okahandja solar (pty) ltdeia.met.gov.na/screening/1736_vol_2_of_3_final_eia... · eia report vol. 2...

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 i Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

P.O. Box 86528

Eros Windhoek

WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA JULY 2017

Final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

(Vol. 2 of 3) Report to Support the Application

for Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC)

for the Proposed 10MW Solar PV Park

Comprising two (2) 5MW Plants next to each

other with an 22kV Overhead Powerline and

Access Road, Okahandja Townlands,

OTJOZONDJUPA REGION, NAMIBIA

Okahandja Solar

(Pty) Ltd

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 ii Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

DETAILS ABOUT THE PROPONENTS Name: Okahandja Solar (Pty) Ltd Address: P.O. Box 86528 Eros Windhoek WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA Details of the Contact Person: Mr. Harry GONTEB, Mobile: 0812022655, Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 iii Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

Prepared By

RRRBBBSSS

Risk-Based Solutions cc

The Consulting Arm of Foresight Group Namibia (PTY) LTD Our Investments and Consultancy Portfolio / Specialisation:

Environmental Assessments (Scoping, SEAs, EIAs and EMPs)

Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Technical Support Services Minerals Exploration and Mining Technical Support Services

Renewable Energy Technical Support Services Property Development and Tourism Investments Waste Management Technical Support Services

Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Engineering Technical Support Services Programme and Project Management and Logistics Support Services

Specialised Training and Industry Research Support

Maerua Mall, Unit 158, 3rd Floor Block A Cnr Jan Jonker Road & Centaurus Street

WINDHOEK NAMIBIA

P.O. Box 1839 WINDHOEK

NAMIBIA

Cell: +264 - (0)811413229 / 81277-2546 Tel: +264-61- 306058

Fax: +264-61-306059 / 61-256830 Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

Global Office URL:http//www.rbs.com.na or www.foresight.com.na

Foresight Group Namibia (FGN) (PTY) LTD – Perfecting the Future Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) – Delivering the Solutions



EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 iv Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS / SUMMARY CV /PROFILE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

PRACTITIONER (EAP) – DR. SINDILA MWIYA Dr. Sindila Mwiya has more than fifteen (15) years of direct technical industry experience in Environmental Assessment (SEA, EIA, EMP, EMS), Energy (Renewable and Non-renewable energy sources), onshore and offshore resources exploration / prospecting, extraction and utilisation, covering general and specialist technical exploration and production support, Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) permitting for Geophysical Surveys such as 2D and 3D Seismic and Gravity Surveys for mining and petroleum (oil and gas) operations support, through to engineering planning, layout, designing, logistical support, recovery, production / operations, compliance monitoring, rehabilitation, closure and aftercare stages. Through his companies, Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) and Foresight Group Namibia (FGN) (PTY) LTD, which he founded, he has worked and continue to work for global reputable resources (petroleum and mining / minerals) and energy companies such as Petrobras Oil and Gas (Brazil) / BP (UK), REPSOL (Spain), ACREP (Namibia/Angola), Preview Energy Resources (UK), HRT Africa (Brazil / USA), Chariot Oil and Gas Exploration (UK), Serica Energy (UK), Eco (Atlantic) Oil and Gas (Canada / USA), ION GeoVentures (USA), PGS UK Exploration (UK), TGS-Nopec (UK), Maurel & Prom (France), GeoPartners (UK), PetroSA Equatorial Guinea (South Africa / Equatorial Guinea), Preview Energy Resources (Namibia / UK), Sintezneftegaz Namibia LTD (Russia), INA Namibia (INA INDUSTRIJA NAFTE d.d) (Croatia), Debmarine (Namibia), Namibia Underwater Technologies (NUTAM) (Namibia), InnoSun Holding (PTY) LTD (Namibia / France) and Okahandja Solar (Pty) Ltd (Namibia). Dr. Sindila Mwiya is highly qualified with extensive experience in petroleum, mining, renewable energy (Solar, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal and Hydropower), Non Renewable energy (Coal, Petroleum, and Natural Gas), applied environmental assessment, management and monitoring (Scoping, EIA, EMP, EMP, EMS) and overall industry specific HSE, cleaner production programmes, geoenvironmental, geological and geotechnical engineering specialist fields. He continue to worked as an Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP), Technical Consultant (RBS / FGN), Project Manager and has worked as a Lecturer (University of Namibia- UNAM), External Examiner/ Moderator (Namibia University of Science and Technology-NUST), National (Namibia) Technical Advisor (Directorate of Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Environment and Tourism / DANIDA – Cleaner Production Component) and Chief Geologist for Engineering and Environment Division and a Field-Based Geotechnician (Magnetics, Seismic, Gravity and Electromagnetics Exploration and Survey Methods) for Geophysics Division, Geological Survey of Namibia, Ministry of Mines and Energy. He has supervised and continue to support a number of MScs and PhDs research programmes and has been a reviewer on international, national and regional researches, plans, programmes and projects with the objective to ensure substantial local skills development pivotal to the national socioeconomic development through the promotion of sustainable natural resources coexistence developmental approaches, utilisation, management and for development policies, plans, programmes and projects financed by governments, private investors and donor organisations. Since 2006, he has provided extensive technical support to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) through GIZ and continue to play a significant role in the amendments of the Namibian Environmental Management Act, 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007), preparation of new Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Regulations, preparation of the updated Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations as well as the preparation of the new SEA and EIA Guidelines and Procedures all aimed at promoting effective environmental management practices. Among his academic achievements, Dr Sindila Mwiya is a holder of a PhD (Geoenvironmental Engineering and Artificial Intelligence) – Research Thesis: Development of a Knowledge-Based System Methodology (KBSM) for the Design of Solid Waste Disposal Sites in Arid and Semiarid Environments (Namibia)), MPhil/PG Cert and BEng (Hons) (Engineering Geology and Geotechnics), qualifications from the University of Portsmouth, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, United Kingdom. During the 2004 Namibia National Science Awards, organised by the Namibian Ministry of Education, and held in Windhoek, Dr. Sindila Mwiya was awarded the Geologist of the Year for 2004, in the professional category. Furthermore, as part of his professional career recognition, Dr. Sindila Mwiya is a life member of the Geological Society of Namibia, Consulting member of the Hydrogeological Society of Namibia and a Professional Engineer registered with the Engineering Council of Namibia.

WINDHOEK, JULY 2017

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 v Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

CONTENT LIST

NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. XI

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... - 1 -

1.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... - 1 - 1.2 PROPONENT AND PROJECT PARTNERS .................................................................................................. - 1 - 1.3 PURPOSE OF THIS EIA REPORT ............................................................................................................. - 1 - 1.4 SITE DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................................ - 1 - 1.5 SUMMARY OF EIA APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ - 8 -

1.5.1 Overview of the EIA Methodology ................................................................................................ - 8 - 1.6 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .................................................................... - 8 - 1.7 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................ - 9 -

2. PROPOSED PROJECT SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... - 10 -

2.1 TECHNICAL CONCEPT OF SOLAR PV PARK .......................................................................................... - 10 - 2.2 SITE LAYOUT ...................................................................................................................................... - 10 - 2.3 OVERHEARD POWERLINE .................................................................................................................... - 10 - 2.4 PRECONSTRUCTION, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION ......................................................................... - 10 - 2.5 MAINTENANCE, MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN ............................................................................ - 10 - 2.6 ESTIMATED CAPITAL INVESTMENT ....................................................................................................... - 10 -

3. ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK .............................................................................. - 11 -

3.1 LEGISLATION AND REGULATORY AGENCIES .......................................................................................... - 11 -

4. RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................................. - 13 -

4.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................... - 13 - 4.2 CLIMATE............................................................................................................................................. - 13 -

4.2.1 Regional Setting .......................................................................................................................... - 13 - 4.2.2 Precipitation ................................................................................................................................ - 13 - 4.2.3 Temperature................................................................................................................................ - 13 - 4.2.4 Wind Patterns.............................................................................................................................. - 13 -

4.3 HABITATS AND ECOSYSTEM ................................................................................................................ - 14 - 4.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. - 14 - 4.3.2 Vertebrate Fauna Diversity ......................................................................................................... - 15 - 4.3.3 Flora Diversity ............................................................................................................................. - 18 -

4.4 SOCIOECONOMIC AND SAFETY ............................................................................................................ - 26 - 4.4.1 Regional Socioeconomic Perspectives ....................................................................................... - 26 - 4.4.2 Developmental Challenges and Opportunities ........................................................................... - 26 - 4.4.3 Regional Land Uses .................................................................................................................... - 26 - 4.4.4 Travel and Tourism Opportunities .............................................................................................. - 26 - 4.4.5 Cultural and Archaeological Sites ............................................................................................... - 27 - 4.4.6 Safety, Security and Obstructions .............................................................................................. - 27 -

4.5 GROUND COMPONENTS ...................................................................................................................... - 27 - 4.5.1 Regional Geology ....................................................................................................................... - 27 - 4.5.2 Local Geology ............................................................................................................................. - 28 - 4.5.3 Water Sources ............................................................................................................................ - 28 -

5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................................... - 29 -

5.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA .......................................................................................................... - 29 - 5.2 ISSUES CONSIDERED IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS ........................................................................... - 30 -

5.2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. - 30 - 5.3 LIKELY POSITIVE IMPACTS ................................................................................................................... - 31 -

5.3.1 Summary of Likely Positive Impacts ........................................................................................... - 31 - 5.3.2 Description and Assessment of Likely Negative Impacts ........................................................... - 32 -

5.4 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT ........................................................................................ - 44 - 5.4.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... - 44 - 5.4.2 Summary Discussions on Public Consultation Process ............................................................. - 44 -

5.5 SEMI-QUANTITATIVE EVALUATION OF IMPACTS ..................................................................................... - 51 - 5.5.1 Impact Factors (Project Activities) .............................................................................................. - 51 - 5.5.2 Evaluation of Project Activities Impacts ...................................................................................... - 51 -

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 vi Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

5.5.3 Project Activities Summary of Impacts Results .......................................................................... - 53 - 5.6 EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ................................................................................................ - 58 -

5.6.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... - 58 - 5.6.2 Significance Criteria .................................................................................................................... - 58 - 5.6.3 Assessment Likely Significant Impacts ....................................................................................... - 58 -

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... - 61 -

6.1 SOLAR PARK OPPORTUNITIES ............................................................................................................. - 61 - 6.2 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................... - 61 - 6.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................... - 61 -

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY...................................................................................................................................... - 63 -

8. ANNEXES ................................................................................................................................................ - 69 -

1. FINAL SCOPING REPORT VOL. 1 OF 3 ....................................................................................................... - 69 - 2. COPIES OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION MATERIALS ................................................................................. - 69 - 3. CV OF EAP DR. SINDILA MWIYA .............................................................................................................. - 69 -

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 vii Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Regional location of the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar Park PV showing the distribution of solar radiation in Namibia ............................... - 2 -

Figure 1.2: Detailed location of the proposed 10MW Solar PV on a 20 Ha Portion (PTN), falling within the Okahandja Townlands ........................................ - 3 -

Figure 1.3: Detailed layout of the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park ........... - 4 - Figure 1.4: Schematic presentation of Namibia’s Environmental Assessment

Procedure. ................................................................................................ - 8 -

Figure 4.1: Vegetation map of the proposed site dominated by varieties of acacias bushes and annual grass with few big trees. ............................. - 20 -

Figure 4.2: Tree and shrub found within the development area. ............................... - 21 - Figure 5.1: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Windhoek

Observer newspaper on the 10th February 2017. ................................... - 45 - Figure 5.2: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Windhoek

Observer newspaper on the 3rd March 2017. .......................................... - 46 - Figure 5.3: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Republikein

newspaper on the 9th March 2017. ......................................................... - 47 - Figure 5.4: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Confidente

newspaper on the 2nd – 8th March 2017. ................................................. - 48 - Figure 5.5: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Windhoek

Observer newspaper on the 30th June 2017. .......................................... - 49 - Figure 5.6: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Confidente

newspaper on the 29th June - 5th July 2017. ........................................... - 50 -

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Government agencies with responsibilities over the proposed

project. .................................................................................................... - 11 - Table 3.2: Likely permit requirements. ..................................................................... - 12 - Table 5.1: The criteria used in the evaluation of environmental impacts. ................ - 29 - Table 5.2: The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the

impact(s). ................................................................................................ - 30 - Table 5.3: Current and future land use impact assessment. .................................... - 33 - Table 5.4: Local surficial materials, alteration of drainage channels, increased

runoff and erosion effect impact assessment. ......................................... - 33 - Table 5.5: Water consumption by conventional power plants, wind and solar

(after American Wind Energy Association). ............................................ - 33 - Table 5.6: Water use and influences quality impact assessment............................. - 34 - Table 5.7: Faunal and habitat destruction impact assessment. ............................... - 34 - Table 5.8: Overall floral, habitant and ecosystem disturbances impact

assessment. ............................................................................................ - 35 - Table 5.9: Visual impacts assessment. .................................................................... - 36 - Table 5.10: Light reflection impact assessment. ........................................................ - 38 - Table 5.11: Ground conditions contamination impact assessment. ........................... - 38 - Table 5.12: Noise / Sound impact assessment. ......................................................... - 39 - Table 5.13: Air pollution and quality impact assessment. .......................................... - 39 - Table 5.14: Impacts of dust on the solar panels energy generation efficiency. ......... - 39 - Table 5.15: Archaeological, paleontological and historical aspects impact

assessment. ............................................................................................ - 40 -

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 viii Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

Table 5.16: Electrical safety electrical safety and grid-connection impact assessment. ............................................................................................ - 42 -

Table 5.17: Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) impact assessment. .................. - 42 - Table 5.18: Restricted public access, vandalism and theft prevention impact

assessment. ............................................................................................ - 43 - Table 5.19: Liquid and solid waste management impact assessment. ...................... - 44 - Table 5.20: Scored on a scale from 0 to 5 for impact magnitude. .............................. - 52 - Table 5.21: Scored time period over which the impact is expected to last. ................ - 52 - Table 5.22: Scored geographical extent of the induced change. ............................... - 52 - Table 5.23: Summary of the qualitative scale of probability categories (in

increasing order of likelihood). ................................................................ - 52 - Table 5.24: Results of the scored on a scale from 0 to 5 for negative impact

magnitude. .............................................................................................. - 54 - Table 5.25: Results of the scored time period over which the impact is expected

to last. ..................................................................................................... - 55 - Table 5.26: Results of the scored geographical extent of the induced change. ......... - 56 - Table 5.27: Results of the qualitative scale of probability occurrence. ....................... - 57 - Table 5.28: Scored impact significance criteria. ......................................................... - 58 - Table 5.29: Significant impact assessment matrix for the proposed Okahandja

Solar PV Park. ........................................................................................ - 60 -

LIST OF PLATES Plate 1.1: The central area of the proposed site dominated by sparsely acacia

in some places .......................................................................................... - 5 -

