calpuff odour impact assessment: proposed fogo system · calpuff odour impact assessment: proposed...
Post on 16-Mar-2020
18 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019 | Page 1
Assets | Engineering | Environment | Air Quality | Noise | GIS & Spatial | Waste
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System
Red Hill Waste Management Facility
Prepared for Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
March 2019
Project Number: TE18098
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019 | Page i
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Version Description Date Author Reviewer
0a Internal Review 01/01/2019 JH JH
1a Released to Client for Review 03/01/2019 JH
1b GLC Table 6-1 included 15/01/2019 JH
1c Final Report 29/03/2019 JH
Approval for Release
Name Position File Reference
John Hurley Senior Environmental Consultant TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c
Signature
Copyright of this document or any part of this document remains with Talis Consultants Pty Ltd and cannot be used,
transferred or reproduced in any manner or form without prior written consent from Talis Consultants Pty Ltd.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019 | Page ii
Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Odour Impact Assessment Objective .................................................................................................... 2
2 Red Hill Waste Management Facility Odour Source ................................................................................. 3
3 Proposed FOGO Design ........................................................................................................................... 6
4 Adopted FOGO Odour Emission Rates ..................................................................................................... 8
5 CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling Method ................................................................................................ 10
5.1 Geophysical and Meteorological Configuration .................................................................................. 10
5.1.1 Terrain Configuration ........................................................................................................... 11
5.1.2 Land Use Configuration ........................................................................................................ 11
5.1.3 Geophysical Configuration ................................................................................................... 11
5.1.4 Meteorlogical Configuration ................................................................................................ 11
5.2 CALPUFF Dispersion Model Configuration .......................................................................................... 20
5.2.1 Computational Domain ........................................................................................................ 20
5.2.2 Receptor Configuration ........................................................................................................ 20
5.2.3 Building Profile Input Program ............................................................................................. 20
5.2.4 Source Configuration and Odour Emission Rates ................................................................ 20
5.2.5 Odour Dispersion Modelling Scenarios and Assumptions ................................................... 21
6 Odour Dispersion Modelling Results ..................................................................................................... 22
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019 | Page iii
Tables
Table 3-1: FOGO MAF System Design and Duration ............................................................................................... 6
Table 4-1: Adopted FOGO Emission Rates for Initial FOGO Process at the Site ..................................................... 8
Table 5-1: CALMET Key Variables (Grid Configuration WGS-84 UTM Zone 50S) .................................................. 14
Table 5-2: Odour Emissions and Modelled Parameters ....................................................................................... 20
Table 6-1: Projected Ground Level Odour Concentrations................................................................................... 28
Figures
Figure 2-1: EMRC Red Hill Waste Management Facility Locality Map and Member Councils ............................... 4
Figure 2-2: Greenwaste, MGB greenwaste and proposed FOGO process area ..................................................... 5
Figure 5-1: Terrain Map of Modelling Domain depicting EMRC’s Red Hill Waste Management Site .................. 13
Figure 5-2: Annual and Seasonal Windroses for Hybrid derived CALMET 2011 EMRC Red Hill, Western Australia
(modelled) ............................................................................................................................................................ 16
Figure 5-3: Time of Day Windroses for EMRC Red Hill, Western Australia (modelled) ........................................ 17
Figure 5-4: Annual X-Y scatter plot diurnal temperatures for 2011 (modelled) ................................................... 18
Figure 5-5: Average Monthly temperatures for 2011 (modelled) ........................................................................ 18
Figure 5-6: Annual X-Y scatter plot diurnal mixing height for Red Hill 2011 (modelled) ...................................... 19
Figure 5-7: Annual stability class frequency for Red Hill 2011 (modelled) ........................................................... 19
Figure 6-1: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Odour Impact Contours (FOGO Discrete
Sources) ................................................................................................................................................................ 23
Figure 6-2: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Odour Impact Contours by SLR in 2012
(Baseline Existing Landfill Odour Impacts – Red Contour) ................................................................................... 24
Figure 6-3: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Odour Impact Contours by Talis (Replicate of
SLR Baseline Existing Landfill Odour Impacts) ...................................................................................................... 25
Figure 6-4: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Cumulative Odour Impact Contours (SLR
Baseline + FOGO Bayswater MGB) ....................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 6-5: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Cumulative Odour Impact Contours (SLR
Baseline + Future FOGO Stages 1 and 2) .............................................................................................................. 27
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019 | Page 1
1 Introduction
Talis Consultants Pty Ltd (Talis) was commissioned by the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council (EMRC) to
undertake a desktop modelling Odour Impact Assessment (OIA) of the Red Hill Waste Management Facility (the
Site), specifically the proposed Food Organics Garden Organics (FOGO) process that will divert organic wastes
from landfill to a reusable organic compost product.
The aim of the OIA was to determine the extent of offsite odour impacts from the Site assessing the FOGO
process as a discrete odour source, as well as the overall Site cumulative impacts to include the FOGO and
baseline odour impacts.
