ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN – MIDSTREAM OPERATIONS LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002 Revision 0 January, 2014
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
MIDSTREAM OPERATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN Scope and application This Operational Environmental Management Plan (OEMP), along with Appended subsidiary Plans, addresses environmental management, monitoring and reporting requirements for operation of the Queensland Curtis Liquefied Natural Gas (QCLNG) Project LNG Facility on Curtis Island. It has been prepared with reference to the requirement for:
an Operations Environmental Management Plan specified in the Coordinator General’s Report for the QCLNG Project (Appendix 4, Part 3, Condition 2);
an Operational Environmental Management Plan specified in the approval for the LNG Plant and Onshore Facilities made under Sections 130(1) and 133 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (Cth) (Approval EPBC 2008/4402, Conditions 26 to 28 inclusive);
an Operational Environmental Management Plan covering the LNG Jetty (Condition 23 of Gladstone Ports Corporation Concurrence Agency Response to the Development Application for Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works (including the Disturbance of Marine Plants) for the LNG Jetty ‐ DA/429/2011);
Further, this OEMP, along with subsidiary referenced management plans and procedures, is intended to address all applicable environmental management, monitoring and reporting requirements for the LNG Facility specified in:
Environmental Authority for Petroleum Facility Licence PFL11 (EPPG00711513);
Operational Works Permits for the LNG Jetty, Materials Offloading Facility (MOF), Construction Dock and tidal works within the bounds of PFL11; and
Approvals for the LNG Facility and associated marine facilities made under the EPBC Act (Marine Facilities Approval – 2008/4401; and LNG Facility Approval – 2008/4402.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 2 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Table of Contents 1.0
8
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Scope of Document
8
1.2. Document Revisions and Approval
9
1.3. Distribution and Intended Audience
9
1.4. Definitions
9
1.5. Acronyms and Abbreviations
10
1.6. Referenced / Associated Documents
11
1.7. Organisation Structure and Responsibilities
12
2.0
15
OEMP STRUCTURE AND LNG FACILITY HSSE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
2.1. HSSE Policy and EMS
15
2.2. OEMP Outline
15
3.0
16
SITE LOCATION AND FACILITY DESCRIPTION
3.1. Project Scope
16
3.2. Description of Petroleum Tenures
16
3.3. QCLNG Curtis Island Site
19
3.3.1. Location and Facilities 3.3.2. Meteorological Conditions 3.3.2.1. Temperatures 3.3.2.2. Relative Humidity 3.3.2.3. Wind 3.3.2.4. Rainfall
19 19 19 19 19 19
3.4. Description of Petroleum Activities
20
3.5. Facility Description
20
3.5.1. LNG Process 3.5.1.1. Gas Pre‐treatment 3.5.1.2. Gas Liquefaction 3.5.1.3. LNG Storage and loading facilities 3.5.2. Utilities 3.5.2.1. Refrigerant and Diesel Storage 3.5.2.2. Power Generation 3.5.2.3. Hot Oil System 3.5.2.4. Fuel Gas System 3.5.2.5. Plant and Instrument Air 3.5.2.6. Nitrogen Storage and Distribution 3.5.2.7. Fire Protection 3.5.2.8. Flare and Vent System 3.5.2.9. Water Systems 3.5.3. Associated Pipelines 3.5.4. Site Buildings and Helipad
21 22 23 25 28 28 29 30 30 30 31 31 32 33 34 34
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 3 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
3.6. Project Life and Phases
4.0
35
3.6.1. Construction and Commissioning Interface 3.6.2. Project Life
35 35
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
36
4.1. Identification of environmental values and potential impacts on environmental values from the activities
36
4.2. Environmental protection commitments
36
5.0
37
ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES, MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING STRATEGIES
5.1. Air Emissions
37
5.1.1. Description of Environmental Values 37 5.1.2. Site Emissions Sources 40 5.1.3. Emissions Reduction through Application of Best Techniques in Design 45 5.1.4. Potential adverse or beneficial impacts of the project activities on the identified environmental values49 5.1.4.1. EIS Summary of Impacts 49 5.1.4.2. Updated Assessment of Impacts 51 5.1.5. Management, Monitoring and Corrective Action 52 5.2. Visual Impact and Light
52
5.2.1. Description of Environmental Values 5.2.2. Potential Impacts 5.2.2.1. Visual Amenity 5.2.2.2. Night Lighting 5.2.3. Potential Light Impacts – Impacts of Flaring on Marine Turtles 5.2.3.1. Post‐EIS Assessment of Flare Visibility from Nesting Sites and Impact on Marine Turtles 5.2.3.2. Potential Impacts from Light Below the Horizons 5.2.3.3. Conclusion 5.2.4. Mitigation Measures in Design 5.2.5. Management, Monitoring and Corrective Action 5.3. Noise
52 52 52 53 53 54 54 55 57 60 60
5.3.1. Description of Environmental Values 60 5.3.1.1. Background Noise Monitoring 61 5.3.1.2. Analysis and Summary of Results 62 5.3.2. Potential adverse or beneficial impacts of the project activities on the identified environmental values63 5.3.2.1. Noise Criteria 63 5.3.2.2. Noise Modelling 63 5.3.2.3. Summary of Noise and Vibration Impacts 64 5.3.3. Management, Monitoring and Corrective Action 64 5.4. Surface Water
64
5.4.1. Description of Environmental values – Surface Water 64 5.4.2. Description of Environmental values – Receiving Environment 65 5.4.2.1. Rodds Bay Dugong Protection Area 66 5.4.2.2. Seagrass and other Benthic Habitat 66 5.4.2.3. Reef Habitat 70 5.4.3. Potential adverse or beneficial impacts of the project activities on the identified environmental values72 5.4.4. Description of Site Water Management 72 5.4.4.1. Stormwater Management 72 5.4.4.2. Inlet Air Chill Condensate 73 5.4.4.3. Process / Oily Water (Unit 29) 74
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 4 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.4.4.4. Reverse Osmosis / Electro‐deionisation (Unit 36) 5.4.5. Management, Monitoring and Corrective Action
78 83
5.5. Waste Management
83
5.6. Biodiversity
83
5.7. Weeds, Pests and Quarantine
83
6.0
DECOMMISSIONING AND REHABILITATION
83
6.1.1.1. Overview 6.1.1.2. Contaminated land 6.1.1.3. Rehabilitation
83 85 85
7.0
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTINGENCIES AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
85
8.0
COMPLAINTS AND INCIDENT MANAGEMENT
86
9.0
AWARENESS, TRAINING AND COMPETENCY
86
10.0 PERIODIC REVIEWS, AUDITS AND CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
87
Revision: 0 Page 5 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Tables Table 1: Referenced / Associated Documents ................................................................................................................... 11 Table 2: Key Management Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................ 12 Table 3: OEMP Plans and Procedures ................................................................................................................................ 15 Table 4: EHP Monitoring Sites for Gladstone ..................................................................................................................... 37 Table 5: Maximum 1‐Hour Average And Annual Average Concentration Of Nitrogen Dioxide (µg/M3) .......................... 38 Table 6: Summary of Annual Measurements of Sulphur Dioxide from the DERM Targinie Monitoring Sites (µg/m3) ..... 39 Table 7: Summary of Emissions Sources ............................................................................................................................ 43 Table 8: Summary of Best Available Techniques Assessment Outcomes as Applicable to Air Quality (assessment per LNG Train) ........................................................................................................................................................................... 47 Table 9: Indicative Site Slope Stabilisation Summary ......................................................................................................... 57 Table 10: Noise Assessment Locations ............................................................................................................................... 61 Table 11: Unattended Noise Monitoring Locations ........................................................................................................... 61 Table 12: Unattended Monitoring RBL Results dB(A) ........................................................................................................ 62 Table 13: Noise Criteria for Project Noise Assessment Locations ...................................................................................... 63 Table 14: Description and areas of habitat, including seagrass meadows, in Port Curtis ................................................. 67 Table 15: Indicative IAC condensate production ............................................................................................................... 73 Table 16: Oily Water Treatment ‐ Design Influent and Effluent Water Characteristics ..................................................... 76
Figures Figure 1: Facility Location – GSDA ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 2: Facility Layout – Two Train Complete ................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 3: Optimized Cascade Process ................................................................................................................................ 21 Figure 4: LNG Process Flow – Process Units ....................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 5: LNG Storage Tanks ‐ Schematic .......................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 6: LNG Loading Layout ............................................................................................................................................ 27 Figure 7: Refrigerant Storage Location .............................................................................................................................. 29 Figure 8: Firewater Pumps and Fire Main .......................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 9: Locations of QCLNG Static Emissions Sources ..................................................................................................... 42 Figure 10: Port Curtis Turtle Nesting Beaches and Seagrass Distribution .......................................................................... 56 Figure 11: Indicative Site Slope Stabilisation Plan .............................................................................................................. 59 Figure 12: Rodds Bay Dugong Protection Area .................................................................................................................. 66 Figure 13: Port Curtis Seagrass Meadow and Mangrove Habitat 2002‐2010 .................................................................... 69 Figure 14: Deep water benthic macro‐invertebrate regions in Port Curtis and Rodds Bay, November/December 2002 . 71 Figure 15: CPI Schematic .................................................................................................................................................... 75 Figure 16: Oily Water Flow Diagram .................................................................................................................................. 77 Figure 17: Site Service/Potable Water Management and Distribution .............................................................................. 79 Figure 18: Filtered / Demineralised Water System Overview ............................................................................................ 80 Figure 19: RO Cutaway ....................................................................................................................................................... 82
Appendices
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 6 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Appendix A – QGC HSSE Policy
88
Appendix B – Gladstone and QCLNG Site Wind Roses
89
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 7 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
1.0
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
INTRODUCTION
1.1. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT This Operational Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) addresses environmental management for operation of the Queensland Curtis Liquefied Natural Gas (QCLNG) Project LNG Facility on Curtis Island (the LNG Facility). QCLNG Operating Company (QCLNG Op Co) will be the Operator of the LNG plant for normal operations. Bechtel Corporation (Bechtel), as the Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) contractor for the QCLNG Project, is responsible for the design, installation, construction, commissioning, start‐up, performance testing, operation and maintenance until handover of the QCLNG Facility to QCLNG Op Co. This document is applicable to LNG Operations undertaken by QCLNG Op Co following handover from Bechtel. It therefore does not consider environmental management associated with construction or commissioning of the LNG Facility as undertaken by Bechtel. Environmental management of construction and commissioning activities will be undertaken under Environmental Management Plan(s) specific to the relevant stage of the Project, including the Bechtel Construction Environmental Control Plan(s) (CECP) and/or Commissioning and Start‐Up Environmental Management Plan(s), as applicable. Dredging, shipping or other marine activities associated with the QCLNG Project, either in the Port of Gladstone or elsewhere are excluded from this OEMP except to the extent that the vessels are using wharves, jetties or other LNG Facility infrastructure. While the QCLNG Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) assessed environmental impacts for a three train LNG Facility, only two LNG Trains are currently under construction. This OEMP addresses site environmental management based on the two train LNG Facility layout, and will be amended as required to address future LNG trains. This OEMP has been prepared with consideration for the requirement for:
an Operations Environmental Management Plan for the LNG Facility as specified in the Coordinator General’s Report for the QCLNG Project (Appendix 4, Part 3, Condition 2);
an Operational Environmental Management Plan specified in the approval for the LNG Plant and Onshore Facilities made under sections 130(1) and 133 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (Cth) (Approval EPBC No. 2008/4402, Conditions 26 to 28 inclusive); and
an Operational Environmental Management Plan covering the LNG Jetty (Condition 23 of Gladstone Ports Corporation Concurrence Agency Response to the Development Application for Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works (including the Disturbance of Marine Plants) for the LNG Jetty ‐ DA/429/2011).
Further, this OEMP, along with subsidiary referenced management plans and procedures, is intended to address applicable environmental management, monitoring and reporting requirements for operation of the LNG Facility specified in:
Environmental Authority (EA) for Petroleum Facility Licence (PFL) 11 (EPPG00711513).
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 8 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
The Material Change of Use approval for the QCLNG LNG Facility (DGBN11_389).
Operational Works Permits for the LNG Jetty, Materials Offloading Facility (MOF), Construction Dock, and other tidal works, and specifically:
-
DA/429/2011 ‐ Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works (including the Disturbance of Marine Plants) for the LNG Jetty.
-
DA/120/2010 ‐ Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works for Curtis Island Construction Dock (including disturbance of marine plants).
-
DA/239/2010 ‐ Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works (including the Disturbance of Marine Plants) for Tidal Area Infrastructure at Curtis Island.
-
DA/190/2010 ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works Marine Offloading Facility, Lot 2, SP228454 and SP228185.
Approvals for the LNG Facility and associated marine facilities made under the EPBC Act, specifically: -
Approval to develop, construct, operate and decommissioning the marine facilities component of the QCLNG LNG Project as described in referral EPBC 2008/4401 (Marine Facilities Approval – 2008/4401).
-
Approval: Queensland Curtis LNG Project – LNG Plant and Onshore Facilities – EPBC No 1008/4402 (LNG Facility Approval – 2008/4402).
1.2. DOCUMENT REVISIONS AND APPROVAL This document has been prepared by Don Stockton, LNG Operations Permits and Licensing Coordinator, and shall be reviewed and endorsed in accordance with the RACIE Matrix. This document bears a revision status identifier which will change with each revision. All revisions to this document (after approval and distribution) will be subject to review and endorsement by the same functions as the original.
1.3. DISTRIBUTION AND INTENDED AUDIENCE This document is intended for Midstream (LNG Operations) members as well as other QGC stakeholders. The document will be made available on the Document Control System. This document will be updated during subsequent lifecycle stages and changes communicated to the team as applicable.
1.4. DEFINITIONS In this document, the following definitions apply: Term
Meaning
CG Report
The Queensland Curtis LNG Project: Coordinator‐General’s Report on the Environmental Impact Statement (June 2010)
LNG Facility
The QCLNG Facility located on Curtis Island Site and including the LNG plant, LNG loading facilities, utilities and associated infrastructure.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 9 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
1.5. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS In this document, the following acronyms and abbreviations apply: Acronym/Abbreviation
Meaning
BWRO
Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis Package
CECP
Construction Environmental Control Plan (Bechtel CECP, which forms a component of the site Framework CEMP)
CEMP
Construction Environmental Management Plan
CG
Coordinator General (Queensland)
CIIP
Curtis Island Industry Precinct
DA
Development Application
DCS
Distributed Control System
DGA
Diglycolamine
DPIF
Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries
EA
Environmental Authority for Petroleum Facility Licence PFL11 (EPPG00711513)
EDI
Electro de‐ionization
EHP
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (Queensland)
EIS
Environmental Impact Statement (consisting of both QCLNG Project Draft and Supplementary)
EMS
Environmental Management System
EP Act
Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld)
EPBC Act
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cmwth)
EPC
Engineering Procurement Construction
ERA
Environmentally Relevant Activity (under the Queensland Environment Protection Act 1994)
ERP
Emergency Response Plan
ERS
Emergency Release System
ESD
Emergency Shut Down (System)
GAWB
Gladstone Area Water Board
GHG
Greenhouse Gas
GSDA
Gladstone State Development Area
HSSE
Health, Safety, Security, Environment
IAC
Inlet air chilling
ISBL
Inside Battery Limits
MCU
Material Change of Use (Approval) for the LNG Facility (DGBN11_389)
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 10 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Acronym/Abbreviation
Meaning
MOF
Materials Offloading Facility
NAL
Noise Assessment Location
NOx
Oxides of nitrogen
OEMP
Operations (Operational) Environmental Management Plan
OMS
Operations Management System
OPW
Operational Works – Prescribed Tidal Works (Approval)
OSBL
Outside Battery Limits
PCIMP
Port Curtis Integrated Monitoring Program
PDS
Pipeline Delivery Station
PERC
Powered Emergency Release Coupling
PFD
Process Flow Diagram
PFL
Petroleum Facility Licence
PSV
Pressure Safety Valve
QCLNG
Queensland Curtis Liquefied Natural Gas (Project)
RO
Reverse Osmosis
ROC
Reverse Osmosis Concentrate
SEWPC
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (Commonwealth)
TWAF
Temporary Workers Accommodation Facility
UF
Ultra‐filtration
VOC
Volatile Organic Compound
WHR
Waste Heat Recovery
1.6. REFERENCED / ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS Documents referenced or reviewed in development of this OEMP are summarised in Table 1 below. Note that the referenced documents do not include environmental procedures or plans which are prepared as subsidiary documents and included as attachments to this OEMP. A list of applicable OEMP subsidiary plans is provided in Section 0. Table 1: Referenced / Associated Documents Document Number
Title/Description
Standards and Guidelines QCOPS‐OPS‐ENV‐PCE‐000020
QGC Procedure for Environmental Operational Control
QGC‐GPA‐STD‐000001
Stakeholder Feedback Standard
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 11 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Document Number
Title/Description
Permits and Approvals EPPG00711513
Environmental Authority (EA) for Petroleum Facility Licence 11
DGBN11_389
Material Change of Use approval for the QCLNG LNG Facility
Marine Facilities Approval – EPBC Approval to develop, construct, operate and decommissioning the 2008/4401 marine facilities component of the QCLNG LNG Project as described in referral EPBC 2008/4401 LNG Facility Approval – EPBC Approval: Queensland Curtis LNG Project – LNG Plant and Onshore 2008/4402 Facilities – EPBC No 1008/4402 DA/429/2011
Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works (including the Disturbance of Marine Plants) for the LNG Jetty
DA/120/2010
Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works for Curtis Island Construction Dock (including disturbance of marine plants)
DA/239/2010
Operational Works ‐ Prescribed Tidal Works (including the Disturbance of Marine Plants) for Tidal Area Infrastructure at Curtis Island
DA/190/2010
Prescribed Tidal Works Marine Offloading Facility (MOF) Lot 2, SP228454 and SP228185
QGC Management Plans, Processes and Procedures QCLNG‐AUS‐PMT‐ENV‐PLN‐0675
Environmental Management Plan: Water Mouse (Xeromys myoides)
QCLNG‐AUS‐PMT‐ENV‐PLN‐0793
Environmental Authority Monitoring Program – Curtis Island
QCLNG – AUS – PMT – ENV – PLN – QCLNG Whole of Project Migratory Shorebird Management 0952 (Rev B, Sept. 2011) Plan QCLNG‐BX00‐ENV‐PLN‐000020
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Strategy – Queensland Curtis LNG
QCLNG‐AUS‐GEN‐GPA‐PLN‐0689
Gladstone Stakeholder Engagement Plan
QCLNG‐BX00‐ENV‐PLN‐000070
Long‐Term Turtle Management Plan LNG Facilities – Curtis Island, Gladstone
Other Documents Queensland Curtis LNG Project The Queensland Curtis LNG Project Environmental Impact Statement Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), incorporating both the draft and supplementary EIS.
