Lecture 12 Significance and Alternatives

Click to edit MasterAssessment:
Environmental title style

Assessing Significance and
Click to edit Master subtitle style
Consideration of Alternatives
Click to edit Master title style
I: ASSESSING
SIGNIFICANCE
When
1. During the scoping process to identify

potential significant impacts for further study
2. After the consideration of
alternatives to
identify the need for mitigation measures
3. After mitigation measures have been

included to evaluate significance of residual
impacts
The challenge
‘There is often not a single, definitive, correct

answer as to whether an impact is significant or
not.

Significance is influenced by the values of the
individual, how the changes to the environment
affect them and whether they have a stake in
the project or not’.
IEMA Guidelines on EIA


In practice
• Information is limited at the scoping stage
Click
• Uses ‘bestto edit Master
judgement’ title style
& experience from similar
developments
• Evaluation is qualitative: minor, moderate, major
• Planning authorities & other stakeholders can assist
• The process can inform additional baseline studies

and environmental evaluation
How: considerations
• Source Relative significance can
depends on the size and nature
(aspect of project) of the source & its influence
Relative significance can depend
• Pathway (mechanism) on proximity to a receptor(s)

Relative significance of the impact
• Receptor (a particular often depends on the sensitivity
/vulnerability and value of the
feature of the physical receptor.
or socio-economic
The sensitivity of a receptor may
environment that is depend on its existing state and
the cumulative impacts from
affected) other sources.
Its value refers to rarity and
criticality
How: 2 Key Elements
• Receptor axis includes:

its sensitivity (incl other
Click to edit Master title style impacts); its value (e.g.
legal protection, rarity)
& importance.

• Nature of the effect:
magnitude includes
spatial extent of the
impact, its duration &
whether or not it is
reversible.
Glasson et al 2012
A range of factors are used to assess significance
according to:
– The characteristics of the source & its consequences
Clickenvironmental
– The to edit Mastercharacteristics
subtitle style of the site & surrounding
area
– Wider considerations (legal standards etc)
Examples
Level of local
Noise levels
Click to edit Master title style Numbers of
procurement
Level of
Duration of employees at
Proximity of disruption to
noisy each stage of
residents local
activities the project’s
businesses
lifecycle
Click toNoise
editonMaster subtitle style Development
local on the local
economy
residents
Vulnerability
Timing of
of residents
noise Duration of Wage levels
due to health
(daytime vs disruption of employees
/ age or
night)
exposure
Residence of
employees
Frequency
(local area /
commuters)
Source Characteristics:
• Relative magnitude
– Size / proportion of the area or population affected
– Scale of the effects in the context of the study area
• Probability of the occurrence
• Duration
– Permanent or temporary
– Continuous or intermittent
• Can it be mitigated or compensated?
• Spatial extent
• Reversible?
– Without any intervention?
– How long will it take for the system to return to normal?
Environmental Characteristics of Locality:
• Proximity to local populations & protected habitats;
• Presence of rare or protected species;
• Numbers & types of receptors;
• Scale of the development within its locality;
• Presence of culturally
Click to edit significant
Master subtitle stylelandscapes / historic
monuments.
• Sensitivity or vulnerability of receiving environment;

• ‘Value’ of receiving environment or the resources affected
(utility & intrinsic) ;
• Scarcity of receiving environment or the resources
affected.
Examples
Amount
of air
pollution
Click How
to edit Master title
Stack
style to be
emitted
much? Types of
height &
air
likely
pollutants
dispersion
Click to edit Master subtitle style Air
pollutants
on
Habitat habitats Proximity
loss Existing
and
Could it Sensitivity
Is it air quality
be of the
protected Legal habitats
compensa
or rare? status of
ted?
the
habitats
Wider considerations
• Legal and policy aspects:
• Compliance with environmental standards (air quality;
noise; emission limits);
• Conflict with policies (climate change, environmental,
land-use, energy, etc).
• Potential for Master
Click to edit transboundary
subtitle impacts
style
• Proximity to a protected area
• Awareness:
• Level of public/ political concern.
• Uncertainty:
• Uncertainty surrounding magnitude and/ or significance.
In general
• Air, water, noise, radioactivity etc. easier to assess as
there are legal minima and receptors to consider.
• Habitats & protected species: consider legal status
and rarity, impacts are difficult to predict.
• Socio-economic and sustainability criteria much

