DOCSLIB.ORG

KELP BLUE NAMIBIA (Pty) Ltd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
KELP BLUE NAMIBIA (Pty) Ltd KELP BLUE NAMIBIA (Pty) Ltd EIA SCOPING & IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED KELP CULTIVATION PILOT PROJECT NEAR LÜDERITZ, KARAS REGION Prepared for: Kelp Blue Namibia (Pty) Ltd August 2020 1 DOCUMENT CONTROL Report Title EIA SCOPING & IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED KELP CULTIVATION PILOT PROJECT NEAR LÜDERITZ, KARAS REGION Report Author Werner Petrick Client Kelp Blue Namibia (Pty) Ltd Project Number NSP2020KB01 Report Number 1 Status Final to MEFT and MFMR Issue Date August 2020 DISCLAIMER The views expressed in the document are the objective, independent views of the author with input from various Environmental and Social Experts (i.e. Specialists). Neither Werner Petrick nor Namisun Environmental Projects and Development (Namisun) have any business, personal, financial, or other interest in the proposed Project apart from fair remuneration for the work performed. The content of this report is based on the author’s best scientific and professional knowledge, input from the Environmental Specialists, as well as available information. Project information contained herein is based on the interpretation of data collected and data provided by the client, accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid. Namisun reserves the right to modify the report in any way deemed necessary should new, relevant, or previously unavailable or undisclosed information become available that could alter the assessment findings. This report must not be altered or added to without the prior written consent of the author. Project Nr: NSP2020KB01 EIA SCOPING & IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT AND EMP FOR August 2020 Report number: 1 THE PROPOSED KELP CULTIVATION PILOT PROJECT 2 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT....................................................................................... 1 1.3 INTRODUCTION TO THE EIA PROCESS ................................................................................................ 2 1.3.1 LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................................... 4 2 BACKGROUND TO THE BIOLOGY, ECOLOGY AND AQUACULTURE OF KELPS AND THE KELP BLUE PILOT PROJECT MOTIVATION (NEED AND DESIRABILITY)....................................................... 5 2.1 KELP FACTS (I.E. BIOLOGY & ECOLOGY) AND INTERNATIONAL KELP CULTIVATION & HARVESTING ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 GENERAL MOTIVATION FOR KELP BLUE’S PROPOSED KELP CULTIVATION PROJECT .............................. 8 2.3 THE NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PILOT PROJECT .................................................................................. 9 3 EIA METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 11 3.1 EIA PROCESS ................................................................................................................................. 11 3.2 EIA TEAM ....................................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 INFORMATION COLLECTION .............................................................................................................. 15 3.4 EIA SCOPING & IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT ................................................................................ 15 3.5 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS ..................................................................................................... 17 3.5.1 INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES .......................................................................................................... 17 3.5.2 STEPS IN THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS ............................................................................................. 18 3.5.3 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND ISSUES RAISED ............................................................................................... 21 4 ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND POLICIES ....................................................................................... 23 4.1 SUMMARY OF KEY LEGISLATION APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED PILOT PROJECT ................................ 23 4.1.1 POLICY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE EIA ............................................................................................. 23 4.1.2 LEGAL FRAMEWORK RELATING TO AQUACULTURE ACTIVITIES ......................................................................... 25 4.2 SUMMARY OF OTHER LAWS AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO THE PILOT PROJECT ..................................... 26 4.2.1 OTHER RELEVANT LEGISLATION ................................................................................................................... 26 4.2.2 RELEVANT POLICIES AND PLANS .................................................................................................................. 29 4.2.3 INTERNATIONAL LAWS AND CONVENTIONS ..................................................................................... 29 5 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED KELP BLUE NAMIBIA PILOT PROJECT ACTIVITIES ........ 31 5.1 GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION .................................................................................................... 31 5.1.1 DETAILS OF THE APPLICANT ........................................................................................................................ 31 5.1.2 KELP BLUE SHAREHOLDERS ........................................................................................................................ 31 5.1.3 OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND TO THE PROPOSED KELP BLUE PILOT PROJECT ................................................. 31 5.2 PROPOSED KELP CULTIVATION PILOT PROJECT ACTIVITIES ............................................................... 32 5.2.1 COLLECTION OF FERTILE SPOROPHYLLS AND HATCHERY ACTIVITIES ................................................................ 32 5.2.2 GIANT KELP GROWTH (I.E. CULTIVATION) ..................................................................................................... 