shuaibah phase iii iwpp - auslandsgeschäftsabsicherung · shuaibah phase iii iwpp environmental...

The Saudi - Malaysian Consortium

Shuaibah Phase III IWPP

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

Volume 1 – Text and Figures

26 November 2005

QM

WSP Environmental (Middle East) P O Box 54102 9th Floor Al-Hawai Tower Sheikh Zayed Road Dubai UAE Tel: +971 4 321 1664 Fax: +971 4 321 1665

Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3

Remarks Internal Draft First Draft Final

Date October 2005 November 2005 26 November 2005

Prepared by Project Team Project Team Project Team

Signature

Checked by Ken Wade Ken Wade Ken Wade

Signature

Authorised by Peter Wilson Peter Wilson Peter Wilson

Signature

Project number 12360002/001 12360002/002 12360002/003

File reference Environmental

Statement DRAFT

Draft_Shuaibah

ES_17-11-

05TJKW

Final_Shuaibah

ES_26-11-05TJKW

Contents

12360002/003– Shuaibah IWPP Phase III Environmental Statement (26 November 2005)

i The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND STANDARDS 7

3 METHODS OF ASSESSMENT AND STANDARDS 18

4 CONSULTATION AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 24

5 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS 31

6 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION, PROPOSALS and PROGRAMME 35

PART 1: PRIMARY ISSUES 54

7 MARINE WATER QUALITY, RECIRCULATION AND CORAL REEF ECOLOGY 54

8 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY AND STACK EMISSIONS 108

9 WASTE MANAGEMENT 176

PART 2: SECONDARY ISSUES 190

10 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS 190

11 NOISE AND VIBRATION 205

12 GROUND CONTAMINATION 219

13 TRANSPORTATION 231

14 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY 242

15 CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY 243

16 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL 243

PART 3: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MONITORING 243


i The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Tables

Table 2.2: PME Receiving Water Guidelines Organic Pollutants

Table 2.3: PME Receiving Water Guidelines Non-Organic Pollutants

Table 2.4: PME Receiving Water Guidelines Biological Pollutants

Table 2.5: PME Performance Standards for Direct Discharge - Physio-

chemical Pollutants

Table 2.6: PME Performance Standards for Direct Discharge - Organic

Pollutants

Table 2.7: PME Performance Standards for Direct Discharge - Non-

Organic Pollutants

Table 2.8: PME Performance Standards for Direct Discharge - Biological

Pollutants

Table 2.9: World Bank Ambient Air Quality Standards for Thermal Power

Plants

Table 2.10: World Bank Effluent Emission Standards from Thermal Power

Plants

Table 2.11: World Bank Ambient Noise Standards for Thermal Power Plants

Table 3.1: Duration Terminology

Table 3.2: Significance Criteria

Table 6.1: Summary Construction Programme

Table 7.1: Summary of Fish, Coral and Invertebrate species at Shuaibah

(October 2005)

Table 7.2: Indicative Sea Water Composition

Table 7.3: In situ measurements by divers on 2nd and 4th October 2005

Table 7.4: General Analysis of coastal waters (4th October 2005)

Table 7.5: Heavy metal concentrations at Shuaibah (4th October 2005)


ii The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Tables (Continued)

Table 7.6: Predicted Temperature and Salinity at Shuaibah Intakes I, II and

III

Table 7.7: Calculated Mixing Zone area for IWPP discharge (Scenarios 9,

10 and 11)

Table 7.8: Summary Impact Table for Marine Water Quality, Recirculation

and Coral Reef Ecology

Table 8.1 SWCC Stack Emissions Data

Table 8.2 SEC Stack Emissions Data

Table 8.3 IWPP Stack Emissions Data

Table 8.4 Current Baseline - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Table 8.5 Future Baseline - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Table 8.6 World Bank Degraded Airsheds - Maximum Ground Level

Concentrations

Table 8.7 IWPP Impact Assessment - Maximum Ground Level

Concentrations

Table 8.8 IWPP Impact Mitigation - Maximum Ground Level

Concentrations

Table 8.9 Residual IWPP Impact - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Table 8.10 Stack Emissions Heavy Fuel Oil for the SWCC Plant

Table 8.11 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Locations

Table 8.12 Monitoring Period Met Data Statistics

Table 8.13 Sulphur Dioxide Monitoring Results

Table 8.14 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Results


iii The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Tables (Continued)

Table 9.1: Types of Waste Arisings

Table 9.2 Summary Impact Table for Solid Waste Management

Table 10.1: Population and Age Statistics (2003 Estimates)

Table 10.2: Civilian Employment Statistics (2000)

Table 10.3 Summary Impact Table for Social and Economic Impacts

Table 11.1: Vibration dose values (VDV m/s1.75) above which various

degrees of adverse comment may be expected

Table 11.2: World Bank 1998 Standards

Table 11.3: Construction Source Noise Levels

Table 11.4: Construction Source Vibration Levels

Table 11.5: External Noise Sources

Table 11.6 Summary Impact Table for Noise and Vibration

Table 12.1 Summary of soil contamination analysis results

Table 12.2 Summary of groundwater contamination analysis results

Table 12.3 Summary Impact Table for Ground Contamination

Table 13.1 Summary Impact Table for Transportation

Table 14.1 Species records according to the DAFOR Scale

Table 14.2 Terrestrial Flora recorded at Shuaibah 4 September 2005

Table 14.3 Summary Impact Table for Terrestrial Ecology

Table 15.1 Summary Impact Table for Cultural Heritage and Archaeology

Table 16.1: Key Viewpoint Descriptions surrounding the proposed site

Table 16.2 Summary Impact Table for Landscape and Visual


iv The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Location of Shuaibah Phase III Power and Desalination Plant

Figure 6.1: General IWPP Plant Layout

Figure 7.1: Location of Coral Reef Survey Sites (October 2005)

Figure 7.2: Summary of Belt Transect Survey at14 coral reef sites (October

2005)

Figure 7.3: GPS Plot of the Shoreline identifying the site transects

Figure 7.4: “Scenario 9” Time Series Temperature Plot at Coral Reef Sites.

Figure 7.5: “Scenario 9” Time Series Salinity Plot at Coral Reef Sites

Figure 7.6: “Scenario 9” Time Series Chlorine Plot at Coral Reef Sites

Figure 7.7: “Scenario 4” Surface Plume Dispersion from Outfall (Depth –

4m)

Figure 7.8: “Scenario 9” Surface Plume Dispersion for Extended Outfall

(Depth – 8m)

Figure 8.1: SWCC (Phases 1 and 2)

Figure 8.2 SEC (Phase 1)

Figure 8.3 Current Baseline – (SWCC Phases 1 and 2; SEC Phase 1)

Figure 8.4 SEC (Phase 1)

Figure 8.5 SEC (Phases 1 and 2)

Figure 8.6 Future Baseline – SWCC Phases 1 and 2; SEC Phases 1 & 2)

Figure 8.7 World Bank Degraded Airshed – SO2 (Moderate)

Figure 8.8 World Bank Degraded Airshed – SO2 (Poor)


v The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Figures (Continued)

Figure 8.9 Standard IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [0% FGDB; 2.0% S-

fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature])

Figure 8.10 Standard IWPP [0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-

water Temperature]

Figure 8.11 Mitigated IWPP [0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-

water Temperature]

Figure 8.12 Mitigated IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [95% FGDB; 2.0% S-

fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]) – SO2

Figure 8.13 Mitigated IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [95% FGDB; 2.0%

S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]) – Nox

Figure 8.14 Mitigated IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [95% FGDB; 2.0% S-

fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]) - PM

Figure 8.15 Maximum 24 Hour Mean SO2 Concentrations

Figure 8.16 Maximum 24 Hour Mean NOx Concentrations

Figure 8.17 Maximum 24 Hour Mean PM10 Concentrations

Figure 8.18 Equivalent 1 Hour Mean SO2 Concentrations: Exceeding 740

µg/m3 more than twice

Figure 8.19 24 Hour Mean SO2 Concentrations: Exceeding 365 µg/m3 more

than once

Figure 8.20 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Locations

Figure 8.21 Monitoring Period Windrose

Figure 9.1 Process diagram to show collection and disposal of fly ash

Figure 9.2 Liner and leachate removal system

Figure 11.1: Noise Contours created by Siemens

Figure 14.1: Terrestrial floral survey locations (September 2005)

Figure 16.1: Site Viewpoint Locations


vi The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Plates

Plate 5.1: View of the SWCC Power and Desalination Plants from the

highway to the east

Plate 5.2: View of Mangroves 5km north of Shuaibah Plants

Plate 5.3: View of SWCC worker housing from the highway to the south-

east

Plate 5.4: Example of rock armour revetment and jetty at fishing harbour

5km south of SEC Plant

Plate 7.1: Bleaching of Corals including Porites sp

Plate 7.2: Construction Debris near Shuaibah I/II Outfall

Plate 7.3: Shoreline Habitat (T1) with SWCC Phase I and II Plants in the

Background

Plate 7.4: Fish (Zebrasoma veliferum) and coral reef communities at

Shuaibah 2005

Plate 7.5: Fish (Pseudanthias squamipinnis) and coral reef communities at

Shuaibah 2005

Plate 14.1: Wetland habitat and birds adjacent to worker housing

Plate 14.2: Birds on amenity grassland adjacent to worker housing

Plate 14.3: View of extensive terrestrial vegetation at Site 6 inside SWCC

fence

Plate 14.4: View of occasional halophytes close to shoreline (Site 2)

Plate 16.1: Landscape Views






vii The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Plates (Continued)












viii The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

List of Appendices Appendix 1.1: The Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook for Thermal

Power: Guidelines for New Plants (July 1998)

Appendix 2.1: Proposal for Category B Status in accordance with the Equator

Principles (October 2005)

Appendix 6.1: Due Diligence Report prepared by Black and Veatch, Nov 2005

Appendix 6.2: Provisional Project Schedule (Revision E, May 2005)

Appendix 7.1: Coral Reef Transect Results (October 2005)

Appendix 7.2: Coral Reef Photographic Record (October 2005)

Appendix 7.3: Dispersion and Circulation of Cooling Water and Dissolved

Agents (DHI, November 2005)

Appendix 7.4: Coral Reef Species List (October 2005)

Appendix 7.5: Laboratory analytical sheets for Water Quality Survey (Oct 2005)

Appendix 7.6: Results of Shoreline Survey at Shuaibah, 29th August 2005

Appendix 7.7: Shuaibah Water Recirculation Study (DHI, January 2004)

Appendix 7.8: Shuaibah Recirculation Study (DHI, June 2005)

Appendix 8.1: Glossary Of Air Quality Terms

Appendix 8.2: Met Data Statistics

Appendix 8.3: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Protocol

Appendix 11.1: Glossary of terminology relating to noise and vibration

Appendix 12.1: Contamination Baseline Survey Report prepared for the

Integrated Water and Power Plant (IWPP) in August 2005 by

Furgo Suhami Limited.

Appendix 14.1: Terrestrial Ecology Survey Report


1 The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental

SHUAIBAH PHASE III IWPP Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

26 November 2005

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 WSP Environmental was commissioned by The Saudi-Malaysian

Consortium (ACWA Power Projects/TNB/Malakoff) in May 2005 to prepare an

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for the proposed Phase III

development of the Shuaibah Power and Desalination Plant (See Figure 1.1).

This report is to be submitted to PME and the lending banks for their review and

approval.

1.2 The site is located approximately 110km to the south of Jeddah on the

Red Sea coast, adjacent to the existing Shuaibah I and II Power and

Desalination Plants. The Phase III IWPP Project (Independent Water and

Power Plant) principally comprises:

• The development, financing, design, construction and operation of a

combined power and desalination plant with a power export of 900MW

and water export of 880,000m3 per day; and

• The sale of the power and water to WEC (Water and Electricity

Company) under a 20 year PWPA

1.3 The proposed Shuaibah III IWPP is the first of four similar plants in

Saudi Arabia which have been identified as a “National Priority” providing an

additional output of 5000MW. The Shuaibah and Shuqaiq IWPPs are located in

the Western Province while two other sites at Ras Al Zour and Jubail are

located in the Eastern Province on the Gulf.

The Requirements for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

1.4 Within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia there is a requirement for EIA to be

undertaken for all major developments, which is overseen by the Presidency of

Meteorology and Environment (PME), the principle agency for environmental

protection.



Figure 1.1: Location of Shuaibah Phase III Power and Desalination Plant



1.5 The current requirements in The Kingdom relate to the General

Environmental Regulations (2001) which arose from Decree No. 34 (28/7/1422)

and the Council of Ministers decision No. 193 (7/7/1422). Article 5 refers to the

requirements for Environmental Impact Assessment. There is also a National

Strategy for Environment and Sustainable Development (2002) which identifies

the policies and objectives and the framework for achieving new environmental

standards.

1.6 The environmental standards for air and water quality which are

appended to the current General Environmental Regulations (2001) are the

MEPA Environmental Protection Standards from document 1409-01 (1988).

These are due to be updated in the next few years to provide national standards

which reflect the specific culture and needs of Saudi Arabia.

1.7 The Shuaibah IWPP is backed by an International Consortium

responsible for the financing, design, construction and operation of the plant.

As a result, the lending banks also require an EIA to be undertaken in

accordance with international environmental development standards,

particularly those of the World Bank and the associated ‘Equator Principles’.

1.8 The ‘Equator Principles’ (2003) outline the industry approach taken by

financial institutions in determining, assessing and managing environmental risk

in project financing. Adoption of ‘The Statement of Principles’ by the financial

institutions will only allow loans to be directed towards projects such as

Shuaibah III IWPP in the following circumstances:

• Where the risk of a project has been categorised in accordance with internal

guidelines based upon the environmental and social screening criteria of the

IFC;

• For all Category A and Category B projects, the borrower has completed an

Environmental Assessment, the preparation of which, is consistent with the

outcome of the IFC categorisation processes and satisfactorily addresses

key environmental and social issues; and

• In the context of the scope of the project, the EIA report has addressed the

following, where applicable:

a) baseline environmental and social conditions;



b) relevant host country laws and regulations and applicable treatise

and agreements;

c) sustainable development and use of renewable resources;

d) protection of human health, cultural properties and biodiversity

including endangered species and sensitive ecosystems;

e) use of dangerous substances;

f) major hazards;

g) occupational health and safety;

h) fire prevention and life safety;

i) socioeconomic impacts;

j) land acquisition and land use;

k) involuntary resettlement;

l) impacts on indigenous peoples and communities;

m) cumulative impacts of existing projects, the proposed project and

anticipated future projects;

n) participation of affected parties in the design, review and

implementation of the project;

o) consideration of feasible environmentally and socially preferable

alternatives;

p) efficient production, delivery and use of energy; and

q) pollution prevention and waste minimisation, pollution controls (liquid

effluent and air emissions) and solid and chemical waste

management.

1.9 The World Bank has its own specific environmental assessment and

policy procedures which are described in OP/BP (Operations Policy, Bank

Procedures) 4.01 (1999, updated 2004). In addition to the general guidance

which closely accords with that of the Equator Principles and the IFC, there is



also sector specific guidance. The Pollution Prevention and Abatement

Handbook for Thermal Power: Guidelines for New Plants (July 1998) provides

guidance for environmental standards and abatement technology for power

plants greater than 50 megawatt capacity (Appendix 1.1).

Project Scoping

1.10 A scoping report was prepared during June/July 2005 to identify key

environmental and social issues which would require assessment and this was

circulated to the Saudi Malaysian Consortium, technical advisors and lending

banks for their comments, which were subsequently updated and issued as a

final document in early August 2005.

1.11 While it is not mandatory to prepare a scoping report, prior to

undertaking an EIA, the scoping has clear benefits including the identification of

key ‘Primary’ issues which require detailed study as part of the assessment,

whilst also identifying ‘Secondary’ issues of relatively lower concern.

1.12 This process also provided an important opportunity for early

stakeholder engagement and consultations. The scoping therefore had the

advantage of accelerating the overall EIA process by identifying suitable

environmental survey methodologies including data collection and analysis and

the selection of internationally approved mathematical models for the accurate

prediction of environmental impacts.

1.13 The Saudi - Malaysian Consortium recognised the value of the scoping

approach and this facilitated the identification of relevant environmental issues

associated with the proposed development, in order to confirm the scope of

further detailed studies which may be required.

1.14 The Scoping Report considered the following information and activities

as part of the scoping process :

• Background project and site information provided by the Client including

the RFP documentation provided to bidders (version dated 28/07/2004);

• Specific studies and information relating to intake/outfall options and

pollution abatement equipment for Shuaibah III IWPP (see references

listed below);

• Preliminary consultations with PME;



• Preliminary consultation with key stakeholders and lenders including a

site meeting (29 May 2005) with plant operators responsible for the

existing Shuaibah I and II Plants;

• A drive through the current Shuaibah facilities (29 May 2005) and the

area proposed for the new Phase III IWPP Plant including the jetty,

outfall and water intake locations;

• A meeting with ILF (30 June 2005) to discuss key environmental issues,

including environmental management and monitoring, pollution

abatement, technical reports prepared to date and those in preparation;

• Preliminary assessment of potential environmental issues associated

with the proposed IWPP including cumulative impacts;

• Initial identification of potentially significant environmental constraints;

• Proposed methodologies for any further environmental studies; and

• A review of the technical bid relating to the EIA process, but excluding

specific environmental due diligence audit of the technical processes.

1.15 In addition to the site visit and meetings with SWCC, further meetings

were proposed with the operational and planning staff of the SEC plants at

Shuaibah during August 2005. This formed part of the ongoing stakeholder

consultations required for the EIA.

1.16 The available technical reports reviewed as part of the scoping study

included the following:

• Shuaibah IWPP Air Dispersion Study Ref 57 544/1 (for calculation of

stack height and assessment of flue gas desulphurisation), prepared for

Fichtner by Muller-BBM 12/11/2003;

• Shuaibah IWPP Recirculation Study Ref 52573, prepared for Fichtner

by DHI Water and Environment 28/01/2004;

• Shuaibah IWPP Recirculation Study Ref 53279 prepared for Doosan by

DHI Water and Environment 09/06/2005;



• Shuaibah IWPP Coral Reef Impact Environmental Review Ref 53279

(Technical Note) prepared for Doosan by DHI Water and Environment

10/06/2005;

• Shuaibah IWPP 70dBA Noise Contour Plot prepared by Siemens AG

13/05/2005; and

• Shuaibah III IWPP Specification for Soil Investigation prepared by

Siemens Ref PG W725/05/007 Rev A revised April 2005.

1.17 Preliminary information relating to noise modelling undertaken by

Siemens, proposals for an intrusive site investigation and preliminary options for

fly ash disposal were not available at the time of scoping.

Interim Report

1.18 An interim report was prepared during September 2005 to provide an

update of the baseline information for each of the main environmental issues

based on a literature review and technical reports including the following;

• Technical Reports identified as part of the Scoping Study;

• Extended Air Dispersion (REF M63 841/3) issued by Muller BBM on 1

August 2005 (the “EAD”);

• Executive Summary Report in relation to the Extended Air Dispersion

Study Report (REF M63 841/3) (August 2005);

• Preliminary air quality monitoring data;

• Site Investigation Specification;

• Site Investigation results (geotechnical and contaminated land);

• Fly Ash Disposal options report;

• Literature sources; and

• Further consultation meetings.



1.19 The Interim report was circulated to the Saudi Malaysian Consortium,

technical advisors and lending banks for their comments in early October 2005.

The report however was unable to provide new environmental assessment of

the primary issues, due in part to the unavoidable delays in obtaining survey

permits for coastal surveys, which would then require subsequent modelling.

Study Area

1.20 The study area for the EIA has been defined for each of the main issues

and often extends beyond the project site, based on factors such as key

receptors which include residential worker housing, local communities,

terrestrial and marine ecology and ground-water and coastal water quality. The

study area has also been influenced by existing power and desalination plants

(Shuaibah I and II operated by SWCC) and the power plants operated (SEC I)

and under construction (SEC Phase II) (See Figure 1.1).

1.21 The following therefore provide an indication of the limits for specific

environmental surveys proposed for the EIA as follows:

• Air dispersion modelling maximum grid size covers a total area of 20 x 20km

with a grid resolution of 200m x 200m including both SWCC and SEC sites;

• Air dispersion baseline measurements within a coastal grid covering a

maximum area of 15km x 3 km to incorporate control sites, sensitive

receptors and predicted sites of maximum ground level concentrations

• Marine coastal studies including coral reef ecology and water quality within

a maximum area covering 7.5km x 1km to incorporate control sites,

construction working area and sites near existing Shuaibah I/II combined

outfall and oil unloading facilities;

• Marine shoreline survey along a 1.5km section of the coastline; and

• Terrestrial ecology studies within the SWCC fence line (2km x 2km)

including the site proposed for IWPP, temporary construction areas and

control sites.



2 LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND STANDARDS

Introduction

2.1 There is a mandatory requirement within the technical guidance from

the RFP that the procedures and presentation of the EIA are to be based on

European Union or World Bank Procedures. On this basis, a new power station

(>50MW) would be defined under ‘Schedule I’ of the UK Environmental Impact

assessment Regulations (amended 1999) requiring a mandatory EIA in support

of the planning submission, assessing all relevant environmental issues on a

similar basis to the World Bank procedures and Equator Principles.

2.2 The requirement to comply with Project Environmental Standards is

referred to in the technical guidance within the RFP as follows:

• Standards and requirements stated in the Project Water and Power

Agreement (PWPA);

• Other National requirements including consents and licenses; and

• USEPA Standards and Regulations (and EU standards and

requirements not covered by those above).

National Environmental Regulations

2.3 The General Environmental Regulations for Saudi Arabia (2001) provide

the framework for the protection of the environment (air, water and land) and

include such intermediaries as humans, plants, animals and different forms of

energy, systems, natural processes and human acts.

2.4 Within Appendix 2-1 of the General Regulations is guidance for the

classification of proposed industrial projects and new developments and the

general principles that need to be considered in project environmental

evaluation as follows:

• The nature and size of the potential activity and the requirement for the

project at this location or other similar sites;

• The use of natural resources by the project specifically relating to land

and mineral use;



• The location of the project and the nature of the surrounding receptors, in

particular residential complexes; and

• The type of power to be used by the proposed project.

2.5 In addition to the above project screening, the evaluation of potential

environmental impacts is further divided into three categories:

Category 1

2.6 This category will include projects that will have a minor impact on the

environment and will include such projects as;

• Simple expansion of Power Lines that will not exceed more than 10% of

the total power lines (e.g. SEC overhead lines linking the IWPP with

existing routes to Mekkah); and

• Extension to existing roads which do not exceed more than 15% of the

extension and enlargement.

Category 2

2.7 This category will include projects that will have significant

environmental impacts associated with its operation and will involve drafting

specific environmental evaluation reports concerned with particular

environmental and technical details. Such projects listed in this category

include:

• Thermal Power Stations less than 30 mega watts; and

• Expansion and readjustment of existing roads which exceed more

than 15% of the infrastructure.

Category 3

2.8 This category will include projects that may potentially have a major

negative impact for both man and the environment and therefore it is necessary

to prepare a comprehensive EIA study in order to evaluate their impacts. Such

projects in this category include:

• Power Stations more than 30 mega watts.

2.9 Category 3 would therefore include projects such as Shuaibah III IWPP.



2.10 The National Environmental Standards (MEPA 1409) apply to all new

facilities and modifications to existing facilities which need to be designed,

operated and maintained in order to maintain compliance with the ambient

environmental standards in Saudi Arabia at the time of approval of the design.

The environmental standards required by PME are listed below.

PME Environmental Standards

PME Ambient Air Quality Standards to be considered within the EIA:

• Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) (the purpose of these PME standards is to

prevent adverse health effects and adverse effects upon vegetation):

• During any 30 day period, the 1 hour average SO2 concentration shall

not exceed 730ugm3 (0.28ppm) more than twice at any location.

• During any 12 month period, the 24 hour average SO2 concentration

shall not exceed 365ugm3 (0.14ppm) more than once at any location.

• During any 12 month period, the annual average SO2 concentration

shall not exceed 80ugm3 at any location.

• Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) (the purpose of these PME standards is to

prevent the development of nitrogen dioxide concentrations which could

produce adverse health effects or lead to the production of significant

concentrations of photochemical oxidants):

• During any 30 day period, the 1 hour average NO2 concentration shall

not exceed 660ugm3 (0.35ppm) more than twice at any location.

• During any 12 month period, the annual average NO2 concentration

shall not exceed 100ugm3 at any location.

• Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM10) (the purpose of this PME standard

is to protect susceptible populations from adverse health effects, taking

into account the synergistic effects associated with the presence of

other contaminants):

• During any 12 month period, the 24 hour maximum particulate

concentration shall not exceed 340ugm3 more than once at any location.



• During any 12 month period, the annual average particulate

concentration shall not exceed 80ugm3 at any location.

2.11 It is important to note that exceedance of the PME particulate standard

is possible due to natural background concentrations arising from dust storms,

but this would not constitute a failure of the standard. This local effect also

demonstrates why international standards applied in Europe and the USA is not

necessarily applicable to the local conditions in Saudi Arabia.

• Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) PME standards

• During any 12 month period, the 1 hour average H2S concentration

shall not exceed 200ugm3 (0.14ppm) more than once at any location.

• During any 12 month period, the 24 hour H2S concentration shall not

exceed 40ugm3 (0.03ppm) more than once at any location.

• Carbon Monoxide (CO) PME standards

• During any 30 day period, the 1 hour average CO concentration shall

not exceed 40,000ugm3 (35ppm) more than twice at any location.

• During any 30 day period, the 8 hour average CO concentration shall

not exceed 10,000ugm3 (9ppm) more than twice at any location.

• Photochemical Oxidants (measured as O3) PME standards

• During any 30 day period, the 1 hour average O3 concentration shall not

exceed 295ugm3 (0.15ppm) more than twice at any location.

PME Source Emission Standards

2.12 The Source Emission Standards to be considered within the EIA will be

based on calculations of thermal input (provided by WEC and Fitchner), include

the following:

• All fossil fuel boilers and furnaces having a heat input capacity equal or

greater than 30 MW (100 MBTU/hour) shall utilize appropriate gas

cleaning equipment to limit emissions to the following rates:

o 43ng/J (0.1 lb/MBTU) of total particulates;

o 1 ug/J (2.3 lb/MBTU) of SO2;



o 130 ng/J (0.3 lb/MBTU) of NOx for oil fired facilities



Fly ash Disposal Requirements

2.13 There is a stipulation in the RFP that the disposal of fly ash is to be

controlled and monitored in accordance with US EPA Regulations or equivalent

EU Regulations.

2.14 There are two main disposal options:

• Pre-treatment to stabilise the ash prior to land filling; or

• Disposal of the fly ash in a landfill as a hazardous waste).

2.15 However it is stated within the PWPA that “The entire plant shall be

designed, operated and maintained in such a way that any soil contamination

will be prevented.”

Noise Levels

2.16 The permissible noise levels are identified in the RFP Technical

guidance 31/07/04, section 4.8.4 and the PWPA

PME Receiving Water Guidelines

2.17 The purpose of the guidelines is to provide guidance for receiving water

quality and for the location, design and operation of new facilities and

modifications to existing facilities and for the operation of existing facilities,

pending development of receiving water standards.

2.18 The guidelines for receiving water quality apply at the edge of the mixing

zone and beyond for the discharge from any facility to the coastal waters.

Unless otherwise stated, each interim guideline refers to the thirty day average.

The guidelines outlined for receiving waters are outlined in Tables 2.1 to 2.4

below:

Table 2.1: Physio-chemical Pollutants

Pollutant Guidelines at Edge of Mixing Zone Floatables Non-attributable to discharge pH 0.1 pH units (maximum change from

typical local baseline conditions) Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 5% (all references to percentage are

maximum changes from typical local baseline conditions)

Temperature 1°C Oil and grease Management measures required* Dissolved Oxygen 5%



Turbidity 5% * - Facilities using, transferring or storing oil and petroleum hydrocarbons are required to

prepare, maintain and update a spill prevention, control and clean up plan

Table 2.2: Organic Pollutants

Pollutant Guidelines at Edge of Mixing Zone Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 5% Total Organic Carbon (TOC) 5% Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen (TKN) 5% Chlorinated Hydrocarbons 5% Oil and Grease 5% Phenolics 5%

Table 2.3: Non-Organic Pollutants

Pollutant Guidelines at Edge of Mixing Zone Ammonia 5% Arsenic 5% Cadmium 5% Chloride 5% Residual Chlorine 5% Total Chromium 5% Copper 5% Total Cyanide 5% Lead 5% Mercury 5% Nickel 5% Total Phosphate 5% Zinc 5% Dissolved Oxygen 5%

Table 2.4: Biological Pollutants

Pollutant Guidelines at Edge of Mixing Zone Total Coliform 70 most probable number per 100ml

(average for a 30 day period)

PME Performance Standards for Direct Discharge

2.19 These are the performance standards for direct discharge (end of

outfall) and require waste water source to adopt best practical controls. Such

standards apply to sanitary sewage, surface run-off (including fire control

waters), cooling water discharges, boiler water conditioning blow down, process

wastewaters and other wastewater.

2.20 Such standards outline that wastewaters of different character shall be

segregated to the maximum extent possible. Uncontaminated surface runoff



and once-through cooling waters may be discharged to receiving waters without

treatment.

2.21 The specific performance standards outlined in Table 2.5 to 2.8 apply to

wastewaters at the end of the outfall and before discharge to coastal waters or

to any channel of wastewater.

Table 2.5: Physio-chemical Pollutants

Pollutant Allowable Effluent Level Floatables None pH 6 to 9 pH units Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 15 mg/l (maximum) Temperature MEPA determines the thermal

properties of discharged water to fit the properties of receiving water and such properties are determined on a case by case basis

Turbidity 75 NTU (maximum)

Table 2.6: Organic Pollutants

Pollutant Allowable Effluent Level Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 25 mg/l Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 150 mg/l Total Organic Carbon (TOC) 50 mg/l Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen (TKN) 5 mg/l Total Chlorinated Hydrocarbons 0.1 mg/l Oil and Grease 8 mg/l (not to exceed 15 mg/l in any

individual discharge) Phenols 0.1 mg/l

Table 2.7: Non-Organic Pollutants

Pollutant Allowable Effluent Level – 30 day average

Ammonia (as nitrogen) 1.0 mg/l Arsenic 0.1mg/l Cadmium 0.02 mg/l Chlorine (residual) 0.5 mg/l Total Chromium 0.1 mg/l Copper 0.2 mg/l Cyanide 0.05 mg/l Lead 0.1 mg/l Mercury 0.001 mg/l Nickel 0.2 mg/l Total Phosphate (as Phosphorous) 1.0 mg/l Zinc 1.0 mg/l



Table 2.8: Biological Pollutants

Pollutant Allowable Effluent Level – 30 day average

Total Coliform 1000 most preferable number per 100ml (average for a 30 day period)

2.22 In terms of the mixing zone, each direct discharge shall be adequately

dispersed and mixed with the receiving waters. A mixing zone shall be

designed to minimise the adverse effects to designated beneficial uses. The

adequacy of the mixing zone shall be determined on a case by case basis.

World Bank Standards for Thermal Power Plants

World Bank Ambient Air Quality Standards

2.23 The World Bank Guidelines presented in Table 2.9 below are to be

used only for carrying out an environmental assessment in the absence of local

ambient standards. They were constructed as consensus values taking

particular account of WHO, USEPA and EU Standards and guidelines. The

Ambient Air Quality Standards for Thermal Power Plants include for PM10,

TSP, Nitrogen Dioxide and Sulphur Dioxide.

Table 2.9: World Bank Ambient Air Quality Standards for Thermal Power Plants

Pollutant 24-hour Average

Annual Average

PM10 150 50

TSP1 203 80

Nitrogen Dioxide 150 100

Sulphur Dioxide 150 80 1 - Measurement of PM10 is preferable to a measurement of TSP

World Bank Source Emission Standards

2.24 The World Bank Source Emission Standards are consistent with PME

Standards (See Paragraph 2.12).

World Bank Effluent Emission Standards from Thermal Power Plants

2.25 In addition to the PME Standards, the World Bank have specific mixing

zone requirements, in particular a requirement to limit sea temperature rise to 3

degrees Celsius within the mixing zone or within 100m of the outfall. The



existing and predicted environmental effects of the discharge will be assessed

following completion of the proposed water quality and coral reef survey. This

will provide the information for discussion with PME regarding the proposed

mixing zone. The parameters outlined in Table 2.10 will be considered within

the EIA will be based on calculations of thermal input (provided by the Project

Company), include the following

Table 2.10: World Bank Effluent Emission Standards from Thermal Power Plants

Parameter Maximum Value1 pH 6-9 TSS 50 Oil and grease 10 Total residual chlorine 0.2 Chromium (total) 0.5 Copper 0.5 Iron 1.0 Zinc 1.0 Temperature Increase <3°C2

1 – values measured in milligrams per litre with the exception of pH and temperature 2 – the effluent should result in a temperature increase of no more than 3 degrees at the edge of the zone where initial mixing and dilution takes place. Where the zone is not defined, use 100m from the point of discharge when there are no sensitive aquatic ecosystems within this distance.

World Bank Ambient Noise Standards

2.26 In accordance with World Bank Guidelines for Thermal Power Plants

noise abatement measures should achieve either the levels provided in the

Table below or a maximum increase of 3 dB(A). The measurements are to be

taken at noise sensitive receptors located outside the project property boundary

and include the levels outlined in Table 2.11 below:

Table 2.11: World Bank Ambient Noise Standards for Thermal Power Plants

Maximum allowable log equivalent (hourly measurements), dB(A) Receptor Day

(07:00 – 22:00) Night

(22:00 – 07:00) Residential , Institutional and Educational

55 45

Industrial and Commercial 70 75

Project Category under the Equator Principles



2.27 The categorisation of the project under the Equator Principles is likely to

be Category B which will be subject to discussions with PME and the lenders,

and this will be determined during the course of the EIA following the additional

surveys, air and marine modelling, assessment and calculations. A justification

for this is given in Appendix 2.2.

2.28 Following the drafting of the ESIA it remains the opinion of the authors

that this project should be classified as a “Category B”.



3 METHODS OF ASSESSMENT AND STANDARDS

3.1 The proposed Shuaibah III development will give rise to a number of

environmental issues that require environmental assessment and appropriate

mitigation. On the basis of the consultations to date, existing reports and

background information, it is apparent that some are likely to be of greater

importance than others.

3.2 It is evident from initial consultations that social issues are likely to be a

relatively minor issue, but these have not been scoped out at this stage, until

the detailed information has been assessed as part of the EIA (ESIA). As a

result, the relevant issues have been identified in relation to

construction/operational activities and categorised as primary or secondary

issues.

3.3 The identification of the primary and secondary issues has been

undertaken through the consultation process and also with reference to recent

experience of EIAs for other similar power station and desalination plants in the

Middle East. The consultations process has identified the potential impact of

the marine discharges as a primary issue, whilst the lenders have requested

detailed consideration of the ambient air quality due to the IWPP and existing

SWCC and SEC plants.

3.4 The issue of contaminated land and waste management, including fly

ash disposal, has also been raised as a primary issue due to the requirement

for safe handling and disposal of hazardous waste materials. The detailed

requirements for the Project Brief have ensured that environmental

management and monitoring are also listed among the primary issues.

3.5 Secondary issues have been identified during the consultations process

but are not expected to require the detailed modelling and assessment for the

primary issues (including the assessment of cumulative impacts) such as air

and marine studies.

Part`1: Primary Issues

• Marine Water Quality, Recirculation and Coral Reef Ecology;

• Ambient Air Quality and Stack Emissions; and

• Solid Waste Management.



Part 2: Secondary Issues

• Social and economic impacts;

• Noise and Vibration;

• Ground Contamination;

• Transportation;

• Terrestrial Ecology;

• Cultural Heritage and Archaeology; and

• Landscape and Visual Impact.

Part 3: Environmental Management Plan and Monitoring

3.6 In addition to assessing the above primary and secondary issues, a

framework for the management plans have been provided in the Environmental

Statement for the following:

• Construction Phase – Construction Environmental Management Plan

(CEMP);

• Operational Phase – Operational Environmental Management Plant

(EMP); and

• Monitoring Programme for Emissions to Air, Water and Land

Assessment of Potential Effects

3.7 The scoping study has taken into account the potential environmental

effects of both the construction and operational phases of the scheme.

Furthermore, a number of criteria have been used to determine whether or not

the potential effects of the development are ‘significant’. These significance

criteria comprise:

• international, national and local standards;

• relationship with planning policy;

• sensitivity of receiving environment;

• reversibility / irreversibility and duration of effect;

• inter-relationship between effects (cumulative); and



• the results of consultations with the relevant ministries and local and

regional administrations.

3.8 The significance of effects reflects judgements as to the importance or

sensitivity of the affected receptor(s) and the nature, magnitude and duration of

the predicted changes. For example, a large adverse impact on a feature or

site of low importance will be of lesser significance than the same impact on a

feature or site of high importance.

3.9 The assessment has followed the requirements of the UK IEMA

(Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment) using recognised

assessment criteria and terminology and the process by which effects are

identified and their significance evaluated is set out below.

Sensitivity or Importance of Receptors

3.10 Receptors are defined as the physical resource or user group that would

be affected. The baseline studies identify potential environmental receptors for

each topic. Some receptors will be more sensitive to certain environmental

effects than others. The sensitivity or importance of a receptor may depend, for

example, on its frequency or extent of occurrence at an international, national,

regional or local level.

Description of Effect

3.11 Effects are defined as the physical changes to the environment

attributable to the Project. For each topic, the likely environmental effects are

identified and taken into account, including their magnitude and other

dimensions of identified change in the environment with the Project by

comparison with the situation without the Project.

3.12 Effects are defined as either adverse or beneficial and depending on

discipline, they may also be described as:

• Direct: Effects directly attributable to a project action/activity;

• Indirect: Effects not directly attributable to a project action/activity;

3.13 Effects are divided into those occurring during the construction phase

and those occurring during operation. Where appropriate, some of the technical



assessment chapters in the ES may refer to these as temporary and permanent

effects.



Significance of Effects

3.14 The significance of an effect differs according to the topic under

assessment. The magnitude of an effect does not directly translate into its

significance. For example, a significant effect may arise as a result of a

relatively modest effect on a resource of national value, or a large effect on a

resource of local value. In broad terms, therefore, the significance of the effect

can depend on both its magnitude and the sensitivity or importance of the

receptor.

3.15 The significance of an effect has generally taken account of the

following criteria:

• Extent and magnitude - The information and data utilised to estimate

the extent/magnitude of the main impacts in terms of its size an

importance of the projected disturbance. Estimates of the impact will be

recorded in measurable quantities with ranges and/or confidence limits

as appropriate. Any qualitative descriptions will be fully defined as

appropriate;

• Duration – the duration of an impact will be assessed using the

terminology highlighted in Table 3.1 below:

Table 3.1: Duration Terminology

Duration Description

Short Term The effects would be of short duration and would not last more than 2-5 years from the commencement of the works.

Medium Term The effects would take 5-15 years to be mitigated.

Long Term The effects would be reasonably mitigated over a long period of time (15 years or more).

• Reversibility and irreversibility – a reversible impact is an impact which

can be returned to the existing baseline condition with appropriate

mitigation. Whereas, a irreversible impact is an impact which cannot be

returned to the existing baseline situation even with unlimited mitigation;

• Performance against environmental quality standards – impacts

identified for each topic will be assessed against the relevant PME and

World Bank Standards, where applicable ;



• Sensitivity of the receptor – the sensitivity of receptors in relation to the

proposed development will be identified in each of topic and will include

human, ecological (terrestrial and aquatic), cultural and social and

economic.

3.16 The Environmental Statement will identify and assess the likely

significant impacts of the proposed development in relation to both the

construction and operational stages. In order to provide a consistent approach

to assessing the outcomes of the individual environmental components the

levels of significance outlined in Table 3.2 below are used in the assessment:

Table 3.2: Significance Criteria

Impact Significance Definition

Major Negative The development fails to satisfy the subject environmental objective and results in major deterioration of the environmental context.

Moderate Negative The development partly satisfies the subject environmental objective and but fails to contribute to the environmental context.

Minor Negative The development satisfies the subject environmental objective but fails to fully contribute to the environmental context.

Negligible/neutral The development satisfies the subject environmental objective but neither contributes to nor detracts from the environmental context.

Minor Positive The development partly satisfies the subject environmental objective and partly contributes to the environmental context.

Moderate Positive The development satisfies the subject environmental objective and contributes to the environmental context.

Major Positive The development satisfies the subject environmental objective and results in a major contribution to the environmental context.

3.17 Where an effect is described as ‘neutral’ this means that there is either

no effect or that the significance of any effect is considered to be negligible. All

other levels of significance apply to both adverse and beneficial effects.

3.18 Summary impact tables that summarise the potential impacts associated

with an environmental topic area (e.g. air quality), potential mitigation measures

and residual effects are also provided at the end of each corresponding section.



4 CONSULTATION AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

4.1 Consultations have taken place over a period of four months and have

included the following organisations, individuals and community groups:

• PME;

• WEC/Fitchener meetings;

• SWCC Shuaibah Plant Manager;

• SWCC Shuaibah Deputy Plant Manager

• SWCC Shuaibah Maintenance Manager;

• SWCC Shuaibah Chemist;

• SWCC Shuaibah Site administration staff;

• Saudi Archirodon Engineering Manager (on behalf of SEC);

• Shuaibah Regional Governor and Mayors Office;

• Fishing Community (south of SEC plant);

4.2 There are no NGOs operating at the site or within the Shoaba Region.

There is one NGO in Jeddah which is The Arab NGO Network for the

Environment and Development (RAED) – Saudi Arabia which emphasises the

Green Cities Concept and Principles. They are involved in education and

environmental awareness events and have been involved in local projects in

Jeddah such as beach cleaning and painting contests for young people.

4.3 Consultations were undertaken with the Yemeni fishermen who live 5km

south of SEC because they earn their living by fishing the reef and therefore

could be affected by existing/future plants.

4.4 Other villages are 20km to the east and 10km to the north and have no

direct contact with the SWCC Plants. A meeting was held with their

representative i.e. the Shuaibah Regional Administration Office which is

responsible for the 15 villages in the Region which extend 80km north and 50

km east of the Power Plants. We discussed all issues with them in a culturally

sensitive way (i.e. with a respected Saudi Professor from the University in



Jeddah) and identified impacts (positive and negative) and possible mitigation

measures in relation to the new Shuaibah III Plant.

4.5 This source of local site information has also been supplemented by

reference to government and research organisation websites to obtain

information for the baseline review and assessment including archaeology,

wildlife, transportation and economic development, National Commission for

Wildlife and Research Papers and relevant Ministry websites.

4.6 During the first site visit on the 29 May 2005, consultations were

undertaken with the Plant Manager, Assistant Plant Manager, Operations

Manager and Plant Chemist who advised of existing site conditions in relation to

environmental issues such as fuel sulphur content, stack emissions data,

disposal of fly ash, local community receptors, on site facilities for workers and

marine studies. These are referred to in specific technical sections where

relevant and highlighted below:

• The coral reef is believed to be very good for diving although there are

no benchmark coral studies for the local area. The existing and

proposed outfalls are likely to be <100m from the coral reef;

• Shuaibah Phase II is only 3 years old. Marine modelling was

undertaken in relation to water circulation and the effects of the

discharge on the water intakes for Shuaibah I and II, but not in relation

to the coral reef ecology;

• A small beach development to the north of Shuaibah, currently with 36

waterside villas has potential for expansion in the future;

• The local land is privately owned and therefore population movement

from Jeddah Industrial City is considered unlikely. Accommodation is

already provided for employees on site in purpose built single and family

units;

• The development of Shuaibah III will not result in the displacement of

indigenous peoples or local communities. The nearest villages are

approximately 30 to 40 km to the south of the site. All development will

be within the existing fence line for Shuaibah plants and on land owned

by SWCC;



• The existing stacks on Shuaibah II are approximately 155m in height.