more subjective.
• GHG impacts poorly represented in EIAs: is the

development consistent with global & national
climate change policy?
Importance of clarity
• Be clear how the evaluation has been reached

• Apply a conservative approach if information
is insufficient
• When the evaluation differs depending on

perspective say so e.g. a visual impact
– substantial significance to local residents
– minor significance nationally
Summary: Potential Significance
• Aims to identify which impacts could be

significant
• Requires information on the characteristics of
theClick
impacts, the location,
to edit Master legal & stakeholder
subtitle style
considerations
• Subjective – supported by stakeholder inputs
• Informs the next stages of the EIA incl baseline

study and the impact predictions
Next steps in the EIA
• Know the potential major environmental

impacts
• Consider alternatives with
view to mitigation
• Establish baseline & predict impacts
• Evaluate and mitigate further as necessary

II: SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS: AVON

POWER STATION
Potentially Significant Impacts
Category Rationale for Significance
CO; NOx and PM10 will be emitted during construction &
Air Pollutant Emissions operation; these gases are controlled & the site is in
close proximity to LAQMs & sensitive sites
Proximity of the site to protected areas mandates
Ecology
further investigation.
Climate change Will emit

Click to edit Master CO2 directly
subtitle styleand indirectly
Land contamination & Existing site contamination: earthworks & piling can
hydrology mobilise contaminants polluting ground water.
Resource use Will require finite resources.

Potentially Significant Impacts
Category Rationale for significance
Subject to legal limits & guidelines; assessment req’d to

Noise & Vibration:
consider background & predicted noise in monitoring sites.
Click to edit
Archaeology & cultural
Master title style
Desk investigations highlight potential for archaeological
heritage assets within the site boundary and adjacent to it
Construction traffic likely to lead to 300-600 transport
Traffic & transport
Click to edit Master
movements subtitle styleoperation impacts considered
a day (during
negligible if Travel Plan is in place).
Visual & landscape At request of local authority; of general public concern; site
will be seen from historic monuments
Flood risk 1 in 100 year or greater risk of flooding
Socio-economic Job creation & loss of amenity value to walkers & horse riders
Non-Significant Impacts
Category Rationale
Waste
Click to edit
A site Masterplan
waste management title stylewill be employed to
and strategy
minimise any impacts
Click to edit MasterH&S

Appropriate subtitle style
procedures will be adhered to during
Health & Safety
construction & operation
The building heights & cranes used during construction are

Electronic
considered to have negligible impacts on mobile or analogue
interference
radio reception
III: CONSIDERATION OF
ALTERNATIVES
Recommended Reading
Section 4.5 & 5.3.3 Glasson et al 2012


Learning Outcomes
After attending the lecture & reading online

materials you should be confident that you can:
• Describe types of alternative and provide
examples that could be considered for a
development
• Describe the role of alternatives in mitigating
environmental impacts
• Use multi-criteria analyses to compare
alternatives
Why consider alternatives?
•Legal requirement in many countries: US & EU
•Reduce environmental ‘footprint’ by considering:

•AClick
varietytoofedit Master
alternative title style
development options;
•A range of means of preventing environmental
damage.
•Creates a transparent decision-making framework:
• Decision-makers presented with a range of
options;
• Stakeholders can understand how key decisions
were made (and have a say in them).
Alternatives to consider
• ‘Alternatives to’ - functionally distinct methods of achieving aims: e.g.
energy generation - fossil fuels, renewable sources or demand-side
management; alleviating traffic congestion – bypass, public transport...
• ‘Alternative means’ - functionally similar means of achieving objectives:
o Location;
o Scale;
o Process or equipment;
o Design & materials;
o Site layout;
o Operating criteria;
o Construction, procurement & logistics
o Mitigation measures
• ‘No-action’ option
Alternatives
Location or Route
Click to edit Master title