35 5.2.3 KELP HARVESTING ..................................................................................................................................... 39 5.2.4 PROCESSING ............................................................................................................................................. 39 5.2.5 PILOT MONITORING .................................................................................................................................... 40 5.2.6 MARINE VESSELS ....................................................................................................................................... 40 5.3 ONSHORE BASE / INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................................. 40 5.4 “CONSTRUCTION PHASE” – I.E. ASSEMBLY OF ARRAYS, ANCHORING AT SEAS, LABORATORY SET-UP, ETC. .............................................................................................................................................. 41 5.5 EMPLOYMENT ................................................................................................................................. 41 5.6 NON-MINERALIZED (I.E. GENERAL) WASTE ......................................................................................... 41 5.7 PROPOSED PILOT PROJECT SCHEDULE ........................................................................................... 42 5.8 DECOMMISSIONING PHASE ............................................................................................................... 42 6 DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT/RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ................................................... 43 6.1 GEOPHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................................................... 43 Project Nr: NSP2020KB01 EIA SCOPING & IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT AND EMP FOR August 2020 Report number: 1 THE PROPOSED KELP CULTIVATION PILOT PROJECT 3 6.1.1 GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 44 6.1.2 BATHYMETRY ............................................................................................................................................ 45 6.2 BIOPHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................................... 46 6.2.1 CLIMATE ................................................................................................................................................... 46 6.2.2 WAVES, LARGE-SCALE CIRCULATION AND TIDES ........................................................................................... 47 6.2.3 WATER MASSES AND TEMPERATURE ........................................................................................................... 48 6.2.4 UPWELLING ............................................................................................................................................... 48 6.2.5 TURBIDITY................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Mineral Industry of Namibia in 1999
    THE MINERAL INDUSTRY OF NAMIBIA By George J. Coakley Namibia is located on the southwestern coast of Africa many years, De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd. had held an between South Africa and Angola. The 825,418-square- exclusive right to exploit the diamond-bearing Orange River kilometer country had an estimated population of 1.77 million alluvial and marine beach sand deposits within the Sperrgebiet. in 1999 and a gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of about Namdeb Diamond Corp. (Pty.) Ltd. increased diamond $4,3001 based on purchasing power parity. In 1999, the mineral production to nearly 1.3 million carats, or about comparable industry of Namibia provided about 43% of exports and 20% of with that of 1998. Namdeb began phasing out production at its the country’s GDP (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, Auchas Mine and planned to open the new Daberas Mine at the Namibia—Economy—World factbook, accessed December 5, end of 2000; the new mine will have an expected mine life of 10 2000, at URL http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/Factbook/ years. During its first full year of operation, De Beers’ geos/wa.html#Econ). Diamond remained the most important NamGem Diamond Manufacturing Co. diamond cutting and sector of the mining industry followed by uranium, for which polishing plant near Okahandja produced 100 finished stones Namibia ranked as the world’s fourth largest producer. per day at an average size of 14 points based on 100 points to a Namibia was also the largest producer of salt in Africa. carat. According to the Chamber of Mines of Namibia (2000, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Directions from Noordoewer to Sossusvlei Lodge (Via Grünau, Keetmanshoop, Mariental, Maltahöhe & Hammerstein)
    Directions from Noordoewer To Sossusvlei Lodge (via Grünau, Keetmanshoop, Mariental, Maltahöhe & Hammerstein) There are a number of alternative routes to follow from the South African - Namibian border to Sossusvlei Lodge. However, the route described below makes optimum use of good asphalt surfaced roads and allows one to travel at the maximum speed of 120 kilometres per hour for a greater distance. The average maximum recommended speed over gravel surfaces is 80 kilometres per hour. Total Distance : 805 Kilometres Road Legend : Average Duration : ±8 Hours B = Major Route (Asphalt) Road Surfaces : Asphalt – 530 kms C = Minor Road (Gravel) Gravel – 275 kms D = District Road (Gravel) o Once you have passed through the South African (Vioolsdrif) and Namibian (Noordoewer) custom posts on either side of the Orange River, leave Noordoewer on the B1 North. o Travel for 139 kilometres to Grünau and then a further 163 kilometres on the B1 to Keetmanshoop. This is a major town en-route and a stop here is recommended. Refuel, stretch the legs and obtain refreshments. o Please note that not all refuelling points indicated on the local maps at small towns are always still there or have fuel available. Always stay on the safe side and refuel at major towns along the way. o Continue on the B1 for another 217 kilometres past Tses, Asab and Gibeon turn-off to just before the town of Mariental. Turn left onto the C19 at the Maltahöhe intersection (T- junction). If you are not sure of your fuel status, rather continue on to Mariental at this point and refuel there.
