ABAYA GEOTHERMAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT – PHASE I: Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

ESIA Report: Part II of III DRAFT August 2019

Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Contents

7 Social impact assessment 11 7.1 Introduction 11 7.2 Impact area 11 7.3 Legislative and policy framework 11 7.3.1 National 11 7.3.2 International 11 7.4 Baseline description 12 7.4.1 Research approach 12 7.5 Demographics 15 7.5.1 Administrative division and governance 16 7.5.2 Project area population characteristics 18 7.6 Religion, culture, ethnicity 20 7.7 Health and health care 21 7.8 Education 23 7.9 Economic activities 24 7.9.1 Livelihood activities 24 7.9.2 Agriculture 26 7.9.3 Land tenure and land ownership 29 7.10 Infrastructure 32 7.10.1 Roads and site accessibility 32 7.10.2 Access to water 33 7.10.3 Source of energy 36 7.11 Impact assessment 38 7.11.1 Impacts during construction and operation phases 38 7.11.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase 38 7.12 Data limitation and uncertainty 39 7.13 Summary of impacts and mitigation measures 39 7.13.1 Impacts during construction phase 39 7.13.2 Impacts during operation phase 40 7.13.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase 40 7.14 Conclusion 41

8 Biodiversity and ecology 42 8.1 Introduction 42 8.2 Affected area 42 8.3 Legislative framework 42 8.3.1 National 42 8.3.2 International 42 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

8.4 Baseline description 42 8.4.1 Protected areas and species 43 8.4.2 Plants and vegetation 46 8.4.3 Birds 49 8.4.4 Terrestrial fauna: 49 8.4.5 Aquatic fauna 50 8.4.6 Threats to biodiversity within the Project area 50 8.5 Impact assessment on biodiversity and ecology 51 8.5.1 Impact during construction and operation phase 51 8.5.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase 52 8.6 Data limitation and uncertainty 52 8.7 Summary of impacts and mitigation measures 52 8.7.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase 52 8.7.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase 53 8.8 Conclusion 53

9 Air quality 54 9.1 Introduction 54 9.2 Affected area 54 9.3 Legislative framework 54 9.3.1 National 54 9.3.2 International 55 9.4 Baseline description 55 9.4.1 Baseline air quality 55 9.4.2 Summary of baseline of air quality at drilling area 57 9.5 Impact assessment on air quality 57 9.5.1 Impact during construction and operation phase 57 9.5.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase 58 9.6 Data limitation and uncertainty 59 9.7 Summary 59 9.7.1 Impacts during construction and operational phases 59 9.7.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase 60 9.8 Conclusion 60

10 Noise 61 10.1 Introduction 61 10.2 Affected areas 61 10.3 Legislative framework 61 10.3.1 National 61 10.3.2 International 61 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

10.4 Baseline description 61 10.4.1 Baseline noise survey 62 10.5 Impact assessment on noise 64 10.5.1 Impact during construction phase 64 10.5.2 Impacts during operational phase 65 10.5.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase 66 10.6 Data limitation and uncertainty 66 10.7 Summary 66 10.7.1 Impacts during construction phase 66 10.7.2 Impacts during operation phase 67 10.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase 67 10.8 Conclusion 68

11 Water and hydrology 69 11.1 Introduction 69 11.2 Affected areas 69 11.3 Legislative framework 69 11.3.1 National 69 11.3.2 International 69 11.4 Baseline description 70 11.4.1 Climate 70 11.4.2 Rainfalls and temperature 72 11.4.3 Drainage patterns in the Project area 74 11.4.4 Water resources and water quality 77 11.4.5 Water Quality 79 11.4.6 Ground water flow 81 11.4.7 Natural hazards and extreme events: 82 11.5 Impact assessment on water and hydrology 82 11.5.1 Impact during construction phase 82 11.5.2 Impacts during operational phase 83 11.5.3 Impacts in decommissioning phase 83 11.6 Data limitation and uncertainty 84 11.7 Summary 84 11.7.1 Impacts during construction phase 84 11.7.2 Impacts during operation phase 84 11.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase 85 11.8 Conclusion 85

12 Geology and soils 86 12.1 Introduction 86 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

12.2 Affected areas 86 12.3 Legislative framework 86 12.3.1 National 86 12.3.2 International 86 12.4 Baseline description 86 12.4.1 Geology 87 12.4.2 Slope 89 12.4.3 Soils 90 12.5 Impact assessment on Geology and soils 91 12.5.1 Impact in construction phase 91 12.5.2 Impacts in operational phase 91 12.5.3 Impacts in decommissioning phase 91 12.6 Data limitation and uncertainty 92 12.7 Summary 92 12.7.1 Impacts during construction phase 92 12.7.2 Impacts during operation phase 92 12.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase 93 12.8 Conclusion 93

13 Landscape and visual impacts 94 13.1 Introduction 94 13.2 Affected areas 94 13.3 Legislative framework 94 13.4 Baseline description 94 13.4.1 Landscape character 94 13.5 Impact assessment 98 13.5.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase 98 13.5.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase 98 13.6 Data limitation and uncertainty 98 13.7 Summary 98 13.7.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase 98 13.7.2 Impacts during construction and operation phase 98 13.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase 99 13.8 Conclusion 99

14 Archaeology and cultural heritage 100 14.1 Introduction 100 14.2 Affected area 100 14.3 Legislative framework 100 14.3.1 National 100 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

14.3.2 International 100 14.4 Baseline description 100 14.4.1 Sites of cultural significance 100 14.5 Impact assessment on archaeology and cultural heritage 101 14.5.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase 101 14.6 Data limitation and uncertainty 102 14.7 Summary 102 14.7.1 Impacts during construction and operational phases 102 14.7.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase 102 14.8 Conclusion 102

15 Waste 103 15.1 Introduction 103 15.2 Affected areas 103 15.3 Legislative framework 103 15.3.1 National 103 15.3.2 International 103 15.4 Baseline description 103 15.5 Impact assessment 103 15.5.1 Impacts during construction phase 103 15.5.2 Impacts during operational phase 105 15.5.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase 105 15.6 Data limitations and uncertainty 106 15.7 Conclusion 106

16 Environment, Health and Safety (EHS) 107 16.1 Introduction 107 16.2 Affected areas 107 16.3 Legislative framework 107 16.3.1 National 107 16.3.2 International 107 16.4 Baseline description 107 16.5 Potential EHS hazards of the Project 108 16.5.1 General hazard related to construction work, power plant operation and decommissioning 109 16.5.2 Hazards specific to geothermal projects 109 16.6 Conclusion 110

17 Bibliography 111

Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Acronyms and glossary AD Anno Domini AFI Acute Febrile Illness AfDB African Development Bank ADLI Agricultural Development Led Industrialization AoI Area of Influence Asl Above Sea Level ARCCH Authority for Research and Conservation of Cultural Heritage ARDO Agriculture and Rural Development Office BSG Bushed Scrubbed Grass Land CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women

CH4 Methane CIA Cumulative Impact Assessment CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora CMS Conservation of Migratory Species of wild animals

CO2 Carbon dioxide CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child CSE Conservation Strategy of Ethiopia dB Decibel dBA Decibels Acoustic DEM Digital Elevation Model DHO District Health Office EA Environmental Assessment EAR East African Rift EBI Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute EC Electrical Conductivity EEA Ethiopian Energy Authority EEP Ethiopian Electric Power EEPCo Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation EEU Ethiopian Electric Utility EHS Environment, Health and Safety EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPA Environmental Protection Authority EPC Environmental Protection Council EPLAUA Environmental Protection, Land Administration and Use Authority EPSE Environmental Policy and Strategy of Ethiopia ERA Ethiopian Roads Authority ERP Emergency Response Plan

7 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan EWCA Ethiopian Wildlife Development and Conservation Authority E&S Environmental and Social F Fluoride FAO Food and Agricultural Organization FDRE Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia FGD Focus Group Discussions FTCs Farmers Training Centers g Gram GDP Gross Domestic Production GIS Geographical Information System GoE Government of Ethiopia GTP Growth and Transformation Plan HEP Health Extension Program HEW Health Extension Workers HH Household HHH Household Head

H2S Hydrogen Sulphide IBA Important Bird Areas ICS Interconnected System IFC International Finance Corporation ILO International Labour Organisation IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature LA A-weighted sound level

LAeq Equivalent sound level M a.s.l. Meter Above Sea Level mcm Million Cub Meter MDGs Millennium Development Goals MER Main Ethiopian Rift mg/l Milligram Per Liter MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forestry MoWIE Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy MoM Ministry of Mines MW Megawatt MWe Megawatt Electrical NCG Non-Condensable Gases NGO Non-Governmental Organization NMSA National Meteorological Services Agency

8 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

NMT Non-Motorised Transport OG Open Grass Land OMC Optimum Moisture Content OW Open Wood Land PAP Project Affected People PLC Private Limited Company POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants PPB Parts Per Billion PPE Personal Protective Equipment PPM Parts Per Million RAP Resettlement Action Plan RCIA Rapid Cumulative Impact Assessment RPF Resettlement Policy Framework SEP Stakeholder Engagement Plan SNNPRS Southern Nations Nationalities & Peoples National Regional State TDS Total Dissolved Solid TOE Tonnes oil equivalent t/h tonnes per household UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change URTIs Upper Respiratory Tract Infections VECs Valued Environmental and Social Components VES Vertical Electrical Sounding VIP Ventilated Improved Pit WBG World Bank Group WFB Wonji Fault Belt WHO World Health Organization WRMP Water Resource Management Policy UEPA Universal Electricity Access Program UNU United Nations University USC Unified Soil Classification

9 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Terminology It should be noted that spelling may vary between sources. The following list is not exhaustive.

Kebele: Hobicha Digiso/Hobicha Bada – Hobita Bada Hobicha Bongota Abala Longana – Abela Longena Abala Faracho - Abola Furacho Abala Qolshobo - Abola Qolshobo Abala Gafata – Abela Gefeta Abala Maraka - Abela Mareqa Abaya Chawkare - Abaya Chawukare - Chokare Abaya Bilate Abaya Gurucho Hobicha Borkoshe Burqe Dongola

10 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

7 Social impact assessment 7.1 Introduction The following chapter describes the socio-economic baseline of the Project area and predict the potential impacts the proposed Project will have there on. The baseline information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants (Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia, 2019) by both qualitative and quantitative methods. Attempts were made to ensure that focused group discussions were disaggregated by gender to ensure that gender issues were well captured. The study was carried out in fallowing main phases:

• Inception phase and fieldwork - mixed research methodology was used that combined both quantitative and qualitative approaches. • Data processing, analysis. • Reporting. The impact assessment was made by VSO Consulting. The chapter addresses the demographic characteristics of the area, economic activities, health and health care, education, religion, culture and ethnicity, service, finance, poverty and tourism.

7.2 Impact area The Project can have direct impact on society within Drilling area, which is within the defined Project area, but in terms of employment opportunities the impact area can reach further out from the Drilling area. In the absence of certainty of where indirect impacts end the definition of the Project area is used.

7.3 Legislative and policy framework

7.3.1 National

• The National Energy Policy (FDRE 2013) • Public Ownership of Rural Lands Proclamation No. 31 /1975 • Expropriation of Landholdings for Public Purposes and Payment of Compensation Proclamation No. 455/2005 • Payment of Compensation for Property Situated on Landholdings Expropriated for Public Purposes Council of Ministers Regulations No. 135 /2007 • Energy Proclamation No. 810/2013 • Growth and Transformation Plan • Public Health Proclamation No. 810/2013 • The 1960 Civil Code of Ethiopia

7.3.2 International

• Millennium Development Goals • Convention on the Rights of the Child • Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women • International Labour Organisation • World Bank Operational Policy OP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources

11 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

• World Bank Operational Policy OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement • World Bank Operational Policy OP 17.50: Public Disclosure • IFC Performance Standard 1: Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts. • IFC Performance Standard 2: Labour and Working Conditions. • IFC Performance Standard 4: Community Health, Safety, and Security. • IFC Performance Standard 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement. • Performance Standard 8: Cultural Heritage.

7.4 Baseline description The following chapter describes the baseline condition of the social and economic status of the Project area.

7.4.1 Research approach Following information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants.

The primary data sources included household survey /questionnaire, community consultation, in-depth and key informant interview, semi-structured and open-ended questionnaire for office data. The specifics are detailed hereunder. A) Household survey questionnaire The Household survey questionnaire was developed to capture the socio-economic background, environmental and cultural contexts of the target location. This includes socio-demographic characteristics, educational status, age and gender distribution, household income and wealth status, land holding and tenure, healthcare, diseases and drug problems, availability of food and water supplies, unemployment, crime levels, indigenous conflict resolution, etc. B) Focus Group Discussion (FGD) In order to find out the views, perception and opinions of the residents of the respective kebeles, focus group discussion was employed. It was a kind of community consultation whereby fifteen to twenty people participated in each target kebeles. Semi-structured guiding questions were prepared for the FGD participants. The composition of the FGD participants constitutes community leaders, women, and youth and kebele workers purposefully selected from concerned kebeles. C) Key Informant Interview The KII was focused on elderly and knowledgeable person from the kebele who is believed to be a resource person in having detailed knowledge and experience about the area. That individual is selected based on consultation with the research team and kebele administration, It is used to capture the state of the kebeles’ overall historical, social, economic, political, cultural and environmental contexts and problems. A different version of interview schedule will also be developed for kebele administrators and other relevant officials.

12 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 7.1 Partial view of Community consultations Abaya Project area

(a) Project Affected People (PAP) These community groups include kebele dwellers whose livelihood mainly based on farming activity and were named as community consultation members or Project Affected People (PAP). The participants were ordinary kebele dwellers and officials of each kebele administration under study. Members of the community consulted were categorized into different groups. This categorization was primarily based on livelihood of the people, the information level they have about the kebele and level of interest in the Project. From each kebele one elderly key informant after community consultation was selected based on his /her experience, knowledge and information he/she has about the kebele. This person was selected by the PAP involvement. After selecting the key informant, key informant interview (KII) was held at most for 30 minutes with probing questions. Generally similar questions with PAP were forwarded for the key informant. Accordingly, the KII voices were recorded. From March 1 to 15 in 2019, community consultation was carried out in all the 10 kebele administration office compound for two to three hours duration. The PAP was composed from different social groups like women representatives, youth representatives, religious leaders, senior citizens (elderly) of each kebele. The total member of PAP consulted from all the 10 Kebeles were 299. Out of the total population consulted females account for 18.4% whereas the rest was male participants. In terms of kebele, the largest participants were from Buke Dongola (14.4%) followed by Abala Kolishebo (12.4%). The smallest participants were from Abala Gafata (6.0%). This was probably because the day

13 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

community consultation undertaken was on Thursday and local communities gather together for big market on Thursday at Humbo Woreda, Tebela Town. The major proving questions forwarded from were following:

• Community perception/ reflection about the project (information they do have about the project). • Income sources of the community, land Holding/tenure system and Main crop types produced and animal husbandry practice. • Existence of natural and social resources (like forest, parks, wetlands, water bodies, archeological sites and wild animals, cultural heritages like churches, mosques, cemeteries, indigenous people or practice) which needs attention. • What do you think as the risks and opportunities of the project? How do you manage it? • List out and prioritize the socioeconomic and environmental problems you (the local community) have been experiencing for the last 5 to 10 years. • How do you explain your willingness to work and cooperate with the project?

(b) Project interest group (PIG) These community groups were mainly government employees starting from the 10 Project kebeles (kebele managers, school heads, health extension workers, agricultural extension workers and natural resource management workers), concerned sector offices of Humbo Woreda administration, Wolayita Zone administration, and SNNPR Government, Federal Ministry of Water, Energy and Mines and Ethiopian geological survey and lastly from Abaya geothermal project officials and employees. They were contact groups named as Project interest group (PIG) in this particular environmental and social baseline study report. The PIG was sources of most secondary data. In addition to this, in one way or another, the PIG facilitated the data collection processes from the kebeles, Woreda offices, Zone offices and PAP consultations. The consulting firm witnessed that all of the kebele, Woreda and Zone officials have strong interest in the launching of the Project. Particularly the kebele, Humbo Woreda and Wolayita Zone officials confirmed that they are going to cooperate in all aspects of Project planning and implementation processes. The socio-economic and environmental baseline study employed a cross-sectional survey design following a mixed research methodology. The mixed methodology combined quantitative and qualitative approaches, details of which are discussed below. (c) Target Locations, Population and Sampling Procedures Mixed methodology was followed to assess the social, economic and environmental context of the project area. Moreover, once the mixed approach was selected, it was also critical to choose a more relevant variant from among the existing sub-procedure within the mixed approach. Accordingly, since the research design followed was cross sectional survey with exploratory purpose, the type of mixed approach employed was the Concurrent-triangulation procedure where both quantitative and qualitative data collection was made simultaneously. The data are collected from both primary and secondary data sources. To this end, multiple data collection techniques were employed. For the quantitative data, the Household survey and other numerical data from desk reviews is used. The qualitative component involves Community Consultation and Key Informant Interview (KII), Moreover, Ground Surveying (GIS and Spatial Analysis), and Desk Review of office data methods.

14 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

In the paragraphs below, the target locations, characteristics of the population and sample, and the sampling procedures are described. Target Locations: The target location was purposively selected in consultation with the Government of Ethiopia and Reykjavik Geothermal (RG). Accordingly, the baseline survey was undertaken in ten kebeles of Humbo Woreda (kebeles listed under chapter 7.5.1). Population and Sample: According to the CSA, (2007 ) data, the total number of household units in the selected ten kebeles was 10,352. But the estimation of the study sample size was based on the actual number of households in the target localities based on data obtained from the respective kebele Administration offices in Humbo Woreda. Participants of the Household Survey: Robert V. Krejcie & Daryle W. Morgan’s (1970) sample size method is used to determine the sample size needed to be representative of the study population. This formula has been published by the research division of the National Education Association and it is considered as an efficient method for determining a small sample that represents the study population. See further details in the appendix X. The total sample size based on Robert V. Krejcie & Daryle W. Morgan’s (1970) formula is 352 (rounding off the digits) households (HH). To compensate for possible loss of data and incomplete responses, 5% of the total sample (i.e. 352 * 0.05 = 15.59) is added. Thus, the total sample size for the household survey is 368 (rounding off the digits). Thus, the distribution of the sampled households by target kebeles are proportionally calculated using the 4.33% ratio (368/8,494=4.33%). The distribution of the sample by kebele and Ketana was divided accordingly as shown in Table 7.1 below.

Table 7.1 Population Household, Sample size by of 10 Kebeles

POPULATION KEBELE TOTAL No. HH ÷6 Sample Size Male Female

HOBICHA BADA 4436 4617 9,053 1509 65

HOBICHA BONGOTA 5317 5288 10,605 1768 77

HOBICHA BORKOSHE 1873 2024 3,897 650 28

ABALA LONGANA 2108 2194 4,302 717 31

BUQE DONGOLA 2286 2454 4,740 790 34

ABALA FARACHO 1313 1381 2,694 449 19

ABALA QOLSHOBO 1616 1844 3,460 577 25

ABALA GAFATA 2449 2850 5,299 883 38

ABALA MARAKA 1894 1855 3,749 625 27

CHAWKARE 1564 1599 3,163 527 23

Total 24,856 26,106 50,962 8494 368

7.5 Demographics Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Population distribution in the region, zone and Project area. • Age and gender distribution

15 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

• Is the Project site /area inhabited or close to any settlement? • How large is the population and density of the settlement? • Gender roles • Households ownership and assets

7.5.1 Administrative division and governance The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) constitutionally comprises the Federal State and nine Regional States. Each region is divided into Zones and Woredas. The basic administration unit is the Woreda (district) and each Woreda is further sub- divided into kebeles (sub-districts) and Peasant /Farmers Associations. Each administrative unit has its own local government elected by the people. The power and duties of the Federal, Regional and Local governments are defined by Proclamations 33/ 1992, 41/1993, and 4/1995. Under these Proclamations, duties and responsibilities of Regional States include: planning, directing and developing social and economic development programs, as well as the protection of natural resources of their respective regions. The proposed Project area is in Humbo Woreda, Wolayita Zone, one of the 16 zones in the SNNPR state (Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Regional state). Humbo Woreda is located at 418 km south from Addis Ababa. The Woreda has a total of 44 Kebeles, 39 rural and 5 urbans. The Project area covers 51,394.09 ha or 513.9 km2 (Figure 7.2) and the area of study involves 10 Kebeles which are the following:

• Hobicha Bada, • Abala Faracho • Hobicha Bongota, • Abala Qolshobo • Hobicha Borkoshe • Abala Gafata • Abala Longana • Abala Maraka • Buqe Dongola • Chawkare

16 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 7.2 Districts (Woredas) in figure above and sub districts (kebeles) in figure below in the Project area. Currently all the kebeles in the study area are dominantly governed following government administrative structures and working procedures, therefore, there are no strong traditional governance and management mechanisms. However, as to the Humbo Woreda culture and tourism office (March, 2019), historically there were traditional justice

17 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

systems, the family systems, elders, the clan, customary laws, cultural and traditional religious beliefs were providing effective mechanisms for managing and resolving conflicts. Currently these cultures are dominated by modern systems. Nowadays there are elders locally called ‘’Chima’’ who optionally take responsibility of mediating issues related to family disputes, resources-based conflicts (water and grazing area use), distraction of field crops by other’s animals and sometimes issues directed to them by kebele social courts. This process may come to effect and results in good solution if both sides of the opponents are willing to deal their issues with facilitation of the Chima /elder. An elder may involve in such reconciliation processes when he /she is assigned /appointed by either of the opponents. If the opponents are not able to reach on consensus or agreement with facilitation of assigned elders, issues will be presented /comeback to kebele social courts and will pass through formal judiciary procedures. In all surveyed kebeles there was no serious peace and security challenges recorded. There were short-term trained local peace and security workers called “tataki /milisha” who are elected by the community in each sub kebele (village) of the study area. One or two regular government employed police staffs are deployed at cluster level to serve three to four kebeles who provide support and supervision services to the local level security workers. The kebele and sub-kebele government assigns community leaders mainly the kebele chairs and security officers who are in charge of maintaining and securing the kebele peace and security issues. Kebele social courts are constitutionally established judiciary bodies to implement and pass procedural decisions at kebele level on issues vested in its mandate. If issues arise beyond its mandate, the kebele social court will immediately refer them to Woreda court.