Plate 1.2: Existing track linking the proposed site to the B2 road that will be upgraded and extended onto site. ............................................................ - 6 -

Plate 1.3: Existing powerline along the B2 Road next to which the new powerline linking the solar park to the substation will also run .................. - 7 -

Plate 5.1: Current view of the solar park site along the B2 Road to Karibib ............ - 37 - Plate 5.2: Photomontage of the solar park site along the B2 Road to Karibib. ........ - 37 -

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 ix Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

LIST OF ACRONYMS AC Alternating Current CV Curriculum Vitae CENORED Central North Regional Electricity Distributor DC Direct Current DEA Department of Environmental Affairs DWA Department of Water Affairs DOF Directorate of Forestry EA Environmental Assessment EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner ECB Electricity Control Board EC Environmental Commissioner ECC Environmental Clearance Certificate EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMP Environmental Management Plan GIS Geographic Information System I & APs Interested and Affected Parties (Stakeholders) IPP Independent Power Producer kV kilowatt MME Ministry of Mines and Energy MWAF Ministry of Water Affairs and Forestry MET Ministry of Environment and Tourism MW Mega Watt MWAC Mega Watt Alternating Current MWP MegaWatt Peak NAD Namibia Dollar (N$)

NBRI National Botanical Research Institute

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 x Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

NamPower Namibia National Power Corporation NSA National Statistic Agency NPC National Planing Commission OEC Office of the Environmental Commissioner O&L Group Ohlthaver and List Group of Companies PV PhotoVoltaic PPA Power Purchase Agreement POC Point of Connection PTN Portion RBS Risk-Based Solutions CC SAPP Southern African Power Pool SOE State Owned Enterprises ToR Terms of Reference VAT Value Added Tax WP Peak watts

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 xi Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY Okahandja Solar (Pty) Ltd (the Proponent) is in the process of developing a 10MW Solar PV Park comprising two (2) 5MW plants next to each other. The proposed Solar PV Park is located within the Okahandja Townlands along the B2 Road to Karibib in the Otjozondjupa Region. The proposed Solar Park PV will be serviced by a new access road from B2 Road and connected to the national electricity grid via a single new 22.5 km long 22kV powerline to the NamPower Osona Substation. In accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations No. 30 of 2012 and the Environmental Management Act, (EMA), 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007) the proponent is required to have undertaken an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) in order to support the application for the ECC for the proposed 10MW Solar PV Park. The following is the summary of the activities associated with the proposed project lifecycle covering preconstruction, construction, operational, rehabilitation, closure and aftercare stages as assessed in this EIA (Vol. 2 of 3) with the mitigation measures provided in the EMP (Vol. 3 of 3) report:

1. Access roads preparation (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

2. A single 22kV power line servitude linking the proposed solar park to the substation (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

3. Underground cable trenching (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

4. Site clearing and preparation (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low ;

5. Fencing (Impact: Localised low Significant: low);

6. Soil / Ground preparation (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

7. Power line connectivity (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

8. Foundation (Impact: Localised high, Significant: low);

9. Posts driving works (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

10. Structure mounting (Impact: Localised very low, Significant: Negligible);

11. Module clamping (Impact: Localised very low, Significant: Negligible);

12. DC wiring and electrical equipment installation (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low ;

13. AC electrical works (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

14. Installation of Communication Monitoring (Impact: Localised low, Significant: low);

15. Commissioning (Impact: Localised very low, Significant: Negligible);

16. Soar Energy Generation and Maintenance (for 25 Years) (Impacts: Localised very low,

Significant: Negligible);

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 xii Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

17. Decommissioning (After 25 Years) / Upgrade of Facility (Impacts: Localised very low, Significant: Negligible).

The following is the summary of the key issues that have been considered in the EIA processes with respect to the likely impacts (without mitigations) that the proposed project activities will have during the preconstruction, construction, operation and decommissioning stages of the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park:

1. Land Use Impacts (Impact: Very low, Significant: Negligible); 2. Surficial geology (Impact: Localised high, Significant: Low); 3. Water Use and Quality (Impact: Very low, Significant: Negligible);

4. Faunal loss (Impact: Localised Very Low, Significant: Negligible);

5. Flora loss (Impact: Localised Very Low, Significant: Negligible);

6. Landscape and Visual Change (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible);

7. Light Reflection (Impact: Very low, Significant: Negligible);

8. Ground Conditions Contamination (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible);

9. Noise and Vibration (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible);

10. Air Quality (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible);

11. Cultural and Paleontological Resources (Impact: Very low, Significant: Negligible);

12. Socioeconomic (Energy Security, Potential Employment, Knowledge Creation and

Awareness Raising) (Impact: High, Significant: High);

13. Electrical Safety (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible);

14. Occupational Health and Safety (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible);

15. Public Access (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible);

16. Waste Management (Impact: Localised low, Significant: Negligible).

Despite the low and localised likely negative impacts that the proposed project may have on the receiving environment, it’s imperative that general site-based mitigation measures that will enhance the positive impacts and minimise the negative impacts are developed and management strategies are provided in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Report Vol. 3 of 3 covering the following key areas:

(i) Solar Park and powerline development (Preconstruction and construction stages):

Socioeconomic and environmental performance;

Community, Health and Safety;

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 xiii Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

Change in land use from –none, area zone industrial already;

Visual, noise and vibrations;

Species (birds and bats) injury, disturbance (and potential alteration of

behaviour), or mortality;

Disturbance of fauna and flora and habitat alteration;

Pollution of biophysical environment (air, soil and water);

Occupational Health and Safety;

Soil erosion;

Possible loss of the seed bank in the topsoil;

Air quality (dust or Particulate Matter (PM) pollution);

Resource use / depletion of natural resources.

(ii) Solar Park and powerline operational and maintenance stage:

Social and Environmental Performance;

Community Health and Safety;



Species (birds and bats) injury, disturbance, or mortality of species;

Species injury, disturbance (and potential alteration of behaviour), or mortality;

Pollution of biophysical environment (soil and water);


(iii) Solar Park and powerline rehabilitation stage:

Social and Environmental Performance & Visual;

Socioeconomic. Overall, the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park project inclusive of the access road, overhead powerline and the underground cable trench will have an overall localised low negative impacts on the receiving environment (physical, biological, socioeconomic environments and ecosystem functions, services, use and non-use values or passive uses). It is hereby recommended that the project shall go ahead. Okahandja Solar (Pty) Ltd (the proponent) shall be issued with the Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for the development of the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park and inclusive of the access road, overhead powerline and the underground cable trench.

EIA Report Vol. 2 of 3 - 1 - Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park-Jul 2017

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND

1.1 Introduction Okahandja Solar (Pty) Ltd (the Proponent) is proposing to develop a 10MW Solar PV Park on a 20 ha Portion of land situated within the municipal townlands, west of the Town of Okahandja, along the B2 road to Karibib in the in the Otjozondjupa Region, central Namibia (Fig. 1.1). The proposed solar park will be connected to the national grid through 22.5 km long, 22kV overhead powerline from the point of connection (POC) to the NamPower Osona Substation. The renewable electricity that will be generated will be sold through a long-term electricity supply contract known as a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA).

1.2 Proponent and Project Partners Okahandja Solar (Pty) Ltd, the proponent is a Namibian registered company owned by Namibian shareholders and South African investors. The partnership brings together a pool of skills and experiences highly relevant to the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park project (Annex 1).

1.3 Purpose of this EIA Report This EIA Report is based on the scope of work as defined in the Environmental Scoping Report (Annex 1). Existing information, field-based assessments and inputs from specialists, competent authorities, Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) was used to identify and evaluate potential environmental impacts on the receiving environment (physical, biological, socioeconomic environments and ecosystem functions, services, use and non-use values or passive uses). This EIA report has been compiled in accordance with the EIA Regulations (2010), promulgated in terms of Environmental Management Act (EMA) (Act No. 7 of 2007). No environmental fatal flaws associated with the proposed project were identified throughout the Environmental Assessment (EA) processes. The detailed assessment of the anticipated impacts were undertaken with the purpose of delineating all key issues regarding the proposed project during its preconstruction, construction, operation and closure / rehabilitation and proposes necessary mitigation measures of the significant impacts. Despite the low and localised likely negative impacts that the proposed project may have on the receiving environment, mitigation measures have been prepared and are detailed in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) report Vol. 3 of 3.

1.4 Site Description The proposed 10MW solar park site falls in an area with all the necessary supporting infrastructure. The proposed solar park will be serviced by a new access road over a distance of 100 m to the B2 tarred road and connected to the national grid through a 22.5 km long 22kV overhead powerline from the point of connection (POC) to the Osona Substation as shown in Figs. 1.2 and 2.3. A servitude for the powerline land and next to existing NamPower powerline will be necessary (Figs. 1.2 and 2.3). The site area has full mobile services and fixed telecommunication infrastructure. Water energy supply to support the preconstruction, construction and operational stages of the proposed development will be provided by the local available resources to be supplied by the municipality.


Figure 1.1: Regional location of the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar Park PV

showing the distribution of solar radiation in Namibia (Modified from Mendelsohn, et. al., 2002).


Figure 1.2: Detailed location of the proposed 10MW Solar PV on a 20 Ha Portion (PTN), falling within the Okahandja Townlands

(Source: Google Earth, 2017).


Figure 1.3: Detailed layout of the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park (Base map Source: Google Map, 2017).


Plate 1.1: The central area of the proposed site dominated by sparsely acacia in some places (RBS Image Series, 2017).


Plate 1.2: Existing track linking the proposed site to the B2 road that will be upgraded and extended onto site (RBS Image Series, 2017).


Plate 1.3: Existing powerline along the B2 Road next to which the new powerline linking the solar park to the substation will also run (RBS Image Series, 2017).


1.5 Summary of EIA Approach and Methodology

1.5.1 Overview of the EIA Methodology Environmental Assessment (EA) process in Namibia is governed by the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations No. 30 of 2012 gazetted under the Environmental Management Act, (EMA), 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007). In accordance with the provisions of the EIA Regulations, 2012, the key assessment steps are summarised in Fig. 1.4. A detailed outline of the methodology and approach used in this assessment is provided in Annex 1.

Figure 1.4: Schematic presentation of Namibia’s Environmental Assessment Procedure.

1.6 Alternatives to the Project Development Process The following is a summary of key alternatives that have been identified during the Scoping phase and evaluated further during the EIA stage:

Project Location: A number of locations were identified and screened as part of the project identification, screening and evaluation process. Issues that have been considered in this EIA process are as follows:

o A high solar irradiation level that will offer high energy yields;

o Land ownership close to the substation;

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Submission of

Project

Proposal

Register Project

with DEA/MET

Classification of

Proposal

Terms of Reference

Development of ProposalNotify Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs);

Establish policy, legal and administrative

requirements; Consult relevant Ministries/I&APs;

Identify alternatives and issues

Scoping

Public Participation

Draft Scoping Report (SR)

Submit Draft SR to

Authorities & I&APs

DEA/MET to issue

Record of

Decision (RoD)

InvestigationSpecialist Studies

Report

Draft Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) & Environmental

Management Plan (EMP)

Submit Draft EIA &

EMP to

Authorities & I&APs

Finalize EIA &

EMP and submit to

DEA/MET

DEA/MET

to issue RoD

Finalize SR and

submit to DEA/MET

Implement, Monitor

and Audit

ApprovedNot Approved

APPEAL

Significant Impact


o Relatively flat to avoid shadowing;

o Existing infrastructure and in particular electricity connectivity (substation) and transmission support and electricity off-takers;

o Environmental sensitivity in terms of potential target and likely pathways and

selection of the suitable site was focused on identifying the already disturbed areas;

o Accessibility as well potential likely negative and positive environmental

impacts.

The current selected site has been chosen because it meets all the above requirements.

Solar Park PV to Substation Connectivity Options: The proposed Solar PV

Park will be connected to national electricity grid network via a 22.5 km long overhead powerline. Alternative powerline and underground cable routes have also been considered and a straight line option as shown in Fig. 1.2 has been favoured with respect to the costs and environmental constraints;

Size of Project: The current project focus is the development of a 10MW solar PV energy generation facility which is within the current connectivity requirements by NamPower distribution and transmission network. However, the project has greater opportunity for expansion due to the availability of land, favourable location, connectivity options and availability of potential off takers including the surrounding local business in the Town of Okahandja. The opportunity for expansion will be continuously reviewed in the light of any new data that might be available over time. This will include: new off-takers for green energy, Government regulatory framework highly favourable to green energy and NamPower wanting additional renewable energy to increase to its energy mix.

1.7 Assumptions and Limitations The following assumptions and limitations underpin the approach to this EIA study:

The information, plans and appropriate data sets received from the project partners, specialist assessments are assumed to be current and valid at the time of the study;

The route and size (22kV ) of the overhead powerline up the substation assumed to be correct;

The powerline design assumes the use of monopole with two (2) used at corners;

A precautionary approach was adopted in instances where baseline information was insufficient or unavailable, and;

Mandatory timeframes will apply to the review and decision of the EIA and EMP reports

by the Environmental Commissioner.


2. PROPOSED PROJECT SUMMARY

2.1 Technical Concept of Solar PV Park The proposed Okahandja 10MW Solar PV Park will be designed as a single-axis tracking Solar PV power plant solution that will be synchronised to the existing NamPower grid connectivity infrastructure. Depending on the final civil design, the tracking structure will be either mounted on concrete or ram foundations. Crystalline solar modules will be used to produce Direct Current (DC) power which then will be inverted to Alternating Current (AC) power and stepped up via a transformer to be feed into the distribution system.

2.2 Site Layout The project site area will be around 20 Ha and is inclusive of the security zone of 30m between the panels and fence line. The site layout may comprise the north - south and east west arrays, separated by roads leading through the middle of each of the 5MW solar parks site (Fig. 1.3). Along this internal site road will be the main internal cable trench and the transformer stations of the solar park. From the PV Park substation, there is an overhead powerline linking the Solar PV Park to the distribution substation (Figs. 1.2 and 1.3).

2.3 Overheard Powerline The proposed 22.5 km long 22kV powerline linking the solar park to the substation will have a servitude of 5 m from the centreline to ether sides. The design of the powerline will comprises 12 m high single wood poles with a spacing of 120 m and each pole will be connected by three wires. The proposed route has been developed using existing Geographic Information System (GIS) databases and to fine-tuned during the preconstruction survey stage.

2.4 Preconstruction, Construction and Operation The preconstruction and construction stages of the proposed project will begin once all the required approvals and permits such as Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), Land Lease Agreement and Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) have been obtained. It will take approximately six (6) months from the beginning of the construction process to complete construction of the proposed solar park.