    [Show full text]
  • CROWNED CORMORANT | Microcarbo Coronatus (Phalacrocorax Coronatus)
    CROWNED CORMORANT | Microcarbo coronatus (Phalacrocorax coronatus) J Kemper | Reviewed by: T Cook; AJ Williams © Jessica Kemper Conservation Status: Near Threatened Southern African Range: Coastal Namibia, South Africa Area of Occupancy: 6,700 km2 Population Estimate: 1,200 breeding pairs in Namibia Population Trend: Stable to slightly increasing Habitat: Coastal islands and rocks, protected mainland sites, artificial structures, inshore marine waters Threats: Disturbance, entanglement in human debris and artificial structures, predation by gulls and seals, pollution from oiling 152 BIRDS TO WATCH IN NAMIBIA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE TABLE 2.5: A resident species with some juvenile dispersal, this small Number of Crowned Cormorant breeding pairs at individu- cormorant is endemic to south-west Namibia and west al breeding localities in Namibia (listed north to south), esti- to south-western South Africa. It has a very restricted mated from annual peaks of monthly nest counts at Mercu- ry, Ichaboe, Halifax and Possession islands, and elsewhere range along the coastline (Crawford 1997b), occupying an from opportunistic counts, not necessarily done during peak area of about 6,700 km2 in Namibia (Jarvis et al. 2001). It breeding (Bartlett et al. 2003, du Toit et al. 2003, Kemper et usually occurs within one kilometre of the coast, and has al. 2007, MFMR unpubl. data). not been recorded more than 10 km from land (Siegfried et al. 1975). It breeds at numerous localities in Namibia Number of Date of most and South Africa. In Namibia, it is known to breed at 12 breeding recent reliable islands, five mainland localities and one artificial structure, Breeding locality pairs estimate from Bird Rock Guano Platform near Walvis Bay to Sinclair Bird Rock Platform 98 1999/2000 Island (Table 2.5: Bartlett et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The German Colonization of Southwest Africa and the Anglo-German Rivalry, 1883-1915
    University of Nebraska at Omaha DigitalCommons@UNO Student Work 7-1-1995 Doors left open then slammed shut: The German colonization of Southwest Africa and the Anglo-German rivalry, 1883-1915 Matthew Erin Plowman University of Nebraska at Omaha Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/studentwork Recommended Citation Plowman, Matthew Erin, "Doors left open then slammed shut: The German colonization of Southwest Africa and the Anglo-German rivalry, 1883-1915" (1995). Student Work. 435. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/studentwork/435 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student Work by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DOORS LEFT OPEN THEN SLAMMED SHUT: THE GERMAN COLONIZATION OF SOUTHWEST AFRICA AND THE ANGLO-GERMAN RIVALRY, 1883-1915. A Thesis Presented to the Department of History and the Faculty of the Graduate College University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts University of Nebraska at Omaha by Matthew Erin Plowman July 1995 UMI Number: EP73073 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI Blsaartalibn Publish*rig UMI EP73073 Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
    [Show full text]
  • South Africa and Namibia, 20 July - 12 August 2017
    South Africa and Namibia, 20 July - 12 August 2017. VLADIMIR DINETS This trip was an introduction to Africa for my wife and daughter; the latter was two and a half years old at the time and enjoyed it a lot. We had three weeks to kill while a container with our stuff was traveling from New Jersey to our new home in Okinawa. We started from Cape Town, drove east to Hermanus and then north to Oranjemund, flew to Windhoek, briefly explored a few locations up to Etosha, returned to Windhoek and spent one day and two nights in Johannesburg. In 2017, Cape Town area, Namaqualand and Namibia were experiencing a major drought. Full moon was on August 7; that made finding small mammals difficult during the Namibian part of the trip. I had six Sherman traps and caught only twelve rodents of two species (two pygmy mice in the far south and Namaqua rock rats almost everywhere else). Bats seemed absent with few exceptions. I saw almost a hundred species, all but four of which I had seen before (see my 2008 trip report), and removed a few species from my “better view much desired” list. South Africa Simon’s Town is a convenient base for exploring the area; M4 south from it is a good place to look for chacma baboons, while humpback whales are often feeding offshore (we saw one, and heard a few while scuba diving). Watch for South African fur seals, too. Four-striped grass mice (locally called “field mice”) were abundant in wooded parts of penguin colonies.