Scale & Process style
/ Equipment
Increasingly fixed design
Design & materials

Site layout
Operating
conditions
Construction,
procurement
& logistics
Location
• Maximise proximity to required infrastructure
& markets:
– Transport
– Electricity networks (incl capacity)
– Labour supply
– Sources of raw materials / markets for the services
provided or products produced
• Avoid constraints e.g. RAMSAR / Populations

• Within a designated development area
M4 Relief Road – Route Alternatives
Source: www.M4newport.com
Process
• Consider alternative ways of
Initial Brief meeting the objective e.g.
reducing congestion; supplying
electricity
• Consider & decide

upon main
Click to edit Master subtitle
Design style
alternatives in terms
of scale / processes
and site layouts.
• Consider & decide

upon the selection
of suppliers &
Implementation equipment,
logistics,
construction &
operations
• What alternatives could be considered at Avon
Power Station in terms of the development’s:
– Scale
– Process / Technology
– Materials
– Site Layout
Alternatives: Scale
Avon Power Station
– 1 plant or 2?
– If 2:
Click
• Thetofirst
editcould
Master subtitle style
provide
base load electricity
supply;
• The second smaller a fast
response generator or
‘peaking plant’
Alternatives: Process / Technology
Avon Power Station

• Cooling methods
a) Direct cooling
b) Hybrid system (Air:Water)
c) Air cooled condenser
• Source of water & location of discharge.

Alternatives: Materials & Design
• Materials
– Retaining topsoil for
landscaping
– Maximising use of existing
resources
– Use of recyclate & best practice
waste control
• Design
– Stack height
– Green roofs
Alternatives: Site Layout
• Proximity of noisy activities
to neighbours
• Road access
• Overhead or underground
connection to the Grid?
Creative Commons: Albert Bridge
• Route of pipelines to connect

with the gas network & for
cooling water
Summary: Alternatives
• Consider alternatives at each stage of the

design from conception to the final details and
Click to edit Master title
construction & operation plans
style

• Alternatives must be reasonable, technically
possible and legal
• The EIS should outline the alternatives

considered and why the final design was
selected above others
IV: COMPARING AND EVALUATING

ALTERNATIVES
Comparing & Evaluating Alternatives
1. Present alternatives to stakeholders as part

of the consultation process
2. Compare the relative impacts
of each option
and their costs using:
Multi criteria analyses
GIS mapping & visualisations (e.g. for landscapes)
Cost benefit analysis (Lectures week 10)
Multi-Criteria Analyses
• Select key criteria
against which to
evaluate the
Click to edit
options Master title style
• Option – weight
relative
importance of
each criterion
• Score each option

against the
criteria Glasson et al 2012
Selecting criteria
• Key to a robust evaluation

• Have all categories of performance been
considered?
• Are criteria sufficient to compare performance

