This Section presents the
findings of an assessment of potential impacts on existing capture and culture
fisheries, including fisheries resources, fishing operations and fish/oyster
culture activities, associated with the construction and operation of the
proposed Project.
The criteria for evaluating
fisheries impacts are stated in the EIAO-TM. Annex
17 of the EIAO-TM prescribes the
general approach and methodology for assessing fisheries impacts caused by a
project or proposal, to allow a complete and objective identification,
prediction and evaluation of the potential impacts. EIAO-TM
Annex 9 recommends the criteria that are to be used for evaluation of
fisheries impacts.
Other legislation which applies
to fisheries includes:
·
Fisheries Protection Ordinance
(Cap. 171),
which provides for conservation of fish and other aquatic life, regulates
fishing practices and prevents activities detrimental to the fishing industry;
·
Marine Fish Culture Ordinance
(Cap. 353),
which regulates and protects marine fish culture and other related activities
and requires all marine fish culture activity to operate under licence in
designated Fish Culture Zones (FCZs);
·
Water Pollution Control Ordinance
(Cap. 358),
which aims to control water pollution in Hong Kong waters. Water Control Zones (WCZs) are
designated with individual water quality objectives to promote the conservation
and best use of those waters in the public interest; and
·
Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance (Cap. 499), the EIA Study Brief Section 3.4.10 and Appendix G which outline the
key fisheries impacts to be reviewed and assessed in the EIA report.
In accordance with Clause
3.4.10.2 of the EIA Study Brief, the Assessment Area for fisheries impact
assessment made reference to the locations of the two proposed subsea pipelines
and the offshore LNG Terminal and covers the area within the Deep Bay WCZ,
Southern WCZ, Second Southern Supplementary WCZ, North Western WCZ and North
Western Supplementary WCZ. For a
detailed description of the physical and biological characteristics of the
marine environment of the Assessment Area please refer to Sections 7 and 9
respectively.
A literature review was
conducted to review the baseline fisheries conditions within the Assessment
Area and to identify information gaps to determine whether field surveys are
required to provide sufficient information for the fisheries impact
assessment. Findings of this
literature review are presented in detail in Annex 10A.
Some of the baseline
information was collected recently after the trawl ban which has taken effect
from 31 December 2012 and is considered to be up-to-date and representative of
the existing conditions of the North Western WCZ and northern part of North
Western Supplementary WCZ, and the southern part of North Western Supplementary
WCZ within the Assessment Area. Therefore, field surveys at selected
locations within the Assessment Area where potential impact could occur and
up-to-date baseline information is not present were conducted to fill the
identified data gaps and update the latest fisheries baseline in these
locations. The methodology for the
field surveys is presented in Annex 10B.
Field survey findings are presented in detail in Annexes 10C
to 10E.
The information from
desktop review and field surveys collectively suggested that:
·
The levels of fishing
operation and fisheries production vary within the Assessment Area. The top dominant species of the
Assessment Area consisted of fish with low commercial value (e.g. the croaker Johnius belangerii) and some fish and crustaceans
of medium to high commercial value (e.g. flatheads, groupers, mantis shrimps,
prawns and crabs). The level of
ichthyoplankton and fish post-larvae resources of the Assessment Area was low
in general with mainly low value commercial species;
·
According to the AFCD
Port Survey 2006 data, compared with other locations of the Assessment Area,
low levels of fishing operation (50 – 100 vessels) and fisheries production
(100 – 200 kg ha-1) were reported in waters near the LNG
Terminal. The BPPS Pipeline
traverses waters with very low to moderate level of fishing operation (10 – 400
vessels) and very low to moderate to high fisheries
production (50 – 600 kg ha-1), while the LPS Pipeline traverses
waters with moderate level of fishing operation (100 – 400 vessels) and low to
moderate to high fisheries production (100 – 600 kg ha-1);
·
According to the
field survey conducted from October 2016 to July 2017, waters near the LNG
Terminal showed relatively low biomass and species richness of fisheries
resources (crustacean and adult fish) with moderate abundance. It also showed low mean densities of
fish larvae and fish post-larvae, and the lowest mean density of fish eggs and
the lowest total species richness in fish post-larvae compared with other
locations surveyed. Dominant
species included the croaker Johnius
belangerii and other species with low commercial value. Waters near the BPPS Pipeline and LPS
Pipeline showed variable levels of biomass and species richness of fisheries
resources, with the highest biomass recorded near Tai O and the highest species
richness recorded near Fan Lau Kok; and
·
Vessel surveys
recorded most fishing activities were observed near Deep Bay and south of Shek
Kwu Chau and south of Cheung Chau.
Over half of the fishing activities observed were undertaken using P4/7
vessels (sampan). Relatively fewer
fishing vessels were observed at the LNG Terminal compared with other sites.
Based on the baseline information
reviewed, the importance of the fisheries within the Assessment Area is
evaluated. Although some fishing
grounds within Assessment Area are considered to have moderate to high
commercial value (e.g. near the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP),
Tai O, Soko Islands, Cheung Chau and south of Lamma Island), the fishing
grounds within the LNG Terminal site are considered as of low commercial
value. The small extent of the LNG
Terminal site and low commercial value of the catches characterise the waters
of LNG Terminal as of low importance to the Hong Kong fishing industry (please
refer to Annex 10C
for details of fisheries resources in the vicinity of the LNG Terminal).
According to Annex 9 of the EIAO-TM,
spawning grounds and nursery area can be regarded as an important habitat type
as they are critical to the regeneration and long-term survival of many
organisms and their populations.
The BPPS Pipeline of the Project is located in the vicinity of the
recognised northern Lantau spawning ground and southern Lantau spawning ground
and nursery area, whereas the LNG Terminal and LPS Pipeline of the Project are
located within the recognised southern Lantau spawning ground and nursery
area. It is, however, important to
note that the level of ichthyoplankton and fish post-larvae resources of the
Assessment Area was low in general with mainly low value commercial species,
which indicates that the potential for the Assessment Area to function as
important spawning grounds and nursery area is relatively low. Also, at Pak Tso Wan of Tai A Chau (South Soko) which was
previously reported as a nearshore juvenile fish habitat ([1]),
fry production was not recorded ([2]).
The waters within the Project’s
footprint and its vicinity also do not support mariculture activities.
Based on the preceding review of
the available information on the capture and culture fisheries of the waters in
the vicinity of the proposed Project, the potential sensitive receivers that
may be affected by the Project activities are identified as follows:
·
Recognised spawning ground and nursery area of commercial fisheries
resources in North Lantau and South Lantau, all located in the immediate
vicinity of the Project;
·
Artificial reefs in the SCLKCMP (located about 1km from the BPPS
Pipeline) and Lo Tik Wan FCZ (located about 7.1km from the LPS Pipeline);
·
FCZs at Lo Tik Wan, Cheung Sha Wan and Sok Kwu Wan (at least 7.1km from
the LPS Pipeline); and
·
Oyster production area at Deep Bay (about 3.6km from the BPPS Pipeline).
