3 scope of the environmental impact assessment …3 scope of the environmental impact assessment 3.1...

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT KEADBY DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED

3-1

3 SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.1 INTRODUCTION

The scope of this EIA falls under the three following broad categories, each of

which is discussed in further detail below:

technical scope;

spatial scope; and

temporal scope.

A separate scoping exercise has not been undertaken in relation to the given

application and the scoping process and ES undertaken in relation to the

Consented Development has been used to inform the scope of this EIA

Report, alongside an assessment of how the changes in project design may

affect each of the topics.

The scoping process for the Consented Development involved setting out the

scope of the EIA under the aforementioned categories and then, based on

knowledge of the intended activity at the time of scoping and the

environmental setting, identifying the key issues for the EIA to address. The

scoping process was informed by interaction with the Consented Development

design team, together with public consultation on a Scoping Report and

receipt of a Scoping Opinion, and has been further refined based on

consultation with a range of stakeholders.

3.2 TECHNICAL SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT

Potential environmental issues associated with the Proposed Development

have been evaluated as part of this EIA Report. The scope of the EIA Report

has been informed by the ES for the Consented Development and the

proposed changes in project design. The changes largely determine the

extent to which topics should be re-evaluated given the changes in project

design or conversely remain essentially unchanged such that the findings of

the EIA of the Consented Development remain valid.

Table 3.1 provides a summary of the significant effects as assessed for the

Consented Development, the changes in project design that may affect the

topic assessment and whether the topic needs further evaluation. Only those

topics where the project design is judged likely to have a material change to

the outcome of the assessment has further consideration been afforded to it in

this EIA Report. For all other topics the assessments presented in the ES

remain valid for the Proposed Development.

3.3 SPATIAL SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT

The spatial, or geographical, scope of the assessment has taken into account

the following factors:


3-2

the physical extent of the proposed works, as defined by the scheme

design;

the nature of the baseline environment and the manner in which the

impacts are likely to be propagated; and

the pattern of governmental administrative boundaries, which provide the

planning and policy context for the Proposed Development.

Appropriate study areas have been considered for each environmental topic

by the specialists undertaking that assessment, in agreement with the relevant

consultees. Further details of the spatial scope for each topic can be found in

Chapter 5 of the ES (see Annex D).

3.4 TEMPORAL SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT

3.4.1 General Considerations

The temporal scope of the assessment generally refers to the time periods

over which effects may be experienced. This has been established for each

technical topic, where appropriate through discussion with the relevant

statutory consultees.

In general, the following terms have been used:

short-term when the impact or effect is temporary and lasts for up to 12

months;

medium-term when the impact occurs or effect lasts for up to 5 years; and

long-term when the effect remains for a substantial time, perhaps

permanently.

3.4.2 Construction Phase

Construction phase impacts may potentially arise during the whole of the

construction works, which is expected to be a period of 43 months in total.

The assessment takes into account the time of day during which works are

going to be undertaken, notably whether they are undertaken during daytime

or night-time periods.

Comparison of Consented Development with Proposed Development: Spatial Scope of the Assessment The spatial scope of this EIA Report remains largely unchanged from that

adopted for the ES for the Consented Development, with one exception: in

accordance with current guidance a zone of influence for the Proposed

Development of 15 km has been used to identify statutory designated

nature conservation sites as opposed to 10 km for the ES.


3-3

3.4.3 Operational Phase

For the operational phase, the temporal scope has been determined by the

predicted date of the first electricity generation in 2021.

For the flood risk assessment, where effects are dependent on longer term

considerations, such as climate change, a 50 year timeframe has been

considered. For all other topics the operational life of the Proposed

Development is assumed to be 25 years.

3.4.4 Decommissioning Phase

The Proposed Development will have a lifespan of at least 25 years and is not

expected to result in any abnormal environmental conditions as a result of or

following decommissioning.

3.5 CONSULTATION

Consultation is a key aspect of the EIA process and essential in agreeing and

focussing the specific EIA scope to be suited to the nature of a project and its

actual environmental and socioeconomic setting. Box 3.1 sets out

consultation undertaken in the preparation of this EIA Report. Historic

England and Anglian Water responded but had no comments to make at this

stage. In addition a community newsletter was issued to all properties in the

North Axholme Ward area (3766 copies); no responses were received.

Box 3.1 Organisations Consulted in the Preparation of this EIA Report

Consultees Department for Business, Energy and

Industrial Strategy (BEIS)

Highways England

Environment Agency National Grid

Natural England RSPB

North Lincolnshire Council Greater Lincolnshire Local Enterprise

Partnership (LEP)

Historic England Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust

NATS Humberside Police

CAA Anglian Water

Ministry of Defence Highways England

Met Office HSE

BEIS provided extensive feedback and guidance on the content of the EIA

Report and other parts of the application. A copy of the newsletter and

responses from BEIS, Historic England and Anglian water are provided in

Annex A, which also sets out how the comments have been addressed in this

EIA Report.

Comparison of Consented Development with Proposed Development: Temporal Scope of the Assessment The temporal scope of this EIA Report remains materially unchanged from

that adopted for the ES for the Consented Development.

Table 3.1 Scope of Assessment for Environmental Topics

Aspect Summary of Potential Effects Arising from the Consented Development (820MW) Change in Scope that may Affect Aspect

Change in Potential Effects Arising from the Proposed Development (910MW)

Detailed Assessment of Aspect (Reference)

Land and

Water

Quality

Soil Resources and Land Quality: The potential for disturbance and contamination of soils as a

result of the Consented Development was assessed. During the construction phase, site

preparation, excavation and installation of infrastructure will disturb soils and in some cases

result in a permanent change from made ground to a surface of hardstanding. These changes

to the low value soil resource will have minor significance. To prevent high value agricultural

soils in the surrounding area from being affected as potentially contaminated ground is

disturbed at the site, mitigation will be implemented to reduce the likelihood of this occurring

and will maintain a negligible impact.