    [Show full text]
  • Namibia Starline Timetable
    TRAIN : WINDHOEK – GOBABIS – WINDHOEK TRAIN : WINDHOEK – OTJIWARONGO – WINDHOEK TRAIN NO 9903 TRAIN NO 9904 TRAIN NO 9966 TRAIN NO 9915 TIMETABLE DAYS MON, DAYS MON, MONDAYS MONDAY WED, FRI WED, FRI WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY STATIONS STATIONS STATIONS STATIONS Windhoek D 05:50 Gobabis D 14:50 Windhoek D 15:45 Otjiwarongo D 15:40 Hoffnung D 06:55 Witvlei D 16:14 Okahandja A 18:00 Omaruru A 18:30 Neudamm D 07:35 Omitara A 17:52 D 18:05 D 19:30 Omitara A 10:10 D 17:56 Karibib D 20:40 Kranzberg A 21:10 D 10:12 Neudamm D 20:36 Kranzberg A 21:20 D 21:50 Witvlei D 11:53 Hoffnung D 21:18 D 21:40 Karibib D 22:20 Gobabis A 13:25 Windhoek A 22:25 Omaruru A 23:00 Okahandja A 01:30 D 23:35 D 01:40 Otjiwarongo A 02:20 Windhoek A 03:20 TRAIN : WINDHOEK – WALVIS BAY – WINDHOEK TRAIN: WALVIS BAY–OTJIWARONGO–WALVIS BAY EFFECTIVE FROM TRAIN NO 9908 TRAIN NO 9909 TRAIN NO 9901 / 9912 TRAIN NO 9907 / 9900 DAYS DAILY DAYS DAILY MONDAY MONDAY MONDAY 21 JANUARY 2008 EXCEPT EXCEPT WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY SAT SAT FRIDAY FRIDAY STATIONS STATIONS STATIONS STATIONS Business Hours : Windhoek Central Reservations : Monday – Friday 07:00 to 19:00 Tel. (061) 298 2032/2175 Windhoek D 19:55 Walvis Bay D 19:00 Otjiwarongo D 14:40 Walvis Bay D 14:20 Saturdays 07:00 to 09:30 Fax (061) 298 2495 Okahandja A 21:55 Kuiseb D 19:20 Omaruru A 17:30 Kuiseb D 14:30 Sundays 15:30 to 19:00 D 22:05 Swakopmund A 20:35 D 18:30 Swakopmund A 15:50 Website : www.transnamib.com.na Karibib D 00:40 D 20:45 Kranzberg A 19:55 D 16:00 StarLine Information : E-mail : [email protected] Kranzberg
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Scoping Report for the Heritage Assessment Related to the Proposed Eskom Kudu-Oranjemund Project in the Northern Cape Province
    Archaetnos Culture & Cultural Resource Consultants BK 98 09854/23 SCOPING REPORT FOR THE HERITAGE ASSESSMENT RELATED TO THE PROPOSED ESKOM KUDU-ORANJEMUND PROJECT IN THE NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE For: LANDSCAPE DYNAMICS PO Box 947 Groenkloof 0027 REPORT: AE01639V By: Prof. A.C. van Vollenhoven (L. Akad. S.A.) BA, BA (Hons), DTO, NDM, MA (UP), MA (US), DPhil (UP), Man Dip (TUT), DPhil (History) Accredited member of ASAPA Accredited member of SASCH July 2016 Archaetnos P.0.Box 55 GROENKLOOF 0027 Tel: 083 291 6104 Fax: 086 520 4173 Email: [email protected] Members: AC van Vollenhoven BA, BA (Hons), DTO, NDM, MA (Archaeology) [UP], MA (Culture History) [US], DPhil (Archaeology) [UP], Man Dip [TUT], DPhil (History) [US] 1 1. Introduction This report deals with the results of a scoping baseline (desktop) study relating to the Heritage Assessment for the proposed ESKOM Kudu-Oranjemund Project. The project entails the following: Establishment of the existing 400kV AT Oranjemund including – . 400kV yard and equipment including busbar; . Installing a 1 x 315MVA 400/220kV transformer; . Create at least 4 x 400kV line bays to allow for potential development; Construction of 2 x 400kV lines from the Orange River to Oranjemund Substation – approximately 5 km of which a 3 km wide corridor should be investigated and authorized. 2. Methodology Terms of reference . Identify as much as possible objects, sites, occurrences and structures of an archaeological or historical nature (cultural heritage sites) located on the property. Assess the significance of the cultural resources in terms of their archaeological, historical, scientific, social, religious, aesthetic and tourism value.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Distribution of the Gibeon Meteorites of South-West Africa Robert Citron