1.7. ORGANISATION STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES QGC accountabilities applicable to this OEMP are provided in Table 2 below, with more detailed responsibilities specific to various environmental aspects (monitoring, site management, corrective actions, etc.) detailed in relevant management plans and procedures referenced in this OEMP. Table 2: Key Management Responsibilities Position
Management Responsibilities
General
All delivery functions on Curtis island (production, maintenance, engineering, marine).
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 12 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Position
Management Responsibilities
Manager, LNG
Establishment of required management and operating systems, processes and procedures in line with company and regulatory obligations. Ensure the QGC HSSE Policy is implemented for QCLNG. All staff made aware of their General Environmental Duty under the EP Act.
Production Manager
LNG production and operation of the LNG facility. Safe Delivery of the Day/Control of Work/Permit to Work. Timely, safe and effective delivery of operational processes, procedures and systems for production.
Maintenance Manager
Marine Manager
Managing port and marine operations. Marine assurance and regulatory compliance.
LNG Operations HSSE Manager
Ensure compliance with environmental legislation and regulations, permits, licences and approvals. Ensure this OEMP and associated environmental plans and procedures are implemented and updated, including training of site personnel in applicable aspects of environmental compliance and this OEMP. Oversee environmental incident investigations and implementation of corrective actions.
QGC Central Environment Team / QGC Central Compliance Team
Manage and coordinate monitoring in response to a complaint or request from the Administering Authority. Undertake audits against the QGC Environmental Management System (EMS). Manage third party auditing of the EA and Coordinator General (CG) Conditions. Coordinate preparation and submission of Statutory Reporting including Annual Environmental Return and Annual Monitoring Report. Communicate non‐compliances with the EA to the Administering Authority.
Business Services Manager
Day‐to‐day management of contracts and procurement activities, including ensuring that environmental requirements are established in applicable contracts. Gladstone Social Performance programs.
Lead Environmental Advisor (LEA) / Superintendent Environment (title TBC for Ops)
Provide input into the Environmental Site Induction provided to all site staff and visitors. Act as primary point of contact for site personnel environmental matters and any associated environmental incidents. Provide the Production Manager and Maintenance Manager with environmental technical and regulatory compliance support with regard to site environmental management. Coordinate and undertake routine site environmental sampling and monitoring and manage field and laboratory analytical data results. Undertake any required reporting associated with site environmental monitoring and report results to the QGC Central Environment Team/QGC Central Compliance Team. Initiate and participate in environmental incident investigations in conjunction with and as directed by the LNG Operations Compliance Manager. Communicate incidences and non‐compliance to the QGC Central Environment Team/ QGC Central Compliance Team.
All maintenance activities. Recruitment and training of maintenance personnel. Management of maintenance support contracts. Planning, delivery and reporting of maintenance execution.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 13 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Position
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Management Responsibilities Collate environmental incident reports and associated regulatory notifications for submission to the QGC Central Environment Team/QGC Central Compliance Team for review and transmission to the administering authority. Monitor the implementation of the management measures and identify corrective actions. Communicate the need for corrective actions to the QGC Central Compliance Team/ QGC Central Compliance Team, Production Manager and LNG Operations Compliance Manager. Interact with Administering Authority as directed by the QGC Central Environment Team/ QGC Central Compliance Team. Participate in audits against the QGC EMS. Facilitate site aspects of third party auditing of the EA and CG Conditions.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 14 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
2.0
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
OEMP STRUCTURE AND LNG FACILITY HSSE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
2.1. HSSE POLICY AND EMS QGC has in place a Health, Safety, Security and Environment (HSSE) Policy that outlines individual accountabilities for all QGC employees and contractors. A copy of the QGC HSSE Policy is included as Appendix A. An Environmental Management System (EMS) is in place for QGC Upstream Activities, certified to ISO 14001, which has also been developed with reference to the QGC HSSE Policy. This OEMP, with associated sub‐plans, is prepared as a site environmental operational control procedure with reference to the QGC EMS. The scope of the QGC EMS will be extended to cover operation of the LNG Facility as described in this OEMP.
2.2. OEMP OUTLINE This OEMP includes: 1. A description of operational activities to be undertaken on the site; 2. Description of the existing environment, and environmental Aspects and Impacts associated with operation of the LNG Facility; and 3. An overview of management, monitoring, reporting and corrective actions for key identified Aspects and Impacts. Appended to this OEMP are sub‐plans addressing detailed environmental management and monitoring for specific environmental aspects. Appended plans and procedures include the following: Table 3: OEMP Plans and Procedures Document Number
Title/Description
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000004
Air Quality Management Plan
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000008
Noise Management Plan
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000006
Water Management Plan (incorporating stormwater and sediment and erosion control, process waters and groundwater)
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000005
Waste Management Plan
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000012
Biodiversity Management Plan
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000007
Weed Management Plan
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000011
Mosquito, Pest and Quarantine Management Plan
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000013
Environmental Contingency and Emergency Response Plan
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000010
Environmental Incident Reporting Procedure
LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000003
Chemicals and Hazardous Substances Management Plan
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 15 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
3.0
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
SITE LOCATION AND FACILITY DESCRIPTION
3.1. PROJECT SCOPE QGC Pty Limited (QGC) is developing an integrated liquefied natural gas (LNG) project in Queensland, known as the QCLNG Project. The QCLNG Project involves expanding QGC’s existing natural gas operations in the Surat Basin of southern Queensland and transporting the gas via an underground pipeline to a gas liquefaction and export facility on Curtis Island, near Gladstone, where the gas will be converted to LNG for export. The general scope of the QCLNG Project includes:
Upstream natural gas field development and facilities;
Pipeline construction of one pipeline sized for two LNG trains free‐flow, with the possible capability of adding compression to supply three LNG trains of feed gas capacity in the future;
Construction of an LNG production and export facility (LNG Facility) on Curtis Island to facilitate the export of liquefied natural gas.
Project design life is 20 years for each LNG train, although these trains will likely operate for significantly longer periods provided additional gas reserves are available. While three (3) LNG Trains are approved under the QCLNG EIS and subsidiary approvals, BG has taken a decision to initially construct a two (2) train LNG facility on Curtis Island, with pre‐investment to support potential addition of future trains in the most economical and least operationally disruptive manner. This OEMP has been prepared to address operations of the LNG Facility component of the Project. The two train site layout is shown in Figure 2. LNG Operations also utilises facilities on the Gladstone mainland including a Marine Operations Terminal (MOT), office facilities, and a warehouse (the Gladstone Supply Base or GSB). These mainland facilities are not covered by this OEMP.
3.2. DESCRIPTION OF PETROLEUM TENURES The LNG Facility is located within the bounds of PFL11 under the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004. The site is located within the Curtis Island Industry Precinct of the Gladstone State Development Area (GSDA). The Real Property Description (RPD) is Lot 2, on SP228454 (previously Lot 2 on SP225924) and SP228185 (wet lease). PFL11 covers both these lots and extends into the water covering marine infrastructure. The site is not currently included on the Environmental Management Register (EMR). Site location, and the surrounding GSDA, is shown in Figure 1.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 16 of 89
# !,) 1 # $ # + 0 ' + # '& ! &
" ) ) '. *
Rail Road Principal Road Secondary Road
&!) '' *$ &
Wet Lease Boundary
# ) '# &+
Export Pipeline QCLNG Site Boundary (PFL11)
) # & '# &+
Aldoga Precinct Clinton Precinct
,) + # * *$ &
Corridor Buffer Area Precinct Curtis Island Industry Precinct # *" ) %&* & # &!
Environmental Management Precinct (Curtis Island)
"# & 0
Environmental Management Precinct (Kangaroo Island) Materials Transportation and Services Corridor
%# $ + '& '# &+
Stuart Oil Shale Reserve Preservation Area
') + ' $ *+ '& ') + ,) + # *
# !!# &* *$ &
Targinnie Precinct Yarwun Precinct
$ *+ '&
2/08/2013
±
0
1
2
3
4
hibberde M_30997_01
5
Kilometers
Map Projec tion: GDA 94
SCALE:
1:100,000
(A3)
Ima ger y - Ne arMa p Site La yout - Bech te l
'+
- ) 0 ') + "* & % + ' &*,) + "# * # &') %+ # '& # * * ( + # $ $ 0 ,) + " $ ' + # '& ' + "# * # &') %+ # '& *"',$ &'+ ) $ # '& * + " / + # $ $ ' + # '& "B as e d on o r c o nta i n s d a ta p ro v id e d b y th e Sta te o f Q u ee n s la n d (D e p a rtm en t o f En v ir on m e n t an d R e so u rc e Ma n a g e me n t) 2 0 11 . In co n si d er a tio n o f th e S ta te p e rm itti n g u s e o f th is d a ta y o u a c kn o w le d g e a nd ag r ee th a t the S ta te g i ve s n o w a rra n ty i n re la ti o n to th e da ta (i n cl u di n g ac cu r ac y, re li a b il ity, co m pl e te ne s s, c ur re n cy or su ita b i li ty) a n d a cc ep ts no l ia b i li ty (i n cl ud i n g w i th o ut l im i tati o n , li ab i li ty i n ne g l ig e n ce ) fo r a n y l o ss , d a m a g e o r co sts (in c lu d i ng c on s e qu e n tia l d a ma g e ) re l a tin g to an y us e o f th e d a ta. D a ta m us t n ot b e u se d fo r d ir ec t ma r ke tin g o r b e u se d in b re a ch o f th e p ri va c y l a w s."
&#
% * *!&% + (! # ! " % Export P ipeline Wet Lease B oundary QCLNG Site B oundary (PFL11)
Workshop
Maintenance Building
Chemical Storage Building
Operations Building
Material Offloading Facility
Main Control Building
Refrigerant Storage
LNG Train 2
Utility Air, Nitorgen & Diesel Storage
LNG Train 1
LNG Tank B LNG Tank A
2/08/2013
Process Flares
±
Marine Flare
0
100
200
300
400
hibberde M_25517_01a
500
Meters Map Projec tion: GDA 94
SCALE:
1:10,000
(A3)
Ima ger y - Ne arMa p Site Bo un dar y - DME
!% ' # * !# % $ % ! $&# % $ !# % ! $ $ " % * &# % !% ! ! % $ !# % ! $ !& !% # ! $ % ) % ! % !
LNG Loading Berth
Construction Dock
"B as e d on o r c o nta i n s d a ta p ro v id e d b y th e Sta te o f Q u ee n s la n d (D e p a rtm en t o f En v ir on m e n t an d R e so u rc e Ma n a g e me n t) 2 0 11 . In co n si d er a tio n o f th e S ta te p e rm itti n g u s e o f th is d a ta y o u a c kn o w le d g e a nd ag r ee th a t the S ta te g i ve s n o w a rra n ty i n re la ti o n to th e da ta (i n cl u di n g ac cu r ac y, re li a b il ity, co m pl e te ne s s, c ur re n cy or su ita b i li ty) a n d a cc ep ts no l ia b i li ty (i n cl ud i n g w i th o ut l im i tati o n , li ab i li ty i n ne g l ig e n ce ) fo r a n y l o ss , d a m a g e o r co sts (in c lu d i ng c on s e qu e n tia l d a ma g e ) re l a tin g to an y us e o f th e d a ta. D a ta m us t n ot b e u se d fo r d ir ec t ma r ke tin g o r b e u se d in b re a ch o f th e p ri va c y l a w s."
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
3.3. QCLNG CURTIS ISLAND SITE 3.3.1. Location and Facilities The LNG Facility is located approximately 8 km northwest of Gladstone, and approximately 9km from the community at South End on Curtis Island. As well as the two LNG train plant and ancillary Curtis Island based utilities and infrastructure, marine facilities associated with the QCLNG Facility covered by this OEMP include a jetty for loading LNG (LNG Jetty), a MOF, and a Construction Dock. These facilities, and associated shipping channels and swing basin are within the Port of Gladstone as defined in Transport Infrastructure (Ports) Regulation 2005 (Qld).
3.3.2. Meteorological Conditions QGC has installed a meteorological station on the QCLNG Facility site for ongoing measurement of site specific meteorological conditions. Longer term data for the Gladstone region sourced from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology is summarised below.
3.3.2.1.
Temperatures
Average daily temperature is 23°C;
Absolute minimum is 4.4°C;
Absolute maximum is 42°C.
3.3.2.2.
3.3.2.3.
Relative Humidity
Mean Annual (9am) 67% @ 22.9°C
Mean Annual (3pm) 59% @ 25.5°C
Wind
Meteorological data from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology at the Gladstone Airport indicates that winds are predominantly from the north‐east to south‐southeast, with 62.2% of winds blowing from this direction. These winds usually dominate day and early evening flows; with winds strongest between midday and 6pm. Winds tend to be strongest in an easterly direction during summer. Wind roses for the Gladstone Airport are presented in Appendix B. Gladstone airport is about 11 km SSE of the QCLNG Facility. In the absence of long term site‐specific meteorological data for the QCLNG Facility site, wind roses were developed for the QCLNG Facility using the meteorological modelling tool, CALMET, and were presented as part of the QCLNG draft EIS. These wind roses are presented in Appendix B. Review of the annual wind rose for the QCLNG site generated by CALMET with the annual wind rose for Gladstone airport indicates that site winds are expected to be slightly less than those measured at the airport, representing the buffering of the site from prevailing winds by topography to the east and south.
3.3.2.4.
Rainfall
About 66% of rain falls during the November to March wet season.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 19 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Mean annual
879 mm
Maximum rainfall in 24 hours
248 mm
Mean number of days with rain
97.2/year
3.4. DESCRIPTION OF PETROLEUM ACTIVITIES This OEMP covers operations of the LNG Facility on Curtis Island. The petroleum activities to be undertaken at the LNG Facility include the following (per Section 3(2) of the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004):
the distillation, production, processing, refining, storage and transport of fuel gas;
authorised activities for petroleum authorities; and
other activities authorised under this Act for petroleum authorities.
3.5. FACILITY DESCRIPTION The QCLNG export terminal will receive natural gas by pipeline, remove impurities from the gas, liquefy the clean dry gas, store the resulting LNG in storage tanks, and load the LNG into LNG tank ships for export. The LNG plant will include two (2) liquefaction trains, each having a nominal capacity of 4.23 mtpa. The trains will utilise the ConocoPhillips Optimized Cascade® Process to chill and liquefy the gas. LNG will leave the QCLNG Facility in purpose‐built LNG ships. The LNG Facility will operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per year, although each LNG train will be periodically shut down for maintenance. The average production capacity of each train is approximately 4.0 mtpa, taking into consideration the expected average feed gas‐flow rates and long‐term availability of the processing equipment, although may be higher in any given year subject to optimisation of operations and maintenance scheduling. For the purposes of this OEMP, the QCLNG Facility comprises:
LNG process systems, incorporating: -
Gas pre‐treatment: including inlet receiving and metering, gas pre‐treatment facilities for the removal of water and impurities from the feed gas.
-
Gas liquefaction units: The process by which the gas is systematically cooled and liquefied at approximately ‐160°C.