7.5.2 Project area population characteristics Based on data obtained from Kebele Administration Offices in Humbo Woreda, the total population of kebeles included in the Project area is 59,166 from which 50.5 percent are female. Among the kebeles the most populated is Hobicha Bongota with population size of 9,203 and the least populated is Abela Lonegena with population size of 4,010 (Table 7.2). The average number of household members, i.e. the family size per household, is about 6.0.

Table 7.2 Population of kebeles included in project area Male Female No. of Kebele Total No. % % households Hobicha Bada 4,436 49.1 4,617 50.9 9,053 1,509 Hobicha Bongota 5,317 50.1 5,288 49.9 10,605 1,768 Hobicha Borkoshe 1,873 48.1 2,024 51.9 3,897 650 Abala Longana 2,108 49 2,194 51 4,302 717

Buqe Dongola 2,286 48.2 2,454 51.8 4,740 790 Abala Faracho 1,313 48.7 1,381 51.3 2,694 449 Abala Qolshobo 1,616 46.7 1,844 53.3 3,460 577

Abala Gafata 2,449 46.2 2,850 53.8 5,299 883 Abala Maraka 1,894 50.5 1,855 49.5 3,749 625 Chawkare 1,564 49.4 1,599 50.6 3,163 527 Total 24,856 26,106 50,962 8,494

18 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

According to the projected population for the year 2019 the maximum population density of 725 people per square kilometer is obtained in Abela Kolshobo and minimum population density of 47 people per square kilometer in Chokare. The average population density for the study area is roughly 291 people per square kilometer, which is relatively higher than the SNNP population density of 169 people per square kilometer.

Figure 7.3 Location of settlements The largest age group of the population is from 18-35 which covers 26 percent of the total population and smallest age group is above 60 which covers 12.5 percent of the population. The mean age was 45.91 years, with maximum age of 100 and minimum age of 23 years. The mode age was 40 with the frequency of 41 HHHs. The result further indicated that 75% of the household’s head age was between 23 and 53 years inclusive. This implies that the majority of the HHH was in the active working age (Table 7.3).

Table 7.3 Age Frequency of the household’s heads. Source: Green Sober field HH Survay, March 2019

Cumulative Age range Frequency % age frequency

21-30 43 11,68 43 31-40 118 32,07 161 41-50 102 27,72 263 51-60 60 16,30 323 61-70 30 8,15 353 71-80 8 2,17 361 81-90 5 1,36 366

19 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

91-100 2 0,54 368 Total 368 100 368

Out of the total 368 households surveyed in the 10 Kebeles of Humbo Woreda 85.3% were male headed, while the rest 14.7% were female headed.. The dominant age proportion; which was 48.4% of the HHHs, remained between the age of 23 and 44 years. The mean value of the family size (household members) of the 10 kebeles was 6.2 with the minimum and the maximum family size 1 and 12 respectively. The most frequent household member was 5 with the frequency value of 61 (16.6 %). The survey result indicated that most of the household heads are married (Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.). the sex ratio of the study area was 1.09 to 1 or there is 109 Males to every 100 females. Table 7.4 Marital status in surveyed households Marital status % Married 84.8 Single 13.9 Widowed 0,8 Divorced 0,5

Dependency ratio can be defined as the ratio of dependent household members which is the summation of an age below 15 years and above 64 years to the ratio of active household members which is the group between 15 years of age and 64 years of age inclusive. Each of 368 households’ dependent household members in the given age category were properly recorded. In the same scenario the active household members in the respective age category were recorded and identified during household survey data collection. According to the survey data of the household average dependency ratio was 0.92. It implies that for every 100 working age group, there were 92 person who were dependent. This particular survey study results further revealed that the minimum and maximum dependency ratio were 0 and 5 respectively. Hence, the study was consistence with the national dependency ratio (0.91). Conferring to CSA (2018) the highest dependence ratio in Ethiopia was reported in Oromia national regional state (1.01) followed by SNNPR State (1.00). On the other hand, the same report further indicated that the lowest dependent ratio of 0.3 was reported in Addis Ababa Arada sub- city.

7.6 Religion, culture, ethnicity Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document regarding demographics Ethnic diversity and structure of developments area. • Which ethnic groups inhabit or use the Project area? • Is the Project area of importance to any specific group of people (inhabitants or users)? Socio-cultural significance of Project area. • Does the geothermal area or site close by have a cultural or historic significance which might be impacted by the Project? • Is any settlement or groups of people dependent on the potential Project area?

20 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Religion. • Baseline information should define the different religious groups in the Project area. • The assessment addresses the question whether the Project is likely to impact on or is contradictory to religious live and activities in some way. As ethnic group of the study area is concerned, on average 95 percent of all surveyed kebeles are Wolayita followed by Sidama 2.5, Amhara 0.7 and Gurag 0.4. Accordingly, the most popular languages used are Wolayitato and Amharic. Sidama (Chawkare), Gurage (Abela Mareka) and Oromiffa (Abela Faracho and Mareka) languages are spoken in few kebeles of the study area. Regarding religious groups, on average 91 percent of the population in the surveyed kebeles are Protestant, 5 percent are Orthodox, 1 percent Catholic and the remaining 2 percent are others (Kebele and Woreda Admin. Office March 2019). During consultation the community representatives indicated, there were no indigenous people who have unique culture or subculture from the main Wolayita community (Ethnic group). As the Community members indicated the main reason was that the local community was sedentary and agrarian for more than centuries and protestant Christianity was first introduced in Ethiopia in Wolayita area. This was probably the foremost reasons which mixed up all the local dwellers creating homogenous community in cultural setup. Thus, there was no isolated or some segment of the community which practice some unique or different way of life which has environmental or cultural importance for conservation.

7.7 Health and health care Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document regarding demographics

• Description of the major health problems of the Project areas and the main reasons for them (diseases, safe drinking water, sanitation, living standards and nutrition). • Health care. Is health care depending on the development area? • Is the development site of importance regarding public health? Does it have a sanitary role for the local community? Is hot water and minerals a health factor? According to the survey, the top 10 diseases frequently occurring in the Project area consecutively Malaria, Infection of the skins and subcutaneous tissue, typhoid, diarrhea, typhus, respiratory diseases, eye disease, marasmus /kwashiorkor, diabetics and measles. However, diseases including acute febrile illness, pneumonia, trauma and helminthiasis which are reported by Woreda health office (March, 2019) in the top ten diseases are not mentioned by kebele health extension workers. Health extension workers pointed out that all diseases except marasmus /kwashiorkor and diabetics are communicable that transmit from person to person in different ways. These top 10 disease lists found during the survey slightly coincide with world health ranking profile of Ethiopia which presents coronary heart disease, stroke, influenza, and pneumonia, diarrheal diseases, tuberculosis, road traffic accident, diabetes, liver disease, HIV /AIDS and breast cancer are the first 10 among the top 50 causes of death in the country (country-health-profile /Ethiopia, 2019). Health service The health service delivery system of Ethiopia explains that at Woreda level, there are three level of health service providers, primary hospitals, approximately one planned for each Woreda, serve about 60,000-100,000 people; health centers, one planned for

21 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

40,000 people in urban areas and for 15,000-25,000 people in rural areas; and health posts, one planned for 3,000–5,000 people. Health Extension Program (HEP) is one of the strategies adopted in Ethiopia with a view to achieving universal coverage of primary health care service by Health Extension Workers (HEW) among the rural population, (IBRD and WB, 2016). The baseline survey conducted in Abaya geothermal Project area indicated that there are three health centers which are located in Chokare, Abela Faracho and Hobicha Bada kebeles. All the surveyed kebeles have health posts which provide primary health services. Forty percent of the kebeles (Abela Kolshobo, Abela Longena, Hobicha Borkoshe and Buke Dongola) have two HEWs, 10% of the kebeles (Abela Gefeta) is with three HEWs, and 50 percent of health posts (Abela Mareka, Chokare, Hobicha Bongota, obicha Bada and Abela Farcho) have four HEWs (Figure 7.4).

Figure 7.4 Number of Health Extension Workers and health posts Out of the total 368 households interviewed, 87.5% reported that they have access to health posts. Regarding functionality; 94.3% of the households interviewed reacted that the health posts were functional whereas 5.7% replied that health posts were not functioning. Concerning service delivery, 84.5% of the households visited confirmed that the health posts were giving proper services to the community. On the other hand, 15.5% of the households reported that the health posts were not giving proper service. The average distance from home to a health post center is 3.03 km. On the other hand, the minimum and maximum distances from home to health post center were 0.5 km and 7 km respectively. Regarding health center access of the households, 22.8% of the households reported that they didn’t have access to a health center. Contrary to this the remaining 77.2% reported, that they have access to health center and at the same time they said it was functioning. Out of the total 284 households who said had access to health centers 95% confirmed that the health centers were giving proper services to them. When considering distance from the nearest health center, the mean distance is 8.1 km and the minimum and maximum distance is 1 km and 35 km respectively. Relating to hospital access of the households, 63.9% of them reported, that they didn’t have access and the remaining 36.2% reported, they had access to a hospital. Regarding functioning of the hospital, all those which had access to hospital reported that it was functional. As far as proper service delivery was concerned, out of 133 households who had access to hospital 97.7% reported that the hospitals were giving proper service to the community.

22 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

7.8 Education Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document regarding demographics

• What is the general educational system in the Project area/zone? • Is the Project likely to improve education in the region?

In all surveyed kebeles primary school facilities are available and accessible to school age children. All kebeles have ‘’o’’ classes in alignment with first cycle primary school which provide equivalent services to kindergarten. Fifty percent of the surveyed kebeles including Chowkare, Abela Gefeta, Hobicha Bongota, Hobicha Borkoshe and Hobicha Bada have second cycle primary schools (classes 5-8) and 40 percent of them (Chokare, Hobicha Bada, Abela Kolshobo and Abela Faracho) have high schools (classes 9-10). All first cycle schools (classes 1-4) have diploma holding teachers whose numbers vary between 5 (Hobicha Bongota) and 13 (Hobicha Bada) per school and two of the kebeles, Abela Mareka and Abela Kolshobo, have 2 and 1 degree holding teachers respectively (Figure 7.5).

Figure 7.5 Number of teachers in first primary school Similarly, in the second cycle primary schools, the number of diploma-holding teachers is equivalent to the first cycle schools and six kebeles have degree holding teachers between 1 (Abela Mareka, Abela Gefeta and Abela Kolshobo) and 7 (Hobicha Borkoshe). The remaining four kebeles have no degree holding teachers for the second cycle primary schools. Four Kebeles, i.e. Chokare, Hobicha Bada, Abela Kolshobo and Abela Faracho, have high schools. The number of teachers in these high schools ranges between 30 degree holding teachers and 4 diploma holders in Hobicha Bada to 10 degree and 4 diploma holders in Abela Kolshobo. Among the kebeles surveyed, Abela Faracho has preparatory (classes 11-12) school having 12 degree and two diploma holding teachers. Analysis of student enrollment time series data from 2006 to 2011, which was collected from kebeles and Humbo Woreda education office (March, 2019), showed that in most kebeles primary school (classes 1-8) students were increasing through time. The total number of first cycle (classes 1-4) students in the 10 kebeles was 5,328 in 2006 and it was increased to 5,976 in 2011. In the second cycle (classes 5-8) the number of students has increased from 3,717 in 2006 to 3,841 in 2011.

23 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Teacher to student ratio for first cycle primary school (classes 1-4) varies among kebeles in the Study area. It ranges between 1:50 in Chokare and 1:105 in Buke Dongola. Book to student ratio varies between 1:1 in Abela Kolshobo and Abela Faracho to 1:3 in Chokare, Hobicha Bongota and Hobicha Bada. In the second cycle (classes 5-8) primary school, teacher to student ratio was 1:15 in Chokare and 1:68 in Buke Dongola, and book to student ratio was 1:1 in Abela Mareka and Chokare and 1:3 in Hobicha Bongota and Hobicha Bada.

7.9 Economic activities

7.9.1 Livelihood activities Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document regarding livelihood activities

• Employment statistics for the Zone(s) /Woredas /Kebeles in Project area. • Number and proportion of employed population. • Nature of activity or employment. • Identify if there are any problems of economic performance in the Zone(s)/Project area. • Possible effects on employment due to the Projects: • Is the development likely to provide work and improve economic activity? • Is the Project likely to be the base for other geothermal based economic activities? • Is there other industry in the area or close by? • Are there possible conflicts with other economic activity? • Poverty, deprivation and vulnerable groups The livelihood of the people in the survey area is majorly dependent on mixed agricultural system. To observe area coverage and yield of main crops, five-year time series data from 2006/7 to 2010/11 Ethiopia Fiscal Year was collected from all surveyed kebeles. The most common annual crops growing in the study area include Maize, Haricot Bean and Sorghum. Agriculture including crop production, animal husbandry, natural resources (forest products especially charcoal) exploitation, petty trades and/or small shops and labor works are the main job opportunities and income sources in the study area. Employment statistics The employment condition is also related to the mode of economy in the area and population density. The population density is believed to be high and the unemployment rate is also high. The major job in the study area is agriculture and the people engaged in agriculture ranges between 32% in Abela Longena and 84% in Chokare. The unemployment rate is found 3.2% in Hobicha Bongota and 27 % in Hobicha Borkoshe which is relatively similar to the regional average of 24.5 %. As far as the livelihood of the households were concerned the respondents indicated that mostly it was based on fathers (male household heads) income (Table 7.5). Table 7.5 Source of livelihood of the households

Source of livelihood of the households % Fathers (male household heads) 82,3 Mothers (female household heads) 15,2 Children 2,5

24 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

There are unemployed youths who completed high school and university. In Hobicha Bada the number of unemployed degree graduates are 28, of which 5 are females, followed by Hobicha Bongota with total of 18 unemployed degree graduates, of which 7 are females, for example. The number of diploma holders, certificates and 10/12 grade complete is significantly higher than degree holders. Poverty According to the household survey, self-wealth ranking of the respondents indicated more than 33.9% of them as poor. Furthermore, 26.6% and 12.5% ranked themselves as very much poor and extremely poor respectively. From this it could be possible to conclude that roughly three fourth of the respondents are poor. Youths and women associations For tackling economic constraints, women and youth in the Study area established different income generating associations and involvement in different activities. Apart from Abela Faracho and Abela Gefeta all kebeles have established youth associations, between 2 in Hobicha Bongota to 17 in Chokare. The areas of their interventions /engagements include furniture manufacturing, stone quarry, sand selling, coble stone preparation, beekeeping, fattening, fruit and vegetable production, and loading and unloading (Abela Mareka). The number of women associations is significantly less than youth associations. Four kebeles (Abela Faracho, Hobicha Bada, Hobicha Bongota, and Chokare) have no established women associations whereas Boke Dongola, Hobicha Borkashe, Abela Longena, Abela Kolshobo and Abela Gefeta have only one association and Abela Mareka has 17 associations almost all involving in saving and credit provision services. This shows that less attention has been made for woman economic challenges in most of the kebeles in the Study area. Income The household survey result depicted that 48.1% of household respondents were participating on farm activities and generating incomes from different crop production activities including cereals, vegetables and fruits. On the other hand, 51.1% were participating on and generating incomes from sale of livestock and livestock products. Those respondents who were participating on beekeeping /apiculture, fish farming and land rent out were 0.3%. The average farm income in the last 12 months was 4,302.22 ETB with the most frequent (264) income category was 100 to 5,000 ETB, which covers about 71.7 % of the respondents. On the other hand, 95.9 % of the households were not participating in Off Farm activities. The minimum off farm income in the last 12 months was 320 ETB and maximum of 54,000 ETB (with 1 household for each). The average of farm income of the households was 9,012 ETB. Concerning the nonfarm source of income, 47.8% of the respondents were participating on the nonfarm activities. In the last 12 months 5 households each got 60 ETB which is the minimum and one household got a maximum ETB of 150,000 from nonfarm activities. The most frequent income category was from 100 ETB to 5,000 ETB (34.8%) and the average nonfarm income of the households was 5,670.90 ETB. Private investments and savings Private investments in the survey area are few and concentrating on agriculture (crop production and fattening), stone quarry production and grain mill. From a total of 8 agricultural and 20 stone quarry investments, 5 on horticulture and 18 on stone quarry are located in Abela Mareka. Two fattening investments are located in Chokare and one

25 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

stone quarry each is located in Abela Faracho and Abela Gefeta. Grain mills are found in all surveyed kebeles except Hobicha Borkoshe. Among the respondents of the interview, 44.6% of households have financial saving amounts in the last 12 months and the remaining 55.4% of them had no savings. Concerning the remittance information, the study showed that 98.8% of the households had no remittance amount of money (no remittance sender) and 5.2% of them had remittance amount from friends, relatives and others.

7.9.2 Agriculture Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document regarding agriculture

• What kind of agriculture is being practiced in the Project area? • Density and size of farms. • Size and location of agricultural land within the Project area? • Is the area inhabited/used by nomad pastoral population? • Are there any crops that depend on the development sites? • What are the most significant seasons for the agriculture in the Project area? • Has the area significance for agriculture? Unique characteristics? • Food availability. Is the food provision/availability of the area or zone somehow dependent on the Project area?

Ethiopia’s economy is chiefly agricultural, with more than 80% of the country’s population employed in this sector. Although majority of the population is engaged in farming, productivity remains low due to reasons such as severe land degradation, low technological inputs, and poor soil fertility among other factors. So, agriculture product of a family is limited or even not enough to support its domestic need. Consequently, availability of food is limited or scarce. About 96% of the cultivated land in Ethiopia is under smallholder farming, while the remaining is used for commercial farming (both state and privately owned). Per capita cultivated land holding averages only around 0.5 hectare (GIBB International, 2015) The Abaya geothermal prospect area is generally covered by volcanic rocks which is not suitable to agriculture. However, there are portion of the area utilized for agricultural purposes (Reykjavik Geothermal, 2018). In all surveyed kebeles there are Farmers Training Centers (FTCs) that facilitate extension services and technology transfer to the farmers. Among the FTCs 20% are nonfunctional (Abela Gefeta and Hobicha Bada), 20% (Abela Mareka and Chokare) are partially functional and the rest are fully functional. The total number of crops, livestock, natural resources, cooperatives and veterinary extension development agents are between 5 (in Chokare and Buke Dongola) and 8 (in Hobicha Bada and Abela Kolshobo). Hence the facilities in all kebeles are filled with minimum required number of extension service providers. Crops In terms of area coverage maize is the dominant crop per annum in all surveyed kebeles. The highest land coverage of maize (545 ha) is recorded in Buke Dongola kebele in 2006/7 and it has decreased over time to 208 ha in 2010/11. The smallest maize coverage is in Hobicha Bada (105 ha) in 2006/7 and slightly increased to 115 ha in 2010/11. Except Buke Dongola which exhibits decreasing trend and Hobicha Borkoshe and Abela Faracho which experienced no change, all kebeles showed increasing trends of maize land coverage over the last five years (Figure 7.6).

26 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

The analysis of yield on maize crop showed comparatively similar pattern to the trends of the area coverage. The highest yield (45 Qt/ha) was recorded in Buke Dongola in 2006/7 and this decreases through time to 15 Qt/ha in 2010/11. The smallest yield 8 Qt/ha is recorded in Hobicha Bada in 2006/7 and it also decreased to 5 Qt/ha in 2010/11. From all the surveyed kebeles 40% of them including Abela Longena, Hobicha Borkoshe, Hobicha Bada and Buke Dongola experienced decreasing trends and the rest experienced increasing trends of yield.

Figure 7.6 Area Coverage trend of maize in kebeles of the study area The second largest crop growing in the survey area is haricot bean. Hobicha Bada showed the highest area coverage of 272 ha in 2010/11 and it showed increasing trend from 2006/7. However, Abela Mareka showed the lowest coverage of 40 ha in 2010/2011 and it was experiencing increasing trend from 2006/7. Except Buke Dongola, all kebeles showed increasing trends of area coverage between 2006/7 and 2010/11. Concerning yield of haricot bean, Abela Gefeta experienced the highest yield of 28 Qt/ha in 2006/7 and this declined to 18 Qt/ha in 2010/11. The lowest yield of 8 Qt/ha was recorded in Buke Dongola in 2006/7 and decreased through time to 2 Qt/ha in 2010/11(Fig.7). The third common crop in the survey area is sorghum. Its highest area coverage of 75 ha is recorded in Chokare in 2009/10 followed by Hobicha Bada which recorded 68 ha in the same year. The smallest is recorded in Hobicha Borkoshe which is 3 ha in 2008/9 and 2010/11. Except in Hobicha Bada and Hobicha Borkoshe kebeles which experienced decreasing trends, all kebeles showed increasing trends between 2006/7 and 2010/11. The productivity of sorghum varies significantly from kebele to kebele. The highest yield of 35 Qt/ha in Chokare and smallest of 2 Qt/ha in Hobicha Bada were recorded in 2010/11. The survey area is also familiar with perennial fruit crops including mango, papaya, avocado and banana. But the area coverage is insignificant compared with annual crops discussed above. Variation in area coverage and yield of common crops with time and different kebeles of the study area might be due to poor documentation culture of the kebeles, shifts in cropping pattern to more drought resistant crops (example from maize to sorghum)

27 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

and/or to more potential and short maturing crops (example to Haricot bean) due to erratic nature of rainfall in the area. Livestocks The livestock resources of the survey area are huge and play significant livelihood contributions to the society. The number of cattle populations ranges between 1,929 in Abela Kolshobo and 10,800 in Buke Dongola with the average of 10 kebeles equals 6,547 cattle heads. Five kebeles including Abela Mareka, Chokare, Abela Gefeta, Hobicha Bada, Buke Dongola and Abela Faracho each has more than the average head of 4,497 goats in the Study area. As most of the survey area is categorized under lowland agroecology, the number of sheep head is quite below to the number of goats. A total of 4,000 sheep head is recorded in Abela Gefeta and 200 in Chokare with average of 1,262 head of all kebeles. Poultry resources are very immense which ranges between 14,620 in Abela Mareka (the largest) and 5,148 in Abela Kolshobo (Figure 7.7).

