golder emp draft final

March 2011

Volume 1

Draft Environmental Management Plan South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application: CENTRAL PRECINCT Shell Exploration Company B.V. PASA Reference No. 12/3/220

For public comment from Monday, 07 March to Tuesday, 05 April 2011

DRAF

T RE

PORT

Golder Report Number. 12800-10364-5

Draft EMP for application for gas exploration in the SOUTH WESTERN KAROO BASIN (CENTRAL PRECINCT) by Shell Exploration Company B.V.

March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 ii

PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT

This document represents a Draft Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for proposed gas exploration in the South Western Karoo Basin, South Africa, by Shell Exploration Company B.V., a registered company of Royal Dutch Shell plc. It relates to the exploration right application referred to as the Central Precinct (PASA Reference No. 12/3/220). The application area intersects the Western Cape, Northern Cape and Eastern Cape, and falls within the Central Karoo, Pixley ka Seme, Chris Hani and Cacadu district municipalities.

Once finalised, the EMP will be submitted to the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (PASA), the designated authority in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) (Act 28 of 2002), as part of an application for a gas exploration right.

The draft EMP is presented in two volumes for comment by interested and affected parties:

- Volume 1. Draft Environmental Management Plan (this report);

- Volume 2. Appendices, which include the Technical Reports to support the EMP.

In addition, a Summary of the EMP is available, as well as a Comments and Response Report in which all stakeholder comments are recorded and responded to.

Appreciation for contributions by stakeholders

Many stakeholders have participated actively during the EMP process to date by attending meetings, and by taking the time to prepare written submissions. The EMP team wishes to express sincere appreciation for these contributions.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 iii

INVITATION TO COMMENT ON THE DRAFT EMP Stakeholders are invited to comment on the Draft EMP in any of the following ways:

Attending a public meeting;

Completing and submitting the comment sheets enclosed with the reports; and

Submitting additional written comments by email, fax or by telephone to the public participation office.

PUBLIC MEETINGS

AREA / VENUE DATE TIME

1. Beaufort-West: Rustdene Hall, 12 De Vries Street, Rustdene, Beaufort-West Wednesday, 16 March 2011 14:00 – 17:00

2. Victoria-West: Town Hall, 78 Church Street, opposite the Apollo Building, Victoria-West Thursday 17 March 2011 10:00 – 13:00

3. Graaff-Reinet: Town Hall (big hall), Church Square, opposite Angel Park, Graaff-Reinet

Wednesday 23 March 2011 13:00 – 16:00

DUE DATE FOR COMMENT ON THIS EMP: Tuesday, 05 April 2011, to the Public Participation Office below

Marisa du Toit / Annerine Prinsloo Golder Associates Africa

P O Box 6001 HALFWAY HOUSE, 1685

Tel: (011) 254 4944 / (011) 254 4839 Fax: (011) 315 0317

Email: [email protected]

PUBLIC PLACES WHERE A FULL VERSION OF THE DRAFT EMP AND ITS ACCOMPANYING TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT REPORTS ARE AVAILABLE

Copies of the full reports are available at the public places below as well as on the following website: www.golder.co.za

PUBLIC PLACE LOCALITY CONTACT PERSON TELEPHONE

Beaconfield Public Library Beaconfield

Mrs Theron Mrs Pillay Central Road Beaconfield Kimberley 8301

053 830 6245

Beaufort West Municipality Beaufort West

Ms Ashley Mitchel 112 Donkin Street Beaufort West 6970

023 414 8020


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 iv


Beaufort West Public Library Beaufort West

Ms Alta van Niekerk 15 Church Street Beaufort West 6970

023 414 8113

Camdeboo Local Municipality

Nieu Bethesda

Municipal Managager: Mr Langbooi 1 Muller Street Nieu Bethesda 6288

049 892 2121

Emthanjeni Local Municipality

De Aar

F Taljaard 45 Voortrekker Street De Aar 7000

053 632 9100

Galeshewe Public Library Galeshewe

Ms Conny Mazimba Ms Eunice Mafungo No 1 Ramatshela Street, Galeshewe Kimberley 8301

053 871 2315

Horse Shoe Public Library Graaff Reinet

Ms Alice Jacobs Ms Georgina Matomela. Parsonage Street Graaf Reinet 6280

049 892 2121

Ikwezi Local Municipality Greystone

Ms Iris Ketchen 34 Main Street Jansenville 6265

049 836 0021

Jansenville Community Library

Jansenville

Mrs Floretta Bhe 34 Main Street Jansenville 6265

049 836 0021

Judy Scott Library Florienville

Ms Mary Soetwaters Stockroos Street Florienville Kimberley 8301

053 874 1312

Kimberley Public Library Kimberley

Mr Van Dyk Mrs van der Merwe No 62 Chapel Street Kimberley 8307

053 830 6241

Murraysburg Public Library Murraysburg

Mrs Nel Beaufort Street Murraysburg 6995

049 844 0077

Nieu Bethesda Library Nieu Bethesda

Mrs Yvonne Besset 1 Muller Street Nieuw Bethesda 6288

049 841 1659


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 v


Richie Library Richie

Ms Madelene Louw No 137 2nd Avenue Richie Kimberley 8301

084 407 8078

Sonny Leon Public Library Roodepan

Ms Jacobs Mrs Karin Peters Starling Street Roodepan Kimberley 8309

053 873 1161

Ultra City Three Sisters Three Sisters

Mr Steenkamp N1 National Road North of Beaufort West 6970

053 622 0088

Victoria West Public Library Victoria West

Ms Sanie Thousand 4 Church Street Victoria West 7070

053 621 1204


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 vi

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Acronym Explanation AQA Air Quality Act

AQM Air quality management

ARC Agricultural Research Council

BBBEE Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment

BEE Black Economic Empowerment

BID Background Information Document

BOP Blowout preventer

BTEX Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene

BTU British thermal unit – heat energy required to raise temperature of one pound of water one degree Fahrenheit

CAA Clean Air Act

CBO Community Based Organisation

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CWA Clean Water Act

D Duration

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DMA District Management Area

DME Department of Minerals and Energy

DMR Department of Mineral Resources

DWA Department of Water Affairs

EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner

EC Electrical Conductivity

ECO Environment Control Officer

EHS Environment, Health, and Safety

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMP Environmental Management Programme

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FRAC Act Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act of 2009

GRI Gas Research Institute

H2S Hydrogen sulphide


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 vii

Acronym Explanation HCl Hydrochloric acid

HHP Hydraulic horsepower

HSA Hazardous Substances Act, 1973 (Act 15 of 1973)

HSE Health, safety, and environmental

I&APs Interested and Affected Parties

IOGCC Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (a grouping of the 38 US State’s that produce petroleum products oil and gas regulatory agency)

IRP Integrated Resource Plan

IWULA Integrated Water Use License Application

IWWMP Integrated Water and Waste Management Plan

KOP kick-off point

LDN Lightning Detection Network

LSA Local Study Area

MHSA Mine Health and Safety Act, 1996 (Act 29 of 1996)

MPRDA Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act 28 of 2002)

MT Magneto-Telluric

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NEM National Environmental Management

NEMA National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act 107 of 1998)

NEMWA National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008)

NGDB National Groundwater Data Base

NGL Natural gas liquids

NGO Non-governmental Organisation

NHRA National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of 1999)

NORM Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material

NOx Nitrogen Oxides

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRTA National Road Traffic Act, 1996 (Act 93 of 1996)

NWA National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998)

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

P Probability

P&A plugged and abandoned


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 viii

Acronym Explanation PASA Petroleum Agency of South Africa

RCRA Resources Conservation and Recovery Act

SABS South African Bureau of Standards

SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency

SALT Southern African Large Telescope

SANS South African National Standards

SAWS South African Weather Services

SOEKOR Southern Oil Exploration Corporation

SP Significance points

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

VAC Visual absorption capacity

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

VU Vulnerable

WARMS Water Authorization and Registration Management System

WEC World Energy Council

WHO World Health Organization

WQMS Water Quality Management System

WRC Water Research Commission


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 ix

UNITS OF MEASUREMENT

Unit of Measurement Explanation

Bbl (Oil barrel) a liquid measurement unit used in the oil and gas industry,equivalent to 42 US gallons

Bcf billion cubic feet

Bcf/D billion cubic feet per day

BLPD Barrels of liquid per day

BOE Barrel of oil equivalent

BWPD Barrels of water per day

GLR Gas to liquid ratio

ha Hectares

J Joule

km Kilometre (1 000 metres)

km2 Square kilometres

km3 thousand cubic meters

kPa Kilopascal

l Litres

l/s Litres per second

lbm/bbl pound per barrel – one pound additive in 42 US gallons of mud

l/s Litres per second

m3 Cubic metres

M3 Mega cubic metres

M Magnitude

mamsl Metres above mean sea level

mm Millimetres

ml Megalitres

MAP Mean Annual Precipitation

MCF Thousand Cubic Feet of gas (the traditional measurement of gas in the US) approximately equivalent to 1 MmBTU (or 1 Million BTU) which is a standardized energy unit by which gas is now measured. Gas is now measured by a thermal unit because some natural gas may have differing components, such as methane, ethane, butane, propane, etc. An MmBTU measures the energy contained in the gas rather than the volume of the gas.

mg/kg milligrams per kilogram


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 x

Unit of Measurement Explanation

mg/L milligrams per litre

MMscf million standard cubic feet

MMsm3 million standard cubic meters

Mscf/d thousand standard cubic feet per day

MWD Measurement while drilling

MWh Megawatt hour

pH Acidity

ppb parts per billion

ppm parts per million

psi pounds per square inch

S Scale

SKA Square Kilometre Array

tpa Tonnes per annum

μg/m³ Micrograms per Cubic Meter


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xi

TERMINOLOGY/DEFINITIONS

Acid frac – A process after fracturing where acid is used to etch the formation to increase the formation conductivity that could increase production.

Alternative energy - energy, such as solar, wind, or nuclear energy, that can replace or supplement traditional fossil fuel sources, such as coal, oil, and natural gas.

Annulus – Open space between the well bore (hole) and the casing or between two different sizes of casing.

Barrel of oil equivalent – Unit of energy that is released by burning one barrel of crude oil.

Bitumen - A dark, gooey type of oil that can be refined to make petroleum products.

Blender – A piece of machinery of fluid mixture and addition of the proppant to the fracing fluid.

Blowout – When pressures at depth cause fluids to enter the well bore at uncontrolled rates.

Blowout Preventer – A valve that is used to close the well in the event of loss of pressure control in the well bore to prevent a blowout.

Bottomhole – Location at the end of the well bore.

Bottomhole assembly – Equipment located at the end of the drill string to supply mud, measurements, and drill bit.

Casing – Pipe lowered into a well bore to stabilize and provide support to the well down to the target formation.

Cement/cementing – Material used to seal off formations and used to stabilize casing used in the well bore. Cement sets up to form connect the casing to the well bore walls.

Ceramic proppant – A proppant [see proppant] that is composed of a ceramic material. Although more expensive, ceramic proppants may yield to more production compared to sand-based proppants.

Completion – Finishing a well so that gas or oil production can commence.

Completion – “Completing the well” The process of casing, perforating, fracing the well.

Conventional Gas – Gas that is produced from conventional reservoirs using conventional techniques. Traditional natural gas reserves include gas associated with oil production and gas that reserves that are not associated with oil production. In general, these reserves are produced from porous or high permeability sedimentary formations such as sandstones using vertical drilling techniques.

Cuttings – Waste rock material from the process of drilling the well bore.

Downhole – A location in the well bore

Drill bit – A tool used to crush rock to make the well bore.

Drill pipe – Pipe used to connect the rig to the drill bit and bottomhole assembly.

Drilling motor – Used to power and rotate the drill bit.

Emulsifier – A chemical used to stabilize fracing fluid. Surfactants can be used as an emulsifier to break down surface tension, to help mix different chemicals in fracing fluid.

Fairway – The connection between perforations and the formation through which oil or gas flows to the well bore


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xii

Flowback – Fluids that resurface from a well after being fractured.

Frac fluid – A liquid mixture primarily composed of water that is pressurized to cause formation fracing. A proppant is also introduced to the frac fluid at the appropriate time to hold fractures open after pressure is released.

Frac job – Another term used in the industry to refer to the process of fracturing a well.

Frac pump – A high-pressure pump used to pressurize the fluids used when fracing a well. Many frac pumps can be used at one time depending on the size of the operation.

Frac stage – A location of fracing along a well bore at a target formation; part of multi-stage fracing where several frac stages can be performed in one well bore.

Fracture – Natural or hydraulically caused cracks or openings in geologic formations.

Fresh water aquifer – Groundwater that is low in salinity and could potentially be used for drinking water.

Gelling agent – A chemical used to increase fluid thickness to decrease fluid loss during the high-pressure fracing.

Greenhouse gases - Waste gases given off by industrial and power plants, automobiles, and processes that trap the heat of the sun in Earth’s atmosphere, producing the greenhouse effect. The major greenhouse gases are water vapour and carbon dioxide. Lesser greenhouse gases include methane, ozone, chlorofluorocarbons, and nitrogen oxides.

Horizontal drilling – The process of changing the well bore to a horizontal direction at a target formation to increase amount of production.

Horizontal leg – The part of a directional well bore that is horizontal and usually in the target formation.

Horizontal well – A well that had horizontal drilling done to increase production (see horizontal drilling).

Hydrocarbons - Any class of compounds containing only hydrogen and carbon. Crude oil is primarily a mixture of hydrocarbon compounds. Fuels made from hydrocarbons, such as natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, coal gas, and refinery gas, can be distributed by pipeline.

Kick-off point (KOP) – The point at which the well bore begins to turn from vertical towards horizontal, usually located 500 feet above the target formation.

Lateral – Another name for the horizontal portion of the well bore.

LAeq,I dB(A) - the A-weighted equivalent sound level using the ‘I’ (Impulse) dynamic response characteristic as recommended in SANS 10103:2008 (ref. 1).

LAMin dB(A) - the minimum A-weighted sound level recorded during the period of measurement.

Log – Measurements taken in or of the well bore.

Lubricant (Frac) – A material used to reduce friction in the well bore and fractures to increase fracture dispersion.

Measurement while Drilling or MWD – A device that provides precise measurements of the drill bit’s location under the earth’s surface located near the drilling motor and drill bit. This allows the operator on the surface to control the directional or horizontal drilling of the well bore.

Multi-stage fracing – Several frac stages in one well bore to increase well stimulation (see frac stage).

Natural fractures – Fractures that occur without stimulation practices due to existing properties of a formation.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xiii

Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) – Radioactive materials that occur naturally and expose people to radiation occur widely and are known by the acronym 'NORM'. Exposure to NORM is often increased by human activities, such as burning coal, making and using fertilizers, oil and gas production. Radon is a commonly known occurrence of NORM. Cement and shales are sources of NORM.

Perf Gun – Electronic downhole tool that detonates small charges creating perfs in the production casing.

Perf or Perforate – Opening the well bore to connect it to the desired formation.

Permeability – The ability, or measurement of a rock's ability, to transmit fluids, typically measured in darcies or millidarcies. The term was defined by Henry Darcy, who showed that the common mathematics of heat transfer could be modified to adequately describe fluid flow in porous media.

Petrochemical - A chemical substance produced from petroleum or natural gas, such as gasoline, kerosene, or petroleum.

Plug – A device placed in the casing to seal off a portion of the well bore (usually cement). This can be permanent or temporary.

Produced water – Water that is produced from a well during oil and/or gas production. This water comes from the producing formation.

Production casing – The final string of casing used to access the reservoir for extracting fluids. Production casing is placed inside the surface casing.

Proppant – Material used (commonly sand) to hold fractures open after pressure is released in the well bore.

R% - The relative humidity at the time of the measurement.

Renewable energy - Energy resources that Can be easily “renewed” or made. Forms of renewable energy include solar, wind, biomass, hydroelectricity, and geothermal energy.

Rig - The machine used to drill a wellbore. In onshore operations, the rig includes virtually everything except living quarters. Major components of the rig include the mud tanks, the mud pumps, the derrick or mast, the draw works, the rotary table or topdrive, the drillstring, the power generation equipment, and the auxiliary equipment. Offshore, the rig includes the same components as onshore, but not those of the vessel or drilling platform itself. The rig is sometimes referred to as the drilling package, particularly when offshore.

Rotary drilling – An efficient way of drilling that uses a quickly rotating bit to cut through rock. Because the bit rotates continuously, cuttings are constantly swept away, while fluid circulates through the bit and up the wellbore.

Seismic survey - A method of finding oil and natural gas by measuring the time it takes acoustic shock waves to travel through layers of Earth, reflect off of oil deposits, and return to the sender. The longer it takes the waves to travel to the oil reservoir and back, the farther down it must be.

Shoe or Heel – The bottom of the casing. Cement is pumped through the shoe to “set casing” and then the shoe is usually plugged.

Stimulation – A variety of different methods (e.g. hydraulic fracturing) used to increase well production.

String – A length of pipe or casing.

Surface casing – A shallow string of casing used to protect fresh water sources and to provide structural support for later stages of drilling.

Surface location – Place where the well bore begins at the surface, from where all drilling is done.

T°C – The temperature at the time of the measurement.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xiv

Tight reservoirs – Formations such as shales and some sandstones that do not have enough natural permeability to allow hydrocarbons to flow through the rock.

Tool or downhole tool – Term used to identify any device that is placed in the well bore other than drill pipe, casing, and the drill bit.

Tripping pipe – The process of removing or replacing the drill string.

Unconventional Gas – Gas that is produced using non-standard recovery techniques. While an exact definition is difficult to provide, unconventional natural gas is gas that is more difficult or less economical to extract, usually because the technology to reach it has not been developed fully, or is too expensive. Sources of unconventional gas include coal beds (coal seams), tight sands, and shales. Hydraulic fracturing, directional and horizontal drilling, and multi-staged frac jobs are all considered unconventional recovery techniques.

Upstream - Exploration for and extraction of oil and natural gas, and the built and operation of the infrastructure necessary to deliver these hydrocarbons to the market.

Well bore – A hole in the ground that is drilled to a target formation to access oil and gas reserves.

Well head (Christmas tree) – The above surface portion of the well through which gas flows and the well is operated once placed into production.

Wireline – Wire that enters the well bore or casing to accomplish tasks such as controlling the perf gun or taking FMI readings.

W m/s – The maximum wind speed measured during the measurement period.

In the Comments column of the noise tables, C - Car, Minibus or LDV, HGV – Heavy Goods Vehicle or Bus, A/c – Commercial airliner, La/c – light aircraft, H – Helicopter.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xv

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Landowners’ and Other Stakeholders’ Concerns ......................................................................................... 1

1.2 Quick project overview .................................................................................................................................. 1

1.3 Application and environmental assessment process .................................................................................... 3

1.4 Environmental consultants ............................................................................................................................ 5

1.5 Interaction with landowners .......................................................................................................................... 6

1.6 Structure of this report .................................................................................................................................. 6

2.0 CONTEXT AND HISTORY ........................................................................................................................................ 8

2.1 The global energy outlook ............................................................................................................................ 8

2.1.1 Shale gas in the global energy context ................................................................................................. 10

2.1.2 International Trends in Natural Gas Supply .......................................................................................... 10

2.1.3 Environmental Benefits of Natural Gas Use .......................................................................................... 10

2.2 South Africa’s energy outlook ..................................................................................................................... 11

2.2.1 Natural gas in the South African energy context ................................................................................... 12

2.3 Overview of shale gas ................................................................................................................................ 13

2.3.1 The geology of shale gas ...................................................................................................................... 13

2.4 Shale gas and greenhouse gas emissions ................................................................................................. 14

2.5 Previous exploration in the Karoo ............................................................................................................... 16

2.6 How this links to the proposed Karoo shale gas exploration ....................................................................... 16

3.0 LEGAL CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................................... 17

3.1 NEMA ......................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.2 Background ................................................................................................................................................ 18

3.3 Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act ................................................................................. 19

3.3.1 Definitions – gas and petroleum ............................................................................................................ 19

3.3.2 Overview of MPRDA ............................................................................................................................. 19

3.4 Other legislation .......................................................................................................................................... 21

3.4.1 The National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) ......................................................... 21

3.4.2 National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004) .............................................. 27

3.4.3 National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008) ...................................................... 28

3.4.4 National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) ...................................................................................................... 28

3.4.5 Astronomy Geographic Advantage Act (Act 21 of 2007) ....................................................................... 29


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xvi

3.4.6 National Nuclear Regulator Act (Act 47 of 1999) .................................................................................. 30

3.4.7 Strategic environmental assessment and Environmental Management Frameworks ........................... 30

4.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT – THE KAROO ............................................................................................................ 32

4.1 Geology ...................................................................................................................................................... 32

4.1.1 High Level Geology: Karoo Basin ......................................................................................................... 32

4.1.2 Regional Geology: Central Precinct ...................................................................................................... 34

4.1.2.1 Lithology ............................................................................................................................................ 34

Regional Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 36

4.2 Climate ....................................................................................................................................................... 36

4.2.1 Local Temperature ................................................................................................................................ 36

4.2.2 Precipitation .......................................................................................................................................... 37

4.2.3 Wind Speed and Direction .................................................................................................................... 40

4.2.4 Microclimate .......................................................................................................................................... 40

4.2.5 Extreme Weather Conditions ................................................................................................................ 41

4.3 Topography ................................................................................................................................................ 41

4.3.1 High Level Topography: Karoo Basin.................................................................................................... 41

4.3.2 Regional Level Topography: Central Precinct ....................................................................................... 42

4.4 Soil .............................................................................................................................................................. 42

4.4.1 Lithosols on the Beaufort sediments ..................................................................................................... 44

4.4.2 Rock outcrops with limited soils ............................................................................................................ 44

4.4.3 Structured soils with marked clay accumulation .................................................................................... 44

4.4.4 Soils on alluvial deposits ....................................................................................................................... 44

4.4.5 Red soils with high base status ............................................................................................................. 44

4.5 Terrestrial Ecology ...................................................................................................................................... 45

4.5.1 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................. 45

4.5.1.1 High Level Vegetation: Biomes .......................................................................................................... 45

4.5.1.2 Regional Level Vegetation: Types in the Central Precinct ................................................................. 45

4.5.2 Animal life ............................................................................................................................................. 50

4.5.2.1 Reptiles .............................................................................................................................................. 50

4.6 Surface water ............................................................................................................................................. 51

4.6.1 Relevant River Systems ........................................................................................................................ 51

4.6.2 Relevant Drainage Areas ...................................................................................................................... 51

4.7 Groundwater ............................................................................................................................................... 51


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xvii

4.7.1 High Level Groundwater: Karoo Basin .................................................................................................. 51

4.7.2 Regional Level Groundwater: Central Precinct ..................................................................................... 52

4.7.2.1 Groundwater Occurrence and Borehole Yield ................................................................................... 52

4.7.2.2 Borehole Drilling Depth ...................................................................................................................... 52

4.7.3 Depth to Water Level ............................................................................................................................ 53

4.7.4 Water Quality (EC) ................................................................................................................................ 53

4.7.5 Registered Water Use ........................................................................................................................... 53

4.7.6 Field Verification ................................................................................................................................... 54

4.8 Air quality .................................................................................................................................................... 55

4.9 Visual aspects ............................................................................................................................................ 55

4.9.1.1 Sense of Place / Genius Loci ............................................................................................................. 55

4.9.1.2 Aesthetic Appeal ................................................................................................................................ 55

4.9.1.3 Visual Absorption Capability .............................................................................................................. 56

4.9.1.4 Visibility .............................................................................................................................................. 56

4.9.1.5 Light pollution at night ........................................................................................................................ 56

4.10 Noise .......................................................................................................................................................... 56

4.11 Archaeology / cultural heritage / palaeontology aspects ............................................................................. 58

4.11.1 Pre-colonial Archaeology ...................................................................................................................... 58

4.11.2 Local tourist attractions ......................................................................................................................... 59

4.11.3 Palaeontology / archaeology ................................................................................................................. 59

4.11.4 Cultural landscapes and sense of place ................................................................................................ 59

4.12 Sensitive landscapes .................................................................................................................................. 60

4.12.1 Terrestrial Ecology ................................................................................................................................ 60

4.12.2 Heritage ................................................................................................................................................ 60

4.13 Socio-economic environment ..................................................................................................................... 61

4.13.1 Population ............................................................................................................................................. 61

4.13.2 Social Services and Infrastructure ........................................................................................................ 64

4.13.3 Tourism ................................................................................................................................................. 65

4.13.4 Economy and Employment ................................................................................................................... 65

4.13.5 Community Health and Safety .............................................................................................................. 67

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT AND PROPOSED EXPLORATION PROJECT ................................................... 70

5.1 The Applicant: Royal Dutch Shell ............................................................................................................... 70

5.1.1 Business principles ............................................................................................................................... 71


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xviii

5.1.2 Shell’s commitment to sustainable development .................................................................................. 71

5.1.3 Safety record ......................................................................................................................................... 71

5.1.4 Environmental commitments and performance ..................................................................................... 72

5.1.5 Social responsibility record ................................................................................................................... 72

5.1.6 Involvement in Gas Exploration and Production ................................................................................... 73

5.1.7 Shell in South Africa .............................................................................................................................. 73

5.2 Steps in the gas exploration process .......................................................................................................... 73

5.3 Location of the proposed exploration phase project activities ..................................................................... 74

5.3.1 Identification of notional areas .............................................................................................................. 76

5.4 Description of proposed exploration project ................................................................................................ 77

5.4.1 Desk-top studies of geology (completed) .............................................................................................. 77

5.4.2 Application for Exploration Right (submitted) ........................................................................................ 77

5.4.3 Geophysical Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 77

5.4.3.1 Magneto-Telluric ................................................................................................................................ 77

5.4.3.2 Seismic Acquisition ............................................................................................................................ 78

5.4.4 Drilling ................................................................................................................................................... 79

5.4.4.1 Exploratory Vertical Wells .................................................................................................................. 79

5.4.4.2 Exploratory Horizontal Wells .............................................................................................................. 80

5.4.4.3 Drilling site preparation ...................................................................................................................... 80

5.4.4.4 Drilling rig mobilisation ....................................................................................................................... 81

5.4.4.5 Drill site management ........................................................................................................................ 82

5.4.4.6 Drilling & well bore data acquisition ................................................................................................... 83

5.4.4.7 Noise from operations ........................................................................................................................ 85

5.4.5 Hydraulic Fracturing .............................................................................................................................. 85

5.4.5.1 The Hydraulic Fracturing Process ...................................................................................................... 85

5.4.5.2 Fracturing Fluid .................................................................................................................................. 87

5.5 EPA Principles of “Green Chemistry” .......................................................................................................... 88

5.6 Historical Choices Chemical Additives ........................................................................................................ 90

5.6.1 Water Requirements ............................................................................................................................. 92

5.6.1.1 Volume of water ................................................................................................................................. 92

5.6.1.2 Sources of water ................................................................................................................................ 93

5.6.1.3 Storage of water ................................................................................................................................ 94

5.6.2 Well testing ........................................................................................................................................... 94


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xix

5.6.3 Other project components ..................................................................................................................... 95

5.6.3.1 Waste management ........................................................................................................................... 95

5.6.3.2 Waste water treatment and disposal .................................................................................................. 96

5.6.3.3 Solid waste management .................................................................................................................. 96

5.6.4 Decommissioning and rehabilitation ..................................................................................................... 96

5.7 Resourcing and employment ...................................................................................................................... 97

5.8 What happens if gas is found? ................................................................................................................... 98

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP) PREPARATION PROCESS .................................................... 99

6.1 Regulatory requirements for the EMP ......................................................................................................... 99

6.2 Approach to assessment to prepare the EMP ............................................................................................ 99

6.3 Technical assessment .............................................................................................................................. 100

6.3.1 Process ............................................................................................................................................... 100

6.3.2 Technical assessments ....................................................................................................................... 101

6.4 Public consultation .................................................................................................................................... 101

6.4.1 The consultation process .................................................................................................................... 101

6.4.2 Next steps in the public consultation process ..................................................................................... 104

6.5 Comments and issues .............................................................................................................................. 104

7.0 CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................. 108

7.1 Location alternatives ................................................................................................................................. 109

7.2 Technology alternatives ............................................................................................................................ 110

7.3 Access roads ............................................................................................................................................ 110

7.4 Water supply ............................................................................................................................................. 110

7.5 Water storage alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 110

7.5.1 Transport routes for water supply ....................................................................................................... 110

7.6 Waste disposal alternatives ...................................................................................................................... 111

7.7 Capturing hydrocarbons on surface .......................................................................................................... 111

7.8 The ‘no go’ alternative .............................................................................................................................. 111

7.8.1 South African Energy Policy ................................................................................................................ 112

7.8.2 International Trends in Natural Gas Supply ........................................................................................ 112

7.8.3 Environmental Benefits of Natural Gas Use ........................................................................................ 112

7.8.4 Global trends in the use of shale gas .................................................................................................. 113

7.8.5 Conclusions – consequence of a no-go to exploration drilling ............................................................ 115

8.0 TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................. 116


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xx

8.1 Approach to technical assessment ........................................................................................................... 116

8.2 Exploration activities that could potentially impact the environment ......................................................... 116

8.2.1 Geophysical data collection ................................................................................................................ 116

8.2.2 Well site preparation ........................................................................................................................... 117

8.2.3 Exploration drilling ............................................................................................................................... 118

8.2.4 Hydraulic fracturing ............................................................................................................................. 119

8.2.5 Decommissioning ................................................................................................................................ 119

8.3 Summary of environmental components considered ................................................................................ 119

8.4 Assessment methodology ......................................................................................................................... 120

8.5 Technical assessment .............................................................................................................................. 123

8.5.1 Geophysical data collection ................................................................................................................ 123

8.5.2 Well site preparation ........................................................................................................................... 124

8.5.3 Exploration drilling ............................................................................................................................... 136

8.5.4 Hydraulic fracturing ............................................................................................................................. 145

8.5.5 Decommissioning ................................................................................................................................ 150

8.6 Human Health ........................................................................................................................................... 155

8.7 Cumulative impacts .................................................................................................................................. 156

8.8 Assumptions and knowledge gaps / limitations ........................................................................................ 156

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... 159

9.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................................................. 159

9.2 Project description .................................................................................................................................... 159

9.3 Applicable Laws and Regulations ............................................................................................................. 160

9.4 Shell Policies and Procedures .................................................................................................................. 160

9.5 Roles, Responsibilities and Training ......................................................................................................... 161

9.5.1 Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................................................. 161

9.5.2 Training ............................................................................................................................................... 161

9.5.3 Monitoring and Inspection Systems .................................................................................................... 161

9.6 Location and Design Methods .................................................................................................................. 161

9.6.1 Project Design Codes ......................................................................................................................... 161

9.6.2 Environmental Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 162

9.6.2.1 Qualitative Criteria ........................................................................................................................... 162

9.6.2.2 Quantitative Design Criteria ............................................................................................................. 162

9.7 Environmental Management Plans and Mitigation Measures ................................................................... 162


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xxi

9.7.1 Drilling and Well Installation ................................................................................................................ 163

9.7.1.1 Casing ............................................................................................................................................. 163

9.7.1.2 Cementing ....................................................................................................................................... 164

9.7.2 Hydraulic Fracturing ............................................................................................................................ 164

9.7.3 Water Management............................................................................................................................. 164

9.7.3.1 Water Supply ................................................................................................................................... 165

9.7.3.2 Water and Fluids Disposal ............................................................................................................... 165

9.7.3.3 Monitoring ........................................................................................................................................ 165

9.7.4 General Activities – Individual Environmental Management Plans ..................................................... 165

9.7.4.1 Air Quality Management Plan .......................................................................................................... 165

9.7.4.2 Noise Management Plan ................................................................................................................. 166

9.7.4.3 Sediment and Erosion Control Plan ................................................................................................. 167

9.7.4.4 Fish and Fish Habitat Management Plan ......................................................................................... 168

9.7.4.5 Soils and Vegetation Management Plan .......................................................................................... 168

9.7.4.6 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Management Plan ............................................................................... 169

9.7.4.7 Hazardous Materials Management Plan .......................................................................................... 169

9.7.4.8 Non-Hazardous Solid Waste and Domestic Wastewater Management Plan ................................... 172

9.7.4.9 Petroleum Management Plan .......................................................................................................... 173

9.7.4.10 Radioactive Waste Management Plan ............................................................................................. 175

9.7.4.11 Spill Prevention and Response Plan ................................................................................................ 175

9.7.4.12 Transportation Management Plan.................................................................................................... 177

9.7.4.13 Archaeological/Cultural Resources Management Plan .................................................................... 179

9.7.4.14 Occupational Health and Safety Plan .............................................................................................. 180

9.7.5 Monitoring Plans ................................................................................................................................. 181

9.7.6 Grievance Mechanism ........................................................................................................................ 182

10.0 UNDERTAKING AND COMMITMENTS ................................................................................................................ 183

10.1 Financial Provision under MPRDA (Act 28 of 2002) ................................................................................. 183

10.1.1 Financial Provision for Decommissioning and Rehabilitation .............................................................. 183

10.1.2 Obligations for Unplanned Incidents ................................................................................................... 184

10.2 Commitments by Shell .............................................................................................................................. 184

10.3 Undertaking by Shell Exploration Company b.v. ....................................................................................... 186

11.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................... 187

11.1 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................................. 187


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xxii

11.2 Recommendations .................................................................................................................................... 188

11.2.1 Environmental recommendations made in this EMP ........................................................................... 188

11.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in terms of NEMA ............................................................... 189

11.2.3 Key questions to be considered in EIA................................................................................................ 189

11.2.3.1 Physical environment ....................................................................................................................... 189

11.2.3.2 Biological environment ..................................................................................................................... 192

11.2.3.3 Social environment .......................................................................................................................... 193

11.3 Declaration of Independence by the EAP ................................................................................................. 195

12.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................... 196


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xxiii

TABLES Table 1: Comparison of greenhouse gas related energy emission by fossil fuel in combustion (EIA, 1998). .................... 11

Table 2: Possible listed activities from NEMA Listing notice 1 (GN R544) which could be triggered at various stages in the gas development process .......................................................................................................... 23

Table 3: Possible listed activities from NEMA Listing notice 2 (GN R545) which could be triggered at various stages in the gas development process (see also Table 2). ............................................................................. 24

Table 4: Possible listed activities from NEMA Listing notice 3 (GN R546) which could be triggered at various stages in the gas development process (see also Tables 2 and 3). ................................................................. 25

Table 5: Long-term annual average temperature and relative humidity statistics (WB40, 1984) ....................................... 37

Table 6: Monthly dry bulb temperature statistics for 2010 ................................................................................................. 37

Table 7: MAP, Monthly Average, Maximum and Minimum monthly rainfall depths ........................................................... 38

Table 8: The 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 200 year return period 24-hour rainfall depths (mm/month) ................................. 39

Table 9: Summarised drilling depths in the precinct .......................................................................................................... 52

Table 10: Summarised depths to water level in the precinct ............................................................................................. 53

Table 11: Distribution of water quality (EC) in the precinct ................................................................................................ 53

Table 12: Registered agricultural and domestic use in the precinct .................................................................................. 54

Table 13: Precincts in relation to municipal boundaries .................................................................................................... 61

Table 14: Central Precinct Population Distribution ............................................................................................................ 63

Table 15: GVA per Sector 2009 ........................................................................................................................................ 66

Table 16: Central Precinct Crime Statistics, 2009 ............................................................................................................. 67

Table 17: Central Precinct HIV/Aids, 2010 ........................................................................................................................ 68

Table 18: Currently available “Green Chemistry” hydraulic fracturing chemical additives available by Industry Suppliers .......................................................................................................................................................... 88

Table 19: Industry Third Party Example: list of additives used by Industry, at the Eagle Ford Shale, Texas, USA producing assets .............................................................................................................................................. 90

Table 20: Industry Third Party Example: Choices available to a Company for the selection of chemical additives to be used during hydraulic fracturing process ..................................................................................................... 92

Table 21: describes, for different drilling depths and objectives, the typical ranges of water volumes which may be required during exploratory drilling operations ................................................................................................. 93

Table 22: Preliminary criteria to use in refining possible locations for well sites (Note: these criteria will be further defined during the EIA) ................................................................................................................................... 109

Table 23: Fossil fuel emission levels – pound per billion Btu of energy input .................................................................. 113

Table 24: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Well site preparation ........................................................................................................................ 124

Table 25: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Exploration Drilling ........................................................................................................................... 136

Table 26: Noise level in dB(A) at certain distances from the drilling site centre (worst case) .......................................... 144

Table 27: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Hydraulic Fracturing ......................................................................................................................... 145

Table 28: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Decommissioning ............................................................................................................................. 150

Table 29: Safe Handling Procedures for Petroleum Products ......................................................................................... 173


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xxiv

FIGURES Figure 1: Proposed shale gas exploration right applications at a glance. ............................................................................ 2

Figure 2: The Central Precinct application area, showing also the notional drilling areas. Up to eight wells may be drilled in the precinct .......................................................................................................................................... 4

Figure 3: The application process for shale gas exploration rights and environmental processes required ........................ 5

Figure 4: Projected sources of energy for global electricity generation ............................................................................... 8

Figure 5: Projected sources of the world’s energy supply, to 2030. (CCS is carbon capture and storage technology). Units are terawatts. From IEA, World Energy Projection System Plus (2010) ............................... 9

Figure 6: These well cores were brought to the surface by Soekor in the 1960s. They are from the Whitehill Formation which is on eof the hydrocarbon-bearing strata in the Ecca Group of the Karoo. ........................... 14

Figure 7. Comparative rates for coal, natural gas, and synthetic natural gas life-cycle GGE in electricity generation as well as just the combustion phase for coal and natural gas. From Jaramillo and co-authors, as posted by Allmendinger . .................................................................................................................................. 15

Figure 8: Well cores from the 1960s drilling for oil exploration are still being kept at the National Core Library at Donkerhoek outside Pretoria, managed by the Council for Geoscience .......................................................... 16

Figure 9: Cross Section of the Main Karoo Basin (reproduced from Woodford 2002) ....................................................... 33

Figure 10: Schematic Aerial Distributions of Lithostratigraphic Units in the Main Karoo Basin (reproduced from Woodford 2002) ................................................................................................................................................ 33

Figure 11: Regional Geology – Central Precinct. .............................................................................................................. 35

Figure 12: Massive Sandstone .......................................................................................................................................... 36

Figure 13: Characteristic horizontal bedding ..................................................................................................................... 36

Figure 14: Characteristic Expansive Landscape with dolerite capped range of hills ......................................................... 36

Figure 15: Inselberg, dolerite capping and dyke ................................................................................................................ 36

Figure 16: Wind roses for Beaufort West .......................................................................................................................... 40

Figure 17: Major topographical features in the Central Precinct ........................................................................................ 41

Figure 18: Soil classes of the Central Precinct .................................................................................................................. 43

Figure 19: Biomes in which the exploration area occurs ................................................................................................... 46

Figure 20: Vegetation communities occurring in the Central Precinct ............................................................................... 47

Figure 21: Photograph taken in the Gamka Karoo vegetation type near Nelspoort .......................................................... 48

Figure 22: Photograph taken in the Southern Karoo Riviere vegetation type near Three Sisters ..................................... 48

Figure 23: Photograph taken in the Eastern Upper Karoo vegetation type near Victoria West ......................................... 49

Figure 24: Photograph taken in the Upper Karoo Hardeveld vegetation type near Murraysburg ...................................... 49

Figure 25: Blue Crane, Grus paradiseus. .......................................................................................................................... 50

Figure 26: Homestead Water Supply Boreholes equipped with Submersible Pump and Windpump ................................ 54

Figure 27: Typical vista of a flat Karoo Plain with flat capped dolerite hills. ...................................................................... 55

Figure 28: Wide open plains with little vegetation cover. ................................................................................................... 56

Figure 22: Baseline noise measuring locations. ................................................................................................................ 57

Figure 23: District and Local Municipalities – Central Precinct .......................................................................................... 62

Figure 24: Central Precinct Employment Distribution by Sector, 2009 .............................................................................. 64


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xxv

Figure 29: Central Precinct Employment, 2009 ................................................................................................................. 66

Figure 30: Steps in shale gas exploration ......................................................................................................................... 74

Figure 31: Illustration of possible areas within which a suitable well site may be identified for future exploration drilling activities ................................................................................................................................................ 76

Figure 32: Well cores from the 1960s Soekor exploration for oil in the Karoo ................................................................... 77

Figure 33: MT sensors like these are placed on the ground for a period of a day, gathering data .................................... 77

Figure 34: From a European location ................................................................................................................................ 81

Figure 35: Down hole measuring device ........................................................................................................................... 83

Figure 36: Close-up of down hole measuring device which contains a small radioactive source used to record rock type inside the bore hole .................................................................................................................................. 83

Figure 37: Directional head off a perforating gun used to punch a hole through the well casing inside the shale layer ................................................................................................................................................................. 83

Figure 38: Example of a crack induced by hydraulic fracturing ......................................................................................... 86

Figure 39: Dots in these images indicate the locations of micro-seismic events generated as the rock in a well in Shell’s Unconventional gas field (Pinedale, Wyoming, America) fractured ...................................................... 87

Figure 40: Public Consultation Process towards the development of the EMP for exploration (not production) - Central Precinct .............................................................................................................................................. 102

Figure 41: Materials that were made available at the open houses for Stakeholders to take home ................................ 103

Figure 42: Posters displayed at the open house in Victoria West ................................................................................... 103

Figure 43: Sreejeeta Datta from Shell explains the environmental authorisation process at the open house in Beaufort-West. ............................................................................................................................................... 103

Figure 44: Toni Pietersen from Golder helps local farmers to locate their farms in the map books to confirm details ..... 103

Figure 45: During the discussion session at the public meeting in Murraysburg farmers wanted to know what the impacts of hydraulic fracking would be on downstream groundwater resources ............................................ 104

Figure 46: Mr Johan Mans, a farmer and businessman who attended the public meeting in Murraysburg officially hands over a memorandum of questions and concerns for the environmental specialists to consider during their studies ......................................................................................................................................... 104

Figure 47: Left and right: Stakeholders in the Graaff-Reinet area attended the public meeting in Graaff-Reinet where the community asked what kind of guarantees Shell could provide in case of a pollution incident during the hydraulic fracturing process of gas exploration. ............................................................................ 104

Figure 48: Environmental process to the stage of completion of a NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment prior to hydraulic fracturing of wells ........................................................................................................................ 108


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 xxvi

APPENDICES

Appendices are attached in Volume 2 – see index to Volume 2 below.

Appendix No. Report Technical

Assessor Name Organisation Qualifications Years of Experience

1 List of affected properties - - - -

2 Groundwater Technical Report Graham Hubert Golder Associates

Africa (Pty) Ltd

BSc in Science, MSc in Hydrology, Diploma of Hydrology.

40 Years

3 Surface Water Trevor Coleman Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

BSc. Civil Engineering, MSc. Eng.

32 Years

4 Soil Louw Potgieter Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

National Diploma – Resource Utilisation (Majors: Soil Science, Agricultural-Economics and Extension Method), 1st Year Baccalaureas Commerci at Unisa.

20 Years

5 Terrestrial Ecology Adrian Hudson Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

BSc (Zoology and Physiology), MSc (Environmental Science).

19 Years

6 Air Quality Dr Lucian Burger Airshed Planning Professionals (Pty) Ltd

PhD (Chemical Engineering) MSc Eng (Chemical Engineering). BSc Eng (Chemical).

28 Years

7 Noise John Hassall JH Consulting

M.Sc. (Applied Acoustics), B.Sc. (Aeronautical Engineering).

43 Years

8 Heritage Frans Prins Active Heritage cc MA (Archaeology) 23 Years

9 Socio-economic Frank Snijder Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

BA Admission, BA Hons. Anthropology, MA Anthropology, MBL, School of Business Leadership (UNISA), Midrand, 2006.

24 Years

10 Public Consultation Antoinette Pietersen Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

BA (Hons) Psychology, BA Psychology.

15 Years

Draft EMP for Application for Gas Exploration in the Western Karoo (Central Precinct) by Shell Exploration Company B.V.

March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION This draft Environmental Management Plan (EMP) is presented to stakeholders (interested and affected parties) in draft for their comment, and will be presented at a series of meetings in March 2011.

Once finalised, the EMP will be submitted to the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (PASA),the designated authority1 in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) (Act28 of 2002), as part of an application for a gas exploration right by Shell Exploration Company B.V. (the name Shell is used in this document to refer to this company). Should the exploration right be granted, it will be valid for three years, but may be extended three times for a total exploration period of nine years.

This EMP relates to the exploration right application referred to as the South West Karoo Gas Exploration Application: Central Precinct (PASA Reference No. 12/3/220). The application area intersects Western Cape, Northern Cape and Eastern Cape, and falls within the Central Karoo, Pixley ka Seme, Chris Hani and Cacadu district municipalities. Appendix 1 in Volume 2 contains a list of properties in this application area.

Shell has also submitted two other applications for consideration by PASA, with Reference numbers 12/3/219 (Westen Precinct); and 12/3/221 (Eastern Precinct) respectively (see map in Figure 1). Separate EMPs are available for these applications.

1.1 Landowners’ and Other Stakeholders’ Concerns There has been concern among landowners and other stakeholders about the proposed exploration project, in particular about drilling and hydraulic fracturing, but also about a range of other aspects. They also expressed uncertainties about the environmental legal process and the time available for thorough environmental assessment of potential impacts. These and other concerns are described and discussed throughout this document and are listed in the Comment and Response Report that will be available.

1.2 Quick project overview The purpose of exploration will be to assess whether there is viable shale gas (unconventional gas) underground within the proposed ± 30 000 km2 exploration area. Proposed exploration activities, should the application be approved, are:

Gathering geophysical data. This data acquisition process is largely non-intrusive and does not involve drilling or significant excavation, together with

Drilling of up to eight exploration wells of up to 5 000 m deep to identify the shale layer. If the shale layer cannot be found or no hydrocarbons are detected, fewer wells may be drilled. Well sites will be approximately 100 m x 100 m. Additional land may be required for access roads, supply base, accommodation etc. The total footprint is not expected to exceed 20 ha of the 30 000 sq km (3 million ha) application area. A well will require between 0.3 and 6 Mega litres (million litres) of water, depending on its depth, nature of the underground rock and whether hydraulic fracturing is required. Various alternatives for obtaining water will be evaluated in detail once actual drill site locations have been selected and will be subject to approvals under the National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998).

Gas stimulation (hydraulic fracturing and testing). If the shale layer cannot be found or no hydrocarbons are detected, hydraulic fracturing may not be used. Fracturing would only be performed if hydrocarbons are found following the drilling of vertical exploration wells. Hydraulic fracturing may take place following drilling of the vertical borehole, if the vertical borehole intersects the shale layer, or hydraulic fracturing may take place at a later stage once a horizontal borehole has been drilled into the identified shale layer.

1 In terms of section 103 of the MPRDA, the Minister has delegated her powers in respect of the consideration of and issuing of applications for exploration rights to the Director General of Mineral Resources. Further, in terms of section 70, the Minister has designated the South African Agency for the Promotion of Petroleum Exploration and Exploitation (Pty) Ltd, known as the Petroleum Agency South Africa (Proprietary) Limited or “PASA”, to perform the functions as set out in Chapter 6 of the Act. PASA therefore administers this application for an exploration right. However, the Director General, and not PASA, is the authorising authority.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 2

Figure 1: Proposed shale gas exploration right applications at a glance.

Central PrecinctPASA application reference no 12/3/22030 000 sq kmSeparate EMP

Western PrecinctPASA application reference no 12/3/21930 000 sq kmSeparate EMP

Eastern PrecinctPASA application reference no 12/3/221 30 000 sq kmSeparate EMP

Draft EMP for Application for Gas Exploration in the Western Karoo (Central Precinct) by Shell Exploration Company B.V

Report No. 3

A full project description is given in Chapter 5. Figure 2 shows the application area (the Central Precinct) covered by this EMP and notional areas, which are broad indications based on a combination of regional geology and information gained from the 1960s exploration data by Soekor, indicating where Shell could choose to focus their initial exploration effort to better understand geology and demonstrate the existence of shale layers deep under the ground. It is however not yet certain where drilling will take place, and no drilling sites have yet been determined. Up to eight drill sites per precinct may be drilled during the exploration process. Typically not all boreholes will encounter gas bearing zones. Therefore, not all boreholes are likely to require hydraulic fracturing.

1.3 Application and environmental assessment process The shale gas exploration right application process, and the environmental processes required, are shown in Figure 3.

Shell had a Technical Cooperation Agreement with PASA for 12 months (December 2009 to Dec 2010). No field work or environmental baseline studies were permitted during this period. In December 2010, Shell made a decision to apply for an exploration right, which was accepted by PASA on 14 December 2010. PASA instructed Shell, in accordance with MPRDA (article 39 (2)) to develop an Environmental Management Plan2, and submit this to PASA in 120 days, on or before 14 April 2011. This requirement under the MPRDA leaves limited time for the applicant to undertake site specific environmental baseline studies to help narrow down and prioritise precise coordinates for drilling locations.

The consultants met with PASA to verify this instruction, and in particular as a result of the concerns raised by stakeholder during the initial consultation period in January-February 2011. PASA re-confirmed that, the EMP should, in the absence of specific drilling sites, as a minimum assess and make recommendations for mitigation in respect of the types of activities to be conducted somewhere within the regional areas.

The current process to compile the required EMP’s consequently comprises assessment of available information covering the application areas supported by broad based field verification for certain studies. The EMP process has also seen widespread consultation with interested and affected parties through a multi-stage consultation process affording stakeholders opportunity to engage with proponent and consultant teams early on in the process, and again during the period of stakeholder review of the draft documents.

The approach followed in compiling this draft EMP document has been to identify and assess potential impacts in a broad, regional context, as well as to assess specific exploration activities generically but not in a site-specific context. A typical gas exploration well was used to assess potential impacts and to develop indicative mitigation measures. This content of and recommendations made in this EMP document should, to a large extent, also be viewed as critical input to a later scoping phase, where the required NEMA EIA will be performed.

2 MPRDA: From section 17 and section 39(2)8 (as read with, 69(2)(a)9) it is clear that the reference to an “environmental management programme” is an error and that that section 79(4)(b) must refer to an “environmental management plan”. PASA routinely accepts environmental management plans in compliance with the content requirements as prescribed in regulation 52(2) and therefore clearly accepts the fact that section 79(4)(b) incorrectly refers to a “programme” instead of a “plan” (Kenneth Cameron, B Proc, Cameron Cross, Pers Com, February 2011).


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 4

Figure 2: The Central Precinct application area, showing also the notional drilling areas. Up to eight wells may be drilled in the precinct


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 5

This plan needs to be submitted within 120 days of the application having been accepted.

However, should an exploration right be granted, the applicant may proceed only with those gas exploration activities that do not trigger a listed activity under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). Drilling and hydraulic fracturing will trigger listed activities under the NEMA (see Chapter 3, Legal Context). Thus, an Environmental Impact Assessment under the NEMA will be required before drilling and hydraulic fracturing can commence, including a rigorous process to determine drill sites in consultation with land owners. This is discussed further in Chapter 7, Alternatives, and Chapter 11, Conclusions and Recommendations.

Figure 3: The application process for shale gas exploration rights and environmental processes required

1.4 Environmental consultants Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd (Golder) has been appointed as the independent environmental consultant compiling the EMPs for the three gas exploration areas.

Stakeholders have expressed the concern that environmental consultants responsible for EIAs must automatically be biased since they are paid by the developer. This is not correct. The requirement for environmental consultants to act independently and objectively is a well established principle in South African law and elsewhere. Whilst this EMP process is not an environmental impact assessment under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), the NEMA is South Africa’s overarching environmental law and its EIA regulations (GNR 385) state:

“that such EAP (environmental assessment practitioner) (must have) no business, financial, personal or other interest in the activity, application or appeal in respect of which that EAP is appointed in

ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES FOR SHALE GAS EXPLORATION

APPLICATION AND EXPLORATION PROCESS

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS

Apply for Technical Cooperation Permit

Apply for exploration rights

None required

Environmental Management Plan, no

EIA process

Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act



s 39 (2)

Data acquisition and drilling

Environmental Impact Assessment process and updated

EMP

Hydraulic fracturing of some drill sites

National Environmental

Management Act (NEMA).

+

Drilling and hydraulic fracturing will trigger listed activities under the NEMA

If application right granted:


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 6

terms of these Regulations other than fair remuneration for work performed in connection with that activity; or that there are no circumstances that may compromise the objectivity of that EAP in performing such work.”

Thus, the task of environmental consultants is not to promote a project but to provide credible, objective and accessible information to government and other stakeholders, so that an informed decision can be made about whether to proceed or not. The consultants are legally bound to critically consider both the potential negative and positive impacts of the proposed project.

Golder Associates is a 50-year old wholly employee-owned company with a strong culture of ethics and values. In a recent global participation process amongst the company’s 7 000 employees, the highest standard of integrity and ethical behaviour were re-affirmed as the fundamental value of the company.

We hope that the information provided in this EMP, and the balanced manner in which it is presented, considering both negative and positive impacts, illustrates that the work is unbiased. In making draft recommendations in the report, Golder has consulted widely with landowners and other stakeholders, and will continue to do so during the period in which the report is finalized.

1.5 Interaction with landowners Landowners will continue to be consulted throughout the EMP process, and following that, throughout the EIA process should the exploration right be granted. The site selection process for drill sites will be based on a set of criteria on which landowners and other stakeholders will be consulted (see Chapter 7 for a preliminary list of criteria). There is some flexibility in terms of location of the sites and Shell will work closely with landowners to identify suitable locations and access roads should the application be approved. Shell also indicated that the company will engage with landowners to try and come to agreements on land access and will seek prior permission for access to land

1.6 Structure of this report This Draft Environmental Management Plan Report is structured as follows:

Chapter 1 is the introduction and amongst other gives a quick overview of the proposed project, highlighting key aspects and new information;

Chapter 2 provides the international and national context for and history to the proposed project, outlining the role of gas in an energy context, South Africa’s energy situation, the role of hydraulic fracturing in shale gas production and the concerns associated with the technology in the USA, and previous exploration in the Karoo by Soekor;

Chapter 3 sets the legal context for gas exploration in South Africa and lists the key laws and regulations applicable ;

Chapter 4 describes the existing environment – the Karoo. It summarises knowledge about the existing physical, biological, social and cultural environment upon which the proposed project may impact;

Chapter 5 describes the applicant and proposed exploration project, outlining Shell as a company, and describing the intended steps in and project requirements for gas exploration;

Chapter 6 outlines how the assessment for the EMP was conducted, both technical assessment and public consultation. It summarises stakeholder issues contributed during the process, and outlines the requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) prior to drilling and hydraulic fracturing;

Chapter 7 describes the project alternatives, including selection of drill sites should the application be approved by PASA, and the ‘no project’ alternative;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 7

Chapter 8 describes the potential impacts of the proposed project in terms of a range of environmental and social aspects;

Chapter 9 contains the Environmental Management Plan which will become legally binding on the applicant should the exploration right be granted;

Chapter 10 contains an undertaking by the applicant, required by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act;

Chapter 11 states the consultants’ conclusion and recommendations pertaining to the proposed project and includes the environmental consultants’ statement of independence; and

Chapter 12 lists the references cited in the report and technical assessment studies.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 8

2.0 CONTEXT AND HISTORY This Chapter grounds the EMP in the context of the energy economy of the world, and examines the energy situation in South Africa, specifically with respect to energy and development in the face of the country’s response to climate change. It then addresses shale-gas development, its potential, its technologies, and its potential risks. It includes a brief history of prior exploration for hydrocarbons in the Karoo region.

2.1 The global energy outlook Energy supply is rated by many authorities as the world’s greatest present challenge: meeting the needs of the developing world, and especially the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals3, requires vastly increased use of energy, while simultaneously the world must substantially decrease the emissions of greenhouse gases if it is to avoid dangerous climate change.

The late Nobel Prize-winning chemist and physicist Richard Smalley focused world thinking on the world’s energy challenge4globally. The world currently uses the equivalent of 14.5 terawatts of energy (2004), but meeting world needs by 2050 would require at least twice this amount, mainly from new technologies, and mainly from lower-carbon sources such as, for electricity generation, liquid natural gas, nuclear and renewables (see Figure 4). In his 2005 paper he confronted the world with what he called the Terawatt Challenge. He reckoned that to meet the needs of a global population of 10 billion by 2100 the world would need to generate 60 terawatts, if all are to live at the level of energy prosperity currently enjoyed by the developed world. Providing for the world’s development needs requires such increases, and at cheap prices, and with much reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The technologies to provide this are presently mostly unknown.

Figure 4: Projected sources of energy for global electricity generation5

In the IEO 2010 projections (i.e. the International Energy Outlook scenarios of the International Energy Agency (IEA)), total world consumption of marketed energy increases by 49 percent from 2007 to 2035. The largest projected increase in energy demand is in non-OECD economies6.

3 The UN Summit on the Millennium Development Goals, 20-22 concluded with the adoption of a global action plan to achieve the eight anti-poverty goals by their 2015 target date. See http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ 4 Richard E. Smalley, 2005. Future Global Energy Prosperity: The Terawatt Challenge. MRS Bulletin Vol. 30 June 2005. www.mrs.org/publications/bulletin 5 Derived from EIA, International Energy Statistics database (as of November 2009), web site www.eia.gov/emeu/international. Projections: EIA, World Energy Projection System Plus (2010)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2007 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Liquids

Renewables

Natural gas

Coal

Nuclear

March 2011 Report No. 12

Authoritativeall anticipatecontributionin the role orenewablesFigure 5). Teliminated bover the nex

The IEA proUN Convenmitigation g“bring abouFactsheet, t2008 and 20per year as of the Terawstill be fromstorage techworld’s eneIntelligence

Figure 5, froUNFCC mesources. Thatmospheric

Figure 5: ProUnits are tera

6 http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf

Development, which represe

7 http://assets.wwfz

8 Deep water ahead

2800-10364-5

e foresights e a substant

ns of fossil fuof renewabless, fossil fuel sThe Worldwidby 2050, but xt few decad

ovided energntion on Climoals (based t a wholesalethe IEA antic035. This woopposed to

watt Challeng fossil fuels (hnologies), argy needs foUnit corrobo

om the IEA Weeting, illustrahis projectionc CO2 conce

ojected sourceawatts. From I

f/ieo/pdf/0484(2010).pdf Royal

nts 34 members largely from th

za.panda.org/downloa

d? The outlook for th

Draft EMPrecinc

on the develtial contributioels, owing tos as well as,

sources remade Fund for Neven that sc

des.

gy outlooks foate Change on its New Pe shift to lowcipates a sceould be at a r2% in the page. Up to 20(though with and the Factsor at least theorates this vi

WEO’s speciaates the anticn is for the soentration to 4

es of the worldIEA, World En

Dutch Shell’s Blueprints Scena

he advanced world. ads/101223_energy_

e oil and gas industr

MP for Applicct) by Shell E

lopment of thon from incre

o national clim in most casain importantNature, in its cenario antic

or the debate(UNFCC) in

Policies Scenw-carbon techenario in whicrate of increaast), owing to35, the IEA pmuch greate

sheet continue next two-anew8.

al early excecipated contro-called scen50 part per m

d’s energy supnergy Projectio

ario offers essentially the same

_report_final_print_2

ry in 2011. The Econo

cation for GaExploration Co

9

he world’s eneases in enemate policieses, nuclear st for the nextEnergy Repipates the ne

e following th2009 on how

nario – the 4hnologies”). ch world primase nearly hao anticipated projection aner efficiency,ues: “Naturand-a-half dec

erpt of the Wributions to tnario 450, whmillion.

pply, to 2030. on System Plu

e outlook; see www-static.shell.