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19670023688 2020-03-12T11:14:37+00:00Z ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE GIBEON METEORITES OF SOUTH-WEST AFRICA ROBERT CITRON L ZOB WYOl AJ.ll13Vd I. 'b Research in Space Science SA0 Special Report No. 238 ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE GIBEON METEORITES OF SOUTH-WEST AFRICA Robert C itron March 30, 1967 Smithsonian Institution Astrophysical Observatory Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02138 TABLE OF CONTENTS Sec tion Page BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE ....................... iv ABSTRACT ............................. -v 1 INTRODUCTION ........................... 1 2 GIBEONDISTRIBUTION ...................... 2 3 RECENTLY RECOVERED GIBEON METEORITES ..... 7 3. 1 The Lichtenfels Meteorite .................. 7 3.2 The Haruchas Meteorite ................... 8 3.3 The Donas Meteorite ...................... 9 3.4 The Bethanie Meteorite .................... 10 3.5 The Keetmanshoop Meteorite ................ 10 3. 6 The Kinas Putts Meteorite ................. 11 3. 7 The Kamkas Meteorite .................... 12 4 POSSIBLE IMPACT CRATERS .................. 15 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................... 20 6 REFERENCES ............................ 21 Atmendix A WEIGHT LIST OF KNOWN GIBEON METEORITES - - - * A-1 B GIBEON METEORITES IN MUSEUMS .............. B-1 . C PHOTOGRAPHS OF RECENTLY RECOVERED GIBEON METEORITES ............................. C-1 D PHOTOGRAPHS OF METEORITES IN PUBLIC GARDENS, WINDHOEK, SOUTH-WEST AFRICA .............. D-1 ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1 Map of known Gibeon meteorite distribution . 5 2a Aerial view of Brukkaros crater . 16 2b Ground view of Brukkaros crater . 17 3 Aerial view of Roter Kamm crater . 19 C-1 The Lichtenfels meteorite . C-2 C-2 The Haruchas meteorite . C-2 C-3 The Donas meteorite . C-3 C-4 The Bethanie meteorite. C-3 C-5 The Kinas Putts meteorite . C-4 D-1 Twenty-seven Gibeon meteorites, whose total weight exceeds 10 metric tons, in the Public Gardens at Windhoek, South-West Africa .
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 75, No. 187/Tuesday, September 28, 2010
    Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 59645 * Elevation in feet (NGVD) + Elevation in feet (NAVD) Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation # Depth in feet Communities above ground affected ∧ Elevation in meters (MSL) Modified Unnamed Tributary No. 1 to At the area bounded by U.S. Route 33, Wabash Avenue, +1415 Unincorporated Areas of Fink Run (Backwater effects and County Route 33/1. Upshur County. from Buckhannon River). * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ∧ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter. ADDRESSES Unincorporated Areas of Upshur County Maps are available for inspection at the Upshur County Courthouse Annex, 38 West Main Street, Buckhannon, WV 26201. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 76.913(b)(1)—62 FR 6495, February 12, collection requirements that are subject 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) 1997. to OMB approval. Dated: September 21, 2010. 76.924(e)(1)(iii) and (e)(2)(iii)—61 FR [FR Doc. 2010–24203 Filed 9–27–10; 8:45 am] Edward L. Connor, 9367, March 8, 1996. BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Acting Federal Insurance and Mitigation 76.925—60 FR 52119, October 5, 1995. Administrator, Department of Homeland 76.942(f)—60 FR 52120, October 5, Security, Federal Emergency Management 1995. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Agency. 76.944(c)—60 FR 52121, October 5, [FR Doc. 2010–24326 Filed 9–27–10; 8:45 am] 1995. Fish and Wildlife Service BILLING CODE 9110–12–P 76.957—60 FR 52121, October 5, 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mineral Industry of Namibia in 2016
    2016 Minerals Yearbook NAMIBIA [ADVANCE RELEASE] U.S. Department of the Interior February 2020 U.S. Geological Survey The Mineral Industry of Namibia By James J. Barry In 2016, the diamond sector continued to be a significant 16%, for Swakop Uranium; about 10%, for Rössing Uranium contributor to Namibia’s economy. In terms of the average Ltd.; and 9% each, for B2Gold Namibia (Pty) Ltd., De Beers value of diamond production in dollars per carat ($533), the Marine Namibia (Pty) Ltd. (Debmarine), and Skorpion Zinc and country ranked second in the world after Lesotho. In terms of Namzinc (Pty) Ltd. (Chamber of Mines of Namibia, 2017, p. 19, the total value of its rough diamond production ($915 million), 90–91). the country ranked fifth after South Africa. Namibia was ranked ninth in the world in terms of rough diamond production by Production weight (carats). Namibia’s total diamond exports were valued at In 2016, copper