7screening of anticipated impacts and … 7...lng carrier, loading arm connection and pumping of lng...

1 of 39Environmental Management Consultants

ESIA of LNG Terminal, Jetty & Extraction Facility - Pakistan Gasport Limited

Ref: Y8LGOEIAPDChapter 7

Potential impacts of establishment during theconstruction and operation phases of thededicated LNG Terminal on the Physical,Biological and Socio-economic environmenthave been identified and assessed in thefollowing sections.

The LNG Terminal at the proposed site in PortQasim area is expected to respond to the needsof natural gas and LPG through import of rawnatural gas as an environmental friendly fuelfor the industrial, commercial and domesticconsumers in Pakistan. The activities related toconstruction and operations of this facility areexpected to have some small orderenvironmental impacts on the baselineconditions in Port Qasim area.

Unlike other liquid bulk products handled atPort Qasim, the chemical and physicalproperties of LNG are such that physicalconveyance is limited to the primary receptor.The product is liquid which shall be re-gasifiedat the terminal for delivery to SSGC networksystem.

A qualitative assessment of each impact hasbeen made in the impact analysis. Each of theimpacts has been reviewed for construction andoperation phases of the LNG Terminal.Mitigation measures as appropriate have beenidentified for implementation.

The anticipated impacts are envisaged asfollows:

n NATURE = Positive (Improvement) orNegative (Degradation)

n MAGNITUDE = Low, Medium or High

n DURATION = Temporary or Permanent /Cyclic (repetitive)

n TERM = Immediate, Short, Medium orLong Term.

n EFFECT = Local (Project site only),Regional (beyond project area) or Strategic(related to other issues)

Where required, mitigation measures for thesignificant negative impacts have beenrecommended.

The operational phase will involve berthing of a bulkLNG carrier, loading arm connection and pumping ofLNG to FSRU vessel parked alongside the berthingfacility. Subsequent processes are re-gasification andtransporting of the RLNG to natural gas grid. Otherthan these activities, power generation shall be madeas per demand on FSRU. Fugitive air emissions,operational leakages, venting of storage spheres etc.may lead to air receptor loading.

7.1- Environmental MitigationGoalsThe project is located in the Korangi Fish Harbourzone. As with other growing fishery and alliedindustries in such developing areas, negative impacton the environment will not take place. Keeping inview the environment mitigation objective, PakistanGasPort Limited shall aim primarily to recognize theimpacts and minimize or avoid such impacts on theenvironment. Mitigation measures have beensuggested here and Environment Management Planhas been proposed for implementation at each stageof Project activity by having an organizational set upto closely monitor the performance.

7.1.1- Short/Near Term Goals

n Planning and design/fabrication of LNGhandling facilities to control undesirableimpacts on the environment.

7 SCREENING OF ANTICIPATED IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATIONS

n Address the environmentally sensitiveissues such as mangrove ecology, marinewater quality, air quality, etc.

n Construction operation to ensure precautionarymeasures to avoid incidents such as spillages,inadequate dredge disposal, mangrovecutting/grabbles.

7.1.2- Long Term Goals

n Long term objectives form part of theEnvironmental Management Plan aimed at creatinga general awareness among operational phase staffand carry out periodical monitoring of quality of airand liquid effluents.

Some of the key objectives are:

n Setting up of a Monitoring and ReportingSystem

n Organizing a Supervisory and MonitoringMechanism

n Drawing out plans for emergency situationand management

n Training of personnel in safe environmentalpractices

n Regular meetings and sessions to reviewsafety, environmental quality andemergency procedures.

7.2- Impacts at Design Stage

7.2.1- Project Siting

Pakistan GasPort Limited LNG terminal is spreadonshore and offshore. The onshore storage area isconnected to offshore development via a sub-seapipeline. The onshore area is located in an open areawhich is presently sporadically developed. Theoffshore jetty and sub-sea pipeline are primarilylocated in tidal waters and mangroves with no humansettlements in the vicinity. However the onshorefacility has some human settlements in proximity (1.5km away).

The location of LNG terminal as described inchapter 3 has been carefully selected to reducethe impact on navigation and ecology. LNGberth at the proposed location seems to be wellpoised in the physical scenario.

While siting of the LNG berth, the onshore area andthe pipeline alignment the following parameterswere considered:

n Safe distance from population.

n Proximity to berth

n Length of delivery lines to customernetwork

n Infrastructure such as roads, utilities etc.

n Tank foundation

n Earthquake

The selected site however offers more thanminimum required distance between the LNGberth and mangroves, thus minimising thedisturbance to mangrove ecology during theconstruction and laying of the sub-sea pipeline.

7.3- Physical impacts duringconstruction & operations

7.3.1- Noise due to LNG Terminal,Pipeline and Land Facilities

A- Impacts during Construction Phase

LNG terminal construction and associatedactivities onshore and offshore may have possibleimpact on ambient noise levels. In particular,works such as pile driving, dredging, drilling,earthworks, etc. as well as site plant such ascompressors, would contribute to noise. Theduration of the construction work is anticipatednot to exceed over a years period.

Wind speed and direction data reveals that windsare inclined to blow from southwest. Offshorewinds are also generated by convection changes asthe land warms during the day. It is considered




likely that there would be regular occasions whenthe prevailing wind is such that noise is directedtowards the land.

The acoustic effect of the creeks especially duringlow water would be to echo the noise, possiblycausing a weak echo effect for sharp burst of noisesuch as those of pile driving. However, the openland would help the dissipation of constructionnoise. There are no notable buildings ortopographical features in proximity toconstruction sites that would provide shielding ordamping effects.

There are no developed residential areas close tothe shore area. There is no school, hospital orlibrary, however some human settlements mostlycomprising earthen dwellings are scattered. Thesource of major noise in the area is Korangi FishHarbour which is not of major concern. It isexpected that on site noise levels duringconstruction phase may not exceed the averagenoise of 85 dB(A) at 7.5m. Acceptable noise levelsfor construction equipment may vary from 75-100dB(A) for which the workers will be provided earplugs to be worn as protective measures.

Mitigations:

Dredging operations typically proceed for 24hours a day. It is not necessary to restrict dredgingtimes because there is no significant or denselypopulated residential area in the vicinity.

Other activities during construction that can be asource of noise and vibration would be themovement and operation of heavy constructionequipment, excavation and fill operation forgrading, pipeline cutting, welding, installation etc.The noise would be confined to the localsurrounding and the impact will be of temporarynature.

The potential changes in sound quality on otherlocal roads resulting from increased vehicle trafficduring construction are not expected to besignificant. The potential changes in ambientsound pressure levels are expected to be low.

Therefore no special mitigation measures arerequired.

B- Impacts due to Operation

As described earlier, there are several factors thatwould affect the potential noise from the terminal.Such factors include the distance from terminal tothe residential areas, local acoustic, barriers tonoise, and the tolerance of the local population.However, distance of the residential area from thesite would be the major provider of cushiondampers for the noise and vibration generated dueto construction activity.

The operation of LNG cargo unloading, storageand re-gasification etc. are low impact activities.Noise emissions during project operation isexpected to be much lower and generally derivedfrom facility operations such as pumps, engines,other on-site machinery, and from marine vesselunloading LNG at berth.

The shore facility is not particularly noisy as thereare is only pipeline juncttion and measurementfacility. There are no continuously noisy conveyorsystems. The standby power generator would behoused in its own building, and occasional use isnot considered a significant noise source.

The most intrusive noise source would be theterminal related traffic especially on the roadoutside the storage area. Traffic movements intoand out of the storage area would continue overday hours. However, vehicles could arrive and /or depart at any time.

Sound emissions from the marine vessels wouldmainly be generated by the operation of thevessel's engines. The noise emissions from vesselengines are substantially dampened by theirplacement deep within the confines of the vessel.The increase in noise emissions from marinevessels using the berth is not expected to result insignificant increase in level <3dB(A).Additionally, sound emissions from marinevessels will occur on an intermittent andinfrequent basis.




Mitigations:

The sources of noise during operation of theproject include vehicular movements, shipsoffloading operations, intermittent sounding ofhorns by the ships etc. The noise emitting fromthese sources will not be significantly higher thanthe background noise level.

As an occupational health and safety standards theworkers wherever necessary will be provided withearmuffs as per specifications to meet the WorldBank guidelines. The World Bank guidelines forambient noise level within industrial sitesrecommend daytime and night time limits of 75dB(A) and 70dB (A) respectively. The NEQ standardof the EPA for external noise levels is 85dB (A) at7.5 m. The IUCN report (1993) on theEnvironmental Review of Port Qasim areasuggested noise level range from 35-45 dB (A) forsmall offices and 75-85dB (A) for maintenanceareas.

7.3.2- Project Impact on Air Quality

Construction and operation of the Project isexpected to result in emissions into the atmospherethat may affect air quality. The effects on airquality are likely to arise during construction fromdust generation by earthwork at onshore site andduring operation from fugitive emissions ofnatural gas, venting and accidental leakages in thecomponents of the system


Fine particulates suspended in the air can bewindblown from the site to adjacent windwardareas. The main impact regarding fugitiveemissions of dust is a nuisance effect. Certainconstruction activities can become major sources ofdust, for example earth-moving, drilling andhandling of aggregates besides operation ofconstruction equipment, which could generatefugitive emissions. However, it is envisaged mostof the ditching and excavation would be done inwet phase thereby minimising the impact arising

due to dust and fugitive emissions.

Regular occurrence of high-level airborne dustemission is neither reported nor recorded for thesite. The climate is dry and the surrounding land istypical of arid zone. Windy conditions prevailduring the monsoons. As the land mass begins towarm up during the day, the resulting convectioncurrents generate offshore winds starting from thenoon hour. Dust storms are known to occur.However, it is unlikely that dust generated duringconstruction would cause a significant nuisanceimpact.

During the levelling and grading operations in thestorage area and handling of constructionmaterials especially materials for concrete, somedust will be generated. The access to the site is overan existing paved road. The movement of trucksbringing in construction materials is therefore notexpected to create significant dust emission.

Construction and transportation equipment (earthmovers, graders, blasting, trucks, vessels, concretebatch plant, etc.) will likely generate dust and emitcombustion gases, including greenhouse gases(GHGs), primarily carbon dioxide. Fugitive dustand particulate matter emissions from constructionactivities (such as clearing, grubbing, blasting, andsimilar earth-moving activities) and operationalactivities (such as vehicle travel) are transient innature and are dependent on many factors such asthe moisture in the soil, the level of activity at aparticular location, and meteorological conditionsat the time of the construction or operationalactivities. These emissions are expected to benominal, and are expected to occur intermittently.Any potential for dust or particulate mattergeneration would likely occur during periods ofhigh winds or extremely dry periods, and as suchare expected to be of low frequency and shortduration. Given the expected low magnitude ofthese emission sources, the low frequency ofoccurrence, limited duration of occurrence, and themitigation that will be applied, dust andparticulate matter emissions from construction andoperation activities are not expected to be




substantive.