There are no FGDB (Flue Gas Desulphurisation Beds) on Shuaibah I or

II although it is proposed that desulphurisation will be provided for the

new Shuaibah III. Fuel additives have been trialled to reduce pollutant

emissions and the companies have undertaken flue gas analysis

including SOx, NOx. However there is no routine stack emissions

monitoring or recording of ambient air quality;

• The current disposal of fly ash is sent by road to landfill in Jeddah

approximately 110km to the north. It is estimated that Shuaibah I and II

currently produce 10 -20m3 per day for disposal (1 truck per day). In the

future it is likely that the production of fly ash will increase to ±40m3 per

day;

• Chemical analysis of the fly ash in the past has indicated a pH value of

as low as 1.5 although this is now raised to 3.5 - 4.2 by the addition of

additives. The ash is collected in hoppers to minimise dust and transfer

by air or emissions through the stacks. There is no monitoring or

analysis of heavy metals retained in the ash;

• There are no environmental permits for Shuaibah I and II from PME.

The current regulatory regime in Saudi Arabia does not include

provision for permitting. As an alternative, industrial operations are

expected to comply with environmental standards issued by PME. It is

expected that Shuaibah III will need to operate in compliance with such

standards.

• The key difference between existing plants at Shuaibah and the new

IWPP is that historically there has been no monitoring of ambient

conditions to check whether the plants are complying with the PME

(MEPA) standards. This will change with the IWPP because there is a

requirement under the new Environmental Regulations for monitoring of

discharges. PME will therefore issue an approval letter for the plant to

proceed based on the findings of the EIA and subject to environmental

management and monitoring as per the CEMP and EMP.

• Domestic wastewater discharges are currently directed to an

evaporation pond (soak away) and are not discharged through the sea

outfalls;



• There are two existing jetties which can dock vessels of 100,000 tonnes.

These will be upgraded for Shuaibah III plant by the addition of new

unloading facilities/arms and new support for an additional pipeline

beneath existing oil pipelines; and

• The existing concrete dock will also be used to unload some equipment

and construction materials for the new development.

4.7 Initial consultations with the Saudi – Malaysian Consortium Technical

Advisors with regards to any project environmental design/construction

parameters resulted in the following clarifications:

• Dredging works were previously undertaken for the construction of the

intake and outfall channels for Shuaibah I/II and similar construction

methodology would be used for the Shuaibah III IWPP open intake and

outfall channels;

• Shuaibah III proposes to use light crude oil which contains lower

concentrations of sulphur (reference content 1.8% and maximum

content 2.5%) compared to that used by Shuaibah I and II (see update

below).

• The specification for the maximum concentration of sulphur in the fuel

for the IWPP has subsequently been reduced from 2.5% to 2.0%,

following a meeting between the Consortium and WEC in Riyadh during

October 2005.

4.8 Consultations with PME are being undertaken to discuss engagement of

stakeholders, and lending institutions in relation to scoping, identification of

issues and data and the environmental assessment procedures.

4.9 Further consultations with SWCC Plant Mangers and staff during August

identified the following:

• Oil unloading facilities have operated for the past 17 years without

incident and have safety valves to prevent accidental oil spillage. The

tankers are moored alongside the terminal using a tug boat. There is no

oil boom around the site as it is impracticable, taking at least 1 day to

deploy and 1 day to remove. Oil is currently pumped into the tanks



using 3 pumps (1 in reserve) at a pumping velocity which prevents

electrostatic build-up in accordance with Industrial Safety Standards.

• Whilst the unloading facilities have operated without incident, there have

been several oil pollution incidents over the past 10 to 15 years

including one case of a ship washing out its tanks which led to oil

coming ashore. In addition the manual drainage of sea water from the

tanks back to the sea has on occasions led to the accidental release of

oil into the bay although this has been localised by the onshore south

easterly winds.

• The SWCC site has a middle school for children living on site although

there is no high school due to the numbers required before the Ministry

of Education will provide the funding and teachers. The schools are

open to children from outside the SWCC site including children of

Bedouins and SEC employees.

4.10 Consultations with Saudi Archirodon have established that dredging

works undertaken for the construction of the inlet channel and discharge have

held material in an adjacent barge prior to being transported to a sea disposal

site under permit. Coral reef surveys have been undertaken but results are not

available. The inlet channel is protected from accidental intake of surface

contaminants including oil.

4.11 A meeting with the Shuaibah Regional Governors office established that

the region is approximately 80km from north to south and 50km from east to

west. There are approximately 15 villages within the region (a village being a

group of at least 7 dwellings). Overall the benefit from the SWCC plants has

been significant as they provide potable quality water delivered by tankers to the

villages. A summary of the issues discussed is as follows:

• The nearest villages to the SWCC plants are 20km to the east and 5km

to the north of the site;

• Four of the villages have either elementary or middle school, but none

have a high school. Education opportunities are generally limited so

access to a high school would be very beneficial;



• The Bedouins are dependent on the natural vegetation for grazing herds

of camels and goats. They use commercial supplies of animal feedstuff

during the summer as there is no irrigation;

• There are no archaeological or cultural features of significance in the

Region and no special routes that should be avoided. The overhead

cables are not of a major concern although they believe there is a case

for compensation from the government. (SEC who are responsible for

all power lines from the Shuaibah plants have advised that they have

not received any claims from local communities which cross a barren

sabkha landscape near the existing plants);

• The new north south highway opened 18 months ago has reduced the

number of accidents and is seen as beneficial;

• Fishing was historically undertaken by the older men although this is

generally confined to foreign workers who fish the coral reef and share

the proceeds;

4.12 A consultation meeting was held on the 10 October 2005 with the

residents of “Al Sauda” fishing community which is situated approximately 5km

south of the SEC Power Plants. The language interpretation was provide by Dr

Bagour from the King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah. The fishing community is

comprised of approximately 60 men, mostly single and with no families on site.

They are all fishermen from Yemen working on 4 year contracts. Most of the

fishermen have been resident on site for at least 6 years and some have lived

there for 20 years. Their comments are as follows:

• The Yemeni fishermen mostly fish on the coral reef, approximately 30km

to the south of the power plants at an optimum depth of 40m. They

undertake line fishing using specific bait for catching different species of

fish. They are able to gather more bait at the site to the south of the

plants. They noted that there is sometimes bleaching of the coral reef in

the shallow waters due to the high water temperature.

• They are prohibited by the coastguard from fishing near the power

plants but did fish to the north before the plants were constructed. They

indicated that fish are attracted close to the shore by the security lights



of the power plants. They have not seen any evidence of pollution

incidents from the power plants affecting the coral reef or the fisheries.

• The Yemeni fishermen live in simple wooden huts. They have no

contact with SEC or SWCC employees as all their fish are sent to

market in Jeddah on alternate days. The only benefit from the SWCC

power and desalination plants is the supply of water by tanker which

costs SR120 per load of which the water is SR40.

• The fishing harbour is a good site for them as it provides good

protection for the boats. There are also good fish found in the harbour

locality. The community live adjacent to a coastguard station which also

provides protection for them and their boats. They area aware of the

new fish farms nearby (between SEC and their community) and are

concerned that they might have to move if the fish farms are expanded.

• The fishermen reported that they have not experienced any bad smells

from the power plants and that the air quality is good. The new road to

Jeddah is of benefit to them as it helps to get their catch to market

without delay.



5 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS

5.1 The coastal plain between Jeddah and Shuaibah forms much of the

Shuaibah Region and is an area of dry desert plain with winter grasses and low

lying scrub grazed by camel herds and goat herds. A new dual carriageway is

currently under construction between Jeddah and Shuaibah and is being

constructed alongside the new two lane road opened in 2004. Some of the

small villages approximately 60km south of Jeddah can be seen between the

road and the shoreline.

Plate 5.1: View of the SWCC Power and Desalination Plants from the highway to the east

5.2 Mangroves are present on the shoreline 5km north of Shuaibah and are

currently being developed as part of a restoration programme being undertaken

by King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah. To the south of the SEC site there are

several fish farms, whilst further south (5km) there is a small fishing community

(Al Sauda) at the coastguard station. To the east of the SEC site are the

sabkha which are large areas of salt pans which do not support any vegetation

due to the underlying salt layer.



Plate 5.2: View of Mangroves 5km north of Shuaibah Plants

5.3 The proposed site for Shuaibah Phase III is next to the existing

Shuaibah Phase I (300MW and 50mgallons/day) and Shuaibah Phase II

(550MW and 100mgallons/day) both plants are owned and operated by SWCC.

The development area for the IWPP is mainly on a brownfield site which was

previously used for the temporary buildings and construction compounds for the

development of Shuaibah Phase II. The site for the third phase is within the

fenced land owned by SWCC and no longer has any temporary buildings or

structures within the proposed footprint associated with the Phase II Plant.

5.4 A tour of the site was undertaken on the 29 May 2005 with the

assistance of the Projects Co-ordinator for WEC. A visual inspection of the

existing facilities indicated that the site is well maintained with little sign of above

ground spills or leakage from any of the large oil storage tanks or other facilities

although containers with fly ash were observed at several locations awaiting

collection. The site has high security with multiple perimeter fencing together

with an outer barrier of concrete blocks and is lit by security lighting together

with CCTV.

5.5 There is currently existing worker housing on site for 50 families and

other single accommodation for up to 500 staff situated in blocks which are

located approximately 500m north east of the existing plants. In addition, there

are approximately 200 3/4 bedroom villas which are also used by site staff. To



the south of the site there are 36 coastal villas adjacent to a beach and which

have leisure facilities including a recreation centre and gym.

Plate 5.3: View of SWCC worker housing from the highway to the south-east

5.6 Another site with power generation (SEC) is located approximately 5 - 6

km to the south of the IWPP/SWCC site. A planned expansion (SEC Phase 2)

which would comprise 6 x 393 MW generation facilities is due to be

implemented by 2010 and is under construction by Saudi Archirodon.

5.7 The existing Shuaibah Plant has two seawater intakes for the

desalination plant which are located within a few hundred metres of the

shoreline. Two jetties have been used to tanker oil on shore to the oil storage

tanks, although only one of these is currently in use. The cooling water

discharges for Shuaibah Phase I and II are located in parallel concrete channels

which merge at the point of discharge which is approximately 200m from the

shoreline.

5.8 The marine environment offshore from the site is characterised by the

presence of coral reef and by large shoals and diversity of fish species. Benthic

macroinvertebrates including molluscs are present while in the upper layers

there are large numbers of plankton and jelly fish. The existing outfall is no

more than 100m from the coral reef.

5.9 The shoreline for the proposed Phase III Plant is generally a sandy

beach which will require some form of revetment works to stabilise the seaward



edge. Land crabs were observed on the upper zone of the beach while shoals

of fish were seen close in shore to the disused landing jetty. The main coral

reef is approximately 100m from the shore.

Plate 5.4: Example of rock armour revetment and jetty at fishing harbour 5km south of SEC Plant

5.10 Along the northern boundary (inside the security fencing) there was a

variety of scrub vegetation together with some wetland birds such as spoonbill

feeding in shallow water. It was noted that the vegetation inside the fence line

appeared to be well established compared with that outside, possibly due to the

restriction of grazing within the security fence.

5.11 Other facilities noted during the site visit included an effluent storage

lagoon and a helicopter landing pad, the latter being used for VIP visits and fire

training at other times.



6 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION, PROPOSALS AND PROGRAMME

Project Justification

6.1 The Saudi Arabian Water and Electricity Company intend to construct a

new power and desalination plant (Phase III) at the existing site at Shuaibah,

approximately 110km south of Jeddah on the Red Sea coastline. The site is

adjacent to the existing Shuaibah I and II plants and will be based on a light

crude oil fired power plant with a gross power generation rate of up to 900 MW

and 880,000m3 /day from the desalination units.

6.2 This project is one of four IWPPs being promoted by the Government of

Saudi Arabia to meet the National Planning needs for continued social and

economic development. It is therefore a unique project by providing water and

power for Makkah, Jeddah and Taif to address existing shortages and as such

cannot consider a “No Project” alternative. The three other proposed IWPPs

are not close enough to serve these locations and have different requirements

to meet other shortages and to support continued growth of the economy.

6.3 There are no viable alternative sites between Shoiaba and Jeddah in

the north which could be developed instead of this IWPP at Shuaibah (adjacent

to the existing Phase I/II Plants) for the following reasons:

• The site is within the ownership of SWCC and is designated for power and

water use;

• The site was previously used for construction works associated with

Shuaibah Phase II and is therefore classified as a “brownfield” site;

• There are existing overhead power lines to Makkah which can be utilised;

• There are shared infrastructure facilities such as the new road into SWCC

plants;

• There are existing security posts including 3 Coastguard stations within 5 to

10km ;

• There is an existing oil unloading jetty which would be used for the IWPP;

• There is an existing deep water jetty for unloading equipment or mooring

boats;



• There is a need to integrate the new IWPP water plant with existing

infrastructure for Shuaibah I/II.

• There are no villages within 10km of the proposed IWPP site to the north

and south and 20km to the east;

6.4 No other site can provide the shared benefits listed above.

6.5 The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the largest economy in the Middle East

in GDP terms and contains one quarter of the World’s oil reserves. A growing

population and strong demand projections for power and water demand make

Shuaibah III IWPP an essential project to meet the requirements of the Seventh

National Development Plan for Saudi Arabia, 1420 to 1425 AH (2000 – 2005).

6.6 Global Water Intelligence (GWI) Desalination Markets quotes Saudi

Arabia as needing an 83% increase in total desalination capacity by 2015

(5,400m3/day), the greatest of any country. Drinking water is rationed in most

cities during the summer months and received media attention in Jeddah during

2005 as water tankers were deployed on the streets to cope with acute water

shortages.

6.7 The Saline Water Conversion Company (SWCC) responsible for

providing the entire Kingdom’s desalinated water is planning to establish 22 new

desalination plants along the Eastern and Western coasts including expansion

of existing units. It has been estimated that an investment of approximately US

$16 billion is needed by 2020 to meet water demands at the current per capita

consumption of almost 300 litres per day.

6.8 Saudi Arabia’s electricity sector has been largely controlled by four

regional state companies providing 85% of the power supply. In 1998 the

Government stared moving towards having a single company, Saudi Electric

Company (SEC) take over form the regional companies. Alongside SEC, power

is also produced by SWCC and Saudi Aramaco. SWCC dual water and power

plants produce about 20% of the Kingdoms power capacity.

6.9 In a press release in June 2005, Abdullah bin Abdul-Rahman Al-

Hussayen, the Minister of Water and Electricity, said it was a significant step in

the development and privatization of Saudi Arabia's water and power sector.

While acknowledging the support and assistance from various organizations,

the Minister stressed that the project has had the full support of the

Government. "The output from the Shuaibah IWPP will play a major role in



meeting the increasing demand for water and power in the Western region

covering cities such as Jeddah, Makkah and Taif.

6.10 Further detailed economic and project justification and assessment of

process selection for the IWPP is provided in the Due Diligence Report

prepared by Black and Veatch, November 2005 (Appendix 6.1).

Project Description

6.11 The proposed general layout for the IWPP Plant is shown in Figure 6.1

with the general configuration summarised below.



Figure 6.1: General IWPP Plant Layout



6.12 The plant layout will be configured in three groups each comprising the

following units:

• 1 steam generator unit;

• 1 steam turbine generator unit;

• 4 desalination units

6.13 The following facilities will also be provided as part of the IWPP:

• Storage facilities for product water (3 No storage tanks);

• Storage facilities for liquid fuels (4 No. 45 days storage, net volume

490,500m3);

• Intake and outfall structures (open channel design);

• Disposal facilities for ash from flue gas cleaning (purpose built landfill

within SWCC fence line); and

• Auxiliary systems including cooling water system, chlorination plant,

sewage and storm water collection, process waste water and associated

dosing and sampling systems).

6.14 The production technologies are as follows:

• The Steam Generators are drum type with economiser, evaporator

reheater and super heater tube sections, designed for constant pressure

operation. The steam generator will burn crude oil with a maximum

sulphur content of 2.0% by wt. The emission limits will be met by

provision of Low NOx burners and FGD equipment. Light oil (diesel) will

be used for start up of the steam generators

• The Steam Turbines will be two casing black pressure type with double

flow intermediate pressure. Each turbine will be directly coupled to its

synchronous Generator. Operational flexibility is provided through the

use of steam turbine HP and IP steam bypass systems and a dump

condenser.

• The Desalination Plant will be Multi Stage Flash Distillation (MSF). The

MSF is of the cross burn type i.e. the hot brine flows at right angles to

the stages and heat transfer surfaces. Each unit is comprised of 19

heat recovery stages and 2 heat rejection stages.

6.15 Further details of the process technologies are reviewed in the Due

Dilligence Report (Black and Veath, November 2005).



6.16 The Shuaibah Independent Power and Water Plant (IWPP) project will

have three (3) nos. of crude oil fired boilers and twelve (12) units of MSF

Distillers producing 900 MW net power and net 880,000 m3/day desalinated

water outputs. The plant will comprise of all facilities necessary for the

generation of power and water as described in the Minimum Functional

Specifications (“MFS”) provided as a bid document to WEC. The main EPC

contractor will be Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Power Generation of Germany in

consortium with Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction Co. Ltd. of South

Korea. Besides the Power and Water Plant, the plant shall also have the

following facilities:

• 380 kV switchgear substation connecting the plant to the main grid

network;

• Storage facilities for water;

• Storage facilities for liquid fuel;

• Seawater Intake and Outfall structures;

• Disposal facility for ashes produced from the flue gas cleaning process.

• A Fuel oil special facilities; and

• An Electrical special facilities.

6.17 A preliminary layout of the Facilities is provided in Figure 6.1 and

summarised below:



Conventional steam process for power generation

6.18 Each power units will have its own boiler and steam turbine and this is

connected to 4 units of MSF distillers making one block of Power and Water

Plant unit. The boilers shall be designed to achieve high availability and

capacity factors. It has to produce specified superheated steam at HP, IP and

LP levels and will have an IP steam reheater to maximize efficiency. The HP

and IP steam will be feed to a Back-pressure Steam Turbine to produce power

and a specified amount of IP steam will be used as ejector steam in the MSF

distillers. LP steam from the Back-pressure Steam Turbine will be channeled

into the MSF brine heaters and the dump condensers to be reused in the water

steam cycle.

6.19 Depending on the selected plant configurations, the minimum scope of

supply shall include, but not be limited to the following:

Steam Turbine Generation Island

6.20 This will include the following:

• Bleed steam system;

• Gland steam system;

• Automatic draining system;

• Lubrication and control oil system;

• I&C system (governor and protection system);

• Three phase Alternating Current (AC) generator, including excitation

and voltage regulations;

• Power System Stabilizer (PSS);

• Generator protection system;

• Generator neutral and out feed panels; and

• Cooling system.

Steam Generator

6.21 To date, the EPC contractor has not confirmed the supplier of the

boilers, although the following suppliers have been short listed.; Ansaldo

Energia of Italy, Doosan Heavy Industries and Construction of South Korea,

Alstom Power Boiler GmBH



6.22 The Steam Generator scope of supply to be included in the EPC

contractor is a complete boiler system including the following;

• Firing system

• Steam drum in case of drum type boiler;

• Vent and drain systems;

• Blow down system;

• Boiler related piping and valves;

• Fuel supply systems;

• Atomizing steam systems;

• Soot blower systems, a complete automatic, programmable, selective

sequential control system shall be provided for remote operation of the soot

blowers from the control room;

• Chemical dosing system

• Fire fighting and alarm system;

• I&C system (burner management systems and boiler protection systems);

• Fuel oil additive system (if applicable);

• Regenerative air heaters;

• Steam air pre-heater;

• Exhaust gas system with flue gas ducts and fans;

• Stack; and

• Removal facility for fly ashes.

Flue Gas Cleaning Plant (FGD)

6.23 Three (3) nos. of FGD will be installed at Shuaibah IWPP, i.e. each

boiler will have a dedicated FGD. The potential suppliers of the FGDs are Lurgi

Lentjes AG and Fisia Babcock Environment GmBH. The scope of supply will be

a complete FGD system, including:

• Exhaust gas system with flue gas ducts and fans;

• Removal facility for fly ashes;

• Seawater Flue Gas Desulphurization (FGD) plants;

• Flue gas reheating system;

• Seawater supply system to FGD;

• FGD effluent treatment plant;

• Landfill for disposal of fly ashes; and

• Facility for stabilisation of fly ashes, if applicable.



Water Plant

6.24 The sea water Desalination Plant shall be a Multi-Stage Flash (MSF)

units, of the brine recirculating type. The plant shall consist mainly of twelve (12)

identical units, each is designed to produce a daily net quantity of 16.2MIGD

over the specified range of seawater temperatures. Outside this range, the

operation shall remain stable, but distillate output may be reduced.

6.25 The gross capacity of the units shall include sufficient surplus capacity

for the internal demand of the power and water plants regardless of the

operating configuration.

6.26 The total dissolved solids contents of the distillate shall be guaranteed

not to exceed 25mg/l. Maximum copper content and iron content shall not

exceed 0.04mg/l.

6.27 The fouling factors to be considered in the design of the various

sections of the distillers should be selected such that the guaranteed net

specific heat consumption (MJ/kg water production), in new and clean condition,

shall be achieved after the reliability test run.

6.28 Online water quality monitoring equipment, including conductivity and

chlorine monitoring shall be provided at each desalination unit. Also an

automatic dump facility shall be put into operation when quality limits are

exceeded.

6.29 All necessary online detection and monitoring systems for seawater

feed and pre-treatment effluent shall be provided to ensure safe operation of the

system. The supplier shall be responsible for taking all necessary seawater

samples and carrying out the analyses to ensure the adequacy of the proposed

equipment design to the actual site-specific conditions.

6.30 Depending on the selected plant configurations, the minimum scope of

supply shall include, but not be limited to the following

Desalination plant

6.31 The Desalination units will be provided by Doosan Heavy Industries and

Construction Co. Ltd. of South Korea and the scope of supply will be complete,

including:

• Evaporators, their accessories and all internal and connecting piping;



• Steam supply and condensate systems;

• Seawater supply system;

• Acid cleaning systems (off-load tube cleaning and demister cleaning for

MSF);

• Brine blow down system;

• Distillate system;

• Chemical dosing system,

• including storage and preparation; and

• Vacuum system;

• Brine circulation system;

• Sponge ball tube cleaning system (on-load).

Potabilization plant

6.32 The potabilization plant is designed to treat 882,000 m3/day of distillate

water to produce 882,000 m3/day of potabilization water. After remineralization

the potable water should meet the requirements set by WEC in its RFP. The

scope of supply for Potabilisation plant is complete, with:

• Vent gas CO2 extraction equipment and dosing system;

• Limestone storage, handling and feeding equipment

• Limestone filter dissolution system;

• Chemical dosing systems

• Corrosion inhibitor dosing (if applicable);

• Potable water chlorination with liquid chlorine storage and handling facilities

and liquid or gaseous dosing system; and

• Equipment for storage, handling, preparation and dosing of the chemicals.

Fuel Oil System

• Start-up fuel oil unloading systems, complete with unloading/transfer

pumps, piping up to fuel oil storage tank valves, etc.;

• Fuel oil storage tanks for start-up fuel (light fuel oil) for at least 10 start-

ups of the Plant;

• Fuel oil storage tanks for crude oil, storage capacity for 30 days full load

operation of the Plant to be ensured; and

• Transfer pumping station (including cleaning and any required

treatment).



Auxiliary Systems

6.33 In addition to the above Power and Water Plant, the EPC contractor will

be providing all the following auxiliary systems;

Auxiliary boiler

• Auxiliary boilers for emergency steam supply to Desalination Units; and

• Connection of auxiliary boilers to steam header at steam parameters.

Cooling water facilities

• Seawater intake system, including screening plant,

• circulating water pumps,

• wash water pumps,

• valves, piping, local instrumentation;

• Closed auxiliary cooling water system, including heat exchangers,

recirculation pumps, piping, valves, high level tank, local instrumentation,

etc.;

• Chlorine generation and dosing system, complete, for pumping station,

including chlorination of intake, corresponding to the seawater demand of

the Plant;

• Oil barrier or oil prevention system and warning system for seawater intake,

complete with floating boom (if required by design), monitoring, warning and

alarm system, and other auxiliaries and

• Seawater quality monitoring system.

Sewage and storm water collection system

• Collection of sanitary sewage, including all necessary sewers, pipes and

pumping stations in a separate system;

• Sewage treatment plant with screen(s), primary settling tank secondary

treatment by activated sludge process,

• effluent disinfection for reclamation of effluents and for discharge into the

sea,

• including all environmental control systems for emission control;

• Sludge treatment by simultaneous aerobic stabilization and sludge

dewatering by drying on beds allowing its use as fertilizer;

• Cesspools for the offsite facilities, vacuum loader for transport of sewage to

the treatment plant; and

• Storm water collection and transfer facilities.



Process waste water system

• Segregated collection systems for oily and chemical wastewater;

• Oil removal by means of oil separators for all waste water and surface water

streams which could contain oil; and

• Neutralization and detoxification for all chemicals containing waste water

streams (e.g. chemical storage, acid cleaning, other wash water,

Balance of mechanical equipment

6.34 All supplies of mechanical equipment not specifically mentioned above,

but deemed necessary for the Plant shall also be provided by the EPC

contractor, such as:

• Dump condenser including evacuation and continuous cleaning system

(if applicable);

• Feed water pre-heaters;

• Deaerator and storage tanks;

• Feed water pumps;

• Turbine by-pass stations, etc.;

• Reducing stations;

• Condensate, feed water and steam piping including valves, vents and

drains;

• Drain condensate collecting tank and pumps;

• Cranes and hoists;

• Workshop equipment;

• Air condition and ventilation equipment;

• Store equipment including air conditioning equipment, if required; and

• Vehicles, fork lifts, mobile cranes, if required subject to agreement of

additional costs.

Fire fighting system

• Fire fighting system, according to Saudi and National Fire Protection

Association (NFPA) Standards (approved by authorized insurance

company), complete with all necessary piping, pumps, safety valves, mobile

equipment, etc.

Other Systems

• Compressed air system for instrument and service requirements;



• Hydrogen plant (if applicable);

• Equipment for workshop, stores and other facilities;

• Boiler feedwater treatment and conditioning, including:

• Make-up water system, including pumps;

• Sampling system;

• Chemical dosing plant;

• Storage tanks; and

• Other required auxiliary systems.

Electrical and I&C system

6.35 All systems of the new plant shall be supplied via the three steam

turbine generator units. The supply from the Shuaibah Plant, Phase 2 will be

used for the first start-up and for black starts, only. A supply from the SEC grid

shall not be foreseen. Each generator feeds a step-up transformer which

supplies the HV switchgear (380kV GIS). This switchgear connects the power

plant with the SEC grid via the three bays for overhead lines.

6.36 The tie-off for supply of the plant shall be placed in the bus-duct

between generator circuit breaker and step-up transformer of each unit. From

this tie-off the supply of auxiliary transformers will be carried out. The

connection with the primary sides of the auxiliary transformers shall be

performed via bus-duct.

6.37 The secondary windings of the auxiliary transformers are connected to

the medium voltage switchgears via single core medium voltage cables. Each

generator unit shall feed on two transformers, one for unit supply of power plant,

the other for supply of four MSF units. Both transformers shall be provided with

two secondary windings. In addition, each of the generator units 1 and 2 feed an

auxiliary transformer for sea water intake, which is provided with one secondary

winding.

6.38 Each power unit shall be equipped with main MV switchgear consisting

of two busbar sections. The feeding of the bus-bar sections shall be performed

via the related secondary winding of the respective power unit transformer. For

the MSF the respective MV switchgears, consisting of two bus-bar sections

shall be provided, too. Each of the three MV switchgears shall feed four MSF

units. It must be possible, to operate the four MSF units via one of the bus-bar

sections.



6.39 For reasons of redundancy the feeding for each MV switchgear shall be

performed via one secondary winding of the related MSF unit transformer for

the first bus-bar section and via one secondary winding of an other MSF unit

transformer for the second bus-bar section. For reasons of redundancy, the

main MV switchgear for sea water intake shall be provided with two bus-bar

sections, too.

6.40 For the power plant common supply a MV switchgears with two bus-bar

sections shall be installed. From each of the switchgear it must be possible to

operate the main consumers of common part. Each of the two switchgear bus-

bar sections shall be connected with the main MV switchgears of power unit 1

and 2, with one of the connections in operation. Further, from the MV

switchgears for common supply the MV switchgear for remin plant shall be fed,

which is also equipped with two bus-bar sections. For start-up of a power plant

unit the necessary electrical energy shall be provided from the running unit(s).

The connection between the running unit(s) and the starting unit shall be carried

out via the 380 kV GIS and backwards through the respective step-up

transformer.

6.41 The following is a list of Electrical and I&C system to be provided by the

main EPC contractor (Siemens Aktiengesellshaft Power Generations);

HV switchgear

• Required substation bays;

• Required bus coupler bays;

• Required measuring bays;

• Three (3) OHL bays;

• One (1) cable bay for connection of the new with the existing plant;

• Two (2) spare bays (space only);

• Gas treatment plant;

• HV, control and protection cabling (alternatively HV busduct);

• Protection of HV switchgear for all bays including:

• Protection cabinets and relays,

• Differential and distance protection,

• Overcurrent and earth fault protection,

• Busbar protection,

• Main and backup protection,

• Current Transformers (CT) and Voltage Transformers (VT),

• Pilot wires,



• Digital fault monitoring system.

• Provision of all digital and analogue signals for a Load Dispatch Center

(LDC) including FOC to OPGW termination box;

• Tariff metering equipment (settlement and backup) including high accuracy

CT and VT;

• Air conditioned buildings with rooms for switchgear, control and protection

and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) equipment;

• HV substation control room and control equipment;

• One dedicated building for the line protection equipment, settlement meters

and telemonitoring equipment.

Interconnection from generators to HV switchgear

• Generator main connection;

• Generator circuit breaker;

• Generator step-up transformer.

Plant auxiliary supply

• Unit auxiliary transformers;

• MV/LV transformers;

• MV-switchgear;

• LV-switchgear;

• MV/LV busducts and cables;

• Direct Current (DC) and Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS)-systems;

• Required protection systems;

• HV, power and control cables, cable supports;

• Earthing and lightning protection systems;

• Lighting, emergency lighting;

• Security fence lighting;

• Electrical workshop equipment;

• Network control systems.

Emergency power supply

6.42 Complete emergency power supply including all related facilities and

supplying auxiliary power required to facilitate a safe shut-down of all units and

to maintain safe auxiliary power supply in case of blackout conditions, including

automatic control, load sharing and all other related facilities.

Fire alarm system



6.43 Fire alarm central station and display board in the central control room;

• Automatic fire alarm detectors, pushbutton fire alarms and sirens;

• Connection to fire monitoring station.

6.44 The entire equipment shall be according to Saudi and National Fire

Protection Association (NFPA) Standards (approved by authorized insurance

company).

DCMS (Common for Water and Power Island)

• Redundant Engineering and Operator stations at (Central Control System)

• Unit Control Systems for the appropriate Sub-unit or Sub-areas and the

necessary amount of Automation system; I/O equipment, etc.

• Data highway, Bus systems

• Marshalling racks, if required

Field Equipment

• Cabeling

• Sensors;

• Transmitters;

• Actuators.

Continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS)

• Sampling system;

• Analyzers; Signal exchange to Distributed Control and Monitoring System

(DCMS).

Metering and quality monitoring equipment (power, water, fuel)

• Settlement metering system;

• Back-up metering system;

• Quality monitoring system (water).

• Online fuel model for billing purposes (hardware and software).

6.45 Other facilities to be provided include the following:

• Communication facilities

• CCTV system

• Clock system



• Interfaces/Data transfer

LDC (power);

LDC (water);

Existing Shuaibah Phase 2 plant

• Field testing equipment

• Instrument workshop equipment

Special Facilities

Fuel Special Facilities

6.46 Fuel Special Facilities as defined in the RFP will be a new crude oil

pipeline connecting the unloading arm at the jetty up to the Shuaibah IWPP

crude oil tank farm connecting point. There will also be a booster pump station

provided by the Project Company possibly at the shoreline near the jetty in case

the oil tankers do not have sufficient pump head capacity to deliver oil up to the

tank farm.

Electrical Special Facilities

6.47 Electrical Special Facilities as defined in the RFP will be an

interconnection between the new plant and an existing plant next door. The

existing plant HV switchgear has to be extended by one bay. The extension bay

shall be from the same manufacturer and type as the in the existing GIS.

6.48 The extension shall include also all associated equipment in the existing

plant such as:

• Installation of related control and protection equipment, including differential and

distance protection;

• Modification of the existing control and protection panels and network control

systems;

• Extension of the existing auxiliary power supply systems;

• Revision of related documentation;

• All related civil works.

6.49 The rating of the connection shall suffice to cope with the essential

power demand of the new Plant in case of outage of the 380 kV substation of

the new Plant. For billing purposes tariff metering equipment (main and check)

including high accuracy CT and VT shall be provided. The HV cabling and

control and protection cabling required for the interconnection shall be included



in the scope. The cable ways as tunnels, trenches, ducts, etc. also on the

existing power plant area shall be provided under this scope. All equipment

shall be supplied, installed commissioned and after commissioning handed over

to SWCC for ownership and maintenance.

Load Dispatch Center

Electrical Dispatch Center

6.50 In order to link the Plant and the 380 kV grid station to the LDC

(Electrical), the EPC Contractor shall make available all analogue and digital

signals as requested by the LDC. The point of the Plant interface to the LDC

network shall be the FOC terminations of the OPGW termination boxes

(supplied by SEC) at the HV gantry, where all interface signals shall be

provided. All interface equipment together with the cables connecting them to

the termination box shall be included in the scope of supply of the EPC

Contractor. From the interface room, data transmission is facilitated by the

telecom equipment to be supplied under EPC scope.

Water Dispatch Center

6.51 In order to link the Plant to the LDC (Water), the EPC Contractor shall

make available all analogue and digital signals as requested by the LDC. The

terminal point to the LDC shall be a termination cabinet for analogue/ binary

signal exchange located in the central control room of the existing Main

Pumping Station 1 (MPS) potable water pumping station. All interface

equipment together with the cables connecting them to the termination cabinet

shall be included in the scope of supply EPC Contractor.

Programme of Works

Construction

6.52 The provisional project schedule is detailed in Appendix 6.2 (Provisional Project Schedule, Revision E, May 2005) and a summary of the key

aspects of the programme and time-scales is highlighted in Table 6.1 below:



Table 6.1: Summary Construction Programme

Construction Phase Period Duration (Months)

Site preparation June 2005 to June 2006 12

Boiler transport / erection April 2006 to September 2007 17

Flue gas desulphurisation plant erection / commissioning

November 2006 to March 2008 16

Erection fuel oil tanks / pipes

June 2006 to September 2007 15

Stack area (civil / structural works) March 2006 to June 2006 3

Erection / Commissioning of Jetty April 2007 to August 2007 4

Steam turbine building July to 2005 to August 2006 13 Erection / commissioning steam turbine March 2007 to April 2008 13

Seawater intake erection / commissioning

April 2007 to December 2007 9

Construction of seawater channel

August 2006 to November 2007 15

Reliability tests on whole plant area October 2008 1

6.53 A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be

prepared for the site by the Consortium in consultation with PME. This will

ensure that all construction activities are conducted in accordance with Best

Practice Guidelines (UK Environment Agency). A framework for the CEMP is

shown in Part 3: Environmental Management Plan of the Environmental

Statement. The EPC will prepare a comprehensive CEMP/EMP in compliance

with the guidelines given in this final ESIA report. Siemens has a standard form

of EMP, which will be reviewed with the EIA report to ensure the project specific

requirements.

Operation

6.54 Prior to the Shuaibah Phase III Plant becoming fully operational, an

Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will be prepared by the Consortium in

consultation with PME. The EMP will detail the operating procedures and

protocols for the plant and also the necessary environmental monitoring and

abatement requirements for the plant. A framework for the EMP is provided in

Part 3: Environmental Management Plan of the Environmental Statement.

12360002/003– Shuaibah IWPP Phase III Environmental Statement (26 November 2005) )


PART 1: PRIMARY ISSUES

7 MARINE WATER QUALITY, RECIRCULATION AND CORAL REEF ECOLOGY

Introduction

7.1 This section will consider the potential impacts of the proposed

Shuaibah III IWPP seawater intake and outfall on ambient water quality and

coral reef ecology and the continuing operation of the existing intake and

discharges from Shuaibah I and II.

7.2 In addition the physico-chemical effects of the cooling water discharge

will be assessed on the basis of on coral reef and water quality surveys

undertaken during 2005, to establish the existing environmental impact of the

mixing zone arising from Shuaibah I and II and the predicted mixing zone from

the new outfall.

7.3 A shoreline survey has also been undertaken along the IWPP site within

the intertidal area to assess the ecology of the shoreline in relation to the

construction of the water intake and outfall channels.

Methodology

7.4 In order to assess the potential impacts on the marine water quality,

ecology and recirculation activities in the vicinity of the proposed plant the

methodology followed has included a review of existing baseline information in

conjunction with marine field surveys and analysis. The key aspects of the

methodology include:

• Consultations have been undertaken with SWCC managers and other

staff, the Bedouin community and with local Yemeni fishermen;

• A water quality survey of the coastal waters at Shuaibah has been

undertaken during 2005 to provide a benchmark for heavy metals, TPH

and general water quality parameters at 3 representative sites in relation

to PME water quality standards.

• A marine survey has been undertaken during 2005 to establish the

existing biodiversity of the coral reef within the mixing zone for the

Shuaibah I/II outfall and oil unloading jetty and the proposed location for



the water intake and effluent channels and control sites to the north of

the IWPP;

• Usage of the existing jetty and the environmental impact of the new

pipeline based on existing track record for unloading oil supplies from

tankers; and

• An assessment of the potential environmental impact from additional

shipping based on the risk of collision or other accidents;

Coral Reef and Water Quality Survey

7.5 A baseline coral reef survey was undertaken at 14 sites at Shuaibah

between the 2nd and 4th October 2005 (see Figure 7.1). The sites were

carefully selected to include the following :

.1 Control Sites C1 to C3 to the north of the IWPP site;

.2 Working Area Sites (WA 1 to WA7) within the outfall and intake areas;

.3 Shuaibah I/II sites (Sh 1 to Sh 4) close to the existing discharge and oil

unloading jetty.



Figure 7.1: Location of Coral Reef Survey Sites (October 2005)



7.6 Two different procedures were used to record the reef condition within

the study area. The Belt Transect was used to determine the dominant species

of fauna and flora and to create a species list. The Belt Transect covered a

distance of 50m with a record made at 50cm intervals listing the fauna and flora

within a 2.5m band on either side of the measuring tape. This provided 100

data records for each of the survey points. A GPS Reference was recorded at

the start of each transect. The results are presented in Appendix 7.1

7.7 A Reef Check was also undertaken to determine the reef and substrate

conditions. A photographic record was made of all species identified together

with notable conditions such as reef bleaching or the presence of construction

debris. In addition to ecological data, water samples were collected from sites

C1, WA1 and Sh1 for laboratory analysis. In situ measurements were also

made of pH, conductivity, air and water temperature and salinity. Photographic

record of the coral reef is presented in Appendix 7.2.

Water Quality Modelling

7.8 Following completion of the coral reef and water quality surveys, Danish

Hydraulics Institute (DHI) were approached to undertake the modelling of three

alternative outfall options to establish whether it would be possible to reduce the

size of the mixing zone around the discharge point from the IWPP (see

Appendix 7.3).

7.9 The purpose was to improve the dispersion of cooling water effluent

away from the shallow coastal waters where there was a large mixing zone area

>3 degrees Centigrade above the ambient conditions.

7.10 It was agreed that the alternatives should consider a 50m extension of

the open channel or a culvert into deeper water, or a higher velocity discharge.

7.11 As a result the following scenarios were tested (the numbering

convention is consistent with the previous DHI recirculation studies report - June

2005):

• Scenario 9 – Straighten the open channel outlet and extend to deeper

water (-8.0m water depth);

• Scenario 10 – Outlet submerged in a culvert and extended

approximately 130m to (-10m water depth) at x, y, = 10180.1350;



• Scenario 11 – As per scenario 9 (-8.0m water depth) but water velocity

increased to 2m/s.

• Scenario 4 – This base option (-4m water depth) from the recirculation

Studies report (June 2005) was tested as a control to ensure no impact

on the standards required for the water intake facilities.

7.12 Time series plots were run for each of the above scenarios to assess

the predicted temperature and salinity (arising from the combined cooling water

and brine effluent) at each of the 14 coral reef sites. In addition sulphate and

chlorine parameters were also modelled based on maximum concentrations

provide by the EPC Contractor and flow rates from the DHI Recirculation

Studies Report –June 2005. Plots of the chemical parameters and the mixing

zone have been provide in 3D to show the results at the surface, mid layer and

the sea bed.

Shoreline Survey

7.13 A survey of the Intertidal Epifauna in the littoral fringe and upper, mid

and lower eulittoral zones was carried out along three equally spaced transects

at the Shuaibah IWPP site on 29 August 2005. An area of 130-150m in the

inter-tidal zone on either side of each established transect was surveyed over a

1 hour period and involved collecting data at regular intervals along semi

diagonal paths across the 5-15m wide inter-tidal zone during periods of

receding tide.

7.14 At each data collection station, the survey involved identifying and

quantifying species in random grids of approximately 1m2 in size along the semi

diagonal path to determine the abundance rating of the species which was

based on the DAFOR SCALE (i.e. Dominant, Abundant, Frequent, Occasional

and Rare Scale). GPS reference points were recorded for each of the

transects which were also photographed.

7.15 Benthic and Sub-Tidal Benthic core samples were collected from the

inter-tidal and sub-tidal zones at each transect to identify benthic species. To

collect the benthic core from the inter-tidal zone, soil from a depth of around 40

cm and grid of approximately 30cmx30cm was collected during periods of low

tide. The sample was then sieved to remove finer sediments. The remaining

sample was dosed with formaldehyde solution (4%) then sorted and grouped for

species identification.



7.16 To collect the sub-tidal benthic core, grab samples of soil to a depth of

approximately 30-40cm from the near shore, sub-tidal regions at each transect

were collected. Sample collection was during periods of low tide. The sample

was then sieved to remove finer sediments. The remaining sample was dosed

with formaldehyde solution (4%) then sorted and grouped for species

identification. It should be noted that at Transects 2 and 3 the sub tidal strata is

mainly composed of rock, therefore, sub tidal samples from these transects

were collected from regions where loose sediments were available.



Existing Baseline Conditions

Coral Reef Ecology

7.17 The Red Sea represents a complex and unique tropical marine eco-

system with important biological diversity and a high degree of rare aquatic flora

and fauna. Whilst large areas of the region have been preserved,

environmental threats in the form of habitat destruction, over-exploitation and

pollution are increasing requiring a programme of action to protect the Region’s

coastal and marine environment. This has taken the form of the Strategic

Action Programme (SAP) which has been prepared through a continuous,

consultative and cooperative process among the coastal states coordinated by

the Regional Organisation for the Conservation of the Environment of the Red

Sea and Gulf of Aden (PERSGA).

