rotan gas floating storage regasification unit esia i - rotan gas non - technical... · rotan gas...

Rotan Gas Floating Storage Regasification

Unit ESIA

Vol I - Final Non-Technical Summary

.

April 2017

Rotan Gas Limited

357718 PWR PHR 1 A

.

21 April 2017

Rotan Gas Floating Storage Regasification Unit ESIA


.

Rotan Gas Floating Storage Regasification Unit ESIA


April 2017

Rotan Gas Limited

P.O. Box CT 6218 Cantonments Accra Ghana

Mott MacDonald, Victory House, Trafalgar Place, Brighton BN1 4FY, United Kingdom

T +44 (0)1273 365 000 F +44(0) 1273 365 100 W www.mottmac.com

357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

Rotan Gas Floating Storage Regasification Unit ESIA Vol I - Final Non-Technical Summary

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description

A 21 Sep 2016 T. Cinar A. Dal Mut I.D. Scott Draft submission to EPA

B 21 April 2017 A. Dal Mut A. Dal Mut I.D. Scott Final submission to EPA

Issue and revision record

Information class: Standard

This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose.

We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties.

This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.

357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .


Chapter Title Page

1 Introduction 1

1.1 What is the Project? _________________________________________________________________ 1 1.2 Who is developing the Project? ________________________________________________________ 2 1.3 Where is the Project located and what is is the Area of Influence? _____________________________ 2

2 The Project 6

2.1 Why is the Project needed? ___________________________________________________________ 6 2.2 Project components _________________________________________________________________ 7 2.3 How were the Project site and technology selected? ________________________________________ 7

3 Assessing Environmental and Social Impacts 10

3.1 What are the Project activities that could affect the environment and people? ____________________ 10 3.2 How was the Project assessed? _______________________________________________________ 10 3.3 How will people and the environment be affected? ________________________________________ 10

4 Cumulative impacts 15

4.1 What are the cumulative impacts and how they can be avoided? _____________________________ 15

5 Managing environmental and social impacts 16

5.1 How will environmental and social impacts from the Project be managed? ______________________ 16

6 Additional information 18

6.1 How do I find out more about the Project? _______________________________________________ 18 6.2 How do I have my say? _____________________________________________________________ 18

Appendices 19

Appendix A. Grievance Form ___________________________________________________________________ 20

Contents


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

1

This document is a Non-Technical Summary (NTS) which presents a summary of

the findings of the environmental and social impacts assessment (ESIA) for a

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) floating storage and re-gasification unit (FSRU) and

associated pipelines (the Project).

The ESIA and supporting documents, including an Environmental and Social

Management and Monitoring Plan (ESMMP) have been prepared to assess the

potential environmental and social effects of the Project and any measures that

would be needed to reduce or eliminate any significant effects. The Environmental

and Social Impact Assessment was carried out in accordance with the national

Ghanaian legislation and relevant international environmental and social

standards. The information in this document is based on the findings of the

studies undertaken by Mott MacDonald Limited and the Ghanaian firm

Environmental, Engineering Management Consultants (EEMC).

1.1 What is the Project?

The Project is the installation, construction and operation of a floating storage and re-gasification unit

(FSRU) with an approximate storage capacity of 170,000m3, an island jetty berth mooring system (IJBMS),

an offshore pipeline approximately 5.7km in length and a 2.5km onshore buried pipeline which will both

connect the FSRU to the Takoradi Ghana Gas Station (Ghana Gas Station) located at Aboadze and a

500m onshore buried pipeline branch connecting to the West Africa Gas Pipeline (WAGP) onshore header.

An FSRU is a floating vessel capable of receiving liquid fuel and re-gasifying it on board. The gas then

gets pumped through the subsea pipeline to shore.

The Project will be located in the Western Region of Ghana, in the Shama District near to the town of

Aboadze and construction activities are envisaged to begin mid-2017 and last approximately 9-12 months.

Under this assumption the Project could begin operations towards the middle of 2018.

1 Introduction


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

2

1.2 Who is developing the Project?

The Project is being developed by:

� Rotan Gas Limited (Project Proponent): an independent power producer registered in Ghana with

strong development experience in Africa.

� Mitsui & Co. Ltd.: one of the largest and most active trading and investment firms in Japan and one of

the largest Corporate Groups in the world. Mitsui is very active in the global power market and has

achieved significant results, with a gross generation capacity of approx. 38,000MW globally (as of end

of financial year March 2015). Mitsui also participates in crude oil and natural gas upstream resource

development projects across 11 countries. In addition, Mitsui has a large liquefied natural gas (LNG)

portfolio across the world and is an active trader, owner, and developer of LNG assets.

� EOSon Infrastructure Limited (EOSon Infra): the infrastructure investment arm of E Oppenheimer &

Son Group (EOS) which holds the Oppenheimer family interests. The Oppenheimer Family were

founders of the global mining company Anglo American, and until August, 2012, managing

shareholders of De Beers, the world’s largest diamond company. EOSon Infra is a significant minority

shareholder in Rotan Energy, the parent company of the Project Proponent.

1.3 Where is the Project located and what is is the Area of Influence?

The Project is located near the town of Aboadze which is on the south eastern end of the Shama District in

the Western Region in Ghana. The Shama District borders Komenda Edna Eguafo Abirem District to the

east, the Mpohor and Wassa East districts to the north, the Sekondi/Takoradi District to the west and the

Gulf of Guinea to the south.

The FSRU will connect to the Ghana Gas Takoradi gas station via a 5.7km subsea pipeline and a 2.5km

onshore buried pipeline. The FSRU will also connect to the WAGP through a 500m pipeline branch. The

onshore pipelines will run within the Aboadze Power Enclave (APE) which is an area zoned by the

Government of Ghana (GoG) as an industrial area to attract Independent Power Producers (IPPs), to

construct and operate thermal power projects. As a result, the Project will be a natural gas supply source

for the future potential IPPs within the APE.

Figure 1.1 presents the approximate location of the onshore and offshore components of the Project in

relation to the Western Region in southwest Ghana.


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

3

Figure 1.1: Ghana - Shama District and the Western Region

Source: Mott MacDonald

The only existing and currently operating power plants in the APE are T1 and T2 which form part of the

Takoradi Thermal Power Station (TTPS) which is owned and operated by the Volta River Authority (VRA)1,

and AMERI (Africa and Middle East Resource Investment). AMERI is a recently-commissioned emergency

power plant under a five year contract with the GoG; however this is a backup plant until other IPPs start

operating in the APE.

Figure 1.2 below shows the APE and in relation to the existing TTPS and the other potential IPPs that may

be developed in the APE. The Figure below also shows the offshore pipeline coming onshore as well as

the two onshore pipelines.

1 The second plant in TTPS is owned and operated as a joint venture between VRA and CMS Generation. CMS Generation is a subsidiary of TAQA


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

4

Figure 1.2: Map of the APE


The FSRU will be permanently moored approximately 5.7km offshore in the Atlantic Ocean on the Sherbro

Bank, which is the area off the coast to the south of the APE. The existing WAGP, which connects to the

TTPS, runs offshore approximately 1.5km to the east of the proposed FSRU and its offshore gas pipeline.

There is an existing offshore light crude oil (LCO) pipeline located approximately 2km to the east that

connects a single point mooring (SPM) to the TTPS. Figure 1.3 below shows the existing and proposed

offshore infrastructure in relation to the FSRU and the APE.


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

5

Figure 1.3: Offshore and onshore pipelines, WAGP pipeline and LCO pipeline



357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

6

2.1 Why is the Project needed?

The Project will be a readily available source of natural gas for the existing Takoradi Thermal Power

Station (TTPS), and other potential future independent power producers (IPPs) that may be developed

within the Aboadze Power Enclave (APE). An onshore pipeline will be laid in land owned by the

Government of Ghana (GoG) and will run along pre-determined RoW within the APE.

As of the first quarter of 2016, the installed power capacity in Ghana is 2,649 MW2 yet demand is expected

to exceed 3,500MW in the coming years. This rising demand is being fuelled by increasing domestic

demand due to improving rates of electrification, a desire by the GoG to become a major electricity

exporter into the West Africa Power Pool (WAPP), and high annual economic growth.

As a result, there is a clear need to increase power production to meet the expected growth in demand.

Consequently the installation and operation of the FSRU will play a crucial role in supplying natural gas to

the potential IPPs and to the GoG through the Ghana Gas Station. Gas-fired power plants remain the most

efficient way to develop additional generation capacity. The FSRU will have the capacity to allow other

power generators in the area to shift from liquid fuels to natural gas for power generation, which will result

in substantial cost savings in Ghana’s power sector. Furthermore, once operational, the FSRU will support

efficient in gas-fired power generation and therefore help to progress the agenda of establishing a reliable

energy network.

Ensuring an adequate and secure supply of natural gas is fundamental to improving the availability and

cost of power in Ghana. Ghana currently imports natural gas from Nigeria through the West African Gas

Pipeline (WAGP) and has also developed indigenous oil and gas fields such as the Jubilee (producing

since late 2014), TEN (currently under development and expected to be operational in 2018), and Sankofa

(expected to start producing by mid-2018) gas fields. However, there have been delays in the

implementation of gas field developments and their associated infrastructure, and there have been several

supply interruptions on the WAGP which have resulted in an acute gas shortage. Increasing gas

availability will require accelerating new gas projects and therefore the Project has an important part to

play.

A gas shortage is expected to continue in the immediate future (World Bank, 2013), however it is expected

that in the next 10 years, the majority of Ghana’s additional power generation capacity will rely on natural

gas. Therefore, ensured availability of adequate gas for power generation is a binding prerequisite for

reliable and adequate power supply.

The Project will have a beneficial impact on the feasibility of all new IPPs by increasing the volume and

security of gas supply. In addition, the Project will significantly help in realising the GoG’s objective in

making Ghana a hub of electricity industry in West Africa, generating additional national income

2 http://www.energycom.gov.gh/files/WEM%20WEEKLY%20MARKET%20WATCH%20-%20GHANA%20new.pdf

2 The Project


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

7

2.2 Project components

The Project will consist of a number of components:

� FSRU:

� Island Jetty Berth Mooring System

� Tugboats

� Offshore pipeline

� Onshore pipelines

2.3 How were the Project site and technology selected?

2.3.1 The Project site

The FSRU location was dependent on being positioned to serve potential IPPs and the Ghana Gas

Station. Therefore, the best location for the FSRU would be in the vicinity of, and offshore from the APE.

The following criteria were used in considering the best location for the FSRU facility:

� Environmental conditions (waves, wind, tide levels)

� Design fleet (types of FSRUs)

� Mooring solutions (‘weather vanning’ solutions, floating fixed solutions, and founded fixed solution) -

these alternatives are further discussed below.

� Water depth and area of influence (this influenced the distance to shore)

� Natural gas subsea pipeline length and route

� Existing exclusion areas

The location of the FSRU was key in deciding pipeline route. The pipeline route from a west FSRU location

would be south of the APE and showed significant benefits compared to locations to the east. In total six

(6) different options were considered for the pipeline route.

The pipeline route selection considered key areas:

� Avoidance of subsea pipelines crossings (i.e. with the WAGP and SPM)

� Environmental and social sensitivity

� Location of the APE

� Existing and planned infrastructure in the APE and Aboadze / Abuesi townships

� FSRU interaction with other shipping traffic along the coast

� Ocean conditions

Considering the above criteria, the chosen subsea pipeline route (Figure 1.3 above) represents the most

suitable route by avoiding inhabited areas in addition to not crossing the WAGP or the SPM, and therefore

avoiding substantial technical issues. The pipeline route from a west FSRU location will encroach upon the

restriction zone of the WAGP. However, it is expected that construction within the zone can be carefully

managed. There are precedents for successful construction of seawater intake / outfall lines within the

restriction zone (for example, the TTPS expansion works).


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

8

The suggested locations for the FSRU and the subsea pipeline have been selected for the following

reasons:

� The subsea pipeline will not cross the WAGP and the SPM

� The FSRU location is located offshore in proximity of an area that has been designated as a future

power enclave by the GoG (i.e. APE)

� The FSRU could supply other potential IPPs within the APE with natural gas, facilitating a switch from

liquid fuels, which in turn will streamline operations for the APE as a whole

� The FSRU will connect to the Ghana Gas Takoradi gas station, which is approximately 2.5km north

from shore

� The FSRU will connect to the WAGP receiving header which is approximately 500m from shore

� There is an existing high voltage grid connection located in close proximity to the TTPS. There are

other assets that will potentially use the FSRU as a fuel supply

� There are no environmentally designated areas in the vicinity of the FSRU

Overall, the location of the FSRU site was chosen as having the best options in terms of the least

combined technical, environmental, socio-economic and financial impacts.

2.3.2 The Project technology and design decisions

The development of this Project commenced in 2011 and it was evident at that stage that 1) local supplies

of gas for power generation would be severely limited and 2) the gas supply through the WAGP was likely

to be expensive. Imported gas through an FSRU was therefore a preferred option as gas availability in

Ghana was, and still is uncertain. Gas is also a cheaper and cleaner option than other fuels for power

generation such as Light Crude Oil (LCO)..

The FSRU will be a new build or newly refurbished, and will be fitted with new efficient equipment.

Two types of designs were considered for the pipeline:

� Fully trenched and buried

� Partially trenched and buried through breaking wave zone only (approximately 1.5km from shore)

A trenched and buried pipeline only within the breaking wave zone and not for the full length of the pipeline

has been chosen as the best option as the deep water currents are considered not to pose a risk to an

uncovered pipeline. In this way the pipeline is protected and also limits any disturbances to the seabed.

The main functional requirement of the mooring system is to guarantee a safe and continuous mooring

operation of the FSRU during its operations. Table 2.1 below present the main mooring options that were

assessed.


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

9

Table 2.1: Mooring options considered

Design Consideration Description

Spread Mooring System

(Floating fixed solution)

The vessel is held in position by a number of chains and anchors, which shall be designed in order to restrain the FRSU in any expected meteoceanic conditions during the facility’s service life.

Multi-Buoy Mooring

(Floating fixed solution)

Both the vessel’s bow and stern are held in position by mooring buoys.

The number of mooring buoys shall be selected to provide adequate mooring capacity.

Island Jetty Berth Mooring System

(Founded fixed solution)

Fixed structure based on piles, jackets or gravity caissons, against which the vessel is berthed. The main structure is based on a jetty head consisting of the following elements:

• Berthing dolphins

• Mooring dolphins

Single Point Mooring

(Weather vanning)

Consists of a mooring buoy, 4 to 8 chains and anchor system, mooring assemblies and floating and submarine hose strings.

Soft Yoke

(Weather vanning)

A turntable is fastened to a tower with a roller bearing to allow the vessel to freely weather vane around the tower. A yoke is connected to the turntable with pitch and roll joints to allow the vessel to pitch and to roll.

After thorough assessment of the various types of mooring systems taking into consideration aspects such

as marine, environmental and health and safety aspects, the preferred option that has been chosen is the

Island Jetty Berth Mooring System.

The decisions made in selecting the FSRU location, the length and route of the subsea pipeline and the

selection of the mooring system were the result of a careful evaluation of various alternatives, technologies

and designs to arrive at the most advantageous Project configuration having taken into account all relevant

environmental and social aspects.


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

10

3.1 What are the Project activities that could affect the environment and people?

It is recognised that a project of this scale and duration has the potential to affect the environment and the

community, both in a beneficial and adverse way. The activities that could cause the most important effects

include:

Effects on people:

� Employment

� Change of land use

� Risks to safety from maritime traffic

� Road traffic

� Dust and emissions to air

Effects on the natural environment:

� Hot and cold water discharges to sea

� Land use

� Terrestrial ecology

� Marine ecology

� Greenhouse gas emissions

3.2 How was the Project assessed?

An ESIA process was applied to the Project and the methodology employed is internationally recognised

for systematically considering the impacts of projects on human and natural environments. The results of

the assessment are presented in the ESIA and a summary of the key issues is given in this document. The

assessment included:

� Establishing the baseline as it relates to a range of environmental and social aspects in order to

understand the current conditions at and around the proposed Project site

� Prediction of impacts using internationally recognised methods and techniques

� Identification of mitigation measures to be included in the design, construction and operation of the

Project that will reduce the adverse impacts.

The assessment process was supported by local consultation in undertaken in Takoradi/Sekondi, Aboadze

and Abuesi to ensure that the Project Proponent understands and incorporates the thoughts and concerns

of local people and fishermen from the surrounding communities into the process.

3.3 How will people and the environment be affected?

Whilst environmental and social issues can interact, the findings of the ESIA broadly cover the following

themes:

� Effects on people

� Effects on the natural environment and resources.

3 Assessing Environmental and Social Impacts


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

11

3.3.1 Effects on people

Employment

Temporary employment generation will result from work required to install the FSRU, the construction of

the island jetty berth mooring system, the subsea gas pipeline and the onshore gas pipelines. The

approximate number of jobs generated is not known as this will greatly depend on the labour requirements

of the contractors who will undertake the construction and installation works.

The operational phase is expected to generate few direct employment opportunities with the number of

jobs estimated at approximately between 30-40. Some roles such as management and administrative staff

may be performed by the same personnel as in the construction phase, so the actual number of new jobs

created may be lower.

Change of land use

The establishment of the right of way for the proposed onshore gas pipelines will result in a change of land

use from undeveloped, vegetated land to industrial pipelines corridors. The width of the pipeline corridor is

expected to be approximately between 15m and 20m. The land where the pipelines will be built is currently

owned by the Volta River Authority operating the TTPS.

The land within the pipeline route is currently undeveloped and unused, and construction will occur in

sections rather than along the full length at once. Some community members in Aboadze cross the

proposed pipeline route near the beachfront next to the TTPS. However community members who access

the beachfront will be able to detour past the construction trenches, therefore there will be no loss of

livelihood as a result of the pipeline construction, which will last approximately three months.

At the time of construction, where assets owned by private individuals (such as crops, fruit trees, structures

or similar) are affected within the pipeline corridor, these will be valued by the Lands Valuation Board and

compensation will be paid to the owners.

Risks to safety from maritime traffic

The FSRU and offshore pipeline will require the establishment of a safety exclusion zone to minimise

security and safety risks from vessels to avoid crew and fishermen being injured from construction and

operation activities. Based on interviews with the Ghana Maritime Authority, the exact size of the safety

exclusion zone is not regulated and subject to application by the Project Proponent. Based on preceding

applications by other offshore developers, the typical safety exclusion zones is 500m surrounding offshore

infrastructure, such as sub-sea pipelines and FSRU. The safety restriction zone for the WAGP, located to

the east of the FSRU, spans 500m either side of the pipeline. Based on this, it can reasonably be expected


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

12

that the safety exclusion zone for the FSRU will be between 500 m and 1,000 m surrounding the FSRU

and 1,000 m surrounding the subsea pipeline3.

The establishment of a security restriction zone around the FSRU and offshore pipeline is expected to

affect fishermen, mostly from Aboadze and Abuesi, as these are the closest fishing communities to the

Project. The actual area of fishing waters that will be restricted is relatively small, considering the size of

the remaining unrestricted waters, and fishing canoes can still navigate and fish over the restriction zone of

the pipeline.

Road traffic

Additional vehicle movements and materials delivery, as well as general construction activities, such as

site development, have the potential to create a nuisance through an increase in noise and traffic

particularly at the Inchaban crossing. A traffic management plan will be implemented. This plan contains a

range of measures which are aimed at avoiding nuisance from traffic.

Dust and air emissions

The construction activity for the onshore gas pipelines has the potential to generate construction dust. At

this stage exact numbers of construction vehicles is not known however, during peak construction periods

the total number of vehicle movements is expected to be less than 200 per day, therefore impacts to air

quality and dust will be minimal. Emissions from construction equipment (excavators, welding machines

etc.) will be temporary in nature and therefore are not considered an issue. Nevertheless appropriate

mitigations to reduce dust and emission to air from vehicles and construction equipment have been

identified.

3.3.2 Effects on the natural environment and resources

Hot and cold water discharges to sea

During operation of the FSRU there will be thermal discharges back into the sea. These impacts are

assessed through a numerical modelling study examining the offshore zone and representative discharges

associated with the operational phase of the FSRU. The temperatures of waters discharged from the

FSRU are shown to be limited to ±0.9°C within a distance of 34.5m from the location of the FSRU

discharge point. Beyond this distance temperatures are seen to fall away rapidly, and return to ambient

conditions. These results show that the water discharges mixes well with the sea water and rapidly return

to normal temperature conditions, therefore the impacts is hardly noticeable. Furthermore modelled

temperatures from all discharge scenarios considered to have little to no effect to the surrounding marine

environment.

3 This recommendation is in line with recommendations provided in the International Finance Corporation’s Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Offshore Oil and Gas Development (2015)


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

13

Soil and ground conditions

Each phase of the Project has the potential to impact the soils, which could have implications on soil

quality. The proposed onshore pipelines will be on land that is not and has not been developed historically

and is therefore considered to be ‘greenfield’. It is considered unlikely to be any direct on-site sources of

contamination although parts of the proposed pipelines route are located adjacent to the existing TTPS

and also receives surface water discharges from the local urban areas such as Inchaban.

Soil and groundwater testing on land to the west of the proposed pipeline route showed the presence of

low levels of contamination in groundwater. The potential presence of soil or groundwater contamination

on the proposed development site, associated with historical activities at the neighbouring TTPS, cannot

be discounted however the probability of the soil being contaminated is considered low. However as a

precautionary measure, prior starting construction activities the presence of contamination will be further

assessed to avoid any potential impacts to soils, groundwater, surface waters and the health of

construction workers and neighbouring site users.

Terrestrial ecology

The main impacts that may arise from the construction and operation activities that could affect the

terrestrial ecology are:

1. Temporary displacement of species due to human presence on site

2. Noise disturbance due to machinery operating on site

3. Road traffic collisions with fauna due to increase vehicles

The construction of the onshore pipelines will last three months approximately. During this time due to

works activities and presence of machinery and workers, the terrestrial fauna may be temporarily

displaced. The flora will be cleared only along the pipeline routes (15 to 20 meters wide approximately) but

will be left to revegetate after that.

Specific mitigation measures have been identified for all impacts on the habitats and species in ESIA.

Mitigation and management measures will be identified and implemented during the Project design,

construction and operation phases to assist the Project performance to deliver good practice.

Marine ecology

The main impacts that may arise from the construction/installation activities that could affect the marine

ecology are:

1. Habitat loss and degradation due to infrastructure footprint on the seabed

2. Acoustic underwater disturbance due to piling activities, and vessel movements

3. Collision with marine fauna due to vessel movements

During the construction and installation of the offshore components of the Project some level of

disturbance to the marine environment will take place. The construction techniques of the mooring system

through piling may create a temporary displacement of marine fauna due to noise and vibration however


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

14

this is a temporary effect. Likewise during the busiest periods during construction some of the vessels

involved in the construction may present a risk of collision with local fauna. However the study indicates

that this probability is remote as the marine fauna, if close enough, will be able to detect the presence of

activities and therefore avoid any area of potential danger.

The ESIA assessment does not predict any significant impacts will occur on marine ecology as a result of

the Project. Mitigation and management measures have been identified to be implemented during the

Project design, installation and operation phases to assist the Project performance to deliver good practice.

It is believed that the nature of the Project, being a floating sea facility that is grounded through a mooring

facility and gas transportation pipeline system, minimizes marine ecology impacts and over the length of

the Project life. The marine structures could even create new marine habitats, which may support coastal

fisheries.

Greenhouse gas emissions

The operational phase of the Project is estimated to lead to emissions of approximately 85,000 tCO2e/yr

with 34,000 tCO2/yr resulting from combustion of fuel on the FSRU and 50,000 tCO2e/yr resulting from

small secondary type of emissions from the FSRU of approximately 5,000 and 100,000 tCO2e/yr.

Based on 2012 data from Ghana’s national GHG inventory, Ghana’s total annual emissions were

33,660,000 tCO2e/yr and emissions from the energy industry were 3,273,000 tCO2/yr. The annual

emissions from the operational phase represent 0.25% and 2.59% respectively.


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

15

4.1 What are the cumulative impacts and how they can be avoided?

The potential for the Project to have combined environmental and social effects with existing and planned

projects in the same location or happening at a similar time were considered. Cumulative impact

assessment was integrated within the environmental and social assessments carried out for the Project.

The valued environmental and social components that are potentially vulnerable to cumulative impacts the

have been identified as below:

� Communities

� Livelihoods

� Terrestrial habitat and ecology

� Marine ecology

� Waste management

Considering the potential impacts, a number of measures could be considered by those responsible for

developing other projects in the same location to help avoid the risk of cumulative impacts occurring. As

these measures are considered to be optional, rather than necessary, they are expressed as

recommendations. The recommendations are:

� A coordinated approach for the transportation schedules on the Inchaban crossing.

� Stakeholder activities to follow up with the conditions of the affected communities, working with other

project proponents to resolve stakeholder issues.

� Project proponents to discuss ways of sharing labour resources and transferring workers between

projects to prolong employment and share skills.

� Each project proponent to develop and implement ecological management plans, drawing on the

combined surveys and assessments to propose and implement measures that avoid impacts on

sensitive flora and fauna.

� Project proponents to share access routes for transportation of materials and workers where possible,

to minimise the area of land disrupted.

� Each project proponent to consult other project proponent’s in the APE to coordinate approach to

habitat restoration, including introduction of native species.

� Depending on the power plant technology, it is recommended that dispersion modelling is used to

determine the collective influence of their thermal discharges back to sea.

� Apply industry best practice implemented to avoid the use of chemicals where possible.

� Project proponents to include measures in their Traffic Management Plans to avoid causing congestion

on the road network around Sofokrom landfill

� Project proponents to be made aware of any significant changes in the district’s waste management

capacity.

4 Cumulative impacts


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

16

5.1 How will environmental and social impacts from the Project be managed?

Whilst the Project has been designed to minimise potential environmental and social impacts, there will be

some impacts that cannot be avoided solely by the design. The Project will therefore develop an

Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan that is based upon the management and

mitigation measures which have been identified in the environmental and social assessments to reduce

potential impacts.

The main objective of an Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan is to protect the

environment, site staff and the local communities from Project activities that may cause harm or nuisance.

Contained within the Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan are a number of

framework processes, plans and procedures that will be developed further by the Project Proponent and its

contractors, which set out the minimum environmental and social requirements necessary for the

protection of the environment and communities.

These framework plans and procedures provide a number of mitigation measures, which have been

designed in accordance with international best practice, and detail how these mitigation measures will be

monitored, by whom and over what timeframe. Listed below are examples of the types of management and

mitigation objectives included in the Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan:

� Air Quality

� Seabed and Coastal Processes

� Thermal Discharges

� Soil and Ground Conditions

� Noise and Vibration

� Marine Ecology

� Terrestrial Ecology

� Waste, Materials Handling and Storage

� Socio-economics

� Hazards and Accidents

� Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs)

Prior to construction or operation these framework documents will be developed in to stand alone,

practical, live documents which will be used on site for both the construction and operation phases where

relevant. Responsibilities for development and implementation are outlined in the Environmental and

Social Management and Monitoring Plan and fall on the Project Proponent and the contractors.

