deborah gas storage project - iema.net · 268240 evt ems 11 a 25 june 2010 deborah gas storage...

Deborah Gas StorageProject

Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

June 2010Eni Hewett Limited

268240 EVT EMS 11 A

25 June 2010

Deborah Gas Storage Project

Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

June 2010

Eni Hewett Limited

Mott MacDonald, Demeter House, Station Road, Cambridge CB1 2RS, United Kingdom T +44(0) 1223 463500 F +44(0) 1223 461007 W www.mottmac.com

Eni House, 10 Ebury Bridge Road, London SW1W 8PZ


Mott MacDonald, Demeter House, Station Road, Cambridge CB1 2RS, United Kingdom T +44(0) 1223 463500 F +44(0) 1223 461007 W www.mottmac.com

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description A 25 June 2010 Sanmita Palit Emma Lunt James Montgomery First Issue

Issue and revision record

This document is issued for the party which commissioned it

and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned

project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or

used for any other purpose.

We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this

document being relied upon by any other party, or being used

for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission

which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by

other parties

This document contains confidential information and proprietary

intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties

without consent from us and from the party which

commissioned it.

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010


Chapter Title Page

1. Introduction 2

1.1 The site and surroundings______________________________________________________________2

1.2 The Proposed Development ____________________________________________________________3

1.3 The need for the Development __________________________________________________________4

1.4 The consideration of alternatives ________________________________________________________5

2. Environmental Effects 7

2.1 Air quality___________________________________________________________________________7

2.2 Ecology and nature conservation ________________________________________________________7

2.3 Landscape and visual impact assessment _________________________________________________8

2.4 Traffic, transportation and access ________________________________________________________8

2.5 Noise and vibration ___________________________________________________________________9

2.6 Geology and soils ___________________________________________________________________10

2.7 Water resources ____________________________________________________________________10

2.8 Socio-economic effects _______________________________________________________________11

2.9 Residual Impacts____________________________________________________________________11

2.10 Cumulative impacts __________________________________________________________________12

3. Further Information 13

Appendices 14Appendix A. Site Location _______________________________________________________________________16

Appendix B. The Proposed Development ___________________________________________________________18

Content

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

1


268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

2


Eni Hewett Limited (the ’Applicant’) are seeking planning permission for an offshore gas storage project, including its associated onshore and offshore installations and infrastructure (hereafter called the Deborah Gas Storage Project). Eni Hewett is the majority owner of the Hewett gas field in the southern North Sea, and the associated Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal at Bacton. The Development will take place at the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal.

The Development is one which requires an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to be completed. This process identifies and assesses significant environmental effects that are likely to arise from the deconstruction, construction and operational phases of the proposed development. The EIA for the Deborah Gas Storage Project was undertaken by a team of specialists independent of the Applicant and the findings of the assessment are reported in the accompanying Environmental Statement (ES). The EIA process has followed the relevant EIA Regulations and other relevant mandatory policies which set out the requirements for environmental impact assessment. This non-technical summary fulfils part of the regulatory requirements and describes the main findings of the ES.

1.1 The site and surroundings

Appendix A shows the location of the exiting Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal in the Bacton Gas Terminal Complex (BGTC) which is located 25km northeast of Norwich on the North Norfolk coast. The Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal is approximately one kilometre west of the centre of Bacton village on the B1159 (National Grid Reference TG 333345).

The Bacton Gas Terminal Complex is used by five operators: National Grid; Interconnector; Eni Hewett; Perenco/Centrica; and Shell

National Grid operates the ‘Bacton Receiving Terminal’ adjacent to the Interconnector site, both of which are located to the south of the B1159. The other companies operate gas processing facilities at the BGTC, which are supplied by offshore gas fields in the southern North Sea and (increasingly) from international gas imports from Holland and further afield.

The onshore part of the Development will take place within the existing Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal (the ‘Site’), which is located at the north western end of the BGTC. The Terminal currently processes natural gas extracted from the Hewett B, Thames and LAPS fields in the southern North Sea.

The immediate surroundings comprise arable fields to the west and the Perenco facilities (part of the BGTC) to the east. The northern Site boundary runs parallel to the sea cliffs above beach.

Three designated sites of conservation importance have been identified within the vicinity of the development site: Paston Great Barn Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI):

approximately 350m to the west of the southern edge of the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal; Mundesley Cliff SSSI: adjacent to the northern boundary of the Terminal, along the beach; and

1. Introduction

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

3


Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB): of the eastern boundary of the AONB coincides with the boundary of the BGTC in this area.

1.2 The Proposed Development

The Deborah Gas Storage Project would involve the transport of treated gas from the National Transmission System (NTS) through the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal and then offshore to be injected and stored in the Deborah reservoir. Typically gas injection would take place during the summer period.

During the winter months the Terminal operations would revert to a “more normal” phase in that gas would be withdrawn from the offshore reservoir via two new pipelines back onshore to the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal for processing. The levels of processing required should be much less than for untreated natural gas. Once the quality of the withdrawn gas reaches National Grid’s specification it would be returned to the NTS for distribution to homes and businesses throughout the UK.

This Deborah Gas Storage Project will increase the volume of gas stored for use in times of national gas shortages significantly and thus will improve the national security of supply of natural gas in the UK.

The Deborah Gas Storage Project will include the following components: Removal (deconstruction) of some of the redundant facilities at the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal ; Installation of new processing plant and facilities in the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal; Construction of onshore pipelines and associated structures (shaft, tunnel to beach, temporary beach

works); Construction of offshore pipelines and associated structures; Drilling and establishment of offshore injection, withdrawal and monitoring wells; Installation of offshore platforms; Testing and commissioning works; Connection to the NTS from the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal; Operation over about a 40 year period; and Decommissioning. The injection and withdrawal phases of the Deborah Gas Storage Project would involve approximately 150 days of injection operation during the summer months and approximately 120 days of withdrawal/ withdrawal during the winter months. The remainder of the time the plant will be on standby, available for operation should gas demand suddenly increase, or there be gas available to inject into the reservoir.

The Mean Low Water Mark (MLWM) has been taken as the boundary between the onshore and offshore components of the Deborah Gas Storage Project. The MLWM is the regulatory boundary between works requiring planning permission from North Norfolk District Council (NNDC) and those requiring approval from the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).

The key activities of the onshore components of the Deborah Gas Storage Project include the following: Removal of redundant equipment within the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal and relocation of existing

equipment; New gas injection and withdrawal compression and gas treatment facilities within the Eni Hewett

Onshore Terminal; Two new 32’’ (813 mm) pipelines and a four inch diameter glycol injection pipeline from within the Eni

Hewett Onshore Terminal to the mean low water mark; Pipeline connection from the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal to the NTS; and

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

4


Provision of a temporary construction compound and access track on the northern boundary of the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal.

Appendix B shows the boundary of the Development.

A number of temporary facilities would be needed to provide access to the site including working space, temporary security arrangements and storage facilities. These temporary facilities would be located immediately outside the site to the west of the existing boundary fence. Once the Deborah Gas Storage Project is fully operational, the contractor’s facilities would be removed and the land reinstated and returned to the local landowner, unless agreed otherwise.

Construction of the development would generally take place during the hours of 7:00 and 19:00 Monday to Saturday. Occasional working outside of these hours would be necessary, for instance for the construction of the reception pit on the beach and the winching of the offshore pipelines onshore.

The existing access from the B1159, Bacton Road, near to the entrance of the Shell Terminal would be used for access to the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal. During construction traffic flow on the B1159, Bacton Road, will be maintained at all times. A proposed traffic management plan for the deconstruction and construction phase will be developed, which will involve the use of previously designated HGV traffic routes by Norfolk County Council’s route hierarchy strategy, enabling the transport of materials and equipment to and from the site; and the provision of a shuttle service for construction workers between the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal and two temporary park and ride sites (near Mundesley and Walcott).

Once operational, the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal would use the existing road network as for current operations.

A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will govern the construction process. Amongst other things, this document will set out all the measures identified during the EIA process as being required to minimise the environmental effects of the construction process. This document will provide strict guidelines for the management of construction activities on site and for ensuring the mitigation of significant environmental effects during construction. The CEMP will form part of all construction contracts for the works and contractors will be required to adhere to it.

1.3 The need for the Development

The Bacton Gas Terminal Complex is a nationally important site for gas operations in the UK. The Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal is one of the gas processing facilities at the Bacton Gas Terminal Complex and is located along the North Norfolk coast, between the villages of Bacton and Mundesley

The Deborah Gas Storage Project is predicted to be the largest of its kind in Europe. Currently the UK is reliant on imports of gas from Europe and Russia. Once fully operational the Deborah Gas Storage Project will contribute significantly to the UK security of supply of natural gas. Figure 2.1 shows the historic and predicted gas demand and supply for the UK. The forecast demand for gas in the UK highlights the dependency on gas imports. National Grid predicts that the UK will be reliant on 46 percent of its gas demand during 2010/11, and by 2018/19 the dependency will have risen to 69 percent.