.pdf

omist Intelligence Un

as Explorationompany B.V

nergy industrergy efficiencs and the risisources. But t several decport7, suggeseed substant

he Copenhagw to achieve50 ScenarioIn its World

mary energy alf of that in tincreases in

nticipates tha, and accompl gas is set to

cades.” The s

orld Energy he world’s enhere urgent a

(CCS is carbous (2010)

.com/.../scenarios /shell_energy

nit Limited 2011.

n in the West

ry to meet thicy, relative deng price of oin spite of th

cades, in thests that fossil tial supplies

gen Conferen the world’s -which assuEnergy Outlodemand incrthe previous n energy efficat 50% of thispanied by cao play a centsurvey by the

Outlook 200nergy supplyaction leads t

on capture and

y_scenarios_2050.pdf The OE

tern Karoo (C

is challenge ecline in the oil and coal, ahe increasingse scenariosfuels could bof hydrocarb

nce of the Paclimate chan

umes urgent ook (WEO) 2reases by 3627 years (a

ciency, but sts increase in arbon capturetral role in me 2011 Econ

9 for the Bany in 2030 fromto containing

d storage tech

ECD is the Organisation for Ec

Central

differ, but

an increase g role of s (see be

bon energy

arties to the nge action to 2010 6% between future 1.2% till like that supply will

e and eeting the

nomist

ngkok m different g future

hnology).

conomic Co-operation and


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 10

2.1.1 Shale gas in the global energy context Though natural gas has been exploited for energy for over a century, its contribution to energy supply has been small relative to coal and oil. But its role has grown rapidly during the past decade.

In the words of the World Energy Council in its World Energy Insight 2010, the world is in an era of energy innovation. According to the council, the biggest innovation since the start of the new century has been the sourcing of natural gas in a new way through the exploitation of shale gas. This innovation has in turn depended on the innovative technology called hydraulic fracturing.

This development of new natural gas transforms the debate over generating electricity, because of the vastly increased reserves and supply of natural gas from these sources, gas’s relatively low carbon dioxide emissions, and the fact that natural gas-fired power plants can be built relatively quickly. In addition, transport fleets can be converted to run on gas. Natural gas holds a further strategic advantage, since gas-fired power plants can supplement the intermittent electricity supplies from renewable sources in a regime of growing electricity consumption. In this way natural gas compliments and facilitats the expansion of the renewable energy sector.

Shale gas, which has been a North American phenomenon until the last few years, is now being considered in Europe (Poland, Sweden, Austria, Germany, etc.), China, India, Australia and New Zealand as well as South Africa. Shale gas is clearly a significant development in North America and especially in the United States. It has dramatically changed the energy outlook for the continent in terms of tapping into a vast unconventional gas resource for domestic use and even with the thought of being a gas exporter. For many years North America was being viewed as needing to develop significant LNG import capabilities to meet rising demands for gas. This has now changed as a result of shale gas.

With the increase in natural gas extraction in the USA and Europe over the past few years there has been growing concern that the hydrocarbons and other chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing would contaminate water supplies. This risk may emerge where and if the water and gas-bearing layers are close to each other. The risk may also emerge if gas-well casings are poorly installed and monitored (see below). This section reviews these concerns in section 2.6 below.

2.1.2 International Trends in Natural Gas Supply The rapid development in the international use of gas has changed the world’s energy landscape. The natural gas supply revolution rests on two pillars of innovation – firstly, improvements in production technologies noted earlier, which have made it economical to produce shale gas and tight gas resources that were previously considered too difficult to tap, and secondly the diversification and globalization of natural gas markets: worldwide, there is now sufficient technically recoverable natural gas in the ground for 250 years at current production rates9. The development of liquid natural gas (LNG) as an efficient means of transporting natural gas anywhere in the world and the huge gas reserves provided by shale gas have been mutually reinforcing, providing the increased resource and the flexibility of supply to guarantee the security of natural gas supply for the long term, thereby providing governments and investors with greater confidence to support the growth of the natural gas industry.

2.1.3 Environmental Benefits of Natural Gas Use Natural gas is the cleanest burning of all the fossil fuels (gas, oil and coal). Composed primarily of methane, the main products of the combustion of natural gas are carbon dioxide and water vapour, the same compounds people exhale when they breathe. Coal and oil are composed of much more complex molecules, with a higher carbon ratio and higher nitrogen and sulphur contents. This means that when combusted, coal and oil release higher levels of harmful emissions, including a higher ratio of carbon emissions, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulphur dioxide (SO2).

9 Deep water ahead? The outlook for the oil and gas industry in 2011. The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2011; IEA Natural Gas Information 2010 at

http://www.iea.org/publications/free_new_Desc.asp?PUBS_ID=2044


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 11

Coal and fuel oil also release ash particles into the environment, substances that do not burn but instead are carried into the atmosphere and contribute to pollution. The combustion of natural gas releases very small amounts of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, virtually no ash or particulate matter, and lower levels of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and other reactive hydrocarbons.

In a major study by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Gas Research Institute (GRI) in 1997, aimed at determining whether the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from increased natural gas use would be offset by a possible increased level of methane emissions, it was concluded that the reduction in emissions from increased natural gas use strongly outweighed the detrimental effects of increased methane emissions. Thus, the study supported the increased use of natural gas in the place of other fossil fuels as a means of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases globally.

The combustion of natural gas does not contribute significantly to smog formation due to low levels of nitrogen oxide emission and virtually no particulate matter emission. For this reason, where natural gas is used for power generation, this will help smog alleviation strategies where air quality is poor, since the principal contributors to acid rain are emissions from coal-fired power plants.

Natural gas contains very low concentrations of sulphur and nitrogen oxides (Table 1). These are the pollutants primarily responsible for acid rain damages to soils, water and crops, forests and structures. These benefits to air quality are of special potential value, where the burden on non-communicable disease is 2-3 times higher than in the developed world, and in which pulmonary disease associated at least in part with poor air quality is highly prevalent, and which disproportionately affect mortality and morbidity among children under five years of age10.

Although natural gas in the combustion phase is a clean energy option, and this offers an important potential national benefit to South Africa, its life-cycle emissions are less advantageous, and local emissions during production may be problematic (see section 2.5 below).

2.2 South Africa’s energy outlook The National Climate Change Response Green Paper (December 2010, Department of Environmental Affairs)11, while at this stage a discussion document, indicates how South Africa will address the energy sector in its response to the dangers of climate change.

The SA Government regards climate change as one of the greatest threats to sustainable development.

Table 1: Comparison of greenhouse gas related energy emission by fossil fuel in combustion (EIA, 1998).

Comparison of Combustion Emission

Pounds Per Billion BTU Energy Input

Air Pollution Combustion Source

Natural Gas Oil Coal

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 117,000 164,000 208,000

Carbon monoxide (CO) 40 33 208

Nitrogen oxides (NOx) 92 448 457

10 Bongani M Mayosi, Alan J Flisher, Umesh G Lalloo, Freddy Sitas, Stephen M Tollman, Debbie Bradshaw, The burden of non-communicable diseases in South Africa. www.thelancet.com Published online August 25, 2009 DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61087-4; Debbie Bradshaw, Pam Groenewald, Ria Laubscher, Nadine Nannan,Beatrice Nojilana, Rosana Norman, Desiréé Pieterse and Michelle Schneide. Initial estimates from the South African National Burden of Disease Study, 2000. MRC Policy Brief No. 1, March 2003. http://www.mrc.ac.za/policybriefs/initialestimates.pdf 11 National Climate Change Response Green Paper 2010 at http://www.polity.org.za/article/national-climate-change-response-green-paper-2010-2010-11-18


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 12

Comparison of Combustion Emission

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 0.6 1,122 2,591

Particulates (PM) 84 2,744

Formaldehyde 0.750 0.220 0.221

Mercury (Hg) 0.000 0.007 0.016

The Green Paper notes that ‘South Africa is both a contributor to, and a potential victim of, global climate change given that it has an energy-intensive fossil-fuel powered economy and is also highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate variability and change.’ Government accepts that although there will be costs with South Africa’s greenhouse-gas reduction efforts, there will be significant social and economic benefits, and that these costs will be far less than the costs of delay or inaction.

In the Green Paper, Government commits to taking a balanced approach to both climate change mitigation and adaptation response. It prioritises mitigation interventions ‘that significantly contribute to a peak, plateau and decline emissions trajectory where greenhouse gas emissions peak in 2020 to 2025 at 34% to 42% of a business-as-usual baseline, plateau to 2035, and begin declining in absolute terms from 2036 onwards – the same commitments the country made at the Copenhagen Conference of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Parties in December 2009. Mitigation interventions that have the potential to create jobs, alleviate poverty, and have general economic benefits, are to receive priority.

There is a direct link between energy and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)12. South Africa is necessarily committed to addressing energy poverty as an essential element of its development strategy, since this a key part of lifting people out of poverty, and supporting the progress in health (especially among children) and education needed to achieve this upliftment. Providing access to safe, clean modern energy for all South Africans means increased electricity generation: 20% of South African households do not yet have access to electricity13, while 28%14 still use indoor fires or paraffin stoves for cooking and heating, a significant source of childhood mortality and morbidity (and South Africa’s under-five-year-old mortality rate was still 104 per thousand in 2007, according to South Africa’s MDG report for 2010).

Since the energy sector is the largest contributor to greenhouse-gas emissions (GGE) in South Africa, the Green Paper is clear that successful climate change mitigation in South Africa must focus on this sector. South Africa’s disproportionate (to economic output) GGE profile is also becoming a source of economic vulnerability, in a world in which barriers to trade based on the carbon intensity of traded goods are beginning to emerge.

The Green Paper identifies energy efficiency measures, the roll-out of renewable forms of energy, as well as nuclear energy development, as the principal means to GGE mitigation in energy. In addition, Government will integrate a climate constraint into its energy planning tools, including the Integrated Energy Plan (IEP) and the Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity Generation (IRP).

2.2.1 Natural gas in the South African energy context The IRP, which is part of the IEP, presents the plan for electricity for South Africa over the next 20 years. It projects the need to supply about 52,000 MW over the next 20 years to meet SA’s future economic growth, despite a 35% offset through improved energy efficiency. The IRP, in its Balanced Revised Scenario, the 12 These goals arose from the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002. 13 http://www.statssa.gov.za/Publications/CS2007Basic/CS2007Basic.pdf

14 Statistics South Africa, General Household Survey (Statistical release P0318), 2008 http://www.statssa.gov.za


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 13

recommended policy frame, foresees only a small contribution from natural gas (about 2,000 MW). However, the potential offered by such a supply is clear from the global trends outlined earlier, and this depends on finding and exploiting natural gas resources.

The value of natural gas lies firstly in it being a cleaner burning fuel, compared with fossil fuels such as coal and oil, with significant benefits in terms of air quality i.e. low particulates (i.e. small particles of dust) emissions. Secondly, natural gas also has lower GGE, compared with coal and oil. Projects that could result in a switch from coal to natural gas would therefore be eligible for carbon credits under the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol. Thirdly, the use of gas in power generation is more efficient compared to coal-fired power (see above), particularly when the gas is used in combined cycle facilities15. Finally, from a cost perspective, it is not as easy to export gas as it is to export coal and consequently the domestic cost of energy would become more stable, being less exposed to international market price fluctuations.

The industrial use of natural gas has particular attractions. With the significant increases in domestic electricity tariffs over the past years, the economic imperative is emerging to invest in power generation technologies involving natural gas. Significant energy and cost efficiencies can be derived from co-generation plants operating in combined cycle systems within industrial activities. A combined cycle co-generation plant involves the burning of gas to drive a gas turbine, which generates electricity, followed by a heat recovery steam generator, which generates high-pressure steam from the waste heat produced by the gas. This steam can then be sent to a steam turbine, where it is expanded to produce additional electricity. The steam exhausted from the steam turbine can then be used in the industry, or alternatively condensed16. Co-generation is a very efficient form of electricity generation, which carries a significantly reduced greenhouse gas emissions impact relative to conventional coal-fired power generation.

2.3 Overview of shale gas Shale gas has the potential to contribute strongly to a country's energy mix, as seen in the United States where shale gas production has increased from 1.6% of that country’s gas production in 1996 to 5.9% by 2006 (Kuuskraa, 2007), with production projected to account for over 45% of the nation’s domestic gas production by 2035.

The proving of large resources of natural gas in South Africa has the potential to supply a vital contribution to the country’s goal of a low-carbon economy, as envisaged in the Green Paper. Unconventional exploitation from shale gas resources could realise this potential.

2.3.1 The geology of shale gas Shales containing natural gas are formations of organic-rich shale, a sedimentary rock formed from deposits of mud, silt, clay, and organic matter. Such shales are referred to as a source rock for gas. In South Africa, certain shale layers in the Karoo Supergroup of sedimentary rocks contain substantial concentrations of organic matter, and have the promise of natural gas. These include the Whitehill Formation (see Figure 6) and the Collingham Formation of the Ecca Group, rocks that crop out at the surface in many places, but which are mostly buried up to 5 km below the surface17 in the Karoo. These natural gas sources have their origin in deposits of plant and microscopic animal remains in the water basins of the Karoo era, dating over 250 million years ago, and their subsequent transformation by the weight of overlying rock and the heat deep

15 Energy Efficiency indicators for Public Electricity: Production from Fossil Fuels. IEA Information Paper OECD/IEA, 2008, at http://www.iea.org/papers/2008/En_Efficiency_Indicators.pdf 16 In situations where industries do not have a steam requirement, the amount of power extracted from the high pressure steam can be increased and the vapor exhausted from the turbine can be condensed and recycled. In this situation, a slightly higher amount of power is generated per unit of gas entering the power generation system.

17 Johnson MR et al, 2006. Sedimentary rocks of the Karoo Supergroup. In: Johnson, MR, Anhaeusser, CR and Thomas, RJ (eds), 2006. The Geology of South Africa. Geological

Soceity of South Africa, Johannesburg/Council for Geoscience, Pretoria. 691 pp; Thomas Branch, Oliver Ritter, Ute Weckmann, Reinhard F. Sachsenhofer and Frank Schilling, The

Whitehill Formation – a high conductivity marker horizon in the Karoo Basin. South African Journal of Geology, 2007, Vol. 110, pp. 465-476. doi: 10.2113/gssajg.110.2/3.46


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 14

Figure 6: These well cores were brought to the surface by Soekor in the 1960s. They are from the Whitehill Formation which is on eof the hydrocarbon-bearing strata in the Ecca Group of the Karoo.

below Earth’s surface. The formations in the Karoo that are believed to contain recoverable gas are located several thousand metres (1 500 m to 4500 m) below the surface18.

Over millions of years the gas may migrate (i.e.‘float’) up through overlying permeable rock layers, for example, sandstone and carbonate reservoirs. If the gas reaches an impermeable rock layer above it (a ‘seal’), it may then be trapped in one area. If no impermeable layer is encountered then any gas generated in the shales will, over millions of years, have disappeared to the surface and into the atmosphere.

Exploring for hydrocarbons held in traps is typically referred to as conventional exploration. This type of exploration for trapped hydrocarbons was pursued by Soekor in the 1960s (see Figure 6).

In certain geological environments the gas generated in the shales (the source rock) cannot migrate up through overlying rock layers, but is held tightly in less permeable rock, unable to move even a few millimetres. This is due to the structure of the rock and also impermeable layers immediately surrounding the shale rock. Exploring for shales and gas in this type of geological environmental is called ‘unconventional’ exploration).

Since the 1940s continual advancement in drilling techniques and well stimulation technology have made it possible to extract gas from these, less permeable, rock formations.

The rock matrix in the shale has low permeability, so gas movement in the shales is very slow. Consequently, production of gas in commercial quantities requires that the shale layers be fractured to stimulate gas flow by improving permeability for gas within the shale layer.

2.4 Shale gas and greenhouse gas emissions Though power generation from natural gas is more efficient that from coal and yields less GGE during generation, the comparisons must be based on full life cycle analysis, i.e. along the whole electricity supply chain from production of the resource to electricity output. Natural gas production involves significant GGE during production and transport; for example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that just over 1% of methane is lost during natural gas production in the United States during production, transmission, and storage. Since methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, these small leakages to the atmosphere have very large consequences on global warming19.

Recent work by Jaramillo and co-authors showed a clear advantage to natural gas over coal in terms of GGE, over the full lifecycles of energy generation in either case. The comparative advantage of natural gas depends on the supply chain, but Jaramillo and co-authors found that the benefit obtains even liquefying natural gas to transport it from a distant source (say, the Middle East) to the USA yields less overall emissions than coal. Figure 7 below illustrates their findings in comparing natural gas and coal over their life cycle.

18 Johnson MR et al, 2006. Sedimentary rocks of the Karoo Supergroup. 19 e.g. R W Howarth at http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/energy/files/39646/GHG.emissions.from.Marcellus.Shale.April12010%20draft.pdf on 27 February 2011


Figure 7. Cowell as just th

NeverthelesCornell Univ1 April 2010

“The most rindustry of areported in consumptioEnergy:httppdf/table_02(http://p2palimited, and

“If we assumof CO2 per CO2 per migas (very roemissions frmillion jouleapproximatepaper says of transportwhile admittwhen burninassess simicomparableassessmen

20 Jaramillo, P., Gr

http://www.geo.corn

21R W Howarth, 20

http://www.technolo

2800-10364-5

omparative rathe combustion

ss, the compversity Depa021, stating a

recent data I an amount oEPA (2008)

on data from p://www.eia.d2.pdf). This lys.net/ref/07 ‘governmen

me a 1.5% lemillion joulesllion joules o

oughly estimarom natural g

es of energy. ely 20.3 g C the followingation and othting that no rng natural gailar emissione to shale gasts.

riffin, W. M., and Mat

nell.edu/geology/facu

010, Preliminary Asse

ogyreview.com/blog/e

Draft EMPrecinc

tes for coal, nan phase for co

parative GGEartment of Ecas follows:

could find fof methane eqInventory of the U.S. Dep

doe.gov/pub/oeakage rate

7/06348.pdf).nt scientists a

eakage rate, s of energy.

of energy) anated above agas from hyd For diesel fuof CO2 per m

g – a) he addher activitiesrigorous estimas (compareds for mining s. These ass

tthews, H. S., 200720

ulty/RWA/photos/mar

essment of the Gree

energy/files/39646/G


atural gas, anoal and natura

E advantage cology and Ev

or the US (froqual to 1.5%U.S. Greenh

partment of oil_gas/natuis roughly eq However, th

and some ind

this would hThis would b

nd to the emias 4.5 g C ofdraulic fractuuel or gasolinmillion joulesds additional associated wmate is availd to 8% for dand transpo

sumptions in

0, as posted by Allme

rcellus_related_imag

nhouse Gas Emissio

GHG.emissions.from.


15

d synthetic nal gas. From Ja

of natural gavolutionary B

om 2006) sug% of the natur

house Gas E

ral_gas/dataqual to that ehe actual leadustry officia

ave a greenbe additive tossions assocf CO2 per miuring may, thene, the total s of energy.” GHG contribwith productable and ass

diesel/ gasolirtation of coadicate some

endiger at

ges/marcellus_blog/li

ons from Natural Gas

Marcellus.Shale.Apr

as Explorationompany B.V

atural gas life-caramillo and c

as is still undBiology, prov

ggest a leakaral gas consuEmissions an

a_publicationestimated bykage is not wls caution th

house gas wo the emissiociated with ollion joules oerefore, be egreenhouse But it is imp

bution to theion (pipelinesumes that ne). b) By hial but then gof the difficu

fecycle_coal_versus

s obtained by Hydrau

il12010%20draft.pdf

n in the West

cycle GGE in co-authors, as

er debate. Rvides a succi

age rate fromumed (basednd Sinks 199

s/natural_gay the EPA in well known, aat the real fig

warming poteons during cobtaining and

of energy). Toequivalent to gas emissioortant to notenatural gas s, water tranthis is 33% s own admisoes on to sa

ulties in maki

s_natur.html on 27 Fe

ulic Fracturing at

on 27 February 201

tern Karoo (C

electricity genposted by Allm

Robert Howanct summary

m the oil andd on leakage 0 – 2006 and

as_monthly/c1997 as monitoringgure is actua

ential equal toombustion (1

d transportingotal greenho33 g C of CO

ons are equive that Howarcalculations

nsport, drillingof the GHG

ssion, it is difay it is probabing sound life

ebruary 2011

1

Central

neration as mendinger 20.

arth of the y in a post of

gas data

d

current/

g is quite ally higher”

o 14.8 g C 13.7 g C of g the natural ouse gas O2 per

valent to rth in his as a result

g of wells) produced fficult to bly e-cycle

f


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 16

Thus, Howarth’s assessment again is in contention, since Howarth may have assumed too high a Global Warming Potential figure for methane22.

For any shale-gas development in the Karoo, the real costs and benefits to be anticipated would need buttressing through a thorough GGE life-cycle analysis based on appropriate assumptions about the technologies to be employed, the transportation involved, and plausible factors for methane Global Warming Potential.

2.5 Previous exploration in the Karoo The first organised search for hydrocarbons in South Africa was undertaken by the Geological Survey of South Africa in the 1940's. In 1965 Soekor (Pty) Ltd was formed by the government and began its search in the onshore areas of the Karoo, Algoa and Zululand Basins23.

In the 1960s, Soekor undertook hydrocarbon exploration activities across the Karoo but was unsuccessful in their exploration for oil. However, the potential for gas being held within geological formations at depths down to nearly five kilometres was noted in a few exploration wells that were drilled.

In only one of the ten wells drilled did gas actually flow, and then only for one day before gas flow stopped and monitoring ceased. This particular well is located south of Shells Eastern exploration rights application area.

As no oil was discovered at that time, and in light of the economic climate, it was not technically-commercially feasible to continue to explore to try to extract gas. Therefore, exploration activities ceased, and the Soekor wells were decommissioned. However, well cores from the 1960s drilling for oil exploration are stored at the National Core Library Donkerhoek, managed by the Council for Geoscience (Figure 8).

2.6 How this links to the proposed Karoo shale gas exploration Technological improvements in drilling techniques make it possible to stimulate gas to flow from these “‘tight” rock formations, such as those found in the Karoo. However, there is inadequate information to evaluate whether the shale formations present within the Karoo hold potential as a viable gas resource. Consequently, early level exploration is necessary to confirm whether South Africa potentially has viable unconventional natural gas resources which may be of strategic value in the future as an energy source to meet the growing demand for electricity within the country.

Shell, a company with considerable experience in exploration, has thus made application for exploration rights to initiate an early level exploration programme in three broad areas to confirm whether the deep shale strata in the Karoo contain unconventional natural gas and, if so, to evaluate the potential to extract unconventional natural gas.

22 Allemendinger at http://www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/faculty/RWA/photos/marcellus_related_images/marcellus_blog/thoughts-on-life-cycle.html on 27 February 2011 23 http://www.petroleumagencysa.com/Promotion/ExplorationHistory.aspx

Figure 8: Well cores from the 1960s drilling for oil exploration are still being kept at the National Core Library at Donkerhoek outside Pretoria, managed by the Council for Geoscience


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 17

3.0 LEGAL CONTEXT This chapter summarises the environmental legal context for the exploration of gas and petroleum resources24. Key points, in summary, are:

The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA; Act 28 of 2002) stipulates in Section 39 (2): Any person who applies for a reconnaissance permission, prospecting / exploration right or mining permit must submit an environmental management plan as prescribed and in Section 79(4) (b) that the applicant should submit an environmental management plan in terms of section 39 within a period of 120 days from the date of the notice.”

The contents of an Environmental Management Plan are prescribed in the MPRDA Regulations Section 52. Considering section 52 (2) (b) and (c) of the Regulations, an assessment of environmental, socio-economic and cultural impact is required, and not an Environmental Impact Assessment process in terms of s 39 (1) of the MPRDA.However, there are activities which form part of the proposed exploration rights application which do require consideration under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA; Act 107 of 1998), notably the following:

Activity 24 of Notice 1, GN 544, requiring a basic assessment: The transformation of land bigger than 1 000 m2 in size, to residential, retail, commercial, industrial or institutional use …. (Drill sites will be approximately 100 x 100 m, thus 10 000 sq m).

Activity 4 of Notice 2, GN 545, requiring a full EIA: The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the refining, extraction or processing of gas, oil or petroleum products with an installed capacity of 50 cubic meters or more per day… (It is assumed that hydraulic fracturing during exploration drilling could stimulate gas flow of 50 cubic meters or more per day).

Thus, an Environmental Impact Assessment will also be required under NEMA before drilling and hydraulic fracturing can commence. This will be a separate process which will follow the EMP submission. This is further described in Chapter 11, Conclusions and Recommendations.

In addition, the applicant may also need to apply for various other licenses such as an Integrated Water Use Licence or individual Water Use Licenses in terms of the National Water Act (NWA), and possibly the National Heritage Resources Act 25 of 1999 depending on location of drilling sites and site specific technical requirements such as water sources which cannot be determined at this time in the absence of known drilling site locations.

Overview: Shell Exploration Company B.V. (Shell) has submitted an exploration rights application for petroleum products over three application areas as described in Chapter 1. Petroleum products include gas and condensate, oil, natural gas and petroleum. Shells intent is to pursue exploration for unconventional natural gas, but other petroleum products may be co-hosted in the targeted geological strata.

As a statutory instrument of environmental management, the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which Shell Exploration Company B.V. (Shell)) is required to submit, no later than 14 April 2011, in support of its exploration rights application. This EMP is governed in the first instance by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 (MRPDA). Other statutes, summarised in section 3.3, which influence the EMP include the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA), the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act 10 of 2004 (NEMBA), the National Environmental Management: Waste Act 59 of 2008 (NEMWA), and the National Water Act 36 of 1998 (NWA)

Note that this EMP only supports an Exploration Right application. Approval of the EMP does not permit Shell to undertake exploration borehole drillings, nor does it allow Shell to make a subsequent application for

24 This chapter is based on Golder’s interpretation of the legal context for this EMP. It is presented here in draft for comment.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 18

Production Rights. All these activities are subject to an independent regulator processes and approvals. The outline of the statutory requirements regarding the EMP set out here applies to the Exploration Rights application. This EMP does not constitute undertaking the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process/es which will be required, as discussed in Section 5 below.

The MRPDA sets out requirements for environmental provisions regarding an application for a petroleum exploration application in section 79. This section in turn requires an EMP to be prepared following the application, according to sections 79(4)(b) and 39(2) of the Act. Sections 39(3) of the MPRDA (as read with section 69(2)(b) of the Act) as well as the sub regulations under regulation 52(2) of the MRPDA specify the requirements to be met in the EMP. The NEMA also stipulates principles that must be considered by any organ of state in any decision “which may have a significant effect on the environment”. Thus, the EMP must demonstrably satisfy these principles.

In terms of section 103 of the MPRDA, the Minister has delegated her powers in respect of the consideration of and issuing of applications for exploration rights to the Director General of Mineral Resources. Further, in terms of section 70, the Minister has designated the South African Agency for the Promotion of Petroleum Exploration and Exploitation (Pty) Ltd, known as the Petroleum Agency South Africa (Proprietary) Limited or “PASA”, to perform the functions as set out in Chapter 6 of the Act. PASA therefore, amongst others “promote, facilitate and regulate exploration and sustainable development of oil and gas” in South Africa. As such it administers this application for an exploration right. However, the Director General, and not PASA, is the authorising authority.

The EMP is to be submitted within 120 days of the notice of acceptance of the exploration right application issued by PASA. This 120-day period elapses on 14 April 2011. The MPRDA does not allow for the extension of this initial timeframe, but the Director General may call for additional information and may direct that the EMP be adjusted as the Director General may require. As will be more fully explained below, this EMP is also not the only vessel for assessment and authorisation of environmental aspects associated with the proposed exploration activities.

3.1 NEMA The NEMA also requires that an environmental authorisation be issued before the commencement of various activities specified in terms of the NEMA regulations (GNR’s 544 and 545 of 18 June 2010). In the case of Shell’s application, environmental authorisation will be required prior to commencement of any drilling and hydraulic fracturing activity. There are several activities associated with the proposed gas exploration activities that would require environmental authorisation prior to commencement of such activities, irrespective of whether an exploration right has been granted by the Director General. Furthermore, an environmental authorisation for any given activity may only be issued after Shell has complied with the procedural requirements as set out in the regulations (GNR 543 of 18 June 2010), which once again requires public participation. These procedures may involve a basic assessment or Scoping and EIA, depending on the nature of the activity.

3.2 Background Shell submitted an application for an Exploration Right in terms of the MPRDA to the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (PASA) in December 2010. PASA accepted the application on 14 December 2010.

In accordance with Section 79(4) of the MPRDA, PASA notified Shell of the acceptance within the statutory time limit of 14 days, which then initiated the process that led to the preparation of this EMP. The EMP is to be submitted within 120 days from the date of notice, i.e. on or before 14 April 2011. The MPRDA does not allow for an extension of this deadline.

In order to meet the 120-day deadline required by the MPRDA, the final EMP is to be submitted to PASA on or before 14 April 2011 for consideration alongside the exploration right application for purposes of making


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 19

recommendations to the Director General25 on the EMP and exploration right application. The Director General in turn may call for additional information in respect of the EMP but has 120 days within which to approve or reject the EMP. Should the Director General approve the EMP, the Director General may grant or deny the exploration right depending on further considerations as set out in section 80(1) of the MPRDA. The Exploration Right, if considered favourably, may be granted for a maximum initial period of three years. It is assumed that this process of review and decision-making will take place during 2011.

Although the granting of an Exploration Right permits Shell to commence with exploration activities, certain activities associated with exploration will require Shell to first obtain other regulatory approvals from the relevant authorities prior to commencing with these activities. Such regulatory approvals include certain environmental authorisations in terms of the NEMA, an Integrated Water Use Licence or individual Water Use Licenses in terms of the National Water Act (NWA), the National Heritage Resources Act 25 of 1999 and possibly authorisations in terms of the National Nuclear Regulator Act 47 of 1999 (NNRA), amongst others.

3.3 Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act This act makes provisions for equitable access to and sustainable development of South Africa’s mineral and petroleum resources. Petroleum is defined to include natural gas (see below).

3.3.1 Definitions – gas and petroleum The definition of petroleum in the MPRDA refers to any liquid, solid, hydrocarbon or combustible gas existing in a natural condition in the earth’s crust and includes any liquid or solid hydrocarbon or combustible gas, which gas has in any manner been returned to such natural condition together with condensates of such gas, but does not include coal, bituminous shale or other stratified deposits from which oil can be obtained by destructive distillation or gas arising from a marsh or other surface deposit.

Gas means (as defined in the SI system of units) any hydrocarbon which at normal temperature and pressure, is in a gaseous phase existing in a natural condition in the earth’s crust, regardless of the nature of the host rock, and includes any gas which has in any manner been returned to such natural condition, and includes condensate of such gas, but does not include hydrocarbon gas obtained.

The list of minerals (List 2) attached to the application forms for exploration rights contain inter alia the following minerals: gas and condensate, oil, natural gas and petroleum. Since there is overlap in the commodity definitions, Shell applied for all four minerals included in the type description of ‘petroleum and gas’.

3.3.2 Overview of MPRDA Chapter 2 - Fundamental Principles, section 6, Principles of administrative justice, provides that, subject to the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (Act No. 3 of 2000), any administrative process conducted or decision taken in terms of this Act must be conducted or taken, as the case may be, within a reasonable time and in accordance with the principles of lawfulness, reasonableness and procedural fairness.

Sections 37 to 42 of the Act make provision for environmental management in prospecting and mining operations.

Chapter 6, on Petroleum Exploration and Production, contains section 79, Application for exploration right, which deals with environmental management requirements in the case of petroleum. Section 79(4) provides that, once the application has been accepted, the applicant for an exploration right must notify and consult with any affected party, and must submit an environmental management programme to PASA as the designated authority, within 120 days from the date of notice. Section 79(4)(b) refers to an environmental management programme, yet this should read an environmental management plan.,

25 In terms of section 103 of the MPRDA, the Minister has delegated her powers in respect of the consideration of and issuing of applications for exploration rights to the Director General of Mineral Resources. Further, in terms of section 70, the Minister has designated the South African Agency for the Promotion of Petroleum Exploration and Exploitation (Pty) Ltd, known as the Petroleum Agency South Africa (Proprietary) Limited or “PASA”, to perform the functions as set out in Chapter 6 of the Act. PASA therefore administers this application for an exploration right. However, the Director General, and not PASA, is the authorising authority.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 20

The contents of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) are prescribed in the MPRDA Regulations (R527 of 2004) section 52(2) as well as section 39(3) of the Act, as shown below.

Contents of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) as prescribed in MPRDA Regulations (R527 of 2004)

Regulation 52(2)

(2) An environmental management plan, must substantially be in the standard format provided by the Department and must contain-

(a) a description of the environment likely to be affected by the proposed prospecting or mining operation;

(b) an assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed prospecting or mining operation on the environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, if any;

(c) a summary of the assessment of the significance of the potential impacts, and the proposed mitigation and management measures to minimise adverse impacts and benefits;

(d) financial provision which must include-

(i) the determination of the quantum of the financial provision contemplated in regulation 54; and

(ii) details of the method providing for the financial provision contemplated in regulation 53;

(e) planned monitoring and performance assessment of the environmental management plan;

(f) closure and environmental objectives;

(g) a record of the public participation undertaken and the results thereof; and

(h) an undertaking by the applicant regarding the execution of the environmental management plan.

Section 39(3)

(3) An applicant who prepares an environmental management programme or an environmental management plan must -

(a) establish baseline information concerning the affected environment to determine protection, remedial measures and environmental management objectives;

(b) investigate, assess and evaluate the impact of his or her proposed prospecting or mining operations on -

(i) the environment;

(ii) the socio-economic conditions of any person who might be directly affected by the prospecting or mining operation; and

(iii) any national estate referred to in section 3(2) of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999), with the exception of the national estate contemplated in section 3(2)(i)(vi) and (vii) of that Act;

(c) develop an environmental awareness plan describing the manner in which the applicant intends to inform his or her employees of any environmental risks which may result from their work and the manner in which the risks must be dealt with in order to avoid pollution or the degradation of the environment; and

(d) describe the manner in which he or she intends to -


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 21

(i) modify, remedy, control or stop any action, activity or process which causes pollution or environmental degradation;

(ii) contain or remedy the cause of pollution or degradation and migration of pollutants; and

(iii) comply with any prescribed waste standard or management standards or practices.

In Section 6, MRPDA affirms the principles of administrative justice:

6(1): Subject to the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (Act No. 3 of 2000), any administrative process conducted or decision taken in terms of this Act must be conducted or taken, as the case may be, within a reasonable time and in accordance with the principles of lawfulness, reasonableness and procedural fairness.

Section 5 of MRPDA deals with the legal nature of prospecting right, mining right, exploration right or production right, and rights of holders thereof as follows:

S 5 (3) Subject to this Act, any holder of a prospecting right, a mining right, exploration right or production right may -

a) enter the land to which such right relates together with his or her employees, and bring onto that land any plant, machinery or equipment and build, construct or lay down any surface, underground or under sea infrastructure which may be required for the purpose of prospecting, mining, exploration or production, as the case may be;

b) prospect, mine, explore or produce, as the case may be, for his or her own account on or under that land for the mineral or petroleum for which such right has been granted;

c) remove and dispose of any such mineral found during the course of prospecting, mining, exploration or production, as the case may be;

cA) subject to section 59B of the Diamonds Act, 1986 (Act No. 56 of 1986), (in the case of diamond) remove and dispose of any diamond found during the course of mining operations;

d) subject to the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998), use water from any natural spring, lake, river or stream, situated on, or flowing through, such land or from any excavation previously made and used for prospecting, mining, exploration or production purposes, or sink a well or borehole required for use relating to prospecting, mining, exploration or production on such land; and

e) carry out any other activity incidental to prospecting, mining, exploration or production operations, which activity does not contravene the provisions of this Act.

In context of this application, Section 96 of the MPRDA as read with regulation 74 of the MPRDA regulations provides that any person whose rights or legitimate expectations have been materially and adversely affected by the decision of the Director General in this application may appeal in the prescribed manner to the Minister of Mineral Resources within 30 days after he or she has become aware of the decision or should reasonably become aware of the decision.

3.4 Other legislation This section lists only the key other legislation applicable to environmental processes. There are others, including international conventions, various provincial ordinances, local government regulations etc.

3.4.1 The National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), amongst others, provide for co-operative environmental governance by establishing principles for decision-making on matters affecting the environment.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 22

Chapter 1 of the Act stipulates national environmental management principles, which apply throughout the Republic to the decisions of all organs of state that may significantly affect the environment. From this, it is clear that the Director General must follow these principles in considering the application from Shell to explore for gas in the Karoo.

These principles apply of course in total, but in the present context, the following ones are immediately relevant:

“(1)(a) apply alongside all other appropriate and relevant considerations, the State’s responsibility to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the social and economic rights in Chapter 2 of the Constitution;…

(1)(b) apply as serve as the general framework within which environmental management and implementation plans must be formulated; and

(2) Environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern, and serve their physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social interests equitably;

(4)(a) Sustainable development requires the consideration of all relevant factors including the following:

(i) That the disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological diversity are avoided, or, where they cannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and remedied;

(ii) that pollution and degradation of the environment are avoided, or, where they cannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and remedied;

(iii) that the disturbance of landscapes and sites that constitute the nation’s cultural heritage is avoided, or where it cannot be altogether avoided, is minimised and remedied;

(i) The social, economic and environmental impacts of activities, including disadvantages and benefits, must be considered, assessed and evaluated, and decisions must be appropriate in the light of such consideration and assessment.

(k) Decisions must be taken in an open and transparent manner, and access to information must be provided in accordance with the law.

(l) There must be intergovernmental coordination and harmonisation of policies, legislation and actions relating to the environment.”

The MPRDA requires that that a risk-averse and cautious approach is applied in environmental management, which takes into account the limits of current knowledge about the consequences of decisions and actions (section 2(4)(a)(vii) of the NEMA as read with sections 37(1) and 69(2)(b) of the MPRDA). This means that, assumptions underlying the EMP and uncertainties contained in assessments must be considered in compiling the EMP.

In addition, the Director General, in considering the EMP and the exploration right application as a whole, is bound by the legal principles of administrative decision making as set out in the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000.

Chapter 5 of NEMA provides for integrated environmental management. The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the application of appropriate environmental management tools in order to ensure the integrated environmental management of activities. The general objective of integrated environmental management as including to:


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 23

“(a) promote the integration of the principles of environmental management set out in section 2 of the Act into the making of all decisions which may have a significant effect on the environment;

(b) identify, predict and evaluate the actual and potential impact on the environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, the risks and consequences and alternatives and options for mitigation of activities, with a view to minimising negative impacts, maximising benefits, and promoting compliance with the principles of environmental management set out in set out in section 2

(c) ensure that the effects of activities on the environment receive adequate consideration before actions are taken in connection with them;

(d) ensure adequate and appropriate opportunity for public participation in decisions that may affect the environment.”

The NEMA also requires that an environmental authorisation be issued before the commencement of various activities specified in terms of the NEMA regulations (GNRs 544 and 545 of 18 June 2010). There are several activities associated with the proposed gas exploration activities that would require environmental authorisation prior to commencement of such activities, irrespective of whether an exploration right has been granted by the Minister of Mineral Resources. Furthermore, an environmental authorisation for any given activity may only be issued after Shell has complied with the procedural requirements as set out in the regulations (GNR 543 of 18 June 2010) which once again requires public participation. These procedures may involve a basic assessment or Scoping and EIA, depending on the nature of the activity.

Table 2 and Table 3 list activities from GNRs 544 and 545 which would probably or possibly require EIAs before such activities can commence as part of the exploration proposed by Shell, together with a preliminary assessment of whether they would be applicable to the proposed exploration project. Of these, item 4 of GNR 545 (Table 3) would be triggered for hydraulic fracturing during exploration. This would require a scoping and EIA for an environmental authorisation before hydraulic fracturing may proceed.

Table 2: Possible listed activities from NEMA Listing notice 1 (GN R544) which could be triggered at various stages in the gas development process 26

GN R544 (require basic assessment) Applicability to proposed gas exploration project

1. The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the generation of electricity where:

(i) the electricity output is more than 10 megawatts but less than 20 megawatts; or

(ii) the output is 10 megawatts or less but the total extent of the facility covers an area in excess of 1 hectare.

10.The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the transmission and distribution of electricity ……

(i) outside urban areas or industrial complexes with a capacity of more than 33 but less than 275 kilovolts;

This activity would only potentially be triggered if gas from exploration wells was used to generate electricity.

This activity would only be triggered if sufficient electricity was generated on site (see above), and transmitted and distributed off site.

The nature and volume of

26 Note: The activities listed in Tables 1-3 that would be triggered by the proposed project will be confirmed subsequent to the site selection process


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 24


13. The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the storage, or for the storage and handling, of a dangerous good, where such storage occurs in containers with a combined capacity of 80 but not exceeding 500 cubic meters.

22. The construction of a road, outside urban areas,

(i) with a reserve wider than 13.5 meters or

(ii) where no reserve exists where the road is wider than 8 meters.

24. The transformation of land bigger than 1 000 m2 in size, to residential, retail, commercial, industrial or institutional use, where, as the time of the coming into effect of the schedule such land was zoned open space, conservation or had an equivalent zoning.

47. The widening of a road by more than 6 meters, or the lengthening of a road by more than 1 kilometer -

(i) where the existing reserve is wider than 13,5 meters; or

(ii) where no reserve exists, where the existing road is wider than 8 meters

chemicals to be handled and stored at individual drilling sites will determine to what extent this activity will be triggered

At this stage Shell plans to utilize existing roads and to choose drill sites close to established roads unless unavoidable.

Each drill site will be about 10,000 m2 in size. The existing land use or zoning will also be a determining factor

At this stage Shells plan to utilize existing roads and to choose drill sites close to established roads unless unavoidable

Table 3: Possible listed activities from NEMA Listing notice 2 (GN R545) which could be triggered at various stages in the gas development process (see also Table 2).

GN R545 (requires scoping and EIA) Applicability to proposed gas exploration project

4. The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the refining, extraction or processing of gas, oil or petroleum products with an installed capacity of 50 cubic metres or more per day, excluding facilities for the refining, extraction or processing of gas from landfill sites

5. The construction of facilities or infrastructure for any process or activity which requires a permit or licence in terms of national or provincial legislation governing the generation or release of emissions, pollution or effluent and which is not identified in Notice No. 544 of 2010 or included in the list of waste management activities in terms of Section 19 of the NEMWA in which case that Act will apply.

21. Any activity which requires an exploration right or renewal thereof as contemplated in sections 79 and 81 respectively of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002). [Commencement date of Activity 21: To be published]

This activity triggers a NEMA EIA

Water and waste management requirements may trigger this activity.

This activity is not yet gazetted but may be in the future.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 25

Table 4: Possible listed activities from NEMA Listing notice 3 (GN R546) which could be triggered at various stages in the gas development process (see also Tables 2 and 3).


2. The construction of reservoirs for bulk water supply with a capacity of more than 250 cubic meters. In the

a) Eastern Cape, Northern Cape provinces …

(ff) Areas within 10 kilometers from national parks or world heritage sites or 5 kilometers from any other protected area identified in terms of NEMPAA or from the core area of a biosphere reserve;

d) Western Cape

iii) all areas outside urban areas

4. The construction of a road wider than 4 m with a reserve less than 13.5 m in

(a) Northern Cape Province

(ii) outside an urban area ….

(bb) National Protected Area Expansion Strategy Focus area; …

(cc) Sensitive areas as identified in an environmental management framework as contemplated in chapter 5 of the Act and as adopted by the competent authority;

(ee) critical biodiversity areas as identified in systematic biodiversity plans adopted by the competent authority or in bioregional plans; …..

(gg) areas within 10 km from national parks or world heritage sites or 5 km from any other protected area identified in terms of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 or from the core areas of a biosphere reserve; and in the

(d) Western Cape

(ii) all areas outside urban areas.

10. The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the storage, or storage and handling of a dangerous good, where such storage occurs in containers with a combined capacity of 30 but not exceeding 80 m3 in

(a) Northern Cape Province

(ii) outside urban areas, in

(bb) National Protected Area Expansion Strategy Focus area;

(ee) critical biodiversity areas as identified in systematic biodiversity plans adopted by the competent authority or in bioregional plans;

At this stage Shell plans to utilize existing roads and to choose drill sites close to established roads unless unavoidable

During the selection of possible drill sites, it will need to be established whether road construction or upgrade will be necessary.

The nature and volume of chemicals to be handled and stored at individual drilling sites will determine to what extent this activity will be triggered


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 26


(gg) areas within 10 km from national parks or world heritage sites or 5 km from any other protected area identified in terms of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 or from the core areas of a biosphere reserve; and in the

(e) Western Cape in

(ii) all areas outside urban areas.

12.The clearance of an area of 300 m2 or more of vegetation where 75% or more of the vegetative cover constitutes indigenous vegetation within (b) critical biodiversity areas identified in bioregional plans.

13. The clearance of an area of 1 ha or more of vegetation where 75% or more of vegetative cover constitutes indigenous vegetation in critical biodiversity areas and ecological support areas as identified in systematic biodiversity plans adopted by the competent authority;

a) CBA’s and ecological support areas as identified in systematic biodiversity plans adopted by the competent authority

b) National Protected Area Expansion Strategy Focus areas; and

c) In the Eastern Cape, Northern Cape and Western Cape

ii) outside urban areas, in

bb) National Protected Area Expansion Strategy Focus area;

cc) Sensitive areas as identified in an environmental management framework as contemplated in chapter 5 of the Act and as adopted by the competent authority

ee) core areas in biosphere reserves;

ff) areas within 10 km from national parks or world heritage sites or 5 km from any other protected area identified in terms of the NEM: Protected Areas Act, 2003 or from the core areas of a biosphere reserve.

14.The clearance of an area of 5 hectares or more of vegetation where 75% or more of the vegetative cover constitutes indigenous vegetation, except where such vegetation is required for;

i) All areas outside urban areas.

19. The widening of a road by more than 4 metres, or the lengthening of a road by more than 1 kilometre.

cc) Sensitive areas as identified in an environmental management framework as contemplated in chapter 5 of the Act and as adopted by the competent authority;

gg) Areas within 10 kilometres from national parks or world heritage


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 27


sites or 5 kilometres from any other protected area identified in terms of NEMPAA of from the core area of a biosphere reserve;

c) In Western Cape

ii). All areas outside urban areas.

26. Phased activities for all activities listed in this Schedule and as it applies to a specific geographical area, which commenced on or after the effective date of this Schedule, where any phase of the activity may be below a threshold but where a combination of the phases, including expansions or extensions, will exceed a specified threshold.

3.4.2 National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004) The purposes of the National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act, 2004 (NEMBA) (Act 10 of 2004) include to provide for:

the management and conservation of South Africa's biodiversity within the framework of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998;

the protection of species and ecosystems that warrant national protection; and

the sustainable use of indigenous biological resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from bioprospecting involving indigenous biological resources.

NEMBA in Chapter 3, on Biodiversity Planning and Monitoring, provides for the preparation and adoption of the National Biodiversity Framework, the determination of bioregions and the publication of bioregional plans. NEMBA provides further for adoption, coordination and alignment of biodiversity plans and biodiversity management agreements, amongst others. Any existing statutory instruments for biodiversity protection and management which may have been adopted in terms of this chapter must be taken into account during the implementation of any exploration activities as well as during assessments for authorisations in terms of additional legislation such as, for instance, environmental authorisations in terms of the NEMA.

Furthermore, should Shell be granted the exploration right, all consequent EIAs would be governed by these biodiversity instruments, and would be activities in the EIA list where threatened ecosystems are involved.

Further provision is made for protection of threatened or protected ecosystems and species as well as provisions guarding against the introduction of alien and invasive species. The Act identifies restricted activities involving listed threatened, protected or alien species. These activities include picking parts of, or cutting, chopping off, uprooting, damaging or destroying, any specimen of a listed threatened or protected species. As stipulated in Section 57 of the Act, a person may not carry out a restricted activity involving a specimen of a listed threatened or protected species without a permit issued in terms of Chapter 7. Lists of critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable and protected species have been published in GNR 151 of 23 February 2007. Regulations have also been promulgated on Threatened and Protected Species in GNR 152 of 23 February 2007. These lists and associated restricted activities as well as the regulations need to be taken into account during the implementation of any exploration activities as well as during assessments for authorisations associated with the exploration activities in terms of other legislation.

Application may be made for a permit to engage in restricted activities, which application may be subject to various stringent requirements as set out in section 88 of the NEMBA.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 28

3.4.3 National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008) The National Environmental Management: Waste Act (NEMWA) came into effect on 1 July 2009. Section 19 of the NEMWA provides for listed waste management activities and states in Section 19(1) that the Minister may publish a list of waste management activities that have, or are likely to have a detrimental effect on the environment. Such a list was published in GN 718 of 03 July 2009 (GN 718) identifying those waste management activities that require a Waste Management Licence in terms of the Act.

In terms of section 20(b) of the NEMWA, any person who wishes to commence, undertake or conduct a waste management activity must first obtain a waste management licence issued in respect of that activity.

The licensing procedures in terms of the NEMWA once again makes use of the procedural provisions as set out in GNR 543 of 18 June 2010 in terms of the NEMA (i.e. procedural regulations regarding environmental impact assessments) and either a Basic Assessment or Scoping and EIA procedure, both incorporating public participation, must be followed before the issuance of a waste management license will be considered by the relevant authority.

This NEMWA however does not apply to, amongst others:

(a) radioactive waste that is regulated by the Hazardous Substances Act. 1973 (Act No. 15 of 1973). the National Nuclear Regulator Act, 1999 (Act No. 47 of 1999), and the Nuclear Energy Act, 1999 (Act No. 46 of 1999); and

(b) residue deposits and residue stockpiles that are regulated under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002).

Before any exploration activities commence which may generate waste, an assessment as to the applicability of the relevant provisions of the NEMWA will need be made and if so required, any requisite waste management licenses applied for and procured prior to the commencement of any waste management activity which requires licensing.

3.4.4 National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) The National Water Act (NWA) includes provisions requiring that a water use license be issued by the Department of Water Affairs before Shell engages in any activity defined as a water use in terms of the NWA. The development of the EMP proceeded in cognisance of the relevant NWA provisions, and the concerns expressed by I&APs during the process.

Water use in terms of the NWA, section 21, includes:

a) taking water from a water resource;

b) storing water;

c) impeding or diverting the flow of water in a watercourse;

e) engaging in a controlled activity

f) discharging waste or water containing waste into a water resource …;

g) disposing of waste in a manner which may detrimentally impact on a water resource;

i) altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics of a watercourse;

j) removing, discharging or disposing of water found underground if it is necessary for the efficient continuation of an activity or for the safety of people.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 29

Should Shell proceed with exploration, its several points of water use may each need licensing for water use, to be secured through applications for individual or Integrated Water Use licences, as may be required by the Department of Water Affairs.

Public and private interests regarding water use are protected in the NWA through the provisions in section 27, Considerations for issue of general authorisations and licences. This section provides as follows:

1) In issuing a general authorisation or licence a responsible authority must take into account all relevant factors, including--

a) existing lawful water uses;

b) the need to redress the results of past racial and gender discrimination;

c) efficient and beneficial use of water in the public interest;

d) the socio-economic impact--

i) of the water use or uses if authorised; or

ii) of the failure to authorise the water use or uses;

e) any catchment management strategy applicable to the relevant water resource;

f) the likely effect of the water use to be authorised on the water resource and on other water users;

g) the class and the resource quality objectives of the water resource;

h) investments already made and to be made by the water user in respect of the water use in question;

i) the strategic importance of the water use to be authorised;

j) the quality of water in the water resource which may be required for the Reserve and for meeting international obligations; and

k) the probable duration of any undertaking for which a water use is to be authorised.

The EMP has proceeded in the knowledge that potential risks to water resources and from wastewater that may arise from the proposed gas exploration would be mitigated by the provisions of the National Water Act, while at the same time providing foresight in this respect.

3.4.5 Astronomy Geographic Advantage Act (Act 21 of 2007) The Astronomy Geographic Advantage Act (AGA) serves to provide for the preservation and protection of areas within the Republic that are uniquely suited for optical and radio astronomy. The Act provides for the declaration of several categories of Astronomy Advantage Areas, and the management and control of such areas. The purposes of the declaration of areas as astronomy advantage areas are to:

(a) ensure that the geographic areas in the Republic which are suitable for astronomy and related scientific endeavours due to, among other things, atmospheric transparency, low levels of light pollution, low population density or minimal radio frequency interference are protected, preserved and properly maintained;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 30

(b) enhance the existing geographic advantage of those areas highly suitable for astronomy and related scientific endeavours through the restriction of activities that cause or could cause light pollution or radio frequency interference or interfere in any other way with astronomy and related scientific endeavours or astronomy advantage in those areas; and

(c) provide for the management of those areas in the public interest and in accordance with good national and international practices.

The Act provides for the declaration of core astronomy advantage areas, to, among other things, provide protection from light pollution, radio frequency interference and other activities which may affect astronomy and related scientific endeavours or astronomy advantage to an area in which radio or optical astronomy is conducted or will be conducted. Government Notice No. 82 of 5 February 2009, the Declaration of Areas as Astronomy Advantage Areas in South Africa, prescribes the areas of all the land within the Northern Cape Province within 250 km of the centre of the South African Large Telescope (SALT) dome, as well as the whole of the territory of the Northern Cape Province, excluding the Sol T Plaatje Municipality, for radio astronomy purposes, to be an Astronomy Advantage Area. This is called the Karoo Central Astronomy Advantage Area.

Government Notice 1092 of 2010 applies to the core astronomy advantage areas declared in the Government Gazette NO.33462 under Notice No.723 on 20 August 2010, and declares as follows:

(1) The core astronomy advantage area containing the Southern African Large Telescope (SALT); and

(2) The core astronomy advantage area containing the MeerKAT radio telescope and the core of the planned Square Kilometre Array (SKA) radio telescope.

These prescriptions would govern the conditions of any gas exploration right in the Central Precinct.

3.4.6 National Nuclear Regulator Act (Act 47 of 1999) It is possible that certain residues generated during exploration activities may contain some levels of radioactivity which may be subject to the provisions of the National Nuclear Regulator Act (NNRA).

Amongst others, the NNRA provides for safety standards and regulatory practices for protection of persons, property and the environment against nuclear damage. Specifically, should any material derived from exploration activities have the potential to cause any injury to or the death or any sickness or disease of a person or the potential to cause other damage, including any damage to or any loss of use of property or damage to the environment due to ionizing radiation, Shell will be required to obtain a certificate of registration in terms of section 22(1) or a certificate of exemption in terms of section 22(3)(b)(ii) of the NNRA, depending on various circumstances. The authorisation process and conditions will ensure that any such activity will be safe to the public and the environment.

Where any activity associated with exploration may require any authorisation in terms of the NNRA, an assessment to that effect will need to be made and the necessary authorisation obtained.

3.4.7 Strategic environmental assessment and Environmental Management Frameworks

There is no statutory requirement for strategic environmental assessment in South Africa. However, NEMA provides for the development of procedures for the assessment of the impact of policies, plans and programmes. In addition, a requirement related to SEA in the context of spatial planning is referred to in the Municipal Planning and Performance Management Regulations of 2001 (Chapter 2, section 2(4)(f)), promulgated in terms of the Municipal Systems Act No 32 of 2000), and in The White Paper on Spatial Planning and Land Use Management, produced by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs in 2001 (Section 3.2).


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 31

South African principles for SEA are contained in the Guideline Document: Strategic Environmental Assessment in South Africa.

In effect, the Environmental Management Framework incorporates many of the principles of the SEA. The Environmental Management Framework Regulation of 2010 in terms of NEMA prescribe requirements in this respect. in section 2. (1) The purpose of this Part is to provide—

(a) for the Minister or MEC with concurrence of the Minister to initiate the compilation of information and maps referred to in section 24(3) of the Act specifying the attributes of the environment in particular geographical areas;

(b) for such information to inform environmental management; and

(c) for such information and maps to be used as environmental management frameworks in the consideration, as contemplated in section 24(4)(b)(vi) of the Act, of applications for environmental authorisations in or affecting the geographical areas to which those frameworks apply.

(3) Environmental management frameworks are aimed at─

(a) promoting sustainability;

(b) securing environmental protection; and

(c) promoting cooperative environmental governance

4. A draft environmental management framework must—

(a) identify by way of a map or otherwise the geographical area to which it applies;

(b) specify the attributes of the environment in the area, including the sensitivity, extent, interrelationship and significance of those attributes;

(c) identify any parts in the area to which those attributes relate;

(d) state the conservation status of the area and in those parts;

(e) state the environmental management priorities of the area;

(f) indicate the kind of developments or land uses that would have a significant impact on those attributes and those that would not;

(g) indicate the kind of developments or land uses that would be undesirable in the area or in specific parts of the area;

(h) indicate the parts of the area with specific socio-cultural values and the nature of those values;

(i) identify information gaps;

(j) indicate a revision schedule for the environmental management framework; and

(k) include any other matters that may be specified.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 32

4.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT – THE KAROO This section provides a description of the existing environment associated with the Central Precinct. Most of the information provided below is based on desktop studies. A thorough baseline will be carried out as part of the full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the vicinity of each of the proposed well site locations to:

Inform and guide the site selection process;

Inform and guide site specific design, construction and operations at well sites, access roads and any other areas of activities;

Inform and guide the development of restoration plans; and

Provide a benchmark against which any potential impacts can be assessed and monitored, including the level of success of restoration.

4.1 Geology A description of the geology was derived through a thorough desktop study of available published resources at a: high (Karoo basin) and regional (Precinct) level. Field verification of the precinct was then undertaken to gain a firsthand overview of the geological setting, to support the desk study information.

For more detailed information regarding the geology, refer to the groundwater report in Volume 2.

4.1.1 High Level Geology: Karoo Basin The Main Karoo Basin has been controlled and shaped by four major geodynamic events (Woodford 2002):

Deposition of the Karoo sediments and the uplift of the Cape Fold Belt,

Intrusion of Karoo basalt and dolerite,

Intrusion of Kimberlite and localised mantle up-welling,

Modern geomorphology, deposition of recent sediments, uplift, cessation of regional tectonics.

The present day Main Karoo Basin is in-filled with sedimentary strata which are capped by a 1.4 km thick unit of basaltic lava. Major lithostratigraphic units of the Karoo Supergroup are shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10. The horizontal strata provide a capping to the shale gas reservoirs present at depths between 1 500 m and 4 500 m depth and protection to the overlying groundwater aquifers. The various lithologies making up the stratigraphic units of the Karoo sequence include the: Dwyka Group, Ecca Group, Beaufort Group, Molteno Formation, Elliot Formation, Clarens Formation and Dolerite Intrusives.

