photomontage from VP2 –
View to Project Site from near shore (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.17a
|
Photomontage from VP3 –
View to Project Site from trail on Black Point headland (Sheet 1 of 2)
|
Figure
12.17b
|
Photomontage from VP3 –
View to Project Site from trail on Black Point headland (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure
12.18a
|
Photomontage from VP4 –
View to Project Site from just off Nim Wan Road (Sheet 1 of 2)
|
Figure
12.18b
|
Photomontage
from VP4 – View to Project Site from just off Nim Wan Road (Sheet 2 of 2)
|
Figure 12.19
|
Landscape
Mitigation Plan
|
Figure 13.1
|
Locations
of the Proposed Additional CCGT Units at BPPS and Existing and Proposed
Intake and Outfall
|
Figure 13.2
|
Locations
of Known Obstructions/Wrecks in the United Kingdom Hydrographic Office
(UKHO) Wrecks Database Identified in the vicinity of the Assessment Area
|
Figure 13.3
|
Previous
MAI Conducted
|
Figure 14.1
|
Locations of Human Health
Sensitive Receivers
|
|
|
Annex List
|
|
Annex 1A
|
Stakeholder Engagement
Activities
|
Annex 4A
|
Detailed Information of All ASRs
|
Annex 4B
|
ISCST3 Model Input Emission
Inventory
|
Annex 4C
|
Detailed Emission Information for
PATH Model Input
|
Annex 4D
|
Traffic Emissions
|
Annex 4E
|
Predicted NO2 Concentrations at
ASRs for Assessment of AoI
|
Annex 4F
|
Detailed Result Tables showing
the Breakdown of Contribution at Each ASR and Height for Each Scenario
|
Annex 4G
|
Predicted Hourly Ozone Results
for Scenarios with and without the Project
|
Annex 5A
|
Tables of Assumptions
|
Annex 5B
|
Summary of Incident Review
|
Annex 5C
|
Results of Frequency Analysis
|
Annex 5D
|
Results of Consequence Analysis
|
Annex 5E
|
Main Risk Contributor to
Potential Loss of Life
|
Annex 7A
|
Results of Sediment and Elutriate
Testing
|
Annex 7B
|
Water Quality Modelling Method
Statement
|
Annex 7C
|
Results of Mode
Verification Annex 7D
|
Annex 7D
|
Results of Construction Phase
Sediment Plume Modelling
|
Annex 7E
|
Results of Construction
Phase Nutrients Release Modelling
|
Annex 7F
|
Results of Operation Phase Thermal
Discharge Modelling
|
Annex 7G
|
Results of Operation Phase Total
Residual Chlorine Discharge Modelling
|
Annex 8A
|
EPD Approved
Sediment Sampling and Testing Plan (SSTP)
|
Annex 9A
|
Contamination
Assessment Plan
|
Annex 9B
|
Contamination
Assessment Report
|
Annex 10A
|
Baseline Ecological
Resources Annex 10B Data of Marine Ecological Resources
|
Annex 10B
|
Data of Marine
Ecological Resources
|
Annex 10C
|
Data of Terrestrial
Ecological Resources
|
Annex 12A
|
Broad Brush Tree Survey
|
Annex 13A
|
UKHO Data of Two
Obstructions
|
Annex 14A
|
Predicted Concentrations for
Acute Non-carcinogenic Health Risk at HSRs
|
Annex 14B
|
Predicted Concentrations for
Chronic Noncarcinogenic Health Risk at HSRs
|
Annex 14C
|
Predicted Concentrations for
Incremental Carcinogenic Health Risks at HSRs
|
Annex 14D
|
Predicted Short-term Concentrations
of Criteria Air Pollutants for “With Project” and “Without Project”
Scenarios and their Incremental Changes
|
Annex 15A
|
Implementation
Schedule
|
|
|