The Government’s Energy White Paper: Meeting the Energy Challenge specifically refers to the need for gas storage projects to increase the proportion of the peak day demand met by such projects from 24% in 2006/07 to between 40% and 60% by 2015/2016. The Government has identified the need for new gas

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

5


storage facilities and has put forward proposals and policies to clarify and modernise licensing and legislation for specific onshore activities, namely the storage of natural gas.

Figure 2.1: Historic and predicted gas demand and supply for the UK

Source: National Grid 2009 – Gas Transportation: Ten Year Statement

A clear overriding need therefore exists to develop gas storage facilities in the UK to ensure security of supply in the UK and to reduce the price fluctuations for consumers of gas and electricity.

1.4 The consideration of alternatives

Eni Hewett identified an opportunity to meet the requirements of the Government’s strategy for gas storage, using the facilities at Bacton and offshore in the Hewett gas field. Alternatives have been considered, but at an early stage alternatives linking the Deborah reservoir and Theddlethorpe or Easington were dismissed due to the extensive environmental effects that would be generated.

Bacton is the closest gas terminal to the Deborah reservoir and would have the shortest pipeline routes thus presenting a more sensible option commercially too, and should also provide the best environmental solution as well.

The existing Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal infrastructure and equipment was installed in the late 1960s and much of this equipment is or has reached the end of its design life. The refurbishment of the existing equipment to meet the predicted design life and the modern health and safety standards of the proposed development is significant in terms of cost and would present engineering/feasibility challenges. The existing facilities onshore were all originally designed for the production (withdrawal) of gas from an offshore reservoir to the NTS via a processing system, and so these facilities need to be replaced and cannot be used for this new project.

Furthermore, equipment that might be suitable for the new project is largely at the end of its operational life so it would not be appropriate to consider using this for the new project. Therefore, this Project requires that the replacement of some equipment takes place.

Pipeline route selection was carried out based on the conventional route selection criteria and Eni project specific requirements as set out below:

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

6


The route lengths shall be minimised; The crossings over the existing pipelines to the BGTC shall be minimised; The horizontal radii at turn points along the routes shall be selected on the basis of layability and curve

lateral stability; and The angles at entrance points into the cliffs along the routes shall be selected on the basis of the

stability of the cliffs.

Six routing arrangements from the beach to the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal were studied. The presence of the existing pipelines, tunnels and shafts were the main constraints on the routing. The integrity of the existing pipelines must not be compromised by construction activities. Thus the option chosen was the shaft located outside the security fence, as it was the only option that reduces the risk of interaction with the live gas facilities inside the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal, and would not compromise the safety of the terminal. The other benefits of this option would be a shorter tunnel length, improved landfall access and easier offshore pipelay routing. Furthermore, it was recognised that a shorter tunnel length provided scope during detailed design to minimise any adverse impacts on the stability of the cliffs.

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

7


2.1 Air quality

It is proposed that the existing access from the B1159 to the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal would be utilised for all phases of the Development.

Deconstruction and construction phase impacts may include: potential dust nuisance effects, local air quality effects as a result of emissions from on-site plant and equipment and heavy duty vehicles, and fugitive hydrocarbon emissions from the removal of redundant plant or relocation within the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal. Appropriate mitigation measures to control deconstruction and construction activities have been identified in the ES and their implementation would reduce the predicted effects of the Development to be minor.

Operational phase impacts may include local air quality effects associated with continuous, intermittent and fugitive emissions sources introduced as part of the Development. All continuous sources (power and heat generation units) would comply with relevant emissions limits and their effects, along with cumulative effects of other local sources within and outside of the site, would be considered as part of environmental permitting at the detailed design stage. Intermittent and fugitive emissions sources would be monitored and managed such that their release of pollutants is minimised and would not cause significant local air quality effects.

2.2 Ecology and nature conservation

The Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal is approximately 360m to the east of the Paston Great Barn Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and National Nature Reserve and is adjacent to the Mundesley Cliff SSSI located on the cliff side immediately within the proposed working area.