Further, emissions from construction equipmentare another source of pollution. The aircontaminants emitted during construction mayinclude nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide (dueto operation of construction equipment andvehicular traffic at the site) besides the suspendedparticulates in the form of dust.

The predominant wind direction in the area isfrom the west that is from the sea to the land. Theairborne dust and emissions from the constructionsite would be blown towards the nearby land area.However, these would be limited to constructionperiod. As the site is located away from urbanareas and human settlements which are notdeveloped yet, these will not create significantadverse impacts.

Mitigations:

The construction contract will includerequirements of dust control by frequentsprinkling of water. Activities such as grading ofaggregates which generate too much dust will notbe allowed at site and will be carried out off site.

During periods when the prevailing winddirection is north-easterly and strong enough togenerate airborne dust naturally, considerationshould be given to either wetting or avoidingworks that would worsen such effects. It is notlikely that dusty conditions would occur oftenenough to significantly disrupt the constructionworks.


i- Dust and Fugitive Emissions

Project operations, including LNG storage tanks,vaporisers used in regasification, demethanizerpreheaters, marine vessels and vehicle traffic, willalso generate fugitive emissions of natural gas,methane, particulate matter, combustion gases andGHGs (primarily carbon dioxide), and possiblysmall releases of natural gas (non-quantifiable). Air

emissions during project decommissioning mayalso occur, although these are expected to be low.

As described above, under certain conditionsfugitive emissions could cause nuisance. Theprevailing wind data indicate that in somecircumstance airborne dusts if any arising due toactivities associated with disturbance to soil couldbe windblown from the terminal and storage areato inlands.

The operation of LPG Terminal and storage,however, does not generate any dust. Anothersource of GHGs emissions would be the trucks andbowsers taking LPG supplies to consumers. As theaccess to site is over paved roads and truck loadingbays inside the LPG storage yard will also bepaved, dust is not likely to be a problem. The trafficgenerated by the operation will be normal andwithin the design capacity of roads in the area.

Mitigations:

The normal dust on the site should be controlledby regular road sweeping. Dust suppression bywater sprinkling is considered appropriate.

ii- Emissions from the PowerGenerators

The proposed LPG Terminal would have naturalgas steam turbine generators as a principalsource of energy and diesel power as standby. Incase of natural gas fuel source emissions wouldlargely be of carbon dioxide; however dieselgenerators emit a number of substances into theatmosphere including nitrogen oxides (NOX),sulphur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO)and and particulate matter only duringemergencies. The power generating plant willfollow World Bank and EPA emission standards.

World Bank Environmental Guidelines foratmospheric emission of SO2 and NOX fromstationary combustion sources are required to befollowed. Limits given in the guidelines are asfollows:




SO2: Maximum allowable increase in ground levelconcentration = 50 µg/m3 (one year average).

NOX: 86 x 10-9 g/Joule heat input (fuel gas), 130 x10-9 g/Joule heat input (when liquid fuelled)

Dust: When background levels of dust are high,dust emissions from the stack should not begreater than 100 mg/m3.

It is ensured that the power generation plants meetthe standards for emissions and manufacturer'sspecifications comply with the same.

Mitigations:

No mitigation measure is required as natural gasfired steam turbine power generators will be used.

iii- Fugitive Emissions of Natural Gasand LPG

The pipeline transportation and storage systemfor the natural gas and LPG is to be rated forzero leakage and designed as a closed system.Therefore, during operation of the facility therewill be no leakages or spills of natural gas andLPG as the latest equipment provides for suctionof disconnected volume. Hence, with theproposed safety equipment, the quantity of thesereleases will be very small, within the NFPA andUS EPA specified limits and will quicklydisperse with the wind. Thus the impact ofoperational releases of LPG to atmosphere isconsidered insignificant and will not be an issue.

Experiments made in several countries show thatintroduction of LPG and natural gas into theenergy matrix has contributed to a considerablereduction in pollution rates. A major positiveimpact of national and strategic dimension is thatthe project, by facilitating the import of LNG andreplacement of oil, wood and coal with gas as fuelwill help reduce the air pollution and save scarceforest resources. Therefore the impact of operationof the LNG terminal on the local air quality wouldbe negative. but low in magnitude and withinacceptable limits.

Regionally and nationally the impact of LNGimport will provide a cleaner fuel substituting forheavy oils and will be positive, large, permanent,direct and long term. It will go a long way inreducing the pollution with increased substitutionof natural gas for other fuels.The 3.13 million tonsof imported LNG will replace 3.94 million tons ofHigh sulfur Furnace oil. The annual reduction inCO2 will be 3.5 millions tons (29 %),NOX by 26thousand tons (79 %), SOX by 83 thousand tons(99.9 %) and Particulate Matter by 6 thousand tons(92 %).Additionally 25,000 tons import of dieselconsumed in transporting HSFO will be saved andconsequential emissions and road congestion willbe eased.

Mitigation

Adequate and proper maintenance of all pumps,valves and pipelines must be ensured to limit anyfugitive natural gas and LPG emissions withinacceptable limits.

C- Air Pollution Dispersion Modelling

The project is associated with a risk due tohandling, storage and transport of LNG and LPG.Hence it was appropriate to carry out airdispersion modelling to investigate into the impacton the ambient air quality.

Modelling Methodology

The TANK4.0 software is employed for evaluationof emission from Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)storage tanks. The TANK software calculatesemissions based on the equations developed byAmerican Petroleum Institute (API) using thebackground information available from differentsources (literature survey and electronic sources).The physical information of Floating Storage Unit(FSU) and physical and chemical properties of theLiquefied Natural Gas (LNG) were used forevaluation emissions for various scenariosenlisted for various normal and emergencyconditions.




Modelling Scenarios

Following modelling a number of scenarios are takeninto consideration based upon variousenvironmental, storage and decking condition:

i- Normal Scenario

Emission of liquefied natural gas (LNG) vapours(Loss of containment) at normal atmosphericconditions.

ii- Emergency Scenario

Following emergency scenarios were considered inthe dispersion modelling:

n Scenario-1: Emission of liquefied natural gas(LNG) vapours (Loss of containment) due tofailure of temperature control system as aresult of collision, Tsunami or other freakweather incidence.

n Scenario-2: Emission of incompletecombustion products of LNG (Loss ofcontainment) in fire condition

Equation

2CH4 + 3O2 ----> 2CO +4H2O

n Scenario-3: Emission of combustion productsof LNG (Loss of containment) in explosioncondition (100%)

Equation

CH4 + 5O2 + 3(3.76)N2 ----> 4NO + XNO2 + CO2 +2H2O

Modelling Applications

The TANKS 4.0 software was used for estimatingthe emissions. The emissions were calculatedaccording to EPA's AP-42. The informationrequisite for the use of software was provided andemissions for the storage tank containing liquidLNG calculated. The software has evaluated theemission related the above scenarios assumed formodelling. These emissions are summarized in thefollowing table:

Gaussian dispersion model AerMod software hasbeen used for evaluating the Ground LevelConcentrations (GLC) i.e. quantitative amount ofemissions from the storage tanks of LiquefiedNatural Gas (LNG) affecting the ambient airquality has been determined. MonthlyMeteorological Data of Karachi Airport has beenused for the Dispersion Modelling. Thedispersions of emissions of vapours and hazardouschemical as per given scenarios have beenevaluated at distances of 100, 200, 300, 400, 500,600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 2000, 3000 meters from thesource towards 16 direction racially keeping northat 0 Degree.

Normal Scenario

Emission of liquefied natural gas (LNG) vapours (Lossof containment) at normal atmospheric conditions.

Contour map shows in Figures 7.1 & 7.2 is onesuch case for normal scenario (please refer toAnnexure-VII for full detailed report onmodelling). The 24-hourly average ground levelconcentration of CH4 vapours increases from theminimum level of 63.65 µg/m3 in May tomaximum level of 214.11 µg/m3 in December andit decreases from the maximum level of 214,011µg/m3 in December to the minimum level of 63.65µg/m3 in May with little increase in April.

Average monthly ground level concentration ofCH4 vapours increases from minimum level of31.26µg/m3 in February to level of 47.12µg/m3 inJune. Then it starts increasing and reaches themaximum level of 13.51µg/m3 in the November.From November, it again decreases to theminimum level of 31.26µg/m3 in February. Alsothe direction of dispersion is SW from Nov-Feband NE from Mar-Oct. In the month of Februarydirection of dispersion is both in SE and SW.

Emergency Scenario 1

Emission of liquefied natural gas (LNG) vapours (Lossof containment) due to failure of temperature controlsystem in result of some collision, Tsunami or otherfreak weather incidence.




The colour contour graphical and spatialrepresentation of one such case of the dispersion ofgaseous pollutants emitted for emergencyscenarios of failure of temperature control systemdue to collision, Tsunami or other freak weatherincidence are shown in Figure-7.3 and 7.4 (refer toAnnexure-VII for extensive details).

Above contour map shows on such emergencyscenario, failure of temperature control system dueto collision, Tsunami or other freak weatherincidence, the 24-hourly average ground levelconcentration of CH4 vapours increases from theminimum level of 38,066.87 µg/m3 in May tomaximum level of 128,038.92 µg/m3 in Decemberand it decreases from the maximum level of128,038.92 µg/m3 in December to the minimumlevel of 38,066.87 µg/m3 May with exceptionallittle increase in April.

Average monthly ground level concentration ofCH4 vapours decreases from maximum level of67,880.64µg/m3 in November to minimum level of18,696.45µg/m3 in February. With little increase toa level of 35,483.22µg/m3, average monthlyconcentration decreases to the level of28,181.20µg/m3 in June. From July it againincreases to the maximum level of 67,880.64µg/m3

in November.

Also the direction of dispersion is SW from Nov-Feb and NE from Mar-Oct. In the month ofFebruary direction of dispersion is both in SE andSW.

Emergency Scenarios 2 and 3

Emission of incomplete combustion products of LNG(Loss of containment) at fire condition

Equation

2CH4 + 3O2 ---> 2CO + 4H2O

The colour contour graphical and spatialrepresentations of the dispersion of gaseouspollutants emitted emergency scenarios atincomplete combustion are shown in Figures 7.5 &7.6 (please refer to Annexure-VII for full details).

Above contour maps show that for emergency

scenario (incomplete combustion), the 24-hourlyaverage ground level concentration of COincreases from the minimum level of 2,132.50µg/m3 in May to maximum level of 7,172.74 µg/m3

in December and it decreases from the maximumlevel of 7,172.74 µg/m3 in December to theminimum level of 2,132.50 µg/m3 in May with littleincrease in April.