-
LNG storage and loading facilities: LNG storage, including two full containment LNG storage tanks. The LNG tanks will each have a capacity of 140,000 m³. Loading facilities include jetty and docking facilities.
Utilities: including refrigerant storage, power generation, hot oil system, fuel gas, nitrogen, air systems, water systems, fuel and chemical storage, fire protection and safety systems, flare and vent systems.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 20 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Associated Pipelines: including the Pipeline Delivery Station and other pipelines located within the boundary of the QCLNG Curtis Island Site.
Supporting services and ancillary infrastructure: including a Construction Dock and Materials Offloading Facility (MOF).
3.5.1. LNG Process A generalised process flow diagram (PFD) for the ConocoPhillips Optimized Cascade® Process is shown in Figure 3 below. A simplified summary of the process, including the Unit numbers relevant to the QCLNG project, is included as Figure 4. Figure 3: Optimized Cascade Process
Figure 4: LNG Process Flow – Process Units
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 21 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
3.5.1.1.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Gas Pre‐treatment
Gas will be transported from the gas fields to the LNG plant through a 42” main export pipeline. The gas is dehydrated to sales gas quality at processing plants in the field. The pre‐treatment at the LNG Facility consists of:
Inlet Gas Receiving and Metering;
Acid Gas Removal / Amine Regeneration; and
Dehydration and Mercury Removal.
Feed gas pre‐treatment is important to remove impurities (primarily CO2 and water) from the feed gas, as these would freeze in the liquefaction section of the LNG trains if not removed and block or damage equipment. Residual CO2 and water in the pre‐treated gas supply to the liquefaction section therefore need to be extremely low. Feedstock is processed through a feed gas heater for hydrate prevention if necessary, and then a diglycolamine (DGA) gas treating system removes CO2, potential trace levels of hydrogen sulphide (H2S), and other sulphur components that may be in the gas. A rich amine regeneration system is included for recovery and recirculation of lean amine. Treated gas, with CO2 removed, is then chilled to a temperature sufficiently above the hydrate point (around 20°C) to allow for the removal of as much water as possible before drying in the molecular sieve dehydration section. This reduces the loading and size of the molecular sieves (free water is removed in an inlet separator and inlet filter coalescer, and is recycled back to the acid gas removal unit).
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 22 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Regeneration of the molecular sieve in the dehydrator vessels is achieved by using dry gas. The dry gas is heated and passed through the dehydrator vessel. The gas is then cooled, dehydrated (water removal), compressed and fed back to the inlet of the acid gas removal system. The dried gas then passes through two mercury removal beds to remove any traces of mercury in the feed gas. While mercury is not expected in QCLNG feed gas, mercury removal has been provided to ensure that pre‐treated feed gas to the liquefaction section has no mercury. Any mercury would condense in the cooler sections, and liquid mercury may attack aluminium equipment in the liquefaction section.
3.5.1.2.
Gas Liquefaction
The liquefaction section consists of:
Propane Refrigeration;
Ethylene Refrigeration; and
Feed Gas Liquefaction, Methane Refrigeration and Nitrogen Rejection.
These three refrigeration units are optimally cascaded to provide maximum LNG production by efficiently using the maximum available horsepower of the compressor /turbine sets. The propane circuit is a closed loop refrigeration circuit which uses propane as the refrigerant. The propane refrigeration unit has three main purposes:
Chill the feed gas prior to liquefaction;
Condense ethylene refrigerant; and
De‐super‐heat methane gas.
Anti‐surge protection is provided for each compressor on all stages. Gas from each compressor discharge is recycled via the anti‐surge control valves. Suction pressure is controlled by varying the turbine speeds of the compressor gas turbines. The Distributed Control System (DCS) has the capability to reset the pressure controller according to the ambient temperature for maximizing plant capacity. At high‐high liquid level in a suction drum, the associated compressor will be shut down and the corresponding suction isolation valves located upstream of the drum will close, thereby protecting the propane compressor from liquid carry‐over. The Ethylene Refrigeration unit is a closed loop refrigeration circuit which uses ethylene as the refrigerant. The Ethylene Refrigeration Unit has two main purposes:
Cool and condense the feed gas; and
Cool and condense the methane gas.
As in propane refrigeration, each ethylene machine is equipped with an anti‐surge control system, Either machine may be started, shut down, or placed on recycle without significant upset to the system as a whole, provided plant throughput is adjusted accordingly.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 23 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Methane Refrigeration provides the final stage of feed gas liquefaction. Condensed feed gas from the Ethylene Refrigeration unit is liquefied at atmospheric pressure. This produces LNG which is transferred to the LNG Storage Tanks via the LNG Transfer Pumps. The methane refrigeration unit is different from the Propane and Ethylene Refrigeration units in that the feed gas itself is used as the refrigerant, as opposed to the closed‐loop propane and ethylene circuits. Vapour from each flash is re‐compressed and recycled to points upstream of the feed gas condensing operations, which use propane and ethylene refrigeration. The methane flash vapours are warmed prior to compression and provide efficient cooling for the methane compressor discharge. A recycle methane gas stream is taken from the high stage compressor discharge to be used as either fuel gas or recondensed in the upstream propane and ethylene units. The methane refrigeration and liquefaction circuit is equipped with a Nitrogen Rejection Unit thermally linked to the methane cold box which rejects and vents excess nitrogen to the atmosphere. The system takes its feed gas as a side stream from the open loop methane refrigeration circuit and rejects a nitrogen (N2) rich vent stream while returning a methane rich stream to the methane system. The Nitrogen Rejection Unit is provided to allow production of a high‐quality fuel gas that meets the heating requirements of the gas turbines. Anti‐surge protection is provided for both of the methane compressor on all stages. Suction pressure is controlled by varying the turbine speeds of the compressor gas turbines. Either machine may be started, shut down, or placed on recycle without significant upset to the system as a whole, provided plant throughput is adjusted accordingly. The DCS has the capability to reset the pressure controller according to the ambient temperature for maximising plant capacity. Compressor Turbine Inlet Air Chilling The Inlet Air Chilling (IAC) system packages are used to maintain a constant air temperature at the inlet of the GE LM‐2500+G4 gas turbine drivers for the refrigeration compressors in the liquefaction units of the QCLNG plant. Gas turbine power output depends on the mass flow of inlet air and the ambient air dry bulb inlet temperature. The IAC will help maintain a steady efficiency for the gas turbines during hot weather to maximize LNG production by:
Reducing the inlet air temperature and hence air flow via increased air density; and,
Reducing the inlet air humidity.
The IAC package has the following process configuration:
Chilled water loop to cool the air at inlet to the gas turbines; and
Propane refrigeration cycle to remove heat from the chilled water.
Chilled water at 5.4°C from the evaporators in the lAC package is sent to the propane‐ethylene‐methane gas turbine IAC coil modules to cool the turbine inlet air in contact with the coils. The warm return water flows from the gas turbine coils are sent back to the lAC package for chilling.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 24 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Water condensed on the outside surface of the coil modules from moisture in the air at turbine inlets is collected and sent to the storm water system for disposal.
3.5.1.3.
LNG Storage and loading facilities
The LNG Facility has two double‐walled, full containment LNG storage tanks of 140,000 m3 capacity, each fitted with four ship loading pumps. The tanks are fitted with level gauges, level transmitters, relief valves, vents, temperature elements and other instrumentation. Lightning protection is provided by roof design and by roof‐wall‐floor electrical continuity to earth. The tank design temperature is ‐168°C. The LNG storage tanks are full containment cryogenic design, consisting of a primary inner tank of high ductility 9% nickel steel surrounded by insulation with a secondary outer tank of reinforced and pre‐stressed concrete. The roof over the complete tank is steel. The annulus between the two tanks is filled with perlite insulation. The outer containment vessel has a 1m‐thick concrete external wall offering protection from external spill fires, and the concrete foundation contains heaters to prevent the soil beneath the tank from freezing. Schematics of the LNG storage tanks are shown in Figure 5. Figure 5: LNG Storage Tanks - Schematic
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 25 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
From the LNG storage tanks, LNG is pumped to the jetty head for ship loading. The ship loading pumps have a combined pump capacity (eight pumps operating in parallel) of 12,000 m3/hr. At the jetty, four loading arms connect to each ship, including:
Two dedicated loading arms;
One dedicated vapour return loading arm; and
One loading arm that can be used either for loading or vapour return.
The jetty is just over 250 m long with a Marine Terminal Building located on the jetty. Mooring is facilitated via six mooring dolphins and four berthing dolphins over a fender line about 360 m long. Boil‐Off Compressors Three Boil‐Off Gas (BOG) compressors remove excess vapour from the tanks and return the vapour for liquefaction in the trains. Composite gases from the LNG tanks and from the ship loading system are compressed by the BOG compressors and returned to the open cycle methane LNG plant refrigerant system. The BOG compressors are electric motor driven centrifugal compressors designed for the cryogenic service. When no is ship loading, one BOG compressor is required for each train in operation to handle vapours from the LNG storage tanks. To minimise flaring during the cool down of a warm ship, a quench system reduces the temperature of relatively warm return vapours and to ensure cooled vapours can be processed by the BOG compressors and returned to the liquefaction process. Ship Loading A Navicom Dynamics “HarbourPilot” berthing aid is used with the “Smartdock” Docking Aid System in bringing tankers alongside. A Mooring Load Monitoring System will guide and monitor the ships’ mooring. When the ship is correctly secured, the gangway may be positioned. Earth and communications cables are connected and tested. Comprehensive pre‐loading procedures are undertaken prior to connecting the loading arms, with the vapour arm connected first followed by the liquid arms. The arms are flushed with N2 and pressure tested. The functionality of the ship and jetty shutdown valves is tested by a warm Shutdown Loading (SDL) test, followed by cool down of the loading arms and ship manifold. Following cool‐down is a cold SDL test, after which the valves are reset and loading may start. Vented gas from the ships’ holds during loading that meets process specifications is directed back to the vapour space of the LNG storage tanks and processed through the BOG compressors. A gas‐chromatograph measures N2, CO2, and oxyen (O2) to ensure they are at the required limits before directing vented gas to the LNG tanks. ‘Off’ spec vented gas from the ships’ holds during loading is directed to the Marine Flare. On completion of loading, the loading arms are all drained of LNG to the collection drains header. The arms are then purged of LNG using N2 before they are disconnected. The communications and earth cables are disconnected, the gangway removed and the ship released in coordination with the harbour pilot. Once two LNG trains are operating under normal conditions, it is anticipated that LNG cargo frequency will be approximately two to three per week (or one every three days). Loading times of about 24 hours alongside
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 26 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
the berth are expected. Both cargo frequency and vessel loading times will vary depending upon the size of the LNG vessels. An overview of the LNG loading layout is shown in Figure 6. Figure 6: LNG Loading Layout
Notes:
Red: 9kg fire extinguisher Purple: Audible alarms Green dotted line: open path gas detectors Also low temp spill detectors at the loading arms and open path gas detector across the rear of the loading arms.
Powered Emergency Release Coupling The unloading arms use a hard arm connector and a cantilever design to cater for ship movements. In addition, the loading arms have the following features:
Each loading arm is of the single counterweight balance type, fitted with self‐ levelling triple swivel assembly joints and equipped with an emergency release system and a manual quick connect/disconnect coupling.
To allow for thermal shrinkage in the product carrying pipe‐work, the structural part of the loading arm is independent from the pipe‐work.
In operation, the loading arms are limited to no more than 80% of the safe operating envelope.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 27 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
On the end of each arm is a Quick Connect Disconnect (QCDC) coupling. Upstream of the QCDC is a Powered Emergency Release Coupling (PERC) for emergency disconnection from the ship. The PERC is a set of two ball valves held together by a releasable hydraulic coupling. In an emergency, the two ball valves close and the hydraulic coupling releases. The loading arm counter weight will swing the loading arm to a safe position clear of the ship. Mechanical linkage ensures that the PERC cannot separate until the ball valves are fully closed. The emergency release system (ERS) allows the unloading arm to be safely disconnected from the ship. The ERS has several alarms so the operator may correct the situation before disconnection occurs:
Pre‐Alarm Warning ‐ A visible and audible signal to warn the operator to adjust the mooring lines.
First Step Alarm ‐ An intermittent and audible signal is initiated at the jetty display panel and Central Control Room (CCR) when the unloading arm crosses its working range limit.
Second Step Alarm (Action) ‐ A continuous visible and audible signal to warn the operator that the PERC will be opened and the loading arms hydraulically blocked.
Automatic Emergency Release ‐ The ERS of all arms will be automatically activated when any arm travels beyond its working range limit.
On arrival of the ship and before unloading starts, the ship's control system is connected to the onshore emergency shut down (ESD) system allowing communication, alarm and shutdown signals to be passed between ship and shore. This allows the ship’s pumps to be shut down either directly or through a process cascade leading to high discharge pressure at the pumps.
3.5.2. Utilities 3.5.2.1.
Refrigerant and Diesel Storage
Refrigerant Refrigerant storage is provided for ethylene and propane systems, allowing for periodic make‐up to each refrigerant circuit, as well as refrigerant storage during maintenance. These systems (Ethylene and Propane Storage) are common for Trains 1 and 2. The refrigerant storage location is shown in Figure 7. Ethylene is stored in pressurised, double‐walled, vacuum jacketed horizontal bullets, with a capacity of approximately 255 m3 each, with inventory being a maximum of:
Three (3) process inventories, shared between two trains; or
Two (2) process inventories plus three month supply for two trains based on estimated losses.
Propane storage is in three pressurized horizontal bullets, with maximum inventory being two process inventories minus the inventory of the propane accumulators plus three months’ supply for two trains based on estimated losses. Each pressurised vessel has a net capacity of 686 m3 at ambient temperatures.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 28 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Figure 7: Refrigerant Storage Location
Diesel Fuel Diesel fuel is used for firewater pumps, back‐up air compressors and black start generators. Located in the refrigerant storage area, the Diesel Oil Storage Tank is an API 650 atmospheric tank. The Diesel Oil Transfer Pump is designed to transfer diesel oil to the day tanks of the Stand‐by Diesel Generators, the Firewater Pump Packages and the Start‐up/Back‐up Air Compressor Packages. This pump can also be used for filling the storage tank.
3.5.2.2.
Power Generation
Electrical demands for Trains 1 and 2 are provided by three gas turbine generators, with two normally operating and one on stand‐by. The normal electrical load of the plant with all equipment operating is around 48,000 kW. Each individual generator (Gas Turbine Generator, GTG) is ISO rated at about 33,000 kW. This may drop to around 26,000 kW under certain conditions. Diesel emergency generators provide backup power for critical services and “black start‐up” power for power generators. The standby generator system consists of three Diesel Generator Packages, which supply power to standby loads during power system outages and serve as a black start generator for the gas turbine generators when required. Day tanks for the Standby Diesel Generator sets are sized for a minimum of 12 hours of operation at full load. Facilities are provided to top up the day tanks. Top up of diesel day tanks is via a hard piped diesel distribution system. An automatic load shedding system ensures power supply to critical services if one of the gas turbine generators fails. The load shedding system also reduces power demand when the electrical system is heavily loaded (possible during hot weather). The load shedding system is totally separate from the standby Diesel Generators (which supply power to the site’s essential services).
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 29 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
3.5.2.3.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Hot Oil System
The hot oil system is a closed loop re‐circulation system provided to service the process heating requirements. “Therminol 55” is the heating medium selected due to its properties in the required temperature range. The Hot Oil Surge Drum (V‐3401) is sized for hot oil volume expansion up to temperature of 246°C. The Hot Oil Storage Tank (T‐3401) is common for two trains and designed to hold one train system inventory plus volume expansion up to the average hot oil return temperature of 142°C. Two (2) parallel Waste Heat Recovery (WHR) Units heat oil from an average inlet temperature of 142°C to an outlet temperature of around 250°C by waste heat recovered from the Methane Gas Compressor Turbines exhaust. A back‐up, direct fired heater is provided for standby/start‐up purposes. The Standby/Start‐Up Hot Oil Heater is common for the two trains.
3.5.2.4.
Fuel Gas System
Natura gas will be used as fuel for major equipment during plant operations. A fuel gas system is provided to supply gas to high‐use components such as refrigerant turbines and power generation prime movers, and low‐level users such as the heaters and flare systems. The primary source of high pressure fuel gas comes from the plant methane refrigerant system with back‐up supply coming from the front end of the LNG plant. The High Pressure fuel gas system is designed to ensure continuity of supply to the power generation turbines in the event of plant upset conditions. Low pressure fuel gas is pressure let down from the high pressure system downstream of the fuel gas heater which is used to dry the gas stream for downstream users. Defrost gas is supplied by pressure control to the Defrost Heater from the make‐up fuel gas line on the front end of the LNG plant. The defrost gas system is used to supply low pressure defrost gas to portions of the refrigeration units and feed gas stream to defrost the possible build‐up of CO2 and water within the equipment in the cold sections of the plant (should it occur). Defrost gas at approximately 54°C is made from mixing hot regeneration gas from the waste heat recovery or from the regeneration gas heater with dry, cool gas from downstream of the mercury removal after filters. A water‐bath heater is provided to heat the pipeline gas to operate the gas turbines when the LNG trains may not be operating (i.e. initial start‐up and subsequent two‐train shutdowns).