2.5 Maintenance, Monitoring and Reporting Plan Once the solar park has been commissioned, the Solar PV Park and the powerline as well as all the supporting components will be self-sustaining and start to feed power into the national grid with ongoing online monitoring and security surveillance. The maintenance plan activities will comprise the preventive and corrective maintenance operations including the cleaning of the solar panel surfaces as may be required. The preventative and corrective maintenance activities will be necessary during the whole envisaged twenty-five (25) years lifespan of the facility to ensure the correct operation, enhance energy yield and to extend the life of all the components.

2.6 Estimated Capital Investment The total estimated capital investment for the development of the proposed Solar PV Park will be about NAD 180 million inclusive of Value Added Taxes (VAT). The operational cost (operation, maintenance, insurance etc) is about 1.5% of the investment per year.


3. ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

3.1 Legislation and Regulatory Agencies The main key legislative instruments governing the proposed project are provided in Section 3 of the Final Scoping Report (Annex 1). The regulatory authorities responsible for permitting, licensing and endorsement of the various aspects of the proposed project are listed in Table 3.1. Table 3.2 shows an extract from the legal instruments of the regulating authorities with respect to the relevant permits / licenses required for the proposed project development. Table 3.1: Government agencies with responsibilities over the proposed project.

AGENCY RESPONSIBILITY

Office of the Environmental Commissioner

(OEC), Ministry of

Environment and Tourism

Is the Environmental Regulator responsible for issuing Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) based on the review and approval of the Environmental Assessments (EA) reports comprising Environmental Scoping, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Environmental Management Plan (EMP) prepared in accordance with the Environmental Management Act (2007) and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2012

Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME)

Is the Competent Authority responsible for development and implementation of wider electricity industry legislation and institutional mechanism including – the overall exercise control over the electricity supply industry and to regulate the generation, transmission, distribution, use, import and export of electricity in accordance with prevailing Government policy so as to ensure order in the efficient supply of electricity.

Electricity Control Board (ECB)

Falling under the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME). The Electricity Control Board (ECB) is a statutory regulatory authority established in 2000 under the Electricity Act 2 of 2000; which has subsequently been repealed by the Electricity Act, 4 of 2007; the latter Act having expanded the ECB mandate and core responsibilities. The core mandate of the ECB is to exercise control over the electricity supply industry with the main responsibility of regulating electricity generation, transmission, distribution, supply, import and export in Namibia through setting tariffs and issuance of licenses. The ECB executes its statutory functions through the Technical Secretariat headed by the Chief Executive Officer.

NamPower

NamPower is a state-owned enterprise, registered and operating according to the Companies Act, NamPower’s core business is the generation, transmission and energy trading within the Southern African Power Pool (SAPP). NamPower supplies bulk electricity to mainly Regional Electricity Distributors (REDs), and to Local Authorities, Farms and Mines (where REDs are not operational) throughout Namibia

Regional Electricity Distributors (REDs)

CENORED

Regional Electricity Distributor

A RED is a regional electricity distributing company tasked with supplying electricity to the residents in a specific region. The proposed project falls within CENORED license area covering the Otjozondjupa and Kunene regions and has a customer base of 40 000 customers and distributes electricity to various towns and settlement areas of central-northern Namibia over an area of approximately 120 000 square kilometres.

Ministry of Agriculture, Water

and Forestry

The Directorate of Resource Management within the Department of Water Affairs (DWA) at the MAWF is currently the lead agency responsible for management of surface and groundwater utilisation through the issuing of abstraction permits and waste water disposal permits. DWA is also the Government agency responsible for water quality monitoring and reporting. The National Botanical Research Institute’s (NBRI) mandate is to study the flora and vegetation of Namibia, in order to promote the understanding, conservation and sustainable use of Namibia’s plants for the benefit of all. The Directorate of Forestry (DOF) is responsible for issuing of forestry permits with respect to harvest, transport, and export or market forest resources.


Table 3.2: Likely permit requirements.

ACTIVITY APPLICABLE LEGISLATION

PERMITTING AUTHORITY

CURRENT STATUS

Feasibility for Solar Energy Electricity Act 2007 (Act No. 4 of 2007)

Electricity Control Board through the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME

Ongoing

Generation Licence To be issued by the ECB

Power Purchase Agreement Cenored / NamPower

To be Concluded

Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC)

Environmental Management Act (2007) and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2012

Office of the Environmental Commissioner (OEC), Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET)

Still to be Issued

Land rights covering the proposed project location

Local Authorities Act, 1992, (Act 23 of 1992)

Okahandja Municipality

Consent given with Letter of Intent (LOT) to conclude a Lease Agreement (LA) with the Local Authority.

Construction, alteration of waterworks with capacity to hold in excess of 20, 000 L.

Water Resources Management Act, 2004 (No. 284 of 2004).

Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry

Freshwater Abstraction and Waste Water Discharge Permits not required because the proponent may utilise the already existing municipality infrastructures

Abstraction of water other than that provided by NamWater.

Discharge of effluents or construction of effluent facility

Removal, disturbances or destruction of bird eggs.

Nature Conservation Ordinance 4, 1975.

Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET)

No removals anticipated but if the need arises, appropriate permits will be obtained.

Removal, disturbance of protected plants.

Removal, destruction of indigenous trees, bushes or plants within 100 yards of stream or watercourse.

Forestry Act, 12 of 2001. Ministry of Water Affairs and Forestry (MWAF)

Scheduled processes in controlled area.

Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Ordinance 11 of 1976

Ministry of Health and Social Services.

No Permits Required but to meet Provisions

Solid Waste Disposal Site

Environmental Management Act (2007) and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2012

Office of the Environmental Commissioner (OEC), Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET)

No permit required because the Proponent will utilise the already existing town council facility


4. RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

4.1 General Overview The current state of the natural environment around Okahandja and in particular the proposed location is critical to this environment assessment process. This is important in order to predict any likely changes that may occur as a result of the proposed solar park development. The considerations of the receiving environment with respect to the proposed development include the following: Local climate, habitat, ecosystem, flora, fauna, current land uses, geology, hydrogeology, socioeconomic, safety and other issues to be identified in the EIA process.

4.2 Climate

4.2.1 Regional Setting Regionally, Namibia lies within the Southern Hemisphere’s anticyclone belt with winds generated from high-pressure systems over the cold Atlantic Ocean generally blowing from a southerly direction. The influence of these winds creates a relatively low-pressure system over the continent due to the convectional uplift of the air being warmed over the land. This results in a pressure gradient that draws the cold southern coastal winds towards the interior of the country (Department of Water Affairs, 2001). However, the spread of moist air only reaches the coastal, northern and central parts of the country. The limited and variable spread of moist air results in coastal fog and relatively high regular precipitation in the northern and central parts of the country with variable and less rainfall around the Okahandja. Cycles with unpredictable patterns and with prolonged droughts are the norm (Namibia Meteorological Service, 1998).

4.2.2 Precipitation Based on the regional data, the average annual rainfall of the area is between 200 – 400 mm. This wide rainfall variability typifies the rainfall patterns in the west central parts of Namibia. Mean annual gross evaporation ranges between 3200 – 3400 mm.

4.2.3 Temperature Ambient air temperature is an important parameter in determining pollution plume behaviour, the depth of mixing height, and position of the inversion layer. The mixing layer is the average thickness of the layer within which pollutants are expected to mix with air over a geographical area. The inversion layer is characterised by an increase in temperature with height. The greater the difference between the emitted pollutant and the ambient air temperature, the resulting plume will have a buoyancy rise. Modelling of any likely ambient air pollution concentration and transport requires knowledge on the morning and afternoon mixing and inversion layers. These two factors are largely dependent on the ambient temperature. Daytime temperatures range between 35° to 45° C from October to March, the hottest months, and can drop below freezing between June and August.

4.2.4 Wind Patterns The medium-term (days) and short-term (seconds) wind characteristics are of fundamental importance in determining the area of the ground that can be exposed to emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) from a source. The prevailing winds in the general area, seems to be dominated by winds from the east, south eastern and southwest quadrants.


Locally, the situation may be different dues various influences including topographic surroundings effects and structures. Seasonal variations in the wind fields are presented by the regional average wind data for January, April, July and October. An increase in the north to north-easterly winds during summer (January) and autumn (April) is likely. Winter months may be characterised by the highest frequency of these north-eastern winds. Due to lack of data, the frequency of high-energy gusts could not be determined and local variability is likely to occur. Generally, the southerly and south-westerly winds that are prevalent in this part of Namibia and may reach a maximum speed of 30.6 m/s particularly during the dry summer periods. During the rainy season winds are much more variable, typically with low average velocities. Low clouds and dust storms sometimes affect the visibility but the influence is limited to fewer than five hours or even minute.

4.3 Habitats and Ecosystem

4.3.1 Introduction The general surrounding project area comprises varying landscapes with topographic high areas being not part of the proposed project location due to the likely shadowing effect. Minor hills with major Ephemeral River channels are common in the general area. Overall, three types of habitats are expected in the general area:

Topographically high area covering the mountainous areas with very high and steep slopes in some places (>20º), limited loose surficial material cover (<0.2m) comprises bare rock heads, boulders, cobbles, gravels and limited or no sands and silts;

Intermediate topographically high areas with slopes angles ranging between 10 – 20 degrees with adulating landscape in some places, loose to cemented surficial deposits in some areas. Marks the transition between very high and low topographically areas, and;

Topographically low lying areas with slopes angles generally less than 10 degrees but very sharp scarps in some areas along the major ephemeral river channels. Comprise, loose to cemented well-rounded and poorly sorted river / surficial deposits in some areas. Surficial materials characterized by cobbles, gravels, calcrete, sands and limited silts in heavily vegetated areas of the zone.

The main reasons for integrating both fauna and flora in the conceptual model of this study are to evaluate:

The ecological significance and conservation status with respect to the international and

local conservation requirements in order to avoid conflicts between the proposed project and conservation;

The nature and scale of any likely negative impacts on the ecological setting, which

include likely temporal or permanent damage to specific species within the vicinity of the targeted areas;

To identify those species that maybe useful for monitoring of the environmental

performances during the proposed project operational stage.


The likely temporal and long-term impacts and influences of the proposed project will largely be localised and will depend on the susceptibility of the local flora and fauna. Such local condition will include the type, density and conservation status of the concerned species with respect to actual project sites likely to be affected. Different plant species have adapted to the prevailing local climatic and ground conditions and such plants have been able to deal with and survive high temperature and low precipitation through photosynthesis, dormancy, morphological and physiological adaptation strategies (The World Book Encyclopedia of Science, 1990; Directorate of Environmental Affairs, 1998). Photosynthesis adaptive species have water loss protection strategies typical of a variety of grasses and plants found around the area and they do not photosynthesise during hot day times. The ephemerals (avoiders) are mostly annuals, which survive low precipitation and long droughts in their seed form only to bloom during temporal short rains (The World Book Encyclopedia of Science, 1990). Morphologically adaptive plant species survive on specific terrains (Directorate of Environmental Affairs, 1998). Typical examples are the variety of the plants and grass species that maybe found in topographically high and low terrain. Other morphologically adaptive plants may survive by having shallow and wide root systems typical of the succulents that grow on rock slopes, those with deep and wide root systems typical of the xeromorphic shrubs while other plants have very deep root systems that penetrate the deep-water bodies. Physiologically adapted plants survive harsh conditions by shedding leaves, typical of the drought deciduous plants. Other physiologically adaptive plants store water in parenchymatous tissues found in leaves or stems while some have smaller leaf surface areas exposed to the heat. This is typical of xeromorphic shrubs and a variety of the Acacias. However, due to the likely diverse ecological settings of the area, the field investigations will focus on evaluating the interactive dependence of fauna on flora with respect to environmental protection and potential influence of the proposed project activities. Generally, plant species are sources of food and shelter to a variety of birds and animals. The size of the habitat area that might be impacted and the conservation status of affected species are important in the assessment process. Numerous bird species, insects as well as other animals may be found in the area. Bush thickening or encroachment is viewed as an economic problem in the general area with an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 plants/ha – mainly Acacia mellifera being the dominant problematic species (Bester 2001, Cunningham 1998, Mendelsohn et al. 2002). Furthermore, Mendelsohn et al. (2002) views the grazing and browse as good in the general area with the risk of farming viewed as low and the tourism potential of this area also viewed as high.

4.3.2 Vertebrate Fauna Diversity

4.3.2.1 Overview The proposed development areas covering the solar park site, road and powerline route although not in a pristine condition with various anthropomorphic activities taking place – e.g. existing power lines and associated tracks, fences etc. – are still relatively undisturbed.

4.3.2.2 Reptiles Endemic reptile species known and/or expected to occur in the general proposed solar site, access and powerline route areas make up 35.9% of the reptiles from the general area and


although not as high as endemism elsewhere for example the western escarpment areas of Namibia – still makes up a large portion of the reptiles. Reptiles of greatest concern are probably the tortoises – Stigmochelys pardalis and Psammobates oculiferus which are often consumed by humans; Python anchietae and P. natalensis which are indiscriminately killed throughout their range and Varanus albigularis as well as the various Pachydactylus species geckos of which 80% are viewed as endemic. Other important species would be the 3 Blind snakes (Rhinotyphlops species of which 2 species are endemic) and 2 Thread snakes (Leptotyphlops species of which 1 species is endemic) which could be associated with the sandier soils in the area.

4.3.2.3 Amphibians Of the 9 species of amphibians expected to occur in the general solar site, access and powerline route areas, 33.3% (3 species) are of conservation value with 2 species being endemic (Poyntonophrynus hoeschi and Phrynomantis annectens) (Griffin 1998b) and 1 species (Pyxicephalus adspersus) viewed as near threatened (Du Preez and Carruthers 2009). The general close proximity of the Von Bach and Swakoppoort Dams and more importantly the Gross Barmen Hot Springs and the Swakop River and its tributaries are viewed as important amphibian habitat in the general area (Plate 4.1).

4.3.2.4 Mammals Of the 85 species of mammals expected to occur in the general solar site, access and powerline route areas 5.9% are endemic and 36.5% are classified under international conservation legislation. The most important groups are rodents (29.4% - 12% endemic), bats (25.9% - 4.5% endemic) and carnivores (20% - 5.9% endemic). The most important species from the general area, other than the endemic species, are probably all those classified as near threatened (Eidolon helvum, Hipposideros vittatus, Rhinolophus blasii, Hyaena brunnea & Panthera pardus) and vulnerable (Acinonyx jubatus, Felis nigripes & Equus zebra hartmannae) by the IUCN (2013).

4.3.2.5 Birds The high proportion of endemics – 10 of the 14 endemics to Namibia (i.e. 71% of all endemics) – expected to occur in the general solar site, access and powerline route areas underscore the importance of this area. Furthermore 21% are classified as southern African endemics (or 6% of all the birds expected) and 79% are classified as southern African near-endemics (or 23% of all the birds expected). The most important species known/expected – although not exclusively associated with the general area – are viewed as various larger raptors (e.g. Tawny, Martial, etc.), Monteiros and Damara Hornbills, Rüppells Parrot, Rosy-faced Lovebird and Rockrunner, all of which breed in the general area, but not exclusively associated with the area.