Baseline odour impacts have been previously assessed by SLR Consulting (SLR) in 2012[1] and those impacts have
been re-modelled herein, based on the SLR input files, to provide the baseline projections that will be assessed
with the proposed FOGO process.
Additionally, an air quality assessment was also undertaken by Synergetics in 2011-2012[2] with a meteorological
dataset being developed for the Site. This meteorological file was used by SLR in their odour assessment. EMRC
attempted to obtain this meteorological file from Synergetics for use in this assessment; however, the dataset
was not forthcoming and subsequently Talis developed a new dataset for the same assessment year used by SLR
using reference to input configuration files for the meteorological dataset provided by SLR and Synergetics.
The scope of works for the desktop dispersion modelling OIA was as follows:
• Develop and run a site-representative odour dispersion model for the Site projecting ground level odour
impacts from the proposed FOGO process at two (2) Site locations;
• Utilise the existing SLR and Synergetics input configurations to derive the Calmet and Calpuff modelling
setups to replicate as close as possible the 2011 meteorological dataset and the odour impact modelling
setup;
• Follow the requirements set by Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) (formerly
Department of Environment Regulation - DER) for odour impact assessments[3] as summarised below:
o Identify and quantify all emissions to atmosphere (odour) with a potential to have a non-trivial
impact on the environment. Emissions of potential concern include (among others) odorous
gases to be considered explicitly, unless the proponent can demonstrate that the emission
rates of these are insignificant;
o For all those odour sources that cannot be dismissed as being of no significance, the proponent
must provide model predictions of the impact of emissions in the form of concentrations
and/or rates of deposition over the range of averaging periods normally associated with
relevant standards for each pollutant, and assess the magnitude of this impact against the
relevant standards;
o Modelling results to be presented in the form of:
a. contour plots covering the region of interest (including population centres or isolated
residences), with a grid density adequate to avoid significant loss of resolution, and
[1] SLR: Red Hill Waste Management Facility Resource Recovery Facility, Odour Impact Assessment for Lot 8 (Site E) Toodyay
Road. Report Number 675.10051-R2, 27 September 2012 [2] Synergetics Environmental Engineering: Air Quality Modelling of Resource Recovery Facility Scenarios at the Red Hill Waste
Management Facility for Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council. 10108 Draft – Red Hill RRF modelling 26 Oct 2011 [3] Department of Environment: Air Quality Modelling Guidance Notes, March 2006
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 2
b. numerical values of concentrations at the point(s) of maximum impact (explain where
this occurs) and other locations (receptors) of interest (e.g. places of human
residence).
o When cumulative concentrations are modelled, in order for the contribution to be properly
assessed, the modelling results are presented for:
a. the existing emissions plus background concentration (pre-proposal),
b. the proposed development in isolation (excluding existing emissions), and
c. the combined (existing plus proposed plus background) emissions.
o Any estimates of emissions employed in modelling assessments are realistic and that
uncertainty is balanced by conservatism;
o The modelling must properly assess both emissions which are continuous in nature and
emissions which are intermittent. Intermittent emissions which are insignificant in magnitude
and/or very improbable in the lifetime of the plant may be screened out and the remaining
emissions modelled together on a probabilistic basis to estimate the total plant impact;
o The models and/or worst case calculation procedures and data employed in the assessment
must be demonstrably capable of simulating, or accounting for, all of the features which are
important in the context of determining the air quality impact of the project. The proponent
is responsible for identifying and properly accommodating these;
o If using a conventional model, the proponent will need to obtain at least one (preferably two
or more) year's data on the meteorology of the area, with high data recovery and verifiable
data accuracy. In the simplest situations, the data may be limited to that necessary to provide
reliable hourly average estimates, at a representative site, of:
a. wind speed,
b. wind direction,
c. air temperature,
d. mixing height, estimated or measured via methods acceptable to the DWER, and
e. atmospheric stability, estimated by a method acceptable to the DWER.
• The proponent’s report should include a description of the meteorological data used or alternatively a
reference to a publicly available report which contains this information.
1.1 Odour Impact Assessment Objective
When undertaking odour dispersion modelling the regulatory criteria for odour is based on the DWER’s current
informal guidance of:
• The modeled odour concentrations at the “most exposed existing or likely future off-site sensitive
receptors” should be compared with the following guideline values:
i. 0.5 ou, 1-hour average, 99.5th percentile for tall stacks;
ii. 2.5 ou, 1-hour average, 99.5th percentile for ground-level sources and down-washed
plumes from short stacks;
AND iii. For facilities that do not operate continuously, the 99.5th percentile must be applied
to the actual hours of operation.
• The DWER also has a preference for the near-field criteria of:
i. 8.0 ou, 1-hour average, 99.9th percentile.