Following construction, disturbed areas that do not support operational infrastructure will be

returned to the required quality and value for their planned land use, using suitable soils / fill.

There will be permanent loss of soils within the footprint of the buildings and hardstanding.

During operation, the main potential impacts for soils will be from accidental spills or leaks from

the plant and equipment, or from handling of materials that can be contaminants. Taking into

account mitigation, no significant effects are predicted. Potential effects during the

decommissioning phase will be broadly similar to those during the construction phase, and are

predicted to be not significant.

Water Resources and Quality: The Consented Development impact assessment considered

potential effects on groundwater and surface waters (and their users) including from potential

newly mobilised contaminants in soils during construction, leaks and spills throughout

construction and operation, and from alterations to the water drainage characteristics at the site

that may persist into operation. Mitigation for these impacts will include water quality

monitoring, a surface water management system that will make use of sustainable drainage

systems, proper management and storage of potential contaminants, and water treatment for

discharges. Taking this mitigation into account, one effect of minor significance has been

assessed on surface waters in the field drains of Keadby Common and in North Soak Drain,

from surface water run-off. No other significant effects are predicted.

Abstraction from the Stainforth and Keadby Canal will take place during operation and to a

lesser extent during construction. Any abstraction from the canal will take place under the

control of a licence to be agreed with the Environment Agency. No significant effects on wider

water availability from water abstraction by the Consented Development are predicted.

Flood Risk: Changes to surface water runoff and the hydrological characteristics of the site

may occur during construction and due to the presence of the newly raised sections of the site.

To minimise these effects, the works will be designed to avoid altering drainage and flood

conveyance patterns on the site, and to ensure that flood waters are routed away from any

sensitive receptors. Flood prevention and surface water management measures will also be

designed into the site. No significant flood related effects on neighbouring land have been

predicted for the Consented Development during construction and operation. At the point of

decommissioning, the removal of hard standing and some infrastructure may cause changes to

surface water runoff characteristics. Standard construction management practices can be

used to control these effects, and no significant effects are predicted.

Cumulative Effects: The assessment of cumulative effects found there would be no cumulative

effects from the Consented Development with other consented or planned projects on land and

water resources.

While some changes to site layout

may occur within the Consented

Development site boundary no

material changes to the construction

techniques or operational procedures

will occur.

Abstraction volumes from the

Stainforth and Keadby Canal will

remain within the maximum daily

allowance assessed in the ES,

however, peak abstraction volumes

may vary over the course of the day.

Considering there is no material change in

scope that will affect land and water

quality the Consented Development

assessment remains valid.

In addition variation in abstraction volume

over the day will not affect the water

resource within the Stainforth and Keadby

Canal as there is plenty of storage in the

waterway.

The newly consented Lincolnshire Lakes

Phase 2 development has been

considered in the cumulative assessment,

alongside the consented or planned

projects assessed in the ES.

The assessment of

other impacts to land

and water quality in

the ES remains valid.

No further

assessment is

required.

See Chapter 6 in the

ES (Annex D) for the

full assessment.

Cumulative effects

are presented in

Chapter 14 of the ES

and revisited in

Chapter 6 of this EIA

Report.

Ecology Designated Sites: No significant effects on fauna or habitats are predicted from discharge from

the new cooling water discharge pipeline as the discharge will be designed to meet industry

standards. No other activities are predicted to have significant effects on designated sites,




There is no change in scope that will

affect ecology receptors during the

construction phase and so the

An assessment of

impacts on ecology

receptors from




whether statutory or non-statutory, during construction.

The main potential effect on designated sites during operation is predicted to be from

emissions generated by the Consented Development. Analysis of the results of the air quality

modelling shows that effects on vulnerable habitats within the protected areas will not be

significant.

The air quality modelling also predicts that short term concentrations of nitrogen oxide and

nutrient nitrogen deposition exceed the assessment level for a number of locally designated

sites in the area. Short term significant effects on these sites may occur when both power

stations are operating full time, which is not likely to occur often. All of the sites are actively

managed (for example through vegetation mowing, clearance, grazing), and this is thought to

be the most important factor in maintaining their status. Mitigation through contributing to

continued or enhanced active management of these sites is expected to be sufficient to

compensate for any changes in the nutrient status in the sites.

During operation, used cooling water will be discharged to the River Trent, and therefore to the

Humber Estuary SAC, SPA and SSSI. On the basis that SSE will operate within the discharge

parameters of a permit that is designed to maintain the status of the receiving waters, there will

be no significant effects on the Humber Estuary SAC or its qualifying species.

In the event that the Keadby I cooling water system is used for the Consented Development

there will be no likely significant effects on aquatic populations in the River Trent including

those migrating past the outfall and including interest features of the Humber Estuary SAC.

Habitats: During construction, some habitats will be lost within the Consented Development

site. Habitats likely to be affected include: amenity grassland, dense continuous and scattered

scrub, improved neutral grassland and young broadleaved woodland. Given the limited

conservation value of the habitats that will be affected, effects of minor significance have been

predicted for loss of habitat in the western part of the site, and no significant effects for the

eastern part of the site.

Species: If reptiles are found during the pre-site preparation survey by an Ecological Clerk of

Works they will be moved to alternative suitable habitat, which is widely available in the area.

Taking this mitigation into account, no significant effects on reptiles are predicted during

construction.

The Consented Development may affect eels and lampreys if they are taken up (or entrained)

within the cooling water for the station as it is abstracted from the Stainforth and Keadby canal.

Screens are expected to keep out many eels and the majority of lampreys, especially since

they will be purpose designed with eel protection in mind. No significant effects on the

populations of either eels or lampreys within the River Trent are expected.