The locations of the sensitive
receivers are shown in Figure 10A.1. Pond fish culture activities in the
northwest New Territories are not expected to be affected by the Project due to
their distances from the Project site and they are thus not considered to be
sensitive receivers.
A review of baseline fisheries
conditions from available literature and field surveys was conducted for the
purpose of establishing the fisheries importance of the waters in the
Assessment Area and its vicinity. Information from the water quality impact
assessment (Section 7) was examined to assess potentially affected area by
perturbations to water quality parameters.
The potential impacts due to the
construction and operation of the Project were then assessed (with reference to
the EIAO-TM Annex 17 guidelines) and
the impacts evaluated (with reference to the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 9).
The construction of the proposed
Project will involve Jetty construction (marine piling and jetty topside
construction) at the LNG Terminal, construction of the BPPS Pipeline and the
LPS Pipeline which will involve dredging, pipe-laying, jetting and rock armour
placement, and land-based construction activities at the GRS at the BPPS and
the GRS at the LPS. Potential
impacts to fisheries resources and fishing operations arising from these works
may be divided into those related to:
·
Direct disturbances of fisheries habitat and fishing ground;
·
Underwater sound generated from marine construction activities;
·
Perturbations to key water quality parameters from marine construction
activities; and
·
Changes in water quality from discharges and runoff from land-based and
jetty topside construction activities, and pipeline hydrotesting.
With respect to inland fish
culture activities, construction activities of the Project will not have any
direct impacts, such as drawdown of water table, disturbance or restriction, on
these activities. Considering the
large separation distance, indirect impacts from construction activities,
including perturbation to water quality and underwater sound, will be
negligible. Consequently, no
unacceptable impacts to inland culture fisheries are expected.
Direct impacts to fisheries
resources, habitats (including spawning or nursery grounds) and fishing
operations include disturbance caused by the Jetty construction and subsea
pipeline construction. The proposed
Jetty construction works is expected to cause temporary disturbance to fisheries
habitats and loss of access to potential fishing ground within an area of
approximately 18ha within the Jetty works areas. No disturbance to the fisheries
sensitive receivers and reported fish fry area at Pak Tso Wan of Tai A Chau (South Soko) is
expected. Considering the temporary
nature of the disturbance (about six to nine months for the Jetty marine piling
works), small extent of the area which is of low fisheries importance, impacts
are considered to be of minor significance and unacceptable impacts on the
fisheries resources, habitats and fishing activities are not expected.
Pipeline construction works are
expected to cause temporary disturbance to fisheries habitats and loss of
access to potential fishing ground within an area of approximately 70ha along
the proposed routes of the two subsea pipelines. Although some locations to be impacted
may have moderate to high fisheries importance considering the commercial value
of fisheries, it is important to note that not the entire lengths of the two
pipeline routes would be disturbed at any one time because pipeline dredging,
pipe-laying, jetting and rock armour placement activities would be undertaken
at discrete work fronts (each within a few hundred metres from the pipeline
centreline), and these activities would be carried out in sequence with each
activity expected to last for four to six months only. No disturbance to the fisheries
sensitive receivers and reported fish fry area at Pak Tso Wan of Tai A Chau (South Soko) is
expected. Considering the temporary
nature of the disturbance and with management of work fronts/sequence, impacts
are considered to be of minor significance and unacceptable impacts on
fisheries resources, habitats and fishing activities are hence not expected.
Fisheries resources are expected
to return to the area following the cessation of marine construction
activities. Issuance of Marine
Department Notice or other notifications is expected to reduce the risk of
collision of increased marine traffic and fishing vessels to within acceptable
levels.
Intermittent sounds, which occur
during construction activities such as marine piling, pipeline construction
works and marine vessel movement, may have an impact on fisheries
resources. Potential effects of increased
underwater sound include physiological stress, avoidance and injury (at high
pressure levels). The level of
impact is however dependent upon background sound, number of fish present, type
of species affected, proximity of fish to the sound source, attenuation
properties of seabed sediments and hearing capabilities of the species
affected, etc..
Most marine invertebrates do not
possess air-filled space and thus it is generally considered that sound would
have limited physiological or behavioural effects on marine invertebrates,
except if they are located within a few metres of the sound source. Therefore underwater sound generated
from marine works is expected to have negligible impact on marine invertebrates
in the Assessment Area.
Fish, however, can detect
underwater sound vibrations through two ways, the lateral line system and the
inner ear for species containing air-filled swim bladders. Anthropogenic underwater sounds
associated with vessels for this Project, such as barges, supply vessels,
dredgers and jetting machine, etc., exhibit major energy below 1,000 Hz and
sound levels of between 170 and 190 dB re 1 μPa at 1 m and may be audible to
most fish species ([3]). Waters within the Assessment Area and
its vicinity is subject to relatively high levels of marine traffic by similar
types of vessels; therefore it is reasonable to assume that fish in these
waters are habituated to a relatively high background level of underwater
sound, and a small increase in vessel activity associated with the construction
of this Project is not anticipated to result in unacceptable impacts on
fisheries resources. Underwater
sound from marine piling involves high intensity pulsed sound with highest
energy also below 1,000 Hz, and the soft-start or ramp-up approaches for piling
activity (slowly increasing the energy of the emitted sound) are expected to be
effective in promoting fish movement away from the piling works area and thus
impacts are considered to be of minor significance and keeping potential
impacts to within acceptable levels.
No unacceptable disturbance to the fisheries sensitive receivers and
reported fish fry area at Pak Tso Wan of Tai A Chau (South Soko)
is expected.
Indirect impacts to fisheries
resources, habitats (including spawning or nursery grounds) and fishing
operations during the construction phase of the Project include sediment
release associated with the marine works.
Potential impacts to water quality from sediment release due to marine
works are described in the water quality impact assessment in Section
7. These potential impacts
are as follows:
·
Increased concentrations of suspended solids (SS);
·
Decreased dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations;
·
An increase in nutrient concentrations in the water column; and
·
Release of sediment-bounded contaminants into the water column.
Marine construction works are
expected to generate SS within the water column and result in increased
sediment deposition in close proximity of the works areas. The modelling works have analysed SS
dispersion from construction works (Section 7.7.1).
Fluxes of SS naturally occur in
the marine environment and as a result, fish have evolved behavioural
adaptations to tolerate changes in SS load (e.g. clearing their gills by
flushing water over them).
Concentrations of SS generated by marine construction activities are
expected to be greater, particularly in the immediate vicinity of the proposed works
areas (in the mixing zone). Beyond
the active marine works areas, dispersion can be expected to lead to a rapid
decline in the SS concentrations.
Compared to adult fish, larvae
and post-juvenile fish are relatively more susceptible to variations in SS
concentrations as their sensory system is less developed. Adult fish are more likely to move away
from area of disturbance when they detect sufficiently elevated SS
concentrations and therefore are unlikely to be significantly impacted.
The SS level at which fish move
into clearer water is defined as the tolerance threshold which varies among
species and different stages of the life cycle. If SS levels exceed tolerance thresholds
and the fish are not able to move away from the affected area, the fish are
likely to become stressed, injured and may eventually die. The rate, timing and duration of SS
elevations influence the type and extent of impacts upon fish and potentially
crustaceans.