The objective of this OIA was to determine the extent of ground level odour impacts from the initial FOGO
process which will be undertaken on the existing greenwaste and Bayswater MBG greenwaste processing area
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 3
located relatively central to the overall landfill area. These ground level impacts were assessed in isolation and
then as cumulative impacts by combining these FOGO projections with the SLR baseline odour impact
projections.
Following this, the future location for ongoing FOGO processing was also assessed both as Stage 1 and the final
expanded Stage 2 at the new location located south-west of the existing landfill. Again, these projections were
assessed in isolation and also as a final cumulative impact.
2 Red Hill Waste Management Facility Odour Source
The details of the Site have been presented in detail in both the SLR and Synergetics reports.
The SLR baseline odour impact assessment assessed, in addition to the existing landfill and associated processes,
two alternate waste technologies in Anaerobic Digestion and Gasification of waste streams.
These technologies have not yet been undertaken and subsequently it is the existing baseline landfill
configuration that is the current odour emitting source.
The Site accepts a wide range of waste from the general public, commercial operators, and local, regional, state
and federal government organisations, including:
• Household and domestic waste;
• Commercial waste;
• Contaminated waste;
• Asbestos and asbestos cement;
• Household hazardous waste; and
• Drum muster.
The Site is licensed to accept Class I, Class II, Class III and Class IV waste. The WMF also includes a compost facility
which recycles greenwastes collected from Council verge collections, greenwaste bins, transfer stations and
commercial customers.
A waste transfer station is located on site which accepts a range of recyclable waste and general rubbish from
members of the public.
A third-party operated electricity generating plant is located at the Site. Operated by Energy Developments
Limited (EDL) (formerly Landfill Gas & Power), the plant extracts landfill gas from cells 1 to 10 and utilises the
methane to produce up to 3.65 MW of electricity.
The Site locality and supporting Member Councils is presented in Figure 2-1.
A layout of the site detailing locations of the proposed FOGO operations is presented in Figure 2-2.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 4
Figure 2-1: EMRC Red Hill Waste Management Facility Locality Map and Member Councils
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 5
Figure 2-2: Greenwaste, MGB greenwaste and proposed FOGO process area
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 6
3 Proposed FOGO Design
It is anticipated that EMRC will utilise the existing greenwaste and Bayswater MGB greenwaste processing area
for FOGO processing from July 2019 and relocate to the permanent FOGO location (Future Stages 1 + 2 FOGO)
in late summer 2020 after construction and commissioning and regulatory approvals for that location.
The expected tonnage of FOGO collections from July 2019 is approximately 50tonnes per week (2600 tonnes per
annum). EMRC will utilise a mobile forced aeration system (MAF) with continuous and controlled aeration to
aerobically breakdown the FOGO product.
This MAF system will include one master blower and two parallel slave blowers. Each blower supplies 4 aeration
pipes, with a processing capacity of 100 tonnes, or 200 – 230m3 (tonnages based on water weight where
moisture content of windrows typically 40%). Each windrow will be approximately 10m wide, 15m long and 2.5m
high and equals 375m3 holding capacity. Hence each blower with 4 aeration pipes can compost the FOGO
collected and delivered to site for a two-week period (100t – 300m3 plus seasonal allowance). Hence each
fortnight a new blower set will be filled, which allows the initial 2-week batch to compost. With the 2 systems
the EMRC will have sufficient capacity to compost 6 batches of 2 weeks’ worth of FOGO. This allows up to 12
weeks for the FOGO to compost, which is sufficient.
The initial FOGO process is expected to increase following setup whereby another member council will
participate. The increase will add another 148 tonnes/week taking weekly totals to 198 tonnes or 10,000 tonnes
per annum. For this expanded scenario the MAF system will require one additional master unit and 2 additional
slaves with the windrows increasing to 400 tonnes (1,100m3) and a windrow size of 30m wide, 15m long and
2.5m high.
The MAF system will be operated as follows:
Table 3-1: FOGO MAF System Design and Duration
Composting Stage Description Duration
0 Fresh FOGO stockpiled and wetted
to form a uniform feedstock
2-3 weeks to accumulate enough
tonnes to make Windrow 1
1 Forced Aeration 2 weeks, then turned and arranged
into Stage 2
2 Forced Aeration 2 weeks, then turned and arranged
into Stage 3
3 Forced Aeration 2 weeks, then turned and arranged
into Stage 4
4 Forced Aeration 2 weeks, then screened for
contamination removal and sizing
Screening Trommel(s) Screened and added to Final
Product Stockpile
It is anticipated that in due course, the EMRC will have approximately 60,000 tonnes per annum (150,000m3) of
FOGO waste for processing by 2024/2025 as the EMRC secures additional contracts from member Councils,
other metro councils and potentially private sources. This will be processed in Lots 9 & 10 on suitably designed
impermeable concrete pad with a leachate collection system and is proposed for implementation following the
trial of the MAF system in the existing greenwaste processing area on Lot 12. This facility on Lots 9&10 may
involve a MAF system or an enclosed system such as tunnel composting and is yet to be determined.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 7
The Future Stage 1 will have a capacity of 60,000 tonnes/year and will utilise a multiple up to 12 Aeration
Systems with 3 blowers/system and windrows containing 600 tonnes (1,500m3) or use some other composting
system. Future Stage 2, if required, will double the Stage 1 FOGO processing capacity at Red Hill.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 8
4 Adopted FOGO Odour Emission Rates
Given that FOGO is a relatively new technology there is little to no surrogate sites within the Perth Metropolitan
area to sample for odour emissions. Consequently Talis undertook a literature review of public domain data and
selected a recent OIA by Jacobs (the report) for a proposed FOGO facility in Launceston, Tasmania[4].