Figure 7.7 Livestock and poultry resources of the study area Pack animals especially donkey is the important transportation means for agricultural products in the study area. However, they are the least populated domestic animals in the area. The total number of pack animals ranges between 1.100 in Hobicha Borkoshe and 350 in Abela Gefeta. Food security As the agricultural system is dominantly dependent on rainfall and the area is characterized by land and natural resources degradation, land fragmentation, soil nutrient depletion, high temperature and erratic rainfall conditions, the study area has been experiencing chronic and transitory food insecurity challenges. Consequently, parts of the people living in the survey area are supported by Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) and emergency food aid programs (Figure 7.8). The percentage of food insecure population to total population in the study area ranges between 11% in Abela Kolshobo and 25% in Hobicha Bada. Rests of the people living in the Study area are self-food secured.

28 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 7.8 Food secured versus insecured people in the study area 7.9.3 Land tenure and land ownership Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Are there other resources in the area that may be attractive for other interests, e.g. tourism, academic, agriculture? • Is there any land use that depends on the geothermal quality of the area? • Housing, living standards. • Is there housing inside the Project area? • What kind of housing permanent or periodically? • Who are the owners /land leases of the Project area? • What are using rights of the land? Land use coverage is based on settlement, commercial area, agriculture, road network, forest, water bodies, grazing area, and other facilities etc. Most of the western, extreme north and central parts of the Project area are covered with volcanic except northwestern part which is used for patches of settlements and traditional agriculture over very small plots of lands. Eastern part is mainly covered with traditional agriculture, military camp, small villages and volcanic rocks. Some part of the Project prospect area is covered with water body that is the Abaya Lake in the southern end. The land cover analysis over the Project area indicated that the area is mostly farm land or 57 percent (29,246 ha) (Table 7.6 & Figure 7.9). Table 7.6 Land cover analysis Land cover % ha Farm land 57 29,246 Shrub land 14,5 7,426 Bush land 13,7 7,004 Forest land 4,6 2,326 Settlement 3,4 1,721 Grazing land 2,5 1,293

29 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Commercial 2,5 1,286 Wetlands 1,7 881

Figure 7.9 Land use and land cover of the study area. The distribution of farm lands of the kebeles to the total farm land in Project influence area has shown that 9,856 ha (33.7%) in Chokare, 2,653 ha (9.1%) in Abela Gefeta, 2,755 ha (9.4%) in Abela Mareka, 4,396 (15%) in Hobicha Bongota and 720 ha (2.5%) in Abela Longena. From the bush lands 69% (4,835 ha) and 9.9 % (694 ha) are found in Chowkare and Hobicha Bada respectively. Concerning shrub lands, 25.6% are in Abela Mareka, 4.8% in Abela Kolshobo, 4.6% in Abela Longena, 3.8 % in Abela Gefeta and 4.8% in Chokare. Land ownership The SNNPR constitution states that the right to ownership of urban or rural land and natural resources is exclusively vested in the state and the people. Land is a common property of the people and shall not subject to sale or other means of exchange. The farmers in the region have the right to obtain land without payment and not to be displaced from it. The Ethiopian Government Charter states that the sole owner of land in the country is government itself. However, farmers in the country side are given land ownership certificates which assures them to use the land for their lifetime. Therefore, land in the prospect area is with in this declaration boundary. However, the Ethiopian Government allocates land to investors on lease bases to various companies when there is any interest from foreign or local bodies. The mean land holding size of the household was 1.01 ha. The maximum and the minimum land holding size was 5 hectare and 0.2 hectare respectively. The most frequent land holding size was 1 hectare with value of 65 households (17.7%).

30 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Regarding, land holding distribution the respondents indicated that households who had one parcel, two parcels, three parcels and four parcels were 100%, 45.9%, 11.1% and 7.6% respectively. Concerning land ownership certification system in the survey area, the percentage of female households received certificate is found between 30% (in Abela Longena, Hobicha Borkashe, Hobicha Bada and Buke Dongola) and 100% in Abela Mareka. The recipients of male households’ range between 30% in Abela Faracho and 87% in Abela Mareka (Table 7.7Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.).

Table 7.7 Landholding Certification in the study area

Percentage of the HHs received ownership certificate Total HH population Administrative unit In number In percent MHHs FHHs MHHs FHHs MHHs FHHs Hobicha Bada 1707 421 1110 126 65 30 Hobicha Bongota 1074 303 694 163 65 54 Hobicha Borkoshe 670 107 422 32 63 30 Abala Longana 695 141 445 42 64 30 Buqe Dongola 683 210 437 63 64 30 Abala Faracho 664 197 199 134 30 68 Abala Qolshobo 839 189 361 69 43 37 Abala Gafata 899 213 539 81 60 38 Abala Maraka 640 92 556 91 87 100 Chawkare 1120 82 672 30 60 36

Tourism There are potential tourist attraction sites in the kebeles that are located in the Project area. Some of the tourist attraction sites include forest, cave, hills, hot springs and lakes. Concerning natural tourist attractions Lake Abaya (Abela Mareka and Chowkare), hot springs (Abela Mareka, Abela Gefeta and Chokare), carbon project forest in Abela Gefeta and Abela Longena, landscapes and biodiversity are mentioned. Wild animals including hyena, monkey, crocodile, boar, hog, hippopotamus, antelope, reptiles and birds are available in the bushes, forests, wetlands and water bodies of the study area. Some of important cultural heritages in the landscape resources around the project site include Humbo carbon forest project, cemeteries, religious institutions, hot springs, schools, health posts, market in some of the Kebeles. The Humbo Natural Regeneration Project is one of carbon related rehabilitation, restoration and afforestation projects of degraded areas. Basically, it is promoting natural regeneration of degraded area through enclosing the area from grazing and human interferences and planting of agroforestry trees. This resulted in increased vegetation cover, decreased soil erosion and downstream siltation, and enhanced biodiversity. Humbo carbon project has been awarded Africa’s 1st Temporary Emission Reduction Award and has been registered in Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (EBI, 2004). This project is found in the Abaya geothermal potential sites has a potential to be a tourist attraction site, wildlife sanctuary or place for cultural practices. Tourist attractions, such as the national parks (Nechsar, Mago and Omo) and tropical forests (Kaffecho, Shekecho and Omo), are long distances away.

31 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

7.10 Infrastructure Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document Transportation • Describing the type of transportation system in the Project area. • If the transportation system will possibly be affected by the development? Accessibility • Does the Projects call for new transport infrastructure? • Does the Projects influence accessibility in the area? Energy • What is the main energy source in the Project area and zone? • What impacts will the Project have on energy accessibility? Water • How is water supply managed? What is the access to drinking water?

7.10.1 Roads and site accessibility The road network of the study area include asphalt, non-asphalt all whether and dry season roads. Asphalt road crosses the boundary of two kebeles namely Abela Mareka (7 km) and Abela Faracho (5 km) on the way from Wolayita Sodo to Arba Minch. Non- asphalt all whether roads are found in Abela Faracho (21 km) followed by Chokare (15 km), Abela Kolshobo (9 km) and Hobicha Bada (7 km). However, as to the observations in the field except the asphalt road other road networks require intensive maintenance to serve big trucks, machineries and buses. Regarding market accessibility, the minimum distance from the nearest market center of the households was 4 km and the maximum was 36 km. During the survey 80.4% of the respondents replied that they have access to roads whereas 19.6% of them reported that they don’t have access to road. About household access to market information, the study revealed that 88.6% of the households had access to market information while rest of them responded that they didn’t have access to marketing information. In similar manner, 75.8% of the households reported that they had access to transport services and the remaining 24.2% responded that have not access to transport services.

32 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 7.10 Map of infrastructure 7.10.2 Access to water Safe water supply coverage in the rural areas of Ethiopia is very marginal and becomes a limiting factor in poverty reduction, resulting in poor health and low productivity, food insecurity and constrained overall national economic development. The water coverage in rural areas still remains very low because of limited progress in water supply activities in these areas (Mengesha et al., 2003). At the household level, improved access to water supply and sanitation (WSS) is expected to lead to significant improvements, not only in human health and welfare but also in levels of production and productivity. In Ethiopia, access for safe water in rural part is calculated as people having 15 l/ c /d within 1.5 km radius from protected water supply schemes (PWSS) while in urban it is defined 20 l/ c /d within 0.5 km of PWSS or public tap stand. With respect to water coverage it is defined as total number of protected water users covered, expressed as percentages of total population. According to the data obtained from Humbo Woreda Water, Energy and Mine office (March, 2019), the gross average potable water coverage of the Study area is nearly 41% when calculated using weighted average method. In Ethiopia, 97% of urban households have access to an improved source of drinking water, as compared with 57% of rural households (CSA 2016). Some research findings from Gondar rural community indicated that 57.6% of the community has got potable water from protected sources (Mengesha et al., 2003). This finding is relatively higher than what is reported for Humbo Woreda (Figure 7.11).

33 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 7.11 Potable water sources in the Study area. Relatively the largest potable water coverage is observed in Chokare kebele (73.4 percent) whereas the smallest in Hobicha Bongota (11.3 percent). All kebeles, except Chokare and Abela Kolshbo have portable water coverage below 50 percent. Almost 20,435 people in the Study area are getting access to potable water. Among the water schemes, one borehole water supply system in Abela Gefeta is not functional due to pump problem but the rest are functional. As far as potable water pumping is concerned, the water from the borehole in Abela Gefeta is distributed by generator and solar energy whereas in Abela Mareka it is pumped by generator. On the other hand, the potable water supply developed from Likimise, Kote Genet and Bilbo springs are distributed by gravity. Cold Springs: Spring “Likimsae” and spring “Kote Genet” are cold water springs sources found in relatively higher altitude which are used as main potable water supply sources for the communities living at the Abaya geothermal study area. They serve as potable water source for 9 (nine) kebeles of the geothermal study area and other kebeles found outside the study area. Lekimese Spring: This spring is a gravity contact spring located in Sodo Zuria Woreda. Its average discharge rate is estimated to be 50 l/s, the largest spring which supply drinking water to 60% of the kebeles found in the Study area which includes kebeles of Abela Maraka, Abela Furacho, Abela Longena, Abela Kolshbo, Buqe Dongola, Abela Gafeta and others (Figure 7.12).

34 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 7.12 Likimsae Water supply source Kote Genet Springs are the second largest cold spring potable water supply in the Study area. Its average discharge rate is estimated to be 6 l/s; “Kote Genet” spring is the source of potable water for Hobicha Bada, Hobicha Bongota and Hobicha Borkoshe kebele residents (Fig.37).

Figure 7.13 Kote Genet spring water source Ground Water Supply Groundwater is an important source of water and is the dominant source for domestic supply in many areas, especially in dry areas where surface water sources are scarce and seasonal. In Abaya geothermal area there are two boreholes. One is located in Abela Mareka and the other in Abela Gafeta kebele (Figure 7.14).

Figure 7.14 Ground source at Abela Mareqa In all surveyed kebeles the community members, key informants emphasized potable water shortage as a serious concern. During field data collection, the consulting firm witnessed that potable water supply is a chronic and persistent problem. As per the information obtained from the Humbo Woreda Water, Energy and Mine office (March,

35 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

2019), most of the existing water supply schemes were developed two decades ago by World Vision. This implies that the schemes are already out of their design period felling short of providing the required amount of water to the current community. Besides this, the consulting firm has observed non-functional water points indicating that there is a serious operation and maintenance problem associated with the schemes. Most of the community groups are getting potable water from public tap for brief period of time within the day mainly in the morning (Figure 7.15).

Figure 7.15 Potable water shortages observed during our field visit. Source: Green Sober survey team Due to shortage of potable water from water distribution lines and those who are living far away from water distribution points, they are using water from Hamessa and Zigere rivers and nearby hot springs as drinking water sources. Some of the community members are also using other seasonal intermittent rivers and streams which flow full in the summer and dry in the winter season.

7.10.3 Source of energy The sources for energy in the Study area include fire wood, charcoal, solar, electricity and kerosene. The dominant lighting energy source is kerosene followed by electricity and solar. The percentage of people using kerosene as light source ranges between 39% in Abela Mareka and 99% in Hobicha Bada, but 49% to 85% percent of people living in the remaining 8 kebeles use kerosene as light energy source (Figure 7.16). Of the surveyed kebeles, 20% have no access to electricity (Hobicha Bongota and Hobicha Borkoshe). Electricity energy source users range between 20% in Abela Gefeta to 60% in Abela Mareka. Solar energy sources are used except in Abela Longena kebele. However, the ratio of people using solar energy is low, between 1% in Abela Gefeta, Buke Dongola, Abela Faracho, Hobicha Bongota and Abela Mareka to 15% in Hobicha Borkoshe compared to kerosene and electricity (Figure 7.16).

36 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 7.16 Energy source (percentage) for lighting Almost all people living in the Study area are using firewood for cooking except 10% of people living in Abela Mareka, Abela Kolshobo and Hobicha Bada are using charcoal. However, there is some access to use electricity and ample charcoal production in the survey area as cooking energy source. Accordingly, half of the households had a mobile cell phone (Table 7.8Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.). Out of the total 44.0% reported that they have access to electricity and the remaining 56.0 % of the households had no electricity. Table 7.8 Ownership of assets Assets % Radio 27,7 Mobil Cell phone 56,3 Television 5,2 Bicycle 3,0 Motorcycle 4,9 Trucks 0,3

37 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

7.11 Impact assessment

7.11.1 Impacts during construction and operation phases Building of well pads, access roads and power plant can result in loss of agricultural and/or grazing land. This may affect local households in the area and may call for expropriation of land used for settlement or agriculture. The population of the ten kebeles affected by the Project area is 10,352. It is expected that temporary jobs will be created in connection with the Project. Local workers will be hired to reduce the risk of socio-cultural conflict due to influx of people to the Project area. Increased activity in the area will however generate temporary influx of people. This might affect the way of life, cause cultural conflicts and strain on local resources It depends on the site selection for the Project how many households will be directly affected by the Project. Choosing drilling sites or locating a power station close to villages will affect more households directly than if the drilling takes place in more rural areas. It is therefore not clear at this stage how many households will be affected by the Project. In general, the Project will improve quality of life in the local community. It will create job opportunities and new income sources. Conventionally, projects of this nature create typical men’s jobs on site although jobs needed to support the work force may be a mixture of both genders. Stakeholder disclosure and consultation with elders will be important in all preparation, planning and organization prior to and during construction and operation. Technical training will be provided to local staff and expertise passed on to local entities. This transition will include training and education of local experts and cooperation with regional institutions and local contractors and consultants. UNU geothermal programs will be introduced and utilized to increase the competence of employees and partners. This will increase the overall skills and have positive impact in the area. The impact significance on cultural sites depends on site selection. Site selection will take into consideration the location of cemeteries and mosques in the Project area. Defining buffer zones for potential impact during construction and operation helps identifying desirable and undesirable sites for drilling and operating a power station and simultaneously minimizing the impact on sites having cultural significance. During construction the risk of accidents for workers may increase. This also applies to the operation of a power station. The transfer of high heat steam and water increases risk of burning. This calls for limited or controlled access to Project sites. The geothermal Project will not increase health problems, on the contrary it may have a significant positive impact, if it leads to easier access to drinkable water and access to electricity. If drilling for water proves successful and the water is potable this could have significant positive impact on the water supply for the local communities in the area. This would also have positive impact on the public health in the area. There should be insignificant risk of adverse impacts on water supply of local households as the Project proponent intends to use different water extraction site(s) than presently used by the communities and not close to known local drinking water sources.

7.11.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase Land restoration that follows the demolition of buildings and structures can temporarily increase employment opportunities. It also causes risk of accidents to workers and

38 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

locals which can be minimized with information campaign, health and safety plan, fencing and signage. Closing of the power plant will cause employment loss along with decreased income for households. It also causes lowered standards in terms of access to drinking water and electricity.

7.12 Data limitation and uncertainty At this stage the location of the directly affected villages and cultural important sites is not known because the exact locations of the drilling pads is still in preparation.

7.13 Summary of impacts and mitigation measures

7.13.1 Impacts during construction phase

Table 7.9 Construction phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measures Residual significance Land Household loses its main Major Livelihood Restoration Moderate expropriated source of income and Plan. Resettlement food Action Plan. Vulnerable groups lose Major Site selection. Policy Moderate their main source of for compensation. income and food Site clearance Crops lost Moderate Compensation for lost Minor crops Water extraction Households get less water Major Use water supply Insignificant from other sources than in local use Hiring of local Lower unemployment Moderate workers rate Increased income for Moderate households May enhance situation of Moderate vulnerable groups Influx of non- Socio-cultural conflict Minor Disclosure of Insignificant local workers Recruitment Policy. Inform workers of the local religion. Sexually transmitted Moderate HIV /AIDS Policy and Minor diseases Engagement Plan Non-local workers will be Moderate Disclosure of Minor hired at the cost of Recruitment Policy. individuals in vulnerable Avoid gender bias groups, i.e. women will whenever possible. not be employed Training for Improves overall skills and Moderate employees knowledge in the area Construction Risk of accidents for Major Training program for Minor work workers and residents staff and preventative safety measures in

39 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measures Residual significance place for residents and visitors such as fencing and signage Health and Safety Minor Program May disturb peace Moderate Take into Minor cemeteries and mosques consideration during site selection Building new Infrastructure improves Moderate roads and enhances access to places and services Access for tourists may Moderate improve Increased access may Minor Take tourist potential Insignificant adversely affect tourist into consideration sites during site selection and design Well testing Disturbance for locals Moderate See chapter 8 on air (noise, air) and 12 on noise Risk of burning from Major Signage, informing Minor steam locals, fencing

7.13.2 Impacts during operation phase

Table 7.10 Operation phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Employment Increased income for Minor regarding households operation Risk of accidents or work- Moderate Staff training and Minor related health issues occupational health and safety plan Drilling of See table Table 7.9 Health & Safety additional wells Program including and testing of training wells Operation of a Attracts tourists, which Minor geothermal can benefit the economy plant

7.13.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase

Table 7.11 Decommissioning phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Land Increased employment Minor restoration

40 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Risk of accidents for Moderate Information Minor workers and locals campaign, health and safety plan, fencing, signage Closing of Employment loss Minor operation decreased income for households

7.14 Conclusion The Project is likely to have minor to moderate positive impacts on the social aspects of the environment. Employment will increase and thus enhance the economy and livelihood of households and lower unemployment rate at least temporarily. Infrastructure will be improved and thus enhance peoples commuting and access for tourists which are likely to be interested in the geothermal plant. Increased tourist attraction can have positive impact on the local economy. Having taken mitigation measures into account the residual adverse impacts on social aspects are insignificant to moderate. The most critical impact is the land expropriation which will be met with Livelihood Restoration Plan and Resettlement Action Plan. Impact on vulnerable groups losing their income and livelihood will be met with compensation policy and site selection. In order to minimize risk on health and safety of workers and locals a training program and preventative safety measures will be put in place. Cultural conflicts due to influx of workers of other culture and religion will be met with information and training. Disturbance of cemeteries and other culturally significant sites will be avoided by/when selecting site for the operation.

41 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

8 Biodiversity and ecology 8.1 Introduction This chapter aims to describe the biodiversity and ecology of the Project area and predict the potential impacts the proposed Project will have there on. A definition is given of the affected area and an overview of the appropriate legislation, guidelines and standards. The baseline information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants (Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia, 2019) The information was collected through desk top study and field sampling. The impact assessment was done by VSO Consulting.

8.2 Affected area Within Area of Influence (AoI), the most impacted area can be defined by distances from potential drilling site:

• Protected sites within 10 km from Drilling area • Ecosystems within 500 m from Drilling area • Migratory birds, mammals and herpetofauna within 2 km from Drilling area

8.3 Legislative framework

8.3.1 National

• Conservation Strategy of Ethiopia (CSE)

8.3.2 International

• Convention on Biological Diversity • African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (The Algiers Convention)

• Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). CITES list of protected species.

• Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals • United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) • The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance. Ethiopia is yet to adopt this convention.

• International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

• Birdlife Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs). • IFC PS 6 - Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources.

8.4 Baseline description The following chapter describes the baseline condition of the biodiversity and ecology of the Project area. Emphasis is put upon describing protected species or species of

42 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

conservation value as well as the characteristic vegetation type, plants, birds, mammals and herpetofauna.

Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document Vegetation • Determine vegetation composition and identify community types of each area. • Determine if there are any endangered plant species or communities that would be affected by the development in the area. • Compare the study with the vegetation mapping. Wildlife and Habitats • What is the wildlife within the Project area? • Are there endemic, endangered or vulnerable species within the Project area? Critically endangered, endangered and vulnerable within Area of impact? • Are there woodlands, bio-diversity, soil and important factors for food security within the Project area? • Are there species important for local communities within the Project area? • Are there migration routes of animals within the Project area? • Are there IBAs (Important Bird Areas) within or close by the Project area? • Can noise and vibration affect animals?

8.4.1 Protected areas and species There are no protected areas i.e. national parks, reserves or wildlife sanctuaries within the Project area or within 10 km from it. The Arial distances of national parks that are located near to the Abaya geothermal study area “Nechisar” and “Maze” national parks are about 56 and 49.5 km respectively from the Project site. “Nechisar” Park is an IUCN category II National Park that was established in 1974 with the aim of conserving the endemic Swayne’s Hartebeest and preserving its scenic beauty, while, “Maze” Park is one of the last remaining sites for the conservation of the Swayne’s Hartebeest. It is arguably the second most important site for the Swayne’s Hartebeest after Senkelle Hartebeest Sanctuary. They are found relatively far away from the Abaya geothermal Project site (Figure 8.1).