Findings from literature reviews
indicated that lethal responses had not been reported in adult fish at SS values
below 125 mg L-1 ([4])
and that sub-lethal effects were only observed when levels exceeded 90 mg L-1
([5]). However, as part of a study for AFCD, Consultancy Study on Fisheries and Marine
Ecological Criteria for Impact Assessment guideline values have been
identified for fisheries and selected marine ecological sensitive
receivers. The values are based on
international marine water quality guidelines for the protection of ecosystems
([6]). The AFCD study recommends a maximum SS
concentration of 50 mg L-1 (based on half of the no observable
effect concentrations). However,
the study cautioned that site-specific data should be considered in
environmental assessments on a case-by-case basis. In order to provide a more conservative
assessment (i.e. with a lower tolerance criterion), the Water Quality
Objectives (WQOs) for SS elevation are adopted instead in this study as the
assessment criteria for fisheries sensitive receivers.
As discussed in Section
7.7.1, the water quality modelling results have indicated that at all
fisheries sensitive receivers, SS elevations as a result of the proposed marine
construction works are predicted to be compliant with the relevant WQOs for
both wet and dry seasons (Table 7.9). Elevated levels of SS as a result of
these works are expected to be temporary in nature and localised to the
proximity of active marine works areas.
With the implementation of mitigation measures proposed in the water
quality impact assessment in Section 7, such as the use of silt
curtains and reduced working rate, potential impacts to fisheries would be
further reduced. Also, although
larvae and post-juvenile fish are more likely to be impacted as they may not be
able to detect and avoid areas with elevated levels of SS, it should be noted
that the level of ichthyoplankton and fish post-larvae resources of the
Assessment Area was low in general.
As such, unacceptable impacts from such works on fisheries resources and
habitats (including spawning or nursery grounds) are not expected to occur.
Finally, it should be noted that
the Assessment Area is on the eastern bank of the Pearl River Estuary. As a result of discharges from the Pearl
River, the background variation in SS levels is acknowledged as being high. Water quality data gathered by EPD has
indicated that in the vicinity of Assessment Area SS values can reach over 106
mg L-1 (Table 7.3).
Therefore, impacts are considered to be of minor significance and
unacceptable impacts to fisheries resources as a result of potential elevations
of SS from the construction works are not expected to occur.
The relationships between SS and
DO are complex, with elevated SS in the water column together with a number of
other factors to reduce DO concentrations.
Elevated SS (and turbidity) reduces light penetration, lowers the rate
of photosynthesis by phytoplankton (i.e. primary productivity) and thus lowers
the rate of oxygen production in the water column. Furthermore, the potential release of
sediment contaminants into the water column may consume the DO in the receiving
waters. The resulting overall DO
depletion has the potential to cause an adverse effect on the eggs and larvae
of fish and crustaceans, as at these stages of development high levels of
oxygen in the water are required for growth to support high metabolic growth
rates.
The results of the water quality
assessment have indicated that elevated levels of SS as a result of marine
construction works are expected to be temporary in nature and localised to the
proximity of active marine works areas.
DO depletion as a result of dispersion of sediment plumes associated
with such works are predicted to be quite low (< 0.5 mg L-1, see Section
7.7.1) and remain compliant with the relevant WQO DO criteria at all
fisheries sensitive receivers for both wet and dry seasons. Therefore, impacts are considered to be
of minor significance and no unacceptable impacts to fisheries from the
reduction of DO concentration are expected to occur.
High levels of nutrients (total
inorganic nitrogen and ammonia) released from disturbed sediments to the water
column may potentially cause rapid increases in phytoplankton population, on
occasions to the point that an algal bloom occurs. An intense algal bloom can cause sharp
decreases in the levels of DO. This
decrease would initially occur in the surface water, and then spread to deeper
water as dead algae fall through the water column and decompose on the seabed.
The water quality modelling
results have indicated that elevated levels of SS as a result of marine
construction works are expected to be temporary in nature and localised to the
proximity of active marine works areas.
The associated elevated nutrient concentrations are expected to be
minimal and remain compliant with WQOs at all fisheries sensitive receivers for
both wet and dry seasons (see Section 7.7.1). Impacts are considered to be of minor
significance and unacceptable impacts to fisheries are thus not expected to
occur.
The potential for release of
contaminants from disturbed sediments has been assessed in Section 7.7.1, whereas, a
comprehensive set of data on the marine sediment quality is provided in Section
8.
As discussed in Section
7.7.1, results of the elutriate tests show that dissolved metal
concentrations for all samples are below the reporting limits. The results also show that all PAHs and
PCBs and chlorinated pesticides are all below the reporting limits. This indicates that the leaching of
these contaminants is unlikely to occur.
Unacceptable water quality impacts due to the potential release of heavy
metals and micro-organic pollutants from disturbed sediments into the water
column are not expected to occur.
Impacts on fisheries resources due to bioaccumulation of released
contaminants from disturbed sediments are thus not expected to occur.
In summary, predicted levels of
SS, DO, nutrient and contaminant concentrations as a result of marine
construction works of this Project are anticipated to be in compliance with the
relevant assessment criteria.
Impacts are considered to be of minor significance. Unacceptable indirect water quality
impacts from sediment release on fisheries resources, habitats and fisheries
sensitive receivers are thus not expected to occur.
For the Jetty topside
construction and the land-based construction of the GRS at the BPPS and the GRS
at the LPS, which do not involve marine works, indirect impacts to fisheries
resources, habitats and fishing operations may include changes in water quality
from land-based discharges and site runoff from construction workforce, as
described in the water quality impact assessment in Section 7. Land-based discharges and runoff from the
work site, particularly during minor trenching and equipment installation
works, may contain suspended solids which could be a source of water
pollution. Uncontrolled disposal of
debris and rubbish such as packaging, construction materials and refuse and
spillages of chemicals stored on-site, such as oil, diesel and solvents would
also result in contamination of construction site runoff. Standard site management practices and
mitigation measures, described in Section 7.9, are recommended and
when properly implemented, it is anticipated that no unacceptable water quality
impacts would arise from these works.
Consequently, impacts are considered to be of minor significance and
indirect impacts on fisheries would be managed to within acceptable levels.
Also, hydrotesting would be
required for checking the integrity of the subsea pipelines. Seawater added with corrosion inhibitor
compound would be used for hydrotesting.
As assessed in Section 7.7.3, most constituents of
the proposed compound are water and other low toxicity substances, and the only
constituent of potential ecotoxicological concern is expected to be discharged
at concentration below the toxic levels determined by toxicity studies (Annex 7B). The discharge of hydrotest water is thus
unlikely to result in notable ecotoxicity in the receiving waters at
end-of-pipe, and further dilution and dispersion is expected upon discharge
such that potential effect, if any, would be negligible. Impacts are considered to be of minor
significance and no unacceptable impact to fisheries would be expected.