Average monthly ground level concentration of




Table 7.1: Nature of Emissions in Scenarios

Scenario Emission in gm/sec Contents

Normal 2.0636289 CH4 Vapors

Emergency-1 1196.316494 CH4 Vapors

Emergency-2 67.03 CO Vapors

Emergency-3 198.10739 NOX Vapors

Table 7.2: 24-hourly Conc. of CH4 in NormalScenario

Months Concentration (µ/m3)

Jan 139.04Feb 120.13Mar 101.22Apr 107.73May 63.65Jun 80.51Jul 107.62Aug 121.01Sep 124.81Oct 123.60Nov 200.72Dec 214.11

Table 7.3: Monthly Conc. of CH4 in NormalScenario


Jan 42.87Feb 31.26Mar 59.33Apr 55.75May 50.94Jun 47.12Jul 49.57Aug 57.84Sep 72.16Oct 63.69Nov 113.51Dec 96.38




Figu

re-7

.1: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

24-H

Avg

. Con

cent

rati

on o

f M

etha

ne f

or th

e m

onth

of

Janu

ary

(Nor

mal

Sce

nari

o)




Figu

re-7

.2: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

mon

thly

Con

cent

rati

on o

f M

etha

ne f

or th

e m

onth

of

Janu

ary

(Nor

mal

Sce

nari

o)

CO decreases from maximum level of3,802.66µg/m3 in November to minimum level of1,047.37µg/m3 in February, with little increase inMarch to the level of 1,987.77µg/m3 which againdecreases to the level of 1,578.71µg/m3 in June.From June it starts increasing and reaches to thelevel of 2,417.67µg/m3 in September.

The dispersion of CO is prominent in thedirections of SW from Nov-Feb and NE from Mar-Oct. In the month of February direction ofdispersion remains both in SE and SW.

Emission of combustion products of LNG (Loss ofcontainment) in explosion condition (100%)

Equation

CH4 + 5O2 + 3(3.76)N2 ---> 4NO + XNO2 + CO2 +2H2O

The graphical and spatial representations of thedispersion of gaseous pollutants emitted as a result

of emergency scenarios causing 100% combustionare shown in Figures 7.7 & 7.8 (please refer toAnnexure-VII for full details).

Contour maps show that for emergency scenario(explosion condition), the 24-hourly averageground level concentration of NOX increases fromthe minimum level of 5,729.12µg/m3 in May tomaximum level of 19270.06µg/m3 in Decemberand it decreases from the maximum level of19,270.06 µg/m3 in December to the minimumlevel of 5,729.12µg/m3 in May with littleexceptional increase in April.

Average monthly ground level concentration ofNOX decreases from maximum level of10,216.09µg/m3 in November to minimum level of2,813.84µg/m3 in February, with little increase tothe level of 5,340.28µg/m3 and later, the averagemonthly concentration of NOX decrease to the levelof 4,241.33µg/m3 in June. Increasing trend isshown for NOX concentration from June toNovember. Also the direction of dispersion of NOX

is SW from Nov-Feb and NE from Mar-Oct. Duringthe month of February direction of dispersionremains both SE and SW.

It is observed from plots of the data that theground level concentration decreases with distanceand is maximum in the direction of wind. Thedispersion is maximum in direction of 45 and 225degrees from north; hence the North-East andSouth-West direction are more effected by theemissions from the FSUs. The concentration ofemitted vapours & gaseous pollutants decreaseswith distance from the source. The emittedpollutants are above danger level up to twokilometres.

The emission of CH4 vapours in normalatmospheric conditions according to Air QualityModelling, be diluted and dispersed so as not toalter the quality of airshed, which fall in theunpolluted category with an average 24-Hourlyand monthly mean values for each month of a yearas given in Table-7.10.

The emission of CH4 vapours in failure of




Table 7.4: 24-hourly Conc. of CH4 underEmergency Scenario 1


Jan 83,151.78Feb 71,842.93Mar 60,534.7Apr 64,426.58May 38,066.87Jun 48,150.00Jul 64,356.95Aug 72,368.093Sep 74,639.51Oct 73,912.85Nov 120,036.25Dec 128,038.92

Table 7.5: Monthly Conc. of CH4 underEmergency Scenario 1






Figu

re-7

.3: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

24-H

rly

Avg

. Con

cent

rati

on o

f M

etha

ne f

or th

e m

onth

of

Janu

ary

(Em

erge

ncy

Scen

ario

)




Figu

re-7

.4: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

mon

thly

Con

cent

rati

on o

f M

etha

ne f

or th

e m

onth

of

Janu

ary

(Em

erge

ncy

Scen

ario

)




Figu

re-7

.5: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

24-H

rly

Avg

. Con

cent

rati

on o

f C

O f

or th

e m

onth

of

Janu

ary




Figu

re-7

.6: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

mon

thly

Con

cent

rati

ons

of C

O f

or th

e m

onth

of

Janu

ary

temperature control system due to collision,Tsunami or other freak weather incidence isdiluted and dispersed. The quality of airshed willbe altered, putting it in the polluted category with

an average 24-Hourly and monthly mean valuesfor each month of a year as given in Table-7.11.

The emissions of CO due to incomplete combustionof LNG in fire condition will spread in the directionof wind altering the quality of airshed of the region.The 24-hourly and monthly ground levelconcentrations of CO will remain as given in Table-7.12.

The emissions of NOX due to explosion andcomplete burning of LNG at fire conditions willpollute the airshed and disperse to largerdistance. The 24-Hourly and monthly groundlevel concentration are modelled as given inTable-7.13.

Impacts of Disperssed Air

The above tables and contour maps leads to theconclusion that gaseous emissions from normalatmospheric conditions for the proposed LNGproject would not add any of the prioritypollutants beyond the limits set by World BankGuidelines and would not degrade the quality ofairshed. The limits set by NEQS also suggest thatthe quality of airshed would not be altered tohazardous state by the emissions from the LNGProject. However, in case of accidentalrupture/explosion the emissions of CH4 vaporsand gaseous pollutants will exceed the NEQSlimits and ambient air quality criteria of WHO &US EPA. Adequate mitigation measures arerequired to be implemented to avoid suchcatastrophe.




Table 7.6: 24-hourly Conc. of CO underEmergency Scenario 2



Table 7.7: Monthly Conc. of CO underEmergency Scenario 2



Table 7.8: 24-hourly Conc. of NOX underEmergency Scenario 3



Table 7.9: Monthly Conc. of NOX underEmergency Scenario 3






Figu

re-7

.7: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

24-H

rly

Ave

rage

Con

cent

rati

on o

f N

Ox

for

the

mon

th o

f Ja

nuar

y




Figu

re-7

.8: C

onto

ur M

ap s

how

ing

mon

thly

Con

cent

rati

on N

Ox

for

the

mon

th o

f Ja

nuar

y

Mitigations

n Regular maintenance and checks be ensured toprevent any leakage or accident

n An emergency safety plan be devised tohandle any emergency / fire situation.

7.3.3- Impacts on MaritimeNavigation


During construction of the LNG Jetty, there may beoccasional temporary obstruction to navigation duringmanoeuvring of the floating construction equipment(piling barge) and mostly will be off from navigationalchannel. However any movement will be coordinatedwith Port Authority. As the proposed jetty is located on

the confluence of Kadiro and Phitti Creek wellseparated away from the main navigation channel,there will be no obstruction to shipping during routineconstruction operations.

Mitigation

No mitigation measures are required.


No impact on navigation in the main channel ofthe port is expected. The Port Authority willregulate the traffic in the channel according toregulations.

Mitigation

No Mitigation measures are required.




Table 7.10: Expceted 24-hourly and monthly mean conc. of CH4 after diluation and gooddispersion in the normal atmospheric conditions

Months 24-Hourly Distance from Direction Monthly Distance from DirectionConc (µ/m3) source (meters) (Degree) Conc (µ/m3) source (meters) (Degree)

Jan 139.04 300 247.5 42.87 300 2447.5Feb 120.13 800 202.5 31.26 900 157.5Mar 101.22 800 67.5 59.33 600 67.5Apr 107.73 800 67.5 55.75 600 67.5May 63.65 600 67.5 50.94 600 67.5Jun 80.51 600 67.5 47.12 600 67.5Jul 107.62 800 67.5 49.57 600 67.5Aug 121.01 800 67.5 57.84 600 67.5Sep 124.81 800 67.5 72.16 600 67.5Oct 123.60 400 22.5 63.69 600 67.5Nov 200.72 800 202.5 113.51 800 202.5Dec 214.11 800 202.5 96.38 600 202.5

Table 7.11: Expceted 24-hourly and monthly mean conc. of CH4 after diluation and gooddispersion in the faliure of temperature control system


Jan 83151.78 300 247.5 25642.13 300 247.5Feb 71842.93 800 225 18696.45 900 157.5Mar 60534.7 800 67.5 35483.22 600 67.5Apr 64426.58 800 67.5 33340.71 600 67.5May 38066.87 600 67.5 30465.01 600 67.5Jun 48150.00 600 67.5 28181.20 600 67.5Jul 64356.95 800 67.5 29644.04 600 67.5Aug 72368.093 800 67.5 34589.41 600 67.5Sep 74639.51 800 67.5 43157.10 600 67.5Oct 73912.85 400 45 38089.81 600 67.5Nov 120036.25 800 225 67880.64 800 225Dec 128038.92 800 225 57638.97 600 225

7.3.4-Impacts on Geology,Geomorphology & Hydrogeology


The proposed LNG jetty and mooring dolphinswill be supported on tabular steel piles while thesub-sea delivery main will run through the inter-tidal mud flats. This type of construction will nothave any negative impact on the geology,geomorphology and hydrogeology of the area.

The LPG terminal is proposed to be located on-shore close to high water line and will require fillto raise, level and grade the area. The material to bedeposited as fill will need to be granular to aiddrainage of subsoil and settlement. The gradedarea will drain to the creek. This construction will

not have any impact on geology, geomorphologyand hydrogeology.