Additionally, the odour data reviewed in the report was compared to Talis’ own archive of data for landfill and
organic waste emissions to determine if the emissions data adopted represented typical organic waste streams.
Odour emissions per square metre (m2) taken from the report and representing the typical steps in EMRC’s
proposed initial FOGO processing, and comparison to Talis’ database for organic waste stream odour emissions
are presented in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1: Adopted FOGO Emission Rates for Initial FOGO Process at the Site
FOGO Source
ASurface
Area
(m2)
Jacobs SOER
(ou.m3 m-2 s-1)
Total OER
(ou.m3 s-1)
DTalis SOERs
(ou.m3 m-2 s-1)
Talis
Average
SOERs
MODELLED
Emission Rates
(ou.m3 m-2 s-1)
Raw Stockpile
(greenwaste + food
organics)
1,050 B0.84 2,100 0.10/0.63/1.07/1.35
1.48/2.60/3.00/3.98 1.78 C2.0
Windrow 1 (0-2 weeks) 405 4 1,620 0.05/0.12/0.15/0.51
3.30/3.35/4.18/5.92 2.20
4
Windrow 2 (3-4 weeks) 405 4 1,620 4
Windrow 3 (5-6 weeks) 405 2 810 0.07/0.26/0.55/0.94
0.12/0.17/0.22 0.33
2
Windrow 4 (7-8 weeks) 405 0.7 283.50 0.7
Final Product Stockpile 1,050 0.2 210 0.07/0.15/0.19 0.41 0.2
Totals 3,720 6,643.50
ASurface Area of Stockpiles/Windrows based on L x W BSOER based on 10% food waste and 90% greenwaste CSOER based on 50% food waste and 50% greenwaste DRange of SOERs measured by Talis
The surface areas for each compost pile are based on the length x width dimensions which would overstate the
emission face for each stockpile given that;
• actively composting windrows have been shown to emit toward the centre and top of the pile which represents a much lower surface area than the overall plan view dimensions; and
• cross flow of winds stripping odour from stockpiles strips from the face upon which the winds are contacting i.e. dependant on wind direction.
By assuming the total emission face for each stockpile is represented by the plan view dimensions the odour
emissions are conservatively overstated.
[4] Jacobs: Launceston Waste Centre Organics Processing Facility, City of Launceston. Development Proposal Environmental Management Plan (DPEMP). Rev 3 June 2017
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 9
It can be seen from Table 4-1 that the Talis database data shows good agreement of ranges of SOERs measured
from both food organics and greenwaste organics. The final column in Table 4-1 lists the modelled SOERs used
in the modelling OIA.
Odour emission rates for the Future FOGO processing areas’ Stages 1 and 2 adopted the same emission rates as
listed in Table 4-1 and extrapolated for the total OERs based on the overall size of the Raw Materials receivables,
Windrows and Final Product Stockpiles.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 10
5 CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling Method
The odour dispersion modelling assessment was carried out using the CALPUFF System (Version 7). The main
system programs are:
• CALPUFF - Version 7.2.1 - Level 150618
• CALMET - Version 6.5.0 - Level 150223
• CALPOST - Version 7.1.0 - Level 141010
CALPUFF is a multi-layer, multi-species, non-steady-state puff dispersion model that is able to simulate the
effects of time- and space-varying meteorological conditions on pollutant transport [5]. CALMET is a
meteorological model that produces three dimensional gridded wind and temperature fields to be fed into
CALPUFF [6]. The primary output from CALPUFF is hourly pollutant concentrations evaluated at gridded and/or
discrete receptor locations. CALPOST processes the hourly pollutant concentration output to produce tables at
each receptor and contour plots across the modelling domain. The result is a summary of pollutant
concentrations at various time averages and percentiles or a tally of hours where a pollutant has exceeded a
pre-determined concentration [2]. For further technical information about the CALPUFF modelling system refer
to the document CALPUFF Modeling System Version 6 User Instructions [5].
The CALPUFF system can account for a variety of effects such as non-steady-state meteorological conditions,
complex terrain, varying land uses, plume fumigation and low wind speed dispersion [4]. CALPUFF is considered
an appropriate dispersion model for impact assessment in one or more of the following applications:
• complex terrain, non-steady-state conditions,
• buoyant line plumes,
• coastal effects such as fumigation,
• high frequency of stable calm night-time conditions,
• high frequency of calm conditions,
• inversion break-up fumigation conditions
• long-range transport, and
• close-field assessments.