within each category?
• Avoid double counting

Weighting Criteria
• Not all criteria are of equal importance to

decision makers
• Weighting criteria can identify the relative
importance of each impact or goal
• Obtain weights from the technical team and/
or stakeholders
• But: in practice stakeholders may not reveal
their true preferences
Scoring
• Score each alternative against an
environmental impact or goal
– Quantitative
• Actual measurement
• For weighted MCA Relative 1-10 scores are often used
– Qualitative
• Not significant
• Significant
• Very significant
• Consider uncertainty, and performance in non-
standard operating conditions
Weighting Criteria
All potential
assessment
criteria
Click to edit Master
Relative impact title
on receptors
importance
style
Weighting: Relative
Weighting
attributed to x impact
Multiply the weight by the
Weighting Alternativethis Alternative
impact by stakeholders
Alternative Alternative
A score B for each criterion
A B
(subjective)
Local air
quality
Ground
water
quality
Land take
Total
Scoring: relative impact of the
Sum the total score for each alternative under
alternative consideration
Weighting Criteria
Relative impact on receptors Weighting x impact
Weighting Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative
A B A B
Air
Water
Click to
40
edit Master
25
4 7
title style
8
160
4 200 100
280
Land 35 implicit assumption
• However, 3 3 105 105
Total is that adverse affects on one 465 485
Click criterion
to edit can
Master subtitle style
be compensated
for by benefits to another
Relative impact–on receptors Weighting x impact
• Such trade-offs may not be
Weighting Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative
acceptable.
A B A B
Air • May 33
need to screen8 out 4 264 132
Water 33
unacceptable 4 1st or
options 7 132 231
Land ensure
33 all options meet
3 3 99 99
minimum thresholds before
Total 495 462
they’re considered
Criteria for the methodology
• Complexity and transparency: can the process & results
be understood by all stakeholders?
• Subjectivity: what influence do the weightings have? Are any
particularly influential?
• Reproducible if a different set of assessors were used?
• Agreed by consensus
• Ensure the methodology does not become more important

than the results
Summary: Alternatives
• Alternatives should be ‘at the heart’ of EIA
• Ensures the developer has considered different options
• Types:
o Alternative means, alternatives to, and the ‘no action’
option
o Can be used to design out significant impacts
• Evaluation Methods:
o Multi criteria analyses, landscape visualisations, CBA
• However, multiple problems in practice
• Need suitable project objectives
• Clear, transparent and independent assessment

Lecture 12 Significance and Alternatives

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Lecture 12 Significance and Alternatives

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Click to edit MasterAssessment:

Environmental title style

Click to edit Master subtitle style

1. During the scoping process to identify

3. After mitigation measures have been

‘There is often not a single, definitive, correct

Click to edit Master subtitle style

IEMA Guidelines on EIA

Click to edit Master subtitle style

• Planning authorities & other stakeholders can assist

• The process can inform additional baseline studies

Click to edit Master subtitle style

• Receptor axis includes:

Click to edit Master subtitle style

• Sensitivity or vulnerability of receiving environment;

• Socio-economic and sustainability criteria much

• GHG impacts poorly represented in EIAs: is the

• Be clear how the evaluation has been reached

• When the evaluation differs depending on

• Aims to identify which impacts could be

• Subjective – supported by stakeholder inputs

• Informs the next stages of the EIA incl baseline

• Know the potential major environmental

• Establish baseline & predict impacts

• Evaluate and mitigate further as necessary

Click to edit Master subtitle style

II: SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS: AVON

Climate change Will emit

Resource use Will require finite resources.

Subject to legal limits & guidelines; assessment req’d to

Flood risk 1 in 100 year or greater risk of flooding

Click to edit MasterH&S

The building heights & cranes used during construction are

Click to edit Master subtitle style

Section 4.5 & 5.3.3 Glasson et al 2012

Click to edit Master subtitle style

After attending the lecture & reading online

•Reduce environmental ‘footprint’ by considering:

Click to edit Master title

Design & materials

• Avoid constraints e.g. RAMSAR / Populations

Click to edit Master title style

Click to edit Master subtitle style

• Consider & decide

• Consider & decide

Avon Power Station

• Source of water & location of discharge.

• Route of pipelines to connect

• Consider alternatives at each stage of the

Click to edit Master subtitle style

• The EIS should outline the alternatives

Click to edit Master subtitle style

IV: COMPARING AND EVALUATING

1. Present alternatives to stakeholders as part

• Score each option

• Key to a robust evaluation

• Are criteria sufficient to compare performance

• Avoid double counting

• Not all criteria are of equal importance to

• Ensure the methodology does not become more important

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen