An assessment of
the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and
operation of the Project has been conducted in accordance with the requirements
of the EIA Study Brief and EIAO-TM. This Section summarises the
key environmental outcomes, environmental impacts and mitigation measures
associated with the proposed Project.
A summary of key assessment assumptions, limitation of assessment
methodologies and related prior agreements required under the EIA Study Brief is also presented.
The EIA study predicted that the Project would be environmentally acceptable with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. The key environmental outcomes, taking into account the selection of environmentally friendly options on location, siting, layout, alternative construction method of LNG Terminal Jetty accrued from the environmental considerations and analysis during the EIA study and the implementation of environmental control measures of the Project, are summarised in the following sections.
CLP and HK Electric support
the HKSAR Government’s objective of improving air quality and environmental
performance in Hong Kong. The implementation of this Project
is in line with the Government’s strategy of reducing Hong Kong’s carbon intensity by
supporting the increased use of natural gas for local power generation (and non-fossil fuel
sources), reducing carbon intensity of local electricity generation by
replacing coal-fired generation, and making provisions for additional local gas-fired power generation
capacity in Hong Kong. The Project increases CLP and
HK Electric’s optionality regarding the sourcing of future gas supplies, and
provides the flexibility to directly access competitively priced gas from the
global LNG market, and diversity of gas supply sources.
The gradual replacement of coal-fired units with gas-fired units is helping to further lower emissions from power generation activities in the long-term. For an equivalent power output, the air pollutants emitted from a gas-fired unit is lower than that from a coal-fired unit. Hence, there will be long term benefits to air quality from the installation of new gas-fired units. Consequently, in order to ensure an efficient, secure and stable electricity supply and meet the long term demand growth in the electricity market, sufficient local gas-fired power generation capacity and natural gas supplies are required to replace Hong Kong’s reducing coal-fired power generation capacity. This Project is therefore proposed to provide a viable additional gas supply option that will provide long-term energy security for Hong Kong through access to competitive gas supplies from world markets.
Different alternative options have been explored to meet the
requirement to increase gas supplies to support Government towards meeting the
target of increasing the proportion of electricity generation from gas-fired
unit(s) to around 50% by 2020. The construction of an offshore LNG
Terminal, which is the preferred option, is the most practicable and feasible option given demand for land availability and need for diversity of
supply, that could reliably secure competitive gas supply and support the fuel
mix target and deliver the potential improvement in air quality associated with
the target.
Sites were considered within HKSAR waters, from the point of view of considering a variety of environmental and operational factors the location of the LNG Terminal was found to be preferred based on environmental and safety grounds. Potential impacts to sensitive receivers, in terms of air quality, hazard to life, noise and visual, are further reduced by choosing a location further away from densely populated areas.
Potential impacts to air quality,
hazard to life, noise, terrestrial ecology and visual impacts have been
minimized/avoided through the selection an offshore location for the LNG
Terminal Project Site, and also by locating the two new GRS within the
footprints of the Power Stations at Black Point and Lamma.
An evaluation of installation/
construction methods for the LNG Terminal Jetty, including piled and steel
jacket substructure and piling method (conventional bored piling, suction
piling, open-ended steel tubular piling), was undertaken to evaluate their
engineering feasibility, constructability and programme, safety and operational
implications and overall environmental performance. The preferred substructure design for
installation/ construction of the Jetty and piling method represents optimal
performance in terms of minimisation of impacts associated with the potential
change to marine ecological and fisheries sensitive receivers. The installation/ construction methods
will be fully assessed during the implementation stage of the Project in order
to select the optimum installation/ construction method.
The subsea pipelines will require
protection measures against anchor drop and drag. An evaluation of three installation
methods, including grab dredging, dredging by trailing suction hopper dredger
and jetting, was undertaken to evaluate their engineering feasibility, safety
and operational implications and overall environmental performance. The proposed scenarios for installation
of the pipelines represent optimal performance in terms of minimisation of
impacts associated with the potential change in water quality to marine
ecological and fisheries sensitive receivers and reduction in the generation of
dredged sediments for offsite disposal.
Environmentally sensitive areas and
populations in the vicinity of the Project include the following:
· The LNG Terminal: proposed South
Lantau Marine Park, the nearest populations on Cheung Chau and South Lantau, as
well as potential existing or future users of Soko Islands (including Tau Lo
Chau) and Shek Kwu Chau, marine waters, marine ecological resources and
fisheries resources in the Southern WCZ.
· The BPPS Pipeline: proposed South
Lantau, Southwest Lantau and Third Runway Marine Parks, and existing Sha Chau
and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, populations in Lung Kwu Tan, Lung Kwu Sheung
Tan, and Tuen Mun, marine waters, marine ecological resources and fisheries
resources in the Southern WCZ, Second Southern Supplementary WCZ, North Western
WCZ and North Western Supplementary WCZ.
· The LPS Pipeline: proposed South
Lantau Marine Park and potential South Lamma Marine Park, populations on
western Lamma Island, marine waters, marine ecological resources and fisheries
resources in the Southern WCZ.
· The GRS at the BPPS: populations in
Lung Kwu Tan, Lung Kwu Sheung Tan, and Tuen Mun.
· The GRS at the LPS: populations in
western Lamma Island.
Environmentally friendly options and
designs as well as various mitigation/ control measures were considered to
avoid and/ or minimise environmental impacts due to the construction and
operation. Accordingly, the
following populations and environmentally sensitive areas have been protected:
· The residential, working and
transient populations in Lung Kwu Tan, Lung Kwu Sheung Tan, Tuen Mun, Cheung
Chau and South Lantau, western Lamma Island, existing or future users of Soko
Islands (including Tau Lo Chau) and Shek Kwu Chau areas are subject to less
potential air quality, hazard to life, noise and visual impacts by the selection
of the currently proposed Project sites.