The dredging of a berthing pocket will not beadjacent to the existing navigation channel, alsothe dredging activity would be insignificant incomparison to the maintenance dredging ofnavigation channel being carried out regularly byPort Qasim Authority. The hydraulic modelstudies for Port Qasim have extensively studiedthe impacts of dredging of navigation channel andthe spoil areas for over a decade. No significantimpact on geology, geomorphology andhydrogeology has yet been identified. Thecomparatively moderate dredging for the berthingpocket and disposal of spoil in the areasdesignated by Port Qasim Authority however maycause some negative impact on the channel




Table 7.12: Expceted 24-hourly and monthly mean conc. of CO due to incomplete combustion ofLNG at fire condition


Jan 4658.16 300 247.5 1436.47 300 247.5Feb 4024.64 800 202.5 1047.37 900 157.5Mar 3391.16 800 67.5 1987.77 600 67.5Apr 3609.18 800 67.5 1867.74 600 67.5May 2132.50 600 67.5 1706.64 600 67.5Jun 2697.36 600 67.5 1578.71 600 67.5Jul 3605.28 800 67.5 1660.65 600 67.5Aug 4054.06 800 67.5 1937.69 600 67.5Sep 4181.30 800 67.5 2417.67 600 67.5Oct 4140.60 400 22.5 2133.80 600 67.5Nov 6724.43 600 225 3802.66 800 225Dec 7172.74 800 225 3228.93 600 225

Table 7.13: Expceted 24-hourly and monthly mean conc. of NOX due to explosion and completeburning of LNG at at fire condition


Jan 12514.48 300 247.5 3859.18 300 247.5Feb 10812.48 800 202.5 2813.84 900 157.5Mar 9110.57 800 67.5 5340.28 600 67.5Apr 9696.30 800 67.5 5017.83 600 67.5May 5729.12 600 67.5 4585.04 600 67.5Jun 7246.65 600 67.5 4241.33 600 67.5Jul 9685.82 800 67.5 4461.47 600 67.5Aug 10891.51 800 67.5 5205.75 600 67.5Sep 11233.36 800 67.5 6495.23 600 67.5Oct 11124.00 400 22.5 5732.60 600 67.5Nov 18065.65 800 202.5 10216.09 800 202.5Dec 19270.06 800 202.5 8674.74 600 202.5

geomorphology but this will be insignificant.

No obstruction to the main navigation channel willbe caused by construction and operation of theproject.

The site is located in a seismic ally moderate tomajor hazard (seismic zone 3 of Pakistan) area anddesign of all facilities shall be based accordingly.

The construction of the proposed project istherefore expected to have however low andnegative impact on geomorphology due to theconsiderable dredging activity i.e. around 3.8million cubic meter of mud flat and its subsequentdisposal as dredged material to remote site around4-5km away. The impact as quantified would behowever low, direct, long term but local.

Mitigation

Following measures will further reduce this impact:

Disposal of dredged material in the areas designatedby Port Qasim Authority as will require considerablylong haulage of the dredged material has beenproposed and recommended to mitigate the impacton navigation and geomorphology of the creek area.

No obstruction or filling up of any drainage orchannel in the area,

The structural design of facilities to take into accountthe seismic risk factor of 0.3 for Operational BasisEarthquakes (OBE) and a factor of 1/15 g forMaximum Credible Earthquake (MCE)

The delivery of fill material to site to be equalizedwith spreading and compaction of fill layers to avoidspillage into the water

Spoils from piling works to be disposed outside thechannels and in areas designated by the PortAuthority.

Protection of fill slopes against erosion. Duringconstruction these to be protected by sand bagsuntil permanent protection by properly designatedstone rip rap. A cofferdam for containment of thedredged material has been proposed and designedto retain the disposed material. Placement of the

dredge material has been sited per PQArequirements. The area selected is exposed lowsloping mud flats that are not used commerciallyor for residences. Cofferdam construction will takeplace from barges used to place and secure theinterlocking dam material. As the work will takeplace from floating platforms, disturbance tosediments will be localized and of short duration.Once in place, the area behind the cofferdam willbe dewatered, and a fabric liner placed shorewardto minimize infiltration of dredge material into thewaterway.


The operation of the LPG terminal will not have anyimpact on the geology, geomorphology andhydrogeology of the area.

Mitigation


7.3.5- Hydrological Impacts


The construction of the project does not interferewith the natural drainage of the area. The soilproposed to be used as fill is granular. The fillslopes on the creek side will be protected againsterosion by stone pitching. However, duringconstruction, some spillage of fill material andwaste on to the foreshore areas may beunavoidable. Careful construction operation willlimit it to minimum with no significant impact.

The ground water is saline. The subsoil being finegrained and largely plastic, the permeability isvery low. Due to the proximity of the seawatercreeks, the subsoil drainage is towards the creeks.The construction of the LNG terminal facility, inparticular the jetty laying of sub-sea pipe, willresult in short term increases in the suspendedsolid loading of the creek system.

i- General Impact on Water Quality




The construction of the proposed project does notinterfere with the natural drainage of the creeksystem of the area. The construction of the LNGJetty including the sub-sea laying of pipeline willresult in short term increase in the suspendedmaterial in the water column of the creekscausing increased turbidity. In addition to thisrelease of contaminants / wastes, loss of benthicflora and fauna and mangroves may happen.

The re-suspended sediments can also betransported and re-deposited elsewhere in thesurrounding causing negative impact on benthicfauna and fishery resource.

Direct impacts on water quality arise when thesediments are contaminated. The release of anyheavy metal, hydrocarbons, or other hazardouschemicals into the water column can cause toxiceffects on marine biota. The release of organicwastes could cause localized oxygen depletion inthe water column creating stressful conditions foraquatic biota.

During the construction phase there will begeneration of some sewage material due topersonnel involved in the construction work. Thedisposal of these sewage materials into the marineenvironment will also have minimum adverseimpact on the water quality as well as marinebiota. Efforts should be made to minimize theimpact of this pollutant. Since it is a purelytemporary phase and short term, no mitigationmeasure is required for the purpose.

Mitigation

Since it is a purely temporary phase and short termactivity, no mitigation measures are requiredexcept careful use of heavy machinery andprecautions because it is a short term activity.

ii- Impact on Sediment Quality

The sediment quality (Table 7.14) reported byKhan et al (1999) for the Korangi Creek, the site ofthe proposed LNG Jetty indicate that the sedimentquality to be excavated/dredged or disturbed due

to construction work of the jetty and laying ofpipeline is not contaminated with heavy metals toany significant level.

Sediment contamination could have been ofconcern because the disturbance caused bydredging/excavation/ reclamation or constructionwork would have released contaminants into thewater column either by solution or re-suspensionof particulate matter. However, as the quality ofsediment does not fall under highly contaminatedcategory, the disturbance caused due toconstruction work is not expected to have anadverse impact on water quality of thesurrounding environment or potential toxicimpacts on aquatic biota due to the bio-availabilityof any contaminants.

Mitigation

No mitigation measures are required as theconstruction of the LNG Jetty and laying of sub-seapipeline is a short term process.

iii- Effects of Dredging on WaterQuality

The disturbance of bed sediments throughactivities such as dredging can lead to a number ofimpacts on marine water quality including:

n turbidity plumes;

n release of contaminants;

n oxygen depletion.

The re-suspension of sediments during dredgingcan cause dense turbidity plumes. Turbidityplumes are usually detrimental to aquaticecosystems because of the effect of reduced lightpenetration through the water column. Re-suspended sediments can also be transported andre-deposited causing the smothering of benthicfauna and fishery resources.

Direct impacts on water quality tend to arise whenthe sediments are contaminated. The release of anyheavy metals, hydrocarbons, organo-halogencompounds, etc. from the sediment into the water




column can cause toxic effects on aquatic biota.The release of organic wastes can cause localizedoxygen depletion of the water, again creatingstressful conditions for aquatic biota. The sedimentquality survey of the area adjacent to the proposedLNG Jetty indicated that the sediments to bedredged from the site area are not contaminated toany significant level. Sediment contaminationwould have been of concern because thedisturbance caused by dredging would havereleased contaminants into the water column,either by solution or re-suspension of particulatematter. However, as the quality tests havedemonstrated that the sediments are effectivelynot contaminated, the dredging is not expected tohave an adverse impact on water quality, Inaddition, potential toxic impacts on aquatic biotadue to the bio-availability of any contaminants arenot expected.

Mitigation


iv- Effects of Disposal of Dredge Spoilon Water Quality

The volume of material to be dredged for theberthing pocket and temporary access canal isconsiderable and dredging spoil of about 3.8million m3 is expected to be disposed in thedesignated area of tidal mud flat in vicinity of theshore area for reclamation or disposed at thespecified disposal areas specified by PQA.

Guidance of the London Convention recommendsthat consideration be given to the environmentalcharacteristics of marine disposal site. The actuallocation for disposal is to be chosen from the sitesapproved by the Port Authority, by the contractorappointed to undertake the dredging. However, interms of water quality, consideration should begiven to the potential effects of turbidity and theintroduction to the disposal site of anycontaminants that may be present in the dredgedmaterial.

Disposal of dredging spoil from Port Qasimchannel have been in progress since 1970's and ismonitored by Hydraulic Research Laboratory,Wallingford (UK). To date no significant impactsfrom disposal have been reported.

The sediment to be dredged and disposed doesnot appear to be contaminated. It is thereforeexpected that water quality would not beadversely affected on long-term basis by thedredging and disposal of spoil.

The dredged material however would be releasedinto the sea either from the dredger's hopper or abarge and as the material is likely to comprise siltsand clays, dispersal by currents during its fallthrough (the water column could cause localizedconditions of high turbidity at disposal site. Thesilts and clays are believed to be relatively wellconsolidated so it is likely that the majority of thedisposed material would fall directly to the bed,reducing potential for dispersion of low densitymaterial by thermal water layers. As the dredge




SOURCE: Khan et al 1999, Netherlands framework for soil remediationNS=Not Specified

Table 7.14: Metal Concentration in the Sediment Samples

METAL NETHERLANDS SOIL QUALITY GUIDELINES AVERAGE CONCENTRATION OF Target Value mg/kg Intervention Value mg/kg METAL IN KORANGI CREEK mg/kg

Cadmium NS NS 0.071

Copper 36 190 39.18

Chromium 100 380 96.46

Lead 85 530 19.96

Mercury 0.3 10 0.071

Zinc 140 720 75.56

spoil is released below the surface, turbidity is nottherefore expected to be high, although some low-density material may be dispersed. In case ofdisposal of dredged spoil in areas earmarked bythe Port Authority for reclamation, the slurry willbe properly contain in settling ponds to allowsuspended solids to settle down and a relativelyclean effluent will be released to the creek. Thestructure of the cofferdam especially designed toretain the dredged material is lined with geotextilematerial to ensure sediment retention and lowturbidity characteristics during the tidal surges inthe containment area. The overall effect of thedisposal operation is therefore not though likely tocause significantly adverse turbid conditions.

Mitigation

In terms of water quality, no mitigation measuresare required. However, due regard should begiven to the mitigations concerning the potentialimpacts of disposal on other characteristics of themarine environment as discussed in the followingsections.

v- Spillages of Construction Materialsand Piling Wastes

During the construction of LNG terminal it ispossible that construction materials could either belost accidentally or dumped intentionally into theaquatic environment. Although materials like rock,concrete, plastics, etc. are relatively inert, othermaterials such as metals, fuels, etc. can causedeleterious effects on the water quality.

Other than a large scale accidental spill of fuels orother mechanical fluids, the impact of anindividual event is likely to be small and notsignificantly adverse.

However, the cumulative impact of a number ofevents over the construction period could havewider implications for aesthetic quality, fisheriesand coastal ecosystems. In addition, largequantities of debris on the sea bed could hinderdredging operations. For example, a bucket

dredger may encounter large sized debris, addingextra time and costs to the dredging operations.