For this study, the air contaminant was odour and ground level concentrations in odour units (ou) were
projected.
CALMET was used to produce a site representative meteorological file within the Hybrid mode. The Hybrid mode
combines surface station observations and upper air data together with predictions of assimilated
meteorological conditions at each domain grid point to derive a 3D meteorological file. The 3D file was then
used for the CALPUFF odour assessment projections.
5.1 Geophysical and Meteorological Configuration
A CALMET Hybrid three-dimensional meteorological data file for the Site locale was produced that incorporated
gridded numerical meteorological data supplemented by surface observation data from the Perth International
[5] https://www3.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_prefrec.htm [6] Atmospheric Studies Group, 2011. CALPUFF Modeling System Version 6 User Instructions.. Lowell: TRC
Environmental Corporation.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 11
Airport Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Automatic Weather Station (AWS), topography and land use over the
domain area.
The CALMET configuration was taken from a combination of inputs from SLR and Synergetics input files.
5.1.1 Terrain Configuration
Terrain elevations were sourced from 1 Second Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) Derived Smoothed
Digital Elevation Model (DEM-S). The SRTM data has been treated with several processes including, but not
limited to removal of stripes, void filling, tree offset removal and adaptive smoothing [7]. The terrain grid and
resolution followed that of the CALMET inputs by SLR and Synergetics to produce a 26km x 26km grid at 0.25km
resolution. Coastline data was sourced from USGS Global Self-consistent Hierarchical High-resolution Shoreline
(GSHHS) Database [8].
A map of the terrain is illustrated in Figure 5-1.
5.1.2 Land Use Configuration
Land use, which refers to surface roughness (trees, scrubland, desert, etc.), was sourced from the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) Global Land Cover Characteristics Data Base for the Australia-Pacific Region [9]. The
data was used as input into CTGPROC processor to produce a 26km x 26km grid at 0.25km resolution.
5.1.3 Geophysical Configuration
The geophysical data file was created using the MAKEGEO processor. Land use data from CTGPROC and terrain
data from TERREL was used as input to produce a to produce a 26km x 26km grid at 0.25km resolution.
5.1.4 Meteorlogical Configuration
5.1.4.1 Surface Observations Input Data
The SLR and Synergetics input files detailed the meteorological (met) setup. The year most recently modelled
was 2011. The previous modelling used a combination of prognostic data for upper air (3D) and surface data
taken from the nearest BoM AWS, Perth Airport. In reviewing the reports it would appear that the 2011 met
setup included hybridisation using met data collected from the Site’s own met station.
This site specific met was not able to be obtained from Synergetics, moreover, the most recent met setup
suggests that site specific met was used previously, but not in the 2011-2012 assessments.
With this in mind, Talis reconstructed the met dataset using the configurations in the input files to produce a
26km x 26km computational grid at 0.25km resolution.
The met data for the 2011 year was taken from the Perth Airport BoM AWS and hybridised into the final Calmet
dataset. The BoM data was firstly prepared into a generic format; gap filled using interpolation for small data
[7] Gallant, J. C. et al., 2011. 1 second SRTM Derived Digital Elevation Models User Guide, Canberra: Geoscience
Australia. [8] Wessel, P. & Smith, W. H. F., 2015. Global Self-consistent Hierarchical High-resolution Geography, s.l.: National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - National Centers for Environmental Information. [9] United States Geological Survey, 1997. Global Land Cover Characteristics Data Base, s.l.: s.n.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 12
gaps, and the CSIRO The Air Pollution Model (TAPM) extracted data at the nearest grid point for large data gaps,
and was processed with SMERGE to produce a surface meteorological data file.
5.1.4.2 Upper Air Observations Input Data
A 3D data tile from TAPM was developed for numerical upper air meteorological data and processed with
CALTAPM into a suitable format. TAPM was run using 41 x 41 (nx,ny) grid points, outer grid spacing of 35km, at
least three nested grids and 30 vertical levels. The TAPM innermost nest was 49.2km2 at 1.2 km resolution. The
nested grid resolutions were close to a ratio of three as possible (35km, 11.6km, 3.8km and 1.2km).
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 13
Figure 5-1: Terrain Map of Modelling Domain depicting EMRC’s Red Hill Waste Management Site
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 14
5.1.4.3 CALMET Meteorological Model Configuration
CALMET was run using the Hybrid option that uses geophysical data, surface station data from Perth Airport
AWS (BoM) and upper air data from the TAPM 3D data tile. The data was used to initialise the diagnostic
functions of the CALMET module to produce a full 3D meteorology data for input into CALPUFF. Table 5-1 shows
key variable fields selected.