Plate 4.1: Potential habits, a local ephemeral river channel west of the proposed solar park and the surrounding area.


4.3.3 Flora Diversity

4.3.3.1 Flora Overview

Although the focus during this study was on the more visible trees, shrubs, grasses and more important other species potentially occurring in the general area, many more other flora species – e.g. herbs – occur throughout the area and are viewed as important. The vegetation structure is classified as Acacia shrublands (Mendelsohn et al. 2002). The main ephemeral river draining the general area is the Swakop River to the south of the proposed site. According to Maggs (1998) there are approximately 4344 higher plant species with the most species being within the grasses (422), composites (Asteraceae) (385), legumes (Fabaceae) (377) and fygies (Mesembryanthemaceae) (177), recorded from Namibia. Total species richness depends on further collecting and taxonomic revisions. High species richness is found in the Okavango, Otavi/Karsveld, Kaokoveld, southern Namib and Central Highland (Windhoek Mountains) areas. Endemic species – approximately 687 species in total – are manly associated with the Kaokoveld (northwestern) and the succulent Karoo (southwestern) Namibia. The major threats to the floral diversity in Namibia are:

Conversion of the land to agriculture (with associated problems) and;

Poorly considered development (Maggs 1998, Mendelsohn et al. 2002). The Thornbush Savannah is the dominant vegetation type in central Namibia. Although the vegetation in the Thornbush Savannah/Thornbush Shruband varies considerably with large areas dominated by Acacia species, characteristic species include Acacia mellifera subsp. detinens, A. reficiens, A. hebeclada subsp. hebeclada, A. erubescens, A. fleckii and in some places A. tortilis subsp. heteracantha. Another tree species usually present is Boscia albitrunca with Philenoptera nelsii and Ziziphus mucronata also occurring in this vegetation type (Giess 1971). The average plant production is “high to very high” with the variation in green vegetation biomass viewed as “medium” estimated at 10-15% (Mendelsohn et al. 2002). Simmons (1998b) puts the plant endemism in the general Gross Barmen area at between 1 and 20 species depending on the locality. The overall plant diversity (all species - “higher” plants) in the general area is “high” and estimated at >500 species (Mendelsohn et al. 2002). Plant endemism is “average” with 6-15 species expected from the general area. The solar park site, access road and powerline route areas are not part of the communal conservancy system in Namibia with the closest such conservancy being the Ovitoto Conservancy to the east of Okahandja (Mendelsohn et al. 2002, NACSO 2010). The closest Freehold Conservancies are the Okawi (farms to the west of Gross Barmen) and Khomas Hochland (farms to the south of Gross Barmen) Conservancies (Mendelsohn et al. 2002 and www.canam.iway.na). The closest formally protected areas are the Gross Barmen Hot Springs (size: 1km²) and Von Bach Recreation Resort (size: 43km²) located approximately 1km and 25km to the west and east, respectively. It is estimated that at least 79-110 larger trees and shrubs and up to 111 grasses are known to or expected to occur in the general area.

4.3.3.2 Trees and Shrubs

It is estimated that at least 79-110 species of larger trees and shrubs (>1m) – Coats Palgrave 1983 [81 sp.], Curtis and Mannheimer 2005 [79 sp.], Mannheimer and Curtis 2009 [110 sp], Van Wyk and Van Wyk 1997 [60 sp.]) – occur in the general Gross Barmen area. The trees and shrubs known, and/or expected to occur in the general Gross Barmen area (derived from Curtis & Mannheimer 2005 and Mannheimer & Curtis 2009) is presented in Table 4.1 below.


Species indicated are know from the quarter-degree square distribution principle used and don’t necessarily occur throughout the entire area (Fig. 4.1). Some species indicated to possibly occur in the area according to Coats Palgrave (1983) and Van Wyk and Van Wyk (1997) is excluded here. According to Curtis and Mannheimer (2005) and Mannheimer and Curtis (2009) between 79 and 110 species of trees and shrubs are known and/or expected to occur in the general Gross Barmen area, respectively. About (35.5%) species of larger trees and shrubs have some kind of protected status in the general area. Five species (4.6%) are endemic, 4 species (3.6%) near-endemic, 10 species (9.1%) protected by the Forestry Ordinance No. 37 of 1952, 11 species (10%) protected by Forestry laws according to Curtis and Mannheimer (2005) and Mannheimer and Curtis (2009), 5 species (4.6%) protected by Nature Conservation Ordinance No. 4 of 1975 with 4 species (3.6%) classified as CITES Appendix 2 species. According to their protective status Cyphostemma bainesii (endemic, NC), Cyphostemma currorii (NC), Cyphostemma juttae (endemic, NC), Erythrina decora (Forestry*, endemic), Heteromorpha papillosa (endemic) and Manuleopsis dinteri (endemic) are probably the trees/shrubs most sensitive that are expected to occur in the general area. The proposed solar site, access and powerline route areas falls within the Thornbush Savannah with Acacia species dominating while Stipagrostis uniplumis dominates the grass layer (Plate 4.2). Other species – e.g. herbs, etc. – observed occurring in the proposed development site, are included in Table 4.1. During the rapid site visit, only 9 species of trees/shrubs were observed in the proposed development site and only 1 of these – Boscia albitrunca (Plate 4.3) – is protected by Forestry. During the tree/shrub survey along transects (1,000 m) in the proposed development site only 6 species were encountered at the proposed development site. The three most dominant trees/shrubs were Acacia mellifera (34%), Catophractes alexandri (30%), and Acacia reficiens (24%) (Fig. 4.2). Tree and shrub densities were determined as 840 trees & shrubs/ha (i.e. mean 8.4 trees/10m² ±0.51SE in 15 plots) which is relatively open and not viewed as typically “encroached” (See Bester 1996 & Cunningham 1998). Only 1 invasive alien species – Prosopis sp. (albeit 1 single individual along the Gross Barmen-Okahandja road verge) – was encountered in the area (Plate 4.4).

4.3.3.3 Grass

The most important grass expected in the area is the endemic Setaria finite associated with ephemeral drainage lines. Although the area is heavily grazed in some places making the identification of grasses difficult, none off the grasses are exclusively associated with the proposed developments site nor protected species, which minimises the overall effect on grasses. Grass cover varies depending on soil type with climax grasses such as Anthephora pubescens, Brachiaria nigropedata and Digitaria species and Urochloa bolbodes representative (Plate 4.5). Stipagrostis uniplumis and Schmidtia pappophoroides also occur in this vegetation type in the course of succession (Giess 1971).

4.3.3.4 Other Flora Species

Aloes are protected throughout Namibia with 2 other aloe species not included in Table 4.1, but which potentially occur in the general area, and also viewed as important are Aloe hereroensis and A. zebrina (Rothmann 2004). Many endemic Commiphora species are found throughout Namibia with Steyn (2003) indicating that Commiphora crenato-serrata (not included in the Table 4.1) potentially also occurring in the general area. Other species with commercial potential that could occur in the general solar site, access road and powerline route areas include Harpagophytum procumbens (Devil’s claw)– harvested for medicinal purposes and often over-exploited – and Citrullus lanatus (Tsamma melon) which potentially has a huge economic benefit (Mendelsohn et al. 2002).


Figure 4.1: Vegetation map of the proposed site dominated by varieties of

acacias bushes and annual grass with few big trees.


Table 4.1: Other species observed at the proposed solar site, access and powerline route

areas.

Figure 4.2: Tree and shrub found within the development area.

Asparagus sp.

Citrullus sp.

Harpagophytum procumbens

Laggera decurens

Leucosphaera bainesii

Pseudogaltonia clavata

Tribulus terrestris

Talinum sp.

1

34

24

30

10

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Acacia erubescens

Acacia mellifera

Acacia rificiencs

Catophractes alexandri

Lycium bosciifolium

Phaeoptilum spinosum

% O

ccu

rre

nce

Tree/shrub species


Plate 4.2: Acacia mellifera (green tree/shrubs) and Catophractes alexandri (grey shrubs with typical white flowers in foreground) dominated

the vegetation structure in the area.


Plate 4.3: Protected Boscia albitrunca is uncommon, with individuals scattered throughout the proposed development area.


Plate 4.4: Prosopis sp. individual observed in the area.


Plate 4.5: Varieties of grass found on the proposed solar site, access and powerline route areas.


4.4 Socioeconomic and Safety

4.4.1 Regional Socioeconomic Perspectives The proposed project is located within the Townlands of Okahandja in the Otjozondjupa Region. The Otjozondjupa region is Namibia’s major farming and agricultural region. With an area of 105 325 km². Tourism through of proportion of game parks plays a significant role in the development in this region. The region has well established conservancies, including the world renowned cheetah conservancies. The region also hosts the Water Berg plateau with its diverse collection birds and wild live.

4.4.2 Developmental Challenges and Opportunities Access to economic opportunities and resources in the region is highly variable especially to rural communities and informal settlements around Okahandja. This is usually due to the isolation and underdeveloped infrastructures within these rural communities and is a situation experienced across all regional parts of the country. The Otjozondjupa Regional Council has adopted developed strategies to address poverty reduction and economic development, with primarily focus on rural areas by initiating measures to insure sound management of the region’s natural resources. The region has a great potential to establish industries connected with farming activities and by-products of it. It further has the advantage of combining communal and commercial farming in the same region. The Regional Development Plans recognises the objectives adopted in the NDPs and Vision 2030.

4.4.3 Regional Land Uses The project area and the immediate surrounding areas are not part of the communal conservancy system in Namibia with the closest such conservancy being the Ovitoto Conservancy to the east of Okahandja (Mendelsohn et al. 2002, NACSO 2010). The closest Freehold Conservancies are the Okawi (farms to the west of Gross Barmen) and Khomas Hochland (farms to the south of Gross Barmen) Conservancies (Mendelsohn et al. 2002, See: www.canam.iway.na). The closest formally protected areas are the Gross Barmen Hot Springs (size: 1km²) and Von Bach Recreation Resort (size: 43km²) located approximately 1km and 25km to the west and east, respectively. The proposed solar park location falls within townlands zoned industrial but currently being leased for subsistence agriculture (small stock farming units).

4.4.4 Travel and Tourism Opportunities The proposed site has very limited travel and tourism potential. However, a number of scenic landscape can also be found around Okahandja area as well as around the Otjozondjupa Region but not necessary around the proposed solar park site. Okahandja offers a number of tourism attractions and include the following: Franke Tower, Sand Dragon, Workshop Tikoloshe Erongo Mountain, Etjo Mount, Vineyards Kristal Keller as well as a number of private game farms. Travel and Tourism is an important sector for the Otjozondjupa Region and Namibia in general. According to the World Travel and Tourism Council, (2017), tourism is currently the third largest economic sector in Namibia with direct contribution to GDP, employment creation, visitors exports and contribution to investments. Overall however, tourism usually employs less skilled workers than many other industries and thus salaries are generally much lower, but it offers employment to a significant number of people, mainly women. Overall however, tourism usually employs less skilled workers than many other industries and thus salaries are generally much lower, but it offers employment to a significant number of people, mainly women.


4.4.5 Cultural and Archaeological Sites On local scale, a site-specific assessment of the possible existence of cultural and archaeological resources around the proposed project areas were undertaken. It became clear that the proposed site is not pristine. There is a number of existing infrastructure such as fences, excavations, powerlines, NamPower Substation and access roads and tracks. There are no evidence of potential traditional, religious sites as well as private grave yards around the proposed solar park area. The proposed solar park site has been used for small scale agricultural units while the access road and powerline routes already have existing similar supporting infrastructure. On a regional scale there may be some sites of archaeological significance in the general area and the construction team must exercise the precautionary principles at all times.

4.4.6 Safety, Security and Obstructions The proposed solar park will generate high voltage electrical current that may have key safety requirements. The electrical safety requirements are covered by engineering standards which sets down requirements for electrical safety and grid-connection of generating systems. Cross-site cabling will utilise both underground and overhead lines between equipment housings. Generally there will be a need to ensure that the solar facilities are adequately secured to reduce theft and vandalism risk and protect passers-by. The entire proposed development will not cause any obstruction to human or fauna as a results of its limited size, remote location and surrounding land uses. An electrified security fence with alarm system will be installed in order to protect the solar panels and related equipment. The requirements will vary and the envisaged fence design will aim at avoiding unacceptable landscape or visual impacts. The fence design will aim at utilising existing ridges, minimising the height of security fencing, using natural features and appropriate measures for effective site blending.

4.5 Ground Components

4.5.1 Regional Geology

The proposed solar park site, access road and powerline routes falls within the Swakop Group and Central Zone (CZ) of the Damara Belt (Miller, 2008 and 1992). According to Miller, (1992), the Central Damara Belt and indeed the rocks underlying the solar park area is characterised by high temperature-low pressure metamorphism and numerous granitic intrusions. Sillimanite-cordierite metamorphic assemblages and intense deformation typified by domal structures are characteristic of this zone. The oldest rocks in the area belong to the Abbabis Metamorphic Complex, often referred to as the Abbabis basement or pre-Damara basement. The Abbabis Complex consists of augen gneiss, migmatite, granitic gneiss, biotite schist and amphibolite, and is exposed in domes and anticlines. The Abbabis Complex is overlain unconformably by the rocks of the Damara Sequence, which comprises mainly sedimentary rocks deposited 650-1000 my (Miller, 2008 and 1992). The Damara Sequence consists of a basal group dominated by meta-arkoses and calc-silicates and schist (Swakop Group). The Nosib Group consists of the basal Etusis Formation and the Upper Khan Formation whose outcrops are limited in extent. The Etusis sediments were deposited in local basins on topographically uneven Abbabis surface and as a result their true thicknesses vary considerably (between 100 and 3000m) over short distances. These rocks are mainly fluviatile quartzites, meta-arkoses and para-gneisses. Conglomerate, mica schist, calc-silicate-bearing quartzites and marble occur locally (Miller, 2008 and 1992).


4.5.2 Local Geology The local geology is dominated by quartz biotite schist and forms part of the major regional metasedimentary rocks of the Swakop Group (Miller, 2008 and 1992). The schist is often gradational to biotite quartzite / greywacke. In general the schist is fine to medium grained, massive sections do occur throughout the stratigraphic section. The schist is typically moderately to well bedded. Bedding and the primary schistosity are, in general, defined by the alignment of fine to coarse-grained biotite. Bedding is commonly on the scale of 1 to 10 cm. Quartz and biotite are the most common constituents and are typically hosted within a fine-grained, biotite, chlorite, and minor sericite matrix. Minor pink garnets are locally developed in some places. Surficial deposits are characterised by the following materials:

(i) Minor boulders with rock fragments from localised loose rock head mainly quartz biotite schist;

(ii) Gravels from the ephemeral river channels within the vicinity of the proposed solar park site;

(iii) Sand and silts.