Construction of the new cooling water discharge pipeline may affect water vole habitat, as it will

cross up to eight ditches. Evidence of water voles was only found at one of these ditches, and

the intensive management of these water courses limits their suitability for the species. If a

trench is dug for the new pipeline this will affect a limited area for a short duration, and

appropriate mitigation and best practise techniques will be applied to minimise any impacts.

Waterways containing suitable water vole habitat are located outside of the potential impact

area of the Consented Development. No significant effects on water voles are predicted during

construction.

No otters, badgers or great crested newts have been recorded from the site and the habitats

within the site have little suitability for these species. These species are not thought to occur in

the area of impact and therefore no effects on them as a result of construction or operation are

predicted.

change to the red line boundary,

construction techniques or

operational procedures will occur.

However, the Proposed

Development is for a 910 MW

facility, as opposed to an 820 MW

facility. Building dimensions and

layouts have also changed slightly

and these will alter the dispersion

behaviour of stack emissions

compared with the Consented

Development. As such there may be

changes in the impacts resulting

from emissions to air, which could

affect the ecology assessment.

Further design definition since the

Consent has established more detail

in regard to discharges from the

cooling system. The rate of

discharge of cooling water (or ‘purge’

water) will vary, dependent on the

ambient climatic conditions and the

operational regime (especially the

concentration factor under which the

system is operating), between circa

0.023 and 0.131 m3 s

-1.

assessment of impacts presented in the

ES for construction remains valid.

During operation the change in layout and

increased output of the power plant have

the potential to affect ecology differently

than has been assessed for the

Consented Development. As such further

assessment of potential effects on

ecology receptors during the operational

phase, with respect to emissions to air,

has been undertaken in this EIA Report.

The accompanying HRA report has also

been updated from that which

accompanied the ES to account for the

changes in emissions to air on ecology.

A cooling water discharge of 0.016 m3s

-1

was assessed in the ES for the

Consented Development as having no

significant effects on aquatic populations

in the River Trent including those

migrating past the outfall and including

interest features of the Humber Estuary

SAC. This was on the basis that the

discharge from the Consented

Development would constitute

approximately 0.13% of the Keadby I

discharge rate. Keadby I, through

monitoring and modelling studies of the

actual discharge has been shown to have

no likely significant effects. A slight

increase of discharge rate for the

Proposed Development up to between

0.19 and 1.1% of the Keadby I discharge

would not change the conclusions of the

ES.

The cumulative assessment has been

reconsidered in light of the new ecology

assessment and HRA report.

emissions from the

project during

operation has been

undertaken in

Chapter 5. The HRA

report is provided in

Annex D.

Cumulative effects

are considered in

Chapter 6.

The assessment of

other impacts to

ecology in the ES

remains valid. See

Chapter 7 in the ES

(Annex D) for the full

assessment.




The features considered to have potential to support roosting bats include woodland to the

south of the site and a tree (crab apple) situated within amenity grassland on the site. Neither

of these features will be removed during construction. Construction of the Consented

Development is not expected to result in any significant adverse effects on bats.

Habitats within the Consented Development that are used by breeding birds, including scrub

and woodland, will be lost during construction. Birds may also be disturbed by construction

activities within the site. Given the relatively small area affected, the number of breeding birds

expected to be displaced by the construction activities is quite small, particularly in comparison

to the estimated breeding populations of those species in the wider area. Construction impacts

on breeding birds are predicted to be not significant.

Habitat Regulations Assessment: Where a project has the potential, either alone or in

combination with other plans or projects, to result in likely significant effects on one or more

European sites, it is subject to the requirements of The Conservation of Habitats and Species

Regulations (2010) (the Habitats Regulations) and a report must be provided with the

application showing the site(s) that may be affected together with sufficient information to

enable the competent authority to undertake a Habitat Regulations Appraisal (HRA). A number

of European sites were identified during preparation of the HRA for the Consented

Development, however the HRA found that the only pathways for a likely significant effect

identified relate to elevated NOx and nutrient nitrogen deposition acting on saltmarsh

communities that are qualifying features in the upper reaches of the Humber Estuary SAC and

Ramsar site. Having considered the low sensitivity of these features to nutrient nitrogen

deposition and NOx, including their current condition as reflected through SSSI monitoring, no

adverse effect on the integrity of the Humber Estuary SAC or Ramsar Site were predicted as a

result of the Consented Development either alone or in combination with other plans and

projects.


effects from the Consented Development with other consented or planned projects on ecology

receptors.

Noise and

Vibration

Nearby residents and other land users will be exposed to construction noise from various site

activities as well as traffic noise and operational noise. Vibration was not considered because

the major construction plant will be over 100 m from the nearest sensitive receiver and

significant vibration effects are not expected

The assessment for the Consented Development compared modelled noise levels with

appropriate criteria, which were informed by baseline survey work.

During construction, daytime work is not likely to give rise to significant noise effects. The

construction access route is away from noise sensitive receptors so no impacts from

constructing traffic are expected. Work on site in the evening or at night will be limited to quiet

activities in order to avoid disturbance with noise levels monitored to ensure appropriate noise

limits are not breached.

Operational noise levels in the residential area of Keadby Village and at Vazon Bridge will not

cause significant effects. Similarly cumulative noise levels from both power plants operating will

not give rise to significant noise effects on people. At Red House and Hawthorne House noise

increases are predicted, but because these are above low baseline levels, absolute noise

standards will be met in the day and at night and, given the context, significant effects are not

predicted.


Although there is a slight increase in the number of AIL, there is no material change to overall traffic volumes from a roadside noise perspective, construction techniques or operation for the Proposed Development.

The design has evolved and the

modified design will include the

necessary mitigation for noise levels

at the sensitive receptors identified

with the ES to still fall within the

consented limits; as such no

significant effects are expected.

Given that there is no material change in

the construction phase scope that will

affect noise levels the assessment for the

Consented Development construction

phase remains valid.