Table 5-1: CALMET Key Variables (Grid Configuration WGS-84 UTM Zone 50S)
104 NX Cells
104 NY Cells
0.25 Cell Size (km)
400.000 6465.000 SW Corner (km)
10 Vertical Layers
ZFACE (m) 0 20 40 80 160 320 640 1000 1500 2200 3000
LAYER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
MID-PT (m) 10 30 60 120 240 480 820 1250 1850 2600
Critical Wind Field Settings
Value Found Typical Values
TERRAD 5 None Terrain scale (km) for terrain effects
IEXTRP 1 4,-4 Similarity extrap. of wind (-4 ignore upper stn sfc)
ICALM 0 0 Do Not extrapolate calm winds
RMAX1 6 None MAX radius of influence over land in layer 1 (km)
RMAX2 0 None MAX radius of influence over land aloft (km)
R1 5 None Distance (km) where OBS wt = IGF wt in layer 1
R2 5 None Distance (km) where OBS wt = IGF wt aloft
Data Choices
Value Found Typical Values
NOOBS 1 0,1,2 0=w/Obs; 1=Partial Obs/No-Obs; 2=No-Obs mode
ITPROG 1 0,1,2 0=Obs.; 1=Obs.Sfc/Prog.Upr; 2=Prog. temperatures
ITWPROG 0 0,1,2 0=Obs.; 1=Obs.T_Diff/Prog.Lapse; 2=Prog. Overwater T
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 15
5.1.4.4 Meteorological Data Analysis
Figure 5-2 shows the annual and seasonal met characteristics for the hybrid derived CALMET met file, whilst
Figure 5-3 shows the hourly met characteristics.
Other met trends, including stability class frequency, are illustrated in Figures 5-4 to 5-7 to follow.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 16
2011 Annual Windrose
Summer
Autumn
Winter
Spring
Figure 5-2: Annual and Seasonal Windroses for Hybrid derived CALMET 2011 EMRC Red Hill, Western Australia (modelled)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 17
0100hrs – 0600hrs 0700hrs – 1200hrs
1300hrs – 1800hrs 1900hrs – 0000hrs
Figure 5-3: Time of Day Windroses for EMRC Red Hill, Western Australia (modelled)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 18
Figure 5-4: Annual X-Y scatter plot diurnal temperatures for 2011 (modelled)
Figure 5-5: Average Monthly temperatures for 2011 (modelled)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 19
Figure 5-6: Annual X-Y scatter plot diurnal mixing height for Red Hill 2011 (modelled)
Figure 5-7: Annual stability class frequency for Red Hill 2011 (modelled)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 20
5.2 CALPUFF Dispersion Model Configuration
5.2.1 Computational Domain
The computational domain was set to the same parameters as the meteorological domain.
5.2.2 Receptor Configuration
Gridded receptors were set to the same parameters as the meteorological domain.
i. = 104 x 104 @ 250m; and
ii. = 10,816 receptors.
Discrete receptors were replicated from the SLR and Synergetics reports.
5.2.3 Building Profile Input Program
The Building Profile Input Program (BPIP) was not utilised for the dispersion modelling assessment since emission
characteristics were area sources.
5.2.4 Source Configuration and Odour Emission Rates
The Odour Sources and their individual configurations and emissions data are presented in Table 5-2 below. The
dimensions of the individual sources were taken from NearMap.com aerial imagery of the site.
Table 5-2: Odour Emissions and Modelled Parameters
FOGO Process
Area
SW Corner
(x), (UTM, kms)
SW Corner
(y), (UTM, kms)
Effective Height
(m)
Base Elevation
(m)
Initial Sigma Z
(m)
SOER (ou.m3m-2s-1)
Initial FOGO Undertaking (Bayswater MGB Process Area)
FOGO Wrows (4) 415.885 6477.936 5 299.6 2.5 2.675
(ave. across 4 windrows)
Raw Stock 415.918 6477.897 5 301.8 2.5 2
Final Stock 415.952 6477.965 5 301.6 2.5 0.2
Future FOGO Stages 1 and 2
Stage 1 Raw 414.612 6477.229 5 256.46 2.5 2
Stage 1 Wrows Nth 414.530 6477.242 5 264.03 2.5 2.675
Stage 1 Wrows Sth 414.529 6477.190 5 260.60 2.5 2.675
Final Stage 1 414.452 6477.190 5 259.81 2.5 0.1
Stage 2 Raw 414.320 6477.231 5 265.67 2.5 2
Stage 2 Wrows Nth 414.370 6477.243 5 264.57 2.5 2.675
Stage 2 WRows Sth 414.370 6477.190 5 265.43 2.5 2.675
Final Stage 2 414.452 6477.190 5 259.81 2.5 0.2
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 21
The values in Table 5-2 above represent the primary characteristics of each odour source, in this case area
sources, that are required by the modelling software, where:
• Effective Height – refers to the height of odour plume release (ground level in this case);
• Base Elevation – refers to the topographical elevation of the odour source (when including terrain);
and
• Initial Sigma Z – refers to the vertical spread of the odour plume (vertical dispersion coefficient).
5.2.5 Odour Dispersion Modelling Scenarios and Assumptions
One modelled scenario was assessed where odour emissions data in Table 5-2 was modelled constantly.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 22
6 Odour Dispersion Modelling Results
The desktop OIA Calpuff dispersion modelling assessment of the proposed EMRC Red Hill Waste Management
Facility FOGO Process has projected that each FOGO stage has no odour impact on receptors. This outcome is
based on each FOGO stage (Bayswater MGB, Future Stage 1 and 2) modelled as standalone odour sources.
Figure 6-1 depicts the discrete modelling projections for each of the FOGO processes.
To assess the overall cumulative impacts of the existing landfill odour sources and those of the proposed FOGO
processes, the OIA was ran to replicate the SLR baseline odour impacts. The comparison of the SLR modelling
projections and those of Talis’ replicated modelling projections are presented in Figures 6-2 and 6-3. These
modelling projections show excellent agreement suggesting that Talis has successfully replicated the SLR 2012
model.
Figure 6-2 depicts the SLR model projections. The red contour in the Figure represents the 2.5ou @ 99.5th
percentile ground level odour projections. Figure 6-3 depicts the Talis replicated model projections from the SLR
assessment (yellow contour).
When assessing the proposed FOGO process as cumulative impacts by including the SLR projections, the
cumulative modelling projections have shown that the initial FOGO Bayswater MGB Process Area, and the Future
FOGO Stages 1 and 2 cumulative impacts have no projected offsite odour impacts on the nearest sensitive
receptors exceeding those projected in the SLR Baseline impact assessment.
Figure 6-4 shows the projections for the cumulative Baseline + FOGO Bayswater MGB Process Area.
Figure 6-5 shows two ground level projections representing the Stage 1 and Stage 2 odour emissions and
subsequent ground level impacts. At Stage 1 or 2 neither scenario has shown that the cumulative emissions have
impacted the nearest sensitive receptors beyond those projections in the SLR Baseline assessment.
Following the Figures, Table 6-1 lists the projected ground level odour concentrations for the re-modelled SLR
baseline scenario and those of Talis’ modelled scenarios to include the cumulative impacts of the baseline
projections with the proposed FOGO processes. Table 6-1 shows the comparison (green columns) of the original
SLR projections, and those of the re-run SLR (2011-2012) baseline model using Talis’ own site-representative
meteorological file. The orange columns show the ground level odour projections for each of the FOGO
processes as standalone odour sources, and as cumulative impacts with the existing odour sources.
The proposed FOGO processes to be undertaken at the EMRC Red Hill Waste Management Facility, modelled as
cumulative impacts, have shown that the FOGO proposal has not increased ground level odour impacts at any
of the nearest sensitive receptors when compared and cumulatively assessed against the SLR baseline odour
impact assessment.
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 23
KEY: Meteorological Data & Assessment Criterion:
• Greenwaste and Bassendean/Bayswater MGB FOGO - 2.5ou @ 99.5th (dark blue contour)
• Future FOGO Stage 1 – 2.5ou @ 99.5th (light blue contour)
• Future FOGO Stage 2 – 2.5ou @ 99.5th (green contour)
• Discrete Receptors (green crosses)
• Emissions Type: AREA SOURCE Constant SOER’s
• File: CALMETT-Hybrid – EMRC Red Hill, CALMET Hybrid 2011
• Meteorological Hours: 8,760
• Modelling Hours Assessed: 44
• Coordinates: UTM
• Criterion Averaging Time: 1-hr
• Criterion Assessment Percentiles: 99.5th
Figure 6-1: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Odour Impact Contours (FOGO Discrete Sources)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 24
