Draft National Wind Farm Development Guidelines - July 2010

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The near field zone can be calculated, and is dependent upon the frequency of the signal, the gain and orientation of the antenna. Typical calculations give the “near-field” zone for: High Band Ultra High Frequency (UHF) signals, such as cellular telephones (800MHz to 1900MHz) as approximately 20m. For point-to-point Microwave links as approximately 720m. For Low Band VHF paging systems approximately 4m. As can be seen from the above examples the near-field zone varies widely depending upon the service type. It is recommended that a conservative criterion for discussing potential impact due to near-field effects with a potentially affected party is if the wind farm proponent intends to locate a wind turbine within, say, 1km of any telecommunications site. • Reflection/scattering This occurs when Radio signals are reflected (scattered) from the wind turbine blades and interfere with a wanted radiocommunications signal. A ratio of the scattered signal to the received signal can be used to determine the full effect of this form of interference. This can be calculated and is dependent upon the distance of the receiver and transmitter to the wind turbine tower. Some methods use worst-case Radar Cross Section (RCS), which is very conservative, or a variant on the second Fresnel zone calculation for users close to a wind turbine. Please note that RCS is relevant to all radiocommunications services, not just radar services. Required signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for different services is variable, but can be of the order of 30dB. An exclusion zone to meet the SNR requirement can be calculated and is dependent upon the gain and radiation pattern of the antenna, the worst case RCS and the distances between user, transmission tower and wind turbine. Higher frequency signals generally utilise antenna patterns with higher gain. As there is no single criterion for potential impact on radiocommunications services due to scattering, it is recommended that the criterion for discussing potential impact due to reflections/scattering with a potentially affected party is if the wind farm proponent intends to locate a wind turbine within 2km of any telecommunications site. Consultation with the organisations listed earlier in this section will reveal any effects on radar services. In summary, the recommended criteria for discussions with a potentially affected party are, if the wind farm proponent intends to locate a wind turbine: • Within the maximum second Fresnel zone of a point-to-point radio link. • Within 2km of a radiocommunications site or a receiver. • Within 250 nmiles of Aeronautical and Weather Radar operations. It should also be noted that the accuracy of radiocommunications site coordinates in the ACMA database is variable, and also that it relies upon the accuracy of individuals providing the correct data when applying for a new service. It also does not guarantee that a particular service is operating, or operating in accordance with ACMA regulations. Therefore, should there be an indication that any individual services may be impacted, or are within, say, 5 km of causing an impact, then it is recommended that independent verification of the radiocommunications site co-ordinates is carried out to confirm the existence of any issues. Page 176 Draft National Wind Farm Development Guidelines – 2 July 2010
Preliminary impact assessment Having determined which services may be potentially affected by the wind farm, a risk assessment should now be conducted to determine the level of impact expected for each identified service. This will assist in a preliminary determination of the mitigation methods to be considered at the next stage. If there is a low risk of impact, or the impact cannot be easily quantified, then mitigation methods may be proposed for implementation after construction, when the actual effects can be measured. There may also be the opportunity to reduce any general exclusion zones due to the specific circumstances of the development. For example, some exclusion zones are based on methods using worst-case RCS to determine signal loss due to scattering. However, while RCS can be minimised, the actual RCS is difficult to determine accurately. Using the worst-case RCS can result in overly conservative exclusion zones. This may be a subject for discussion with the individual organisations affected at the next stage. Following the risk assessment, a preliminary determination of which organisations or individuals require consultation at the Planning Application Stage can be made. F.4.2 Planning Application Collect data for validation When the decision has been made to progress to a Planning Application, data should be validated by taking the following actions: • Community consultation Any concerns raised in the community consultation phase of the project should now be validated and included in the list for consultation. • Review of licensed radiocommunications services If it has been some time since the Review of Licenced Radiocommunication Services in Section F.4.1 was undertaken, or the proposed turbine layout has changed, it is recommended that this data be refreshed and reviewed for any relevant changes. • Evaluation by relevant organisations Those organisations identified in Section F.4.1 should now be contacted to conduct their own assessment of the development for the potential of electromagnetic interference with their radiocommunications services. Consultation with potentially affected operators Having verified the radiocommunications site co-ordinates, and determined which services may be affected, those operators should now be contacted to jointly assess the impact. This is important as initial discussions may reveal that the service is no longer in use, and therefore there will be no impact. A more detailed risk assessment of the potential impacts would be carried out with the affected parties at this stage, and potential mitigation options can then be discussed. Where an organisation specifies a general exclusion zone, it is recommended that this is confirmed as being applicable to the specific services identified as impacted. Draft National Wind Farm Development Guidelines – 2 July 2010 Page 177