During operation noise levels are likely to

be different to those assessed during the

ES, which has the potential to affect

nearby noise sensitive receptors. Given

that the Proposed Development is

committed to meeting the noise levels

provided in the consent and no significant

effects are expected no further

assessment is required at this stage.


reconsidered in light of the additional

cumulative schemes.

The assessment of

impacts on noise

sensitive receptors in




full assessment.

Cumulative effects

are considered in

Chapter 6.




effects from the Consented Development with other consented or planned projects on sensitive

noise receptors.

Air Quality Effects on People: During construction, the main source of pollutants that could have air quality

impacts will be traffic associated with the Consented Development. Changes in levels of

nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulates (PM10 and PM2.5) within the area of influence were

assessed, and no significant effects predicted.

During operation, the Consented Development will produce emissions through combustion of

gas for electricity generation. The Consented Development will be designed in line with current

regulations that limit emissions. The maximum impacts predicted from operation of the

Consented Development, alongside Keadby I, have moderate significance for both short term

and long term impacts. However, the largest contribution to these impacts is provided by

Keadby I, which has higher predicted impacts than the Consented Development. In addition,

these worst case impacts still fall within standards designed to protect human health.

Effects on Sensitive Ecological Receptors: Habitats are the primary ecological receptors

sensitive to air quality impacts. Sites designated for habitat protection have therefore been

considered as the sensitive receptors for these impacts. The relevant air quality parameters

when considering potential effects on these habitats are deposition of nutrient nitrogen and

acid, as well as nitrogen oxide concentrations. The issue for ecosystems is the possibility that

the deposition rate of acid or nutrient nitrogen may exceed the amount that the ecosystem can

tolerate. The point at which this occurs is termed the ‘critical load’, and depends on factors

such as geology and vegetation for acid, and species and habitat type for nitrogen.

The assessment of ecological effects from operational emissions considered the maximum

impacts occurring anywhere within a sensitive site. This means that the impact may not occur

at the actual location of the particular sensitive habitat of interest. The assessment therefore

takes a worst case approach. Based on this, the assessment identified that the operation of

the Consented Development alongside Keadby I may make significant contributions to the

deposition or concentrations of pollutants at several sites. For short term NOx concentrations

and deposition of nutrient nitrogen, these sites include: Humber Estuary, Keadby Warping

Drain, Keadby Wet Grassland, Keadby Wetland, Keadby South Soak Drain, Stainforth and

Keadby Canal Corridor, Three Rivers and Three Rivers Marsh. For long term NOx

concentrations and deposition of acid, only contributions to Humber Estuary sites were

identified. It should be noted that these contributions are all predicted to occur even when

Keadby I is operating alone, without the contribution of the Consented Development.

Cumulative Effects: The assessment of cumulative effects found that Keadby I and the

Consented Development can operate without causing a breach of any air quality standards

designed for the protection of human health. Therefore no significant cumulative effects were

identified.

Although there is a slight increase in

the number of AIL, there is no

material change to overall traffic

volumes from a road side air quality

perspective, construction techniques

or operation for the Proposed

Development.

The Proposed Development is for a

910 MW facility, as opposed to an

820 MW facility. As such there may

be changes in the assessment and

modelling of emissions to air,

especially considering the change in

layout within the site boundary and

some building heights have

increased.

Given that there is no material change in

the construction phase scope that will

affect emissions to air the assessment for

the Consented Development construction

phase remains valid.

Given the increased output of the power

station from 820 MW to 910 MW new air

quality modelling has been undertaken to

reflect the changes. In addition a further

assessment of air quality impacts has

been undertaken in this EIA Report.


reconsidered in light of the new air quality

modelling and assessment.

An assessment of

impacts on people

and ecological

receptors from

emissions has been

undertaken in

Chapter 4.

Cumulative effects

are considered in

Chapter 6.

The assessment of

impacts on air quality

receptors during

construction in the

ES remains valid.



full assessment.

Cultural

Heritage

Archaeology: No significant effects on buried remains of archaeological significance are

predicted from construction in the eastern part of the site as there is low likelihood of buried

remains of archaeological significance being present due to past construction and demolition

on the site. Construction works involving ground disturbance in the western part of the site or

installation of the cooling water discharge pipeline in a new trench have the potential to affect

buried archaeological remains if any are present within the construction footprint. Construction

activity in the western part of the site will be preceded by investigative archaeological fieldwork

(e.g. taking cores or digging trial trenches). If intrusive construction works are required for the

new cooling water pipeline, a watching brief will be put in place, meaning that work will be

stopped if any buried archaeological remains are found in order to allow these to be

appropriately managed. All archaeological fieldwork will be undertaken in accordance with the

standards and guidance of the Chartered Institute for Archaeology.




change to the construction

techniques will occur. There are no

changes in scope that are predicted

to affect the assessment in the

Consented Development.


scope that will affect the cultural heritage

assessment the Consented Development

assessment remains valid.






The assessment of

impacts to cultural

heritage receptors in


No further

assessment is

necessary.

See Chapter 10 in

the ES (Annex D) for

the full assessment.

Cumulative effects

are presented in




No potential for significant effects on archaeological remains has been identified during the

decommissioning phase.

Heritage Assets: Changes in setting of assets resulting from the presence of the Consented

Development during operation have been assessed. Given the existing industrial character of

the area and the presence of the Keadby I power station and nearby Keadby wind farm, the

addition of the Consented Development is not expected to cause a significant change in

historic character of the area. At most minor negative effects on the setting of nearby heritage

assets are predicted but these will not lead to significant effects on the assets themselves.

No potential for significant effects on heritage assets has been identified during the

decommissioning phase.


effects from the Consented Development with other consented or planned projects on

archaeology or cultural heritage.

Chapter 14 of the

ES.

Traffic and

Transport

Construction Workforce and Operational Staff Traffic: Based on the predicted construction

peak of 500 personnel, and on expected shift patterns, it is predicted that approximately 133

vehicles will arrive for the dayshift between 06:00 and 07:00 each day and then depart between

19:00 and 20:00. These time periods will receive the most impact from traffic. It is expected

that 75% of this traffic will distribute to and from the east of the site, and 25% to and from the

west, based on expected residential locations for staff. The increase in traffic associated with

construction workers has been assessed as having minor or moderate impacts.

A total of 18 additional members of staff will be required to operate the Consented

Development, with a maximum of eight on site at one time during the day shift. Shift patterns

will be from 07:00 to 19:00 and 19:00 to 07:00 as per Keadby I. Given the shift patterns, staff

members will be travelling to and from the site outside of the usual network peak hours. Based

on these assumptions, the change in traffic during operation is considered to be negligible.

HGV Traffic: Up to ten construction vehicles per hour may be required to access and depart the

site to bring materials and plant to and from the Consented Development. These will mainly

consist of rigid and articulated HGVs, as well as specialised vehicles such as mixers.

Construction vehicles will only enter and leave the site during the day shift, between 07:00 and

19:00, making use of the construction access road. No HGVs will be permitted to travel to or

from the east past Althorpe or Keadby. The increase in traffic associated with construction

HGVs has been assessed as having minor or potentially moderate impacts.

Abnormal Loads: Up to ten abnormal loads are expected through the construction period.

Abnormal loads will access the site either via the A18 and dedicated site access road or via

Ealand. Temporary closures of certain roads may be required while the loads are moved, as

well as some minor upgrades of the route, primarily on private land under the control of SSE.

The transport of abnormal loads in relation to the Consented Development has been assessed

as having temporary minor impacts.

Other Road Users: Minimal or no impacts have been predicted for other road users including

drivers and pedestrians. A low risk of increased accidents has been assessed at the junction

where site traffic joins the road network, during the construction phase only. To further ensure

safety, the speed limit at this point could be reduced.


effects from the Consented Development with other consented or planned projects on traffic

and transport.

There are no anticipated changes to

construction and operation workforce

staff traffic or HGV traffic.

A higher number of abnormal loads

will be required, however, no more

than 10 AIL will be routed through

Ealand, as previously assessed in

the Consented Development. AILs

above this number will access the

site via the A18 and dedicated site

access road.


scope that will affect the assessment of

traffic and transport the Consented

Development assessment remains valid.






The assessment of

impacts to traffic and

transport in the ES

remains valid. No

further assessment is

required.

See Chapter 11 in



Cumulative effects

are presented in

Chapter 14 of the

ES.

Socio- Demography and Local Communities: Migration into the local or wider area of influence for Although the construction phase is Considering there is no material change in The assessment of




economic

Characteristi

cs

employment opportunities is not expected to occur at a level that will change local demographic

characteristics, so no perceptible changes in demography are expected as a result of the

Consented Development, during either construction or operation. No perceptible difference

from baseline conditions is expected in relation to demand for housing, accommodation or local

services.

Economic Effects: No tourism and recreational facilities are located within 2 km of the

Consented Development, with the exception of three Public Rights of Way that are adjacent to

the site. The Stainforth and Keadby Canal currently has limited access for pedestrians, cyclists

and anglers, but a new multiuser path is due to be created along it, opening in 2017. Due to

the lack of recreation and tourism facilities close to the site, and taking into account the nature

of the Consented Development, no effects on tourism are predicted.

Direct expenditure by SSE on labour and construction materials during construction of the

Consented Development will bring investment from a local to a national level. As well as direct

investment, those employed on the Consented Development and within its supply chain will

generate indirect and induced expenditure. Without the Consented Development this

investment would not occur, and no reductions of output are expected elsewhere due to

displacement. The economic benefits of the Consented Development are therefore expected

to have a minor positive impact. Direct and indirect investment will continue during operation

but are harder to quantify. This will include the economic benefits arising from employment

generation. The Consented Development’s contribution to security of energy supply will also

support economic prosperity in the region and country. This is assessed as a minor positive

impact.

Employment: The Consented Development will generate an estimated 500 construction jobs

during peak construction, with the overall construction period lasting around 36 months. This

represents approximately 116 full time equivalent (FTE) jobs over this period. It is likely that

the majority of jobs (104 FTE) will be filled within the local area. This is assessed as a minor

positive impact. Once fully operational, the Consented Development will employ 18 FTE, split

over two 12 hour shifts. While Keadby I continues to operate, some of its workforce will be

employed across both power stations, effectively safeguarding their jobs. The majority of jobs

are expected to be filled from the wider area of influence during operation. In addition, the

assessment considered multiplier effects during operation, where additional economic activity

is generated by spending in the supply chain and increases in local income. This has been

calculated as equivalent to 74 jobs over the lifetime of the Consented Development. This is

assessed as a minor positive impact.

Providing Opportunities: The Company is keen to ensure that, where possible, local labour and

suppliers are used during the construction and operation of the Keadby 2 CCGT project.

Following an investment decision for the project a local Meet The Buyer event will be held in

conjunction with the projects main EPC contractor. This will provide the opportunity for local

businesses to present and pitch their goods and services to the principle contractor and project

team.


effects from the Consented Development with other consented or planned projects on local

services, accommodation provision or bed space demand; therefore cumulative effects are not

anticipated.

slightly longer and this will provide

extended employment opportunities

there are no material changes in

scope that are predicted to affect the

assessment presented for the

Consented Development.

scope that will affect the assessment of

socio-economic characteristics the

Consented Development assessment

remains valid.






impacts to

socioeconomic

characteristics in the

ES remains valid.

No further

assessment is

required.

See Chapter 12 in



Cumulative effects

are presented in

Chapter 14 of the

ES.