Contractors will be required to adhere to the principles of international standards for managing

environmental and social issues (i.e. ISO 14001:20154 and OHSAS 18001:20075) or equivalent if not

4 ISO 14001:2015 http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/management-standards/iso14000.htm

5 OHSAS 18001:2007 http://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/ohsas-18001-occupational-health-and-safety/

5 Managing environmental and social impacts


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

17

already accredited. These standards place strong emphasis on the need for continuous improvement of

the environmental and health and safety management practices and performance.

The appointed contractor will be required to agree to the following actions:

� Develop a framework Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan based on the one

developed as part of this ESIA

� Develop a project specific Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan

� Elaborate other sub-management plans as relevant depending on their specific construction activities

� Implement the requirements of the mitigation activities in the Environmental and Social Management

and Monitoring Plan

� Provide all training necessary to oversee and implement the Plans’ requirements prior to and

throughout construction as appropriate

� Be responsible for producing comprehensive suite of environmental and health and safety

management and coordination procedures

� Identify a full time person on site with dedicated environmental and health and safety responsibilities to

oversee works on site.

The contractor will be required to be responsible for sub-contractors’ performance, including sub-

contractor(s) adherence to the requirements of the Plans. All sub-contractors will be required to have

dedicated environmental and social staff to implement and monitor the Plans and manage this on an on-

going basis.


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

18

6.1 How do I find out more about the Project?

An ESIA report and a Project Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) have been developed to guide

disclosure of its public information and stakeholder engagement in the Project and have been published on

the Project Proponent’s website. Key stakeholders have been identified and a programme of information

disclosure events have been developed to further inform the public and wider stakeholders regarding the

Project. A Community Liaison Officer (CLO) has been appointed by the Project Proponent. The CLO will

manage stakeholder engagement and grievances.

The contact details of the Project Proponent are presented below and all requests for further information

may be addressed to the contact presented below.

Table 6.1: Project Proponent contact details

Project Proponent Information

Name of Company Rotan Gas Limited

Contact Mr Edwin Abanga

Address P.O. Box CT 6218, Cantonments, Accra, Ghana

Telephone +233-244-422-455

Email [email protected]

Website www.rotangas.com

6.2 How do I have my say?

All concerns may be reported and requests lodged by filling a standard Grievance Form presented below

in Appendix A by post or e-mail or to the Rotan Gas Limited local office, or by telephoning the company on

the number stated above.

6 Additional information


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

19

Appendices

Appendix A. Grievance Form ___________________________________________________________________ 20


357718/PWR/PHR/1/A 21 April 2017 .

20

If you wish to remain anonymous, please do not fill the first three lines below.

Full Name

Contact Information

Please include how you wish to be contacted (i.e. mail, telephone or e-mail).

If you wish to remain anonymous, please do not fill this box.

Postal Address:

Telephone number:

E-mail address:

Preferred language (please tick)

Ghanaian

English

Other

Please start below this line, if you wish to remain anonymous.

Description of feedback or grievance (What happened? Where did it happen? Who did it happen to? What

is the result of the problem?):

Date of incident / grievance

One time incident / grievance date………………………………

Happened more than once? How many times? ………………

Still on-going (i.e. currently experiencing problem) Y / N (please circle)

How would you like to see this problem resolved?

Signature……………………………………………………Date………………………………….

Please return this form to: Rotan FSRU project or any of the grievance boxes listed below.

Location of grievance boxes: [to be determined]

(For office use only) Reference number:

Appendix A. Grievance Form

rotan gas floating storage regasification unit esia i - rotan gas non - technical... · rotan gas...

Documents