3.5.2.5.
Plant and Instrument Air
The plant and instrument air system supplies all instrument air for plant start‐up, including Nitrogen Generation System requirements. Plant air, instrument air, and feed air to the Nitrogen Generator Package is supplied by the motor‐driven Air Compressor Packages, complete with discharge coolers and controls. The diesel Start‐up/Back‐up Air Compressor Packages with discharge coolers and controls are provided for each train. Each Air Compressor Package has 50% capacity of 2,950 normal cubic meters per hour (ncmh). Two normally running compressors and two diesel driven back‐ups are dedicated for each LNG train.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 30 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Low pressure at either the Train 1 or 2 Plant Air Receiver activates a low pressure switch, which automatically starts the Start‐Up/Back‐Up Air Compressor Package. Continuing low pressure cuts off air flow primarily to the plant air system and secondarily to the nitrogen generation system.
3.5.2.6.
Nitrogen Storage and Distribution
Gaseous nitrogen is generated by membrane Nitrogen Generator Packages (one package for each train and a common back‐up). The nitrogen is then fed to a Nitrogen Receiver to provide surge capacity to the users within the train. Nitrogen is also supplied to Outside Battery Limits (OSBL). Nitrogen is used as a blanket gas for various tanks, drum and sumps, purge gas for the cold boxes, back‐up purge gas to the blowdown headers, loading arm swivel point purge, compressor gas seals (start‐up and tertiary), pump seals, and as a general inert gas for purging of systems before maintenance and for leak testing and inerting equipment before recommissioning.
3.5.2.7.
Fire Protection
The LNG Plant has a philosophy that should fire be detected within the processing facilities, the immediate area will be automatically isolated and depressured to minimise the risk of a fire escalating. Isolation and depressurisation will continue via a number of pre‐programmed sequences until either the fire has been extinguished or the whole LNG facility has been de‐pressured. The Firewater system is common for both Train 1 and Train 2 facilities along with OSBL and the Jetty. The fire protection system consists of:
Fire water pumps (diesel firewater pumps normally on standby, with electrically driven jockey pumps used to maintain the pressure of the firewater loop)
Fire water storage tanks
Deluge systems
Fire monitors
Wheeled dry chemical fire extinguishers
Dry chemical extinguishers
Hydrants
Hose reels
Fire hoses
Emergency Tug boat connection at LNG Jetty
Foam generators
Fire and gas detection
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 31 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
The firewater system source will be supplied from the utility water system and will be stored in two firewater tanks (T‐3302 A/B) with a capacity of 3300m3 each. Both tanks are sized to meet the largest firewater demand in the event of single largest fire in the facility or in the jetty plus 50% of maximum flow rate required. A simplified schematic of the firewater pumps and fire main is provided in Figure 8 below. Figure 8: Firewater Pumps and Fire Main
3.5.2.8.
Flare and Vent System
The flare system and vent system is designed to protect the QCLNG Facility in the event of overpressure, fire or hydrocarbon leaks. Flare System The flare system includes three separate flare systems common for both Train 1 and Train 2. One of these flare stacks is designed to handle warm hydrocarbon streams that may be saturated with water vapour or may contain free liquid hydrocarbons and water, or both. This is referred to as the Wet Gas Flare. A second flare is designed to handle vapour and liquid cryogenic hydrocarbons. This flare stack is referred to as the Dry Gas Flare. The wet and dry gas flares are located side by side in a common derrick and are jointly referred to as the Process Flares. The third flare system handles vapour from the LNG Storage Tanks in the event of BOG compressor failure, and any ship vapours not recovered during ship loading. This is referred to as the Marine Flare. The Wet Gas and Dry Gas Flare Systems include "knock out drums" to separate any liquids from the gas before it is routed to the flare stack. Any liquids separated from the flared gas in the Wet Gas Flare are
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 32 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
pumped to the Waste Water Tank (T‐2912) for disposal. Connections are provided to dispose liquids from Wet Gas and Dry Gas K.O. Drum via vacuum truck. Each flare is equipped with a utility‐type flare tip and an integral purge gas reduction seal. Each flare is provided with a flame front generator (FFG) ignition system. The material of construction of the Wet Gas Flare is carbon steel and the Dry Gas Flare is constructed of stainless steel. The flares are designed to be smokeless up to a certain capacity of methane relief although smoke may occur during relief of the propane or ethylene systems. Vents Key vents include:
Reject gases from the amine regeneration system continuously vented to atmosphere through the CO2 vent stack within each LNG train, as described in Section 3.5.1.1. Dispersion modelling has confirmed that the CO2 Vent Stack outlet is at a “safe location” under worst case conditions.
The reject N2 stream from the Nitrogen Rejection Unit (NRU) in each LNG train removes non‐ condensable N2 from the LNG product as described in Section 3.5.1.1, with the NRU reject gas stream continuously vented to atmosphere from a vent located around 40 m above ground level. The NRU reject gas contains a small concentration of methane. Dispersion modelling has confirmed that the NRU Vent outlet is at a “safe location” under worst case conditions.
A manual vent to atmosphere is provided at the Pipeline Delivery Station (PDS) to allow venting of the pig receiver and filters. In the event of an emergency, the PDS will be quickly depressured through the main LNG flare system.
3.5.2.9.
Water Systems
Potable water for the LNG Facility is supplied by the Gladstone Area Water Board (GAWB) via pipelines constructed from the Gladstone mainland to Curtis Island. Pipelines are constructed allowing sewage return from the QCLNG Facility to GAWB facilities on the Gladstone mainland for treatment. The water system has been designed to treat the water from GAWB to generate demineralized water, service water, potable water, and fire water. This overall system includes a hypochlorite injection package, ultrafiltration package, brackish water reverse osmosis (BWRO) package, electro deionization (EDI) package, potable water cartridge filter package and an ultraviolet (UV) disinfection package. The wastewater and sanitary sewage collection systems are segregated in the LNG Facility. The process area drains, oily water from knock‐out drums, and potentially contaminated storm water from the process and utility areas are routed to effluent treatment unit (Unit 29). Sanitary waste from various sources within the Facility are routed to sanitary lift stations, pumped to the property boundary and then connected to the Gladstone Regional Council sewer line for treatment. Further description of the site water management system is provided in Section 5.4, with detailed management, monitoring and reporting requirements associated with site water provided in the Water Management Plan (LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000006).
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 33 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
3.5.3. Associated Pipelines The 42” feed gas pipeline from the gas fields crosses the mainland to Curtis Island just outside of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. On Curtis Island, it passes behind the neighbouring APLNG site and to the east of the QCLNG site along a Common Infrastructure Corridor (CIC‐GSDA) before it turns into the QCLNG Facility. At the QCLNG site boundary, the pipeline is brought above ground and enters the PDS, which consists of:
Pig Receiver ‐ this facility allows pigs, which are used to clean the pipeline and to conduct internal inspections of the pipeline, to be either launched or recovered;
Filter Coalescers ‐ this facility removes dust particles and liquid, which may have entered the gas during upstream processing equipment and ensures that the gas is free from contaminants when transferred to the LNG facility;
Metering ‐ this measures the gas flow rate into the LNG facility at the point of custody transfer; and
Local Equipment Room ‐ Process Control & Instrumentation.
After exiting the metering system at the PDS, the gas enters the 850 m underground pipeline to the LNG Plant. The PDS sits at the interface between the export pipeline and the LNG facility. The PDS is authorised under Petroleum Pipeline Licence 155 and Environmental Authority (EA) EPPG00945113, and will be owned and operated by QCLNG Pipeline Pty Ltd. The LNG facility will be owned and operated by QCLNG Op Co.
3.5.4. Site Buildings and Helipad In addition to the process, utilities, and marine facilities described, the site will contain other site buildings and infrastructure including:
Maintenance Building;
Warehouse Building;
Chemical Storage Building;
Main Control Building;
Operations Building (including office space);
Marine Terminal Building
Fire Aid / Fire Station Building;
Various electrical substantion buildings and associated control rooms; and
Helipad (for emergency use only).
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 34 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
3.6. PROJECT LIFE AND PHASES 3.6.1. Construction and Commissioning Interface At the time of preparation of this OEMP, construction of LNG Train 1 and 2, along with all ancillary infrastructure on the QCLNG site, is being undertaken by the principal contractor (Bechtel) on behalf of QGC. As construction moves towards completion, commissioning and start‐up of the LNG Facility, and commencement of operations can be described as follows: Phase 1 ‐ Commissioning Train 1 and Utilities: This phase of operations will entail power generation, utility and initial LNG plant commissioning. This phase will see a dedicated crew of commissioning personnel operating the QCLNG Facility in conjunction with the principal contractor (Bechtel) with live areas and systems positively isolated from construction areas where construction activities will be ongoing. Phase 2 – SIMOPS: This phase will be defined by Simultaneous Operation (SIMOPS) of the first LNG train and utilities, and the completion of construction, commissioning and start‐up of the second LNG train. The construction and commissioning of the second LNG train will be undertaken by the principal contractor (Bechtel) on a segregated area of the site. The LNG train (Train 1) will be operated by QCLNG personnel under the direction of Bechtel until transfer of care, custody and control. During this period LNG will be produced and the first LNG cargo will be shipped from the LNG Facility. QGC take‐over of Train 1 from Bechtel will occur during this period. Phase 3 – Beneficial Operation of 2 LNG Trains: The final and ‘normal’ operating phase is the normal continuous operation of two (2) LNG trains by QCLNG personnel. During construction and Phase 1 (Commissioning Train 1 and Utilities) site environmental management, monitoring and reporting is being undertaken in accordance with the Construction Environmental Control Plan (Bechtel) and Framework Construction Environmental Management Plan (QGC) and other applicable plans, procedures and processes. Environmental management for commissioning and start‐up of the LNG Facility is addressed in the Bechtel Commissioning and Start‐up EMP. This OEMP will apply only to operational activities undertaken following completion of commissioning and start‐up activities, and at take‐over of the facility by QGC from Bechtel. It should be noted that take‐over will occur on a staged basis, with areas of the site (e.g. Train 1 and process control areas) handed over, while construction / commissioning activities are ongoing in other areas of the site. During this period of partial handover, this OEMP will apply only to those portions of the site where take‐over has occurred.
3.6.2. Project Life Commercial operations are anticipated to start in 2014 for Train 1. The Project is anticipated to have a design life of at least 20 years for each LNG train. However, trains will likely operate for significantly longer provided additional gas reserves are available. The first train is scheduled to commence LNG commercial production in 2014 with commercial production from the second train planned six to 12 months after. The QCLNG Project EIS envisaged construction and operation of up to three LNG trains, and additional LNG trains will be constructed and commissioned as gas supply allows and subject to the commercial viability. The timing of a decision on construction of any LNG trains beyond the two currently under construction will be based on a number of commercial factors including the growth of the LNG market internationally. This
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 35 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
OEMP does not address construction or operation of a third LNG train, and any such activity will trigger revision of this OEMP.
4.0
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
4.1. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES FROM THE ACTIVITIES The environmental values of the LNG Facility location and the potential impacts of LNG Facility operation are described in Section 5.0 below, with further detail provided in the QCLNG Project EIS. A process for identification of environmental hazards has been developed as part of the QGC EMS, and Aspects and Impacts workshops undertaken addressing potential environmental impacts associated specifically with LNG Operations. The Aspects and Impacts Register is maintained within the QGC EMS and will be reviewed and updated in accordance with relevant procedures. Applicable environmental Aspects and Impacts identified in the workshops and recorded in the associated register are addressed within this OEMP.
4.2. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITMENTS The environmental protection commitments associated with LNG Facility operations are described in Section 5.0 below, with further detail provided in the specific sub‐plans referenced in this OEMP.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 36 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.0
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES, MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING STRATEGIES A description of environmental values and summary of potential impacts, environmental performance objectives, targets, and key performance indicators for specific environmental aspects are provided below and in referenced sub‐plans to this OEMP.
5.1. AIR EMISSIONS 5.1.1. Description of Environmental Values A detailed description of the existing Environmental Values for air quality in the Gladstone region, and detailed assessment of potential impacts, have been described in the QCLNG Project draft EIS (Volume 5 Chapter 12). A summary of findings from the EIS is provided below. The Gladstone region is highly industrialised, and EHP operates a network of ambient air quality monitoring stations in the city and surrounding areas. Table 4 summarises monitoring stations, approximate distance from the proposed QCLNG Facility, pollutants measured and the recording period. Table 4: EHP Monitoring Sites for Gladstone Distance to Project site (km)
Record Period
Nitrogen dioxide
PM10
Sulphur dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Aldoga
17
2002 – present
No
No
No
No
Boat Creek
7
2008 – present
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Clinton
11
2001 – present
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
South Gladstone
12
2001 – present
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Targinie
9
2001 – 2008
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
9
1997 – present
Yes
No
Yes
No
25
2008 – present
Yes
No
Yes
No
24
2008 – present
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
11
1997 – 2003
Yes
No
Yes
No
Site
(Stupkin Lane) Targinie (Swans Road) Boyne Island (Environment Centre) Boyne Island (Beacon Ave) Barney Point
The closest monitoring stations to the LNG Facility site are at Boat Creek and Targinie. The Swans Road station at Targinie has been operating since 1997 and monitors nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and sulphur dioxide (SO2). The Stupkin Lane station at Targinie was operational between 2001 and 2008 and monitored NO2 (until May 2006), particulate matter (PM10) (until June 2008) and SO2 (until May 2006). The Targinie sites were used to describe the background concentrations of NO2, PM10 and SO2 at the QCLNG site. Nitrogen Dioxide
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 37 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
The Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2008 (EPP (Air)) air quality objective of 250 µg/m3 for the 1‐hour average concentrations was not exceeded at either of the Targinie monitoring stations for the years for which NO2 data is available. Additionally, there were no exceedances of the EPP (Air) objective of 62 µg/m3 for annual average concentrations of NO2. The maximum 1‐hour average and annual average results are shown in Table 5. Table 5: Maximum 1‐Hour Average And Annual Average Concentration Of Nitrogen Dioxide (µg/M3) Maximum 1‐hour average Annual average Year Targinie Targinie Targinie Targinie (Stupkin Lane)
(Swans Road)
(Stupkin Lane)
(Swans Road)
1997
‐
78.1
‐
4.1
1998
‐
90.4
‐
6.2
1999
‐
86.3
‐
8.2
2000
‐
78.1
‐
6.2
2001
96.5
78.1
10.3
6.2
2002
98.6
80.1
16.4
6.2
2003
84.2
71.9
8.2
6.2
2004
90.4
61.6
8.2
6.2
2005
96.5
80.1
8.2
6.2
2006
‐
84.2
‐
8.2
2007
‐
73.9
‐
6.2
2008
‐
65.7
‐
6.4
EPP (Air) objective for 1‐hour average: 250 µg/m³ EPP (Air) objective for annual average: 62 µg/m³
Carbon Monoxide A monitoring station at Beacon Avenue, Boyne Island, has been recording carbon monoxide (CO) levels in the Gladstone region since October 1, 2008. The following 1‐hour average CO concentrations were recorded:
Minimum:
0.00 µg/m3
Average:
60.7 µg/m3
Maximum:
624.6 µg/m3
The maximum 8‐hour average CO concentration during the monitoring period was 312.3 µg/m3, well below the EPP (Air) goal of 11,000 µg/m3. This monitoring station is predominantly upwind of the industrial activity in the Gladstone region and is therefore not representative of a background CO level for the location of the LNG Facility. PM10 The EPP (Air) objective for the 24‐hour average concentrations of PM10 of 50 g/m3 was exceeded at Stupkin Lane monitoring station on 23 occasions between 2001 and 2008 during the following periods:
October – November 2001
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 38 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
July, October and December 2002
December 2004
January – February 2005
November 2006
March and April 2008.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Uncharacteristically high events during 2002 were attributed to bushfires while those during 2005 were attributed to dust storms that occurred for 2‐3 days over a significant portion of Queensland. Sulphur Dioxide The maximum 1‐hour average and annual average concentrations for SO2 at the Targinie Stupkin Lane and Swans Road monitoring stations are presented in Table 6. The EPP (Air) goal of 570 µg/m3 for the 1‐hour concentration has not been exceeded at either of the Targinie monitoring stations for the years for which SO2 data is available. Additionally, there were no exceedances of the 24‐hour average SO2 concentration EPP (Air) goal of 230 µg/m3 or the annual average EPP (Air) goal of 57 µg/m3. Table 6: Summary of Annual Measurements of Sulphur Dioxide from the DERM Targinie Monitoring Sites (µg/m3)
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 39 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Maximum 1‐hour average
Maximum 24‐hour average
Annual Average
Year
Targinie (Stupkin Lane)
Targinie (Swans Road)
Targinie (Stupkin Lane)
Targinie (Swans Road)
Targinie (Stupkin Lane)
Targinie (Swans Road)
1997
‐
118.7
‐
51.2
‐
10.3
1998
‐
92.9
‐
24.7
‐
4.8
1999
‐
118.7
‐
21.7
‐
6.0
2000
‐
143.0
‐
23.0
‐
4.7
2001
19.5
266.0
2.4
25.4
0.6
3.7
2002
201.6
147.3
33.5
32.8
6.3
5.9
2003
235.9
291.7
44.9
48.0
6.7
6.3
2004
316.0
348.9
34.3
23.9
6.8
4.6
2005
147.3
121.5
36.2
32.6
6.7
4.4
2006
150.1
130.1
35.7
31.4
9.1
6.2
2007
‐
204.5
‐
24.3
‐
4.7
2008
‐
138.7
‐
20.5
‐
3.5
EPP (Air) objective
570
230
57
5.1.2. Site Emissions Sources Emissions sources addressed in this plan include the following: 1. Point Sources under Normal Operations Sources with continuous emissions under normal operations, including emissions generated by the combustion of gas and the processing of feed gas for liquefaction. 2. Point Sources under Start‐up, Shutdown or Upset Conditions Non‐normal operations refer to conditions at the LNG Facility that are outside the general operating parameters of the plant and occur intermittently for a short duration. Emission rates for these activities may also be variable and, consequently, do not impact air quality on a continual basis. 3. Fugitive Emissions and Other Sources There may also be minor emissions from vehicles and occasional use of mobile plant and equipment (for example, mobile pumps to manage stormwater, mobile generators for maintenance works, etc.). These emissions will be transient, intermittent and spatially variable. Vehicles may also generate dust if driven on unsurfaced roadways.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 40 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Fugitive emissions may arise due to trace leakage of gas through flanges, valves or other equipment, and from vents and pressure safety valves (PSVs). PSVs and vents are installed on a range of equipment across the site. Locations of key site static emissions sources during LNG operations are shown in Figure 9, and a summary provided in Table 7 below.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 41 of 89
Train 2
Nitrogen Rejection Unit
Acid Gas Removal Unit
( !