43 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 8.1 Nearest national parks to the Project area According to IUCN’s Red List of Threatened Species there are 11 birds and 14 other animals that are critically endangered (CR), endangered (EN) or vulnerable (VU) and are extant within 50 km from Project Area of Influence (Error! Reference source not found.).

Table 8.1 Species on IUCN‘s Red List of Threatened Species that are extant within 50 km from Project AoI Extant in Scientific name Species Project IUCN Status* of Species AoI?

Resident is in southwest Mountain Redunca 1 Ethiopia, Project’s AoI EN Reedbuck fulvorufula ✓ included.

Resident is southwest of African Wild 2 Lycaon pictus Lake Abaya. Is not in Project EN Dog AoI.

Susana's Resident is southwest of Leptopelis 3 Forest Treefrog Lake Abaya. Is not in Project EN susanae AoI.

Resident is southeast of Guramba 4 Crocidura phaeura Lake Abaya. Is not in Project EN Shrew AoI.

Chlorocebus Resident is east of Lake 5 Bale Monkey VU djamdjamensis Abaya. Is not in Project AoI.

Residents around Lake 6 Hippopotamus Abaya and Lake Chamo. ✓ VU Resident are in Project AoI.

44 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Extant in Scientific name Species Project IUCN Status* of Species AoI?

Presence uncertain. Likely in Pseudagrion 7 mid-Ethiopia, Project AoI VU kaffinum ✓ included.

Residents is southwest of Shoa Forest 8 Letopelis ragazzii lake Abaya. Not in Project VU Treefrog AoI.

Residents is east of lake 9 Cheeta Acinonyx jubatus Vu Abaya. Not in Project AoI.

Residents is east of lake 10 Lion Phantera leo VU Abaya. Not in Project AoI.

Resident are east and south of lake Abaya. Possibly 11 Leopard Phantera pardus VU extinct north of the lake, ✓ Project AoI included.

Resident in mid-Ethiopia, 12 Otomops harrisoni VU Project AoI included ✓ Resident between Lake Nechisar Caprimulgus 13 Abaya and Lake Chamo. VU Nightjar Solala Not in Project AoI

Resident is probabilly extant Crenigomphus 14 in Mid-Ethiopia, Project AoI VU abyssinicus ✓ included.

Birds Resident is in all Ethiopia, 15 Rüppell's Gyps rueppelli CR Vulture Project AoI included. ✓

Resident or possibly White headed Trigonoceps 16 resident is in all Ethiopia, CR vulture occipitalis ✓ Project AoI included.

Necrosyrtes Resident is in all Ethiopia, 17 Hooded vulture CR monachus Project AoI included. ✓ White backed Resident is in all Ethiopia, 18 Gyps africanus CR vulture Project AoI included. ✓ Lappet-faced Torgos Resident is in all Ethiopia, 19 Vulture EN tracheliotos Project AoI included. ✓

Egyptian Neophron Resident is in all Ethiopia, 20 Vulture EN percnopterus Project AoI included. ✓

Basra Reed- Acrocephalus Passage area near Abaya 21 warbler EN griseldis Lake, not in Project AoI.

Resident and breeding in 22 Saker Falcon Falco cherrug most Ethiopia, Project AoI ✓ EN included

Extant, non-breeding in most 23 Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis parts of Ethiopia, Project AoI ✓ EN included.

45 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Extant in Scientific name Species Project IUCN Status* of Species AoI?

Blue winged Cyanochen Resident in mid-Ethiopia, 24 VU Goose cyanoptera Project AoI included.

Bugeranus Resident in mid-Ethiopia, 25 Wattled Crane VU carunculatus Project AoI included.

* CR: Critically endangered, EN: Endangered, VU: Vulnarable Acacia species are one of the important plants species that are declining from time to time due to charcoal production. Some of the plants are indigenous others are exotic planted by the farmers for various purposes. Emphasis has to be given for the protection and management of indigenous plant and animal species which might have a role in the well-functioning of the ecosystem.

8.4.2 Plants and vegetation The Abaya geothermal Study area has Acacia-Commiphora Woodland Ecosystem which is covered by a combination of agricultural land, field trees and bushes. The major species include Combretum spp., Acacia spp, Balanitesaegyptica, Ximenia spp, Aloe spp and others. There is lack of document that describes unique flora or fauna that requires special management in the Project area, Acacia species are one of the important plants species that are declining from time to time due to charcoal production. Biodiversity is the variety and variability among living organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. Ethiopia is one of the most important primary and secondary centers of origin and diversity of several crop species. The Ethiopian biological diversity is made up of an estimated total of 6,500–7,000 plant species of which 12 are endemic. There are also 277 terrestrial mammals some 861 bird species, 201 species of reptiles, 63 species of amphibians, 150 species of fish and 324 butterfly species of which 31 mammals, 28 birds 24 amphibian, 4 fish, 9 reptile, 7 butterfly species are endemic. On other hand, with the combined effects of topographic and climatic factors, the country is endowed with diverse ecosystems that are inhabited by diverse animal, plant and microbial species. For instance, there are more than 18 major and 49 minor Agro Ecological Zones (AEZs) . Ethiopia comprises ten ecosystems that range from Afro-alpine at the highest elevations to desert and semi-desert ecosystems at the lowest elevations. Based on the attitude and vegetation cover of the area, Abaya Study area will probably be categorized as Acacia- Commiphora Woodland Ecosystem. Generally, this ecosystem is found between 900 and 1,900 m.a.s.l., in the area the Rift Valley of Oromia, Afar and SNNP national regional states. The vegetation cover is mainly open bush, wooded grassland with acacia trees. The characteristic woody species of this ecosystem include Acacia senegal, Acacia seyal, Acacia tortilis, Acacia mellifera, Boswellia microphylla, Boswellia. neglecta, Balanites aegyptiaca, Commiphora africana, C. myrrha, C. boranensis, C. cilliata, C. monoica and C. serrulata. These species are characterized by either small deciduous or leathery persistent leaves. Species of Acalypha, Barleria, Aerva and Aloe are also common in Acacia-Commiphora Woodland Ecosystem.

46 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 8.2 Some of the plants observed during baseline field visit Abaya geothermal study areas have Acacia-Commiphora Woodland Ecosystem and covered by a combination of agricultural land field trees and bushes. Hence there are about mixed type of trees are found in the project site. The most dominant and common tree species observed and listed by the community are included in Table 8.2.

Table 8.2 Some of dominant plant species in Abaya geothermal Study area

Scientific name of Family Wolitigna Nature of origin IUCN Species name Status

1 Acacia brevispica Fabaceae Gwemoriyya Indigenous DD

2 Acacia lahai Fabaceae Guganta Indigenous DD

3 Acacia Senegal Fabaceae Tundukiyac Indigenous DD

4 Acacia seyal Fabaceae Fulisa Indigenous DD

5 Aloe vera /A. barbadensis, Aloeaceae Unknown DD

6 Balanites aegyptiaca Balanitaceae Bedena DD

7 Cordia Africana Boraginaceae Moqota Indigenous DD

8 Croton macrostachyus Euphorbiaceae Anneka Indigenous DD

47 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Scientific name of Family Wolitigna Nature of origin IUCN Species name Status

9 Delonix regia Fabaceae Madagascar DD

10 Dodonaea viscosa Sapindaceae Indigenous DD

11 Eucalyptus grandis Myrtaceae Zozafi Australia DD

12 Euphorbia candelabrum Euphorbiaceae Indigenous DD

13 Euphorbia tirucalli Euphorbiaceae Indigenous DD

14 Ficus sur/ F. capensis Moraceae Indigenous DD

15 Grevillea robusta Proteaceae Australia DD

16 Jacaranda mimosifolia Bignoniaceae Brazil DD

17 Jatropha curcas Euphorbiaceae Tropical America DD

18 Juniperus procera Cupressaceae Indigenous DD

19 Mangifera indica Anacardiaceae Northern India DD

20 Melia azedarach Meliaceae Western India DD

21 Millettia ferruginea Fabaceae) Zagiya Indigenous LC

22 Moringa oleifera Moringaceae Alekoo India DD

23 Oxytenanthera abyssinica Poaceae Tewaye Indigenous DD

24 Podocarpus falcatus Podocarpaceae Ziga Indigenous DD

25 Psidium guajava Myrtaceae Tropical America DD

26 Syzygium guineense Myrtaceae Doqima Indigenous DD

27 Ximenia Americana Olacaceae Astie/ enkoy Indigenous DD

(Bekele-Tesemma 2007) (Azene Bekele-Tesemma 1993) (National Herbarium 1989) (Jose et al.,2005 ) IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources; LC: Least Concern DD: data Deficient There is no document that describes unique flora or fauna that requires special management in the area, Acacia species are one of the important plants species which are used for source of energy for cooking as firewood or charcoal. The plant species used for charcoal production are declining from time to time because of the energy demand. There is no specifically localized /registered area for spawning ground habitat for migratory species or used as a corridor for wield life. But, the wetland that is available in Chokare kebele has potential for such ecological services like breeding ground for aquatic bird’s source of food for wild animals. The existing carbon forest project in Abela Longena and the Hobicha ridges have a great potential in sequestering carbon and wildlife conservation (Figure 8.3).

Figure 8.3 Wetland and hot spring source in the Abaya Chokare kebele

48 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

There is lack of information about level and status of species in the area whether they are endangered or threated based on the IUCN criteria or level of classification to the plant and animal’s species to the Abaya Project Study area. Some of the plants are indigenous others are exotic planted by the farmers for various purposes. Emphasis has to be given for the protection and management of indigenous plant and animal species which might have a role in the well-functioning of the ecosystem.

8.4.3 Birds In relation to bird species, in Acacia-Commiphora Woodland Ecosystem has characteristic bird species that include Ostrich, Hunter's Sunbird, Shining Sunbird, Golden-breasted Bunting, Salvadori's Seed Eater, Yellow-throated Seed Eater, Ruppell's Weaver, White-headed Buffalo Weaver, Golden-breasted Starling, White-tailed Swallow and Stresemann’s Bush Crow and others might be available. During field visit have some of the bird species observed (Figure 8.4) and names of birds were collected from key informants in the kebleles and the common names and scienctifc names are presented in Table 8.3.

Figure 8.4 Some of bird species observed during field visit Table 8.3 Some of bird species available in the Abaya Study area

Common name Scientific name IUCN status

Common Raven Corvus corax DD

Brewer’s Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus DD

Common Fiscal Shrike Lanius collatis DD

Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura DD

Speckled Mouse bird Colinus striotus DD

African Pied Wagtail Motacila aguimp DD

Wattled ibis Bostrychia carunculata DD

White Pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus DD

(Kavanach and Leung 2000;Boise Parks & Recreaton 2015;Weldemariam Tesfahunegny 2016 ) DD: Data Deficient

8.4.4 Terrestrial fauna: The most common wildlife in the area are mainly greater kudu, dik-dik, crocodile, python hyena, baboon, swine, hippopotamus, variety of tortoises, rabbit, variety of snakes and lizards, variety of birds (secretary bird) etc. (personal communication with the experts of Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority).

49 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Northern and eastern shores of Lake Abaya are good habitat for crocodiles and hippos. The escarp and dense wet forests and the wooded grass arid lands are good habitats for most of the wild live including birds. Currently, most of the animals were not seen during field visits except some birds, baboon and squirrels. However, different agricultural development workers, agents and key informants in kebeles confirmed that they have seen most of the animals long time ago when the area was dominated by zebras, giraffes, elephant, lion and others, which they suspect that the animals have migrated to “Nech Sar” “Mazae” national parks due to deforestation, settlement and agricultural practices in the area. The commonly listed mammals in the ten kebeles are listed (Table 8.4).

Table 8.4 Common mammals listed by residents of the Abaya geothermal sites English Name Local name Local name Scientific name Family/Order Wolayitigna Amharic

1 Common Duiker ሚዳቋ Gensiye Sylvicapra grimmia

2 Bushbuck ድኩላ Gara Traglaphus scriptus Tragelaphines

3 Warthog ከርከሮ Gashiwa Phacochoerus Suidae africanus

4 Serval አነር Felis serval Felidae

5 Leopard ነብር Mahiya Panthera pardus Felidae

6 Lion አንበሳ Gamua Panthera leo Felidae

7 Spotted Hyena ተራ ጅብ Guderiya Crocuta crocuta Hynidae

8 Common Jackal ተራ ቀበሮ Worekana Canis aureus Canidae

9 Hyrax ሽኮኮ O. Hyracoidae

10 Squirrel አደሴ ቁኒ Xerus erythropus O. Rodentia

11 Olive Baboon ጥቁር ዝንጀሮ Geleshuwa Papio anubis O.Primates

12 Baboon ዝንጀሮ Geleshuwa Tribe papionini O.Primates

13 Genet ሸለምጥማጥ Usuwa Genetta tigrina / Viverridae G.felina

14 Hippopotamus ጉማሬ Tediya Hippopotamus amphibius

15 Greater Kudu አጋዘን Chofoshuwa Tragelaphus O. Tragelaphines strepsiceros

(ሰለሞን ይርጋ, 2000 or Solomon Yirga,2000)

8.4.5 Aquatic fauna During field visit and discussion with the dwellers of Chowkare Kebele, it was informed that fish is collected from Lake Abaya. The Lake support stocks of Nile Perch and Cat Fish. We have observed availability of Cat Fish in one of the restaurants found in the rural kebele. There was no detail information about the production of fish and further varieties.

8.4.6 Threats to biodiversity within the Project area Key threats to biodiversity identified in Project area include: a) unsustainable anthropogenic activities; and b) natural phenomena such as i) drought and climate change, ii) soil erosion and iii) spread of invasive species and c) the interaction between these processes.

50 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Tree cutting for fuel wood and construction materials is a significant threat Acacia- Commiphora Woodland Ecosystem. The demographic pressure on diminishing natural resources, trees are still being cleared at an alarming rate to open up land for agriculture and livestock production. People generally lack the opportunity to preserve biodiversity and they are often forced to use natural resources in an unsustainable way, as a source of food, fuel or income. In addition, Ethiopia has the largest population of livestock in Africa; thus grazing pressure has increased the rate at which tree and shrub species are becoming scarcer.

8.5 Impact assessment on biodiversity and ecology

8.5.1 Impact during construction and operation phase Site clearance in preparation for construction causes disruption of vegetation cover, as well as disruption of habitat (fauna) and possible disruption of pathways/corridors. This might result in adverse impacts on protected species. Apparently there are no documents that that describes unique flora or fauna that requires special management in the Project area at present time. Rapid biodiversity survey could be carried out during rainy season and when site selection has been proposed to examine further the baseline findings and mitigate adverse impacts to avoid disturbing sensitive areas and species. Clearance of certain vegetation can have adverse impacts on secretive species and burrowing fauna and thus consideration will be given to that regard during site selection. If applicable, sensitive areas will be cordoned off as to not being disturbed by accident. Clearance of natural vegetation can also give invasive species opportunity to spread. In order to prevent the spreading of invasive plants a Wildlife Protection Plan will be put in place. Soil or other material with invasive plant residues such as seeds and roots will be treated properly and when re-vegetating land only native species will be used. Clearing of culturally important vegetation such as acacia species will be avoided as possible. Consultation with locals will be undertaken as necessary. Steam and geothermal fluid can cause damage to vegetation close to and when drilling and well testing. Hot steam can scald vegetation and therefore have impact on fauna. This is however temporary impact during drilling and testing of wells and should be reversible. If relevant, potential damage to vegetation due to geothermal steam can be mitigated by shortening well testing time. Steam from high rising cooling towers or other high buildings/structures can impede on bird flyways. This will be considered as an input for power plant design, and some means may have to be contemplated to prevent collision as part of the Wildlife Protection Plan. Conflicts between humans and animals may be exacerbated by the Project activities especially if the animals’ semi-natural habitats are reduced in size or the animals’ dens are opened during construction work. Accidental deaths of wildlife can be minimized by understanding better the wildlife in and around the operation. The baseline studies did not return information on recent presence of protected, endemic and endangered species, breeding birds and burrowing animals. Biodiversity survey before the commencement of the Project with focus on these species could prove more conclusive. This survey could be repeated on a regular basis as the Project expands and appropriate actions taken to lower the risk of accidents. Hunting, cultivation or deforestation by personnel will be prohibited. In order to minimize impact on fauna efforts will be made, within reasonable limits, to plan construction outside breeding season.

51 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Impacts on air quality and noise is discussed in consequent chapters (chapter 9 and 10).

8.5.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase Noise from machineries and demolition can affect animals, disturb them or scare them which could have impact on results from breeding or nesting season. One way to mitigate impacts is to plan demolition outside breeding season. Demolition can cause trapping or accidents for animals. Accidental deaths of wildlife will be minimized by undertaking detailed surveys before the commencement of the demolition. Demolition will be planned so it will be continuous and surface finish will not leave hazards of abandoned structures for wildlife.

8.6 Data limitation and uncertainty Location of specific plants, fauna species or birds is not known.

8.7 Summary of impacts and mitigation measures

8.7.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase

Table 8.5 Construction and operation phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Removal of Habitat loss for Moderate Biodiversity survey Minor vegetation fauna, fauna species when drilling sites cover lost. have been suggested Flora species lost. Minor Survey carried out Minor prior to site selection. Protected species Minor Survey carried out Insignificant lost when sites have been suggested. Wildlife Protection Plan. Disruption of Minor Survey carried out Insignificant pathways/corridors when site has been selected. Wildlife Protection Plan. Spreading of Moderate Soil from outside of Minor invasive plants area avoided. Wildlife Protection Plan. Only native species Minor used if /when re- vegetating. Conflicts between Moderate Biodiversity survey Minor humans and animals carried out when sites due to reduction of have been suggested. habitats or opening up of dens Steam and Scalding of Minor Control well testing Insignificant geothermal vegetation with time. Fluids directed fluid from wells impact on fauna to infiltration ponds. High rising Disruption of bird Minor During design, work Insignificant buildings and flyways with bird experts and relevant authorities.

52 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

steam from cooling towers Collision deferring Minor equipment placed on high rise buildings Construction Accidental deaths of Moderate Biodiversity survey Insignificant activity wildlife, especially carried out when sites endangered species, have been selected. breeding birds and Repeat on regular burrowing animals. basis. Wildlife Protection Plan. Plan construction Insignificant outside breeding season if there is any.

8.7.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase

Table 8.6 Decommissioning phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Noise from Disturbance of Moderate Plan demolition Minor machineries wildlife, impact on outside breeding results from nesting season. Wildlife season Protection Plan. Demolition Trapping or Moderate Carry out surveys Minor accidents of wildlife before starting demolition. Wildlife Protection Plan. Demolition planned Minor so it will be continuous and surface finish complete

8.8 Conclusion After having taken mitigation measures into account the Project is likely to have insignificant to minor impacts on biodiversity. To verify or double-check the findings of the baseline study, it is recommended to carry out a biodiversity survey once drilling site(s) have been suggested. Most of the impacts are temporary and reversible. A Wildlife Protection Plan will be implemented.

53 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

9 Air quality 9.1 Introduction This chapter aims to describe the baseline air quality of the Project area and predict the potential impacts the proposed Project will have there on. A definition is given of the affected area and an overview of the appropriate legislation, guidelines and standards. The impact assessment was done by VSO Consulting.

9.2 Affected area Radius around residential area of 500 m which would represent the limit to sense foul smell of H2S (0.3 ppm, 30 sec average) (RWDI, 2009). Hydrogen sulphide concentration of 7 μgr/m3 (0.005 ppm) with a 30-minute averaging period is recommended as a limit for odor (WHO, 2000). In the area near the possible drilling area there is very sparsely population and no residential areas or sensitive sites like school or health centers.

Figure 9.1 Expected Drilling area (blue area inside the Project area) and sites of cultural significance (historical, cemeteries, school) near the area. 9.3 Legislative framework

9.3.1 National ► Environmental Pollution Control Proclamation No. 300/2002 ► Prevention of Industrial Pollution Council of Ministries Regulation No. 159/2008 ► EPA draft guidelines for EIA for Mineral and petroleum operation projects, 2003

54 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

9.3.2 International ► IFC Environmental Health and Safety General Guidelines: 1.1. Ambient Emissions and Ambient Air Quality ► IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for Geothermal Power Generation ► Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer ► The 1992 UNFCCC (Rio Convention) ► Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC ► WHO air quality guidelines (2005) ► The Paris Agreement to the UNFCCC

9.4 Baseline description Impact assessment interests and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Comparison of CO2 emissions with alternative power generation schemes. • The Project will include emission of different gas components. The assessment for air quality will be based on the current standard of air quality and a detailed study will be carried out to give data on: • The emissions from the drilling and operation of the power plant (H2S, NOx, CO2, SO2, VOC). • How the emissions comply with national and WHO standards.

9.4.1 Baseline air quality Sensitive receptors considered generally include private residences /villages, community buildings such as schools, hospitals and any publicly accessible areas. The key natural factors likely to influence ambient air quality in the Study area are the manifestations of hot-springs, topography, vegetation cove r/barrier and atmospheric conditions. The existing artificial factors are limited to intermittent traffic on the earth roads, mechanised tillage of farmlands especially in dry windy weather conditions associated with whirlwinds and charcoal burning. It is notable that no industrial activities exist within or in close proximity of the Project area. Result from measurements conducted in Tulu Moya in Oromia, also on the East African Rift, which is more populated than the Abaya research area, show that we have value of 3 3 PM10 lower than 10 µgr/m , and measured concentration for H2S is lower than 5 µgr/m . Measurements of the H2S from hot springs in the area show very similar values in the Abaya area as in the Tulu Moya area, i.e. very low values.

According to the WHO air quality guidelines, 24-hour health limit for H2S concentration in 3 3 air is 150 μgr/m (107 ppb) (WHO, 2000). Hydrogen sulphide concentration of 7 μgr/m (0.005 ppm) with a 30-minute averaging period is recommended as a limit for odour to avoid „substantial complaints about odour annoyance among the exposed population“ (WHO, 2000).

Table 9.1 WHO air quality standards and guidelines

Pollutant Averaging period Guideline Value (µg/m3)

SO2 24-hour maximum 20 10-minute maximum 500

NO2 1-year mean 40

55 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

1-hour maximum 200 TSP 1-year mean No guideline 24-hour maximum No guideline

PM10 1-year mean 20 24-hour assessed as the third highest 10 24 hour period (99th percentile)

PM2.5 1-year mean 10 (guideline) 24-hour maximum 25

Table 9.2 EPA Air Quality Standards: Discharges to Air (Adopted from Ministry of Environment, British Columbia, Canada 1989).

Parameter Maximum discharge (ppb) Sulphur Dioxide Annual arithmetic mean 75.00 24-hour concentration 260.00 3-hour concentration 665.00 1-hour concentration 900.00 Antimony (Sb) 0.50 Arsenic (As) 1.00 Beryllium (Be) 0.1 Cadmium (Cd) 0.30 Chromium (Cr) 0.10 Copper (Cu) 2.50 Fluorine (F) 2.00 Lead (Pb) 2.50 Mercury (Hg) 1.00 Molybdenum (Mo) 2.50 Nickel (Ni) 0.10 Selenium (Se) 0.50 Uranium (U) 6.00 Vanadium (V) 1.00 Zinc (Zn) 2.50

Table 9.3 Established dose-effect relationships and guidelines for H2S concentration in atmosphere (WHO, 2000)

Description ppm µgr/m3 Odour limit, 30 min average period 0.005 7 WHO, 24 hrs health limits 0.107 150

56 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Threshold for eye irritation 10-20 15,000-30,000 Loss of olfactory sense 150-250 210,000-350,000 Risk of death >300 >420,000

The IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for geothermal power generation, emissions monitoring guidelines say that H2S emissions or other types of emissions should not result in ambient concentrations above rationally established air quality standards or, in their absence, internationally recognized guidelines. In the ESMP there will be put forward measuring scheme for relevant component to follow during the construction phase and the operating phase. Wind Wind speed will be determined both in the distance of downward transport and the rate of dilution of pollutants. The generation of mechanical turbulence is similarly a function of the wind speed, in combination with the surface roughness. Annual wind rose for the Project area indicates that the prevailing direction of winds is NE. Most of the time in the Project area, winds blew from NE direction at 8.8-11.10 m/s. However, minimal seasonal variations exist. December to May and September to November is a dry season with the general wind motion trend from North-East to South-West. The predominant wind speeds are in 8.8- 11.10 m/s range. June to August is a wet season with the general motion trend from South-West and predominant wind speed from 5.7 to 8.80 m/s range.

9.4.2 Summary of baseline of air quality at drilling area Baseline of drilling area Observation in the Project area and near the Drilling area indicate that air quality is within limits of WHO standards. Prevailing wind direction is NE in the dry season and from SW in the wet season. Wind speed is less in wet season.

9.5 Impact assessment on air quality

9.5.1 Impact during construction and operation phase Geothermal gases will be released during the testing period and the operation of the power station. This includes carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen sulphide (H2S), nitrogen (N2), hydrogen (H2), and methane (CH4). The gas concentration in geothermal power plant emissions can vary over time.

Compared to fossil fuel power plants in terms of carbon dioxide (CO2) and sulphur dioxide (SO2), geothermal power plant emission is very low. In terms of greenhouse gasses, geothermal power plants release carbon dioxide and methane (Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.). Gas emission during drilling is expected to be insignificant except if the drilling hits a gas chamber but that is difficult to predict. In the case of H2S release during drilling the drilling company’s contingency plan will become effective.

Table 9.1 Average Green House Gas emission from different sources of different electricity generation.

57 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Technology gCO2 equivalent /kWh Coal 1,000 Oil 790 Natural Gas 560 Hydroelectric 7 Geothermal 188 Source: (VSO Consulting and Reykjavik Energy, 2008), (Austurbrú, 2016)

It is likely that 1-2% of the uptake will be gas of which 25-30% is H2S and 65 - 70 % is CO2 and 5% other gases, mainly methane and the rest hydrogen and argon.

Hydrogen sulphide (H2S) is a gas with an offensive “rotten eggs” odour that is detectable at very low concentrations, below 8 μg/m3 in air (WHO, 2005). It is formed when sulphides are hydrolyzed in water, like in geothermal conditions. However, the level of hydrogen sulphide found in drinking-water will usually be low, because sulphides are readily oxidized in well aerated water. The concentration in geothermal power station emission varies greatly between sites and even between wells within the same geothermal area. In Reykjanes power plant in Iceland the concentration of H2S in different wells has been measured in the range of 26- 86 mg/kg (Fridriksson & Giroud, 2007). The compound can accumulate in certain areas, tunnels and depressions, which can increase danger to workers at the Project site. The emission of H2S is expected to cause odours in the neighbouring areas during well testing and during operation of the power station. Due to lack of data regarding location of settlement and geothermal wells it is difficult to predict the impact of H2S on the population. However, in open areas wind will disperse the gases, preventing accumulation around the power plant (except in recesses as mentioned above).

According to preliminary data it can be assumed that H2S odour could possibly be detected at some settlements, given that radius around residential area of 500 m which would represent the limit to sense foul smell of H2S (0.3 ppm, 30 sec average) (RWDI, 2009). Hydrogen sulphide concentration of 7 μgr/m3 (0.005 ppm) with a 30-minute averaging period is recommended as a limit for odour (WHO, 2005). It can also be expected that H2S concentration to be higher closer to the source. By drawing an estimated radius of 500 m around present, known settlements – location(s) can be suggested for boreholes and power plant, where such activities will not have an impact. Dust: Vehicles transporting equipment and materials during construction will cause dust clouds, but the affected area will be limited. Impact will be more in dry season with more winds and dryer surface. Individual households may though be affected.

9.5.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase Vehicles transporting materials from demolition site will cause dust clouds, but the affected area will be limited. Dust can also be generated with the demolition of buildings and structures. A plan will be put into place to manage dust from building material that may pose hazard to workers and locals. Impact will be more in dry season with more winds and dryer surface. Individual households may though be affected.

58 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

9.6 Data limitation and uncertainty Composition of gas from drilling and operation will not be clear until exploration drilling is finished. There is however ample data on gas concentration from other geothermal power plants and this data is used as a basis for the impact prediction. Location of geothermal wells has not been decided and thus it is difficult to predict impacts on air quality of settlements with certainty.

9.7 Summary

9.7.1 Impacts during construction and operational phases

Table 9.2 Construction and operational phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measures Residual significance Earthworks Dust from vehicles Moderate Work procedures Minor causing deterioration of plan for minimizing air quality for locals and dust creation. workers. Provide workers with personal protective equipment. Dust from vehicles Minor Schedule civil work causing deterioration of during rainy season air quality for fauna Site clearance Dust from disturbed, Moderate Work procedures Minor de-vegetated surfaces plan for minimizing affects air quality for dust creation. locals and workers. Provide workers with personal protective equipment. Dust from disturbed, Minor Schedule civil work de-vegetated surfaces during rainy season affects air quality for fauna. Transport of Dust rising from truck Moderate Work procedures to Minor materials beds and road affects minimize dust. air quality for humans PPE for workers. and fauna. Schedule work during rainy season Well drilling and Release of geothermal Moderate Concentration of Minor gases can cause risk to testing H2S and other locals, workers and relevant gases will fauna. Especially H2S. be monitored around the power plant. A contingency plan regarding high levels of H2S will be implemented. Geothermal gases Release of geothermal Moderate Concentration of Minor gases can cause risk to exhaust from H2S and other operation relevant gases will be monitored

59 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measures Residual significance locals and fauna. around the power Especially H2S. plant. A contingency plan regarding high levels of H2S will be implemented. Release of green Green house gases Minor house gases contribute to climate changes

Exhausts from drill Emission of combustion Minor rig and vehicles related pollutants can have effect on air quality for locals and workers Emission of combustion Minor Site selection with related pollutants can regard to vulnerable have effect on air species. quality for fauna.

9.7.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase

Table 9.3 Decommissioning phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Demolition of Dust creation from Moderate Plan for preventing Minor buildings building material being dust arising from demolished affects air harmful building quality. material. Personal protective Minor equipment for workers. Earthworks See table Table 9.2

9.8 Conclusion Impacts on air quality are minor after having taken mitigation measures into consideration. Emphasis will be placed on minimizing dust creation and geothermal gas will be monitored during construction and operation. Since location of boreholes is not known it is difficult to predict impacts of geothermal gas, i.e. H2S on local settlement. A preliminary study shows that there is sparsely settlement in the expected Drilling area. Creating a buffer of 500 m around settlements where H2S odour is likely to be detected shows that in some areas there can be predicted that odour is to be detected. This means that wells and Power plant can be located within impact zone and some settlements can be affected. Gas emission will be monitored and a contingency plan regarding high levels of H2S will be implemented.

60 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

10 Noise 10.1 Introduction This chapter aims to describe the baseline noise levels of the Project area and predict the potential impacts the proposed Project will have there on. A definition is given of the affected area and an overview of the appropriate legislation, guidelines and standards. The baseline information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants (Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia, 2019). The environmental noise level measurements were carried out with respect to the ISO 1996, Acoustics – Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise. The impact assessment was carried out by VSO Consulting. The impact assessment is based on the following references (Mannvit, 2010), (Efla, 2009), (Kötter Consulting Engineers, 2008), (VSO Consulting and Reykjavik Energy, 2008), (Efla, 2014).

10.2 Affected areas

• Construction phase: 1,200 m radius around settlement where noise level of 45 dB(A) can be reached i.e. without mitigation measures. • Operation phase: 500 m radius around settlement where noise level of 45 dB(A) can be reached. • Decommissioning phase: Affected area not specified as additional noise from machineries will be within 5 dB(A).

10.3 Legislative framework

10.3.1 National

• The Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia • Environmental Standards for Industrial Pollution Control - Noise • Public Health Proclamation No. 810/2013

10.3.2 International

• IFC PS 4 – Community Health, Safety and Security • IFC PS 6 - Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources. • IFC Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines: 1.7 Noise • IFC Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines: 4.2 Occupational Health and safety and 4.3 Community Health and Safety. • IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability, 4. Community Health, Safety and Security. • IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for Geothermal Power Generation • British Standard 5228 – Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control.

10.4 Baseline description Impact assessment queries and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Information for the ambient noise and vibration at the mentioned sites.

61 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

• Noise map for the Project, around the drilling pads and power station. Showing the decibel levels of noise. • Data on the vibration from the drilling. • Data on possible vibration and noise during construction. • Can noise and vibration have negative impacts on residents in and near the Project area and employees of the Project? • Can noise and vibration disturb wildlife and grazing animals?

10.4.1 Baseline noise survey Sound is a sensory perception and noise corresponds to undesired sound. Noise is present in every human activity, and when assessing its impact on human well-being it is usually classified either as occupational noise (i.e. noise in the workplace), or as environmental noise, which includes noise in all other settings, whether at the community, residential, or domestic level. Environmental noise on exposed population may cause auditory and non-auditory disorders. Such impacts of noise include temporary or permanent hearing loss, sleep disruption, vertigo, agitation, weariness, hypertension, gastrointestinal system problems (including gastric and duodenal ulcer), cardiac arrhythmia, nervous and psychic disorders and so on. Triplicate noise measurement was taken from randomly selected five (5) kebeles during the day time and night time for 48 hrs. Noise levels measured using a calibrated digital sound meter with integral recording Model C.A 834 Sonometer recorder set to the A weighting scale. All sampling points, the sound level meter was placed a distance of about 1.5 m above ground surface. LA (A-weighted instantaneous sound pressure level) measurements were recorded for a period of 30 minutes. This was made three times per day and night from each sampling location.

Figure 10.1 Noise Measurement Sampling points AGPA

62 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Noise measurement was carried out as following:

• 7:00am-10:00am (morning); • 7:00pm-10:00pm (evening); • 11:00am-1:00pm (mid-day); • 11:00pm-1:00am (mid night); • 3:00pm-5:00pm (afternoon); • 10:00 am-12:00 am (dawn).

The following measurements all expressed in dB were recorded:

• Loudest noise (Lmax) peak sound pressure level;

• (Lmin)or base line sound pressure level; and A weighted equivalent continuous level (LAeq) – if one listened to this level of noise constantly for 5 minutes; The ears would be exposed to the same amount of noise as if listened to the varying level of noise recorded in each 5minutes period. After transforming obtained noise level into logarithmic scale day time and night time noise levels compared with the WHO community noise level guideline and IFC practices. The noise level measurements are presented in Table 10.1. The level of noise pollution was evaluated LD is the day time average sound level, LN night time average sound level and Lmax and Lmin stand for the maximum and minimum sound levels detected

Table 10.1 Noise level in selected kebeles Abaya geothermal sites

Site Period of the Noise level (Db(A) GPS points /Kebele day

LMax LMin LAeq LD LN

1 37N0374847

Morning 78 16.5 55 52.21 48.91 0741772

Longena Midday 89 18.7 71

Afternoon 77.3 14.7 55.3

Night 59 21.7 42.7

Mid night 62.7 21.3 39

Early morning 63 27.3 42.7

2 37N 0371225

Morning 88 15.7 63 53.98 52.28 728193

Mareqa Midday 91.7 13 70

Afternoon 89.3 12.3 65.3

Night 87.3 11 55.3

Mid night 83.7 19.7 59.3

Early morning 79 29 50

3 37N0371248

Morning 78 16 43.3 49.09 49.21 0736060

Feracho Midday 82.7 17 51.7

Afternoon 75 18.7 46.7

Night 74.3 14.7 43.7

Mid night 79 13.3 37

Early morning 73 14.3 39.3

63 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

4 37N0374501

Morning 73.3 41 51.7 51.40 50.24 0739048

Kolshebo Midday 79.7 23.3 56

Afternoon 78.3 26.7 56.3

Night 68 21 47.3

Mid night 64.3 23 42.3

Early morning 73 14.3 42.7

5 37N0382452

Morning 84.3 18 63.7 54.12 45.03 0731659

Chewkare Midday 73 16 43.3

Afternoon 75 20 40.3

Night 66.3 18.3 31.7

Mid night 69 12.7 29.7

Early morning 64 16.3 37.3

Source: Green Sober survey team WHO has stipulated 65 dB permissible noises from an industrial area during day and night time. In commercial area it is 60 dB whereas 55 and 45 dB is prescribed for commercial, residential and silence zones respectively. According to the Ethiopian EPA guideline the upper permitted limit standard for noise in Industrial setting is 75 dBA (day) and 70dB (night); for commercial area noise about 65 dB (day) and 55 dB (night); In residential setting upper level of noise is about 55dB (day) and 45dB (night). The main activities identified in the local area that attribute to ambient noise levels are intermittent road traffic and commercial activities within the rural trading centres. Noise level was within the guideline values of WHO and ETH EPA during the day time which is less than 55 dB but the noise level measurement at the night time was somewhat higher than 45 dB. This might be associated with noise from vehicles that are transporting fruits and crops to main market area during night time and measurement has been taken nearby of homes shops, roads as to control the instrument may interfere with recordings. But relatively lower level of noise is expected in the night than the day either in the rural or urban areas. Noise level in the Abaya geothermal study sampling sites was within the guideline limit during the day time while little bit higher the guideline value of noise set by WHO (1999) during night time.

10.5 Impact assessment on noise

10.5.1 Impact during construction phase The Abaya area is rural and background noise level can be considered very low in general (Table 10.1). Therefore, all development in 1,200 m radius can cause an impact without mitigation. Residents, livestock and wildlife are potential receptors of temporary noise and vibration due to development during civil work, drilling and well testing. It is anticipated that construction will take place between 06:00 and 18:00 (natural available light) and include the following activities; Site establishment (site office, stores/material depot, workshops), excavation operations (foundations infrastructure, compaction of sub soil and surface levels, trenches for cabling and piping etc.), general construction activities (concrete mixing, building, steel work, concrete vibration) and

64 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

general vehicle movement (on-site movement, delivery of materials and construction equipment). The equipment likely to be required to complete the above tasks will typically include: grader/bulldozer, a vibratory roller, concrete truck(s), mobile crane and various 4WD and service vehicles. The impact from these construction noises will depend on the type of activities taking place, the number of activities taking place at the same time, type of equipment used. Traffic relating to this construction period is not considered to be an additional noise source of any significance given the already existing traffic in the area. These activities are not expected to give an increase of 5 dB(A) and as such will not exceed the existing guideline values. However, monitoring is encouraged during the construction phase during which the greatest noise increase is expected. Noise levels will be raised temporarily during the preparation, drilling, and testing. The most impact will be the drilling equipment and from testing geothermal wells. Noise distribution is very dependent on surface and landscape. Therefore, the selection of drilling site can have considerable impact on noise levels. There will be minor vibration during drilling and construction, but this also is temporary impact. Operation of the power plant also causes some vibration close to the plant. Noise from drilling is generally in the range of 70-100 dB(A) in 10 m distance from the source, depending on the equipment used. In this case all drilling equipment will fulfill strictest standards regarding noise levels and highest noise levels can be expected to be 92 dB(A) at a 2 m distance. At 80 m distance the noise has dropped to below 70 dB(A). At 600 m distance the sound level is below 45 dB(A). Noise from discharging wells or wells being tested ranges from 70-110 dB(A). This noise level varies e.g. due to different ratio of steam and water. Icelandic measurements show that the noise drops to about 60 dB(A) level at 200 m from the well. At a distance approx. 1,500 m the sound level should have reached 40 dB(A) level. This is assuming flat land without barriers, reasonable max. limits can be estimated at 1,200 m. In reality, noise from the geothermal construction and operation will be lower than reported above. Sound is absorbed by landscape and by all parts of plants such as leaves, branches, twigs and wood. Thus, trees and shrubs produce masking effect (e.g. Fant & Ling 2002, Hellis 2015). Alternatively, trees and shrubs may be used in conjunction with solid barriers to achieve the best of all mitigation scenarios.

10.5.2 Impacts during operational phase The Abaya area is rural and background noise level can be considered very low in general (Table 10.1). Therefore, all development will cause an impact. Residents, livestock and wildlife are potential receptors of noise and vibration due to development during operation. An increase in noise in relation to the baseline conditions is expected during operations. The additional noise sources for geothermal power plant typically include:

• The steam turbine • Pumps (incl. oil pumps, vacuum pumps, hot well pumps and cooling The generator • water pumps) • The droplet separator • Ejectors • The steam strainer • The main condenser • Valves (main and stop valves) • The cooling towers • Transformers

65 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Noise ratings of the plant equipment will have to be considered in assessing likely project impacts. Noise during operation is mainly from cooling towers, power plant and separators. It can be concluded that the noise level from coolers is around 80 dB(A). According to experience from Icelandic geothermal projects, both measurements and noise distribution models, the residential noise limits 45 dB(A) are met within 500 m distance from cooling towers and wells during operational phase. Noise from power plant and separators can be expected to be around 55 dB(A) and the residential noise limits are met at approx. 160 m. As mentioned above this is quite dependent on terrain and surface.

10.5.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase Impacts during decommissioning phase are similar to the ones in the construction phase, without the drilling and testing of wells. Those impacts are temporary.

10.6 Data limitation and uncertainty Distance from noise sources to settlements is not known.

10.7 Summary

10.7.1 Impacts during construction phase

Table 10.2 Construction phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Drilling Increased noise level for Moderate Site selection Minor residents Install a sound barrier Minor between noise source and residential area Risk of hearing loss for Major Personal protection Minor workers equipment and health and safety plan Disturbance for fauna Moderate Site selection and/or Minor sound barriers Well testing Increased noise level for Moderate Silencers put on top Minor residents of wells during testing periods Site selection Minor Install a sound barrier Minor between noise source and residential area Risk of hearing loss for Major Personal protection Minor workers equipment and health and safety plan Noise disturbance for Moderate Site selection and/or Minor wildlife sound barriers Vibration causes Minor Minor, temporary and disturbance for wildlife limited range

66 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Earth works Increased noise level for Moderate Implement policy on Minor and residents machine maintenance construction and speed limits Risk of hearing loss for Moderate Implement policy with Minor workers regard to condition of machineries. Personal protection equipment and health Minor and safety plan Disturbance for fauna Moderate Site selection Minor Sound barriers Minor

10.7.2 Impacts during operation phase

Table 10.3 Operation phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Cooling towers Increased noise level for Major Sound barriers Moderate residents between source of noise and settlement Site selection Minor Risk of hearing loss for Major Personal protection Minor workers equipment and health and safety plan Disturbance for wildlife Major Sound barriers Moderate between source of noise and receptors Site Selection Minor Vibration causes Moderate Site selection disturbance for wildlife Vibration causes Minor disturbance for locals

10.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase

Table 10.4 Decommissioning phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Earth works Increased noise level for Moderate Implement policy Minor and demolition residents regarding condition of machineries. Sound barriers. Minor Risk of hearing loss for Moderate Implement policy Minor workers regarding condition of machineries.

67 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Personal protection Minor equipment and health and safety plan Disturbance for wildlife Moderate Sound barriers Minor Timing of demolition Minor regarding i.e. breeding season

10.8 Conclusion The Project is likely to have minor to moderate impacts on noise having taken mitigation measures into account. The main source of noise is from drilling, well testing and cooling towers. Drilling and well testing is temporary but noise from cooling towers remains through the operation of the power plant. Both people and wildlife can be affected by noise and vibration but mitigation measures in the form of silencers on top of wells, sound barriers and site selection will minimize the impact. Elevated noise levels can cause hearing loss for workers during construction and operation. Emphasis will be placed on personal protection equipment and health and safety plan for personnel.