Landscape

and visual

amenity

Landscape Character: During construction, there will be potential short term landscape effects

from construction machinery and activities on the Consented Development site, including

construction lighting, temporary fencing, buildings and roads, and the presence of tall

construction machinery. During operation the main source of impact will be from the

permanent presence of the new generating station, and in particular the chimney stack, turbine

buildings and cooling towers. These will cause long term landscape effects. In general, within

The construction period has

increased slightly to 43 months from

36 months as assessed in the ES.

In addition some changes to site

layout are planned within the

Although the construction period has

increased, the presence of construction

machinery remains temporary and will not

affect the assessment conclusions

presented in the ES.

The assessment of

impacts to landscape

and visual amenity in


While no further

assessment is




the wider context of the NCA and LCAs, many of which incorporate existing industrial elements

or are located far from the Consented Development; there are not predicted to be any

significant impacts on landscape character during either construction or operation. One impact

of minor significance is predicted for the industrial LCA within which the Consented

Development is situated, during operation.

Visual Amenity: The sources of potential short term and long term visual effects from the

Consented Development during construction and operation will be the same as for landscape

effects. Moderate to major visual effects have been predicted for the assessed viewpoints,

mainly for the single-shaft option and for both options at one viewpoint. These are all very

nearby locations, located either immediately to the north or south of the Consented

Development on adjacent roads. For other nearby viewpoints, and for the multi-shaft option at

the two viewpoints previously mentioned, effects were predicted of minor to moderate

significance. For most viewpoints located at a greater distance from the Consented

Development site, no significant effects have been predicted.

Cumulative Effects: The Consented Development was considered unlikely to make any

material contribution to overall cumulative effects on landscape and will only have a small

cumulative effect on views from some close viewpoints to the north and south. Therefore the

assessment of cumulative effects found there would be no significant cumulative effects from

the Consented Development with other consented or planned projects.

Consented Development site

boundary, however, there will be no

change to the red line boundary

itself. A number of key structures for

the Proposed Development have

different dimensions from those

assessed for the Consented

Development. A comparison of the

key building dimensions is provided

in Table 1.1.

The landscape setting for the Proposed

Development has not changed from that

for the Consented Development.

However, some of the buildings in the

Proposed Development have been altered

and are slightly different to what was

assessed for the Consented

Development. The changes in the layout

have been illustrated in the aerial imagery

in Figure 3.1. The key changes are with

respect to the alignment of buildings and

the layout of the entire facility. The

Proposed Development has a refined

alignment which is more ideal than the

Consented Development. With the help

of 3D modelling and photomontages it is

reasonable to conclude that there will be

no material difference between the

Proposed and Consented Development in

terms of effects on landscape.

The EIA for the Consented Development

also assessed visual impacts and

incorporated a number of viewpoint (VP)

locations as part of the assessment

process. To aid this assessment process,

two viewpoint locations were chosen and

photomontages were redeveloped. Due

to the change in alignment of buildings it

can be seen that the buildings in the

Proposed Development look smaller in VP

1c (see Figure 3.2). In VP1b, the HRSG

building looks slightly taller when

compared to the same building in the

Consented Development. However,

overall it is considered that in their main

respects the assessment findings for the

Consented Development (as reported in

Chapter 13 of the ES in Annex D) apply

equally to the Proposed Development in

regard to significance of effects on visual

amenity and so it has not been necessary

to update the full landscape and visual

impact assessment presented in the ES.






necessary additional

photomontages of

the Proposed

Development from

key viewpoints are

provided in Figure

3.2.

See Chapter 13 in



Cumulative effects

are presented in

Chapter 14 of the

ES.


3-11

Figure 3.1 Comparative Layout on Aerial Imagery

Consented Development

Proposed Development

SIZE:

TITLE: DATE: 17/07/2017

DRAWN: NT

DRAWING:

CHECKED: NT/

APPROVED: KM

PROJECT: 028078 /19 /def

SCALE: NTS

REV:

ERM 2nd Floor Exchequer Court 33 St Mary Axe London EC1A 8AA Tel: 020 3206 7200 Fax: 020 7465 7272

Figure 3.2

Comparison of layout /design between Proposed Development and Consented Development A3

Figure 3.2 - Comparative Images 1

Not to scale. For illustration only

CLIENT:

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Viewpoint 1c

CONSENTED DEVELOPMENT


Viewpoint 1b





3-13

3.6 BASELINE

This section provides justification for the baseline conditions used in this EIA Report and any changes in baseline conditions from the ES. Baselines for each of the topics are provided in the ES (see Annex D) as well as Chapters 4 and 5 of this EIA Report with supplementary information provided in Table 3.2 to wholly meet the requirements set out in The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017. When reviewing the baseline environmental conditions it is important to consider that in the case the Proposed Development does not go ahead the baseline will not remain static; although the baseline will not be affected by the Proposed Project the baseline environment will continue to be altered by other natural and anthropogenic factors. Table 3.2 provides an overview of likely future trends in the baseline conditions as far as natural changes from the baseline can be considered at this stage, where possible, relevant and meaningful.

Table 3.2 Baseline Data Considered in this EIA

Topic Baseline Data Review Land and Water The Consented Development land and water baseline

considered the soils and geology, land quality, hydrogeology

(groundwater), and hydrology (surface water resources and

flood risk) of the development site and surrounding area.

Given the nature of these topics, the timescales involved in

natural change and that there are no new projects under

construction or in operation that will have affected the

baseline conditions there is no material change in baseline

conditions between the Consented Development and the

Proposed Development.

Future trends – Over the lifetime of the project very few

natural changes to land and water can be expected. Natural

floods, if they occur, may deposit small amounts of sediment

on the flooded area, which is likely to improve soil fertility.

The natural variation in river flow over the course of the year

and with major rain events will continue, although with the

implementation of River Basin Management Plans under the

Water Framework Directive river water quality and ecological

status of the river should improve.