( ! Compressor Gas Turbines (x6)
! ( ( !
Regeneration Gas Heater Hot Oil Heater
Figure 11: Locations of QCLNG Static Emissions Sources Legend
( !
Static Emission Source
Gas Turbine Generator (x3)
QCLNG Site Boundary (PFL11)
Train 1 Acid Gas Removal Unit
( !
( !
Compressor Gas Turbines (x6)
Static Emission Source
Wet Lease Boundary
Nitrogen Rejection Unit
Export P ipeline
Emergency & Back-Up Diesel Generators Fire Water Pum ps (x3)
Process Flares (Wet and Dry Gas)
( !
Marine Flare
( !
DATE: 2/08/2013 CREATED BY: MAP NO:
hibberde M_25547_01c
±
Standby Diesel Generator (Marine Terminal Building)
0
50
100
150
200
250
Meters Map Projec tion: GDA 94
DATA SOURCE:
SCALE:
1:5,000
(A3)
Site La yout - Bech te l Site Bo un dar y - DME Aer ial Imag ery - Near Map
N ote : E v er y e ffo rt ha s b ee n m ad e t o e ns ur e this infor m a t io n is sp at ia lly a c c ur at e . T he loc a tion of this infor m a tio n s hould n ot be r e lie d o n a s t he e xa c t f ield lo c at ion. "B as e d on o r c o nta i n s d a ta p ro v id e d b y th e Sta te o f Q u ee n s la n d (D e p a rtm en t o f En v ir on m e n t an d R e so u rc e Ma n a g e me n t) 2 0 11 . In co n si d er a tio n o f th e S ta te p e rm itti n g u s e o f th is d a ta y o u a c kn o w le d g e a nd ag r ee th a t the S ta te g i ve s n o w a rra n ty i n re la ti o n to th e da ta (i n cl u di n g ac cu r ac y, re li a b il ity, co m pl e te ne s s, c ur re n cy or su ita b i li ty) a n d a cc ep ts no l ia b i li ty (i n cl ud i n g w i th o ut l im i tati o n , li ab i li ty i n ne g l ig e n ce ) fo r a n y l o ss , d a m a g e o r co sts (in c lu d i ng c on s e qu e n tia l d a ma g e ) re l a tin g to an y us e o f th e d a ta. D a ta m us t n ot b e u se d fo r d ir ec t ma r ke tin g o r b e u se d in b re a ch o f th e p ri va c y l a w s."
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Table 7: Summary of Emissions Sources Location Aspect
Point Sources ‐ Normal Operations
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Emission Source
Number
Compressor Gas Turbines
12 (6 per train)
NOx (minor / trace CO, PM10, CO2, CH4)
Trains 1 and 2
Acid Gas Removal Unit (CO2 vent)
2 (1 per train)
CO2 (minor CH4)
2 (1 per train)
N2 (minor CH4)
Power Generation
Nitrogen Rejection Unit (NRU vent) Gas Turbine Generators
3
NOx (minor / trace CO, PM10, CO2, CH4)
2 operational, 1 standby
Wet & Dry Gas Flares
NOx, CO (minor/trace PM10, CO2)
Pilot light only during normal ops
Marine Flares
Dependent upon vessel
Pilot light
Wet and dry gas flares
Flaring due to purging, dryout, cooldown, trips or upset
Marine flare
Hot Oil Heater
1
NOx, CO, (minor / trace PM10, hydrocarbons) NOx, CO, (minor / trace PM10, hydrocarbons) NOx (minor / trace CO, PM10, CO2, CH4)
Regeneration Gas Heater
1
NOx (minor / trace CO, PM10, CO2, CH4)
Start‐up only (not monitored)
Power generation (diesel)
3
Diesel emissions
Start‐up / back‐up only (not monitored)
Fire Water Pumps (diesel)
3
Diesel emissions
Intermittent – emergency (not monitored)
Standby Diesel Generator Marine Terminal Building
1
Diesel emissions
Emergency air compressor – (diesel) Vehicles
2
Diesel emissions
Diesel emissions
Mobile Plant and Equipment PSVs ‐ Amine Units and Tanks
PSVs ‐ LNG Tanks
Diesel emissions N2 Blanket CH4
Vent ‐ Hot Oil Storage Tank
N2 Blanket
Flares
Flares
Point Sources ‐ Start‐up, Shutdown or Upset Conditions
Fugitive Emissions and Other Sources
Comments
Key Emissions
Utilities and Back‐up
Mobile
PSVs and vents
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Trips or upset Start‐up only (not monitored)
Intermittent – (not monitored) Intermittent –back‐up (not monitored)
Intermittent for pressure relief
Revision: 0 Page 43 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Location
Aspect
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Emission Source
Number
Comments
Key Emissions
Miscellaneous Atmospheric Vents (e.g. water tanks, plant and instrument air receivers)
Air
Demineralised Water Storage Tanks
N2 Blanket
Nitrogen Receivers
N2 Service
Gas Analysers
CH4
PSVs on Hydrocarbon Absorbers
Air, N2
PSVs ‐ Refrigerant Isotainers
Ethylene, propane
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 44 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.1.3. Emissions Reduction through Application of Best Techniques in Design A part of Project development, a Best Available Techniques (BAT) assessment was undertaken. BAT is essentially an assessment of techniques that minimise the environmental impact, without entailing disproportionate cost. Techniques refer to both technology and the way the process is operated. For the QCLNG Project, a BAT assessment undertaken by QGC during the design stage focussed on reducing a range of atmospheric emissions, principally:
GHG emissions (primarily CO2 and CH4)
Emissions with potential impacts on local air quality (primarily nitrous oxides (NOx))
Emissions from H2S (not anticipated from the LNG Facility)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (not anticipated from the LNG Facility)
As a result of the BAT assessment process undertaken, the following emissions mitigations were incorporated into the design of LNG Facility:
Adoption of waste heat recovery (WHR) to reduce requirement for use of fuel gas burners associated with the dehydration and CO2 removal components of the LNG process. Use of fuel gas burners is estimated to result in emission of approximately 10,800 tonnes of CO2 per annum per LNG train, with WHR to reduce this to approximately 365 tonnes CO2 per annum
A variety of refrigeration compressor drivers were considered for the Project. The aero‐derivative LM2500+G4s with Dry Low Emissions (DLE) were selected in a 2+2+2 configuration for each LNG process train (a total of six compressor drivers per train). Design NOx emissions from this configuration of LM2500+G4s + DLE are as low as or lower than any of the other options considered in detail (although electric motor drives were not considered in detail due to being unproven technology for the required drive size and electrical stability analysis). The initial template design of the facility assumed use of 2+2+2 (per LNG train) Frame 5D Gas Turbine Drivers, and selection of the LM2500+G4s will result in a reduction of: -
annual NOX emissions from approximately 975 tpa per LNG train (for the Base Case of the Frame 5D) to approximately 580 tpa per LNG train and
-
annual CO2 emissions from approximately 1,020 Mtpa per LNG train (for the Base Case of the Frame 5D) to approximately 730 Mtpa per LNG train.
Optimisation of power generation, with a range of turbine configurations assessed for 1, 2 and 3 train operation. Aero‐derivative LM2500+G4s with DLE were also selected for power generation, with 2 operating + 1 spare (for 2 Train operation). For the third train it was assumed that IAC has been applied (see below), allowing two operating LM2500+G4 units to run all three trains. Use of the LM2500+G4 is calculated to result in the lowest NOX and CO2 emissions of all the options considered.
Inlet air chilling on the main refrigeration turbines optimises the efficiency of the turbines over a range of ambient temperatures and humidity, improving annual LNG production. The use of IAC can provide additional power per train to the liquefaction refrigeration compressors on a warm day for an investment of less power to the IAC utility plant.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 45 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
IAC provides an operational benefit for upstream operations, as it can provide a stable feed demand throughout daily temperature swings, thus improving the efficiency of upstream operations by reducing personnel and transportation resources through steady operations rather than continually cycling the production flow rates.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 46 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Table 8: Summary of Best Available Techniques Assessment Outcomes as Applicable to Air Quality (assessment per LNG Train) Component Environmental Issue / Constraint Base Case BAT Assessment Summary Acid Gas Removal
H2S
BAT Outcome
Venting off acid gas: ‐ no incinerator.
Negligible H2S present in feed gas. Also, given concentration of CO2, additional hydrocarbons would need to be added to incinerator to make it burn, resulting in increased emissions.
Base case retained.
Dehydration and TOC/CH4 emissions arising from Mercury Removal operation of fuel gas burner
Fuel gas burner (H‐1301). 3 beds, 2 beds on 24 hr adsorption, 1 bed on 12 hrs regeneration/standby with 3.5 hours heating.
WHR to reduce burner requirement. ‐ 3 beds, burner only required on restart. Assume WHR reduces requirement to 5 per cent of year (ie, 95 per cent reduction emissions from base case)
WHR adopted.
Refrigeration gas turbines
2+2+2 Frame 5D Gas Turbine Drivers
Options considered:
NOx
LM2500+G4 aero‐ derivative refrigeration Option 1 2+2+2 Frame 5D Gas Turbine Drivers driver with Dry Low Option 2 2+2+2 LM2500+G4 Gas Turbine Drivers Emissions (DLE) Option 3 2+2+2 Electric Motor Drives with LMS100 combustion system Power Station Drivers (Simple Cycle) selected for the Project, Option 4 2+2+2 Electric Motor Drives with LMS100 utilising 6 x LM2500+G4s, Power Station Drivers (CCGT) in 2:2:2 configuration for NOx discharges of each turbine: Aero derivative engines will be each 3.8 mtpa LNG train. guaranteed at around 25 ppmv NOx. The Frame 5D LHE combustor will operate at around 121 ppm NOx, and the Frame Estimated reduction in 5D with a DLN1 combustor will produce 42 ppmv NOx. annual NOx emissions from approximately 975 Electric drives partially rejected due to limited reliability and tpa per LNG train (for the proven technology data. Base Case of the Frame 5D) to approximately 580 tpa per LNG train.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 47 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Component
Environmental Issue / Constraint
Base Case
BAT Assessment Summary
Electric Power
NOx
Power generation using Solar Taurus 70's with Solonox. Five operational generators required for Train 1 (plus one spare, for a 5+1 configuration), with an additional three operational generators required per additional LNG train
Options considered on a 2 train basis with Inlet Air Chilling. ‐ Option 1: LM2500+ G4s ‐ 2 Units Online ‐ Option 2: Taurus 70 ‐ 8 Units Online ‐ Option 3: Mars 100: ‐ 6 Units Online ‐ Option 4: Titan 130 ‐ 4 Units Online LM2500+G4 option results in the lowest NOx emissions.
Hot Oil System
CO2, TOC/CH4 and NOx
Heater 3401 ‐ 2 per train. Estimated emissions per train: 83,000 tpa CO2, 7 tpa TOC/CH4, 64 tpa NOx.
WHR would allow reduction of heaters to 1 heater per train, with Waste Heat Recovery operation required only on start‐up. adopted. Assume WHR reduces requirement to 5 per cent of year, this would indicate 95 per cent reduction in emissions from base case.
Inlet Air Chilling (IAC)
No inlet air chilling IAC on refrigeration turbines reduces power requirements and potentially allows for increase in LNG production without an increase in the PFD flow rates. However, reduced power requirement on the refrigeration turbines and increased LNG production is offset by increased demand in electric power. Hence, IAC has the potential to increase emissions (primarily NOx and CO2) associated with turbine operation
Estimates indicate that IAC potentially provides a marginal increase (3.8 per cent) in LNG production per total unit of power generation for the 1 train case, and a slightly greater increase (5.1 per cent) in LNG production per total unit power generation for the 2 train case.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 48 of 89
BAT Outcome LM2500+g4s: 2 operating 1 spare (for 2 Trains or 3 Trains with IAC). Estimated reduction in annual NOx emissions for 2 trains from approximately 145 tpa (for the base case) to approximately 124 tpa (for the LM2500+G4 option).
IAC adopted.
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.1.4. Potential adverse or beneficial impacts of the project activities on the identified environmental values 5.1.4.1.
EIS Summary of Impacts
Detailed assessment of the potential impacts of LNG operations on the existing air quality values of the Gladstone region are described in Volume 5 Chapter 12 of the QCLNG Project draft EIS. The assessment was undertaken on the basis of a three train LNG Facility, so represents a higher emissions scenario than would be applicable to this OEMP, and considered both the QCLNG Facility in isolation and cumulative impacts arising from other emissions sources in the Gladstone air shed. A summary of outcomes is provided below. For normal operation of the LNG Facility, the air quality assessment indicates the following:
The predicted maximum 1‐hour and annual average ground‐level concentrations of NO2 at any sensitive place during normal operating conditions, and including background, are below the EPP (Air) air quality objectives.
The maximum concentrations of CO are below air quality objectives across the modelling domain under normal operation conditions including background.
The predicted maximum 24‐hour average ground‐level concentration of PM10 at any location within the modelling domain, under normal operating conditions, in isolation is 1.8 μg/m3. With the inclusion of the background (i.e. air quality resulting from existing industrial activities in Gladstone region) the maximum is 30.8 μg/m3, which is 61.6 per cent of the EPP (Air) air quality objective of 50 µg/m3.
None of the hydrocarbon species associated with emissions from the LNG Facility exceed the ambient air quality objectives at the most sensitive receptor.
The contribution from operations to photochemical activity in the Gladstone region is, at worst, minor and unlikely to be of any concern.
Predicted maximum 1‐hour average concentration of odorous compounds, from the LNG Facility in isolation, at the most affected sensitive receptor is well below both the odour threshold and the ambient air quality objective.
Non‐normal operations were assessed on the basis of three scenarios, including:
normal plant operations plus LNG carrier at wharf.
non‐normal plant operations with dry gas flare upset conditions.
non‐normal plant operations with marine flare upset conditions.
Under the normal plant operations plus LNG carrier at wharf scenario, the air quality assessment indicates the following:
The predicted maximum 1‐hour and annual average ground‐level concentrations of NO2 at any sensitive place, including background, are below the EPP (Air) air quality objectives;
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 49 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
There are no exceedances predicted of the EPP (Air) air quality objective for the 1‐hour, 24‐hour and annual average ground‐level concentrations of SO2, due to the proposed shipping activity, when assessed in isolation. Predicted ground‐level concentrations in exceedance of the 1‐hour, 24‐hour and annual average air quality objectives are located in close proximity to the existing Gladstone power station and due to power station emissions, with predicted ground‐level concentrations of SO2 in the vicinity of the QCLNG Project, well below the air quality objectives;
The predicted maximum 1‐hour, 24‐hour and annual average ground‐level concentrations of SO2 at any sensitive place for the shipping activities, including background, are below the EPP (Air) air quality objectives.