The potential impacts of the
operation phase of the Project on the fisheries of the Assessment Area include:
·
Changes in fisheries habitats at the Jetty;
·
Loss of access to fishing ground at the LNG Terminal;
·
Impingement and entrainment of fisheries resources at the seawater
intake of the FSRU Vessel, and through ballast water uptake of the LNGC;
·
Indirect impacts arising from the alteration of marine water quality due
to the discharge of cooled water with residual chlorine, concentrated seawater
from the freshwater generator, and treated sewage from the FSRU Vessel;
·
Underwater sound generated from the FSRU Vessel and LNGC transits;
·
Change in water quality during maintenance dredging at the LNG Terminal;
and
·
Potential risk of accidental spillage due to the
operation of the LNG Terminal.
No impacts are expected to occur
during the operation of the subsea pipelines which maintenance dredging is not
expected. Impact to fishing
operations caused by the presence of subsea pipelines is avoided as the
pipelines will be buried under the seabed and the seabed along the pipeline
routes is expected to return to the same level as the surrounding. Also, benthic resources, which may serve
as food sources for fisheries resources, are expected to recolonise the
affected seabed areas along the pipeline routes (Section 9.5.1) and thus
indirect impacts on fisheries are not expected. No disturbance to the fisheries
sensitive receivers and reported fish fry area at Pak Tso Wan of Tai A Chau (South Soko) is expected.
For fish culture activities,
operational activities of the Project will not have any direct impacts, such as
disturbance or restriction, on these activities. Considering the large separation
distance, indirect impacts from operational activities such as perturbation to
water quality will be negligible. Consequently,
no unacceptable impacts to culture fisheries are expected.
There will be a permanent loss of
about 0.8ha of seabed habitats due to the presence of Jetty
piles. Given
the very small size and low fisheries importance of the affected seabed
habitats, the impacts to fisheries are considered to be of minor significance. Although some seabed habitats within the
direct footprint of the Jetty piles (about 0.8ha) would be lost due to the
Project, the Jetty is a piled deck structure with high surface area and would allow the water column to continue to function as fisheries
habitats. The Jetty piles will
provide hard substrates that could be colonised by a variety of marine
organisms. There is considerable
knowledge in Hong Kong and elsewhere on the colonisation of marine structures
with species such as seaweeds, crustaceans, octocorals, bivalves, amphipods,
anemones, bryozoans and more mobile fauna including crabs. Colonisation of these structures could
attract fish and marine invertebrates into the area. Overall, the
Jetty structure is expected to result in potential positive effect on fisheries
resources and habitats of the waters in the vicinity of the LNG Terminal.
Also, the Jetty would have little
effect on current velocity and the hydrodynamics of the offshore area (Section
7.6.2), and so unacceptable impacts from changes to the hydrodynamic
regime and water quality and consequential impacts to fisheries are, therefore,
not expected to occur.
It is normal practice in the LNG
industry to implement a Safety Zone around the LNG Terminal during Project
operations in order to protect the safety of the LNG Terminal and visiting LNGC
moored alongside, and their personnel.
As the facilities will form critical infrastructure to provide gas for
power generation, to provide the protection to these facilities, no
unauthorized vessels including fishing vessels are permitted to enter the
Safety Zone (see Section 3.3.1). The
overall dimension of this zone is proposed to be with a radius of approximately
250m from the centre of the LNG Terminal Jetty. The total area will be approximately
20ha. It should be noted that the details
of the Safety Zone is under examination with the relevant authorities and will
be further determined under separate exercises outside of the EIA Study
process.
The fishing ground within and in
the vicinity of the LNG Terminal site is considered to be of low commercial
value with low level of fishing operations, and overall the waters around the
LNG Terminal are considered to be of low importance to the Hong Kong fishing
industry. The fishing ground within
the Safety Zone is located in open waters and is not in area that is thought to
be unique or important for fishing activities, and there are suitable fishing
grounds outside of this zone for similar activities to take place. Also, the overall area lost for fishing
activities is considered to be small in the context of similar fishing grounds
elsewhere in Hong Kong that are available for fishing activities. As such, the loss of access to fishing
ground within the Safety Zone of the LNG Terminal is considered to be of minor
significance.
In addition, the long-term
reduction in fishing activities within the Safety Zone during Project operation
may help protect commercially exploited stocks and allow for the attraction of
fish into this area without fishing pressure. Coupled with the potential effect on fisheries resources and habitats by the Jetty structure discussed
above, this could have a potential positive effect on fisheries resources,
which consequently may benefit fishing activities just outside of the Safety
Zone from the ‘spill-over’ effect whereby fisheries resources in the Safety
Zone would emigrate into nearby areas.
Overall, no unacceptable impact to fisheries
is expected.
From a fisheries perspective, the
intake of seawater at the FSRU Vessel for LNG regasification and LNGC (for
ballast water uptake if needed ([7]))
may have negative effects on fish, fish eggs and larvae, and crustaceans due to
the physical damage caused by collisions with the screening system
(impingement) and due to their uptake to the process system (entrainment). The swimming speeds of juvenile and
larval fishes vary greatly but are generally slower than the water velocity of
the intake system. Owing to their
larger size, juvenile fish are generally more susceptible to impingement,
whilst fish and crustacean larvae and eggs are more exposed to entrainment, as
their small size enables them to pass through the screening system ([8])
([9]). Adult fish are in general much less
susceptible to risks of impingement and entrainment since they can swim at
higher velocities and hence can counteract the intake velocity and actively
move away.
The rate of water intake would be
about 20,000m3 per hour for the FSRU Vessel at full production, and
the seawater uptake by the LNGC would be dependent on the ballast water need of
each cargo. Whilst it is
acknowledged that the intake of seawater may minimally increase the natural
mortality rate of fish larvae, crustaceans and fish eggs due to impingement and
entrainment, it has been noted that the significance of such impacts is
strongly dependent on the ecological sensitivity and the productivity of the
impacted area as well as the rate of water intake. Although the LNG Terminal is located in
the identified spawning ground and nursery area of commercial fisheries
resources South Lantau, findings from the EIA field surveys suggested that the
waters of the LNG Terminal showed low mean densities of fish larvae and fish
post-larvae, and the lowest mean density of fish eggs and the lowest total
species richness in fish post-larvae compared with other locations surveyed
(see Annex 10C). Dominant species included croakers and
other species with low commercial value.
The potential for the waters of the LNG Terminal to function as spawning
grounds and nursery area is, therefore, likely to have diminished. Considering the low sensitivity and
productivity in ichthyoplankton and fish post-larvae in the waters of the LNG
Terminal, impacts are considered to be of minor significance and unacceptable
impacts due to impingement and entrainment of fisheries resources are not anticipated. The use of suitable screen mesh size and
intake velocity would help reduce the impingement and entrainment mortality of
fisheries resources, if present ([10]).
Induced temperature changes to
natural aquatic habitats have been shown to affect the physiology and
development of fishes. The decrease
in temperature, for example, has the potential to affect the rate of
development of fish embryos, larvae and gonad maturation. A slower growth rate means that fish
larvae remain longer in the delicate early development stages, potentially
increasing mortality. The altered
development of gonad maturation could ultimately reduce the spawning success of
fish, and the altered muscle development could potentially reduce the chance of
survival of juvenile fish.