7.18 The climate for Saudi Arabia is extremely arid with the average rainfall

of generally less than 70 millimetres per year with Jeddah recording an annual

rainfall of 63 millimetres per year. Due to the arid nature much of the biological

productivity in Saudi Arabia is confined to a narrow coastal strip and originates

mostly from habitats such as coral reefs and the mangrove and seagrass

communities located in the shallow embayment.

Coastal and Marine Resources

7.19 In terms of coastal and marine resources generally four physiographic

zones are recognised within Saudi Arabian Red Sea based upon species

distribution and include:

• Zone A – Gulf of Aqaba;

• Zone B – Northern Red Sea;

• Zone C – Central Red Sea, including the outer Farasan Bank; and

• Zone D – Southern Red Sea.

7.20 The site proposed for the Shuaibah Phase III IWPP Plant is located in

Zone C which is characterised coral reefs and explains the species distribution

and temperature in this zone.



Coral Reefs

7.21 The coral reefs in the Red Sea are in relatively good condition along the

coast and surrounding islands (having been extensively surveyed between 1998

and 2000). However, reefs along some stretches, particularly Jeddah and the

industrial city of Yanbu are becoming increasingly affected by development.

There are 194 species of coral recorded along the Saudi Arabian coast with the

greatest diversity in the central portion. There are five areas along the coast

noted for their extensive corals including the Tiran Island area, Wajh Bank, the

area north of Yanbu, the coastline between Obhur and Tuwwal north of Jeddah

and the outer Farasan Bank.

7.22 Coral reefs play an important role in the coastal ecosystem and provide

habitat for a wide variety of marine species and plant. In the Red Sea, coral

reef communities generally form extensive and productive reef flats which

create protected areas for many juvenile species as well as lagoons which also

serve this purpose.

7.23 Bleaching of coral reefs due to high sea temperatures occurred during

1998 and resulted in high mortality, particularly near Rabigh where bleaching or

recently killed coral accounted for 65%. Significant levels of coral mortality were

observed along the southern Red Sea where some sites (e.g. Abalat Islands)

live coral cover declined from 80% in 1993 to 10% in 1999. Mean monthly

temperatures were found to be unusually high (>32 Centigrade) in the 3 months

prior to the first reports of coral mortality.

7.24 For the Shuaibah site there is evidence from the recent survey which

indicates that the control sites away from the existing discharge may have

recently killed coral of up to 25% cover. The closest site to the Shuaibah I/II

outfall, however, has twice this percentage of dead coral compared with the

background. This may be due to the components of the discharge such as

residual chlorine.

Coral Reef Survey October 2005

7.25 The Coral Reef Survey at Shuaibah in October 2005 identified 80

species of fish from 25 family groups, 25 species of coral and a number of

invertebrate and algal species (see Appendix 7.4). The results of the survey

are summarised in Table 7.1 which shows the number of species per family

group for each of the sites and indicates similar biodiversity at all sites ranging

from 41 to 60 species per site. The sites are grouped into the following areas:



• Control sites C1 to C3 north of the IWPP site support 41 to 58 species;

• Working Area sites WA1 to WA7 opposite the IWPP site support 48 to

60 species;

• The sites Sh1 and Sh2 adjacent to the Shuaibah I/II outfall support 43 to

49 species;

• The sites Sh 3 and Sh4 adjacent to the oil unloading terminal support 51

to 55 species.



Table 7.1: Summary of Fish, Coral and Invertebrate species at Shuaibah (October 2005)

Control Stations Working Area for IWPP Outfall and Intake

C Area *

Shuaibah I/II Oil Jetty FISH families

C1 C2 C3 WA1 WA2 WA4 WA5 WA6 WA7 WA3 Sh1 Sh2 Sh3 Sh4

F. Synodontidae 1

F. Syngnthide 1

F. Holocentridae 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 3 2 2 1 1

F. Scorpaenidae 1 1

F. Serranidae 1 2 1 2 2 1

F. Cirrhitidae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F.Pseudochromidae 1

F. Apogonidae 2 1 1 1 1 1

F. Carangidae 1

F. Lutjanidae 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 2

F. Caesionidae 1 1 1 1 1

F. Haemulidae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F. Lethrinidae 1 1 2 1 1 1 2

F. Sparidae 1 1

F. Pempherididae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F. Mullidae 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

F. Pomacentridae 7 5 5 8 8 7 8 5 5 7 5 4 5 4



FISH Control Stations Working Area for IWPP Outfall and Intake Shuaibah I/II Oil Jetty


F. Labridae 5 1 6 5 6 7 6 5 5 6 6 5 6 6

F. Scaridae 5 4 5 4 4 3 4 3 2 4 3 4 3

F. Chaetonditae 2 5 3 2 2 5 6 4 3 4 2 5 5 6

F. Pomacanthidae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F. Acanthuridae 4 4 4 5 4 7 4 3 6 3 7 4 4 4

F. Balistidae 1 2 1

F.Tetraodonitae 1 1 1 1

F. Microdesmidae

Sub Total 35 30 26 34 30 38 39 30 39 31 34 29 34 32



Control Station Working Area for IWPP Outfall and Intake

C Area

Shuaibah I/II Oil Jetty CORAL REEF


Fire Coral

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Soft Coral

4 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4

Black Coral

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Stony Coral

11 9 7 15 10 6 11 12 11 14 8 7 12 9

Sub Total

18 15 12 22 16 12 16 18 17 20 15 11 19 16



Control Station Working Area for IWPP Outfall and Intake

C Area

Shuaibah I/II Oil Jetty INVERTEBRATES


Sponge 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Molluscs 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Echinoderms

1 2 1 1 1

Algae 1 1

Sub Total 5 2 3 1 2 4 2 3 4 2 0 3 2 3

TOTAL 58 47 41 57 48 54 57 51 60 53 49 43 55 51



7.26 It is notable that there are no fish or coral family groups that are entirely

absent from the sites near to the Shuaibah I/II outfall or the oil unloading jetty.

The dominant fish species Hipposcarus harid was recorded from all sites.

However it is evident that there are no invertebrate species recorded from the

site Sh1 which is located within 300m of the existing outfall. It is possible that

the relatively sessile invertebrates are unable to successfully colonise this area

due to strong currents or would be slow to avoid the area should the water

quality conditions deteriorate in the short term. Photographs of the reef in close

proximity to the existing outfall show relatively high levels of bleaching

compared with the control and working area sites.

Plate 7.1: Bleaching of Corals including Porites sp



7.27 The results of the Belt Transect survey are shown in the following

Figure 7.2 and show the percentage cover for each of the recorded categories

including, Hard Coral, Recently Killed Coral, Soft Coral and substrate types.

Figure 7.2: Summary of Belt Transect Survey at14 coral reef sites (October 2005)

Legend Abbreviations

HC Hard Coral SP Sponge SI Silt

RKC Recently Killed Coral RC Rock OT Other

SC Soft Coral RP Rubble

FS Fleshy Seaweed SD Sand

Sample Area 1 – Control Sites

Control Site 2

05

1015

20253035

HC RKC SC FS SP RC RP SD SI OT

Variable

Per

cent

age

HCRKCSCFSSPRCRPSDSIOT

Control Site 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Variable

Perc

enta

ge




Sample Area 2 – Working Area

Working Area 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Variable

Perc

enta

ge


Working Area 2

05

1015

20253035


Variable

Perc

enta

ge


Working Area 3

05

1015

20253035


Variable

Perc

enta

ge




Working Area 4

05

1015

20253035


Variable

Perc

enta

ge


Working Area 5

05

1015202530354045


Variable

Perc

enta

ge


Working Area 6

05

1015

20253035


Variable

Perc

enta

ge


Working Area 7

05

10152025303540


Variable

Per

cent

age




Sample Area 3 – Outfall Area

Shoaiba Outfall Area 1 (Sh 1)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Variable

Per

cent

age


Shoaiba Outfall Area 2 (Sh 2)

05

1015

20253035


Variable

Perc

enta

ge


Sample Area 4 – Oil Unloading Jetty

Shoaiba Oil Unloading Jetty (Sh 3)

05

1015202530354045


Variable

Perc

enta

ge




Shoaiba Oil Unloading Jetty (Sh 4)

05

10152025303540


Variable

Perc

enta

ge


7.28 The figures demonstrate that Control sites 1 and 2 have approximately

40% coral cover with 10 to 12% recently killed coral. In contrast C3 has a much

higher proportion of soft coral (50%) with 10% hard coral and little recently killed

coral. Most of the sites have rock cover of 25% or more and none have any

recorded silt.

7.29 The Working Areas (WA1 to WA7) typically have 40 to 50% of hard/soft

corals except site 5 (approximately 35%) and site 4 which has the highest

percentage of recently killed coral in the WA sites (23%) . The site at WA 4 also

has 23% recently killed coral.

7.30 The sites Sh1 and Sh2 are close to the existing outfall and had the

highest percentage of recently killed coral (50%) with an absence of soft corals

at this site also. There was also a high percentage of rubble and construction

debris (23%) compared with <10% at other sites although there is evidence to

suggest some previous disturbance at the Control sites and WA1 to WA3. Plate 7.2 indicates the type of debris and the extent of bleaching at Sh 1 and Sh

2.



Plate 7.2: Construction Debris near Shuaibah I/II Outfall

7.31 The sites Sh3 and Sh4 are located close to the oil unloading jetty and

have approximately 45% of hard/soft corals with 15 to 25% of recently killed

coral. The percentage of recently killed coral is higher than the control sites (2

to 12%) although two other sites WA4 and WA5 have 20-23% dead coral also.

There is no evidence therefore to suggest that the oil unloading operations are

having an adverse effect on the adjacent coral reef.

Water Quality

7.32 Indicative water quality characteristics of the coastal sea water at

Shuaibah was provided as part of the MFS and is given in Table 7.2 to provide

an indication of the background concentrations

Table 7.2: Indicative Seawater Composition (source MFS)

Parameter Unit Results

Temperature °C 25 - 35

Conductivity (µS/cm) 58,500

Turbidity NTU 1.0

pH 8.25

Total dissolved solids (mg/l) 37,000 - 44,460

Total suspended solids (mg/l) 10.4



Parameter Unit Results

Total hardness as CaCO3 (mg/l) 6,900

Total alkalinity as CaCO3 (mg/l) 121

Chloride as Cl (mg/l) 21,511

Sulphate as SO4 (mg/l) 2,750

Calcium as CaCO3 (mg/l) 1,200

Magnesium as Mg (mg/l) 1,485

Sodium as Na (mg/l) 13,794

Copper as Cu as Cu (ppb) 1

Iron as Fe as Fe (ppb) 2

Water Quality Survey October 2005

7.33 A water quality survey was undertaken in October 2005 by the divers

who recorded in-situ readings and collected water samples from 3 locations to

be analysed for a range of determinands including heavy metals, nutrients,

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and oil and grease (see Appendix 7.5)

7.34 The results of in situ measurements at Sites C1, WA1 and Sh1 are

shown in Table 7.3 below and show similar values at each of the sites, although

water temperature is elevated by 1 degree Centigrade near the Shuaibah I/II

outfall compared with the control site. However there is no elevation of salinity

above the background concentration of 40ppt at the control site.

Table 7.3 In situ Measurements by divers 2nd to 4th October 2005

SITE C1 WA1 Sh1 GPS Location N20 41231 E

3930602 N20 40 776 E39

30 966 N20 39 918 E 39

31 421 Air Temperature 32 32 32

Water Temperature

31 31.5 32

pH 8.38 8.43 8.34 Conductivity (siemens)

50.6 51.0 50.8

Salinity (ppt) 40 40 40

7.35 Water samples were collected on the 4th October 2005 and sent for

analysis at the Environmental Consulting Bureau in Riyadh. The samples were

analysed according to the following standard techniques:



• Heavy metals (excluding mercury) were analysed using the method

prescribed by USEPA 200.7/6010 Acid Digestion/Analysis by ICP-OES;

• Mercury was analysed by USEPA 245.7; acid Digestion/Analysis by Hg-

Analyser (CVAFS Technique);

• Other tests according to Standard Methods for the Examination of Water

and Wastewater, 19th Edition (1995), Published by AWWA,APHA,WEF,

Washington DC USA.

7.36 The results of the general analysis (all in mg/l) indicate that there are

similar nitrate levels at all three sites, although phosphate, COD and oil and

grease are elevated above background concentrations near to the Shuaibah I/II

outfall (see Table 7.4). The levels of chloride and sulphate are similar to the

baseline data provide in the MSF. There are slightly elevated residual chlorine

levels at Site Sh1.

Table 7.4 General Analysis of Coastal Waters– 4th October 2005


3930602 N20 40 776 E39

30 966 N20 39 918 E 39

31 421 Nitrate 1.4 1.8 1.6

Phosphate 0.6 0.6 1.3 Chemical Oxygen

Demand 13 19 26

Oil and Grease < 1 < 1 < 5 Chloride 20561 20703 20986

Residual Chlorine < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.02 Sulphide ND < 0.1 ND < 0.1 ND < 0.1 Sulphate 2799 2894 2807

7.37 The results of analyses for heavy metals (in ug/l) are provided in Table 7.5 below and indicate that there is a possible source of selenium associated

with the existing outfall which is not detectable at the control site. In addition it

is apparent that there are detectable concentrations of zinc and copper at all

three sites and that the copper levels are higher than the 1ug/l advised within

the MFS. The evidence of heavy metals associated with C1 which is to the

north of the site would suggest a source of contamination which may relate to

the rubble identified at this location.



Table 7.5 Heavy Metal Concentrations at Shuaibah 4th October 2005


3930602 N20 40 776 E39

30 966 N20 39 918 E 39

31 421 Arsenic ND ND ND

Lead ND ND ND Cadmium ND ND ND Selenium ND 6.83 45.92

Nickel ND ND ND Zinc 10.25 0.73 7.72 Iron ND ND ND

Chromium ND ND ND Copper 16.89 6.54 7.55

Vanadium 0.09 2.22 1.52 Mercury 0.0204 0.0259 0.0257

Shoreline Survey October 2005

7.38 The results of the shoreline survey from transects T1, T2 and T3 are

reported in full in Appendix 7.6. Habitat features are shown in Plates 7.3 to

7.5.

Plate 7.3: Shoreline Habitat (T1) with SWCC Phase I and II Plants in the Background

7.39 The presence of epifauna at Shuaibah was based on a checklist of

species that would be expected for a typical shoreline, using species data

gathered by ECB from similar survey projects undertaken on the Red Sea and a

literature review. From a checklist of approximately 30 species, just 5 species



were recorded from the three transects covering “sandy beach” and rocky

shore” habitats. The following species were recorded:

• Paguristes persicpax (hermit crab) – dominant species in upper, mid

and lower eulittoral zones;

• Ocypopde saratan (ghost crab) –frequent species on littoral; fringe and

upper eulittoral zone;

• Tylodiplax indica (crab) – dominant in upper eulittoral zone (transect 3)

and occasional in mid eulittoral (transect 2) rare in lower eulittoral

(transect 2);

• Metapograpsus messor (crab) – rare upper eulittoral zone (transect 3);

• Neries sp (polychaete worm) – occasional upper eulittoral fringe

(transect 3)

7.40 The Ghost Crab (Ocypode saratan) is recorded as a species of

conservation priority (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2001).

7.41 The intertidal and near shore subtidal benthic survey identified 5 species

of polychaetes, 6 species of molluscs and the crustacean Petrolisthes indicus

(Porcelain Crab).

7.42 The Conch Shells (Strombus gibberulus) are recorded as a species of

conservation priority (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2001).

7.43 The relatively low species diversity within the shoreline habitat would

suggest that the habitat has been modified by previous construction activities for

the Shuaibah site and therefore does not represent pristine habitats. However

the presence of species of conservation priority will require consideration during

the construction works to minimise the impact on these species.

7.44 The shoreline habitat adjacent to the IWPP site will be affected by

construction works as result of the works to construct the outfall and intake and

the requirement to provide further wave protection and potential erosion of the

shoreline in front of the IWPP. This will result in the loss of 30 to 50% of the

shoreline habitat within the working corridors. However adjacent to the IWPP

site there remains similar habitat which will, support both the species of

conservation importance and the other common species recorded. Protecting

the similar adjacent habitat from construction works will be a further mitigation



measure to ensure that the species continue to thrive along this coastline.

During operation of the outfall, the potential impact of the discharge on the

shallow waters has been reduced by extending the outfall and directing the flow

away from the coast.

7.45 In addition to the shoreline habitats, the potential impacts on other key

habitats including mangroves and sea grass beds are as follows:

7.46 The mangroves are located more than 5km to the north of the proposed

IWPP. They are being actively managed and monitored as part of a restoration

project being undertaken by the King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah which is

extending the shoreline coverage. There will be no impact either from cooling

water discharge or from atmospheric emissions on the mangroves. The

ambient monitoring programme confirms that sulphur dioxide levels are at their

lowest concentration at this location compared with any of the sites. The

discharge modelling shows no effect at a distance of approximately 200m to the

north (at least 5km from the mangroves).

7.47 The seagrass beds are located in the shallow waters within the harbour

(5km south of SEC) where the Yemeni fishermen are based. There is no

impact from the IWPP (10km to the north) and no evidence of impact from SEC

discharges at this location. The small harbour area has an abundance of fish

and invertebrates in the shallow waters while the shoreline habitat is suitable for

many species of sea birds including waders. These all remain unaffected by the

IWPP and therefore do not require mitigation.



Figure 7.3: GPS Plot of the Shoreline Identifying Site Transects



7.48 Mangroves generally grow in waterlogged and saline soil of the intertidal

zone and are often associated with areas of runoff. Only two species have

been recorded along the Saudi Arabian Red Sea coast which includes

Avicennia marina which is widespread, and Rhizophora mucronata found at

only six sites. They are found in such areas as coastal plains, protected shores,

over shoals and spits and in lagoons. Mangroves are located 5km north of the

Shuaibah site and are currently being studied by the King Abdulaziz University

as part of a restoration project.

Seagrasses

7.49 Seagrasses are fairly widespread along the Red Sea Coast and are

concentrated in shallow water areas such as lagoons, sharms, and marsas due

to the soft bottom sediments found in these areas. Of the eleven seagrass

species in the entire Red Sea, ten have been recorded along the Saudi Arabian

Coast. As seagrasses are one of the most productive habitats in coastal

environments, their abundance is indicative of a highly productive ecosystem.

7.50 Seagrass beds have been observed in the shallow lagoons at the

coastguard and fishing village 5km south of the SEC site, approximately 10km

south of Shuaibah.

Sabkhas

7.51 Sabkhas or salt pans are broad expanses of seasonally inundated mud

flats often incrusted with salt. However, relative to other forms of coastal

vegetation these areas are less important ecologically. Sabkhas occur east of

the SEC site approximately 3 to 4km inland and are delineated by the line of

vegetation around their margins. Their soft ground structure prevents vehicles

of heavy equipment from passing over them.

Other Coastal Vegetation

Saltmarsh halophytes and freshwater dependent vegetation such as date palms

are also found along the Red Sea coast. Studies have indicated that the most

developed and greatest variety of halophyte communities grows in the central

region of the Red Sea.

Water Recirculation Study (DHI, January 2004)

7.52 The Danish Hydraulics Institute (DHI) have undertaken a number of

coastal modelling studies at Shuaibah to assess the recirculation patterns and



the requirement to protect the water quality at the intake to existing and future

desalination plants. The recirculation study (January 2004) was associated with

WEC’s initial proposals to implement a new Shuaibah Phase III Power and

Water Plant adjacent to the existing Phase I and II plants (see Appendix 7.7).

7.53 The report highlights that the new Phase III Plant will have a net water

production capacity of 880,000 m3day and a power production of approximately

900MW. The study undertaken by DHI in 2004 comprised of the following

components:

• A marine survey of the currents, temperature and salinity at the site; and

• A recirculation modelling study.

7.54 The principal objective of the study was to identify the most preferred

option together with providing information on the following:

• Thermal and salinity recirculation for the proposed arrangement of intake

and outfall;

• The most preferred option and most appropriate location of the intake

and outfall for the requirements of minimum recirculation;

• Identifying the impact of the discharge of the new plant (Phase III) on the

existing plants (Phase 1 and Phase II) together with thermal and salinity

recirculation.

• The study also qualified and quantified any direct or indirect recirculation.

7.55 The period for the 2004 survey was dominated by southerly winds and

northerly currents. Based on the survey data, advection of the existing (Phase

1 and Phase II) dense plumes were verified in the model.

7.56 The Shuaibah Phase III plant is proposed to be located north of the

existing Shuaibah Phase I and II plants. The seawater intake of the Shuaibah

Phase III plant is located adjacent to the existing plants, whereas the outfall is

located to the north of the new Shuaibah Phase III plant with an approximate

distance of 800m to the intake.

7.57 DHI assessed two main options (Variant A and B). For Variant B (with

9°C temperature increase) of the proposed Shuaibah Phase III outlet/intake, the

recirculation calculations undertaken by DHI showed that most adverse

conditions with respect to recirculation of salinity and heat are in the summer



period with northerly winds. During such conditions DHI noted that Variant B

generates a high heat recirculation from the Phase III outlet to all intakes and for

such reasons was not recommended.

7.58 DHI also assessed Variant A (with 7°C temperature increase) and noted

that if this Variant of the Phase III outlet/intake was applied the Phase III plume

changes from a light plume to a dense plume relative to the ambient water. In

such a situation DHI highlight that the recirculation is lower and satisfied the

minimum recirculation criteria as follows:

• The increase in seawater temperature at the intake of Shuaibah Phase

I, II and III shall not exceed 1°C for more than 10% of the time in the

summer; and

• The increase in the salinity of the seawater at the intake of Shuaibah

Phase I, II and III shall not exceed 2g/kg at any time, based on the

design value of 45g/kg for ambient seawater.

7.59 A comparison of the calculated maximum recirculation of salinity and

temperature undertaken by DHI in 2004 for the two variants is provided in Table 7.6 below for the three intakes:

Table 7.6: Predicted Temperature and Salinity at Shuaibah Intakes I, II and III

Phase I Phase II Phase III

Variant Max. Salinity

Max Temp

Max. Salinity

Max Temp

Max. Salinity

Max Temp

A 0.56g/kg 1.02°C 0.84g/kg 1.57°C 0.67g/kg 1.27°C B 0.43g/kg 0.97°C 0.94g/kg 1.95°C 1.09g/kg 2.48°C

Variant Max. Salinity

Max Temp

Max. Salinity

Max Temp

Max. Salinity

Max Temp

A 0.19g/kg 0.53°C 0.25g/kg 0.66°C 0.24g/kg 0.62°C B 0.21g/kg 0.42°C 0.22g/kg 0.44°C 0.22g/kg 0.44°C

7.60 The 2004 recirculation study noted that a higher maximum recirculation

(1.87°C and 0.91g/kg) at the Phase I intake was obtained for a specific scenario

but the recirculation occurs within the existing Phase I and II Plants. DHI

concluded that this scenario was not considered in the direct comparison of the

two variants, A and B, as the existing recirculation was independent of the

Phase III layout.

7.61 DHI concluded that for Variant B, an excess temperature of 1°C is

exceeded more than 10% of the time, whereas for Variant A an excess

temperature of 1°C is exceeded for less than 10% of the time.



7.62 On the basis of the information available, at the time of the study in

2004, and the number of simulations undertaken, DHI concluded that the two

requirements for minimum recirculation were not satisfied for Variant B but were

satisfied for Variant A. DHI noted that as Variant B has a more frequent

recirculation of heat above the 1°C excess temperature criterion and as the

recirculation is higher and periodic, Variant A was recommended.

7.63 In addition, a sensitivity analysis of the position of the Shuaibah Phase

III outfall and intake was also undertaken by DHI as part of the assessment in

2004. This sensitivity analysis indicated that the degree of recirculation at the

three intakes was not very sensitive to the initial dilution at the Shuaibah Phase

III outlet. DHI highlighted that this was potentially due to the greater distance

between the Shuaibah Phase III outlet and the intakes of the all three Phases.

The report also noted that the alternative positions of the Shuaibah Phase III

structures investigated provided no significant improvement in the recirculation

and accordingly DHI concluded that the present location of the structures was

most appropriate with respect to salinity and heat recirculation.

Recirculation Study (DHI, June 2005)

7.64 The 2005 Recirculation Study undertaken for the Shuaibah IWPP was

prepared by DHI to supplement the recirculation study prepared in the pre-

tender phase for Shuaibah in January 2004. The potential for recirculation of

salt and heat from the outlet of the Shuaibah (proposed Phase III and the

existing Phase I and II) to the intakes was investigated by DHI uusing the 3D

hydrodynamic model, MIKE 3. (see Appendix 7.8)

7.65 The report highlighted that the recirculation study in 2005 takes into

account the new Phase III power and water plant in addition to the existing

Phase I and II plants. For this assessment the study considered a proposed

open channel intake and outfall structures with the aim of the study assessing

the following issues:

• The increase in seawater temperature at the intake of Shuaibah Phase

I, II and III shall not exceed 1°C for more than 10% of the time in the

summer; and

• The increase in the salinity of the seawater at the intake of Shuaibah

Phase I, II and III shall not exceed 2g/kg at any time, based on the

design value of 45g/kg for ambient seawater.



7.66 The investigation was carried out for adverse summer and winter

scenarios based on the design for ambient water temperature and salinity. Two

adverse wind cases were investigated as part of the assessment and these

include the following:

• Case 1 – a characteristic wind of 6m/sec from NNW (330°N) was

specified.

• Case 2 – an extreme land breeze situation with winds of 6m/sec and

alternating wind direction (12 hours onshore and 12 hours offshore) was

simulated.

7.67 In both cases DHI specified a net southward current and a reduced

mean sea level to account for the increased evaporation during the summer.

The simulation results prepared by DHI showed that the maximum excess

salinity was below 2 g/kg at all of the intakes for all scenarios. The maximum

excess temperature of 1°C was not exceeded, with the exception of Scenario 2,

with the ambient sea water temperature of 35°C, where it was exceeded less

than 10% of the time.

7.68 DHI concluded that these scenarios are representative of adverse

summer and winter situations and that the proposed layout assessed as part of

the study satisfied the specified requirements on the maximum increase in

seawater temperature and salinity at the intakes for Shuaibah Phase I, II and III.

7.69 The results of the study showed that the most critical scenario for the

recirculation was the case with alternating wind directions (land-sea breeze)

during summer conditions when the plume was less dense compared to the

ambient water.

Dispersion and Circulation of Cooling Water and Dissolved Agents on the Coral

Reef (DHI, November 2005)

7.70 Following the completion of the coral reef ecology and water quality

surveys in October 2005, DHI were commissioned to assess alternative outfall

scenarios involving changes to the orientation of the open channel, increased

discharge velocity and extending the outfall into deeper water (see paragraph

7.8).

7.71 The hydrographical and meteorological conditions used were as follows:

• Plume characteristics for I, II and II discharges negatively buoyant;



• All discharges included in the model to assess cumulative effects;

• Net southerly current (0.2m/s, 6m/s wind with alternating direction (12

hours onshore and 12 hours offshore) representing land-sea breeze;

• The background temperature in the sea is 33 degrees Centigrade;

• The background salinity is 45 g/kg; and

• The model simulation period is 8 days.

7.72 It was confirmed that all three scenarios (9, 10 and 11) satisfy the

requirements on the maximum increase in seawater temperature and salinity at

the intakes of Shuaibah I, II and III (see Appendix 7.3).

7.73 Time series plots showing temperature and salinity for Scenario 9 at

each of the 14 coral reef sites are shown in Figures 7.4 and 7.5. The plots

show slight peaks of temperature and salinity at low water for sites including

WA1, Sh3. The only site with significantly higher peaks is WA6 which is due to

the site being close to a deepwater channel along which the negatively buoyant

discharge which is being carried by the current.

Plate 7.4: Fish (Zebrasoma veliferum) and coral reef communities at Shuaibah 2005



Figure 7.4: “Scenario 9” Time Series Temperature Plot at Coral Reef Sites

C1: Temperature [C] [deg C]C2: Temperature [C] [deg C]C3: Temperature [C] [deg C]

F_su

mm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M45

.dfs

0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50

WA 1: Temperature [C] [deg C]WA 2: Temperature [C] [deg C]WA 3: Temperature [C] [deg C]

F_su

mm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M15

.dfs

0F_

sum

mer

_w1_

r1\d

ata\

out\T

imes

erie

s\C

ontro

lP_M

45.d

fs0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50

WA 4: Temperature [C] [deg C]WA 5: Temperature [C] [deg C]WA 6: Temperature [C] [deg C]WA 7: Temperature [C] [deg C]

umm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M45

.dfs

0um

mer

_w1_

r1\d

ata\

out\T

imes

erie

s\C

ontro

lP_M

15.d

fs0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50

SH 1: Temperature [C] [deg C]SH 2: Temperature [C] [deg C]SH 3: Temperature [C] [deg C]SH 4: Temperature [C] [deg C]

umm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M15

.dfs

0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50



Figure 7.5: “Scenario 9” Time Series Salinity Plot at Coral Reef Sites

C 1: Salinity [psu] [PSU]C 2: Salinity [psu] [PSU]C 3: Salinity [psu] [PSU]

F_su

mm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M45

.dfs

0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50

WA 1: Salinity [psu] [PSU]WA 2: Salinity [psu] [PSU]WA 3: Salinity [psu] [PSU]

F_su

mm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M15

.dfs

0F_

sum

mer

_w1_

r1\d

ata\

out\T

imes

erie

s\C

ontro

lP_M

45.d

fs0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50

WA 4: Salinity [psu] [PSU]WA 5: Salinity [psu] [PSU]WA 6: Salinity [psu] [PSU]WA 7: Salinity [psu] [PSU]

umm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M45

.dfs

0um

mer

_w1_

r1\d

ata\

out\T

imes

erie

s\C

ontro

lP_M

15.d

fs0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50

SH 1: Salinity [psu] [PSU]SH 2: Salinity [psu] [PSU]SH 3: Salinity [psu] [PSU]SH 4: Salinity [psu] [PSU]

umm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\ou

t\Tim

eser

ies\

Con

trolP

_M15

.dfs

0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-28

00:0008-29

00:0008-30

00:0008-31

00:0009-01

30

35

40

45

50



7.74 In general therefore, the predicted temperature and salinity on the coral

reef sites do not indicate major fluctuations. This prediction is supported by in

situ data from early October 2005 which showed a maximum 1 degree

Centigrade difference between the control site C1 (32) and outfall site Sh1 (33)

while the salinity 40ppt was the same at all locations.

7.75 The time series plots for sulphate demonstrate that this contribution is

very small (typically <10 mg/l) compared with the normal background

concentration in the sea of approximately 2,750 mg/l. The removal of sulphur

from the stack emissions by the scrubbing process and discharge with the

cooling water into the sea will therefore not alter the sulphate levels in the

coastal waters. (The discharge will however comply with the prescribed pH

limits and minimum oxygen levels prior to release).

7.76 The time series plots for residual chlorine are based on a concentration

in the effluent of 0.25mg/l. The results are shown in Figures 7.6 and predict

negligible levels of chlorine at the control sites C1 to C3 while there are small

peaks up to 0.05mg/l sites WA1 and WA6. It is notable that the chlorine

residual from the existing discharge for Shuaibah I/II shows peak concentrations

at sites Sh1 to Sh4 up to 0.2mg/l which is significantly higher than for the

predicted residuals from the IWPP discharge.

Plate 7.5: Fish (Pseudanthias squamipinnis) and coral reef communities at Shuaibah 2005



Figure 7.6: “Scenario 9” Time Series Chlorine Plot at Coral Reef Sites

C1 Chlorine [-]C2 Chlorine [-]C2 Chlorine [-]

F_su

mm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\Ti

mep

lots

\Con

trolP

_M45

_SC

l.dfs

0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-29

00:0008-31

00:0009-02

00:0009-04

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

mg/

l

WA 1 Chlorine [-]WA 2 Chlorine [-]WA 3 Chlorine [-]

F_su

mm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\Ti

mep

lots

\Con

trolP

_M15

_SC

l.dfs

0F_

sum

mer

_w1_

r1\d

ata\

Tim

eplo

ts\C

ontro

lP_M

45_S

Cl.d

fs0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-29

00:0008-31

00:0009-02

00:0009-04

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

mg/

l

WA 4 Chlorine [-]WA 5 Chlorine [-]WA 6 Chlorine [-]WA 7 Chlorine [-]

umm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\Ti

mep

lots

\Con

trolP

_M45

_SC

l.dfs

0um

mer

_w1_

r1\d

ata\

Tim

eplo

ts\C

ontro

lP_M

15_S

Cl.d

fs0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-29

00:0008-31

00:0009-02

00:0009-04

0.00

0.05

0.10

mg/

l

SH 1 Chlorine [-]SH 2 Chlorine [-]SH 3 Chlorine [-]SH 4 Chlorine [-]

umm

er_w

1_r1

\dat

a\Ti

mep

lots

\Con

trolP

_M15

_SC

l.dfs

0

00:001981-08-27

00:0008-29

00:0008-31

00:0009-02

00:0009-04

0.00

0.10

0.20

mg/

l



7.77 Detailed 3D dispersion plots for temperature, salinity, sulphate and

residual chlorine show little differences in terms of dispersion characteristics for

the three scenarios. However the mixing zone areas are greatly reduced

compared with the scenario 4 and the dispersion is generally away from the

coast instead of being carried parallel to the coast as in Scenario 4.

7.78 Based on the original scenario 4 option, the mixing zone at the Phase III

outlet extends to a distance of about 500m westwards and about 100m

southwards (total 50,000m2), of which approximately 20,000m2 would have

been >3 degrees Centigrade above ambient conditions. In the southerly

direction, the dense plume is advected into deeper waters because of the steep

bottom slope in this area.

7.79 In comparison with Scenario 4, one of the new options tested (Scenario

9) has demonstrated that the dilution of water >3 degrees Centigrade is greatly

improved with no impact of this magnitude below -10m depth to -20m depth.

The mixing zone area for Scenario 9 at -20m is 39,850m2 compared with the

50,000m2 for the Scenario 4 option.

Figure 7.8: “Scenario 9” Surface Plume Dispersion for Extended Outfall (Depth – 8m)

Figure 7.7: “Scenario 4” Surface Plume Dispersion from Outfall (Depth – 4m)



7.80 A comparison of the three new options tested is given in Table 7.7.

Table 7.7: Calculated Mixing Zone area for IWPP discharge (Scenarios 9, 10 and 11)

Phase III outlet Excess Temperature Scenario 9 Scenario 10 Scenario 11

Surface m 1350 1800 14625 -5 3375 2250 5850

-10 10800 6075 9450 -15 34425 31500 34425

>1oC

-20 39850 50625 33750 Surface m 450 0 2250

-5 1125 0 1350 -10 450 450 0 -15 0 225 0

>3oC

-20 0 0 0

7.81 The preferred option following the modelling is Scenario 9, the 50m

extension (which discharges at a depth of – 8.0m), which significantly reduces

the mixing area >3 degrees and is discharged away from the coastline into

deeper water.

7.82 The relatively high peaks shown earlier in Figure 7.4 are due to short

term changes over a few hours, at low tide, and are associated with site WA6

which is adjacent to a deep water channel along which the plume is dispersing.

Most changes however are little more than 1 degree which is well within the

normal changes resulting from weather conditions affecting sea temperatures.

The shallow coral reef structures can be seen in Figure 7.1 although the satellite

image does not show the reef which can extend to a depth of 30 to 40m. The

reef is likely to be within 100m of the outfall where ever it is located due to the

wide range of reef depths from approximately 2m down to 40m.

Key Marine and Coastal Species

Birds

7.83 Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea coast and its associated islands are important

for birds, where in particular, the tidal flats are considered important over

wintering areas, hosting between one and two million wading birds of 125

species. In addition, many of the Red Sea Islands are important nesting sites

for seabirds including the Brown Booby (Sula leucogaster), Pelican (Pelecanus



rufescens), Sooty Gull (Larus hemprichii), White Eyed Gull (L. leucophthalmus)

and Brown Noddy (Anous stolidus).

Marine Turtles

7.84 Five species of Marine Turtle have been recorded in Saudi waters of

which the green turtle (Chelonia mydas) and the hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys

imbricate) are the most important. A MEPA study undertaken in 1989 noted

that the Red Sea population estimate of both species is approximately 3,500.

All marine turtles with the exception of the loggerhead turtle are on the IUCN list

of endangered species.

Marine Mammals

7.85 Of the thirty species of whales and dolphins expected to occur in Saudi

waters, nineteen have been observed, including the dugong which occurs in

significant numbers. The MEPA study undertaken in 1989 noted that Saudi

Arabia’s two coasts constitute one of the two most important areas for dugong

in the world. The MEPA survey noted that the population of dugongs in Saudi

waters are approximately 2,000 and recommended that coastal areas important

for dugong survival be preserved as protected areas.

Assessment of Impacts, Mitigation and Residual Effects

Construction Phase

7.86 Impact: – The construction of the water intake and outfall channel on the

coastal water quality and the associated coral reef and shoreline ecology during

the construction works, relating to the following activities:

• Direct loss of habitat due to the excavation of the open channel;

• Physical damage to coral reef from the dredge boat and moored barges

• Smothering of adjacent coral reef due to deposition of dredge material;

• Dispersion of silt onto coral reef carried onto the currents;

• Adverse effect on fish communities due to noise and vibration from the

excavation works;

• Accidental spillage or release of lubricating oils or fuels during dredging;

• Land-water interface impacts relating to the shoreline habitats;



• Transportation of materials to and from the site required for the open

channel structures;

• Disposal sites for the deposition of rubble and dredge material;

• Disturbance and/or water quality impacts on protected marine and

coastal species; and

• Cumulative impacts of construction of both intake and outfall

simultaneously.

7.87 The potential construction impacts are considered to be of major negative significance in the absence of appropriate mitigation measures.

7.88 Assessment of Construction Effects – The direct loss of habitat due to

the excavation of the intake and outfall structures has been assessed to reduce

this land take where practical. A comparison of closed pipe and open channel

intake structures was undertaken by Doosan in April 2005 with anumber of

alternative systems considered. Their drawings indicated a channel width of

106m for the open channel compared with 102 m for the 6 parallel GRP pipeline

intakes. Both arrangements have dredge material adjacent to the channels.

7.89 The high maintenance required for a closed pipe system due to potential

blockages from silt and sediment, marine invertebrates, fish and annual

“blooms” e.g. of jelly fish or algae make this option difficult to manage without

the use of high levels of chlorine or other biocides which may need to be back-

flushed to remove the build up of material which would otherwise adversely

affect the operation of the desalination plant.

7.90 The operation of an open channel intake will require the intake velocity

to be no greater than 0.3m/s to reduce the unintentional trapping of fish

invertebrates, such as crabs and jelly fish and other floating debris and

filamentous algae. Due to this key operational requirement it is not practical to

reduce the internal width of the channel (32 to 46m at the sea bed) although

there maybe scope to narrow the channel walls with a potential reduction in

width of up to 10% of the total channel width.

7.91 A range of possible mitigation measures for consideration by the EPC

contractor to reduce the trapping of fauna in the channel and system are

identified at the end of this sub section. The design may also be optimised by

further consultation with Archirodon who have constructed similar open channel

intake/outfall facilities during 2005 as part of the SEC Phase 2 Scheme.



7.92 The construction of the outfall open channel is similar to SEC Phase 2

and will be required to cut a path through the reef using a technique such as a

cutter suction dredger to remove the rock and resulting fine silt which will be

pumped into an adjacent barge. The proposed land take for the open channel

is based on an initial design with an internal width of approximately 50m and a

total width including the sloping walls of approximately 110m. It is important

that the direct loss of reef is kept to a minimum and discussions are taking place

with the EPC contractor to optimise the internal width and supporting wall

structures which may reduce the land area required by at least 10%. The model

options tested by DHI are compatible with a potential reduction in channel width.

7.93 Construction impacts are initially greater with an open channel due to

the increased land take, although this has been kept to a minimum by narrowing

the proposed width of the channel. The opportunities for recolonisation of the

outer walls of the open channel are far better than the heated pipeline due to

the increased surface area, suitable structural habitat, the range of depths

providing habitats for a wider range of species and numerous rock crevices

suitable for fish and invertebrates. In addition the high maintenance of a

pipeline to prevent obstructions and biological growth is likely to require high

doses of biocides and disinfectants such as chlorine which may severely impact

on local seabed ecology. There is also a high safety risk associated with the

maintenance of closed pipe intakes.

7.94 There is the potential for the dredger and barges to damage the reef

due to the relatively shallow waters although there is a deep water mooring

adjacent to the IWPP site which was used for delivery of materials and

construction related works for Shuaibah Phase II. This would be a good local

mooring for the dredger and barges and has a deep water channel for access.

It is proposed therefore that a route corridor for the dredger and support vessels

is agreed prior to construction to minimise accidental damage of adjacent reef

structures.

7.95 During the excavation of the open channels, the rock material may be

used for fill material within the developing wall structures where it is

geotechnically suitable for this purpose. However any unsuitable material

should be stored in barges moored alongside the dredger and not spread onto

the adjacent coral reef. This process should be monitored by divers inspecting

the works at key stages of the channel construction to. It is likely that fish will



avoid the area due to the disturbance and the main species lost will be

sedentary coral communities and slow moving invertebrates.

7.96 The dispersion of silt from the channel excavations onto adjacent reef

communities will be localised by undertaking the dredging under suitable tidal

and wind conditions. The dredging and construction works would undertaken

over a period of 15 months and during that time water quality samples would be

taken at agreed monitoring sites on a monthly frequency to assess parameters

such as suspended solids, COD, oils and grease. The monitoring regime

should reflect the findings of the offshore site investigation undertaken by

Suhaimi Furgo (2005 – See Appendix 7.4).

7.97 The preferred dredging method will be confirmed by the EPC, although

the rock substrate will require a technique such as a cutter suction dredger.

This method provides minimal release of fine sediment at the cutter head. The

dredged material is pumped into a barge moored alongside and can then be

taken to the disposal site. The barge should not be overfilled as this will allow

silt to disperse onto the adjacent coral reef. If silt plumes do occur then they

should be minimised by the deployment of silt screens between the barge and

the coral reef. The background suspended solids concentration is

approximately 10mg/l. A dredging standard of 20mg/l should be set for the reef

at a distance of no more than 200m from the dredger and barge. There should

be no land disposal of dredge material for dewatering.

7.98 While the use of dredging equipment will result in noise and vibration

impacts, it is proposed to minimise this impact by identifying suitable work

periods that avoid a 24 hour dredging schedule to enable fish to feed and

remain on nearby reefs. There should be no use of charges or explosives for

loosening rock structures to avoid the potential for acute fish mortality. The

construction of the channel walls with rock material should also avoid the need

for piling works. Should this be required, then a rotary technique should be

adopted and not a percussive method for piling to reduce noise and vibration

impacts.

7.99 The disturbance due to dredging works will result in fish avoiding the

immediate vicinity of the works. From the surveys undertaken we have no

evidence of sea grass beds which are particularly important for spawning and

this may be because the area has been affected in the past by the construction

works undertaken for Shuaibah I/II. While there will be losses of corals and



invertebrates, the data records of species demonstrate that there are similar

species groups along this 7.5km area surveyed and that construction related

impacts will be contained within a corridor approximately 200m wide for the

intake and outfall. The mitigation measures propose will ensure that the coral

reef community including the reef builders such as Porites will recover in the

future. There is no evidence to indicate that any endemic species will be

endangered by the works.