68 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

11 Water and hydrology 11.1 Introduction This chapter aims to describe the hydrology of the Project area and predict the Project impact on water in the area. The baseline information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants (Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia, 2019). The information gathering entailed both desk study where previous research was reviewed and field work to verify information and fill identified gaps. Impact assessment was done by VSO Consulting.

11.2 Affected areas Definition of affected areas is based on predicted impacts and mitigation measures. Construction and Operation Phase

• The affected area can be defined as the Drilling area itself with the extension to the south where potential water sources are located. Decommissioning Phase

• Impacts during decommissioning phase are limited to the drilling site.

11.3 Legislative framework

11.3.1 National

• Ethiopian Water Resources Management Proclamation No. 197/2000 • Ethiopian Water Resources Management Council of Ministers Regulations No. 115/2005

• Ethiopian Water Resources Management Policy. • Ground and surface water quality criteria adopted from tentative Netherlands criteria and from UK Environment Agency.

• ES 261:2001 Standard for Drinking Water - Specifications

11.3.2 International

• WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality set requirements for drinking-water safety. • IFC Environmental, Health and Safety General Guidelines. • IFC PS 4 – Community Health, Safety and Security

Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Description of the hydrogeology of the Project area. • Identifying the baseline condition of the chemical composition of groundwater and surface water in the Project area. • Potential water sources and to determine the sustainability of the supply. • The quality of the water source in terms of operation standards and that of the drinking water itself. • The amount and chemical compounds of the discharge water.

69 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

• The water source biology and possible impacts on water supply for the Project. • Are there seasonal lakes that form within the Project area? • Identify other users of the lakes and groundwater close to new wells.

11.4 Baseline description Water is a precious natural resource, vital for life, development and the environment. Safe water is a precondition for health and development and a basic human right, yet it is still scarce to hundreds of millions of people throughout the developing world. Water related diseases caused by insufficient safe water supplies coupled with poor sanitation and hygiene cause 3.4 million deaths a year, mostly among children. Not only access but the existing improved sources in developing countries do not provide water of adequate quality for domestic purposes. Hydrologic study for water use is concerned with the development of water resources to meet human needs and with the conservation of the natural life in the environment. As population and economic activity increases, so do the demands for use of water. But these must be balanced against the finite supply provided by nature and the desire to maintain healthy human life, plant and animal life in the environment. Therefore, hydrologic information plays a vital role in managing the balance between supply and demand for water resources and in planning water resources development projects. The major rivers within the Project area are Bilate, Hamessa, Bisare and their tributaries. The general flow direction of the rivers draining to Lake Abaya Basin is from east to west, while those rivers draining to Rift Valley Lakes Basin is from North to South, and they are originating from the high lands and falling to the low lands of the respective basins. The flow of rivers located in the Study area is closely connected to the bi-modal climate having two peaks. The stream flows increasing through June to October, where they reach a maximum (the first peak) mostly in the months of August. When the wet season ceases, the river levels decline, and the flows are smallest from November through to March and then it increases from March to May and the second minor peak flow occurs mostly in May. The major rivers are perennial although some smaller courses dry out in dry months of the year.

11.4.1 Climate The climate of Ethiopia is grouped into three main categories, namely Tropical Rainy Climates (group A), Dry Climates (group B), and Warm Temperate Rainy Climates (group C). These three groups are each sub divided into three or more types making a total of eleven principal climatic types. From climatic classification map of Ethiopia and the climate classification of the region is based on the annual and monthly means of temperature and rainfall. The climate of the Study area falls in to low land (kola) climate zone. The Project site is placed in the low altitude with an elevation of approximately 1180-1800 meters above sea level. In general, the distribution and amount of precipitation varies due to different factors. Among in the country the meteorological data is collected primary by National Meteorological Services Agency (NMSA), under the Ministry of Water Resources. NMSA is the one that install and operate the meteorological stations. Therefore, directly or indirectly, the main source of climatological data is NMSA. Analysis of the data obtained from NMSA SNNP branch (March, 2019) showed inter annual variability in the Study area. The mean annual rainfall of the Study area is 1108.2 mm over 1999 to 2018. In these 20 years’ time duration, the Study area experienced five below average annual rainfall years (drought) with the worst year of 2009 having 397.9

70 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

mm rainfall deficit from the average. For the other 15 years, the Study area had received nearly equal and/or above average rainfall with a maximum of 1337.5 mm in 2008. However, receiving above average rainfall does not necessarily mean that it is uniformly distributed temporally and spatially to satisfy the hydrological requirements of the area (Figure 11.1 & Figure 11.2).

Figure 11.1 Mean annual rainfall and variability

163,6 150,7 154,9

118,1 118,5 114,8

89,0 67,5 53,8 37,0 24,6 15,8

Figure 11.2 Average of monthly total of observed rainfall Analysis of observed rainfall data also showed that the annual rainfall distribution is bimodal with first rainfall starting between February and March, reaching pick in May (monthly total average of 164 mm) but continues with decreasing rate to the next rainy season. The second rainy season starts between June and July, and picks in August (monthly total average of 155mm) and continue till November. As the agricultural system is highly dependent on rainfall the cropping season of the Study area follows these rainfall patterns. The first rainy /cropping season is termed ‘’belg’’ from February /March to May /June and the second is ‘’meher’’ from July /August to November/December.

71 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

11.4.2 Rainfalls and temperature The regional meteorological agency has not been recording most of the climate elements except rainfall in the Study area. Accordingly, analysis of 1998 to 2017 maximum temperature data has shown that the average annual maximum temperature of the Study area varies between 26.8 degree Celsius in 1999 and maximum of 27.8 in 2002, 2009 and 2015. The annual maximum average temperature of the Study area was 27.3 degree Celsius. Analysis of average minimum temperature has shown that it varies between 10.2 degree Celsius in 1999 and 11.9 in 2009 and 2015 and the annual average minimum temperature between 1999 and 2017 was 11.5 degree Celsius (Figure 11.3 & Figure 11.4).

Figure 11.3 20 years average minimum and maximum temperature of the Study area

Figure 11.4 Monthly average maximum and minimum temperature The mean monthly maximum temperature of the Study area analysis has pointed out that the hottest month is February with average of 30 degree Celsius. It increases from 25 degree Celsius in July gradually to maximum in February and then starts declining. The smallest minimum temperature was found in December with 8.1 degree Celsius and then increases gradually till July and then it starts declining. The temperature ranges between maximum and minimum is 11.8 and 20 degree Celsius in July and January respectively.

72 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Potential Evapotranspiration and moisture status The monthly pattern of potential evapotranspiration (CRU) and rainfall (observed data) of the Study area was comparatively analyzed and found that in average the area is receiving rainfall enough to satisfy evapotranspiration requirement for plant/crop growth between April and October which is commonly known cropping seasons (Belg and Meher) of the Study area. Between October and March, the Study area is suffering from deficit of moisture to satisfy the required evapotranspiration. The maximum evapotranspiration requirement is in March which is about 111.4 mm per month and the minimum is in July 52.3 mm per month. Yearly total of potential evapotranspiration (Climatic Research Unit) and rainfall (Observed) data showed that years 1999, 2004, 2009, 2015 and 2016 were found to be deficient in moisture since the total annual rainfall amount was significantly below the potential evapotranspiration. The greater moisture differences were figured out in 1999, 2004 and 2009. It can be concluded that these years are drought years of the Study area (Figure 11.5 & Figure 11.6).

Figure 11.5 20 years average rainfall and potential evapotranspiration

Figure 11.6 Monthly rain falls and potential evapotranspiration of the Study area

73 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

11.4.3 Drainage patterns in the Project area Due to anthropogenic activities the land surface has been modified enormously in the recent years. The surface covered by vegetation like forests and agriculture traps and holds water in the root zone of plants, whereas the built-up and rocky land use affects the recharge of groundwater by increasing runoff during the rain, so it is necessary to study what kind of features are coverings the Study area’s land surface. The supervised classification method has been used with level – I classification. The result of the study found the Study area covered by six different classes such as agricultural land, forest, built-up, water body, wetland and others. The weight assigned based on water logging and runoff properties of LU/LC. For this study 15 percent weightage was used for LU/LC. The density of drainage is one of the factors which play the major role in Potential Groundwater Zoning (PGZ). The water runoff will be high if the density of drainage is high so the infiltration of water into ground would be less, whereas, low drainage density area’s surface-water runoff will be less so the infiltration of surface water into the ground will be high. For the present study the stream data has been created from the aster DEM and this data have been compared with the stream data which collected from department of mines and geology. The corrected streams data have been used to find out the drainage density of Study area. Fifteen percentage of weightage was considered for this study. Thematic maps of each of the above six controlling factors have been prepared using GIS technique from ASTER DEM, land use land cover from Ortho photo imagery, and the lineaments and geological data obtained from Ethiopian Geological Survey, to be utilized as layers and relationship of each layer to the ground water regime has been evaluated through detailed analysis of the individual hydrological parameters. The accurate information to obtain the parameters that can be considered for identifying the ground water potential zone are generated using a satellite data and survey of the Abaya geothermal area Topo Sheets. These are then integrated with weighted overlay in ArcGIS. Suitable ranks are then assigned for each category of these parameters. Further, for the various geomorphic units, weight factors are decided based on their capability to store ground water. The weighted overlay table allows the calculation of a multiple-criteria analysis between several rasters with respected weight Table (3).

Table 11.1 Weighted overlay analysis Parameters Weight (%)

Geomorphology 30

Slope class 20

Drainage density 15

Liniment density (KM2) 15

Land use and land cover 15

Geology 5

This procedure is repeated for all the other layers and resultant layers are reclassified. Accordingly, a ground water potential zoning map shown in (Figure 11.7) has been produced. The map produced includes all the parameters through the weightage assigned to them. The ground water potential zoning map so produced is classified into five categories. These are: Very poor, Poor, Moderate, Good and Very good.

74 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 11.7 Map of the Potential Groundwater Zoning Areas around Abela Mareka, Abela Gifata, Abaya Chokare, Abela Faracho and small part of Hobicha Bongota and Abela Longena, Abela Mareka, Abela Gifata and have a very good and good ground water potential. From geological point of view, these areas are mostly associated with basalt lavas and reddish brown basaltic scoria and the lacustrine deposits (lake deposits such as poorly sorted gravel, sand, pumice, tuffs and volcanic sand) which are very good ground water aquifers. The overall areal extent of these zone amounts 9452.3 hectares or 58.9 percent. The hilly areas around Hobicha Bongota, Abela Longena, Abela Kolshiabo, and Abela Gifata, have very poor and poor ground water potential. These are mostly hilly areas which are recharge zones to the potential ground water aquifers. The overall areal extent of these zone amounts 1728.5 hectares or 10.8 percent. Whereas, areas around Abela Mareka, Abaya Chokare, Abela Gifata, Hobicha Bongota and Abela Kolshobo have moderate ground water potential. The overall areal extent of these zone amounts 4867.9 hectares or 30.3 percent. The actual depth to the ground water and the extent of extraction however should be determined by further geo physical investigation. The source of recharge to the groundwater could be different. Rainfall and channel lose are the main sources of recharge of the Project area. The ultimate source of groundwater recharge in the area is rainfall. The rainfall from the Gamo and Wolyita highlands are the main source of groundwater recharge. This is also evident from the existence of high discharge springs in the rift floor. The typical example is the high discharge springs along the western and eastern escarpment and within the rift (Lekemse, Kote Genet and Abaya hot springs). The plain areas around Lake Abaya likely are productive aquifer systems. This is because of the highland rainfall that comes in the subsurface and in few cases as flash floods.

75 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

The perennial rivers that originate from the highlands may possibly recharge the shallow groundwater systems. In this regard systematic measurement has to be made to know the groundwater recharge from channel losses. It is visually observed that the topography of the Project areas under consideration concession are characterized by flat -laying plains i.e., moderately plain areas except few ups and downs at the periphery of the kebeles. Topography at high land areas, however, is characterized by relatively undulating land features associated with several ups and downs. Generally, the Project area is located in the Ethiopian rift floor close to the Lake Abaya. The elevation of the Project area decreases towards the east and south. In much of the Project area the topography is flat. The Gamo (Wolayita) Highland is characterized by high rainfall. The high rainfall in the highlands often causes flash flood in the rift floor. The major ground water recharge to the Project area comes from the highlands. It is very likely that Lake Abaya could also play important role in recharging the rift floor groundwater system in the Project area. A closed drainage system exists within the Study area, with Hamessa River and its tributaries draining the western part of the Study area finally drain into Lake Abaya. The central and Northern part of the study area is drained by Bilate River and its tributaries such as Bisare and Derba while Gidabo and Gelana Rivers drain the southeastern part of the Study area to end up into the Lake. The drainage area of the Abaya geothermal study area falls within the two main rivers Bilate and Hamessa. River Hamessa covers the largest water shade of the Study area. The discharge rate of Hamessa River is 74 l/second. Zigere stream is the main tributary for Hamessa River. Bilate River is one of the main rivers in the Study area which has a discharge rate of 151 l/second. It covers the second largest water shade in the Study area next to Hamessa River. The main tributary for the river Bilate in the study area is Bisare stream. Both Bilate and Hamessa rivers drain in to Lake Abaya (Figure 11.8).

Figure 11.8 Drainage pattern of the Abaya geothermal Study area

76 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

11.4.4 Water resources and water quality The area is endowed with both surface and groundwater resources. The different streams and rivers draining the area are important sources of water for fauna and flora of the area. There are four main rivers, namely Hamessa, Bilate, Bisare and Zigere, which can be mentioned at this point. The weathered and fractured volcanic rocks are important sources of groundwater in the Project area. Several springs and seepages emerging from fractures and water table contacts show the availability of groundwater at shallow depths. The alluvial deposits also are found to have significant groundwater potential as observed from the boreholes drilled in the area. The water demand for both domestic water supply, hydropower and, irrigation and currently like geothermal is rising at an ever-increasing rate. Water resources therefore should get more attention, and wherever feasible should be developed for intended purpose. The estimation of surface water availability in each Project kebeles of the Study area has been carried out. There are two main rivers in the Abaya geothermal study area that drain to Lake Abaya. These are river Bilate and Hamessa. River Hamessa is found in Abela kebeles while Bilate is found nearby of Chokare kebele. Besides these there are two tributaries. Zigere is stream is found at Longena kebele and it is a tributary for Hamessa while Bisare stream is a tributary of Bilate found near Obicha kebeles (Figure 11.9, Figure 11.10, Figure 11.11).

Figure 11.9 Zigre River at Abela Qolshebo and Longena

Figure 11.10 Hamessa River at Abela Mareqa kebele

77 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 11.11 Water diversion head work at Hamessa River Mareqa kebele Hot springs are unique water bodies in their mineral content and usually have water temperature above the mean annual air temperature. They are found mainly in two kebeles of Abela Mareqa and Chokare. Specifically, Chokare kebele is endowed with numerous hot springs and wetlands. Bilbo hot springs are found around the wetland along the way to Abaya Chawukare Kebele and are emerging from the fault lines located at the southern edge of Abala Gifata Kebele. Their average discharge rate is estimated to be 7.5 l/sec in dry season.

Figure 11.12 Bilbo hot springs at Chokare kebele Hamessa hot springs are located 500 meters away from Hamessa River Bridge along the Wolayita Sodo-Arba Minch road (Figure 11.13). It emerges from the riverbed and out of the contact surface between the Tertiary ignimbrites and the Quaternary Basalts. The local community confirmed that it is the largest hot spring in the Study area.

Figure 11.13 Hot Spring at Hamessa River Gorge Abala Mareq Kebele

78 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Lake Abaya is the largest lake in the rift valley. The major rivers which drain to Lake Abaya are Rivers like Bilate, Gidabo, Gelana, Basso, Hare and Wagifo. A portion of the lake borders kebeles of Abelea Mareka and Chokare. Although at regional scale the lake is fed by the rivers and groundwater, locally the groundwater could be also recharged by the lake. In the geothermal Project and community area the lake water is very important source of recharge if wells are sank and pumped. Technically pumping a well close to the lake is the same as taking the lake water. However, the lake water will be naturally filtered while recharging wells.

11.4.5 Water Quality An increasing number of water sources and systems used by people for drinking and cooking water are not adequately protected from fecal contamination. This is due to a variety of factors, including leakage of water distribution line, unsanitary way of protecting spring waters, inadequate construction, and low level of disinfection coupled with poor maintenance, operation and monitoring activities towards potable water lines may contribute their own share for the poor microbial quality of water in the area. In certain instances, sometimes fully protected sources and well-managed systems may not guarantee that safe water is delivered to households.

79 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 11.14 Microbial water sampling points at AGPA Reliable household water connection is not feasible in rural area as result water might be contaminated from the source, during transportation and storage. Safe sources are important to the community together with improved hygiene, better water storage and handling, improved sanitation and in some cases, household water treatment, that the quality of water consumed by people can be assured. See further details on water quality analyses in annex X. In the Study area there is a potential for potable water that can be developed for the community. Sources like ground as well as spring water are available in the area but the water potential and developed schemes are not utilized at the required level and extent to the community. Potable water shortage or access for it is serious problem observed in each studied kebeles and are using unprotected water sources like rivers, fluoride rich hot springs and ground water as an alternative. The existing protected springs have got good microbial quality from the source but the quality deteriorates in the water distribution system and at point of use. Public tap-water points and household containers have been contaminated with total and fecal coliforms. Risky and unsanitary water distribution scheme has been observed from the source to point of use. With respect to the chemical quality of water in the hot springs and ground water sources that have been developed as a source of potable water to the community has got higher level of fluoride level. The fluoride level is much more and far from 1.5 mg/l what is set as a guideline for drinking water by WHO or Ethiopian standard agency. Since fluoride has been associated with health risk to humans these needs attention. An elevated fluoride intake in humans can cause adverse changes in bone structure like crippling skeletal fluorosis or skeletal fluorosis. Alternative drinking water sources should have to be developed. To maintain the quality of potable water public awareness of hygiene and sanitary condition has to be given side by side with development of drinking water supply.

80 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

As a remark most of the areas required a new potable water supply together with the existing one.

11.4.6 Ground water flow Geology is one of the major factors which play an important role in the distribution and occurrence of groundwater. The study area is generally formed by ingenious rocks (tertiary volcanic rocks). The major rocks found in Study area are Pleistocene basalt, Lacustrine sediments, Silts, Clays, Diatomites, Volcano Clastics sediments and Tuffs. The weightage for factor was 5 percent. The occurrence and movement of groundwater is highly influenced by the hydrogeologic characteristic of the underlying different rock types in the given area. The storage capacity and transmissivity of the water bearing formation are the main hydrogeologic features to be investigated during groundwater development process. These features are also dependent on the porosity and permeability of the formation. A good aquifer is one that has large storage capacity and high transmissivity. In the Project area, the volcanic rocks (i.e. basalts, ignimbrites and trachytes) have extensive aquifers with fracture permeability and have moderate to high productivity. This is observed from the boreholes drilled in the area. There are also several springs with various yields and physico-chemical characteristics emerging from deep fractures. Examples are the Abaya hot spring and Bilbo hot spring emerging from a deep-seated fracture of the volcanic rocks. The alluvial and lacustrine deposits are also important sources of groundwater at shallow depths. The shallow depth borehole (BH) found in the Abala Maraka kebele is good example of such deposits. These wells are drilled in the alluvial deposits composed of clay and sandy soil mixed with pebbles and cobbles. Most springs in the Study area emerge from hill foots made up of different lithologic units of varying mode of deposition, mainly of rhyolites and acidic pyroclastic deposits. The same magma source probably gave rise to alternating sequences of volcanic products, which gave rise to alternating layers of lava flows and pyroclastic deposits. As can be seen from the hydro geological map of the Project area (Figure 11.15) the dominant geological structures are Pleistocene basalt, Lacustrine sediments, Silts, Clays, Diatomites, Volcano Clastics sediments and Tuffs. These are associated with geologic units having high porosity which are expected to be excellent ground water aquifers. The areal extent of these formations within the potential Project area is estimated to be 15,410 hectares. Accordingly, parts of the kebeles included within these hydrogeological formations are Abela Mareka, Abela Faracho, Abela Giffata, Abela Qolshiabo, Buqe Dongola, Abela Longena. The other hydro geological structures in the potential area are Nazerate group and Dino formation. These are associated with lithographic units having moderate porosity which are relatively good aquifers. The areal extent of these formations in the potential Project zone is estimated to be 966.15 hectares. The kebele mainly included in this formation is Hobicha Bongota. (Waikar M.L and Nilawar A.P 2014; Sumit Das 2019).

81 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 11.15 Hydrogeological Map of the Project Area 11.4.7 Natural hazards and extreme events: In AGPA the main natural hazard observed was drought. Analysis of the 20 years rainfall data obtained from NMSA SNNP branch showed that in the Study area there is an indication of drought recurrences within six or less years. During the survey there was lack of sufficient meteorological and other hazard data for detail analysis. Further study and meteorological data analysis is required to conclude the existence of natural hazards and extreme events in the Project area using sufficient meteorological and other natural hazard data.

11.5 Impact assessment on water and hydrology

11.5.1 Impact during construction phase The main potential impacts on water during construction phase are:

• Disruption of seasonal waterways /run-offs due to structures that come with the Project or compaction of soils and vegetable clearance.

• Surface water pollution due to accidental spillage or poor water management and discharge of waste water /sewage on site.

• Water consumption of workers and construction competes with that of locals. • Discharge of drilling fluids and /or geothermal fluid from testing of wells pollutes surface and/or ground water. Care will be taken to adjust design and landscaping as to minimize the disruption of seasonal waterflow. Cooling water for drilling will be obtained from boreholes in vicinity of the Drilling area and will not compete with drinking water of locals as there are no drinking water sources in

82 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

that area. Drinking water for the Project will be obtained from sources that comply with drinking water standards. RG recognizes that water is scarce in the area and care will be taken as to use water in a sustainable and responsible way and in accordance with standards and guidelines. The IFC EHS guidelines 1.4 Water Conservation include water monitoring and management and setting of targets for water use. The also address process water reuse and recycling and possible interventions for building facility operations, cooling and heating systems. Drilling of geothermal holes and testing of wells entails the discharge of geothermal effluent. It contains dissolved minerals of which concentration can be considerably higher than in water at lower temperatures. To minimize the risk of water pollution, the Project owner will adhere to the Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Thermal Power Plants developed by the World Bank shown in Table 15.2. Geothermal effluent from well testing and drilling will be directed to infiltration ponds and /or shallow wells that will be installed close to the drill sites. The fluid is led through a basin where most of the drill cuttings and other sediment will settle. The waste fluid is disposed of in shallow well open fissures or disposed at another authorized designated site. Groundwater levels in the Project area are approximately x m under the surface. Since drilling and well testing are temporary measures and harmful substances will filtrate trough lava layers before reaching groundwater there is not a risk of groundwater pollution. The IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for geothermal power generation, effluent monitoring guidelines recognize that effluents should meet site-specific discharge levels for surface water as discussed in the General EHS Guidelines (

Table 15.2 and Table 15.3).

11.5.2 Impacts during operational phase The main potential impact on water during construction phase is similar to those during construction phase:

• Disruption of seasonal waterways/run-offs due to structures that come with the project or compaction of soils and vegetable clearance.

• Surface water pollution due to accidental spillage or poor water management and discharge of waste water/sewage on site.

• Water consumption competes with that of locals. • Discharge of geothermal fluid from power plant pollutes surface and/or ground water. For discussion of impacts see chapter 11.5.1. During operation geothermal fluid will be injected into the ground, below ground water as to avoid ground water pollution. Environmental and Social Management System will be implemented. Emphasis will be put upon good household standards in order to avoid accidental spillages. Wastewater and sewage will be treated according to law and regulation and not disposed of untreated to waterbodies or groundwater.

11.5.3 Impacts in decommissioning phase The main potential impacts on water during decommissioning phase are:

• Surface water pollution due to accidental spillage from machineries.

83 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

• Water pollution due to remaining chemicals after closing of power plant. Good site management can prevent pollution from machineries. In order to minimize pollution risk from abandoned power plant it is possible to require that all chemicals be removed before abandonment or that the decommissioning party is carefully informed of the location of possible chemicals and their hazards before starting of decommissioning. Carefully prepared dismantling of the power plant and proper handling of waste is essential in preventing water pollution.

11.6 Data limitation and uncertainty

11.7 Summary

11.7.1 Impacts during construction phase

Table 11.2 Construction phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Building of well Compacting of ground Moderate Adjust design and Minor pads and roads and clearing of site leads landscaping to to flooding of farmland or minimize the surface water becomes disruption of seasonal polluted after flooding. waterflow. Well testing Geothermal effluent Major Effluent is directed to Insignificant causes surface water infiltration ponds and pollution. not released untreated into the environment. Geothermal effluent Major Bedrock layers filtrate Insignificant causes groundwater substances from pollution. effluent before reaching groundwater. Spillages or overflow Moderate Infiltration ponds and Insignificant cause water pollution. basins will be monitored for effluent level. Cooling water Obtainable water for Major Different water Insignificant and drinking locals will diminish due to sources will be used water the water use of the than that of the harvesting Project. locals.

Water monitoring and Insignificant management, setting of targets for water use according to IFC EHS guidelines 1.4

Disposal of Surface water polluted Major Adhere to IFC and sewage due to sewage disposal national standards. from work camps.

84 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

11.7.2 Impacts during operation phase

Table 11.3 Operation phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Geothermal Pollution of surface or Major Effluent is injected Insignificant effluent ground water. into bedrock, below discharge groundwater. Spillage of oil Pollution of surface or Moderate Establish good Insignificant or other ground water. householding chemicals practices. Moderate Establish Insignificant Environmental and Social Management System.

11.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase

Table 11.4 Decommissioning phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Earth works Disposal of waste water Moderate Good site Insignificant and or chemical spillage to management plan. construction surface pollutes surface water

11.8 Conclusion Impact on water and hydrology is likely to be insignificant to minor. Care will be taken to adjust design and landscaping as to minimize disruption of seasonal waterflow, if any. Geothermal fluid will be directed to infiltration ponds during construction and then injected to the bedrock below groundwater during operation phase. Ground water is already geothermal influenced, but it is not likely that the Project will add to that influence. Different water sources will be used than that of the locals and thus the Project will not have impact on drinking water availability of the local community.

85 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

12 Geology and soils 12.1 Introduction This chapter aims to describe the baseline geology and soils of the Project area and predict the potential impacts the proposed project will have there on. A definition is given of the affected area and an overview of the appropriate legislation, guidelines and standards. The baseline information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants (Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia, 2019). The impact assessment was done by VSO Consulting.

12.2 Affected areas Potential impacts to surface and sub-surface geology and soils are most likely to occur at the Drilling area but a baseline survey for the Project area is needed to understand and map geological formations and processes that extend beyond the Drilling area. Thus, the baseline of the Project area is also discussed. 12.3 Legislative framework

12.3.1 National

• Mining Operations Proclamation No.678/2010 • Mining Operations Council of Ministers Regulations No. 182/1994 • EPA draft guidelines for EIA for Mineral and petroleum operation projects, 2003. Soil quality criteria.

12.3.2 International

• African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources • United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCDD) • IFC PS 8 – Cultural Heritage • World Bank Operational Policy 4.01 • IFC EHS Guidelines: Construction and Decommissioning • IFC EHS Guidelines: Emergency Preparedness and Response

12.4 Baseline description Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• The appearance of geysers, hot springs and other important geological formation in the Project area. • The possible long-term impacts on geothermal activity on the surface. • The direct surface disturbance to important geological formations. The Project area is located in what is known as the Main Ethiopian rift (MER) system that extends from the catchment of Lake Chamo up to the southern Afar (Metehara area). This region characterized by typical rift floor bounded by the east and west by prominent high lands and escarpment with large regional faults. The floor of the rift is occupied by many lakes separated by volcanic depressions and hills. Lake Abaya is the largest fresh water lake in the rift valley occupying the floor of the rift. The ground water is expected to be fresh in the area. Regional ground water flow direction in the Study area is to the

86 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

southwest following Bilate River which is the major river draining into the lake and parallel to the major NNE-SSW structural fabric of the rift which provides secondary permeability. In the Project area three physiographic regions can be identified. These are the rift floor, escarpment and highlands. The rift floor and highlands are separated by distinct parallel and sub parallel normal faults in places with steep faults /scraps. Within the rift such faults are also present. The geothermal Project is localized in the rift floor, during the Quaternary period the extensional axis of the MER became the locus of volcanic activity with bimodal basalt –rhyolite extrusion in the rift floor. It is evident that shallow crustal magma chambers feeding felsic volcanic complexes such as Duguna Fango, Saluwua Dere - Hako, Chericho, Kilisa and Donga provide the heat for the hydrothermal system which reside in Pliocene volcanic formations and are capped by Quaternary lacustrine and volcanoclastic sediments. There are number of volcanic centers namely Obitcha, Chericho, Kilisa, Donga, Salwa, Dore and Hako which indicates the presence of shallow magma chamber which provide the heat for the hydrothermal system. Hydrothermal manifestations are concentrated around NW of Lake Abaya, around the Bilate tobacco plantation, Bolocho and Salwa Dore. Hot springs are unique water bodies in their mineral content and usually have water temperature above the mean annual air temperature. They are found mainly in two kebeles of Abela Mareqa and Chokare. Specifically, Chokare kebele is endowed with numerous hot springs and wetlands.

12.4.1 Geology The general geology of the Abaya geothermal Project area is mainly composed of Teritiary volcanic rocks. These are the Pleistocene Basalts, Nazreth Group and Dino Formation, Rhyolitic & Ignimbrite lava flows, Aphyric and porphyritic basalt with lesser vesicular basalt, minor alkali trachyte flows & tuffs, and lacustrine volcano clastic sediments and tuffs. Pleistocene basalt (Qwbp) This is the highly abundant Lithographic unit in the Project area. It is found exposed on the very north of Lake Abaya stretching along most of the Project kebeles. It covers

12212.4 ha of the Project area. When it is weathered it shows light gray to brownish gray color. Most of the exposures make cliffs having a sharp contact with the Lacustrine, volcano clastic sediments and tuff units. It is coarse grained when containing plagioclases and olivine crystals. The petrographic study shows very coarse texture with plagioclase mineral 40%, 10% olivine, 30% opaque minerals. Aphyric & porphyritic basalt with lesser vesicular basalt, minor alkali trachyte flows and tuffs (Tv2) This geologic unit stretches along the north west of Lake Abaya bordering Abaya Mareka kebele and covers 1471 ha area (Figure 12.1). It consists of Aphyric basalt which is black and slightly weathered when exposed on the top of the small hills. The porphyritic basalt is olivine-pyroxene phyric which has a fresh dark gray color and shows slight to medium weathering. When weathered it shows light gray to light brown color. The lesser vesicular basalt is a brown colored medium to highly weathered and it forms cliffs. In general, this geologic unit contains olivine pyroxene phyric basalt, pyroxene phyric basalt, olivine pyroxene plageoclase phyric basalt and aphyric basalt.

87 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 12.1 Geological map of the Project area Nazreth Group and Dino Formation (Tig1) This formation is found exposed on the North West part of the Project area specially in Abela Longena and Abela Kolshabo kebeles. It covers an approximate area of 814.6 ha. It contains different types of lithographic units such as Ignimbrites, Rhyolites, Basalts, and Tuffs. These different types of units are the upper Miocene exposures controlled by some primary structures which have a trend of North East dip. The lithic fresh Ignimbrite shows light gray to gray color and light brown color when weathered. Most of it contains rhyolitic and trachytic rock fragments with fine and compacted ground mass. The fresh rhyolite shows pink color, medium to coarse grains and slight to high weathering. Some of the basalt are slightly weathered porphyritic textured consisting of olivine, pyroxene and plagioclase; the Aphyric one shows dark gray color, slightly weathered and most of the time it makes small hills. Rhyolitic and Ignimbrite lava flows (Qwa) It is found exposed on the northern and north eastern parts of Lake Abaya. It covers Mountainous areas of Abela Longena kebele on the very North West corner of the Project area and small part of Abaya Chokare and Buke Dongela kebeles. It is found intercalated with the Nazreth series. The rhyolite is medium to highly weathered and makes large hills having pink color, high friability and in some parts, it is difficult even to take a sample from the unit. Quartz and feldspar crystals could be seen by hand specimen and sometimes by naked eye. This unit covers an approximate area of 433.3 ha within the Project area. The fresh samples of the ignimbrite thin section had been studied and it shows 40% quartz, 10% opaque, 5% plagioclase (coarse), 50% plagioclase (fine) and 10% volcanic glass.

88 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Lacustrine, volcano clastic sediments and tuffs (Qvs) This lithological unit is found exposed on Abaya Chokare, Hobicha Borkoshe, and Hobicha Bada areas. The areal extent of this lithographic unit within the Project area is approximately 887.8 ha. Most of the lacustrine sediments and the volcano clastic sediments are light yellow colored with medium grain size. The exposure making a sharp contact with Pleistocene basalt (Qwbp) is observed exposed on north of Lake Abaya. The rock units include aphyric basalts, scoraceous basalts, ignimbrites, unwelded tuffs, volcano clastic sediments and lacustrine sediments. The dominant exposures are volcano sediments and tuffs. The volcano clastic sediments show light gray color and are friable and thick. The exposure is best seen along the road.

12.4.2 Slope Slope of the Study area varies between 0 and more than 10 degrees. Areas of slopes greater than 10 degree are analyzed to be 3717 ha. Level and gentle level areas with slopes between 0 and 1 degree are 2186 ha. Moreover, areas that have slope degree that range 1 to 3 is about 2839 ha and from 3 to 5 degrees are about 2247 ha with the remaining 5382 ha that ranges between 5 to10 degrees (Figure 12.2).

Figure 12.2 Slope map of the Study area Geomorphology is a study of earth structures and also depicts the various landforms relating to the ground water potential zones and also structural features. Geomorphology of an area depends upon the structural evolution of geological formation. The Study area comprises the features Pediment, Pediment Inselbergs complex, and most of the area covered with Pedi plain followed by hills, settlement, rivers /stream and reservoirs (Figure 12.3).

89 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 12.3 Geomorphology of the Study area

12.4.3 Soils The area has a thick soil cover derived from the volcanogenic lacustrine and alluvial sediments and less extensive brown soils has developed from the older basic volcanic. Soil erosion is a significant problem creating deep gullies. The soils are divided into vitric anlosol, chromic vertisol and eutric nitrosols according the information obtained from the Ministry of Agriculture. Majority of the soil class of the study area is chromic vertisols which covers 46 percent of the area. Next to chromic vertisols, vitric andosols coverd 34 percent and eutricnitisols 12 percent. Eutricfluvisols and leptosols cover 1 percent each. In this FAO soil classification, 6 percent of the area is not defined may be due to lack of adequate data. Farm lands in the Study area are dominantly fell under chromic vertisols 15,368 ha (64%) and vitric andosols 11,366 (65%). Concerning other land covers 2081 ha (9%) and 4922 ha (28%) of chromic vertisols is covered by bushs, and 2451 (10%) chromic vertisols and 3304 (52%) of eutricnitisols are covered by shrubs (Figure 12.4).

90 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 12.4 Soil Map of the Study area 12.5 Impact assessment on Geology and soils

12.5.1 Impact in construction phase There is a risk of soil erosion with surface water runoff or wind erosion following surface clearance prior to construction. The soil is very fine grained and susceptible to erosion. In order to mitigate these impacts designs of drains and channels will be made with resistance to flood erosions. Surface that is sensitive to wind erosion will be covered and areas revegetated as soon as possible. In the case of decreased slope stability cuts and slopes will be stabilized with walls and structures as well as minimizing the steepness of slope. The Project may possibly cause the direct disruption of geological phenomenon or formations with conservation value. The Project area is characterized by geological formations which may be rare in surrounding areas even on national basis. Emphasis will be put on avoiding formations of conservation value in the site selection process. By using directional drilling, it gives the possibility to select drilling site which causes minimum disruption of geological or other natural phenomenon.

12.5.2 Impacts in operational phase Extraction from the geothermal reservoir can affect fumaroles and hot springs on the surface. If groundwater levels lower, these phenomena may decrease in activity. Also, the development of a steam cap as a result of extraction can increase the activity in fumaroles and hot springs. This would be considered as an adverse impact.

12.5.3 Impacts in decommissioning phase No significant impacts on geology during decommissioning.

91 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

12.6 Data limitation and uncertainty Exact location of well-pads with regard to geological formations of conservation value is not known.

12.7 Summary

12.7.1 Impacts during construction phase

Table 12.1 Construction phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Surface clearance Risk of soil erosion with Moderate Design of drains Minor surface water runoff or and channels made wind erosion with regard to resistance of flood erosions. Design drainage system that takes possible floods into account.

Surface sensitive to Minor wind erosion will be covered. Revegetate areas Minor as soon as possible. Decreased slope Minor Cuts and slopes Insignificant stability stabilized with walls and structures. Minimize Insignificant steepness of slope. Earthworks and Disturbance of sensitive Major Site selection to Minor construction or valuable geological avoid disturbance. formations such as surface manifestations e.g. hot springs

12.7.2 Impacts during operation phase

Table 12.2 Operation phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation Residual significance measure Resource Increased or decreased Major Monitor Moderate extraction surface manifestation. sustainability of resource extraction.

92 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

12.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase

Table 12.3 Decommissioning phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation Residual significance measure No significant impact on geology

12.8 Conclusion The Project is likely to have insignificant to moderate effects on geology and soils, having taken mitigation measures into account. The main impact would be the removal of or disturbance of sensitive or valuable geological formations such as surface manifestations /hot springs. Surface clearance can also have adverse impacts on soils and soil erosion. Mitigation methods involve limiting areas of disturbance, to design drains and channels to resist floods. Also, to stabilize cuts and slopes with walls and structures and re-vegetate areas to stabilize slopes.

93 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

13 Landscape and visual impacts 13.1 Introduction The following chapter aims to describe the landscape character of the Project and Drilling area and describe how the Project is likely to impact on the landscape and visual amenities. The baseline information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants (Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia, 2019) and the description of the landscape within proposed Drilling area was made by VSO Consulting. Various maps, aerial photographs and other resources were consulted during the impact assessment.

13.2 Affected areas Affected areas are the Project area on one hand and Drilling area with 5 km visibility buffer on the other hand.

13.3 Legislative framework

• IFC PS 8 – Cultural Heritage • World Bank Operational Policy 4.01 Environmental Assessment

13.4 Baseline description Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Does the landscape at and near the Project area have special characteristics? • Project area will be presented on photographs, showing the Project sites before and after development.

13.4.1 Landscape character The area has mainly plain topography with an interesting visual look covered by diverse type of arid vegetation that includes mainly shrubs and trees. The area is bounded to the west by the western escarpment of the Main Ethiopian Rift (MER) which forms a series of normal faults from an elevation of about 2000 m.a.s.l. on the west to 1170 m.a.s.l. at the level of Lake Abaya to the east. Lake Abaya area is characterized by a tectonic graben, where all rivers and streams of the surrounding area draining the plateau to the east. The landscape lies between South of Damota Mountain and East of Gamo highlands that decrease in altitude towards Lake Abaya. Within this landscape there are plain lands, forests, grasslands, gorges, hot springs, rivers, wetland, lake, scattered settlements, agricultural lands and others. Figure 13.1 shows the landscape of the area.

94 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 13.1 Partial view of the study area Road infrastructure constitutes a small component of the landscape character in the Project area as their construction results in the introduction of alien elements into the existing landscape. Distribution of road network within the area is limited and near all the roads are of graded gravel. No towns are located within the Project area but rural settlements are scattered within the landscape. Any Project related landscape impacts (e.g. new roads, well pads and associated drilling rigs) are expected to be minimal, only concentrated within small portions of the Study area with exception of plumes from escaping geothermal steam which may be projected vertically to heights higher than existing hills and be noticeable from long distances depending on the prevailing atmospheric conditions.

95 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Baseline of landscape within Drilling area The landscape character of the proposed Drilling area can be divided into three main categories: 1. Regions characterized by scattered settlements and farmlands 2. Shrubland landcover 3. Landscape characterized by faults and graben margins

Figure 13.2 Landscape character type 1 within the proposed Drilling area. Farmlands, mostly located in the southern part of the Project area, and scattered settlements (image source: Google Earth).

96 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 13.3 Landscape character type 2 within the proposed Drilling area. Shrub lands cover the hills in the western and northwestern part of the Project area (image source: Google Earth).

Figure 13.4 Landscape character type 3 within the proposed Drilling area. Graben margins and faults, generally in NS direction, characterize the majority of the area and beyond. (image source: Google Earth).

97 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

13.5 Impact assessment

13.5.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase Bringing a geothermal power plant into the landscape will unavoidably change the visual aspects of the area although landscape forms will not be altered. The building of access roads, well pads, pipelines and power station can affect the landscape by changing its character and change visual aesthetics. Steam coming from temporary testing of wells, steam stacks and cooling tower can rise high and can be expected to be seen as far as 5 km distance or more, depending on weather conditions. Temporary drilling rigs can rise a few meters and be visible and be contrasting in the landscape. Geothermal power plants are known to be of interest to tourists, for example in Iceland and one can expect that the plant itself will be of attraction in an area with few tourist sites. This could lead to indirect job creation in the area. In general, the structures and steam related to the power plant can be seen from nearby settlements. Well pads and their borehole structures can be designed as to be low key in the landscape.

13.5.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase Demolition will be planned so it will be continuous and surface finish will not leave signs of abandoned power plant. Surface will be levelled and revegetated as applicable.

13.6 Data limitation and uncertainty Location and design of structures is not known and thus is it difficult to predict visual impacts on the locals and passersby. Hence it was not possible to present the Project area on photographs, showing the Project sites before and after development.

13.7 Summary

13.7.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase

13.7.2 Impacts during construction and operation phase

Table 13.1 Construction and operation phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Building of Change landscape Moderate Site selection and Minor structures character and visual design of structures aesthetics that aim to blend in with the landscape. Steam plumes Steam plumes will Minor There are already from wells be visible from afar. plumes present Steam plumes Steam plumes will Moderate power plant be visible from afar. Raising of drilling Contrast in the Minor rigs landscape Power plant Indirect job creation Minor attracts tourists

98 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

13.7.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase

Table 13.2 Decommissioning phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measure Residual significance Demolition of An abandoned and Moderate Demolition will be Moderate building and derelict plant has planned so it will be structures adverse impacts on continuous. Surface visual amenities will be levelled and revegetated as applicable.

13.8 Conclusion Impact on landscape and visual aspects is likely to be minor, having taken mitigation measures into account. It is evident that the structures and steam plumes that will be placed in the landscape will be visible and some of them from afar. Mitigating the effects can be done by site selection and design of structures. The Project is also likely to have minor beneficial effects as it may attract tourists.

99 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

14 Archaeology and cultural heritage 14.1 Introduction This chapter aims to describe the archaeology and cultural heritage of the Project area and predict the potential impacts the proposed Project will have there on. A definition is given of the affected area and an overview of the appropriate legislation, guidelines and standards. The baseline information was gathered by Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants (Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia, 2019). Various anthropological methods were applied to obtain baseline information on the cultural heritage of the Project area. These included but not limited to desk top review, cartographic and aerial imagery reviews, site visits, transect walks, interviews and consultation. The assessment of environmental impacts was done by VSO Consulting.

14.2 Affected area ► Project area for indirect impacts ► Drilling area for direct impacts

14.3 Legislative framework

14.3.1 National ► Research and Conservation of Cultural Heritage Proclamation No. 209/2000

14.3.2 International ► IFC Performance Standard 8 - Cultural Heritage. ► World Bank Operational Policy OP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources

14.4 Baseline description Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Determine if any archaeological, cultural and historical sites are within the area and to assess their value. • Determine the risk of adverse impacts due to the Project’s construction and operation.