4.5.3 Water Sources

4.5.3.1 Overview

Water supply for the Town of Okahandja and the proposed solar park site is from Von Bach Dam. The Von Bach Dam is located about five (5) kilometres southeast of the town Okahandja. It has a capacity of about 49 million m³ and it is also the main water supply for the City of Windhoek. Groundwater as well as surface water (only during the rainy season) from ephemeral river channels is the sources of water supply in the area as well as much of the Otjozondjupa Region. According to the Department of Water Affairs, (2001), the Otjozondjupa Region and in particular the proposed project area generally has a low groundwater potential. The area with aquifer potential, more or less reflects the rainfall distribution, decreasing westwards. Knowledge of the aquifers in this area is sparse, due to the low number of boreholes and few on groundwater. Recharge from rainfall is an important parameter deter-mining the groundwater potential, but the degree of metamorphism affects the groundwater potential too. The groundwater potential of rocks decreases, as the degree of metamorphism increases. Rocks such as the various quartz schists found around the proposed site, exhibit a very low tendency to store water. Unfortunately, as indicated by the lithology, the proposed project area is underlain by quartz schists rocks that are not good aquifers. Possible targets for water resources in this area are mainly fractured zones and faults that outcrop on the surface without impermeable infillings. But the success rate and yields for these rock types are generally low. The proposed solar energy project will only require water for various construction related activities and limited for cleaning and maintenance during the operational stage. If water is require for the development stage or operational maintenance, it can be transported to site from the nearby municipal intake.

4.5.3.2 Water Vulnerability

The proposed project is likely to have no major negative impacts on the water resources. The local area does not seem to have economic water resources. Therefore, the development of the proposed solar park is likely to have no negative impacts on water resources.


5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT

5.1 Impact Assessment Criteria To ensure consistency in the evaluation of environmental impacts associated with the proposed 10MW solar park site development, the access road, powerline and cable trench routes, the rating criteria for the impact assessment has been standardised to include a set definitions often used in the risk assessment as shown in Table 5.1. Furthermore, when evaluating impacts, the allocated ranks refer to the resultant impact and not of the cause thereof. Each activity has been assessed with respect to the type of effect that the aspect will have on the relevant component of the receiving environment and includes “what will be affected and how?” Table 5.2 shows the criteria used in determining the significance. Table 5.1: The criteria used in the evaluation of environmental impacts.

Rating Definition of Rating

Status of the Impact – in terms of meeting the objective of maintaining a healthy environment.

Positive The impact benefits the environment

Negative The impact results in a cost to the environment

Neutral The impact has no effect

Probability – the likelihood of the impact occurring

Negligible Possibility negligible

Improbable Possibility very low

Probable Distinct possibility

Highly Probable Most likely

Definite Impact will occur regardless of preventive measures

Degree of confidence in predictions – in terms of basing the assessment on available information

Low Assessment based on extrapolated data

Medium Information base available but lacking

High Information base comparatively reliable

Extent – the area over which the impact will be experienced

Site specific Confined to within < 1 km of the project

Local Confined to the study area or within 5 km of the project

Regional Confined to the region, i.e. > 5 km but < National

National Nationally

International Beyond the borders of Namibia

Duration – the time frame for which the impact will be experienced

Temporally Less than 2 years

Short-term 2 to 5 years

Medium-term 6 to 15 years

Long-term More than 15 years

Permanent Generations

Intensity – the magnitude of the impact in relation to the sensitivity of the receiving environment

Negligible Natural functions and processes are negligibly altered due to adaptation by the receptor(s) to high natural environmental variability

Mild Natural functions and processes continue albeit in a modified way that does not appear to

have a significant disruptive effect (i.e. changes are temporary)

Moderate Natural functions and processes continue albeit in a modified way that does appear to have a

noticeable disruptive effect (i.e. changes are permanent)

Severe Natural functions or processes are altered to the extent that they temporarily cease resulting in severe deterioration of the impacted environment

Very Severe Natural functions or processes permanently cease or are completely disrupted


Table 5.2: The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the impact(s).

Low Where the impact will have a negligible influence on the environment and no modifications or mitigations are necessary for the given project description. This would be allocated to impacts of any severity/ magnitude, if at a local scale/ extent and of temporary duration/time.

Medium Where the impact could have an influence on the environment, which will require modification of the project design and/or alternative mitigation. This would be allocated to impacts of moderate severity, locally to regionally, and in the short term.

High

Where the impact could have a significant influence on the environment and, in the event of a negative impact, the activity(ies) causing it should not be permitted without substantial mitigation and management, and pro-active rehabilitation commitments (i.e. there could be a ‘no-go’ implication for the project). This would be allocated to impacts of severe magnitude, locally over the medium-term, and/or of severe magnitude regionally and beyond.

5.2 Issues Considered in the Assessment Process

5.2.1 Introduction The development of the proposed solar park will only be implemented following the completion of the environmental assessment process as well as other additional permits as may be applicable. According to the preliminary work plan, the implementation of the actual site development activities is likely to start in towards the end of 2017, beginning of 2018. The implementation of the development process has been subdivided into the following four (4) stages:

(i) Preconstruction;

(ii) Construction;

(iii) Operational and Ongoing Environmental Monitoring Stage;

(iv) Closure and Restoration. Unless otherwise indicated, all potential impacts will be valid for the duration of the proposed solar park life span initially estimated at twenty-five (25) years. The following is the summary of the activities (impact factors) associated with the preconstruction, construction, operational and rehabilitation stages of the proposed solar park:

Access roads preparation;

22 kV power line servitude linking the solar park to the substation;

Underground cable trenching as may be required;

Site clearing and preparation;

Fencing;

Soil / Ground preparation;

Power line connectivity;

Foundation;


Posts driving works;

Structure mounting;

Module clamping;

DC wiring and electrical equipment installation;

AC electrical works;

Installation of Communication Monitoring;

Commissioning;

Soar Energy Generation and Maintenance (for 25 Years);

Decommissioning (After 25 Years) / Upgrade of Facility. The impact assessment considerations include land disturbance/land use impacts; potential impacts to specially designated areas; impacts to soil, water and air resources; impacts to vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, and sensitive species; visual, cultural, paleontological, socioeconomic and potential impacts from hazardous materials.

5.3 Likely Positive Impacts 5.3.1 Summary of Likely Positive Impacts The proposed solar will reduce the environmental impacts of combustion used in fossil fuel power generation, such as impacts from greenhouse gases and other air pollution emissions. The following are the key likely positive impacts that have been evaluated for the proposed solar park:

Contribute to the energy security for Namibia;

Efforts to reduce climate change;

Improved energy and environment regulatory measures;

Awareness raising about alternative renewable energy sources;

Improved energy infrastructure, and;

Contribution to national (Namibia), regional (Otjozondjupa) and local (Okahandja) industrial and socioeconomic development through the provisions of reliable local energy sources.

Overall, the proposed development will significantly contribute local economic development and to the Namibia’s economy through capital injection and various taxes that will be payable for the lifespan of the proposed project.


5.3.2 Description and Assessment of Likely Negative Impacts

5.3.2.1 Overview

The following are the key likely negative impacts that have been assessed as part of the impact assessment process for the proposed solar park site, access route and powerline route:

Land use impacts;

Surficial geology;

Water use and quality;

Faunal loss;

Flora lose;

Landscape and visual change; Light reflection;

Ground conditions contamination; Noise and vibration;

Air quality;

Cultural and paleontological resources;

Socioeconomic;

Electrical safety;

Occupational health and safety;

Public access, and;

Waste management.

5.3.2.2 Land Use Impacts

Site-specific evaluation of the selected site /s were undertaken as part of the EIA process in order to make sure that the likely impacts are minimised. The proposed solar park will require a limited fenced area which is considerably small compared to the size of the entire undeveloped surrounding municipal land area. The current and likely future land use of the area will have no conflict with the proposed project development. The likely negative impacts of the proposed project on the current and future land uses of the selected and surrounding areas is very low because most of the current and future land uses can coexists with the proposed project (Table 5.3).


Table 5.3: Current and future land use impact assessment.

Impact on the current industrial zone / agricultural and other potential future land uses of the project area (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Probable

Confidence High

Extent Local project area with limited coverage

Duration Permanent for the duration of life span of the Solar PV Park

Intensity Very Low

Significance Negligible

5.3.2.3 Surficial Geology

The construction of the proposed solar park will not require any clearing and grading of the area during the preconstruction and construction stages because the land is already cleared. Based on the proposed engineering and construction methods, potential negative impacts to the local surficial materials, alteration of drainage channels, increased runoff and erosion effect have all been considered to be localised and the actual construction area will be localised and very low (Table 5.4). Appropriate siting, engineering and construction methods have been proposed as alternatives to development process. Table 5.4: Local surficial materials, alteration of drainage channels, increased runoff and

erosion effect impact assessment.

Potential negative impacts to the local surficial materials, alteration of drainage channels, increased runoff and erosion effect (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Probable

Confidence High

Extent Local project area with limited coverage

Duration Permanent for the duration of life span of the Solar PV Park

Intensity Very Low


5.3.2.4 Water Use and Quality

The use of water and any likely negative impacts that may be associated with the proposed solar park developed is limited compared to the water use in conventional power plants, (Table 5.5). According to Table 5.5, the proposed solar project will have very low impacts on the water consumption and will not affect the quality of the water resources in the area (Table 5.6). The non-use of hazardous chemicals in the development of the solar park and limited footprint and its influence on the local catchment area means that the likely project impacts on the water resources in term of water quality influences will be negligible. Table 5.5: Water consumption by conventional power plants, wind and solar (after

American Wind Energy Association).

Technology Litres per kWh Nuclear 2.30

Coal 1.90

Oil 1.60

Combined Cycle Gas 0.95

Wind* 0.004

Solar 0.110 * In arid environments, some water is used to clean the rotor blades in order to prevent dust and insect build-up.


Table 5.6: Water use and influences quality impact assessment.

Influence of the proposed Solar PV Park on the local water use and quality (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability

Improbable (impact will not occur because the activities of the proposed project are not associated with any polluting products and the entire project lifecycle will require very low amounts water (Table 5.3)

Confidence High

Extent Site specific

Duration Temporary

Intensity Very low


5.3.2.5 Faunal and Habitat Loss

Faunal loss at the proposed solar plant site would be localised. Table 5.7 indicates the potential / envisaged impacts expected regarding faunal destruction which is obviously closely linked to habitat destruction. The significance of faunal loss will be very low to negligible. Table 5.7: Faunal and habitat destruction impact assessment.

Assessment of faunal disturbance with respect to the proposed Solar PV Park site, Access and powerline

Status Negative

Probability

1. Access – Improbable (very short (80m) long access will not affect any local fauna. 2. Solar PV Park Site - Improbable (The proposed project area is already cleared and

has been used for agricultural activities (cultivation of crops) for a very long time. The entire area has no vegetation cover and for fauna were observed on the targeted cleared area during the field visit).

3. Powerline - Probable powerline may affect the local fauna marginally because the powerline route follows the already disturbed areas with existing powerlines.

Extent

1. Access route – Localised disruption/destruction of the habitat and thus consequently fauna associated directly with the actual route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

2. Solar plant development site – Localised disruption/destruction of the habitat and thus consequently fauna associated directly with the actual site. This however, would be a relatively small area – depending on scale of operations – with localised implications.

3. Pylon route – Localised disruption/destruction of the habitat and thus consequently fauna associated directly with the actual route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

Confidence High

Duration

1. Access route – The duration of the impact is expected to be permanent along the route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

2. Solar plant development site – The duration of the impact is expected to be permanent. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

3. Pylon route – The duration of the impact is expected to be permanent along the route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

Intensity Overall intensity will be low. The areas adjacent the development site and other associated infrastructure should not be significantly affected. This however, would depend on control over the contractors during the construction phase, but should be limited to localised implications. Areas not directly affected by the development and associated infrastructure although within the immediate area would be affected moderately. This would include dust, noise, pollution and other associated disturbances in the area.

Significance Before mitigation: Low to Very Low After mitigation: Very low to negligible


5.3.2.6 Flora Loss

Flora loss at the proposed solar plant site would be localised. Table 5.8 indicates the potential / envisaged impacts expected regarding flora destruction (which is obviously closely linked to habitat destruction). The significance of faunal loss will be very low to negligible (Table 5.8). Table 5.8: Overall floral, habitant and ecosystem disturbances impact assessment.

Assessment of the overall floral, habitant and ecosystem disturbances impact assessment with respect to the proposed Solar PV Park site, Access and powerline

Status Negative

Probability

1. Access – Improbable (very short (80m) long access will not affect any local fauna. 2. Solar PV Park Site - Improbable (The proposed project area is already cleared and

has been used for agricultural activities (cultivation of crops) for a very long time. The entire area has no vegetation cover and for fauna were observed on the targeted cleared area during the field visit).

3. Powerline- Probable the powerline may affect the local fauna marginally because the powerline route follows the already disturbed areas with existing powerlines.

Extent

1. Access route – Localised disruption/destruction of the habitat and thus consequently fauna associated directly with the actual route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

2. Solar plant development site – Localised disruption/destruction of the habitat and thus consequently fauna associated directly with the actual site. This however, would be a relatively small area – depending on scale of operations – with localised implications.

3. Pylon route – Localised disruption/destruction of the habitat and thus consequently fauna associated directly with the actual route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

Confidence High

Duration

1. Access route – The duration of the impact is expected to be permanent along the route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

2. Solar plant development site – The duration of the impact is expected to be permanent. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

3. Pylon route – The duration of the impact is expected to be permanent along the route. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

Intensity 1. Access route – The actual construction of the route would be permanently altered. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

2. Solar plant development site – The actual development site would be permanently altered. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

3. Pylon route – The actual construction of the route would be permanently altered. This however, would be a relatively small area with localised implications.

Overall intensity will be low. The areas adjacent the development site and other associated infrastructure should not be significantly affected. This however, would depend on control over the contractors during the construction phase, but should be limited to localised implications. Areas not directly affected by the development and associated infrastructure although within the immediate area would be affected moderately. This would include dust, noise, pollution and other associated disturbances in the area.

Significance Before mitigation: Low to Very Low After mitigation: Very low to negligible

5.3.2.7 Landscape and Visual Change

Landscape and visual change may occur as a result of clearing of the ground during the preconstruction and construction stages. The installation of the solar array in the absence of any vegetation and topographic break within the solar park will create a monotonous site. However, being visible is not necessarily the same as being intrusive. Aesthetic issues are by their nature highly subjective particularly when working in remote areas. The EIA approach of minimising the landscape and visual change focused on the overall design of the proposed solar park including limiting the height of the solar arrays, even at their steepest angle, to typically less than 4 m so that they not higher than the infrastructure in the surrounding area.