7.100 Throughout the construction works it will be important to prevent

accidental spillage of oils or fuel from the moored boats, and land based

equipment providing the channels to connect the intake/outfall with the land

works. As a result refuelling of the dredger and barges should only be

undertaken using established refuelling protocols at existing sites. All land

based fuels and oils would be stored away from the shoreline within bunded

areas on a hard standing to avoid accidental spillages from seeping into the

ground.

7.101 Construction corridors will need to be agreed with the EPC contractor to

identify routes and working corridors in the shallow waters, but also the working

corridor along the shoreline adjacent to the IWPP site. The identification of

several species of conservation value along the shoreline means that

consideration must be given to nearby habitat which would remain outside of

the main construction works.

7.102 The transportation of materials to site by sea would minimise the use of

the road highway infrastructure. The type and quantity of materials to be

delivered by this route should be identified as part of the programme. It is

understood that large sections of the desalination plant are planned to be

delivered by sea using the unused deep water jetty adjacent to the site

(previously used for delivery of construction materials for Shuaibah II Plant). A

route corridor should be agreed within the CEMP to avoid accidental damage of

the coral reef at low water although this is unlikely because of the deep

approach channel dredged for Shuaibah II. The delivery of fuels, oils and

chemicals should not be undertaken by this route but delivered by road and

stored away from the shoreline in a secure compound.

7.103 Any surplus dredge material should be taken to an offshore designated

disposal site to be agreed with PME. This would be at a site >50m in depth

beyond the coral reef habitats. This would be used for the disposal of dredge



material only and not include temporary construction materials. It has been

noted from the coral reef survey that there are a number of sites which have

10% or more of rubble which may have been deposited during the construction

of previous plants at Shuaibah.

7.104 During construction works on land, there will be a requirement to

dewater deep excavations due to the high groundwater table. This dewatered

effluent will be pumped to two large temporary settlement/evaporation ponds

which would only be discharged to coastal waters when in compliance with PME

standards.

7.105 The construction works are unlikely to have any impact on marine

protected species such as dugong and turtles as there are no marine

conservation sites near to the Shuaibah Power and Desalination Plants. There

are no of records of protected species for this location. The impacts on corals,

fish and invertebrates will be largely mitigated by careful consideration to the

construction methods. These will be detailed in the CEMP.

7.106 Mitigation: The key mitigation measures to minimise construction

impacts are as follows:

• Throughout the construction programme there should be an

Environmental Manger on site responsible for managing environmental

risks, training of staff and liaising with PME and other regulatory

authorities;

• During the detailed design of the intake and outfall structures, identify

opportunities for reducing the loss of coral reef habitat by at least 10%

and the provision of outer wall structures which will facilitate the

recolonistion of corals in the future;

• Dredge material which is not used as fill for the wall structures is to be

collected in adjacent barges and taken to a designated deep water sea

disposal site approved by PME;

• A construction monitoring programme should be agreed with PME to

include monthly water quality sampling and quarterly coral reef surveys

during the offshore construction programme;

• The results of the monitoring programme are to be sent to PME on a

quarterly basis showing the analytical results for agreed monitoring

sites;



• An access route for the dredger and barges should be identified which

avoid physical damage to adjacent coral reef communities, particularly

at low tide;

• A minimum width working corridor for construction activities associated

with the intake and outfall structures should be identified prior to

construction works commencing;

• There should be no use of biocides or chemical treatment during the

construction process;

• Should there be a requirement for piling, this should be restricted to

rotary techniques to minimise noise and vibration impacts on fish;

• There should be no refuelling of the dredger or barge while working on

site. While there is a nearby deep water mooring, this should not be

used to transport fuel, oils and chemicals to the site during construction;

• All land based fuels should be stored away from the shoreline in bunded

areas on hard standing to avoid accidental spillage;

• Spill kits and oil booms should be available for immediate use in the

unlikely event of an accident.

• There should be a site book in which any environmental incidents are

reported. In the event of an incident, site procedures would be

reviewed;

7.107 Residual Effect: The residual effect of the construction activities are

considered to be of minor negative significance after mitigation as the works

will be localised and occur in an area, which although subject to construction of

two previous plants, remains a relatively diverse ecological community. The

work will be controlled in accordance with a construction environmental

management plan and will include a detailed monitoring programme. The direct

habitat loss will be partially mitigated by reducing the channel width and by the

construction of channel walls which can be readily colonised by coral reef

communities.

7.108 Impact: Assessment of Operational Effects. This impact is considered

to be of moderate negative significance prior to mitigation measures.

7.109 The principal impacts that could arise from the operation of the IWPP

are as follows:



• Discharge of cooling water effluent with elevated salt concentrations

(brine) and sulphate from the flue gas scrubbers into the shallow coastal

waters;

• Discharge of other constituents in the cooling water including, chlorine,

nutrients, heavy metals, storm water etc;

• Abnormal and emergency discharge following planned maintenance

work or an accidental spillage;

• Oil spillage during unloading operations or from passing ships;

• Cumulative impacts of IWPP discharge with existing Shuaibah I/II outfall

7.110 Assessment of Operational Effects – The cooling water will be the

principal discharge from the IWPP but will also contain smaller volumes of

treated waste water effluent, process waste waters and the resulting discharge

from the FGD scrubbers which will add sulphate to the effluent.

7.111 The modelling of the discharges including Shuaibah I/II/III includes not

only cooling water but the brine effluent too which is mixed with the cooling

water and discharged together. Therefore the two have been modelled

together. The water from the flue gas will be neutralised and deoxygenated

prior to release to meet the PME discharge standards. The relatively low

concentrations of sulphate will be dispersed in the high background

concentration naturally occurring in sea water. The brine discharge results in no

changes in salinity at the Control Sites C1 to C3 and minimal changes at all

other sites.

7.112 The process systems will be controlled to ensure that the effluent pH is

balanced by neutralisation where necessary and contains sufficient oxygen to

meet the required PME and World Bank standards. Siemens have provided a

Performance Guarantee which includes the physicochemical; pollutants, heavy

metals, microbiological and mixing zone standards.

7.113 The increase in temperature and salinity has been modelled with

different outfall options to identify opportunities for more effective dispersion of

the effluent. A comparison between Scenario 4 and Scenario 9 has

demonstrated much improved plume dispersion by straightening the end of the



open channel outfall and increasing the length of the outfall by 50m to discharge

at -8.0m instead of -4.0m as previously proposed. This modification has

reduced the size of the mixing zone at the surface from approximately 50,000m2

to <2,000m2. At lower depths the new scenario has reduced the mixing zone >3

degrees Centigrade to a maximum of 1125m2 at -5m. The area with a >1

degree Centigrade increase does not increase significantly until 15m to 20m

below the surface. Alternative modifications assessing a culvert extension and

increased velocity of discharge to 2m/s did not improve the dispersion

characteristics of the plume.

7.114 The 2005 coral reef survey suggests that there is an increase in the

proportion of recently killed coral within 300m of the discharge although the

water temperature at this location was only 33 degrees Centigrade at the time of

the survey compared with a 35 degree benchmark used for the modelling which

is typical of summer conditions. The extent of bleaching at this location would

either suggest that the temperature may be higher or that other constituents of

the effluent such as residual chlorine have a localised impact on the reef

community.

7.115 There is no available data on the discharge quality from Shuaibah I/II

other than the survey undertaken in October 2005. This limited data set

indicates that Phosphate, COD, Oils and greases and chlorine are all twice the

control concentrations which should be typical of normal background. In the

absence of monitoring it would be premature to conclude whether these values

are typical or not. However the critical factors are likely to be phosphate

(limiting nutrient controlling algal growth), chlorine (highly toxic in low

concentration (shock dosing could have a major impact) and turbidity

(background concentration should be <10mg/l (reduces light and impacts on the

reef communities). The COD, oils and greases are a further indication of

chemical and oil contaminants from plant operations.

7.116 To avoid similar impacts on the reef from the Shuaibah III Plant, the

most important factors are as follows:

• Minimise mixing zone area and temperature increase >3 degrees;

• Ensure outfall location is at suitable depth to provide good initial mixing;

• Provide an inventory of chemicals to be used on site and minimise

biocides;



• Ensure that process monitoring prevents over chlorination of water

and/or dumping of condenser water directly into the outfall;

• Provide water quality monitoring of the main feed lines to the outfall with

an option to divert to a holding pond if exceeding process standards;

• Monitor the quality of process water from the sulphate scrubbers in

relation to pH and oxygen concentrations;

• Do not allow chlorinated product water to be discharged directly to the

outfall;

• Provide a continuous flow and quality monitor on the main outfall with

alarms for chlorine if 95% of standard is reached;

• Undertake quarterly inspections of the reef in Year 1 together with water

quality analysis at specified points. Reduce this frequency to 6 monthly

if there is minimal environmental impact (within the range of natural

fluctuations);

• Report coral reef and water quality data following each survey;

• Undertake a study to monitor the recolonisation of the outer channel

walls of the intake and outfall channels;

• As part of the EMP for the site operations, seek opportunities for

improving the quality and reliability of the discharge effluent.

7.117 The control and monitoring of other constituents of the IWPP effluent will

be important, as the recent survey indicates elevated concentrations of copper

(maximum 16 ug/l) and zinc (maximum 10ug/l) at the Control site C1. In

addition slightly elevated levels of phosphate, COD and oils and grease were

recorded close to the Shuaibah I/II outfall although they comply with PME and

World Bank standards. In contrast though the phosphate concentration of

1.3mg/l may exceed the standards. Elevated levels of selenium also appear to

be associated with the outfall, although they maybe derived form a natural

gypsum source in the sea bed.

7.118 The discharge of effluent under abnormal and/or emergency conditions

will be monitored to ensure that the maximum standards are not exceeded as

this will have less effect on fish which can avoid the area but have an acute

effect on sedentary corals and relatively sessile invertebrates. The IWPP will



therefore have storage and balancing ponds on site which are able to store and

treat storm water and other infrequent wastes, prior to discharge.

7.119 The emergency storage and balancing ponds required for construction

will need to be discussed with the EPC in relation to possible long term

operational requirements. This will be an obligation of the EPC if the

requirement is specified under the EIA/EMP.

7.120 The unloading of oil at the existing oil jetty has been in operation for the

past 17 years and has an emergency cut=off valves which prevent accidental

spillage should the tanker break away from its moorings during unloading. The

new IWPP will have a dedicated pipeline hung on the existing jetty structure

which provides the light crude oil for the Phase III Power Plant.

7.121 The only incidence of oil spillage at the SWCC site has been associated

with the draining of seawater from the tanks after delivery which is currently a

manual system. It is proposed that the new IWPP has automated oil level

censors to prevent accidental release. There has only been one recorded case

of oil being washed ashore at Shuaibah due to a passing ship washing its tanks

out (not associated with delivery). This activity is closely monitored by the

Coastguard and PMEs Oil Pollution and Research Unit, and is an unlikely event.

However there will be a requirement for appropriate oil booms and similar

equipment to be available on site to deal with any unforeseen emergency.

7.122 Mitigation: The key mitigation measures during operations to prevent

acute or chronic impacts on the marine environment are as follows:

• Provision of on-line process monitoring for the cooling water system and

associated auxiliary processes, particularly those requiring application of

chlorine or chemical additives. These will include

o Flow rate

o Water temperature

o Salinity

o Conductivity

o pH

o Oxygen saturation

o Phosphate



o Nitrate

o COD

o Oils and Greases

o Suspended Solids

o Residual Chlorine

• Chemical monitoring of individual effluent lines prior to mixing with the

cooling water and a continuous flow/quality monitor on the final effluent

channel. These will include

o Flow rate

o COD

o Oils and Greases

o Suspended solids

o Chlorine

o Heavy metals (e.g. Zinc and copper);

o Sulphate;

o Phosphate

o Other potential contaminants as necessary

• The monitoring programme for segregated waste waters (e.g. from

cooling water, oil drain, chemical drain and sewage treatment plant) will

ensure that the single effluent discharge to coastal waters complies with

the PME and World Bank standards for discharge to coastal waters.

The treatment design required will include preliminary, primary and

secondary treatment as necessary.

• The provision of balancing/evaporation ponds to receive storm water

drainage or flows associated with abnormal or emergency conditions;

• Prevent planned or accidental discharge of chlorinated product water

with effluent due to potential impact on the coral reef – discharge to an

evaporation pond if not required;

• Chemical stores to be within an enclosed structure on hard standing and

with an impermeable bund equivalent to 100% of the largest tank;



• All oil storage tanks to have an impermeable bund capable of holding

110% of the largest tank;

• Undertake an annual monitoring programme at selected coral reef sites

and combine with the effluent monitoring report to be sent to PME for

approval;

• Ensure that site staff are aware of the environmental management

system and that there is an Environmental Co-ordinator for the site to

record training, incidents etc

7.123 Residual Effect: The residual impact of the operational discharges from

the IWPP is considered to be of minor negative significance as the discharge

will be within the PME and World Bank Standards. However the gradual

increase in conservative substances such as heavy metals will need to be

monitored in the future. In addition the gradual increase in nutrients should also

be monitored to identify any adverse effects from increased algal growth on the

reef.

Assessment of Construction Cumulative Effects

7.124 Impact – The cumulative construction related impacts prior to mitigation

are considered to be of moderate negative significance due to the

requirement for detailed programming of the respective land and offshore works

which will require effluent treatment and a temporary discharge location while

facilities are being constructed.

7.125 Assessment of Effects - The cumulative construction impacts associated

with the simultaneous construction of the intake and outfall channels would

have a potentially wider area of impact on the adjacent coral reef communities

due to combined noise, vibration, and cumulative dispersion of silt. On the

basis of the draft construction programme it is likely that the dredging works

would not be undertaken simultaneously. However on this basis, the longer

period of dredging will need to be monitored to assess water quality and coral

reef ecology at agreed monitoring sites.

7.126 There will also be upgrading of the oil unloading jetty to provide the new

pipeline for delivering fuel oil to the IWPP. However this will not involve

dredging works. The upgrading of the jetty will be undertaken in accordance

with a specific protocol identified as part of the CEMP to ensure that there are



no additional risks associated with tankers unloading fuel oil for Shuaibah

Phase I/II plants.

7.127 The provision of land based works will also produce treated waste water

effluent associated with the construction workforce and effluent form the

dewatering of excavations. Following wastewater treatment involving primary

and secondary treatment, it is proposed to provide tertiary treatment in

balancing ponds planted with reeds such as Phragmites australis to provide

further removal of suspended solids and reduction in nutrients, particularly

phosphate, prior to discharge. The location of any temporary discharge would

need to be agreed with PME beforehand.

7.128 Mitigation Measures – these will include the following:

• Preparation of a programme of works with specific reference to the

handling, storage, treatment and discharge of effluent during the

construction works;

• The provision of a tertiary treatment system to minimise the release of

suspended solids and nutrients to coastal waters whilst also avoiding or

minimising the use of hypochlorite to disinfect the effluent;

• Appointment of an environmental co-ordinator to oversee the

implementation of the CEMP.

7.129 Residual Impact – the residual impact of the cumulative impacts during

construction are considered to be of minor negative significance.

Assessment of Operational Cumulative Effects

7.130 Impact Operational cumulative impacts are likely to of moderate negative significance in the absence of appropriate mitigation

7.131 The coastal water quality associated with the existing discharge from

Shuaibah I/II indicates that there may be some gradual increase in nutrient

levels and possibly heavy metals including copper, zinc and selenium. It is

important to note however that this indication is based on one set of samples

only and that further monitoring would be required to establish the current water

quality.



7.132 The predictive modelling of discharges from the IWPP and Shuaibah I/II

indicates that the effluents disperse independently and are not entrained by the

currents to provide a cumulative effect. It is evident from the modelling that the

dispersed effluent tends to be away from the coral reef except sites (e.g. WA6)

where the site is close to a deep channel in which the effluent is being carried

by the currents. The results of the coral reef survey did find higher levels of

bleaching and 50% recently killed coral close to Shoaiab I/II although this effect

was observed at other sites including the Controls C1 to C3 which is believed to

be due to naturally high summer temperatures (e.g. reported in the literature

throughout the Red Sea on a number of occasions);

7.133 There are expected to be approximately 5 tankers per month unloading

oil for the IWPP. The oil will be delivered in 100,000 loads dwt within a 24 hour

period. The increase in fuel delivery at this jetty will be scheduled to avoid

tanker loads for SWCC Phase I/II plants. However the maximum days per

month for all oil unloading will be approximately 15 ensuring that tankers are not

moored awaiting a facility to unload. The cumulative impacts arising from this

are therefore likely to be insignificant.

7.134 Mitigation: Mitigation measures to reduce operational cumulative

impacts would be as follows:

• Ensure that the proposed coastal water monitoring programme for

discharge operations includes the water quality sites (October 2005) to

monitor the effects of all inputs from the adjacent Shuaibah outfall;

• Monitor the levels of “indicator” heavy metals in the coastal waters such

as copper, zinc and selenium to assist with the identification of the

source and the opportunity to prevent this from increasing.

Residual Effect: Residual Effect of cumulative operational to be minor negative significance after mitigation measures.

Summary

7.135 A summary of the key impacts on Marine Water Quality, Recirculation

and Coral Reef Ecology are provided in Table 7.8 overleaf together with the

associated mitigation and residual effects.



Table 7.8: Summary Impact Table for Marine Water Quality, Recirculation and Coral Reef Ecology

Potential Impact Nature of Impact (Permanent or Temporary)

(Direct or Indirect)

Significance (Major, Moderate or Minor)

(Positive or Negative)

Mitigation / Enhancement Measures Residual Effects (Major/Moderate/Minor/Neutral)

(Positive/Negative) Construction Impacts Temporary and

Indirect

Major Negative • Refer to Mitigation Measures outlined in

Paragraph 7.93

Minor Negative

Operational Impacts Permanent and

indirect

Moderate Negative • Refer to Mitigation Measures outlined in

Paragraph 7.105

Minor Negative



8 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY AND STACK EMISSIONS

Introduction

8.1 Air quality is determined by the presence or absence of atmospheric

pollutants in the air. Poor air quality is characterised by high concentrations of

air pollution.

8.2 This Section of the Environmental Statement considers the issues of

ambient air quality and stack emissions arising from existing Saline Water

Conversion Corporation (SWCC) plants, Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)

plants and the proposed SEC expansion, and the proposed Shuaibah III

Independent Water and Power Plant (IWPP). Further details regarding these

plants are provided in the front-end of the Environmental Statement.

8.3 The following key issues are considered in this Section:

• Ambient air quality conditions at the existing Shuaibah I + II site, the

proposed site and sensitive receptors;

• Emission characteristics and concentrations for key pollutants provided

by the Water and Electricity Company (WEC) for the existing SWCC and

SEC plants;

• Dispersion modelling of the area to establish the existing conditions,

including all existing and planned SWCC and SEC plants at Shuaibah

and the cumulative contribution from the proposed SEC expansion and

Shuaibah III IWPP emissions;

• Consideration of potential pollution abatement required to achieve the

Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) and World Bank

standards; and

• Consideration of the contribution of greenhouses gases such as carbon

dioxide (CO2) from the Shuaibah III IWPP in relation to Saudi Arabia’s

ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in January 2005.

8.4 A glossary of terms used in this Section is provided in Appendix 8.1.



Policy and Legislative Context

International

8.5 For the purpose of this assessment, international standards for air

quality are provided by the World Bank (Thermal Power: Guidelines for New

Plants 19981).

8.6 These calculated stack emissions are summarised in paragraph 8.18 in

to demonstrate how the emission standards for SO2, NOx and particulates will

be fully complied with by the new Shuaibah III IWPP.

World Bank Emissions Standards

Air Emissions Standards

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

• Total SO2 emissions are to be less than 0.2 metric tonnes per day (tpd) per

MWe of capacity for the first 500 MWe, plus 0.1 tpd for each additional MWe of

capacity over 500 MWe;

• Total SO2 emissions of 1µg/j (2.3lb/MBTU); and

• Flue gas concentrations are to be less than 2000 mg/m3, measured at Standard

Temperature and Pressure (STP), with a maximum emissions level of 500 tpd.

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

• Flue gas concentrations are to be less than 460 mg/m3, measured at

Standard Temperature and Pressure (STP), for an oil-fired power plant; and

• Total NO2 emissions of 130 ng/j (0.2lb/MBTU).

Particulate Matter (PM10)

• Flue gas concentrations are to be less than 50 mg/m3, measured at Standard

Temperature and Pressure (STP); and

• Total Particulate Matter (PM) emissions of 43 ng/j (0.1lb/MBTU).

World Bank Air Quality Standards



8.7 As a means of classifying existing ambient air quality which can be

considered to be directly affected by emissions from existing plant, the World

Bank provides criteria for the identification of Degraded Airsheds. Criteria are

provided for the classification of existing ambient air quality as either ‘Moderate’

or ‘Poor’ for four pollutants; sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2),

inhalable particles (PM10) and total suspended particles (TSP).

8.8 The World Bank criteria for the identification of Degraded Airsheds are

provided below:

Standards for the Purpose of Defining Degraded Airsheds


Moderate Air Quality Airshed

• The annual mean concentration exceeds 50 µg/m3; or

• The 98th percentile of 24 hour mean concentrations over a year exceeds

150 µg/m3.

Poor Air Quality Airshed



150 µg/m3.

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)




150 µg/m3.




150 µg/m3.


1http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/essd/envext.nsf/51ByDocName/ThermalPowerGuideli






150 µg/m3.




150 µg/m3.

Total Suspended Particulate Matter (TSP)




230 µg/m3.




230 µg/m3.

Standards for Carrying Out Environmental Assessments

8.9 International standards for air quality in thermal power plants are also

provided by the World Bank for use in Environmental Assessments. However,

as stipulated in the World Bank Guidelines, these standards are only to be used

in the absence of local (national) ambient air quality standards; there is also

debate to be had as to their application beyond the site boundary of a thermal

power plant.

8.10 The World Bank standards for ambient air quality in thermal power

plants are provided below:


• There is no World Bank Standard for 1 hour mean concentrations of SO2;

nesforNewPlants/$FILE/HandbookThermalPowerGuidelinesForNewPlants.pdf



• (Maximum) 24 hour mean concentration of 150 µg/m3; and

• Annual mean concentration of 80 µg/m3.

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

• There is no World Bank Standard for 1 hour mean concentrations of NO2;




• There is no World Bank Standard for 1 hour mean concentrations of PM10;



Total Suspended Particulate Matter (TSP)

• There is no World Bank Standard for 1 hour mean concentrations of TSP;



National

PME Emissions Standards

8.11 National emissions standards provided by PME are identical to those

set by the World Bank.

PME Air Quality Standards

8.12 National ambient air quality standards for Saudi Arabia are provided by

the Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) in Document No. 1409-

01. As per World Bank Guidelines, these national ambient air quality standards

take precedence over those provided by the World Bank for use in

Environmental Assessments in thermal power plants.

8.13 The PME standards for ambient air quality in Saudi Arabia are provided

below:


8.14 Air quality standards for ambient SO2 concentrations are set for the

prevention of adverse health effects and adverse effects upon vegetation. The

following air quality standards are set by PME.



• During any 30 day period, the 1 hour mean SO2 concentration shall not

exceed 730 µg/m3 (280 ppb) more than twice at any location;

• During any year, the 24 hour mean SO2 concentration shall not exceed 365

µg/m3 (140 ppb) more than once at any location; and

• During any year, the annual mean SO2 concentration shall not exceed 80

µg/m3 (30 ppb) at any location.

Nitrogen Oxides (Defined as Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2))

8.15 Air quality standards for ambient NO2 concentrations are set for the

prevention of the development of concentrations which could produce adverse

health effects or lead to the production of significant concentrations of

photochemical oxidants. The following air quality standards are set by PME.

• During any 30 day period, the 1 hour mean NO2 concentration shall not

exceed 660 µg/m3 (350 ppb) more than twice at any location;

• There is no PME 24 hour mean standard for NO2; and

• During any year, the annual mean NO2 concentration shall not exceed 100

µg/m3 (50 ppb) at any location.

Inhalable Particles (PM10)

8.16 Air quality standards for ambient IP(PM10) concentrations are set for the

protection of susceptible populations from adverse health effects, taking into

account the synergistic effects associated with the presence of other

contaminants. The following air quality standards are set by PME.

• There are no PME 1 hour mean standard for IP(PM10).

• During any year, the 24 hour mean IP(PM10) concentration shall not exceed

340 µg/m3 more than once at any location; and

• During any year, the annual mean IP(PM10) concentration shall not exceed

80 µg/m3 at any location.

8.17 For the proposed development it is important to note that the

exceedence of the PME IP(PM10) standards is possible with no additional

contribution from industrial sources, such as SWCC, SEC or Shuaibah III IWPP

emissions. This is due to high background concentrations arising from dust

storms and would not constitute a failure of the standard.



8.18 The National Stack Emission Standards (oil fired power plants >30MW)

for PME are identical to those of the World Bank are as follows:

• Total Particulates 43ng/j (0.1lb/MBTU)

• Sulphur Dioxide 1ug/j (2.3lb/MBTU)

• Nitrogen Dioxide 130ng/j (0.2lb/MBTU)

8.19 The thermal input of Shuaibah III IWPP will be 4182 MW. Therefore

according to the emission standards cited above, the maximum acceptable

emission rates are as follows:

• PM (Total Particulates) 648 kg/hr

• Sulphur Dioxide 15,055kg/hr

• Nitrogen Dioxide 1,958kg/hr

PME/World Bank Stack Emission Standards

Specific standards

for Shuaibah III

IWPP (kg/hr)

Standard IWPP

(no FGD) but with

Low NOx burners

and EPs (kg/hr)

95% FGD (kg/hr

Total Particulates 648 82 82

Sulphur Dioxide 15,055 5,710 375

Nitrogen Dioxide 1,958 653 653

8.20 The World Bank Standards for maximum flue gas concentrations and for

95% FGD are as follows:

• Total particulates 50 mg/m3 <50 Achieved

• Sulphur Dioxide 2,000mg/m 230 Achieved

• Nitrogen Dioxide 460mg/m3 400 Achieved



8.21 Siemens who are providing the control systems for atmospheric

emissions and effluent quality have provided a statement of guarantee that the

emissions will comply with the PME and World Bank standards under normal

operating conditions. There are also guarantees provided by Doosan and the

specialist companies who will be providing the equipment for pollution

abatement and waste water treatment.

Methodology

Scope of Assessment

8.22 The scope of the assessment undertaken herein has been informed by

a review of recent (2003/2005) dispersion modelling undertaken by Müller-BBM

GmbH to inform plant design specifications.

Review of Modelling Undertaken To Date

8.23 Preliminary and extended desktop air dispersion modelling studies have

been undertaken by Müller-BBM (for the Saudi – Malaysian Consortium) to

consider the requirement for Flue Gas Desulphurisation Beds (FGDB) to

remove sulphur oxides (SOx) prior to the emission from the Shuaibah III IWPP

stack. These stand-alone studies are presented in Müller-BBM reports M57

544/1 (2003) and M63 841/3 (2005).

8.24 The reports consider ground-level concentrations (GLCs) of key

pollutants including sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NO2)2 and

particulate matter (PM10)3 and were based on the use of the Lagrangian model,

LASAT, to model an area covering 28 x 28 km at a grid resolution of 200 x 200

m. This approach to air dispersion modelling undertaken by Müller-BBM is

considered to be appropriate for a stand-alone assessment of the requirement

for FGDB.

8.25 Meteorological data considered representative of the model area was

obtained from the King Abdul Aziz International Airport. A 1995 three hour

observation interval dataset was used as input to the Müller-BBM model. The

meteorological dataset used in the dispersion modelling was identified as

having 16.9% calm days. In an annual dataset this is equivalent to

approximately 62 days or 2 months.

2 Nitrogen oxides, defined as NO2 in the Müller-BBM report 3 All particulate matter assumed to be PM10 in the Müller-BBM report



8.26 It is likely that the dispersion model was not able to consider dispersion

during these calm days. The data capture of the meteorological data set is not

presented within the Müller-BBM studies. The combination of calm days,

including possible omitted data, and interpolation of three hour observational

interval data to hourly data is likely to influence the prediction of short-term

percentile concentrations presented in the Müller-BBM report.

8.27 It is understood that no assessment of the influence of this factor on the

short term concentrations has been undertaken to date by Müller-BBM.

Method of Assessment

8.28 A description of the data inputs, emission parameters and the

methodology used in this assessment is provided below:

Stack Emissions Data

8.29 Stack emissions data was provided by Fichtner and WEC for SWCC

and SEC plant, as used in the Müller-BBM Extended Air Dispersion Study

(2005). This same emissions data was used as input to this assessment.

8.30 Stack emission data provided by Fichtner and WEC is considered to be

maximum emission data representative of worse-case operating conditions.

Maximum emission data have also been applied across each of the four

individual stacks located at both the SWCC and SEC sites. Consequently, this

data is unlikely to be representative of normal operation conditions which are

considered likely to occur throughout the year, as such dispersion modelling

results based on these worse-case emissions data will also be worse-case for

these emissions sources.

8.31 Stack emissions data for the SWCC site is provided overleaf in Table

8.1.



Table 8.1: SWCC Stack Emissions Data

SWCC SWCC

Phase 1 Phase 2 Units

Stack coordinates, Gauss-Krüger North

2,286,071 2,285,971 2,286,619 2,286,504 m

Stack coordinates, Gauss-Krüger East

554,959 555,024 554,639 554,715 m

Stack Height 138 138 151 151 m Equivalent Stack Diameter2

4.1 5.0 5.2 6.3 m

Gross Power Output 125 187.5 202 303 MWe

Gross Efficiency1 23.3 23.3 19.9 19.9 %

Thermal Input 536 805 1015 1523 MWt Actual O2 in exhaust gas1 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 %

Flue Gas Flow Rate, STD, Wet, Actual O21

741,296 1,111,943 1,402,606 2,103,909 Nm3/h

Flue Gas Flow Rate, STD, Dry, 3% O2

555,196 8,32,795 1,050,487 1,575,731 Nm3/h

SWCC SWCC Phase 1 Phase 2

Units

Exhaust Gas Velocity1 25 25 30 30 m/s

Flue Gas Temperature 155 155 165 165 oC

Sulphur Content in Fuel1

3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 %

SO2 emissions, Dry, 3% O2 6,164 6,164 6,163 6,163 mg/Nm3

NOx (as NO2) emissions, Dry, 3% O21

400 400 400 400 mg/Nm3

Particulate Matter3, Dry, 3% O21

50 50 50 50 mg/Nm3

SO2 Emissions 3,422 5,133 6,474 9,711 kg/h NOx (as NO2) Emissions 222 333 420 630 kg/h

Particulate Matter Emissions

28 42 53 79 kg/h

Heat Emission 35.01 52.51 71.53 107.3 MW 1 Estimate/Assumed by Fichtner; to be confirmed by SEC/SWCC. 2 Calculated by WSP Environmental Ltd. 3 Particulate Matter (PM) is assumed to be synonymous with TSP. STP: Standard Temperature and Pressure (273 K, 1013 hPa).

8.32 Stack emissions data for the SEC site is provided overleaf in Table 8.2.



Table 8.2: SEC Stack Emissions Data

SEC SEC

Phase 1 Phase 2 Units

Stack coordinates, Gauss-Krüger North

2,280,748 2,281,092 2,280,868 2,281,238 m

Stack coordinates, Gauss-Krüger East

557,998 557,794 557,927 557,707 m

Stack Height 160 160 160 160 m Equivalent Stack Diameter2

8.8 10.7 10.7 10.7 m

Gross Power Output1 786 1179 1179 1179 MWe

Gross Efficiency1 35 35 35 35 %

Thermal Input 2246 3369 3369 3369 MWt Actual O2 in exhaust gas1 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 %

Flue Gas Flow Rate, STD, Wet, Actual O21

3,103,072 4,654,608 4,654,608 4,654,608 Nm3/h


2,324,058 3,486,087 3,486,087 3,486,087 Nm3/h

SEC SEC Phase 1 Phase 2

Units

Exhaust Gas Velocity1 22 22 22 22 m/s

Flue Gas Temperature 148 148 148 148 oC


3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 %

SO2 emissions, Dry, 3% O2 6,505 6,505 6,505 6,505 mg/Nm3


400 400 400 400 mg/Nm3

Particulate Matter, Dry, 3% O2

88 88 88 88 mg/Nm3

SO2 Emissions 15,118 22,677 2,2677 22,677 kg/h NOx (as NO2) Emissions 1,081 1,621 1,621 1,621 kg/h


205 307 307 307 kg/h

Heat Emission 138.33 207.49 207.49 207.49 MW 1 Estimate/Assumed by Fichtner; to be confirmed by SEC/SWCC. 2 Calculated by WSP Environmental Ltd. STP: Standard Temperature and Pressure (273 K, 1013 hPa).

8.33 Stack emissions data was provided by Siemens GmbH for proposed

Shuaibah III IWPP scenarios. This data reflects a commitment to meeting

World Bank and PME emissions standards and includes provision of low NOx

burners and electrostatic precipitators to minimise emissions of NO2 and PM.



Stack emissions data is also provided for a scenario which includes adoption of

95% FGDB abatement.

8.34 The adoption of 95% FGDB for the first IWPP in Saudi Arabia will

ensure that this meets the highest pollution abatement level of any plant within

the Kingdom and will also set a new benchmark for the delivery of other power

and desalination plants of this size. This standard will supersede the norm in

KSA which is “zero FGDB” i.e. no pollution abatement measures. However in

Jeddah, the first introduction of FGDB up to 95% is being considered to improve

air quality in a city of > 4 million residents.

8.35 At Shuaibah, the new IWPP will be constructed alongside existing

plants, typical of those operating throughout KSA although it will utilise a light

crude oil with a maximum sulphur content of 2.0% compared with the normal

3.8% used in the existing plants. This constitutes a reduction in sulphur

emissions by almost 50% prior to combustion. However within the ESIA it has

been demonstrated that the site is of low sensitivity with no towns or major

residential sites within the zone of the plumes, no predicted effects on land

ecology or marine ecology and the continued protection of the SWCC worker

housing complex (confirmed by the air quality monitoring programme). The

modelling has also demonstrated that the IWPP lies just outside the World Bank

degraded air shed and will not provide a material contribution to the failure of

the SO2 standards. As a result of the foregoing, it is considered that there are

no economic, social or environmental benefits associated with FGDB greater

than 95% at this location and therefore this has not been assessed any further.

8.36 It is understood that heavy fuel oil used to power the IWPP plant will be

an average of 1.8% sulphur fuel (S-fuel) content; with a maximum S-fuel content

of 2.0%. In order to provide a conservative assessment of the impact of IWPP

emissions on ambient air quality, emissions data for the maximum S-fuel

content (2.0%) have been used in this assessment. Consequently, dispersion

modelling results will provide worse-case predictions of the impact of IWPP.

8.37 It is important to note however that as, over the period of a year, the

average S-fuel content is estimated to be 1.8%, there will be periods where the

S-fuel content will be less than this in order to off-set the 2.0% S-fuel content

maximum. As such, dispersion modelling contributions to long-term standards

(i.e. 1 hour and 24 hour) are likely to be less than those presented in this

assessment.



8.38 Stack emissions data for the proposed IWPP plant is provided below in

Table 8.3.

Table 8.3: IWPP Stack Emissions Data

Standard IWPP Mitigated IWPP 0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content;

35oC Sea-water Temperature 95% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature

Units

Stack coordinate 20o 41’ N, 39 o 31’ East 20 o 41’ N, 39 o 31’ East M

Stack Height 150 150 M Equivalent Stack Diameter2

7.0 5.7 M

Thermal Input 4,182 4,182 MWt Flue Gas Flow Rate, STD, Wet, Actual O21

1,995,000 1,927,500 Nm3/h


1,631,510 1,631,510 Nm3/h

Exhaust Gas Velocity2 25 25 m/s

Flue Gas Temperature 190 46.6 oC


2.0 2.0 %

SO2 emissions, Dry, 3% O2 3,500 230 mg/Nm3


400 400 mg/Nm3

Particulate Matter, Dry, 3% O21

50 <<50 mg/Nm3

SO2 Emissions 5,710 375 Kg/h NOx (as NO2) Emissions 653 653 Kg/h


82 82 Kg/h

1 Estimate/Assumed by Siemens. 2 Estimate/Assumed by WSP Environmental Ltd. STP: Standard Temperature and Pressure (273 K, 1013 hPa).

8.39 The thermal input of Shuaibah III IWPP will be 4182 MWt. Therefore,

according to World Bank and PME emission standards the maximum

acceptable emission rates are as follows:

• Sulphur Dioxide 15,055 kg/h

• Nitrogen Dioxide 1,958 kg/h

• Particulate Matter (PM) 648 kg/h



8.40 Maximum acceptable emissions rates for the proposed IWPP plant meet

each of these standards. Flue gas concentrations for the Mitigated IWPP also

meet World Bank Flue Gas Concentration standards.

Meteorological Data

8.41 Meteorological data considered representative of the model area was

obtained from the King Abdul Aziz International Airport in Jeddah. While it was

understood that three hour observation interval data was available for the years

1990 to 1999, this was not readily available in a format appropriate for input to

the dispersion modelling software used and was dismissed in preference for

one hour observation interval data available for the years 1977 to 1982.

8.42 A one hour observation interval dataset has been selected in preference

to a three hour observation interval dataset as it is considered to provide greater

temporal resolution and therefore more accurately predict ambient air quality

impacts against short-term standards, such as over 1 hour and 24 hour periods.

8.43 Of the six available one hour observation interval metrological datasets,

the 1980 dataset was selected as most appropriate for use in this assessment.

Data capture for this year was in excess of 94% and 17% classed as calm

days4.

8.44 In order to evaluate the suitability of the 1980 meteorological dataset to

represent typical conditions over a longer period of time, statistical analysis of

the dataset was undertaken by certified consulting meteorologists at Trinity

Consultants, Inc. A comparison of the 1980 dataset to the 1995 three hour

observation interval dataset used by Müller-BBM in the Extended Air Dispersion

Study was made. The 1995 dataset used by Müller-BBM was considered by

Deutscher Wetterdienst (DWD – German Meteorological Office) as a

representative year.

8.45 The meteorologists at Trinity Consultants confirmed that the 1980 one

hour observation interval dataset was consistent with the 1995 three hour

observation interval dataset, and consequently can also be considered to be

representative of typical meteorological conditions over a longer period.

8.46 Statistical analysis of the 1980 one hour observation interval

meteorological dataset is provided in Appendix 8.2.

4 A ‘calm’ period is defined as a period when the wind speed is <0.75m/s and is recorded in the data as a period of zero wind speed.



Dispersion Modelling

8.47 Concentrations of key pollutants (SO2, NOx / NO2, and PM) have been

predicted over a modelling area which covers 20km x 20 km with a resolution of

200m. This is in line with the World Bank Guidelines that suggests airshed

models include all point sources within a radius of 10-15km. For the region

under focus in this assessment, there are considered to be no relevant emission

sources of air pollutants other than the SWCC, SEC and IWPP plant. Initial

dispersion modelling results also confirm that maximum ground level pollutant

concentrations are located within this model area.

8.48 The UK’s principal Gaussian Plume air quality dispersion model, also

applied in Europe and USA, the Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling System

(ADMS) version 3.3 (2005) has been used to predict ambient air quality

concentrations in this assessment. ADMS is an advanced dispersion model for

calculating concentrations of pollutants emitted either continuously from point,

line, volume and area sources; or discretely from point sources, and is approved

by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as an

acceptable alternative to US dispersion models in regulatory applications and

considered suitable for this type of assessment by the UK Environment Agency.

8.49 The model includes algorithms which are also able to take into account

the following:

• effects of main site building;

• complex terrain; wet deposition,

• gravitational settling and dry deposition;

• short term fluctuations in concentration;

• chemical reactions;

• radioactive decay and gamma-dose;

• plume rise as a function of distance;

• jets and directional releases;

• averaging time ranging from very short to annual;

• condensed plume visibility; and

• meteorological pre-processing.

8.50 The model includes algorithms which are also able to take account of

the following: effects of main site building; complex terrain; wet deposition,

gravitational settling and dry deposition; short term fluctuations in concentration;

chemical reactions; radioactive decay and gamma-dose; plume rise as a



function of distance; jets and directional releases; averaging time ranging from

very short to annual; condensed plume visibility; and meteorological pre-

processing.

8.51 The Gaussian Plume model differs from the Lagrangian approach

undertaken by Müller-BBM as it considers dispersion of the whole plume, rather

than particle aerosol transport. Additional details of the ADMS model5, including

a range of validation papers6 are available the internet.

8.52 A conservative assumption has been made that all emissions of PM

from SWCC, SEC and IWPP plant are considered to be Inhalable Particles

(PM10). Also, as there is limited existing monitoring data available with which

chemical or empirical conversion of NOx concentrations to NO2 concentrations

can be applied, a worse-case assumption has been made that 100% of all NOx

emissions (i.e. the sum of NO and NO2) from SWCC, SEC and IWPP plant are

emitted as NO2. Consideration of dispersion modelling results of NOx

concentrations against World Bank and PME ambient air quality standards for

NO2 will also therefore be worse-case.

8.53 Due to the nature of the local environment in the model area, only slight

slopes are apparent. The influence of topographic features on dispersion of

pollutants has therefore not been considered.

8.54 Surface roughness lengths have been selected equivalent to strands,

dunes and areas of sand and water; typically representative of the model area

under consideration. A Priestly-Taylor parameter of 0.1 has also been selected

as representative of a desert (dry) environment.

8.55 Isopleth mapping of predicted pollutant concentrations has been

undertaken to identify the geographical location of specific ranges of pollutant

concentrations. The results of the isopleth mapping have also been used to

identify likely exposures to concentrations at relevant local receptor locations.

8.56 Pollutant concentrations have been modelled over annual, 24 hour and

1 hour periods for comparison with relevant World Bank and PME ambient air

quality standards.

8.57 With respect to a comparison of dispersion modelling results against the

1 hour PME ambient air quality standards, i.e. no more than two exceedences

5 http://www.cerc.co.uk/software/pubs/ADMS3%20techspec.htm 6 http://www.cerc.co.uk/software/pubs/ADMS%20Validaton%20Papers.pdf



during a 30 day period of 730 µg/m3 and 680 µg/m3 respectively for SO2 and

NO2, this cannot be done with reasonable effort by means of the dispersion

model within the timeframe available.

8.58 Dispersion model results were therefore compared to an equivalent

standard relative to the same permitted percentage frequency of exceedences

over an annual period. This is equivalent to 24 exceedences over the year.

Comparison of model results against this equivalent standard should be made

with caution; a fair comparison would be to divide the number of exceedences

modelled by 12 (months) and assume uniform exceedences throughout the

year. In practice however, this may not occur although it is a reasonable

comparison.

8.59 The results of the modelling are discussed and evaluated with respect to

these standards.

Modelling Scenarios

8.60 For the assessment of the impact of the Shuaibah III IWPP plant on

ambient air quality, the following main modelling scenarios have been

considered:

• Current Baseline - (SWCC Phases 1 and 2; SEC Phase 1);

• Future Baseline - (SWCC Phases 1 and 2; SEC Phases 1 and 2);

• With Standard IWPP – (Future Baseline + IWPP[0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel

Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]); and

• With Mitigated IWPP – (Future Baseline + IWPP[95% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel

Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]).

8.61 In addition to the above main modelling scenarios, emissions from all

local power plant have also been modelled individually where appropriate, in

order to determine their cumulative impact on ambient air quality.