The structural pattern is dominated by an E – W and NNW – SSE trends. Faults and fractures have been infilled by dolerite dykes some of which continue over 500 km.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 33

Figure 9: Cross Section of the Main Karoo Basin (reproduced from Woodford 2002)

Figure 10: Schematic Aerial Distributions of Lithostratigraphic Units in the Main Karoo Basin (reproduced from Woodford 2002)

MAIN KAROO BASINS N

Johannesburg

Drakensberg Group

Tarkastad SubgroupAdelaide Subgroup

Molteno, Elliot, Clarence FmsBeaufort Group

KarooSuper Group

CapeSuper Group

Ecca GroupDwyka GroupWitteberg GroupBokkeveld GroupTable Mountain GroupPre-Cape rocks

Lesotho

Cape Fold BeltGeo

rge

km5432100 50 100 km

12800-002

Not to Scale

Legend:

Sandstone and subordinate Mudrock/Rhythmite

Basalt

Mudrock/Rhythmite and subordinate Sandstone

Carbonaceous ShaleMudrock/Rhythmite

DiamictiteExploration Application Area

Dwyka Gp

Prince Albert Fm

Prince Albert Fm

Whitehill Fm

CamarvonFm

ECCA Gp Adela

ide

Subgroup

Tarka

stad

Subgro

up

Ecca

Gp

Beaufort

Gp

Elliot F

m

DrakensbergGp

Ripon Fm

ECCA Gp

Dwyka Gp

Volksrust Fm

Pietermaritzburg Fm

Dwyka Gp

Dwyka Gp

Katberg, Burgersdorp Fm

Katberg

Burgersdorp FmMolteno Fm

Clarens Fm

Koonap FmFort Brown FmLaingsburg FmVischkuil Fm

Collingham FmWhitewhill FmPrince Albert Fm

Koedoesbers FmSkoorsteenberg FmKookfontein Fm

Waterford Fm

Balfour FmKatberg Fm

Fort Brown FmRipon FmCollingham FmWhitehill FmPrince Albert FmDwyka Gp

Tierberg Fm

Tierberg Fm

Volksrust Fm

Vryheid Fm

Vryheid Fm

Bloemfontein

Durban

Port ElizabethCape Town

Johannesburg

34 S0

32 S0

31 S0

28 S0

26 S0

19 E0 21 E0 23 E0 25 E0 27 E0 29 E0 31 E0

12800-006

B

C D

A

100 100 200 km0

Middleton Fm

Balfour FmBeaufort West


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 34

4.1.2 Regional Geology: Central Precinct The regional geology setting of the Central Precinct is discussed with reference to the 6 maps (Maps C1 to C6) presented in the groundwater report in Volume 2.

4.1.2.1 Lithology The geology shown in Figure 11 was compiled using the simplified geology of South Africa (DWA) with the dolerite sills and dykes obtained from the published 1: 250 000 scale geological maps superimposed on the map. The main Karoo sediments that outcrop in the precinct include the sediments comprised of the Adelaide and Tarkastad Subgroups of the Beaufort Group. A small part of the north and NW of the precinct is underlain by sediments of the Ecca Group.

The Adelaide Subgroup covers the large majority of the Central Precinct and comprises predominantly mudstone. They are underlain by the Ecca Group. The Teekloof Formation is characterised by a greater relative abundance of red mudstone compared to the underlying and overlying units, in practise the boundaries are linked to specific sandstone-rich marker units (members). The arenaceous Poortjie and Oudeberg Members constitute the base of the Teekloof and Balfour Formations, respectively. In the western basin the Abrahamskraal and Teekloof Formations attain thicknesses of 2,500 and 1,400 m, respectively. The Balfour Formation attains a maximum thickness of 2,000 m.

The Tarkastad Subgroup is present in the far eastern portion of the precinct north and east of Bieu-Bethesda (Figure 11). This subgroup is characterised by a greater abundance of both sandstone and mudstone when compared to the Adelaide Subgroup. The subgroup has a maximum thickness of 2,000 m and comprises a lower, sandstone rich Katberg Formation and an upper, mudstone rich Burgersdorp Formation. An example of typical sandstone is shown in Figure 12.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 35

Figure 11: Regional Geology – Central Precinct.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 36

The precinct is characterised by horizontal to quasi horizontal strata. The scene of horizontally bedded sandstone and shale depicted in Figure 13 is typical of the geological setting throughout the precinct. The horizontal bedding gives rise to the wide expansive landscape of flat to gently undulating plateaux as shown in Figure 14.

Dolerite sills and dykes occur in abundance in the northern and central parts of the precinct. The dolerite intrusions represent the main targets for groundwater exploration. The high ridges and inselbergs which characterise large parts of the precinct are the result of erosion resistant dolerite forming cappings to these features, as illustrated in Figure 15.

The locations of four deep core boreholes are indicated on Figure 11. Two are located within the Central Precinct boundary (AB1 and KA1) and two (VR1 and CR1) are located outside and to the south-east of the precinct boundary. These boreholes are all located along a similar stratigraphic horizon with largely reduced presence of dolerite intrusion to the south of these boreholes.

Regional Structure The distribution of intruded dykes in the Main Karoo Basin forms three major structural domains, namely the Western, Eastern and Transkei-Lesotho-Northern Karoo Domains, (Woodford 2002). The Western Karoo Domain extends from Calivinia to Middelburg, and covers the entire Central Precinct area. It is characterised by two distinctive structural features:

E-W Dyke Intrusions

Some of these dykes are extensive and continue over 500 km. They were intruded along major lateral E-W dislocation/shear zones and are accompanied by NW and NE trending sympathetic shears.

NNW Dyke Intrusions

These are also extensive and are regularly spaced from east to west across the domain. The trend of these dykes varies along the trajectory, curving from WNW in the south to NS in the north.

Only limited fault zones are indicated on the published 1:250 000 scale geological maps of the precinct. These zones have similar trends to the dykes and form part of the Western Karoo Domain.

4.2 Climate Climatic data was taken from the South African Weather Service (SAWS) summary of 1984 (WB40, 1984).

4.2.1 Local Temperature The monthly variation of dry bulb temperatures for 2010 is shown in Table 6. The average temperature daily is 25.2°C, which could be described as temperate. The temperature also appears to rarely fall below 0°C, however extreme cold temperatures of -5.6°C have been recorded. Table 5 is a summary of historical dry bulb temperature measurements made at Beaufort West.

Figure 12: Massive Sandstone

Figure 13: Characteristic horizontal bedding

Figure 14: Characteristic Expansive Landscape with dolerite capped range of hills

Figure 15: Inselberg, dolerite capping and dyke


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 37

Table 5: Long-term annual average temperature and relative humidity statistics (WB40, 1984)

Site Dry bulb temperature (°C) Relative Humidity (%)

Daily Extreme 08h00 14h00 20h00

Average Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Beaufort West 25.2 4.7

(July) 32.2

(January) -5.6 42 62 29 39

Table 6: Monthly dry bulb temperature statistics for 2010

Month Beaufort West

Min (°C) Ave (°C) Max (°C) Jan 11.3 24.2 39.2 Feb 3.4 24.7 39.4 Mar 10 22.6 36.4 Apr 4.8 18.6 35.9 May 1.5 16.3 28.1 Jun 0.7 12 27.9 Jul 0 13.5 27 Aug 0.2 15.8 32.5 Sep 2.7 16.7 35.1 Oct 6.2 17.1 34.2 Nov 9.1 20.9 36.2 Dec 9.7 21 36.8 4.2.2 Precipitation The daily rainfall data for eight rain gauges in the precinct were extracted (Kunz, R, 2004) and analysed. These eight rain gauges were chosen due to their long historical record and their proximity to the site area. The locations of the rain gauges are shown in the surface water report in Volume 2. The data was analysed to determine the rainfall depths for the different recurrence interval 24 hour storms (Smithers and Schulze, 2003) as well as the MAP, minimum, average and maximum monthly rainfall depths. The results of the analysis are given in Table 7 and Table 8.

This area falls in the arid region of South Africa where the potential evaporation far exceeds the mean annual rainfall (MAP). The mean annual Symons pan evaporation ranges from 1 800 mm to 2600 mm and the MAP from 100 mm to 500 mm (WRC, 1994).

The results given in the tables highlight the following:-

The MAP in the precinct is low ranging from 205 mm to 284 mm.

The rainfall is one of extremes. There are years where there is no rainfall as shown by the minimum average monthly rainfall depths and other years where there is significant rain fall as shown by the maximum average monthly rainfall depths.

The area is prone to droughts and hence surface water availability is not reliable;

The rainfall is seasonal with the majority of the rainfall falling between October and May.

The area can receive significant 24 hour rainfall depths as shown by the 50 year, 100 year and 200 year 24 hour rainfall depths. The area will be subject to flooding.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 38

Table 7: MAP, Monthly Average, Maximum and Minimum monthly rainfall depths

MAP (mm) Monthly Minimum, average and maximum rainfall depths (mm/month)

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Sterling (0140616_W) 205.6 Average 13.0 18.6 18.3 21.5 29.5 43.3 20.5 13.5 5.7 5.5 8.0 8.3

Maximum 48.4 137.8 78.9 116.2 177.0 211.6 95.2 97.3 23.8 41.0 79.7 85.4

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Rheboksfontein (0141066_W) 216.9 Average 12.5 21.1 19.0 21.4 34.8 39.8 26.6 11.9 7.0 7.4 8.5 6.7

Maximum 62.5 93.0 96.0 114.8 248.0 164.0 96.5 62.5 46.0 40.6 86.0 47.5

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nelspoort (0093070_W) 204.7 Average 13.7 18.1 20.2 19.2 29.3 41.6 21.7 11.0 5.3 6.8 9.0 8.8

Maximum 112.3 137.2 82.1 105.4 117.2 142.1 104.1 55.5 33.8 57.4 86.5 98.9

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kampferskraal (0093074_W) 217.9 Average 16.6 23.3 21.5 19.8 27.9 40.4 21.3 12.2 6.1 7.8 10.7 10.4

Maximum 86.5 119.0 109.5 108.5 156.0 184.0 127.0 72.0 37.5 49.0 92.0 104.1

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Bakensrug (0093314_W) 218.4 Average 16.0 24.6 24.1 19.7 30.4 33.5 20.5 14.4 7.5 8.5 8.7 10.5

Maximum 76.5 137.7 160.5 120.5 200.3 161.7 109.5 79.5 48.0 54.5 106.7 75.2

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Murraysburg (0117447_W) 267.2 Average 16.1 29.5 26.1 26.3 39.1 46.1 26.0 18.2 9.0 10.3 10.1 10.4

Maximum 85.4 124.7 147.7 145.8 210.8 150.1 121.2 101.6 42.0 63.0 104.4 75.3

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Doornbosch (0095123_W) 372.3 Average 28.2 35.1 32.3 35.0 47.0 57.1 33.3 30.6 16.4 17.9 21.2 18.3

Maximum 145.9 175.1 130.0 190.8 150.0 198.1 115.3 136.5 70.0 102.6 193.5 162.0

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Quaggasdrift (0095006_W) 384.4 Average 26.9 35.4 32.8 35.5 52.1 60.7 39.3 31.0 16.7 17.3 19.6 17.2

Maximum 127.0 211.6 139.4 150.5 166.4 174.5 152.1 150.3 82.8 80.5 140.1 96.2

Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 39

Table 8: The 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 200 year return period 24-hour rainfall depths (mm/month)

Rain Gauge Return Period (years)

2 5 10 20 50 100 200 Sterling (0140616_W) 243 29.8 42.1 50.8 59.6 71.7 81.4 Rheboksfontein (0141066_W) 235 38.8 54.8 66.1 77.6 93.3 105.7 Nelspoort (0093070_W) 226 35.1 49.3 59.4 69.6 83.5 94.6 Kampferskraal (0093074_W) 219 34.5 48.5 58.5 68.5 82.2 93.1 Bakensrug (0093314_W) 218 34.5 48.6 58.5 68.5 82.3 93.2 Murraysburg (0117447_W) 257 33.3 47.0 56.5 66.2 79.4 90.0 Doornbosch (0095123_W) 407 45.2 63.7 76.7 89.8 107.8 122.0 Quaggasdrift (0095006_W) 411 48.4 68.1 82.1 96.0 115.3 130.5


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 40

4.2.3 Wind Speed and Direction Figure 16 shows a summary of the wind conditions at Beaufort West. Wind roses comprise 16 spokes, which represent the directions from which winds blew during the period. The colours reflect the different categories of wind speeds; the grey area, for example, representing winds of 1 m/s to 2 m/s. The dotted circles provide information regarding the frequency of occurrence of wind speed and direction categories.

For the current wind roses, each dotted circle represents a 5 % frequency of occurrence. The value given in the centre of the circle described the frequency with which calms occurred, i.e. periods during which the wind speed was below 1 m/s.

Figure 16: Wind roses for Beaufort West

It should be noted that Beaufort West falls just outside the study area towards the southwest. The effect of the topographical barrier that shelters the study area towards the north would not be shown by this figure. Instead, it is expected that the southerly wind components may be less pronounced. Nonetheless, it is believed that the prevailing easterly wind would be similar to the conditions in the study area. Furthermore, the strong westerly winds are also expected to occur in the study area. Low occurrence of calm wind conditions are also illustrated with these observations.

4.2.4 Microclimate Microclimates are dictated by the local topography. As shown in Figure 17, the most significant rise in topography is towards the southern sector. It is expected that these mountain ranges would determine the prevailing wind conditions to a great degree. Southerly winds would mostly be sheltered. This would only apply to the area south of the 32° latitude. North of this latitude, the relatively flat terrain will have no significant impact.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 41

Figure 17: Major topographical features in the Central Precinct

4.2.5 Extreme Weather Conditions The Central Precinct is fairly protected against extreme weather conditions. Potential extreme weather conditions for the central region are noted below:

The study area is not located on a hurricane track or adjacent to a warm ocean. Therefore it is not expected that the site will experience a hurricane, or at least there is a very low probability.

It is important to note the difference between a hurricane and hurricane force winds. The latter refers to a wind speed scale called the Beaufort Scale, where hurricane force winds are those with speeds above 118 km/h. This likelihood of this wind speed being exceeded (excluding the occurrence of tornadoes) has an estimated likelihood of about 0.1 per annum.

No evidence of tornadoes could be found for the study area. This risk of tornadoes occurring in the study area is considered to be 1 x 10-7 per year.

A new Lightning Detection Network (LDN) recently (2006) set up by the SAWS in South Africa reports that the study area experiences between 1 (western portion) and 5 (north-eastern portion) lightning flashes per year per km².

4.3 Topography 4.3.1 High Level Topography: Karoo Basin The Main Karoo Basin covers the greater part of the central region of South Africa. Surface altitudes range from 800 to 3 650 mamsl. Altitudes are highest in the east decreasing gradually as the surface slopes to the west. The generally flat to undulating topography is broken by the up-warped plateau edges and the escarpment, most prominent in the Drakensberg region.

The topography is heavily influenced by the underlying geology of alternating sequence of horizontally bedded sandstone, siltstone, shale, rhythmite and mudstone of Karoo age, combined with dolerite sills and dykes. The sequence is over 5 000 m thick. These lithologies are intruded by dolerite sills and dykes. The horizontal bedding gives rise to the characteristic Karoo landscape of expansive plains formed on siltstone or


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 42

sills, low ridges following sandstone outcrops and high ridges and inselbergs where dolerite sills form resistant cappings (see photographs in Figure 13 - Figure 15).

4.3.2 Regional Level Topography: Central Precinct According to Mucina and Rutherford (2006) the majority of the Central Precinct can be described as flat with gently sloping plains, interspersed with hills and rocky outcrops. The altitude generally varies between 1 000 mamsl and 1 700 mamsl. The area is further characterised by discrete areas of slopes and ridges including dolerite dykes and sills, in these areas altitude varies between 1 000 mamsl and 1 900 mamsl. The Central Precinct is bordered to the south by the steeper slopes of the Great Escarpment.

Dolerite sill and ring-complexes are often prominent features of the Karoo landscape. These structures are easily recognized on satellite images, where they often display a sub-circular saucer-like shape, the rims of which are commonly exposed as topographic highs forming ring-like outcrops.

Topography forms an integral part of the environment and affects surface drainage, microclimates, soil formation and ecology. Each of these elements is discussed in more detail separately.

4.4 Soil Spatial information from the Golder GIS database was used to create three overlays for the Central Precinct including the 1:1 000 000 Geology map for South Africa, a general soil pattern map for South Africa and topographical background based on the digital terrain model (DTM) data.

An overlay of the soil classes over the precinct (Figure 18) displayed the following five soil classes of significance:

Soils with minimal development (Lithosols);

Rock outcrops with limited soils;

Structured soils with marked clay accumulation;

Soils on alluvial deposits; and

Red soils with high base status.

A brief description of these soils is given in the sections that follow. More detailed information can be obtained in the soil report in Volume 2.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 43

Figure 18: Soil classes of the Central Precinct


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 44

4.4.1 Lithosols on the Beaufort sediments The Lithosols cover a large area of the precinct, stretching in an east- west band over the centre of the project area and covering large parts in the west of the project area. Soils in this class are derived from in-situ weathering of Beaufort Group sediments and have undergone minimal development. These soils are light coloured, usually shallow (<300 mm) in profile and interface directly with hard or weathering rock (including the elliptic zones). Lime is often present in the soil profile.

No information for this specific soil class could be obtained from the National Land Type Survey database, however, the characteristics will be similar to the Lithosols of the Central Precinct (Golder 2011). These soils displayed fine-grained loamy sand to sandy loam textures, massive structure and soft to slightly firm consistency when moist often containing a small amount of angular gravel and low organic content typical of the semi-arid region. Chemically, these soils have alkaline pH, often resulting from elevated concentrations of calcium in the form of carbonates. In agricultural terms the soils are consider of poor quality that are at best useful as grazing lands.

4.4.2 Rock outcrops with limited soils Rock outcrops with limited soils are in abundance over the precinct. This soil unit can be described as manifesting in-between rock outcrops and/or overly rock at shallow to moderate depths. These soils are associated with dolerite or Beaufort sediments. Soil characteristics are similar to the Lithosols when in association with the Beaufort sediments but tend to be more reddish in colour and of heavier texture when derived from the dolerite. These areas are perceived to have low agricultural potential due to their shallow nature and rocky surfaces.

4.4.3 Structured soils with marked clay accumulation In the Central Precinct, soils with marked clay accumulation occur mainly in association with the Beaufort sediments but are at times associated with dolerite. When the soils are derived from Beaufort sediments they are greyish to brownish in colour. When the soils are of dolerite origin the soils can have relatively high magnesium and iron content which impart a strong red colour.

The texture of these soils may vary between sandy clay loam and sandy clay. Chemical profiles of the soils (Land Type Survey Staff, 1972-2003) indicate highly basic pH and high base status in the sub layer, while the topsoil is sandy with significantly lower base status. Chemically, dolerite derived soils are perceived as being more fertile than the soils from the Beaufort sediments.

The strong structure encountered in this soil class indicates poor drainage capability, which in turn, may lead to issues for storage and rehabilitation of these soils. Erosion and compaction will be of importance when management measures are considered. Soils from this class are associated with low agricultural potential.

4.4.4 Soils on alluvial deposits This soil class is associated with riverbeds and drainage ways and are mainly present in the flatter topography or wide valleys. They are present in the south and southwest of the precinct. These alluvial soils can have varying depths and marked differences in textural characteristics. These soils can be associated with large water courses and are therefore of importance in the context of the predominately dry surrounding catchment. Rivulets and rocky streambeds serve to channels water from mountainous areas and usually comprise rocky banks and shallow soils overlying rock and are associated with steeper landscape.

4.4.5 Red soils with high base status Red soils with high base status constitute 20% of the most south-western of the precinct. The soil profile is typically sandy in texture with an imbalance of calcium and magnesium, which may indicate a potential risk for instability. Base status is not in the same order compared to the Lithosols and clay soil classes, which can ascribed to the lower contents of calcium pH is basic and organic carbon content is low, as can be expected for this sparsely vegetated region with low precipitation.

Soil from this soil class is perceived as having high agricultural potential soils as they usually present favourable depth. Depth ranges are not provided in the available soil information but a typical profile (Land Type Survey Staff, 2006) located in this class, indicates a depth of 0.5 m for the subsoil. The seemingly adequate depth may raise expectations of a moderate agricultural potential, but given the semi-arid setting,


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 45

development of the profile at depth is very slow. It is therefore anticipated that depth of this soil class in this particular region will not be favourable for agricultural utilisation.

4.5 Terrestrial Ecology A literature survey was conducted in order to determine which, if any, areas within the greater exploration area are regarded as ecologically sensitive. A list of potential occurring species in each of the potential drilling areas was obtained through databases and a literature study of relevant publications. The list of species was then cross referenced with the IUCN database (IUCN, 2010) and the national and provincial Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) lists (NEMBA, 2007) in order to determine the probability of Red Data or protected species occurring within the area.

The fieldwork component of the ecological assessment involved a ground truthing exercise, which served to determine whether or not the data collected during the literature review is correct, at a broad scale level. This exercise also served to identify biodiversity sensitivities which will need to be taken into account when selecting drilling sites in future.

The result of the ecological assessment are summarised below. For details, refer to the ecology report in Volume 2.

4.5.1 Vegetation 4.5.1.1 High Level Vegetation: Biomes Biomes can be defined as the major communities of the world, classified according to their predominant vegetation and characterised by adaptations of organisms to that particular environment. The single most important factor influencing the biomes in South Africa is the weather and, more specifically, the rainfall.

Important factors to be taken into account with regard to the weather and its influence on the biomes of South Africa are:

The western parts of the country are much drier than the east;

Rainfall occurs in winter in the west, but in summer in most other regions; and

Temperatures in the mountains and on the Highveld are more extreme than along the coast.

As shown in Figure 19 the Central Precinct is comprised of Nama Karoo and Grassland Biomes, these are described in more detail in the ecology report in Volume 2.

4.5.1.2 Regional Level Vegetation: Types in the Central Precinct 4.5.1.2.1 Vegetation Types According to Mucina and Rutherford (2006) the Central Precinct encompasses eight vegetation types namely:

Upper Karoo Hardeveld NKu2

Gamka Karoo NKl1

Eastern Upper Karoo NKu4

Southern Karoo Riviere AZi6

Eastern Lower Karoo NKl2

Northern Upper Karoo NKu3

Karoo Escarpment Grassland Gh1

Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland The coverage of these vegetation units for the Central Precinct is shown in Figure 20, and discussed in more detail in the ecology report in Volume 2.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 46

Figure 19: Biomes in which the exploration area occurs


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 47

Figure 20: Vegetation communities occurring in the Central Precinct


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 48

The vegetation of the Central Precinct grades quickly between Karoo, Grassland and Thicket Biomes. Some typical photos of the vegetation in the area are shown in Figure 21 to Figure 24.

Figure 21: Photograph taken in the Gamka Karoo vegetation type near Nelspoort

Figure 22: Photograph taken in the Southern Karoo Riviere vegetation type near Three Sisters


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 49

Figure 23: Photograph taken in the Eastern Upper Karoo vegetation type near Victoria West

Figure 24: Photograph taken in the Upper Karoo Hardeveld vegetation type near Murraysburg


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 50

4.5.1.2.2 Plant species diversity The PRECIS (National Herbarium Pretoria (PRE) Computerised Information System (CIS)) data for these grid squares returned 753 plant species known to occur in these grid squares. Of these species, 24 are considered rare or are listed as Red Data species (according to IUCN (IUCN, 2010) and TOPS (NEMBA, 2007) lists); species overlap considerably between vegetation types and vegetation communities. Refer to the ecology report in Volume 2 for a list of red data species.

4.5.2 Animal life Well over 400 fauna species are known to occur in the Central Precinct of the study area. Of these species four are of particular concern due to their Red Data status and limited distribution ranges:

Blue Crane, Grus paradiseus (see Figure 25);

Mountain Zebra, Equus zebra;

White-tailed Mouse, Mastomys albicaudatus;

Riverine Rabbit Bunolagus monticularis; and

Karoo Rock Sengi, Elephantulus pilicaudus.

The species with the highest distribution in the Central Precinct include the Riverine Rabbit and Blue Crane. For more detailed information, refer to the ecology report in Volume 2.

4.5.2.1 Reptiles According to Branch (1996) less than 50 reptile species are known to occur within the Central Precinct. Five reptilian species were recorded in the Central Precinct surveys (see the ecology report in Volume 2 for details). None of the recorded species are classified as Red Data Species. It is likely that more species could occur in the area but, but due to the shy nature of the taxon it is usually impossible to record all species in an area during a study of limited time.

4.5.2.1.1 Amphibia No frog species were recorded during the study in the Central Precinct area, and therefore no Red Data or protected species were recorded. Amphibian species may occur in seasonal rivers which occur in the area and may occupy the wetlands in the area, these will however be unsuitable as drilling sites and therefore it is unlikely that any amphibian species will be affected by the exploration activities. Aquatic species such as Xenopis sp usually occur in man-made dams in the area and drinking troughs occurring on the farms in the area.

4.5.2.1.2 Avifuana Approximately 350 species of birds are known to occur in the area in which the Central Precinct is situated, some of which are endemic to the area. Thirty species were found to occur within the study area during the time of the study (see list in the ecology report in Volume 2). Of the bird species known to occur in the study area, 14 are listed as Red Data species, of the 30 recorded species, only the Kori Bustard, Ardeotis kori (VU) was listed as a Red Data species. Kori Bustards were common species in the northern part of the Central Precinct, Victoria West and Rietfontein sites.

4.5.2.1.3 Small mammals Three hundred and ninety-nine mammal indigenous mammal species occur in Southern Africa, of these species about 54 species historically occur in the region in which the study area occurs. Of the 54 historically occurring species in the area, 19 species are locally extinct. Mammal species diversity was assumed to be moderate to low in the study area, with only seven species being recorded (see list in the ecology report in Volume 2). The reasons for the low mammalian species diversity may be due to degradation of habitat in

Figure 25: Blue Crane, Grus paradiseus.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 51

the study area due to anthropogenic impacts such as grazing, and the fact that some species have been persecuted historically. None of the species recorded were listed as Red Data species or considered protected species.

4.6 Surface water The surface water is described in the following sections on the basis of a desktop study and review of available information. A more detailed surface water report is attached in Volume 2.

4.6.1 Relevant River Systems The Central Precinct falls mainly in the Northern Cape Province but also in the Western Cape Province and the Eastern Cape Province. In the Northern Cape Province, the Central Precinct falls into the Ongers, Brak and Seekoei River Catchments which form part of the Orange River Catchment which enters the sea on the border of South Africa and Namibia. Of these rivers, only the Seekoei and the Orange Rivers are perennial.

In the Western Cape Province, the Central Precinct falls into the Sout, Buffels and the Kariega River Catchments, which form part of the Groot River Catchment and then the Gamtoos River Catchment which enters the sea in the Eastern Cape Province. Of these rivers, only the Groot and the Gamtoos Rivers are perennial. In the Eastern Cape Province, the Central Precinct falls into the Gats and Kamdeboo River Catchments which form part of the Sondags River

4.6.2 Relevant Drainage Areas The Central Precinct falls in the secondary drainage areas D6 and D3 in the Northern Cape Province, secondary drainage areas L1 and L2 in the Western Cape Province secondary drainage area N1 in the Eastern Cape Province (WRC, 1994). This area falls in the arid region of South Africa where the potential evaporation far exceeds the mean annual rainfall (MAP). The mean annual Symons pan evaporation ranges from 1800 mm to 2600 mm and the MAP from 100 mm to 500 mm (WRC, 1994).

4.7 Groundwater This baseline description of the hydrogeology of the Central Precinct is based upon a desk study of available data, supported by brief field verification. Available reports and data for groundwater boreholes obtained from the National Groundwater Data Base (NGDB) of the Department of Water Affairs (DWA) have provided a large volume of information which has been used to prepare this regional overview of the groundwater situation. The more detailed groundwater report is available in Volume 2.

4.7.1 High Level Groundwater: Karoo Basin The Karoo lithologies are characterised by very low primary porosity and permeability, <0.1% to <0.02%. Deep holes (up 5550m) drilled by SOEKOR in the late 60’s confirmed that the permeabilities of the sandstone/siltstone are very low, and vary from 0.00 – 2 m/d for Beaufort strata and 0.00 – 0.1m/d for Ecca strata. Overall the deep core logs have confirmed that the vast majority of the deep Karoo sequence is composed of tight and cemented strata.

Weathering and fracturing within the Karoo rocks provides secondary porosity and permeability. This zone controls the presence of groundwater and groundwater is widespread in the upper 50m and to a lesser extent the upper 100m of the geological profile. An analysis of fracture frequency struck in boreholes shows that the highest number of fractures are present with 10m of the water level, and reduces rapidly once below 50m. This confirms the majority of groundwater is present within 50 – 100m of ground surface.

The study has indicated:

The depth of groundwater supply boreholes is mostly <150m, with the vast majority of boreholes (92% of 1756 records) reportedly <100m deep.

Sustainable borehole yields are between 0.5 and 2 l/s over most of the precinct. An area around Victoria West has yields of 2 – 5l/s and a small area in the SW of the precinct NE of Beaufort West is characterised by yields of >5l/s.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 52

Groundwater levels are generally shallow with 91% of reported levels <20m (1712 records) confirming that the groundwater resources are driven by rainfall recharge.

Groundwater quality is variable but mostly potable. 82% of water is Class 0 or 1 (SANS 241, 2005) and only 4.4% reported as Class 3 or 4 (2356 records).

Groundwater is widely used for domestic, livestock watering and occasional irrigation. Registered annual water use is almost entirely agricultural (15.785Mm3) with a small registered domestic component of 0.243Mm3.

Groundwater occurrence is controlled by the presence of secondary permeability associated with weathering and fracturing.

The contact zones of dolerite dykes often represent linear aquifers and are an important target for the drilling of water supply boreholes.

4.7.2 Regional Level Groundwater: Central Precinct The distribution of intruded dykes in the Main Karoo Basin forms three major structural domains, namely the Western, Eastern and Transkei-Lesotho-Northern Karoo Domains, (Woodford 2002). The Western Karoo Domain extends from Calivinia to Middelburg, and covers the entire Central Precinct area. It is characterized by two distinctive structural features:

E-W Dyke Intrusions; and

NNW Dyke Intrusions.

Only limited fault zones are indicated on the published 1:250 000 scale geological maps of the precinct. These zones have similar trends to the dykes and form part of the Western Karoo Domain.

4.7.2.1 Groundwater Occurrence and Borehole Yield The hydrogeology shown in MAP C2 (see the groundwater report in Volume 2) was compiled from the published hydrogeological map series at 1:500 000 scale by DWA, dated 1996 to 2003. MAP C2 indicates that the Central Precinct is dominated by the fractured aquifer type. The borehole yield prospect for a large portion of the precinct is between 0.5 to 2.0l/s. This increases to 2 – 5l/s around Victoria West and exceeds 5l/s in the SW corner of the precinct NE of Beaufort West.

An area of intergranular and fractured aquifer types is shown to be present in the north eastern portion of the precinct. The borehole yield in this area mainly has a range between 0.5 to 2.0 l/s although smaller areas of intergranular and fractured flow are identified throughout the precinct with yields ranging from 0.1 to 0.5l/s.

4.7.2.2 Borehole Drilling Depth The borehole distribution and drilling depths presented in MAP C3 (see the groundwater report in Volume 2) were compiled from the NGDB borehole database of DWA, dated 2008. The boreholes are unevenly spread throughout the precinct. It is nonetheless expected that groundwater is widely used in the precinct.

Information on the drilling depths of 1756 boreholes is available. The depth ranges have been categorised into 5 depth intervals summarized in Table 9 below.

Table 9: Summarised drilling depths in the precinct Depth Range (metres) Total number of records Percentage of Total

0 – 50 1101 62.7 50 – 100 558 31.8 100 – 150 38 2.2 150 – 200 11 0.6 200 – 300 48 2.7


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 53

The drilling depths in the precinct indicate that less than 6 per cent of the boreholes abstract water from depths in excess of 100 metres. The records also show that no water supply boreholes have been drilled deeper than 300m. The 48 borehole listed above as having been drilled to depths of between 200 and 300 metres relate to deeper exploration drilling by DWA to investigated dolerite ring structures.

4.7.3 Depth to Water Level The depth to groundwater levels has been compiled from the NGDB borehole database from DWA, dated 2008, and is depicted in Map C4 (see the groundwater report in Volume 2) and summarised in Table 10. The depth ranges were categorised in 7 depth intervals.

The distribution of water level depths indicates that shallow water level conditions of <20m are generally (~91%) present throughout the precinct. This indicates that sustainable groundwater exploitation relies mainly on recharge from rainfall and the storage potential of the aquifer at shallow depths.

Table 10: Summarised depths to water level in the precinct Depth Range (metres) Total number of records Percentage of Total

0 – 10 1023 59.8 10 – 20 541 31.6 20 – 30 133 7.8 30 – 82 7 0.4 50 – 75 7 0.4 75 – 100 1 0.1

4.7.4 Water Quality (EC) The electrical conductivity (EC) data presented in (Map C5 of (see the groundwater report in Volume 2) was compiled from the Water Quality Management System (WQMS) database from DWA, dated 2008. This information has been plotted on the published EC zone map of DWA.

Information on the electrical conductivity of water from 2356 boreholes is available. The EC ranges have been categorized in 5 water quality classes as used by DWA. These intervals are depicted in Map C5 and summarized in Table 11 below.

Table 11: Distribution of water quality (EC) in the precinct EC Range (mS/m) Total number of records Percentage of Total

0 – 70 Class 0 810 34.4 70 – 150 Class 1 1126 47.8 150 – 370 Class 2 317 13.5 370 – 520 Class 3 37 1.6

>520 Class 4 66 2.8

The distribution of the EC indicates that potable water suitable for domestic use (Class 0 and Class 1) is largely (82.2 %) available throughout the precinct. Approximately 14% of the water is brackish (Class 2) and 4.4% can be classified as saline (Class 3 and 4) and unsuitable for human consumption.

4.7.5 Registered Water Use The water use sector is listed for all registered water use on the Water Authorization and Registration Management System (WARMS) maintained by DWA. Two water use sectors, agriculture (stock watering and irrigation) and domestic comprise the main water users in the Central Precinct. The annual water use


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 54

registration for these sectors has been categorized in 5 volume intervals and the use distribution is presented in MAP C6 (see the groundwater report in Volume 2). The annual registered groundwater use for the precinct is summarised Table 12 below:

Table 12: Registered agricultural and domestic use in the precinct Water Use Sector Number of Users Annual Use (million m3)

Domestic 63 0.243 Agriculture (Stock and Irrigation) 465 15.785

The total annual agricultural use is 15.785 million m3. The domestic use by municipalities is possibly not all registered and outdated.

4.7.6 Field Verification Groundwater use is almost entirely for agriculture, mostly stock watering and for homestead supply. The use of wind pumps may indicate limited abstraction capacity since the average yield of the wind pumps is usually 0.3l/s and therefore a maximum daily volume of around 26m³ can be achieved.

Farm homesteads are often supplied by 3 - 5 windpumps. These are commonly located on the margins of dolerite dykes and/or sills. Some homestead supply boreholes are equipped with electrical submersible pumps, as shown in Figure 26.

Figure 26: Homestead Water Supply Boreholes equipped with Submersible Pump and Windpump

The site visit provided the opportunity to verify the regional geological setting, particularly in respect to the occurrence of groundwater.

As noted above, the area is characterised by quasi- horizontal strata. This is important to the gas exploration programme since the horizontal strata provides a capping and protection to the shale gas reservoirs present at depths between 1 500m and 4 500m depth.

Dolerite sills often form capping to hills, due to their increased resistance to weathering and erosion

The wide expansive plains are controlled by the horizontal bedding and are formed on dolerite sills or siltstone horizons

Groundwater occurrence is mostly controlled by the presence of dolerite dykes, where the fractured contact zones with the country rock offer enhanced permeability, with the upper contact zones of dolerite sills where these are relatively shallow, fracture zones and weathering and fracturing of sandstone, siltstone and shale where these strata form topographic lows, along drainage lines for example.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 55

Specific verification of groundwater usage, groundwater levels and groundwater quality will be undertaken during the EIA in the area of the proposed gas exploration drilling sites, once potential site(s) for the drilling of the gas exploration well(s) are selected. An EIA for each site(s) is required prior to commencing any drilling. This is further discussed in Section 8.

4.8 Air quality According to the current understanding of the air quality in South Africa (DEA 2009a), the air concentrations of nitrogen dioxide in rural regions, such as the study area, are likely to be in the range 0.5 parts per billion (ppb) to 4.5 ppb. Similarly, the expected sulphur dioxide air concentrations would be between 0.5 ppb and 2.5 ppb (DEA 2009a). The DEA (DEA 2009a) recommends a background inhalable particulate concentration of 16.39 µg/m³, based on observations made north of Port Elizabeth in the Eastern Cape.

Due to the agricultural activities, daily average inhalable particulate concentrations are therefore expected to be about 20 µg/m³ or less. Air concentrations of volatile organic compounds, such as benzene are expected to be very low (less than 2 ppb for benzene and less than 10 µg/m³ for combined volatile organic compounds) (DEA 2009a).

The study area has a low level of industrial activity. The only identified sources of significant air pollution are the current farming activities. These emissions are mainly airborne particulates. Commercial activities, albeit relatively small, vehicular exhausts and domestic use of wood and coal in Victoria West, Murraysburg and Beaufort West may result in elevated combustion pollutants such as carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen and particulates. The use of solvents and fuel (mainly petrol) evaporation would also result in some volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions.

4.9 Visual aspects 4.9.1.1 Sense of Place / Genius Loci According to Lynch (1992), sense of place is "the extent to which a person can recognise or recall a place as being distinct from other places, as having a vivid or unique, or at least particular character of its own". Thus, sense of place means that a site has a unique character that distinguishes it from other places. The primary informant of these qualities is the spatial form and character of the natural landscape together with the cultural transformation associated with historic use and habitation.

4.9.1.2 Aesthetic Appeal On the basis of contemporary research by Crawford (Crawford, 1994), landscape quality increases when:

Topographic ruggedness and relative relief increase.

Where water forms are present.

Where natural landscapes increase and human-made landscapes decrease.

Where land use compatibility increases and land use edge diversity decreases.

The area within which the central district occurs is characterised by vast landscapes, distinct topography (see Figure 27), geological features and mostly scarce or hardy vegetation communities (as shown in Figure 21 to Figure 24). The latter is distinctly typical of the Karroo and in many parts, responsible for much of the visual character, especially during blooming time in spring and early summer. The majority of the area is arid and water is scarce, resulting in a landscape that can be harsh and challenging. Yet watercourses have been fundamental in shaping the landscape and streams and water bodies do occur; and where they do, are

Figure 27: Typical vista of a flat Karoo Plain with flat capped dolerite hills.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 56

prominent or important features. For the aforementioned reasons, the application area can be considered to have a strongly defined sense of place and is generally characterised by high levels of aesthetic appeal, a fact which will be taken into consideration when specific sites for prospecting are selected.

4.9.1.3 Visual Absorption Capability Visual absorption capacity (VAC) describes the capacity of the landscape to absorb development without creating a significant change in visual character or producing a reduction in scenic quality (Oberholzer, 2005). The ability of a landscape to absorb development or additional human intervention is primarily determined by the vegetation cover (see Figure 28), topographical landforms and existing human structures. A further major factor is the degree of visual contrast between the proposed new project and the existing elements in the landscape.

The Central Precinct is mostly characterised by sparse or very low vegetation cover due to the arid climate. The topography is distinct and often appealing, and numerous prominent if highly eroded landforms occur almost throughout. The landscape is an intricate network of erosion lines and watercourses that snake through between these landforms, which means that the depth of views varies considerably. The Karoo and southern interior of the country is also famous for its expansive landscapes, where human intervention is in little evidence. The result of the aforementioned factors is that the VAC of the landscape varies somewhat, especially as a result of the varying topographical conditions. Nevertheless the VAC is generally still low throughout, meaning that extensive development will be highly noticeable.

4.9.1.4 Visibility Visibility describes the degree to which elements present in the landscape are actually seen by people in the area. This aspect is again a function of the topography, land cover and level of development of the location in which the development will occur. As has been established, the Central Precinct is situated on a highly eroded plateau, punctuated by distinct landforms. The result is that the depth of views are often somewhat limited where these visual obstructions occur, preventing long-range views. Nevertheless significant large low-lying areas with gently sloping topography also occur and many of the higher-lying locations allow views over vast distances. T

4.9.1.5 Light pollution at night Light pollution at night is one of the most noticeable impacts of development on rural areas. “Light-spill” is caused when non-directional lighting methods are indiscriminately applied and can be particularly intrusive, especially in an area renowned for its star-gazing and spectacular night skies.

4.10 Noise The baseline description of the noise climate is based on a desktop review that has been verified by fieldwork in a number of potential drilling site locations. As the exact location of drilling sites is not known, a number of sites that represent typical drilling locations were sampled to determine the baseline noise climates. A more detailed noise report is attached Volume 2.

Figure 28: Wide open plains with little vegetation cover.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 57

Figure 22: Baseline noise measuring locations.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 58

The desktop study found that the noise climate at all potential sites is typical of remote rural areas as defined by the relevant National Standard, SANS 10183, and are likely to be below the recommended levels of 45 dB(A) during the day (06:00 to 22:00) and 35 dB(A) at night (22:00 to 06:00). This was confirmed by fieldwork, with the noise climate at the majority of sites being dominated by natural sounds of birds, insects and the rustling of vegetation in the wind. Only the site located ~100m from the N12 road outside Victoria West was the noise climate dominated by the sounds of a main road in a rural area.

Once the drilling sites have been selected, baseline noise levels will be measured comprehensively at the property boundary of the ultimately selected drilling sites, with measurement points chosen to represent the wider noise climate and, where appropriate, at the position around the property boundary at which the noise emission is expected to be greatest, or which is nearest to a sensitive receptor.

4.11 Archaeology / cultural heritage / palaeontology aspects A preliminary desktop exercise to identify potential heritage resources within the Central Precinct was undertaken. As part of the exercise, a survey of the literature pertinent to the region, including archaeological, anthropological and historical sources, was conducted. The report is attached in Volume 2.

A brief description of the archaeology and history of the area is given in the sections below to describe the context of the archaeological and historical environment in which the proposed exploration activities will be undertaken. This information has been extracted from the heritage report attached in Volume 2 which can be consulted for more detailed information.

4.11.1 Pre-colonial Archaeology The results of the desktop survey indicated that the following cultural heritage resources occur in the Central Precinct:

Isolated scatters of stone tools on the plains, some rock painting sites in the mountains of the Camdeboo, and freshwater shell middens containing bone, stone tools, and food remains along river banks, pans and flood plains.

More than 16 000 Stone Age sites were recorded during a 30 year period by Professor Garth Sampson and his students in the Upper, Middle and Lower Seacow River area.

The SARADA data base of rock art indicates that rock paintings and engravings occur at various localities within the Central Precinct. Perhaps the best known site is the rock engravings at Nelspoort near Beaufort–West. This site has recently been developed for tourism purposes. Rock art has been recorded on four other farms near Beaufort-West, at sixteen different localities in the greater Richmond area, at two farms near Murraysburg, at two farms near Nieu Bethesda, and at one locality near Victoria West (Van Riet-Lowe 1941).

Archaeology of pastoralist occupation of vast areas in the Karoo are indicated by various stone kraal complexes of which several hundred have been recorded in the Zeekoe River Valley.

A number of old graveyards and possibly historic buildings belonging to the early Trekboer period on various farms in the area.

Another notable feature of the area is the corbelled houses that developed as a vernacular architecture of the northern Karoo and “Bushmanland” districts during the nineteenth century. The majority of these occur near Williston and Carnavron in the Western Precinct. However, some do occur near Beaufort-West in the Central Precinct and one has been declared provincial heritage site.

Other declared Provincial Heritage Sites include:

Twelve historical buildings in Beaufort-West

The old powder magazine at Murraysburg

Two declared provincial heritage sites at Noupoort. These include a blockhouse from the Anglo-Boer War and a church building.

One historical building declared as a provincial heritage site at Victoria-West. Ninety other histiorical sites, mostly homesteads, are listed on the SAHRA register as occurring in this town.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 59

Two historical buildings declared as provincial heritage sites at Richmond. Sixty three other historical sites, mostly homesteads, are listed on the SAHRA register as occurring in this town.

4.11.2 Local tourist attractions The first would-be settlers arrived in this region during the mid-1700s. But these pioneers posed a great threat to the Bushmen’s way of life and they retaliated by making life so difficult for the newcomers that most left within a short time. Towards the end of the 18th century, an effort was once again made to begin farming in this area, but it took until the mid-1800s before men were able to settle here. The settlement history of the area, which is punctuated with conflict during the Anglo-Boer War, manifests itself in the settlements in the area, some of which have their origins as fortified outposts or settlements. Natural attractions abound in the area, many of which occur in nature reserves and parks. The Three Sisters Mountains, near the town of Murraysburg, are one such feature. The region also abounds in evidence left by its original inhabitants, the peoples collectively known as “Bushmen”. Engravings near Nelspoort are one such example, the "bushman piano's" - stone gongs whose exact purpose has been lost in the annals of time – another. Near Leeufontein the exposed the skeleton of a tiny man buried in a sitting position, is another tantalising relic left by these people. Investigations by archaeologists revealed that he was an early hunter-gatherer who probably once lived with a group at a nearby natural fountain. The Northern Cape Province is the largest, but also least and most sparsely populated Province in the country. Due to the arid conditions, the largest part of the region is dominated by expansive livestock (mostly goat and sheep) farming and localised irrigated agricultural activity only occurs in areas where viable water sources are available. However in spite, or perhaps because of its largely agrarian and under-developed character, the region has developed a burgeoning tourism trade, with a multitude of attractions being present. Apart from the rich cultural-historic heritage, the area is popular as a backpacking and scenic detour road trip destination, with a variety of hiking, cycling, camping and adventure sports attractions. Guesthouses abound in the region and star-gazing is a popular attraction in the region, owing to the clear night skies and lack of light pollution. In essence a substantial part of the regional economy is therefore dependent on the tranquil, timeless character and development must be done circumspectly to ensure that that this way of life is not impacted upon.

4.11.3 Palaeontology / archaeology The Central Precinct occurs within the central western extent of the Karoo Basin, one of the few basins worldwide in which the terrestrial fossil record for the 45-million-year interval spanning the Permian/Triassic (P/Tr) Boundary is preserved and exposed. The Karoo Basin provides an ideal site for scientists to collect fossils illuminating the Permian/Triassic Boundary that was marked by the greatest mass extinction during the last 600 million years of Earth history (Smithsonian Museum of Natural History, 2011). The application area occurs within an area characterised by rocks dating from the Permian and Triassic Eras and the Karoo has over the years yielded a number of significant fossil finds that are on display in numerous museums throughout the region. It is therefore possible that fossils may be encountered during exploration drilling activities. If and when this occurs, qualified specialists will be consulted to ensure that this precious aspect of our natural heritage is protected.

4.11.4 Cultural landscapes and sense of place As no field surveys have been undertaken at this stage it is difficult to establish whether specific areas could be described as cultural landscapes. Nevertheless, the landscape of the Central Precinct can be described as a remote arid landscape and its visual qualities linked to the undulating topography and undisturbed nature of the landscape. The only intrusions are existing transmission lines, scattered homesteads, wind pumps, and access roads. These contribute to the rural landscape. “There is a perceived sense of absence of human intervention or intrusion” (Patrick et al. 2009), the vast empty expanses exemplifying the qualities of the Karoo. The historic town of Graaff-Reinett situated to the immediate south of the Central Precinct would be an ideal candidate for nomination as a cultural landscape. This scenic town harbours almost 200 provincial heritage sites – more than any other town in South Africa (Oberholster 1972). These are mostly historic buildings belonging to the 19th century period, however, the town is also situated in the mountain shadows of the Camdeboo National Park – an area that contains various San hunter-gatherer and Khoekhoen pastoralist


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 60

archaeological sites as well as rock art. The scenic natural heritage site of the “Valley of Desolation” is also situated within this Provincial Park. Various memorials and monuments relating to the Khoisan genocide, Voortrekker leaders, Anglo-Boer War, and the more recent struggle history of South Africa are located in and around this town. Although not strictly situated within the borders of the Central Precinct it does indicate the potential that may exist for similar cultural landscapes in areas less well surveyed and documented within the study area. A possible extension of the cultural landscape of Graaf-Reinett would be the Sneeuberge (Snow Mountains) the mountainous area immediately to the north of the town and well situated within the Central Precinct of the study area. Not only is the Sneeuberge a prominent physical marker on the landscape of the Eastern Karoo but it is an important icon in the sad history of the now extinct Karoo San. For many decades this area functioned as the last stronghold of the San. At one point San resistance here was so effective against colonial expansion that it effectively halted Trekboer movement for almost 30 years (Penn 2003; Adhikari 2010). The Sneeuberg and adjacent areas contain numerous Later Stone Age sites associated with San settlement of the central interior. The Seacow River area alone contains around 16 000 sites (Sampson 1985). This is more than any other area of comparable size in southern Africa. Here, as well as elsewhere in the larger Sneeuberg area are numerous San rock painting and engraving sites. Some spectacular examples occur on the farm Ganora not far from the little town of Nieu Bethesda, itself an interesting village filled with historical buildings and ambiance. Although not inhabited ny Khoekhoen pastoralists in historical times there is archaeological evidence for their occupation of the area during wetter climatic epochs such as during the so-called Little Ice Age around 1400 AD. Old buildings and graves relating to early Trekboer history occur on various farms in the area (Van Schalkwyk & Wahl 2007). In addition, the area contains numerous palaeontological sites. However, there is a need to compile a thorough inventory of heritage sites in this area and that can only happen once ground surveys have been initiated.

4.12 Sensitive landscapes 4.12.1 Terrestrial Ecology The Central Precinct infringes on the Karoo National Park to the west and the Sakrivier and Kromrivier Riverine Rabbit conservancies to the north-west. It is recommended that these areas are avoided during the exploration. Rehabilitation in this area will be very difficult due to climatic and vegetation conditions, rainfall is low and erratic, therefore any vegetation planted during rehabilitation will need to be watered in order for it to survive. The difficulty in rehabilitation further stresses the importance of site selection for the exploration project. Removing and keeping vegetation from the site in a nursery, for transplanting back on the site during decommissioning is an option that can also be investigated. It must be noted that the further eastwards the development progresses, the more readily areas will be rehabilitated, but in staying with the Precautionary Principle it is advised that the entire Central Precinct be characterised as an area where rehabilitation will be problematic.

4.12.2 Heritage Based on the available heritage data it is possible to indicate broad patterns that may assist the gas exploration team in avoiding heritage sites and the potential damage thereof:

Rock shelters in the river valleys bisecting the mountain ranges will contain rock paintings and archaeological deposit

Dolerite outcrops and boulders may contain rock engravings. Karoo koppies consisting of dolerite boulders are promising candidates in this regard.

It is also likely that ground surveys may uncover scatters of Early, Middle and Later Stone age artefacts near fountains and water courses.

Stone walling, including stone walled enclosures, related the Khoekhoen pastoralist activities may also be found in various localities were grazing would have been available in the past.

Old farmsteads, older than 60 years and hence of heritage significance, will occur on most farms in the area. We may anticipate that these may consist of farmhouses, sheds, outbuildings, kraals and other structures. Of particular significance are the vernacular corbelled huts/houses that has been erected in the 18th and 19th centuries in the vicinity of Beaufort-West.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 61

Various historical buildings occur in the small towns in the area. Victoria-West and Richmond are especially well represented in this regard.

Graves belonging to both the indigenous San as well as colonial graveyards will occur on various farms and small towns in the area.

Pans and watercourses were a foci of human activity in the past and prehistoric and colonial-era heritage sites may be found near its environs.

4.13 Socio-economic environment The Central Precinct is the local study area (LSA) and intersects the Western Cape, Northern Cape and Eastern Cape, and falls within the Central Karoo, Pixley ka Seme, Chris Hani and Cacadu district municipalities (DM) as shown in Table 9.

Table 13: Precincts in relation to municipal boundaries Precinct District Municipality Local Municipality

Central Central Karoo, Pixley ka Seme, Cacad and, Chris Hani

Beaufort West, Ubuntu, WCDMA05, Camdeboo, and Inxuba Yethemba

The LSA falls mostly within Beaufort West LM in the Western Cape, Ubuntu LM in the Northern Cape and Camdeboo LM in the Eastern Cape as well as the Western Cape District Management Area (WCDMA05) (Figure 23). District Management Areas (DMAs) are often sparsely populated and characterised by abundant natural resources. These areas fall outside the boundaries of local municipalities and municipal services are generally not provided to these areas (e.g. national parks and world heritage sites). District municipalities then assume direct responsibility for the governance, administration and management of these areas by providing a limited number of local government functions27. The DMA of the Central Karoo DM is a unique arid zone with a legacy left by the indigenous Khoi-San people. The DAM incorporates the town of Murraysburg, a small town primarily supported by tourists drawn by the surrounding Sneeuberg Mountains, plains and rock art sites. The fossil-rich terrain has some of the most important archaeological sites in the world – particularly near Beaufort West and Nelspoort where stone-age sites and Bushmen engravings have been found – and boasts over 9,000 plant species. Murraysburg caters to this market with a number of local crafts being produced. Beyond Murraysburg, the area is sparsely populated with a few large farms. Beaufort West (just outside the Central Precinct boundary), the largest urban area in Beaufort West LM, is a typical South African "platteland" or country town adjacent to the Karoo National Park. Beaufort West was originally established as a service centre for rail- and road transport and to a lesser degree for rural agriculture. It lies in a sheltered spot, between two normally dry rivers, at the foot of the Nuweveld Mountains. During the 1970s and 1980s, 90% of the town’s economically active people were employed by the SA Railways. The National Road from Cape Town to Johannesburg (N1) bisects the town, and is still responsible for generating a significant portion of the town’s revenue. Victoria West is the main town (of three urban settlements) in Ubuntu LM.

4.13.1 Population Beaufort West LM has a population of just over 37,500 (64% of the total population in the DM) and is characterized by large areas of agricultural land with Beaufort West as the main urban centre. The population density is 2 per km². The majority of the population (77%) is Coloured and approximately 90% speak Afrikaans as their first language.

27 National Study of Service Delivery in District Management Areas (DMAs), Human Sciences Research Society, Final Draft, April 2005


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 62

Figure 23: District and Local Municipalities – Central Precinct


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 63

Table 14: Central Precinct Population Distribution28 Population Designation

Province / Municipality Total Per km2 Black Coloured Asian White Western Cape 5,357,000 41 30% 50% 1% 18% Central Karoo DM 59,000 2 10% 80% 0% 10%

Beaufort West LM 37, 600 2 14% 77% 0% 9% Northern Cape 1,147,600 3 40% 50% 0% 10% Pixley ka Seme DM 179,500 2 23% 67% 0% 10%

Ubuntu LM 17,600 1 13% 80% 0% 6% Eastern Cape 6,743,823 40 88% 8% 0% 4% Cacadu DM 369,700 6 46% 40% 0.2% 13%

Camdeboo LM 43,005 6 23% 68% 0% 10% Chris Hani DM 812,900 22 95% 3% 0.1% 2%

Inxuba Yethemba LM 49,200 4 48% 36% 0.2% 16%

Ubuntu LM includes the towns of Victoria West (main town), Loxton (outside the Central Precinct boundary) and Richmond as well as two former Spoornet villages: Hutchinson and Merriman. While the population is significantly smaller in Ubuntu LM, the population profile is very similar to the rest of the Central Precinct (notably the Beaufort West LM). More than 80% of the local population in both municipalities is Afrikaans-speaking and designated Coloured29.

The Camdeboo LM is one of nine LMs in the Cacadu district and represents approximately 12% of the total population in the district. Main urban centres in the LM include Graaff-Reinet (which falls outside the Central Precinct boundary) and Nieu-Bethesda which are surrounded predominantly by livestock and game farms. With reference to the socio-economic landscape, the changing social character of the region was summarised as follows30:

“During the last fifty years, extensive livestock farms have grown even larger, and shed a great deal of labour. Many of these unemployed farm workers have drifted to the small towns, to join the ranks of the urban unemployed. The recent advent of game farming has contributed to this trend, although opportunities in agri-tourism and eco-tourism are beginning to create scope for new and more sophisticated types of employment in the tourism sector.”

In a Quality of Life survey conducted in 2008, one of the main reasons for people leaving the Camdeboo LM was to find employment and approximately 26% of the population between 18 and 65 years was ‘unemployment and looking for work’. Pensions and social grants constituted the main sources of income for the majority of respondents.

28 Community Survey 2007, Statistics South Africa 2007, sourced at www.statssa.gov.za on 11.02.2011 29 In South African context, the term Coloured (also known as Bruinmense, Kleurlinge or Bruin Afrikaners in Afrikaans) refers or referred to an ethnic group of mixed-race people who possess some sub-Saharan African ancestry, but not enough to be considered Black under the former law of South Africa. They are mixed race and often possess substantial ancestry from Europe, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaya, Mozambique, Mauritius, Saint Helena and Southern Africa. The extensive combining of these diverse heritages in the Western Cape developed into a distinctive 'Cape Coloured' and affiliated Cape Malay culture. 30 D.Atkinson. 2008. Towards “Soft Boundaries” Pro-poor Tourism and Cross-border Collaboration in the Arid Areas of Southern Africa.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 64

Figure 24: Central Precinct Employment Distribution by Sector, 2009

The Capacity Assessment report (2008) (an annual assessment by Government of municipal capacity to perform the municipal powers and functions for which it is authorised) compiled annually by the Municipal Demarcation Board (MDB)31 indicated a negative population growth rate of 13%, 1.4% and 6.7% in Beaufort West LM, Ubuntu LM and Camdeboo LM respectively between 2001 and 2007. The declining population in Beaufort West LM and Camdeboo LM is significant and could be linked to the declining contribution of the agricultural sector to the Gross Value Added (GVA) indicator from 8% in 2004 to 5% in 2009 in Beaufort West LM and from 6% to 3% in Camdeboo LM. The natural arid climate compounded by the pressing drought in the region will have contributed to the out-migration.

4.13.2 Social Services and Infrastructure There are 18 schools, 3 hospital and 10 clinics/health centres in the Beaufort West LM, 12 schools, 2 hospitals and 3 clinics in Ubuntu LM and 13 schools, 2 hospitals and 6 clinics in the Camdeboo LM. The Water Services Development Plan (WSDP) (a municipal planning document compiled annually for municipal

31 Namakwa District Municipality (DC6), Northern Cape, Assessment of Capacity for the 2008/9 Period, Municipal Demarcation Board, November 2008

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Agriculture, forestry, fishing

Mining and quarrying

Manufacturing

Electricity, gas, water

Construction

Wholesale, retail, catering, accommodation

Transport, storage, communication

Finance, insurance, real estate business services

Community, social, personal services

General government

7%

0%

14%

0%

7%

22%

4%

18%

14%

13%

12%

0%

8%

0%

8%

22%

4%

12%

18%

15%

6%

8%

7%

24%

5%

12%

20%

18%

34%

6%

0%

6%

15%

2%

8%

15%

13%

18%

0%

5%

6%

29%

3%

7%

15%

16%

17%

8%

4%

1%

5%

16%

3%

9%

15%

22%

25%

1%

3%

1%

4%

14%

2%

10%

18%

21%

26%

0%

4%

0%

10%

11%

1%

13%

17%

19%

Ubuntu LM Pixley ka Seme DM Northern Cape Camdeboo LM

Cacadu DM Beaufort West LM Central Karoo DM Western Cape


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 65

water and sanitation services) for Beaufort West LM 14 urban settlements where municipal services are delivered which includes 291 businesses. The WSDP for Ubuntu LM states that the municipality has three urban settlements with 85 businesses and 123 homesteads ‘scattered’ in the rural region of the municipality, while the Camdeboo LM has 3 urban settlements where services are delivered including 207 businesses.

Water services in Beaufort West LM are supplied from 32 groundwater and 2 surface water sources while Ubuntu LM supplies water through reticulated systems from 17 groundwater sources. The Camdeboo LM supplies water services from 5 groundwater sources and 1 surface water source. The population is thus solely dependent on local water sources.

4.13.3 Tourism Tourism has been considered a developmental opportunity for the Karoo region evidenced by the tourism conference held at the end of 2009 with the theme “creative tourism in the Karoo – implications for 2010 and beyond”32. Several presentations were made about the tourism potential that is seemingly locked up in the history, natural resources and heritage of the region. These experiential features are also referred to as the ‘sense of place’ of the area and relate to what has been referred to by stakeholders as the aesthetic value. Aesthetic value of an area is the emotional response derived from the experience of the environment with its particular natural and cultural attributes and includes atmosphere, landscape character and sense of place (Schapper, 1993).

The local economic situation is typically characterized by small towns with small local economies and a migration towards the east and coastal regions which are also the focus of tourism development. Tourism is described in various planning documents as having the potential to generate income and reduce poverty:

The Western Cape highlights the eco-tourism, historical culture, agri-tourism, hiking, stargazing, bird watching etc. (Western Cape Government 2002). The Cacadu Tourism Spatial Development Plan refers to the attractions of the open plains; mountains and valleys; rivers; nature reserves and wilderness areas; private game lodges; hunting and birding; hiking; biking; and horse riding. In the Northern Cape, the 2005 White Paper on Tourism refers to the parks, game reserves and conservancies, offering abundant wildlife and floral diversity. There are also many cultural and heritage resources, including museums, historical sites, and monuments. There are archaeological and rock art sites, arts and cultural festivals, prominent historical figures. There are also unique and endangered cultures, such as the San communities, the Griquas, and the Namas. Another potential area for tourism development is the game farming industry which has expanded massively in southern Africa.33

The Karoo tourism initiative highlights the economic potential inherent in the ecological and historical heritage of the region.

4.13.4 Economy and Employment The Central Karoo district is a designated development node as part of the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy and Beaufort West has been linked to the opportunities resulting from its position along national transportation routes (notably the N1). The IDP highlights that Beaufort West is strategically situated approximately 450 kilometres northwest from Cape Town along the N1 route, which connects Cape Town with cities like Bloemfontein and Johannesburg and is also situated on the stretch of the N1 where the N12 converges with the route, adding to the town transport potentials. Agri-business development initiatives that have been pursued over the past five years include the manufacturing of essential oils and a hydroponic project.

32 Karoo Tourism Conference: Creative Tourism in the Karoo – Implications for 2010 and Beyond 33 D.Atkinson. 2008. Towards “Soft Boundaries” Pro-poor Tourism and Cross-border Collaboration in the Arid Areas of Southern Africa.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 66

Formal employment levels are approximately 34% in the Central Karoo DM, over 10% lower than employment figures for the Western Cape Province (Figure 29). The wholesale and retail industry sector (including catering and accommodation) is the largest employer in the local municipality, accounting for 24% of employment, and contributing 14% of the local municipality GVA. The largest contributor to GVA is the financial, insurance, business and real estate sector at 29%. Agriculture accounts for only 6% of employment and 5% of GVA sector contribution. However, the Beaufort West LM identifies the sector as one of importance and with opportunities for growth and employment creation despite the harsh climate and poor carrying capacity of the veld. Agri-processing, particularly related to mohair and deciduous fruit, is seemingly offering new prospects for the future. Game farming is also developing as an economically viable option.

According to a “Broad Socio-Economic Profile” report for the Cacadu DM34 the district experienced a higher growth rate (1.1%) than the larger province. Camdeboo LM contributed 13% to the district’s GVA in 2007, preceded by Kouga (22%) and Makana (24%). Agriculture is the greatest employer in the district (34%) while Camdeboo LM experienced the greatest contribution to employment in the wholesale and retail sector. The rate of employment (formal and informal) in the district is approximately 53% and approximately 47% in Camdeboo LM.

In the Ubuntu LM, agriculture and government services are the largest contributors to the economy and employ the largest number of people.

Table 15: GVA per Sector 2009

Sector

Wes

tern

C

ape

Cen

tral

K

aroo

DM

Bea

ufor

t W

est L

M

Cac

adu

DM

Cam

debo

o LM

Nor

ther

n C

ape

Pixl

ey k

a Se

me

DM

Ubu

ntu

LM

Agriculture, forestry and fishing 4% 9% 5% 6% 3% 7% 15% 21%Mining and quarrying 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 27% 5% 0%Manufacturing 17% 11% 10% 13% 9% 4% 3% 4%Electricity, gas and water 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 3% 2%Construction 5% 6% 5% 4% 3% 1% 2% 7%Wholesale and retail trade, 14% 14% 14% 12% 19% 12% 14% 11%

34 Cacadu District Municipality, 2008. Broad Socio-Economic Profile.

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

Western Cape

Central Karoo DM

Beaufort West LM

Cacadu DM Camdeboo LM

Northern Cape

Pixley ka Seme DM

Ubuntu LM

45%

33% 34%

40%

34% 34%32% 31%

6% 5% 5%

13% 13%

4% 4% 4%

14%17% 16%

10% 10%15%

18%20%

35%

45% 45%

37%

43%47% 46%

44%

Employed - Formal Employed - Informal Unemployed Not Economically Active

Figure 29: Central Precinct Employment, 2009


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 67

Sector

Wes

tern

C

ape

Cen

tral

K

aroo

DM

Bea

ufor

t W

est L

M

Cac

adu

DM

Cam

debo

o LM

Nor

ther

n C

ape

Pixl

ey k

a Se

me

DM

Ubu

ntu

LM

catering and accommodation Transport, storage and communication 10% 12% 14% 5% 7%

10% 10% 5%Finance, insurance, real estate and business services 33% 27% 29% 23% 19%

14% 18% 17%Community, social and personal services 5% 7% 8% 13% 10%

10% 12% 12%General government 10% 13% 14% 23% 28% 14% 18% 21%

It is evident from this brief description that the local economy in the Central Precinct is driven by the services sector with limited contributions from the construction and manufacturing sectors and no contribution from the mining sector.

4.13.5 Community Health and Safety Community safety is measured by the number of incidents reported at local police stations. Crimes are typically categorised into violent and non-violent crimes, under the following headings: contact crimes (including murder and grievous bodily harm (GBH)); contact related crime (arson); property related (theft and burglary); firearms and drug related crime; other serious crime and other unspecified crime (Table 16).

The total number of crimes reported between April 2008 and March 2009 for the affected towns in the Central Precinct is 7,525. Several areas recorded an overall decrease in incidents. The increase in incidents in Beaufort West LM has been attributed to liquor abuse amplified by illegal shebeens, domestic violence and money lenders.

Table 16: Central Precinct Crime Statistics, 2009

Town

Tota

l crim

es

Con

tact

crim

es

agai

nst p

erso

n (m

urde

r, G

BH

)

Con

tact

rela

ted

crim

e (a

rson

)

Prop

erty

rela

ted

(bur

glar

y, th

eft)

Fire

arm

s, d

rug

rela

ted

crim

e

Oth

er s

erio

us

crim

e

Oth

er

Murraysburg Beaufort West LM

Total crimes 394 117 17 103 95 32 28

Change since 2005 2% -31% -39% 312%

Crime distribution 30% 4% 26% 24% 8% 7%

Beaufort West Beaufort West LM

Total crimes 4105 1285 305 753 599 934 225

Change since 2005 21% 12% 17% 44% 37% 14% 4%


Richmond Ubuntu LM

Total crimes 283 111 23 97 20 22 9

Change since 2005 -12% -12% 21% -13% 25% -46% 50%


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 68

Town

Tota

l crim

es

Con

tact

crim

es

agai

nst p

erso

n (m

urde

r, G

BH

)

Con

tact

rela

ted

crim

e (a

rson

)

Prop

erty

rela

ted

(bur

glar

y, th

eft)

Fire

arm

s, d

rug

rela

ted

crim

e

Oth

er s

erio

us

crim

e

Oth

er


Victoria West Ubuntu LM

Total crimes 507 191 32 153 44 81 6

Change since 2005 28% 35% 14% 76% -41% 53% -50%


Graaff Reinet Camdeboo LM

Total crimes 2236 673 154 572 168 594 69

Change since 2005 -18% -33% -9% -12% 29% -5% -50%


A scoping health impact assessment was compiled in a separate technical report. Table 17 refers specifically to the HIV/Aids status of the local populations in the LSA. It is evident that the percentage Aids-related deaths are significant against an infection rate of between 3-10% of the population in the range 15 and 49 years. In light of the current negative population growth rate, an increase in Aids-related deaths would further diminish the local population and reduce the ability of the local communities to reproduce their productive capacity.

Table 17: Central Precinct HIV/Aids, 2010

Population HIV Positive AIDS Deaths Other Deaths Percentage of Deaths

related to AIDS Central Karoo DM 3% 0.1% 0.9% 13%

Beaufort West LM 3% 0.1% 0.9% 14% Pixley ka Seme DM 6% 0.3% 0.9% 26%

Ubuntu LM 6% 0.2% 0.9% 22% Cacadu DM 10% 0.6% 1.1% 36%

Camdeboo LM 8% 0.4% 1.2% 24% Chris Hani DM 11% 0.7% 1.1% 40%

Inxuba Yethemba LM 10% 0.6% 1.1% 35%


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 69

According to the IDP of Beaufort West LM, health indicators revealed that the proportion of children under the age of 1 year with first measles immunization was 93 per cent (above the national target of 90%), TB prevalence stood at 950 for every 100 000 people, with a cure rate of 74 per cent. The national target for TB cure rate of 85 per cent had not been met because of social grants, which have become a source of living for people; it implies that being cured will remove the grant. The patient nurse ratio was 31:1, better than the national target of 34:1.

During an AIDS strategy planning session in 2002, Ubuntu LM conceded that “There are only 3 clinics and 2 hospitals in the Ubuntu municipal area to deal with people who are living with AIDS. According to estimates by the District Council about 10 % of a total population of 20 000 are likely to be HIV positive and these hospitals and clinics are understaffed and under resourced and cannot provide an effective service”. It appears that the general health systems are inadequate to deal with the present health conditions.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 70

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT AND PROPOSED EXPLORATION PROJECT

This chapter introduces the applicant, described the steps involved in exploration for shale gas and typical activities that may be undertaken for shale gas exploration.

5.1 The Applicant: Royal Dutch Shell Shell Exploration Company B.V. is a registered company of Royal Dutch Shell plc, a public limited company registered in England and Wales and headquartered in The Hague, the Netherlands (see www.shell.com).

The application for the exploration right has been submitted by Shell Exploration Company B.V. which is registered in The Netherlands.

Shell is one of the world’s largest independent oil and gas companies in terms of market capitalisation, operating cash flow and oil and gas production. The company is active in more than 90 countries, with over 101,000 employees worldwide.

Shell’s upstream businesses explore for and extract crude oil and natural gas, often in joint ventures with international and national oil companies. These businesses also liquefy natural gas by cooling and transporting it to customers across the world, and convert natural gas to liquids (GTL) to provide cleaner burning fuels. They also market and trade natural gas and power.

Shell’s downstream business manufactures, supplies and markets oil products and chemicals worldwide. Manufacturing and supply includes refineries, chemical plants and the supply and distribution of feed stocks and products. Marketing sells a range of products including fuels, lubricants, bitumen and liquefied petroleum gas for home, transport and industrial use. Downstream also trades crude oil, oil products and petrochemicals. The downstream business also includes activities in biofuels, and it co-ordinates Shell’s CO2 management activities across the company.

In addition, to meet the growing demand for cleaner, lower-CO2 transport fuel, Shell is applying a range of approaches, including vehicles powered by biofuels, electricity, compressed natural gas and hydrogen fuel cells.

Biofuels: Shell has been involved in distributing biofuels for over 30 years and continue to build their capacity in biofuels Shell distributed 9 billion litres of biofuels in 2009.

Hydrogen: In partnership with carmakers Shell has opened demonstration hydrogen filling stations, in the USA, Europe and Asia to learn more about consumer behaviour, safety, cost, and the dispensing and storage of hydrogen at these stations. Shell has several partnerships that explore the development of a hydrogen market and help reduce costs.

Shell develops wind power to generate electricity, Shell has an interest in wind projects with an overall capacity of around 1,100 MW. In the USA, their share of the operating capacity is 450 MW, enough to power 150,000 US homes. Shell has a further 98 MW share of wind generated power in European projects. Shell’s wind-energy output avoids around 1.5 million tonnes of CO2 a year, if compared to a coal-fired power station. Shell is looking at potential new North American wind projects.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 71

5.1.1 Business principles The company has set business principles, first published in 197635, and standards for health, safety, security, environment and social performance. Every employee is expected to abide by the business principles (see http://www.shell.com/home/content/aboutshell/who_we_are/our_values/sgbp/), which cover, among others the principles of:

Contribution to sustainable development by balancing short and long-term interests and integrating economic, environmental and social considerations into decision-making;

Applying a systematic approach to health, safety, security and environmental management in order to achieve continuous performance improvement. To this end, Shell companies manage these matters as critical business activities, set standards and targets for improvement, and measure, appraise and report performance externally, continually looking for ways to reduce the environmental impact of Shell’s operations, products and services and involving stakeholders in dialogue about issues of concern to them;

Being a good neighbour by continuously improving the ways, in which Shell contributes directly or indirectly to the general wellbeing of the communities within which they work and committing. Shell companies aim to manage the social impacts of their business activities carefully and work with others to enhance the benefits to people in the local communities, and to mitigate any negative impacts from their activities. Shell has an active Social Investment programme in countries where it operates and at a global level, with a focus on local enterprise development, road safety and access to clean burning cooking stoves for local community members; and

Other business principles include a responsibility to not only shareholders, customers and employees, but to society as well as contractors, suppliers and business partners.

5.1.2 Shell’s commitment to sustainable development Shell began reporting voluntarily on their environmental and social performance with the first Shell Report that covered 1997. The reporting focuses on the environmental and social challenges that most affect business performance and matter most to their key stakeholders. Internal controls such as audit trails and statistical checks help assure the accuracy of the Shell Sustainability Report. An External Review Committee of independent experts helps make sure the reporting is balanced, relevant and responsive to stakeholders’ interests. More information on Shell’s sustainability reporting can be found at http://www.shell.com/home/content/environment_society/reporting/.

Shell was included in the FTSE4Good Index in 2010, like every year since it started in 2001. Companies must meet the index’s criteria on the environment, relationship with interested parties, supply chain labour, bribery, and human rights to be included. There is no ranking within the index. More information can be found at: http://www.ftse.com/Indices/FTSE4Good_Index_Series/index.jsp

Shell remains second in the Goldman Sachs GS SUSTAIN ESG (environmental, social and governance), which focuses on sustainable investing in the energy sector. Companies are rated according to 25 indicators across the categories of corporate governance, leadership, labour, communities and investment and environment. For more details, refer to http://www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/environment-and-energy/goldman-sachs/gs-sustain/index.html

5.1.3 Safety record Safety is high priority for Shell. In 2009, a number of Shell’s major construction projects achieved a high number of working hours without time lost through injury. The oil sands expansion project in Canada recorded 43 million working hours, while the Shell Eastern Petrochemicals Complex in Singapore achieved 38 million working hours without an injury leading to time off work. Gbaran-Ubie, Shell’s integrated oil and

35 Updated in 2005


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 72

gas project in Nigeria, achieved 40 million man-hours without any lost time incidents (LTI) in 2010.The company has won several safety awards. Recent examples include:

In Qatar, the company’s Pearl Gas to Liquids team (with 77 million safe working hours) was awarded the HSE Project of the Year at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference (ADIPEC) Excellence in Energy Awards 2010. (http://www.adipec.com/page.cfm/link=35); and

Shell Todd Oil Services (STOS) which operates the Maui and Kapuni fields in Taranaki, New Zealand, won the Excellence in Health and Safety Award in 2010 at the inaugural New Zealand Energy Awards. (http://www.energyawards.co.nz/award/excellence-in-health-and-safety-award).

5.1.4 Environmental commitments and performance Shell is committed to carry out impact assessments for all its major projects or large expansions across its existing operations.

Shell is committed to consider biodiversity early in new projects, develop action plans and collaborate with experts to help protect areas with rich and delicate eco-systems. Shell made the following four commitments:

1. They will not explore for, or develop, oil and gas resources in natural World Heritage Sites.

2. They will further improve the way they operate in IUCN Category I-IV protected areas, and areas of high biodiversity value. Shell is committed to preparing Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) in Areas of high Biodiversity Value (AHBV) (which include IUCN I - IV, Ramsar, Important Bird Areas, Natura 2000, and man and Biosphere Reserves).

3. They will publicly report on their activities in IUCN Categories I-IV protected areas.

4. They will work with IUCN and others to help safeguard protected areas.

Shell works with conservationists to lessen impact on biodiversity in areas where they operate. As an example, the Smithsonian Institution Monitoring and Assessment of Biodiversity Programme (SI/MAB) and Shell have been working together to increase understanding of biodiversity and energy resource development in the Gamba Complex in Gabon. This partnership, which began in 2000, is funded by the Shell Foundation, Shell Gabon and the Smithsonian Institution. Through this partnership, SI/MAB has been carrying out long-term independent biodiversity studies in the area. More details on this partnership are available at <http://nationalzoo.si.edu/SCBI/MAB/conservation/centralafrica/gabon/MABinGabon/partnership.cfm>.

In terms of greenhouse gas reduction (GHG), Shell had set a voluntary target of 5% lower GHG emissions in 2010 than their comparable 1990 level. In 2009, the direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from facilities they operate were 67 million tonnes on a CO 2-equivalent basis, 11% lower than in 2008 and around 35% below the 1990 level which puts them on track to meet their voluntary target.

5.1.5 Social responsibility record In their projects and operations around the world, Shell brings benefits to local people by providing jobs, tax revenue, contracting and business opportunities and social investment programmes.

Shell also support local communities in setting up businesses to provide goods and services. In Nigeria in 2009, 85% of the total number of contracts awarded by Shell companies in Nigeria (worth nearly $892 million) went to Nigerian companies.

Another example is Brunei Shell Petroleum (BSP – Shell interest 50%), which is helping the government to grow small and medium-sized businesses. BSP prefers local companies in bids, and provides training and skills development. BSP has increased its spending with Bruneian companies from almost $500 million in 2004 to over $1 billion in 2009. The joint venture’s latest oil platform was built in Brunei, largely by local companies. Some of these companies have since won international contracts.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 73

Shell also makes voluntary contributions to support local communities and the areas where they operate. In 2009, Shell spent around $132 million on social investment mostly on community development projects.

5.1.6 Involvement in Gas Exploration and Production Currently, Shell has some 25,000 wells producing oil and gas in many different countries around the world. The company drills about 1 000 exploration and production wells each year.

As global energy demand increased over the past five years, the company has found more than 1.5 billion barrels boe (barrels of oil equivalent) of new hydrocarbon resources each year. In 2009, Shell explored for and discovered 2.4 billion boe of hydrocarbons, and produced 2% of the world’s oil and 3% of the world’s gas.

Shell has considerable experience in drilling and fracturing unconventional gas wells. For example, over the period 2009-2010 Shell drilled about 500 wells onshore in North America to stimulate gas production. Many of these wells were hydraulically fractured.

5.1.7 Shell in South Africa The Shell Transport and Trading Company was formed in 1887, exporting oil from the Far East. Not long afterwards, in 1902, Shell started business in South Africa with a focus back then on distributing paraffin and kerosene.

Shell employs nearly 1 400 people in South Africa and operates a nationwide retail network of 750 service stations. Its commercial businesses include sale of aviation, marine and commercial fuels and bitumen. They provide fuel and lubricants to the transport, construction, manufacturing, mining, marine and agriculture markets in South Africa. Shell jointly owns with BP the SAPREF refinery in Durban, one of the largest refineries in Africa.

Shell South Africa is a signatory to the Petroleum and Liquid Fuels Industry Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) Charter of 2000. The charter seeks to increase the participation of previously disadvantaged people in the petroleum industry. As of 2010, Shell South Africa is the first international oil company to achieve BBBEE (Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment) accreditation. Shell entered into various empowerment transactions with a local BEE partner as early as 1998.

The general principle of BEE as a key component of the South African economic environment is established in several pieces of legislation such as the Broad-based Black Empowerment Act, the White Paper on the Energy Policy of the Republic of South Africa, the MPRD Act, the Preferential Procurement Framework Act and the Employment Equity Act. Relevant BEE requirements for Shell’s potential upstream operations are set out in the MPRD Regulations (Chapter II, Part II), which require Shell to submit a “Social and Labour Plan” with the application for a production right in order to demonstrate how we will achieve defined BEE.

Even if there is no specific BEE requirements during the exploration phase, Shell is committed to build a solid BEE compliance programme, which will require early development in exploration phase of a BEE strategy and some upfront specific actions.

5.2 Steps in the gas exploration process The following flow diagram shows the indicative steps to be followed in a typical shale gas exploration programme.

Terminology • Hydrocarbons – any class of

compounds containing only hydrogen and carbon, such as gas.

• Boe – barrels of oil equivalent

• Conventional gas - gas trapped in a single gas reservoir underground

• Unconventional gas – gas trapped in rock underground

• Onshore – on land

• Offshore – in the sea


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 74

Figure 30: Steps in shale gas exploration

5.3 Location of the proposed exploration phase project activities The application covers a total area of ±30,000 km2 in the magisterial districts of: Aberdeen, Beaufort-West, Carnarvon, Graaff-Reinet, Middelburg, Murraysburg, Noupoort, Richmond and Victoria-West.

In terms of physical footprint, a number of sites will be established to execute drilling operations, distributed across the total license application area. However, in terms of cumulative footprint, only a few square kilometers of surface land is expected to be required, and the area will be distributed across a number of different locations throughout the application area. Subject to appropriate regulatory approvals and landowner consent, Shell’s activities may include:

Steps in shale gas exploration

Desk‐top studies of geology

Obtain geophysical data (Magneto‐telluric)

If not promising, discontinue If promising, Select areas for future wells based on geology, complete EMP

Target shale too deep or too shallow, select other locationTarget shale at right

depth range

Shell is here :

Yes, old seismic, offset wells No

Depth to target shale accurately known?

Select & prepare new location for vertical well with horizontal section

At original well surface location

Demobilise Rig,

If no gas flow observed, rehabilitate, consider continue exploration

programme (or exit after n‐wells)

Mobilise Rig + Drill exploration vertical well

Gas flow tested successfully ( “puff” of gas)

Drill new well at new location nearby

Demobilise Rig, design frac, mobilise frac crew. Frac& test horizontal section

Mobilise Rig + Drill vertical well with horizontal section

If promising(gas encountered in mud

logs, wireline logs)

If promising (gas encountered in mud logs, logs or canisters)

Drill new well first

Obtain land access and perform Environmental Impact Assessment for drilling location

Design frac, mobilise frac crew. Frac & test small vertical section

Undertake Hydraulic Fracture within existing vertical well

If no gas flow observed, rehabilitate, consider continue exploration programme(or exit after n‐wells)

If no gas flow observed, rehabilitate, consider continue exploration

programme (or exit after n‐wells)

If no gas flow observed, rehabilitate, consider continue exploration programme(or exit after n‐wells)

Repeat process unless successive no‐gas observed or flows


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 75

Geophysical Data Acquisition: The non-intrusive geophysical technique called magneto-telluric (MT) involves placing a number of sensors on the ground for about a day, which are then moved to a new point, typically 3 - 10 kilometers away. Over time, by collecting individual data points, the acquired data may represent approximately 1000 kilometers of points that can be joined to form lines on a map. Section 5 of this report describes the process in a more detail.

Exploration Drilling: Having analysed Soekor well data from the 1960’s Shell’s prognosis is that hydrocarbon bearing shale layers may exist in the license area, but at different depths, varying between 1000 to 5000 meters. Shell may drill up to eight wells in the license area to identify the shale layer (which may or may not contain hydrocarbons). If the shale layer cannot be found or no hydrocarbons are detected deep underground then fewer wells may be drilled

A well site typically can be 100 meter by 100 meter (1ha) in area in order to place a temporary drilling rig, and other drilling related equipment, materials and some onsite storage (e.g. tubulars, containers and water pits). In some instances additional storage area for equipment or vehicle parking may be required, which will require additional land in the vicinity. Dependent upon where a well site is located, an access road may be required. If temporary accommodation is required nearby in the form of a temporary camp (rather than utilizing available rental accommodation), this would require additional temporary land. Once drilling locations have been identified, decisions on access road, accommodation, etc. will be made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account, individual well site considerations and will involve land owner and community consultations;

Water wells: Dependent upon regulatory requirements and landowner approval, water wells may be drilled for baseline data collection, monitoring of aquifers, or possibly to supply water for general drilling operations. These ‘water’ wells would typically be drilled to shallow depth to intercept either the shallow aquifer for monitoring purposes, or slightly deeper (>100 m) if a deeper groundwater supply well was contemplated. No decisions have been taken on this yet, but further analysis will be required during the planning for well site specific environmental impact assessments; and

Supply base: a supply/ logistics base will be required for drilling operations to store material, preparation and possibly testing of equipment before being despatched to sites. Typically a supply base is established in a central location – such as a major town. The location(s) of the supply base has not yet been selected as this depends on the location of the drilling sites. Considerations for locating a supply base would include existing (brown-field) storage facilities, availability of local skills, labour and other materials.

The precise locations where exploration drilling activities may take place have not yet been identified. Information on surface conditions and landowner and community opinions are being gathered to assist in the selection of suitable sites.

The illustration (Figure 31) provides an overview of possible areas within which suitable well sites may be identified for future exploration drilling activities.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 76

Figure 31: Illustration of possible areas within which a suitable well site may be identified for future exploration drilling activities

5.3.1 Identification of notional areas The precise drilling locations have not yet been identified. During 2009, as part of the Technical Cooperation Permit (TCP), desktop studies were undertaken to better understand the subsurface, geological characteristics and surface considerations. In addition environmental mapping data was reviewed to narrow down potential areas that may fit a number of high level operational criteria. The following criteria were used:

Topography: slope < 10%, elevation < 2000m.

Logistics / Accessibility: close to existing, national (tar) road network.

Population density / urbanisation: outside towns/ urban areas.

National Electricity Grid Infrastructure: Within 20 km of existing network or substation (where known);

Consideration of national conservation or protection areas.

As part of the engagement process with I&APs during January and February 2011, Shell has started to gather the opinions of people in the Karoo to help improve the local understanding against these initial criteria. In addition, I&APs are also providing suggestions for criteria that Shell may wish to consider in order to minimise potential impacts on, for example, particular species of plant or native wildlife.

Going forward, detailed site selection criteria will be developed along with the provision of alternative locations, which will only be possible with further local dialogue and consultation with land owners and


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 77

Figure 32: Well cores from the 1960s Soekor exploration for oil in the Karoo

Figure 33: MT sensors like these are placed on the ground for a period of a day, gathering data

regional experts. This process of scoping will also form part of any Environmental Impact Assessment(s) studies.

5.4 Description of proposed exploration project 5.4.1 Desk-top studies of geology (completed) During the 12-month period of Shell’s Technical Co-operation Permit, issued by PASA in December 2009, Shell carried out desktop evaluations of the geology underlying the Karoo.

These evaluations were based mainly on information obtained by Soekor in the 1960s, when approximately 10 deep wells were drilled to depths of up to 5 km to search for hydrocarbons (oil). Cores from these wells are still kept by the Council of Geosciences (see photo in Figure 32). Information recorded during drilling operations at the time indicated that shale may be present underground and in one well gas was observed.

Analysis by Shell of the 1960’s Soekor well cores and logs has provided an indication that shales containing gas may be present but the results are not conclusive.

The quality of data acquired in the 1960s had deteriorated over the past 50 years, and left many technical geological uncertainties which makes it difficult to assess the presence, volume, quality, and possible rate of flow of gas in any one particular area.

5.4.2 Application for Exploration Right (submitted)

In December 2010, Shell made an application to PASA for an Exploration Right with the objective to, over a 3-year license period, collect modern geophysical and well data to help quantify the possible existence of gas, and if present, start to assess whether it may flow (or not) within a particular area.

As part of the application process, legislation requires Shell to submit an Environmental Management Plan within 120 days of PASA accepting the application documents.

The various activities described in the following sections may form part of Shell’s exploration programme (should they be granted an Exploration Right and after obtaining necessary permits and approvals).

5.4.3 Geophysical Data Collection 5.4.3.1 Magneto-Telluric In order to better understand the geological characteristics of the Karoo, Shell proposes to use a non-intrusive geophysical technique (measuring only natural phenomena) named “Magneto-Tellurics” (MT) which


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 78

is commonly used in modern petroleum, mining and geothermal resource exploration. MT has already been used successfully by academics36 to study the geological history of the Karoo area.

Naturally varying magnetic fields caused by sunspots and even distant thunderstorms, result in electrical fields in the earth. The MT technique measures these very small magnetic fields. Information is then recovered and interpreted to map the subsurface geology, down to depths of 10 km in some instances. Figure 33 shows how sensors are placed on the ground to measure the magnetic fields. The MT equipment easily fits into a small suitcase and can be carried by one person. A number of small receiving sensors are positioned on the ground, orientated in different directions to allow measurement of the magnetic field. The equipment is set-up during the day, records data overnight and then is moved to a new location the following day. The distance between measuring locations is typically 3 – 10 km.

Shell will engage with land owners to seek permission to access their land to allow MT measurements to be taken.

5.4.3.2 Seismic Acquisition During the initial 3-year Exploration Right, a selection of other geophysical data acquisition methods may be used near a well site or within the well bore itself. These may include shallow seismic and micro-seismic techniques:

Shallow seismic is a technique used to assess the (shallow) rock composition in and around a proposed well site to characterise the geological components. A shallow seismic programme could have an additional footprint, although if the seismic lines are acquired along existing roads this would be minimal. A surface seismic programme consists of series of "shots" (i.e. a source of acoustic energy such as vibroseis trucks (vehicle-mounted vibrator plates), weight drop, or detonation of a small charge in shallow holes), which are used to create an acoustic signal. For each shot, a string of sensors (geophones or accelerometers) is used to record the acoustic reflections (echoes) from the subsurface geologic formations. A typical seismic survey that is designed to image shallow targets (500 to 1 000 m in depth) would have shots spaced roughly every 40 m and sensors spaced every 10 m along lines that would be 10 to 30 km in length. The length and number of lines that would be required depend on the geologic features that need to be delineated.

Seismic sensors are connected by electrical cables back to the recording truck with 100 to 200 sensors placed for every shot. The sensors are small; a single sensor would fit in a persons hand. Small spikes on each sensor are pushed into the ground to couple the sensor firmly to the soil. Vibroseis trucks are often used for lines along roads or in smooth and firm ground conditions. Small charges are used in more rugged terrain or where ground conditions are not suited for vibroseis trucks. Shot holes are drilled by small hand held augers or by units mounted on the backs of all terrain vehicles, with hole depths around 3m and charge sizes of 1/8 to 1/4 kg.

Micro-seismic is a technique used once a well has been drilled to understand the characteristics around the well bore. It can also be used if hydraulic fracturing has taken place to map the extent of the induced microscopic fractures around the well bore (refer to Figure 33) for an example of mapping of fractures). When deploying micro seismic equipment, the purpose is to listen to the very small noises that are created, deep underground, as fractures are created during the hydraulic fracturing process. Sensors (called geophones) are used, which can be placed on the surface, in a grid pattern, to listen to the very small noises made as the rocks are fractured. There is also the option to use a neighbouring (drilling) well as the ‘observation’ well, within which one could place the ‘listening geophones’.

A recording truck sits on the well pad to record the signals generated during hydraulic fracturing. No additional footprint or land disturbance occurs as a result of recording the micro-seismic data.

36 http://www.agu.org/journals/ABS/2007/2005JB003975.shtml: New Magnetotelluric Measurements across the Magnetic Beattie Anomaly and the Southern Cape Conductive Belt in South Africa, Weckmann, U.; Ritter, O.; de Wit, M.; Jung, A.; Hübert, J.; Branch, T.; Stankiewicz, J.; Mabidi, T. American Geophysical Union, 2004


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 79

At this point Shell is not planning to acquire other seismic data (e.g. 2D seismic) until after drilling a number of exploration wells, and therefore most likely not during the 3-year Exploration Right. If Shell successfully identifies hydrocarbon-bearing rock, 2D seismic technique may be used in some areas at a later exploration stage.

5.4.4 Drilling Shell may drill up to eight exploration wells in a license area. Drilling is not expected to start until late 2012. Furthermore, drilling will not start until an Environmental Impact Assessment has been performed, as outlined in Chapter 3, Regulatory Requirements, for any gas well site that will be proposed.

Shell has not yet identified where exploration drilling may take place. Since there is some flexibility from a subsurface point of view in where a well site could be located, Shell will determine the sites in consultation with landowners.

The section below describes a typical exploration well site and activities that may occur in the Karoo and is based on typical drilling activities on land, anywhere in the world. For the Karoo, once a number of alternative well sites have been identified more site specific details, per location, will be included in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) scoping and evaluation.

5.4.4.1 Exploratory Vertical Wells To assess whether there is gas trapped in the rock formations, Shell will drill vertical wells possibly down to depths of 5000 m. Each well would consist of several well bore sections, with each subsequent section having a smaller diameter, starting at the surface with a hole diameter of approximately 20-30” (inches), and reducing to about 4 to 8.5” at the deepest point.

Each well bore section would be lined with a steel casing, cemented in place. This process provides a barrier between the formations (that may include water bearing zones) and the well bore. During the drilling process, rock core and technical data measurements (including logging) will be recorded.

Each well section would be lined with a steel casing, which in turn would be cemented in place. The casing and its accessories will be of such specifications that they can withhold down hole pressures and are resistant to the composition of the wellbore and formation fluids that they are exposed to. The casing integrity is tested through a casing integrity test, typically upon completion of the cementation or at any other moment when there is no open connection with the formation at the bottom of the well. During the test, the maximum expected pressure during drilling or production is applied to the casing and held for generally at least 15minutes. The test would confirm that the casing can actually withstand the expected pressures and hence proves there are no leaks in the casing. In case a leak is detected during the integrity test, pressure is bled off immediately, and a casing repair will be undertaken before drilling or production can continue.

The cement around the casing holds the casing in place, but also is aimed to prevent communication (of pressure or fluids) around the outside of the casing between deeper and shallower formations, or even surface. The quality of the cement can be accessed through for example a Cement Bond Log. This log will indicate whether there are possible communication paths through the cement. In case a so-called leak path would be detected, secondary operations may be undertaken in order to seal off the detected communication path. Examples of such operations are top-filling the annulus37 with cement (pump additional cement with specialised equipment into the annulus on top of the existing cement column) or installing packers (sealing device) above the existing cement column. Once a casing is cemented in place and the necessary integrity tests and checks have been passed successfully, operations or production may continue.

During operations all annuli will be monitored to confirm no leaks develop over time. Also during production when the rig is no longer on site, it is common practice that the annuli are monitored at a regular basis. In case pressure or fluid levels are observed to increase, a full investigation will be carried out and if required production is halted or operations stopped (close in well). Once the investigation confirms the cause of the increased pressure or fluid levels, appropriate action will be taken to restore the required integrity.

37 The annulus is the gap between the casing and the bore hole.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 80

Whilst drilling the vertical exploratory wells, geological samples of the rock cuttings from the bore hole as well as core samples will be collected and analysed to determine the presence of a potential (shale) reservoir and whether gas is still present in these rock formations deep under the ground.

The drilling equipment necessary to drill the well is transported on trucks to the location. During operations, the drilling rig itself may be 30-50m in height, dependent upon the equipment selected. Subject to regulatory approvals, operations may take place 24 hours a day. Once drilling operations are completed, the well is suspended and the drilling rig equipment is demobilised.

5.4.4.2 Exploratory Horizontal Wells Should a vertical exploration well confirm indications of hydrocarbon gas, Shell may drill one or more additional wells, from either the same surface location, or from another location (possibly up to 10 - 25 km away) to evaluate the possible volume, productivity and distribution of the gas-bearing formations in the vicinity. In this situation, the next well would likely be drilled with a horizontal section that would be placed horizontally within the target reservoir rock formation.

A horizontal section exploratory well would be very similar to the vertical exploratory well, with an initial vertical section drilled to confirm the depth and location of the target rock formation(s), then sidetracked to drill a horizontal section at approximately 90 degrees (‘horizontal’) into the targeted formations. The horizontal section may be up to 2000 m in length. Data acquisition whilst drilling would be similar to drilling vertical wells and may include coring and logging.

5.4.4.3 Drilling site preparation 5.4.4.3.1 National Road Network and Well Site Access During January-February 2011, as part of developing the Environmental Management Plan, some limited on-the-ground data collection has taken place in order to begin verifying existing national data sets. Some stakeholders also shared their local knowledge on the quality of roads. Establishing a good understanding of the national (tarmac) roads will be essential, including the tonnage (load) weight restrictions. It is assumed that smaller (access) roads may need to be upgraded (or built) from an existing (minor) road to provide access to a well site.

Well sites have not been identified yet, therefore it is not possible to say where or how access roads may require upgrading. In general terms, an access road that is 6 to 10 meters wide would typically be required to allow vehicles to bring on/off-site temporary equipment. The total length of the road will vary for each proposed well site, dependent upon the distance of the well site from the nearest existing road. However, where feasible, existing access routes will be used and upgraded if required. Dependent upon the length and type of road, Shell expects that activities such as upgrading an existing road may require appropriate Environmental Impact Assessment and environmental approvals.

As part of the well site selection study, Shell will engage with landowners to help identify what may be an acceptable well location and route for access. Once a site for drilling has been selected, environmental impact assessment or other regulatory approvals are in place, and all necessary permissions have been obtained, then construction can commence. It will be required to identify a contracting and procurement approach for this engineering phase, including the supply of suitable raw materials, equipment and labour for any particular proposed well site.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 81

5.4.4.3.2 Well Site A typical well site, such as the one shown above from a European location, may be approximately be 100 x 100 meters (1ha) in size, however, dimensions can vary dependent upon the actual rig used, the overall operational requirements and other requirements relating to what is stored on or off-site. In certain instances additional area is required for storage of materials or placement of additional equipment. Typically during exploration drilling, equipment on site would include a small site office and store, waste storage and the drilling rig and associated equipment and materials.

A well site is constructed using normal earthmoving equipment and techniques. Heavy equipment such as bulldozers, graders, earth movers and a number of lorries will be used to remove waste as required. In addition, the construction workers will require temporary accommodation somewhere in the vicinity.

In general, whilst the detailed site-specific designs have not been made yet, typically on a site, preparation would include:

Remove topsoil, which is then stockpiled nearby for site rehabilitation purposes later.

Grade, level and if necessary backfilled with crushed stone the area where the drilling and well pad will be located.

Compact the site to ensure for stability during movement of heavy equipment and support the weight of the rig.

Create erosion and sediment control structures around the site, where appropriate.

Create on-site storage for drilling fluids or water, which may require construction of geotextile lined pits or as an alternative the use of storage tanks.

Construction of a well cellar may be required on certain sites to contain the wellhead. The dimensions will vary depending on the size of the wellhead.

As described earlier the crew(s) involved with the drilling operations will require temporary accommodation. This could be located close to the site in a purpose-built temporary camp, or utilise available accommodation, or a combination of both. The most appropriate option can only be selected once well locations have been selected. Shell will draw upon local expertise, landowner preferences and other guidance to support its final decisions. If camp accommodation was the preferred option for operations relating to a well site then this would typically require about 0.5 ha of land, for accommodation, a restaurant (mess), offices, stores, and parking (assuming crews for one well site).

5.4.4.4 Drilling rig mobilisation The precise specification of the drilling rig to be used will depend on the contractor selection. The contracting process has not yet commenced since Shell currently does not have an Exploration Right. The choice will be dependent upon the total drilling depth for a particular well, which in turn will determine the minimum capacity requirements. However, a 1500-2000hp land rig should in general be capable of drilling the full range of depths across the license application. Therefore this rig capacity has been used to describe a typical operational environment.

Figure 34: From a European location


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 82

The drilling rig will be transported by standard prime mover and 40 ft trailer trucks, and will be assembled on site. The construction of the temporary drilling rig typically takes between 3 and 4 weeks. Additional trailer(s) will be required to bring other portable equipment, a site office etc. for temporary use on site. Typical traffic associated with "rig up" operations requires approximately 50 to 70 truck loads, which includes portable accommodation units and rig site offices.

The frequency with which additional vehicle traffic visits a site will depend upon the phase of drilling operations. For example:

On average a standard re-supply to a rig will require 2 to 4 trucks loads per day, although when pipe casing strings and mud supplies are required this may require up to 10 truck loads per day for a short period of time.

Dependent upon the distance to available infrastructure, for example a supply base or airport, may require additional traffic once per week, plus ad-hoc travel of employees to/from the site on a daily basis.

5.4.4.5 Drill site management This section describes, at a high level, the types of equipment and chemicals required during drilling operations:

Fuel: Power for the well site and rig is usually provided through diesel fuelled generators. Dependent upon drilling activity, fuel use can vary between 2 to 4 m3 per day. Therefore, normally there will be an on-site fuel store to support ongoing operations. In line with regulatory requirements and international best practices, fuel will typically be stored in storage tanks, bunded by a retention wall, with fire prevention equipment in place.

Drilling Mud (Chemicals): Storage for mud (drilling fluid) is kept in a designated area on the well site. Typically only the chemicals necessary for the stage (depth, geological characteristic) of drilling are kept on site - the rest is stored at the supply base. Contingency stocks of heavy mud additives (i.e. barite) are also kept at the supply base to use if needed to maintain well control. The majority of chemicals kept on the rig site comprise barite and hole conditioning chemicals. Barite is an inert (naturally occurring) substance with clay-like properties, which is typically stored in a silo. Well hole conditioning chemicals are typically stored in 50 kilo sacks or drums inside containers, separated in accordance with manufacturers handling guidelines. The conditioning chemicals may include KCL (salt), gels and naturally occurring fibres.

Steel Pipe: Hydrocarbon wells will be lined with tubular steel pipe. Generally, the storage of individual sections of the casing (typically 10 meters long) on the well site is kept to a minimum. All casing and related equipment and materials that are not imminently required for the operations are kept at the supply base for distribution. Each pipe can weigh hundreds of kilograms, therefore safety and careful management of the equipment is essential. At the supply base and the well site casing storage is regulated in accordance with Shell standards and handled by trained personnel.

Low-Level Radio-active Measuring Device: During drilling operations, at certain points when geological strata are reached, data measurements may be undertaken. This would typically require ‘logging’, using a specialised down hole measuring device which is lowered into the well bore . This device may contain a low level radio-active source for measurement purposes. The handling and execution of these devices can only be done by specialised licensed companies. The movement, storage and use of these logging devices are regulated under South African legislation. Temporary storage would likely be used at the well site, again in compliance with applicable local regulations.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 83

Figure 35: Down hole measuring device

Figure 36: Close-up of down hole measuring device which contains a small radioactive source used to record rock type inside the bore hole

Minor Explosives: Minor explosives may be required to create small (typically ~1 to 2 cm) holes, so-called perforations, in the steel pipe casing, at specified points inside the well bore (across potential hydrocarbon bearing formations). These perforations are likely to also penetrate the surrounding rock around the wellbore to <20cm. The objective of these perforations is to make a series of holes that would then allow any gas to flow from the surrounding shale rock into the well bore in a controlled manner. In the event that hydraulic fracturing is required to stimulate the gas to flow into the wellbore, slightly larger perforating guns would be used, that may create a ~2cm hole, penetrating slightly deeper (<1 meter) into the rock formation. Any explosives required would be handled by specialised licensed companies, with the movement, storage and use of explosives regulated by the South African legislation, which Shell will comply with. Again, dependent upon the regulations, storage bunkers would likely be used on the well sites for safe storage.

5.4.4.6 Drilling & well bore data acquisition A well is "drilled" using a mechanical drill bit. The diameter of the bore hole progressively gets narrower as the well is drilled deeper. At the surface, when drilling starts the hole would typically vary between 20 and 26 inches in diameter.

After drilling with a certain sized drill bit, for example 22” at the surface, a smaller sized (e.g.18.5/8“) steel pipe string (casing) is inserted into the 22” bore hole. Next, special cement is then pumped down the steel pipe casing and forced up the gap between the casing and the bore hole (annulus). The objective is to cement in place the casing string, providing both structural integrity to the newly drilled wellbore and importantly to isolate (seal off) off the rock layers that have been drilled through so that there is not linkage between such layers. This process also isolates any water bearing formations from the well bore or other formations. Once the casing and cementing process is completed for a specific stage of the well, a new section can be drilled deeper, this time with a smaller drilling bit lowered through the casing. Subsequently as deeper sections are drilled and cased off, smaller diameter casing is being used.

The drilling process is a mechanical process, whereby the drill bit, aided by rotary torque and the compressive weight of the drill string above it, grinds the rock formation. The term drill string, refers to a gradually lengthened pipe onto which the drill bit is attached; sections of approximately 10m drill pipe are gradually added at surface, to allow drilling to go deeper. Usually joints are made up into stands of three for a 30m continual drilling section. Whether this is actually done in practice is dependent on the type of rig

Figure 37: Directional head off a perforating gun used to punch a hole through the well casing inside the shale layer


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 84

used. During drilling operations certain mechanical properties are continually recorded, such as the actual weight on the drill bit used to grind through the rock, the rate of penetration, and torque required. All these parameters help to characterise the mechanical properties of the different rock layers.

During the drilling process drilling fluid, referred to as drilling mud, is pumped down the inside of the drill string, exits at the bottom through the drill bit and returns through the space between the borehole and drill string back to surface.

The drilling mud keeps the drill bit cool and transports rock cuttings from the drill bit deep underground to the surface for analysis. The mud is directed over a device known as a shale shaker to separate the cuttings over mesh screens, allowing the mud to return back into the mud tanks for reconditioning and then re-use. The cuttings are analysed for their rock properties and for possible traces of hydrocarbons, this process is called MudLogging. After analysis the rock cuttings are recycled in accordance with the regulated waste management programme.

Typically, vertical exploration wells will likely use a water based mud, comprising water, weighing agents, such as barite and other additives such as viscosifiers. If exploration wells are drilled with a horizontal section, dependent upon the subsurface conditions, it may be necessary to use a non-toxic synthetic oil based fluids. In this case, the base component of such a fluid typically is base oil.

The primary objective to undertake the initial vertical exploration drilling is to gain a better understanding of the subsurface, identify the existence of shale reservoirs and assess whether gas is still held in the rocks, deep underground. In addition to analyzing the rock cuttings and the drilling parameters, at certain points (depths) during drilling solid rock cores may be taken and specialist data acquisition (logging) devices used inside the well bore, which may include, but not be limited to:

Measurements while drilling (MWD): specialized tools, for example gamma ray and resistivity tools, are installed just behind the rotating drill bit. These measurements are transmitted to surface allowing near real-time observation of the characteristics of different geological rock formations.

Electric wire-line logging: Upon completion of a drilled section, specialized tools can be lowered down the well bore on a wire-line to measure characteristics of the rocks. Tools that might used could include borehole imagers, caliper devices, density-, azimuthal sonic-, and resistivity tools.

Cores: as part of plans to drill exploratory vertical explorations wells, formation samples (cores) will likely be taken if targeted geological rock formations are encountered. Specialised coring tools will be used to retrieve the core for analysis at the surface. Subsequently the core sections will be sent to a specialist lab for detailed analysis.

Formation sampling: In addition previously mentioned data acquisition techniques, localized side wall coring and potentially formation fluid sampling may be undertaken at certain intervals whilst drilling. This may be to target specific shales or if encountered, to quantify the characteristics of certain water-bearing zones.

Mudlogging: drilling fluid returns are analysed at surface on composition. Drilling parameters, such as Rate of Penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB) and torque, as well as cuttings retrieved at surface are also examined as they may indicate what types of formation are being drilled. This data is compiled into a so-called mud-log.

Upon completion of the exploratory operations the well is suspended and all drilling related equipment demobilized and moved off-site.

Drilling related operations (excluding site preparation and rig-up) may take 2-4 months, dependent upon how deep the well is required to be drilled. Drilling is expected to take place 24 hours per day, using two crews, each working a 12 hour shift.

Dependent upon the phase of the drilling, a typical crew may contain up to 30 personnel, but may increase for short periods, to ~50 personnel, during periods of specialist operations, such as data acquisition or


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 85

completion activities. The personnel would include drillers, roughnecks, mud specialists, mechanics, electricians, drivers, equipment operators, catering and specialist services (e.g. logging, coring, casing running) and supervisory personnel.

Shell will endeavour to employ only competent staff and contractors to carry out operations. Where staff or contractors do not meet the appropriate competence or awareness of standards and regulations that is required, Shell will provide adequate and suitable training to meet the requirements.

5.4.4.7 Noise from operations The mechanical process of drilling a well, generators and moving equipment create noise. The levels of noise will vary dependent upon the type of rig, ancillary equipment and phase of operation. For example, there are differences between drilling itself, and adding new drill pipe into the well bore. Each activity will generate a different noise profile, with varying contributions of different pieces of equipment. The top drive and mud pumps have a typical noise range of 96 to 102 dB(A) near the source.

It is common practice that rig-specific operational noise assessments are carried out when a rig is being considered for use. Sound measurements are typically taken at various sound levels during operations, both at the source and at distance intervals of 100m away from the well bore. An example of such assessment was carried out on the KCA-Deutag’s T-208 drilling rig. Shell would consider using the former type of rig (which does not mean specifically this rig or supplier) for exploration activities in the licence area. The T-208 assessment demonstrated that noise generated around the wellbore during drilling operations quickly dissipated over distance from 104.7 dB)(A) (measured at 1.5m above ground) to 58 dB(A) at 100m and 39dB(A) at 600m lateral distance. In case noise reduction measures would be implemented these noise levels may have been reduced further to 53dB(A) at 100m and 35 dB(A) at 600m.

During early baseline data capture for the Environmental Management Plan background noise levels have been recorded at a number of areas. Later, once well locations are selected an Environmental Impact Assessment will commence at a specified well site location. At that time noise measurements, impacts and mitigations will form part of the basic scoping requirement. As part of the site selection process, stakeholders will be consulted to seek thier input for locating the well site. This will take into consideration proximity to people, wildlife and livestock and measures needed to achieve acceptable noise levels.

Dependent upon the equipment used and the location where drilling may take place, different options can be developed to limit the amount of noise created and how quickly the noise dissipates with distance away from a well site. For example, in Sweden Shell used hay bales on the perimeter of the well site to reduce the noise impacts. In operations around the world it is often a legislated requirement to monitor and control noise levels within legal limits, at specified distances from a well site. It is therefore likely that Shell will monitor noise levels at various distances from the well site, if granted land access to install monitoring equipment.

5.4.5 Hydraulic Fracturing Fracturing would only be undertaken in the case where hydrocarbons are found during the first vertical drilling operations, and if the intervals of hydrocarbon-bearing shale rock were found. Dependent upon the properties of the rock formation, the fracturing operations typically can take 2 - 4 weeks per well. A specialised crew, normally of 15 to 20 people, operate the pumps and ancillary equipment.

5.4.5.1 The Hydraulic Fracturing Process Hydraulic fracturing is a process that makes it possible to recover natural gas from low permeability formations where the rock is unusually densely packed.

Hydraulic fracturing was first used more than 100 years ago in 1903 in the United States. The first commercial fracturing treatment by Industry was performed in 1949. In Europe, during the 1950’s. Shell undertook some of its first hydraulic fracturing operations on ventures in the Netherlands and Germany into hydrocarbon bearing rock layers where gas was discovered but would not flow because it was held very tightly in the rock.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 86

Since the 1940’s it has become an industry recognized technique used to try to stimulate the flow of hydrocarbons held tightly in rock formations and is a key technical process to allow the development of natural gas resources around the world. In the US, per year, approximately 35,000 wells are now drilled and then fractured by Industry, annually (source: www.energyindepth.org).

Shell has considerable experience in drilling and fracturing unconventional gas wells. For example, over the period 2009-2010 Shell drilled ~500 wells onshore in North America to stimulate the production of gas. Many of these were hydraulically fractured.

Hydraulic fracturing is the process of creating fissures, or fractures, in underground formations to enable natural gas to flow. These fractures start at predetermined points (perforations) in the wellbore through which fracturing fluid is pumped under pressure into the formation. The extent of these fractures depends on the combination of formation characteristics, the fracturing fluid composition and the pressure applied during injection of the fluid. Figure 38 shows a typical crack induced through hydraulic fracturing. Shell is able to measure the distance, direction and effectiveness with which the fracturing process worked.

Typically a fracturing fluid consists predominantly of water and proppant, the latter generally being sand, ceramic or bauxite. A small amount of special-purpose additives are required to facilitate the hydraulic fracturing process. The proppant holds the fractures open, allowing hydrocarbons to flow into the wellbore and so to surface after injected fluids (flowback water) are recovered. Flowback water can be re-used and recycled for other operations. For example, in North America, Shell collects the water produced, then re-uses it for other drilling related activities, reducing the water use by up to 50% in some unconventional ventures.

Shell will study a range of variable factors such as the nature of the rock formation and the thickness of the targeted area before finalising the hydraulic fracturing design (fluid composition, pressure required etc.) to ensure fractures are contained within the targeted geological formation(s).

The process to optimise the hydraulic fracturing design, including chemical additives to be used, can only take place once the well has been drilled. Therefore, hydraulic fracturing operations will not occur immediately after completion of drilling and logging operations. In the case of operations in the Karoo, the plan will be to move the rig away. Next the rock properties, any core and data acquired from logging will be analysed before committing to the final fracturing design.

The pressure required to generate microscopic fractures in the shale can vary enormously, which is why rock cuttings, cores and other data acquired during drilling must be carefully analysed before completing the fracture design. Typically the range of fracture pressures can be 5,000psi (345 bar) to 10,000psi (690 bar).

The pressure applied during fracturing should never be higher than the tested maximum allowable casing pressure. The maximum allowable pressure would be confirmed during earlier phases of the well operations through a casing integrity test.

Only once all data has been analysed can the fracture design be completed and specialist hydraulic fracturing equipment and ancillary equipment be mobilised to a well site. With careful design of the fracturing process this allows the fracture network, location, length and effectiveness to create a permanent fracture system in a specified rock formation to be tightly controlled. Figure 39 shows how the results of a fracture can be mapped. The pictures depict points, deep underground, where fractures were created as a result of the hydraulic fracturing process. Each point represents the location (in X, Y and depth) for a microscopic fracture (typically <1mm in size) which was artificially created in the rock. As the hydraulic fracturing liquid is pumped along the well casing, through perforation holes and into the rock formation, small fractures are created in the rock. This process creates very small sound waves that can be picked up by geophones,

Figure 38: Example of a crack induced by hydraulic fracturing


which are vthe United S

Figure 39: DoUnconvention

5.4.5.2 The fracturithen keep frtargeted sha

The selectiocompatible

Within the Kdeep under areas, only the last 50 y

From Shell’shale gas (rrock compo

Shell believcalled slick-some chem

For soor bau

The finafter dChemi

2800-10364-5

ery sensitiveStates (Pined

ots in these imnal gas field (P

Fracturing fluid is a cractures (typale layer, if p

on of the fracwith the targ

Karoo area, tthe ground, ~3 deep welyears deterio

s analysis inreservoirs) to

osition, and p

ves that the m-water fractu

mical additives

-called slick-xite.

nal choice of rilling a well.istry” (refer to

Draft EMPrecinc

e sensors. Thdale, Wyomi

mages indicatePinedale, Wyo

ring Fluid critical comp

pically <1mm present, coul

cturing fluids geted rock fo

the only inforcomes from

lls provide georated, and th

the Karoo, ao be stimulatpore pressure

most likely hyring. This aps that compr

-water hydra

chemical ad. For examplo section 5.5


his example ng, America)

e the locationsoming, Americ

ponent of theis size) oped be located

compositionrmation in or

rmation availm the Soekor

eological insherefore only

and more geted will vary me.

ydraulic fractpproach woulrises the rem

ulic fracturin

dditives to bee, this will he

5 below)


87

is from one o)

s of micro-seisca) fractured

hydraulic fran deep in the

d as deep as

n used for anrder to try an

lable to Shelwells drilled ights. The gey provides ve

enerally globamarkedly in t

turing fluid cold typically re

maining 1%.

g, the propp

e used will deelp make app

as Explorationompany B.V.

of Shell’s pro

smic events ge

acturing proce targeted ro5000 meters

ny well, at annd create and

l, at this timein the 1960s

eological corery some ge

ally for unconterms of buri

omposition toequire around

ant likely to b

epend on inspropriate cho

n in the West

oducing unco

enerated as th

cess in orderock formations under the g

y site, must d maintain th

e, regarding ts. Within Shere data obtaineric guidan

nventional opal depth, tem

o be used, wd 99% water

be used will

sights from neoices with reg

tern Karoo (C

onventional g

he rock in a we

r to try to cren. In the Karoground.

be tailored tohe fractures.

the rock comell’s license aned by Soekce.

perations, thmperature, pe

will be based r and proppa

be one of sa

ew informatiogard to so-ca

Central

gas fields in

ell in Shell’s

ate and oo the

o be

mposition application kor has, over

e targeted ermeability,

upon a so-ant, plus

and, ceramic

on obtained alled “Green

r


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 88

Note : Shell will commit to undertake toxicity screening, the results of which will be publically shared, prior to developing the final hydraulic fracture design for an Exploration well. In addition, more generally Shell supports disclosure by Contractors and Suppliers of chemicals that may be used during the hydraulic fracturing process.

The following sub-sections briefly talk about the current drive, across Industry, to utilize more widely so-called Green-Chemicals, and this is contrasted against a selection of chemicals that have in the past been used by Industry for hydraulic fracturing.

5.5 EPA Principles of “Green Chemistry” Note : It is important to emphasize that the additives described in this section are examples from publically available sources, used for unconventional gas operation. They have not been specifically selected to be used in the Karoo. The choice of additives will be used in the Karoo will depend on a number of location specific factors.

There is a growing choice of fluid compositions available by Industry suppliers, which cater to the wide range of geological conditions and particular drivers of an individual company.

Since 2004, industry has experienced a technical evolution that currently reflected in the availability and use of so-called Eco-friendly Green Chemistry stimulation fluids (In the United States, these are in compliance with the USC Water Act).

The term and objectives for ‘Green Chemistry’, are depicted (for example) by the adherence to the EPA’s Principles of “Green” Chemistry, where by chemicals selected must achieve the following objectives:

Prevent Waste

Design safer chemicals and products. Achieve balance between toxicity, fluid effectiveness and loading requirements

Design less hazardous chemical syntheses.

Use renewable feed-stocks and bio-degradable products. Green chemistry and Eco-friendly and biologically derived versus synthetic or oil-based additives

Avoid chemical derivatives: No carcinogenics, nor endocrine disruptors, nor heavy metals

Use safer solvents and reaction conditions to reduce large volumes of solvents and auxiliary chemicals

Green fracture fluids use of bio-degradable products (into benign byproducts) to degrade after use, preventing bio-magnification and ecological toxicity

The change of chemistry and green products to help prevent pollution in real-time. Eco-friendly alternative fracture fluids allow for easy cleaning of spills

For this reason, there are a growing number of different products available by Industry which cater to these objectives (Table 18).

Table 18: Currently available “Green Chemistry” hydraulic fracturing chemical additives available by Industry Suppliers

Company Products Details

Halliburton CleanSuite™ Technologies - Ultra Clean Fracturing Fluid Technology

CleanStim™ Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid System. With components are sourced from the food industry and can provide an extremely clean fracturing fluid with excellent proppant transport and cleanup. Provides Breakthrough Environmental Benefits and Excellent Retained Conductivity CleanStream® Service - Enhances Environmental Performance by Reducing the Volume of Conventional Biocides Required CleanStream® for


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 89

Company Products Details

Fracturing Fluid, Ultraviolet Light Bacteria Control.

Ultra Clean Liquid Gel Concentrates (LGC™). All LGC’s are now ultra clean and meet requirements of the Energy Act of 2005 and the CleanWater Act. Under this family, the Water-Based Gelled Fluid Systems include:

SilverStim® LT service for a wide variety of applications including

CBM stimulation,

pHaserFractureSM – compatibility with CO2,

SiroccoSM service for high temperatures

DeepQuest® service that enables fracturing ultra deep reservoirs

Source: http://www.halliburton.com/public/projects/pubsdata/Hydraulic_Fracturing/CleanSuite_Technologies.html

Ultra Clean Liquid Gel Concentrates (LGC™)

SilverStim® LT service

FractureTech Eco Green Family Slickwater “Green”

Powdered “Greener” Environmental Scorecard suggests a large improvement as compared to traditional fracture fluids

Powdered “Greener” components Friction Reducer Biocide Oxygen Scavenger Clay Control Scale Inhibitor

Adherence to the EPA’s 12 Principles of “GREEN” Chemistry Superior/equal performance vs. current chemistry Location footprint reduction Simplified logistics

Source: ECO-Green, Green Stimulation Solutions http://www.fractech.net/eco-green/#slickwater-green

Schlumberger OpenFRACTURE Fluid Additive Systems

OpenFRACTURE range of hydraulic fracturing fluids are resulting from extensive development and testing programme. Operators receive full disclosure of additive components, a disclosure level similar to that used in the food industry.

OpenFRACTURE SW—used for slickwater fracturing, where drag reduction and less-complex fluid systems are desired

OpenFRACTURE WF—used for linear gel fracturing, offering improved proppant transport characteristics.

OpenFRACTURE XL—used for crosslinking, maintaining all the advantages of the first two fluids while also creating wider fractures to enable high proppant concentrations and generate high fracture conductivity

Source: OpenFRAC Fluid Additive Systems http://www.slb.com/services/stimulation/unconventional_gas_stimulation/openfrac_hydraulic_fracturing_fluids.aspx


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 90

5.6 Historical Choices Chemical Additives Note : It is important to emphasise that the additives described in this following section are examples taken from publically available sources, used by Industry for unconventional gas operation, they are not specific to the Karoo. The choice of additives that may be used in the Karoo will depend on a number of location specific factors.

As one example, additives used by Industry in the United States on an existing, producing shale gas asset (Eagle Ford Shale, Texas, USA) is shown in Table 19 below. This information is publically available at the following website: http://www.halliburton.com/public/projects/pubsdata/Hydraulic_Fracturing/fluids_disclosure.html. The types of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids, and common products which may also contain such chemicals is provided as a point of reference for benefit of the reader (Table 20).

Table 19: Industry Third Party Example: list of additives used by Industry, at the Eagle Ford Shale, Texas, USA producing assets

Product Name Additive Purpose Concentration

15% Hydrochloric Acid (HCl)

Acid/Solvent Removes scale and cleans wellbore prior to fracturing treatment

4000-6000 gal run ahead of fracturing stages

BA-20™ Organic Acid Acid used to adjust the pH of the base fluid.

0.1 - 0.5 gal/1000 gal

BE-9™ Biocide

Prevents or limits growth of bacteria that can cause formation of hydrogen sulfide and can physically plug flow of oil and gas into the well

0.25 - 0.5 gal/1000 gal

CL-28M™ Crosslink Agent A delayed crosslinker for the gelling agent. 0.3 -1.1 gal/1000 gal

CL-31™ Crosslink Enhancer

A non-delayed crosslinker for the gelling agent.

0.25 - 0.75 gal/1000 gal

Clayfix™ 3 Clay Stabilizer Clay-stabilization additive which helps prevent clay particles from migrating in water-sensitive formations.

2.5 gals/1000 gal

Common White Sand 100 mesh

Proppant/Fluid Loss

Prevents some treating fluid leak off and holds open fracture to allow oil and gas to flow to well.

0.2 - 1 lbs/1000 gal

FR-66™ Friction Reducer Allows fracture fluid to move down the wellbore with the least amount of resistance

0.2 - 1 gal/1000 gal

HAI-404M™ Corrosion Inhibitor

Prevents acid from causing damage to the wellbore and pumping equipment

5- 25 gals/1000 gal

Losurf-300D™ Surfactant Aids in recovery of water used during frac 0.5 - 3 gal/1000 gal

LP-65™ Scale Inhibitor Prevents build up of certain materials (i.e. scale) on sides of the well casing and the surface equipment

0.25 - 10 gal/1000 gal

MO-67™ Buffer Used to adjust the pH of the base fluid. 1 - 10 gal/1000 gal

Optikleen-WF™ Breaker Agent used to degrade viscosity 0.25 - 1 lbs/1000 gal

Premium White Sand 30/50 mesh

Proppant Holds open fracture to allow oil and gas to flow to well

0.5 - 5.5 lbs/gal

Premium White Sand 40/70 mesh

Proppant Holds open fracture to allow oil and gas to flow to well

0.2 - 1.5 lbs/gal


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 91

Product Name Additive Purpose Concentration

SP Breaker Breaker Agent used to degrade viscosity 1 - 2 lbs/1000 gal

Vicon NF™ Breaker Agent used to degrade viscosity 1 - 10 gal/1000 gal

Water Base Fluid Base fluid creates fractures and carries proppant, also can be present in some additives

N/A

WG-36™ Guar Gelling Agent

Gelling agent for developing viscosity 20 - 50 lbs/1000 gal

Note : Shell will commit to undertake toxicity screening, the results of which will be publically shared, prior to developing the final hydraulic fracture design for an Exploration well. More generally Shell supports disclosure by Contractors and Suppliers of chemicals that may be used during the hydraulic fracturing process.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 92

Table 20: Industry Third Party Example: Choices available to a Company for the selection of chemical additives to be used during hydraulic fracturing process

Source http://www.energyindepth.org/frac-fluid.pdf Note : Shell will commit to undertake toxicity screening, the results of which will be publically shared, prior to developing the final hydraulic fracture design for an Exploration well. More generally Shell supports disclosure by Contractors and Suppliers of chemicals that may be used during the hydraulic fracturing process.

5.6.1 Water Requirements 5.6.1.1 Volume of water Water is required to perform exploratory drilling operations and, if required, hydraulic fracturing at a later stage.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 93

Water for drilling vertical wells: As outlined in previous sections, the first objective during the initial Exploration Right period is to drill a number of vertical exploration wells to understand the geological properties of the rock, hopefully identify the presence of the shale layer and observe that gas is still held tightly in the rock. Water is the main constituent of the drilling fluid normally referred to as ‘mud’ which is required to cool the drill bit during drilling operations, transport rock cuttings to the surface and for bore hole conditioning during drilling. The mud also acts as a primary control for down-hole pressures that may be encountered whilst drilling. For drilling, water typical water volumes required will be 0.3 – 0.9 million litres per well.

Water for hydraulic fracturing: Having drilled a vertical well, if gas is observed in the shale layer at a certain well site, then Shell may decide to hydraulically fracture a small section of the vertical well, or it may decide to drill a new exploratory horizontal well section in an attempt to locate the well within the narrow shale layer deep under the ground. If successful and gas is observed to be still present in the shale rock then hydraulic fracturing technique may be attempted (this could be in vertical and horizontal wells). Water is needed also for such hydraulic fracturing operations. In this case, the volume of water required to perform that operation could be up to 6 million liters. Of course if no gas is observed during drilling then no hydraulic fracturing will take place, in which case the water consumption would only be that used to cool the drill and carry rock cuttings to the surface.

Table 21: describes, for different drilling depths and objectives, the typical ranges of water volumes which may be required during exploratory drilling operations

Indication of anticipated water usage* for drilling and suspension of vertical exploration wells, for the expected depth range (As part of 3-year Exploration Right)

Well Depth 1000m deep well 2500m deep well 5000m deep well

Drilling Fluids ~300m3 (300,000L) ~700m3 (700,000L) ~900m3 (900,000L)

* Anticipated water usage assumes theoretical hole volumes plus empirical excess volume assumptions. In practice, water usage may be higher or lower. The drilling of the exploration wells will provide more insight into the characteristics of the rock formations and therefore the specific fluid requirement which in turn could mean higher or lower volumes of water.

Hydraulic Fracturing

(if performed)

- Optional Stage 1 Vertical exploration well: up to 2.2 million litres

- Optional Stage 2 Horizontal section exploration well: up to 6 million litres

# Excludes efficiency gains by re-use or re-cycling of water.

Shell is committed to responsible water management and wherever possible will recycle and re-use water and drilling fluids. This builds on Shell’s experience elsewhere in similar projects where water from drilling operations has been cleaned, then re-used for other drilling activities, reducing overall the water use requirements by ~50% on some North American unconventional business ventures.

5.6.1.2 Sources of water Shell recognizes that the quality and supply of shallow drinking water aquifers in the licence application areas needs to be protected and is therefore investigating a number of potential water sources to support the requirements of the proposed exploration in the Karoo. Shell is looking at suitable options and will respect the fragile water balance of fresh/potable water in the Karoo – these options may include the use of brackish or seawater for certain operations.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 94

Preliminary water assessments, as part an early feasibility scoping will be focused upon a number of alternative water sources, such as, beneath the ground (typically at depths >100 m), sea water, surface water, water imported by truck or recycled grey water.

The identification and use of water is likely to be subject to regulatory approvals under the National Water Act. In the next phase, local experts will be consulted to identify suitable water supply options and appropriate studies undertaken as required to meet the legal requirements. Detailed evaluations will be carried out during the Environmental Impact Assessment phase which will focus on specific drilling locations. The intention is to identify the most suitable water source on a per-well site basis. Stakeholders e.g. the relevant water authorities, local stakeholders, environmental advisors will be consulted during the water source selection process.

5.6.1.3 Storage of water Water required for drilling operations will need to be stored, either on-site or nearby. There are various options to store water, such as using metal tanks, pillow tanks or geotextile lined bunded-wall. Local experts will be consulted to help identify where or how best to store the water required for operations.

Water and additives are normally blended into a base fluid off site and then maintained on site with the use of possibly a truck mounted blending unit, with hoses to transfer liquid additives from storage containers to the blending unit or well directly from blending truck. Dry additives are poured into a feeder system on the blending unit. The blended solution is immediately fed into the wellbore as required.

5.6.2 Well testing During drilling operations which have the potential to drill into hydrocarbon bearing zones, there may be a requirement to have an operational flare at the well site, which can be used in emergency situations to evacuate gas or other hydrocarbons in a controlled manner.

If an exploration well identifies a (shale) reservoir containing hydrocarbons and a hydraulic fracturing procedure successfully stimulates the hydrocarbons to flow up the well bore, then the next stage is to evaluate the rate of gas flow and fluid composition. The key products of a typical well test may include, but not be limited to:

Hydrocarbons and other gases (gas and / or liquid forms)

Water (From the fracture fluid or produced reservoir water)

Solids (Sand/rock/mud – from the drilling, hydraulic fracturing process or from the reservoir rock)

These product streams could be handled by routing the hydrocarbons through a low emissions flare at the well site. Any water flowing up the well bore would be captured for recycling or cleanup and disposal. Any solids encountered would be caught in a tank and in a test separator, then emptied for recycling or disposal as part of the waste management programme.

Based upon experience elsewhere in the world, the duration of these gas flow tests may vary greatly from one well to another, dependent upon the particular properties and thickness of shale encountered.

Based upon analysis a scenario Shell has developed is that gas may flow from a vertical well at about 0.15 MMscf/day on average. This assumes gas is present at a location and can then be made to flow. When Soekor drilled approximately 10 deep wells, during the 1960s, there was only one successful shale gas well test (which today is located outside Shell’s licence applications). At that one location, Soekor was able to test for gas flow to the surface, however after 1 day the gas flow rate had significantly reduced to such a level that they stopped the test.”

Well test durations are also dependent on the type of information that is sought and regulations. Therefore the duration for a well test can vary between a few hours to weeks during the initial Exploration Period. If permitted under South African legislation, and if longer term gas flow tests are to be performed, Shell is


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 95

investigating alternative methods to evaluate gas flow which might convert hydrocarbons in more efficient ways. These methods may include:

Combustion of the hydrocarbons in power generation units (turbines or gas engines) installed on-site.

Liquefaction of gas using surface facilities that will allow compression and cooling the gas to allow for its transportation by truck to an existing nearby processing facility.

Capture and settling of any liquid hydrocarbons in a settling tank in preparation for export by truck to an existing nearby processing facility.

5.6.3 Other project components The proposed exploratory drilling activities will require additional infrastructure, which may include some or all of the following:

Electricity usage: Throughout the exploration phase electricity for the exploration drilling and possible fracturing activities will be provided through diesel generators on-site. If gas is discovered there may be opportunities to utilize some of the gas for power generation. However, the rate or duration of flow cannot predicted; therefore, diesel generation will be the assumed mode.

Accommodation: Drilling operations will require a number of crews (teams) that will work in rotating shifts. These employees are expected to be a mix of technical professionals and semi-skilled who, when not working at the well site will require temporary accommodation within an acceptable distance of the well site. At this time no well sites have been identified, therefore options have not been developed whether to, for example, establish a temporary camp or use locally available accommodation. As plans start to be developed these types of options will be considered on a location-by-location basis, following dialogue with the local community, landowners and considering the potential impacts upon road transportation and employee safety.

Logistics/supply base: Not all materials and equipment required for drilling operations are stored at any one time on a well site. Typically a supply base is established in a central location, such as a major town, which allows for storage, preparation and possibly testing of equipment before being dispatched for use to a well site. The location(s) for a supply base have not yet been selected because the locations of well sites have not yet been selected. Additional considerations for a supply base could include the existence of possible (brown-field) storage facilities, local skills, labour and other materials.

Roads and Traffic: The national network of roads, ports and railways will be used where ever possible for the transportation of equipment and personnel. If specialist equipment has to be imported the South African ports facilities will be utilised as much as possible. It is not envisioned that land transport will involve unusually wide or heavy loads during the initial Exploration phase. Standard heavy goods vehicle (HGV) transport will be used for the movement of the drilling rig and supplies. When well site locations are finalised then it may be necessary to create or upgrade existing access roads from national roads. This process would be subject to individual consultation with land owners and obtaining necessary regulatory permits. A typical access road, to a well site, would be 6 to 10 metres in width, allowing for standard HGV transportation of equipment.

5.6.3.1 Waste management Shell indicates that the company will capture and recycle well construction materials as far as practicable. As an example, cuttings will be separated from the mud returns at surface, allowing the mud to be treated and re-used in the well and the cuttings to be transported from the well site to an appropriate waste disposal or treatment facility registered for such purposes under South African legislation. Shell will develop a waste management plan prior to commencing any drilling operations, and the plan will be applicable to the possible range of materials to be used and collected at each well site location. All plans will comply with appropriate legislation.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 96

5.6.3.2 Waste water treatment and disposal Shell is committed to responsible water management and wherever possible will recycle and re-use water and drilling fluids. This builds on Shells experience elsewhere in similar projects where water from drilling operations has been cleaned, then re-used for other drilling activities, reducing overall the water use requirements by ~50% on some North American unconventional business ventures.

During drilling operations fluids (drilling mud) return to surface where they are captured, recycled and re-used wherever possible. The fluids returning to surface will contain chemicals and subsurface contaminants mobilised during the drilling process. These elements will be removed from the fluids prior to reuse. Having passed through separators the fluids are then flowed to secure storage tanks prior to cleanup and/or reuse.

If wells are hydraulically fractured, fluids used in this process return to the surface once the well is back produced. These fluids are, referred to as ‘flow back’, can then be recycled, and mostly re-used for other drilling activities. The percentage of fluids that can be re-used for other drilling operations will vary from one well location to another as a result of even small variations in the geological properties of the shale formations deep underground. Similarly, the quality of flow back water which may or may not require additional treatment, prior to re-use, will likely vary.

Any water that is no longer required for the operation will be treated and cleaned up – using mobile water processing equipment - in line with Shell’s own technical standards and relevant South African regulations. The most suitable location for recycling will be sought in consultation with Regulators and environmental consultants on a location by location basis.

5.6.3.3 Solid waste management Throughout the operations, a number of solid waste elements will be produced. All products must form part of a regulated waste management plan that Shell must produced as part of later regulatory permitting to then be allowed to drill.

Some typical well site will include but not be limited to:-

Standard domestic waste;

Metal/plastic tubular thread protectors,

Used engine oil and filters,

Wood (Pallets, packing crates etc)

Unused Chemicals – (which will then typically be returned to the supplier)

Scrap Metal

It is Shell’s intention to contract a reputable local environmental disposal contractor who will dispose of the waste in accordance with South African Legislation. The Contractor will be fully permitted to perform the work on behalf of Shell.

As part of the Environmental Management Plan consultation and data gathering process, Shell has started to investigate the capability of the waste treatment /disposal facilities across South Africa. There are between~25 sites located in and around the licence areas that could be suitable locations to process the waste products.

5.6.4 Decommissioning and rehabilitation Following exploration activities, if the shale layer is not encountered and/or no gas is found present in the shale, then a decision may be taken for that well site to be decommissioned. If a well is decommissioned cement plugs are introduced at various stages inside the well bore depending on the geological formations that have been drilled through, in accordance with Shell’s own technical standards, relevant South African regulations and recognised Industry practice. This additional plugging is needed for the long term protection


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 97

of groundwater, surface water bodies and soil. Well plugging involves removal of certain down hole equipment.

Once plugged, the surface casing will be cut at a certain depth below surface (in line with South Africa regulations and permits) and the wellhead removed. All remaining surface equipment will be removed from the site. Shell will implement a site-specific land rehabilitation programme appropriate to the local habitat in line with industry practices and regulations. Shell will consult with local experts and communities to design and implement the most appropriate way to do this. This will be further assessed as part of the impact assessment and studies may be then commissioned drawing upon local expertise if Shell is granted an Exploration Right.

5.7 Resourcing and employment During the initial exploratory drilling it is likely that certain technologies and equipment will need to be imported, and highly specialised expertise or personnel be required. Efforts will be taken to source ancillary services locally, or through companies with an established South-African presence. Whilst a number of these roles will require specialized expertise, it is likely that over time, if gas is discovered and confidence grows that there is sufficient volumes to develop, there will be further opportunities for local employment, training and services generation.

At this stage there are large uncertainties whether gas will be found in the license area and if it is found, exactly where that might be. Therefore, during the exploration process, Shell will align the development of the B-BBEE strategy with increasing certainty if there is a viable long-term project and will work with stakeholders in the process.

Exploration is typically a period for considerable investment, without generating revenues. However Shell will seek to make meaningful contributions to broad based black economic empowerment (B-BBEE) aligned projects, enterprises and organisations from the start of its operations in South Africa. Which may include :

Socio-economic development: contributing to specific, local socio-economic development and enterprise development activities, for example, linked to specific, local capabilities development. The dialogue with stakeholders to create the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and subsequent Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), consultation with communities, local governmental and non-governmental organisations will help Shell develop appropriate project concepts. It is envisaged that these will initially be focussed on local capability development, but will change if exploration activities are successful. Once decisions are taken to apply for Exploration Right renewals (over a 9-year period), then with increasing confidence and understand that gas is present in the licence area, the emphasis will increase towards local enterprise development, prior to making an application for a Production Right.

Procurement: From a procurement perspective, Shell’s foremost priorities in all of its operations are quality and Health, Safety and Environment (“HSE”) requirements. When assessing potential suppliers of goods and services to use, Shell, employs a thorough and in-depth process of contractor and sub-contractor assessment to ensure quality and HSE standards are maintained. Shell will identify various categories of products and services will be required during the exploration phase, and undertake a review which are available from South African suppliers of goods and services, for each of the categories. Shell will endeavour to source products and services, for example, security, catering, cleaning, transport/ logistics, etc. from local (B-BBEE) compliant parties during the exploration phase. Shell will work with local companies to raise their capacity in terms of HSE if and where necessary to enable them to become competitors for local contracts

Skills development: Shell is committed to attract, development and retain talented South Africans. For any new project, such as the Shell Karoo Shale Gas Venture, Shell will establish a new team that combine the best skilled local talent available, provide suitable training and where required utilise specialist international staff, where skill transfer is required. Due to the uncertainty related to the phase of the project (exploration phase), Shell does also not wish to create unrealistic expectations regarding future employment opportunities at this stage of the project.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 98

5.8 What happens if gas is found? If the presence of gas is indicated during the initial three year exploration period, Shell can make a formal application to PASA to renew its exploration rights and to undertake additional exploration activities. This request for a licence renewal can be made three times, which if granted each time, could allow Shell to explore for up to nine years.

During later stages of exploration, if Shell successfully discovers gas which can be stimulated to flow to the surface, the next step would typically be to drill additional wells, to establish whether similar geological characteristics exist.

Once an area had been established that did have produce-able, sizeable volumes of gas, then the likely engineering concept would be to drill several wells from a single, existing site, to touch the greatest area of rock from a single point on the surface.

The guiding principles for the conceptual development are reduced surface footprint modularity and scale-ability At this stage, due to large uncertainties (E.g.: where gas may be located, how much, how much each well might flow etc) the concept is based upon using a modular, on (or near) well site mobile gas plants to process the gas and generate electricity to then be distributed into the existing national electricity grid. In this scenario additional infrastructure would be required to ”connect” the sites so that the gas can be distributed or used to generate energy locally, feeding into existing infrastructure.

Shell is also considering other engineering concepts that could take gas that is discovered and generate energy for the people of South Africa, as described earlier in this document.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 99

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP) PREPARATION PROCESS

This chapter briefly describes the regulatory situation, then describes the technical assessment and public participation process, both of which are required in the preparation of an EMP report.

6.1 Regulatory requirements for the EMP

Chapter 3, Legal Context, sets out the legal context for this EMP, referring to various acts and regulations that need to be taken into consideration. Below, regulatory requirements in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act 28 of 2002) (MPRDA) are described as background to the process followed to develop the EMP.

Note, however, the requirements of the National Environmental Management Act shown in Box 6.1 and discussed in Chapter 1, Conclusions and Recommendations.

In terms of this EMP process, the MPRDA stipulates that Any person who applies for a reconnaissance permission, prospecting / exploration right or mining permit must submit an environmental management plan as prescribed within a period of 120 days from the date of acceptance of the application.

The contents of an Environmental Management Plan are prescribed in the MPRDA Regulations Section 52, shown in Box 6.2. Considering section 52 (2) (b) and (c) of the Regulations, an assessment of environmental, socio-economic and cultural impact is required, and not an Environmental Impact Assessment process in terms of s 39 (1) of the MPRDA.

6.2 Approach to assessment to prepare the EMP

Shell had a Technical Cooperation Agreement with PASA for 12 months (December 2009 to Dec 2010). No field work or environmental baseline studies were permitted during this period. In December 2010, Shell had to decide whether to apply for an exploration right or not, and whether within 120 days of PASA accepting the application to submit an EMP or not. The company chose to apply for the right and submit the EMP within 120 days (four months). But effectively, this requirement in the MPRDA leaves little time for environmental baseline studies or for identifying potential drill sites.

The consultants met with PASA in this regard, and in particular because of the extensive stakeholder concerns around both the proposed exploration project and the time available to prepare the EMP. In PASA’s view, indicated in a meeting with the consultants in February 2011, the assessment and EMP should, in the absence of specific drilling sites, at least assess and make recommendations for mitigation in respect of the types of activities to be conducted somewhere within the regional areas.

Given the above, the approach followed in the assessment was to identify and assess potential impacts in a broad, regional context, as well as to assess specific exploration activities generically but not in a site-

Box 1: EIA in terms of the National Environmental Management Act

Drilling and hydraulic fracturing will trigger listed activities under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act 107 of 1998), notably the following:

Activity 24 of Notice 1, GN 544, requiring a basic assessment: The transformation of land bigger than 1 000 m2 in size, to residential, retail, commercial, industrial or institutional use …. (Drill sites will be 100 x 100 m, thus 10 000 sq m).

Activity 4 of Notice 2, GN 545, requiring a full EIA: The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the refining, extraction or processing of gas, oil or petroleum products with an installed capacity of 50 cubic meters or more per day… (It is assumed that hydraulic fracturing during exploration drilling could stimulate 50 cubic meters or more of gas per day).

Thus, an Environmental Impact Assessment for drilling and hydraulic fracturing will be required in terms of the NEMA. This is further described in Chapter 11, Conclusions and Recommendations.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 100

specific context. A typical gas exploration well was used to assess potential impacts and to develop indicative mitigation measures, but these need to be confirmed during the NEMA EIA, and this EMP will then need to be updated.

Box 2: Contents of an Environmental Management Plan as prescribed in the MPRDA Regulations Section 52

Environmental Management Plan

52. (1) An applicant who’s application for a prospecting right or mining permit was accepted in terms of the Act, must submit an environmental management plan at the office of the Regional Manager in whose region the application was lodged within 60 days from the date of notification by the Regional Manager.

(2) An environmental management plan, must substantially be in the standard format provided by the Department and must contain:

(a) a description of the environment likely to be affected by the proposed prospecting or mining operation;

(b) an assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed prospecting or mining operation on the environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, if any;

(c) a summary of the assessment of the significance of the potential impacts, and the proposed mitigation and management measures to minimize adverse impacts and benefits;

(d) financial provision which must include- (i) the determination of the quantum of the financial provision contemplated in regulation 54;

and (ii) details of the method providing for the financial provision contemplated in regulation 53; (e) planned monitoring and performance assessment of the environmental management plan; (f) closure and environmental objectives; (g) a record of the public participation undertaken and the results thereof; and (h) an undertaking by the applicant regarding the execution of the environmental management

plan.

6.3 Technical assessment 6.3.1 Process The technical assessment process consisted of the following:

Gather broad, regional environmental, social and health baseline data for the application area, using publicly available data bases and other data sources such as the National Groundwater Database, the South African Biodiversity Institute database (the SANBI's Biodiversity Advisor38),and others (Chapter 4, The Existing Environment – the Karoo);

Gather field data to verify the accuracy of publicly available data in respect of terrestrial ecology, noise and groundwater. Field studies were done in some of the notional (provisional) drilling areas, each more than 30 sq km in size, as shown on the map in Figure 1, Chapter 1, Introduction. Field data is reflected in Chapter 4, The Existing Environment – the Karoo;

Gather data from international sources on the potential impacts of drilling and hydraulic fracturing since this type of exploration is new to South Africa, and because of stakeholder concerns about the exploration methodology in other countries (Chapter 2, Context and History);

38 http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org/


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 101

Considering comments, local knowledge and information from landowners and other stakeholders received via the public consultation process described in the next section;

Assess the potential impacts, both negative and positive, of exploration activities, regardless of where in the application area they would be conducted (Chapter 8, Environmental Assessment);

Recommend measures for mitigation of impacts to avoid or reduce negative impacts, and to enhance positive impacts (see Assessment Reports in Volume 2);

Capture mitigation measures for each exploration activity in an EMP (see Chapter 9, Environmental Management Plan);

Define provisional criteria for the selection of drilling sites to be done during a NEMA EIA process should this application be approved by PASA (see Chapter 7, Alternatives Consideration); and

Set closure and environmental objectives (see Chapter 9)

Financial provision required in terms of section 52 of the MPRDA Regulations Section 52 is presented in Chapter 10 (Understanding and Commitments by the Applicant).

6.3.2 Technical assessments The baseline information collected and the assessment of potential impacts are captured in a series of technical assessment reports contained in Volume 2:

Soils; Terrestrial ecology; Surface water; Groundwater; Noise; Air quality; Heritage and Social.

6.4 Public consultation This section summarises the requirements for consultation, and the consultation process. The full Public Consultation Report is included in Volume 2. A Comment and Response Report, in which all stakeholder comments are captured with responses, is also available.

The MPRDA is brief on public consultation during the development of an EMP. Section 79 (4) of the Act states: If the designated agency accepts the application, the designated agency must …notify the applicant in writing (a) To notify and consult with any affected party.

However, good practice principles reflected in the NEMA guide consultation, and these were applied.

6.4.1 The consultation process The process is shown in Figure 40 and summarised below.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 102

Identifying landowners and other stakeholders

A total of 2,213 stakeholders have registered as stakeholders across all three of Shell’s exploration application processes of which 1,337 stakeholders, including 308 landowners, are currently registered for the Central Precinct EMP process.

They represent various sectors of society: national, provincial and local government, landowners, agriculture, conservation, cultural heritage, education, research, NGOs, research organisations, and many others.

Landowners were identified through the Surveyor General’s title deeds database. Other stakeholders were identified through networking and referral and in response to media advertisements. When stakeholders were registered by a spokesperson, their permission for registration was obtained telephonically. Information on potential land claimants is being awaited from the Northern and Western Cape Departments of Rural Development and Land Reform.

Announcing the opportunity to comment and providing information (January 2011 – February 2011)

The first document for comment, a Background Information Document (BID), was distributed in the week of 03 January 2011. The comment period on the BID ran up to 18 February 2011. The process was announced as follows:

Telephone calls to organisations and other bodies alerting them to documents being mailed;

Paid advertisements, in English and Afrikaans, in two national, one regional and six local newspapers;

Announcements on two national radio stations;

Distributing a BID accompanied by a letter notifying Stakeholders of the proposed project, EMP and consultation

process, in English, Afrikaans and Xhosa; more than 2,800 hard copies and 350 electronic copies distributed;

Figure 40: Public Consultation Process towards the development of the EMP for exploration (not production) - Central Precinct

PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS TOWARDS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EMP FOR EXPLORATION

(NOT PRODUCTION)

IDENTIFICATION OF IAPS

PROJECT ANNOUNCEMENT

Notification letter to

landowners

Information letter to public

Comment Sheet

Paid adverts

Public Places

Web‐site

COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT

ANNOUNCE DRAFT EMP

DRAFT ENVIROMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUMMARY

Distribution of documents

Public Meetings Minutes as CRR

SUBMISSION OF FINAL EMP TO PASA

PROGRESS FEEDBACK

End of EMP process

LETTER TO ANNOUNCE DECISION

Letter Adverts

We are here

Public Consultation Process

CONSULTATION

OPEN HOUSES AND PUBLIC MEETINGS

Victoria‐West Graaff‐ReinetBeaufort‐West Murraysburg


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 103

Providing information on the proposed project and EMP process took place as follows:

Distributing the BID mentioned above, and making available lists of affected properties on Golder’s website (www.golder.com), at nine public places, at open houses and public meetings and sending copies to stakeholders upon request;

Telephone calls to key stakeholders, e.g., farmer’s unions, local communities, NGOs, CBOs to confirm their attendance at the open houses and public meetings; and

Convening open houses in Victoria-West, Beaufort-West, Murraysburg and Graaff-Reinet (Figures Figure 41 – Figure 47) where the project and process were visually displayed and/or presented. At the request of stakeholders some open houses were run as public meetings in which the proposed exploration project was presented and there was collective discussion.

Obtaining comments

Comments were obtained in various ways, as follows:

During the open houses/public meetings mentioned above, where stakeholders commented directly to members of the EMP team;

Meetings with three national and three provincial authorities; and

Comment sheets were returned by stakeholders after having read the BID or having attended meetings, written submissions were received by email or mail and telephonic comments were recorded.

Figure 41: Materials that were made available at the open houses for Stakeholders to take home

Figure 42: Posters displayed at the open house in Victoria West

Figure 43: Sreejeeta Datta from Shell explains the environmental authorisation process at the open house in Beaufort-West.

Figure 44: Toni Pietersen from Golder helps local farmers to locate their farms in the map books to confirm details


Figure 45: Dumeeting in Mimpacts of hygroundwater

Figure 47: Lecommunity afracturing pro 6.4.2 The next ste

Annouto stakGolder

Conve

Collati

Once t

6.5 CA total of 2,with the Cenbelow. EachReport.

2800-10364-5

uring the discuMurraysburg faydraulic frackinresources

eft and right: Sasked what kocess of gas e

Next stepeps in the pr

uncing the avkeholders per website;

ene public an

ng comment

the PASA de

Commen796 issues antral Precinch issue raise

Draft EMPrecinc

ussion sessionrmers wantedng would be o

Stakeholders ikind of guaranexploration.

ps in the process are:

vailability of trsonally, adv

nd other mee

ts on the Dra

ecision is ava

nts and isand commenct process coed, or comme


n at the publicd to know whaon downstream

in the Graaff-Rntees Shell c

public con

he Draft EMPvertisements

etings with sta

aft EMP into

ailable later t

ssues nts were raiseontributed a tent made has


104

c t the

m

Figurwho handthe estudi

Reinet area acould provide

nsultation

P for comme in the printe

akeholders a

a Comments

this year, not

ed across alltotal of 2,074s been respo

as Explorationompany B.V.

re 46: Mr Johaattended the p

ds over a memenvironmental ies

ttended the puin case of a

process

ent. This will ed media, em

and organisa

s and Respo

tify stakehold

three precin4 comments aonded to with

n in the West

an Mans, a farpublic meeting

morandum of qspecialists to

ublic meeting a pollution inc

be done by wmail, and ann

ations in Marc

nse Report o

ders.

ncts of whichand issues bhin the Comm

tern Karoo (C

rmer and busig in Murraysbuquestions and

consider durin

in Graaff-Reincident during

way of lettersnouncements

ch/April 2011

on the Draft E

h stakeholderbroadly summment and Re

Central

inessman urg officially concerns for ng their

net where thethe hydraulic

s addressed s on the

1;

EMP; and

rs registered marised esponse

e c


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 105

Aesthetics

Many stakeholders said the Karoo is a special and treasured environment due to its landscape quality, quietness, heritage, and sense of place. They were concerned about a range of possible impacts that would bring industrialised activity.

Biodiversity and rehabilitation

Given the low ecological resilience of Karoo ecosystems, and the presence of Red Data Book species, landowners, conservation bodies and other stakeholders were concerned about potential impacts to biodiversity. Farmers said there is little research on the rehabilitation of disturbed veld and that it could take up to 30 to 40 years for a disturbed habitat to recover, if at all;

Conservation NGOs indicated that some trial research projects on rehabilitation in the Karoo have been completed recently and offered specialists access to the data; and

National parks indicated that information on Red Data species that occur in the Central Precinct is available to environmental specialists.

EMP process and EMP Report

NGOs, representatives from research institutions and landowners were concerned about the limited time available to develop the EMP, and that the authority decision will be based on a report lacking critical information on the potential impacts of gas exploration. They asked that the process of developing the EMP comply with regulations, compare valid alternatives, and receive a proper independent review; and

People asked whether the assessment would include a thorough assessment of environmental risks arising from the exploration, and what risk management measures will accompany this. They wanted to know how the assessment can be sufficiently thorough when the project description is not yet firm.

Financial provision

There was concern that the statutes and regulations governing the proposed development are not adequate to protect the public interest, and/or that the regulations and conditions of approval will not be properly enforced. Fearing an event like the one which happened recently in the Gulf of Mexico, stakeholders asked that Shell prove that exploration in the Karoo will be safe, and asked for examples of similar work the company has undertaken. They wanted Shell to provide a financial guarantee in the event of environmental harm.

Human health

Concerns were expressed about impacts on community and human health, including cancer risk, arising from air pollution, water pollution and potentially from radio-activity. Stakeholders wanted to know if the assessment will identify and evaluate the potential sources and impacts of radio-activity, including uranium.

Appreciation for contribution by stakeholders

Many stakeholders have participated in the process to develop the EMP by

attending meetings and by taking the time to prepare written submissions.

Some landowners hosted members of the EMP team in their homes or offices, or showed them around their properties.

The EMP team wishes to express sincere appreciation for these contributions.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 106

Landowner and property rights and values

Many farmers and landowners wanted to know whether they had the right to refuse Shell and environmental specialists access to their land and what process will be followed to gain access to land once the drill sites have been identified; and

Landowners were concerned about their property rights, and that adverse public perception will have an impact on the market value of their properties. They wanted to know if property owners will receive compensation in case of loss or liability arising from the proposed exploration and its impacts.

Local and regional development

Stakeholders said the EMP must address the potential knock-on effects of the proposed project on local and regional development planning, including land use planning

Transport

Landowners said that provincial, regional and local roads are in poor condition and will deteriorate with additional traffic as a result of the transport of heavy equipment and materials, and that traffic hazards will increase due to additional vehicles on the roads.

Waste management

Stakeholders asked that the nature and consequences of waste generation, including acid mine drainage, during exploration, should be quantified and compared with the limited waste disposal capacity in the Karoo region;

Stakeholders stated that the Karoo is known for flash floods. They wanted to know how Shell will deal with flash floods if water is contained in ponds as part of the waste management process. They are concerned about the potential negative impacts on the environment; if pollution occurs who will be responsible for management of, and/or clean up the pollution?

Farmers wanted to know what the risks are of toxic waste being generated during the hydraulic fracturing process and who will pay for the transport of toxic waste. Facilities for waste disposal in the Karoo are small with no facilities for hazardous waste. Where would the hazardous waste that would be generated be disposed of?

Safety and security

Landowners were concerned that the exploration project will increase traffic and access to their properties by unknown persons, thus compromising security.

Sustainable development

Stakeholders said the perspective of sustainable development and cumulative impacts should be assessed. A comparative life-cycle assessment of natural gas development as opposed to alternative energy source development should be provided through proper cost benefit analysis. The question was asked about whether this type of development should be allowed in a water-stressed environment.

Socio-economic issues

The impacts on local and regional socio-economic factors, including impacts on employment, migration and urbanization, on tourism, export products, food security, on road access, and the sharing of benefits from the project, were raised as issues.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 107

Water resources and waste water management

Stakeholders asked what volumes of water will be required for drilling and hydraulic fracturing, where the water will be obtained from and if obtained from a farmer, how the farmer will be compensated;

Questions were asked about the management of excess and waste water from hydraulic fracturing and how monitoring will be conducted to measure potential impacts to groundwater and the environment; and

Concerns were expressed about horizontal drilling below wetlands and surface water courses.

Groundwater: NGOs, the business sector and landowners wanted to know whether specialist studies will be conducted to study the interaction of the various underground systems, e.g., shallow water aquifers, deep water aquifers, ancient water aquifers and artesian wells within the exploration area;

Since hydraulic fracturing is a new technology in South Africa, there is little information available on its potential impacts locally. Stakeholders were concerned about the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing when the hazards of deep and shallow drilling are unknown, and in the knowledge that the US EPA has placed a two-year moratorium on this type of exploration. They also question why Shell and the consultants did not disclose which chemicals would be used in hydraulic fracturing;

Stakeholders asked that the potential impacts on groundwater resources, including disturbance of the aquifers, pollution of groundwater by chemicals used in fracturing, and increased abstraction, be properly assessed. They feared that if one aquifer were to be contaminated, all others will be affected too because the aquifers are likely to be connected; and

Conservation organisations, NGOs and academia asked that the precautionary principle be applied and that the exploration rights application be rejected until the consequences of hydraulic fracturing are better understood and until there is demonstrated proof that hydraulic fracturing is not harmful to human health and the environment.

Socio-economic impacts on the Karoo communities

Stakeholders indicated that the proposed project could help address poverty and other social problems experienced in local communities. They asked whether this project will bring education and build capacity in local communities; and

Some stakeholders expressed concern that the proposed project will impact negatively on tourism in the area. They suggested that a thorough analysis be done on the impacts of the proposed project on tourism.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 108

7.0 CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES In the event that Shell is granted a gas exploration license by PASA, the company will undertake further planning for gas exploration in a number of steps. These are described in greater detail in Chapter 5, Project Description, but are briefly summarized here for the purposes of a discussion about alternatives.

Also as background to this discussion, Figure 48 shows the environmental process to the stage of completion of a NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment prior to drilling and hydraulic fracturing of wells, as discussed in earlier chapters.

Figure 48: Environmental process to the stage of completion of a NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment prior to hydraulic fracturing of wells

Based on previous Soekor data from the 1960s and desktop work, Shell has defined notational drilling areas as described in Chapter 5, Project Description. These notional areas were based on a desktop study and high level considerations such as topography, road access, etc. The precise locations where exploration drilling activities may take place have not yet been identified. This will be done with inputs from environmental specialists and in consultation with stakeholders, including land owners through the following steps:

Step 1: Refine the areas within which drilling could be considered

Step 2: Determine the specific location of proposed drilling sites in the licence area, on the basis of integrated technical and environmental analysis and in consultation with the landowners. Prepare a preliminary Site Selection Report. This step will be undertaken jointly by Shell and independent environmental consultants.

Step 3: Prepare an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). The preliminary Site Selection Report will be subject


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 109

to public review and will only be finalized during the Scoping Phase of the EIA. The EIA will be prepared, as required by the NEMA, by independent environmental consultants.

The alternatives that will be considered will consist of various options that could avoid or minimise the potential impacts as described in Chapter 8 or enhance the benefits of the proposed exploration activities.

This EMP and future EIA studies will not include a comparison of shale gas with alternative energy forms, which is beyond the terms of reference of this and future EIA investigations. Given the general nature of this PASA application, it is not possible to consider specific alternatives in detail in this report.

The remainder of this chapter presents an outline of the method that will be used to select sites for drilling as well as other alternatives that are also likely to be open for consideration in the EIA, if the exploration project is approved by PASA.

Criteria used to identify drilling sites will be further defined during the subsequent EIA process in terms of regulations and with input from the subject matter specialists.

7.1 Location alternatives The selection of drilling sites within the application area will be determined by integrated technical and environmental analysis. Table 22 presents a preliminary listing of criteria which will help to refine the locations for drilling sites. It is emphasised that these criteria are preliminary, and are meant simply to illustrate the structured process that will be followed in order to finalize drill site locations. It will start BEFORE the EIA as part of the preliminary site selection report Consultation with stakeholders may result in changes or additions to the criteria.

Table 22: Preliminary criteria to use in refining possible locations for well sites (Note: these criteria will be further defined during the EIA)

ASPECT DESCRIPTION OF PRELIMINARY CRITERION

ISSUE ADDRESSED

Agriculture SITE NOT to be situated on high potential arable land

Economic loss

Infrastructure (airfield) SITE NOT to be closer than 500m to any airfield

Use conflict

Slope SITE NOT to exceed an average slope of 10%

Erosion hazard

Infrastructure (boreholes) SITE NOT to be within 100 m of any borehole

Groundwater pollution

Geology SITE NOT to be closer than 500m to the nearest major dyke present at surface

Groundwater pollution

Dams and Rivers SITE NOT to be closer than 500 m from the nearest dam or perennial river

Surface water pollution / biodiversity

Wetlands SITE NOT to be closer than 100 m from areas of hygromorphic soils

Surface water pollution / biodiversity

Protected Areas SITE NOT to be closer than 500 m from the boundary of any proclaimed conservation area

Biodiversity

Threatened habitat SITE NOT to be within any area untransformed area of endangered habitat

Biodiversity


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 110

The above preliminary criteria are intended as a means of further narrowing the possible sites using a simple methodology which is suited to screening of large areas, using computer generated overlay mapping. Final identification of specific sites within the areas defined as suitable can then follow, using a more layered approach which compares the details of individual sites.

7.2 Technology alternatives Various technology and infrastructure alternatives exist which will be considered during the course of the EIA for each of the wells. The alternatives will vary depending on the location of the well site and the circumstances specific to each well. Once the location of the well has been identified, realistic options concerning each of the alternatives described below will be defined and evaluated.

7.3 Access roads A route selection process will be undertaken to determine the alignment of the access roads to the well sites. Where possible, existing access roads will be upgraded in preference to constructing new roads.

7.4 Water supply Between 1 and 6 million litres (Mega litres) of water is typically required per well for the purposes of drilling and well fracturing in the exploration phase. The following water supply options will be investigated and assessed during the EIA, depending on the location of the well:

Deep groundwater aquifers (including wells sufficiently deep to access brackish-to-saline water supplies);

Raw (untreated) water from a local municipality;

Treated wastewater from a local municipality, mine or any other facility generating wastewater;

Surface water from large perennial rivers or dams and potentially seawater

Water conservation measures are also feasible and have been used by Shell and other companies in other locations. Measures that may be considered in individual cases include re-use of flow back, which can reduce water consumption. In other operations, Shell has achieved up to 50% reuse but this will vary from location to location. Shell has indicated that it will not compete with landowners for fresh water.

7.5 Water storage alternatives Water required for drilling operations will be stored, either on-site or nearby. There are various options to store water, such as using metal tanks, pillow tanks or geotextile lined bunded-wall containment. The type of storage provided may depend, in part, on the quality of the water supplied.

7.5.1 Transport routes for water supply Water supplied from remote sources may be initially by train in the case of sea water, and then by truck. Water supplied from freshwater or groundwater sources is likely to be transported to individual drilling sites

ASPECT DESCRIPTION OF PRELIMINARY CRITERION

ISSUE ADDRESSED

Landowner agreements SITE PREFERABLY to be where landowner/s have consented and entered into an agreement for land access

Good relations

Homesteads SITE NOT located in close proximity to homesteads – distance to be confirmed by noise specialist studies, etc

Nuisance, risk


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 111

by truck. Specific transport routes will be assessed as part of the subsequent EIA process once drill site locations are known.

7.6 Waste disposal alternatives Fluid used for drilling and fracturing will be recovered. This fluid will be treated; the wastes emanating from the treatment process will be temporarily stored in containers on site. The disposal method will depend on the location of the site and the quality of the return flow water.

Shell will develop a waste management plan prior to commencing any drilling operations. The plan will be applicable to the possible range of materials to be used and collected at each well site. It will cover the disposal of fracturing fluid. It will also take into consideration the location of the drilling site and available waste disposal options relative to individual drill sites.

7.7 Capturing hydrocarbons on surface Hydrocarbons surfacing from the well will either be flared or captured for use. Flaring would involve the installation of short gas flow lines from the well bore to a flare. Capturing and use of the hydrocarbons could involve:

Combustion in power generation units (turbines or gas engines) installed on site.

Liquefaction of gas by means of surface facilities that will allow compression and cooling for transportation by truck to the nearest refinery.

Both of the above cases could involve the pre-settling of any liquid hydrocarbons in a settling tank in preparation for export by truck to the nearest refinery, prior to the use of the gas.

7.8 The ‘no go’ alternative The intention of the ‘No go’ alternative as an option in environmental analysis is to provide the decision maker with a view of what will be foregone in the event that the proposal does not go ahead. This may then be compared with the possible impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposal, so as to provide a balanced view of the costs and the benefits of a particular course of action. The analysis is often complicated by the fact that some of the major benefits that could be foregone are national, regional, and strategic, relating to issues such as energy security. These are difficult to compare with the specific, direct local effects (both positive and negative) of developing the resource.

In the case of the current project, it must be borne in mind that the application is for an exploration right, and not for the development of shale gas fields – the application for which would have much wider implications. The Shell exploration right would involve the installation and testing of perhaps up to 8 wells in a 30 000 sq km area . This is an important distinction since there is a tendency to judge the desirability of the exploration phase of oil and gas development on the basis of the anticipated, but as yet unevaluated, impacts of a future production well field. The legal (and reasonable) present compliance requirement is to consider only the impacts of the exploration phase. The desirability of developing a production well field and the positive and negative issues associated with this must be undertaken at the appropriate time, if and when such authorization is sought.

Even in relation to the restricted extent of Shell’s exploration right application, assessed in this report, there are limitations affecting the extent to which the ‘no go’ alternative can be meaningfully compared with direct project related impacts. This is because the well sites have not been determined yet, which precludes a meaningful assessment of local impact caused by each well site. While there is still much debate surrounding shale gas extraction around the world, with many protagonists and detractors, it is clear from the evidence emerging from the burgeoning shale gas industry that there can be both successful, low impact well installations and questionable, high impact installations. The impacts depend on the local circumstances and the technology selected to manage the impacts and safety standards associated with the well. It is not possible to make meaningful generic statements about shale gas exploration without consideration of the specific circumstances surrounding each well.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 112

With this said, the intention of this subsection is to provide some insight into the benefits that could be foregone in the event that the proposed shale gas exploration does not go ahead. The benefits as summarised below are stated in more detail in Chapter 2, Context and History.

7.8.1 South African Energy Policy In the South African Government’s 2009 Energy Policy, the then DME reflects that one of five key policy objectives is to secure energy supply through diversity. South Africa has never become fully energy self sufficient in either petroleum or nuclear fuels. The heavy investment in the apartheid era in synthetic fuels and nuclear development was costly and left the country with a legacy of undiversified supply. The current policy is to encourage diversity of supply both locally, wherever there are promising opportunities, and through international energy trade.

Pertaining to this, the Government commits through the Energy Policy to promote the development of South Africa’s oil and gas resources by ensuring a range of undertakings are met, including appropriate tax and contractual arrangements to encourage private investors, promoting research and technology development and technology transfer to stimulate the development of the country’s oil and gas resources and ensuring that there is appropriate environmental management and stewardship of any oil and gas development. The Energy Policy further states (Section 7.5.12) that the approach that has been followed in some countries to limit the use of gas to particular applications (due to perceived limitations in gas reserves) will not be followed. The South African Government perceives this as having limited the growth of gas markets and hence the rate of gas exploration. Even in 1998, when the Policy was published, the Government recognised that gas reserves are far larger than had been expected (Section 7.5.12).

The Government also acknowledges the benefit of gas as a ‘cleaner fuel’. In the White Paper on Renewable Energy, published in 2003, it notes that the current euphoria about gas has primarily environmental roots, but it cautions that a potential shift to natural gas as a significant contributor to energy supply is unlikely since South Africa has very limited known reserves of natural gas, estimated to be only 0,5% of coal reserves, even when Mozambique and Namibia are included. These reserves are therefore not expected to materially change South Africa’s dependence on coal and the Government is looking to increase the potential opportunities for the growth of the renewable energy industry over time; a strategy which is complimentary to development of natural gas resources as gas provides a useful foil to the limitations of renewable in terms of reliability of supply

7.8.2 International Trends in Natural Gas Supply The rapid development in the international use of gas has changed the world’s energy landscape. The natural gas supply revolution rests on two pillars of innovation – firstly, improvements in production technologies that have made it economical to produce shale gas and tight gas resources that were previously considered too difficult to tap, and secondly the diversification and globalization of natural gas markets. Worldwide, there is now sufficient technically recoverable natural gas in the ground for 250 years at current production rates. The development of liquid natural gas (LNG) as an efficient means of transporting natural gas anywhere in the world and the huge gas reserves provided by shale gas have been mutually reinforcing, providing the increased resource and the flexibility of supply to guarantee the security of natural gas supply for the long term, thereby providing governments and investors with greater confidence to support the growth of the natural gas industry.

7.8.3 Environmental Benefits of Natural Gas Use Natural gas is the cleanest burning of all the fossil fuels (gas, oil and coal). Composed primarily of methane, the main products of the combustion of natural gas are carbon dioxide and water vapor, the same compounds people exhale when they breathe. Coal and oil are composed of much more complex molecules, with a higher carbon ratio and higher nitrogen and sulphur contents. This means that when combusted, coal and oil release higher levels of harmful emissions, including a higher ratio of carbon emissions, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulphur dioxide (SO2).

Coal and fuel oil also release ash particles into the environment, substances that do not burn but instead are carried into the atmosphere and contribute to pollution. The combustion of natural gas releases very small


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 113

amounts of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, virtually no ash or particulate matter, and lower levels of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and other reactive hydrocarbons.

In a major study by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Gas Research Institute (GRI) in 1997, aimed at determining whether the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from increased natural gas use would be offset by a possible increased level of methane emissions, it was concluded that the reduction in emissions from increased natural gas use strongly outweighed the detrimental effects of increased methane emissions. Thus, the study supported the increased use of natural gas in the place of other fossil fuels as a means of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases globally.

The use of natural gas does not contribute significantly to smog formation due to low levels of nitrogen oxide emission and virtually no particulate matter emission. For this reason it can be used to help smog alleviation strategies where air quality is poor (e.g. Sasolburg). Increased natural gas use in electricity generation would have a major positive impact on smog formation.

As said, natural gas contains very low concentrations of sulphur and nitrogen oxides (Table 23). These are the pollutants primarily responsible for acid rain damages to crops, forests and wildlife populations, and cause respiratory and other illnesses in humans. Principal causes of acid rain are emissions from coal-fired power plants.

Table 23: Fossil fuel emission levels – pound per billion Btu of energy input Pollutant Natural gas Oil Coal

Carbon dioxide 117 000 164 000 208 000

Carbon monoxide 40 33 208

Nitrogen oxides 92 448 457

Sulphur dioxide 1 1 122 2 591

Particulates 7 84 2.744

Mercury 0.000 0.007 0.016

7.8.4 Global trends in the use of shale gas In the continuing search for sustainable and secure energy, world attention has turned to ‘new’ and promising technologies for supplying energy resources. These ‘unconventional methods’, and in particular shale gas extraction technologies, have been making headlines over the past few years. The ability to extract gas from shales at economical prices means that very large recoverable deposits of shale gas can now realistically be developed. Much of this gas lies in non-OPEC39 countries, and its development could widen the base of energy supply and improve global energy security.

There are more than 688 shale formations wordwide in 142 basins. At present, only a few dozen of these shales have known production potential, most of which are in North America, where shale gas extraction is most advanced. Developing shale gas infrastructure may be costly, depending on the location, requiring significant capital investment to process, store and distribute the gas. This means that that the viability of each resource will need to be assessed on its own merit, taking into consideration the local infrastructure and market conditions (World Energy Council, 2010).

The potential volumes of shale gas worldwide are thought to be enormous. Nevertheless, the resource has not yet been quantified on a national level by most countries. The most credible studies put the global resource at around 456 trillion cubic meters (tcm) compared with 187 tcm for conventional natural gas. It is estimated that about 40% of this could be recoverable using currently available technology. The World 39 OPEC – Organisation for Petroleum Exporting Countries


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 114

Energy Council (2010) emphasises that these estimates are likely to be revised (generally upward) as proper assessments are performed in countries where the resource has not yet been estimated (an example of the USA is provided in which the estimate of available shale gas was revised upward from 21,7 tcf to 32,8 tcf in a single year).

Worldwide, the World Energy Council (2010) sees the increased security of supply of natural gas as a result of shale gas impacting on many aspects of energy policy and practice. Natural gas power plants are likely to become more common, given the significantly better performance of gas compared with other fossil fuels in relation to global warming. The World Energy Council also sees natural gas being used in tandem with renewables, to supply the energy needed at night (solar power generation) and when the wind doesn’t blow (wind power generation). Because of the widespread occurrence of shale gas, energy supply may become more localized.

The World Energy Council (2010) views the emergence of shale gas as an energy resource to be a potentially major factor in strategic geopolitics across the globe. The advantages of expanding the use of shale gas include:

Adding significant quantities of natural gas to the global resource base

Shorter time to first production compared with conventional gas

Using a cleaner energy resource

Broader use of new drilling technologies around the world, and

Improved security of supply for gas importing countries

On the negative side, the drawbacks at a global level are:

Uncertainty over costs and affordability

Doubts about the environmental acceptability of the production technology

Unclear rates of decline which may materially impact reserve estimates, and

Local opposition to shale gas development.

In its annual World Energy Insight (2010), the WEC concludes that the greatest concern is the fear in some quarters that hydrocarbons or chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing might flow into aquifers that supply drinking water. However, the WEC expresses the view that in most instances the gas bearing and water bearing layers are widely separated by thousands of vertical feet, as well as by rock, with the gas being much deeper and that hydraulic fracturing is therefore unlikely to be a risk to groundwater in such cases. The risks of contamination from surface handling of wastes, common to many similar industrial processes, require continual care but are not un-manageable.

As indicated by the World Energy Council, there are contrary views. Concerns about the human health and pollution risks of hydraulic fracturing are not limited to the general public. Examples of such concerns may be seen in the Final Impact Assessment Report on Natural Gas Production in the New York City Water Supply Watershed (Hazen & Sawyer, 2009). In examining proposals for hydraulic fracturing in the West-of-Hudson watershed, where the quality of water supply makes possible the use of unfiltered water supply systems to very large numbers of people in the State, this study observes:

‘Natural gas development in the West-of Hudson watershed at the rates and densities observed in comparable formations (full well field development of 3000 - 6000 wells), will be accompanied by a level of industrial activity and heightened risk of water quality contamination that is inconsistent with the expectations for unfiltered water supply systems. Intensive natural gas well development in the watershed (will) bring an increased level of risk to the water supply: risk of degrading source water quality, risk to long-term watershed health and the city’s ability to rely on natural processes for what is accomplished elsewhere by physical and


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 115

chemical treatment processes, risk of damaging critical infrastructure, and the risk of exposing watershed residents and potentially NYC residents to chronic low levels of toxic chemicals.’

Concerns about hydraulic fracturing (especially potential risks to drinking water resources) culminated in a directive from the US U.S. Congress’ Appropriation Conference Committee to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct research to examine the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water resources40.

In another investigation, Wood et al, 201141 concluded that while shale gas extraction, at a global level, does not involve the high energy and water inputs at the scale of other unconventional fuels (such as tar sands), it does pose a significant potential risk to human health and the environment. The report cites the potential for hazardous chemicals to enter groundwater via the extraction process as a significant risk, particularly as it difficult to verify, categorically, the pathways of contamination of groundwater by chemicals used in the extraction process. The authors reference the fact that the only operating shale gas production fields are currently in the USA. Until such time as the knowledge base concerning the impacts of shale gas is improved, Wood et al (2011) argue that no development of shale gas should be permitted in Europe and the United Kingdom.