As discussed in Section
7.8.1, at a maximum discharge temperature differential of 9°C below ambient, the
predicted change in water temperature from a maximum discharge of about 20,000 m3 per hour from
the FSRU Vessel is negligible at all fisheries sensitive
receivers. The predicted maximum
change in water temperature at the nearest sensitive receivers is less than 1°C (Section 7.8.1) and is well below the
proposed assessment criteria based on WQO, and is considered to be within or
similar to range of daily fluctuation.
The water quality modelling also predicted that a temperature change
exceeding the WQO of ± 2°C would
be localized within the immediate proximity of the discharge outfall of the
FSRU Vessel in both the dry season and wet season. Considering the overall low fisheries
importance and the low sensitivity and productivity in ichthyoplankton and fish
post-larvae in the waters of the LNG Terminal, no
unacceptable impact from the cooled water discharge on fisheries from the LNG
Terminal operation is thus expected.
To counteract the settlement and
growth of marine organisms on the vaporization system, the system would be
dosed with sodium hypochlorite which acts as an antifoulant to inhibit the
growth of organisms within the system.
A consequence of this form of treatment is associated with the discharge
of residual chlorine into the marine environment. The LNG Terminal is predicted to
discharge total residual chlorine (TRC) at a maximum level of 0.5 mg L-1. A past study by the City University of
Hong Kong ([11])
suggested that ecotoxicity may arise in marine organisms for TRC level above
0.02 mg L-1 and this is adopted as the assessment criterion.
TRC level has been shown to
diminish rapidly with time through decay and with distance from the discharge
point through dispersion and dilution.
The water quality modelling indicated that TRC levels at all
fisheries sensitive receivers are predicted to be negligible due to the large
separation distances (Section 7.8.1).
The water quality modelling also predicted that TRC levels exceeding the
assessment criterion would be localized within approximately 100m of the
discharge outfall of the FSRU Vessel in the dry season and approximately 130m
in the wet season. Considering the overall low
fisheries importance and the low sensitivity and productivity in
ichthyoplankton and fish post-larvae in the waters of the LNG Terminal, no unacceptable impact on fisheries from the discharge of TRC from the
LNG Terminal operation is thus expected.
A
freshwater generator will be provided on board the FSRU Vessel to provide
potable water for staff onsite. The
freshwater generator would employ vacuum distillation for freshwater production
and no chemical additive would be required for its normal operation. The assessment in Section 7.8.2 suggested
that salinity change due to the discharge of concentrated seawater
would only result in < 2% elevation at the point of discharge, which is much
lower than the corresponding WQO criteria of 10%. Concentrated seawater would also be
further diluted and dispersed upon discharge to within or similar to the range
of daily fluctuation and therefore no unacceptable impact on fisheries is expected.
For the discharge of a small
quantity of treated sewage (maximum 14.4 m3 day-1) from
the operation of the LNG Terminal, the modelling results and assessment in Section
7.8.3 showed that such
discharge would be compliant with the corresponding WQOs and/or discharge
standard. Thus, no unacceptable indirect impact on fisheries from the increase in pollution
load from treated sewage discharge from the proposed Project is expected. Other pollution load and effluent
generated from the LNG Terminal operation would be stored in storage tank(s) on
board and collected for treatment and disposal at appropriate facilities on
land (see Section 7.8.3), and so no impact to fisheries is expected.
The FSRU Vessel is anticipated to
be permanently moored and so transit would be minimal except for typhoon
evacuation. For LNG cargo delivery
to the LNG Terminal, it is expected that on average one LNGC would arrive every
five to eight days, subject to actual gas demand. LNGC transits would be assisted by tug
boats for safe mooring at the Jetty.
A supply-cum-guard boat would be stationed at the LNG Terminal to
support operational activities.
Consequently, very few vessel movements are expected for the day-to-day
operation of the LNG Terminal, and the underwater sound characteristics of the
vessels involved are very much similar to those in the area at present from
similar marine traffic. Fish in
these waters are habituated to the background level of underwater sound, and a
small increase in vessel activity associated with the operation of this Project
is not anticipated to result in unacceptable impacts on fisheries resources.
Most of the sound generated by
the LNG Terminal and visiting LNGC will be from engine for power generation and
machinery mounted on the decks and platform above the waterline, i.e.
airborne. Though continuous, the
low level of vibration and underwater sound transmitted into the surrounding
waters and the seabed from Project operation is expected to be of low energy
and in the low frequency range.
This is likely to be absorbed by natural and traffic-related background
sound, and given that fish are habituated to background underwater ground,
impacts are considered to be of minor significance and unacceptable impacts on
fisheries resources are not expected.
Maintenance dredging at the LNG
Terminal may be required once every around five years (subjected to site
condition) to maintain sufficient clearance for safe navigation of the LNGC. The scale and extent of dredging would
be much smaller than similar marine works of the construction phase. Thus, the potential water quality
impacts on fisheries sensitive receivers from operation phase maintenance
dredging are considered much lower than those for the construction phase. With the implementation of mitigation
measures proposed in the water quality impact assessment in Section
7.9, such as the use of silt curtains and appropriate working rate,
potential impacts to fisheries would be reduced to within acceptable
levels. Consequently, impacts are
considered to be of minor significance and no unacceptable
indirect impact on fisheries sensitive receivers from the maintenance dredging
is expected.
LNG spillage from the LNG
Terminal and visiting LNGC is not considered a major issue because LNG
vaporizes at ambient temperature ([12]). In any case of LNG spillage, there would
not be any significant residues in the receiving waters from the LNG and hence impact
on fisheries resources would be negligible.
Risk of spillage or leakage of
other chemicals would be managed by implementing preventive measures at the LNG
Terminal such as bunding and closed drainage of machinery and chemical storage
areas and provision of spill clean-up kits to prevent spillage or leakage to
reach the marine environment.
Unacceptable impacts on fisheries resources are thus not expected.
In the extremely unlikely event
of an LNGC fuel spillage, the spill would tend to float on the water surface,
subject to rapid dilution, dispersion and evaporation into the atmosphere. As required under the EIA Study Brief,
modelling of the unlikely event of fuel spillage has been conducted, in the
absence of spill response, and predicted the spilled fuel could extend over
Hong Kong southern waters with trajectory depending on the prevailing wind and
currents at the time (see Section 7.8.4). It is important to recognize that upon a
spill event, immediate response would be provided and clean-up effort would be
deployed as necessary. The
potential for impact to fisheries resources, habitats and fishing operations
would depend on the nature and degree of exposure following clean-up. A project-specific contingency plan will
be prepared including protocols for containment, remediation and reporting
accidental spill event. Given the
extremely low likelihood of such spill event and the effective implementation
of contingency plan if this occurs, no unacceptable impacts on fisheries would
be expected.
From the information presented
above, the fisheries impacts associated with the Project are not considered to
be significant. An evaluation of
the impacts according to Annex 9 of
the EIAO-TM is presented in Table
10.1.