Figure 6-2: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Odour Impact Contours by SLR in 2012 (Baseline Existing Landfill Odour Impacts – Red Contour)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 25
Figure 6-3: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Odour Impact Contours by Talis (Replicate of SLR Baseline Existing Landfill Odour Impacts)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 26
KEY: Meteorological Data & Assessment Criterion:
• SLR Baseline + FOGO Bassendean/Bayswater MGB – 2.5ou @ 99.5th (blue contour)
• Discrete Receptors (green crosses)
• Emissions Type: AREA SOURCE Constant SOER’s
• File: CALMETT-Hybrid – EMRC Red Hill, CALMET Hybrid 2011
• Meteorological Hours: 8,760
• Modelling Hours Assessed: 44
• Coordinates: UTM
• Criterion Averaging Time: 1-hr
• Criterion Assessment Percentiles: 99.5th
Figure 6-4: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Cumulative Odour Impact Contours (SLR Baseline + FOGO Bayswater MGB)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 27
KEY: Meteorological Data & Assessment Criterion:
• SLR Baseline + Future FOGO Stage 1 – 2.5ou @ 99.5th (light blue contour)
• SLR Baseline + Future FOGO Stage 2 – 2.5ou @ 99.5th (green contour)
• Discrete Receptors (green crosses)
• Emissions Type: AREA SOURCE Constant SOER’s
• File: CALMETT-Hybrid – EMRC Red Hill, CALMET Hybrid 2011
• Meteorological Hours: 8,760
• Modelling Hours Assessed: 44
• Coordinates: UTM
• Criterion Averaging Time: 1-hr
• Criterion Assessment Percentiles: 99.5th
Figure 6-5: CALPUFF Dispersion Modelling ground level Projected Cumulative Odour Impact Contours (SLR Baseline + Future FOGO Stages 1 and 2)
Calpuff Odour Impact Assessment: Proposed FOGO System Red Hill Waste Management Facility Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
TE18098-RedHillFOGO_Calpuff_OIA_1c March 2019| Page 28
Table 6-1: Projected Ground Level Odour Concentrations
Receptor
SLR (Baseline 2011-2012) Talis' SLR (2018) Talis' MGB
2.5ou @ 99.5th
Talis' Stg1
2.5ou @ 99.5th
Talis' Stg2
2.5ou @ 99.5th
Talis' SLR+MGB
2.5ou @ 99.5th
Talis' SLR+Stg1
2.5ou @ 99.5th
Talis' SLR+Stg2
2.5ou @ 99.5th Maximum 8ou @ 99.9th 2.5ou @ 99.5th Maximum 8ou @ 99.9th 2.5ou @ 99.5th
1 6.1 3.4 2.3 9.08 3.91 2.37 0.50 0.30 0.52 2.48 2.38 2.42
2 5 3.1 1.9 6.05 3.68 2.09 0.33 0.18 0.35 2.19 2.12 2.12
3 3.2 2.2 1.3 3.74 3.04 1.70 0.25 0.17 0.31 1.81 1.72 1.73
4 3.1 1.8 1.1 3.01 2.00 1.18 0.15 0.13 0.24 1.28 1.21 1.23
5 2.6 1.4 0.8 2.72 1.38 0.90 0.12 0.11 0.20 0.97 0.94 0.99
6 2.4 1.4 0.7 2.18 1.68 0.85 0.10 0.09 0.17 0.95 0.95 1.03
7 0.8 1.5 0.8 4.12 2.10 1.09 0.13 0.11 0.22 1.19 1.23 1.33
8 4.4 2.3 1 3.15 2.16 1.24 0.14 0.12 0.22 1.36 1.36 1.45
9 2.9 1.7 1 3.95 2.15 1.27 0.14 0.11 0.22 1.40 1.35 1.42
10 4.7 2.1 1.3 6.94 3.06 1.64 0.17 0.13 0.24 1.80 1.66 1.71
11 5.8 2.7 1.3 5.51 3.25 1.51 0.15 0.12 0.22 1.64 1.52 1.53
12 4.2 3.3 1.4 7.16 3.58 1.33 0.16 0.14 0.26 1.46 1.33 1.37
13 6.7 1.9 0.8 4.45 1.65 0.96 0.12 0.13 0.24 1.07 0.98 1.02
14 2.8 1.8 0.6 3.03 1.74 0.89 0.11 0.12 0.23 1.00 0.91 0.96
15 2.3 1.4 0.6 3.50 1.63 0.79 0.12 0.15 0.26 0.88 0.81 0.85
16 2.5 1.4 0.6 2.83 1.53 0.79 0.13 0.17 0.30 0.90 0.82 0.85
17 3.5 1.6 0.6 3.48 1.44 0.78 0.13 0.18 0.32 0.88 0.83 0.86
18 4.1 1.5 0.7 3.11 1.42 0.80 0.12 0.20 0.35 0.88 0.86 0.91
19 4.6 1.4 0.7 2.32 1.40 0.80 0.12 0.22 0.39 0.88 0.89 0.94
20 3.6 1.5 0.8 2.85 1.53 0.76 0.11 0.24 0.42 0.84 0.88 0.93
21 3.5 1.6 0.8 3.01 1.68 0.72 0.11 0.26 0.45 0.80 0.86 0.91
22 3.4 1.9 0.8 3.52 1.82 0.68 0.11 0.28 0.48 0.76 0.86 0.91
23 3.8 1.6 0.8 4.56 1.65 0.68 0.10 0.30 0.52 0.76 0.88 0.95
24 5.4 2.3 0.8 4.31 1.41 0.69 0.08 0.33 0.56 0.77 0.91 1.01
25 4.1 1.6 0.8 2.64 1.38 0.64 0.09 0.37 0.62 0.71 0.80 0.94
26 3.2 1.2 0.6 3.08 1.37 0.60 0.09 0.40 0.67 0.66 0.72 0.89
27 3.1 1.3 0.6 3.73 1.46 0.61 0.08 0.48 0.72 0.66 0.75 0.94
top related