It is further anticipated that the piling operationsassociated with the jetty construction will producesmall spoil material. Samples of the spoil materialproduced from mud flats may be tested forcontamination and, if found heavily contaminated,should be disposed off-site. The dumping of thisspoil otherwise would be restricted to the areasimmediately adjacent to the jetty construction site.

The estimated quantity is considerably low andunlikely to cause adverse impact on long-termbasis.

No handling and use of any contaminants duringconstruction is required. However, some oilywastes from construction equipment may bereleased but their quantity being insignificant, noimpact on marine water quality is expected.

Any negative impact on the soil due toconstruction will be small, reversible, temporary,direct but short term and local. No impact onground or sub-marine soil water is anticipated.

Mitigation

In order to minimize any impacts from losses orspillages of site materials and wastes duringconstruction, the contractor undertaking theconstruction should ensure that there are no lossesof potentially polluting materials to the water andthat any spillages on land are removed andcleaned up immediately. The latter point would beimportant to ensure that substances such as fuelsand oils are not left to soak away. A clause toensure this takes in effect therefore need to beincluded within the contract package of theconstruction works. In addition, beforecommencing any work that could involve spillagesof polluting materials, the contractor shouldproduce an effective plan of prevention and clean-up measures (refer EMP as described in chapter 8of this document).

The resident engineer at site should be consulted




and should approve such measures.

A further clause in the construction contract shouldensure that the contractor keeps all working areas,storage areas, waterways and berths clear of anyrubbish, debris and obstructions at all times. Alldebris and rubbish should be regularly removedfrom the site. Lastly, all possible precautions shouldbe taken to provide for the safe storage and use offuels, gas bottles and all other hazardous materialstemporarily brought at site by contractor.


i- Industrial Effluents & Spills

The port operations at Karachi and Port Qasimwould suggest that contaminating substances aredischarged and deposited into the deep waterchannel. Therefore, despite the mitigationmeasures incorporated into the design of the Portfacilities and recommendations of good practice,the sediments that accumulate in the deep waterchannel become contaminated from wastesdischarged from other port terminals, berths andindustrial effluents.

The transportation and storage system is designedfor zero leakage. Any accidental spill willimmediately vaporize and disperse with wind.However, as a further safety measure, the tankfarm shall be provided with an impermeablebarrier below the ground surface to preventinfiltration in soil and contain any major leaks orspill from the tanks within the bunds.

Mitigation

While no mitigation measures are required as faras the operation of LNG terminal is concerned butin view of other sources of pollutants within theport, periodic monitoring of water and sedimentquality is therefore recommended. A monitoringprogramme should be executed by the Port QasimAuthority to keep a close watch on the water andsediment quality and ensure enforcement of EPAstandards on various port users in the area in

future. Monitoring would record anyaccumulation of contaminants and should be usedas an indicator for targeting reduction ofcontaminating inputs. In this way it is hoped thatsignificant quantities of contaminants would notaccumulate.

ii- Drainage from the Berth andStorage Areas

In many long established port areas, the run-offfrom quays and storage areas has been allowed toflow unchecked into the adjacent water. Run-offcan contain various contaminants and substancesdetrimental to the aquatic environment. Forexample, typical ship to shore operations at jettiescould lead to spillages of fuels, oil and grease, etc.Although each spill may contribute little, manyspills over the long term can cause the chronicconcentrations of contaminants and the significantdegradation of water quality. Such conditions havearisen at both Karachi Port and Port Qasim,probably through a combination of limitedmaintenance of facilities and working practices.

The LNG terminal facility would have leastdischarges of pollutants to soil and water. Thestorm water run off from storage areas and berthwill be having minimal contaminant dischargesexcept for sediments and some traces of oils. Runoff from the built surfaces will be allowed to flowthrough a series of catch pits leading to drains thatdischarge directly to the water. The jetty platformand storage area is hard surfaced. The storm runoffwill be collected by open drains and discharged tothe nearest storm water drain.

As the rainfall in the area is scarce, the run-off fromthe onshore area would be minimal. In addition, itis planned to regularly sweep the hard areas toremove the littered/spilled solid wastes and dust.

Mitigation

No mitigation measures are required as far as theproposed LNG terminal and storage facility isconcerned. However, good working and house




keeping practices would need to be emphasized.Evidence from working practices at Karachi Portand Port Qasim indicate that current practicesinclude the discharging and dumping of wastematerials directly into harbour waters withoutregard for subsequent environmental damage. It istherefore proposed that LNG terminal staff begiven short term training in observing good housekeeping practices beside their respective job. Morespecifically managers as well as workers will bemade aware of the implications of unhealthypractice on the environment.

In addition, it is recommended that the PQAshould establish a water and sediment qualitymonitoring programme. Under this programme,all terminal operators & PQA should be jointlyresponsible for monitoring the change incontaminant concentration in the water and bedsediments in the Port for any remedial measuresthat may become necessary.

iii- Oily Spills

The LNG Jetty for berthing of ship as well as thehandling area will not be handling anyhydrocarbon based fuel and hazardous chemical,the spillage during operation will be negligible.The only minor pollution will be added to themarine environment will be due to shipping traffic.The ship will be anchored / handled at the sitevery near to already navigational Channel of PortQasim which is receiving the regular dischargesfrom Port Qasim activities. The minor dischargesfrom LNG. Terminal will be of no significant level.It is also not going to create any change isgeomorphology, geology and hydrodynamics ofthe area. Moreover the water quality will also benot adversely impacted.

Spillage of oil and other hydrocarbon-based fuels,such as diesel, discharges of untreated oily slops orballast water has marked pollution effects on thequality of water and damages aquatic environment& ecosystems. In enclosed channels such as at PQAthe breakdown of fuel to its more toxic fractionscan cause the mortality of many aquatic faunal

species.

Although the LNG terminal is not to handle bulkoil, the storage area does include installations tostore diesel in certain quantity for use by powergenerator which will be part of the jetty structureof the terminal. There is potential likelihood ofsmall scale spillages near the diesel tank to causeminor adverse impacts locally. There would be nopossibility for a spill large enough to cause impactson the seawater or local ecosystems. In order tocontain any spill, a dyke would surround thediesel tank. It is recommended to construct a dykecapable of containing the spilled contents of thetank plus another 10% in accidental cases, when apipe or tank were to rupture, the diesel oil wouldbe well contained.

Mitigation

No mitigation measures required, as the storedquantity of oil is small and is located onshore norany possible spillage can mix with sea water orgroundwater.

iv- Discharges from the Septic Tank

Incident of discharge of untreated sewage into thecreeks could have potentially adverse effects onwater quality. Any impact would be influencedprincipally by the effluent quality and quantity,and the dilution and dispersion effects around thepoint of discharge. For example, the discharge ofraw sewage with a high BOD to low energy insheltered water could cause localized oxygendepletion.

The industries in Port Qasim area are required totreat their industrial sewage and discharge thetreated effluent meeting EPA's NEQS. The LNGterminal will have only domestic sewage from itsoffices which shall be collected and treated in aseptic tank or otherwise transported to shore fordisposal.

Mitigation

No mitigation measures are required as the




effluent is treated in septic tank before itsdischarge into PQA sewerage system or creekwaters.

v- Discharges of Ships' Wastes

The discharge of ships' wastes into the mainchannel & onto port waters could cause thecontamination of water and sediments.Secondary impacts could arise, such as thedegradation of fisheries and aquatic habitats,large commercial vessels are a major source ofwaste generated by port operations. MARPOL73/78, seeks to prevent the discharge ofpolluting substances from ships into the marineenvironment. MARPOL 73/78 contains severalannexes with restrictions on the discharge ofwastes including:

Annex I, Oil: Prohibits the discharge of oil, oilybilge water, etc. containing > 15 ppm oil within 12miles of land. Also establishes other conditions fordischarges beyond 12 miles of land;

Annex IV, Sewage: Prohibits discharge of ships'sewage unless treated or discharged at a certaindistance from land;

Annex V, Garbage: Prohibits discharge of ships'food waste, sludge, packaging etc. to sea undercertain conditions. Any discharge of plastic wastesis banned.

As per Annexure-I of MARPOL 73/78, where theoil content of the separated waters is below 15ppm, the water can be discharged into the harbour,In Pakistan, the EPA standard for grease and oil inmunicipal and liquid industrial effluents is 10 mgper litre (i.e. equivalent to 10 ppm).

The discharge of ship's garbage causes thecollection of waste products on the shoreline. Inaddition to the adverse aesthetic impact, garbagesuch as plastics and glass are not biodegradable.

Mitigation

The ships calling on LNG terminal will be requiredto follow MARPOL 73/78. As no facilities for

reception of ships bilge water, ballast or solidwaste and their treatment are proposed at the LPGTerminal, the ships will be advised accordingly.All waste material will be taken away by qualifiedcontractors for disposal according to World Bankand Pakistan regulatuions for each material.

7.4- IMPACTS ON ECOLOGYThe biota at site comprises of the terrestrialecology, mangroves and marine ecology. These arereviewed below:

7.4.1- Terrestrial Ecology

The construction of the proposed LNG Terminal,storage area and sub-sea pipeline will not result insignificant damage to the ecosystem that is alreadysparsely vegetated with a few plant species, each ofwhich is prevalent in the Karachi region. It isestimated that on shore ecology will not be muchaffected. Some land will be used for construction butit is expected that any unique habitat will not be lost.Similarly, during operation phase terrestrial ecologywill remain unaffected.


The grading operation for the LPG storage tankfarm will cause removal of some sparse vegetationclose to the high water line. This vegetation is of alow grade scrub, abundant in the adjacent areasand all over Karachi. Removal of this from an areaof about 6 ha will be required. This will impact thehabitat of some birds and other animals which areexpected to migrate to the adjacent busy on theeast and west of the site. No rare or endangeredspecies of plants or animals are reported in thearea.

The laying of the sub-sea pipeline from onshorestorage to the LPG terminal across the fore-shoreinter-tidal mud flats will disturb the sparse shrubnear high water line of similar nature as in thestorage area besides some mangroves betweenKorangi and Kadiro Creeks. Some of these plantswill need removal at the location of the trenchedpipeline. This will be minimal and the rest of the




plants other than the 3m width (of the aligned root)shall remain in tact. The impact will be thoughnegative but small and local with minimaldisturbance of plant and animal habitat in the area.

Mitigation

The construction contract should include provisionsto limits the removal of any bushes or mangrove toabsolute necessity. All other plants in the vicinitywill need to be protected against damage byconstruction operations. The areas beyond the limitsof site shall not be disturbed or otherwise damaged.Mangrove plant,trees and shrubs be planted aroundthe boundary of the storage area to compensate forthe loss of shrubs and shield the development formvisual intrusion.