Page 1:
EPHC National Wind Farm Development
Page 5:
Acknowledgements These Guidelines h
Page 8 and 9:
A.6.1 Site selection 28 A.6.2 Proje
Page 10 and 11:
E.7 Technical discussion of key con
Page 12 and 13:
The 20/20 target is challenging; ho
Page 14 and 15:
Table 1-1 Elements of a ‘wind far
Page 16 and 17:
2 Principles for responsible wind f
Page 18 and 19:
3 Wind Farm Specific Issues The spe
Page 20 and 21:
Specific noise limits are not provi
Page 22 and 23:
3.5 Shadow flicker The issue Shadow
Page 24 and 25:
Guidance notes Heritage issues are
Page 26 and 27:
Table 4-1 Typical decision process
Page 28 and 29:
The studies and community consultat
Page 31 and 32:
A Community and Stakeholder Consult
Page 33 and 34:
• Responsive There is a comm
Page 35 and 36:
Figure A-1 IAP2 Public Participatio
Page 37 and 38:
Specific components which should be
Page 39 and 40:
Figure A-2 Example of Good Practice
Page 41 and 42:
Recording the occurrence and outcom
Page 43 and 44:
A.6.6 Decommissioning Planning & Co
Page 45 and 46:
Potential Stakeholders Consultation
Page 47 and 48:
B Noise B.1 Introduction This Appen
Page 49 and 50:
the converse. These Guidelines reco
Page 51 and 52:
The Standard should form the basis
Page 53 and 54:
Stage and methodology Construction
Page 55 and 56:
Other noise-sensitive uses such as
Page 57 and 58:
Table B-2 Existing state and territ
Page 59 and 60:
Establish background noise monitori
Page 61 and 62:
As noted in Section 6.3.1 of AS4959
Page 63 and 64:
predicted levels are significantly
Page 65 and 66:
Prepare expert evidence (as require
Page 67 and 68:
Undertake unattended monitoring to
Page 69 and 70:
assessment of wind farm noise emiss
Page 71 and 72:
B.4.5 Decommissioning Noise-related
Page 73 and 74:
If a significant amount of time has
Page 75 and 76:
B.7 Technical discussion of key con
Page 77 and 78:
The HGC Engineering report 10 also
Page 79 and 80:
C Landscape C.1 Introduction This A
Page 81 and 82:
• Cumulative impacts “Cumulativ
Page 83 and 84:
C.2 Overview of Methodologies Figur
Page 85 and 86:
C.3 Task Methodologies C.3.1 Projec
Page 87 and 88:
• State Relevant State herita
Page 89 and 90:
The preliminary landscape character
Page 91 and 92:
• Identifying and describing (in
Page 93 and 94:
Advanced photomontages should also
Page 95 and 96:
C.4.2 Visual Impact Assessment The
Page 97 and 98:
C.4.2.4 Assessment of cumulative im
Page 99 and 100:
the implementation of agreed change
Page 101 and 102:
Figure C-2 IBRA mapping of Australi
Page 103 and 104:
Table C-4 Mapping of landscape char
Page 105 and 106:
C.7.2 Levels of significance What a
Page 107 and 108:
Consider ‘Supporting Evidence’
Page 109 and 110:
information available for other sit
Page 111 and 112:
Figure C-4 Example of viewshed mapp
Page 113 and 114:
Figure C-6 Example of photomontages
Page 115 and 116:
communicate broad-scale ideas and p
Page 117 and 118:
Table C-5 Mapping other wind farms
Page 119 and 120:
C.7.9 Glossary & acronyms Australia
Page 121:
Viewpoint The point from which a vi
Page 124 and 125:
D.1.2 Underlying approach The under
Page 126 and 127:
All of the above is generally appli
Page 128 and 129:
the operational wind farm is aimed
Page 130 and 131:
D.4 Task methodologies D.4.1 Site S
Page 132 and 133:
area as it was not collected accord
Page 134 and 135:
used throughout these Guidelines as
Page 136 and 137: wind farms. Such data from existing
Page 138 and 139: considered acceptable, undesirable,
Page 140 and 141: construction phase are identified d
Page 142 and 143: Searches for dead birds and bats ar
Page 144 and 145: D.5 Cumulative impacts D.5.1 Defini
Page 146 and 147: in the absence of any turbine colli
Page 148 and 149: that it was first observed. Where m
Page 150 and 151: e the case that assessment for bats
Page 152 and 153: Department of Primary Industries, W
Page 154 and 155: Percival, S.M. 2003, Birds and wind
Page 157 and 158: E Shadow Flicker E.1 Introduction T
Page 159 and 160: • The use of recreational facilit
Page 161 and 162: • The method is inherently linked
Page 163 and 164: Table E-1 Recommended exposure limi
Page 165 and 166: E.4.4 Construction Assessment of th
Page 167 and 168: E.7 Technical discussion of key con
Page 169 and 170: Figure E-4 Variation in shading wit
Page 171 and 172: common practice varies between one
Page 173: as the actual limit, rather than th
Page 176 and 177: likely to be obstructed. Radiocommu
Page 178 and 179: Licensed radiocommunications servic
Page 180 and 181: Figure F-1 EMI mitigation methodolo
Page 182 and 183: F.4 Task methodologies F.4.1 Projec
Page 184 and 185: Expected timeframe for evaluation r
Page 188 and 189: Develop mitigation strategy As a st
Page 190 and 191: aseline RF survey which involves th
Page 193 and 194: G Wind Farm Development Process G.1
Page 195 and 196: Project Sub-stages Activities to be
Page 197 and 198: Preliminary Technical Studies Issue
Page 199 and 200: Planning application (PA2) The plan
Page 201 and 202: Develop mitigation strategy Finalis
Page 203 and 204: Environmental Management Plans Issu
Page 205 and 206: Monitoring: confirmation (O3) Confi
Page 207 and 208: Decommissioning (D2) Once a decisio
show all

Draft National Wind Farm Development Guidelines - July 2010

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?