Under the non‐normal plant operations with dry gas flare upset conditions scenario, the air quality assessment indicates the following:
There are no exceedances predicted of the EPP (Air) air quality objective for the 1‐hour average ground‐level concentration of NO2 due to a dry gas flare event, when assessed in isolation. Predicted exceedances of the 1‐hour average ground‐level concentration EPP (Air) air quality objective are located in close proximity to the existing Gladstone power station and due to power station emissions. Predicted ground‐level concentrations of NO2 in the vicinity of the LNG Facility are well below the EPP (Air) air quality objectives.
The maximum concentrations of CO are below air quality objectives across the modelling domain including background.
Predicted ground level concentrations of hydrocarbons are very low and none are likely to be present in sufficient quantities to cause asphyxiation.
Under the non‐normal plant operations with marine flare upset conditions scenario, the air quality assessment indicates the following:
There are no exceedances predicted of the EPP (Air) air quality objective for the 1‐hour average ground‐level concentration of NO2 at any sensitive receptor location when assessed in isolation and with background. An exceedance of the 1‐hour average ground‐level concentration EPP (Air) air quality objective for NO2 is predicted in the proximity of the marine flare and wharf facilities, with predicted ground‐level concentrations of NO2 beyond the QCLNG Project operations area below the EPP (Air) air quality objectives.
Maximum predicted concentrations of CO are below air quality objectives across the modelling domain including background.
Predicted ground level concentrations of hydrocarbons are very low and none are likely to be present in sufficient quantities to cause asphyxiation.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 50 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.1.4.2.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Updated Assessment of Impacts
A more recent assessment has been undertaken1 to validate the findings of the QCLNG Project EIS, addressing some minor changes from the assessment undertaken for the EIS due to:
Minor modification to the site layout from what was previously assessed;
The inclusion of waste heat recovery (WHR) on two of the six compressor turbines per LNG processing train;
Changes in the source characteristics of the gas compressor turbine drivers and power generation turbines.
Given that NO2 was identified in the QCLNG Project EIS as the air pollutant which resulted in the highest ground‐level concentrations during normal operations compared to the air quality objectives, the revised assessment considered only NO2 emissions. The EIS modelling included compressor turbine drivers, power generation turbines, regeneration oil heaters, hot oil heaters, and flares as NO2 sources. The revised QCLNG facility plans incorporate waste heat recovery (WHR) on two of the six compressor turbines per LNG processing train. A consequence of the use of WHR is that the regeneration gas heater and the hot oil heater will be required for start‐up and back‐up only. Because of this change and since the emissions contribution of flares during normal operations is negligible, this revised assessment considers only the compressor turbine drivers and the power generation turbines. These two types of sources were together responsible for more than 90% of the NO2 emissions for normal operations in the EIS modelling. The assessment considered both the two LNG train case (which is the focus of this OEMP) and the three train case assessed in the EIS, with key conclusions summarised below:
1
The predicted 1‐hour average and annual average ground‐level concentrations of NO2 for the QCLNG Facility in isolation are well below the relevant Air EPP objectives at all locations in the modelling domain, including all of the sensitive receptors.
The highest short‐term concentrations (1‐hour average) of NO2 due to the plant in isolation are predicted to occur on site and on elevated terrain to the north and at Mount Larcom. However, the NO2 concentrations predicted in these areas are less than 20% of the Air EPP objective of 250μg/m³.
The highest annual average concentrations of NO2 are predicted to occur to the northwest of the site due to the dominance of winds from the southeast. The highest predicted annual average NO2 concentration in this area is less than 3% of the Air EPP objective of 62μg/m³
Background ground‐level concentrations of NO2 in the Gladstone region are significantly higher than the contributions by the QCLNG Facility, a conclusion of the QCLNG Project EIS air quality assessment. As a consequence of the minor differences in predicted NO2 concentrations from the QCLNG facility in both the QCLNG Project EIS and this air quality assessment, the cumulative impacts predicted in the EIS remain valid.
Katestone, 2013. Air Quality Impact Assessment for the QCLNG Facility. Unpublished report D12070-6, June 2013.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 51 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.1.5. Management, Monitoring and Corrective Action Specific management and monitoring measures for air emissions are addressed in the Air Quality Management Plan (LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000004).
5.2. VISUAL IMPACT AND LIGHT 5.2.1. Description of Environmental Values The QCLNG Project EIS considered the existing visual amenity of the Gladstone region and key impact issues associated with the LNG Facility and associated lighting, with a summary of findings provided below. The LNG Facility falls within the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area (GBRWHA), which is World Heritage listed for Outstanding Universal Values including aesthetics and natural beauty. However, in the Gladstone region the visual amenity of the GBRWHA is already attenuated by the presence of Port of Gladstone industrial elements in the viewshed. Therefore, this area is not ‘‘pristine’’ or representative of the “exceptional natural beauty” assigned to the World Heritage and National Heritage values. The Narrows is listed on the Australian Heritage Commission Register of National Estate. The Statement of Significance as detailed on the Heritage database includes the fact that “The Narrows represent an uncommon passage landscape and are one of only five narrow tidal passages separating large continental islands from the mainland in Australia”. The significant aesthetic values of this “uncommon” passage landscape are not, however, limited to this administrative area but are continuous with the natural coastal landscape of Curtis Island fringing the northern extent of the Port of Gladstone. Management of scenic values across this interface is detailed in the Curtis Coast Regional Coastal Management Plan. The Curtis Coast Regional Coastal Management Plan also identified Areas of State Significance (Scenic Coastal Landscape), with areas of scenic coastal landscapes in the Gladstone region including islands and offshore features, coastal wetlands, estuaries and inlets. In addition to visual amenity, a number of fauna species are expected to inhabit or migrate through Port Curtis, with consideration given to impacts associated with lighting of the LNG Facility. Species considered as having potential to be impacted included reptiles (including marine turtles), birds, amphibians, terrestrial and marine mammals and fish. Visual impacts associated with lighting for residents of Gladstone city were also considered.
5.2.2. Potential Impacts 5.2.2.1.
Visual Amenity
Taking into account visual impact mitigation measures incorporated into LNG Facility design (refer Section 5.2.4), the QCLNG EIS considered the visual impact of the LNG Facility on landscape character from a range of viewpoints in the Gladstone region, with impacts ranging from major (from viewpoints located from the waters of Port Curtis immediately in front of the LNG Facility), to low to negligible from residential dwellings in the Gladstone region. The EIS concluded that the impact on the “aesthetics and natural beauty” of the GBRWHA area is already attenuated by the presence of Port of Gladstone industrial elements in the viewshed. Therefore, this area is not ‘‘pristine’’ or representative of the “exceptional natural beauty” assigned to the World Heritage and National Heritage values. In addition, the GSDA designation of Curtis Island indicates a planning intention to
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 52 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
develop the area into an industrial precinct. In these circumstances, the landscape and visual impact of the proposed LNG Plant Facility and associated onshore mainland facilities would be consistent with the proposed expansion of industry around the Port of Gladstone, and therefore does not result in a significant impact to World Heritage Area values.
5.2.2.2.
Night Lighting
For residents of Gladstone, high levels of existing industrial lighting in and surrounding the Port of Gladstone reduce the significance of night lighting impact when viewed from the mainland areas. Light impacts on other fauna were considered, with reptiles (except marine turtles), amphibians, terrestrial and marine mammals and fish rated as having low potential susceptibility to impacts caused by light pollution. Birds and marine turtles were rated as having high potential susceptibility to impacts caused by light pollution. Impacts on birds were considered unlikely to increase the extent of any roosting and/or nesting displacement above that caused by vegetation clearing for construction of the LNG Facility. Foraging and roosting sites within adjacent habitat areas, particularly those located to the south and west of the LNG Facility site, are expected to be subjected to light spill. Potential impacts on these locations are expected to be low to moderate, and generally within natural fluctuations and trends.
5.2.3. Potential Light Impacts – Impacts of Flaring on Marine Turtles The issue of potential impact of lighting (including light associated with flaring) from the QCLNG LNG facility on turtle nesting was considered in the QCLNG EIS which noted that the Green turtle (Chelonia mydas); Loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta); and Flatback turtle (Natator depressus) are known to occur in Port Curtis. These turtles nest occasionally on the ocean side beaches of Curtis Island and Facing Island, but no known turtle‐nesting beaches were identified within close proximity to the proposed QCLNG Project. Based on the LNG Facility layout and flare height described, it was concluded that nesting beaches on the ocean side of Curtis and Facing Islands would not be subject to direct light spill from the Facility (refer draft EIS Vol 5, Chapter 8 Section 8.4.1.4 and Chapter 16). Known turtle nesting beaches are shown in Figure 10. Green turtles have been regularly observed within local seagrass meadows, particularly those on Pelican Banks (eastern side of Curtis Island). Leatherback turtles Dermochelys coriacea), Hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) and Olive Ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) are not known to nest in the Port Curtis area. Individuals may migrate through the area, but significant numbers of them are unlikely in the vicinity of the LNG Facility. The assessment of flaring impacts described in the QCLNG EIS was based on a flare stack height of approximately 60 m above ground level. Subsequent refinement in design and safety considerations has resulted in an amended flare stack height of approximately 95 m, which combined with the revision to the flare location described in the QCLNG EIS required a re‐visit of this assessment2. A summary of issues considered and conclusions is provided below.
2
QGC, 2010. Potential Visibility of QCLNG Flares from Turtle Nesting Beaches. Unpublished report, August 2010, Doc No. QCLNG-BX00ENV-RPT-000016
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 53 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.2.3.1.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Post‐EIS Assessment of Flare Visibility from Nesting Sites and Impact on Marine Turtles
A preliminary indication of flare visibility from known turtle nesting beaches was undertaken based on sightlines from the QCLNG flare locations to a total of eight viewpoint (8) locations along approximately 23 km of coastline along Curtis and Facing Island. The viewpoints were selected along known nesting beaches for Green and Flatback turtles. All viewpoints are more than 10 km away from the LNG Facility, with the closest viewpoint being approximately 11.1 km from the nearest flare. Intervening topography was assessed along each of these sightlines to determine whether the top of the flares (including flame) would be visible as a direct line of site from the beach. Lines of sight were run to each of the two process flares, with flare stack height assumed as follows:
Stack height : 114 m (note that refinement of flare design has subsequently reduced the flare height to 95 m above ground level)
Flame height: 40‐60 m above stack (indicative height of flame, based on non‐emergency flaring scenarios – e.g. commissioning, start‐up, and process control).
This assessment indicated that intervening topography will result in no direct line‐of‐sight visibility of the flares (flare stacks or flame) from the viewpoints considered, with the viewpoint based on an estimated elevation of 1 m at the beach.
5.2.3.2.
Potential Impacts from Light Below the Horizons
Given that direct visibility of the flare flames is not anticipated from the viewpoints considered along the turtle nesting beaches on Curtis and Facing Islands, further consideration was given to whether impacts arising from light below the horizon may have a significant impact on turtle nesting behaviour. Turtle hatchlings respond not only to nearby light sources but also show aversion behaviour to tall dark horizons, such as the hills on Curtis Island behind the eastern beaches3. This type of behaviour is likely to occur despite the constant night sky glow from Gladstone city and existing industrial construction areas around the western side of Port Curtis. This would be particularly relevant to the turtles nesting on the eastern beaches of Curtis Island where proximity to the Curtis Island range (up to 164m) would generally allow for significant effects from background silhouetting on turtle behaviour. Further, while artificial lighting has been linked to disorientation in marine turtles (particularly during periods of nesting and hatching), the most disruptive wavelengths for hatchlings is relatively low wavelengths of 300 to 500 nanometres (nm)4 (with some data suggesting that Flatback turtles may cue off slightly higher wavelengths). Light emitted from a natural gas flare has peak spectral intensity in the 750 to 900 nm range5. In addition, the distances from the QCLNG Facility to the nesting beaches are such that levels of luminosity from LNG Facility flaring would be very low, with the distances involved greater than anything that had been observed as being an influence to turtle behaviour.
3
Pendoley, K, 2000. The Influence of Gas Flare on the Orientation of Green Turtle Hatchlings at Thevenard Island, Western Australia.
4
Shell Development (Australia) Proprietary Limited, 2009. Prelude Floating LNG Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement. pp131
5
Pendoley, K, 2000. The Influence of Gas Flare on the Orientation of Green Turtle Hatchlings at Thevenard Island, Western Australia
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 54 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.2.3.3.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Conclusion
On the basis of the above, while recognising that light sources are a known potential cause of disorientation for marine turtles, especially for hatchlings on beaches, assessment of the potential visibility and impact of QCLNG’s flares indicates that:
Light emitted from an LNG flare flame is typically of higher wavelength than the wavelengths that are most disruptive for marine turtles.
Intervening topography means there will not be direct line of site to the QCLNG process flares (stack or flame) from the eight viewpoints assessed along the nesting beaches on the eastern side of Curtis and Facing Island.
The distances involved (>10km) between the LNG Facility and the nesting beaches are greater than anything that has been observed as being an influence to turtle behaviour.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 55 of 89
Figure 13: Port Curtis Turtle Nesting Beaches and Seagrass Distribution
[ ¶
CURTIS ISLAND
Legend
/ " Temporary Marine Access
[ ¶
CURTIS ISLAND
Narrows Crossing Curtis Island Laydown
Flatback Turtle Green Turtle
Turtle Nesting Beaches
[ ¶
Proposed Export Pipeline Existing Export Pipeline
!
/ "
Existing Channels
MOF !
!
!
!
2001-2011 Seagrass Habitat
Coastal Seagrass, November 2011 !
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Coastal Seagrass, 2010 (November 2009)
Con Dock
!
!
!
!
/ "
Temporary Navigation Channel for MOF and CD
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Coastal Seagrass, June 2010
[ ¶ !
/ "
!
/ "
[ ¶ [ ¶
Key Transport Nodes
[ ¶
!
FACING ISLAND
/ "
RG Tanna
/ "
Marina
/ "
Auckland Point 2
/ "
Auckland Point
[ ¶ [ ¶
DATE: 6/08/2013 CREATED BY: MAP NO:
±
0
1
2
3
hibberde M_30997_03
4
Kilometers QUEENSLAND MAINLAND
Map Projection: GDA 94
[ ¶
DATA SOURCE:
SCALE: 1:85,000
(A3)
Imagery - NearMap Site Layout - Bechtel
Note: Every effort has been made to ensure this information is spatially accurate. The location of this information should not be relied on as the exact field location.
"Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2011. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws."
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.2.4. Mitigation Measures in Design Mitigation measures for visual impact incorporated into the site location and design of the LNG Facility include:
Screening of the LNG Facility from the vast majority of Curtis Island and in particular the adjoining Environmental Management Precinct through the location of the facility in relation to the Ship Hill linear ridgeline located to the north.
Retaining the vegetated ridges and hills on the skyline to assist in reducing the visual impact by retaining the natural landscape horizon.
The landscape values of Curtis Island as viewed from Gladstone are largely maintained due to the retention of the minor ridgeline to the south‐east of the site. Vegetation along these hills and ridgelines maintained to ensure their integrity as screening elements in the landscape.
Views of Curtis Island from Targinie and the waters of the Port of Gladstone opposite the site do not have the benefit of the screening potential of topography or vegetation. Retention of the mangroves along the shoreline, where possible, contribute to reducing the visual impact by maintaining a continuity of the natural shoreline on Curtis Island and softening the interface between the constructed edge of the LNG Facility and the water’s edge.
Based on the EIS assessment, State and Commonwealth Project Approvals imposed conditions on the Project relating to minimisation of visual impact, primarily through measures undertaken during design, layout and construction of the LNG Facility. Management and mitigation measures for visual impact implemented (or planned for completion during construction) include:
Constructing the LNG Facility within the bounds of the site footprint as approved in the Project Material Change of Use approval (permit DGBN11_389), the EA (EPPG00711513), and LNG Facility EPBC Approval (2008/4402) with clearing of vegetation kept to the minimum required for construction works;
Utilising a colour scheme for the LNG facility and buildings, other than the LNG storage tanks and corrosion protected structures and pipe insulation, selected from the palette of predominant colours found in the locality to minimise the visual intrusion of the structures except where health and safety requirements dictate;
Treating earthworks such as cuttings, batters and retaining walls, to minimise visual impacts. Figure 11 below shows the planned completion status of site slopes and Table 9 summarises the areas to be treated (noting that these are indicative subject to finalisation of slope treatment design), with the majority of site slopes being seeded with grass (approximately 60% of site slopes being lined with grass, either with or without underlying geoweb for stability), or rock.
Physically shielding lights and directing the lights onto work areas, and keeping light heights as low as practicable.