Table 10.1 Evaluation
of Fisheries Impacts in accordance with the Criteria described in Annex 9 of
the EIAO-TM
|
Potential Impact |
Nature of impact |
Size of affected
area |
Loss of fisheries resources / production |
Destruction and
disturbance of nursery and spawning grounds |
Impact on
fishing activity |
Impact on
aquaculture activity |
Overall Impact
Significance |
Mitigation
Measures Required |
|
Construction
Phase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct disturbances of fisheries habitat
and Loss of Access to Fishing Ground |
Temporary and short term for a few months
in each active works area. |
About 18ha within the Jetty works areas
and about 70ha along the proposed routes of the two subsea pipelines. |
Jetty area is of low level of fisheries
production, low commercial value and low fisheries importance. The BPPS Pipeline and LPS Pipeline
traverse waters with varying levels of fisheries production, with some locations
of moderate to high fisheries production and importance. Considering the temporary nature of
the disturbance and with management of work fronts /sequence,
unacceptable impacts on fisheries resources / production are not expected. |
Although the Project is located within
recognised spawning ground and nursery area, the level of ichthyoplankton and
fish post-larvae resources was low in general with mainly low value
commercial species. No
unacceptable impact expected. |
Jetty area is of low level of fishing
operations. The BPPS Pipeline and
LPS Pipeline traverse waters with varying levels of fishing operations, with
some locations of moderate to high levels of fishing operations. Considering the temporary nature of
the disturbance and with management of work fronts /sequence,
unacceptable impacts on fisheries resources / production are not expected. |
No aquaculture activities at the Project
works areas and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No |
|
Underwater sound generated from marine
construction activities |
Temporary and short term for a few months
in each active works area. |
Localized to sound-generating activities,
e.g. marine vessels and piling. |
Avoidance and habituation by fish are
expected, and negligible loss of fisheries resources or production. |
Underwater sound is expected to have
negligible impact on spawning ground and nursery area. |
Underwater sound is expected to have
negligible impact on fishing operations. |
Aquaculture activities are too remote to
be affected by underwater sound and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No; mitigation measures, such as using ramp-up piling procedures would further reduce
impacts (Section 9.11) |
|
Perturbations to key water quality
parameters from marine construction activities |
Temporary and short term for a few months
in each active works area. |
Localized to the immediate vicinity of the
active works areas. |
Avoidance by fish is expected, and
negligible loss of fisheries resources or production. |
Water quality compliance expected with no
unacceptable impact. |
Impacts are localised with negligible
impact on fishing operations. |
Water quality compliance at FCZs expected
with no unacceptable impact. |
Minor |
No; water quality mitigation measures
would further reduce impacts (Section 7.9) |
|
Changes in water quality from discharges
and runoff from land-based and jetty topside construction activities, and
pipeline hydrotesting |
Temporary and short term for a few months
near the BPPS, the LPS and the Jetty. |
Localized to the immediate vicinity of the
works areas at the BPPS, the LPS and the Jetty. |
Avoidance by fish is expected, and
negligible loss of fisheries resources or production. |
Water quality compliance expected with no
unacceptable impact. |
Impacts are localised with negligible
impact on fishing operations. |
Aquaculture activities are too remote to
be affected by such discharges and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No; standard site practices would further
reduce impacts (Section 7.9) |
|
Operation Phase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in fisheries habitats at the Jetty |
Long term over Project operation. |
Localized to the immediate vicinity of the
Jetty. |
Loss of ~0.8ha seabed habitats, however, the Jetty structure is expected to result in
potential positive effect on fisheries resources and habitats of the waters
in the vicinity of the LNG Terminal. |
Jetty structure may provide
spawning and nursery habitats. |
Impacts are localised with negligible
impact on fishing operations. |
No aquaculture activities at the Jetty
site and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No |
|
Loss of access to fishing ground at the
LNG Terminal |
Long term over Project operation. |
About 20ha of the LNG Terminal Safety
Zone. |
The Safety Zone is expected to protect
fisheries resources and production due to the long-term reduction in fishing
activities. |
The Safety Zone is expected to protect
spawning ground and nursery area due to the long-term reduction in fishing
activities. |
Fishing activities are not allowed in the
Safety Zone which is of low fisheries importance. Suitable fishing grounds outside of
this zone can allow similar fishing activities to take place and so no
unacceptable impact is expected. |
No aquaculture activities at the Safety
Zone and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No |
|
Impingement and entrainment of fisheries
resources at the seawater intake of the FSRU Vessel, and through ballast
water uptake of the LNGC |
Long term over Project operation. |
Localized to the immediate vicinity of the
LNG Terminal. |
Adult fish not likely to be affected as
they can swim against the intake velocity and actively move away; negligible
loss of fisheries resources or production expected. |
The level of ichthyoplankton and fish
post-larvae resources at the LNG Terminal was low with mainly low value
commercial species. No
unacceptable impact expected. |
Impacts are localised with negligible
impact on fishing operations. |
No aquaculture activities at the Project
site and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No |
|
Indirect impacts arising from the
alteration of marine water quality due to the discharge of cooled water with
residual chlorine, concentrated seawater from the freshwater generator, and
treated sewage from the FSRU Vessel |
Long term over Project operation. |
Localized to the immediate vicinity of the
FSRU Vessel. |
Avoidance by fish is expected, and
negligible loss of fisheries resources or production. |
Water quality compliance expected with no
unacceptable impact. |
Impacts are localised with negligible
impact on fishing operations. |
Water quality compliance at FCZs expected
with no unacceptable impact. |
Minor |
No |
|
Underwater sound generated from the FSRU
Vessel and LNGC transits |
Long term over Project operation. |
Localized to sound-generating activities,
e.g. marine vessels and piling. |
Avoidance and habituation by fish are
expected, and negligible loss of fisheries resources or production. |
Underwater sound is expected to have
negligible impact on spawning ground and nursery area. |
Underwater sound is expected to have
negligible impact on fishing operations. |
Aquaculture activities are too remote to
be affected by underwater sound and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No |
|
Change in water quality during maintenance
dredging at the LNG Terminal |
Temporary and short term near the LNG
Terminal. |
Localized to the immediate vicinity of the
LNG Terminal. |
Avoidance by fish is expected, and
negligible loss of fisheries resources or production. |
Water quality compliance expected with no
unacceptable impact. |
Impacts are localised with negligible
impact on fishing operations. |
Water quality compliance at FCZs expected
with no unacceptable impact. |
Minor |
No; water quality mitigation measures
would further reduce impacts (Section 7.9) |
|
Potential risk of accidental spillage due
to the operation of the LNG Terminal |
Accidental only and transient impact near
the LNG Terminal. |
Dependent on the volume of spills/leaks,
noting large spill is extremely unlikely with preventive measures in place. |
With effective implementation of
contingency plan and clean-up, negligible loss of fisheries resources or
production expected. |
With effective implementation of
contingency plan and clean-up, negligible disturbance to spawning ground and
nursery area expected. |
With effective implementation of
contingency plan and clean-up, negligible impact on fishing activity
expected. |
Aquaculture activities are too remote to
be affected by such events and hence no impact. |
Minor |
No; effective implementation of a
contingency plan to contain and clean up any spilled or leaked fuels or
chemicals would further reduce impacts |
The fisheries impact assessment
has considered the cumulative effects of different activities of this Project
on fisheries resources, habitats and fishing operations. The Water
Quality Assessment (Section 7.7) was based on the
worst-case scenarios of concurrent construction activities of this Project as
well as relevant concurrent projects (see Annex 7B for the detailed consideration)
and thus has also incorporated potential cumulative impacts. The cumulative impacts of the various
construction activities of this Project and other relevant concurrent projects
have been demonstrated in Section 7.7 as not causing
unacceptable impacts to water quality.