· All sensitive uses of marine waters,
marine ecological resources and fisheries resources in the Southern WCZ, Second
Southern Supplementary WCZ, North Western WCZ and North Western Supplementary WCZ
have been protected from the potential change in water quality during
construction phase and operation phase.
· Loss of vegetation and terrestrial
habitats has been avoided by the selection of the existing BPPS and LPS sites
for the GRSs, which are developed areas.
Impacts to water quality, marine ecology and fisheries resources have been managed by the adoption of appropriate working rates and the use of silt curtains. Standard measures and good site practices are recommended to avoid/ minimise potential impacts as far as practicable.
Appropriate safety management
measures would be implemented to minimise risks at the GRS and the LNG Terminal
during operation of the Project.
The summaries of environmental impacts are structured as
follows for each of the technical assessment completed under this EIA Study:
l
Sensitive
receivers/ assessment points;
l
Assessment
Methodology and Criteria;
l
Key
Construction Impacts;
l
Key
Operation Impacts;
l
Key
Mitigation Measures;
l
Residual
Impacts; and
l
Compliance
with the guidelines and criteria of the EIAO-TM.
Table 14.1 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to air quality as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 4 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.1 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Air Quality
|
Item |
Description |
|
Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) |
The Study
Area is defined as an area within 500m from the boundary of the Project as
stated in Section 3.4.4.2 of the
EIA Study Brief. A total of seven
ASRs beyond the Study Area are identified in accordance with the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 12 and are illustrated
in Figure 4.2
and Figure
4.3. The Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) includes: · Sludge Treatment Facilities (STF) Office · Proposed WENT Extension Site Office · Lung Kwu Tan · Planned Development in Lung Kwu Tan Reclamation Area · Village house at Tai Shan Central · Village house at Wang Long · Concerto Inn The nearest ASR to the GRS at the BPPS is the Proposed WENT Extension Site Office (1.4km), and the village houses at Tai Shan Central and Wang Long for the GRS at the LPS (1.3km). The nearest ASR to the LNG Terminal Project Site is approximately 4km away. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
· The principal legislation for the management of air quality in Hong Kong is the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (APCO) (Cap. 311). Evaluation criteria for the AQIA will follow the prevailing Air Quality Objectives (AQOs) which stipulate the statutory limits of typical air pollutants in the ambient air and the maximum allowable number of exceedances over the specified periods under APCO. · A maximum hourly average Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) concentration of 500µg m-3 at ASRs is stipulated in Annex 4 of the EIAO-TM to address potential construction dust impacts. The measures stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation will be followed to ensure that potential dust impacts are properly controlled. · Conservative cumulative air quality impact assessment by atmospheric dispersion modelling was conducted which considered three tiers of emission sources: (1) Stack emissions from the GRSs at the BPPS and the LPS (Project); (2) Stack emissions from key emission sources in the vicinity of the Project sites and vehicular emissions from open roads within 500m from ASRs near the BPPS; and (3) PATH background in 2020. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
LNG
Terminal & Subsea Pipelines: The
construction of the LNG Terminal as well as the two subsea pipelines are
marine works and are not considered to be dust generating activities. GRSs at the
BPPS and the LPS: Site
clearance activities and construction works at the GRSs at the BPPS and the
LPS are identified to be the potential dust generating activities. Due to large separation distance
between the worksites and the nearest ASRs, no unacceptable dust impact
arising from the construction activities of the Project is anticipated. |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
LNG
Terminal: At the LNG Terminal, during normal operation, the FSRU Vessel and the Jetty will be fueled by natural gas. Due to the large separation distance between the LNG Terminal and the nearest ASRs (> 4km), no unacceptable air quality impact arising from the operation of the Project is anticipated for the LNG Terminal. GRSs at the
BPPS and the LPS: No
unacceptable air quality impact due to the operation of the GRSs at the BPPS
and the LPS is anticipated. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
Construction Phase: For the GRSs at the BPPS and the LPS, dust control measures stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation will be implemented. Operational Phase: No mitigation is considered necessary, where visiting LNGCs will comply with the fuel restriction requirement under the Air Pollution Control (Ocean Going Vessels) (Fuel at berth) Regulation, and emissions from the proposed new gas heaters will be kept at or below their design parameters. |
|
Residual Impacts |
Construction Phase: With the implementation of the recommended dust control measures, no adverse residual impacts are anticipated. Operational Phase: With vessels complying with the fuel restrictions, and emissions of the new gas heaters of the GRSs as per their design parameters, no adverse residual impacts are anticipated. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are acceptable and in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 4 and 12 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.2 presents a summary of the key findings of the assessment, and full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 5 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.2 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Hazard to Life
|
Item |
Description |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
· The Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) study for the Project has assessed the risk level associated with storage, transfer, handling and use of natural gas and other dangerous goods, marine transport and activities of LNG Carriers and FSRU Vessel and natural gas subsea pipelines within Hong Kong waters in normal and adverse weather or tidal situations, and accidental spillage or leakage of natural gas.. · The methodology involved five major components: review of the Project and baseline data, hazard identification, frequencies analysis, consequence analysis and risk assessment. · The results from the risk assessment were compared with the Hong Kong Risk Guideline and,
mitigation measures identified and recommended where appropriate. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
LNG
Terminal & Subsea Pipelines: The
construction of the LNG Terminal as well as the two subsea pipelines will not
have LNG, natural gas or other dangerous goods present, other than for
commissioning, therefore assessment of construction phase risks are not
considered necessary. GRSs at the
BPPS and the LPS: No unacceptable risks are foreseen as a result
of the construction of the proposed Project and risks are in compliance with
risk criteria in Section 2 of Annex 4
of EIAO-TM, with safety management
measures in place to further manage and minimise the external hazards from
constructions activities. |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
For marine transits of LNGC and FSRU Vessel, the LNG Terminal, subsea pipelines, and the GRSs at the BPPS and the LPS: No unacceptable risks are foreseen as a
result of the operation of the proposed Project and risks are in compliance
with the risk criteria in Section 2 of Annex
4 of the EIAO-TM. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
Construction Phase: Although mitigation measure is not required, safety
management measures would be implemented to further manage and minimise the
external hazards from construction activities. Operational Phase: Although mitigation measure is not required, safety
management measures would be implemented in the form of a safety
management system to be developed for the Project, in which safety inspection
and audit would be conducted. |
|
Residual Impacts |
With the implementation of safety management measures during construction and operation, no unacceptable residual impacts are anticipated. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annex 4 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.3 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to ambient noise level as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 6 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.3 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Noise
|
Item |
Description |
|
Noise Sensitive Receivers (NSRs) |
In
accordance with the EIA Study Brief Section
3.4.6.3 of the Project, the Assessment Area for the noise impact
assessment covers areas within 300m of the Project boundary. No NSR was
found within the Assessment Area.