Table 9: Indicative Site Slope Stabilisation Summary Slope Treatment
Treated Area
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 57 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
m2
Area as % of all Site Slopes
Rock lining
1,272
0.5%
Grass lining
151,257
59.0%
Geoweb with rock
69,647
27.2%
No treatment
7,703
3.0%
2.1 base course
26,499
10.3%
240,642
100.0%
TOTAL
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 58 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Figure 11: Indicative Site Slope Stabilisation Plan
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 59 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.2.5. Management, Monitoring and Corrective Action As outlined above, management and mitigation measures for visual impact (including light impacts on nesting marine turtles) are addressed through:
Location of the QCLNG Facility, and in particular the topographic barriers between the facility and turtle nesting beaches in the Gladstone region;
Minimisation of vegetation clearing during construction;
Utilising a colour scheme for the LNG Facility and buildings, where safe and practicable, selected from the palette of predominant colours found in the locality;
Treatment of earthworks such as cuttings, batters and retaining walls, to minimise visual impacts, which will be completed during construction of the QCLNG Facility; and
Lighting design.
During Operations, measures applicable to management of visual impact will include:
Maintenance of treated earthworks (i.e. – maintenance of re‐vegetated slopes) to minimise visual impact
Management of complaints associated with visual impact in accordance with the QGC Gladstone Stakeholder Engagement Plan (QCLNG‐AUS‐GEN‐GPA‐PLN‐0689).
Reporting on monitoring undertaken in response to complaints or specific direction of the Administering Authority will be provided within fourteen (14) days of completion of the investigation or receipt of monitoring results, whichever is the latter, in accordance with Schedule J of the EA.
Additional management and monitoring requirements specific to marine turtles are included in the Long‐Term Turtle Management Plan LNG Facilities – Curtis Island, Gladstone (QCLNG‐BX00‐ENV‐PLN‐ 000070), as referenced in the Biodiversity Management Plan.
5.3. NOISE A detailed description of the existing environmental values for noise in the Gladstone region, and a detailed assessment of potential impacts, have been described in the QCLNG Project EIS (Volume 5 Chapter 13). A summary is provided below.
5.3.1. Description of Environmental Values This section describes potentially sensitive noise receptors in the vicinity of the LNG Facility project area (which includes Curtis Island and the Gladstone mainland) and outlines the background noise monitoring that was undertaken to establish the baseline noise environment.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 60 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.3.1.1.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Background Noise Monitoring
Seven residential properties were identified as representative of the nearest sensitive receptors for noise from the proposed LNG Facility and were designated as noise assessment locations (NALs) for the purposes of the assessment. These NALs are summarised in Table 10 below. Table 10: Noise Assessment Locations Noise Assessment Address Location NAL 1 Jetty G/H, Gladstone Marina NAL 2 Lot 2 Fisherman’s Road, Yarwun NAL 3 Turtle Street, South End, Curtis Island NAL 4 71 Flinders Parade, Gladstone NAL 5 Tide Island NAL 6 12 Lord St, Gladstone NAL 7 Smith St, Targinie
Approximate Distance from Curtis Island LNG Site (km) 8.5 6.5 11.5 10 5 9.5 9
Five noise loggers (M1–M5) were used to monitor background noise levels at locations that were conservatively selected as having an acoustic climate representative of the NALs. The loggers continuously recorded and logged noise statistics every hour for the duration of logging. Additional data from prior studies were obtained for locations M6 and M7. Noise monitoring locations and durations are summarised in Table 11. Table 11: Unattended Noise Monitoring Locations Monitorin Address Start‐Finish Date (Duration) g Location
Logging Representative of:
M1
Jetty G/H, Gladstone Marina
9 ‐ 25 Sept 08 (17 days)
Permanent residents living on boats in the marina
M2
Lot 2 Fisherman’s Road, Yarwun
9 ‐ 25 Sept 08 (17 days)
Resident
M3
Turtle Street, South End, Curtis Island
10 ‐ 26 Sept 08 (17 days)
Resident
M4
71 Flinders Parade, Gladstone
10 ‐ 26 Sept 08 (17 days)
Resident
M51
Hamilton Point, Curtis Island
10 ‐ 26 Sept 08 (17 days)
Tide Island resident
M6
12 Lord St, Gladstone
5 ‐19 April 06 (15 days)
Resident
M7a2
Forest Road, Targinie
12‐19 Apr 08 (8 days)
Smith St, Targinie Resident
Notes: 1
Monitoring undertaken at Hamilton Point proxy for Tide Island.
2
Monitoring was undertaken at a location representative of the Targinie area.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 61 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
For periods where wind speeds exceeded 5 m/s, or while raining, noise data from the affected period was disregarded, using data from the Gladstone Airport and Gladstone Radar weather stations operated by the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). Day (7am‐6pm), evening (6pm‐10pm) and night‐time (10pm‐7am) attended monitoring was conducted to supplement the unattended noise monitoring surveys and to quantify the contribution from existing industry, road and other sources at the NALs. The attended monitoring indicated that industrial, road traffic or rail noise was audible at all locations at various times of the day, with the exception of NAL 3 (South End, Curtis Island). Seasonal variations in ambient noise levels were also factored into the assessment. These variations are typically the result of an increase in insect activity, which usually occurs in the warmer months of the year. Spectral unattended noise monitoring data was analysed for NAL’s 2, 3 and 5 as insects were audible at these locations during attended monitoring. Analysis showed a significant contribution from insect noise during the evening at the three locations but the night‐time contribution was negligible and as such does not affect monitored Rating Background Levels (RBL) at these three locations. Evening RBL levels will be increased by insect noise in some cases, however, this does not have a significant effect on the noise criteria.
5.3.1.2.
Analysis and Summary of Results
Analysis of logger data was conducted in accordance with the EcoAccess guideline6. The methodology is prescribed in terms of the measured Assessment Background Level (ABL) and RBL or minLA90,1hour. In accordance with the EcoAccess guideline, a minimum of one week of representative data was then selected for analysis to determine the RBL. Table 12 provides a summary of RBL values for each NAL. In addition to the day, evening, and night periods, a RBL value was calculated for the 6 am to 7 am period. Table 12: Unattended Monitoring RBL Results dB(A) Rating Background Level (RBL)1 – dB(A) Monitoring Day Night Evening Location (6pm‐10pm) (7am‐6pm) (10pm‐7am)
6am–7am
M1
45
47
43
43
M2
36
36
37
39
M3
32
35
27
29
M4
40
36
36
40
M5
30
31
29
37
M6
42
45
36
–2
M7a
30
32
31
38
Notes: 1 RBL or min L90 is an overall single figure representing each assessment period over the whole monitoring period 2 Data not available.
6
Queensland Environmental Protection Agency (now EHP). Guideline – Noise: Planning for Noise Control
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 62 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.3.2. Potential adverse or beneficial impacts of the project activities on the identified environmental values 5.3.2.1.
Noise Criteria
During operations, the LNG Facility will contain various noise sources that may produce low‐frequency tonal noise including gas turbines, compressors, flare, pumps and fin‐fan air coolers. Given the large distances to the nearest noise sensitive receptors and the large number of individual noise sources emitting noise at different frequencies at the LNG Facility, it is expected that the industry noise may be heard as a low frequency source, with no distinguishable tonal components. Hence, no adjustment for tonal characteristics has been made to the criteria. However, the predicted noise levels will be assessed against the low‐ frequency guideline to determine the acceptability of the LNG Facility noise. Table 13 provides the Operational noise criteria based on noise monitoring results applied for each NAL, as specified in the EA (Schedule D). Table 13: Noise Criteria for Project Noise Assessment Locations Noise Assessment Location Period NAL1 NAL 2 NAL 3 NAL 4 NAL 5 Operations Noise Criteria dB(A) (LAeq, 1 hour) Monday – 7am – 6pm 48 39 35 43 33 Sunday / 6pm – 10pm 47 39 25 33 34 Public 10pm – 7am 40 40 27 39 32 Holidays
5.3.2.2.
NAL 6
NAL 7
45 35 38
33 35 33
Noise Modelling
Modelling for the construction and operational noise impact assessment was undertaken, with the model allowing for incorporation of meteorological and topographical effects into noise calculations. Modelling incorporated topographic data including LNG Facility site benching levels. Areas of open water (i.e. Gladstone Harbour) were modelled as areas with very low absorption, while land areas were modelled as absorptive. The natural terrain (ridge running north to south) provides shielding for the eastern site of Curtis Island. Where modelling was undertaken, consideration was given to “neutral” and “adverse” weather conditions. Due to the flat topography between the LNG Facility site and the sensitive receptors, no drainage flow7 was assessed. Due to the prevalence of the east–south‐easterly (ESE) sea breezes which occur in Gladstone, a “typical” weather condition was also modelled, with an east–south‐easterly breeze.
7
Drainage flows can occur where cooler air flows down a hill or ridge into the valley creating an air movement that can influence sound propagation in a similar way to a light wind.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 63 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.3.2.3.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Summary of Noise and Vibration Impacts
Noise contour maps representing the various scenarios modelled for the LNG Facility can be found in Volume 5 Chapter 13 of the QCLNG Project draft EIS. A high‐level summary of predicted operational noise and vibration impacts is presented below. The site selected for the LNG Facility is appropriate from a noise perspective as it is located well away from residential receptors and the natural terrain (a ridge running north ‐ south) provides shielding to the eastern side of Curtis Island. This results in negligible impacts for the nearest noise sensitive receptors. Predicted operational noise levels are below the relevant Queensland criteria for all sensitive locations under neutral and typical weather conditions. Under adverse conditions (temperature inversion and calm winds), predicted operational noise levels are below the relevant criteria for all locations except Tide Island, the closest sensitive receptor to the proposed LNG Facility. The exceedance of 5dB(A) under adverse conditions is expected to occur only occasionally as temperature inversions infrequently form over water, and winds are calm for only 14 per cent of the time. This exceedance is not expected to be significant. In future, noise from the proposed LNG Facility may well be masked on Tide Island by noise from other industry, including the proposed Wiggins Island coal terminal. The nature of the noise generated by the LNG Facility is a continuous noise, with no significant impulsive characteristics. Predicted worst‐case noise levels (based on noise levels for ships under full power) for LNG vessels indicate noise will not impact on sensitive receptors other than Tide Island. Impact on Tide Island will be transient and hence shipping traffic is not expected to have a significant direct noise impact on the residence at Tide Island. The LNG plant and equipment primarily involves rotating machinery, which will transfer relatively low levels of vibration to the ground. Hence operation of the LNG plant will not produce significant levels of ground vibration. In summary, noise and vibration are not predicted to impact on sensitive receptors under most conditions.
5.3.3. Management, Monitoring and Corrective Action Specific management, monitoring and correction action measures for noise, over and above those related to design, location and layout of the LNG Facility which formed the basis of the modelling undertaken for the QCLNG Project EIS and summarised above, is provided in the Noise Management Plan (LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐ PLN‐000008).
5.4. SURFACE WATER 5.4.1. Description of Environmental values – Surface Water Volume 5 Chapter 9 of QCLNG Project draft EIS for the QCLNG Project describes “surface waters” and “water resources,” as terrestrial lakes and ponds, streams, riverine and non‐riverine wetlands, and localised watersheds in the vicinity of the LNG Facility.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 64 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
The streams within the Curtis Island Surface Water Management Area (SWMA)8 are unregulated. No data is available in relation to the monitoring of Curtis Island water bodies including wetlands, vernal pools, lakes and ponds, rivers and streams (ephemeral or intermittent). The local catchment area on Curtis Island drains into Port Curtis, which is within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park World Heritage Area. The Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia (DIWA) lists Port Curtis, The Narrows and Northeast Curtis Island as Nationally Important Wetlands. However, these are not Ramsar sites. The Queensland Wetlands Program database indicates there are riverine9 wetlands containing periodic or moving water in the vicinity of the LNG Facility site. Estuarine10 wetlands are the predominant system within and adjoining the LNG Facility site and the indicative wet lease area. These wetlands consist of mangroves, salt flats and estuaries.
5.4.2. Description of Environmental values – Receiving Environment The QCLNG Facility is located on western side of Curtis Island within Port Curtis. Port Curtis is a major industrial centre that supports aluminium refineries/smelters, cement production works, chemical plants and Queensland's largest power station. The Port facilities provide for commercial shipping activities for a number of commodities with international destinations. Environmental issues in the region include harbour dredging, port infrastructure development, industrial development, discharge of effluent, and extensive reclamation of intertidal wetlands, including mudflats, mangroves, salt flats and marshes. Intertidal wetlands occur on the Port Curtis coastline, and some of these areas have been extensively cleared, filled or modified in areas surrounding Gladstone City and Auckland Creek. Intertidal areas along the south‐west coastline of Curtis Island in the vicinity of the proposed LNG site are largely undisturbed. A number of sensitive habitats, including seagrass meadows, are represented across Port Curtis (as well as broader regional areas). The key habitats found in Port Curtis are upper intertidal salt flats, mid intertidal mangroves and rocky shores, and low intertidal mudflats. These habitats are all widespread in the region, and are not unique to the area of the QCLNG Facility. The upper intertidal salt flats are areas of elevated salinity, too high for mangroves to survive. These are low productivity areas virtually devoid of invertebrates, except for small populations in the small tidal waterways. The coastal area of Port Curtis is subject to a strong tidal influence with up to 5m difference involving the waters of the interconnected Port Curtis and Fitzroy River estuaries. The Port is well protected from the open ocean by Curtis and Facing Islands. The area comprises a complex of inlets, channels, shoals, seagrass beds, tidal marshes, river and stream mouths small islands and shorelines11. The Boyne and Calliope rivers, Auckland Creek and several smaller creeks drain the upper catchment and enter the estuary through its south‐western coast near Gladstone Harbour. Within the area of Port Curtis are several key ecosystem areas or habitats, described further below.
8
As defined in the Australian Water Resources Assessment Database, 2000
9
Riverine wetlands describe all wetlands and deepwater habitats within a channel. These channels can be naturally or artificially created, periodically or continuously contain moving water, or form a connecting link between two bodies of standing water.
10
Estuarine wetlands are those with oceanic water sometimes diluted with freshwater run-off from the land.
11
Conaghan, P.J. 1966. Sediments and Sedimentary Processes in Gladstone Harbour, Queensland. Pap. Dep. Geol. Univ. Qld 6, 1-52
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 65 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.4.2.1.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Rodds Bay Dugong Protection Area
Port Curtis, including the QCLNG Facility, is located within the Rodds Bay Dugong Protection Area (DPA), with this area covering the entire coastal zone between Rodds Bay and the Narrows. The extent of the Rodds Bay DPA is shown in Figure 12 below. Figure 12: Rodds Bay Dugong Protection Area12
5.4.2.2.
Seagrass and other Benthic Habitat
Seagrasses are true flowering plants found between intertidal and subtidal habitats. Seagrasses play a major role in marine ecosystem functioning including as a substrate, nursery area and providing shelter and food for organisms as well as physical stability of the coastline and seafloor. They are essential food sources for a variety of marine and estuarine organisms including dugongs, turtles, fish and macro invertebrates. Within the Port Curtis region, seagrass has been regularly monitored by the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (DPIF) Marine Ecology Group in collaboration with the Port Curtis Integrated Monitoring Program (PCIMP) which is funded by local industry. Within the Port of Gladstone, the following six seagrass species have been identified:
12
Halodule uninervis
Halophila ovalis
From Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority - http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0019/6157/gbrmpa_RoddsBay.gif
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 66 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Halophila decipens
Halophila minor
Halophila spinulosa
Zostera capricorni.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
A total of 7,246 ha of intertidal (coastal) seagrass beds have been identified within the Port of Gladstone – Rodds Bay Dugong Protection Area (DPA), with an additional 6,332 ha in deepwater areas (>5m Mean Sea Level) identified to the east and south of Facing Island13. No deepwater seagrass communities have been reported within the inner‐port area. A summary of marine habitat within Port Curtis are summarised in Table 14 below14.