The likely significance negative visual impacts will be localised and medium to low at local level (change of current landscape) (Table 5.9). There is good major vegetation along the B2 road linking Okahandja to Karibib that will provide the necessary screening measures and shield the view of the solar park from the public and tourists using the B2 (Plates 5.1 and 5.2). However, the presence of other industrial activities such as brick making factory and Charcoal manufacturing within the vicinity of the proposed solar park will provide an alternative view that will break the monotonous solar park view while driving along the B2 road (Plates 5.1 and 5.2). Table 5.9: Visual impacts assessment.

Visual Impact as a result development of the proposed Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route

Status Negative

Probability Probable (subjective impact will occur regardless of prevention measures)

Confidence High

Extent Highly localised

Duration Permanent for the duration of life span of the Solar Park

Intensity Mild

Significance Medium to low due to existing infrastructure and local structures as well as the limited vegetation screen


Plate 5.1: Current view of the solar park site along the B2 Road to Karibib (RBS Image Series, 2017). Plate 5.2: Photomontage of the solar park site along the B2 Road to Karibib (RBS Image Series, 2017).


5.3.2.8 Light Reflection

Solar panels are designed to absorb, not reflect, irradiation. They are responsible for only a limited levels of either glint or glare and are less reflective than most surfaces. The likely significance impact associated with the light reflective impact will be very low (Table 5.10). Table 5.10: Light reflection impact assessment.

Light reflection interferences for the Solar Park

Status Negative

Probability Improbable

Confidence High

Extent Local (within project area)

Duration Permanent during the operational stage

Intensity Low


5.3.2.9 Ground Conditions Contamination

The proposed solar arrays will be installed using screw piled, piled or ballast supported systems or concrete plinths or other more intrusive foundations. The proposed project is a PV with a single axis tracker. The tracker is environmentally friendly maintenance and free from oil or any hydraulic fluids that may results in ground contamination. The significance impacts will be localised and low (Table 5.11). Table 5.11: Ground conditions contamination impact assessment.

Ground conditions contamination impact assessment mainly resulting from the foundation construction related activities (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Low to very low

Confidence High

Extent Local (<5 km)

Duration Temporally during the construction stage

Intensity Very Low

Significance Low due to the use high engineering and construction standards

5.3.2.10 Noise and Vibration

Localised and limited noise and vibrations may occur during the preconstruction and construction stages. During the operational stage, the solar cells which are inert solid state devices which convert light into electricity, will produce virtually no noise and no emissions. The inverters require some cooling, so there is a slight fan noise perceptible only if standing immediately adjacent to the housing. There are no fast moving parts. Any likely minor noise that may be associated with the tracking system (if this system is used) will have no perceptible noise. In this case all the modules will be moving during the day with no noise associated with the movement. There could be very small noise in the vicinity of the plant and the noise will be associated with the DC electrical engines that will drive the trackers. The likely overall significance impacts will be localised and low (Table 5.12).


Table 5.12: Noise / Sound impact assessment.

Noise / Sound Impact Assessment mainly resulting from preconstruction and construction related activities (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Definite (impact will occur regardless of prevention measures)

Confidence High

Extent Local (<5 km)

Duration Temporally for the duration preconstruction and construction stages lasting for six (6) months

Intensity Very Low

Significance Localised and low due to the use high construction standards and technology

5.3.2.11 Air Pollution and Quality

The key main sources of air pollution and effect to the local air quality will be the construction equipment, vehicles and dust. The main prevailing wind direction around the project area is from the south. Likely localised air quality impacts may be associated with the activities of the preconstruction and construction stages. The impacts may be due to traffic movements as well as excavations for the erection of fencing, foundations, access and powerline. During the operational stage, the panels do not give rise to any emissions which could impact on air quality. The likely negative air quality effects due to traffic movements during the operational stage will be negligible and highly limited to occasional maintenance visits to the site. The level of any likely significance negative impact will be low and temporary during the construction stage (Table 5.13). During windy events the solar park may be affected by dust from the surrounding areas including from the brick and charcoal factories situated to the north and west of the proposed solar site respectively. However, there is good natural vegetation that surrounds the entire solar park site that will minimising wind erosion that could result in dust generation from the brick and charcoal factories. Dust may affect the energy generation efficiency of the solar panels and increase the maintenance costs if washing of the surface of the panels need to be undertaken regularly. The likely significance negative impact will be low and temporary during of the dry season from June - November occasional windy events (Table 5.14). Table 5.13: Air pollution and quality impact assessment.

Air pollution and quality during, preconstruction and construction stages with respect to national and international standards (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Localised low

Confidence Medium


Duration Temporally, Occasional windy events

Intensity Low

Significance Low during the dry season June-November) windy events

Table 5.14: Impacts of dust on the solar panels energy generation efficiency.

Dust from the surrounding areas including dust mobilisation from the brick and charcoal factories may affect the solar panels energy generation efficiency

Status Negative

Probability Localised low

Confidence Medium


Duration Temporally, During the dry season June – November windy events

Intensity Low

Significance Low during the dry season June – November windy events


5.3.2.12 Cultural and Paleontological Resources

No cultural, paleontological artefacts or cultural landscapes or form of existing archaeological resources have been identified. The proposed solar park is targeting the flat areas, whereas potential archaeological resources such as rock paintings and historical early human existence in the general area are associated with the caves found in topographically high areas or along major Ephemeral River, both not suitable for solar park development. The level of any likely significance negative impact will be low to negligible (Table 5.15). Table 5.15: Archaeological, paleontological and historical aspects impact assessment.

Destruction / damage of sites of archaeological and/or palaeo-environmental value during site establishment, preconstruction, construction and operational and closure / upgrading stages (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Unknown, but improbable

Confidence Low; with regard to the value of the archaeological resource as a sound information base is lacking

Extent Site Specific

Duration Permanent

Intensity Very Severe; if archaeological artefacts or historical sites are destroyed

Significance Low to Negligible (Highly disturbed area)

5.3.2.13 Socioeconomic

Socioeconomic impacts of the proposed project throughout the various developmental stages are likely to be minimal and tend to be positive. A clear understanding of these impacts may help communities understand and anticipate the effects of the proposed project. One of the major possible impacts may be unrealistic job expectations about the proposed project. It’s important for local communities to bear in mind that it will take some time to fully develop the proposed solar energy project. No major influx of job seekers that could disrupt public services for the Town of Okahandja is expected. The following is the summary of the likely positive and negatively social, economic and cultural impacts:

(i) Employment: There will be many positive social impacts resulting from the proposed project which will benefit residents at local, regional and at national level. The provision of temporary preconstruction and construction employment to skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labourers is one of these positive benefits. It is likely that Namibians with relevant qualifications will be employed or contracted to do various tasks as required and more other opportunities are likely to arise for both semi-skilled and unskilled workers. This will help ease the chronic unemployment situation in the country, which was recently estimated at 52%. In this way the project will also contribute towards the government’s Vision 2030 plan;

(ii) Skills Development and Transfer of Knowledge: The proposed project will contribute

significantly towards skill development and knowledge transfer. Key areas to benefit will be knowledge and research opportunities in renewable energy and in particular the construction, operation, maintenance and decommissioning of the proposed 10MW solar energy project infrastructures. The transfer of skill must be implemented during pre-contraction in order to insure that by the time the project is operation, local Namibian will already fully skilled in participate in running the solar park;


(iii) Community Incentives through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Another way

the proposed project could benefit the local and regional communities would be through a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programme which could be used to invest some resources in local community initiatives. The CSR programme could be used to: fund schools developmental initiatives: Support the local community projects: generate human capacity development on renewable energy issues; conservation activities or for HIV/AIDS prevention programmes around Okahandja;

(iv) Promotion of Greener Energy Usage: The economic development of any country

depends much on the ability of its people to utilise the available resources at its disposal. Namibia has a competitive advantage over many other countries in the in Southern Africa in terms of potentials and opportunities in renewable energy generation. Its location means it is subject to consistent high solar radiation conditions which offer much potential to energy generation. The proposed project can boost economic growth in Namibia by providing reliable energy supply. It will also help Namibia to become self-sufficient in energy provision, in alliance with other green energy schemes such as wind energy and hydro power. This is particularly important given the current energy problems facing the country;

(v) Infrastructural Development: The project is likely to contribute positively to the

infrastructural development in the local area. It is planned that the existing access road(s) will be upgraded or constructed during the construction phase, so that the solar panels and all the associated components can be transported to the site and installed. These developments will contribute to economic development in the region and give local residents some incentives to improvement on their livelihoods and economic status;

(vi) Mitigating Climate Change: The effects of climate change are being felt in almost all

the regions of Namibia in terms of droughts etc. The country is for the most part an extremely arid region, relying on ephemeral rivers to supply water to its increasing population and industrial development. Energy for the increasing needs of the region is also typically imported from fossil-fuel burning power stations in Southern Africa. The proposed renewable energy project would represent a considerable additional response to the threat of climate change. It would contribute to reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

5.3.2.14 Electrical Safety and Grid-Connection

Electrical safety impacts have been assessed based on the Engineering Standards of the proposed solar park against the NamPower, Electricity Control Board (ECB) and Ministry of Mines and Energy regulatory requirements and standards. The electrical aspects of the proposed solar park are covered by Engineering Standard that are in line with the provisions of NamPower, Electricity Control Board (ECB) and Ministry of Mines and Energy requirements. Operation of solar facilities, may involve high temperatures that may pose an environmental or safety risk in some instances. Like all electrical generating facilities, solar facilities produce electric and magnetic fields. The Engineering Standards for the proposed solar park sets down requirements for electrical safety and grid-connection of generating systems. Cabling and power line linking the solar park to the equipment housing as well as the powerline link to the substation will all be undertaken in accordance with NamPower, Electricity Control Board


(ECB) and Ministry of Mines and Energy regulatory requirements and standards, resulting in low and negligible impacts (Table 5.16). Table 5.16: Electrical safety electrical safety and grid-connection impact assessment.

Assessment of electrical safety and grid-connection impacts (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Low

Confidence High

Extent Site Specific Occupational Health and Safety Matter

Duration Temporary during construction and operational / maintenance / closure / upgrading stages

Intensity Sever if an accident occurs

Significance Low due to high NamPower, Electricity Control Board (ECB) and Ministry of Mines and Energy regulatory requirements and standards

5.3.2.15 Occupational Health and Safety (OHS)

The proposed project development is associated with a number of health and safety challenges and these have been assessed as part of environmental assessment process. Hazards associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the proposed solar park include, physical hazards such as working at heights and in confined spaces, working with moving machinery as well as falling objects. Adhering to the engineering standards, provisions of the Labour Act and use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) at all times will minimise the likely impacts low (Table 5.17). Table 5.17: Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) impact assessment.

Impacts Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Medium

Confidence High

Extent Site Specific Occupational Health and Safety Matter

Duration Temporary during construction and operational / maintenance / closure / upgrading stages

Intensity Sever if an accident occurs

Significance Low through adhering to the engineering standards, provisions of the Labour Act and use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).

5.3.2.16 Restricted Public Access, Vandalism and Theft Prevention

Issue of security and structural protection from vandalism of great concerns. However, the proposed solar park site falls within undeveloped land current no public access to the area. However, despite the current seclusion status of the site, human activities will increase around the site and vandalism and theft of the solar panels can still take place and as such additional measures to secure the site will need to be implemented. Some of the management measures that will be implemented to prevent vandalism or theft of the solar panels and associated components occurring are:

All round perimeter electrified fencing of the solar park with a single high security gate access;


Alarm system around the solar park perimeter;

24 hour security services will be provided including monitoring of the solar park

peripheral by security personnel and alarm system. The implementation of the above measures aimed at preventing vandalism or theft of the solar panels will not affect public access because the proposed solar park is situated in secluded part of the townlands. The level of any likely significance negative impact will be negligible (Table 5.18). Table 5.18: Restricted public access, vandalism and theft prevention impact assessment.

Prevention of vandalism and theft restricting public access (Solar Park)

Status Negative

Probability Improbable (Secluded property);

Confidence High

Extent Local

Duration Permanent (Secluded property)

Intensity Low (Secluded property)

Significance Negligible (Secluded property)

5.3.2.17 Waste Management

The construction and operational maintenance of the proposed Solar Park, access and powerline routes will be associated with very limited waste and no large quantities of hazardous waste /materials. Construction waste such as cement / concrete / steel remains and packaging wastes will dominates the preconstruction and construction phases. The assessment results of likely negative impacts associated with liquid and solid waste management with respect to the proposed project are shown in Table 5.19. All the liquid and solid waste that will be generated during the site establishment, preconstruction, construction and operational and closure / upgrading stages will be managed in accordance with the national regulations and standards and the management will be undertaken as follows:

(i) Solid Waste: Waste specific sealed containers will be provided at all times around the site and sorting, reuse and recycling will be encouraged. All generated waste will be disposed of at the local approved municipal waste disposal site;

(ii) Liquid Waste: Liquid waste will be managed using the already existing infrastructure. In the absence of such existing infrastructure being available within reasonable distance, chemical toilets will be made available around the solar park site, access and powerline routes.

The operational phase will have very little or no massive amounts of both liquid and solid waste.


Table 5.19: Liquid and solid waste management impact assessment.

Liquid and solid waste management during, site establishment, preconstruction, construction and operational and closure / upgrading stages with respect to national and international standards (Solar Park site, Access and Powerline route)

Status Negative

Probability Low;

Confidence High


Duration Very Short During the construction phase of six (6) months

Intensity Low


5.4 Public Consultations and Engagement

5.4.1 Overview The proposed project has gone through a publicly advertised generation license application process by the Electricity Control Board (ECB). All the key institutional stakeholders such as Cenored, NamPower, Ministry of Mines and Energy, Electricity Control Board (ECB), Regional Council and Okahandja Municipality are all fully aware of the proposed project. During the preparation of the initial project proposal and planning stages and generation license application, the proponent also contacted all the key institutional stakeholders relevant to the proposed project and inclusive of the land owner (Okahandja Municipality) who has agreed in writing to make available the land for the proposed project. As such there was no need of again writing to the various institutional stakeholders and the landowner during the Environmental Assessment process. However, further public consultation and engagement has been part of the EIA process for this project. In line with the environmental regulatory requirements a Draft Scoping Report was prepared to be made available to registered stakeholders as part of the consultation requirements (Annex 1). Public notices were published in the local newspapers from February to July 2017, over six (6) months of consultation period as shown in Figs. 5.1-5.6, while telephones, faxes, letters and emails were part of the communication and outreach strategy. A stakeholder register was opened and despite the advertisements (Figs. 5.1- 5.6) only three (3) registration were received with respect to the land allocation and boundaries.

