concept EIA-rapport - Staatsolie

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SRK Consulting: Project No: 439414 Staatsolie Pipeline EIA – Draft EIA Report Page 56 • Propose suitable mitigation and monitoring methods to minimise negative impacts and enhance benefits. Risk: • Propose suitable mitigation and monitoring methods to minimise negative impacts and enhance benefits. SRK consultants with the necessary qualifications will provide input on other aspects and issues, such as climatic conditions, visual conditions and noise impacts, as required. 6.1.3 Impact assessment and methodology The significance of potential impacts that may result from the proposed project has been rated in accordance with the standard methodology outlined below. The assessment of impacts is based on the professional judgement of the EIA team (including specialists), fieldwork and desk-top analysis. The significance of an impact is defined as a combination of the consequence of the impact occurring and the probability that the impact will occur, which are determined as follows: Table 6-2: Criteria used to determine the Consequence of the Impact Rating Definition of Rating Score A. Extent– the area over which the impact will be experienced Local Confined to project or study area or part thereof 1 Regional The region (e.g. wider corridor along the proposed pipeline route) 2 (Inter) national Beyond the district borders 3 B. Intensity– the magnitude of the impact in relation to the sensitivity of the receiving environment, taking into account the frequency of the impact and degree to which impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources Low Site-specific and wider natural and/or social functions and processes are negligibly altered Medium Site-specific and wider natural and/or social functions and processes continue albeit in a modified way High Site-specific and wider natural and/or social functions or processes are severely altered C. Duration– the timeframe over which the impact will be experienced and its reversibility Short-term Up to 2 years 1 Medium-term 2 to 15 years 2 Long-term More than 15 years 3 The combined score of these three criteria corresponds to a Consequence Rating, as follows: Table 6-3: Method used to determine the Consequence Score Combined Score (A+B+C) 3 – 4 5 6 7 8 – 9 Consequence Rating Very low Low Medium High Very high Once the consequence was derived, the probability of the impact occurring was considered, using the probability classifications presented in Table 6-4 below. Table 6-4: Probability Classification Probability– the likelihood of the impact occurring Improbable < 40% chance of occurring Possible 40% - 70% chance of occurring Probable > 70% - 90% chance of occurring Definite > 90% chance of occurring REUT/DALC 439414_StaatsoliePipelineEIA_Draft EIA Report_Final June 2012 1 2 3
SRK Consulting: Project No: 439414 Staatsolie Pipeline EIA – Draft EIA Report Page 57 The overall significance of impacts was determined by considering consequence and probability using the rating system prescribed in Table 6-5 below. Table 6-5: Impact significance ratings Consequence Probability Improbable Possible Probable Definite Very Low INSIGNIFICANT INSIGNIFICANT VERY LOW VERY LOW Low VERY LOW VERY LOW LOW LOW Medium LOW LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM High MEDIUM MEDIUM HIGH HIGH Very High HIGH HIGH VERY HIGH VERY HIGH Finally the impacts were also considered in terms of their status (positive or negative impact) and the confidence in the ascribed impact significance rating. The prescribed system for considering impacts status and confidence (in assessment) is laid out in Table 6-6 below. Table 6-6: Impact status and confidence classification Status of impact Indication whether the impact is adverse (negative) or beneficial (positive). Confidence of assessment The degree of confidence in predictions based on available information, SRK’s judgment and/or specialist knowledge. + ve (positive – a ‘benefit’) – ve (negative – a ‘cost’) REUT/DALC 439414_StaatsoliePipelineEIA_Draft EIA Report_Final June 2012 Low Medium Different types of impacts will also be considered in the impact ratings, as listed in Box 6-2 below. Box 6-2: Types of impact Direct – impacts that result from the direct interaction between a project activity and the receiving High environment (e.g. dust generation which affects air quality). Indirect – impacts that result from other (non-project) activities but which are facilitated as a result of the project (e.g. in-migration of job-seekers, which places additional demands on natural resources) or impacts that occur as a result of subsequent interaction of direct project impacts within the environment (e.g. reduced air quality that affects crop production and subsequently impacts on subsistence-based livelihoods). Cumulative – impacts that act together with current or future potential impacts of other activities or proposed activities in the area/region that affect the same resources and/or receptors (e.g. combined effects of waste water discharges from more than one project into the same water resource, which may be acceptable individually, but cumulatively result in a reduction in water quality and fishing productivity). There is no statutory definition of ‘significance’ and its determination is therefore necessarily partially subjective. Criteria for assessing the significance of impacts arise from the following key elements: • Status of compliance with relevant Suriname legislation, policies and plans, any relevant or industry policies, environmental standards or guidelines and internationally accepted best practice; • The consequence of the change to the biophysical or socio-economic environment (e.g. loss of habitats, decrease in water quality) expressed, wherever practicable, in quantitative terms. For socio-economic impacts, the consequence should be viewed from the perspective of those
Page 1 and 2:
Environmental Impact Assessment for
Page 3 and 4:
1 INTRODUCTION NON‐TECHNICAL SUMM
Page 5 and 6:
SRK Consulting: Staatsolie Pipeline
Page 7 and 8:
1 INLEIDING NIET‐TECHNISCHE SAMEN
Page 9 and 10:
SRK Consulting: EIA Staatsolie Pijp
Page 11 and 12:
SRK Consulting: EIA Staatsolie Pijp
Page 13 and 14:
SRK Consulting: Project No: 439414
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22: SRK Consulting: Project No: 439414
Page 71: SRK Consulting: Project No: 439414
show all

concept EIA-rapport - Staatsolie

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?