Sensitive Receptors

8.62 PME and World Bank standards for the pollutants of concern are set for

the protection of human health, vegetation and the environment. Where

appropriate, consideration of exposure of local sensitive receptors, such as

worker housing, coastal villas and villages within Shuaibah and neighbouring

areas, to potential exceedences of ambient air quality standards has been

made.



8.63 Local receptors which may be considered sensitive to changes in local

air quality include worker housing and local amenities (including a school) which

are located approximately 1-2 km north-east of Shuaibah III IWPP.

Approximately 2-3 km to the south-east of Shuaibah III IWPP lie a small number

of coastal villas; these properties are secondary housing for residents in Jeddah

and are predominately used as holiday homes. As such, they are classified as

temporary accommodation and are not considered to be representative of

locations which are representative of typical exposure. There are no villages

within the air quality model area.

Impact Assessment

Current Baseline

8.64 Table 8.4 overleaf provides modelled maximum ground level pollutant

concentrations for existing plant which comprises the current baseline, i.e.

SWCC Phases 1 and 2, and SEC Phase 1.

8.65 This table confirms that, based on worse-case emissions data, predicted

maximum ground level concentrations for the current baseline exceed World

Bank and PME ambient air quality standards for SO2. It also confirms that,

based on the same worse-case emissions data predicted maximum ground

level concentrations are not anticipated to exceed World Bank and PME

ambient air quality standards for NO2 or PM10.

8.66 Figures 8.1 and 8.2 provide annual mean SO2 concentration isopleths

for SWCC Phases 1 and 2, and SEC Phase 1 respectively; while Figure 8.3

provides annual mean SO2 concentration isopleths for the cumulative impact of

these two sites.

8.67 Figure 8.3 confirms that, based on worse-case emissions data, the

IWPP site lies outside of the existing ‘Moderate’ and ‘Poor’ World Bank

Degraded Airsheds for annual mean SO2 concentrations.



Table 8.4: Current Baseline - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Where Current Baseline = (SWCC Phases 1 and 2, SEC Phase 1) i.e. the existing emissions during 2005 Maximum Ground Level Concentration (ug/m3; to nearest whole number)

PME Standards World Bank Standards Maximum SO2 Concentrations Annual Mean 99.73%ile of 24

Hour Means # Days Exceeding 365

99.72%ile of 1 Hour Means

# Hours Exceeding 730 Annual Mean 24 Hour Mean

Scenario/Standard Limit 80 365 1 730 24 (Equivalent) 80 150

SWCC Phases 1 and 2 303 1,484 148 2,989 1,443 303 1,646

SEC Phase 1 232 1,047 106 2,516 1,203 232 1,155 Current Baseline 307 1,484 149 2,989 1,456 307 1,646

PME Standards World Bank Standards Maximum NOx Concentrations Annual Mean 99.72%ile of 1

Hour Means # Hours Exceeding 730 Annual Mean 24 Hour Mean

Scenario/Standard Limit 100 660 24 (Equivalent) 100 150

SWCC Phases 1 and 2 20 195 0 20 107

SEC Phase 1 17 180 0 17 83 Current Baseline 20

No 24 Hour Standard Applicable

195 0 20 107

PME Standards World Bank Standards - (PM) (TSP) Maximum PM10 Concentrations Annual Mean 99.73%ile of 24

Hour Means # Days Exceeding 340 Annual Mean 24 Hour Mean

Scenario/Standard Limit 80 340 1 50 (80) 150 (230)

SWCC Phases 1 and 2 2 12 0 2 14

SEC Phase 1 3 14 0 No 1 Hour Standard Applicable

3 16 Current Baseline 3 15 0 3 17



Maximum Ground Level Concentration as a Percentage of the Standard (%; to 1 decimal place)






SWCC Phases 1 and 2 379% 406% 14,771% 409% 6,014% 379% 1,097%

SEC Phase 1 290% 287% 10,620% 345% 5,013% 290% 770% Current Baseline 384% 406% 14,890% 409% 6,065% 384% 1,097%




SWCC Phases 1 and 2 20% 29% 0% 20% 71%

SEC Phase 1 17% 27% 0% 17% 55% Current Baseline 20%


29% 0% 20% 71%

PME Standards World Bank Standards - (PM10) (TSP) Maximum PM10 Concentrations Annual Mean 99.73%ile of 24

Hour Means # Days Exceeding 340 Annual Mean Maximum

24 Hour Mean Scenario/Standard Limit 80 340 1 50 (80) 150 (230)

SWCC Phases 1 and 2 3% 4% 0% 5% 9%

SEC Phase 1 4% 4% 0% 6% 10% Current Baseline 4% 4% 0%


7% 11%



Figure 8.1: SWCC (Phases 1 and 2)



Figure 8.2: SEC (Phase 1)



Figure 8.3: Current Baseline – (SWCC Phases 1 and 2; SEC Phase 1)



Future Baseline


concentrations for existing and future plant which will comprise the future

baseline, i.e. SWCC Phases 1 and 2, and SEC Phases 1 and 2.

8.69 Table 8.5 confirms that, based on worse-case emissions data, predicted

maximum ground level concentrations for the future baseline exceed World

Bank and PME ambient air quality standards for SO2. It also confirms that,

based on the same worse-case emissions data, predicted maximum ground

level concentrations are not anticipated to exceed World Bank and PME

ambient air quality standards for PM10.

8.70 Worse-case maximum ground level NOx concentrations are anticipated

to meet all PME ambient air quality standards for NO2, and all but the maximum

24 hour mean World Bank standards. However, this is based on the

assumption that 100% of all NOx emissions are NO2; which is a worst-case

assumption

8.71 World Bank standards for ambient air quality also only apply in the

absence of local (national) standards. As there are national PME standards for

short-term NO2 concentrations, achievement of these have a higher priority than

potential exceedence of World Bank standards.

8.72 Figures 8.4 and 8.5 provide annual mean SO2 concentration isopleths

for SEC Phase 2, and SEC Phases 1 and 2 respectively. Figure 8.6 provides

annual mean SO2 concentration isopleths for the cumulative impact of these two

phases at SEC and SWCC Phases 1 and 2.

8.73 Figure 8.6 confirms that, based on worse-case emissions data, the

IWPP site will to lie outside of the future ‘Moderate’ and ‘Poor’ World Bank

Degraded Airsheds for annual mean SO2 concentrations.



Table 8.5: Future Baseline - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Where Future Baseline = (SWCC Phases 1 and 2, SEC Phases 1 and 2) Maximum Ground Level Concentration (ug/m3; to nearest whole number)






SEC Phase 2 240 991 118 2,602 1,202 240 1,114 SEC Phases 1 and 2 470 2,039 201 5,104 1,526 470 2,253

Future Baseline 510 2,172 209 5,281 1,657 510 2,409




SEC Phase 2 17 186 0 17 80 SEC Phases 1 and 2 34 365 0 34 161

Future Baseline 36


376 0 36 171




SEC Phase 2 3 13 0 3 15 SEC Phases 1 and 2 6 28 0 6 30

Future Baseline 7 29 0


7 32









SEC Phase 2 300% 272% 11,841% 356% 5,007% 300% 743% SEC Phases 1 and 2 588% 558% 20,142% 699% 6,358% 588% 1,502%

Future Baseline 638% 595% 20,870% 723% 6,903% 638% 1,606%




SEC Phase 2 17% 28% 0% 17% 53% SEC Phases 1 and 2 34% 55% 0% 34% 107%

Future Baseline 36%


57% 0% 36% 114%




SEC Phase 2 4% 4% 0% 6% 10% SEC Phases 1 and 2 8% 8% 0% 13% 20%

Future Baseline 8% 8% 0%


13% 21%



Figure 8.4: SEC (Phase 2)



Figure 8.5: SEC (Phases 1 and 2)



Figure 8.6: Future Baseline - SWCC Phases 1 and 2; SEC Phases 1 and 2)



World Bank Degraded Airsheds


concentrations for current and future baselines and compares them to World

Bank Degraded Airshed criteria.

8.75 Table 8.6 confirms Figures 8.3 and 8.6 that, based on worse-case

emissions data, predicted maximum ground level concentrations for the current

and future baselines exceed World Bank Degraded Airshed criteria for SO2. It

also confirms that, based on the same worse-case emissions data, predicted

maximum ground level concentrations are not anticipated to exceed World Bank

Degraded Airshed criteria for NO2 or PM10.

8.76 Figures 8.7 and 8.8 provide 24 hour mean SO2 concentration isopleths

for the current and future baselines. Figure 8.7 shows the World Bank

‘Moderate’ degraded airshed and confirms that, based on worse-case emissions

data, the IWPP site lies outside of the airshed for the current baseline, but

inside the airshed for the future baseline. However, as this isopleth is based on

worse-case emissions data, it is considered unlikely that when based on

emissions data for normal operating conditions for the SWCC and SEC plant,

the isopleth for 24 hour mean SO2 concentrations will encompass the IWPP

site.

8.77 Figure 8.8 show the World Bank ‘Poor’ degraded airshed and confirms

that the IWPP site lies outside the airshed in both current and future baselines.



Table 8.6: World Bank Degraded Airsheds - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Where Current Baseline = (SWCC Phases 1 and 2, SEC Phase 1); and Future Baseline = (SWCC Phases 1 and 2, SEC Phases 1 and 2) Maximum Ground Level Concentration (ug/m3; to nearest whole number)

World Bank Degraded Airshed (Moderate) World Bank Degraded Airshed (Poor) Maximum SO2 Concentrations Annual Mean 98%ile of 24 Hour Means Annual Mean 95%ile of 24 Hour Means Scenario/Standard Limit 50 150 100 150 Current Baseline 307 847 307 689 Future Baseline 510 1,448 510 1,210

World Bank Degraded Airshed (Moderate) World Bank Degraded Airshed (Poor) Maximum NOx Concentrations Annual Mean 98%ile of 24 Hour Means Annual Mean 95%ile of 24 Hour Means Scenario/Standard Limit 100 150 200 150 Current Baseline 20 55 20 45 Future Baseline 36 103 36 86

World Bank Degraded Airshed (Moderate) World Bank Degraded Airshed (Poor) Maximum PM10 Concentrations Annual Mean PM10 (TSP) 98%ile of 24 Hour Means

PM10 (TSP) Annual Mean PM10 (TSP) 95%ile of 24 Hour Means PM10 (TSP)

Scenario/Standard Limit 50 (80) 150 (230) 100 (160) 150 (230) Current Baseline 3 10 3 8 Future Baseline 7 20 7 16




World Bank Degraded Airshed (Moderate) World Bank Degraded Airshed (Poor) Maximum SO2 Concentrations Annual Mean 98%ile of 24 Hour Means Annual Mean 95%ile of 24 Hour Means Scenario/Standard Limit 50 150 100 150 Current Baseline 614% 565% 307% 459% Future Baseline 1,020% 965% 510% 807%

World Bank Degraded Airshed (Moderate) World Bank Degraded Airshed (Poor) Maximum NOx Concentrations Annual Mean 98%ile of 24 Hour Means Annual Mean 95%ile of 24 Hour Means Scenario/Standard Limit 100 150 200 150 Current Baseline 20% 37% 10% 30% Future Baseline 36% 69% 18% 58%

World Bank Degraded Airshed (Moderate) World Bank Degraded Airshed (Poor) Maximum PM Concentrations Annual Mean PM10 (TSP) 98%ile of 24 Hour Means

PM10 (TSP) Annual Mean PM10 (TSP) 95%ile of 24 Hour Means PM10 (TSP)

Scenario/Standard Limit 50 (80) 150 (230) 100 (160) 150 (230) Current Baseline 7% 6% 3% 6% Future Baseline 13% 13% 7% 11%



Figure 8.7: World Bank Degraded Airshed – SO2 (Moderate)



Figure 8.8: World Bank Degraded Airshed – SO2 (Poor)



Standard IWPP Impact Assessment

8.78 The ‘Standard IWPP’ scenario includes 0% FGDB (i.e. no abatement of

SO2 emissions) and assumes a maximum S-fuel content of 2.0% and a sea-

water temperature of 35oC. Low NOx burners and electrostatic precipitators are

included within this scenario.


concentrations for the cumulative impact of worse-case Standard IWPP

emissions and those modelled for the future baseline.


maximum ground level concentrations for worse-case Standard IWPP in

addition to the future baseline will continue to exceed World Bank and PME

ambient air quality standards for SO2. It also confirms that increases in

maximum ground level concentrations as a result of worse-case Standard IWPP

are small (up to approximately 1%).

8.81 Table 8.7 confirms that, based on the same worse-case emissions data,

predicted maximum ground level concentrations remain below World Bank and

PME ambient air quality standards for PM10.



24 hour mean World Bank standards. However, as for the future baseline, this

is based on the worst-case assumption that 100% of all NOx emissions are NO2.

8.83 World Bank standards for ambient air quality again only apply in the

absence of local (national) standards; as there are national PME standards for

short-term NO2 concentrations, achievement of these have a higher priority than

potential exceedence of World Bank standards.

8.84 Figures 8.9 provide annual mean SO2 concentration isopleths for the

worse-case Standard IWPP plus future baseline.



Table 8.7: IWPP Impact Assessment - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Where Future Baseline = (SWCC Phases 1 and 2, SEC Phases 1 and 2); and With Standard IWPP = Future Baseline + IWPP [0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature] Maximum Ground Level Concentration (ug/m3; to nearest whole number)






Future Baseline 510 2,172 209 5,281 1,657 510 2,409 With Standard IWPP 517 2,197 210 5,319 1,676 517 2,437




Future Baseline 36 376 0 36 171 With Standard IWPP 37

No 24 Hour Standard Applicable 309 0 37 174

PME Standards World Bank Standards - (PM10) (TSP)

Maximum PM10 Concentrations Annual Mean 99.73%ile of 24



Future Baseline 7 29 0 7 32 With Standard IWPP 7 29 0

No 1 Hour Standard Applicable 7 32









Future Baseline 638% 595% 20,870% 723% 6,903% 638% 1,606% With Standard IWPP 647% 602% 21,000% 729% 6,985% 647% 1,625%




Future Baseline 36% 57% 0% 36% 114% With Standard IWPP 37%

No 24 Hour Standard Applicable 47% 0% 37% 116%





Future Baseline 8% 8% 0% 13% 21% With Standard IWPP 8% 9% 0%

No 1 Hour Standard Applicable 13% 21%



Figure 8.9: Standard IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [0% FGDB, 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature])



Impact Mitigation

IWPP Impact Mitigation

8.85 Table 8.8 overleaf provides the relative reduction in ambient maximum

ground level pollutant concentrations that will be achieved by implementing 95%

FGDB abatement of SO2 emissions from IWPP plant.

8.86 While Table 8.8 confirms that, based on worse-case emissions data,

the implementation of 95% FGDB will significantly reduce predicted maximum

ground level SO2 concentrations from IWPP; it confirms that increases in

maximum ground level NOx and PM10 concentrations are likely to occur as a

result.

8.87 This is due to differences in respective flue gas flow rates and flue gas

temperatures, and consequently effective source height, which will influence

local dispersion effects. As mass flow rates and concentrations of NOx and

PM10 are unlikely to reduce as a result of the implementation of the 95% FGDB

abatement, these changes to dispersion parameters will mean reduced

dispersion and hence higher concentrations of these in the ambient air.

8.88 Table 8.8 confirms that, despite these changes to dispersion

parameters, maximum ground level concentrations of NOx and PM10, as a result

of the implementation of the 95% FGDB abatement, remain low and below

World Bank and PME standards.

8.89 Figures 8.10 and 8.11 provide annual mean SO2 concentration

isopleths for Standard and Mitigated IWPP respectively. The influence of the

95% FGDB abatement is clearly demonstrated by the reduced airshed.



Table 8.8: IWPP Impact Mitigation - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Where Standard IWPP = [0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]; and Mitigated IWPP = [95% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]; and Maximum Ground Level Concentration (ug/m3; to nearest whole number)






Standard IWPP 50 243 0 548 0 50 271 Mitigated IWPP 9 61 0 128 0 9 69




Standard IWPP 6 62 0 6 31 Mitigated IWPP 16






Standard IWPP 1 4 0 1 4 Mitigated IWPP 2 14 0










Standard IWPP 62% 67% 0% 75% 0% 62% 181% Mitigated IWPP 11% 17% 0% 18% 0% 11% 46%




Standard IWPP 6% 9% 0% 6% 21% Mitigated IWPP 16%






Standard IWPP 1% 1% 0% 1% 3% Mitigated IWPP 2% 4% 0%




Figure 8.10: Standard IWPP [0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]



Figure 8.11: Mitigated IWPP [0% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]



Residual Effects

Mitigated IWPP Impact Assessment


concentrations for the cumulative impact of worse-case Mitigated IWPP

emissions and the future baseline.


maximum ground level concentrations for worse-case Mitigated IWPP in

addition to the future baseline will continue to exceed World Bank and PME

ambient air quality standards for SO2. It also confirms that increases in

maximum ground level concentrations as a result of worse-case Mitigated IWPP

remain small (up to approximately 0.1%).

8.92 Table 8.9 confirms that, based on the same worse-case emissions data,

predicted maximum ground level concentrations remain below World Bank and

PME ambient air quality standards for PM10. In the case of the predicted

contribution to maximum ground level concentrations of PM from the Mitigated

IWPP, there is no discernable increase.



24 hour mean World Bank standards. However, as for the future baseline, this

is based on the worst-case assumption that 100% of all NOx emissions are NO2.

8.94 World Bank standards for ambient air quality only apply in the absence

of local (national) standards; as there are national PME standards for short-term

NO2 concentrations, achievement of these have a higher priority than potential

exceedence of World Bank Standards.

8.95 Figures 8.12, 8.13 and 8.14 provide annual mean SO2, NOx and PM

concentration isopleths respectively for worse-case Mitigated IWPP impacts on

the future baseline and confirm there to be no significant increase in exposure

of sensitive receptors to potential exceedences of ambient air quality standards.

8.96 Figures 8.15, 8.16 and 8.17 compare short-term mean SO2, NOx and

PM concentration isopleths respectively against World Bank standards, for

worse-case Mitigated IWPP impacts on the future baseline. In the case of

Figure 8.17, no isopleth contour is shown as there are no exceedences of the

objective in any scenario. These figures also confirm there to be no significant



increase in exposure of sensitive receptors to potential exceedences of ambient

air quality standards.

8.97 Figures 8.18 and 8.19 compare short-term mean SO2 concentration

isopleths against PME equivalent 1 hour mean and 24 hour mean standards

respectively, for worse-case Mitigated IWPP impacts on the future baseline.

These figures again confirm there to be no significant increase in exposure of

sensitive receptors to potential exceedences of ambient air quality standards.



Table 8.9: Residual IWPP Impact - Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Where Future Baseline = (SWCC Phases 1 and 2, SEC Phases 1 and 2); and With Mitigated IWPP = Future Baseline + IWPP [95% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature] Maximum Ground Level Concentration (ug/m3; to nearest whole number)






Future Baseline 510 2,172 209 5,281 1,657 510 2,409 With Mitigated IWPP 511 2,174 209 5,283 1,658 511 2,411




Future Baseline 36 376 0 36 171 With Mitigated IWPP 37






Future Baseline 7 29 0 7 32 With Mitigated IWPP 7 29 0










Future Baseline 638% 595% 20,870% 723% 6,903% 638% 1,606% With Mitigated IWPP 638% 595% 20,870% 724% 6,908% 638% 1,607%




Future Baseline 36% 57% 0% 36% 114% With Mitigated IWPP 37%






Future Baseline 8% 8% 0% 13% 21% With Mitigated IWPP 8% 9% 0%




Figure 8.12: Mitigated IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [95% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]) – SO2



Figure 8.13: Mitigated IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [95% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]) – NOx



Figure 8.14: Mitigated IWPP (Future Baseline + IWPP [95% FGDB; 2.0% S-fuel Content; 35oC Sea-water Temperature]) – PM



Figure 8.15: Maximum 24 Hour Mean SO2 Concentrations



Figure 8.16: Maximum 24 Hour Mean NOx Concentrations



Figure 8.17: Maximum 24 Hour Mean PM10 Concentrations



Figure 8.18: Equivalent 1 Hour Mean SO2 Concentrations: Exceeding 740 µg/m3 more than twice



Figure 8.19: 24 Hour Mean SO2 Concentrations: Exceeding 365 µg/m3 more than once



Air Quality Monitoring Results

Emissions From Plant

8.98 Consultations undertaken with WEC to date have confirmed that there is

no routine stack monitoring undertaken at the existing SWCC and SEC plant or

measurement of ambient air quality to allow for preliminary evaluations of

ambient air quality in the vicinity of these plant. However, emissions monitoring

data from an isolated monitoring event for the SWCC plant has been obtained

for the period between 3 May and 11 May 2005, and this is presented in Table 8.10.

8.99 It is understood that other sources of data may be available from

manufacturing company’s trialling new equipment at the plants although this has

not been provided to date.

Table 8.10: Stack Emissions Heavy Fuel Oil for the SWCC Plant

Date and Time of Monitoring Determinand 3rd May 2005

12:10 4th May 2005 10:38

8th May 2005 10:15

11th May 2005 10:31

Oxygen (%) 6.77 6.04 6.29 6.86 CO (ppm) 0 0 0 0 CO2 (%) 10.71 11.25 11.07 10.64 NO (ppm) 173 200 182 172 NO2 (ppm) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flue Temperature (°C) 148 149.1 149.8 150.5

NOx (ppm) 173 200 182 172 SO2 (ppm) 1,471 1,536 1,518 1,462 H2 (ppm) 2 4 1 2 Cx Hy (ppm) 30 0 0 0 Ambient Temperature (°C) 34.7 31.7 33.3 32.3

Device Temperature (°C) 32.5 29.8 30.9 29.3

8.100 Review of the above stack emissions monitoring data indicates that the

Flue Temperatures are lower than those used for SWCC plant in this

assessment. Lower Flue Gas Temperatures are likely to reduce the size of

Degraded Airsheds and slightly increase ground level concentrations within

them, as plume buoyancy will be less.

8.101 Conversion of monitored SO2 and NOx stack concentrations7 (assuming

STP) to equivalent mass concentrations, gives values of approximately 4,394

7 Assuming tabled values have accounted for O2 and H2O.



mg/Nm3 and 410 mg/Nm3 respectively. While stack concentrations for NOx can

be considered to be similar to those used in this assessment (400 mg/Nm3), the

emissions monitoring data, as presented in Table 8.10, may suggest that

concentrations of SO2 used in this assessment (6,164 mg/Nm3) have been

overestimated by approximately 30%.

8.102 If recent stack emissions monitoring data are considered to be

representative of ‘normal operating conditions’ at SWCC, it can be confidently

assumed that the actual ambient air quality concentrations in both current and

future baselines are likely to be less than those predicted in this assessment.

8.103 In addition, if emissions data used in this assessment for SEC plant

have also been overestimated by a similar amount, it is reasonable to assume

that the true extents of both current and future Degraded Airsheds are likely to

be less than that predicted in this assessment. Consequently, it is also possible

that such potential differences between the worse-case emissions data for

SWCC and SEC plant used in this assessment and the potential reduction in

SO2 stack concentrations which may occur under ‘normal operating conditions’,

will show that IWPP does not lie within a ‘Moderate’ Degraded Airshed.

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring

8.104 A 3 month programme of ambient air quality monitoring has been

undertaken between 5th August 2005 and 5th November 2005 to demonstrate

current air quality conditions along a 15km coastal zone in relation to the Müller-

BBM ambient air quality predictions and those presented in this assessment.

8.105 Ambient air quality monitoring programmes, undertaken as input to

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are often no more than 3 months

duration. In the absence of any other ambient air quality monitoring undertaken

in the vicinity of SWCC, SEC and Shuaibah III IWPP sites and based on our

experience, a monitoring programme of this length adds significant value to the

overall assessment.

8.106 The programme of ambient air quality monitoring was undertaken in

accordance with the monitoring protocol as set out in Appendix 8.3. Monitoring

was undertaken at 10 locations in the vicinity Shuaibah III IWPP, SWCC and

SEC plant. These locations are listed from North to South in Table 8.11 and

provided in Figure 8.20. The existing Shuaibah plant are located central within

these monitoring locations.



Table 8.11: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Locations

Site Number Site Description Site Location

1 5km North of Shuaibah III Site N20° 43.268 E 39° 29.472

2 2km North of Shuaibah III Site N 20 41.671 E 39 30.418

3 Easterly Perimeter Road at Shuaibah III Site

N20° 41.113 E39° 31.576

4 Worker Housing East of Shuaibah III Site

N20° 41.241 E39° 31.787

5 3km East of Shuaibah III Site N20° 41.643 E39 33.062

6 Villas (Worker Housing) South of Shuaibah III Site

N20° 39.906 E39° 31.895

7 Coastal Villas North of SEC Power Plant

N20° 39.553 E39° 32.013

8 2km East of SEC Power Plant N20° 38.299 E39° 34.594

9 2km South of SEC Power Plant N20° 36.562 E39° 34.006

10 5km South of SEC Power Plant N20° 35.044 E39° 34.992

8.107 Locations 4 and 6 may be considered representative of relevant

exposure of members of the public.



Figure 8.20: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Locations



Laboratory Analysis

8.108 Sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide monitoring samples were analysed

in accordance with Harwell Scientifics’ standard operating procedures

HS/GWI/1011 issue 7 and HS/GWI/1015 issue 10 respectively. Diffusion tubes

were received in good condition unless otherwise stated.

8.109 Nitrogen dioxide diffusion tubes were prepared by spiking

acetone:triethanolamine (50:50) onto grids prior to the tubes being assembled.

The absorbent was then extracted from the exposed tubes using de-ionised

water and nitrite content analysed using a colourimetric technique on the Bran &

Luebbe Segmented Flow Auto Analyser III. The instrument was calibrated at

the beginning of each run, and a ‘Quality Control’ sample of known

concentration analysed several times during any one run in adherence to UKAS

guidelines. This particular method has a limit of detection of 0.03 µg nitrite, with

any samples greater than 2.0 µg requiring dilution.

8.110 The analysis of diffusion tube samples to determine the amount of

nitrogen dioxide present on the tube is within the scope of the UKAS schedule

of accredited tests. The Workplace Analysis Scheme for Proficiency (WASP)

inter-comparison scheme for comparing spiked Nitrogen Dioxide diffusion tubes

currently ranks Harwell Scientifics as a category ‘Good’ laboratory.

8.111 Advice received by Harwell Scientifics has been that NO2 diffusion tubes

will typically over-read. However, as no suitable monitoring was able to be

undertaken from which a local (Saudi Arabia) bias factor could be calculated to

account for potential over-read of the diffusion tube data. Diffusion tube results

are considered to be over estimates of local pollution concentrations and should

be interpreted as worse-case values.

8.112 Sulphur dioxide diffusion tubes were prepared by spiking grids using a

potassium hydroxide and glycerol solution prior to the tubes being assembled.

The sulphur content of the tubes were analysed as a component of sulphate

using ion chromatography. The absorbent was then extracted from the exposed

tube using hydrogen peroxide solution, to ensure that all sulphur components

present are oxidised to sulphate prior to analysis. The instrument was

calibrated at the beginning of each run, and a QC sample of known

concentration analysed several times during any one run in adherence to UKAS

guidelines. This particular method has a limit of detection of 0.02 µg, with any

samples greater than 1.8 µg requiring dilution.



8.113 The analysis of sulphur dioxide in the sample is within the scope of the

UKAS schedule of accredited tests.

Monitoring Analysis

8.114 In the absence of any local meteorological data covering the ambient air

quality monitoring period, a breakdown of a typical windrose and meteorological

data statistics for the equivalent duration of the monitoring period, from the

representative 1980 dataset used in this assessment, is presented overleaf in

Figure 8.21 and Table 8.12.

Figure 8.21: Monitoring Period Windrose

Table 8.12: Monitoring Period Met Data Statistics

Cumulative Wind Speed Categories (m/s) Wind Direction -1.54 -3.09 -5.14 -8.23 -10.8 10.8 Total ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- N 69 198 204 15 0 1 487 NNE 20 23 14 0 1 0 58 NE 4 6 1 0 0 0 11 ENE 6 7 3 0 0 0 16 E 7 6 3 0 0 0 16 ESE 3 5 2 0 0 0 10 SE 2 2 1 0 0 0 5 SSE 2 0 4 4 0 1 11 S 0 1 12 8 6 0 27 SSW 0 1 5 1 2 0 9



SW 1 5 13 6 1 0 26



WSW 2 6 36 5 0 0 49 W 14 34 172 9 0 0 229 WNW 4 28 139 54 5 0 230 NW 11 34 119 70 8 1 243 NNW 35 82 197 55 6 0 375 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Total 180 438 925 227 29 3 1802 Calms1 430 Missing 0 Total 2232 1 Defined as a wind speed of less than 1 m/s. Relative (Period) Wind Speed Categories (m/s)

Wind Direction -1.54 -3.09 -5.14 -8.23 -10.8 10.8 Total ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- N 3.09% 8.87% 9.14% 0.67% 0.00% 0.05% 21.82% NNE 0.90% 1.03% 0.63% 0.00% 0.05% 0.00% 2.60% NE 0.18% 0.27% 0.05% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.49% ENE 0.27% 0.31% 0.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.72% E 0.31% 0.27% 0.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.72% ESE 0.13% 0.22% 0.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.45% SE 0.09% 0.09% 0.05% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.22% SSE 0.09% 0.00% 0.18% 0.18% 0.00% 0.05% 0.49% S 0.00% 0.05% 0.54% 0.36% 0.27% 0.00% 1.21% SSW 0.00% 0.05% 0.22% 0.05% 0.09% 0.00% 0.40% SW 0.05% 0.22% 0.58% 0.27% 0.05% 0.00% 1.17% WSW 0.09% 0.27% 1.61% 0.22% 0.00% 0.00% 2.20% W 0.63% 1.52% 7.71% 0.40% 0.00% 0.00% 10.26% WNW 0.18% 1.25% 6.23% 2.42% 0.22% 0.00% 10.31% NW 0.49% 1.52% 5.33% 3.14% 0.36% 0.05% 10.89% NNW 1.57% 3.67% 8.83% 2.46% 0.27% 0.00% 16.80% ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Total 8.07% 19.62% 41.44% 10.17% 1.30% 0.13% 80.74% Calms1 19.27% Missing 0.00% Total 100.00% 1 Defined as a wind speed of less than 1 m/s. Relative (Annual) Wind Speed Categories (m/s)

Wind Direction -1.54 -3.09 -5.14 -8.23 -10.8 10.8 Total ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- N 0.79% 2.25% 2.32% 0.17% 0.00% 0.01% 5.54% NNE 0.23% 0.26% 0.16% 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.66% NE 0.05% 0.07% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.13% ENE 0.07% 0.08% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.18% E 0.08% 0.07% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.18% ESE 0.03% 0.06% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.11% SE 0.02% 0.02% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.06% SSE 0.02% 0.00% 0.05% 0.05% 0.00% 0.01% 0.13% S 0.00% 0.01% 0.14% 0.09% 0.07% 0.00% 0.31% SSW 0.00% 0.01% 0.06% 0.01% 0.02% 0.00% 0.10% SW 0.01% 0.06% 0.15% 0.07% 0.01% 0.00% 0.30% WSW 0.02% 0.07% 0.41% 0.06% 0.00% 0.00% 0.56% W 0.16% 0.39% 1.96% 0.10% 0.00% 0.00% 2.61% WNW 0.05% 0.32% 1.58% 0.61% 0.06% 0.00% 2.62% NW 0.13% 0.39% 1.35% 0.80% 0.09% 0.01% 2.77%



NNW 0.40% 0.93% 2.24% 0.63% 0.07% 0.00% 4.27% ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Total 2.05% 4.99% 10.53% 2.58% 0.33% 0.03% 20.51% Calms1 4.90% Missing 0.00% Total 25.41% 1 Defined as a wind speed of less than 1 m/s.

8.115 When compared with meteorological data statistics for an annual period

(Appendix 8.2) Table 8.12 indicates that over the ambient air quality monitoring

period, it is anticipated that wind speeds lie within +/- 2% of the annual

frequency and wind directions lie within +/- 3% of the annual frequency. It can

therefore be assumed that wind conditions over the 3 month monitoring

programme undertaken are representative of those wind conditions likely to be

experienced throughout the whole year.

8.116 Given an assumption that under normal operating conditions, emissions

from SWCC phases 1 and 2 and SEC phase 1 are likely to be fairly uniform,

monitoring data collected over this 3 month period can be assumed to be

representative of an annual mean dataset.

8.117 The monitoring data collected have been ratified to remove any results

which were considered to have been significantly influenced by factors external

to the monitoring exercise, such as fallen or damaged diffusion tubes. Ratified

monitoring data for SO2 and NO2 are presented in Tables 8.13 and 8.14 below.

Table 8.13: Sulphur Dioxide Monitoring Results

Site Number Period Mean Concentration (µm/m3) 1 32 2 73 3 55 4 47 5 73 6 40 7 52 8 134 9 145

10 59

8.118 Table 8.13 confirms that, over the 3 months monitoring period,

exceedence of the annual mean SO2 standard are likely to be experienced

south of the SEC site. Of those monitoring locations that could be considered

representative of relative exposure to the annual mean standard (locations 4

and 6) monitoring data suggests that exceedence of the annual mean SO2

standard is unlikely.



Table 8.14: Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Results

Site Number Period Mean Concentration (µm/m3) 1 22 2 38 3 17 4 18 5 21 6 23 7 19 8 28 9 24

10 25

8.119 Local monitoring data obtained over a 3 month ambient air quality

monitoring exercise suggests that, at the location of sensitive receptors (worker

housing) in the vicinity of Shuaibah III IWPP, concentrations of SO2 (40 – 47

µg/m3) and NO2 (18 – 23 µg/m3) are anticipated to currently meet World Bank

and PME standards of 80 and 100 µg/m3 respectively.

Conclusions

8.120 The proposed Mitigated IWPP plant as a single site emission will not

breach any World Bank or PME emission or ambient air quality standard.

8.121 No major power plant in Saudi Arabia has any SO2 abatement installed.

The proposed Mitigated IWPP plant will set the new benchmark for all future

power plants in the Kingdom.

8.122 The majority of power plants in the Kingdom utilise oil fuel with an

average

S-fuel content of approximately 3.8%. The proposed IWPP plant is committed

to an average S-fuel content of 1.8%, equivalent to a reduction of associated

SO2 emissions of approximately 53%. In addition to this 53% reduction in SO2

emissions, implementation of 95% FGDB abatement will further reduce these

emissions to approximately 2.4% of those which would typically be associated

with the majority of power plants in Saudi Arabia; this is equivalent to a total

reduction in SO2 emissions of approximately 97.6%.

8.123 The results of the modelling has shown that the implementation of 95%

FGDB abatement of Standard IWPP emissions will significantly reduce

predicted maximum ground level SO2 concentrations from IWPP.

8.124 The assessment of ambient air quality and stack emissions concludes

that currently, exceedences of World Bank and PME standards for SO2 are

anticipated in the vicinity of SWCC and SEC. However, these exceedences are



independent of IWPP. In the future, once SEC phase 2 becomes operational,

maximum ground level SO2 concentrations are anticipated to increase; such

increases are again independent of IWPP.

8.125 The results of modelling worse-case emissions data predict there are

not anticipated to be current or future exceedences of World Bank or PME

standards for NO2 or PM10 as a result of SWCC and SEC plant alone.

8.126 The results of modelling worse-case emissions data also suggests that

the proposed IWPP is not located within an existing degraded airshed; while a

combination of modelling and monitoring data suggest that it is unlikely that the

proposed IWPP will be located within a degraded airshed once SEC phase 2

comes online.

8.127 Although there are anticipated to be some limited effects on ambient air

quality in the local area, as the proposed IWPP plant is not anticipated to lie

within a degraded airshed, World Bank offset conditions are not considered to

apply to Shuaibah III IWPP. A high standard of pollution abatement technology,

including low NOx burners, electrostatic precipitators and flue gas

desulphurisation beds, will be applied to the IWPP scheme and stack emissions

will be in accordance with Best Available Techniques (BAT) suitable for this

location (as defined under the EU –BAT).

8.128 While as a result of implementing 95% FGDB to minimise SO2

emissions, this system is anticipated to increase maximum ground level NOx

and PM10 concentrations are as a result of the abatement. However despite

these increases, maximum ground level concentrations of NOx and PM10, as a

result of the implementation of the 95% FGDB abatement, remain low and are

below World Bank and PME standards. The benefits of the 95% FGDB

abatement is clearly demonstrated by a reduced SO2 airshed associated with

IWPP.

8.129 Modelling has shown that worse-case increases in maximum ground

level concentrations as a result of the Mitigated IWPP plant are anticipated to be

materially insignificant (up to approximately 0.1%); in the case of the predicted

contributions to maximum ground level concentrations of PM, there is no

discernable increase.

8.130 The introduction of the Mitigated IWPP plant is predicted to cause no

significant increase in exposure of sensitive receptors to potential exceedences

of any World Bank or PME ambient air quality standards. Worker housing to the



north-east of the IWPP site are not anticipated to be exposed to any increase in

exceedences of World Bank or PME standards.

8.131 Annual mean predictions of concentration of SO2, NOx and PM10 show

that as a result of plant design, such as stack height, exhaust gas emission

velocity, exhaust gas temperature, emissions rates and stack concentrations,

etc., emissions associated with the Mitigated IWPP plant are not anticipated to

contribute to any material change in concentrations at sensitive receptors

(worker housing and school) to the north-east of IWPP.

8.132 Local monitoring data obtained over a 3 month ambient air quality

monitoring exercise suggests that, at the location of sensitive receptors (worker

housing) in the vicinity of Shuaibah III IWPP, concentrations of SO2 (48 – 55

µg/m3) and NO2 (20 – 29 µg/m3) are anticipated to currently meet World Bank

and PME standards of 80 and 100 µg/m3 respectively.

8.133 Even with the addition of the predicted maximum ground level

concentrations as a result of the Mitigated IWPP plant (9 µg/m3 and 16 µg/m3

respectively for SO2 and NO2) ambient air quality concentrations at these

sensitive receptor locations are still anticipated to meet World Bank and PME

standards.

Recommendations

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring

8.134 It is recommended that local ambient air quality monitoring be continued

to be undertaken at sensitive receptor locations in the vicinity of Shuaibah III

IWPP. Automatic continuous air quality monitoring systems capable of

measuring ambient concentrations of SO2, NOx / NO2 and PM10 using

recognised reference methods, such as ultraviolet fluorescence,

chemiluminescence and tapered element oscillating microbalance, are

recommended to be established within or close to the school grounds

approximately 2-3 km north-east of Shuaibah III IWPP.

8.135 In addition to measuring ambient pollutant concentrations, it is also

recommended that a number of meteorological parameters, such as wind

speed, wind direction, temperature and cloud cover, are also recorded over 1

hour observation intervals at the air quality monitoring station.

8.136 Such ambient air quality monitoring would assist in the assessment of

the possible need for temporary changes in operating practices (including short-



term switching to burning low sulphur content fuel to minimise high short-term

exposures), especially during periods of adverse meteorological conditions.

The establishment of a local long-term (annual) record of meteorological

parameters will also greatly enhance any future ambient air quality modelling

exercises which may be undertaken.

Stack Monitoring

8.137 It is also recommended that a programme of regular stack emissions

monitoring be established to record any possible changes in emissions

parameters from those associated with normal operating conditions. Monitoring

data should be analysed and reviewed at regular intervals and compared with

the operating standards so that any necessary corrective actions can be taken.

Such monitoring data would also accurately inform any future ambient air quality

modelling and provide a basis for enhanced management practices.



9 WASTE MANAGEMENT

Introduction

9.1 This chapter outlines the waste assessment for the proposed

development of the Shuaibah III IWPP Plant. The potential impacts that may

arise form waste generated during the construction and operational phases are

identified with the overall aim of developing a strategy for legislative compliance

and good practice in the storage, transfer and disposal of waste arisings from

the development.

9.2 This chapter also outlines the opportunities for implementing waste

mitigation measures for the potential impacts arising during each phase of the

development. This is to ensure that such measures are consistent with Saudi

Arabian guidance on waste management and also with key international waste

management good practice guidance, including the approach adopted in the

UK.

Methodology

9.3 The principle aim of this assessment is to consider the key waste

management issues associated with the proposed power plant development

with particular reference to:

• Identifying opportunities to minimise waste streams from the outset of

the development thus reducing the amount of material that requires

landfiling;

• Identifying the requirements for a flexible waste mitigation strategy for

both the construction and operational phases of the development,

including appropriate storage, transfer and disposal of both hazardous

and non – hazardous waste streams during both phases.

9.4 The waste management assessment has involved a number of tasks

including;

• A site visit and desk top review to collate existing information relevant to

waste generation and disposal;

• A review of existing proposals and plans for the proposed Shuaibah III

plant and considerations given in relation to waste storage and transfer

requirements;



• A review of available and accessible waste guidance and policy

information.

Existing Conditions

9.5 Responsible management of waste materials has become a pressing

need for all developing and modern economies, including Saudi Arabia. Rapid

growth rates in the production of all types of waste have been experienced all

over the world in recent decades as a result of the growth in production and

consumption of consumer products of all descriptions. Economic development

leading to dramatic increases in the production of waste is a common problem

encountered in many countries including Saudi Arabia. As a result there are

strong economic and environmental reasons for tackling the growing quantity of

waste:

• Poor product design and manufacturing processes add unnecessarily to

industrial costs as well as creating extra household waste;

• Disposing of waste can potentially cause significant pollution. For

example, there is evidence widespread tipping of wastes at unlicensed

sites in Saudi Arabia concentrated around the industrialised areas;

• Well targeted government intervention to reduce the rate of growth in

waste volumes is consistent with key principles of Sustainable

Development.

9.6 Effective management of the waste materials produced by domestic

consumers and industrial producers is an issue of great importance to the

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Waste of varied types is produced in great quantities

by many varied activities, these are summarised in Table 9.1 below.

Table 9.1: Types of Waste Arisings

Waste Detail

Controlled waste that must be managed and disposed

of in line with waste management

regulations. It includes municipal,

commercial, and industrial wastes.



Table 9.1 (Continued): Types of Waste Arisings

Waste Detail

Municipal Includes all wastes under the control of

municipalities.

Household Includes regular waste from household

collections

Industrial Includes waste arisings form factories and

industrial plants.

Commercial Includes arisings from wholesalers, shops,

offices and catering businesses.

Agricultural Includes waste from farms and market

gardens.

Construction & Demolition Includes any waste arisings from the

construction, repair, maintenance and

demolition of buildings and structures.

Mines & Quarries Includes materials such as overburden, rock

and minerals.

9.7 Based upon the nature and chemical properties, wastes can be

classified into three major categories, namely;

• I Hazardous Wastes which constitute a potential hazard to public health

and the environment such as power station fly ash.

• II Non-hazardous solid wastes and dewatered sludges which are

biologically or chemically decomposable in the natural environment.

• III Non-water soluble wastes which are not biologically or chemically

active in the natural environment such as building aggregates.

9.8 Effective management of solid waste materials is an essential

component of environmental protection, as the potential for pollution of water,

air and land is very significant where waste is not properly controlled.



The Waste Hierarchy and Future for Waste Management

9.9 The preferred model for determining the optimised management of

waste relies upon the principle of the ‘Waste Hierarchy’. This points towards the

development of a waste strategy which places the options for minimisation,

reuse and recycling at the forefront of a management solution, with disposal

options dealing with these wastes which do not have further opportunity for

diversification. The general Waste Hierarchy consists of the following in

descending order of preference:

• Waste Elimination;

• Waste Minimisation;

• Reuse;

• Recycling;

• Recovery;

• Energy Recovery;

• Incineration without energy recovery; and

• Landfill Disposal.

9.10 The future is to move towards a ‘target based’ system, which allows for

continuous improvement to be made over a reasonable time period. The target

setting must take into account the potential for bringing new processes and

methods on-line, and the timescales involved in doing this. If considered well in

advance a system can be developed which will help to deliver major

improvements in the waste management system.

Current Policy, Regulations and Planning Issues

9.11 PME are given broad ranging responsibilities for the protection of the

environment, in particular land, sea, air and water. The General Environmental

Regulations makes specific reference to the control of solid waste materials and

in particular waste materials which are classified as hazardous in terms of their

impact on the environment. Article 14 of the Regulations identifies PME as the

responsible authority for regulation of waste materials. In Appendix 4: “Rules

and procedures for hazardous waste control”, further details are provided

regarding the classifications of waste and the obligations placed on producers,

transporters and waste disposal authorities to ensure environmental pollution is

avoided.

9.12 Waste management sites and facilities in the KSA are operated and

managed by private companies or the local municipality, with PME currently



providing an advisory role in their operation. When new sites are proposed and

constructed, PME plays an important role in advising the operators on the

environmental protection requirements for the facility.

9.13 The design of any new facilities that are to be developed should take

into account the environmental setting in which they are to be placed. Care

should be taken to reduce the overall environmental impacts, which can come

about through the poor siting of new waste facilities. The needs and concerns of

the local population should be considered within the decision process. Planning

of new facilities must also take into account the types of waste being produced

within a given area or region to provide a workable waste strategy.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION AND RESIDUAL EFFECTS

Construction Phase

9.14 Impact: Waste generated during the construction phase would be

expected to have a moderate negative impact prior to mitigation measures.

Raw material waste from the construction of buildings and plant infrastructure

may require off site disposal. Some of the waste streams are likely to be

generated during the excavations for building foundations and the construction

of the building frame, internal fittings, electrical installations and external works

and include the following waste streams;

• Class I Wastes including: solvents, thinners, cleaners, cutting

oils, paints, contaminated rags, packaging and containers,

adhesives. light bulbs and Batteries;

• Class II Wastes including: food and canteen waste, scrap metal

waste, waste paper, textiles, wood, cardboard packaging; and,

• Class III wastes including: glass, uncontaminated soil and

rubble, plastics and rubber.

9.15 Prior to mitigation this is likely to have a moderate impact on the

environment given the fact that there are limited waste disposal facilities within

the region, the nearest being reported as 40km from the site, although this has

not been verified. Alternative landfill facilities are in Jeddah 110 km to the north,

which is used by SWCC to dispose of their fly ash.

9.16 Mitigation: During the construction process an action plan for the

management of wastes would be dealt with through a Construction

Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) in accordance with World Bank



Guidelines. The approved contractor will be committed to minimising the

impacts on the environment that may arise as a result of construction works.

The construction contractor will also promote emphasis on the commitment to

continual improvement and the identification of appropriate opportunities to

reduce waste and where practicable, promote recycling and the potential re –

use of materials. It is important to effectively design waste out as much as

possible from the outset through;

• The initial project planning phase,

• The consideration of the types of materials used;

• The methods of transportation and how materials are handled,

stored and disposed of on – site, particularly any excavated material

from building foundations; and

• Retention of excavated materials on site (within the SWCC fence

line.)

9.17 In addition to emphasising the minimisation and reuse aspect during the

construction process, it is important that best practice measures are adopted by

the work force and the sub – contractors working on the development site. This

may include increased awareness among the construction workers of waste

minimisation and recycling initiatives and developing more sustainable working

practices. This may include looking at the development of suitable design

principles to minimise waste before it is generated, resulting in a more pro –

active, sustainable approach to the construction of the development.

9.18 For instance the CEMP for the construction process will promote the use

of appropriate waste management options in line with the key principles of the

waste hierarchy. The CEMP will emphasise the importance of waste and

resource minimisation from the outset to reduce the quantities of waste material

being disposed of to landfill.

9.19 Through the CMEP, a programme can therefore be developed which

allows the identification of the types and quantities of waste that can be

minimised of effectively segregated for recycling / re-use and the materials that

require disposal to landfill. As part of this process, clearly labelled waste skips

should be provided for the separation of specific waste materials such as metal,

wood, and cardboard. All skips will be located within a centralised storage on an

impermeable hadrstanding surface. Any waste oils and chemicals will be stored



separately in a bunded compound situated on an impermeable surface in order

to prevent a potential spillage.

9.20 Furthermore, to accord with the World Bank guidelines on the principles

of waste avoidance and utilisation waste minimisation will also need to be

encouraged among suppliers of raw materials. This may involve suppliers

committing to reduce surplus packaging associated with any construction raw

materials, particularly common materials such as plastics, cardboard and

wooden pallets.

9.21 Residual Effects: The inclusion of waste issues within the CEMP will

provide the necessary framework for the management of waste on site during

the construction process. This will assist in reducing the amount of waste

disposed of to landfill. It is anticipated that such an approach will result in a minor negative residual effect.

9.22 Impact: The potential impact from the off site disposal of waste either to

an appropriate landfill facility may result in increased traffic movements from the

Shuaibah site. If no minimisation issues are implemented at the site this is likely

to result in the increase of off site lorry movements (noise and dust generation)

and the amount of waste disposed of to landfill sites resulting in a minor / moderate negative impact.

9.23 Mitigation; It is important that through the CEMP that the primary

emphasis is placed upon waste minimisation and reuse on site in accordance

with World Bank guidelines. In addition, the CEMP will identify the appropriate

waste management facilities for off site disposal.

9.24 The contractor will need to ensure that the waste disposal company

selected to dispose of any residual waste streams off site are registered with

PME and will have a duty to ensure that waste is disposed of in a safe and

correct manner. All records of paperwork relating to the disposal of both

hazardous and non – hazardous waste streams need to be retained as part of

the CEMP and monitoring maybe required to ensure that the movement of

waste off site is undertaken with the appropriate waste management guidelines.

9.25 In addition, in order to ensure that such a system of reuse and recycling

is effective the CEMP will need to encourage a programme of on site auditing at

each stage of the construction process. This will assist in implementing

appropriate on site waste targets and programme of monitoring at the Shuaibah

III site to focus upon;



• Quantifying raw material wastage;

• Quantifying the generation of each waste stream;

• Any improvements in current working practices;

• Methods by which the waste streams are being handled and

stored; and

• Quantifying the material disposed of off site to landfill facilities.

9.26 Residual Effect: Through the CEMP a programme of realistic target

setting and subsequent monitoring arrangements at an early stage of the

construction process will assist in reducing the amount of waste disposed of to

landfill. It is anticipated that a sustainable approach to waste management

during the construction phase will result in a neutral residual effect overall.

Operational Phase

9.27 Impact: The generation of fly Ash as a result of the burning of crude oil,

and the subsequent containment and transportation associated with its disposal.

Fly ash is classified as a hazardous waste if it is disposed of to landfill without

any form of treatment or stabilisation process. A further potential impact

associated with generation of fly ash, concerns the release of fly ash material

into the environment. Due to its low density (0.25 g/cm3) and fine particulate

size, it has the potential to travel relatively large distances. Without mitigation

this represents an impact of potentially major negative significance.

9.28 Mitigation: The proposed fly ash collection system involves collection of

fly ash using Electrostatic Precipitators (ESPs). The overall removal efficiency of

ESPs ranges between 90% and 98% which satisfies PME requirements for

particulate emission from stacks. The precipitated fly ash is transported from the

ESP chambers to the storage silos through closed conduits using suction

pumps. In any ESP or cyclone separator, the fly ash is collected in hoppers in a

dry state after separation and stored temporarily in silos before transporting to

the designated disposal facility.

9.29 The fly ash will be transported to the disposal area located within the

plant limits on a daily basis. The fly ash stored in silos is loaded through an

outlet pipe into closed dump truck at the filling points (located below the silos)

for transportation to the disposal site. This will prevent the release of fly ash into

the environment during transportation to the disposal area.

9.30 Once at the disposal area, the fly ash will be pumped into the mixing

chamber where it will be mixed with cement for stabilisation at a ratio of 5:1 fly



ash: cement. The wet mixture will then be pumped into the landfill. This

procedure ensures a fully enclosed uploading and handling of the fly ash and

avoids dust. Figure 9.1 overleaf illustrates the process described above. This

disposal will be carried out according to the Official Journal of the European

Communities (Council Directive 1993/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the Landfill of

Waste). As an alternative, the standards of US Environmental Protection

Agency (US EPA from October 2001) would be applied.

Figure 9.1 Process diagram to show collection and disposal of fly ash from IWPP

Transportation

Power Plant Area

Pumping

Landfill

Disposal Facility

Filling In closed vehicle

Ash Silo

Mixing with cement

9.31 Due to the relatively high water table beneath the site (see Section 12

Land Contamination), it has been agreed with the EPC contractor that the

landfill will be located at or above ground level to minimise the risk of leachate

entering the groundwater. Access to the disposal facility will be through a ramp

to the top of the dam which will then lead into the disposal area, the height



difference between the top of dam and bottom of the disposal area will be

approximately 6 metres.

9.32 The disposal facility will be equipped with a double sealing system and

leakage control system. The double sealing system will consist of a primary liner

beneath which the leakage control system will house a series of drainage pipes

which are connected to control shafts. A secondary liner will then rest on the

floor of the disposal area ensuring no fly ash can come into contact with the

underlying substrate. Figure 9.2 below displays the structure of the liner and

leachate removal system. The leachate control system would be monitored as

part of the operational EMP.

Figure 9.2 Liner and leachate removal system

9.33 The on site disposal of fly ash eliminates the potential impacts

associated with the transportation of waste to an off-site landfill. The

development of a purpose built landfill meeting the standards required for

hazardous waste storage at Shuaibah, will avoid it being dispersed while in

transit and retain landfill capacity in Jeddah. The area of land available to

receive the fly ash (within the SWCC site) is fully sufficient to meet the disposal

requirements for the next 20 years.

9.34 Residual Effect: It is anticipated that with the implementation of the fly

ash treatment programme described above, the residual effect will be of minor negative significance.

9.35 Impact: Potential impact associated with the generation of special

wastes and non hazardous waste streams associated with the operational

process at the Shuaibah III site. The types of solid waste materials generated

during the operational phase will be associated with the maintenance works of



the plant equipment and general waste streams generated from the

administration buildings.

9.36 The key waste streams that are likely to be generated from maintenance

and plant activities are likely to include pipe work, metals, wood, cardboard and

plastics associated with replacement parts or filter media and sludge arising

from treatment works.

9.37 The key waste streams that are likely to be generated from the

administration areas of the plant will be general waste streams of a non

hazardous nature and include:

• Paper – waste paper maybe generated during the general

administration process and on site record keeping;

• Cardboard – waste cardboard maybe generated from the

deliveries of material to the site;

• Plastic Packaging – waste plastic packaging in the form of shrink

and bubble wrap; and

• General mixed waste – this may include a degree of

biodegradable waste including food waste.

9.38 It is anticipated that waste streams generated from the maintenance

works, plant processes and administration areas is likely to result in a minor negative impact.

9.39 Mitigation: The management of special wastes and non – hazardous

waste materials will be dealt with through the operational Environmental

Management Plan (EMP) for the site. This will be in accordance with World

Bank Guidelines.

9.40 It is anticipated that the plant processes and operations will generate

relatively small quantities of waste streams during the operational life cycle and

those waste streams that will be generated are mainly associated with the

maintenance works and administration operations. Although such waste

streams are generated in small quantities, a waste management strategy needs

to be in place as part of the site EMP to ensure that the waste streams

generated are appropriately managed.

9.41 In accordance with the principles of the Waste Hierarchy the following

waste management practices will need to be adopted at the Shuaibah III site to

limit the requirement for off site disposal to landfill;



Maintenance Works and Plant Process Waste

9.42 The waste generated from maintenance works and plant operations are

likely to be minimal but may include waste oils, fuels, chemicals, filters which

may have associated hazardous properties. Therefore, a bunded compound for

hazardous waste will need to be provided on-site for potentially hazardous

waste materials including waste fuels, oils, chemicals and filters generated

during the plant operations and maintenance works.

9.43 This compound will need to be located on an impermeable surface and

under cover to prevent any discharge or spillages to the surrounding

environment. The storage area will need to be clearly labelled and staff will

need to receive appropriate training and are informed of the types of waste

materials to be stored in this compound area through the EMP.

9.44 Hazardous waste streams will need to be collected by a suitably

registered waste contractor and transferred to the new waste landfill site on the

SWCC site which will be constructed to the US EPA specification required for

hazardous waste materials, although most will be specials waste or non

hazardous. The wastes will be be landfilled in separate cells from those

containing the fly ash. All paperwork and records of hazardous waste

management activities on-site will need to be maintained as part of the EMP

including records of off-site disposal to landfill for monitoring purposes.

Administration Areas

9.45 The administration buildings and offices on-site are likely to generate

negligible quantities of non-hazardous waste streams including waste paper,

cardboard, plastic packaging that have the potential to be segregated for

recycling. Therefore suitable waste receptacles will need to be provided at

central locations on-site for the segregation of waste streams for recycling and

residual general waste.

9.46 The segregated waste will be transferred to the central storage area on

site for non-hazardous waste which will consist of dedicated skips for recyclable

waste (including paper, cardboard and plastics) and general waste. The central

storage area for non-hazardous waste will be located on an impermeable

hardstanding surface and located under cover.

9.47 The waste streams segregated for recycling will need to be collected for

recycling by a suitably qualified waste contractor. In addition, the general waste



streams generated on-site that have limited potential for recycling will be

collected by an appointed waste contractor and disposed of to the new waste

landfill site on an agreed basis. All paperwork and records of non-hazardous

waste management activities on-site will need to be maintained as part of the

EMP including records of off-site disposal to landfill for monitoring purposes.

9.48 Residual Effects: Although it is anticipated that the quantities of speciola

wastes and non-hazardous waste streams generated at the Shuaibah III Plant

will be negligible it is essential that the approach to waste management at the

site highlighted above is adopted within the EMP where economically viable and

practical.

9.49 In addition the provision of waste storage areas for hazardous and non-

hazardous waste streams provides a degree of segregation between the two

waste streams and will be clearly labelled and securely maintained.

9.50 Also through encouraging waste minimisation and recycling principles at

the site and promoting the training of staff with regards to on-site waste

management practices, this will increase staff awareness and limit the amount

of material disposed of to the local landfill sites in Bahrain. The residual affect

overall, as a result of the above good practice waste management measures,

will generate a neutral residual effect.

Summary

9.51 A Summary of the environmental impacts associated with waste

management are provided in Table 9.2 overleaf.



Table 9.2 Summary Impact Table for Solid Waste Management

Potential Impact Nature of Impact (Permanent or Temporary) (Direct or Indirect)

Significance (Major, Moderate or Minor) (Positive or Negative)

Mitigation / Enhancement Measures Residual Effects (Major/Moderate/Minor/Neutral) (Positive/Negative)

Raw material waste from the construction of site buildings

Temporary / Direct Minor Negative The CEMP will promote the principles of the waste hierarchy therefore encouraging sustainable practices consequently reducing the amount of raw waste materials going to waste.

The residual effect is considered to be neutral to minor positive.

Impacts associated with the off site disposal of waste to an appropriate landfill facility

Temporary / Direct Minor / Moderate Negative

The CEMP will promote the principles of the waste hierarchy therefore encouraging sustainable practices consequently reducing the amount of wastes that require disposal to off site facilities.

The residual effect is considered to be neutral to minor positive.

Impacts associated with the generation of fly ash

Permanent / Direct Major negative The on site disposal facility and the designated protocol for the handling and transportation of fly ash will eliminate the need to transport the fly ash to an external facility and greatly reduce the possibility of the fly ash being released into the environment.

The residual effect is considered to be minor negative

Impacts associated with the generation of general operational wastes.

Permanent / Direct Minor negative The operational Environmental Management Plan for the site will accord with World Bank guidelines and the principles of the waste Hierarchy to promote sustainable practices and consequently reduce the amount materials going to waste.

The residual effect is considered to be neutral.



PART 2: SECONDARY ISSUES

10 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS

Introduction

10.1 This component of the EIA identifies the key socio-economic issues

associated with the Shuaibah Power Plant development on and surrounding the

site during both the construction and operational phases. The significance of

proposed power plant on the local economy and amenity issues is also

assessed and where necessary, potential mitigation measures have been

suggested.

Methodology

10.2 In order to assess the potential social and economic impacts associated

with the proposed development a desk based assessment was undertaken

comprising the following tasks:

• A review of indigenous communities located within a 50km radius of the site

will be identified in relation to temporary settlement and grazing rights;

• The identification of potential unplanned temporary settlements at Shuaibah

in relation to construction activities;

• An assessment of project skill requirements in relation local skill availability

(the output of which will be utilised to define local labour use policies in the

EMP for the development);

• An assessment of potential social and economic impacts including the

presence of worker camps and potential increased pressure on local

services and resources;

• A qualitative assessment of potential health and safety issues associated

with the plant;

• The appropriateness of the proposed site location in terms of land-use

planning requirements in the area; and

• A review of potential impact of the plant on existing local activities, such as

the local fishing industry.


Population

10.3 The population of Saudi Arabia was estimated at 24,293,844 based on

2003 estimates and includes 5,576,076 non-nationals. A summary of additional

population information is summarised in Table 10.1 below:



Table 10.1: Population and Age Statistics (2003 Estimates)

Area Statistic

Population Estimate • 24,293,844 this includes 5,576,076 non-nationals (July 2003 est.)

Age structure

• 0-14 years: 42.3% (male 5,245,413; female 5,028,595)

• 15-64 years: 54.8% (male 7,700,121; female 5,622,099)

• 65 years and over: 2.9% (male 393,173; female 304,443) (2003 est.)

Median age • total: 18.8 years • male: 20.9 years • female: 16.8 years (2002)

Population growth rate • 3.27% (2003 est.)

Economy

10.4 Saudi Arabia's economy, prior to the discovery of oil, depended on

trade, the export of local produce and the revenues brought in by Pilgrims to

Mecca and Medina.

10.5 The oil resources of Saudi Arabia are estimated to represent

approximately twenty-five percent of the world's proven reserves and the

country is the world's largest exporter. The resources of natural gas are equal in

scale and a percentage of the gas is used as an energy source, the remainder

for petrochemical products.

10.6 The country's other mineral resources include gold and silver, copper,

iron, lead, bauxite, tin and zinc have been discovered, along with minerals such

as potash and bentonite.

10.7 The oil revenues are being used to diversify the country's industrial

base, with new industrial centres such as Jubail and Yanbu leading the way in

the establishment of the new manufacturing ventures. This has made Saudi

Arabia one of the world's fastest growing economies and similar investment is

now being made in the transport system and other infrastructure projects.

10.8 In addition, water is an important resource in this region and Saudi

Arabia is now the world's largest producer of desalinated water, with thirty-three

plants turning the salt water of the Gulf and the Red Sea into drinkable water.

10.9 The agricultural sector of the economy is now self-sufficient in wheat,

fish and vegetables, dairy produce and certain meats. Farming depends on the

supply of water and future developments will concentrate on high value crops



that need less water. Among the vegetables and fruit grown are dates, apricots,

limes and quinces, onions, tomatoes and watermelon. Fishing has always been

important along the Saudi Arabian coasts; the fisheries industry is expanding

with an increase in fish farms.

10.10 A key element in the Saudi Arabian government's economic strategy is

industrial diversification, a process which has as its primary objective the

reduction of the Kingdom's dependence on oil revenues. To this end, the

government has encouraged the development of a wide range of manufacturing

industries.

10.11 The government has provided a range of incentives to encourage the

private sector to participate in the Kingdom's industrial effort. Eight industrial

estates provide private Saudi manufacturing companies with the necessary

infrastructure and services..

10.12 The Kingdom has adopted a free market economic model. The financial,

industrial and trade sectors of the economy have made rapid progress, enabling

the private sector to play an increasingly important role in the development and

diversification of the economy, especially in the fields of construction and

farming.

Employment

Table 10.2 below shows the numbers of civilians employed in the Kingdom of

Saudi Arabia by Sector for 2000:

Table 10.2: Civilian Employment Statistics (2000)

Civilian Employment by Sector (2000) Economic Activity Employees (000s) Share (%)Agriculture and Hunting 341 6 Fishing 8 1 Petroleum and Minerals 102 2 Manufacturing 441 8 Electricity, Gas and Water 76 1 Construction 516 9 Wholesale and Retail Trade 901 16 Restaurants and Hotels 165 3



Table 10.2 (Continued): Civilian Employment Statistics (2000)

Civilian Employment by Sector (2000) Economic Activity Employees (000s) Share (%)Transportation and Communication 242 4 Banking and Insurance 43 1 Real Estate and Business Services 140 2 General Administration 1,116 19 Education 713 12 Health and Social Services 218 4 Personnel and Community Services 133 2 Domestic and Other 551 10 International Organisation 5 0 Not Stated 3 0 TOTAL 5 100.0

Social Development

10.13 One of the underlying purposes of establishing the Kingdom’s

infrastructure, and the expansion of the industrial and agricultural base, has

been to encourage social development. The Saudi Royal Family has declared in

public pronouncements the Government’s commitment to ensuring that all

Saudi citizens participate in the Kingdom’s development, both in terms of

enjoying the benefits and contributing to its success and includes the following

areas:

• Education;

• Health;

• Social Services;

• The Arts;

• The Media;

• Sport;

• The Role for Women in Saudi Arabia; and

• Youth Hostels.

Consultations

10.14 Meetings have been undertaken in August 2005 with the Regional

Governors Office of Shuaibah to identify relevant information relating to the

Bedouin communities and the villages within the Region and such information

has been incorporated into the assessment of both the social and economic

impacts.



10.15 A meeting with the Shuaibah Regional Governors office established that

the region is approximately 80km from north to south and 50km from east to

west. There are approximately 15 villages within the region (a village being a

group of at least 7 dwellings) with a total population numbering in the hundreds.

Overall the benefit from the SWCC plants has been significant as they provide

potable quality water delivered by tankers to the villages. A summary of the

issues discussed is as follows:

• The nearest villages to the SWCC plants are 20km to the east and 5km

to the north of the site;

• Four of the villages have either elementary or middle school, but none

have a high school. Education opportunities are generally limited so

access to a high school would be very beneficial;

• The Bedouins are dependent on the natural vegetation for grazing herds

of camels and goats. They use commercial supplies of animal feedstuff

during the summer as there is no irrigation;

• There are no archaeological or cultural features of significance in the

Region and no special routes that should be avoided.

• The new north south highway opened 18 months ago has reduced the

number of accidents and is seen as beneficial;

• Fishing was historically undertaken by the older men although this is

generally confined to foreign workers who fish the coral reef and share

the proceeds;

10.16 A consultation meeting was held on the 10 October 2005 with the

residents of “Al Sauda” fishing community which is situated approximately 5km

south of the SEC Power Plants. The language interpretation was provided by

Dr Bagour from the King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah. The fishing

community is comprised of approximately 60 men, mostly single and with no

families on site. They are all fishermen from Yemen working on 4 year

contracts. Most of the fishermen have been resident on site for at least 6 years

and some have lived there for 20 years. Their comments are as follows:

• The Yemeni fishermen mostly fish on the coral reef, approximately 30km

to the south of the power plants at an optimum depth of 40m. They

undertake line fishing using specific bait for catching different species of



fish. They are able to gather more bait at the site to the south of the

plants. They noted that there is sometimes bleaching of the coral reef in

the shallow waters due to the high water temperature.

• They are prohibited by the coastguard from fishing near the power

plants but did fish to the north before the plants were constructed. They

indicated that fish are attracted close to the shore by the security lights

of the power plants. They have not seen any evidence of pollution

incidents from the power plants affecting the coral reef or the fisheries.

• The Yemeni fishermen live in simple wooden huts. They have no

contact with SEC or SWCC employees as all their fish are sent to

market in Jeddah on alternate days. The only benefit from the SWCC

power and desalination plants is the supply of water by tanker which

costs SR120 per load of which the water is SR40.

• The fishing harbour is a good site for them as it provides good

protection for the boats. There are also good fish found in the harbour

locality. The community live adjacent to a coastguard station which also

provides protection for them and their boats. They area aware of the

new fish farms nearby (between SEC and their community) and are

concerned that they might have to move if the fish farms are expanded.

• The fishermen reported that they have not experienced any bad smells

from the power plants and that the air quality is good. The new road to

Jeddah is of benefit to them as it helps to get their catch to market

without delay.


Construction Phase

10.17 Impact: It has been established through consultations with Bedouins

that local skill levels within the village communities is relatively limited and that

fewer than 10% are likely to be interested in manual construction work activities.

10.18 It has been reported that the Shuaibah I plant used significant numbers

of local people for the construction work while the Shuaibah II plant brought in

most labour from outside the Shuaibah Region.



10.19 The construction of the Shuaibah III Plant will therefore provide

opportunities to have a positive impact on the local economy in terms of local

employment by creating temporary local jobs and the opportunities during the

construction phase for the “up-skilling” of the local construction work force.

There are several positive factors that will contribute to the overall effect on the

economy, which include:

• creation of temporary jobs during the construction phase;

• the potential for the extent of labour and supplier contracts let locally during

construction; and

• the potential for indirect increased local spend from the workforce

commuting to and from Jeddah.

10.20 However, in order to achieve this there will be a need for non-Saudi

construction workers to be sourced in order to provide the necessary levels of

skills and experience that are required to train the local workers during the

construction phase. This will result in a temporary impact of minor positive significance.

10.21 The number of workers during construction, peak period, etc will vary

from NTP to final completion. This will be updated during implementation by

means of monthly progress reports. It is not possible to provide exact figures at

this stage of the environmental assessment.

10.22 The existing SWCC site at Shuaibah has several shops including a

large supermarket on site which would has capacity for additional construction

workers. This is used by SWCC employees and is likely to be available for

construction workers. Existing housing is segregated between family

accommodation (with school) and single male workers. The accommodation for

construction workers would be in a new compound adjacent to the bachelor

housing and there would be no access to the family area which is contained

within a separate compound. There would be no access to site for workers

other than via official buses.

10.23 Fishing on the reef is not permitted without appropriate permits and is

closely watched by the Coastguard. Any boats in the coastal waters will be

challenged and any workers along the shoreline outside of the fenced

construction site will also be challenged by the coastguard.



10.24 The waste water is treated on site and is due to be extended to meet the

treatment requirements for the additional temporary workers. This will be

detailed by the EPC in the CEMP.

10.25 Mitigation: There will be no requirement for mitigation as the proposed

measures will result in a positive impact.

10.26 Residual Effect: Overall through the use of local construction workers

this will result in temporary minor positive residual effect on the local

economy and on the up-skilling of the local workforce. In addition, the sourcing

of non-Saudi construction workers will also have a minor positive residual effect

on the local economy, particularly those commuting to and from Jeddah,

although a percentage of the construction work force will be temporarily housed

in construction compounds adjacent to the site.

10.27 Impact: The potential impact from unplanned temporary settlements at

Shuaibah in relation to construction activities resulting in a temporary impact of

minor negative significance prior to mitigation.

10.28 Mitigation: Unplanned settlements to the east of the SEC site are

unlikely due to the sabkahs which are hostile salt pan environments unsuitable

for building or providing vegetation for grazing herds.

10.29 It has also been observed that the worker housing at Shuaibah within

both SWCC and SEC areas is of high quality with landscaped gardens and

other amenities. There is strict control over the provision of temporary worker

housing and this will prevent unplanned settlements from developing.

10.30 Residual Impact: It is anticipated that due to the surrounding

environment being unsuitable for the construction of unplanned settlements and

the strict controls over the provision of temporary worker housing the overall

residual impact will be temporary and of minor positive significance.


10.31 During the construction phase the training of the local construction

workers by skilled non-Saudi workers will have a positive cumulative impact on

the local economy in terms of educating and up-skilling of the local workforce.

In addition, the sourcing of non-Saudi construction workers will also have a

positive cumulative effect on the local economy, particularly those commuting to

on from Jeddah.



10.32 In addition, the construction of the SEC Phase II plant will take until

2010 to complete. Although construction workers will be housed in separate

compounds 5kms apart there will be a cumulative positive benefit to the

surrounding communities.

Operational Phase

10.33 Impact: During the operational phase of the power plant there is likely to

be a permanent impact of major positive significance on the local economy in

terms of the provision of both water and power supply to the major such as

Jeddah, Makkah and Taif.

10.34 The Saudi Arabian Water and Electricity Company intend to construct a

new power and desalination plant (Phase III) at the existing site at Shuaibah,

approximately 110km south of Jeddah on the Red Sea coastline. The site is

adjacent to the existing Shuaibah I and II plants and will be based on a light

crude oil fired power plant with a gross power generation rate of up to 900 MW

and 880,000m3 /day from the desalination units.

10.35 The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the largest economy in the Middle East

in GDP terms and contains one quarter of the World’s oil reserves. A growing

population and strong demand projections for power and water demand make

Shuaibah III IWPP an essential project to meet the requirements of the Seventh

National Development Plan for Saudi Arabia, 1420 to 1425 AH (2000 – 2005).

10.36 Global Water Intelligence (GWI) Desalination Markets quotes Saudi

Arabia as needing an 83% increase in total desalination capacity by 2015

(5,400m3/day), the greatest of any country. Drinking water is rationed in most

cities during the summer months and received media attention in Jeddah during

2005 as water tankers were deployed on the streets to cope with acute water

shortages.

10.37 The Saline Water Conversion Company (SWCC) responsible for

providing the entire Kingdom’s desalinated water is planning to establish 22 new

desalination plants along the Eastern and Western coasts including expansion

of existing units. It has been estimated that an investment of approximately US

$16 billion is needed by 2020 to meet water demands at the current per capita

consumption of almost 300 litres per day.

10.38 Saudi Arabia’s electricity sector has been largely controlled by four

regional state companies providing 85% of the power supply. In 1998 the



Government stared moving towards having a single company, Saudi Electric

Company (SEC) take over form the regional companies. Alongside SEC, power

is also produced by SWCC and Saudi Aramaco. SWCC dual water and power

plants produce about 20% of the Kingdoms power capacity.

10.39 In a press release in June 2005, Abdullah bin Abdul-Rahman Al-

Hussayen, the Minister of Water and Electricity, said it was a significant step in

the development and privatization of Saudi Arabia's water and power sector.

While acknowledging the support and assistance from various organizations,

the Minister stressed that the project has had the full support of the

Government. "The output from the Shuaibah IWPP will play a major role in

meeting the increasing demand for water and power in the Western region

covering cities such as Jeddah, Makkah and Taif."

10.40 Mitigation: There will be no requirement for mitigation as the proposed

development will result in a major positive impact to the local economy.

10.41 Residual Impact: Given the output from the Shuaibah IWPP

contributing a major role in meeting the increasing demand for water and power

in the western region covering cities such as Jeddah, Makkah and Taif.

Therefore the overall residual impact will be permanent and of major positive significance.

10.42 Impact: The potential impacts from the presence of worker housing

potentially increasing pressure on local services and resources. It has been

established through consultations that local skill levels within the village

communities is relatively limited. The lack of high school education facilities is

one of the most important factors limiting the education of young Bedouins from

the villages within the Shuaibah Region. Prior to mitigation this is likely to result

in a permanent impact of minor negative significance.

10.43 Mitigation: The assessment has identified the lack of local infrastructure

provisions, in the form of secondary high school facilities and also a local

mosque, to serve not only the local Bedouin communities but also the incoming

operational workforce which are likely to have families. The incoming workers

will be accommodated in the permanent worker housing adjacent the proposed

site and investment by the appropriate Ministries in the provision of further

social infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of the site will be required.

10.44 Residual Effect: Overall, the assessment has identified the need for

investment by the appropriate Ministries in the provision of further social



infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of the site, particularly in the form of

education and religious institutions, and given the distances to nearby

settlements and cities. The overall residual effect will be permanent and of

minor positive significance as a result of identifying the requirement for

providing this level of infrastructure.

10.45 Impact: The potential impact of the plant operations on social health and

safety may result in a permanent impact of minor negative significance prior

to mitigation.

10.46 Mitigation: Given the sparsely populated nature of the area surrounding

the site the impact on people in the immediate area is considered to be

negligible. However, measures to ensure the occupational health and safety of

the on-site work force, including those accommodated in the adjacent worker

housing, and protection of the environment has been developed for the site

(See Part 3: Environmental Management Plan). This provides health and safety

guidelines for staff, personnel and sub-contractors including personnel safety,

site conduct, security, site safety zoning and emergency preparedness. The

Health and Safety requirements for the plant will ensure the following:

• Protect and promote health and safety issues to all staff and personnel on-

site.

• To minimise exposure to potential hazards and safety issues and reduction

in risk from injury and health risk;

• Minimise impacts on the environment from the plant activities taking into

account the necessary balance between economic efficiency, energy

requirements and environmental protection;

• To implement good practice measures in terms of social health and safety

to comply, as a minimum requirement with Saudi law and policy.

10.47 Residual Effect: Overall given the sparsely populated nature of the

surrounding area and the implementation of appropriate measures as part of the

Health, Safety and Environment Management Plan during the operational phase

of the plant will ensure that occupational health and safety risks are minimised.

It is anticipated that this will result in a permanent residual effect of moderate positive significance.

10.48 Impact: The potential impacts of the plant on existing local activities,

such as the local fishing industry are considered to be negligible. Given the

security and health and safety restrictions in the vicinity of the existing Shuaibah



I and II plants no fishing within several kilometres of the coral reefs adjacent to

the site is permitted.

10.49 Consultations with the Bedouin communities and Yemeni fisherman in

August 2005 confirmed that the main fishing activities take place approximately

5 to 10km to the north of the Shuaibah region and approximately 30km south of

the SEC Plant. In addition, the local Bedouin communities confirmed that the

majority of the fishing activities are contracted to the Yemeni fisherman who

undertake this on their behalf.

10.50 Therefore, based on the above consultations, the overall impact on the

fishing industry is negligible.

10.51 Mitigation: As no impacts are anticipated on the local fishing industry as

a consequence of the proposed Shuaibah Phase III Plant no mitigation

measures are required.

10.52 Residual Effect: Given the exclusion zone for fishing within several

kilometres of the existing Shuaibah Phase I and II Plants and the key fishing

locations situated approximately 5 to 10km to the north of the Shuaibah region

and 30km south of the SEC Plant the residual impacts on the local fishing

industry are considered to be negligible.


10.53 During the operational phase the output from the Shuaibah IWPP

combined with that of the adjacent Shuaibah I and II Plants will contribute a

major role in meeting the increasing demand for water and power in the western

region covering cities such as Jeddah, Makkah and Taif.

10.54 In addition, the full-time operatives at the Shuaibah Phase III Plant will

place further increasing pressures on local infrastructure and resources in the

vicinity of the site. The assessment has identified the need for investment by

the appropriate Ministries in the provision of further social infrastructure in the

immediate vicinity of the site, particularly in the form of education and religious

institutions, and given the distances to nearby settlements and cities.

10.55 The cumulative impacts on occupational health and safety will be

minimised by the implementation of appropriate measures at the Shuaibah

Phase III Plant as part of the Health, Safety and Environment Management Plan

during the operational phase and given the sparsely populated nature of the



surrounding area the cumulative impacts on occupational health and safety

risks are negligible.

Summary

10.56 A summary of the key impacts, associated mitigation and residual

effects are provided in Table 10.3 overleaf.



Table 10.3 Summary Impact Table for Social and Economic Impacts

Potential Impact Nature of Impact (Permanent or

Temporary) (Direct or Indirect)

Significance (Major, Moderate or

Minor) (Positive or Negative)


(Positive/Negative)

Employment and training of local workforce during the construction phase

Temporary Minor Positive • No Mitigation Measures Required Minor Positive

The potential impact from unplanned temporary settlements at Shuaibah in relation to construction activities

Temporary Minor Negative • Unplanned settlements to the east of the SEC site are unlikely due to the sabkahs which are hostile salt pan environments unsuitable for building or providing vegetation for grazing herds.

• There will be a strict control over the provision of temporary worker housing and this will prevent unplanned settlements from developing.

Minor Positive

During the operational phase of the power plant is likely to benefit the local economy in terms of the provision of both water and power supply to the major such as Jeddah, Makkah and Taif

Permanent Major Positive • No Mitigation Measures Required Major Positive

The potential impacts from the presence of worker housing potentially increasing pressure on local services and resources.

Permanent Minor Negative • The assessment has identified the lack of local infrastructure provisions, in the form of secondary high school facilities and also a local mosque, to serve not only the local Bedouin communities and the incoming operational workforce which are likely to have families.

• The incoming workers will be accommodated in the permanent worker housing adjacent the proposed site and investment by the appropriate Ministries in the provision of further social infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of the site will be required.

Minor Positive

The potential impact of the plant operations on social health and safety

Permanent Minor Negative • the implementation of appropriate measures as part of the Health, Safety and Environment Management Plan during the operational phase of the plant will ensure that occupational health and safety risks are minimised

Moderate Positive

The potential impacts of the plant on existing local activities, such as the local fishing industry

Permanent Negligible • No Mitigation Measures Required Negligible



11 NOISE AND VIBRATION

Introduction

11.1 This chapter considers the potential effects associated with the

generation of noise and vibration during the construction and operation of the

power and desalination plant, upon the existing workers accommodation located

to the south and east.

11.2 This chapter is necessarily technical in nature, so to assist the reader a

glossary of terminology relating to noise and vibration is contained within

Appendix 11.1.

11.3 The methodology used in this chapter is based on the UK standards for

noise assessments to provide an internationally recognised procedure which is

consistent with World Bank guidelines.

Methodology

Construction Phase: Noise and Vibration

11.4 Predicted construction noise and vibration levels can be assessed

against the guidelines detailed in British Standard (BS) 5228: 1997: ‘Noise and

Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites’ and the Transport Research

Laboratories (TRL) Report 429: ‘Groundborne Vibration from Mechanised

Construction Works’. BS 5228: 1997 advises on a number of factors that are

likely to affect the acceptability of construction noise including ‘site location,

existing ambient noise levels, duration of site operations, hours of work, attitude

of the site operator and noise characteristics of the work being undertaken.’

11.5 The Department of the Environment (DoE) Advisory Leaflet (AL) 72

includes construction noise limits applicable at residential locations during

daytime hours (07:00 – 19:00 hours) and although AL72 out of print, its

guidance on acceptable levels of noise remains applicable. The publication

states that the noise level at the façade of the nearest occupied room of a

receptor should not exceed:

• 75dB(A) in urban areas near to main roads in heavy industrial areas;

or

• 70dB(A) in rural, suburban and urban areas away from main road

traffic and industrial noise.



11.6 Following the advice given in AL72, a daytime construction noise limit of

75dB LAeq,T can be used as the indicator above which a significant

construction noise impact may be registered. ‘T’ equates to the period in hours

over which construction activities will be undertaken.

11.7 In respect of vibration, levels from construction activities are very

dependent on ground conditions, underlying geology and upon the foundations

and construction of the building itself. It is stated within BS 5228: Part 4, that

the threshold of vibration perception for humans is: ‘….typically in the peak

particle velocity range 0.15mm/s to 0.3mm/s at frequencies between 8Hz to

80Hz. Vibration levels above this value can disturb, startle, cause annoyance or

interfere with work activities. At higher levels they can be described as

unpleasant or even painful.’

11.8 Also in respect of human response to vibration, BS 6472: 1992 ‘Guide to

the Evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings (1 to 80Hz)’ provides

guidance on the probability with which various degrees of adverse comment to

vibration are likely. Following this guidance for residential dwellings, Table 11.1

details the vibration levels at which varying degrees of adverse comment may

be expected.

Table 11.1: Vibration dose values (VDV m/s1.75) above which various degrees of adverse comment may be expected

Place

Low probability of

adverse comment

Adverse comment possible

Adverse comment probable

Residential

buildings – 16hr

day

0.2 to 0.4 0.4 to 0.8 0.8 to 1.6

Residential

buildings – 8hr

night

0.13 0.26 0.51

11.9 In respect building damage BS 7385 Part 2: 1993 ‘Evaluation and

Measurement for Vibration in Buildings – Guide to damage levels from ground

borne vibration’ indicates that for continuous vibration building damage could

occur in a residential or light commercial type building where levels of vibration

above 7.5mm/s, from 4Hz upwards, are measured.



Operational Phase

11.10 Permissible noise levels for the power and desalination plant are

detailed within the following documents:

• Appendix H to the Turnkey Agreement; and

• Volume II of the RFP Minimum Functional Specification.

11.11 Appendix H to the Turnkey Agreement states that compliance with the

following noise pressure levels, measured according to ISO standards, shall be

guaranteed and proved during performance tests:

• At 1m outside the southern plant fence max 65 dB (A)

• At 1m outside the eastern plant fence max 65 dB (A)

• At 1m outside the northern plant fence max 70 dB (A)

• At 1m outside the western plant fence max 70 dB (A)

• At 1m away from open air installations max 85 dB (A)

• Within the CCR max 50 dB (A)

• Within turbine hall (outside operational areas) max 90 dB (A)

• Within other machine rooms and workshops max 85 dB (A)

11.12 Volume II of the RFP Minimum Functional Specification quotes the

following World Bank 1998 Standards, which have been taken from Bahrain

Draft Legislation for Environmental and Occupational Health at Work.

Table 11.2: World Bank 1998 Standards

Maximum allowable log equivalent (hourly measurements) in dB (A) Receptor

Day (07:00 – 22:00) Night (22:00 – 07:00)

Residential, institutional,

educational 55 45

Industrial, commercial 70 70




Construction Phase

11.13 Impact: At this early stage very little information is known on the

proposed site preparation and construction methodologies that will be used by

the eventual contractor. However, indicative noise levels during the

construction of the proposed development can be predicted for operations that

are likely to take place on the site.

• Site preparation - Site preparation will involve the back-filling,

levelling and grading and the removal of made ground in areas

where foundations are to be installed. It is assumed that these

activities will require the use of dozers, excavators and lorries.

• Piling – It is understood that driven piles are proposed for the

building foundations and shoreline protection. With respect to noise,

such a piling method would involve the use of an impact hammer.

• Building - This phase of works is assumed to involve the casting of

reinforced concrete slabs ‘in-situ’, brickwork/blockwork,

steel/scaffold erection and roofing etc. It is assumed that any

concrete works will require the use of concrete truck mixers, a

compressor and hand tools. It is also assumed that a wheeled

loader may be used to support plant.

• Drainage and road paving - This stage of the works may comprise of

several operations that may include excavation for and laying of

drainage and road surfacing.

11.14 Based on the above activities, it is anticipated that impact pile driving

will be the nosiest potential activity. The construction noise impact assessment

has, therefore, been based on this operation in order to represent the worst

case scenario. The predictions are further considered worst case in that it is

assumed that any mitigation measures (such as those mentioned later in this

chapter) have not been implemented.

11.15 Predictions are based on the methodology contained within BS 5228

and assumptions of the working practices likely to be employed. Source noise

levels are presented in terms of the equivalent continuous sound level, LAeq,T

over a working day.



11.16 The predictions are based upon piling being undertaken along the

eastern perimeter of the site, which is approximately 500m from the closest

workers accommodation located outside the eastern site fence.