Table 14: Description and areas of habitat, including seagrass meadows, in Port Curtis Habitat Type
Area (Ha)
% Area of Total
Prominent Location(s)
Exposed mud and sandbanks
5,144
9
Eastern side of Curtis Island, Western side of Facing Island
Exposed rocky substrate
297
0.52
Curtis, Facing, Tide and Picnic Islands
Seagrass (coastal)
7,246
12.7
Pelican Banks, Quoin Island, Fisherman’s Landing area
Seagrass (deepwater)
6,332
11.1
Facing Island, Seal Rocks, West and East Banks
Benthic macro‐ invertebrate communities (including coral)
Open substrate, occasional individual
9,876
17.3
Outside Facing Island from Curtis Island to East Bank
Low Density
8,606
15
Throughout the Port of Gladstone / Rodds Bay area
Medium Density
4,099
7.2
Southern and northern side of Seal Rocks
High
4,189
7.3
Narrow strip in channel form
North‐west of Seal Rocks Entrance to Rodds Bay
The maximum ranges of seagrass communities in Port Curtis from surveys between 2002‐2010 are shown in Figure 13. It should be noted that more recent surveys (February, March and November 2011) indicate low seagrass cover at all permanent Port Curtis transect sites, with the lowest seagrass cover and biomass recorded at all permanent transect sites since monitoring began in November 2009 and very low levels of
13
Data taken from QCLNG Draft EIS, Volume 5 Chapter 8 Marine Ecology, based on: Rasheed M A, Thomas R, Roelofs,A J, Neil K M.and Kerville S P (2002) Port Curtis and Rodds Bay Seagrass and Benthic MacroInvertebrate Community Baseline Survey
14
Danaher K, Rasheed M A and Thomas R (2005) The Intertidal Wetlands of Port Curtis
Data taken from QCLNG Draft EIS, Volume 5 Chapter 8 Marine Ecology
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 67 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
recovery during the 2011 growing season. All sites experienced a significant reduction in seagrass cover since the previous quarterly survey in November 2010. Biomass estimates also showed a significant decline from November 2010 for Fisherman’s Landing, Pelican Banks North and Pelican Banks South and Rodds Bay. Seagrass at transects at Fisherman’s Landing, Wiggins Island and Rodds Bay had almost disappeared with mean per cent covers of 0.03 ± 0.01%, 0.03 ± 0.03% and 0.008 ± 0.007% respectively15. Surveys in November 2010, over the Western Basin region (during the seasonal peak for seagrass growth) found no seagrass was present in the vicinity offshore from the QCLNG Facility site (Curtis Island), and only one small isolated patch of Halophila ovalis was present in the entire investigation area616. Low cover patchy meadows are known to vary considerably between years and seasonally. Although absent in 2009 and 2010, the presence of seagrass in 2002 indicates that this area is potential seagrass habitat and there is a reasonable expectation that seagrass could occur in the area again given suitable environmental conditions. Changes observed between surveys are within expected natural intra‐ and inter ‐annual variability for seagrass along the tropical and sub‐tropical regions of the Queensland coast17. The most recent monitoring reports of seagrass for the WBDDP project showed similar results in both July and August (2013) at the permanent monitoring sites. Seagrass was present at all sites surveyed, though percent cover at most sites remained low, as expected for this time of year. The seasonal trends are generally consistent with previous years, showing smaller seasonal increases in cover during the spring months of August or September. In particular, new shoots were observed at inner harbour sites where seagrass has been absent since the beginning of the year. The return of seagrass meadows in these areas is a sign of the commencement of the growing season. The trends observed at most inner harbour sites during July are consistent with seasonal low percentages linked to recent flooding events observed in the past few years. It is expected that further increases in seagrass cover should continue at all locations, including the reference sites in Rodds bay, provided environmental conditions remain favourable and there is an adequate seed bank18.
15
Sankey, T. L. and Rasheed, M. A. (2011) Gladstone Permanent Transects Seagrass Monitoring Sites – February and March 2011 Update, DEEDI Publication. Fisheries Queensland, Cairns, 24pp
16
Vision Environment (2011) Marine Plant Surveys for Disturbance Areas – QCLNG Facility. Revised Report – April 2011. Pp.36
17
Unsworth, RKF, Rasheed MA, and HA Taylor (2009) Port of Townsville long term seagrass monitoring – October 2008. DEEDI, Cairns,30 pp
18
Amies RA, McCormack CV & Rasheed MA 2013. Gladstone Permanent Transect Seagrass Monitoring – July 2013 Update Report, Centre for Tropical Water & Aquatic Ecosystem Research Publication 13/36, James Cook University, Cairns, 19pp.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 68 of 89
Figure 15: Port Curtis Seagrass Meadow and Mangrove Habitat 2002-2010 Legend QCLNG Facility Layout Seagrass and Seagrass Habitat 2002-2010 Saltpan Mangrove Communities Closed Ceriops Closed Mixed Closed Rhizophora Open Avicennia / Ceriops Laird Point
Friend Point Nth Passage
China Bay
Sth Passage
Witt Island
DATE: 6/08/2013 CREATED BY: hibberde M_30997_02_B MAP NO:
±
0
1
2
3
4
5
Kilometers Map Projection: GDA 94
DATA SOURCE:
SCALE: 1:65,000
(A3)
Imagery - NearMap Site Layout - Bechtel
Note: Every effort has been made to ensure this information is spatially accurate. The location of this information should not be relied on as the exact field location.
"Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2011. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws."
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.4.2.3.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Reef Habitat
Detailed discussion of Port Curtis reef habitats is provided in the QCLNG Supplementary EIS (Volume 5, Chapter 8). In summary, Port Curtis is a depositional environment and consequently intertidal rocky shores are generally restricted to areas that experience relatively strong tidal currents and wave action (i.e. in the lower intertidal zone). Overall, exposed intertidal rocky shores within Port Curtis cover 297 ha, which represents ~1.4% of the total intertidal wetland area of the Port Curtis region. Unvegetated mud and sand banks (24 per cent), mangroves (~25 per cent), saltpan (18%) and seagrass meadows (~21%) form the largest intertidal habitat areas in the Port Curtis area. The water quality of Port Curtis is characterised by high suspended sediment loads at most times of the year with a noticeable gradient in water clarity that improves towards the sea (South Channel and North Entrance) and diminishes further into the harbour towards The Narrows. The benthic reef fauna and flora assemblages of Port Curtis exist within the constraints imposed by variable water (and air) temperature range, large tidal range, strong tidal currents and low light levels and associated high suspended solid concentrations. Most light‐dependent reef‐building corals, seagrass and seaweed (macroalgae) species therefore occur from the lower intertidal area to a depth not usually exceeding 2 m below lowest astronomical tide (Port datum). Many of the rocky shores extend into subtidal waters to form rocky reefs/rubble banks. Baseline deepwater benthic habitat assessments in Port Curtis recorded nine reef habitat classes on the basis of density, diversity and types of epifauna19. The dominant habitat classes found were:
medium‐density benthic community on rubble substrate, dominated by bryozoans, hard coral, hydroids, echinoids (1984 ± 1612 ha). This habitat class was recorded south of East Banks and Facing Island.
high‐density benthic community – scallop/rubble substrate dominated by a bivalves with a mix of reef biota (1456 ± 832 ha). This habitat class was recorded in deepwater areas (coincident with navigation channels between Fisherman's Landing and west Facing Island, as well as a patch south of Gatcombe Head (south of Facing Island).
high‐density benthic community on rubble substrate dominated by sponges, soft coral, hard coral, hydroids, bryozoans, gorgonians and a mix of other benthic taxa (915 ± 352 ha).
high‐density benthic community on rubble substrate dominated by bryozoans, sponges, low numbers of other taxa (944 ± 337 ha). This habitat class occurred east of Boyne Island.
Deep‐water macroinvertebrate distributions in Port Curtis are shown in Figure 14. No such communities are shown in the immediate vicinity of the jetty outfall outfall, with the closest identified region being characterised as “dominated by open substrate with a low density of varied benthic taxa”.
19
Rasheed MA, Thomas R, Roelofs, AJ Neil, KM and SP Kerville (2003). Port Curtis and Rodds Bay seagrass and benthic macro-invertebrate community baseline survey, November/December 2002. DPI Information Series QI03058 (DPI, Cairns), 47 pp.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 70 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Figure 14: Deep water benthic macro‐invertebrate regions in Port Curtis and Rodds Bay, November/December 200220
20
Rasheed, M.A., Thomas, R, Roelofs, A.J. Neil, K.M. and Kerville, S.P. (2003). Port Curtis and Rodds Bay seagrass and benthic macroinvertebrate community baseline survey, November/December 2002. DPI Information Series QI03058 (DPI, Cairns), 47 pp.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 71 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
5.4.3. Potential adverse or beneficial impacts of the project activities on the identified environmental values Impacts on the marine environment within Port Curtis arising from site water discharges may potentially occur as a result habitat degradation primarily resulting from potentially high sediment loads in the discharged waters (with sensitive receptors primarily being mangrove and seagrass), or from other contaminants in discharged waters.
5.4.4. Description of Site Water Management For the purposes of summarising environmental discharges from the site, with consideration for potential impacts on environmental values, site surface water management consists of the following key elements / activities:
Stormwater management, including sediment and erosion control;
Management of atmospheric condensate from the IAC units on the LNG Trains;
Management of site process / oily waters; and
Management of waters arising from the site RO and EDI.
5.4.4.1.
Stormwater Management
At completion of construction and upon activation of this OEMP, site civil works will be complete and the site will have in place an engineered stormwater collection and control system designed to manage site stormwater and reduce suspended sediment solids from storm run‐off prior to discharge to Port Curtis. Key design features of the stormwater management system include the following:
runoff from outside the LNG Facility is diverted around the site to ensure discharge to Port Curtis without coming into contact with site runoff;
stormwater from within the site is segregated to allow runoff from process areas to be diverted to for treatment to reduce possible concentrations of potential contaminants prior to discharge;
permanent stormwater drainage channels are designed and constructed to convey up to a 1 in 25 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI), one‐hour rainfall with intensity of 80 mm per hour;
site slopes stabilised to minimise erosion;
intermediate and shoreline sedimentation ponds, allowing sediment to settle prior to discharge.
Figures showing site road surfaces and slope stabilisation, as well as detailed management measures for stormwater management, sediment and erosion control, are provided in the site Water Management Plan (LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000006). The Water Management Plan includes details of:
design of stormwater drainage channels, sedimentation ponds, and discharge points;
locations of key sumps and diversion drains to ensure potentially contaminated stormwater from process areas is segregated from clean stormwater runoff;
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 72 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
specific site management measures to address potential impacts arising from discharge of site stormwater;
discharge criteria and monitoring requirements; and
additional sediment and erosion control measures, including corrective action measures.
5.4.4.2.
Inlet Air Chill Condensate
The IAC system packages are used to maintain a constant air temperature at the inlet of the compressor gas turbine drivers for the refrigeration compressors in the liquefaction units of the QCLNG plant. This helps maintain a steady efficiency for the gas turbines during periods of high ambient temperature to maximize LNG production by: 1. Reducing the inlet air temperature via increased air density; and, 2. Reducing the inlet air humidity. The IAC package includes:
a chilled water loop to cool down the air at inlet to the gas turbines; and
a propane refrigeration cycle to remove the heat from the chilled water.
Water is chilled to approximately 5°C in evaporators in the lAC package, and sent to the propane/ethylene/methane gas turbine IAC coil modules to cool the turbine inlet air. Warm return water flows from the gas turbine coils back to the lAC package for chilling. At the IAC package, water condenses on the outside surface of the coil modules from atmospheric moisture at turbine inlets. This atmospheric condensation on the cold carbon steel of the coil modules is referred to as IAC condensate. Rate of condensate production will vary significantly with ambient temperature and humidity. As an example of the volume of IAC condensate that could be generated under different conditions, indicative rates of production of IAC condensate at three different atmospheric temperature / humidity levels is provided in Table 15. Table 15: Indicative IAC condensate production Air Temperature
Relative Humidity
Indicative IAC Condensate
23°C
100%
21.6 m3/hr/LNG train
31°C
57%
12.4 m3/hr/LNG train
13.5°C
80%
1.6 m3/hr/LNG train
As atmospheric condensate without contamination by process chemicals, IAC condensate is diverted to the stormwater management system for discharge through Sediment Pond 4.
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 73 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
5.4.4.3.
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
Process / Oily Water (Unit 29)
Oily water streams will be treated through Unit 29 (oily water treatment system), which will reduce oil and suspended solids prior to discharge. The oily water treatment system can effectively be divided into the following sections:
Corrugated plate interceptor (CPI) oil/water separator (1PK‐2905)
Dissolved air flotation (DAF) unit (1PK‐2902); and
DAF effluent filter package (1PK‐2910).
The site water management system is designed to capture the following streams for treatment through Unit 29:
Runoff from skids and drains of the propane, ethylene and methane compressors, and oily water from the water de‐gassing drum. Both these streams are captured within the Compressor Area Collection Tank (T‐2902), and pumped to the CPI;
Runoff from the power generation turbines skid area, which is collected in the Power Generation Oily Water Sump (PK‐2918) prior to being pumped to the CPI;
Oily waters from the Equipment Washdown Pad (Q‐2909), and from the laboratory, both of which are captured in the Lab/Wash Down Pad Oily Water Sump (PK‐2916) prior to being pumped to the CPI;
Runoff from within the process area within each LNG Train. Runoff is collected within the Process Area Spill Containment Sump (Q‐2908), an inground sump of 365m3 capacity designed to capture 16mm of rain runoff and with a 100 mm thick perlite liner to also contain a LNG spill event of up to 10 minutes. In periods of high rainfall the sump overflows to the clean stormwater drain. Within the process area spill containment sump, an oil skimmer package (PK‐2909) skims off any free oil carried into the spill containment sump. This package has two 100% capacity air driven diaphragm pumps with pulsation dampers to skim the oil/water film from the sump. This is pumped to PK‐2905 CPI for oil separation. Submerged pumps at the base of the sump will pump clean water to the seawater outfall on the LNG jetty. In the event of an LNG spill within the process area, temperature monitoring at the entrance to the sump pumps will isolate power to prevent pumping of LNG to the stormwater system.
A summary of treatment within Unit 29 is provided below. A schematic of the collection and treatment process is included as Figure 16. Corrugated plate interceptor The CPI consists of inclined corrugated plates mounted parallel to each other at a spacing of 20 mm. Water passes between the plates from the top, with laminar flow conditions induced for the effective gravity separation of water, oil and suspended contaminants. This is shown in Figure 15 below. In the course of passing from inlet to outlet, oil droplets that are sufficiently large float to the upper surface of the plates, while solid particles denser than water pass to the lower surface of the plates. The buoyant oil
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 74 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
then floats and collects on the surface of the CPI where is it skimmed from the CPI tank by a slotted pipe skimmer and collected in the oil reservoir for subsequent transfer to the waste oil tank. Solids (sludge) slide down the plate for collection in the sludge hopper. Figure 15: CPI Schematic
Dissolved Air Flotation Clarified effluent from the CPI is stored in the DAF surge tank to feed to the DAF unit. A polymer injection system demulsifies the water before it fed to the DAF, and then mixed for effective flocculation. Effluent from DAF flocculation tank is then gravity fed to the DAF unit, where the emulsified oil and waste water is destabilized by polyelectrolyte aiding in emulsified oil conversion into free floating oil of size more than 50 microns. Following demulsification, finely dispersed air micro bubbles are passed through the water, attaching to flocculated oil and imparting strong buoyancy. The DAF package unit has plate packs (with 35 mm plate spaces) to improve the quality of treated effluent. The flocs that rise rapidly, accumulate in a surface layer while the flocs that rise slower are separated for collection in a float layer. The float is skimmed by a Float skimmer removal mechanism and is collected in an oil chamber that is an integral part of the DAF unit. This is removed under level control intermittently by air driven diaphragm pumps to the waste oil tank. Sludge gravitates to the bottom of the DAF and is periodically removed with the help of a screw auger at the bottom of the hopper. The sludge collected will be disposed off‐site. Clarified effluent is collected in DAF Effluent tank. This has a level transmitter, which is used to control the pump flow of effluent to DAF Effluent Filters. Part of the treated effluent is recycled back for saturation with air. Air is injected in the saturated vessel and mixed with the water. The DAF recycle pump pressurizes the
UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
© QGC 2013
Revision: 0 Page 75 of 89
QGC Midstream Operations Environmental Management Plan LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000002
Issue date: September 2013 Review due: September 2014
air‐water mixture to 5 bar g so that the air will dissolve into the water. The air‐water mixture is discharged through a set of distributors on the inlet to the DAF. DAF Effluent filters DAF Effluent filters are designed to remove suspended particles from DAF effluent. The filters can be operated either in Auto mode, Semi Auto mode or Manual mode. The filtration media consist of a layer of anthracite on top of a layer of sand. As the trapped particles begin to fill the pores of the filter media, it becomes increasingly difficult to pass feed water through the filters, and the filters must be “backwashed” to clean the trapped particles out of the media. Backwash is the process to reverse the flow of water through the media. Backwash will occur when based on pressure differential or after a fixed period of time (every 24 hours). Once filtered, the effluent is transferred to the Treated Effluent Tank (TK‐2903), and pumped from there to outfall on the LNG jetty. Discharge is sampled online. Detailed management and monitoring measures associated with the oily water treatment system are included in the Water Management Plan (LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000006). Further detail on management of wastes associated with the oily water treatment system, including sludge, waste oil and waste water, are addressed in the Waste Management Plan (LNGOP‐QL00‐ENV‐PLN‐000005). The oily water treatment system is designed to treat inflow waters to achieve discharge concentrations as specified in Table 16 below. Table 16: Oily Water Treatment ‐ Design Influent and Effluent Water Characteristics Flow (m3/hr) Free Oil (mg/L) TSS (mg/L) pH Influent Water 85
100
100
6 ‐ 8
GH? *'&, IJ KD
L7 359 MN@/GG0B@
4P2 4T9 'K%;E=S@@
62349 ,/B;E
-/0