Ecology and Habitat

Regulations Assessment

Report

The Consented Development ecology baseline set out what

was known about the baseline ecology and nature

conservation interests of the area. Some natural change in

species ranges and abundance may have occurred since the

Consented Development baseline was written, however, this

uncertainty is a part of any ecology baseline and is

considered during assessment. Given the absence of new

projects under construction or in operation in the vicinity of

the development site there is no material change in baseline



In addition, a water vole survey has been conducted as part

of the Consented Development discharge conditions and will

feed into the construction plan as required.

Future trends – As noted above some natural change in

species ranges and abundance may occur in time. Although,

the Proposed Development is not located within any statutory

or non-statutory nature conservation designations there are a

number of nearby sites. With proper management of the


3-14

Topic Baseline Data Review sites it is likely that the conditions of the qualifying features of

the sites will improve.

Noise The Consented Development baseline noise study consisted

of a series of continuous unattended noise measurements

(UANMs) and operator attended noise measurements

(OANMs) within the vicinity of Keadby Power Station while

the power station was both non-operational and operational.

For the Proposed Development baseline conditions with

Keadby I in operation are considered most relevant and will

be used for the assessment of effects. Given the absence of

new projects under construction or in operation there is no

material change in baseline conditions from an EIA

perspective between the Consented Development and the


Air Quality The Consented Development considered baseline air quality

conditions that are relevant to the dispersion of atmospheric

pollutants (for example, wind speed and direction) as well as

air quality parameters such as NO2 concentrations. The

baseline conditions in the area of influence depend upon

local and regional sources of emissions to air, both natural

and anthropogenic. Given that there are no new sources of

emissions, new sensitive receptors in the area of influence or

new projects under construction or in operation there is no

material change in baseline conditions between the

Consented Development and the Proposed Development.

The 2017 EIA regulations require inclusion of a greenhouse

gas baseline. However, the effects of greenhouse gases are

apparent regionally and globally so a project-specific

baseline is not appropriate. The proposed scheme will have

an incremental effect on national and global emissions of

greenhouse gases from the combustion of natural gas into

carbon dioxide, but this increase will be de minimis on a

national or global scale and the significance of the

incremental change cannot be assessed. Consideration of

greenhouse gas emissions from the Proposed Development

is provided in Chapter 4.

Cultural Heritage The Consented Development considered a range of cultural

heritage and archaeology baseline conditions, which given

their nature and inherent age remain unchanged. Given that

there are no new projects under construction or in operation

there is no material change in baseline conditions between

the Consented Development and the Proposed

Development.

Traffic and Transport The Consented Development traffic and transport baseline

considered traffic flows as well as travel by foot, bicycle and

public transport. Given the absence of new projects under

construction or in operation and the location of the Keadby

Power Plant on the west side of the river there is no material

change in baseline conditions between the Consented

Development and the Proposed Development.

Socio-economic The Consented Development socio-economic baseline

considered demography, deprivation, employment and

economic profile, business operators and recreational,

community and tourism features and visitor economy. While

some of these baseline subjects will have changed slightly

with time there have been no changes to the local area, such

as new schemes or projects that provide local jobs, and as

such it is considered there is no material change in baseline



Landscape and Visual The Consented Development landscape and visual baseline

addresses landscape and visual amenity within a 7.5 km


3-15

Topic Baseline Data Review radius study area as this approach and area of search is

considered appropriate to capture all potential significant

effects. Given that there have been no changes to the local

area that may affect the nature of the landscape or visual

amenity, such as new schemes or projects that will be visible

from the nearby receptors, it is considered there is no

material change in baseline conditions between the

Consented Development and the Proposed Development.

Future trends – Over the lifetime of the project natural

changes in landscape would be very small and present no

material change to the baseline as presented in this EIA

Report.

Cumulative Effects During the cumulative assessment in the Consented

Development a number of other projects were considered.

The baseline conditions were that these projects were either

consented or planned, although none were under

construction at the time. For the consideration of cumulative

effects for the Proposed Development the list of potential

projects that may create a cumulative effect have been

revised. The White Rose Carbon Capture and Storage

facility did not receive consent and is no longer considered.

The overhead lines associated with the Keadby Power Plant

have now received consent. In addition are those projects

listed in Table 3.23.

3.7 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

The Proposed Development has been considered in the context of both

baseline conditions and together with schemes which are in development or

may be developed in future, and the resultant environmental effects of the

schemes coexisting. The Proposed Development has also been considered in

the context of the existing Keadby I plant. These effects are termed

cumulative effects.

The assessment considers the accumulation of effects on people and the

environment, even if the Proposed Development when assessed on an

individual basis has effects that are not significant.

For this EIA Report the Company has confirmed with North Lincolnshire

Council the projects that are planned or consented and are of a scale and

nature to have potential cumulative effects (see Table 3.3).

3.8 INDIRECT EFFECTS

In order to operate, the Proposed Development will require connection to the

National Grid Electricity Transmission System, directly to the north of the

Proposed Development Site. This will involve connection from the Proposed

Development to an existing tower (pylon) and realignment of an existing

connection from Keadby I to the transmission system via a new tower. These

works will be carried out under Section 37 of the Electricity Act 1989 and

granted pursuant to The Department for Business, Energy and lndustrial

Strategy reference numbers: 12.04.09.05-579U (Keadby 2 Overhead line) and

2.04.09.05-560U (Keadby 1 Replacement line).


3-16

Although already consented, the overhead lines can be regarded as an

indirect (or induced) result of the Proposed Development, as the need for the

lines is a direct result of the Proposed Development and lead to their own

specific impacts.

