This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
PROPOSED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE THERMAL TREATMENT PLANTS AT PULAU TIOMAN , PAHANG DARUL MAKMUR Terms of References for Detailed Environmental Impact Assesment
27 MEI 2012
Project Proponent and EIA Consultant
Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara, Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan, Paras 2&4, blok B (utara), Pusat Bandar Damansara, Peti surat 12579, 50782 Kuala Lumpur
SMART Consulting Group Sdn Bhd
9-2 & 9-3 Jalan USJ 21/6 47630 Subang Jaya, MALAYSIA Tel: 603-80242287 Fax: 603-80242320
DEIA Study Team
Area of study •Soil control • Sedimentation control Name Dr. Muhamad Hafiz b Mat Kasa
•Air quality assesment
Dr. Zaifah bt Che Wil
•Noise impacts assesment
Ir. Asyanatul Awin Bt Ahmad Termizi
•Water quality & Wastewater
Dr. Nurul Hanna Attiya Bt Baharuddin
DEIA Study Team
Area of study •Social and Economic Impact Assessment Name Prof. Dr. Nur Hafiza Bt Ahmad
•Health Impact Assessment
•Land use •Traffic
Dr. Mohd Afdhal Bt Abd Razak
Norhaliza Bt Hashim
•Occupational Safety and Health
Asilah Bt Mohamad Ali
Dr. Nazhirah Bt Mohd Mera Shoib
Overview Objective Project Background Statement of Need Project Description Existing Environment Potential & Magnitude Impacts Conclusion .
• Less than 2 Acres Project Location ( Pulau Tioman ) . Kg tekek.Project Background • Proposed thermal treatment plant • Replaced Incinerator which no longger operate for disposal of Municipal Solid Waste • Overal capacity = 15MT/day • Located at Lot 145 .
Statement of Need • Need of replacing the existing incinerators • Current incinerator are under capacity and stopped since 2007.breakdown • Wastes transported back to mainland for final disposal.improper .potential pollute • Current incinerator site.used for temporary storage.
Statement of Need • Has impacts.reducing the adverse impacts Surface and groundwater pollution Health risk Air polution Odour aesthetic .
Statement of Need Existing condition of waste stored/ disposed at the Project Site (southwest) Existing condition of waste stored/ disposed at the Project Site (west) .
Project Location Aerial Image of Project Site .
Existing Environment Road to the existing waste disposal ground Marine Park Centre Houses at 220m from project Site (west) Sg. Hantu during low tide .
) hanging on the tree near airport .Existing Environment Bamboo tree (Phyllosachys) on the Sg. Batang Siput river bank One of the coras species found off the river mouth of Sg.) at the project site Flying fox (Pteropus sp. Air Hantu Monitor lizards (Varanus sp.
cyclone and baghouse fliter •Mechanical and biological treatment system •Treating leachate Waste seperation faciity Thermal Treatment Plant Gas cooling facility Air pollution control facility Waste water treatment pant .Project Description Project component Waste reception facility •Waste receiving bay. waste storing area •:: receive MSW prior sending for seperation and treatment •Mechanical seperation and sorting •:: seperates combustible and non combustible •Made up primary chamber (>650 C) •Primary chamber ( >800 C) •Continous operation •Cool down flue gas temperature to 200 C •Consist Neutralization tower .
Project Description Proposed Layout Plan .
Scope & Methodology 5 km around project option .
Potential & Magnitude Impacts Environmental Aspects Air quality Water quality Noise Socio-economics Soil and sedimentation Ecology Land use and traffic Safety Occupational and health Magnitude of Impacts High Medium Low Safety and Health .
SCOPE OF STUDY ECOLOGY SOCIO ECONOMIC WATER QUALITY AIR QUALITY HUMAN HEALTH SOIL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL TRAFFIC NOISE QUALITY OSHA CONCLUSION .
• Pulau Tioman is a hilly island surrounded by – the South China Sea. secondary and beach forest.• The Project site is generally surrounded by – overgrown grass and shrubs except at the north of the Project site where the area was bordered by trees. . • There are 3 forest types within 5 km of the Project site – primary.160 ha) has been gazetted as Wildlife Reserve – to protect the flora and fauna on the island. • Over 50% of Pulau Tioman (about 7.
• Pulau Tioman Development Guidelines and Carrying Capacity Report. 2008. – 33 species mammalian – 48 species reptilian – 17 species amphibian – 67 species birds . JPBD.
Mammals • Species protected: – Binturong (Artictic binturong) – Long-tailed Macaque (Macaca fascicularis) – Slow Loris (Nycticebus coucang) – Black Giant Squirrel (Ratufa bicolor) – Brush-tailed Porcupine (Atherurus macrourus) – Red-giant Flying Squirrel (Petaurista petaurista) – Common Palm Civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus) – Larger Mouse Deer (Tragulus napu) .
Reptilian and amphibian – toad species Ansonia tiomanica – lizard Gonicocephalus chamaelinotus .
Birds White – bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster). Hill Myna (Gracula religiosa) is the common bird species found on the island. White-belied Fish Eagle (Haliatur Indus) Crested Serpent Eagle (Spilornis cheela) Black-winged Kite (Elanus caeruleus). .
).Marine • The marine ecology in general consist of diversity of marine organisms including – penyu hijau (Chelonia mydas) – Blacktip Reef Sharks (Carcharhinus melanopterus). – Golden Trevally (Gnathanodon speciosus) – Blue Spotted Sting Ray (Taeniura lymma) . – Coral Trout (Plectropomus sp.
Coral • Terdapat 111 spesies karang di Pulau Tioman. • Pachyseris speciosa . – hard coral species recorded • Porites rus. Porites cylindrical • Stylophora pistillata.
8 Other 2.Coverage of Coral Life Forms Life forms Life coral Dead Algae Abiotic coral Coverage (%) 50.6 0.3 at Teluk Tekek. Pulau Tioman.2 7.2 Source : Coral Monitoring Quarterly Report No.8 24. August-October 2008 BACK .
model ISCST3 -Operasi normal -Keadaan paling teruk . Debu larian – hoarding (3m) dan jalan diturap Semasa operasi 1.IMPAK DAN MITIGASI Sebelum operasi 1. Gas serombong hasil daripada pembakaran .
persampelan kualiti udara • 4 lokasi .tapak insinerator .3 di kawasan berdekatan .
OPERASI NORMAL .
KEADAAN PALING TERUK .
.Good Housekeeping . pembebasan tidak terkawal dalam tempoh 1 jam boleh menyebabkan pencemaran udara yang teruk.operasi TTP dijalankan oleh kakitangan yang cekap dan terlatih .KPIs .Di bawah keadaan paling teruk.
neutralization reactor . teknologi ACT 3. Sistem ACP .baghouse .2.siklon .
BACK .With the implementation of these measures. no residual impacts are anticipated.
4 – 65.26-28 2008 Location LAeq (dBA) range N1 49.9 – 68.8 57.0 – 57.8 60.1 N2 50.1 86 % (31 Reading ) Sound Level LAeq (dBA) range Night *Average LA90 (dBA) Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible Sound Level time .8 25 % ( 15 Reading ) 44.1 50.2 45.9 56.62.3 Day time *Average LA90 (dBA) Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible 50.9 8% ( 3 Reading ) 47.8 35 % ( 21 Reading ) 53.9 61.2 .
2 47.9 39.1 Night time *Average LA90 (dBA) Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible Sound Level 0% 17 % ( none of the Reading ) ( 6 Reading ) BACK .60.8 60.1 50.9 oct 2008 Location LAeq (dBA) range *Average LA90 (dBA) Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible Sound Level LAeq (dBA) range N1 44.63.5 56.4 45.1 – 54.Inference 7.8 Day time 0% 13 % ( none of the Reading ) ( 8 Reading ) 51.8 50.8 57.9 61.7 .1 .1 – 53.8 N2 47.
the main hazard are: 1. • In case of the TTP. the on-site diesel storage 2. • The main risk during the operation of the TTP is identified related to fire hazards within the facility.• The risk assessment conducted for this Project is to identify the potential hazards associated with the TTP operation. Spontaneous Combustion of Solid Waste .
• The safety and health aspects for on-site workers for the proposed TTP is review for both construction and operation phases of the plant. 1967 (FMA 1967) . the safety and health of workers is governed under the Occupational Safety and Health Act. 1994 (OSHA 1994) and the Factories and Machinery Act. • In Malaysia.
CONSTRUCTION PHASE Traffic accident Overturned crane Safety Hazards Possible hazards may occur Health Hazards Fall from heights Machine/tool usage injuries Exposed to noise levels that exceed the action level of 85 dBA Dengue fever and recently chikungunya epidemics .
OPERATIONAL PHASE Common Hazards expected exposed to potential hazardous or toxic materials Physical injuries Manual handling Heat stress BACK .
IMPACTS Construction phase • Sewage discharge • Oil & grease pollution • Soil contaminated • Effect marine water (coral) • Construction waste Operational phase • Increase nutrients • Increase coliform bacteria • Increase in suspended solids • Depletion of O₂ • Noxious odours (H₂S) • Limit light penetration • Oil contaminate – degrade aesthetic value Residual Impact • Not Significant .
Air Hantu were not considered The present BOD of Sg.Assumption for Assessment • • • • Effluent and river water are completely mixed at the point of discharge The BOD of the effluent does not change along the Sg. • The following formula has been used:- . Air Hantu is taken as 3 mg/l under normal conditions. Air Hantu Other pollution sources along Sg.
when cw = 7.1 year return period and 30 day low flow is 3.004 MLD. • The BOD concentration for Sg. Q = 3. Air Hantu for the 1. • The low flow of Sg.731 mg/l C₀ = 832 mg/l . • The effluent discharge from the WWTP is 0.33 x 10-2 MLD r Cr = 3 mg/l qw = 0.731 mg/l • Therefore. Air Hantu assumed at 3 mg/L.004 MLD cw = 20 mg/l C₀ = 4. • The BOD concentration of the effluent is 20 mg/L based on design parameter/ based on Standard A • Therefore.8 mg/l Scenario 2 – Abnormal Condition • failure of the WWTP and raw wastewater is discharged into the river • BOD concentration in the raw wastewater is 7.BOD Prediction Scenario 1 – Normal Condition • Accordance to the design parameters.33 x 10-2 MLD.
MITIGATIONS – Construction Phase Oil & Grease Containment • Store in large bin/tank/drums • Soak with sand • Construct concrete/brick containment wall • Bund wall (Appendix I) Sewage Discharge • Treat in septic tank • Desludging once /2 years • Leachate management Construction Waste • On-site storage area • Stockpiled at temporary storage (Figure 6-1) • Construct drain flow into silt trap .
MITIGATIONS – Operational Phase Control • WWTP • Leachate management • Engineering control Maintenance • Inspection • Testing • Cleaning • Lubrication • Adjusting • Repairing Adequate Training • Personnel • Execute duties properly .
Leachate Management and Wastewater Treatment Refer FIGURE 3-5 3 type wastewater: • leachate from the stored solid waste • plant washings • incoming truck washings Leachate management • leachate drained into collection sumps before being channelled to an onsite WWTP • require washing to ensure that the area is clean at all times • collection sumps drained by gravitation/pump to the WWTP • Leachate from garbage trucks drained into a designated sump/pit at the waste receiving area .
Figure 3-5 Proposed Layout of Wastewater Drainage Plan .
Figure 3-8 WWTP Equipment Layout Plan .
Figure 6-1 Location of Stockpile & Temporary Waste Storage Area BACK .
Human Health Impact The steps of health risk assessments are: Step 1: Hazard Identification Step 2: Dose-response relationships Step 3: Exposure Assessment Step 4: Risk Characterization .
elemental mercury.Human Health Impact Step 1 : Hazard Identification Type of emmision Pollutants Criteria air pollutants Particulate less than 10 μg(PM10). SO2. NO2 Toxic air pollutants Arsenic. lead. HCL. cadmium. dioxin . chromium.
Human Health Impact Step 2 : Dose-response relationships Health Reference Values for Criteria Air Pollutants Criteria pollutants PM10 SO2 Averaging time 24 hrs Reference values μg/m3 150 1 Annual 1hr 24 hrs 1hr Annual 50 1 350 1 105 1 320 1 40 2 NO2 •Notes: 1 US National Ambient Air Quality Standard 2 Recommended Malaysian Ambient Air Quality Guidelines. .
Relative Risk (RR) Associated with a 10 μg/m3 in PM10 for Short Term Effects Health Outcome Hospital admissions for cardiovascular causes Hospital admission for respiratory disease Occurrence of respiratory symptoms RR per 10 μg/m3 1.Human Health Impact Step 2 : Dose-response relationships Summary of Health Outcome. 2002 .051 Asthma exacerbation(aged >15) 1.009 1.016 1.004 Source: WHO.070 Acute bronchitis (aged <15) Asthma exacerbation(aged <15) 1. Health Impact of Air Pollution in the Eight Major Italian Cities.306 1. Regional Office for Europe.
2005 NA IRIS (20/11/08) IRIS (20/11/08) .7.03 0. elemental ND* 2x10-2 4x10-5 0.02 (μg/m3) NA 1x10-4 3x10-4 URT URT Development Skin Kidney NA Respiratory toxicity Nervous system URT Irritation URT Irritation Systemic effect Systemic effect Systemic effect NA Systemic effect Systemic effect IRIS (20/11/08) OEHHA. 2005 OEHHA.8-TCDD) Arsenic Cadmium Lead Chromium IV Mercury.Human Health Impact Step 2 : Dose-response relationships Table 3 Non-cancer toxicity Information of criteria air pollutants Type of critical Chemical of concern Chronic RfC (mg/m3) Primary Target Organ effect for development of threshold dose SO2 ND* URT URT Irritation Source of Toxicity data (date*) NO2 HCl Dioxin/Furan ITEQ (as 2. 2005 OEHHA.3.
8E-03 1.3E-03 1.Human Health Impact Step 2 : Dose-response relationships Toxicity Information of the Carcinogenic Hazards Chemical of concern URF Type of (Hg/m3) cancer -1 EPA Weight of Evidence/Route Source of Toxicity data (date*) Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Lead Dioxin/Furan (TEQ) Mercury 4.20E05 1.3 NA Lung Lung Lung Not reported Lung NA A/Inhalation B1/inhalation A/Inhalation B2 B2/inhalation D (Not classified as Human carcinogen) IRIS (20/11/08) IRIS (20/11/08) IRIS (20/11/08) OEHHA IRIS (20/11/08) IRIS (20/11/08) .2E-02 1.
.Human Health Impact Step 3 : Exposure Assessment Sensitive receptors • The sensitive receptors for all three criteria pollutants emitted from the proposed TTP are clearly identified as the asthmatics. people suffering from respiratory diseases and heart disease and the elderly and very young people.
.Human Health Impact Step 3 : Exposure Assessment Exposure route • Direct exposure through the inhalation route is the most important route of exposure for the health risk assessment on the identified hazards emitted from the proposed plant.
Human Health Impact Step 3 : Exposure Assessment Exposure level • The health risk was calculated based on the exposure data derived from the air quality modelling and the baseline data submitted by the air quality consultants. .
• The health risk is calculated using the results of the air quality modelling. .Human Health Impact Step 4: Risk Characterization • The Risk Characterization integrates all information from the earlier steps. the health risk to the residents was estimated based on the actual or normal operation of the TTP. For this assessment.
Human Health Impact Step 4: Risk Characterization Percentage Of Health Outcomes Increment Due To Maximum 24 Hours Average Incremental Level of PM10 (Normal Operation) BACK .
EXISTING ENVIROMENT •POPULATION .
AGE GROUP .
ECONOMIC ACTIVITY .
To identify potential adverse impacts of the proposed development on socioeconomic aspects of the local population in Pulau Tioman. . 2. To address social issues associated with the impacts of the proposed development through the design of mitigation measures.Socio-economic The objectives of the SIA study are: 1. 3. To determine opportunities for enhancing the socio-economic well-being of the local population.
4% .6% NOT INTERESTED 29.PERCEPTION BEFORE PROJECT COMMENTS RESPONDENTS AWARE OF PROJECT 56.
Awareness of the location .
There were altogether 16 positive impacts. Perceived positive impacts .
Perceived negative impacts
There were altogether 17 negative impacts.
Potential socio-economic impacts
(i) During construction • Discomfort due to increased level of noise and traffic • Concerns for safety due to increased traffic and boat activity • Decrease in monthly incomes due to environmental implications (ii) During operation • Concerns for health in view of potential environmental pollution • Concerns for safety in the event of failure or improper operationof the TTP
Mitigation measures and recommendations
There are a few recommended to enhance the solid waste management in Pulau Tioman:
Improvement of solid waste collection Community Education and Awareness Programmes Follow-up SIA
TRAFFIC AND MATERIAL CONVEYANCE .
No. • The impact due to traffic is minimal: Transportation route less than 2km No public amenities located along transportation route.• Traffic volume is expected to increase during the construction phase. • Traffic impact is not significant during operational phase. of rubbish trucks and trucks which transport bottom ash and sludge is small. .
• Impact due to marine traffic are follow:Spillage of bottom ash. sludge and fuel Damage to corals by barge movement Collision with other boats BACK .
Soil and sedimentation control Phases Constructions Impacts because of Site clearing •Phasing •Sediment trap •Temporary drains Operational No impacts because of whole area are covered .
Soil and sedimentation control BACK .
Conclusion Proposed TTP will not impose significant adverse environmental impacts during both the construction and operational stage if the required environmental management measures are implemented. .
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.