Consequently, unacceptable cumulative impacts to fisheries resources are not predicted to
occur.
Information from publicly
available sources suggested the major projects that may coincide with the
construction/ implementation programmes of this Project (Section 3.7 and Annex 3A). Potential cumulative impacts were evaluated with other major developments in southern, western or
northwestern Hong Kong waters.
Outcomes of this evaluation are summarised as follows:
·
Habitat Loss and disturbance and loss of access to fishing grounds: the extent of disturbance is
expected to be small and confined to localised works areas of the active
construction workfronts. Major
concurrent development projects are expected to result in a loss of about 672ha of fisheries habitats in north Lantau waters
by the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System (3RS)
project. It is also expected to
result in a loss of about 149ha fisheries habitats in north Lantau waters
by the Tung Chung New Town Extension (TCNTE) project, which is of low
fisheries production and operation and thus it is likely to cause only minor
contributions to the total cumulative impacts. In
addition, the Development of the Integrated Waste Management Facilities Phase 1 at
Shek Kwu Chau (IWMF Phase 1) project would result in a loss of about 16ha of
fisheries habitats. The severity of such cumulative
habitat loss is expected to be significantly reduced to acceptable levels by
mitigation measures proposed as part of the 3RS EIA study, TCNTE EIA study and
the IWMF Phase 1 EIA study. Unacceptable cumulative
effect is not expected.
·
Underwater Sound: this Project is located at sufficient distance from other projects and
high speed ferries would not be used for this Project. Given the similarity in underwater
acoustic profiles generated by works vessels of this Project and other projects
(e.g. by the use of large vessels generating low-frequency sound), cumulative
effects of works vessels operational sound, if any, are anticipated to be
negligible. The proposed piling
works for the Jetty construction will be temporary and with the mitigation
measures in place, including the use of vibratory/ hydraulic ‘pushing’
and hydraulic hammering method with soft-start
or ramp-up approaches, it is not expected to result in significant cumulative impact to fisheries.
·
Marine Traffic: this Project is located at sufficient distance from other projects in
the vicinity. It is expected to
involve a relatively small number of works vessels (typical < 10) (e.g. 1
dredger/ jetting plant/ pipelay barge, 1 anchor handling tugboat, 1-2 dumping
barge for dredging/ rock placement work front, 1-2 survey boat, 1 crew boat,
1-2 guard/ supply boat) at any one time at each work front, and the
frequency/ trip of vessel would also be low
(expected to be about 15 trips per day). Given the waters off western and
southern Hong Kong have high levels of existing marine traffic, the cumulative
effects of marine traffic disturbance to
the nearby fishing operations, if any, are anticipated to be negligible.
Other projects either do not have a marine
element or are at more than a few kilometres from this Project, and so no
unacceptable cumulative impact on disturbance to fisheries resources, habitats
(including spawning or nursery grounds) and fishing operation is expected.
Unacceptable operation phase
impacts on fisheries resources, habitats and fishing operations are not
expected to occur for this Project (Section 10.5.2). The nearest committed project is more
than a few kilometres from this Project and operation phase cumulative impacts
with other developments in and around the LNG Terminal are not predicted to
occur.
In accordance with the guidelines
in the EIAO-TM on fisheries impact
assessment, the approach adopted in this EIA for mitigating impacts to
fisheries includes:
·
Avoidance: Potential impacts should be
avoided to the maximum extent practicable by adopting suitable alternatives;
·
Minimisation: Unavoidable impacts should be
minimised by taking appropriate and practicable measures such as confining
works in specific area or season; and
·
Compensation: When all possible mitigation
measures have been exhausted and there are still significant residual impacts
or when the impacts are permanent and irreversible, consideration shall be
given to off-site compensation. It
may include enhancement of fisheries resources and habitats elsewhere.
Construction impacts to fisheries
resources, habitats and fishing operations have largely been avoided (i.e.
areas of high fisheries importance) and reduced through proper planning and
design of the works, in particular those associated with marine construction
works (e.g. minimisation of works area through the use of
steel jacket substructure design which can reduce the number of piles required
from 400 (~4ha seabed habitat loss) to 80 (~0.8ha seabed habitat loss)). Appropriate notification,
communications, site protection and marking would be adopted to reduce
navigation risks with fishing vessels.
Using ramp-up piling procedures would reduce underwater sound impact on
fisheries resources. The marine
works have been designed (e.g. appropriate work rate for jetting machines / dredging vessels during pipeline
construction works)
to confirm compliance with the assessment criteria at sensitive receivers and
control water quality impacts to within acceptable levels and water quality
mitigation measures (e.g. silt curtain
deployment, good site practices) will be implemented to further avoid/reduce potential impacts (see Section
7). These measures are
expected to control and reduce potential impacts to fisheries resources as
well, and no fisheries-specific mitigation measures are thus required during
construction.
No unacceptable impacts to
fisheries resources, habitats and fishing operations are expected to occur
during the operation phase of the Project.
Appropriate demarcation would be provided at the LNG Terminal to reduce
navigation risks with fishing vessels, and the implementation of a Safety Zone
around the LNG Terminal would further mitigate such risk, which, together with
the Jetty which provides habitats for marine organisms, may result in a potential positive effect on fisheries resources of the
waters in the vicinity of the LNG Terminal. Compliance with the relevant discharge
standards to control water quality impacts to within acceptable levels is also
expected to control impacts to fisheries resources. Furthermore, impingement and entrainment
of fisheries resources will be reduced through appropriate design of the intake
screens and intake velocity at the FSRU Vessel. Water quality mitigation measures (e.g. controlled dredging rate, silt curtain
deployment, accidental spill contingency plan) will be implemented to manage potential
impacts from maintenance dredging or accidental events to within acceptable
levels (see Section 7). No
fisheries-specific mitigation measures are required during operation.
As discussed in Section 9.12, enhancement measures
in the form of an independent funding have been recommended in supporting
enhancement initiatives that contribute to enhance the marine environment of
southern Lantau for the benefit of its biodiversity and the community. It is expected that such initiatives can
also enhance fisheries resources of southern Lantau and also support the
sustainable development of the fishing industry. CLP and HK Electric are committed to
collaborating with relevant Government departments and other stakeholders to
formulate and then agree, after the EIA process has been completed, on the most
appropriate mechanism, funding and time of implementation of an Enhancement
Plan for the Project.