Deconstruction and construction related indirect effects which may affect the condition status of the Paston Great Barn SAC have been assessed and include: Noise disturbance (plant and equipment, and traffic) Habitat loss (roosts, foraging and commuting) Light pollution

The slight increase in noise levels predicted during site set up and preparation phase when put in context with the existing noise levels from vehicles passing Paston Great Barn would not be heard. No significant effects are predicted on Paston Great Barn SAC.

Bats are known to forage for insects along the cliff slope and in the adjacent arable field as well as going much further afield. There will be short periods during the construction and deconstruction phases when bats may be disturbed from foraging in the immediate area but this effect is predicted to be slight adverse, overall and is not considered to be significant.

Breeding birds would experience some minor adverse impacts during the deconstruction and construction phases. However, the breeding bird survey showed that the conservation value of the birds breeding in the area is low (ie. they are relatively common birds). The overall effect is therefore considered to be minor adverse which is not considered to be significant.

2. Environmental Effects

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

8


During the operation of the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal there are no direct impacts predicted on the Paston Great Barn SAC/SSSI. Similarly, it is also unlikely that the habitats and protected species would experience any negative impacts compared to existing situation (the baseline) once the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal is operational and the surrounding land has returned to its original state.

There are no in combination impacts of the Deborah Gas Storage Project on the Paston Great Barn SSSI/SAC and Mundesley Cliff SSSI.

2.3 Landscape and visual impact assessment

The landscape and visual assessment has considered the effects of the Development in terms of landscape character and visual amenity during deconstruction of the existing equipment, and construction and operation of the new development.

No significant adverse effects are predicted during the deconstruction works on landscape character. Moderate adverse effects on visual receptors located close to the site are identified due to the presence of the site compound, construction traffic, plant and associated equipment and additional lighting during night time work. However, these impacts would be temporary in nature and minimised by the proposed mitigation measures.

During the construction works, the tranquillity of the surrounding landscape would be temporarily slightly affected (given that the area is already affected by the existing terminal complex). However, no significant changes will result from the Development to existing vegetation, field patterns, surrounding settlements and the skyline. Moderate adverse effects on visual receptors located close to the site are identified due to the site compound, construction works, traffic, plant and associated equipment and additional lighting during night-time work. However, these impacts would be temporary in nature and minimised by the proposed mitigation measures.

No significant adverse effects were identified during the operational phase of the Development on landscape character or visual amenity.

2.4 Traffic, transportation and access

The peak number of traffic movements generated during the deconstruction and construction phases of the Development was estimated through the consideration of the delivery of materials and equipment required for construction; removal of deconstructed equipment and other wastes, and the labour force.

Overall it has been demonstrated that the HGV traffic associated with the deconstruction and construction phases would be relatively low and would therefore not impact on the condition and use of the surrounding highway network, particularly as these vehicles would use existing designated HGV routes to the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal.

The implementation of a joint park and ride system between Perenco/Centrica Shell and Eni would limit the numbers of personal vehicles travelling through Bacton and the surrounding villages.

Public access along Public Rights of Ways (PROWs) and permissive paths surrounding the Eni Hewett Onshore terminal would continue during the deconstruction and construction phases; however minor diversions may be required. At some phases of the Development temporary short duration closures of

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

9


paths may be required to protect public safety. Appropriate signage would be implemented to minimise disruption at all times.

No significant adverse effects are predicted as a result of the Development during the deconstruction and construction phases of the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal.

Finally, there are no significant operational changes anticipated at the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal following the deconstruction and construction phases, meaning that there would be no material difference in traffic levels associated with the site in the future compared to the existing situation.

2.5 Noise and vibration

Noise measurements have been taken in the vicinity of the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal at the three community control points (Church Farm, Abinger Cottage, Castaways), and also at the Paston Great Barn Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

Deconstruction would not create a significant effect at either Church Farm or Castaways. At Abinger Cottage some deconstruction activities would produce short term moderate adverse effects, but when considered over the duration of the whole construction process these are unlikely to be regarded as intrusive.

During site preparation some construction activities would produce significant adverse effects at Church Farm and Abinger Cottage, but while some noise may be noticeable it is not be expected to be intrusive.

Concreting activity and construction on the cliff top and on the beach would not create significant effects at any of the community control points, and would be practically inaudible in comparison with traffic noise (and other Terminal complex noise) on the B1159.

At Paston Barn SAC deconstruction activity and site preparation works would not produce an increase over the background noise level.

Preliminary predictions indicate that operational noise levels would be within both daytime and evening measured ranges at all locations except Abinger Cottage during the evening period. With respect to the community reference level, calculations indicate that with some design modifications, community limits would be complied with. At Paston Barn SAC the predicted noise level would be very similar to the predicted noise level at Abinger Cottage.

Operational noise from the Deborah Gas Storage Project would not have an impact at Paston Barn SAC,

Due to the inherent unpredictability of construction and deconstruction activity (and consequently the noise levels emitted by it), it is recommended to periodically monitor noise levels at the community control points to check whether the actual noise levels are substantially above those predicted.

Assuming best practice for noise management occurs as routine during construction, additional mitigation measures are not straightforward to specify. Therefore the residual effects are the same as those given in the impact assessment.

Deconstruction, construction and operational vibration would not be expected to have an effect at any of the community control points.

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

10


2.6 Geology and soils

The impacts of the Development on geology and soils were assessed, including contaminated land and unstable land, both from deconstruction and construction phase, and subsequent operation of the Development.

Sensitive receptors include Grade 1 agricultural soil in the adjacent field, and groundwater in the Secondary and Principal aquifers beneath the area. Mundesley Cliffs SSSI is also within the proposed site area.

No significant residual impacts are expected on the soil structure of the Grade 1 agricultural soils in the field within the site.

During demolition and construction within the Terminal, neutral impacts on soils are anticipated due to the implementation of defined mitigation measures, which will be set out in the Construction Environment Management Plan and the Site Waste Management Plan.

No significant residual effects on the Mundesley Cliffs SSSI will result from the deconstruction, construction and operation phases of the Development.

For the operational phase of the Development, the residual effect on soils and groundwater is assessed as beneficial as during the construction works the equipment will have been upgraded (reducing potential for leaks of contaminants to the soils and groundwater), contamination encountered in soils during demolition and deconstruction will have been removed or remediated and the site will operate following good environmental practice as required by the operational Environmental Permit.

No significant adverse residual impacts have been identified on the stability of the cliff and on Mundesley SSSI during the operational phase.

2.7 Water resources

The existing water regime, relating to surface water and groundwater, was established in an assessment of baseline conditions. Surface water was assessed in the surface water catchment in which the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal is located, together with the regional groundwater regime. Information was collected on groundwater abstraction sources located mainly within an area extending up to 1km from the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal. As the Terminal is located close to the sea, any impacts on groundwater should be restricted to an area located within a 1km distance from the terminal.

As there are no main rivers or watercourses crossing the construction area there are not predicted to be any significant impacts on surface waters from sediment-laden discharge during deconstruction and construction. Similarly pollution impacts on groundwater from spillages or from existing contaminated land within the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal are assessed as being of low significance. All residual effects, following mitigation, are assessed to be insignificant.

Similarly no major adverse effects have been identified for surface water or groundwater during the operational phase. Given the improved facilities (and pollution control) to be installed, and the removal of historic contaminated soils then it is likely that the effects on groundwater would be potentially beneficial.

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

11


2.8 Socio-economic effects

The socio-economic assessment established that the Development would take place predominately within an existing operational gas processing Terminal where such activities are permissible and its objectives would benefit society. The assessment identified and attributed significance for impacts related to employment generation during deconstruction, construction and operation as well as temporary land use and access changes, temporary neighbourhood effects, induced development effects and improved energy security.

Mitigation and enhancement measures related to public and worker safety and security, local employment, and community engagement are recommended. Potential cumulative impacts resulting from the interaction of various temporary negative effects on nearby local tourism establishments resulting from an influx of construction crews for several projects were also identified and mitigation measures recommended.

The socio-economic assessment concluded that whilst there would be some negative effects (related mostly to localised disturbance during construction), most of the socio-economic impacts would be beneficial, particularly with regard to employment generation and national energy security.

2.9 Residual Impacts

Residual air quality effects of the deconstruction and construction phases of the Development are anticipated to be ‘minor’ with reference to dust nuisance effects as mitigation measures would control emissions of dust and other pollutants. Normal operational effects have been considered in terms of intermittent and fugitive gaseous releases and the air quality effects of such operations are not considered to be significant.

No significant residual effects are expected on the Mundesley Cliffs SSSI during the deconstruction, construction and operation phases of the Development. For the operational phase of the Development, the residual effect on soils and groundwater is assessed as beneficial as during the construction works the equipment will have been upgraded, source contamination encountered in soils during demolition and deconstruction will have been removed or remediated.

No significant residual effects on landscape character and visual amenity are expected providing the mitigation measures outlined are implemented.

It is anticipated that there would not be any significant ecological residual effects as a result of the Deborah Gas Storage Project. Slight adverse impacts are however predicted on foraging and commuting bats, and breeding birds during the construction and deconstruction phases. No significant residual effects are predicted on Paston Great Barn SAC.

With the implementation of a park and ride system for the construction workers and the use of designated HGV routes, no significant residual impacts are anticipated on traffic and transportation.

No significant residual impacts are anticipated on site drainage and local watercourses as a result of the Development and on flood risk.

Overall, there are no significant residual effects predicted as a result of the deconstruction, construction and operation of the onshore Development.

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

12


2.10 Cumulative impacts

The design of the Development and the mitigation measures it incorporates should eliminate or minimise adverse environmental impacts

Cumulative air quality effects associated with approved and proposed developments at the Shell UK and Perenco gas terminals in Bacton are not considered significant, either during the construction or operational phases of the Development.

The deconstruction and construction activities associated with the three developments (Deborah Gas Storage Project, Baird Gas Storage Project and the Shell Rejuvenation Project) are unlikely to have a significant cumulative ecological impact on Paston Great Barn SAC and Mundesley Cliff SSSI.

Cumulative noise and vibration effects due to construction would be considered unlikely at Abinger Cottage. Church Farm would experience an adverse effect due to just one construction activity for the Deborah Gas Storage Project. Construction activity on the Perenco/Centrica and/or Shell terminals would be closer to Church Farm than the construction activity of the Deborah Gas Storage Project. It is therefore likely that construction activity on the Perenco/Centrica and/or Shell terminals would by themselves produce significant noise effects at Church Farm. Construction activity of the Deborah Gas Storage Project has been shown not to have a significant effect at Castaways.

It is considered unlikely that the cumulative impact from operational noise from the Deborah Gas Storage Project and other developments on the Perenco/Centrica and Shell terminals would produce a significant cumulative noise effect at the community control points including the Abinger Cottage that is most sensitive to the Deborah Gas Storage Project.

The noise effects due to the deconstruction and construction activities associated with the three developments (Deborah Gas Storage Project, Baird Gas Storage Project and the Shell Rejuvenation Project) are unlikely to have a significant cumulative impact on Paston Great Barn SAC.

There will be no significant cumulative impacts of the Development as no significant impacts upon the landscape character and amenity are predicted for both the Shell Rejuvenation Project and the development of the Baird Gas Storage Project proposed by Perenco/Centrica.

There is no significant traffic and transport related cumulative impacts predicted as a result of the Deborah Gas storage Project, Baird Gas Storage Project and Bacton Rejuvenation Project.

It is likely that beneficial cumulative impacts will arise during construction and during future operations of the three terminals on groundwater from contamination. This is because good site practice during construction and operation on all sites require contaminated ground to be removed or isolated as it is encountered. . Insignificant beneficial effects are anticipated in respect of geology and soils if the removal and remediation of source point contaminated soils takes place.

In conclusion, the cumulative impacts would be negligible of the Deborah Gas Storage Project and the proposed developments in at the Bacton Gas Terminal Complex.

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

13


Comments, queries or requests for further information regarding the Environmental Statement can be sought from: Emma Lunt Mott MacDonald Limited Demeter House Station Road Cambridge CB1 2RS Telephone: 01223 465000 Copies of the Environmental Statement are available from Mott MacDonald at a cost of £200 for a complete hard copy. The Environmental Statement can be provided on CD at a cost of £10. Copies of this non-technical summary are provided free of charge.

3. Further Information

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

14


Appendix A. Site Location ______________________________________________________________________ 15 Appendix B. The proposed development ___________________________________________________________ 17

Appendices

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

15


268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

16


Figure A.1: Location of the Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal

Source: Ordnance Survey © Crown Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020449

Appendix A. Site Location

Bacton Gas Terminal Complex Eni Hewett Onshore Terminal

268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

17


268240/EVT/EMS/11/A 25 June 2010

18


Appendix B. The Proposed Development

deborah gas storage project - iema.net · 268240 evt ems 11 a 25 june 2010 deborah gas storage...

Documents