7.8.5 Conclusions – consequence of a no-go to exploration drilling The volume of recoverable gas stored in Karoo shales is unknown at present. Soekor’s exploration in the 1960s did not make provision for hydraulic fracturing of the wells, which is the critical technological development that has facilitated gas recovery from ‘tight formations’. In the absence of a license granted for exploration, the potential of these shales to supply economically recoverable supplies of gas will remain unknown.

In our opinion, such a strategy would be unnecessarily conservative. It would prevent (or delay) the determination of the resource potential of the Karoo shale gas formations and the benefits that South Africa could derive from this - in the absence of any material evidence that a small number of exploration wells could result in an unacceptable level of environmental impact.

While such a determination can only be finalized once the exploration wells have been sited, it is unlikely, in our view, that the construction of a small number of wells could, in itself, result in environmental damage that is unacceptable, as long as the siting and management of these wells is controlled through a rigorous, scientific, EIA process.

It is acknowledged that there are concerns about the risks associated with hydraulic fracturing in shale gas production well fields, which typically involve large numbers of wells over a considerable area and at a high density. The current review of well-field risks and impacts by the USEPA bears testimony to this. While we would support the current application for an exploration right submitted by Shell, we believe it would be wise for the Regulator to await and review the findings of the current USEPA investigation of the impacts of hydraulic fracturing on human health and the environment42, before any licensing of a production well field is considered.

40 The USEPA’s announcement in March 2010 that they would prepare a detailed, peer reviewed, investigation of the impacts of hydraulic fracturing on

human health and the environment. It is expected that this study will take two years to complete (Reuters, March 18, 2010)

41 Prepared as a research investigation under the auspices of the Tyndall Research Centre for Climate Change Research, Manchester, United Kingdom

42 Draft Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources, Office of Research and Development US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC, February 7, 2011


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 116

8.0 TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT 8.1 Approach to technical assessment The location of drilling sites is not yet available. Consequently, assessment of environmental issues, mitigation and management for a typical exploration site has been adopted for the technical assessment. Environmental issues were identified for the geophysical data acquisition activities (i.e. Magneto-Telluric and Seismic Survey techniques) (Section 8.5.1), for well site preparation for drilling activities (Section 8.5.2), and for vertical drilling (Section 8.5.3). In addition, after drilling a vertical exploration well, if gas bearing shale’s are encountered, following further data analysis there may be a requirement to perform hydraulic fracturing of the vertical well to determine whether the gas can be stimulated to flow. This could be done in the shale intersect in the vertical well, or by drilling a horizontal borehole in the shale layer. The horizontal well section would then be hydraulic fractured (Section 8.5.4). Once drilling operations are completed at a well site and it is no longer required, then decommissioning and rehabilitation would be undertaken (Section 8.5.5).

A standard impact ranking system (DEAT, 1998) has been applied to assess the significance of the identified possible impacts (Section 8.4). It is, however, important to note that impact significance ratings provided below are estimates of likely significance of these activities, as the impact is dependent upon the site and the characteristics of that site. No site clearing for drilling or subsequent hydraulic fracturing may commence before an environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been completed under the requirements of the NEMA., and authorisation to proceed with these activities has been received from the regulator (in this case Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), not PASA) as described in Chapter 3.

Key mitigation measures are proposed for the identified issues and taken up in the project EMP (Chapter 9).

8.2 Exploration activities that could potentially impact the environment

8.2.1 Geophysical data collection Magneto-Tellurics The typical activities associated with Magneto-Telluric Surveys at any one site include:

Accessing the relevant property via vehicle, using existing roads, and then by foot to access remote sites;

Vegetation and soil clearing of five small areas comprising four small trenches of approximately 0.2 m2 (40 cm deep, 20 cm wide, 100 cm long) spaced no more than 5 meters apart and a central vertical hole of about 20 cm diameter and 100 cm deep;

Positioning of small receiving sensors in the cleared areas; and

The equipment will typically be set up during the day; record data overnight, and then will be moved to a new location (3 to 10 km away) the following day.

Seismic acquisition During the initial 3-year Exploration Right, a selection of other geophysical data acquisition methods may be used near a well site or within the well bore itself. These may include shallow seismic and micro-seismic techniques (refer to Section 5.4.3.2. The typical activities associated with seismic acquisition may include:

Shallow seismic:

Creating an acoustic signal by producing a series of "shots" (i.e. a source of acoustic energy such as vibroseis trucks (vehicle-mounted vibrator plates), weight drop, or detonation of a small charge in shallow holes);


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 117

Shots will be spaced roughly every 40 m and sensors spaced every 10 m along lines that would be 10 to 30 km in length. The length and number of lines that would be required depends on the geologic features that need to be delineated;

Shot holes produced by charges are drilled by small hand held augers or by units mounted on the backs of all terrain vehicles, with hole depths around 3m and charge sizes of 1/8 to 1/4 kg; and

For each shot, a string of small sensors (geophones or accelerometers) are used to record the acoustic reflections (echoes) from the subsurface geologic formations. These sensors are connected by electrical cables back to the recording truck with 100 to 200 sensors placed for every shot. Small spikes on each sensor are pushed into the ground to couple the sensor firmly to the soil.

Micro-seismic:

Placing of sensors (called geophones) on the surface, in a grid pattern, or down a neighbouring (drilling) well; and

A recording truck sits on the well pad to record the signals generated during hydraulic fracturing.

8.2.2 Well site preparation The well site will entail establishment of a level, compact and secure (fenced off) area of about one hectare at each gas exploration drilling site. Should groundwater monitoring wells need to be drilled for monitoring purposes in proximity to the gas well site, the groundwater wells would be drilled using conventional groundwater drill rigs commonly used in agricultural applications. The typical activities associated with gas well site preparation43 at any one site include:

Remove topsoil, which is then stockpiled nearby for site rehabilitation purposes later;

Grade, level and if necessary backfill with crushed stone the area where the drilling and well site will be located;

Compact the site to ensure for stability during movement of heavy equipment and support the weight of the rig;

Create erosion and sediment control structures around the site, where appropriate;

Create on-site storage for drilling fluids or water, which may require construction of geotextile lined pits or storage tanks;

On-site fuel (diesel) storage to support well site preparation (e.g. generators);

Create on-site storage for cement;

Construction of a well cellar may be required on certain sites to contain the wellhead;

Construction of access road to the site;, if required

Erection of portable offices, stores, storage areas, pumps, offices and parking;

Construction of open and closed drainage systems;

Construction of a temporary purpose built accommodation camp which typically requires less than 0.5 ha of land for, for accommodation, a restaurant (mess), offices, stores, and parking. Depending on the location of the site and local landowner preferences, the drilling crew could also utilise existing accommodation in the area, in which this activity will not be necessary; and

43 Note: not all materials and equipment required for drilling exploration are stored at any one time on a well site. Typically, a supply base is established in a central location, such as a major town, which allows for storage, preparation and testing of equipment before being dispatched for use to a well site.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 118

Disposal of domestic waste, used engine oil and filters, wood (pallets, packing crates, etc), scrap metals, etc. (disposal method to be confirmed during refinement of the site specific waste management plans; plan is to be in accordance with relevant legislation).

8.2.3 Exploration drilling The typical activities that could potentially impact the environment as a result of drilling vertical wells include:

Drilling:

Erection of the drilling rig;

Drilling a vertical well using a mechanical, rotating drill bit;

Inserting the pressure rated steel casing string (well casing) into the well;

Cement grouting of the casing in place. This entails forcing cement up the gap between the casing and the outer rock surface of the bore hole. Deep gas boreholes of this nature are typically 50 to 80 cm diameter holes at surface. As the depth of the boreholes increases and new casing is inserted the casing diameter is reduced to fit within the upper cased section of the boreholes. Consequently, the upper section of the boreholes typically contains multiple layers of steel casing and cement grouting;

During the drilling process, drilling fluid, referred to as drilling mud is pumped down the inside of the drill string, exits at the bottom where the drill bit is rotating and returns to surface through space between the outer surface of the borehole (upper boreholes sections) or cased sections of the borehole (lower boreholes sections) and the drill string where it is captured, reconditioned and re-used;

Analysing and subsequent disposal/recycling of rock cuttings; and

Cores may be taken and specialist data acquisition (logging) devices used inside the well bore to extract core for testing from the shale layer.

Site management / services:

On-site fuel (diesel) storage to support exploration equipment (e.g. generators);

On-site storage and handling of mud (drilling fluid). These will be lined containers or sumps;

On-site lay down areas for the storage of individual sections of steel pipe (typically 10 meters long);

Temporary on-site storage and handling of logging devices which may contain a low level radio-active source;

On-site storage of explosives;

Source of water:

− Supply seawater, recycled (treated) or surface water by truck. The source of water will vary from one drilling site to another depending on available options; or alternatively,

− Borehole drilling where appropriate: Dedicated water wells could be used to access water supplies at depths greater than 100 m, which may yield brackish or saline quality water;

Storage of water (using metal tanks, pillow tanks or geotextile lined bunded-wall) on site or nearby;

Disposal of domestic waste, metal/plastic tubular thread protectors, used engine oil and filters, wood (pallets, packing crates, etc), scrap metals, etc;

On-site temporary storage of flowback water in lined storage vessels;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 119

Re-cycling, cleaning/treatment and then re-use of flowback water from the well; and

Disposal of wastes generated from the cleaning/treatment of flowback water from the well (disposal method to be confirmed during the development of the waste management plan for each specific site; plan is to be in accordance with relevant legislation).

8.2.4 Hydraulic fracturing The typical activities that could potentially impact the environment as a result of hydraulic fracturing include:

Potential hydraulic fracturing at the sites.

Mobilisation of specialist hydraulic fracturing equipment and ancillary equipment to a well site (e.g., pumps, a crane, etc);

Water and additives will be blended into a base fluid off site and then maintained on site with the use of possibly a truck mounted blending unit, with hoses to transfer liquid additives from storage containers to the blending unit or well directly from blending truck. Dry additives will be poured into a feeder system on the blending unit. The blended solution will be immediately fed into the wellbore as required; and

Pumping of hydraulic fracturing fluids under pressure into the shale formation.

Site management / services:

Temporary storage of flowback water;

Re-cycling, cleaning/treatment and then re-use of flowback water from the well; and

Disposal of wastes generated from the cleaning/treatment of flowback water from the well.

Hydrocarbons surfacing from the well will either be:

Flared; or

− Possible installation of gas flow lines from well bore to flare.

Transformed (possibly by one of the following):

− Combustion of the hydrocarbons in power generation units (turbines or gas engines) installed on site to generate electricity.

− Liquefaction of gas using surface facilities that will allow compression and cooling the gas to allow for its transportation by truck to an existing processing facility.

− Capture and settling of any liquid hydrocarbons in a settling tank in preparation for export by truck to an existing processing facility.

8.2.5 Decommissioning Wells will only be decommissioned if no gas is found or deemed technically / commercially not viable. If the well is decommissioned, then the well will be sealed off below the level of the upper aquifer and capped.

8.3 Summary of environmental components considered

Climate

Geology

Topography


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 120

Soil

Terrestrial ecology

Vegetation

Animal life

Surface water

Groundwater

Air quality

Visual aspects

Noise

Cultural heritage aspects

Sensitive landscapes

Socio-economic environment

Human health

8.4 Assessment methodology The significance of the identified impacts has been determined using the approach outlined below. This incorporates two aspects for assessing the potential significance of impacts (terminology from the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Guideline document on EIA Regulations, April 1998), namely occurrence and severity, which are further sub-divided as follows:

Occurrence Severity

Probability of occurrence Duration of occurrence Magnitude (severity) of impact

Scale / extent of impact

To assess each impact, the following four ranking scales are used:

PROBABILITY DURATION 5 - Definite/don’t know 5 - Permanent

4 - Highly probable 4 - Long-term

3 - Medium probability 3 - Medium-term (8-15 years)

2 - Low probability 2 - Short-term (0-7 years) (impact ceases after the operational life of the activity)

1 - Improbable 1 – Immediate

0 - None

SCALE MAGNITUDE 5 - International 10 - Very high/don’t know

4 - National 8 - High


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 121

PROBABILITY DURATION 3 - Regional 6 - Moderate

2 - Local 4 - Low

1 - Site only 2 - Minor

0 - None

Magnitude According to DEAT (2002), impact magnitude should as far as possible be determined by reference to legal requirements, accepted scientific standards or social acceptability. If no legislation or scientific standards are available, the EIA practitioner can evaluate impact magnitude based on clearly defined criteria. The following section describes the criteria used to assess the magnitude of the potential impacts of the proposed exploration activities on the environmental components most relevant to this project:

Impact criteria Geology There are no specific impact criteria for geology. Impacts on geology are assessed indirectly based on their effects on other environmental media such as soil, surface water and groundwater.

Topography There are no specific impact criteria for topography. Topographic impacts are assessed indirectly based on their effects on other environmental media as well as on an aesthetic basis, based on the change in the landscape character that may result from the topographic change.

Soil, land use and land capability Impacts on soil, land use and land capability are assessed qualitatively based on the area of soil disturbance.

Flora Impacts on flora are assessed qualitatively based on the anticipated change in species numbers and type, and the density of cover. This is directly related to the area of surface disturbance. Potential impacts on Red Data species are also considered during the technical assessment.

Fauna Impacts on fauna are assessed qualitatively based on the anticipated change in species numbers and type, and animal populations. This is directly related to the area of surface disturbance. Potential impacts on Red Data species are also considered during the technical assessment.

Surface water Surface water impacts are assessed based on the potential of an activity to change the quality or quantity of surface water affected by the proposed exploration activities. This is directly related to the area of surface disturbance, as well as the volumes of water to be managed on site.

Groundwater Impacts on groundwater in the project area are assessed based on the potential of an activity to change the quality and quantity of the groundwater in the project area, especially those resources used by surrounding landowners.

Groundwater quality is assessed in relation to relevant National Standards. The following standard is considered applicable in the context of the proposed development:


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 122

South African Water Quality Guidelines SAWQG (1996) Domestic and/or Agricultural Use which applies to any water source intended for domestic and /or agricultural use

Noise Noise and vibration impacts are assessed using the following national standard:

SANS 10103:2008 – The measurement and rating of environmental noise with respect to land use, health, annoyance and to speech communication.

Archaeology / cultural heritage Impacts on cultural heritage are assessed based on the potential of an activity to damage heritage resources, as outlined in the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of 1999). This is directly related to the area of surface disturbance.

Sensitive landscapes A ‘sensitive landscape’ usually falls within one of the following categories:

Nature conservation areas and important natural resources;

Sites of archaeological, paleontological, cultural and historical value;

Sites of scientific interest (e.g. astronomy areas);

Green belts or public open spaces; or

Wetlands.

Impacts on sensitive landscapes are assessed qualitatively based on anticipated changes to sensitive landscapes. This is directly related to the area of surface disturbance.

Estimating the magnitude of the impact is of primary importance. Typically, it is expressed in terms of relative severity, such as major, moderate or low. Severity, as opposed to size, also takes account of other aspects of impact magnitude, notably whether or not an impact is reversible and the likely rate of recovery

Reversibility An indication of impact reversibility is also provided, i.e. impacts are distinguished between being reversible and irreversible.

Overall significance rating The significance of the two aspects, occurrence and severity, is assessed using the following formula:

SP (significance points) = (probability + duration + scale) x magnitude

The maximum value is 150 significance points (SP). The impact significance will then be rated as follows:

SP >75 Indicates high environmental significance

An impact which could influence the decision about whether or not to proceed with the project regardless of any possible mitigation.

SP 30 – 75 Indicates moderate environmental significance

An impact or benefit which is sufficiently important to require management and which could have an influence on the decision unless it is mitigated.

SP <30 Indicates low environmental significance

Impacts with little real effect and which should not have an influence on or require modification of the project design.

+ Positive impact An impact that is likely to result in positive consequences/effects.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 123

8.5 Technical assessment 8.5.1 Geophysical data collection Magneto-Tellurics The geophysical data collection is largely a non-invasive process. Nominal excavation of approximately four short trenches (40 cm deep, 20 cm wide, 100 cm long) in the field is necessary. The survey team will consist of three to four members accessing the relevant property via vehicle (in one to two vehicles on existing roads) and then by foot. The equipment will typically be set up during the day; record data overnight, and then will be moved to a new location (3 to 10 km away) the following day. Should the controls outlined in Chapter 9 be implemented, negligible impacts on land use, soil, vegetation and sensitive landscapes are expected. Such controls include the following:

Landowners should be notified in advance that access to the site is required;

The field survey team will only make use of established farm roads and tracks.

All gates entering the property and between livestock camps on the property must be left in the state in which they were found (gates that are closed will be closed again).

No geophysical data acquisition will be conducted within:

The bed of any river, stream or drainage line;

Any identifiable wetland area;

500 m of any occupied dwelling

100 m of any identifiable gravesite;

100 m of any identifiable livestock watering point;

100 m of any identifiable livestock feed-supplement feeding point; and

Any cultivated land.

There will be no cooking on site and no fires. Field personnel may not smoke on site;

Vehicle speed will not exceed 30 km an hour on farm roads;

The field team will be self-contained bringing their own chemical camping toilets to site;

In excavating shallow trenches for geophysical equipment, care should be taken to avoid digging out established vegetation where ever possible. If this is unavoidable, rooted woody shrubs should be avoided and grass tufts removed. Where grass tufts must be removed, they should be removed together with soil around the roots and covered with excavated soil to keep the root system from drying out.

On completion of the geophysical data acquisition, the shallow excavations must be in filled with the soil removed from the area and tufted grasses planted back into these excavations. The aboveground leaf mass of replanted grass tufts must be cut off one third of the length of the aboveground portion of the plant above the soil. This is to reduce transpirational water loss from the plant and increase the chance for survival of any plants temporarily removed from the veldt.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 124

Seismic acquisition Shallow seismic As with the Magneto-Telluric Surveys, shallow seismic techniques are largely a non-invasive process. The surface area required by the equipment is relatively small in size. The shot used to create the acoustic signals will be a short once-off occurrence per site. The survey team will consist of a few members accessing the relevant property(ies) via vehicle (in one to two vehicles on existing roads) and then by foot. The equipment will typically be set up during the day; will record the acoustic signal created by the shot, and then will be moved to a new location. Should the controls as summarised above for Magneto-Telluric Surveys, negligible impacts on land use, soil, vegetation, sensitive landscapes are expected.

Micro-seismic No additional footprint or land disturbance is required as a result of recording micro-seismic data. No impacts are therefore anticipated as a result of these activities.

8.5.2 Well site preparation Table 24 below summarises those impacts directly related to the preparation of the well site, including the construction/upgrading of access roads, and provides a significance rating for each impact before and after mitigation. It is important to note that these are estimates of likely significance of these activities as the impact is dependent upon the site and the characteristics of that site.

Table 24: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Well site preparation

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: WELL SITE PREPARATION

ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE

Before mitigation After mitigation (refer to Chapter 9 for relevant mitigation measures)

M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 1. Topography In some cases, the land will be cut and shaped in order to obtain a level area on which to position the drilling rig. Depending on the location of the site, it is possible that access routes will need to be constructed and may cut into the topography to be able to transport the rig to the drilling site.

4 2 2 2 24 Low 4 2 2 1 20 Low

2. Soil Loss of soil resource due to well site preparation and construction of access road.

8 3 1 5 72 Mod 8 3 1 5 72 Mod

Loss of soil integrity due to well site preparation and construction of access roads.

8 5 1 3 72 Mod 4 5 1 3 36 Mod

Heavy vehicle movement, excavation exploration and soil removal will potentially result in soil compaction (lithosols soils).

4 2 1 4 28 Low 3 2 1 3 18 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 125




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP Heavy vehicle movement, excavation exploration and soil removal will potentially result in soil compaction (clay soils).

6 2 1 4 42 Mod 4 2 1 3 24 Low

Potential spillages from heavy machinery, vehicles, generators, domestic wastewater, etc could contaminate soils.

8 3 1 3 56 Mod 4 3 1 2 24 Low

Excavation activities, vegetation clearing and soil stockpiling, could increase the potential for erosion.

4 2 1 3 24 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

3. Land use and land capability Approximately 1 ha will need to be cleared around the well; this will influence the existing land use on that site. In the event that soil contamination occurs, and it is not treated and managed effectively, this could influence the capability of that land in the future.

4 3 2 4 54 Mod 4 3 2 3 32 Mod

4. Ecology (fauna and flora) Clearing of vegetation during the well site preparation phase may result in the destruction of Red Data or Protected plant species.

6 5 2 3 60 Mod 4 5 1 0 24 Low

Clearing of vegetation may result in loss or fragmentation of habitat for Red Data faunal species.

6 2 2 3 42 Mod 4 2 2 2 24 Low

Vehicle collisions with Red Data faunal species, especially smaller, slower moving terrestrial species, on road networks.

8 2 3 2 56 Mod 4 2 3 1 24 Low

Impacts on fauna may result due to localised increases in noise, light and dust levels.

6 2 2 5 54 Mod 4 2 2 3 28 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 126




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 5. Surface water The removal of vegetation from the site and the hardening of surfaces will result in additional erosion and runoff volumes. The increased runoff could cause local erosion and scour around the site.

2 2 2 2 12 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

Should access roads to the site cross watercourses, the banks of the stream and flow hydraulics could be impacted. This impact is only for cases where streams are crossed.

2 2 2 2 12 Low 2 2 2 2 12 Low

The activities on site involve the handling of fuels, domestic wastewater, and domestic waste. There is the potential for spills from these storage and material handling facilities. The runoff from the site therefore has the potential to be polluted.

2 2 2 2 12 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

The site could be located adjacent to a watercourse. Although the area has low rainfall, there is the potential for floods, which can in turn transfer contaminants from the site and/or impact on downstream flow paths.

4 2 2 2 24 Low 2 2 2 2 12 Low

6. Groundwater Construction of the well site could lead to reduction in groundwater recharge.

2 1 1 4 12 Low 2 1 1 2 8 Low

Leakage and spillage of fuels from vehicles / heavy machinery could impact on groundwater quality.

2 1 2 2 10 Low 2 1 1 2 8 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 127




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 7. Air quality Various activities during well site preparation require disturbing the soil to some degree through the use of construction machinery. Fugitive dust will be released as well as exhaust emissions.

8 1 1 5 56 Mod 4 1 1 5 28 Low

8. Visual aspects Excessive vegetation removal, dust and night lighting could result in visual impacts.

6 2 2 4 48 Mod 4 2 2 2 24 Low

9. Noise Construction of access road, earth and concrete works, and trucks and heavy machinery will increase ambient noise levels.

2 2 2 4 16 Low 2 2 2 3 14 Low

10. Cultural heritage Construction of access roads and the well site may damage heritage sites and features in the immediate environs of the well site. The generation of dust could pose a threat to rock paintings in close proximity to the site.

6 5 2 3 60 Mod 2 5 2 1 16 Low

11. Sensitive landscapes There is a potential for impacts associated with site clearance on identified or unknown potentially sensitive features, such as Red Data species habitat types and paleontological sites.

6 4 3 3 60 Mod 4 3 3 1 28 Low

12. Socio-economic aspects Loss of land due to construction of well site and access road.

4 2 1 4 28 Low 2 2 1 4 14 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 128




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP Presence of foreign exploration teams may lead to social conflict due to cultural and language differences.

2 2 2 5 18 Low 2 2 1 5 16 Low

Local employment opportunities. 2 2 2 1 10 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

13. Access, traffic and transport Exploration activities will entail additional traffic on local roads. Additional traffic will increase wear and tear on the roads, increase risk of accidents, and increase noise and fugitive dust levels.

6 2 3 4 56 Mod 4 2 2 4 32 Mod

Topography Impacts on topography are anticipated due to the following:

An area of approximately 1 ha will be cleared of vegetation. In some cases, the land may be cut and shaped in order to obtain a level area on which to position the drilling rig; and

Depending on the location of the site, it is possible that access routes will need to be constructed and may cut into the topography to be able to transport the rig to the drilling site.

These impacts are, however, considered to be of low significance. Sites will be located in areas of relatively flat topography, thus decreasing the probability of altering the topography.

Should disturbed areas be filled, compacted and rehabilitated, upon decommissioning, this impact is reversible.

Soils Loss of the soil resource The proposed exploration project will result in a loss of approximately 1 ha44 of soil resource at eight well sites within the application area during site preparation; this impact will continue until decommissioning. The well site preparation process will involve clearing of the topsoil to allow for preparation of the drilling well site and access road. The soil will be stockpiled for remediation during decommissioning.

The potential impact is likely to be of high magnitude on the soil directly impacted at each site; an impact of moderate significance may occur. The moderate significance of the impacts is confined to the immediate area of the activity which makes up <0.0001% of the total application area.

Should removed soils be stockpiled and replaced during decommissioning, this impact is reversible.

44 A small amount of additional area may be required should it be necessary to build an access road, temporary accommodation, additional storage and parking, etc.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 129

Loss of soil integrity The soil integrity is a function of the inherent fertility, nutrient and water retention, organic matter content, and a number of physical properties of the soil. When a soil is disturbed in any way, any number of these may be affected and may result in negative impacts for the soil. Disturbances expected to bring about such changes include:

Movement of vehicles over virgin soil;

Excavating;

Soil removal for well site preparation; and

Stockpiling of stripped soils.

The loss of soil integrity will occur during well site preparation, and will persist until decommissioning. During decommissioning, the soil integrity can be remediated to a certain extent.

Without mitigation, the potential impact is likely to be of high magnitude on the soil directly impacted at each site; an impact of moderate significance is therefore likely to occur. The moderate significance of the impacts is confined to the immediate area of the activity which makes up <0.0001% of the total application area. The magnitude of this impact can be further reduced, should the appropriate mitigation measures presented in chapter 9 be implemented.

Since the soil integrity can never be fully remediated, this impact is irreversible.

Soil compaction Soil compaction occurs when a weight is applied on the surface and soil particles including the porous network, are rearranged as a result (Singer, 1987). Soil compaction may occur as a result of the following activities:

Heavy vehicle movement;

Excavating; and

Soil removal and restoration.

The structured soils falling within the precinct will be more susceptible to compaction than the sandy soils. Soil compaction will be largely limited to well site preparation.

The impacts from soil compaction are likely to be of low to moderate significance (depending on soil type) prior to mitigation on a site specific basis. However, the implementation of the mitigation measures presented in Chapter 9 will reduce this impact to one of low significance. This impact is reversible.

Soil contamination/pollution There is potential for contamination of soil to occur at the site due to accidental spillages of fuels or domestic wastewater at the site. The significance of this impact is considered moderate prior to mitigation; with the implementation of measures described in Chapter 9, the significance of this impact can be reduced to one of low significance.

Erosion Erosion is a function of both the physical characteristics of that soil, and the topography it occurs on. In general, the lighter textured, free draining soils will be less prone to erosion than heavier clay type of soils with a wet base.

Soil situated on gentle sloped topography will be less prone to erosion compared to those on steep slopes when it comes under disturbance of human activity. Existing and established vegetation binds and stabilises the soils and ensures better resistance to erosion.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 130

Sites on gentle sloped topography will be selected to limit the potential for erosion and erosion management measures will be implemented during well site preparation. The significance of this impact is likely to be low. The impact of erosion is reversible, should soils be replaced in eroded areas.

Land capability and land use Approximately 1 ha will need to be cleared for the well site; this will influence the existing land use on that site. In the event that soil contamination occurs, and it is not treated and managed effectively, this could influence the capability of that land in the future. The significance of this issue is dependent upon the existing land use, and ability to rehabilitate the land during decommissioning.

Due to the relatively small area of surface disturbance, an impact of moderate significance is likely to occur. Impact on land use is reversible; impact on land capability is irreversible (due to irreversible loss of soil integrity).

Ecology Loss of Red Data or Protected plant species Red Data or Protected plant species are known to occur within the broad exploration areas. However, detailed assessment of each proposed drilling site will precede site development as part of the site specific EIA studies. Wherever possible, identified populations of red data species will be avoided through re-siting the drilling site.

Due to the low level of historical transformation of the vegetation types within the precinct, one would expect an impact of high magnitude; however, due to the limited scale of the ground clearing required for well site preparation and access road construction, and the naturally sparse cover of the vegetation within the region, impact magnitude is considered moderate. Should Red Data or Protected plant species be lost during well site preparation, this impact will be permanent and irreversible. Overall impact significance is therefore moderate.

This impact can, however, be mitigated by avoiding areas with high densities of Red Data or Protected Plant species during the site selection process. Any Red Data or Protected Plant species encountered during ground clearing should be translocated to a nursery area and returned to the site during the rehabilitation phase. Should these measures be implemented, overall impact significance can be reduced to low.

Loss or fragmentation of habitat for Red Data faunal species Red Data faunal species are expected to occur within the application area. These species are threatened due to a variety of factors including habitat loss and fragmentation. Clearing of vegetation during well site preparation and road construction may constitute a further loss or fragmentation of habitat for these species.

Due to the limited scale of surface disturbance required for well site preparation and access road construction, the naturally sparse cover of the vegetation within the region, and that impacts are likely to be localised (with birds especially), impact significance is considered to be moderate. All of the Red Data species are limited within their ranges by very specific habitat preferences; by avoiding these habitat types, impacts on these species can be mitigated to low. Should appropriate mitigation measures be implemented, this impact is reversible.

Collisions with Red Data faunal species on road networks Red Data faunal species are expected to occur within the application. While travelling on road networks, vehicles moving to and from the site could collide with these species, especially the smaller, slower moving terrestrial species. Impacts of high magnitude will occur over a regional scale; impact significant is therefore rated as moderate. Should appropriate mitigation measures, such as reduced speed limits and awareness, impact significance can be reduced to low.

Should vehicles moving to and from the site collide with Red Data faunal species, the impact will be irreversible.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 131

Disturbance of Red Data fauna due to increased dust, noise and light Exploration activities will result in a temporary localised increase in noise, light and dust levels.

Increased noise levels may affect a wide range of taxa (including avifauna, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and arthropods) due to the associated increase in vibration. Avifauna, especially songbirds, and amphibians may find it difficult to find mates in areas of increased noise. Most taxa will move away from areas with increased noise. In general, most species seem to tolerate constant, even very loud, sounds better than sudden, unfamiliar ones.

Increased atmospheric dust may occur in the vicinity of the well site and access road construction. Dust settling on plant material can reduce the amount of light reaching the chlorophyll in the leaves, thereby reducing photosynthesis, which in turn reduces plant productivity, growth and recruitment.

Lights at night are likely to attract insects which may in turn attract night feeding birds, lizards or amphibians at the site.

The impact on terrestrial fauna is likely to be temporary and localised, but will definitely occur. Impact significance is therefore anticipated to be moderate. Should the appropriate mitigation measures outlined in Chapter 9 be implemented, impact significance can, however, be reduced to low. These impacts on terrestrial fauna are reversible; fauna may return to the site subsequent to decommissioning; similarly, vegetation distributed by dust may recover subsequent to decommissioning.

Surface water Increased erosion and runoff volumes The removal of vegetation and top soil as well as the hardening of the surfaces to construct the well pad will result in increased runoff and erosion from the site. The runoff with the higher sediment load and flood peaks will report to the local streams.

Due to the low probability of rainfall in the area and the small area of the site, the impact is ranked as low. Impact significance can be reduced further by implementing mitigation measures such as collecting runoff from the site in a sump or pond. The impact of increased erosion is irreversible and should be prevented.

Access road and watercourse crossings altering the banks of watercourses This potential impact is dependent on the location of the sites in relation to any watercourses. The access road may have to be constructed over a watercourse to gain access to the site. This will alter the banks of the watercourse and affect the hydraulics of the watercourse during a runoff event. Increased inundation areas behind the weirs could result.

Due to the low probability of rainfall in the area and the small area of the site, the impact is ranked as low. This impact can, however, be prevented by selecting sites where the access road does not need to cross any watercourses.

Polluted runoff leaving the site During well site preparation, fuels and domestic wastewater (sewage) will be stored and handled on site. There is the potential for spills from these storage and material handling facilities. The runoff from the site therefore has the potential to be polluted.

Should the runoff from the site be collected in a sump or pond within the site, fuel handling areas be bunded, and domestic wastewater be disposed of in an appropriate manner (and not discharged to the environment), impact significance is expected to be very low. Should polluted runoff leave the site and enter watercourses, the impact on water quality may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Flooding of site If the site is located near a surface water body, there is potential for water to enter the site during flood events. This can potentially result in contaminants described above being transferred to the water body


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 132

and/or alteration of the natural flow path. There will be potential for flooding of the site during all project phases.

The site could be located adjacent to a watercourse. Although the area has low rainfall, there is the potential for floods. There is the risk of flood waters inundating the site. Should the site selection process exclude the areas within the 100 year flood line or within a 100 m of the watercourse (whichever is greater), this impact can be mitigated to low.

Groundwater Construction of the well site leading to reduction in groundwater recharge Construction of the well site will result in reduction of recharge to the groundwater over the well site area. It is anticipated that magnitude of the impact will be minor due to the small area of the site. An Impact of low significance is therefore expected. Impact significance can be reduced by directing clean storm water runoff off the well site to a soak away. The impact on groundwater recharge is irreversible.

Leakage of fuels leading to deterioration of groundwater quality at the site During well site preparation, fuels and domestic wastewater (sewage) will be stored and handled on site. There is the potential for spills from these storage and material handling facilities, which could result in groundwater contamination. Should the runoff from the site be collected in a sump or pond within the site, fuel handling areas be bunded, and domestic wastewater be disposed of in an appropriate manner (and not discharged to the environment), impact significance is expected to be very low.

The impact on water quality may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Air quality The air pollution generated during site preparation would be the same as for any other general construction activities, with the main air pollutant being airborne dust. The various activities during site preparation require disturbing the soil to some degree through the use of construction machinery. Depending on the soil type, this could generate significant amounts of fugitive dust during the limited period of site preparation.

In addition, combustion gases (sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, 1, 3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter) will be emitted from vehicle exhausts.

As these vehicles may be also be fuelled on site, the potential to emit volatile organic compounds exists.

It is anticipated that the well site preparation activities could result in localised impacts in the short term; impacts of moderate significance are therefore anticipated. Should appropriate mitigation measures be implemented, such as dust suppression on roads, impact significance can be mitigated to low.

Visual aspects Visual impacts will be dependent upon the location of the drilling site, characteristics of existing vegetation, topographic features and waterways. Excessive vegetation removal, dust and night lighting could result in visual impacts. Impacts of moderate significance are anticipated due to relatively small area of surface disturbance required for well site preparation. Impact significance can, however, be mitigated to low, should the appropriate mitigation measures be implemented – refer to Chapter 9 for details. Should the appropriate mitigation measures be implemented, this impact is reversible upon decommissioning.

Noise Noise of construction is expected to include earthworks, erection of some temporary buildings/facilities and construction of access roads. All these require trucks and heavy machinery, and compressors and generators. It is anticipated that during the daytime, impacts on noise levels will be very low or negligible. Should construction be carried out at night, impacts may rise to low significance. This impact will be reversible once well site preparation activities are completed.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 133

Archaeology / cultural heritage / palaeontology aspects Construction of access roads and the well site could damage heritage sites and features in the immediate environs of the proposed well site.

Impacts of moderate significance are expected if the proposed access road is situated within the immediate environs of a heritage site (i.e. within 20 m), if the proposed well site is located within 50 m from heritage site, and the proposed well site and/or access road are located within 100 m of rock art sites.

Should the following mitigation measures be implemented prior to well site preparation and construction, impact significance will be reduced to low:

During well site selection, no sites should be placed within 100 m of declared national and provincial heritage sites.

Once the preliminary sites are selected, a site specific cultural heritage impact assessment will need to be conducted to identify any heritage sites and features. Based on the findings of the assessment:

No access roads should be constructed within 20 m of identified heritage sites and features which are rated as sites of high local significance by the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) (see Table 1 in heritage report attached in Volume 2);

No well sites should be constructed within 50 m of heritage sites and features which are rated as sites of high local significance by the SAHRA; and

No well sites or access roads should be constructed within 100 m of rock art sites which are rated as sites of high local significance by the SAHRA.

The site specific cultural heritage impact assessment will therefore inform final site selection.

Note: the SAHRA usually allows for development to commence where heritage sites or features are rated as sites of low significance (i.e. are not of any regional or local importance and/or are duplicated in many areas).

Should heritage sites rated as sites of medium to high significance be located within the above-mentioned buffer zones in relation to the selected well sites, appropriate mitigation measures will need to be implemented, in consultation with the relevant heritage agency. Mitigation could entail rescue excavation, once a permit is granted by the SAHRA.

Should any archaeological or heritage features artefacts be uncovered during exploration, all activities must be stopped and an archaeologist accredited with the Association for Southern African Professional Archaeologist (ASAPA) approached in order to determine appropriate mitigation measures for the discovered finds, if necessary. Mitigation of heritage sites will be called for when they are rated as of medium to high significance. Mitigation could entail rescue excavation of relevant heritage sites - once a permit is granted for excavation by the SAHRA. If the relevant heritage sites include graves then the protocol provided in Section 36 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of 1999), regarding grave exhumation, will be followed.

It is recommended that a heritage awareness guide be provided to the well site preparation personnel and drilling crew to help them identify heritage resources, should they be unearthed as a result of the exploration related activities.

Should archaeological or heritage features artefacts be damaged during exploration, the impact will be irreversible.

The Karoo has over the years yielded a number of significant fossil finds that are on display in numerous museums throughout the region. It is therefore possible that fossils may be encountered during exploration drilling activities. If this occurs, qualified specialists will be consulted and the required mitigation measures implemented, to protect this precious aspect of cultural heritage in the area.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 134

Sensitive landscapes There is a potential for impacts associated with site clearance and road construction activities on identified or unknown potentially sensitive features such as wetlands, patches of indigenous vegetation considered to be Critical Biodiversity Areas, Protected Areas, etc. This may result in impacts of moderate significance, due to the relatively small area of surface disturbance associated with well site preparation.

The site selection process for the locating of the wells will be aimed at avoiding wetlands, vegetation in areas considered to be critical biodiversity areas, as well as protected areas contemplated in terms of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act of 2003. This impact is therefore unlikely to occur.

In terms of the Astronomy Geographic Advantage Act, 2007 (Act 21 of 2007), sites declared as core astronomy advantage areas are subject to a 3 km buffer on development; should any such sites fall within the application area, this will need to be taken into consideration during well site selection.

Socio-economic Loss of land and impact on livelihood Well site preparation activities will involve the clearing of well sites (which are typically expected to be approximately 1 ha). Access to exploration sites may be via an existing (upgraded) or new access road. Landowners will therefore lose temporary access to these areas during well site preparation and exploration activities. However, if initial exploration test results indicate a feasible shale gas resource, further exploration activities may be conducted. If this leads to gas production activities under a production right, the well will be secured for future development and production. Any non-viable exploration wells will be decommissioned.

Loss of access as a result of exploration activities and associated health and safety requirements may require mitigating measures, such as alternative access ways. Loss of income due to loss of production and economic resources will need to be compensated. Compensation for use of land may be provided through lease agreements.

Site selection must take cognisance of current land use in order to minimise economic displacement. Land compensation and lease agreements should be entered into independently with each affected landowner or party. Where possible, engagements with local stakeholders should be held to understand grazing schedules – these aspects need to be taken into account during final selection of the well sites.

The scale of impact is local with a definite probability and moderate magnitude, resulting in an impact of low significance. Upon decommissioning, this impact is reversible.

Air quality, noise and vibration impacts may also impact indirectly on the livelihoods of affected landowners or parties. The results from the air quality and noise assessment studies are presented in separate technical reports. Increased noise levels may impact current land uses, such as game farms. With regard to air quality, dust settling on plant material can reduce the amount of light reaching the chlorophyll in the leaves, thereby reducing photosynthesis, which in turn reduces plant productivity and growth. Should the appropriate mitigation measures for noise and air quality be implemented, these impacts can be mitigated to low.

Presence of (temporary) workers Exploration is regarded as a skilled technical process that requires adherence to industry-regulated and corporate health and safety standards. During the initial exploratory drilling, it is likely that certain technologies and equipment will need to be imported and highly specialised expertise or personnel to be required. Shell will establish a team that will include international staff and contractors. During operation of the drilling site there will be between 30 to 50 staff on site. During site establishment this number is expected to be in the order of 20 people. Accommodation of teams may be in a purpose built temporary accommodation camp or in accommodation facilities in nearby urban centres. This decision will be evaluated on a site by site basis taking into account proximity to off site accommodation options at the time that drill site localities are known.

Well site preparation teams could be considered as business travellers and may stimulate the local tourism industry, especially the hospitality sector for short periods during exploration activities. This may have an


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 135

associated positive impact on general business in the local economy. No long-term housing requirements are anticipated.

In contrast, the presence of foreign exploration teams may lead to social conflict due to cultural and language differences.

Teams will work under a strict code of conduct which requires, for example, prior permission for access, non-disturbance of farm activities and restoring any damages they may inadvertently cause. On-site camps will have controlled access and all staff will carry personal identification.

The scale of the potential positive impact on the local tourism industry and local economy is local, with medium probability and moderate magnitude, which equates to an impact of low significance. The negative impact of social tension is also considered to be an impact of low significance, but will be reversible, once the well site preparation team leaves the area.

Employment Due to the technical nature and regulated health and safety requirements, opportunities for local employment are limited to casual positions. Influx of job-seekers and the associated increase in crime and social ills is not expected to occur due to the isolated character of the study area and controlled access to private property in the area. At a regional scale, transportation and security requirements may lead to a limited increase (low magnitude) in employment for the duration of the exploration activities. The local hospitability sector may benefit from a low increase in employment opportunities.

Where possible, employment opportunities should be offered to local communities before others are considered. Opportunities for skills development and training should be explored in order to maximise long-term benefits of employment.

Due to the limited opportunities for local employment, impact significance associated with this positive impact is considered low.

Access, traffic and transport The drilling rig will be transported by standard prime mover and trailer trucks, and will be assembled on site. The construction of the temporary drilling rig typically takes between 3 and 4 weeks. Additional trailer(s) will be required to bring other portable equipment, a site office, etc. for temporary use on site. Typical traffic associated with "rig up" operations requires approximately 50 to 70 truck loads, which includes portable accommodation units and rig site offices. The frequency with which additional vehicle traffic visits a site will depend upon the phase of drilling operations. For example, on average a standard re-supply to a rig will require 2 to 4 trucks loads per day, although when pipe casing strings and mud supplies are required this may require up to 10 truck loads per day for a short period of time. Dependent upon the distance to available infrastructure, for example, a supply base or airport, additional may be required traffic once per week, plus ad hoc travel of employees to/from the site on a daily basis.

Additional traffic will increase wear and tear on the roads, increase risk of accidents, and increase noise and fugitive dust levels. Due to the number truck loads required, impact magnitude is rate moderate. In addition, since impacts could be regional. Impact significance is therefore considered to be moderate. The significance of this impact will, however, need to be confirmed subsequent to site selection, as part of the detailed environmental impact assessment.

The following measures may mitigate these risks:

Locating well sites in close proximity to the supply base or airport, and existing towns;

Implementing speed limits, drivers’ education, public education, and scheduling and maintenance of vehicles will reduce the impacts on all of roads used by heavy duty vehicles; and

Information should be provided to local residents and police on traffic movements.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 136

The impact on traffic will be reversible, once the exploration team leaves the area. Traffic impacts will receive consideration through a specialist study to inform impact assessment for individual well sites once these are known, taking into consideration transport and logistics routing at that time.

8.5.3 Exploration drilling Table 25 below summarises those impacts directly related to the proposed exploration drilling programme, and provides a significance rating for each impact before and after mitigation. It is important to note that these are estimates of likely significance of these activities as the impact is dependent upon the site and the characteristics of that site. For this reason, the significance ratings provided herein are purely a guideline. Impact significance will be confirmed as part of the detailed EIA.

Table 25: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Exploration Drilling

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: EXPLORATION DRILLING



M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 1. Geology The drill rig will penetrate geological layers up to a depth of 1 to 5 km (depending on site conditions), at each drilling site. Core (soil, unconsolidated material and rock) will be removed. Core or drill chippings could possibly contain naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORMs) which could contaminate the environment.

6 3 1 3 42 Mod 4 3 1 2 24 Low

2. Soil Potential spillages from heavy machinery, vehicles, generators, chemical storage areas, drilling muds, hydraulic fracturing fluids, etc could contaminate soils.

8 3 1 3 56 Mod 4 3 1 2 24 Low

3. Ecology (Fauna and Flora) Vehicle collisions with Red Data faunal species, especially on smaller, slower moving terrestrial species.

8 2 4 3 72 Mod 2 2 4 2 16 Low

Impacts on fauna may result due to localised increases in noise, light and dust levels.

6 2 2 5 54 Mod 4 2 2 3 28 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 137




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 4. Surface water The activities on site involve the handling of fuels, water and drilling mud. These materials will be stored on site. There is the potential for spills from these storage and material handling facilities. The runoff from the site therefore has the potential to be polluted.

2 2 2 2 12 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

There is the potential for spills and leaks of the potentially polluted return flow fluid from the drilling process.

2 2 2 2 12 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

5. Groundwater Storage tanks for poor quality water, i.e. saline / brackish water, could leak/collapse/burst leading to contamination of aquifer.

4 1 2 2 20 Low 2 1 1 2 8 Low

Failure of pumps/pipes to/from storage tanks to wellhead, resulting in spillage.

4 2 2 2 24 Low 2 2 2 1 10 Low

Leakage of stored drilling fluids leading to deterioration of groundwater quality at the site.

4 2 2 2 24 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

The gas exploration well will drill through the potential water bearing zones present at the well site. The well could therefore provide a pathway for groundwater loss and potential contamination.

8 5 1 4 80 High 2 5 1 1 14 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 138




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP The gas exploration well will drill to depths of up to 5 km. A deep water bearing zone, most likely containing brackish or saline water, could be intersected. If the well was not adequately cased, it could provide a pathway for saline water to rise to the surface, impacting on the shallower aquifer.

4 1 2 2 20 Low 2 1 2 2 10 Low

The gas exploration well will drill to depths of up to 5 km. An unexpected fracture/fault zone could be intersected at depth. The well could therefore provide a pathway for groundwater loss to the fractured zone and potentially saline water within the fracture rising to the surface and impacting on the shallower aquifer.

4 1 2 2 20 Low 2 1 2 2 10 Low

Failure of the steel well casing and cement grout could lead to loss of groundwater via flow into the well and contaminated water, gas and hydraulic fracturing chemicals entering the shallow aquifer.

4 1 1 2 16 Low 4 1 1 1 12 Low

Inflow of groundwater into the well causing a lowering of water levels.

6 2 2 2 36 Mod 2 1 1 1 6 Low

Drilling of water wells as an option to obtain a groundwater supply.

6 2 2 3 42 Mod 4 2 2 2 24 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 139




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP Poorly managed abstraction of groundwater from the boreholes can lead to excessive lowering of the water table, failure of the borehole and possible lowering of the water level in water supply boreholes located within the area of influence of the wellsite borehole(s).

6 4 3 3 60 Mod 2 2 2 2 12 Low

6. Air quality Routine emissions are expected from power generators. Fugitive emissions may occur at drill rig and open air fluid impoundments, if these are used to hold drill cuttings and fluid.

6 2 2 4 42 Mod 4 2 2 4 28 Low

7. Visual aspects Dust generation and night lighting could result in visual impacts.

6 2 2 3 42 Mod 4 2 2 2 24 Low

8. Noise Drilling, pumps, compressors and generators, and vehicles importing and exporting materials and staff could increase ambient noise levels between ±150 m and 1.6 km from the centre of the site, at night.

4 2 2 4 32 Mod 2 2 2 4 24 Low

9. Socio-economic aspects Refer to site preparation 10. Access, traffic and transport Refer to site preparation

Geology The drill rig will penetrate geological layers up to a depth of 1 to 5 km (depending on site conditions), at each drilling site. Core (soil, unconsolidated material and rock) will be removed. Core or drill chippings could possibly contain naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORMs) which could contaminate the environment. This impact is considered to be an impact of moderate significance. Should, however, the below-mentioned mitigation measures be implemented, impact significance can be reduced to low:


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 140

Identify and log strata that could host naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORMs).

Separate drill chippings that may contain NORMs. Test natural radioactivity level. If necessary, dispose of such material at an off site facility licensed to receive such material.

Soils There is potential for contamination of soil to occur at the site due to accidental spillages of fuels, flowback water or drilling muds at the site. These materials will be stored in appropriate containers. Storage facilities used for drilling muds and flowback water will be lined to prevent infiltration into the soil.

The significance of this impact is considered moderate prior to mitigation; with the implementation of measures described in Chapter 9, the significance of this impact can be reduced to one of low significance. Should soils be contaminated with fuels, flowback water or drilling muds, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant. Should soils be remediated using bioremediation, impacts may, however, be reversible

Ecology Collisions with Red Data faunal species on road networks Red Data faunal species are expected to occur within the precinct. While travelling on road networks, vehicles moving to and from the site could collide with these species, especially the smaller, slower moving terrestrial species. Impacts of high magnitude will occur over a regional scale; impact significant is therefore rated as moderate. Should appropriate mitigation measures, such as reduced speed limits and awareness, impact significance can be reduced to low.

Should vehicles moving to and from the site collide with Red Data faunal species, the impact will be irreversible.

Disturbance of Red Data fauna due to increased dust, noise and light Exploration activities will result in a temporary localised increase in noise, light and dust levels.

Increased noise levels may affect a wide range of taxa (including avifauna, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and arthropods) due to the associated increase in vibration. Avifauna, especially songbirds, and amphibians may find it difficult to find mates in areas of increased noise. Most taxa will move away from areas with increased noise. In general, most species seem to tolerate constant, even very loud, sounds better than sudden, unfamiliar ones.

Increased atmospheric dust may occur in the vicinity of the drilling site and access roads. Dust settling on plant material can reduce the amount of light reaching the chlorophyll in the leaves, thereby reducing photosynthesis, which in turn reduces plant productivity, growth and recruitment.

Lights at night are likely to attract insects which may in turn attract night feeding birds, lizards or amphibians at the site.

The impact on terrestrial fauna is likely to be short-term and localised, but will definitely occur. Impact significance is therefore anticipated to be moderate. Should the appropriate mitigation measures outlined in Chapter 9 be implemented, impact significance can, however, be reduced to low.

These impacts on terrestrial fauna are reversible; fauna may return to the site subsequent to decommissioning; similarly, vegetation distributed by dust may recover subsequent to decommissioning.

Surface water Polluted runoff leaving the site The activities on site involve the handling of fuels, water and drilling mud. These materials will be stored on site. There is the potential for spills from these storage and material handling facilities. The runoff from the site therefore has the potential to be polluted.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 141

Should the runoff from the site be collected in a sump or pond within the site, fuel and drilling mud handling areas be bunded, and domestic wastewater be disposed of in an appropriate manner (and not discharged to the environment), impact significance is expected to be very low.

Should polluted runoff leave the site and enter watercourses, the impact on water quality may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Spill and leaks of drilling return flow fluid The drilling process will generate a return flow from the wells. The return flow fluid could be polluted to an extent that the fluid cannot be discharged to the environment. This fluid will be stored on site and disposed of in an appropriate manner. The disposal method will depend on the water quality of the fluid. The disposal could be to a local sewage treatment works, treatment on site before discharge or disposal at an appropriate facility off site. The fluid will also be pumped on site and there is the potential for pipe leaks or bursts on site.

The storage container for the fluid will be in a bunded area. The water quality of the fluid will be determined on site and the appropriate disposal method applied. Any leaks from the pumping system will be caught in the onsite sump before entering the environment. The development and application of material handling procedures for the site will also reduce the risk of material entering the environment.

Due to the local scale of the potential impacts, impact significance is anticipated to be low; should the above mitigation measures be implemented, impact significance can be reduced further.

Should surface water become contaminated with drilling return flow fluid, the impact on water quality may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Groundwater Water storage tanks leak/collapse/burst leading to contamination of aquifer Poor quality water (i.e. saline / brackish water) may be used for drilling and may be stored on site. Leakage and/or spillage of this water could result in groundwater contamination. It is anticipated that spillage of water will result in negligible impacts, and will be restricted to the site only. Impacts of low significance are therefore expected. Impact significance can, however, be reduced, should appropriate mitigation measures are implemented, such as ensuring that water storage containers are located in a bunded area.

Should groundwater be contaminated, the impact on water quality may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Pumps/pipes to/from storage tanks to wellhead fail resulting in spillage Poor quality water (i.e. saline / brackish water) may be used for drilling. Failure of pumps and pipes could result in spillage of this water leading to groundwater contamination. It is anticipated that spillage of water will result in negligible impacts, and will be restricted to the site only. Impacts of low significance are therefore expected. Specification of high quality pumps and pipes of suitable strength will minimise the risk of bursts, and hence reduce impact significance.


Leakage of stored drilling fluids leading to deterioration of groundwater quality at the site Drilling fluids will be stored on site. Leakage and/or spillage from these storage areas could result in groundwater contamination. Impacts of low significance are expected; however, impact significance can be reduced should appropriate mitigation measures be implemented, e.g. ensuring that drilling fluid storage facilities are located in a bunded area.



March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 142

Intersection of aquifers The gas exploration well will drill through the potential water bearing zones present at the well site. The well could therefore provide a pathway for groundwater loss and potential contamination.

Each well bore section will be lined with a steel casing, cemented in place. This process provides a barrier between the formations (that may include water bearing zones) and the well bore. Each well section would be lined with a steel casing, which in turn would be cemented in place. The casing and its accessories will be of such specifications that they can withhold downhole pressures and are resistant to the composition of the wellbore and formation fluids that they are exposed to. The casing integrity will be tested upon completion of the drilling to confirm that the casing can withstand the expected pressures and there are no leaks in the casing.

The cement around the casing holds the casing in place, but also is aimed to prevent communication (of pressure or fluids) around the outside of the casing between deeper and shallower formations, or even surface. The quality of the cement can be assessed through for example a Cement Bond Log. This log will indicate whether there are possible communication paths through the cement. In case a so-called leak path would be detected, secondary operations may be undertaken in order to seal off the detected communication path.

During operations, all annuli will be monitored to confirm no leaks develop over time. Also during production when the rig is no longer on site, it is common practice that the annuli are monitored at a regular basis. In case pressure or fluid levels are observed to increase, a full investigation will be carried out and if required production is halted or operations stopped (close in well). Once the investigation confirms the cause of the increased pressure or fluid levels, appropriate action will be taken to restore the required integrity.

It is anticipated that the well construction adopted will result in negligible groundwater impacts. Impacts of low significance are therefore expected.

Intersection of deep (saline) water bearing zones The gas exploration well will drill to depths of up to 5 km. A deep water bearing zone, most likely containing brackish or saline water, could be intersected. If the well was not adequately cased, it could provide a pathway for saline water to rise to the surface, impacting on the shallower aquifer.

The same mitigation measures will be implemented as described above.

It is anticipated that the well construction adopted will result in negligible groundwater impacts. Impacts of low significance are therefore expected.

Intersection of significant fracture zone The gas exploration well will drill to depths of up to 5 km. An unexpected fracture/fault zone could be intersected at depth. The well could therefore provide a pathway for groundwater loss to the fractured zone or and potentially saline water within the fracture rising to the surface and impacting on the shallower aquifer.

The same mitigation measures will be implemented as described above.

The site selection process will ensure that the gas exploration well is drilled in a position where structures are unlikely to be encountered. It is anticipated that the site selection process and the well construction adopted will result in negligible groundwater impacts. Should there be doubt, the well will be decommissioned and sealed. Impacts of low significance are therefore expected.

Failure of steel well casing and cement grout – groundwater inflow Failure of the steel well casing and cement grout could lead to loss of groundwater via flow into the well. Should the steel casing and high pressure cement grouting be constructed according to industry standards, and the casing be pressure tested before installation, impacts of low significance are expected.

It is anticipated that the correct well construction and use of materials will provide protection against any failures. Negligible impacts to the groundwater system from the well are therefore anticipated. Impacts of low significance are therefore expected.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 143

Inflow of groundwater into the well Uncontrolled inflow of groundwater into the well could lead to a lowering of water levels and reduction of yield of surrounding water supply boreholes. This is considered an impact of moderate significance. Should, however, the well construction be designed to isolate the well from the groundwater aquifers, and the well not be positioned in proximity to water supply boreholes, impact significance can be reduced to low.

Drilling of water wells as an option to obtain a groundwater supply Water is required for the drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations. If hydraulic fracturing is undertaken the volume of water required will be 1 000 – 6 000m3 for each well, considerably less water is needed should drilling only be required.

At this stage a range of options are being considered; these include groundwater and other sources.

The water supply could be obtained from groundwater in the general vicinity of the well site. The groundwater supply would be obtained from dedicated water supply boreholes sited to exploit potentially brackish or saline quality water, i.e., groundwater unsuitable for domestic or livestock use, occurring below the main potable aquifer. The target aquifers are therefore deep water bodies probably at depths greater than 100 to 300m.

The abstraction of groundwater could have negative impacts on the groundwater regime if not probably managed.

The water supply would be obtained from a wellfield specifically sited and drilled to supply the well site with water. These boreholes would be positioned within a reasonable distance of the well site and would be the subject of a specialised survey to locate suitable target aquifers. It is probable that groundwater sources to be developed for once-off use during the exploration phase could generally be developed within a 10 km radius of the well.

The water supply boreholes will need to be correctly constructed with steel casings and sanitary seals to prevent any surface contaminants entering the groundwater via the borehole annulus. It will also be important that any new boreholes are not selected within 300 metres of existing boreholes to minimise impacts.

Provided the water supply boreholes are correctly sited, constructed and tested, and the management recommendations prepared are adhered to, impacts are anticipated to be low.

Abstraction of groundwater for water supply for drilling Poorly managed abstraction of groundwater from the boreholes can lead to excessive lowering of the water table, failure of the borehole and possible lowering of the water level in water supply boreholes located within the area of influence of the well site borehole(s).

These impacts are considered to be of moderate significance. Should, however, the management recommendations prepared as a result of the testing of the borehole(s) be adhered to, it is anticipated that impact significance can be reduced to low.

Air quality During drilling, air emissions are expected to occur from the following:

Transportation;

Power generators;

Pumps;

Drilling rig; and

Open air fluid impoundments (should these be used to hold drill cuttings and fluid).


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 144

Pollutants include:

Fugitive dust from access roads;

Combustion gases (sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, 1,3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter) from vehicle exhausts;

Vehicle exhaust emissions include combustion gases (sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, 1,3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter). As these vehicles may be fuelled on site, the potential to emit volatile organic compounds exists;

Fugitive emissions of methane from unplanned events, such as encountering a methane pocket; and

Combustion gases (same as above) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from power generators.

Although emissions are likely to occur, it is anticipated that the impacts will be localised. The resulting impacts on air concentration levels are expected to be of moderate magnitude, hence of moderate significance. Impact significance can, however, be reduced to low, should the appropriate mitigation measures be implemented (e.g. reducing vehicle speed, dust suppression on access roads and minimising the surface area, if open air impoundments are used for storage).

Visual aspects Dust generation and night lighting will result in visual impacts of moderate significance. Impact significance can be mitigated to low, should the mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 9 be implemented.

This impact will be reversible upon decommissioning.

Noise Noise is expected to emanate from the drilling site.

It is assumed that the noise emissions of the drilling and fracturing activities will be similar to measurements which have been previously measured at other gas drilling operations. These measurements yielded a worse case range of between 82 and 102 dB(A) at a nominal distance of 1.5 m from the acoustic centre of the source.

Using the simplified attenuation by distance model and assuming uniform directivity, a flat noise spectrum, zero ground attenuation, zero air absorbtion, and uniform atmospheric conditions, the noise level at certain distances from the site centre, can be predicted as follows (theoretical worst case):

Table 26: Noise level in dB(A) at certain distances from the drilling site centre (worst case)

Distance 1.5m 3m 6m 12m 24m 50m 100m 200m 400m 800m 1.6km

From (dB)

82 76 70 64 58 52 46 40 34 28 22

To (dB) 102 96 90 84 79 72 66 60 56 48 42

When compared with the acceptable values for rural areas according to the SANS standard SANS 10103, under these worst case conditions, the limit noise level which can be accepted (according to the SANS standard) will occur at a dwelling which is ±100 m (45 dB(A) during daytime) or ± 2 km (35 dB(A) at night) from the drilling site centre (when using a worse case value of 82 dB(A) at a nominal distance of 1.5 m from the acoustic centre of the source).

It needs to be emphasised that this really is the worst case scenario, and the noise level will in practice be attenuated by relaxation of the various worse-case scenario criteria such as the actual noise level information for the drilling rigs, individual equipment noise emissions, duration of operations and pause


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 145

periods, site layout, local barrier effects of buildings on site, etc. Predicted noise levels will need to be confirmed during exploration.

It is anticipated that daytime noise levels will have very low or negligible impacts within a distance of approximately 80 m from the centre of the site. Impacts at night may, however, rise to moderate significance within 150 m from the centre of the site. (When using a worse case value of 82 dB(A) at a nominal distance of 1.5 m from the acoustic centre of the source).

This impact will be reversible upon decommissioning.

Socio-economic Same as for site preparation

Access, traffic and transport Same as for site preparation

8.5.4 Hydraulic fracturing Table 27 below summarises those impacts directly related to hydraulic fracturing, and provides a significance rating for each impact before and after mitigation. It is important to note that these are estimates of likely significance of these activities as the impact is dependent upon the site and the characteristics of that site. For this reason, the significance ratings provided herein are purely a guideline. Impact significance will be confirmed as part of the detailed EIA.

Table 27: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Hydraulic Fracturing

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: HYDRAULIC FRACTURING



M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 1. Soil Potential spillages from hydraulic fracturing fluids, etc could contaminate soils.

8 3 1 3 56 Mod 4 3 1 2 24 Low

2. Surface water The activities on site involve the handling of chemical additives for the hydraulic fracturing. These materials will be stored on site. There is the potential for spills from these storage and material handling facilities There is the potential for the spill and leaks of the potentially polluted return flow fluid from the hydraulic fracturing process.

2 2 2 2 12 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

3. Groundwater Storage tanks for poor quality water, i.e. saline / brackish water, could leak/collapse/burst leading to contamination of aquifer.

4 1 2 2 20 Low 2 1 1 2 8 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 146




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP Failure of pumps/pipes to/from storage tanks to wellhead, resulting in spillage.

4 2 2 2 24 Low 2 2 2 1 10 Low

Leakage / spillage of stored hydraulic fracturing chemicals leading to deterioration of groundwater quality at the site.

4 2 2 2 24 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

Failure of steel casing to provide complete seal with hydraulic fracturing zone and leakage of gas and chemicals into the well annulus and subsequently into the overlying aquifers.

6 2 2 1 30 Mod 4 2 1 1 16 Low

Hydraulic fracturing of the well leading to invasion of chemicals from the target shale horizon into the overlying aquifers via unknown fracture zones.

8 2 2 1 40 Mod 4 2 2 1 16 Low

Larger volume of return water from the gas exploration well than expected resulting in the return water storage dam filling and overflowing and/or spillage of saline/brackish return water from the well causing contamination of the underlying groundwater.

6 2 2 3 42 Mod 4 1 1 1 12 Low

Abstraction of groundwater to supply water for hydraulic fracturing.

6 4 3 3 60 Mod 2 2 2 2 12 Low

4. Air quality Gas may be flared. Fugitive emissions may occur at open air fluid impoundments, if these are used to store hydraulic fracturing flowback water.

6 2 2 4 42 Mod 4 2 2 4 28 Low

5. Visual aspects An operational flare at the well site will result in visual impacts.

8 2 2 3 56 Mod 6 2 2 2 36 Mod


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 147




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 6. Noise Drilling, pumps, compressors and generators, flaring and vehicles importing and exporting materials and staff could increase ambient noise levels between ±150 m and 1.6 km from the centre of the site, at night.

4 2 2 4 32 Mod 2 2 2 4 24 Low

7. Socio-economic aspects Refer to site preparation 8. Access, traffic and transport Refer to site preparation

Soils There is potential for contamination of soil to occur at the site due to accidental spillages of chemicals (such as hydraulic fracturing fluids) at the site. All hazardous chemicals will be stored in appropriate containers. Storage facilities used for flowback water will be lined to prevent infiltration into the soil. The significance of this impact is considered moderate prior to mitigation; with the implementation of measures described in Chapter 9, the significance of this impact can be reduced to one of low significance.

Should soils be contaminated with chemicals, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Surface water Spill and leaks of hydraulic fracturing chemicals and return flow fluid into the environment The chemical additives used in the fracturing fluid have not be identified at this stage and the impacts and required mitigation measures will be investigated further in the next stage of the project based on the actual chemical additives to be used.

The hydraulic fracturing process will generate a return flow from the wells. In other operations, Shell has achieved recovery of up to 50% of the water used as a return flow volume. The return flow fluid will contain the chemical additives used in the fracturing water as well as any contaminants mobilised from the (geological) formation.

The return flow fluid could be contaminated to an extent that the fluid cannot be discharged to the environment. This fluid will be stored on site and disposed of in an appropriate manner. The disposal method will depend on the water quality of the fluid. The disposal could be to a local sewage treatment works, treatment on site before discharge or disposal at an appropriate facility off site. The fluid will also be pumped on site and there is the potential for pipe leaks or bursts on site.

The storage container for the fluid will be in a bunded area. The water quality of the fluid will be determined on site and the appropriate disposal method applied. Any leaks from the pumping system will be caught in the onsite sump before entering the environment. The development and application of material handling procedures for the site will also reduce the risk of material entering the environment.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 148

The impact is ranked as low due to the provision of the mitigation measures and the local scale of the impacts.

Should surface water be contaminated with chemicals, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Groundwater Water storage tanks leak/collapse/burst Same as for exploration drilling.

Pumps/pipes to/from storage tanks to wellhead failure Same as for exploration drilling.

Leakage / spillage of stored chemicals Chemicals used for hydraulic fracturing may be stored on site. Leakage and/or spillage of could result in groundwater contamination. Should appropriate mitigation measures be implemented, such as storage of chemicals in containers located in bunded areas, impact significance is anticipated to be low.

Should groundwater be contaminated, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Leakage and spillage of contaminated water during transport to selected disposal site Contaminated water and chemicals may need to be removed from the site. Leakage and/or spillage while being transported could result in groundwater contamination. Should the appropriate mitigation measures be implemented, such as ensuring that tankers and associated pumps and pipelines are mechanically sound and tanker drivers are experienced and trained in driving hazardous loads, impact significance is anticipated to low (due to low probability of impact occurrence).

Should groundwater be contaminated, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Failure of steel casing to provide complete seal in the with hydraulic fracturing zone and leakage of gas and chemicals into the well Failure of the steel well casing and cement grout due to stresses caused by installation depth and/or the hydraulic fracturing process could lead to contaminated water, gas and hydraulic fracturing chemicals entering the shallow aquifer.

This impact is considered to be of moderate significance. Should the steel casing and high pressure cement grouting be constructed according to industry standards, and the casing be pressure tested before installation, impacts of low significance are expected.

Hydraulic fracturing of the well Hydraulic fracturing of the shale is carried out under high pressure and is designed to crack the shale open to improve the permeability around the gas well. Concern has been expressed that the hydraulic fracturing process could lead to uncontrolled fracturing of the overlying strata. This could then provide a pathway for contamination of the groundwater via fractures newly created by the hydraulic fracturing process.

The hydraulic fracturing process is designed to fracture the shale in the target reservoir only. The gas exploration wells will be located away from fracture zones, dolerite dykes and other zones of potential weakness to minimise the risk of unexpected fracturing. The ground geophysical surveys are designed to identify such features and thus aid in positioning the well away from these lines of structural weakness.

The great depth at which the hydraulic fracturing will take place (1 000 – 5 000 m below surface) provides substantial protection to the overlying groundwater aquifers due to the weight of the overlying rock mass which will counteract the hydraulic fracturing pressures.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 149

Prior to the commencement of the drilling, an EIA will first be undertaken. This detailed assessment of the selected site and surrounding area will involve monitoring of water levels and water quality. This monitoring will continue throughout the drilling and hydraulic fracturing process. Should any impact be detected hydraulic fracturing will cease.

Based on the above, it is anticipated that hydraulic fracturing will result in negligible impacts outside of the intended target shale zone. Impacts of low significance are therefore expected.

Larger volume of return water from the gas exploration well than expected Between 1 and 6 million litres of water may be used if hydraulic fracturing is carried out. This water will be pumped into the well and used to achieve the desired fracturing of the target shale horizon. Fluids used in this process return to the surface once the well is back produced. These fluids are, referred to as ‘flowback’, can then be recycled, and mostly re-used for other drilling activities. The percentage of fluids that can be re-used for other drilling operations will vary from one well location to another as a result of even small variations in the geological properties of the shale formations deep underground. Similarly, the quality of flow back water which may or may not require additional treatment, prior to re-use, will likely vary.

Any water that is no longer required for the operation will be treated and cleaned– using mobile water processing equipment - in line with Shell’s own technical standards and relevant South African regulations. The most suitable location for recycling will be determined subsequent to site selection.

Higher recoveries of flowback than anticipated could lead to on site storage facilities overflowing and spillage occurring, which could in turn lead to contamination of the groundwater.

It is, however, anticipated that the implementation of the above-mentioned mitigation measures will result in impacts of low significance.

Inflow of groundwater into the well Same as for exploration drilling.

Abstraction of groundwater for water supply to the drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations Same as for exploration drilling.

Air quality During hydraulic fracturing, air emissions could potentially occur from the following:

Combustion gases (sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, 1,3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from power generators;

Evaporating VOCs from open air fluid impoundments, if these are used to store flowback water; and

Combustion gases (same as above) from compressors and from well testing / flaring.

It is anticipated that a flare pit will be constructed. A flaring rate of 2 800 to 8 500 m3 (100 to 300 Mscf) is expected during the testing period. Flaring is seen as a safer way to manage the gas than simply allowing it to vent into the air. Flaring is also used to burn gases that would otherwise present a safety problem. It is common to flare natural gas that contains hydrogen sulphide in order to convert the highly toxic hydrogen sulphide gas into less toxic compounds.

Early explorations done by Soekor did not encounter hydrogen sulphide (not from the drilling reports, nor core analyses). The gas composition that was measured in the past was a mix of mainly Methane (92%) , Ethane (6%) and higher hydrocarbon chains (2%) (Rowsell, D.M. and De Swardt, A.M.J., 1976, Diagenesis in Cape and Karroo sediments, South Africa, and its bearing on their hydrocarbon potential). Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa 79 (1), 81-129). The likelihood of hydrogen sulphide emissions is therefore low.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 150

The nature of flare emissions depend on the chemical composition of the gas being burned and the efficiency and temperature of the flare. Flaring results in sulphur dioxide emissions if hydrogen sulphide is present in the natural gas. There may also be additional by-products formed if some of the chemicals used during the drilling or hydraulic fracturing process are converted to a gaseous form and are burned along with the natural gas. The detailed EIA will address this possibility and its significance.

Fugitive emissions are unintentional leaks of gases. This may occur from breaks or small cracks in seals, tubing, valves or pipelines, as well when lids or caps on equipment or tanks have not been properly closed or tightened. When natural gas escapes via fugitive emissions, methane as well as VOCs and any other contaminants in the gas (e.g. hydrogen sulphide) are released to the atmosphere. The detailed EIA will address this possibility and its significance.

Although emissions are likely to occur, it is anticipated that the impacts will be localised. The resulting impacts on air concentration levels are expected to be of moderate magnitude, hence of moderate significance. Impact significance can, however, be reduced to low, should the appropriate mitigation measures be implemented. Refer to Chapter 9 for mitigation measures.

Visual aspects An operational flare at the well site will result in visual impacts, and indirect impacts on animal life.

Impact significance is considered to be moderate, with limited mitigation potential, due to the relatively low visual absorption capacity of the area (as a result of little vegetation cover, topographical landforms and existing human structures). For this reason, where possible, care must be taken to position well sites in locations and in such ways that it will not constitute an excessive intrusion.

This impact will be reversible once flaring is discontinued.

Noise Same as for exploration drilling.

Socio-economic Same as for site preparation.

Access, traffic and transport Same as for site preparation.

8.5.5 Decommissioning Table 28 below summarises those impacts directly related to decommissioning, and provides a significance rating for each impact before and after mitigation. It is important to note that these are estimates of likely significance of these activities as the impact is dependent upon the site and the characteristics of that site. For this reason, the significance ratings provided herein are purely a guideline. Impact significance will be confirmed as part of the detailed EIA.

Table 28: Technical Assessment Matrix for the proposed South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project –Decommissioning

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: DECOMMISSIONING



M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 1. Soil Potential spillages from heavy machinery, vehicles, generators, etc could contaminate soils.

8 3 1 3 56 Mod 4 3 1 2 24 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 151




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 2. Ecology (Fauna and Flora) During decommissioning, infrastructure will be removed and the site will be rehabilitated. This may result in the colonisation of the site by invasive alien plant species.

6 3 2 3 48 Mod 4 2 2 2 24 Low

3. Surface water The decommissioning activities on site involve the removal of equipment and storage facilities. Runoff from the site has the potential to be polluted.

2 2 2 2 12 Low 2 2 1 2 10 Low

4. Groundwater Leakage and spillage of contaminated water during transport to selected disposal site.

2 1 2 2 10 Low 2 1 1 2 8 Low

Spillages and residues during and after site clean up.

2 1 1 2 8 Low 2 1 1 2 8 Low

Inadequate sealing of well resulting in poor sealing of gas and contaminated hydraulic fracturing water and subsequent invasion of the well and contamination to groundwater aquifers.

6 4 3 2 54 Mod 2 4 2 1 14 Low

Inadequate sealing of water supply boreholes leading to aquifer contamination.

6 4 2 2 24 Low 2 4 2 1 14 Low

5. Air quality Various activities during site decommissioning may disturb the soil to some degree through the use of machinery. Fugitive dust will be released as well as exhaust emissions.

4 1 1 3 20 Low 2 1 1 2 10 Low

6. Visual aspects Excessive dust and night lighting could result in visual impacts.

6 3 2 3 48 Mod 4 3 2 2 28 Low


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 152




M D S P Total SP M D S P Total SP 7. Noise Decommissioning activities, such as removing of infrastructure, and trucks and heavy machinery, will increase ambient noise levels.

2 2 2 4 16 Low 2 2 2 3 14 Low

8. Socio-economic aspects Same as for well site preparation 9. Access, traffic and transport Same as for well site preparation

Soils Upon decommissioning, soil remediation of the site will aim to restore the soil resource back to its original state. The remediation process will include ripping of the soil, re-application of topsoil and establishment of vegetation cover.

There is the potential for contamination of soil to occur at the site due to accidental spillages of fuels at the site. The significance of this impact is considered moderate prior to mitigation. With the implementation of the mitigation measures described in Chapter 9, the significance of this impact can be reduced to one of low significance.

Should soils be contaminated with fuel, the impact may be reversible, should the soil be remediated using bioremediation.

Land capability and land use In terms of Section 37 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act 28 of 2002), the holder of a permit is liable for any and all environmental damage or degradation emanating from his/her operation, until a closure certificate is issued in terms of Section 43 of the Act.

The following are preliminary recommendations for rehabilitating the well site after decommissioning the well – these recommendations will be investigated further during the site specifc EIA:

Remove all temporary works in and around the accommodation camp and drilling site.

Fences and private roads disturbed by activities will be restored to their original condition unless another agreement is reached with the applicable landowner.

Allow normal surface drainage except where special measures are employed to prevent soil erosion.

Loosen compacted soils along the delineation of the access road. Scarifying areas where topsoil has been removed shall be carried out prior to the replacement of topsoil. Care shall be taken to avoid topsoil inversion if scarifying is carried out in areas where topsoil has not been removed. Any ploughing or scarifying operation shall not exceed a depth of 100 mm.

Where the land is naturally armoured with surface rock or stone, armouring rock should be placed over the construction servitude to protect against erosion, in a manner similar to its original condition.

Re-establish the vegetation that existed prior to disturbance, to the greatest extent possible.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 153

After decommissioning and successful rehabilitation, the land use may return to the original use.

Ecology The long term objective for rehabilitation is to in all affected areas, re-establish the vegetation that existed prior to site preparation, to the greatest extent possible. Where the routes/affected areas pass through areas that are disturbed or degraded to varying degrees, especially where extensive agriculture has occurred, indigenous vegetation should be established, covering the affected areas, in order to protect the soil against erosion.

Rehabilitation in this area will be very difficult due to climatic and vegetation conditions and the low and erratic rainfall. A number of publications are available on rehabilitation of vegetation in the Karoo (De Villiers et al., 2004; Beukes and Cowling, 2003; Blignaut and Milton, 2005; Simons and Allsopp, 2006; Burke, 2001; Hanke et al., 2011; Visser et al., 2004). These publications and input from local conservation specialists will need to be applied in developing a successful rehabilitation plan. Removing and maintaining vegetation from the site in a nursery for transplanting back on the site during decommissioning is an option that should be investigated.

Colonisation of the site by invasive alien plant species During well site preparation, vegetation will be cleared and will be maintained in this state during exploration. Upon decommissioning, infrastructure will be removed and the site rehabilitated. This may result in the colonisation of the site by invasive alien plant species such as Prosopis sp., Salsola kali and Medicago laciniata.

This impact can be mitigated by implementing an invasive plant monitoring programme at the site, until such a time as the indigenous vegetation community has been re-established.

The significance of this impact is rated as moderate due to the localised nature of this impact. Should, however, the monitoring programme be implemented and, if necessary, invasive alien plant species removed, impact significance can be reduced to low.

Should alien invasive species become established at the site, this impact is reversible by clearing the site of such species.

Surface water Polluted runoff leaving the site The decommissioning activities on site involve the removal of equipment and storage facilities. The runoff from the site has the potential to be polluted. Due to the low probability of rainfall in the area and the small area of the site, the impact is ranked as low. The sump should be maintained on site to collect any runoff from the site. The sump will be removed once the site is decommissioned.

Should surface water be contaminated with pollutants, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Groundwater Leakage and spillage of contaminated water during transport to selected disposal site Contaminated water and chemicals will need to be removed from site during decommissioning. Leakage and/or spillage while being transported could result in groundwater contamination. Should the appropriate mitigation measures be implemented, such as ensuring that tankers and associated pumps and pipelines are mechanically sound and tanker drivers are experienced and trained in driving hazardous loads, impact significance is anticipated to low (due to low probability of impact occurrence).

Should groundwater be contaminated with pollutants, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 154

Spillages and residues during and after site clean up Storage containers and the flowback water storage facility will need to be removed and rehabilitated to minimise risk of long-term pollution of groundwater. During this process, there is the potential for spillages and subsequent groundwater contamination. Impacts of low significance are expected.

Should groundwater be contaminated with pollutants, the impact may/may not be reversible, depending on the nature of the pollutant.

Inadequate sealing of well The well will provide a pathway from the gas reservoir to the surface. If the well is decommissioned, and inadequately sealed, there is the potential that gas and contaminated hydraulic fracturing water can contaminate groundwater aquifers. This is considered to be an impact of moderate significance. However, should correct application of pressure grouting techniques, including maintaining records of the volume of cement used compared to volume of the well be ensured, impact significance can be reduced to low.

Should this impact occur, it will be irreversible, unless an alternative water supply is provided to affected groundwater users.

Inadequate sealing of water supply boreholes The water supply boreholes will provide a pathway for poor quality surface water to enter the aquifer. The boreholes will also provide a pathway for brackish and/or saline groundwater targeted at depth to contaminate the overlying freshwater aquifer, should there be a positive hydraulic head acting on the deeper aquifer. These aspects could lead to groundwater contamination.

If potable quality groundwater was suppled for the drilling/hydraulic fracturing processes, the borehole can be incorporated into the long-term monitoring programme, or given to the landowner to use.

If the borehole provided brackish and/or saline groundwater, the well is to be decommissioned, backfilled and sealed according to industry standards. This could involve pressure grouting the hole closed. Should the well be sealed, impacts of low significance are anticipated.

Should this impact occur, it will be irreversible, unless an alternative water supply is provided to affected groundwater users.

Air quality Minimal emissions are expected upon decommissioning of the exploration well, and would mainly include particulate emissions during the decommissioning process. Fugitive particulate matter and VOC emissions may also occur during the rehabilitation of any fluid impoundments. It is anticipated that the site decommissioning activities could result in low impacts.

Visual aspects Excessive dust generation and night lighting could result in visual impacts during decommissioning. Impact significance can be mitigated to low, should the mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 9 be implemented.

This impact will be reversible upon closure.

Noise Decommissioning activities, such as removal of temporary buildings/facilities, and trucks and heavy machinery, will increase ambient noise levels. It is anticipated that the impact will be of a temporary nature and will be localised. An impact of low significance is therefore likely to occur.

This impact will be reversible upon closure.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 155

8.6 Human Health This section provides a brief overview of some of the key potential risks to human health associated with exploration drilling any hydraulic fracturing. The below description is based on reviewing literature that is available in the public domain (specialist reports from projects in the USA and a position statement from Europe), while considering the specific process that Shell will adopt, as described in Chapter 5. The following potential risks to human health may be associated with the proposed exploration drilling programme:

The large amount of water required for hydraulic fracturing could lower water tables and decrease the amount of available drinking water sources/supplies. Lower water tables may also affect water quality by exposing naturally occurring minerals to an oxygen rich environment which may cause salination and chemical contamination of water. Lower water tables may also stimulate bacterial overgrowth leading to taste and odour problems;

The bulk of the hydraulic fracturing fluid comprises water and sand which acts as a proppant to keep fractures open. Fracturing fluids do, however, contain quantities of chemicals (about 1-2% by volume). The type and concentration of the chemicals used depends on the conditions of the specific well. While many of the chemical additives are relatively benign, some chemicals that a company may select to use are known to have acute (from acids and bases) and more chronic effects (ethylene glycol, glutaraldehyde, and n,n-dimethyl formamide), if an exposure path exists;

Hydraulic fracturing may affect the mobility of naturally occurring substances especially in the gas containing formulation. Substances such as naturally occurring radioactive material, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and mercury, lead or arsenic may be mobilised as a result. There is the potential that these substances may find a pathway to the upper source of drinking water after the fracturing process if the fractures extend past the target formation to reach aquifers or if the cement casing in the wellbore fails under pressure exerted in the fracturing process.

Flow-back water occurs with a change in direction of the injected fluid whereby the injected fluid plus naturally occurring substances that were mobilised in the subsurface move back up the borehole to surface at the end of the fracturing process. The physical and chemical properties of flow-back and produced water varies with the type of hydraulic fracturing fluid used and the specific geological formation. Flow-back fluid usually contains high concentrations of total dissolves solids (TDS) but can also have high concentrations of major ions and radionuclides as well as VOCs (including benzene, toluene and xylenes). Potential contamination of water sources may occur at the surface and at the upper source of drinking water.

Methane is the largest potential source of air emission associated with hydraulic fracturing. The challenge is to manage the flow of methane before the well is put into production which may entail venting or flaring. The high concentrations of methane may pose a significant explosion threat.

Flow-back fluids may be sources of VOCs (including acetone, benzene, toluene, phenol and ammonia) and hydrogen sulphide.

Increased truck traffic to support the operations is potentially a major source of air emission. This can include increased levels of NO2, CO and diesel particulates. Dust from vehicles may also increase.

There are suggestions that hydraulic fracturing activities may be associated with low magnitude earthquakes.

There was a concern related to contamination of soil by hydraulic fracturing fluids, and also potential exposure of domestic animals and wildlife to water impoundment dams with adverse effects to the animals and unknown potential effects of bioaccumulation in the food chain. The same may apply to plant material with potential bioaccumulation effects.

Concerns were expressed about public safety associated with potential chemical spills, well blowouts and transportation of hydraulic fracturing fluids and waste water.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 156

Occupational risks in the workplace health and safety which includes acute and chronic health effects. These can be divided into physical, chemical, biological and psychosocial risks.

Acute loud noise and chronic low level noise is associated with a variety of negative health effects. These can include hearing loss but also psychological and physical health effects due to noise annoyance.

Light disturbance at night may disrupt sleep and cause health effects by disrupting normal circadian rhythms and hormone release.

As part of the site specific EIA, a human health impact assessment will be conducted to confirm potential risks to human health, as well as to provide measures to manage and mitigate identified risks.

8.7 Cumulative impacts Geophysical data acquisition Due to the minimal area of surface disturbance associated with the MT surveys, it is not anticipated that this exploration activity will contribute to any existing cumulative impacts on the environment.

Well site preparation, exploration drilling and hydraulic fracturing Due to the relatively small area of surface disturbance associated with the well site preparation, exploration drilling and hydraulic fracturing activities, it is not anticipated that these exploration activities will contribute significantly to any existing cumulative impacts on the environment. This will, however, be verified once the drilling sites have been selected and aspects such as current land use, and future mining and infrastructural developments, are taken into consideration.

8.8 Assumptions and knowledge gaps / limitations A number of assumptions have been made to complete the technical assessment. This section provides a description of the assumptions made herein.

These knowledge gaps and limitations will need to be addressed as part of the detailed EIA, which will be undertaken prior to commencement of drilling and/or hydraulic fracturing.

General

The locations of the sites have not yet been determined. Impacts were therefore assessed for a generic site;

The mud programme, well design, content of the hydraulic fracturing fluids, treatment/disposal method for backflow water, fate of hydrocarbons produced, etc are currently not yet defined;

Impact significance ratings have been estimated, as the impact is dependent upon the site and the characteristics of that site. For this reason, the significance ratings provided herein are purely a guideline. Impact significance will be confirmed as part of the detailed EIA; and

Impacts after mitigation are based on the assumption that mitigation measures have been put in place and implemented correctly.

Soil

Available databases were only of a general scale; and

The study area has not been subjected to a field survey. This study is entirely based on a desktop review and no field or groundtruthing took place. A field study is anticipated for the near feature.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 157

Terrestrial ecology

An intensive baseline biodiversity assessment of potential drilling sites taking seasonal variation into consideration has not yet been conducted since sites where drilling will take place have not yet been identified.

Surface water

The source and quantity of water has not yet been finalised. The source will affect the need for storage and the handling approach on site; and

The quantity and quality of the return flow (backflow) fluid is currently unknown.

Groundwater

The groundwater technical assessment has been prepared without detailed knowledge of the actual drilling sites. It is therefore indicative at this stage.

A detailed assessment of potential impacts to the groundwater aquifers will be undertaken as part of the EIA, once site selection has been completed.

Air quality

Air pollutants from the exploration drilling activities may be divided into their potential impacts, namely nuisance (odours and dustfall) and toxic (irritants and carcinogenic) compounds. The significance of these impacts are determined firstly through the potential to violate relevant regulatory criteria (both ambient air and emission limits) and secondly through the comparison to health risk criteria. Since the air quality technical assessment was conducted at a qualitative level, direct comparison of absolute air concentrations was not possible. Instead, only the potential sources of air emissions and the various air pollutants have been discussed.

The final detail of the proposed exploration activities in terms of, for example, layout, is not yet available. Sources of emissions were therefore based on typical exploration configurations.

The anticipated power generation and compressor sizes have not been fixed. It was therefore not possible to quantify air emissions of gases and particulate matter from the equipment.

The number and types of vehicles required during the various steps for exploration drilling are still preliminary.

The access road lengths have not been determined since the exact locations for drilling have not been identified.

It is assumed that the flare would operate continuously during hydrocarbon flow testing.

Noise

For the purposes of the noise assessment, a range of between 82 and 102 dB(A) at a nominal distance of 1.5 m from the acoustic centre of the source has been used.

A worst case scenario has been assumed, i.e. continuous well site preparation and road construction and drilling activities throughout the day and night.

In addition, the precise locations of the selected drilling locations are as yet undefined; therefore, any sensitive receptors adjacent to the sites are currently unknown.

Heritage / cultural aspects

The available heritage databases are incomplete. Large areas of the study area have never been surveyed from a heritage perspective.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 158

The application area has not been subject to a field survey. The technical assessment undertaken for the EMP is entirely a desktop based survey and no field or ground surveys were conducted. However, these will be commissioned as part of the detailed EIA to follow.

Human health The following has been recognised as limitations to the human health assessment:

The broad project area and the lack of definition of specific potentially affected communities. A more detailed study will be undertaken as part of the EIA, when specific locations have been identified.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 159

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 9.1 Objectives This section outlines the Environmental Management Plan (EMP), in draft form, that will be implemented during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the proposed South West Karoo Basin gas exploration Project (see Section 5 for a detailed project description).

The EMP comprises a series of individual plans that outline the scope of environmental management pertaining to compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and Shell policies and procedures.

Key objectives of the EMP are to:

recognize that social responsibility and environmental management are among the highest corporate priorities;

ensure that applicable acts, regulations and guidelines are met;

assign clear accountability and responsibility for environmental protection and social responsibility to management and employees;

facilitate environmental planning through Project life cycle;

provide a process for achieving targeted performance levels;

provide appropriate and sufficient resources, including training, to achieve targeted performance levels on an ongoing basis; and

evaluate environmental performance and social responsibility against Shell’s environmental and other policies, objectives and targets and seek improvement where appropriate.

The EMP is organized into the following sections:

Project Description.

Applicable Laws, Regulations and Guidelines

Shell Policies and Procedures.

Roles and Responsibilities.

Location and Design Methods.

Environmental Management Plans and Mitigation Measures – a description of the mitigation measures and individual EMPs that will be implemented during the Project.

Monitoring Plans – a description of monitoring plans that will be implemented during all Project phases.

Grievance Mechanism

9.2 Project description The project description is described in detail in Section 5. In broad terms the project entails the following key activity steps, which are not necessarily consecutive implementation.

Undertaking geophysical data acquisition. This is largely a non-invasive task although nominal excavation is required to position the recording equipment below ground level (shallow trench the depth of a spade head);


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 160

The drilling of vertical boreholes to intersect the targeted Shale layer. These boreholes will be between 1500 m and 5000 m deep depending on their location within the exploration rights areas. These boreholes will be developed using standard deep level drilling techniques but may also include the sampling of intact geological core through the target shale layer once this layer has been intersected. Shale samples will be analysed for gas;

The vertical intersection of the shale layer may be hydraulically fractured to test whether gas can be stimulated to flow;

If gas can be stimulated to flow within the shale layer, a horizontal borehole may be drilled from the base of a vertical hole extending up to 2 km into the shale layer;

Horizontal boreholes would be hydraulically fractured to stimulate gas flow and enable gas yield properties of the strata to be tested, and lastly; and

If the exploration proves unsuccessful, gas exploration wells will need to be decommissioned and made safe.

9.3 Applicable Laws and Regulations The primary legislation applicable to the Project includes, but is not likely limited to, the following:

Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act;

National Environmental Management Act;

National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act;

National Environmental Management Waste Act;

National Water Act; and

National Nuclear Regulator Act.

Section 3 provides further details on the Project legal context.

9.4 Shell Policies and Procedures Shell will comply with all legal requirements prior to, and during, any field activity in the Project.

The company has set business principles and standards for health, safety, security, environment and social performance (http://www.shell.com/home/content/aboutshell/who_we_are/our_values/sgbp/), to which every employee must abide by. Briefly, these principles include:

Contribution to sustainable development by balancing short and long-term interests and integrating economic, environmental and social considerations into decision-making;

Applying a systematic approach to health, safety, security and environmental management in order to achieve continuous performance improvement; and

Being a good neighbour by continuously improving the ways, in which Shell contributes directly or indirectly to the general wellbeing of the communities within which they work and committing.

All activities will be carried out in accordance with Shell’s General Business Principles, Sustainable Development Principles and HSE Commitment and Policy which is supported by a full suite of Shell HSE standards (unless there is a conflict with legislation, in which case legislation takes precedence).


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 161

9.5 Roles, Responsibilities and Training 9.5.1 Roles and Responsibilities Shell will be responsible for the overall implementation, monitoring and quality assurance/quality control of this EMP. The Project EMP would be provided to contractors submitting tenders for construction and operation of any components and activities of the Project. This would provide the contractors with details on the environmental sensitivities and requirements of the Project.

Shell will be responsible for the monitoring of the environment while each contractor is to be responsible for monitoring working conditions, safety and occupational health of contractor’s work area.

Shell will be responsible for periodic environmental inspections of the exploration sites in general. Each contractor shall be responsible for workplace occupational health, safety and environmental inspections. Each contractor shall also be responsible for following up on the corrective action required as a result of these inspections. Contractors shall report the results of all environmental inspections to Shell.

9.5.2 Training All Shell employees will be appropriately trained and qualified to carry out their duties under the scope of the EMP.

Shell will endeavour to employ only competent staff and contractors to carry out their operations. Where staff or contractors do not meet the appropriate competence or awareness of standards and regulations that is required, Shell will provide adequate and suitable training to meet the requirements.

9.5.3 Monitoring and Inspection Systems A periodic monitoring and inspection system shall be implemented throughout the exploration phase, with reports made on the following: adverse impacts, effectiveness of plans and remediation efforts. Any significant impact on persons, property or the environment must be reported immediately to Shell, and a written report shall be submitted on these incidents, including a root cause analysis.

9.6 Location and Design Methods This section contains a description of location and design criteria for the Project that will be applied during the Project. The location and design methods and criteria are based on:

applicable local and national laws and regulations;

applicable technical design codes;

applicable national environmental criteria and standards; and

The environmental criteria have been subdivided into qualitative and quantitative criteria. Qualitative criteria correspond to general and specific criteria that cannot be measured with the aim of preventing or minimizing environmental impact. Quantitative criteria correspond to those definite limit values, established in national regulations. These limits will continue to be used as a control of the mitigation measures as detailed in the Environmental Monitoring Plan (see Section 8.8).

9.6.1 Project Design Codes This section will be updated to reflect standards to which project designs will be completed.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 162

9.6.2 Environmental Criteria 9.6.2.1 Qualitative Criteria The following qualitative environmental criteria are related to Project location and design criteria to avoid or minimize potential effects:

Archaeological Sites: Where feasible, avoidance of terrestrial and marine archaeological sites. If sites cannot be avoided, adherence to regulatory protocols for protection and/or removal.

Protected Areas: Avoidance of direct Project footprint effects to nearby protected areas and avoidance or minimization of indirect effects (e.g. marine water quality, air quality).

Wildlife Species of Conservation Status: Avoidance of direct mortality, destruction of habitats and indirect effects to species with conservation status, including International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List species.

Key Wildlife Habitats: Avoidance or minimization of direct and indirect impacts to key wildlife habitats (e.g., reproductive and migratory habitats).

Natural and Industrial Risks: Establish Project design parameters to help minimize environmental and public health and safety impacts from natural and industrial hazards.

Water: Extraction of water will not occur as to result in a high impact to the environment or users of the identified water source. Water is recycled into the process where practical and appropriate. The discharge of untreated wastewater, spill and drainage into the environment is prohibited unless it meets applicable water quality standards for discharge.

Atmosphere: Dust and other emissions produced by Project activities will meet applicable ambient air quality standards at sensitive receptors.

Noise: Noise levels will meet applicable noise criteria at sensitive receptors.

9.6.2.2 Quantitative Design Criteria This section will contains information on South African ambient standards for air, atmospheric noise, water quality and sediment quality.

Likewise, maximum permissible limits/discharge limits are identified that were also included as design criteria for this Project.

These criteria and limits will be defined as a discipline level during detailed impact assessment which will precede site clearance, drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

9.7 Environmental Management Plans and Mitigation Measures The section outlines the individual EMPs and mitigation measures that will be implemented during the duration of the Project. The section is categorized based on primary Project activities that will require specific mitigation measures that are unique to that activity, as follows:

Drilling and Well Installation


There is an additional subsection that provides individual EMPs that are likely applicable throughout the Project life cycle in a more general sense. These individual EMPs include the following:

Air Quality Management Plan;

Noise Management Plan;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 163

Sediment and Erosion Control Plan;

Hazardous Materials Management Plan;

Non-Hazardous Solid Waste and Domestic Wastewater Management Plan;

Petroleum Management Plan;

Fish and Fish Habitat Management Plan;

Soils and Vegetation Management Plan;

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Management Plan;

Spill Prevention and Response Plan;

Transportation Management Plan;

Archaeological/Cultural Resources Management Plan; and

Occupational Health and Safety Plan.

9.7.1 Drilling and Well Installation The American Petroleum Institute has published a guidelines document entitled “Hydraulic Fracturing Operations - Well Construction and Integrity Guidelines (API 2009). The purpose of the document is to provide guidance on recommended practices for well construction and integrity for wells that will be hydraulically fractured.

This section discusses some of the key guidance principles in this document as they might apply to the Project. These principles will be become further refined once a Project description is further defined and they will be incorporated into the EIA document.

Maintaining well integrity is through the design and construction process is key to:

Isolate the internal conduit of the well from the surface and subsurface environment to protect the environment; and

Isolate and contain the well’s produced fluid to a production conduit within the well.

The primary method used for protecting groundwater during drilling operations consists of drilling the wellbore through the groundwater aquifers, immediately installing a steel pipe (called casing), and cementing this steel pipe into place.

The following guiding principles will be implemented during drilling and well installation:

9.7.1.1 Casing The casing must be able to withstand the various compressive, tensional, and bending forces that are exerted while running in the hole, as well as the collapse and burst pressures that it might be subjected to during different phases of the well’s life.

Casing used in oil and gas wells that will be hydraulically fractured should meet API standards, including API Spec 5CT. API casing specifications and recommended practices cover the design, manufacturing, testing, and transportation.

Casing manufactured to API specifications must meet strict requirements for compression, tension, collapse, and burst resistance, quality, and consistency.

The casing used in a well should be designed to withstand the anticipated hydraulic fracturing pressure, production pressures, corrosive conditions, and other factors.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 164

9.7.1.2 Cementing

Selected cements, additives, and mixing fluid should be laboratory tested in advance to ensure they meet the requirements of the well design.

The following cement practices are recommended in order to ensure that isolation is achieved:

Prior to drilling, operators should investigate and review the history of nearby wells for cementing problems encountered;

Computer simulation and other planning should be carried out in order to optimize cement placement procedures;

Operators should use established, effective drilling practices;

Operators should ensure that the drilling fluid selection is appropriate for the designed well and the geologic conditions likely to be encountered; and

Appropriate cement testing procedures should be properly carried to meet site-specific geologic conditions.

9.7.2 Hydraulic Fracturing Hydraulic fracturing may take place following drilling of a vertical borehole, assuming the borehole successfully intersects the shale layer, or hydraulic fracturing may take place at a later stage once a horizontal borehole has been drilled into the identified shale layer. .

The process of hydraulic fracturing increases the exposed area of the formation resulting in a high conductivity path that extends from the wellbore through a targeted hydrocarbon bearing formation so that hydrocarbons and other fluids can flow more easily from the formation rock, into the fracture, and ultimately to the wellbore.

To conduct hydraulic fracturing, a fluid must be pumped into the well’s production casing at high pressure; therefore it is necessary that production casing has been installed and cemented and that it is capable of withstanding the pressure that it will be subjected to during hydraulic fracture operations (see above design principles).

Prior to beginning this process, all equipment should be tested to make sure it is in good operating condition. All high-pressure lines leading from the pump trucks to the wellhead should be pressure tested to the maximum treating pressure. Any leaks must be eliminated prior to initiation of the hydraulic fracture treatment.

9.7.3 Water Management The objective of the water management during drilling and hydraulic fracturing is to achieve the following:

Ensure the reliability of water supply; and

Control, collect, and treat wastewater during fracturing process.

These management procedures are linked to the following other EMPs:

Hydrocarbon Management Plan (Section 9.7.5);

Hazardous Material Management Plan (Section 9.7.9);

Non-Hazardous Solid Waste Management Plan (Section 9.7.10);

Spill Prevention and Response Plan; and

Fish and Fish Habitat Management Plan.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 165

9.7.3.1 Water Supply Water will be required both during drilling the well and if gas is observed in the shale layer at a certain well site, hydraulic fracturing.

Shell recognizes that the quality and supply of shallow drinking water aquifers in the licence application areas needs to be protected and is therefore investigating a number of potential water sources to support the requirements of the Project.

Preliminary water assessments, as part an early feasibility scoping have been focused upon a number of alternative water sources, such as, beneath the ground (typically at depths >100 m), sea water, surface water, water imported by truck or recycled grey water.

Detailed evaluations will be carried out during the EIA that will focus on specific drilling locations. The intention is to identify the most suitable water source on a per-well site basis.

9.7.3.2 Water and Fluids Disposal During drilling operations fluids (drilling mud) return to surface where they are captured, recycled and re-used wherever possible. The fluids returning to surface will contain chemicals and subsurface contaminants mobilised during the drilling process. These elements will be removed from the fluids prior to reuse. If wells are hydraulically fractured, fluids used in this process return to the surface once the well is back produced. These fluids will be recycled, and mostly re-used for other drilling activities as much as possible.

9.7.3.3 Monitoring Treatment Parameter Monitoring During the hydraulic fracture treatment, certain parameters should be continuously monitored, including, but not limited to, surface injection pressure (psi), slurry rate (bpm), proppant concentration (ppa), fluid rate (bpm), and, sand or proppant rate (lb/min).

Pressure Monitoring Pressure behaviour throughout the hydraulic fracture treatment should be monitored so that any unexplained deviation from the design can be immediately identified and analysed before operations continue. Pressure exerted on equipment should not exceed the working pressure rating of the weakest component.

Micro-seismic Monitoring Micro-seismic mapping allows operators to monitor micro-seismic events associated with hydraulic fracture growth. It requires a geophone array to be placed in an observation well, and utilizes the energy of the fracturing process to map the resulting micro-seismic events. Micro-seismic monitoring provides a way to evaluate critical hydraulic fracturing parameters such as vertical extent, lateral extent, azimuth and fracture complexity.

Shell may conduct micro seismic monitoring. It is defined in chapter 5.

9.7.4 General Activities – Individual Environmental Management Plans 9.7.4.1 Air Quality Management Plan The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) addresses the management of emissions and air quality associated with construction and operation activities. This plan covers all activities that could result in air emissions through all phases of the project.

The principles used to develop the AQMP include:

Meeting all applicable regulatory standards regarding air emissions;

Implementing best management practices in air emissions management;

Consulting with local communities to understand community air quality issues related to the Project; and


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 166

Having a programme in place to monitor and verify performance standards.

The AQMP goal is to manage air emissions from the Project so that the effect on air quality is minimal. The AQMP targets are:

Keep all air emissions within appropriate regulatory guidelines;

Keep ambient air quality within appropriate regulatory guidelines and standards;

No regulatory or community concerns regarding air quality and emissions management;

The following main emission sources are anticipated during the Project:

Vehicles, specially traffic on un paved roads;

Construction equipment; and

Fugitive emissions.

The following general management practices and measures by Project phase, include, but are not limited to:

Design Stage

Selecting equipment with low emissions that meet SA legislated emissions standards and guidelines;

Designing covers or control devices to limit the spread of dust;

Construction Phase

Using low sulphur and low aromatic fuel;

Using modern construction/ equipment that meets latest applicable emissions standards;

Ensuring proper equipment maintenance;

Limiting vehicle and construction equipment idling;

Minimising land disturbance;

Optimising vehicle movement; and

Using dust suppression measures.

Operations Phase

Using low sulphur and low aromatic diesel fuel;

Limiting vehicle idling;

Optimising vehicle movement; and

Using dust suppression measures (i.e., wetting work areas, roads, and storage piles, installing equipment covers, and using dust hoods and shields).

9.7.4.2 Noise Management Plan A Noise Management Plan (NMP) will be prepared for the Project before construction commences. Elements of the NMP will include, but not be limited to:

Identification of applicable ambient noise criteria;

Implementation of noise mitigation measures as presented in the following sections;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 167

Development and implementation of noise monitoring plan to verify compliance with relevant standards and criteria; and

Employee training awareness.

Construction and Operation Phase Mitigation measures that can be implemented during the construction and operation phases include:

Schedule noisy construction activities at normal working hours (i.e., day-time) as much as possible;

Perform regular inspection and maintenance of construction vehicles and equipment to ensure that they have good quality mufflers installed and worn parts are replaced;

Turn equipment off when not in use;

Use noise abatement accessories such as sound hood and mufflers. If required, use noise barriers, baffles or enclosures for particularly noisy equipment, where feasible; and

Develop and implement a noise monitoring programme for the construction phase.

Noise Associated with Road Traffic The following measures that will be implemented to minimize transportation-related noise impacts include, but are not limited to:

Avoid trucking operations at night, where possible.

During maintenance check that noise abatement devices are in good order (e.g., brakes, exhaust mufflers).

Place speed limits along access roads that are located off primary roads and highways.

9.7.4.3 Sediment and Erosion Control Plan A Sediment and Erosion Control Plan (SECP) will be developed during detailed design phase of the Project. This plan deals with the management of sediments arising from the erosion of overburden fines in areas disturbed as part of the construction and operations activities.

Erosion and sediment management will involve the use of a number of management practices that will target each of the erosion process stages.

Upstream and non contact diversion systems will help to keep clean water from running onto disturbed areas, thus reducing volumes for handling and the erosive power of the water that would otherwise need to be handled within the disturbed areas of the site. This will minimize the volumes potentially requiring sediment control and/or treatment as well as the overall footprint of areas required for treatment facilities.

In concert with this approach is the implementation of sediment and erosion control measures. A number of examples of effective management practices for surface erosion protection and sediment control for consideration at the site include, but are not limited to, the following:

maximise the diversion of non contact waters (clean water) around areas of potential disturbance;

intercept sources of potential sediment-laden waters as close to source of erosion as possible and use runoff control and conveyance measures to move these waters to a receiving waterbody;

establish self-sustaining vegetation in erosion-prone areas once disturbed but no longer required;

use appropriate sediment traps and barriers such as silt fences to minimize sheet erosion and velocity of sheet flow in areas prone to erosion;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 168

use sediment catchment basins;

use ditch armouring along ditches depending on factors such as area steepness, erodability of soil materials and presence of any immediate downstream watercourses; and

undertake sensitive operations during periods of dry weather to minimize traffic through these areas and select equipment that will create the least disturbance.

9.7.4.4 Fish and Fish Habitat Management Plan A Fish and Fish Habitat Management Plan will be prepared. The objective of this plan is to protect aquatic resources during all phases of the Project.

This plan is linked to other management plans including;

Emergency Response Plan and Spill Prevention and Response Plan;


Petroleum Management Plan;

Non-Hazardous Solid Waste and Domestic Waste Water Management Plan;

Transportation Management Plan; and

Sediment and Erosion Control Plan.

Sediment-laden surface water during all phase of the Project has the potential to affect fish habitat. Therefore, sediment and erosion control mitigation measures will be used during all Project phases. An outline of the SECP is provided in Section 9.7.4.3 above.

Sensitive aquatic habitat areas will be avoided and appropriately marked to identify these areas to employees and contractors during all phases of the Project. No drilling will take place within 500 meters of any stream. Management practices and timing windows will be followed to minimize effects (particularly during construction) on aquatic habitat during sensitive periods (e.g., spawning) to the maximum extent practicable.

9.7.4.5 Soils and Vegetation Management Plan Soils and vegetation effects are expected to be greatest during construction when soil is removed and terrain and vegetation disturbed during site clearing for the Project.

Construction Phase Soils Topsoil materials will be salvaged before site clearing. The topsoil salvaged will be stockpiled and used as reclamation material during decommissioning. Topsoil stockpiles will be strategically located to avoid operational disturbance. As well, erosion control measures (including vegetating) will be applied to the salvage stockpiles to reduce erosion.

Vegetation Vegetation will be removed during the clearing process. Vegetation removal will occur only as necessary for the placement of drill pads, structures and access roads. Small trees and shrubs may be mulched and incorporated into and placed onto the topsoil piles to improve the organic matter and reduce erosion. Burning of vegetation will be limited when practical.

All environmental monitors will have an illustrated list of rare plants that might be found in the areas to be cleared. Rare plants will be identified by the environmental monitors and salvaged, where practical, and re- established in suitable natural habitats unaffected by the Project construction.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 169

Operation Phase Invasive Plants An environmental monitor will conduct annual surveys for invasive plants along access roads and around the drill pads. If found they will be removed by hand, bagged and burned.

9.7.4.6 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Management Plan The following sections provide an overview of the proposed Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Management Programme (WWHMP) that will be implemented for the Project.

The WWHMP will work in conjunction with other management plans part of the EMP for the Project, including:


Noise Management Plan;

Non-Hazardous Solid Waste and Domestic Waste Water Management Plan; and

Transportation Management Plan.

Purpose The objective of the WWHMP is to minimize interaction between the Project and its components and wildlife receptors while acknowledging operational requirements and the safety of employees and contractors. This objective is targeted through a series of actions designed to prevent mortalities, avoid human-wildlife interaction and reduce wildlife disturbance.

Management Practices The general management practices that will be implemented include, but are not limited to, the following:

restricting access to the area;

giving wildlife the right of way when of such a size that it can be readily seen from vehicles;

prohibiting hunting;

prohibiting feeding of wildlife;

managing wildlife attractants by using non-palatable seed mixtures for revegetation and road maintenance;

ensuring waste is managed properly;

avoiding wildlife sensitive areas and periods, which will be identified in the EIA report;

educating employees during the orientation process in:

access road use and haulage operating protocols;

employee awareness of wildlife sensitive locations/timing; and

waste management procedures.

9.7.4.7 Hazardous Materials Management Plan A Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP) will be developed for the Project that will identify potentially hazardous materials to be used at the site and provide a system for monitoring these materials. Transportation, storage, use and ultimate disposal will be considered. Safety of the workers and the


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 170

surrounding communities will be taken into account for all stages of materials handling during all Project phases.

This section presents a framework for a HMMP.

Training Hazardous materials and wastes require special handling and training procedures. All employees will be provided with basic training so that, at minimum, they:

can identify hazardous materials;

know how to obtain appropriate information on special handling procedures required;

know what precautions and protective equipment are required;

know how to label and package hazardous materials and wastes;

know where and how hazardous wastes are to be stored; and

know how wastes are to be disposed.

Employees who are tasked with receiving, off loading and storing potentially hazardous materials or involved in the storage and shipment off-site of hazardous wastes should receive hazardous materials handling training.

Hazardous Waste Identification Project designs and processes will be reviewed to identify waste streams. A system will be developed to screen and classify waste streams according to applicable legislation.

Transport Proper labeling, marking and placarding using proper containers will be implemented for all hazardous materials being transported.

The following measures will be implemented during transport:

non-compatible materials will be transported by separate shipment;

fire extinguisher and fire prevention materials will be adequate and appropriate for the material being transported;

containers will be appropriate for the material being shipped;

containers will be properly secured;

containers and trucks will be properly marked, labelled and placarded;

transport manifests will be maintained;

spill response materials will be adequate and appropriate for materials being transported; and

drivers will be adequately trained and equipped for spill first response, containment and communication.

Hazardous Materials Storage Hazardous materials will be segregated and stored using accepted management practices including but not limited to the following:

the storage areas will be designed to adequately and safely store a sufficient quantity over a prescribed period;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 171

the storage area will be properly designed to contain and prevent contamination of the environment, particularly soil and groundwater;

floor, curbing, walls and roofs will be designed to adequately contain spills and to protect the storage area from weather where necessary;

spill kits, protective equipment, and other necessary equipment to clean and mitigate spills will be in the storage area or near the storage area;

fire prevention systems appropriate and adequate for the materials being stored will be designed;

only containers that are in good condition will be used;

containers or liner materials will be compatible with the waste being stored;

incompatible (e.g., bases and acids) materials will not be stored in the same container and will be stored safely and sufficiently far apart to prevent accidents;

to provide a safe work area, incompatible wastes will be separated by walls, dykes, or stored in separate facilities;

drums, containers, and storage areas will be properly labelled, marked, placarded and secured;

sufficient storage space between containers will be allowed for safe access and handling of containers; and

a no smoking policy will be implemented and fire prevention and management practices will be developed specific to the materials being stored.

Waste Minimisation The following procedures will be used to minimize wastes before start-up and as an ongoing programme during operation:

using whenever possible, non-hazardous materials in lieu of hazardous materials;

keeping inventories of products to a workable minimum to prevent expiration of dated products (shelf life) and the generation of wastes;

developing alternative methods or processes to reduce generation of high volume wastes;

properly segregating and handling waste streams to minimize cross contamination of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes;

developing, implementing and tracking training programs and housekeeping standards to reduce wastes; and

making waste minimisation procedures a part of employee training programs.

Inspection Programme An inspection programme will be developed with the following objectives:

to inspect the Project area for proper waste segregation, storage, and disposal;

to inspect waste storage sites and document the volume of waste stored, type of waste, and storage facility conditions;

to inspect spill kits and protective equipment, and reorder and replace as necessary;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 172

to allow periodic reviews of off site transporters including procedures, training, equipment, spill kits, records, and employee awareness; and

to review inspection findings with operation, transporters, and off site contractors to correct deficiencies, maintain awareness and communication, and to recognize negative or positive performance.

Inspection programme will be defined in the site specific EIA’s.

9.7.4.8 Non-Hazardous Solid Waste and Domestic Wastewater Management Plan

This plan discusses the recycling, storage, handling, and disposal of all non-hazardous industrial and domestic wastes including sewage.

List of Typical Wastes Typical wastes that will be generated from construction and operations are listed below:

Domestic Wastes

food waste;

biological waste from first aid operations;

paper and cardboard;

some plastics;

general waste such as plastic food wrap during construction; and

office wastes such as used office supplies.

Inert Bulk Waste

Non-toxic, non-food solid wastes will be sorted into four types—combustible, noncombustible, recyclable, and reusable in the waste transfer storage area;

Combustible items will be disposed in an off-site approved incinerator (if required by applicable regulations and suitable for disposal), while non-combustible items will be land filled or recycled if practical; and

Inert bulk wastes that cannot readily be recycled or reused, such as general debris, will be stored in the waste transfer storage area and transferred to the landfill.

Solid Waste Management Facilities Good housekeeping dictates the management of solid wastes. Solid waste management will be coordinated through Shell or its contractor. Key elements in the management of inert industrial and domestic wastes will include:

a solid waste management plan that will be finalized before construction begins; and

facilities to effectively contain and treat solid wastes, such as:

covered sheds for sorting and temporary storage of items that can be recycled;

containers for temporarily holding small solid wastes; and

a waste containment area.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 173

Containers Drums, bins, receptacles, and dumpsters used for storage of waste will be selected based on waste material requirements. All containers will be labelled to identify those wastes for which they are suitable.

Sorting Waste must be sorted at source before it can be disposed, or transported to specific designated areas for proper disposal. The following measures will be implemented for sorting:

containers will be located throughout Project site for immediate sorting of solid waste;

containers will be located for the collection of burnable and non-burnable materials and recyclable wastes;

haulers will be required to have appropriate training that prevents inadvertent release of wastes or recyclables en route; and

procedures and general education during employee orientation will be in place to ensure dumping of wastes in unauthorised locations or facilities does not occur.

Waste Transfer Storage Area A secured area will be established for the handling and transfer of wastes. Non-food waste products will also be collected, sorted, and placed in designated areas within the fenced area.

Once a practical quantity of solid waste has accumulated, the waste will be collected, packaged, transported and disposed of at a permitted landfill or other approved and licensed facility.

9.7.4.9 Petroleum Management Plan The Petroleum Management Plan (PMP) will describe the actions that will be taken to manage petroleum products used on the Project site. These products will be mostly diesel but will also include oils and greases and hydraulic fluids. All products will be stored onsite in appropriate containers.

This section provides an overview of the contents of the PMP and the management practices that will be followed.

Safe Handling Procedures Table 29 provides a summary of safe handling procedures for that will be implemented at the Project site.

Table 29: Safe Handling Procedures for Petroleum Products

Product Safe Handling Procedure

Diesel

Do not get in eyes, on skin or on clothing.

Avoid breathing vapours, mist, fumes.

Do not swallow.

Wear protective equipment and/or garments if exposure conditions warrant.

Wash thoroughly after handling.

Launder contaminated clothing before reuse.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 174

Product Safe Handling Procedure Use in areas with adequate ventilation.

Keep away from heat, sparks, and flames.

Store in a closed container in a well-ventilated area.

Bond and ground during transfer. Motor Oil/Hydraulic

Oil/Transmission

Fluid

Wear protective clothing and impervious gloves when working with oils and transmission fluids.

Keep container closed until ready for use.

Unleaded gasoline

Avoid skin contact.

Avoid breathing vapor, mist, or fumes.

Launder contaminated clothing before reuse.

Store in a flammable liquids area away from heat, ignition sources, and open flames.

Bond and ground during transfer.

Automotive grease

Avoid prolonged or repeated contact with skin.

Remove contaminated clothing; launder or dry-clean before re-use.

Cleanse skin thoroughly after contact, before breaks and meals, and at end of work period.

Fuel Handling Fuel transfer will take place inside bermed areas. The general procedures to be followed for fuel transfer and fueling tanks include, but are not limited to:

Before fuel transfer verify that:

all fuel transfer hoses have been connected properly and couplings are tight;

transfer hoses are not obviously damaged;

fuel transfer personnel are familiar with procedures;

for fuelling stations, personnel are located at both the fuel truck and fuel transfer tank(s) and have the ability to shut off fuel flow manually;

a means of communication has been established between the two people transferring fuel;

transferring fuel as per established procedures of the fuelling contractor; and

ensuring that any accidents or spills are reported immediately.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 175

Used Petroleum Products All used liquid petroleum products will be collected in marked tanks and disposed of appropriately.

9.7.4.10 Radioactive Waste Management Plan Drill chippings from certain Karoo geological strata may contain naturally occurring levels of radiation. It will need to be established whether this material requires separate handling. Radioactive waste management will include pre-disposal management procedures to ensure:

waste prevention and waste minimisation.

the selection of suitable waste management options.

a waste package that meets acceptance criteria for disposal, storage and for any associated handling and transportation activities.Waste or material that is suitable for authorized disposal / discharge and clearance for disposal through regulatory approval.

During the generation of radioactive waste the emphasis shall be on the control of waste generation and minimization. Unavoidable radioactive waste shall be classified to enable category specific waste management.

All radioactive waste will be packaged, stored and transported according to applicable regulatory requirements and disposed of at only those facilities licensed and authorized to accept radioactive waste.