11.17 The following assumptions have been made in the predictions:

• noise propagation is assumed to be hemispherical,

• no attenuation from atmospheric or ground absorption is assumed,

• the intervening ground between the development and the receptor

points is acoustically hard ground,

• no barrier attenuation has been assumed,

• predicted noise levels are those under neutral weather conditions.

11.18 The following source noise levels and operational on-times have been

used in the predictions:

Table 11.3: Construction Source Noise Levels

Plant LAeq at 10m On-time (hr)

Sheet Steel Piling – diesel hammer

[BS8233 C.4/3] 106 60

Wheeled Excavator [BS8233 C.3/78] 83 70

11.19 Based on the above source noise levels and assumptions it is predicted

that the worst case construction noise levels at the façade of the nearest

workers accommodation will be 73 dB(A) LAeq,10h during pile driving, which

falls below the 75dB(A) limit as recommended in AL72.

11.20 To put this estimated level into context, it should be borne in mind that

mitigation measures, (such as those discussed later in this chapter), which are

likely to have a beneficial effect, have not been considered at this point.

11.21 In respect of construction vibration, as previously stated, there is little

guidance on the methodologies available to predict levels of vibration from

construction activities, however, it is generally accepted that for the majority of

people vibration levels of between 0.15 and 0.3 mm/s peak particle velocity are

just perceptible.



11.22 Table 11.4 below details the distances at which certain activities give

rise to a just perceptible level of vibration, based on historical field

measurements and BS 5228.

Table 11.4: Construction Source Vibration Levels

Construction Activity Distance from activity when

vibration may just be perceptible (metres)

Excavation 10 - 15

Hydraulic breaker 15 - 20

Hydraulic vibratory pile hammer 50 - 100

Hydraulic impact pile hammer 40 - 50

Auger piling 15

11.23 On the basis of the above figures and the assumption that piles will be

impact driven it can be seen that at a distance of 500m to the workers

accommodation, vibration levels are likely to be imperceptible.

11.24 On the basis of the above, construction noise and vibration impacts are

considered to be of moderate negative significance and neutral significance,

respectively.

11.25 Mitigation: It is recommended that the following procedures be

considered where appropriate:

• All plant brought on to site should comply with the relevant EC/UK

noise limits applicable to that equipment or should be no noisier than

would be expected based the noise levels quoted in BS 5228: 1997.

That plant should be properly maintained and operated in

accordance with manufacturers recommendations.

• Electrically powered plant should be preferred, where practicable, to

mechanically powered alternatives. All mechanically powered plant

should also be fitted with suitable silencers.

• Items of plant on site operating intermittently should be shut down in

the intervening periods between use.

• Where feasible, all stationary plant should be located so that the

noise impact at all occupied commercial and residential properties is

minimised and, if practicable, every item of static plant when in



operation should be sound attenuated using methods based on the

guidance and advice given in BS 5228.

• The contractor and their sub-contractors should at all times apply

the principle of Best Practicable Means as defined in Section 72 of

the Control of Pollution Act 1974 and carry out all work in such a

manner as to reduce any disturbance from noise and vibration to a

minimum.

• The construction site should be surrounded by site hoarding to

provide some acoustic shielding at ground level. The hoarding

should consist of plywood sheets or similar, with all knotholes,

cracks and other joints sealed to minimise the escape of noise.

• Deliveries should be programmed to arrive during core daytime

hours (08:00 – 18:00 hours) only. Care should be taken when

unloading vehicles to minimise noise. Deliveries should be routed

so as to minimise disturbance to local residents and delivery

vehicles should be prohibited from waiting within or near the site

with their engines running.

11.26 Furthermore, as the construction programme and methodologies

become more defined it is suggested that construction noise vibration be

reconsidered in greater detail.

11.27 Residual Effect: As a worst case scenario it has been predicted that

noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors would meet the recommended

criteria set out in AL72, and vibration levels would be imperceptible.

11.28 The residual construction noise and vibration impacts are, therefore,

considered to remain of minor negative significance and neutral significance, respectively.

Operational Phase

11.29 Impact: In order to determine the noise impacts associated with the

proposed power and desalination plant a noise model has been created by

Siemens AG, which includes the main external noise sources. Each of the

sources considered within this model, along with information on their associated

sound power levels (Lw), are detailed within Table 11.5.



11.30 The sound power levels provided are valid for the steady state base

load and bypass operations but do not cover the following activities:

• Start up/shut down of the power station;

• Commissioning Phase;

• Failure conditions;

• Emergency conditions; and

• Other abnormal operating conditions

11.31 Noise emissions attributable to facilities outside the Siemens scope and

other industrial/commercial activities within the vicinity are excluded

from this assessment.

Table 11.5: External Noise Sources

Component Sound Power Level,

Lw [dB(A)]

HRSGs, including firing system ≤120

HRSG stacks ≤110

Steam pipes (HP, CRH, HRH) during base load and steam

turbine bypass operation ≤90

Scrubbers ≤119

Electrostatic precipitators ≤112

Ash handling and transportation systems ≤110

Local PCCs (AC units) ≤85

Transformers ≤116

Oil unloading pumps (UEH) ≤103

Diesel pumps (UEL01) ≤103

Crude oil pumps (UEL02) ≤103

Facades, roof, doors, gates and air ventilation of the Turbine

Building (UMC) ≤110

Facades, roof, doors, gates and air ventilation of the Water

Treatment Building (UGD) ≤100

Air ventilation system for the Grid system switchgear building

(UAB) ≤100

Air ventilation system for the Switchgear/ control room building

(00UBA) ≤100



Table 11.5 External Noise Sources

Component Sound Power Level,

Lw [dB(A)]

Air ventilation for the Administration building (UYC) ≤96

Air ventilation for the Canteen Building (UYD) ≤96

Air ventilation system for the Workshop and Storage Building

(UST) ≤98

Desalination plant units during base load and steam turbine

bypass operation (Desalination pumps, dump condenser,

auxiliary equipment etc)

≤126

Steam pipes to desalination (to TP3) during base load and

steam turbine bypass operation ≤115

Steam pipes for desalination plant during base load and steam

turbine bypass operation ≤118

Portable water blending plant ≤92

Sea water pump sets ≤97

HP steam bypass station of HRSG (LBF) and connecting pipes ≤90

Blow down flash tank of the HRSG (LBH) ≤110

Blow up opening of the blow down system of the HRSG (LBH) ≤112

Blow up opening of the blow down system of the Steam

Turbine (LCM) ≤112

Auxiliary boiler ≤105

11.32 The noise contours created by Siemens on the basis of the above data

are reproduced in Figure 11.1 below. This model, created using the IMMI noise

mapping suite, demonstrates that the permissible noise levels detailed within

Appendix H of the Turnkey Agreement, as reproduced within Section 1.2, will

not be exceeded outside the plant fence in any direction.



Figure 11.1: Predicted Noise Levels from Shuaibah IWPP

Notes:

Buchanan House 24-30 Holborn London EC1N 2HS Tel: 020 7314 5000 Fax: 020 7314 5005 Site: Shuaibah Phase III IWPP Client: Title: Figure 11.1 Noise Model

Scale: NTS



11.33 The remaining criteria presented within the Turnkey Agreement

Appendix refer to noise levels within the development and are not relevant to

this assessment.

11.34 With respect to the World Bank 1998 Standards the noise model

indicates that the daytime residential criteria of 55dB will be achieved at the

worker accommodation to the east of the development during the daytime

period. However, should the plant operate at a steady state load and bypass

operation level; during the night, the World Bank night-time residential limit

would be exceeded.

11.35 At the adjacent industrial developments and the workers

accommodation to the east the World Bank 1998 Standards will be achieved

during both the day and night-time periods.

11.36 This impact is, therefore, considered to be of neutral significance

during the day and of moderate negative significance at night.

11.37 Mitigation: Should it be proposed to operate the power and desalination

plant at steady state load or bypass operation level during the night-time period

it is recommended that the eastern plant fence be replaced with a solid sound

attenuating structure, with sufficient height to eliminate the line of sight between

the noisy items of plant in the central and western sections of the site and the

workers accommodation to the east.

11.38 In order to be effective i.e. capable of reducing noise impacts upon the

workers accommodation by up to 10dB, the fence should be either a proprietary

acoustic fence or fabricated from material with a minimum surface density of 12

kg/m2. It should be noted that 25mm thick seasoned softwood has a surface

density of 12kg/m2. The acoustic fence must be constructed with longevity in

mind and must be maintained so its acoustic performance will not reduce with

time. In order not to compromise the acoustic performance of the fence there

must be no air gaps in the structures, such as between the fence and the

ground or between any individual panels or boards.

11.39 Furthermore, in order to meet the Minimum Functional Specifications,

sound levels at the boundary fences and at the closest workers accommodation

must be measured as described within Appendix F to the EPC Contract ‘Sound

Test Principles’ and monitored on a regular basis.



11.40 Residual Effect: It is predicted that the construction of a solid structure

along the eastern site boundary would reduce the resultant noise impact at the

workers accommodation by up to 10dB, such that the World Bank 1998

Standard for the night-time period would be achieved.

11.41 Furthermore, the solid structure would have the additional benefit of

further reducing daytime noise levels at the workers accommodation, which

already achieve the World Bank criteria in the absence of any mitigation.

11.42 The residual impact is therefore, considered to be of neutral significance.



Summary





Table 11.6 Summary Impact Table for Noise and Vibration






(Positive/Negative) Construction Noise Temporary, Direct Minor Negative • Erection of site hoarding and localised

screening as appropriate

• Application of best practicable means

• Use of well maintained and silenced plant

Neutral

Construction Vibration Temporary, Direct Neutral • N/A Neutral

Operational Plant Permanent, Direct Neutral during the day

and moderate negative

at night

• Erection of a solid structure along the eastern

site boundary

Neutral



12 GROUND CONTAMINATION

Introduction

12.1 This section considers the soils and geological conditions, both on and

surrounding the site of the proposed phase III development of the Shuaibah

Power and Desalination Plant. The aim is to identify the potential impacts

associated with the development of the Power Plant on the soils and solid

geology of the site.

12.2 The assessment considers potential contamination issues associated

with both the construction and operational phases of the development and

provides appropriate pollution control best practice measures where applicable.

12.3 A key element in the Saudi Arabian government's economic strategy is

industrial diversification, a process that has as its primary objective to produce

more petroleum products for export instead of relying on crude petroleum

export. In this context, Saudi Arabia has established oil refineries, gas

production plants, and other associated industries, leading to the development

of several industrial regions in different parts of the Kingdom. To cope up with

the economic growth, some of the current power plants and saline water

conversion facilities are being expanded and new ones are being planned.

12.4 Industrial diversification can have some very serious impacts on the

environment if proper waste minimization, treatment and disposal techniques

are not followed. In the absence of effective law enforcement and waste

management facilities, there is a widespread practice of tipping hazardous and

municipal waste near the cities and industrial areas.

12.5 It is therefore extremely important to analyze the ground contamination

to set baseline data prior to the construction and operation of a new facility such

as the IWPP.

12.6 This section is being prepared to assess the ground contamination

issues both on and surrounding the site of the proposed phase III development

of the Integrated Water and Power Plant (IWPP). The aim is to identify potential

impacts associated with the developments on the soil, groundwater and solid

geology of the site.

12.7 The assessment considers potential contamination issues associated

with both the construction and operational phases of the development and

provides appropriate pollution control best practice measures where applicable.



Methodology

12.8 A detailed geotechnical investigation was performed at the site during

June and July, 2005 to evaluate the soil conditions at the site and benchmark

the current potential contamination status. Field exploration methods including

boreholes, cone penetration tests, trial pits, electrical resistivity tests, cross hole

seismic tests, plate load tests and standard permeability tests were conducted

to establish the physical and engineering properties of the site.

12.9 The specification and methodology for the geotechnical investigation

comprised the following stages:

Desk Study

12.10 A desk study was undertaken to review and assess all available

information and documents, taking into account the site history and all potential

contaminant sources and associated contaminates. The recent geotechnical

investigation completed by Fugro Suhaimi Limited (FSL) along with a soil

investigation report undertaken by Kling Consult GmbH Geotechnical Institute in

1992 was reviewed and the underlying strata and aquifers were identified.

Boreholes

12.11 Subsurface stratigraphy and groundwater conditions at the site were

investigated by drilling a total of 78 onshore boreholes. The boreholes were

drilled to depths ranging from 10-30 meters. The depth of borings near

Turbines & Process Units and Fuel Storage Tanks was 30 meters; near the

Water Plant was 20 meters and near the disposal area was up to 30 meters

below the existing ground level.

Soil Sampling

12.12 Soil samples were obtained at 1 meter depth intervals from the existing

grade to 10 meters, and at 1.5 meters depth intervals thereafter. The samples

were then packaged and shipped to FSL testing facilities for further

investigation.

Trial Pits

12.13 A total of 14 test pits were excavated to 2 meters depth at the site. The

objective of the test pits was to visually examine and classify the shallow soil

stratigraphy in-situ, and obtain samples of the superficial soil materials for



laboratory classification and earthworks tests. All samples were labelled,

packaged and transported to FSL’s Jeddah and Dammam laboratory for further

examination and testing.

Permeability Tests

12.14 Nine in-situ permeability tests were performed in selected boreholes

drilled at the site. The falling head permeability test was performed by raising

the water level in the boreholes and thereafter, the drop in the level of water in

the boreholes was recorded at regular time intervals. The permeability of the

subsurface materials was evaluated by recording the quantity of water flowing

into the borehole in a given time.

Groundwater Observation and Sampling

12.15 Observations were made in the boreholes during and after completion of

drilling and sampling operations to investigate the depth of groundwater at the

site. Groundwater samples were collected from a depth where the water table

is reached and at a deeper elevation of each representative bore hole.

Evaluation of Results

12.16 A total of 50 soil samples and 10 groundwater samples were collected

to be analyzed for organic and non organic contaminants. The testing was

performed according to European and German standards for lab testing and the

contaminants recorded were compared to the Dutch intervention values.

Evaluation of Results

12.17 Based on the assessment of the contamination results, measures to

prevent or reduce adverse environmental impacts were identified, and the

necessary environmental monitoring plans were described.


12.18 The subsurface stratigraphy and groundwater conditions revealed at the

boreholes, cone penetrometer tests, and trial pits drilled/excavated at the site

provide the following baseline information relating to site topography, geology,

soil and groundwater conditions at the IWPP site.



Site Topography

12.19 The proposed project area measures about 900 meters by 850 meters

in plan. The proposed site is slightly undulating. The ground surface elevation

in the power plant area at the locations of the field explorations ranges between

EL -0.52 meters and EL -3.15 meters, and in the water plant area the elevation

ranges between EL -0.03 meters and EL -2.9 meters at the locations of field

explorations.

Geology

12.20 The Shuaibah area where the proposed IWPP is planned to be

constructed is situated along the Red Sea coast about 60 km from the western

Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah within the coastal plain which stretches between

the Red Sea and the eastern Al Hiyaz mountain chain.

12.21 The coastal plain is underlain by compact layers of coralline limestone

formed by Miocene and Pliocene formations deposited during the initial down-

wrapping of the Red sea rift. In addition, they also include materials associated

with coral reef formations during periods of indentation by the sea. The

limestone layers are mostly porous and have formed in layers of varying

thickness ranging from 0.5 meters to 10 meters.

Soil Characteristics

12.22 The results of site investigation have identified the soil on site to consist

of a combination of man-made ‘filled topsoils’ and ‘natural topsoils’. Detailed

description of the soils encountered at all three areas within the proposed IWPP

site is presented below.

12.23 Power Plant Area - The subsurface stratigraphy at the site of the

proposed Power Plant Area shows that the top layer comprises of man made fill

material of loose to medium dense silty sand with gravel ranging up to 2.0

meters below the existing grade. The sub-soil strata (from 1.0 – 2.0 meters up

to 4.5 - 8.5 meters) consist of very loose to medium dense silty sand varying to

sandy silt. The sub-soil strata, from 4.5 - 8.5 meters up to 10.0 - 20.0 meters

deep, consist of a weak to moderately coralline limestone interbedded with silty

sand and silt layers. An open cavity was encountered in one of the boreholes

between 8.45 to 15.0 meter depth below the existing grade. However, no other

cavity was encountered in any other borehole indicating that the cavity

encountered could possibly be a local fissure. Loss of drilling fluid was



encountered in all the boreholes indicating presence of solution cavities and

solution channels in the subsurface materials at the site.

12.24 Water Plant Area - Similar to the Power Plant Area, the subsurface

stratigraphy at the site of the proposed Water Plant Area shows that the top

layer comprises of man made fill material of loose to medium dense silty sand

with gravel ranging up to 2.0 – 4.0 meters below the existing grade. The sub-soil

strata (from 2.0 – 4.0 meters up to 5.4 - 18.3 meters) consist of very loose to

medium dense silty sand, gravel or sandy silt. The sub-soil strata, from 5.4 -

18.3 meters up to 20.0 meters consist of a weak to moderately coralline

limestone interbedded with silty sand and silt layers. Loss of drilling fluid was

also encountered in all the boreholes within this area indicating presence of

solution cavities and solution channels in the subsurface materials at the site.

12.25 Disposal Area - The subsurface stratigraphy at the site of the proposed

Disposal Area shows that the top layer comprises of loose to medium dense

sand ranging up to 7.0 meters below the existing grade. The sub-soil strata

(from 7.0 – 11.5 meters) consist of medium dense silty sand varying to sandy

silt. The sub-soil strata, from 11.5 meters up to 20.5 meters consist of medium

dense to dense sand. The depths below 20.5 meters show the presence of

dense to very dense sandy silt.

Hydrology

12.26 Surface Water - There are no permanent surface water sources within

or in proximity to the proposed project areas though local wadis will channel

water during heavy rainfall episodes.

12.27 Groundwater - Groundwater was encountered in all the boreholes. The

observations indicate that the natural groundwater level at the Power Plant and

Water Plant Area of the proposed site was at about 1.5 to 4.1 meter depth

below the existing grade at the time of investigation. The groundwater level at

the disposal area was at about 1.8 meter depth below the existing grade at the

time of the investigation. Groundwater levels vary due to seasonal variation in

rainfall and surface evaporation rates. Due to the close proximity of the

seashore to the proposed development area, the groundwater beneath and

within the vicinity of the site is highly likely to be in continuous hydraulic

continuity with the Red Sea. Using a ± 1 meter seasonal variation in the

groundwater levels in the design calculations has been recommended by the

geotechnical engineers.



Sources of Contamination

12.28 Current guidance in the UK advocates the use of a conceptual risk

assessment model in an attempt to establish the links between a hazardous

source and a sensitive receptor via an exposure pathway.

12.29 The concept behind this approach is that, without each of the three

fundamental elements (source, pathway, and receptor) there can be no

potential contamination risk. Thus the mere presence of a contamination hazard

at a particular site does not necessarily imply the existence of associated risks.

The conceptual model may be illustrated as follows:

12.30 The potential sources of contamination in the vicinity of the site may

originate form historical contamination associated with the construction of the

adjacent Shuaibah I and II Power Plants, and the use of the proposed Shuaibah

III site for the temporary storage of construction materials, plant, fuels and

chemicals.

Site Investigation and Chemical Analysis

12.31 Ten groundwater samples and fifty soil samples were analysed for

organic and non organic parameters that included heavy metals, BTEX,

Cynides, PAH, VOCs, mineral oil, and cresols. A summary of the results for the

site investigation are shown in Tables 12.1 and 12.2 for soil and groundwater

respectively. A full version of the results within the contamination baseline

survey can be viewed in Appendix 12.1. The analysis results have been

compared to appropriate international guidelines and criteria for contamination

including the Dutch intervention values and the US EPA threshold values which

has enabled a value judgment to be made on the suitability of the material for its

end use.



Table 12.1 Summary of soil contamination analysis results

Barium Nickel PAH Zinc Chromium Mineral Oil

Dutch Intervention Value mg/kg / Detection Limit mg/kg

Location

625 / 3 210 / 1.8 40 / 0.005 720 / 2.5 380 / 6 5000 / 15

DOB – 40 0 921 14.4 0.105 45.3 33.9 1500

DOB – 44 0 1020 13.5 0.075 41.8 35.7 1400

B – 7 0 849 15.3 0 82 34.8 40

B-13 0 917 12.4 0 156 30.6 <15

B-23 0 1080 13.3 0 39.1 47.1 20

B- 29 0 490 22.2 0.28 46.6 39.8 1300

C- 32 1.5 862 22.7 0 44.4 43.0 65

C- 40 1.5 679 8.3 0 52.3 47.9 60

PTP- 05 1,5 634 48.6 0 81.3 74.5 40

PTP -07 0 1010 22.5 0 38.2 38.3 25

PTP- 07 1,5 812 31.7 0 52.5 45.2 30

WTP- 05 754 18.8 0.024 118 47 55

Table 12.2 Summary of groundwater contamination analysis results

Barium Cadmium Copper Phenan-hrene

Tetrahydrofuran

Phthalate

Dutch Intervention Value µ/l / Detection Limit µ/l

Location

625 / 20 6 / 0.5 75 / 2 5 / 0.005 1 / 0.5 5 / 5

B – 19 26.5 0.88 6.04 0.020 0.8 25

B – 20 38.7 0.91 6.59 0.020 0.6 7.5

B – 23 50.2 0.98 7.19 0.020 20 9.0

B – 28 21.5 0.75 2.52 0.020 3.9 5.5

B – 30 30.4 < 0.5 7.72 0.020 <0.5 7.0

DOB – 1 21.0 0.61 5.41 0.020 <0.5 91

DOB – 16 43.0 <0.5 5.60 0.020 45.0 5.5

DOB – 20 <20 <0.5 <2 0.020 1.4 25

12.32 Compared to the intervention values of the Dutch list for water,

Phthalates in all samples and tetrahydrofuran in 4 of the 10 samples are above

the intervention value of 5 µg/l and 1 µg/l, respectively. It is most probable that

the high levels of phthalates, which are commonly used as softeners in the

production of PVC and tetrahydrofuran, which is commonly used as solvent in

the production of PVC, originate from the plastic caps of some of the sample

bottles.



12.33 Compared to the intervention values of the Dutch list for soil, Barium in

the vast majority of samples is above the intervention value of 625 mg/kg.

Barium levels were recorded above the Dutch intervention values for both the

proposed Desalination Plant and Power Plant Areas. When considering the

proximity of the Shuaibah III site to the shore along with the high concentrations

of salts in the soil in general, it is probable that that the high Barium levels are

from a natural source. As the Dutch intervention values refer to European

climatic conditions, the levels are reflective of Barium levels found in European

soils which differ significantly from the arid conditions found at the Shuaibah

site.

12.34 At three locations within the proposed Power Plant Area, elevated

levels of mineral oil were recorded in the soil, although these levels were within

the Dutch intervention values.


Construction Phase

12.35 Construction of the Power Plant Area, Water Plant Area and Disposal

Area will give rise to environmental impacts to water and ground quality.

12.36 Impact: Aqueous effluents including sanitary wastewater from temporary

construction facilities, washing down, dust damping activities and concrete work

may lead to the contamination of groundwater. This impact is likely to be

temporary in nature and will only be applicable to the construction phase. Prior

to mitigation, it is considered that the impact will be temporary and of minor negative significance.

12.37 Mitigation: Sewage shall be treated within the wastewater treatment

plant on site prior to disposal.

12.38 Residual Effect: Following mitigation the overall residual impact is

considered to be temporary and of minor negative to negligible significance.

12.39 Impact: Storage of construction materials such as solvents, paints,

cleaning fluids, fuel for heavy equipment, etc. may lead to spillages or leaks of

hazardous material that may result in contaminating the groundwater. This is

likely to result in a temporary impact of minor negative significance and.

12.40 Mitigation: Hazardous materials such as fuels, oils and chemicals used

during the construction phase that have the potential to cause contamination will



be managed through the Construction Environmental Management Plan (see

Part 3 : Environmental Management Plan). The CEMP will provide detailed

health and safety guidelines for construction workers, on site personnel and sub

– contractors including personnel safety, site conduct, security, storage of

hazardous chemicals and materials and emergency preparedness.

12.41 The key control measures will be incorporated into the CEMP to

promote on site environmental good practice during the construction process.

Suitable storage facilities would be required on-site which are clearly labelled

and such facilities would include:

• Storage areas for raw materials and assembly areas for construction

components located away from sensitive receptors;

• Any fuels, oils and chemicals that are used on-site would need to be

stored in appropriate containers within a secure bunded compound in

accordance with good site practice. Such areas will need to be located

away from sensitive receptors e.g. residential and ecological receptors,

watercourses and surface water drains.

• Any hazardous waste materials would need to be stored in a secure

bunded compound in appropriate containers and are clearly labelled to

identify their hazardous properties and are accompanied with the

appropriate COSHH (Control of Substances Hazardous to Health)

assessment sheets.

Residual Effect: Following mitigation, the adoption of good on site working in the

form of appropriate storage practices, the implementation of suitable control

measures and on site training and emergency preparedness will ensure that the

potential contamination is minimised to a residual effect which is temporary in

nature and of minor negative to negligible significance.

Operational Phase

Impact: During the operation of the plant the key contamination issues are

associated with potential leaks and spills associated with plant operations and

storage of hazardous materials on site. The substances with the potential to

cause contamination include:

• Fuels - associated with the generator operation;

• Oils – associated with equipment maintenance and repair;

• Lubricants – associated with plant equipment maintenance; and

• Chlorine and other water treatment chemicals.



Prior to mitigation measures being implemented the use and storage of

materials on site with hazardous properties and potential to cause

contamination is likely to result in a permanent impact of moderate negative significance.

Mitigation: The on site Environmental Management Plan and the Shuaibah III

Health, Safety and Environmental Policy will contain operating procedures that

are to be implemented at the Shuaibah III site to prevent contamination to soils

and groundwater.

Hazardous chemicals and materials will be appropriately stored on site in a

bunded compound and located on an impervious surface, with sufficient

capacity to contain a single release from largest tank in containment area. Any

accidental spills shall be handled promptly and disposed of in accordance with

applicable standards and regulations. The storage area will be clearly labelled

with material safety data sheets maintained as part of the on site record

keeping.

Details and properties for each material should be clearly detailed which include

its nature (poisonous, corrosive, flammable), details in relation to its disposal

and the specific disposal method (recycle, sewer, burn, storage, landfill). A

signed checklist should be developed for users of hazardous materials detailing

the quantities taken, used, returned and disposed of.

Other measures in relation to personnel safety, housekeeping and security, on

site awareness training and emergency preparedness measures are also

essential. Such measures will form part of the EMP/Health, Safety and

Environmental Policy with the overall aim of avoiding incidences.

Residual Effect: It is anticipated that the EMP and Health, Safety and

Environmental Policy for the site will encourage good on-site working practices

and through the appropriate secure storage of hazardous materials on site, in

accordance with World Bank Guidelines, will minimise the risk of pollution

incidences occurring resulting in a permanent residual effect of minor negative significance to negligible.

Impact: Surface run-off during periods of rainfall or in case of fire (from use of

fire water) has the potential of mobilising residual contaminants on the ground.

This may result in generation of contaminated wastewater being released to the

environment and may have an impact on groundwater. Without mitigation this it



is considered that this impact would be temporary and of minor negative significance.

Mitigation: The design of the site drainage system will ensure that surface run –

off for the site will be channelled into an evaporation pond. The pond will be

appropriately lined to prevent water within the pond infiltrating into the

underlying groundwater. Following evaporation of stored run-off waters, any

residual contamination can be collected and treated in accordance with

guidance stipulated under the site Environmental Management Plan.

Residual Effect: Overall, following mitigation, the residual impact is considered

to be of minor negative to negligible significance.

Summary





Table 12.3 Summary Impact Table for Ground Contamination

Potential Impact Nature of Impact

(Permanent or

Temporary)





(Positive/Negative)

Aqueous effluents, washing down, dust damping activities and concrete work may lead to the contamination of groundwater.

Temporary Minor Negative • Sewage shall be treated within the wastewater treatment plant on site prior to disposal.

Minor Negative to Negligible

Storage of construction materials may lead to spillages or leaks of hazardous material that may result in contaminating the groundwater.

Temporary Minor Negative • Storage of all construction material such as solvents, paints, cleaning fluids, fuel for heavy equipment, etc. shall be in a designated area with containment. Fuelling and maintenance shall be performed in designated areas.

• Prompt clean-up of spillages shall be carried out under guidance stipulated in the CEMP.


Surface run-off during rainfall or in case of fire (from use of fire water) potentially contaminating groundwater during the operational phase.

Temporary Minor Negative • Surface run – off will be drained and stored in evaporation ponds where any residual contaminants can be appropriately disposed of.


Leakage or spillage of hazardous material from chemical storage tanks, fuel storage tanks and other storage facilities has the potential of contaminating soils and groundwater during the operational phase.

Permanent Minor Negative • All hazardous materials shall be stored in bunded area with sufficient capacity to contain a single release from largest tank in containment area.

• Any accidental spills shall be handled promptly and disposed of in accordance with applicable standards and regulations.




13 TRANSPORTATION

Introduction

13.1 This section provides an assessment of the potential impacts from traffic

movements associated with the proposed Phase III development of the

Shuaibah Power and Desalination Plant and identifies opportunities to minimise

environmental impact from vehicle movements during the construction and

operational phases.

13.2 The specific issues associated with Air Quality and Noise has been

assessed in Sections 8 and 11 respectively. This qualitative transportation

assessment has been undertaken in relation to the location of the new IWPP

plant is identifies mitigation measures relating to transportation, where

appropriate.

Methodology

13.3 A desk based assessment and site visit in May 2004 have been

undertaken to collate baseline data which has been utilised to determine the

potential the transportational impacts resulting from the proposed construction

and operational phases of the Phase III development of the Shuaibah Power

and Desalination Plant.

13.4 The information sources consulted to obtain the existing transport

framework within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in the vicinity of the

proposed site include:

• The Ministry of Municipalities and Rural Affairs, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia -

http://www.momra.gov.sa/english/index.asp

• General Directorate for Transport and Traffic Planning, Kingdom of Saudi

Arabia


Current Transport System

13.5 Saudi Arabia’s substantial socio-economic growth in recent years has

prompted a parallel expansion in the kingdom’s transportation sector, including

road, air, rail and ports. A summary of the existing transportation framework in

Saudi Arabia is provided below:



Road Network

13.6 With the massive increase in traffic that has resulted from the Kingdom's

industrial and agricultural development, it has been necessary to upgrade many

of the inter-city roads to expressways, with anything up to eight lanes for traffic.

Some of the more important inter-city highways are;

• Dammam - Abu Hadriya - Ras Tanura Highway (257 kms);

• Khaybar - Al Ola Highway (175 kms);

• Makkah - Madinah Al Munawarah Highway (421 kms);

• Riyadh - Dammam Highway (383 kms);

• Riyadh - Sedir - al Qasim Highway (317 kms);

• Riyadh - Taif Highway (750 kms); and

• Taif - Abha-Gizan Highway (750 kms).

13.7 The cities have also become congested by the growth in traffic and a

number of cities now have modern ring-roads which serve to speed vehicles on

their way and reduce congestion and pollution issues in the city centers. A

further development is the construction of networks of over- and under-passes

within the cities which again serve to facilitate driving in city centers. The length

of roads constructed up to 2001 was 111,770 kilometers.

Saudi Ports

13.8 The Kingdom currently has eight ports in total, five on the west coast

and three on the east coast. The strategic importance of Jeddah Islamic Port on

the Red Sea is key and is located in a prime location at the connection point

between Europe and the Middle East, and proximity to major shipping lines on

the Red Sea and make it the point of entry for almost 60% of the country’s

imports.

13.9 The Jiddah Islamic Port is the principal commercial port and the main

port of entry for pilgrims on their way to the Holy Cities of Makkah and Madinah.

In 1994, Jiddah was visited by 4,805 vessels and imported 15,276,411 tons. In

2000/2001, the Jiddah Islamic Port handled 23,011,579 tons of cargo. As well

as providing the main point of entry for industrial and consumer goods, the

Jiddah Islamic Port is the Kingdom's main port for the importation of livestock.

13.10 The King Abdul Aziz Port at Dammam ranks second to Jiddah as a

commercial port and has a fully equipped repair yard. In 1994, Dammam was



visited by 2,022 vessels and imported 6,603,817 tons. In 2000/2001 King Abdul

Aziz Port handled 13,740,338 tons of cargo.

13.11 The commercial port at Jizan, which is the main port in the south of the

country, and in 1994, Jizan was visited by 678 vessels and imported 310,005

tons. In 2000/2001, it handled 1,840,488 tons of cargo.

13.12 The Jubail Commercial Port in 1994 was visited by 1,215 vessels and

imported 1,127,112 tons. In 2000/2001, the port handled 2,145,676 tons of

cargo.

13.13 The commercial port at Yanbu was visited by 1,082 vessels and

imported 1,123,659 tons in 1994. In 2000/2001, it handled 2,005,318 tons of

cargo.

13.14 Dhiba Port is strategically located at the north end of the Red Sea coast

of Saudi Arabia. It is a natural harbor protected on all three sides by hills. This

port has vast hinterland on the inland frontier up to the northeast coast of Saudi

Arabia and extends up to the Mediterranean Sea on the maritime front. It is the

nearest Saudi port to the Suez Canal and other Egyptian ports.

13.15 Dhiba is the latest Saudi port developed to serve the north west region

of the Kingdom. There are three berths, which are supplied with fresh water

either by shore installations or by barge. In 2000/2001, it handled 441,608 tons

of cargo.

Air Transport

13.16 Air transport comes under the jurisdiction of the Presidency of Civil

Aviation (PCA). The country has 27 airports, three of which are international,

and Saudi Arabian Airlines (Saudia), the national carrier, has the largest fleet in

the Middle East. Until recently, national airline Saudia was the only carrier, but

in order to manage the increasing demand the PCA has granted its first new

license to Al Khayala, set up by private aviation company National Air Services

(NAS).

13.17 Saudi Arabia’s largest airport is the King Abdul Aziz International Airport

in Jeddah, which is currently undergoing an expansion that will increase its

passenger handling capacity to 21 million a year. The project includes

construction of two new terminals and the extension of the existing, with

passageways connecting the three. A two-story car park will accommodate



5,700 cars, and 25 passenger bridges will connect departure and arrival

lounges directly with aircraft.

13.18 The two other international airports still have the potential for expansion.

At King Khaled Airport in Dammam, an entire terminal is available for added

capacity once the demand materialises, while at King Fahd Airport in Riyadh

has capacity to receive seven million more passengers a year.

Railways

13.19 The Kingdom's railways currently consist primarily of a single track,

standard-gauge line, running for 570 kilometers from Riyadh to Dammam in the

eastern region. This line which was opened in 1951, passes through Dhahran,

Abqaiq, Hofuf, Harad and Al-Kharj and has benefited from substantial

renovation in recent years. An additional line joining Hofuf with Riyadh was

opened in 1985.

13.20 The Kingdom's railways are managed by the Saudi Arabian Railway

Corporation (now the Saudi Railways Organisation), established in 1976 as an

independent public utility, governed by a board of directors.

Public Transport

13.21 The Saudi Public Transport Company (SAPTCO) is responsible for

operating the country's inter-city and intra-city bus service. The company was

established in 1979 and operates a fleet of over 2,000 buses in large urban

centers such as Riyadh, Jeddah, Dammam, Madinah and Makkah, and

between cities and towns across the country, transporting over three million

passengers annually. In addition, there are ten international routes, used by

approximately half a million travellers each year.

Existing Transportation and Site Access

13.22 The site at Shuaibah has no access to vehicles other than for

employees and companies undertaking business on-site. However in addition

to the employees who are resident in the worker housing on site, there are up to

10 buses per day which transport workers to the SWCC plants from Jeddah.

13.23 A new road from Jeddah to Shuaibah was opened approximately 18

months ago and this has replaced the old road which is situated further inland.

The new highway consists of two lanes plus overtaking lanes providing a high

speed coastal highways route. In addition there is ongoing construction work to



provide dual highway facilities equivalent to a motorway link along the Red Sea

coast which is likely to be completed over the next three years.

13.24 Consultations with the Operations Manager for the existing Shuaibah I

and II Power and Desalination Plants noted that approximately 500 construction

workers were transported to the site from Jeddah via 10 to 12 buses. During

the construction phase approximately 50% of the work force was temporarily

housed on-site in work compounds and 50% were transported back and forth to

Jeddah.


Construction Phase

13.25 Impact: It is anticipated that the principle issues during the construction

phase will be associated with the transportation of workers from Jeddah. Prior

to mitigation this is likely to have a temporary impact of minor negative significance on the local highway network.

13.26 Mitigation: Based on information provided as part of the consultations

with the Operations Manager for Shuaibah I and II approximately 500

construction workers were transported to the site via buses. It was estimated

that approximately 50% of the workers were temporarily housed in worker

compounds adjacent to the site with the remaining 50% transported to and from

Jeddah on a daily basis.

13.27 It is anticipated that a similar approach will be adopted for the propsoed

Shuaibah III plant would be undertaken with many of the construction work force

being housed in temporary worker compounds adjacent to the site. This will

significantly minimise the requirement to transport the work force to and from

Jeddah on a daily basis, although it is anticipated that there will be a need to

transport residual numbers of the construction work force to and from Jeddah.

13.28 The remaining work force will be transported to and from Jeddah on a

daily basis. The use of buses to transport the workers on a daily basis to and

from Jeddah reduces the need for multiple private car journeys.

13.29 Residual Effect: Overall, the accommodation of a percentage of

construction workers in temporary worker compounds coupled with transporting

the remaining workers to and from Jeddah on a daily basis via a series of buses

will reduce the need for multiple journeys by private car and minimise the



residual effect on the local highway network to temporary and of negligible to minor positive significance.

13.30 Impact: The transportation of construction materials / plant to the

development site and the removal of waste materials may result in a temporary

impact of minor negative significance on the local road network. Prior to

mitigation, it is anticipated that this would result in a temporary impact of minor negative significance.

13.31 Mitigation: There is an existing dock adjacent to the site which was

utilised as a temporary dock for the delivery by sea of material and equipment

during the construction of the Shuaibah I and II Power and Desalination Plants.

It is anticipated that this dock could also be utilised to transport equipment and

materials to the site during the construction of the Shuaibah III Plant.

13.32 Although marine transport will be utilised as the primary mode of

transport for the delivery of material via the existing dock there may also be a

requirement for material and plant equipment to be delivered via the existing

road network from Jeddah. At present the coastal highway is being upgraded to

a dual highway and will be of sufficient capacity to manage the residual

requirement of material and equipment delivery to the site from Jeddah and

delivery during off-peak traffic periods will be encouraged to avoid potential

congestion issues.

13.33 Residual Effect: It is anticipated that the primary emphasis on marine

transportation for importing material and equipment to the site will reduce the

impact on the local highway network. Although the coastal highway adjacent to

the site will be utilised as a secondary mode of transport for material and

equipment it is anticipated that the upgrades to this road to a dual highway will

reduce the overall impact to a residual effect of negligible to minor positive significance.


13.34 During the construction of Shuaibah II there is the potential for

cumulative traffic impacts associated with the existing Shuaibah I and II plants

and the SEC plant, which is currently being constructed.

13.35 It is anticipated that there will be minor negative cumulative effect

associated with the use of the local highway network by multiple lorry

movements from the construction site of Shuaibah II and the existing Shuaibah I



and II plants. However, given the upgrading of the primary coastal highway

north-south link road adjacent to the site will be duelled over the next two years

and will alleviate any potential traffic related cumulative effects.

13.36 In addition, the use of marine transport for the import of materials to the

Shuaibah II site during construction will also minimise the requirement to import

equipment and materials to the site using the local highway network.

13.37 The accommodation of a percentage of construction workers at the

Shuaibah II site will also minimise the potential cumulative impact of the number

of private car journeys to and from the site.

Operational Phase

13.38 Impact: During the operational phase there is the potential for the impact

of materials being delivered including oil. Prior to mitigation this is likely to

result in a permanent impact of minor negative significance.

13.39 Mitigation: During the operational phase the primary mode of transport

for the delivery of oil and other material to the proposed site will be via marine

transport. The delivery of oil to the site will be via the existing oil unloading jetty

and is a facility that has been constructed only to receive oil. For any surplus

material delivered to the site during the operational phase this will be

undertaken using the existing deep water jetty.

13.40 The use of marine transport negates the requirement for the transport of

material via the existing road network, however, as a secondary option should

deliveries be required via the local road network from ports in Jeddah the

operator will encourage off-peak delivery times to ensure that rush our traffic

and any congestion issues in the vicinity of the site are avoided. It is anticipated

that should deliveries of material via the local highway be required the current

upgrading of the coastal highway adjacent to the site to a dual lane highway will

assist in minimising any potential congestion issues.

13.41 Residual Effect: The use of marine transport as the primary mode of

transport for oil and any surplus material will significantly reduce the impact on

the local highway network. However, the use of the coastal highway as a

secondary mode of transport fro the delivery of materials from the marine port in

Jeddah will be infrequent and will have a residual impact of negligible to minor positive significance on the local transport infrastructure.



13.42 Impact: The impact associated with personnel travelling to and from the

site during the operational phase of the power plant. Prior to mitigation this is

likely to result in a permanent impact of minor negative significance

13.43 Mitigation: During the operational phase, it is estimated that the use of

efficient control systems for the operation of the plant will minimise the

requirement for full time operatives at the site compared with the more

conventional plants.

13.44 In addition, the provision of permanent staff accommodation in the form

of working housing during the operational phase of the development will reduce

the number of required traffic journeys to and from the site.

13.45 The ongoing construction works currently being undertaken on the

adjacent coastal highway to provide dual highway facilities equivalent to a

motorway link along the Red Sea coast is likely to be completed over the next

three years and any traffic flows resulting from staff arriving and leaving the site

is considered to be minimal.

13.46 Residual Effect: The accommodation of a percentage of full-time

operatives at the power plant in permanent worker housing and the adoption of

efficient controlled operating systems at the planting requiring fewer operatives

will reduce the impact on the local coastal highway.

13.47 In addition, although it is anticipated that a small percentage of full time

operatives will travel to and from the site on a daily basis this will have a

minimal impact on potential congestion issues on the adjacent coastal highway

which is currently being upgraded to a dual highway and overall this is likely to

result in a permanent residual effect of negligible to minor positive significance.


13.48 There is the potential for cumulative traffic impacts to arise during the

operational phase of the Shuaibah II Plant and the adjacent Shuaibah I and II

and SEC Plant.

13.49 However, the use of efficient control systems at the Shuaibah II Plant

compared with the more conventional plants will require fewer operatives and a

reduction the number of vehicle journeys to and from the site.



13.50 In addition the accommodation of a percentage of full time operatives in

permanent worker housing will also minimise potential cumulative traffic impacts

and the need to commute on a daily basis to Jeddah.

Summary





Table 13.1: Summary Impact Table for Transportation






(Positive/Negative) The transportation of workers from Jeddah impacting on local highway network

Temporary Minor Negative • A percentage of the construction work force will be housed in temporary worker compounds adjacent to the site.

• the remaining work force being transported to and from Jeddah on a daily basis. The use of buses to transport the workers on a daily basis to and from Jeddah reduces the need for multiple private car journeys.

Negligible to Minor Positive

The transportation of construction materials / plant to the development site and the removal of waste materials may result in a temporary impact of minor negative significance on the local road network.

Temporary Minor Negative • There is an existing dock adjacent to the site which was utilised as a temporary dock for the delivery by sea of material and equipment

• At present the coastal highway is being upgraded to a dual highway and will be of sufficient capacity to manage the residual requirement of material and equipment delivery to the site from Jeddah and delivery during off-peak traffic periods will be encouraged to avoid potential congestion issues.