B- Impacts due to Operations

The operation of the LNG terminal and LPG storagewill not affect the terrestrial ecology of the area. LNGafter its gasification will be natural gas and itsfugitive emissions or spillage will cause no specialremedial measures other than proper ventilationand diffusion in atmosphere. LPG being highlyvolatile, any spills will quickly evaporate toatmosphere. Hazards of any accidental release ofLNG and LPG are discussed in subsequent chapteron Risk Assessment. No impacts on the terrestrialecology are likely from the normal operation of theLNG Terminal.

Mitigation


7.4.2- Mangroves


For the construction of sub-sea delivery pipeline,jetty and dolphins some mangrove plants willneed removal at the locations along the alignmentof the pipeline and jetty area. The proposed designensures that no major damage to this importantasset is caused. The technique employed for laying

of the pipeline underneath the sea bed isenvironment friendly causing minimal disturbanceto ecology particularly relating to mangroves andbenthos. Similarly for construction of jetty, accessto the area would be required and dredgingactivity would be undertaken. It is recommendedthat the dredged material is to be saved as refilledin the temporary canal on completion of work.This will help in replanting, rehabilitation and re-colonizing of the mangroves in the area and theimpact will be temporary. Therefore, the impact ofconstruction on mangroves will be thoughnegative but, small, reversible, temporary, direct,short term and local.

Mitigation

On completion of construction, the temporarycanal should be back-filled and mangrove saplingsplanted to ensure re-colonization.

B- Impacts due to Operations

The operations at the jetty are requiring specialarrangements particularly in context to leakagesand fugitive emissions of LNG which whenexposed to atmosphere vaporizes as methane ornatural gas. It is ensured that the system is zero-tolerant to leakages owing to design of the storageand transfer system and operations. At the on-shore area the impact of fugitive emissions due tohighly volatility of gas, during its routine handlingwill have no impact on marine ecology includingmangrove ecosystems. Fugitive emission will soonbe dispersed, diluted and carried away due tostrong wind current.

Liquid effluent from offices and the facilities willbe domestic sewage and will be treated using anappropriate system such as a septic tank to meetNEQS before discharge into the drainage system.There fore the operation of the LNG terminal willhave no impact on mangroves.

7.4.3- Marine Ecology





Most studies on the impact of dredging on marinebenthos show that dredging can result in a 30 to70% reduction in species variety, a 40 to 95 %reduction in the number of individuals and asimilar reduction in biomass in dredged areas(Newell et al., 1998). The process of recolonizationand recovery is a complex one involving initialcolonization by fast growing animals(opportunistic) species. In stable environmentsthese are replaced and supplemented by a widerspecies diversity of slow-growing (equilibrium)species after cessation of dredging. In moredisturbed habitats the community is dominated byopportunistic species, which do not move towardsan equilibrium community of repeatedenvironmental disturbance.

The dredging process has important potentialimpacts outside the boundaries of the dredge site. Thedredged material comprises of a large inorganicparticulate load and also contains significantquantities of organic matter. Such material has alower specific gravity than inorganic components ofthe dredge outwash and is detectable at distances ofas much as more than 3 km downstream of a dredger.Material derived from the dredging process may alsobe carried as a benthic plume for significant distancesalong the sea bed. The impact of dredging within theintensively exploited anchor dredged site is limited tothe dredge area. Impacts include suppression ofspecies variety, population density and biomass aswell as differences in species composition comparedwith the surrounding deposits. Generally, there areno suppression of species diversity, populationdensity or biomass of benthic macrofauna outside theimmediate boundaries of the dredged sites.

The other environmental impacts may besummarized as follows:

Physical disturbance of nesting and spawning,destruction of habitats, especially

n disturbance of spawning habitats

n physical removal of benthic faunalcommunities

n physical removal of protected plants

n disturbance of fish ,shrimps and benthicfaunal feeding habitats

Detrimental effects of suspended sediments,turbidity and sedimentation, especially

n disturbance of fish spawning and nurseryhabitats

n disturbance of fish and shrimp larvaldevelopment

n effects on the behaviour of migratingorganisms

n effects on feeding of larval, juvenile and adultfishes and crustaceans

n burial of benthic fauna communities

n disturbance of benthic fauna development

n enhancement of photosynthetic oxygenproduction of planktonic algae

n burial of benthic plants

Degradation of water quality, especially in zoneswith low energy and in waters with sedimentswith high organic content

n impairment of larval development of marineanimals

n impact on adult and crustaceans (e.g.bioaccumulation)

n impact on benthic organisms

n enhancement of algal growth

In the light of above discussion regarding impactof dredging and reclamation for the proposedLNG Jetty will have very localized impact on themacrofauna near the site. Moreover, recolonisationof most species would occur after the constructionof the proposed LNG Jetty when the stableenvironment will prevail.

i- Effect of Turbidity Plumes onAquatic Species during Dredging

When dredging and disposing of non-contaminated fine materials in estuaries and




coastal waters, the main environmental effects areassociated with suspended sediments andincreases in turbidity. All methods of dredgingrelease suspended sediments into the watercolumn, during the excavation itself and duringthe flow of sediments from hoppers and barges. Inmany cases, the locally increased suspendedsediments and turbidity associated with dredgingand disposal is obvious from the turbidity 'plumes'which may be seen trailing behind dredgers ordisposal sites.

Turbidity plumes are caused by the re-suspensionof sediments in the water column. If suspended atsufficient concentrations for long periods of time,then the penetration of sunlight through the watercolumn may be reduced. Light is fundamental tophotosynthesizing aquatic life such as algae andspecies associate with coral, and other organisms.In addition, increase in turbidity can cause theclogging of gills and feeding structures of certainspecies (e.g. Shellfish and filter feeding speciesincluding worms and mollusks). Similarly, youngfish can be damaged if suspended sedimentsbecome trapped in their gills and increasedfatalities of young fish have been observed inheavily turbid water. Adult fish are likely to moveaway from or avoid areas of high suspendedsolids, such as dredging sites, unless food suppliesare increased as a result of increases in organicmaterial. Hence, turbidity can promote reducedproductivity and in extreme cases can be fatal. Formaintenance dredging, the extent of theseenvironmental affects is near-field and temporarygenerally only lasting as long as dredgingoperations are taking place.

The degree of re-suspension of sediments andturbidity from maintenance dredging and disposaldepends on four main variables:

n The sediments being dredged (size, densityand quality of the material), method ofdredging (and disposal),

n Hydrodynamic regime in the dredging anddisposal area (current direction and speed,

mixing rate, tidal state), and

n The existing water quality and characteristics(background suspended sediment andturbidity levels).

The considerable dredging activity proposed forthe berthing pocket and temporary access channel(that may be required) would last for around 12months but not in one location.. It is envisaged thatthe creation of turbidity plumes during dredgingcould adversely affect certain marine species.Dense plume of turbid water is expecteddepending upon the method employed fordredging. However the activity will not be a 'fixedpoint' operation therefore the impact of dredgingwill not be significant. It is also recommended thathydraulic dredging be employed to minimize thedisturbance caused to the sea bed. The bedsediments to be dredged comprise fine materials,predominantly fine silty sands, silts and silty-clays.It is the finer material which tends to remain insuspension for relatively long periods of time,thereby causing significant impacts ontransparency of seawater. Initial site investigationsindicate that the bed sediments are reasonably wellconsolidated. It would be reasonable to assumethat an efficient trailing suction or cutter suctiondredger would remove most sediment only re-suspending relatively small volumes ofparticulates in the low layers of the water column.In the low energy conditions of the shelteredcreeks, it is anticipated that the majority of re-suspended material would soon resettle on the bedwhile any turbidity created would have no adverselong-term impact.

The dredging of berthing pocket of Kadiro Creekand the dredging of the temporary access canalwill have negative impact on the marine habitatand the benthos of the creek to adversely affectfisheries reproduction. However, carefullyregulated construction program and disposal ofspoil only in the designated areas as suggested andrefilling of temporary canal would minimize andlocalize these impacts. In view of the extensivedredging and disposal of spoils carried out for Port




Qasim over the last decade or so, has greatlyreduced the benthic habitat. PGPL has ensured theadoption of careful methods to reduce the impactof construction on marine ecology of the site.

Mitigation

There are a number of mitigation measures whichcan be implemented in order to reduce thesignificance of this potential impact. These aregiven below (a combination of most practicalmeasures will be adopted):

n For use of dredged spoil for reclamation,coffer dam is being built to retain the dredgedmaterial which is especially designed to strainwater without releasing considerablesediment load back into the marine ecosystem.

n Reduce overspill as far as practically possible

n Ensure that the discharge pipe is located at asuitable depth in the water

n Use an efficient trailing suction hopperdredger, wherever possible

It is recommend that, as a minimum standard, theWorld Bank guidelines are adhered to, in terms ofthe acceptable limit of suspended sedimentconcentration allowed. This equates to 2,000 mgper lit. (World Bank Technical Paper 140) and isderived in order to prevent covering valuablebenthic species (e.g. shellfish) which areparticularly sensitive to increased suspendedsediment concentration. Studies by Palermor et al(1990) and Appleby and Scaratt (1989) indicate thatsuspended sediment concentration of 500 mg perlit. and 1,000 mg per litre at 500m distance from thedredger can be considered safe for fish becausethey are mobile and can avoid adverse aquaticconditions. It is also recommended that dredgingis restricted during critical spawning periods forshellfish.

No endangered species are reported to exist in thearea. The impact of construction on the marineecology will therefore be local, small andtemporary.

ii- Removal of Benthos by Dredging

During the dredging process, there will be aninevitable removal of some benthic species. Some ofthe species could be of importance in themselves, oras a source of food for other marine fauna, includingfish. The substrate with in the proposed dredgingarea is consistent with that in the rest of the portarea. It is also reported that the species found withinthe proposed dredging area are found elsewherewithin the study area. In addition, the sedimentwhich will remain after dredging is likely to be verysimilar to that which exists at present. It is likely thatthe species from adjacent areas will re-colonize thedredged area following dredging. The exactcomposition of species, in terms of abundance anddistribution, may not re-colonize the area initially asthe area will first be colonized by opportunisticspecies which are short-lived an reproduce rapidly.As the rate of siltation in the inner channel of theport is very low, yearly maintenance dredging is notrequired normally.

Mitigation

No particular mitigation measures are required.

iii- Smothering of Benthos duringDredging

Sediments dispersed during maintenance dredgingand disposal may resettle over the seabed and theanimals and plants that live on and within it. Thisblanketing or smothering of benthic animals andplants may cause stress, reduced rates of growth orreproduction and in the worse cases the effects maybe fatal. Generally sediments settle within thevicinity of the dredged area, where they are likelyto have little effect on the recently disturbedcommunities, particularly in areas where dredgingis a well-established activity. However, in somecases sediments are distributed more widely withinthe estuary or coastal area and may settle overadjacent sub-tidal or inter-tidal habitats possiblysome distance from the dredged area. The mostsusceptible species will be the sessile species such




as sedentary worms and the slow moving speciessuch as mollusks. The significance of this impactwill be dependent on the amount of sediment insuspension, the sediment size distribution and thecurrent movements around the dredging area.