5.4.2 Summary Discussions on Public Consultation Process An objection by the Ministry of Health and Social Services (MHSS) as well as the principal agents and engineers for their project were received with respect to the land allocation by the municipality. The issue of land allocation was referred to local authority who clarified the site allocations to the MHSS and the proposed solar park project. During the public consultations and disclosure process, and apart from the land issue, no inputs or comments requiring further discussions were received. In the absence of any public interest and based on the findings of this EIA Vol. 2 of 3 Report and the prepared EMP Vol. 3 of 3 report no further public consultations will be undertaken as part of the Environmental assessment process. Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) and on behalf of the proponent will be submitting the EIA and EMP reports in support of the application for Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park project.


Figure 5.1: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Windhoek

Observer newspaper on the 10th February 2017.



Observer newspaper on the 3rd March 2017.


Figure 5.3: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Republikein

newspaper on the 9th March 2017.


Figure 5.4: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Confidente

newspaper on the 2nd – 8th March 2017.



Observer newspaper on the 30th June 2017.


Figure 5.6: Copy of the newspaper notice that was published in the Confidente

newspaper on the 29th June - 5th July 2017.


5.5 Semi-Quantitative Evaluation of Impacts

5.5.1 Impact Factors (Project Activities)

Key project activities have been characterised as sources of impact and have been classified

into impact factors in order to assess the likely impacts of the proposed project activities on

the physical, biological and socioeconomic environment. Impact factors have been evaluated

separately for each environmental component relevant for the scope of this study.

5.5.2 Evaluation of Project Activities Impacts

5.5.2.1 Summary Overview

In evaluating the degree of potential impacts, the following factors have been taken into

consideration:

(i) Impact Severity: The severity of an impact is a function of a range of considerations;

(ii) Likelihood of Occurrence (Probability): How likely is the impact to occur?

5.5.2.2 Severity Criteria for Environmental Impacts

In evaluating the severity of potential environmental impacts, the following factors have been

taken into consideration:

Receptor/ Resource Characteristics: The nature, importance and sensitivity to

change of the receptors / target or resources that could be affected;

Impact Magnitude: The magnitude of the change that is induced;

Impact Duration: The time period over which the impact is expected to last;

Impact Extent: The geographical extent of the induced change, and;

Regulations, Standards and Guidelines: The status of the impact in relation to

regulations (eg. discharge limits), standards (eg. environmental quality criteria) and

guidelines.

The overall impact severity has been categorised using a subjective scale as shown in Table

5.20 for magnitude, Table 5.21 for duration and Table 5.22 for extent.


Table 5.20: Scored on a scale from 0 to 5 for impact magnitude.

SCALE DESCRIPTION

0 no observable effect

1 low effect

2 tolerable effect

3 medium high effect

4 high effect

5 very high effect (devastation)

Table 5.21: Scored time period over which the impact is expected to last.

SCALE DESCRIPTION

T Temporary

P Permanent

Table 5.22: Scored geographical extent of the induced change.

SCALE DESCRIPTION

L limited impact on location

O impact of importance for municipality;

R impact of regional character

N impact of national character

M impact of cross-border character

5.5.2.3 Likelihood (Probability) of Occurrence

The likelihood (probability) of the pre-identified events occurring has been ascribed using a

qualitative scale of probability categories (in increasing order of likelihood) as shown in Table

5.23. Likelihood is estimated on the basis of experience and/ or evidence that such an

outcome has previously occurred. Impacts resulting from routine/planned events (i.e., normal

operations) are classified under category (E).

Table 5.23: Summary of the qualitative scale of probability categories (in increasing order of likelihood).

SCALE DESCRIPTION

A Extremely unlikely (e.g. never heard of in the industry)

B Unlikely (e.g. heard of in the industry but considered unlikely)

C Low likelihood (egg such incidents/impacts have occurred but are uncommon)

D Medium likelihood (e.g. such incidents/impacts occur several times per year within the

industry)

E High likelihood (e.g. such incidents/impacts occurs several times per year at each

location where such works are undertaken)


5.5.3 Project Activities Summary of Impacts Results The results of the impacts assessment and evaluation has adopted a matrix framework similar to the Leopold matrix. The Leopold matrix is a two dimensional matrix cross-referencing the following:

The activities linked to the project that are supposed to have an impact on man and the environment;

The existing environmental and social conditions that could possibly be affected by the

project. The activities linked to the proposed solar park development are listed on one axis, while the environmental and social conditions are listed on the other axis, and divided in following two (2) major groups:

(i) Physical Environment:

o Physical conditions: receiving environment, air, etc.;

o Biological conditions: fauna, flora, ecosystems etc., and;

o Social and cultural conditions: Socioeconomic setting, historical and cultural issues, populations, economy…

(ii) Biological Environment:

o Fauna;

o Flora;

o Habitants.

Assessment results of the magnitude, duration, extent and probability of the potential impacts due to the proposed project activities interacting with the receiving environment are presented in form of a matrix as shown in Tables 5.24 – 5.27. The overall severity of potential environmental impacts of the proposed project activities will have low magnitude (Table 5.24), temporally duration (Table 5.25), localised extent (Table 5.26) and low probability of occurrence (Table 5.27). It is important to note that impacts have been considered without the implementation of mitigation measures. The need for and appropriate mitigation measures as presented in the EMP Vol. 3 of 3 Report have be determined on the basis of the impact assessment presented in this report.


Table 5.24: Results of the scored on a scale from 0 to 5 for negative impact magnitude.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT KEY

RECEPTORS / TARGETS THAT MAY BE IMPACTED (RESOURCES) PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

Natural Environment – Air,

Noise, Water, Green Space

Built Environment – Houses, Roads,

Transport Systems, Buildings, Infrastructure

Socioeconomic and Cultural –Characteristics of

the local societies and communities

Flora

Fauna

Habitat

SO

UR

CE

S O

F P

OT

EN

TIA

L IM

PA

CT

DEVELOPMENT STAGES

ACTIVITIES

PRECONSTRUCTION

Access roads preparation 2 1 1 2 2 2 Site clearing and grading 2 1 1 2 2 2

CONSTRUCTION

Fencing 2 1 1 2 2 2 22 kV Power line to substation

2 1 1 2 2 2

Soil / Ground preparation 1 1 1 2 2 2 Underground cable trenching

1 1 1 2 2 2

Solar Panels Foundation 1 1 1 0 0 0 Posts driving works 1 1 1 2 2 2 Structure mounting 0 0 0 0 0 0 Module clamping 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cabling and electrical equipment installation

0 0 0 0 0 0

AC electrical works 0 0 0 0 0 0 Power line connectivity 0 0 0 0 0 0 Installation of Communication Monitoring

0 0 0 0 0 0

OPERATION Commissioning 0 0 0 1 1 1 Solar Energy Generation and Maintenance (for 25 Years)

0 0 0 1 1 1

DECOMMISSIONING/ REHABILITATION / AFTERCARE

Decommissioning (After 25 Years) / Upgrade of Facility

1 1 1 1 1 1


Table 5.25: Results of the scored time period over which the impact is expected to last.



Natural Environment – Air, Noise, Water, Green Space

Built Environment – Houses, Roads, Transport Systems, Buildings, Infrastructure

Socioeconomic and Cultural –Characteristics of the local societies and communities

Flora

Fauna

Habitat

SO

UR

CE

S O

F P

OT

EN

TIA

L IM

PA

CT

DEVELOPMENT STAGES

ACTIVITIES

PRECONSTRUCTION

Access roads preparation T T T P P

p

Site clearing and grading P T T P P P

CONSTRUCTION

Fencing P T T P P P 22 kV Power line to substation

P T T P P P Soil / Ground preparation

T T T T T T Underground cable trenching

T T T T T T Solar Panels Foundation

T T T T T T Posts driving works T T T T T T Structure mounting T T T T T T Module clamping T T T T T T Cabling and electrical equipment installation

T T T T T T AC electrical works T T T T T T Power line connectivity T T T T T T Installation of Communication Monitoring

T T T T T T

OPERATION Commissioning T T T T T T Solar Energy Generation and Maintenance (for 25 Years)

p p p P P P


Solar Energy Generation and Maintenance (for 25 Years)

T T T T T T


Table 5.26: Results of the scored geographical extent of the induced change.






Flora

Fauna

Habitat

SO

UR

CE

S O

F P

OT

EN

TIA

L IM

PA

CT

DEVELOPMENT STAGES

ACTIVITIES

PRECONSTRUCTION

Access roads preparation

L L L L L L Site clearing and grading

L L L L L L CONSTRUCTION

Fencing L L L L L L 22 kV Power line to substation

L L L L L L Soil / Ground preparation L L L L L L Underground cable trenching

L L L L L L Solar Panels Foundation L L L L L L Posts driving works L L L L L L Structure mounting L L L L L L Module clamping L L L L L L Cabling and electrical equipment installation

L L L L L L AC electrical works L L L L L L Power line connectivity L L L L L L Installation of Communication Monitoring

L L L L L L

OPERATION Commissioning L L L L L L


L L L L L L



L L L L L L


Table 5.27: Results of the qualitative scale of probability occurrence.






Flora

Fauna

Habitat

SO

UR

CE

S O

F P

OT

EN

TIA

L IM

PA

CT

DEVELOPMENT STAGES

ACTIVITIES

PRECONSTRUCTION


C B B C C C Site clearing and grading C B B C C C

CONSTRUCTION

Fencing C B B C C C 22 kV Power line to substation

C B B C C C Soil / Ground preparation

B B B C C C Underground cable trenching

B B B C C C Solar Panels Foundation

B B B A A A Posts driving works B B B C C C Structure mounting A A A A A A Module clamping A A A A A A Cabling and electrical equipment installation

A A A A A A AC electrical works A A A A A A Power line connectivity A A A A A A Installation of Communication Monitoring

A A A A A A

OPERATION Commissioning A A A B B B


A A A B B B



B B B B B B


5.6 Evaluation of Significant Impacts

5.6.1 Overview The significance of each impact has been determined by assessing the impact severity against the likelihood (probability) of the impact occurring as summarised in the impact significance assessment matrix provided in Table 5.28.

5.6.2 Significance Criteria Significance criteria for negative/adverse impacts (i.e., relative ranking of importance) are defined in Table 5.28. It is important to note that impacts have been considered without the implementation of mitigation measures. The need for and appropriate mitigation measures as presented in the EMP Vol. 3 of 3 Report have be determined on the basis of the impact assessment presented in this report. Table 5.28: Scored impact significance criteria.

IMPACT LIKELIHOOD

IMPACT

SEVERITY

Extremely Unlikely

[0]

Unlikely

[1]

Low Likelihood

[2]

Medium Likelihood

[3]

High Likelihood

[4]

Slight

[A]

Negligible Impact [A0]





Low

[B]

Negligible Impact [B0]



Negligible to Low Impact [B3]

Low Impact [B4]

Medium

[C]

Negligible Impact [C0]

Negligible Impact [C1]

Low Impact

[C2]

Low to Medium

Impact

[C3]

Medium Impact

[C4]

High

[D]

Negligible to Low

Impact

[D0]

Low Impact

[D1]

Medium Impact

[D2]

High Impact

[D3]

High to

Unacceptable

Impact

[D4]

5.6.3 Assessment Likely Significant Impacts The assessment of significant impacts depended upon the degree to which the proposed project activities are likely to results in unwanted consequences on the receptor covering physical and biological environments (Table 5.29). Overall, the assessment of significant impacts has focused on the ecosystem-based approach that considers potential impacts to the ecosystem. The main key sources of impacts that have been used in the determination of significant impacts posed by the proposed solar park comprised all the activities associated with the preconstruction, construction, operation and decommissioning stages. Each of the main areas of impact have been identified and assessed as follows:


Positive Impacts are classified under a single category; they are then evaluated qualitatively with a view to their enhancement, if practical;

Negligible or Low Impacts will require little or no additional management or mitigation

measures (on the basis that the magnitude of the impact is sufficiently small, or that the receptor is of low sensitivity);

Medium or High Impacts require the adoption of management or mitigation measures;

High Impacts always require further management or mitigation measures to limit or

reduce the impact to an acceptable level. Overall the results of the significant impact assessment matrix for the proposed solar park as shown in Tables 5.28 and 5.29 is low impact [C2] significant impacts on the biological environmental (fauna, flora and habitant) with respect to the activities of the preconstruction and part of the constructions stage. The rest of the activities of the construction, operational and decommissioning stages will have negligible impact [B0] on the biological environment (Tables 5.28 and 5.29). In accordance with Table 5.28 and 5.29, the following is the summary of the results of the significant impacts of the proposed solar park project activities on the physical environment:

Natural Environment – Air, noise, water and green space with assessment of low impacts [C2] for preconstruction and part of the constructions stage, negligible impact [B1] for 1st parts of the construction stage and negligible impact [B0] for the rest of the construction, operational and decommissioning stages;

Built Environment – Houses, roads, transport systems, buildings and infrastructure with assessment of negligible impact [B1] for preconstruction and the 1st parts of the construction stage and negligible impact [B0] for the rest of the construction, operational and decommissioning stages;


with assessment of negligible impact [B1] for preconstruction and the 1st parts of the construction stage and negligible impact [B0] for the rest of the construction, operational and decommissioning stages.


Table 5.29: Significant impact assessment matrix for the proposed Okahandja Solar PV Park.

SIGNIFICANT IMPACT KEY


Natural Environment – Air,

Noise, Water, Green Space

Built Environment – Houses, Roads,

Transport Systems, Buildings, Infrastructure

Socioeconomic and Cultural –Characteristics of

the local societies and communities

Flora

Fauna

Habitat

SO

UR

CE

S O

F P

OT

EN

TIA

L IM

PA

CT

DEVELOPMENT STAGES

ACTIVITIES

PRECONSTRUCTION


[C2] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2]

Site clearing and grading [C2] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2]

CONSTRUCTION

Fencing [C2] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2] 22 kV Power line to substation

[C2] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2]

Soil / Ground preparation

[B1] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2]

Underground cable trenching

[B1] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2]

Solar Panels Foundation

[B1] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2]

Posts driving works [B1] [B1] [B1] [C2] [C2] [C2] Structure mounting [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0]

Module clamping [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] Cabling and electrical

equipment installation [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0]

AC electrical works [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] Power line connectivity [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] OPERATION Installation of

Communication Monitoring

[B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0]

Commissioning [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0]



[B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0] [B0]


6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Solar Park Opportunities Solar energy represent a viable solution to Namibia’s energy challenges. Solar energy has very low to negligible, highly localised environmental impact which constitutes one of its primary high positive selling points. The proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV Park will not only contribute to the overall national energy security but will also contribute to the promotion of renewable energy development and expansion of the national generation capacity. Overall, the development of renewable energies mix in Namibia will greatly reduce the overall national energy carbon footprint and will support efforts aimed at reducing the effects of climate change in Namibia.