The identified impact arising
from the Project is the permanent loss of about 20ha of potential fishing
ground within the Safety Zone of the LNG Terminal which is of low fisheries
importance and is considered to be small in the context of similar fishing
grounds elsewhere in Hong Kong. The
Jetty structure has the potential to mimic an ‘artificial reef’ that
provides habitat and shelter for juveniles or adult fisheries resources. The reduced fishing pressure may have
potential positive effect on fisheries resources within and adjacent to the LNG
Terminal. The effects on fisheries
resources and habitats may reduce the potential impacts on fishing operations
or their individual economic losses and would not adversely affect local
fisheries as a whole. The potential
effects of the LNG Terminal may reduce the magnitude of this residual impact
and the residual impact remains within acceptable levels.
With implementation of the
recommended water quality mitigation measures during construction and operation
phases, underwater sound mitigation measures during construction phase, mitigation
measures for impingement and entrainment of fisheries resources during
operation phase, potential impacts on fisheries habitats and resources will be
further minimised. No unacceptable
impact on fisheries is expected.
As no unacceptable impacts have
been predicted to occur during the construction and operation of this Project,
monitoring of fisheries resources during these project phases is not considered
necessary.
Monitoring activities designed to
detect and mitigate impacts to water quality during construction and operation
phases are also expected to serve to protect against impacts to fisheries. The details of the water quality
monitoring programme are presented in the EM&A
Manual attached to this EIA.
A review of baseline information
on commercial fisheries resources, habitats and fishing operations surrounding
the waters of the proposed Project from available literature and field surveys
has been undertaken. Results from
the review indicate that, within the Assessment Area, although some fishing
grounds near the SCLKCMP, Tai O, Soko Islands, Cheung Chau and south of Lamma
Island are considered to have moderate to high commercial value, the fishing
grounds within the LNG Terminal site are considered as of low commercial
value. The small extent of the LNG
Terminal site and low commercial value of the catches characterise the waters
of LNG Terminal as of low importance to the Hong Kong fishing industry. Sensitive receivers, including spawning
ground and nursery area of commercial fisheries resources in North Lantau and
South Lantau, artificial reefs in the SCLKCMP and Lo Tik Wan FCZ, FCZs at Lo
Tik Wan, Cheung Sha Wan and Sok Kwu Wan, and oyster production area at Deep
Bay, have been identified, and the assessment of water quality impacts
demonstrated that these areas would not be unacceptably affected.
During construction of the
Project, direct impacts arising from the proposed marine works include
temporary disturbance to fisheries habitats and loss of access to potential
fishing ground within an area of approximately 18ha within the Jetty works
areas. Given the small size of the
affected areas which is of low fisheries importance and temporary nature of the
disturbance, no unacceptable impacts are expected to occur. During subsea pipeline construction, not
the entire lengths of the two pipeline routes would be disturbed at any one
time because pipeline construction activities would be undertaken at discrete
work fronts only and in sequence.
Considering the temporary nature of the disturbance and with management
of work fronts/ sequence, unacceptable impacts on fisheries resources, habitats
(including spawning or nursery grounds) and fishing activities are hence not
expected. Potential impacts of
elevated levels of underwater sound as a result of construction activities are
not expected to be unacceptable.
Indirect impacts to fisheries resources related to perturbations to key
water quality parameters, from both marine and land-based activities, are also
expected to be insignificant as the predicted changes in water quality are
short term, localised to immediate vicinity of the works areas and in
compliance with the corresponding WQOs and assessment criteria. Marine construction works have been
designed to reduce potential impacts on water quality which will, in turn,
reduce impacts on fisheries resources.
No fisheries-specific mitigation measures are required during
construction.
No unacceptable impacts
are expected to occur during the operation of the subsea pipelines. There will be a permanent loss of about
0.8ha of seabed habitats due to the presence of Jetty piles during operation of
the Project. Given the very small size and low fisheries importance of the affected
seabed habitats, the impacts to fisheries are considered to be of minor
significance. The Jetty piles will provide hard substrates
that could be colonised by a variety of marine organisms. Colonisation of these structures could
attract fish and marine invertebrates into the area. The loss of about 20ha of potential
fishing ground access within the Safety Zone of the LNG
Terminal, which is of low fisheries importance, is considered to be minor in the context of similar fishing grounds elsewhere in Hong Kong, and
the effect on fisheries by the Jetty structure may have potential positive
effect on fisheries resources. With
the absence of significant ichthyoplankton and fish larvae resources in the LNG
Terminal site, impingement and entrainment of fisheries resources is not
anticipated to be unacceptable.
Indirect impacts to fisheries as a result of the discharge of cooled
water with residual chlorine, concentrated seawater from the freshwater
generator, and treated sewage from the FSRU Vessel, and maintenance dredging
are not expected to occur. Potential
obstruction to fishing activities due to maintenance dredging works is not
anticipated as it will be limited to the vicinity of the LNG Terminal
only. Potential impacts of elevated levels of
underwater sound generated from the FSRU Vessel and LNGC transits are not
expected to be unacceptable.
Accidental spill events at a scale that may impact fisheries are
extremely unlikely to occur, and contingency plan will be in place to reduce
potential impacts on fisheries. No
unacceptable operational phase impacts to fisheries resources, habitats and
fishing operations are expected to occur and no fisheries-specific mitigation
measures are required during operation.
No unacceptable impacts to
fisheries are expected to occur. All
of the potential construction and operational fisheries impacts identified are
deemed acceptable.
([1]) Shin PKS, Cheung SG (2004) A Study of Soft Shore Habitats in Hong Kong for Conservation and Education Purposes: Revised Final Report.
([2]) AFCD (2017), available at:
https://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/fisheries/fish_cap/fish_cap_latest/fish_cap_latest.html
([3]) Richardson WJ, Greene CRG, Malme CI, Thomson DH (1995) Marine Mammals and Noise. Academic Press, San Diego, 576 pp
([4]) References cited in BCL (1994) Marine Ecology of the Ninepin Islands including Peddicord R and McFarland V (1996) Effects of suspended dredged material on the commercial crab, Cancer magister. in PA Krenkel, J Harrison and JC Burdick (Eds) Dredging and its Environmental Effects. Proc. Speciality Conference. American Society of Engineers.
([5]) Alabaster JS & Lloyd R (1984) Water Quality Criteria for Freshwater Fisheries. Butterworths, London.
([6]) City University of Hong Kong (2001). Agreement No. CE 62/98, Consultancy Study on Fisheries and Marine Ecological Criteria for Impact Assessment, AFCD, Final Report July 2001.
([7])No discharge of ballast water from LNGC is expected since LNGC would arrive at the LNG Terminal with LNG cargoes and thus with minimal ballast water.
([8]) Fernando Martinez-Andrade and Donald M. Baltz (2003). Coastal Marine Institute: Marine and Coastal Fishes subject to Impingement by Cooling-Water Intake Systems in the Northern Gulf of Mexico - An Annotated Bibliography. U.S. Department of the Interior.
([9])Turnpenny, A. W. H (1988) Fish impingement at estuarine power stations and its significance to commercial fishing. Journal of Fish Biology, Vol. 33, pp. 103-110.
([10]) Water Reuse Association (2011) Desalination Plant Intakes – Impingement and Entrainment Impacts and Solutions. Available at: https://www.watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/IE_White_Paper.pdf