The sensitivity of marine animals and plants tosiltation varies greatly. In areas with high naturalloads of suspended sediments, the relatively smallincreases in siltation away from the immediatedredging area are generally considered unlikely tohave adverse impacts on benthic populations.

Mitigation

The mitigation measures proposed to controlturbidity plumes will also help mitigate the aboveimpacts.

iv- Release of Contaminants duringDredging and Disposal

Dredging and disposal activities can potentiallycause the remobilization of contaminatedsediment. Contaminated sediment may not benecessarily harmful to aquatic organisms living inthe sediment due to contaminant's adsorptionbehaviors. However, if sediment conditions arechanged such that contaminants become releasedinto the water column (either dissolved or asparticulate matter), then they may become bio-available and can cause toxic effects The results ofthe sediment quality analysis indicate that thesediments to be dredged are not contaminated toany significant level. Therefore no adverse impactsare expected in terms of release of contaminants bydredging and uptake by aquatic organisms.

Mitigation


v- Noise Disturbance to Marine Fauna

Dredging activity can have an impact on marinefauna by causing noise disturbance. Thesignificance of this impact depends on the ambient

noise levels, the acoustic nature of the area to bedredged, the sensitivity of the species affected andthe type of dredger used. However, very littlework has been carried out relating to thesensitivity of marine fauna to noise levels. Theambient levels of noise within the study area arerelatively low, in comparison to t he noise of adredger. The area of dredging is relatively verysmall which should limit the significance of theimpact. The species thought to be most susceptibleto noise are fish. It is likely that fish will be able toavoid noisy areas and it is therefore consideredthat this particular impact will be of minor, localand temporary significance.

Mitigation

No mitigation measures are necessary.

vi- Impacts on Marine Animals duringConstruction Phase

The bottom sediments to be excavated comprise offine materials predominantly fine silty sands, siltyclays and silt. Due to re-suspension of sediments,turbidity plumes are formed in the water column.If the suspended material remains for longerperiod at higher concentrations then thepenetration of sunlight through the water columnmay be reduced. Moreover, the turbidity can causethe clogging of gills and feeding structures of fishand shell fish and filter feeding species includingmolluscs and worms. Hence, the enhancedturbidity will lead towards reduced productivityand may be fatal in extreme cases.

The excavation of the area for pipeline laying;dredging of the creek as well as reclamation for,and back filling of desired land will have negativeimpact on the habitat of the proposed site and thebenthos of the Korangi Creek, which will beadversely affected if proper care is not takenduring construction. There will be inevitableremoval of some benthic species at theconstruction site. Some of the species could beimportant in themselves or as a source of food forother marine fauna including fishes of the




adjoining area. It is a natural phenomenon thatafter construction phase is over the species fromadjacent areas will recolonize at the site. The exactcomposition of species in terms of abundance anddistribution may not recolonize in the area initiallybut with the passage of time and stability in theecology of the area, the habitat may become similarin nature prior to the construction by long livedspecies. Since the pipeline laying is a short termactivity, the impact may not be very significantbecause the severity of impact is dependent on theamount of sediment in suspension, sediment sizedistribution and the current movement in theoperation area. It is anticipated that the turbiditythus caused would not have significant impact.

Mitigation

Careful and regulated excavation, back filling andconstruction methods should be employed by thecontractors. It is proposed that the method of pipe-laying would be a more sophisticated oneinvolving non-destructive technique. The alignedarea would then be jetted resulting in vibration ofsoil leading to mudflow of the top few feet of theseabed thereby enabling placing of the pipeline inthe bed soil at the required depth. The foreignmaterial for filling purpose would then be freefrom contaminant or alien soil. These measureswould minimize and localize the adverse impacts.Since the activity is short-term, the above-notedmitigation measures would be adequate and nospecial measures would be necessary.


The operational activity involves shipping traffic, offloading of LNG at jetty, LPG storage, transmissionand transportation activities at the land basedterminal. It is mandatory for all shipping companiesto follow all the principles of safe navigation tominimize accidents. Even if a LNG carrier runsground it will face minimal damage since thechannel is formed in mud and sand. There are norocks in the vicinity of channel. The jetty and theLPG storage facility have been designed keeping in

view the standard international safety specificationfor handling the cargo. All necessary controlmeasures have been incorporated to ensure that nofugitive emissions enter the marine ecosystem.

The nature of the project is such that it will haveminimal impact on marine ecology. The liquideffluents from the offices will be treated to meet EPAstandards and will have no potential for pollution ofthe habitats occupied by juvenile fish and othercommercially important species. The potential threat tothe fish is from the untreated industrial and municipalsewage already being discharged into the creeks. Theoperation of LNG terminal facility will have no impacton the marine ecology of the area.

The proposed LNG jetty project area is not known tocontain any rare or endangered species and theterminal / jetty is not expected to disturb the ecology ofthe core area significantly. The project is also notexpected to release any pollutants during normaloperations. Its location and operation is not expected toaffect the breeding habitats of marine animals ormigratory paths of any bird species. No adverseimpacts are anticipated on the marine life duringoperation. The only probability of degrading theecosystem will be collision of ships, boats or tankers.An oil spill due to tanker accident would contaminatethe environment leading to adverse impacts. However,the ecological impact would be confined to theecosystem around the spill zone and the effects woulddissipate after a short period.

Mitigation

No mitigations measures would be requiredduring operation. However the proponent hasdeveloped a contingency plan to combat oil spillsin case of emergency. It will maintain an in-housecapability to fight small to medium oil spill due toaccidents, besides being participant in theContingency Plan developed by and inimplementation at Port Qasim.

7.5- Socioeconomic ImpactsThe socioeconomic evaluation and assessment of the




impact arising due to the project was not simpleexercise as it was dependent upon the needs andexpectations of the community being evaluated forthe LNG project. Keeping in considerations theexpectations and prevailing conditions, the followingpoints can be made:

n The project is currently conducting a study andevaluation of fishing in the project area todetermine the fishing pressure of the local fishingcommunity. Any impacts upon local fishermenfrom the project will be evaluated andcompensated if warranted under the CommunityGrievance Procedures detailed in Chapter 6.

n The ESIA study has not identified anysettlements, habitations or commercial buildingsor operations impacted by the project and noresettlements are anticipated. If any resettlementissues arise during project planning,construction, or operation, they will be addressedunder the projects on-going programmaticsystem for identifying, evaluating and fullycompensating any loss or impact as addressed inChapter 6.

n The project is currently conducting a study andevaluation of fishing in the project area todetermine the fishing pressure of the local fishingcommunity. Any impacts upon local fishermenfrom the project will be evaluated andcompensated if warranted under the CommunityGrievance Procedures detailed in Chapter 6.

n The project is committed to providingemployment and service contract access to thelocal community to the extent reasonable andfeasible per the community outreach programoutlined in Chapter 6.

The project will boost the natural resources of theregion by providing a cheap and environmentfriendly fuel source. Hence it will add to the economicprosperity of the country that will in-turn play aconstructive role in the national development. Theproject will in improvement in quality of life of thecitizens of Pakistan.

7.5.1‑ Site Selection andResettlement IssuesNumber of different sites under PQA’s jurisdiction wasexamined in the coastal waters of Port Qasim area forlocating the proposed LNG terminal of which alocation just north of Qutub Point in Kadiro Creeklinking main Port Qasim navigation channel withKorangi Creek in Port Qasim waters was selected asthe preferred site for PGPL’s LNG import terminalproject.

PQA provided guidelines and recommended the sitesin the Kadiro-Korangi Creek. Following aspects havebeen taken into account while selecting the site forlocating the LNG terminal:

n Siting of LNG terminal in sheltered locations,remote from other Port users and populated areas.

n The Location is so chosen as to reduce the risk ofpassing ships striking a berthed LNG carrier.

n Siting the terminal in a position that reduces thepossibility of surging by large ships passing nearthe jetty.

n Providing adequate backup area.

The international practice imposes a safety and securityzone around LNG vessels while in transit and duringthe berthing operation. The zone is applied on theastern, ahead and on either side. The exclusion zonesand safety distances are applicable to LNG vs otherships/activity and not between two LNG carrier.Following LNG safety and security zones are appliedby existing US, European and Far East NG terminals:

n US (enforced by the US Coast Guard):

Ahead: 1.5 - 3 km

Astern: 0.5 - 1.5 km

Port and starboard: 500 meters

n European & Far East Terminals:

Ahead: - 800 meters

Astern: - 800 meters




Port and starboard: typically the channel width

The macroenvironment of concern for theconsideration of socioeconomic and environmental ofthe LNG projects is outside of the safety and securityzone recommended by PQA and internationalguidelines such as SIGTTO for siting the LNGterminals.

No living population and indigenous people - with asocial and cultural identity distinct from the existingdominant society that makes them vulnerable to beingdisadvantaged in the development process of the LNGProject are known to exist in and around the proposedsite. As such the aspect of relocation of population orloss of business opportunity does not emerge in thesituation. No population will be displaced directly orindirectly during the construction stage and operation

of LNG terminal.

The recommended site for Jetty location is a shelteredarea remote from other port users where other ships donot pose a collision risk and where any gas escapecannot affect a local population. Moreover the locationhas been selected that reduces the risk of passing shipsstriking a berthed LNG carrier. The populated areas arefar away and are not found within the safety zonesrecommended for siting the LNG terminal by PQA, US& European guidelines.

The onshore facility comprises gas measuring stationfor custody transfer of gas and for connection toexisting SSGC pipeline system. The onshore facilitywill not impact the nearest living population in GothAli Muhammad located approximately 1.5 km NWfrom the proposed land terminal facility.




Table 7.15: Significant Population Centres in the AreaS.No. Location Rural /Urban Population (Approx.) KM from Jetty Direction

1 Port Qasim Colony Urban 1,260 5 NE

2 Wireless Colony Urban 238 7 NE

3 Gulshan-e-Hadeed Urban 20,000 10 NE

4 Steel Town Urban 12,000 10 NE

5 Nasirabad Urban 12,500 8 NE

6 Railway Marshaling Yard Urban 2,500 10 NE

7 Nishtrabad Urban 1,400 7 NE

8 Edu Goth Rural 2,400 8 NE

9 Pir Nau Goth Rural 1,000 8 W

10 Razzakabad Rural 3,500 6 NE

11 Abdullah Goth Rural 1,050 6.5 NE

12 Ranju Goth Rural 750 8 NE

13 Kamran Khan Goth Rural 325 10 NE

14 Allah Dino Goth Rural 230 10 NE

15 Muhammad Raheem Goth Rural 250 10.5 NE

16 Mai Hur Goth Rural 230 11 NE17 Abdul Latif Goth Rural 200 12 NE18 Muhammad Saleem Goth Rural 180 10.5 NE

19 Morund Khan Goth Rural 200 12 NE20 Mayo Khan Goth Rural 150 12 NE

21 Ali Khan Goth Rural 270 12 NE

22 Asmaj Goth Rural 85 12 NE23 Ahmed Goth Rural 78 12 NE24 Khan Muhammad Goth Rural 120 12 NE25 Allah Bakh Goth Rural 80 12 NE

26 Abdul Rehman Goth Rural 70 12 NE

27 Abdul Raza Goth Rural 80 12 NE

28 Muhammad Ahsan Goth Rural 80 12 NE

The site on the north of Qutub Point in Kadiro Creek islinked with main navigation channel of Port Qasimand with Korangi Creek. Kadiro-Korangi Creek systemis part of the 48 creeks in the Phitti-Kadiro-Korangi-Gharo creek system.

