Final EIAR - Aurecon AME Environmental | Environmental Projects

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proposed Wind and Solar (Photovoltaic) Energy Facilities on Kangnas Farm near Springbok in the Northern Cape: Final EIR 102 Figure 4.20: Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas for the study area (SANBI, 2012), general site area encircled (source: Belcher, 2012) © Aurecon (2012) No unauthorised reproduction, copy or adaptation, in whole or in part, may be made. P:\Projects\108495 Kangnas WEF & PV EIA's\3 Project Delivery\4 Reports\FEIR\FEIR 210213 Final.doc
Proposed Wind and Solar (Photovoltaic) Energy Facilities on Kangnas Farm near Springbok in the Northern Cape: Final EIR 103 The potential impact on freshwater is considered to be of local extent, low magnitude and long term, and therefore of very low (-) significance, with and without mitigation. No difference in significance would result from the proposed wind alternatives. Solar Energy Facility Potential Impacts During the operation phase the proposed solar energy facility would be monitored and controlled remotely. When required, a mobile team would conduct maintenance of the panels. Regular cleaning of the panels to remove dust, dirt, pollen, and bird excretions would be required to ensure that the maximum quantity of sunrays can be captured by the PV panels. The frequency of panel cleaning would depend on the site conditions. Panels would be washed with water and a mild, organic, and non-abrasive detergent. Potential impacts associated with the access roads during the operation phase relate to disturbance to freshwater related habitats at river crossings for transmission lines and access routes to the solar panels and increased runoff. According to a hydrology study undertaken for the proposed project, the PV facility would increase runoff from the site, however this runoff would not coincide with the flood peak of the upstream catchment. This means that the larger flood peak from the combined catchment would not be increased by the increased runoff from the PV area and the impact of the 1:100 year flood is therefore limited. A localized long term impact of moderate to low intensity and local extent and therefore very low (-) significance, without and with mitigation, would result on the aquatic resources. No difference in significance would result from the proposed solar alternatives. c) Mitigation measures The following mitigation measures are recommended: Mitigation measures for the wind energy facility • Limit operational activities as far as possible to the delineated site and the identified access routes. • Monitor invasive alien plant growth on an ongoing basis to ensure that disturbed areas do not become infested with invasive alien plants. • Locate any septic tanks at least 100 m (measured from top of bank) from the ephemeral streams and at least 1 000 m away from the springs or any boreholes/wellpoints. • Compile a stormwater management plan and maintain storm water run-off infrastructure to mitigate both the flow and water quality impacts of any storm water leaving the site. • Stabilise any erosion areas soon as possible should they develop. Mitigation measures for the solar energy facility The same mitigation measures as those recommended for the proposed wind energy facility should be implemented, as well as: • The stormwater management plan should address the discharge of runoff into the watercourses flowing across the site to ensure that erosion of the river channels does not occur. © Aurecon (2012) No unauthorised reproduction, copy or adaptation, in whole or in part, may be made. P:\Projects\108495 Kangnas WEF & PV EIA's\3 Project Delivery\4 Reports\FEIR\FEIR 210213 Final.doc
Page 1 and 2:
PROPOSED WIND AND SOLAR (PHOTOVOLTA
Page 3 and 4:
OMGEWINGSINVLOEDBEPALING: BEOOGDE A
Page 5 and 6:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: PR
Page 7 and 8:
OMGEWINGSINVLOEDBEPALING: BEOOGDE A
Page 9 and 10:
wat elk ongeveer 40 x 5 m groot is.
Page 11 and 12:
Die Kangas wind- en sonenergie proj
Page 13 and 14:
o Twee alternatiewe tegnologieë vi
Page 15 and 16:
IMPAK BEDRYFSFASE IMPAKTE 1.1 1.2 2
Page 17 and 18:
Ten einde onnodige OM-wysigings te
Page 19 and 20:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: PR
Page 21 and 22:
The fundamental difference between
Page 23 and 24:
EIA Process EIA Regulations (Regula
Page 25 and 26:
Identified impacts The EIR has prov
Page 27 and 28:
IMPACT OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS 1.
Page 29 and 30:
In order to limit unnecessary EA am
Page 31 and 32:
Proposed Wind and Solar (Photovolta
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92: Proposed Wind and Solar (Photovolta
Page 141: Proposed Wind and Solar (Photovolta
show all

Final EIAR - Aurecon AME Environmental | Environmental Projects

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?