9.7.4.11 Spill Prevention and Response Plan Before construction of the Project commences, a Spill Prevention and Response Plan will be developed for use by field personnel in the event of a deleterious material spill. The following sections outline the general framework for this plan

Spill Prevention and Response Priorities All spills occurring on the Project site will be responded to in a way which will uphold the following priorities:

protection of human life;

protection of human health;

protection of the environment;

protection of property; and

minimised disruption to operational activities.

At all times, applicable regulations will be used to guide response and cleanup activities.

Spill Prevention Site Planning

At locations where the potential for spillage of hazardous material is highest, spill control and containment means will be incorporated into the infrastructure.

Material Storage

All materials will be stored in a safe and appropriate manner which will mitigate accidental releases to the environment. Management practices to be considered for use onsite, including, but not limited to, the following:

double-walled containment tanks, with barriers to protect tank from accidental impact;

bermed storage areas for material containers, with adequate capacity;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 176

spill response kits readily available, specific to type of material; and

regular inspections of all storage areas and storage tanks.

Material Handling

Material handling procedures will be documented within this plan, and will likely include, but will not be limited to:

fuelling procedures; and

fuel truck transfer procedures.

Spill Response The objective of the spill response measures will be to ensure that where accidental spills occur, all available resources are used appropriately to minimize the extent and severity of effect on the environment. The following measures will be implemented:

Equipment

Spill response kits appropriate to the type and volume of material will be specified for each piece of equipment which handles or transports contaminant materials (including fuel). As well, spill response kits will be located at appropriate material handling and storage locations.

Spill response kit contents will be based on the potential risk associated with the material, volume of material, and environmental sensitivity of the area. General kit contents could include:

oil absorbent pads;

absorbent socks;

granular absorbent; and

protective equipment (e.g., gloves, goggles, protective suits).

All kits will be stored in a visible location, in an appropriate weather-resistant container. Regular inspections of the kits will be performed to ensure that kits are complete and all materials remain functional.

General Spill Action Plan

The following actions will be taken in the event of a spill:

identification and control of immediate dangers to human life or health;

identification and control of spill source;

elimination of additional potential spill sources;

containment of spill;

notification of authorities, as appropriate;

recovery and cleanup; and

incident investigation and report.

The following framework will be incorporated into the Spill Response Plan.

1) Initial Response

ensure safety of all personnel and public;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 177

mitigate hazards;

notification; and

identify source of spill and attempt to stop and/or contain it, if safe to do so.

2) Secondary Response

determine if additional resources are necessary (external contractors);

contain the spill, and protect any nearby water bodies; and

review material characteristics, and implement a suitable clean-up.

3) Reporting

4) Spill Cleanup and Disposal

5) Follow-up Investigation

Training All Shell employees and contractors will undergo environmental hazard awareness training as part of their orientation to the site. This training programme will focus on spill prevention and hazard identification, as well as spill response and containment procedures. At minimum, employees will be educated on:

spill response plan;

applicable legislation;

environmental receptors (i.e., soil, groundwater and surface water);

field application of appropriate spill response techniques;

initial response procedures; and

spill reporting procedures.

9.7.4.12 Transportation Management Plan Key issues to incorporate for the transportation activities during the operation of the project:

Trucking volumes;

Trucks with hazardous materials;

Bridge loading capacities;

Special measures in localities and other sensitive points (schools for example)

Any restricted use of road access during special dates (community celebrations for example)

Transportation for the Project will include personnel, materials, and supplies to the Project site and wastes from the site. The purpose of the Transportation Management Plan (TMP) is to provide a framework of management practices to be followed during the Project.

The following additional management plans will also apply to the TMP:

Occupational Health and Safety Plan;

Archaeological Resources Management Plan;


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 178


Fish and Fish Habitat Management Plan;

Sediment and Erosion Control Plan;

Hazardous Materials Management;


Petroleum Management Plan; and

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Management Plan.

Road and Wildlife The protection of wildlife is important through all phases of the Project. The following management practices will be followed to control potential wildlife injury or mortality during road use:

speed levels will be controlled to reduce dust levels and to reduce the chance of a collision with birds and other wildlife;

areas known to be high use areas along the road will be clearly signed;

sensory disturbances, such as noise, will be minimized;

harassment of wildlife will not be tolerated on site or along the access road;

animals will have the right-of-way and areas of high use will by identified;

the road will be maintained so as to prevent potential attraction to wildlife;

no employee or contractor employee will be permitted to have firearms on site; and

no employee or contractor will be permitted to fish while on company business or during travel to and from the project site.

Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources Sites As noted in the Archaeology/Cultural Resources Management Plan, a Chance Find Procedure (CFP) will be implemented during the construction and operation phases of the Project. If archaeological artifacts or features are encountered during any road construction and other Project activities, Shell and its contractors will initiate the CFP.

Guidelines for Vehicular Traffic The following guidelines will apply to vehicular traffic:

all drivers will be properly licensed and trained according to specific vehicle type and operating conditions;

vehicle use will be determined by local ground conditions and access requirements;

all local traffic laws and speed limits will be obeyed;

traffic on the rights-of-way will follow the posted speed limits, which might vary depending on site-specific conditions;

all vehicular traffic will be confined to approved rights-of-way, workspace and access roads or trails; and


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 179

site-specific features of concern (e.g., archaeological sites, sensitive wildlife habitat) will be flagged, or otherwise designated, so that subsequent traffic can avoid these areas.

9.7.4.13 Archaeological/Cultural Resources Management Plan The purpose of the Archaeological/Cultural Resources Management Plan (ACRMP) is to:

manage and protect existing archaeological and cultural heritage resources during construction and operations; and

provide a framework to identify, manage, protect, or mitigate recorded and previously unrecorded archaeological and cultural heritage resources encountered during project construction and operation.

General components of this plan include the following.

Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources Awareness Training An internal awareness education and training programme will be conducted to provide personnel and contractors with knowledge and an understanding of the importance of archaeological and cultural resources.

Protection of Existing Sites Existing sites will be protected using the following procedures:

all Project plans/drawings will be reviewed to ensure that all construction areas have been examined for archaeological and cultural resources;

all project plans/drawings will be reviewed on an on-going basis to ensure that all areas affected by the Project undergo archaeological study as necessary;

all project plans/drawings will be marked to identify any archaeological and cultural resources that require protection or monitoring;

protective measures will be taken throughout the Project area to avoid and mitigate effects on identified archaeological resources and culturally sensitive areas; and

if new sites are discovered, all relevant parties will determine the scope of further work or impact management and will follow the CFP identified below.

Monitoring A monitor will be responsible for ensuring that the designated archaeological resources areas are avoided, protected, and monitored.

Monitoring procedures to be followed during the life of the project will include the following:

all areas (identified archaeological sites, possible archaeological sites, and areas of cultural sensitivity) requiring archaeological monitoring or protection throughout the Project site will be clearly marked on the development plans;

any identification, recording, removal, and reporting of artifacts or features will be conducted under the supervision of a qualified archaeologist; and

the exposure and identification of previously unidentified archaeological resources will automatically result in the implementation of the chance find procedures described below.

Any archaeological investigations of known sites or chance find sites discovered during construction will be done by a qualified archaeologist.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 180

Chance Find Procedure The chance find procedure (CFP) outline the protocol to be followed if a new archaeological or cultural resource is encountered in any phase of the Project. The CFP is primarily applicable to:

construction and operations personnel and management;

contractors;

environmental team; and

visitors or other people active in the Project area.

The proposed CFP measures are as follows:

When a suspected archaeological or cultural resource find has been encountered, he/she will immediately make efforts to protect the site by excluding traffic and further disturbance. If an artefact has been discovered, it will not be removed from the site. All work near the site or artefact will stop immediately and construction equipment will be kept away from the site or artefact to avoid further disturbance or destruction. A qualified archaeologist and the applicable government ministry will immediately be contacted.

6) An archaeological or cultural heritage resources site card will be completed by a qualified archaeologist with the following basic information:

date (when the archaeological find was first encountered);

observer (name of the person recording the information on the site or artefact);

site location (detailed enough so that it can be relocated, GPS if possible);

type of site (archaeological site, burial site or artefact);

any obvious disturbance to the site (by equipment, animals, etc.); and

photographs.

The qualified archaeologist will assess the significance of the artefact and the location. Mitigation options for the site or artefact will be drafted by the archaeologist, reviewed and approved by the applicable government ministry, and an agreement on the approach will be determined by the qualified archaeologist in coordination with the government ministry.

7) Once the site is assessed and mitigated to the satisfaction of government ministry and the site has been cleared, construction or operations activities may recommence.

9.7.4.14 Occupational Health and Safety Plan An Occupational Health and Safety Plan (OHSP) will be prepared prior to construction and operation of the Project. The OHSP will uphold Shell´s commitment to a safe environment for employees, contractors and visitors. The plan will also addresses all applicable legal requirements relating to health and safety.

The OHSP will set out the framework under which health and safety on the Project site and to and from the site will be managed. The roles and responsibilities of the company, manager, superintendents, supervisors and workers are set out under this plan. The programs that will be outlined under the plan include provisions for the anticipation, recognition, evaluation and control of physical, chemical, radiological, biological, ergonomic and psychosocial factors that may exist at the project site and in other project related activities.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 181

A health and safety training programme will also be implemented at the site. The objectives of this training programme will be to:

provide appropriate orientation and support to all employees, contractors and visitors onsite so that they can act in an appropriately safe manner;

provide ongoing training to workers;

inform at risk workers to help attain a positive and safe work environment;

instruct managers and supervisors of duties and responsibilities, including applicable legislation, risk communication, labour relations and hazard prevention; and

instruct workers of responsibilities and rights.

9.7.5 Monitoring Plans Shell is committed to monitoring the environment, and addressing potential effects that may arise as a result of the Project. The objectives of the environmental monitoring is to verify the accuracy of predicted environmental effects that will be identified in the ESIA report, to determine the effectiveness of the measures taken to mitigate environmental effects of the Project and to promote compliance by Shell with applicable regulatory requirements and internal policies.

Detailed monitoring plans will be developed once the ESIA is completed and Project design has been finalized. These plans will outline the rationale for monitoring, the parameters to be monitored, monitoring programme details and follow-up actions to be taken as appropriate.

An independent environmental monitor (EM) will be onsite during site clearing and well installation and testing. The EM will also be onsite during any wastewater disposal activities during hydraulic fracturing, if conducted. The primary responsibilities of the EM will be to:

Monitor the implementation and functioning of mitigation measures;

Conduct routine environmental monitoring (i.e., biophysical parameters) that will be defined in the EIA report;

Liase with the contractor and provide daily input into the functioning and adequacy of mitigation measures, and make recommendation for further measures if necessary; and

Have the authority to stop work in the event of an identified risk to the environment and human health.

Preliminary recommended monitoring will include the following:

Noise during construction and operation at nearby noise sensitive receptors

Surface water quality monitoring at streams near well pad sites

Monitoring of source water supplies for well production and hydraulic fracturing. Depending on the nature and location of the source water, this may include water quality, water quantity and flow and biomonitoring.

Monitoring of nearby groundwater wells to measure groundwater quantity and quality during well installation and testing and hydraulic fracturing, if conducted.

Additional monitoring programmes and modifications to those listed above, if required, will be detailed in the EIA report.

Proposed technical monitoring during well installation is described above.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 182

9.7.6 Grievance Mechanism Shell will implement a grievance mechanism throughout all Project phases. This purpose and processes of this mechanism will be communicated to all potentially affected parties and other stakeholders, as required. The intent of this mechanism will be to allow those persons that have potential issues during the course of the Project to communicate those issues to Shell. The issues will be tracked in a database according to nature of issue, date, location and person/group submitting the issue. Shell will then discuss the identified issue with the person/group, identify the nature and cause of the issue, and, if required, to take appropriate action to mitigate the potential issue.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 183

10.0 UNDERTAKING AND COMMITMENTS 10.1 Financial Provision under MPRDA (Act 28 of 2002) This section provides the financial provision from Shell as per Section 41 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act 28 of 2002) (MPRDA).

Section 41 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act 28 of 2002) (MPRDA) stipulates that:

“(1) An applicant for a prospecting right, mining right or mining permit must, before the Minister approves the Environmental Management Programme or environmental management programme in terms of section 39 (4), make the prescribed financial provision for the rehabilitation or management of negative environmental impacts.

(2) If the holder of a prospecting right, mining right or mining permit fails to rehabilitate or manage, or is unable to undertake such rehabilitation or to manage any negative impact on the environment, the Minister may, upon written notice to such holder, use all or part of the financial provision contemplated in subsection (1) to rehabilitate or manage the negative environmental impact in question.

(3) The holder of a prospecting right, mining right or mining permit must annually assess his or her environmental liability and increase his or her financial provision to the satisfaction of the Minister.

(4) If the Minister is not satisfied with the assessment and financial provision contemplated in this section, the Minister may appoint an independent assessor to conduct the assessment and determine the financial provision.

(5) The requirement to maintain and retain the financial provision remains in force until the Minister issues a certificate in terms of section 43 to such holder, but the Minister may retain such portion of the financial provision as may be required to rehabilitate the closed mining or prospecting operation in respect of latent or residual environmental impacts.”

10.1.1 Financial Provision for Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Shell will put in place the required financial provision for the proposed exploration programme. The guarantee will cover the estimated costs for decommissioning and rehabilitation of sites during the initial exploration period.

This financial provision will be provided to PASA by a Parent Company Guarantee.

Parent Company guarantee This guarantee indicates that Shell Exploration Company B.V. has adequate financial resources to fulfil their obligations and will be provided by Shell Finance (Netherlands) B.V., an affiliated company incorporated in the Netherlands, with Moody’s long term credit rating of Aa1.

Quantum of Financial Provision The guarantee will cover the estimated costs for decommissioning and restoration of sites during the initial exploration period. The guaranteed amount will be 90 million rand (see breakdown below).

Indemnity Shell will obtain and maintain appropriate insurance against operational risks.

Such insurance will be held for and in relation to operations, against (inter alia) pollution damage, damage to property, the cost of clean-up operations pursuant to an operational accident, injury to employees and other persons, in accordance with good oilfield practice and applicable law.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 184

Activity Cost (Rands)

Site restoration and Access roads

Well Abandonment, Site Clearance, disposal of waste, etc

Shaping, levelling and vegetation of subsided areas Rehabilitation of damaged existing infrastructure (fences etc)

80,000,000

Monitoring, Maintenance, Management Costs

Follow-up monitoring, maintenance. Planting seeding and fertilizer application (to promote vegetation establishment)

2,000,000

Contingencies 8,000,000

Grand Total 90,000,000

10.1.2 Obligations for Unplanned Incidents In addition, in the unlikely event of an unplanned incident, NEMA (Section 28) imposes a primary obligation on everyone who causes, has caused or may cause significant pollution or degradation of the environment to take reasonable measures to prevent such pollution or degradation from occurring, continuing or recurring. Furthermore, insofar as harm to the environment is authorized by law (such as by way of an exploration right) or cannot be reasonably avoided or stopped, there is a duty on such person to minimize and rectify pollution or degradation of the environment.

The entity that undertakes exploration would be liable to take reasonable measures if pollution is caused.

The National Water Act, 1998 imposes a similar duty of care to that in the NEMA, save that it does not require “significant” pollution. Under the National Water Act, 1998 (Section 15(i) and (j)), it is a criminal offence intentionally or negligently to pollute a water resource or to do something which is likely to pollute a water resource”.

10.2 Commitments by Shell Shell has made the following commitments to the people of South Africa:

General

We will set up an independent advisory committee for this project to provide expert steers and advice on environmental and social impacts (hydraulic fracturing, water, etc) to ensure we reduce and mitigate impacts as far as possible, take into account people’s concerns and reflect them in the project design/execution.

This committee will also look particularly into development of the region and provide Shell suggestions for contributing to economic and social growth over and above its commitments to social investment, local content of suppliers, contractors and job creation.

We will create citizen advisory groups – made up of a broad cross-section of community leaders and elected officials – who will work alongside Shell’s management team to identify and provide advice regarding concerns related to operations, such as truck movements, noise, etc.

Shell will provide full compensation to any landowner with evidenced direct negative impact or loss on their land as a result of their activities.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 185

Utilising best practices, we will work with impacted communities and landowners to address how they can receive direct benefits from UCG development.

We are committed to lead in setting of global best practices and operational standards for unconventional gas development in the Karoo.

Water

In the Karoo, we commit to analysing and implementing relevant recommendations arising from the US EPA study currently underway through 2014 into the project.

We also commit to incorporate any new best practices from Provincial and/or States with existing well design and HF regulatory primacy - especially recognizing these jurisdictions may have similar geologic, water, etc conditions more consistent with the Karoo.

We commit not to compete with the people of the Karoo for their water needs. Nobody will go short of fresh water because of our operations; either in the exploration phase, or if there is any further development.

We will commit to establishing mutually acceptable protocols for the independent monitoring of the water quality in existing water wells and surface water surrounding our activities.

We will conserve and recycle water where ever possible.

We will commission an independent study in our licence area of water resources using third party experts to ensure that we get a better understanding, also providing information that may be useful in further development of water supplies for the region.

When we develop plans to source water in our operations we will make sure we understand local community needs and see how we can help meet community shortages in addition to project needs.

We will commit to make available any recovered and unwanted clean water for community use – along with the transfer of water boreholes which are no longer required by the project.

Prior to drilling any exploration well, local experts will be consulted to identify the most suitable water source for development areas. We will develop a water plan for each well or pad (multiple wells at same location) site.

Impacted landowners, the relevant water authorities, local stakeholders and environmental advisors will be consulted throughout the water source selection process.

We will share our well design and aquifer protection plans which will adopt best practices from around the world. Best practices include the use of standards and guidelines around multiple barriers and cementing, casing integrity testing and annuli monitoring.

Any well that is permanently plugged and abandoned will meet best practice internationally


We commit to disclose fracturing fluids at each drilling location, and consult with communities as part of the development of hydraulic fracturing plans. The information will be available on our website.

We will recycle the flow back water as much as possible and dispose of remaining fluids responsibly.

We will not use BTEX in any hydraulic fracturing operations.

We will support the development of ‘best-in-class” regulatory standards for hydraulic fracturing in South Africa.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 186

Based on the results of the water study, we will ensure a suitable natural physical barrier exists between target gas-bearing formations and any potable water aquifers used by communities/industry.

Our well design, drilling, completions and operations standards require multiple physical barriers and procedures to control well operations – including the fracturing process, and prevents the migration of gas and any fluids into underground drinking water sources.

We will publish well completion reports publicly.

Shell will monitor the integrity of its wells.

10.3 Undertaking by Shell Exploration Company b.v.

I,___________________________________________, the undersigned and duly authorised thereto by the Company Shell Exploration Company B.V. have studied and understand the contents of this document in it’s entirety and hereby duly undertake to adhere to the conditions as set out therein

Signed at .______________________. on this ………… day of ………………………. 2011.

SIGNATURE IN FINAL DOCUMENT DESIGNATION IN FINAL DOCUMENT

....................................... .......................................

Signature of applicant Designation

Name of designated signatory


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 187

11.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter contains the consultants’ draft conclusions and recommendations for comment by stakeholders. Firstly, conclusions pertaining to the assessment conducted for the Environmental Management Plan are discussed. Secondly, under recommendations, key recommendations from the EMP process are provided, as well as recommendations for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998).

11.1 Conclusions Shell propose to conduct an unconventional natural gas exploration drilling programme in the Karoo to confirm whether tight shale bands located between 1000 and 5000 m below ground contain unconventional natural gas and, if present, whether this gas can be stimulated to flow. This exploration programme will entail the drilling of up to 8 deep level exploration boreholes in the 30,000 km² exploration rights application area. It may be necessary to hydraulically fracture the deep tight-shale gas bearing layer.

The proposed exploration programme has a number of discrete phases namely;

Geophysical data acquisition which is largely non-invasive,

Drilling and casing of deep level boreholes to intersect the targeted shale layer,

Testing the sampled shale rock samples for presence of gas,

Possibly hydraulically fracturing a part of the vertical hole through the shale layer to test whether gas can be stimulated to flow; and / or

Drilling another vertical well from a nearby location which will have a horizontal section from the base of the vertical hole that extends into the shale layer and hydraulically fracturing the exploratory horizontal hole in order to stimulate gas flow for the purposes of gas yield testing.

The technology of hydraulic fracturing has been in use for many years, but only recently has it been rapidly developed and improved for shale-gas development. It offers promise, should worthwhile natural gas reserves be proven in the Karoo. However, the volume of recoverable gas stored in Karoo shales is unknown at present.

The process of deep level exploration drilling and hydraulic fracturing involves fair numbers of traffic and freight to/from each exploration well, the consumption of substantial quantities of water, and the use of quantities of materials in the drilling and fracturing process. The traffic and the onsite development could have marked aesthetic impacts at a local scale, while drilling and hydraulic fracturing takes place, but these impacts will be of relatively short duration and reversible. The volume of wastewater generated will need to be addressed in accordance with legislation, but this is not beyond what would be reasonable to manage at an exploration site of this nature. Potential risk to groundwater resources is mitigated through installation of well casing and thorough integrity testing of the installed casing prior to commencement of hydraulic fracturing. The footprint of each exploration well site is roughly 1 ha in extent and will be cleared of vegetation, stabilised and used for the duration of the exploration drilling activity on the site. There will be up to eight such sites in each exploration licence application area (30,000 km²). There is flexibility in choosing each drill site and the EMP document describes criteria that will govern the site selection process. Should these be applied, the real impact of this land clearance on biota, habitat, heritage resources will be low. Moreover, with proper siting of drill sites direct impact on landowners can be considerably reduced.

Soekor’s exploration in the 1960s was focused on drilling to find oil, not natural gas. In only one borehole did gas flow, and then only for one day. Soekor did not make provision for hydraulic fracturing of the wells, which is the critical technological development that has facilitated gas recovery from ‘tight shale formations’. There still remains some evidence of gas presence in shale core samples retained in the National core archive from this early exploration programme.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 188

In the absence of a license granted for exploration, the potential of these shales to supply economically recoverable supplies of gas will remain unknown.

In Golder’s opinion, such an approach would be unnecessarily conservative. It would prevent (or delay) the determination of the resource potential of the Karoo shale gas formations and the benefits that South Africa could derive from this - in the absence of any material evidence that a small number of exploration wells could result in an unacceptable level of environmental impact.

While such a determination can only be finalised once the exploration wells have been sited, it is unlikely, in our view, that the construction of a small number of wells could, in itself, result in environmental damage that is unacceptable, as long as the siting and management of these wells is controlled through a rigorous, scientific, EIA process.

Although the Karoo may never see shale-gas development as intense as under way and foreseen in the Northern Hemisphere, any development in the Karoo would require stringent risk assessment and risk management strategies, as part of environmental impact assessment, before it could proceed. Such risk assessment would need to be based on rigorously formulated shale-gas development risk scenarios, and informed by high quality evidence, especially on the Karoo stratigraphy. The risk scenarios would necessarily be based on careful specifications for the fracturing and production technologies appropriate to the Karoo development, and scaled for a feasible development, and not simply transferred from experience elsewhere. A benefit will be, that by the time such production scenario becomes imminent (which could be nine years from today), the findings of current research in the Northern Hemisphere will be available to inform the process.

11.2 Recommendations It is acknowledged that there are concerns about the risks associated with hydraulic fracturing in shale gas production well fields. These concerns have typically emerged in relation to shale gas production operations. The current review of the risk to water resources posed by hydraulic fracturing, being conducted by the USEPA bears testimony to this. However, Shell’s application does not involve production – it is for exploration wells only and is of a much smaller scale compared to production phase operations.

While we would support the current applications for exploration rights submitted by Shell, we believe it would be wise for decision-makers to await and consider the findings of the USEPA review45, before any licensing of a production well field is considered.

11.2.1 Environmental recommendations made in this EMP The principal recommendations from the Environmental Management Plan, are summarised here:

The site selection criteria presented in this report should be applied to best position identified drilling sites in order to avoid impact to the environment and to landowners where ever possible and, where this is not possible to minimise the operational impact of the exploration drilling site.

The environmental management plan (EMP) presented in chapter 9 of this document must be updated for each drilling site to reflect site-specific conditions, drawing upon the findings and recommendations of the detailed technical studies which will underpin the site-specific environmental impact assessment. This must happen prior to commencement of site clearing and deep level drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

An environmental impact assessment (EIA) supported by detailed technical study will need to be conducted prior to the commencement of drill site establishment, deep level drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

45 Draft Plan to Study to address the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources, Office of Research and Development US

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC, February 7, 2011


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 189

11.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in terms of NEMA Should an exploration right be granted, the applicant may proceed with only those gas exploration activities that do not trigger a listed activity under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). Drilling (drill site establishment) and hydraulic fracturing will trigger listed activities under the NEMA, as explained in Chapter 3, Legal Context, and Chapter 6, EMP Process.

The following two listed activities as a minimum will trigger a NEMA EIA, but there are others too, which are outlined in Chapter 3 and will need to be confirmed once drill sites have been identified and there is greater finality regarding the associated supporting infrastructure at each drill site.

Activity 24 of Notice 1, GN 544, requiring a basic assessment: The transformation of land bigger than 1 000 m2 in size, to residential, retail, commercial, industrial or institutional use …. (Drill sites will be approximately 100 x 100 m, thus 10 000 sq m).

Activity 4 of Notice 2, GN 545, requiring a full EIA: The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the refining, extraction or processing of gas, oil or petroleum products with an installed capacity of 50 cubic meters or more per day… (It is assumed that hydraulic fracturing during exploration drilling could stimulate 50 cubic meters or more of gas per day).

Thus, an Environmental Impact Assessment for drilling and hydraulic fracturing will be required in terms of the NEMA.

11.2.3 Key questions to be considered in EIA In anticipation of a future EIA, the consultants have developed initial criteria for drill site selection (see Chapter 7, Alternatives), and a preliminary list of key questions to be considered by the EIA. The questions are based on stakeholder and authority comments, and input from technical specialist who conducted assessments to inform the current EMP.

The key questions will guide the terms of reference for Specialist Studies to be conducted during the EIA. Importantly also, these key questions largely reflect concerns raised by stakeholders and landowners and have been drafted to ensure that these concerns get carried forward into subsequent detailed EIA.

The EIA will thus need to address these questions during EIA scoping and reflect competent scopes of work during the EIA scoping phase for inclusion into the EIA Draft Scoping Report which will be available to stakeholders for comment and review prior to the initiation of detailed specialist study to inform site-specific impact assessment.

The key questions are listed below for comment by stakeholders. In considering these key questions during the EIA, applicable laws, regulations, conventions, standards, guidelines and other legal instruments or guidelines will need to be considered in the assessments.

11.2.3.1 Physical environment Groundwater

How can the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on groundwater be determined given the limited groundwater information for the Karoo? What can we learn from how this is done in other parts of the world?

Will shallow aquifers from which landowners draw domestic and stock water be at risk from hydraulic fracturing or other project activities in terms of water supply? Will the yield of aquifers be affected by hydraulic fracturing?

Will shallow aquifers from which landowners draw domestic and stock water be at risk from hydraulic fracturing or other project activities in terms of water quality in particular because of the chemicals required for hydraulic fracturing and potentially also through naturally occurring radioactive materials brought to surface in drill chippings? Will the quality of water from aquifers be affected by hydraulic fracturing?


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 190

Will hydraulic fracturing cause fractures to open between aquifers?

Should one aquifer be contaminated, will the water flow via fractures or pathways created by well holes to another aquifer cause contamination there too?

Should shallow aquifers be contaminated, can the water be treated and if so, how and where?

Are shallow aquifers at risk from surface storage of waste water contaminated with fracturing chemicals?

One alternative for the applicant to obtain water for drilling and fracturing purposes is from groundwater resources; should this option be exercised, what will the impact be to the groundwater resources used by surrounding landowners?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to groundwater?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to groundwater resources?

Surface water

Are groundwater sources linked to surface water sources? If so, what is the possibility of contaminated aquifers polluting surface water sources?

Are surface water resources at risk from surface storage of waste water contaminated with fracturing chemicals?

Will horizontal drilling below surface water resources, including wetlands, affect these surface water resources through for example subsidence, fractures opening etc?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to surface water?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to surface water resources?

Air quality

What quantities of shale gas will be released per well during exploration?

Will air quality be negatively affected by the release of shale gas during exploration?

Will air quality be negatively affected by the flaring of gas during exploration?

Will dust be generated by vehicles and activities on drill sites?

What gaseous emissions and volumes of gaseous emissions will be released by exploration activities including vehicles, release and/or flaring of gas, chemicals in waste water vapourising, etc

How far will air pollutants be dispersed in the atmosphere?

Will air pollutants settle on vegetation used by livestock, homes or farming activities and if so, what will be the consequences of this?

What will be the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions as a result of this project?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to air quality?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to air quality?

Archaeology and history

Will any archaeological and historic sites be disturbed and if so, what will be the impacts of this?


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 191

What will be done when there are ‘chance finds’ during land clearing or drilling?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to archaeological, paleontological and historical sites?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to archaeological, paleontological and historical sites?

Astronomy

Drill sites for exploration will operate 24 hours per day. What light at night will be needed, and how far will this light project?

Will light at night as a result of exploration affect the efficiency of the SALT and the proposed MeerKAT telescopes?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts of light at night?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts of light at night?

Soils

Will high-potential agricultural soils be sterilized by establishment of drill sites, access roads and other project infrastructure?

Will hygromorphic soils be disturbed by establishment of drill sites, access roads and other project infrastructure?

What is the existing land use, land capability and soil types at site?

What is the likelihood of erosion from drill sites, access roads and other infrastructure?

Will soils be affected as a result of the storage of chemicals, machinery and other equipment on drill sites, and as a result of the storage of waste water containing fracturing chemicals or drill cuttings that may be radio-active on site?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to soils?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to soils?

Seismicity

Will the depth of proposed drilling have effects on seismicity in the Karoo?

Will the high pressures used in hydraulic fracturing have effects on seismicity in the Karoo?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts on seismicity?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts of drilling on seismicity?

Waste

What types of wastes will be generated from the exploration activities?

How and where will waste classified as hazardous be disposed of? Are there sufficient licensed hazardous waste sites to do so?

How and where will other wastes be disposed of? Are there sufficient licensed waste sites to do so?

How will wastes be transported and what are the risks of spillage and contamination off the drill sites?


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 192

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts of different types of waste?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts of different types of waste?

11.2.3.2 Biological environment Terrestrial ecosystems (flora)

What proportion of different vegetation types will be affected by land clearing?

How significant will land clearing be in terms of impacts on different vegetation types?

Will any Red Data Plants, medicinal plants, threatened taxa or locally protected taxa be affected?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to different vegetation types and Red Data species?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to different vegetation types and Red Data species?

Animals (Fauna)

What animals (mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, insects, arachnids etc) are likely to be affected by land clearing and how?

How significant will land clearing be in terms of impacts on different animals?

Will any Red Data species be affected?

Are any animals likely to affect drilling activities and cause risk of failure of the operations?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to different animals and Red Data species?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to different animals and Red Data species?

Biodiversity

Will the high biodiversity in the Karoo be affected by land clearing, drill site operations, waste water storage and other project activities?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to biodiversity?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor the potential impacts to biodiversity?

Rehabilitation

Given the low ecological resilience of Karoo ecosystems, what measures will be taken to rehabilitate disturbed areas?

What is the likelihood of disturbed areas recovering, and how long will it take?

What mitigation measures are available to manage rehabilitation?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor rehabilitation? For how long should that monitoring be done and who will be responsible for it once the developer has left the sites.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 193

11.2.3.3 Social environment Aesthetics / visual

What visual impacts will be caused during the day and at night by the proposed gas exploration activities, and to whom?

Will the landscape quality, quietude and sense of place be disturbed and if so, over what distances?

What mitigation measures are available to manage visual impacts?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor visual impacts?

Noise

What noise impacts will be caused during the day and at night by the proposed gas exploration activities, and to whom?

Who are the noise receptors in proximity to each site and what will be the noise impact of proposed activities be on these receptors?

Will the landscape quality, quietness and sense of place be disturbed and if so, over what distances?

What mitigation measures are available to manage noise impacts?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor noise impacts?

What noise impacts will be caused by vehicles transporting equipment and materials to and from the site?

Health

What is the likelihood of health impacts to humans, their stock or wild animals as a result of any of the exploration activities?

What types of health impacts can be caused by chemicals used for hydraulic fracturing, potentially radio-active drill cuttings and other project inputs and outputs?

Will there be an increased likelihood of dreaded diseases like cancer or contamination by radio-activity in project areas?

What mitigation measures are available to manage health impacts?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor health impacts?

Property value

Will the gas exploration project cause a negative impact to property values?

What is the negative impact likely to be?

Would home owners and landowners have redress should their property values be affected?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to property values?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor impacts to property values?

Safety and security

How and where will construction workers be accommodated and for how long?


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 194

How and where will drill site workers be accommodated and for how long?

What will be the safety and security impacts to surrounding landowners as a result of construction workers?

What will be the safety and security impacts to surrounding landowners as a result of drill site workers?

What mitigation measures are available to manage impacts to safety and security?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor impacts to safety and security?

Traffic

What will be the increase in traffic as a result of construction of project elements?

What will be the increase in traffic as a result of operation of drill sites?

How will provincial, regional and local roads be impacted as a result of increased traffic? Who will maintain the roads?

Will there be an increased risk of traffic accidents?

Will there be an increased nuisance to surrounding landowners and others as a result of increased traffic?

What mitigation measures are available to manage traffic impacts?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor traffic impacts?

Socio-economic issues

Will the proposed gas exploration cause negative impacts to the economy of the Karoo, e.g. income earned from sheep farming, other agricultural practices, tourism etc?

What will be the impacts on employment, migration and urbanization?

How will informal settlement and its resulting social ills be avoided?

What are the potential socio-economic benefits of this project at national, provincial and local scales? Who will benefit and how?

What mitigation measures are available to manage negative socio-economic impacts?

What mitigation measures are available to enhance positive socio-economic impacts?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor negative socio-economic impacts?

What monitoring needs to be done to monitor enhancement of positive socio-economic impacts?

Cumulative assessment and Risk Assessment

Will be cumulative impact of the project be assessed?

How will the project impact regional planning?

Will detailed risk assessment be carried out?


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 195

11.3 Declaration of Independence by the EAP

I, , declare under oath that I –

• act as the independent environmental practitioner in this application ; • do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity, other than

remuneration for work performed in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2006; • have and will not have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding; • have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity; • undertake to disclose, to the competent authority, any material information that have or may have the

potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or the objectivity of any report, plan or document required in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2006;

• will ensure that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the application is distributed or made available to interested and affected parties and the public and that participation by interested and affected parties is facilitated in such a manner that all interested and affected parties will be provided with a reasonable opportunity to participate and to provide comments on documents that are produced to support the application;

• will ensure that the comments of all interested and affected parties are considered and recorded in reports that are submitted to the competent authority in respect of the application, provided that comments that are made by interested and affected parties in respect of a final report that will be submitted to the competent authority may be attached to the report without further amendment to the report;

• will keep a register of all interested and affected parties that participated in a public participation process; and

• will provide the competent authority with access to all information at my disposal regarding the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or not.

SIGNATURE IN FINAL DOCUMENT

Signature of the environmental practitioner:

Golder Associates Africa Pty Ltd

Name of company:

Insert date

Date:

Name of EAP


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 196

12.0 REFERENCES Acocks, J.P.H. 1988. Veld Types of South Africa, 3rd Ed, Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa No. 57, Botanical Research Institute. Acts online. Retrieved from url: http://www.acts.co.za. Adhikari, M. 2010. The Anatomy of a South African Genocide: the Extermination of the Cape San Peoples. UCT Press: Cape Town. Air Quality Impact Assessment: Specialist Report in Support of the EMP for the South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project - EASTERN PRECINCT Report No.:APP/10/GA-11 Rev 0. Air Quality Standards 1210. Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria, Government Gazette. Act 39 of 2004. Andrews A, et al. 2009 Unconventional Gas Shales: Development, Technology, and Policy Issues. Congressional Research Service. CRS Report for Congress. 7-5700 www.crs .gov R40894. October 30, 2009. ARC-GIS Staff, 2004. Generalised Soil Patterns of South Africa 2004. ARC-ISCW, Pretoria. ARC-ISCW Staff, 2004. Generalised Soil Patterns of South Africa. ARC-ISCW, Pretoria. Arthur J & Bohm B (2008): Hydraulic Fracturing Considerations for Natural Gas Wells of the Marcellus Shale. Paper presented at the Groundwater Protection Council, 2008 Annual Forum, Cincinnati, Ohio September 2008. Beaumont, P. & Morris, D. 1990. Guide to Archaeological sites in the Northern Cape. McGregor Museum, Kimberley. Beukes, P. C., Cowling, R. M. 2003. Evaluation of Restoration Techniques for the Succulent Karoo, South Africa, Restoration Ecology, 11: 3 Blackwell Science Inc. Bradshaw D, Nannan N, Laubscher R, Groenewald P, Joubert J, Nojilana B, et al. South African National Burden of Disease Study 2000: Estimates of provincial mortality 2004. Brady, N.C. 1984. The Nature and Properties of Soils, Macmillan Publishing Company. New York. Branch, W.R. 1996. Snakes and other reptiles of Southern Africa, 2nd Edition. Struik. Cape Town. BRANCH, W.R. 1998. South African Red Data Book – Reptiles and Amphibians. National Scientific Programmes Report No 151. Brink ABA, (1983): Engineering Geology of Southern Africa Volume 3. The Karoo Sequence; Building Publications, August 1983. Burke, A. 2001 Determining Landscape Function and Ecosystem Dynamics: Contribution to Ecological Restoration in the Southern Namib Desert. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment. 30: 1 . Carruthers, V. 2001. Frogs and frogging in Southern Africa. 1st Edition. Struik, Cape Town.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 197

CEPA/FPAC Working Group, 1999. National Ambient Air Quality Objectives For Particulate Matter. Part 1: Science Assessment Document. Minister, Public Works and Government Services, Ontario. Available at URL: http://www.hcsc.gc.ca/bch. Chevallier, Goedhart & Woodford, (2001): The Influences of Dolerite Sill and Ring Complexes on the Occurrence of Groundwater in Karoo Fractured Aquifers: A Morpho-Tectonic Approach; Water Research Commission WRC Report No 937/1/01. Chopra M, Steyn N, Lambert V. Decreasing the burden of cardiovascular disease. Western Cape Burden of Disease Reduction Project [serial on the Internet]. 2007; 6 of 7. Close, A. E, & Sampson, G. 1998. Did the Seacow River Bushmen make backed microliths? Southern African Field Archaeology: 7(1): 3-11. Community Survey 2007, Statistics South Africa 2007, sourced at www.statssa.gov.za on 11.02.2011. Day C, Gray A. Health and related indicators. South African Health Review 2010 [serial on the Internet]. 2010: Available from: http://www.hst.org.za/publications/876. Day C, Monticelli F, Barron P, Haynes R, Smith J, Sello E, et al. The District Health Barometer 2008/092010. De Villiers, A.J., van Rooyen, M.W., Theron, G.K. 2004. The restoration of Strandveld and Succulent Karoo degraded by mining: an enumeration of topsoil seed banks. South African Journal of Botany 70: 5. DEA (2004). National Environment Management: Air Quality Act. No.27318. South Africa, Government Gazette. 476: 56. DEA (2009a). State of the Air Report 2005, National Environmental Management: Air Quality. DEA (2009b). National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004, National Ambient. DEA (2010). National Environment Management: Air Quality Act- List of activities which may result in atmospheric emissions which have or may have a significant detremental effect on the environment, inluding health, social conditions, economic conditions ecological conditions or cultural heritage. No.33064. South Africa, Government Gazette. 537. Deacon, J. 1986. My place is the Bitterpits: the home territory of Bleek and Lloyd’s /Xam San informants. African Studies 45:135-155. Deacon, J. 1988. The power of a place in understanding Southern San rock engravings. World Archaeology 20: 129-140. Deacon. J & Foster, C. 2005. My Heart Stands in the Hill. Struik Publishers: Cape Town. Deacon. J. & Dowson, T. A. 1996. Voices from the past. /Xam Bushmen and the Bleek and Lloyd Collection. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. Dean, W.R.J., Milton, S.J. 1999. The Karoo: ecological patterns and processes, Cambridge University Press. DEAT (Department of Environmental Affairs & Forestry) 2002. Specialist Studies, Information Series 4, Pretoria.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 198

Department of Environmental Affairs. Pretoria. Department Of Health. Central Karoo District profile. Pretoria2000 [February 2, 2011]; Available from: www.doh.gov.za/facts/eusites/centralkaroo. Department Of Health. National antenatal sentinel HIV and Syphilis prevalence survey in South Africa, 2009. Pretoria: National Department of Health; 2010. Derricourt, R. 1971. Prehistoric Man in the Ciskei and Transkei. Struik: Cape Town. Domestic Tourism Survey, 2009, Quantec, 2011 Quantec Research South Africa, sourced at http://www.quantec.co.za on 11.02.2011. Dr Scott Cline. Presentation on Shale Gas exploration. October 2010. ENDANGERED WILDLIFE TRUST. 2004. Red Data Book of the Mammals of South Africa: A Conservation Assessment. CBSG Southern Africa, Parkview, South Africa. EPA Initiates Hydraulic Fracturing Study: Agency seeks input from Science Advisory Board. March 2010. Evans, T. L, Thackeray, A.I. & Thackeray, J. F. 1985. Later Stone Age Rescue Archaeology in the Sutherland District. The South African Archaeological Bulletin 40: 106-108. Fuggle, R. F. and Rabie, M. A. et al., Environmental Management in South Africa. Juta & Co, Ltd., 1992. Gaill, S, 2002. The Bushmen of Southern Africa: Slaughter of the Innocent. Pimlico: Great Brittain. Gainewe M. Road traffic report: 30 June 2010. In: Transport Do, editor. Pretoria: Road Traffic Management Corporation; 2011. Geer, I.W. (ed.) (1996), Glossary Of Weather And Climate With Related Oceanic And Hydrologic Terms. Boston Metereological Society. Glass, D. C., C. N. Gray, et al. (2003). "Leukemia risk associated with low-level benzene exposure.[see comment]." Epidemiology 14(5): 569-77. Golder Associates (2011). Surface Water Specialist Report in support of the EMP for the Soth Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project: EASTERN PRECINCT, Report 12800-10375-10. Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd), 2011. Specialist report in support of the EMP for the South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project. Eastern Precinct. Report no. 12800-10370-8. Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd), 2011. Specialist report in support of the EMP for the South Western Karoo Basin Gas Exploration Application Project. Western Precinct. Report no. 12800-10369-7. Goliger A.M., Milford R.V., Adam B.F. and Edwards M. (1997), Inkanyamba - Tornadoes in South Africa. Pretoria, United Litho. Hall, S. 1988. Archaeology and Early History. In Lubke, R. A., Gess, F. W., & Bruton, M. N. (eds). A Field Guide to the Eastern Cape Coast. A Wildlife Handbook, Grahamstown.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 199

Hall, S. L & Binneman, J. N. F., 1985. (eds). Guide to the Archaeological sites in the Eastern and North Eastern Cape. Prepared for the South African Association of Archaeologists Excursion. September 18-21 1985. Hanke, W., Grongroft, A., Jurgens, N., Schmiedel, U. 2011. Rehabilitation of arid rangelands: Intensifying water pulses from low-intensity winter rainfall, Journal of Arid Environments, 75: 2. Harrison, J.A., Allan, D.G., Underhill, L.G., Herremans, M., Tree, A.J., Parker, V., Brown, C.J. (Eds.) 1997a. The Atlas of southern African birds. Volume 1: Non-passerines. Johannesburg: Birdlife South Africa. Harrison, J.A., Allan, D.G., Underhill, L.G., Herremans, M., Tree, A.J., Parker, V., Brown, C.J. (Eds.) 1997b. The Atlas of southern African birds. Volume 2: Passerines. Johannesburg: Birdlife South Africa. Hart, T 2005. Heritage Impact Assessment of a proposed S.utherland Golf Estate, Sutherland, Northern Cape Province. Henderson, l. 2001 Alien weeds and invasive plants, Plant Protection Research Institute, ARC. HENNING, S.F. & HENNING, G.A. 1989. South African Red Data Book – Butterflies. South African National Scientific Programmes Report No 158. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shale_gas on 25 February 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shale_gas on 25 February 2011. See also Carl T. Montgomery and Michael B. Smith, 2010. Hydraulic fracturing: history of an enduring technology. JPT December 2010. http://www.spe.org/jpt/print/archives/2010/12/10Hydraulic.pdf. http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/BA591EE790C58D30852576EA004EE3AD. Huffman, T. N. 2007. Handbook to the Iron Age: the Archaeology of Pre-Colonial Farming Societies in Southern Africa. University of KZN Press: Pietermaritzburg. Hummel, H. C. 1988. The Human Impact: an Historical Overview. In Lubke. R. A., Gess, F. W., & Bruton, M. N. (esd). A Field Guide to the Eastern Cape Coast. A Wildlife Handbook. Grahamstown. Hydraulic Fracturing Research Study (2010): Science in Action. US Environmental Protection Agency EPA/600/F-10/002 June 2010. Hydrologic Terms. Boston, American Meteorological Society. IAIA. Health impact assessment international best practice principles. Special publication series No. 5. International Association for Impact Assessment, Fargo, USA; 2006 [http://www.iaia.org/modx/assets/files/SP5.pdf; accessed: September 2009]. IFC. IFC Performance standards. 2006 [cited February 2010]; Available from: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/PerformanceStandards. IFC. Introduction to health impact assessment. 2009 [cited February 2010]; Available from: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/Publications_Good Practice_HealthAssessment. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) (2005). Reference Document on Best Available Techniques for Waste Treatment Industries. European Commission.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 200

Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) (2006). Reference Document on Best Available Techniques for Food, Drink and Milk Industries. European Commission. IPIECA/OGP.A guide to health impact assessment. 2005 [http://www.ipieca.org/activities/health/downloads/publications/hia.pdf; accessed: September 2009]. IUCN. 2001. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. In: Red Data Book of the Mammals of South Africa: A Conservation Assessment. IUCN. 2010. Red List. http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/search. Johnson MR et al, 2006. Sedimentary rocks of the Karoo Supergroup. In: Johnson, MR, Anhaeusser, CR and Thomas, RJ (eds), 2006. The Geology of South Africa. Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg/Council for Geoscience, Pretoria. 691 pp. Karoo Hoogland Local Municipality Integrated Development Plan (IDP) 2001 – 2005. King, Hodgson, Flint, Potts & van Lente, (2009): Development of subaqueous fold belts as a control on the timing and distribution of deepwater sedimentation: an example from the Southwest Karoo Basin, South Africa; SLOPE Project, SEPM Special Publication No 92, ISBN 978-1-56576-200-8, p 261-278. Kirchner, van Tonder & Lukas, (1991): Exploitation Potential of Karoo Aquifers; Institute for Ground-Water Studies IGS WRC Report No 170/91, April 1991. Kunz, R (2004). Daily Rainfall Data Extraction Utility, Version 1.4. Land Type Survey Staff, 1972-2003. Land Types of South Africa. Mem.agric.nat Resour. S. Afr ARC-Institute for Soil Climate and Water, Pretoria. Land Type Survey Staff, 1999: 3122 Victoria West Land Type Survey. Institute for Soil Climate and Water, Pretoria. Land Type Survey Staff, 2001. 3226 King Williams Town Land Type Survey. Institute for Soil Climate and Water, Pretoria. Land Type Survey Staff, 2002. 3126 Queenstown Land Type Survey. Institute for Soil Climate and Water, Pretoria. Land Type Survey Staff, 2005. 3222 Beaufort West Land Type Survey. Institute for Soil Climate and Water, Pretoria. Leeming, J. 2003. Scorpions of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town. Nature Conservation Ordinance of Transvaal, 1983 (No 12 of 1983). List of Threatened Species www.iucnredlist.org. Listorti, J.A. and F.M. Doumani, Environmental health: bridging the gaps. World Bank discussion paper No. 422. 2001: Washington, D.C.: The World Bank Group. Listorti, J.A., Bridging environmental health gaps. Lessons for sub-Saharan Africa infrastructure projects. AFTES Working paper No. 20. 1996: Environmental sustainable development division. Africa technical department: The World Bank.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 201

Loveday M 1995. Clean Air Around the World. National Approaches to Air Pollution Control, published by the International Union of Air Pollution Prevention and Environmental Protection Assosiation, Brighton, 402 pp. Low, A.B., Rebelo, T.C. 1998. Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria. Low, A.B., Rebelo, T.C. 1998. Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria. MINTER, L.R., BURGER, M., HARRISON, J.A., BRAACK, H.H., BISHOP, P.J. & Kloepfer, D., eds. 2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. SI/MAB Series #9. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC. Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. (Eds.). 2006. Vegetation map of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. Namakwa District Municipality (DC6), Northern Cape, Assessment of Capacity for the 2008/9 Period, Municipal Demarcation Board, November 2008. Namakwa District Municipality Integrated Development Plan (IDP) 2006 – 2011, Compiled by Namakwa PIMS Centre. National Department Of Water Affairs. Blue drop report 2009. Version 1. South African drinking water quality management performance. In: Affairs DoW, editor. Pretoria: National Department of Water Affairs; 2009. National Department of Water Affairs. Green drop report 2009. Version 1. South African waste water quality management performance. In: Affairs DoW, editor. Pretoria: National Department of Water Affairs; 2009. National Insitute for Communicable Disease N. Rift Valley fever alert. NICD Communicable Diseases Communique. 2011 Jan 2011;10(1). National Study of Service Delivery in District Management Areas (DMAs), Human Sciences Research Society, Final Draft, April 2005. NEMBA. 2007. Threatened and Protected Species List. In Government Gazette, No 29657, February 2007. New York State (2009) Supplemental generic environmental impact statement on the oil, gas and solution mining regulatory program by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Mineral Resources. Based on European Commission Joint Research Centre CAS registration system from url: http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (2009), “Chapter 5 – Natural Gas Development Activities and High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing”. Oberholster, J. J., 1972. The Historical Monuments of South Africa. Rembrandt van Rijn Foundation: Cape Town. Oil and Gas Collection Hydraulic Fracturing, Toxic Chemicals and the Surge of Earthquake Activity in Arkansas. Centre for Research on Globalisation. Parkington, J, Morris, D, & Rusch, N. 2008. Karoo Rock Engravings: Follow the San. Creda Communications: Cape Town.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 202

Parkington., J. 2003. Cederberg Rock Paintings: Follow the San. Creda Communications: Cape Town. Patrick, M. 2009. Final Scoping Heritage Impact Assessment: Gamma-Omega 765kV transmission line. Unpublished report for PD Naidoo on behalf of Eskom Holdings. Penn, N. 2005. The Forgotten Frontier: Colonist and Khoisan on the Cape’s Northern Frontier in the 18th century. Ohio University Press: Athens. Picker, M., Griffiths, C., Weaving, A. 2002. Field Guide to Insects of South Africa. Struik. Cape Town. Pope III, Arden C, Schwartz, J and Ransom M R 1992. Daily Mortality and PM-10 Pollution in Utah Valley, Archives of Environmental Health, 42(3), 211-217. Pope III, Arden C, Thun, M J, Namboordiri, N M, Dockery, D W, Evans J S, Speizer, F E and Heath Jr, C W 1995. Partulate Air Pollution as a Predictor of Mortality in a Prospective Study of U.S. Adults, American Journal of Critical Care Medicine, 151(3), 669-674. POSA. 2011. http://posa.sanbi.org/searchspp.php. Preston-Whyte R A and Tyson P D 1988. The Atmosphere and Weather over South Africa, Oxford University Press, Cape Town, 374pp. Prins, F. E. 2008. Cultural Heritage Assessment of the KAT Development site. Unpublished report prepared for Strategic Environmental Focus (S.E.F). RSA Regional Indicators, Quantec, 2011 Quantec Research South Africa, sourced at http://www.quantec.co.za on 11.02.2011. SAHRA, 2005. Minimum Standards for the Archaeological and the Palaeontological Components of Impact Assessment Reports, Draft version 1.4. SAHRA. 2009. Archaeology, Palaeontology and Meteorite Unit: Report Mapping Project. Sampson C G., Hart, C, Wallsmith, T, Blagg, J. D. 1989. The ceramic sequence in the upper Seacow Valley; problems and implications. South African Archaeological Bulletin 44: 3-16. Sampson, C G., 1985. Atlas of Stone Age settlement in the central and upper Seacow River Valley. Memoirs van die Nasionale Museum Bloemfontein. No. 20. Sampson, C. G., Sampson, B. E. & Neville, D. 1994. An early Dutch settlement pattern on the north east frontier of the Cape Colony. Southern African Field Archaeology. Vol. 3 No 2: 74-81. SAWS (2008) Caelum - A History of Notable Weather Events in South Africa 1647- 2007. Pretoria. Schulze B R 1986. Climate of South Africa. Part 8: General Survey, WB 28, Weather Bureau, Department of Transport, Pretoria, 330 pp. Schwela D 1998. Health and Air Pollution – A Developing Country’s Perspective, Paper 1A-1, Papers of the 11th World Clean Air and Environment Congress, 13-18 September 1998, Durban South Afrca. Simons,L., Allsopp, N. 2006 Rehabilitation of Rangelands in Paulshoek, Namaqualand: Understanding vegetation change using biophysical manipulations, Journal of Arid Environments, 70: 4 .


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 203

Singer, M.J. Munns, D.N. 1987. Soils An Introduction. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. Collier Macmillan Publishers, London. Skead, C. J. 1980. Historical mammal incidence in the Cape Province. Volume 1. The Western and Northern Cape. Cape Town. SKEP database. 2011. http://www.skep.org.za/ . Skinner, J.D., Smithers, R.H.N. 1990. The Mammals of the Southern African Subregion. University of Pretoria, Pretoria, RSA. Smith, A, Malherbe, C, Guenther, M, Berens, P. 2000. The Bushmen of Southern Africa: a foraging society in transition. Clyson Printers: Cape Town. Smithers, JC and Schulze, RE (2002). "Rainfall Statistics for Design Flood Estimation in South Africa", WRC Project K5/1060, Pretoria, South Africa. SMITHERS, R.H.N. 1986. South African Red Data Book – Terrestrial Mammals. South African National Scientific Programmes Report No 125. SMITHERS, R.H.N. 1992. Land Mammals of Southern Africa. Southern Book Publishers Pty Ltd. Halway House. SOUTH AFRICAN STANDARD - Code of practice, SABS 10328:2008, Methods for environmental noise impact assessments. SOUTH AFRICAN STANDARD - Code of practice, SABS 10357: 2008, The calculation of sound propagation by the Concawe method. SOUTH AFRICAN STANDARD - Code of practice, SANS 10103:2008, The measurement and rating of environmental noise with respect to annoyance and to speech communication. SOUTH AFRICAN STANDARD - Code of practice, SANS 10210:2008, Calculating and predicting traffic noise. Statistics South Africa. 2003. Census 2001: Census in Brief. Report No. 03-02-03 (2001). Pretoria: Statistics South Africa. Statistics South Africa. South African Statistics2009: Available from: www.statssa.gov.za. Stuart, C., Stuart, T. 1993. Mammals of Southern Africa, 3rd Edition. Struik Cape Town. Teresa Coons, P. and R. Walker, PhD (2008). Community Health Risk Assessment An Assessment of Risk Related to the Natural Gas Industry in Garfield Country Part I: Risk Study. Teresa Coons, P. and R. Walker, PhD (2008). Community Health Risk Assessment An Assessment of Risk Related to the Natural Gas Industry in Garfield County Part II: Health Study. The then DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM. NO. R. 154. Noise Control Regulations in Terms of Section 25 of the Environmental Conservation Act, 1989 (Act No. 73 of 1989). Govt. Gazette. No. 13717, 10 January 1992.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 204

The Water Wheel March/April 2004. Water User’s Association. Water Control Ensures Great Fish River Valley Remains Land of Milk and Honey. United Nations Development Programme. 2004. South Africa Human Development Report 2003. Cape Town: Oxford University Press Southern Africa. Van Oudtshoorn, F. 1999. Guide to grasses of southern Africa. 1st Edition. Briza Pretoria. Van Riet-Lowe, C., 1941. Prehistoric Art in South Africa. Bureau of Archaeology: Archaeological Series no. v. Government Printers: Pretoria. Van Schalkwyk, L & Wahl, E. 2007. Heritage Impact Assessment of the Gamma Grassridge Powerlines and substation, Eastern, Western, and Northern Cape Provinces South Africa. For ACER (Africa) by eThembeni Cultural Heritage. Unpublished Report. Van Wyk, B. Van Wyk, p. 1997. Field Guide to Trees of southern Africa. 1st Edition. Struik. Cape Town Volume 7: Aquatic Ecosystems. Vegter, JR (1995): An Explanation of a Set of National Groundwater Maps; Water Research Commission WRC Report No TT 74/95, August 1995. Visser, N., Botha, J.C., Hardy, M. B. 2004. Re-establishing vegetation on bare patches in the Nama Karoo, South Africa, Journal of Arid Environments, 57: 2. Water Services Development Plan (WSDP), Karoo Hoogland Local Municipality 2010, sourced at www.dwa.gov.za/dir ws/WSDP on 12.02.2011. WB 40 1984. Climate of South Africa. Climate Statistics up to 1984. WB40, Weather Bureau, Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria. Webley, L., & Hart, T., 2010. Scoping Heritage Assessment: Proposed Suurplaat Wind Energy Facility near Sutherland, Western Cape & Northern Cape. Prepared for Savannah Environmetal (Pty) Ltd. Western Cape Provincial Treasury. Socio-economic Profile: Central Karoo District. In: Office DB, editor. Cape Town: Western Cape Provincial Treasury; 2007. WHO 2000. Air Quality Guidelines, World Health Organisation, April 2000, Geneva. WHO/ECHP. Gothenburg consensus paper. Health impact assessment: Main concepts and suggested approach. 1999 [http://www.euro.who.int/document/PAE/Gothenburgpaper.pdf; accessed: September 2009]. Wood R, Gilbert P, Sharmina M, Anderson K (2011): Shale Gas: A Provisional Assessment of Climate Change and Environmental Impacts: Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester, January 2011. Wood. R., et al: 2011, Shale gas: a provisional assessment of climate change and environmental impacts. A report commissioned by the Cooperative and undertaken by researchers at the Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester. Woodford & Chevallier, (2002): Hydrogeology of the Main Karoo Basin: Current Knowledge and Research Needs; Water Research Commission WRC Report No TT 197. WRC, 1994. Surface Water Resources of South Africa, 1990, Volume III. WRC Report No. 298/3.2/94.


March 2011 Report No. 12800-10364-5 205

WRC, 1994. Surface Water Resources of South Africa, 1990, Volume IV. WRC Report No. 298/4.2/94. WRC, 1994. Surface Water Resources of South Africa, 1990, Volume V. WRC Report No. 298/5.2/94.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES AFRICA (PTY) LTD.

Reg. No. 2002/007104/07 Directors: FR Sutherland, AM van Niekerk, SAP Brown, L Greyling Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation.

g:\projects\12800 -service provision for shell exploration\4_reports\emp\cp\volume 1\cp emp final.docx

Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. Thandanani Park Matuka Close Midrand South Africa T: [+27] (11) 254 4800

golder emp draft final

Documents