Major human settlements in the macro-environmentbeyond 5 kilometers from LNG terminal site are theseveral large and small rural villages and urbantownships. The following populated places are reportedin the macroenvironment of Port Qasim (Table 7.15):

The microenvironment of the LNG terminal site isscattered over the coastal area of Bin Qasim District,which includes the settlements of Rehri and GothMuhammad Ali Khaskheli that are approximately 3.5km east and 1.5 km NW and from the LNG terminalproposed site respectively.

The marine environment of the area between theshoreline and the proposed site in Kadiro creek ishighly degraded. It has totally lost the aquatic/marinebiodiversity due to discharge of effluent from the cattlebarns in Cattle Colony, and the industrial estates. Assuch the marine fauna including the shrimps and theflora including the mangroves have hardly survived.

The project is currently conducting a study andevaluation of fishing in the project area to determinethe fishing pressure of the local fishing community.Any impacts upon local fishermen from the project willbe evaluated and compensated if warranted under theCommunity Grievance Procedures detailed in Chapter6.

The above note confirms that that there would be nodisplacement of persons or impacts on livelihood ofpeople since they do not rely on fishing in the waters ofthe area. Most of them have had to change theirprofession from fishing to working as unskilled labor.For the same reason there is no question ofcompensation for lost business.

The project will also not cause displacement of populationin the microenvironment. The population will not beaffected due to the operations of LNG regasification andassociated facilities. Mitigation measures have also beenproposed in this regard which PGPL will have to follow

in letter and spirit. Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF) beingthe major stakeholder will be taken on board during themonitoring phase of project.

The Proponent is alive to the impoverished conditionof the Goth and would do whatever it can in terms ofmaintaining good company-community relation.

Following are the positive impacts of the project beingcommitted by PGPL:

n The interaction of local communities with theproposed project staff would increase sympathyand sense of realization of the problems beingfaced by the community.

n With the development of the project andintroduction of related infrastructure will improvethe socioeconomic conditions of the localcommunity.

n Project would improve the health and educationquality of the local community by providing thema window of opportunity to improve the basicfacilities.

n The project would enhance the skill andcapabilities of the people through providing jobs.

7.6‑ CumulativeEnvironmental and SocialImpactsThe FSRU will have three 6 megawatt steam turbinegenerators to provide electric power for the FSRU, re-gasand jetty operations. One of the STGs will be held inreserve to support forced or scheduled outages. Steamis supplied to the STG’s from an on-board boiler firedfrom boil off gas from the FSRU’s LNG tanks. The totalproject GHG emissions have been calculated at 220,456tons /CO2/year. The IFC emission standard for NOxfor steam thermal generators is 320 mg/Nm3 at 3% O2.The steam/electric plant on the FSRU produces125mg/Nm3 or less of NOx, in full compliance with IFCstandards.

LNG import is not only economically viable, but moreimportantly is environmentally beneficial. Since 2005when the demand for electricity increased theavailability of indigenous natural gas decreased for




power generation.

The HSFO & HSD movement is largely by road (75 %)and this figure would increase as both rail & pipelinesare operating at full capacity, as consumption of HSFOand HSD continued to grow at 20 % and 36 %respectively. This is turn would increase the HSDconsumption for road transportation of thesecommodities to Central and Northern parts of Pakistanwhere the storage of Natural Gas are more pronounced.

The import of 3.1 Million tons per annum of LNGwould replace 3.8 Million tons of HSFO (3.7 TOE).There is capacity in national Gas grid to transport thisto various power stations and may well reduced theconsumption of gas required for consumption by thepipeline system. Also the system is plagued by lowBTU gas (high nitrogen gas) as the two companies have

no alternative but to accept what is available. Untilyear 2000 the average calorific value was high around1000 BTU / CFT which has declined currently toaround 920 BTU / CFT.

The induction of high CV LNG would restore the CVas well as BTU through put capacity of National Grid.The positive environmental affect due to replacementof HSFO (3% sulfur) and HSD would are given in thefollowing table.




Table 7.16: Emissions to air: The FSRU shall operate on gas fuel except during start‑up and emergency operations, where MDO will beused temporarily. The following World Bank Standards to be applied. AIR POLLUTION WORLD BANK STANDARDS

POLLUTANT UNIT mg/Nm³ UNIT mg/Nm³

BOILERS GAS TURBINEParticulate 50Sulfur oxides 2,000carbon mono oxide no standardnitrogen oxide 125 320

Table 7.17: GAS CONSUMPTION IN POWER SECTOR MMCF

2004 ‑ 05 2005 ‑ 06 2006 ‑007 2007 ‑ 08 2008 ‑ 09 2009 ‑ 10 ACGR %

MMCF 503,983 490,142 432,607 429,892 404,140 366,906 ‑6.2MMCFD 1,380 1,343 1.185 1,178 1,107 1,005

Table 7.18: GAS CONSUMPTION IN POWER SECTOR MMCF

2004 ‑ 05 2005 ‑ 06 2006 ‑007 2007 ‑ 08 2008 ‑ 09 2009 ‑ 10 ACGR %

HSFO 3,308,574 4,076,897 6,521,503 6,741,614 7,210,211 8,339,330 20.3HSD 55,899 32,176 45,125 168,449 173,947 262,499 36.3GAS 10,305,897 8,694,561 8,640,101 8,492,919 7,830,065 7,160,962 ‑7.2

NB: 1 TOE = 41.9 million BTUACGR = Accumulated Compound Growth Rate

Table 7.19: Savings in Emissions by replacing HSFO with LNG as fuel for Power Stations in equivalent quantity LNG quantity 3 millions / year

Pollutant LNG HSFO Savings Percentage Savings

Particulate Matter 515 6,186 5,670 92Carbon Dioxide 8,615,636 12,076,617 3,460,982 29Sulfur Oxide 74 82,622 82,548 99.9Nitrogen Oxide 6,775 32,990 26,215 80

Table 7.20: SAVINGS IN EMMISSIONS FROM DIESELCONSUMPTION FOR TRANSPORTATION OF HSFO EQUIVALENTTO 3.1 MTPA OF LNG

TONS / YEAR

CO2 72,357

NOx 1,933

SOx 295

Additionally: power generation on RLNG would leadto higher efficiencies in form of technology such ascombined cycle system, cleaner operation, reducedoperation and maintenance cost, increased plantavailability and longer life of equipment.

IN POOR COUNTRIES, MORE PEOPLE DIEPREMATURELY FROM INDOOR AIR POLLUTION-SMOKE FROM WOOD, COAL, PEAT, AND DUNGTHAN FROM MALARIA.

Noise: Including the proposed PGPL-LNG importterminal at Korangi Creek and proposed EVTL LNGimport terminal at Kadiro Creek (Khiprianwala), noother LNG terminals are planned to be developed in thevicinity of project site. As per the information providedby Port Qasim, other terminals are coming in ChhanWaddo Creek which is at a distance of more than 10 kmfrom project site. There is limited information availableas to the planned development of these proposedprojects or the scale and timing of their development.The cumulative effect of the noise emission from LNGfacility and any other proposed industrial developments(including any other proposed LNG facilities) is assessednot to exceed the recommended ambient noise levels, onthe basis that any other proposed industrialdevelopment would be required to achieve the samenoise criteria which are acceptable for the proposedPGPL-LNG project. In some circumstances, the existingambient noise level may already be above therecommended noise levels. In such cases, noisegenerated by the LNG facility will be maintained belowthe existing ambient noise levels. This should ensure thatambient cumulative noise impacts of the project will benegligible. Also other proposed industrial developments(including potential LNG facilities) are likely to includesome or all of the proposed mitigation measuresoutlined within, thereby minimizing cumulative impacton the receiving environment.

Dredging and Removal of Mangroves: Siting of theLNG re-gasification terminals and laying the pipelineso as to connect the FSRUs with the receiving station (s)would require considerable land take for the Right ofWay (RoW) and removal of mangrove trees andtransportation of dredging spoil to locations identifiedby PQA or where extensive erosion has taken place, for

example; at Bundal Island itself in consultation withPQA and other stakeholders.

The excavated dredged material can also be used as thesubstrate for mangrove habitat development. Withinvarious habitats, several distinct biological communitiesmay occur. For example, the development of a dredgedmaterial can reinforce eroded banks by providingcoastal nourishment. The sediments can be used forreclamation of Bundal Island can also be developed afterinitiating necessary coastal hydraulic studies. PQA mayhave to undertake extensive environmental impactassessment and Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)before taking the final decision on designing the channeland locating the LNG facilities thereon.

PGPL will dispose off the dredged material withincofferdam which is the best solution for dredged spoilmanagement.

Like PGPL, if other project developers commit and takenecessary steps to compensate for removal ofmangroves, the impact would be minimized sincemangroves (Avicenna Marina) is the key specie of thecoastal ecosystem.

Effluent Discharge: National Environmental QualityStandards for disposal of effluent as well as otherInternational Guidelines e.g. World Bank are in forcewhich have to be followed by all project developers tosave the marine ecosystem. Cumulative impact wouldbe minimized through the adoption of mitigationmeasure which include treatment of effluent toNEQS/WB Standardsbefore discharge.

National Economy: There are undoubted positiveimpacts of an expanding gas sector on employment,competitiveness and sustainable development.However, the gas sector is a relatively modest creatorof employment, and has contributed mostly as asubstitute for coal in power generation. However NGis being used in the transport sector as CNG and alsofor cooking and heating. It is the main raw material forfertilizer production. These uses have modest impactson competitiveness but have clear environmentalbenefits. In the drive to a low carbon economy, gas is atransitional fuel rather than the ideal fuel of the low-carbon economy. It nonetheless contributes to policiesof sustainable development.




The cumulative impact on the National economy willbe a strongly positive one. Significant additionalresources will be realized by the nation as a result ofthis project, which is consistent with the government'slong-term development plan. The additional licensingincome, among other sources of additional income, willadd to the government revenues and economic growthresulting from expanded and diversified businessdevelopment in Pakistan in future.




7screening of anticipated impacts and … 7...lng carrier, loading arm connection and pumping of lng...

Documents