The effects of the construction and operation of the overhead lines and pylons were fully assessed in Environmental Information Report in respect of Proposed Overhead Power Lines for the Keadby I and Keadby II Power Generating Stations at Keadby, Lincolnshire (October 2016), which supported the application for Section 37 consents. The assessment concluded that:

“The construction of overhead lines is a well-established practice and the environmental effects of construction and operational presence are well understood. The works will involve a single pylon and stringing of two sets of cables on land with little or no associated environmental or socioeconomic sensitivities. As a result of the nature of the surrounding area, in terms of the existing power station, multiple pylons and overhead lines, substation and wind turbines, the proposed overhead lines will be barely discernible once in place. Overall there will be no likely significant effects, including cumulative, during construction and operation.”

On the basis of the above and that there are no material changes to design of the Proposed Development, these conclusions are considered to be still valid and there will be no significant indirect effects from the Proposed Development.


3-17

Table 3.3 Cumulative Schemes Considered in this EIA

Scheme Nature of scheme Status Outcome of Screening

Lincolnshire

Lakes

Up to 3,500 new units in two villages on the Lucent

landholding Commercial park New primary school Flood defences A new terminating junction for the M181 will be

delivered to the north of Brumby Common Lane,

allowing access to the development land east and

west of the junction

Consented The potential for cumulative effects with the Lincolnshire Lakes development was

considered as part of the ES. There have been no changes to the Proposed

Development or to the Lincolnshire Lakes scheme that affect the assessment of

cumulative effects in the ES.

Lincolnshire

Lakes Phase 2

(LL2)

A further 2,500 new units

New primary school

Village Centre

Improvements to the B1450 Burringham Road and

Scotter Road Junction

De-trunking of the M181 between the southern and

northern junction

Lake development with marina type facility

Parks and gardens

The LL2 site is located to the south of the

Lincolnshire Lakes site, over 3 km from the


Consented

(pending

agreement

of Section

106)

Land and Water Quality: The Proposed Development is not likely to increase flood

risk at the LL2 site. The LL2 scheme includes drainage and storage works to mitigate

flood risk. It is not expected that there will be any resultant flood risk at the Proposed

Development from the works at LL2. Within the shared area of influence of the

developments there is potential for cumulative effects upon flood plain storage

capacity or surface water run-off (quantity and quality) as a result of these additional

planned / proposed properties.

Ecology and Nature Conservation: LL2 is located over 3 km from the Proposed

Development and will not have cumulative effects on the same sensitive receptors.

Noise: LL2 is located over 3 km from the Proposed Development and will not have

cumulative effects on the same sensitive receptors.

Air Quality: LL2 is located over 3 km from the Proposed Development and will not

have cumulative effects on the same sensitive receptors. The Proposed

Development will not have significant air quality effects on the LL2 scheme.

Cultural Heritage: LL2 is located over 3 km from the Proposed Development and

will not have cumulative effects on the same sensitive receptors.

Traffic: The construction traffic associated with LL2 is unlikely to result in significant

cumulative effects with the Proposed Development.

Socio-economic Characteristics: The residential nature of the LL2 scheme means

that there will be no adverse significant effects as a result of the Proposed

Development and there may be positive effects through employment generation for

residents of the scheme.


3-18

Scheme Nature of scheme Status Outcome of Screening

Landscape and Visual: LL2 is located over 3 km to the southeast of the Proposed

Development. The Proposed Development will not have significant visual effects on

the scheme. Scunthorpe

United Stadium

(part of the

Lincolnshire

Lakes scheme)

Hybrid planning permission for 12,000 capacity

football stadium (Class D2); cafe/bar (A3/A4);

offices (Class B1); 94-bed hotel (Class C1);

gymnasium (Class D2); crèche (Class D1);

launderette (Sui Generis); show venue (Sui

Generis); outdoor training football pitch (Class D2);

site access, car parking and associated

infrastructure, landscaping and drainage. Outline

planning application for multi-use arena (Class D2)

and outdoor football pitches (Class D2), with all

matters reserved save for access.

At the time of the assessment for the ES, the

planned location of the stadium was in the eastern

part of the Lincolnshire Lakes development area.

The proposed stadium occupied the same area as

the commercial park originally proposed as part of

the Lincolnshire Lakes development application. In

2017 it was announced that the stadium was now

planned to be located within the Lincolnshire Lakes

Phase 2 development area.

Consented The potential for cumulative effects with the football stadium, when it was located at

the Lincolnshire Lakes commercial park, was considered as part of the ES. The

relocation of the football stadium to the Lincolnshire Lakes Phase 2 site will not affect

the assessment of cumulative effects in the ES. Given that the stadium will be

located slightly further away from the Proposed Development, the potential for

cumulative effects to occur may even be reduced.

The Transport Assessment for the ES assessed the potential for cumulative effects

of traffic with the football stadium. The relocation of the stadium to a nearby location

is not expected to affect the outcome of the assessment, which concluded that

significant cumulative effects were not probable.

Overhead lines Construction of a new overhead power line

connecting the Keadby II power station to the

National Grid Electricity Transmission System and

the realignment of an existing overhead line

connecting the Keadby I power station to the

system

Consented The potential for cumulative effects with the overhead lines was considered as part of

the ES. There have been no changes to the Proposed Development or to the

overhead lines that affect the assessment of cumulative effects in the ES.

Ash extraction SSE is considering a project to commercially

extract ash material that formed a waste produced

by the former Keadby coal-fired power station.

The ash is stored on land entirely within SSE

ownership.

Planned Although a planning application has not yet been submitted and consent has not

been granted, in theory the ash extraction has the potential to have cumulative

effects (e.g. construction disturbance, traffic), especially during the construction

phase of the Proposed Development. Cumulative effects with the Proposed

Development will be considered as part of the application for the ash extraction

project and the Company will ensure that the ash extraction activities, should they

proceed, are phased to avoid any overlap with construction of the Proposed

Development. The potential for cumulative effects is therefore deemed to be very

small and is not considered further in this EIA Report.

3 scope of the environmental impact assessment …3 scope of the environmental impact assessment 3.1...

Documents