electrowon production increased by 54% about $1.1 billion (about 1.9 million carats of diamond) in 2016. to 16,391 metric tons (t) from 10,659 t in 2015, which was According to the World Nuclear Association, Namibia’s Rössing attributed to the Tschudi Mine reaching nameplate capacity Mine and Langer Heinrich Mine were capable of providing 10% of 17,000 metric tons per year (t/yr). Uranium production of the world’s uranium output; the Langer Heinrich Mine was increased by 22% to 3,654 t (uranium content) in 2016 from one of the leading producing uranium mines in the world. The 2,993 t in 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling a Regime Shift in a Kelp Forest Ecosystem Caused by a Lobster Range Expansion
    BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE. 89(1):347–375. 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.5343/bms.2011.1127 MODELING A REGIME SHIFT IN A KELP FOREST ECOSYSTEM CAUSED BY A LOBSTER RANGE EXPANSION Laura K Blamey, Éva E Plagányi, and George M Branch ABSTRACT The South African West Coast rock lobster, Jasus lalandii (H. Milne-Edwards, 1837), has expanded its range to the southeast, where its abundance has increased radically. The ecological consequences of this “invasion” are likely to be considerable. We employed a minimally realistic model to simulate the “invasion” and to explore interactions of J. lalandii with the sea urchin, Parechinus angulosus (Leske, 1778), and the abalone, Haliotis midae Linnaeus, 1758, juveniles of which shelter beneath this urchin. Model fits to empirical data were good, although species-interaction terms were difficult to estimate. Base-case trajectories indicated: (1) Lobster biomass peaked at about 1000 t in 1994 and was then reduced by fishing to a stable value approximately 50% lower by 2008. (2) Urchins remained close to carrying capacity in “noninvaded” areas but collapsed to local extinction by 1997 in the invaded area. (3) Abalone declined over 2000–2008 in noninvaded areas because of illegal fishing and collapsed to near zero in the “invaded” area because of illegal fishing combined with increased lobster abundance. Sensitivity analyses favored the hypothesis that the invasion was due to adult immigration rather than larval recruitment. Modeled 50-yr projections indicated that urchins will remain locally extinct in the invaded area, even 50 yrs into the future. The abalone collapse in the invaded area would persist >50 yrs, even if lobsters were absent.
    [Show full text]
  • Penguin Camp)
    Appendix 1.2 PENGUIN Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (PENGUIN CAMP) Report from a Workshop held 8-9 September 1996, Cape Town, South Africa Edited by Susie Ellis, John P. Croxall and John Cooper Data sheet for the African Penguin Spheniscus demersus African Penguin Spheniscus demersus STATUS: New UCN Category: Vulnerable Based on: A1a, A2b, E CITES: Appendix II OTHER: In South Africa, endangered in terms of the Nature and Environmental Conservation Ordinance, No. 19 of 1974 of the Province of the Cape of Good Hope. This now applies to the Northern Cape, Western Cape and Eastern Cape Provinces. In Namibia, there is no official legal status. Listed as Near Threatened in Birds to Watch 2 (Collar et al. 1994). Listed as Vulnerable in the Red Data Book for South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland (Crawford 2000). Listed in Appendix II of the Convention for the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention). Taxonomic status: Species. Current distribution (breeding and wintering): Breeding distribution: Between Hollams Bird Island, Namibia and Bird Island, Algoa Bay, South Africa. Number of locations: 27 extant breeding colonies - eight islands and one mainland site along the coast of southern Namibia; 10 islands and two mainland sites along the coast of Western Cape Province, South Africa; six islands in Algoa Bay, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa (Crawford et al. 1995a). There is no breeding along the coast of South Africa's Northern Cape Province, which lies between Namibia and Western Cape Province. Concentrated Migration Regions: None. Juveniles tend to disperse along the coastline to the west and north (Randall et al.
    [Show full text]