14.4.1 Sites of cultural significance In most of the kebeles, surveyed there were communal historical grave yards (Figure 14.1). In Abela Faracho, Abela Gefeta and Chowkare there was historical stone bund locally called ‘’kawo Amado kela’’ of 1 to 2 meters high. Cultural pottery products, cultural houses/guest houses in Abela Mareka and Abela Faracho and ‘’Gifata’’ cultural ceremony (New-year ceremony) in all kebeles were mentioned as the cultural heritages of the Study area (Figure 14.2).

100 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Figure 14.1 Cemetery at Obicha Bada kebele So far there are no archaeological sites of significance that has been registered by the government offices in the AGPA area.

Figure 14.2 Sites of cultural significance (historical, cemeteries, school) 14.5 Impact assessment on archaeology and cultural heritage

14.5.1 Impacts during construction and operation phase Site clearing, and earth works can disturb archaeological remains or sites of historic and cultural value. This will be avoided by a survey before site selection, locating with GPS. In the case of unearthing previously undiscovered remains proper authorities will be notified. Noise from testing of wells and from the operation of the power plant can have adverse effects on those visiting historical sites and cemeteries. The noise causes risk of

101 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

disturbance of peace for those visiting the sites. This can mainly be avoided by site selection or raising of sound barriers. Odor in low concentrations can causes nuisance for people visiting historical or cultural sites. Closer to source in higher concentration can cause health risk. This can mainly be avoided by site selection and monitoring of gas emission.

14.6 Data limitation and uncertainty There is always an uncertainty regarding archaeological remains. First of all, the remains may not be recorded and second of all they may be difficult to see if the ground is densely vegetated. If archaeological remains will be uncovered in the process of the Project relevant authorities will be notified as per Chance Find Procedure. Location of cemeteries in the Drilling area is not known and thus a survey will have to be carried out prior to site selection.

14.7 Summary

14.7.1 Impacts during construction and operational phases

Table 14.1 Construction and operational phase: Summary of potential impacts and residual significance after taking mitigation measures into account

Action Impact Significance Mitigation measures Residual significance Site clearing Disruption of Major Site selection, Minor archaeological remains signage and or site of historical value cordoning archeological remains off Chance Find Procedure Noise and Disturbance of peace at Major Site selection and Minor vibration from historical sites and sound barriers wells graveyards Emission of gases Odor in low Moderate Site selection. Minor from wells concentrations causes Gas emission nuisance for people monitoring. visiting historical or cultural sites. Closer to source in higher concentration can cause health risk.

14.7.2 Impacts during decommissioning phase No significant impacts.

14.8 Conclusion Impacts on archaeological remains and cultural heritage are minor, after having taken mitigation measures into account. If previously unknown archaeological remains are discovered a Chance Find Procedure will be followed. Disturbance of peace at graveyards and historical sites will be limited by site selection, sound barriers and gas emission monitoring.

102 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

15 Waste 15.1 Introduction This chapter aims to describe the main types of waste generated by the Project during construction, operation and decommissioning. Likely impacts of waste on the environment is predicted and legal requirements and those of international standards identified. Impact assessment was done by VSO Consulting.

15.2 Affected areas The impact of waste on the environment is on one local if disposed of within the Drilling area and on the other hand within Project area and vicinity depending on where the waste will be transported to.

15.3 Legislative framework

15.3.1 National ► Solid waste management proclamation no. 513/2007 ► Standards for industrial effluents (EPA) ► Environmental pollution control proclamation no. 300/2002 ► Ethiopian water resources management Council of Ministers regulations no. 115/2005 ► Public health proclamation no. 810/2013 ► Ethiopian water resources managment policy

15.3.2 International ► World Bank Environmental, Health and Safety guidelines, on limits for wastewater ► IFC Environmental, Health and Safety general guidelines, ○ 1.3 Wastewater and ambient water quality ○ 1.6 Waste management • IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for geothermal power generation • IFC PS 3 - Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention

15.4 Baseline description Information on waste handling in the Project area was not gathered as part of the baseline studies. As the Drilling area is placed in rural environment it is surmised that waste generation in the area is rather low. Information below is based on similar projects.

Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Information on waste handling in the Project area • Determine the risk of adverse impacts due to the Project’s construction and operation

15.5 Impact assessment

15.5.1 Impacts during construction phase Main waste generation during construction phase will be excavation materials, concrete mix and concrete washings, iron and steel scrap, drilling mud, timber, paper and

103 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

cardboard and household waste. Some hazardous wastes will be generated from the construction. Geothermal fluid from well testing can be considered as waste. The waste which will be generated from the construction of the Project will be handled according to national and international laws, regulations and standards. A waste management plan will be put in place as to minimize the adverse impacts the waste can have on the environment. Emphasis will be placed on reducing waste, reuse and recycle, in that order. Environmental impacts can entail groundwater and soil pollution and other contamination. Discarded waste can be blown around the vicinity and cause harm to wildlife and have adverse visual impacts.

Table 15.1 Overview of likely main waste stream during construction phase

Waste Potential Impact Management Excavation material Dust generation Reuse on site if possible e.g. as sound barrier or disposal at landfills. Drilling mud and cuttings Visual impact Directed to infiltration ponds. Sediment is disposed of in a approved landfill. Concrete mix and Dust generation, visual impact Wash water directed to infiltration washings ponds, concrete solids disposed of in landfills. Scrap metal Visual impact, hazard for locals and Segregate for recycling. wildlife. Timber and wood-based Visual impact. Segregated for recycling. Reused if waste possible. Paper and cardboard Visual impact, waste is easily blown Reuse and recycle. away. Household waste Visual impact, odour, pest. Collected in closed containers and transported to appropriate disposal site. Waste from hygiene Ground and soil pollution, disease Sewage treated according to facilities (black water) distribution. standards as not to create risk of pollution. Hazardous waste (oils, Contamination of receiving Segregated as appropriate and lubricants, batteries, environment. stored in closed containers. chemicals, tires) Collected by licensed party to dispose of in a safe manner. Geothermal fluid from Groundwater and soil Directed to infiltration ponds which well testing contamination. Visual impact from will be covered with earth after use. silica deposits.

Table 15.2 International limit values for liquid effluents from thermal power plants

Parameter Limit Values World Bank [mg/l]1 pH 6-9 pH-units Total suspended Solids 50 Oil & Grease 10 Copper (Cu) 0.5 Chromium (Cr) 0.5 Iron (Fe) 1.0

104 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Zinc (Zn) 1.0 Temperature increase2 Less than or equal to 30 °C

1Maximum value for effluents from thermal power plants (Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook, July 1998) 2The effluent should result in a temperature of no more than 30o C at the edge of the zone where initial mixing and dilution takes place. Use 10 m as the minimum limit from the point of discharge to the nearby water point.

Table 15.3 IFC indicative values for treated sanitary sewage discharges

Pollutant Units Guideline value PH pH 6-9 BOD Mg/l 30 COD Mg/l 125 Total nitrogen Mg/l 10 Total phosphorus Mg/l 2 Oil and grease Mg/l 10 Total suspended solids Mg/l 50 Total coli form bacteria MPN/100 ml 400

15.5.2 Impacts during operational phase Waste generated during operational phase is considerably less than of the construction phase. Waste is mainly generated form maintenance, personnel and from the spent geothermal fluid which will be injected into the bedrock.

Table 15.4 Overview of likely main waste stream during operation phase

Waste Potential Impact Management Scrap metal from Visual impact, hazard for locals and Segregate for recycling. maintenance wildlife. Timber and wood-based Visual impact. Segregated for recycling. Reused if waste possible. Paper and cardboard Visual impact, waste is easily blown Reuse and recycle. away. Household waste Visual impact, odour, pest. Collected in closed containers and transported to appropriate disposal site. Waste from hygiene Ground and soil pollution, disease Sewage treated according to facilities distribution. standards as not to create risk of pollution. Hazardous waste (oils, Contamination of receiving Segregated as appropriate and lubricants, batteries, environment. stored in closed containers. chemicals, tires) Collected by licensed party to dispose of in a safe manner. Geothermal effluent Groundwater and soil Effluent injected into the bedrock contamination. Visual impact from below groundwater level. silica deposits.

15.5.3 Impacts during decommissioning phase Decommissioning of the Project entails removal of all structures and facilities and closing of wells. This would generate a considerable amount and variety of waste. A specific

105 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

waste management plan for decommissioning would have to be put in place, ensuring that among other, hazardous waste is identified and disposed of in a proper manner. Emphases should be placed on recovering, reusing and recycling of waste.

15.6 Data limitations and uncertainty Information on waste handling in the Project area was not gathered as part of the baseline studies and present discussion is based on experience from similar projects. Quantities of waste generated from the Project is not known.

15.7 Conclusion If not handled properly waste can have adverse impact on the environment, causing contamination, visual impact and causing hazard to locals and wildlife. A waste management plan will be put in place where emphasis will be placed on reducing, reusing and recycling. Hazardous materials will be disposed of in an approved manner through a certified hazardous waste disposal service provider. Therefore, impact of waste on the environment is likely to be minor.

106 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

16 Environment, Health and Safety (EHS) 16.1 Introduction This chapter discusses the main aspects of health and safety with regard to construction and operation of the Project. The chapter is based on IFC Environmental, Health and Safety guidelines, chapter 2.0 (International Finance Corporation, 2007), IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for Geothermal Power Generation (International Finance Corporation, 2007) and with the following impact assessment questions in mind. The assessment of environmental impacts was done by VSO Consulting.

16.2 Affected areas The Project can have adverse impacts on EHS on workers, possibly nearby locals and guests at the Drilling site. The affected area is defined by the Drilling area.

16.3 Legislative framework

16.3.1 National

• Environmental Pollution Control Proclamation No. 300/2002 • Public Health Proclamation No. 200/2000 • Prevention of Industrial Pollution Council of Ministries Regulation No.159/2008 • Labour Proclamation No. 377/2003 • Environmental Standards for Industrial Pollution Control

16.3.2 International

• Standards of the International Labour Organization • IFC Performance Standard 2: Labour and Working Conditions. • IFC Performance Standard 4: Community Health, Safety, and Security. • IFC Environmental, Health and Safety General Guidelines • IFC Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Geothermal Power • Generation

16.4 Baseline description Impact assessment questions and objectives of study according to scoping document

• Are there any environmental hazards that threaten the development? • Can local hazard management or shelter structures be impacted by the development? Sandstorms, desertification?

The IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for geothermal power generation, occupational health and safety guidelines require occupational health and safety performance of geothermal project to be evaluated against internationally published exposure guidelines. Examples of these include: the Threshold Limit Value (TLV) occupational exposure guidelines and Biological Exposure Indices (BEIs) published by American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), the Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards published by the United States National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) published by the

107 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the United States (OSHA), Indicative Occupational Exposure Limit Values, published by European Union member states, or other similar sources.

The emission of H2S gas from the Project can cause hazard to workers. A review of the various international guidelines for hydrogen sulphide (H2S), for both general community health and occupational exposure relevant to the Project is summarized in table below. The WHO limits are recommended for the Abaya project’s community health and odour assessment while ACGIH guidelines are recommended for occupational exposure (Table 16.1)

Table 16.1 Summary of recommended limits of H2S by various international organizations. Effect Concentration (µg/m3) Concentration (ppm) Averaging period Occupational 1500 (ACGIH) 1 8-hour Community health 150 (WHO) 0.1 24-hour 50 (Iceland) 0.03 24-hour 10 (OEHHA*) 0.007 annual Community odour 7 (WHO) 0.005 30-min 70 (New Zealand) 0.05 1 hour *Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Agency, under California Environmental Protection Agency

16.5 Potential EHS hazards of the Project The EHS hazards related to the project can be divided into few components: • General hazard related to construction work • Occupational hazard related to the operation of the Project • Hazard that is specific to geothermal projects, both during construction and operation. The hazards of construction work and operation are much the same although at a different scale since a construction site is busier than a powerplant in operation. RG and its contractors are obliged to implement all reasonable precautions to protect the health and safety of workers. Risk assessment will be carried out prior to the commencement of the Project as to analyze potential risk. Based on the analysis, preventative and protective measures will be introduced according to the following order of priority (see further IFC guidelines) (International Finance Corporation, 2007):

• Eliminate the hazard • Control the hazard • Minimize the hazard • Provide appropriate PPE An EHS management plan will be put in place, and a part of that will be monitoring of occupational accidents and diseases, dangerous occurrences and incidents. There are no known environmental hazards that threaten the Project and the Project does not have impact on existent hazard management or shelter structures.

108 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

16.5.1 General hazard related to construction work, power plant operation and decommissioning Construction work is of the nature that it can pose hazard for the personnel and others on site. The main hazards of the work are identified in Table 16.2, the table is not exhaustive and does not take the place of a thorough risk assessment. The hazards of construction work, operation and decommissioning are much the same. In order to minimize risk an EHS management plan and Emergency Response Plan will be put in place.

Table 16.2 Overview of hazards related to construction work, power plant operation and decommissioning. The table does not replace a thorough risk assessment.

Hazards Consequences Measures Rotating and moving Injury or death from being trapped, Eliminate hazard by design. Installation equipment entangled or struck by machinery of EHS regulation on site. Noise Hearing loss Adhere to noise limits, provide PPE. Vibration Nuisance and possible health effects Adhere to exposure limits Electricity Injury or death from electrocution Signage, information, inspection of electrical devices

Eye hazard Solid particles or liquid chemical strike Use machine guards, splash shields, worker in eye, causing injury or safety goggles. Installation of EHS blindness regulation on site.

Welding/hot work Bright and intense light that can injur Provide proper eye protection. Standard workers eyesight operating procedures.

Site Traffic Risk of accidents due to poor skills or Training and licensing. Define traffic vehicular and pedestrian traffic routes, rights of way and other rules at site.

Working environment Exposure to hot or cold conditions can Monitor conditions and put in place a temperature result in temperature stress related contingency plan injury

Working at heights Injury or death due to fall from heights Fall prevention equipment and measures or a falling object from heights for work over 2 m

Chemical hazards Potential illness or injury due to Replace hazardous substances with less exposure hazardous ones. Provide material safety data sheets and PPE, information and training.

Air quality Respiratory irritation, discomfort, illness Implement work practices to minimize air pollution. Provide ventilation and PPE

Fire and explosions Loss of property, injury or fatalities of EHS regulation, proper storage of project workers flammables. Work procedures.

Confined spaces Loss of consciousness, fatality Identify confined spaces, measure oxygen level, work procedures, contingency plan.

16.5.2 Hazards specific to geothermal projects Hazards related to work in geothermal projects are mostly related to the fluid and steam of extreme temperatures and the emission of geothermal gases, especially H2S.

Table 16.3 Overview of hazards specific to geothermal projects. The table does not replace a thorough risk assessment.

Hazards Consequences Measures

109 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Gas monitoring and warning system, Impact on health or fatality due to H2S contingency plan, ventilation. EHS Geothermal gases release. Management Plan & Emergency Response Plan /Procedure Reduce time required for work in hot Potential blowout accidents burn injuries environments, shield surfaces, PPE, or fatalities when maintaining hot pipes, Heat safety procedures. Provide plenty wells. Heat related stress. drinking water.

16.6 Conclusion The construction, operation and decommissioning of the Project poses some hazards. The hazards will be met with preventative or mitigative measures as to minimize the risk of accidents. A thorough risk assessment will be conducted for the work and from that a set of EHS rules and management plan for the site will be established. RG recognizes the importance for workers’ health and safety and will comply with national and international legislation and standards to ensure the safekeeping of the workers.

110 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

17 Bibliography A., T. (2005). Major ions composition of the groundwater and surface water systems and their geological and geochemical controls in the Ethiopian volcanic terrain. Austurbrú. (2016, March 13). Losun gróðuhúsalofttegunda með því minnsta sem þekkist. Retrieved from Sjálfbærniverkefnið á Austurlandi: http://www.sjalfbaerni.is/austurlandsverkefnid/ahugaverdar-nidurstodur/nr/424 CSA. (2007). Population and Housing Census of Federal Demoractic Republic of Ethiopia. Census, Addis Ababa: Central Statistic Agency Ethiopia. EEPCO, G. &. (2005). Geothermal Exploration and Development in Ethiopia. Proceedings World Geothermal Congress , 1-9. Efla. (2009). IDC HH220 Noise Mapping. Reykjavik: Efla. Efla. (2014). Havadadreifing fra borholu, minnisblad, unnið fyrir HS Orku. Reykjanesbaer: HS Orka. EPA. (2003). Environmental Impact Assessment Procedural Guidelines Series 1. EPA. Eysteinsson, H., Jonsson, S. B., & Tekka, A. H. (2015). Resisitivity study of the Tulu Moye Geothermal Prospect, Ethiopia. Resisitivity exploration. Reykjavik: RG. FDRE. (1994). Mining Operations Council of Ministers Regulation No. 182/1994. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2000). Ethiopian Water Resources Management Proclamation No. 197/2000. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2000). Public Health Proclamation No. 200/2000. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2000). Research and Conservation of Cultural Heritage Proclamation No. 209/2000. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2002). Environmental Pollution Control Proclamation No. 300/2002. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2002). Environmental Protection Organs Establishment Proclamation No. 295/2002. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2002). Investment Proclamation No. 280/2002. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2003). Labour Proclamation No. 377/2003. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2005). Ethiopian Water Resources Management Council of Ministers Regulation No. 115/2005. Federal Negarit Gazeta . Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2007). Payment of Compensation for Property Situated on Landholdings Expropriated for Public Purposes Council of Ministers Regulation No. 135/2007. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2007). Solid Waste Management Proclamation No. 513/2007. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2009). Prevention of Industrial Pollution Council of Ministries Regulation No. 159/2008. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa.

111 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

FDRE. (2010). Mining Operations Proclamation No. 678/2010. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2011). Ethiopia's Climate Resilient Green Economy Strategy. FDRE. (2013). Ethiopian Electric Power Establishment Council of Ministers Regulation No. 313/2013. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa. FDRE. (2013, February). Ethiopian National Energy Policy (Draft) . Addis Ababa: Ministry of Water and Energy. FDRE. (n.d.). Public Ownership of Rural Lands Proclamation No. 31/1975. Federal Negarit Gazeta. Addis Ababa: FDRE. Fridriksson, T., & Giroud, N. (2007). The Reykjanes geothermal gas: cencentrations and emissions. Reykjavik: ISOR. GIBB International. (2015). Environmental and Social Baseline Studies, Stakholders (community) Engagement Plan and Resettlement Policy Framework. Reykjavik: Reykjavik Geothermal. Green Sober Environmental Management Consultants. Ethiopia. (2019). Abaya Geothermal Development Project. Baseline Study. International Finance Corporation. (2007, April 30). Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) Guidelines. IFC World Bank Group. International Finance Corporation. (2007, April 30). Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for Geothermal Power Generation. International Finance Corporation and World Bank Group. Jackson, A. R., & Jackson, J. M. (2000). Environmental Science. The Natural Environment and Human Impact. Essex: Prentice Hall. Kötter Consulting Engineers. (2008). Schalltechnischer bericht nr. 208170-01.01 über die prognostizierte Geräuschsituation eines Standard „Euro-Rig“ während des Bohrbetriebes. Mamo, T., Gudbrandsson, S., & Gislason, G. (2015). Tulu Moye Geothermal Prospect. Surface Exploration: Geology report. Reykjavik: RG. Mannvit. (2010). Þeistareykjavirkjun Allt að 200 MWe jarðhitavirkjun í Þingeyjarsveit og Norðurþingi. Reykjavik: Landsvirkjun. Ministry for the Environment and Natural Resources. (2015, December 12). Parísarsamkomulagið í höfn. Retrieved February 20, 2016, from Umhverfis- og auðlindaráðuneytið: https://www.umhverfisraduneyti.is/frettir/parisarsamkomulagid-i-hofn Ministry of Finance and Economic Development. (2010). Growth and Transformation Plan 2010/2011-2014/2015. Mott MacDonald & Green and Clean solutions. (2013). Karisimbi Geothermal Exploration Drilling Project. Volume II - ESIA. Reykjavik Geothermal. (2018). Inception Report - TOR. The Abaya Geothermal Development Project. Reykjavík: Reykjavik Geothermal. RWDI. (2009). H2S Dispersion Modeling for an Un-ignited Uncontrolled Release. Masdar City Geothermal Project. Project number #0940338. Abu Dhabi.

112 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

Scientists, U. o. (2016, April 27). Retrieved from www.ucsusa.org: http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/our-energy-choices/renewable-energy/how- geothermal-energy-works.html#.VyOXRvmLT0M Sigurbjorn Jonsson. (2015). Remote Sensins in Tulu Moye. Reykjavik: RG. Smithsonian Institution. (2016, April 12). Global Volcanism Program. Retrieved from Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History: http://volcano.si.edu/volcano.cfm?vn=221250 United Nations. (1979). The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination agians Women. United Nations. United Nations. (1989, November 20). Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved from Untied Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner: http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx United Nations. (2016, April 15). United Nations Millenium Goals. Retrieved from United Nations: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/bkgd.shtml USAID Ethiopia. (2016, March). Water. Fact sheet. USAID Ethiopia. VSO Consulting and Reykjavik Energy. (2008). Hverahlidarvirkjun. Allt ad 90 MWe jardvarmavirkjun. Matsskyrsla. Reykjavik: Reykjavik Energy. Walta Information Center. (2011). Electrification in Ethiopia is boosting development. Retrieved from http://www.waltainfo.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=25858& Itemid=47 . WHO. (2000). Air Quality Guidelines. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe . WHO. (2005). Air Quality Guidelines. Global update 2005. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe. Wikipedia. (2016, March 14). Silvopasture. Retrieved from Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia: ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture World Nuclear. (2011). WNA Report Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources. London: World Nuclear Assocation.

113 Geothermal utlization in Abaya ESIA Report

114