Beyond the Assessment Area, a total of three existing NSRs and one
planned NSRs were identified and are illustrated in Figure 6.1.
The nearest NSRs are approximately 1.3km away
from the sites of the GRSs at the BPPS and the LPS; approximately 2km from
the LPS Pipeline during construction, and over 4km from the LNG Terminal
Project Site during operation. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
The methodology for the noise impact assessment is in accordance with the procedures outlined in the GW-TM, which is issued under the NCO and the EIAO-TM. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
No existing or planned NSRs are located within the Assessment Area for all the Project Sites, as such no unacceptable construction noise impact is anticipated. |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
In view of
the insignificant noise impact arising from the operation of the Project and
the large separation distance to the nearest NSRs (> 1.3km away), no
unacceptable noise impact associated with the operation of the Project is
anticipated. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
In view of the insignificant noise impact arising from the proposed Project, mitigation measures are therefore not required for both construction and operation phases. |
|
Residual Impacts |
In view of the insignificant noise impact arising from the proposed Project, no unacceptable residual impacts are anticipated. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 5 and 13 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.4 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to water quality as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 7 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.4 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Water Quality
|
Item |
Description |
|
Water Sensitive Receivers (WSRs) |
A total of 86 WSRs were identified under this Project, covering: · Four types of fisheries sensitive receivers, namely oyster production area (1 WSR), fisheries spawning/nursery grounds in North & South Lantau (2 WSRs), artificial reef deployment area (1 WSR), and fish culture zones (3 WSRs); · Six types of marine ecological sensitive receivers, namely Intertidal Mudflats / Mangroves / Horseshoe Crab Nursery Grounds (14 WSRs), Designated / Proposed / Potential Marine Parks (5 WSRs), seagrass bed (2 WSRs), and corals (22 WSRs); · Three types of water quality sensitive receivers, namely gazetted beaches (8 WSRs), non-gazetted beaches (12 WSRs), and seawater intakes (16 WSRs). The seawater intakes for freshwater generation and regasification unit of the FSRU Vessel have no specific water quality requirement and were not considered as WSRs; and · Secondary contact recreation subzones and potential water sports activities. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
· The potential impacts due to the construction and operation of the Project were assessed following the EIAO-TM Annex 6 guidelines and the impacts evaluated based on the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 14. Water quality impacts on WSRs were evaluated according to the corresponding WQO criteria or other proposed assessment criteria. · Impacts due to the dispersion of suspended sediment and release of sediment-bounded nutrient during marine dredging and jetting for installing the BPPS and LPS Pipelines have been assessed using computational modelling Delft3D-WAQ models). Impacts due to the dispersion of suspended sediment and release of sediment-bounded nutrient during marine dredging, jetting and maintenance dredging, depletion of dissolved oxygen, release of sediment-bounded contaminants and nutrients from the dredging and jetting operation were also assessed quantitatively. · The simulation of operation phase thermal, total residual chlorine discharge have been studied by means of computational modelling (CORMIX, Delft3D-FLOW and Delft3D-WAQ models). · The simulation of operation phase sewage effluent discharge have also been studied by means of computational modelling (CORMIX models). · Analysis of EPD routine water quality and sediment data from the years of 1986 to 2016 has been undertaken to determine the assessment criteria for increase in suspended solids, depletion of dissolved oxygen and release of sediment-bounded nutrients. · Elutriate test has been conducted to determine the potential release of sediment-bounded contaminants from the marine dredging and jetting works and the findings were taken into account in the computational modelling. · The potential pathway and extent in case of a hypothetical oil spill event, in the absence of spill response, has been studied by means of computational modelling (Delft3D-PART model) |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
The water quality modelling have
indicated that the dredging and jetting can proceed at the recommended
working rates with the implementation of silt curtains without causing
unacceptable impacts to water quality sensitive receivers. · Suspended Solids (SS): With the implementation of recommended mitigation measures, including silt curtain at sediment sources (grab dredgers and jetting machine), reduction of work rates as well as silt curtain at WSRs, it is predicted that SS elevation and sedimentation flux would be in full compliance at all WSRs. · Water Quality (dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and heavy metals): The dispersion of sediment due to dredging and jetting operations is not expected to impact the general water quality of the receiving waters. Effects will be transient, localised in extent, of small magnitude and compliant with applicable standards. Thus, no unacceptable impact is expected from the dredging works. · Non-toxic chemical would be used for hydrotesting. Compliance to the corresponding WQO criteria is expected at discharge. ·
Other Discharges: With the
implementation of appropriate management measures, no unacceptable water
quality impact is expected from vessel discharges, land based construction
activities and sewage effluent from construction workforce. |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
· Cooled Discharge: The change in water temperature at the nearest water sensitive receiver is minimal. Thus, no unacceptable impact is expected from the Project operation. · Discharge of Residual Chlorine: The level of total residual chlorine at WSRs is expected to be in compliance with the proposed assessment criteria. Thus, no unacceptable impact is expected from the Project operation. · Discharge of Treated Sewage Effluent: The treated effluent is expected to be diluted to negligible level at the nearest water sensitive receiver. Thus, no unacceptable impact is expected from the Project operation. · Other Discharges: ballast water would be taken in and out from the surrounding sea according to operating conditions of the FSRU Vessel and LNGC. Thus, no unacceptable water quality impact from the intake and subsequent discharge of ballast water would be expected. · Potential Risk of Fuel Spillage: The additional risk associated with accidental spill from the operation of the LNG Terminal is expected to be minimal. With the implementation of appropriate design features as well as the adoption of contingency plan, no unacceptable water quality impact would be expected. Modelling of oil spillage has been conducted to predict the potential pathway and extent of oil patch to inform containment and clean-up actions. · Maintenance Dredging: No unacceptable water quality impact would be expected from maintenance dredging with the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, plant numbers and dredging rate. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
Construction Phase: · For the BPPS and LPS Pipelines: adoption of appropriate dredging and jetting rates, plant numbers and silt curtains at the plant and WSRs, where appropriate. ·
Grab dredging can be conducted concurrently with one TSHD. ·
One jetting machine can be working on each pipeline. ·
Cofferdam construction and removal at pipeline landfalls of the BPPS
and the LPS (if needed) should not be conducted concurrently with the nearby
pipeline dredging sections (BPPS Pipeline KP44.9-45.0 and LPS Pipeline KP17.4-18.2). Silt curtain surrounding the works
areas for cofferdam construction and removal at pipeline landfalls of the
BPPS and the LPS. · Standard measures and good site practices are recommended to avoid/minimise the potential impacts, see Section 7.9. · A detailed hydrotesting procedure will be developed, including how the process will be carried out, how it will be carefully controlled and monitored, and how the discharge of hydrotesting water will be managed. Operational Phase: · For accidental fuel spill: · Design features such as shutdown valves and leak detectors to avoid and minimise potential fuel leak. · A project-specific contingency plan will be prepared including protocols for avoidance, containment, remediation and reporting accidental spill event. · For maintenance dredging: · Controlled dredging rate, plant number as well as silt curtain. · Applicable control measures related to construction phase marine works as stated above would also be implemented. |
|
Residual Impacts |
Construction: With the adoption of the
recommended mitigation measures, no unacceptable residual water quality
impacts are expected during the construction phase of the Project. Operation: No unacceptable residual water
quality impact would be expected from the operation of the proposed LNG
Terminal including the discharge of cooled seawater, concentrated seawater
and treated effluent from sewage treatment plant; and maintenance dredging at
the Jetty, with the implementation of mitigation measures including
controlled work rate and silt curtains, where appropriate. The additional risk associated
with accidental spill from the operation of the LNG Terminal is expected to
be minimal. With the
implementation of appropriate design features as well as the adoption of
contingency plan, no unacceptable water quality impact would be expected. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 6 and 14 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.5 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to waste management as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 8 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.5 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Waste Management
|
Item |
Description |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
The potential environmental impacts associated with the handling and disposal of waste arising from the construction and operation of this Project are assessed in accordance with the criteria presented in Annexes 7 and 15 of the EIAO-TM. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
The key potential impacts during the construction phase are related mainly to dredged marine sediment from the BPPS and the LPS Pipelines that will require off-site disposal. The project proponent should liaise with MFC and EPD at an early stage of the project, as to the allocation arrangement for sediment disposal. Marine sediment sampling, testing and reporting in accordance with the requirement stated in PNAP ADV-21 for EPD approval as required under the Dumping at Sea Ordinance is recommended prior to dredging and disposal. Other waste quantities, including Construction & Demolition (C&D) materials, chemical waste, and general refuse including floating refuse are anticipated to be small, and will be disposed of accordingly to their nature and relevant regulations, avoiding any potential adverse impact. |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
The operation of the GRSs at the BPPS and the LPS, and LNG Terminal will generate minimal quantities of waste, with the implementation of standard waste management practices no adverse environmental impacts are anticipated from handling, collection, transport and disposal of wastes. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
Standard measures and good site
practices are recommended to avoid/minimise the waste
arisings during construction and operation, see Section 8.5. A Waste Management Plan will be devised which incorporates mitigation measures that have been proposed to avoid or reduce potential adverse environmental impacts associated with handling, collection, transportation and disposal of waste arising from the construction and operation of this Project. |
|
Residual Impacts |
With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, in particular the establishment and implementation of the Waste Management Plan, no adverse residual impacts are anticipated from the construction and operation of this Project. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 7 and 15 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.6 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to ecology as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 9 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.6 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Ecology
|
Item |
Description |
|
Sensitive Receivers |
In accordance with the EIA Study Brief Section 3.4.9.2 of the Project, the ecological sensitive receivers were identified and detailed in Section 9. · No terrestrial ecological sensitive receivers are identified within the 500m Assessment Area from the Project boundary. 11 individuals from five bird species were observed within the Assessment Area including the proposed LNG Terminal Project Site; · For marine ecological impact assessment, the Assessment Area is the same as the water quality impact assessment, which covers the Southern Water Control Zone (WCZ), Second Southern Supplementary WCZ, North Western WCZ and North Western Supplementary WCZ as designated under the WPCO. The Assessment Area also extends to cover the Deep Bay WCZ (Outer Subzone) and Western Buffer WCZ; · Known ecological important habitats and species in the vicinity of the Project within the Assessment Areas include existing, planned and potential marine parks, horseshoe crab breeding and nursery grounds, mangroves, coral communities, marine benthos of conservation interest, and ecological important species including Chinese White Dolphins (CWDs), Finless Porpoises (FPs), Green Turtles, Whale Sharks, Amphioxus, Horseshoe Crabs, White-bellied Sea Eagle, seabirds and migratory birds. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
· A literature review was supplemented by a programme of field surveys that covered intertidal, subtidal (benthic and coral), marine mammal and offshore avifauna. ·
The potential impacts due to the construction and
operation of the proposed Project were assessed following the EIAO-TM Annex 16 guidelines and the
impacts evaluated based on criteria in EIAO-TM
Annex 8 and Guidance Notes. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
· Impacts from temporary habitat loss and disturbance, underwater sound from Jetty pile installation works, increased marine traffic from marine construction activities, short-term changes in water quality, underwater sound from marine construction activities, accidental spillage/leakage of fuels/ chemicals on marine ecology, marine mammals and marine parks is considered negligible to moderate, and would be acceptable with implementation of scheduling and other mitigation measures. · Impacts from habitat disturbance to terrestrial ecology including offshore avifauna from the whole Project, and habitat loss, fragmentation and isolation from works at the BPPS is considered to be negligible to minor and acceptable. · Water quality impacts arising from the proposed dredging / jetting, and other marine works will be reduced through implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in Section 7 (Water Quality). |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
· Impacts from permanent habitat loss (2.5ha) from construction of the Jetty to marine and terrestrial ecology, including Finless Porpoise (FP) and offshore avifauna is considered to be minor and acceptable. · Impacts from impingement and entrainment, mooring for LNG transfer, changes in water quality, temporary habitat loss and disturbance, short-term changes in water quality, underwater sound, increased marine traffic, accidental spillage and leakage of fuel / chemicals from operation of the LNG Terminal operations, maintenance dredging, and FSRU Vessel/ LNGC transits are considered to be negligible to minor and acceptable for marine ecology, marine mammals and marine parks. · Impacts from potential bird interactions and collision risk and habitat disturbance, e.g. light and noise emissions from operation of the LNG Terminal and GRS are considered to be negligible to minor and acceptable for terrestrial ecology, including offshore avifauna. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
General Measures for Marine Ecological Resources: · Vessel operators will be required to control and manage all effluent from vessels. · A policy of no dumping of rubbish, food, oil, or chemicals will be strictly enforced. · Only well-maintained and inspected vessels would be used. · The effects of the construction and operation of the Project on elevated suspended sediment will be reduced as described in Section 7 (Water Quality). · Standard site practices outlined in ProPECC PN 1/94 ”Construction Site Drainage” Specific Measures for Marine Mammals/ Marine Parks: · Pipeline dredging/ jetting works between North of Tai O and Fan Lau will avoid the peak months of CWD calving (May and June). · Pipeline dredging / jetting works between South of Soko Islands and the LNG Terminal will be restricted to a daily maximum of 12 hours with daytime (0700 – 1900) operations. · Pipeline dredging/ jetting from LNG Terminal to South of Shek Kwu Chau will be restricted to a daily maximum of 12 hours with daytime (0700 – 1900) operations. · Use of vibratory/ hydraulic pushing method to push the open ended steel tubular pile for the upper layer of the seabed and only use hydraulic hammer (if needed) to install the remainder of the pile length through the lower layer of the seabed. During underwater percussive piling works: o Quieter hydraulic hammer; o Use of Noise Reduction System for hydraulic hammering; o Acoustic decoupling of noisy equipment on work barges; o Using ramp-up piling procedures; o Underwater percussive piling should be conducted inside a bubble curtain; o The percussive pile driving will be conducted during the daytime (0700 – 1900) for a maximum of 12 hours; and o Underwater percussive piling works for the Jetty construction will avoid the peak season of FP (December to May). · The vessel operators of this Project will be required to use predefined and regular routes (that do not encroach into existing and proposed marine parks), make use of designated fairways to access the works areas, and would avoid traversing sensitive habitats such as existing and proposed marine parks; · Any anchoring/ anchor spread requirements during Project construction will avoid encroachment into the existing and proposed marine parks; · Silt curtain deployment during Project construction will avoid encroachment into the existing and proposed marine park; · No stopping over or anchoring activity of vessels related to the Project should be conducted within existing and proposed marine parks, even before, during and after typhoon. · Use of appropriate dredging and jetting rates with the use of silt curtain, see Water Quality section (Section 7); and · Silt curtain will be checked and maintained to ensure its effectiveness in mitigating water quality impacts on existing, planned and potential marine parks. Precautionary measures will be taken to further reduce impacts to marine mammals: · All vessel operators working on the Project will be given a briefing, alerting them to the possible presence of dolphins and porpoises in the marine works areas, and the guidelines for safe vessel operation in the presence of these animals. The vessels will avoid using high speed as far as possible; · All vessels used in this Project will be required to slow down to 10 knots around the Project's marine works areas and areas with high dolphin and porpoise usage, including existing and proposed marine parks; · During underwater percussive piling works, a marine mammal exclusion zone within a radius of 500m radius will be implemented during underwater percussive piling works. Qualified observer(s) will scan an exclusion zone of 500m radius around the work area for at least 30 minutes prior to the start of piling. If a marine mammal is observed in the exclusion zone, piling will be delayed until they have left the area. This measure will ensure the area in the vicinity of the underwater percussive piling work is clear of marine mammals prior to the commencement of works and will serve to reduce any disturbance to marine mammals. When a marine mammal is spotted by qualified personnel within the exclusion zone, piling works will cease and will not resume until the observer confirms that the zone has been continuously clear of the marine mammal for a period of 30 minutes. This measure will ensure the area in the vicinity of the piling is clear of the marine mammal during works and will serve to reduce any disturbance to marine mammals; · During marine dredging or jetting operations, a marine mammal exclusion zone within a radius of 250m from dredger or jetting machine will be implemented. Qualified observer(s) will scan an exclusion zone of 250m radius around the work area for at least 30 minutes prior to the start of dredging or jetting. If cetaceans or other megafauna are observed in the exclusion zone, dredging or jetting will be delayed until they have left the area. This measure will ensure the area in the vicinity of the dredging or jetting work is clear of marine mammals prior to the commencement of works and will serve to reduce any disturbance to marine mammals. When a marine mammal is spotted by qualified personnel within the exclusion zone, dredging or jetting works will cease and will not resume until the observer confirms that the zone has been continuously clear of the marine mammal for a period of 30 minutes. This measure will ensure the area in the vicinity of the works is clear of the marine mammal during works and will serve to reduce any disturbance to marine mammals. If necessary, for night-time works, exclusion zone monitoring for FP by underwater acoustic means would be explored to supplement the exclusion zone monitoring by trained observers. A site trial will be conducted to demonstrate its practicability/ effectiveness before actual implementation during the night-time works; · Implementation of a contingency plan to contain and clean up the spilled or leaked fuels or chemicals at the LNG Terminal, surrounding waters and marine parks. Precautionary measures will be taken to further reduce impacts to marine parks: · All vessel operators working on the Project will be given a briefing, alerting them the locations of the existing, proposed and potential marine parks and the regulations for marine parks. The vessels will avoid using high speed as far as possible; · The vessel operators will be required to use predefined and regular routes (that do not encroach into existing and proposed marine parks), and would avoid traversing sensitive habitats such as existing and proposed marine parks, with the exception of the FSRU Vessel which will need to transit through the proposed SLMP during manoeuvring to the Jetty and after typhoon event due to its safe operational requirement; · Silt curtain deployment during maintenance dredging will avoid encroachment into the proposed SLMP; · Implementation of a marine mammal exclusion zone during underwater percussive piling works and pipeline dredging and jetting works (details described above); · No stopping over or anchoring activity of vessels related to the Project should be conducted within existing and proposed marine parks, even before, during and after typhoon; and · Implementation of a contingency plan to contain and clean up the spilled or leaked fuels or chemicals at the LNG Terminal, surrounding waters and marine parks. |
|
Enhancement Measures |
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. |
|
Residual Impacts |
The following residual ecological impacts have been identified: · Loss of about 0.8ha of subtidal soft bottom habitat and water column within the footprint of the piles at the Jetty. Considering the low ecological value and very small size in the context of surrounding similar habitat, the residual impact is considered to be acceptable. · Loss of about 2.5ha of Finless Porpoise and offshore avifauna habitats within the footprint of the Jetty. Considering the habitat is very small in size in the context of surrounding available habitat for these species, and taking account of the sizable movement ranges and mobility of affected animals, it is expected that the loss would not give rise to significant adverse impacts on individuals or the populations as a whole. Additionally, the habitat which would be lost is not considered to be unique or critical habitat in terms of habitat utilization by the species, the residual impact is considered to be acceptable. · The assessment of residual impacts associated with the habitat loss for the Project is considered to be acceptable and have met the requirements of Section 4.4.3 of the EIAO-TM. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 8 and 16 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.7 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to fisheries as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 10 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.7 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Fisheries
|
Item |
Description |
|
Fisheries Sensitive Receivers |
The identified fisheries sensitive receivers are: · Recognised spawning grounds. nursery area of commercial fisheries resources in North and South Lantau; · Artificial reefs in the Sha Chau & Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park and Lo Tik Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ); · FCZs at Lo Tik Wan, Cheung Sha Wan and Sok Kwu Wan · Oyster production area at Deep Bay. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
· A literature review was supplemented by a programme of field surveys was conducted to establish the fisheries importance of the area surrounding the Project. · The potential impacts due to the construction and operation of the Project and associated developments were assessed following the EIAO-TM Annex 17 guidelines and the impacts evaluated based on the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 9. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
· Temporary disturbance to fisheries habitats and loss of access to potential fishing grounds within an area of approximately 18ha in the LNG Terminal Jetty area is considered to be minor and acceptable given the small size of the affected areas which is of low fisheries importance. · During subsea pipeline construction, temporary disturbance to fisheries habitats and loss of access to potential fishing grounds within an area of approximately 70ha will be limited and managed at temporary, discrete work fronts, impacts are considered to be minor and unacceptable impacts on fisheries resources, habitats and fishing activities are not expected. · Water quality impacts are also expected to be minor and acceptable as the impacts are short term, localised and in compliance with the corresponding WQOs and assessment criteria. |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
· The permanent loss of about 0.8ha seabed habitats (which are of low fisheries importance) due to the presence of Jetty piles is considered to be of minor significance. · The loss of access to about 20ha of fishing grounds (which are of low fisheries importance) within the safety zone is considered to be small in the context of similar fishing grounds elsewhere in Hong Kong and the effect on fisheries resources by the Jetty structure may have potential positive effect on fisheries resources and habitats of the waters in the vicinity of the LNG Terminal. No unacceptable impact is expected. · Unacceptable indirect impacts on fisheries resources, due to discharge of cooling water and the associated residual chlorine from the proposed LNG terminal, are not expected. · With the absence of significant ichthyoplankton and fish larvae resources in the LNG Terminal site, impingement and entrainment of fisheries resources is anticipated to be minor and acceptable. · Unacceptable indirect impacts to fisheries, due to 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. · Obstruction of fishing activities due to maintenance dredging works is not anticipated. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
The mitigation measures designed to mitigate impacts to water quality to acceptable levels (compliance with assessment criteria) and marine ecological impacts are expected to mitigate impacts to fisheries resources. Impingement and entrainment of fisheries resources will be reduced through appropriate design of the intake screens on the cooling water intake. |
|
Enhancement Measures |
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. |
|
Residual Impacts |
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. Residual impact from loss of
potential fishing grounds within the LNG Terminal Safety Zone remains within
acceptable levels. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 9 and 17 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.8 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to the visual environment as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 11 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.8 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Visual
|
Item |
Description |
|
Visual Sensitive Receivers (VSRs) |
A total of 17 VSR groups have been
identified, including 14 VSRs for the LNG Terminal, 3 VSRs for the GRS at the
BPPS, and 3 VSRs for the GRS at the LPS.
VSRs included recreational, residential occupational and travelling
users. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
·
The methodology of the LVIA was based on Annexes 10 and 18 in
the EIAO-TM under the EIA Ordinance and associated Guidance Notes. ·
The visual assessment examined the impact of the proposed development
on the existing views and the visual amenity, particularly from the VSRs
within the viewshed. ·
In order to illustrate the visual impacts of the proposed Project
structures, photomontages prepared from selected viewpoints compare the
existing conditions with the view after construction. The residual impacts are evaluated
qualitatively, in accordance with the requirements of Annex 10 of the EIAO-TM. |
|
Key Construction Impacts |
Visual impacts during construction
of the Project are considered acceptable prior to mitigation. |
|
Key Operation Impacts |
Operational impacts are expected to be acceptable and arise from
the presence and operation of the new facilities within the existing BPPS and
LPS sites, and within the existing seascape. Night-time lighting from the LNG Terminal
is not anticipated to be significant. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
Measures including the use of
appropriate architectural design of new facilities, reinstatement of
temporary construction areas and preservation of vegetation are recommended
to further enhance the visual elements associated with the Project. Control of light intensity and beam
directional angles at the GRSs and LNG Terminal will reduce light pollution. |
|
Residual Impacts |
No unacceptable residual visual impacts are expected. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 18 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
Table 14.9 presents a summary of the findings of the assessment of impacts to cultural heritage as a result of the construction and operation of this Project. Full details of the assessment and mitigation measures are presented in Section 12 of this EIA Report.
Table 14.9 Summary of Environmental Assessment and Outcomes – Cultural Heritage
|
Item |
Description |
|
Sensitive Receivers |
No declared monument protected under the AM Ordinance, graded/proposed graded historic buildings, built heritage or sites of archaeological interest located within the Project Site area. Review of the 19th to 20th century charts,
previous MAIs and wreck database supplemented by a geophysical survey
identified no evidence of any marine archaeological sites / shipwrecks sites
in the Project’s impact area. The
proposed marine works areas of the Project are concluded to have no
archaeological potential. |
|
Assessment Methodology and Criteria |
The study methodology follows the
criteria and guidelines as stated in Annexes
10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM and the Guidelines for Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI) as
stated in the EIA Study Brief. |
|
Key Impacts |
As there are no declared monument protected under the AM Ordinance, graded/proposed graded historic buildings, built heritage or sites of archaeological interest located within the Project Site area, no terrestrial cultural heritage impacts are expected to occur during the construction and operation of the Project. Findings of the MAI conclude that there is no marine archaeological potential within the Project’s impact area. No marine archaeological impact is expected to occur during the construction and operation of the marine works of the Project. |
|
Key Mitigation Measures |
As no impacts to terrestrial and marine cultural heritage resources are expected, no mitigation measure is required. |
|
Residual Impacts |
As no impacts to terrestrial and marine cultural heritage resources are expected, no adverse residual impacts are expected. |
|
Compliance with EIAO-TM |
The assessment and the impacts are in compliance with the EIAO-TM Annexes 10 and 19 and applicable assessment standards/ criteria. |
A summary of key assessment assumptions, limitation of assessment methodologies and related prior agreements with relevant Government Departments is presented in Table 14.10.
The construction and operation of the proposed Project has been demonstrated in this EIA Report to comply with the EIAO-TM requirements. Actual impacts during the construction works will be monitored through a detailed Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) programme. Full details of the EM&A programme are presented in the EM&A Manual attached to this EIA Report. This programme will provide management actions and mitigation measures to be employed should impacts arise, thereby ensuring the environmental acceptability of the construction and operation of this Project.
No unacceptable residual impacts have been predicted for the construction and operation of this Project. It must be noted that for each of the components assessed in the EIA Report, the assessments and the residual impacts have all been shown to be acceptable and in compliance with the relevant assessment standards/criteria of the EIAO TM and the associated Annexes.
There are a number of advantages to the commissioning of this LNG Terminal project, which are summarized below.
Table 14.10 Key Assessment Assumptions, Limitation of Assessment Methodologies and related Prior Agreement(s) with the Relevant Authorities
|
Environmental
Aspect |
Key
Assessment Assumptions |
Limitation
of Assessment Methodologies |
Prior
Agreement(s) with the Director of Environmental Protection or other
Authorities |
|
Air Quality |
· Vehicular emission factors are referenced from EMFAC-HK v3.3. · Ozone Limited Method (OLM) for conversion of NOx to NO2 -
28% for vehicular tailpipe
emission sources - 10% for all emission sources except tailpipe emission · Hourly meteorological data in 2010 as extracted from relevant grids (depending on ASRs) of PATH model is adopted for modelling. · Land use parameters are estimated according to EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters. · Emission rates of the identified key emission sources are conservatively estimated based on the maximum allowable emissions with reference to publicly available information (e.g. SP licence, approved EIA reports). · PATH-2016 model re-run with key emission sources modelled as Tier 2 contribution removed. |
Gaussian models are designed for use in simple terrain under uniform flow. Steady-state Gaussian plume models have been shown to produce conservative results, and are more likely to over-predict rather than under-predict ground-level concentrations. |
In accordance with Clause 3.4.2 and Appendix A of the EIA Study Brief, an Air Quality Modelling Method Statement detailing the quantitative assessment methodology was submitted for agreement by the Director. No comment was received from EPD on 29 November 2017. PATH-2016 emission files were modified by
EPD with the identified Tier 2 emission sources removed to avoid double
counting of these sources in PATH-2016 model. The PATH-2016 emission files were
received from EPD on 1 December 2017 for subsequent PATH-2016 model re-run. |
|
Hazard to Life |
The key assessment assumptions are summarised in Annexes 5A and B |
The use of average density approach for
the marine population estimation in each marine grid area is deemed
conservative. |
In
accordance with Clause 3.4.5 and Appendix B of the EIA Study Brief, a Hazard
to Life Quantitative Risk Assessment Study Method Statement detailing the
hazard assessment methodology was submitted for agreement by the
Director. Agreement was received from EPD on 28 September 2017. |
|
Noise |
Operational
noise impacts were estimated based on the latest design information available
from CLP / HK Electric at the time of reporting. |
N/A |
In accordance with Clause 3.4.6 and Appendix C of the EIA Study Brief, a Noise Impact Assessment Method Statement detailing the methodology including proposed assessment area and assessment points for fixed noise sources impact assessment was submitted for agreement by the Director. Agreement was received from EPD on 16 August 2017. |
|
Water Quality |
· Water quality baseline developed based on available EPD water quality monitoring data within Assessment Area in 1986-2016 · Sediment release at peak rates of dredging and jetting are assumed for conservative assessment. · Consideration of future coastline and concurrent projects as stated in Section 7.11. · First order decay rate of total residual chlorine in marine water is assumed to 24/day. |
· Modelling exercise simulates only typical conditions of dry season and wet season, which is generally considered acceptable. · Maximum rates of sediment release and thermal discharge assumed to ensure conservative assessment. |
In
accordance with Clause 3.4.7 and Appendix D of the EIA Study Brief, a Water
Quality Modelling Method Statement detailing scope, assessment approach,
criteria, model use, etc. for the water quality modelling exercise was
submitted for agreement by the Director.
No comment was received from EPD on 27 April
2018. |
|
Waste Management |
Volume
of C&D material, dredged material and general construction and
operational waste were estimated based on the latest design information
available from CLP / HK Electric at the time of reporting. |
N/A |
In
accordance with Clause 3.4.8 and Appendix E of the EIA Study Brief, a Marine
Sediment Sampling & Testing Plan which detailed
the ranges of parameters to be analysed; the number, type and methods of
sampling; sample preservation; and chemical and biological laboratory test
methods to be used was
submitted for agreement by the Director.
Agreement was received from EPD on 9 August
2017. |
|
Ecology |
Assessment was conducted based with literature review supplemented with marine field surveys within the Assessment Area, namely intertidal, subtidal (benthic and coral), marine mammal and avifauna surveys. |
N/A |
None
required under the EIA Study Brief. Ecological Survey Method Statement
detailing the methodology and scope of the marine and terrestrial ecological
surveys was however
submitted to AFCD for agreement prior to ecological survey. |
|
Fisheries |
Assessment was conducted based on literature review of past fisheries studies, AFCD’s Port Survey, recent fisheries surveys of the approved EIA studies, supplemented by fisheries surveys. |
N/A |
In
accordance with Clause 3.4.10 and Appendix G of the EIA Study Brief, a Method Statement for Fisheries Field Surveys detailing the methodology (including
sampling gear type and gear specification, number and location of sampling
stations, and data analysis, etc.), duration and timing for the fisheries
field surveys was submitted for agreement by the Director. Agreement was
received from EPD on 11 November 2016. |
|
Visual |
Photomontages follow design details available. Colours of buildings may be subject to change at detailed design stage. |
Assessment of magnitudes of change caused
by the Project works to visual sensitive receivers are inherently subjective.
|
None
required under the EIA Study Brief. Method
Statement detailing scope, assessment approach, sensitive receivers and
vantage points for assessment, etc. for the visual impact was however
submitted to PlanD for agreement prior to assessment. |
|
Cultural
Heritage |
The Marine Archaeological Investigation
was conducted based on the literature review of past projects that conducted
geophysical surveys and MAIs supplemented by geophysical surveys of
information gaps. |
N/A |
In
accordance with Clause 3.4.12 and Appendix I of the EIA Study Brief, a Method Statement for Marine Archaeological Investigation detailing
programme of investigation, including the methodology and time schedule, etc.
was submitted for agreement by the Director. Agreement was received from EPD on 12
July 2017. |