During the operational phase there is the potential for the impact of materials being delivered including oil

Permanent Minor Negative • During the operational phase the primary mode of transport for the delivery of oil and other material to the proposed site will be via marine transport. The delivery of oil to the site will be via the existing oil unloading jetty and is a facility that has been constructed only to receive oil.

• For any surplus material delivered to the site during the operational phase this will be undertaken using the existing deep water jetty.

• As a secondary option should deliveries be required via the local road network from ports in Jeddah the operator will encourage off-peak delivery times to ensure that rush our traffic and any congestion issues in the vicinity of the site are avoided.




Table 13.1 (Continued): Summary Impact Table for Transportation






(Positive/Negative) The impact associated with personnel travelling to and from the site during the operational phase of the power plant.

Permanent Minor Negative • the use of efficient control systems for the operation of the plant will minimise the requirement for full time operatives at the site compared with the more conventional plants.

• In addition, the provision of permanent staff accommodation in the form of working housing during the operational phase of the development will reduce the number of required traffic journeys to and from the site.




14 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY

Introduction

14.1 This section assesses the terrestrial ecology of the site in relation to the

potential construction and operational impacts associated with the development

of the IWPP plant at Shuaibah. The assessment is based primarily on a survey

of the terrestrial floral community, focusing on native species, although there is

also reference to bird species observed using the habitats within the SWCC

fence line. An indication of the terrestrial invertebrate community found at the

site and along the coastal plain at Shuaibah has been assessed by considering

the local biodiversity of butterflies in this region which rely on the vegetation for

stages of development.

Methodology

14.2 A preliminary site visit and consultation meeting with SWCC was

undertaken on 29th May 2005. Vegetation, mainly in the form of coastal scrub

was observed inside the SWCC fence-line varying from sparse cover within the

main working areas of the Shuaibah I and II Power and Desalination Plants, to

relatively extensive vegetation in undeveloped areas of the site. A vegetation

survey was subsequently undertaken to assess the biodiversity of coastal flora

and to identify any potentially sensitive areas within the overall development

footprint and the sites for the temporary camps.

14.3 The survey area was confined to the SWCC land ownership within the

fence line boundary because it was evident that the sparse scrub vegetation

outside of the site is grazed by goat and camel herds and is not necessarily

representative of the floral community relating to the Shuaibah Power and

Desalination Plants. It was also noted that the vegetation was particularly

sparse compared with that inside the SWCC fenceline including some adjacent

areas characteristic of sabkhas (salt pans) which are entirely devoid of any

scrub or grassland vegetation.

14.4 The National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development

(NCWCD) website has been consulted to identify relevant maps, designated

sites or species, or habitats of key importance along the Red Sea coast, in

proximity to the Shuaibah site. Reference has also been made to the technical

publication “Butterflies of Saudi Arabia and its neighbours” by Torben Larsen.



14.5 A survey of terrestrial vegetation on land owned by SWCC was carried

out September 4 2005 to identify the range and biodiversity of the floral

community. The survey was carried out by ECB’s Associates from the King

Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah, Dr. Mohammed Bagour and Dr. Ahmed

Bakhaswain.

14.6 Perennial plants were identified to species or species groups, although

grasses were generally difficult to classify due to the dry condition late in the

summer season. The survey focused on native flora and therefore did not

record ornamental landscape species associated with the temporary

construction and worker housing compounds. In addition habitats resulting from

man-made actions such as wetland habitat, which has developed at two

locations, was not assessed in detail but were recorded in relation to the

additional value for wildlife, particularly wading birds and wildfowl.

Plate 14.1: Wetland habitat and birds adjacent to worker housing



Plate 14.2: Birds on amenity grassland adjacent to worker housing 14.7 The overall study area was within the SWCC fenced site boundary

based on an initial reconnaissance visit which identified three main areas for

survey relating to the following:

• The habitat adjacent to the shoreline;

• The IWPP operational footprint area; and

• The IWPP construction layout area and control sites

14.8 Eight Sites (see Figure 14.1) were selected for the survey as follows:

• Site 1 shoreline (north);

• Site 2 shoreline (south)

• Site 3 IWPP operational footprint;

• Site 4 IWPP site northern boundary;

• Site 5 IWPP temporary site adjacent to worker housing;

• Site 6 Control (north)

• Site 7 Control (central); and

• Site 8 Control (south)



Figure 14.1: Terrestrial floral survey locations (September 2005)



14.9 Ten representative sample locations, each contained within a 2m2

quadrat, (total 20m2) were selected for each of the eight sites, to provide a semi

quantitative survey area, for recording species biodiversity and cover (see

Appendix 14.1). The total percentage cover for each of the eight sites was also

estimated to provide an overall comparison of vegetation cover between sites.

14.10 In addition each species was also recorded on the DAFOR SCALE (i.e.

Dominant, Abundant, Frequent, Occasional and Rare Scale as indicated in

Table 14.1 below

Table 14.1 Species records according to the DAFOR Scale

Sl

No

Percentage Cover Denoted by Abundance Rating

1 N.O (-) Not observed

2 10– 20% R Rare

3 30- 40% O Occasional

4 50– 60% F Frequent

5 70– 80% A Abundant

6 90– 100% D Dominant


14.11 . The survey undertaken on the 4th September 2005 has indicated that

the majority of the vegetation is typical of the Red Sea coastal plain and is

comprised of mixed vegetation community types namely:

• salt marsh /halophytic communities species such as

o Anabsis spp; Suaeda spp., Zygophyllum spp; and

• xerophyte communities typical of desert scrub , such as

o Rhanrium epapposum; Panicum turgidum; Calotropis procera;

and Cassia italica community types.

14.12 Some of the species recorded, such as Rhantrium epapposm in Site 1

exhibited some amounts of deterioration which might be due to the high salinity

combined with recent drought conditions. In some areas, perennial grasses

were observed but the species could not be identified as they were dry and cut.



14.13 The survey recorded a total of 19 species, mainly scrub vegetation and

low growing xerophytes.

Plate 14.3: View of extensive terrestrial vegetation at Site 6 inside SWCC fence

Plate 14.4: View of occasional halophytes close to shoreline (Site 2)

14.14 The species diversity ranged from 6 species at Sites 4 and 5 which are

located within the footprint of the IWWP operational site, to a maximum of 12

species at site 1 adjacent to the shoreline. The lowest percentage cover was

recorded at sites 3 and 4, (< 1 to 5%), while the highest cover of 70 to 80% was



recorded at Sites 6, 7 and 8 which are located to the east of the IWPP site just

inside the SWCC fence line.

Table 14.2 Terrestrial Flora recorded at Shuaibah 4 September 2005

SITES

SPECIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Panicum Turgidum

60 30 0 0 20 80 0 60

Cyperus conglomerlatus

40 80 20 0 0 20 0 20

Anabasis setifera

70 90 70 30 60 70 20 60

Perennial grasses

0 0 0 0 40 50 30 70

Suaeda spp. = S.aegyptiaca = S. vermiculala

10050 40 50 0 60 0 60

Rhantrium epapposum 80 20 10 0 0 50 0 0

Salsola spp. 50 30 0 0 0 50 30 50

Zygophyllum spp.

30 40 .10 30 10 20 10 10

Calotropis procera

0 30 10 0 0 40 0 10

Tamarix spp. 0 0 0 80 0 0 0

Halexylon salicornicum

0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0

Cassia italica 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 0

Mesembry anthem spp.

30 0 10 0 20 20 40 20

Arnebis spp. 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 10

Rhazya stricta 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0

Convolvulus spp 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0

Cruciavella membranacea

10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0

Hippocrepis unilsilqua

10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0

Astragalus tribulorides

10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL SPP 12 8 11 6 6 10 9 10

% COVER 10 15 <1 5 20 80 70 75



14.15 A review of the potential for terrestrial invertebrates has been based on

butterfly distribution in the Arabian Peninsula. There are almost 150 species of

butterflies found in Saudi Arabia of which 80 species are found along the flat

coastal plain stretching from Jeddah to Yemen, known as the Tihama. This

habitat has similarities with open savannah but the climate is hotter and with

higher humidity. This habitat supports some highly specialised butterflies which

are found only on the Tihama.

Assessment of Impacts, Mitigation and Residual Effects

Construction Phase

14.16 Impact: Construction impacts are likely to be of minor negative significance prior to mitigation.

14.17 Assessment of Construction Impacts - During the 30 month construction

period, the land based works need to be assessed in relation to the following

issues :

• The impact on vegetation within the footprint of the IWPP operational

site;

• The impact on vegetation at locations which are to be used as

temporary compounds or storage areas;

• The effects of construction on other aspects of terrestrial ecology;

14.18 The results of the floral survey have indicated that the site for the IWPP

is principally cleared and levelled in readiness for the new development. As a

result, the vegetation cover is < 1% and does not contain any notable species.

However the highest number of species was identified at the interface between

the site and the shoreline although the percentage cover is relatively low (10%)

compared with the high floral cover at the sites to the east of the IWPP but

within the SWCC fence line.

14.19 While the construction of the IWPP will have negligible impact on

existing flora, the location of temporary housing compounds, laying out areas

and access roads are potentially of greater significance due to the fairly

extensive vegetation to the east. However it is likely that the main access road

to the site will be outside the SWCC fence line for security reasons and this will

be along an existing track with little or no vegetation. This route would therefore

have benefits in retaining the existing vegetation where there is at least 70%



ground cover and where there are secondary benefits for associated fauna

including birds and terrestrial invertebrates. In addition existing swamp habitat

to the north of the worker housing (inside the SWCC fence line) will not be

directly affected by temporary facilities. This is likely to result in a temporary

impact of minor negative significance.

14.20 Mitigation: The principal mitigation measures during constriction works

are as follows:

• New access routes to the IWPP site should be located outside the

SWCC fence line to avoid large scale removal of highly vegetated areas

which are to the east of the worker housing;

• The temporary worker housing, storage compounds and laying out

areas should be located adjacent to the IWPP site, where practical as

this will reduce the further clearance of vegetation;

• Consider the working corridors required by the contractors and identify

areas of vegetation which can be retained outside of these corridors;

• Following completion of the construction works, the temporary facilities

should be removed and the land returned to its former condition allowing

natural recolonisation of the native coastal flora;

• Existing swamp habitat located to the north of the worker housing, which

is of relatively high nature conservation value for wading birds and

wildfowl should be avoided during the construction period;

• The requirements for the provision of temporary storage and

evaporation ponds containing groundwater pumped from ground works

could be enhanced for wildlife by the provision of a shallow margin

which would naturally colonise with waterside reeds. The use of reeds

would also improve the treatment of the water prior to discharge.

14.21 Residual Effect: The residual effect of construction works is considered

to be of minor positive significance.

14.22 Impact: The operational impacts associated with the IWPP are

considered to be of minor negative significance in the absence of mitigation

measures.

14.23 The main operational area of the site will comprise industrial facilities,

hardstanding, roads and adjacent drainage areas. This may be supplemented



by limited landscaping of main entrance areas although this would tend to use

non native amenity species. As a result there are likely to be limited

opportunities for retaining or promoting vegetation within the operational site.

14.24 However there will be a requirement to provide tertiary waste water

treatment on site and this could be achieved using shallow ponds planted as

reed beds rather than relying entirely on disinfection prior to discharge. In

addition there is a requirement to provide storage ponds to receive storm

drainage or release of chlorinated product water. Alternatively the slow release

of treated waste water effluent into an artificially created wadi would be rapidly

colonised by waterside plants and provide enhancements suitable for birds and

terrestrial invertebrates. Overall therefore, there are opportunities within the site

to enhance the wildlife habitats without impacting upon the operations of the

IWPP.

14.25 Mitigation: The mitigation measure proposed for the operational site

include the following:

• During detailed design, identify requirements for storage/treatment

ponds on site which can be enhanced for wildlife by the planting of

reeds in shallow margins;

• Release of product water should be via storage ponds or an artificial

wadi which will encourage colonisation by local vegetation whilst

avoiding impacts on coastal waters form the residual chlorine levels.

14.26 Residual Effect: The residual impact would be permanent and of

negligible to minor positive significance.

Summary





Table 14.3 Summary Impact Table for Terrestrial Ecology






(Positive/Negative) Construction Impacts Temporary Minor Negative • See Mitigation measures outlined in

Paragraph 14.20 above

Minor Positive

Operational Impacts Permanent Minor Negative • See Mitigation measures outlined in Paragraph

14.25 above

Neutral to Minor Positive



15 CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY

Introduction

15.1 This section of the EIA reviews the key cultural heritage and

archaeology issues associated with the proposed Phase III development of the

Shuaibah Power and Desalination Plant on and surrounding the site during both

construction and operational phases.

15.2 The significance of the proposed power plant on the local archaeology

and cultural heritage resource, if any have been assessed and where

necessary, mitigation measures have been identified.

Methodology

15.3 This assessment has been guided and prepared in accordance with the

current UK guidance the ‘Standard and Guidance for Desk-based Assessments’

issued by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA 1999).

15.4 The baseline assessment involved consultation of readily available

archaeological and historical information from documentary and cartographic

sources. The major repositories of information consulted comprised:

• Consultations have been undertaken with Ministry responsible for historic

issues in relation to the development site ;

• A review of the current site investigation for the site to identify any potential

evidence of buried archaeological and cultural resource at the site;

• A desk top assessment of available archaeological / cultural data; and

• An assessment of the potential archaeological implications of the

development, with recommended mitigation measures if required.

15.5 A site visit has also been undertaken in May 2004 in order to record

current site land-use and topography, and to assess any potential above ground

archaeology and cultural heritage resources / features at the site and

surrounding area.




Overview of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology in Saudi Arabia

15.6 Historic preservation is an essential element of Saudi Arabian culture.

Currently the Kingdom's archaeological heritage is safeguarded by the

Department of Museums and Antiquities, which has excavated, catalogued and

preserved pre-historic and historic sites. Important archaeological work is also

carried out by the Department of Archaeology at King Saud University in

Riyadh.

15.7 The Kingdom places emphasis on preserving its Islamic archaeological

heritage. In addition to the Holy Mosque in Makkah and the Prophet's Mosque

in Madinah, a large number of mosques around the Kingdom, such as those

built by the first caliphs after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, have been

restored.

15.8 The restoration of the old Qasr Al-Hokm area in Riyadh is indicative of

the Kingdom's commitment to maintaining and preserving its cultural heritage

for the benefit of its citizens. Similar restoration work of old quarters has been

undertaken in Jeddah, Hail and other cities around the Kingdom.

Site Visit (August 2005)

15.9 A site visit was undertaken in August 2005 in order to record current site

land-use and topography, and to assess the visible cultural heritage resource, if

any, at the site.

15.10 Shuaibah is an isolated site on the banks of the Red Sea approximately

110km south of Jeddah with Mecca and Medina located approximately 40km

inland to the north east of the IWPP site.

15.11 The development of Shuaibah I and II has occurred in recent years

together with worker accommodation. This is no above ground evidence of

former communities at this location or features of cultural or archaeological

sensitivity.

15.12 Consultations undertaken during the site walkover with local Bedouin

communities in the vicinity of the site confirmed the following regarding the site

of the existing and proposed power and Desalination plants:



• there are no known features of historical interest such former Shuaibah

settlements;

• there are no historic trading routes or features of cultural or archaeological

importance; and

• the site currently does not have a mosque situated either on the site or in

the immediate vicinity.


Construction Phase

15.13 Impact: The absence of any above ground evidence of former

communities at this location or features of cultural or archaeological sensitivity

was confirmed during the site walkover and consultations with local Bedouin

communities in the vicinity of the site. In addition, ground investigation also

confirmed the absence of any finds of archaeological or cultural significance on-

site. Therefore, the potential impact on unknown sources of archaeological or

cultural heritage interest on or surrounding the site during the construction

phase is considered to be neutral.

15.14 Mitigation: Not mitigation measures are required during the construction

phase given the absence of above ground or buried cultural or archaeological

resource on or in the immediate vicinity of the site.

15.15 Residual Effect: The overall residual effects on cultural heritage and

archaeology on and in the immediate vicinity of the site would be neutral.


15.16 The absence of any above ground evidence of former communities at

this location or features of cultural or archaeological sensitivity was confirmed

during the site walkover and consultations with local bedwin communities in the

vicinity of the site. The ground investigation also confirmed the absence of any

finds of archaeological or cultural significance on-site.

15.17 In addition, given the adjacent industrial activities associated with the

existing Shuaibah I and II Power and Desalination Plants it is anticipated that

the potential cumulative impact on any above ground or buried cultural and



archaeological resources during the construction phase is considered to be

negligible.

Operational Phase

15.18 Impact: Due to the absence of any above ground evidence of former

communities at this location or features of cultural or archaeological sensitivity

and also the absence of any finds of archaeological or cultural significance

during the ground investigation the impact on unknown sources of

archaeological potential during the operational phase of the site is considered to

be neutral.

15.19 Mitigation: Once the proposed development is complete it is considered

that no additional impact on any archaeological resource on or in the vicinity of

the site is anticipated. Therefore no mitigation measures are required.

15.20 Residual Effect: The overall residual effect on the potential cultural and

archaeological finds on and in the vicinity of the site will be neutral.


15.21 The absence of any above ground evidence of former communities at

this location or features of cultural or archaeological sensitivity was confirmed

during the site walkover and consultations with local bedwin communities in the

vicinity of the site. In addition, ground investigation also confirmed the absence

of any finds of archaeological or cultural significance on-site.

15.22 Therefore, given the adjacent industrial activities associated with the

existing Shuaibah I and II Power and Desalination Plants it is anticipated that

the potential cumulative impact on any above ground or buried cultural and

archaeological resources during the operational phase of the development is

considered to be negligible.

Summary





Table 15.1 Summary Impact Table for Cultural Heritage and Archaeology






(Positive/Negative) The potential impact on unknown sources of archaeological or cultural heritage interest on or surrounding the site during the construction process

Temporary Neutral • No above ground or buried cultural or archaeological resources were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the site and therefore no mitigation measures required

Neutral

The potential impact on unknown sources of archaeological or cultural heritage interest on or surrounding the site during the operational phase

Permanent Neutral • During the operational phase it is anticipated that the proposed development will have no significant impact on above ground or buried cultural or archaeological resources and therefore no mitigation measures required

Neutral


258 The Saudi-Malaysian Consortium WSP Environmental u

16 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL

Introduction

16.1 The purpose of this section of the report is to describe and assess the

existing character and visual resources of the application site and its

surroundings.

16.2 This section will also evaluate the likely visual impacts of the

development on the landscape and, where applicable, appropriate mitigation

measures will be provided.

Methodology

16.3 The methodology used follows the guidelines set out in the UK

Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Assessment’s “Guidelines for

landscape and visual impact Assessment” 2000. The methodology includes:

• Desk based review of existing information, including site plans,

photographs, maps, etc; and

• A site survey undertaken in August 2005, to establish the character of the

existing site and its surroundings and the relationship of the site to adjacent

areas and vantage points.


16.4 Shuaibah is an industrial site characterised by existing industrial

facilities comprising Shuaibah I and II Power and Desalination Plants. The area

is therefore of low sensitivity in landscape and visual terms.

16.5 However the potential for further beech side developments in the future

should not be discounted at this stage and therefore a desk and field study has

been undertaken to assess the potential landscape and visual impacts that may

occur on surrounding sensitive receptors. The results of this assessment have

also been linked to the Chapter 14: Terrestrial Ecology and the identification of

key habitats / features of landscape value.

16.6 The main viewpoints of the site and surrounding area are shown in

Figure 16.1 and are described in further detail in Table 16.1 below:



Figure 16.1: Site Viewpoint Locations



Table 16.1: Key Viewpoint Descriptions surrounding the proposed site

Site Reference Viewpoint Description

Site 1 Site 1 Is located approximately 5km to the north of

the Shuaibah IWPP Phase III site

Site 2 Site 2 is located approximately 2km to the north of

the Shuaibah IWPP Phase III site.

Site 3 Site 3 is located adjacent to the proposed

Shuaibah IWPP Phase III boundary.

Site 4 Site 4 shows the existing worker housing to the

east Shuaibah IWPP Phase III site.

Site 5 Site 5 is located 3km east of the existing Shuaibah

I and II Power and Desalination Plants.

Site 7 Site 7shows the coastal villas north of the SEC

Power Plant.

Site 8 Site 8 is located 2km east of the SEC plant

Site 9 Site 9 is located 2km south of the SEC plant.

Site 10 Site 10 is located 5km south of the SEC plant

16.7 The above key viewpoints taken at each site are discussed in further

detail below and the descriptions are supplemented will viewpoint photographs

to illustrate the existing landscape and features surrounding the site.

Site 1

16.8 Site 1 is located approximately 5km to the north of the Shuaibah IWPP

Phase III site and illustrates the nature of the fishing village settlements located

to the north of the proposed IWPP site (Plate 16.1).

Plate 16.1



16.9 The view from Site 1 looking south illustrates an unoccupied shade

structure which is used by local fisherman and the absence of any terrestrial

vegetation adjacent to the shelter. In the background, approximately 5km to the

south of the site, is the existing SWCC plant (See Plate 16.2).

16.10 The view to the east of Site 1 illustrates the existing overhead power

lines operating between the SWCC Plant and Mekkah with the line of the

foothills visible in the background. In the foreground there is limited terrestrial

vegetation at this location (See Plate 16.3).

Site 2

16.11 Site 2 is located approximately 2km to the north of the Shuaibah IWPP

Phase III site. The view south from this location shows the existing SWCC plant

Plate 16.3

Plate 16.2



with overhead power lines in the distance and the coast line to the west of the

site (See Plate 16.4).

Site 3

16.12 Site 3 is located adjacent to the proposed Shuaibah IWPP Phase III

boundary. The view looking south along the proposed boundary illustrates the

existing SWCC plant and adjacent water storage tanks with overhead power

lines and debris material in the foreground (See Plate 16.5)

16.13 At Site 3 the view to the east of the proposed IWPP site illustrates the

existing worker housing (See Plate 16.6).

Plate 16.5

Plate 16.4



Site 4

16.14 Site 4 to the east Shuaibah IWPP Phase III site shows the existing

worker housing and associated infrastructure (See Plate 16.7)

Site 5

16.15 Site 5 is located 3km east of the existing Shuaibah I and II Power and

Desalination Plants. To the south of Site 5 are the main routes of the overhead

power lines from SWCC with SCC visible in the distance (See Plate 16.8 below)

Plate 16.7

Plate 16.6



16.16 To the west of Site 5, Plate 16.9 shows the worker housing which is

approximately 3km from this location.

Site 6

16.17 Photographs were taken at Site 6, however, have been omitted from the

assessment on security grounds as the site is located adjacent to the existing

Shuaibah I and II Plants. The representative views and landscape profile in at

Site 6 is illustrated in photographs taken at Site 7 which is in close proximity.

Site 7

Site 7 is to the north of the SWCC I and II Power Plants and Plate 16.10 shows

the view to the west including the extent of the existing oil unloading jetty in the

background.

Plate16.9

Plate 16.8



Site 8

16.18 Site 8 is located 2km east of the SEC plant and from this location to the

west this illustrates the absence of vegetation and the extent of the salt pan

(Sabkha) in the foreground and the temporary worker housing in the

background (See Plate 16.11 below).

16.19 Plate 16.12 below shows the continuation and extent of the salt pan

(Sabkha) to the south of Site 8.

Plate 16.10

Plate 16.11



Site 9

16.20 Site 9 is located 2km south of the SEC plant and looking north from Site

9 shows the SCC Plant and the water storage tanks and coastline with

overhead power lines visible in the distance (See Plate 16.13 below)

Site 10

16.21 Site 10 is located 5km south of the SEC plant and at Site 10 to the east

there is the existing coast guard station (See Plate 16.14).

Plate 16.12

Plate 16.13



To the west of Site 10 illustrates the existing jetty with a number of boats

moored alongside (See Plate 16.15 below).


Construction Phase

16.22 Impact: During the construction phase, plant and equipment including

large cranes will be present on the site. Prior to mitigation, such structures are

likely to have a temporary impact of minor negative significance.

16.23 Mitigation: As outlined in the baseline review section above the area

surrounding the proposed site is sparsely populated with the nearest small

Plate 16.14

Plate 16.15



villages located approximately 15 to 20km to the north and east of the site and

the largest town located approximately 40km to the south.

16.24 In addition, the proposed site is also set back approximately 7km from

the adjacent coastal highway and will therefore present minimal visual impact to

motorists.

16.25 Residual Effect: Given the temporary nature of the construction

operations and the distances to nearby villages and towns and the adjacent

coastal highway it is anticipated that the residual impact on local people and

road users will be temporary and of negligible significance during the

construction phase.


16.26 During the construction phase the cumulative impact associated with

such operations will be temporary in nature and due to the sparsely populated

nature of the surrounding area the overall cumulative visual impact is likely to be

minimal.

Operational Phase

16.27 Impact: The stacks from the new power and Desalination plant will be

visible during the operational phase. Prior to mitigation this is likely to result in a

permanent impact of minor negative significance.

16.28 Mitigation: Given the sparsely populated nature of the surrounding area

and distance between the site and the nearest residential villages

(approximately 15 to 20km to the north and east of the site) and the presence of

the existing Shuaibah I and II Plants, it is considered that the visual impact on

properties in this area will be minimal and no mitigation is required.

16.29 In addition, the area proposed site is located in an area currently

categorised by industrial operations in the form of the Shuaibah I and II Plants

and also the SEC Plant. Therefore the introduction of the proposed Shuaibah

Phase III plant is unlikely to create any additional visual impact as the height of

the stacks proposed for the IWPP Plant will be the same height as those

currently operating for the Shuaibah I and II.

16.30 Residual Effect: Given the sparsely populated nature of the surrounding

area and the use of stacks of the same height as those currently associated



with Shuaibah I and II it is anticipated that the overall residual effect would be

permanent and of negligible significance.


16.31 During the operational phase there is the potential for a cumulative

visual impact associated with the stacks for Shuaibah I, II and III. However,

given the sparsely populated nature of the surrounding area and the fact that

the proposed IWPP site will be set back approximately 7km from the coastal

road will result in minimal cumulative visual impacts on the surrounding

receptors.

Summary





Table 16.2 Summary Impact Table for Landscape and Visual






(Positive/Negative) During the construction phase, plant and equipment including large cranes will be present on the site creating a visual impact

Temporary Minor Negative • No Mitigation Required Negligible

The stacks from the new power and Desalination plant will be visible during the operational phase

Permanent Minor Negative • No Mitigation Required Negligible



PART 3: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MONITORING

Introduction

This section considers the potential framework of pollution control and best

practice measures that may be operated at the Shuaibah Phase III IWPP site

during both the construction and operational phases in order to minimise and

where possible prevent impacts in the areas on and surrounding the site.

Methodology

The methodology used to carry out this assessment comprised of the following:

• A desktop review of available information based on current EU and US EPA

best management practices for construction operations;

• A desktop review of available information based on current EU and US EPA

best management practices for Power Station sites;

• Laws and standards relating to Saudi Arabia and World Bank.

• A site visit undertaken in June and July 2005.

Environmental Performance

The developer has a remit to design, construct and operate the proposed plant

in accordance with the applicable environmental laws and standards. In order

to ensure compliance with environmental legislation, a comprehensive

Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) should be developed

and an Environmental Management System (EMS) implemented, to manage

environmental risks during construction and operational phases respectively for

the Shuaibah III IWPP project.

The key benefits of both a CEMP and an EMS are that they:

• establish a baseline against which environmental performance can be

assessed;

• provide a system for the formal identification of potential environmental

impacts associated with construction and operational processes;

• enable the identification of objectives and targets; &



• provide a framework for the monitoring and measurement of

performance and ultimately a progression towards continual

environmental improvement.

Construction Phase – Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)

This Construction Environmental Management Plan will be prepared to ensure

that the potential impacts that may arise from the construction of the Shuaibah

Phase III IWPP are actively managed and minimised. The actions set out in this

framework are intended to act as a guide and a tool for anticipating, recording

and ameliorating any impacts that may arise.

It is anticipated that the Construction Management Plan will evolve as the

project progresses to ensure that its content reflects the current construction

programme and will be discussed with PME.

The principle requirement of the Environmental Management Plan for the

Construction Phase of the project is to provide a management framework to

address all the environmental aspects identified for the construction of the

proposed Shuaibah Phase III site.

Environmental Roles and Responsibilities of the Environmental Co-ordinator

The Environmental Co-ordinator is responsible for all environmental activities on

the project and will report to the Project Director for the site. The duties involve

the following:

• Overall management of the environmental component of the project;

• Manage day to day activities to ensure significant environmental effects

are avoided;

• Review and update the Site Construction Environmental Management

Plan;

• To act as the main point of contact between the regulator (PME) and the

project on environmental issues;

• To act as the main point of contact between the local population and the

project;

• Development and delivery of environmental training (induction and

toolbox talks) for site personnel and sub-contractors;

• Ensure Best Practice is promoted at all times;



• Assisting with the development of procedures which highlight the

emergency response to environmental incidents;

• Management of the monitoring programme, including noise, dust and

water quality; &

• Environmental incident monitoring and reporting.

Assessment of Significant Environmental Aspects

The environmental aspects identified should be evaluated in terms of

significance to ensure that resources are targeted appropriately and effectively.

The environmental aspects determined to be of most significance are the

activities of the project that require managing and should be subject to

improvement in performance.

An Environmental Aspects Register will be developed and reviewed on a

monthly basis and will be structured in the following way.

Project Specific Measures

Consideration and Responsibility

All works should be carried out with positive consideration towards the

surrounding worker housing and the environment. Works that may cause an

impact to neighbouring receptor sites will be advertised through a mechanism to

be agreed with PME.

Upon agreement of the advertising mechanism, this Construction Environmental

Management Plan will be amended to include the specific mechanism.

The contractor will ensure that all site personnel, specialist sub-contractors,

delivery drivers and any other persons working on or visiting the site fully

understand and implement the obligations of the Construction Environmental

Management Plan and monitor their compliance with it. This will be achieved by

Activity Aspect Impact(s) Legislation Significance Management response

Comments



including the Construction Environmental Management Plan and its obligations

in the safety induction that everyone working on site should attend. The

inductees will be required to sign a statement stating that they have understood

and will abide by the content of the Construction Environmental Management

Plan.

Air Quality

A number of best practice measures can be implemented to minimise dust

generation and general plant emissions during the site preparation and

construction phases. Examples of appropriate procedures include:

• Finished ground/road surfaces should be set down in line with the

provided construction programme to seal the ground to ensure that the

generation of dust is kept to a minimum;

• Surfaced and un-surfaced site access roads should be kept in good

order and would be treated if practicable in windy conditions to minimise

impact on worker housing receptors;

• On-site cement and concrete batching, where required, would be

undertaken in suitable areas, with wind shielding to avoid wind blown

dry cement;

• Stockpiles of soils and materials should be located as far as possible

from sensitive properties (e.g. worker housing), taking account of

prevailing wind directions and seasonal variations in the prevailing wind

and transfer should be completed in a way that minimises the

requirements to deposit materials from height;

• Dust-suppressed tools should be used for all operations and all

construction plant and equipment should be maintained in good working

order; &

• There should be no unauthorised burning of materials on-site.

Monitoring

A programme of appropriate monitoring should be undertaken to ensure that the

mitigation measures outlined above are minimising air quality impacts on local

receptors. The monitoring should include:



• The placing of dust gauges on the perimeter of the site.

• Screening monitoring through a visual inspection of the site perimeter

should be carried out weekly to check for dust deposition (evident as soiling

and marking) on vegetation, cars and other objects. Perspex screens

should be placed at strategic positions off site and should be monitored

before and during construction works on a weekly basis, to give an

indication of dust levels above the norm in the vicinity of sensitive receptors.

Remedial measures should be taken if necessary.

Waste

As part of the Construction Environmental Management Plan minimising and

reducing waste during the construction stage is a key priority and the following

good site practices measures be implemented:

• All construction personnel including sub-contractors should be briefed

through toolbox talks regarding the importance of minimising, segregating

and recycling wastes during the construction process;

• Guidance should be provided on the segregation of certain waste streams

such as aggregates, excavated materials, metal, wood, cardboard and

polythene packaging waste;

• The objectives of the toolbox talks should be to maximise opportunities for

recycling and minimise waste to landfill; Deliveries to site should be on a

scheduled programme to minimise potential damage and wastage of

materials;

• Clearly labelled waste skips should be provided at the site for the

segregation of waste streams for recycling and for general waste to be

disposed of to landfill. The skips should be stored in a secure location on-

site to prevent waste nuisance issues arising;

• Construction materials should be stored in a secure compound to prevent

the potential for vandalism and theft of material;

• Wastes that cannot be recycled would be removed from site by a licensed

waste contractor to an appropriate licensed landfill facility in accordance

with applicable Saudi Arabian law.



In summary, the following construction best practice should be followed:

Discharges to Water

A number of measures can be implemented to minimise potential impacts to

water bodies during the construction phase and these include:

• Fuels, oils and chemicals should be stored in appropriate containers within

secure bunded compound constructed of an impermeable hardstanding. In

addition, appropriate spill-kits should be retained in the vicinity of the

storage areas;

• All plant should be regularly maintained and appropriate drip-trays should

be located below mobile plant such as generators;

• Washout from concrete mixing plant or cleaning ready-mix concrete lorries

is contaminated with cement and therefore highly alkaline. This should not

be allowed to enter any drainage channel and should be re-used on site

where possible; and

• All vehicle/plant re-fuelling should be supervised in a designated area;

Noise

Potential construction noise impacts can be minimised by the adoption of

various good site practises including:

• Piling operations should be restricted to the core working hours of 07:00 to

19:00 hours Saturday to Wednesday, 08:00 to 13:00 hours on Thursdays

with no piling at other times.

Ordering Delivery

Avoid: -

• Over ordering (order “just-on-time”)

• Ordering standard lengths rather than lengths required (e.g. Plasterboard)

• Ordering for delivering at the wrong time (update programme regularly)

Avoid: -

• Damage during unloading

• Delivery to inappropriate areas of the site

• Accepting incorrect deliveries, specification or quantity

Storage Handling

Avoid: -

• Damage to materials from incorrect storage

• Loss, theft or vandalism through secure storage and on-site security

Avoid: -

• Damage or spillage through incorrect or repetitive handling



• Where practical and where there is a positive environmental benefit, use

should be made of temporary spoil heaps to shield the surrounding

receptors from the construction works. For example, this may be utilised

during the earthworks and site preparation phases of the works.

• All plant items should be properly maintained and operated in accordance

with the manufacturers’ recommendations, so that excessive noise is

minimised. Noise caused by vibrating machinery can be reduced by proper

attention to balancing.

• Plant known to emit noise strongly in one direction should, where possible,

should be orientated so that the noise is directed away from noise sensitive

areas;

• Acoustic covers should be kept closed when engines are in use and idling.

The use of compressors that have effective noise enclosures and are

designed to operate when their access panels are closed is recommended;

• Stationary plant such as compressors and generators should be positioned

away from sensitive locations within the confines of the operational use of

the equipment;

• Materials should be lowered where practicable and not dropped.

• Deliveries should be programmed to arrive during daytime hours only and

care should be taken when unloading vehicles to minimise noise. Delivery

vehicles should also be routed so as minimise disturbance to local residents

and vehicles should be prohibited from waiting within the site with their

engines running;

All employees and contractors will need to be informed about the need to

minimise noise. As part of on site training they will be advised regularly of the

following:

• The proper use and maintenance of tools and equipment;

• The positioning of machinery on site to reduce the emission of noise to

the neighbourhood and to site personnel;

• Avoidance of unnecessary noise when carrying out operations, and

when operating plant and equipment;



• Using and maintaining measures adopted for noise control;

• By reporting defective noise control equipment;

• Managers and supervisors recognising the need for employees to make

proper use of measure to minimise noise.

Noise Monitoring

Noise monitoring should be undertaken on a regular basis at boundary locations

in the vicinity of Sensitive receptors (eg, worker housing) in order to ensure that

noise standards stipulated by PME are not exceeded;

All measured noise levels will be recorded and retained on-site for the duration

of the construction programme.

Operational Phase – Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

The Plant operator will be required to implement a comprehensive Management

Plan that considers Health, Safety and Environmental issues. The management

plan will identify, monitor and control all potential health, safety and

environmental aspects associated with the operation of the site.

Environmental Management

The management plan will also need to consider the environmental actions

required at the site. There is a potential for this to be undertaken via

implementing a controlled informal system or through a formal certified

international accredited e.g. ISO 14001:1996. Alternatively it can be bespoke

dependent on level and form of risk management required and the reason for

implementing the system (i.e. certification to ISO 14001 would demonstrate

environmental compliance and adherence to best practice principles to a third

party).



The structure of a typical EMS certified to IS14001 is shown below.

Typical structure of an Environmental Management System (ISO 14001)

As part of the above system there are a number of general procedures related

to management and administration which can be adopted within the Shuaibah

Phase III IWPP site to minimise or prevent pollution. This will incorporate

practices that aim to reduce impact on the surrounding environment and provide

a robust system of pollution control.

1. General Environmental Management Procedures

The main purpose of the Environmental Management Plan will be to implement

environmental actions to ensure the relevant legal and environmental

compliance. The general procedures that would be implemented at the

Shuaibah Phase III IWPP site should include:

• compliance with all PME regulatory requirements in environmental

matters;

• application of good environmental management practices with a view to

ongoing improvement;

• ensuring the effective and efficient use of raw materials and energy;

1. Planning

• Environmental Policy

• Environmental Aspects

• Legal and Other Requirements

• Objectives and Targets

2 Implementation

• Structure and Responsibility

• Training and Communication

• Operations Controls

• Documentation

3 Checking

• Monitoring, Measurement & Records

• Auditing

4. Act • Management Review CONTINUOUS

IMPROVEMENT



• provision of written standard operating procedures (SOP’s) for all

processes and appropriate document control;

• provision of awareness training for all employees including

management, office staff and technical staff on pollution prevention and

control techniques and best practices;

• establishment of daily checklists for plant and office areas to confirm

cleanliness and adherence to proper storage and security. Specific

employees should be assigned specific inspection responsibilities and

given the authority to remedy any problems found;

• details and properties for each material should be clearly detailed which

include its nature (poisonous, corrosive, flammable), prohibitions on its

disposal (dumpster, drain, sewer) and the recommended disposal

method (recycle, sewer, burn, storage, landfill);

• a signed checklist should be developed for users of hazardous materials

detailing amount taken, amount used, amount returned and disposal of

spent material;

• continuous monitoring and reporting of the plants performance should

be undertaken in order to establish baseline conditions and whether

conditions are improving or deteriorating;

• records should be maintained of water, air and solid waste quantities

and quality tests and their disposition

• a mass balance of incoming, outgoing and on site materials should be

maintained to ensure that loses are traced and accounted; and

• regular reviews of emergency response procedures should be

undertaken, including a contingency plan for spills, leaks, weather

extremes etc.

2. Organisation and Responsibility

The contractors Environmental Management Policy provides the guiding

principles and a driving force to create value and through this secure its

business. The policy emphasises continuous environmental improvement,



setting progressively higher environmental commitments and developing the

organisation and responsibility for environmental management.

The Shuaibah Phase III IWPP Operations will have line of environmental

responsibility where the Operations Manager is recognised as having the

primary responsibility for compliance with a continued chain from the Operation

Manager to the local operators in the installations. In addition, an

Environmental Officer will be nominated at an appropriate level and will report

directly back to the Operations Manager. The Environmental Officer will have a

defined role in implementing and maintaining the Environmental Management

Plan at the site and will include:

• Communicating the Environmental Policy to staff and personnel;

• Responsible for environmental issues in the area of responsibility and

reporting any potential incidents to the operational hierarchy and

implement corrective measures once decided by the Operations

Manager;

• Co-ordinate with other internal systems e.g. Quality and Health and

Safety; and

• Environmental awareness training for plant operators.

• Environmental Compliance

The Shuaibah Phase III IWPP operations will be compliant to all applicable

laws, regulations and contractual clauses and the regulations here are all

obligations linked to authorisations, permits or licenses applicable to the

Shuaibah Phase III IWPP installations. However, the environmental

management plan has accounted for three potential types of non-compliance

with associated corrective action and includes the following:

• A major non-compliance - this refers to any deviation from compliance

that has an impact on environment and / or public health in terms of

exceednaces in emissions, pollution, noise, etc. The Shuaibah Phase

III IWPP Operations and Management Team will be responsible for

reporting any major non-compliance’s under its accident and reporting

system and will implement an approved recovery plan.



• An administrative non-compliance – this refers to any deviation from

compliance associated with the administrative obligations including

permitting, reporting to competent authorities, etc, without any impact on

the environment or public health.

• An incidental non-compliance – this refers to a temporary deviation from

normal operating conditions having limited impact on the environment

and public.

3. Environmental Reporting

The Environmental Regulations include a number of environmental indicators

that need to be monitored and reported to ensure compliance. Data collection

requirements for appropriate environmental reporting include the following:

• Data from its on-line monitoring system for stack emissions and will need to

report daily as part of the daily operation report;

• The provision of any accident / incident reports;

• The provision of water and soil samples for regular monitoring and analysis;

• The Environmental Officer will be responsible for co-ordinating all data via

monthly / yearly reports and verifies any non-compliances; and

• The Quality System will be responsible for the notification on changes in law

and the regulatory framework for the Shuaibah Phase III IWPP.

4. Environmental Auditing

An environmental auditing procedure will be implemented for the processes at

the plant to ensure compliance with relevant statutory legislation and

regulations. The responsibility of initiating the environmental audit will be with

the Operations Manager and the Environmental Officer.



Environmental Monitoring Requirements

The operational Environmental Management Plan is of the IPPC (Integrated

Pollution Prevention and Control) type which requires material consumption,

energy efficiency and waste minimisation processes to be implemented as part

of the operating procedures.

Requirements on Air Pollutants

• Limitation of sulphur oxides – SOx – emissions will be achieved by

installation of adequate flue gas desulphurisation facilities;

• Limitation of nitrogen oxides – NOx – emissions will be achieved by

installation of low NOx burners or selective catalytic reduction;

• Limitation of particulates (PM10) – by the use of electrostatic

precipitators;

• Monitoring of Carbon Monoxide in the stack emissions;

• Monitoring of Hydrogen Sulphide in the flue gases;

• Monitoring of Oxygen in the flue gases

Requirements on Water Pollution

Waste water treatment systems will include an oil drain, a chemical drain and

sewage treatment. These facilities will be designed to cater for the entire waste

water of the plant. The water metering and monitoring system may include the

following equipment (to be confirmed as part of the EMP);

• Measurement of flow rate

• Conductivity Metering

• pH monitoring

• Temperature measurement

• Turbidity Monitoring

• Residual Chlorine Management

• Sampling points and equipment for potable water sampling at the outline

measuring units.



Requirements on Soil Contamination

As soil can become contaminated by oil and chemical spillage during operation

and maintenance of the plant, the entire plant will be designed, operated and

maintained in such as way that soil contamination will be prevented.

Requirements on Noise

To meet the noise level requirements the plant is required to be equipped with

standard noise attenuation features. All machinery which exceeds the

permissible noise limits shall be equipped with silencers or with lagging or

specially designed acoustic enclosures.

Responsibility for Environmental Monitoring

Monitoring will be carried out and be the obligation of the EPC contractor during

construction based on the EIA/EMP. During operation, the O&M will carry out

monitoring also based on the EIA mitigation requirements and guidelines.

shuaibah phase iii iwpp - auslandsgeschäftsabsicherung · shuaibah phase iii iwpp environmental...

Documents