6.2 Conclusions The proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV project activities covering preconstruction, construction and operation, closure / upgrade, rehabilitation and aftercare of the site and inclusive of the access road, overhead powerline and the underground cable trench, will all have an overall localised low negative impacts on the receiving environment (physical, biological, socioeconomic environments and ecosystem functions, services, use and non-use values or passive uses). Despite the low and localised likely negative impacts it’s imperative that general site-based mitigation measures must be prepared covering the Solar Park and powerline preconstruction, construction, operational and maintenance as well as any rehabilitation process that maybe required once the project reaches its lifespan of 25 years.

6.3 Recommendations It is hereby recommended that Okahandja Solar (Pty) Ltd (the proponent) shall be issued with the Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for the development (preconstruction, construction and operation) of the proposed 10MW Okahandja Solar PV park, access road and the 22.5 km long overhead powerline near Okahandja in the Otjozondjupa Region in north central Namibia. Mitigation measures that will enhance the positive impacts and minimise the negative impacts have also been developed and management strategies are provided in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Report Vol. 3 of 3 covering the following key areas:

(i) Solar Park and powerline development (Preconstruction and construction stages):

Socioeconomic and environmental performance;

Community, Health and Safety;

Change in land use from “Industrial / Agriculture” to “Energy Generation”;

Visual, noise and vibrations;

Species (birds and bats) injury, disturbance (and potential alteration of

behaviour), or mortality;

Disturbance of fauna and flora and habitat alteration;


Pollution of biophysical environment (air, soil and water);


Soil erosion;

Possible loss of the seed bank in the topsoil;

Air quality (dust or Particulate Matter (PM) pollution), and;


(ii) Solar Park and powerline operational and maintenance stage:

Social and Environmental Performance;

Community Health and Safety;



Attraction of species (birds and bats) to the area due to open water and

subsequent injury, disturbance, or mortality of species;

Species injury, disturbance (and potential alteration of behaviour), or mortality;

Pollution of biophysical environment (soil and water), and;


(iii) Solar Park and powerline rehabilitation stage:

Social and environmental performance and visual, and;

Socioeconomic.


7. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Alexander, G. & Marais, J. 2007. A guide to the reptiles of southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Barnard, P. 1998. Underprotected habitats. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Bester, B. 1996. Bush encroachment – A thorny problem. Namibia Environment 1: 175-177. Branch, B. 1998. Field guide to snakes and other reptiles of southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Branch, B. 2008. Tortoises, terrapins & turtles of Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Boycott, R.C. & Bourquin, O. 2000. The Southern African Tortoise Book. O Bourquin, Hilton, RSA. Broadley, D.G. 1983. Fitzsimons’ Snakes of southern Africa. Jonathan Ball & AD. Donker Publishers, Parklands, RSA. Brown, C.J., Jarvis, A., Robertson, T. & Simmons, R. 1998. Bird diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Buys, P.J. & Buys, P.J.C. 1983. Snakes of Namibia. Gamsberg Macmillan Publishers, Windhoek, Namibia. Carruthers, V.C. 2001. Frogs and frogging in southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Channing, A. 2001. Amphibians of Central and Southern Africa. Protea Bookhouse, Pretoria, RSA. Channing, A. & Griffin, M. 1993. An annotated checklist of the frogs of Namibia. Madoqua 18(2): 101-116. Coats Palgrave, K. 1983. Trees of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Craven, P. 1998. Lichen diversity in Namibia. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Craven, P. (ed.). 1999. A checklist of Namibian plant species. Southern African Botanical Diversity Network Report No. 7, SABONET, Windhoek. Cunningham, P.L. 1998. Potential wood biomass suitable for charcoal production in Namibia. Agri-Info 4(5): 4-8. Cunningham, P.L. 2006. A guide to the tortoises of Namibia. Polytechnic of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia.


Curtis, B. & Barnard, P. 1998. Sites and species of biological, economic or archaeological importance. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Curtis, B. & Mannheimer, C. 2005. Tree Atlas of Namibia. National Botanical Research Institute, Windhoek, Namibia. De Graaff, G. 1981. The rodents of southern Africa. Buterworths, RSA. Du Preez, L. & Carruthers, V. 2009. A complete guide to the frogs of southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Estes, R.D. 1995. The behaviour guide to African mammals. Russel Friedman Books, Halfway House, RSA. Giess, W. 1971. A preliminary vegetation map of South West Africa. Dinteria 4: 1 – 114. Griffin, M. 1998a. Reptile diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Griffin, M. 1998b. Amphibian diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Griffin, M. 1998c. Mammal diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Griffin, M. 2003. Annotated checklist and provisional national conservation status of Namibian reptiles. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek. Griffin, M. 2005. Annotated checklist and provisional national conservation status of Namibian mammals. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek. Hebbard, S. n.d. A close-up view of the Namib and some of its fascinating reptiles. ST Promotions,Swakopmund, Namibia. Hockey, P.A.R., Dean, W.R.J. & Ryan, P.G. 2006. Roberts Birds of Southern Africa VII Edition. John Voelcker Bird Book Fund. IUCN, 2010. 2010 IUCN red list of threatened animals, IUCN, Gland, Switserland. Joubert, E. & Mostert, P.M.K. 1975. Distribution patterns and status of some mammals in South West Africa. Madoqua 9(1): 5-44. Komen, L. n.d. The Owls of Namibia – Identification and General Information. NARREC, Windhoek. Maclean, G.L. 1985. Robert’s birds of southern Africa. John Voelcker Bird Book Fund. Maggs, G. 1998. Plant diversity in Namibia. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Mannheimer, C. & Curtis, B. (eds) 2009. Le Roux and Müller’s field guide to the trees and shrubs of N amibia. Macmillan Education Namibia, Windhoek.


Marais, J. 1992. A complete guide to the snakes of southern Africa. Southern Book Publishers, Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg, RSA. Mendelsohn, J., Jarvis, A., Roberts, A. & Robertson, T. 2002. Atlas of Namibia. A portrait of the land and its people. David Philip Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Monadjem, A., Taylor, P.J., F.P.D. Cotterill & M.C. Schoeman. 2010. Bats of southern and central Africa. Wits University press, Johannesburg, RSA. Müller, M.A.N. 1984. Grasses of South West Africa/Namibia. John Meinert Publishers (Pty) Ltd, Windhoek, Namibia. Müller, M.A.N. 2007. Grasses of Namibia. John Meinert Publishers (Pty) Ltd, Windhoek, Namibia. NACSO, 2006. Namibia’s communal conservancies: a review of progress and challenges in 2005. NACSO, Windhoek. NACSO, 2010. Namibia’s communal conservancies: a review of progress and challenges in 2009. NACSO, Windhoek. Passmore, N.I. & Carruthers, V.C. 1995. South African Frogs – A complete guide. Southern Book Publishers, Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg, RSA. Rothmann, S. 2004. Aloes, aristocrats of Namibian flora. ST promotions, Swakopmund. SARDB, 2004. CBSG Southern Africa. In: Griffin, M. 2005. Annotated checklist and provisional national conservation status of Namibian mammals. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek. Schultz, M. & Rambold, G. 2007. Diversity shifts and ecology of soil lichens in central Namibia. Talk, Ecological Society of Germany, Austria and Switzerland (GfÖ), 37th Annual Meeting, Marburg: 12/9/2007 to 15/9/2007. Schultz, M., Zedda, L. & Rambold, G. 2009. New records of lichen taxa from Namibia and South Africa. Bibliotheca Lichenologica 99: 315-354. Simmons, R.E. 1998a. Important Bird Areas (IBA’s) in Namibia. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Simmons, R.E. 1998b. Areas of high species endemism. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Simmons R.E. & Brown C.J. 2009. Birds to watch in Namibia: red, rare and endemic species. National Biodiversity Programme, Windhoek. Skinner, J.D. & Smithers, R.H.N. 1990. The mammals of the southern African subregion. University of Pretoria, RSA. Skinner, J.D. & Chimimba, C.T. 2005. The mammals of the southern African subregion. Cambridge University Press, Cape Town, RSA. Stander, P. & Hanssen, L. 2003. Namibia large carnivore atlas. Unpublished Report, Ministry of Environment & Tourism, Windhoek.


Steyn, M. 2003. Southern Africa Commiphora. United Litho, Arcadia, South Africa. Tarboton, W. 2001. A guide to the nests & eggs of southern African birds. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Taylor, P.J. 2000. Bats of southern Africa. University of Natal Press, RSA. Tolley, K. & Burger, M. 2007. Chameleons of southern Africa. Struik Nature, Cape Town, RSA. Van Oudtshoorn, F. 1999. Guide to grasses of southern Africa. Briza Publications, Pretoria, South Africa. Van Wyk, B. & Van Wyk, P. 1997. Field guide to trees of Southern Africa. Cape Town: Struik Publishers. 2. FURTHER READING ON SOLAR ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT Alsema, E.A., 1996. Environmental Aspects of Solar Cell Modules, Summary Report, Report 96074, Department of Science, Technology and Society, Utrecht University.

Basore P. A., "CSG-1: Manufacturing a New Polycrystalline Silicon PV Technology," in Conference Record of the 2006 IEEE 4th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, Hawaii, 2006, pp. 2089-2093.

European PhotoVoltaic Industry Association (EPIA) / Greenpeace International, 2008. Advanced Scenario Solar electricity for over one billion people and two million jobs by 2020, Brussels / Amsterdam. Fthenakis, V.M. and P.D. Moskowitz, 1995. Thin-film Photovoltaic Cells: Health and Environmental Issues in their Manufacture, Use and Disposal, Progress in Photovoltaics, 3, p. 295-306.

Green M. A., "Consolidation of Thin-film Photovoltaic Technology: The Coming Decade of Opportunity," Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, vol. 14, pp. 383-392, August 2006.

Green M. A., P. A. Basore, N. Chang, D. Clugston, R. Egan, R. Evans, D. Hogg, S. Jarnason, M. Keevers, P. Lasswell, J. O'Sullivan, U. Schubert, A. Turner, S. R. Wenham, and T. Young, "Crystalline silicon on glass (CSG) thin-film solar cell modules," Solar Energy, vol. 77, pp. 857-863, 2004.

Huber, W. and G. Kolb, 1995. Life cycle analysis of silicon-based photovoltaic systems, Solar Energy, 54(3), p. 153-163. Hynes, K.M., Baumann, A.E., and Hill, R. 1994. An assessment of environmental impacts of thin film cadmium telluride modules based on life cycle analysis, 1st World Conf. on PV Energy Conversion, Hawaii. IHS, 2013. Predictions for the Solar Industry in 2014: Top 10 Trends for the Year Ahead IHS Whitepaper, December 2013, http://www.ihs.com/info/sc/a/solar-predictions-2014.aspx


Jin X, Gao P, Wang D, Hu X, Chen GZ (2004). Electrochemical preparation of silicon and its alloys from solid oxides in molten calcium chloride. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 43 (6): 733–6.

Kalogirou S.A., Y. Tripanagnostopoulos (2006). "Hybrid PV/T solar systems for domestic hot water and electricity production". Energy Conversion and Management 47 (18-19): 3368. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2006.01.012.

Moskowitz, P.D., N. Bernholc, V.M. Fthenakis, R.M. Pardi, H. Steinberger, and W. Thumm, 1995. Environmental, Health and Safety Issues Related to the Production and Use of Cadmium Telluride Photovoltaic Modules, in: Advances in Solar Energy, Vol 10, K.W. Boer (Eds.), American Solar Energy Society, Boulder, CO, , p. 211-245.

Nohira T, Yasuda K, Ito Y (2003). "Pinpoint and bulk electrochemical reduction of insulating silicon dioxide to scon". Nat Mater 2 (6): 397–401. doi:10.1038/nmat900. PMID 12754498.

Terrazzoni-Daudrix V., F.-J. Haug, C. Ballif, et al., "The European Project Flexcellence Roll to Roll Technology for the Production of High Efficiency Low Cost Thin Film Solar Cells," in Proc. of the 21st European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 4–8 September 2006, pp. 1669-1672.

Swanson R. M., "A Vision for Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaics," Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, vol. 14, pp. 443-453, August 2006.

Yamaura et al., J. (2003). "Ultraviolet light selective photodiode based on an organic–inorganic heterostructure". Appl. Phys. Lett. 83: 2097. doi:10.1063/1.1610793.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES International Finance Corporation (IFC). April 2006. Performance Standards on Social & Environmental Sustainability. www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/PerformanceStandards International Finance Corporation (IFC). April 2007. Environmental, Health, and Safety General Guidelines. www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/EnvironmentalGuidelines International Finance Corporation (IFC). July 2007. Guidance Notes: Performance Standards on Social & Environmental Sustainability. www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/GuidanceNotes Ministry of Environment and Tourism. Republic of Namibia. 2008. Guide to the Environmental Management Act No. 7 of 2007. 56 pp. Republic of Namibia. 2005. Namibia’s Environmental Assessment Policy for Sustainable Development and Environmental Conservation. Republic of Namibia. 2007. Environmental Management Act No. 7 of 2007. Government Gazette No. 3966.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.enconman.2006.01.012


http://dx.doi.org/10.1038%2Fnmat900

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed_Identifier

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12754498


http://dx.doi.org/10.1063%2F1.1610793

http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/PerformanceStandards

http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/EnvironmentalGuidelines

http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/GuidanceNotes


4. OTHER GENERAL REFERENCES Department of Affairs and Forestry, 2001. Groundwater in Namibia: An explanation to the

hydrogeological map. MAWRD, Windhoek, 1, 128 pp. Directorate of Environmental Affairs, 2002. Atlas of Namibia Project. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek, http://www.met.gov.na Directorate of Environmental Affairs 1995. Namibia's environmental assessment policy for

sustainable development and environmental conservation. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, 17 pp.

Directorate of Environmental Affairs, 1998. Special issue: The biological diversity of Namibia. P. Barnard (ed), Biodiversity and Conservation, 325 pp.

Geological Survey of Namibia, 1999. The Simplified Geological Map of Namibia, Windhoek.

Mendelsohn, J., Jarvis, A., Roberts, C. & Robertson, T. (2002): Atlas of Namibia. A Portrait of the Land and its People, Cape Town, South Africa.

Miller, R.McG. 2008. The geology of Namibia. Geological Survey, Ministry of Mines and Energy, Windhoek, Vol. 3.

Miller, R. McG., 1992. Stratigraphy. The mineral resource of Namibia, Geological Survey of Namibia, MME, Windhoek, 1.2 .1 -1.2.13.

Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME), 2010. Strategic Environmental Assessment for the central Namib Uranium rush. Ministry of Mines and Energy, Windhoek, Republic Of Namibia.

NamPower, 2016. NamPower Annual Report for 2016, Windhoek (www.nampower.com.na).


8. Annexes

1. Final Scoping Report Vol. 1 of 3 2. Copies of the Public Consultation Materials

3. CV of EAP Dr. Sindila Mwiya

okahandja solar (pty) ltdeia.met.gov.na/screening/1736_vol_2_of_3_final_eia... · eia report vol. 2...

Documents