ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA- TURKEY POWER PLANT
ISTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY MASLAK-ISTANBUL INVESTMENT AND CONSULTING MASLAK-ISTANBUL TURKEY LIMITED COMPANY TURKEY ANKARA TURKEY
DECEMBER 2007
This report is produced by EN-ÇEV and technically reviewed and evaluated by ITU Environmental Engineering Department and Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering Department Working Groups.
Prof. Dr. Orhan İNCE Prof. Dr. Hasancan OKUTAN Prof. Dr. Derin ORHON Prof. Dr. Ekrem EKİNCİ Prof. Dr. Seval SÖZEN Dr.Volkan ARINCI Eng. Senem TEKSOY
CONTENT N0
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
1.1 Project Description 2 1.2 Project Impacts 2 1.3 Recommendations 3
2. POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK 4
2.1 Policies 4 2.1.1 National Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation 4 2.1.2 World Bank Policy on Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01) 5 2.2. Legal and Regulatory Framework 5 2.3 Institutions 7
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 8
4. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE DATA 15
4.1. Physical Environment 15 4.1.1 Geology and Geomorphologic Characteristics 15 4.1.1.1. General Geological Structure 15 4.1.1.2. Stratigraphy 15 4.1.2. Soil Characteristics 25 4.1.3. Climatology 25 4.1.4. Topography 29 4.1.5. Ambient Air Quality 33 4.1.6. Noise 36 4.1.7. Flora and Fauna 36 4.1.8. Archaeological and Cultural Resources 42 4.1.9. Land Use 42 4.1.10. Sensitive Zones 42 4.2. Biological Environment 42 4.2.1. Wetlands 42 4.2.2. Vegetation 42 4.2.3. Wildlife 43 4.2.4. Social Environment 43
5. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 44
5.1. Construction Phase 44 5.1.1. Physical and Chemical 44 5.1.1.1. Geology and Soils 44 5.1.1.2.Topography and Landforms 44
i 5.1.1.3. Climate and Meteorology 44 5.1.1.4. Air Quality 45 5.1.1.5. Noise 45 5.1.1.6. Hydrology 45 5.1.1.7. Water Quality 46 5.1.1.8. Solid Waste 46 5.1.2. Biological 47 5.1.2.1. Flora and Fauna 47 5.1.2.2. Ecosystems 47 5.1.3. Socio-economic 47 5.1.3.1. Demographic 47 5.1.3.2. Land Use 48 5.1.4. Occupational Health and Safety 48 5.2. Operation Phase 48 5.2.1. Physical and Chemical 49 5.2.1.1 Geology and Soils 49 5.2.1.2. Topography and Landforms 49 5.2.1.3. Climate and Meteorology 49 5.2.1.4. Air Emissions 49 5.2.1.5 Noise 54 5.2.1.6. Hydrology 55 5.2.1.7 Water Quality 55 5.2.1.8. Solid Waste 56 5.2.2. Biological 56 5.2.2.1. Flora and Fauna 56 5.2.2.2. Ecosystems 57 5.2.3. Socio-economic Structure 58 5.2.3.1. Demographic 58 5.2.3.2. Land Use 58 5.1.4. Occupational Health and Safety 59
6. MITIGATION MEASURES 60
7. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 63
7.1. Site 63 7.2. Fuel Types 63 7.3. Technology 63 7.4. The "Do Nothing" Scenario 64
8. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP) 65
ANNEX 1 ANNEX 2
ii
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AKSA ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş. is proposing to construct a 566 MW natural gas driven power plant in Antalya in order to meet the increasing power demand in the region. However, considering the site conditions the actual output will be 525,2 MW. The Company acquired approximately 120 ha of land neighboring the organized industrial district of Antalya.
This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is to provide information on the potential negative and positive environmental and social impacts of the project. It also aims to make recommendations for the mitigation of the potential negative impacts and enhancement of the positive ones. A field survey of the project site was conducted and potential environmental impacts of project activities were identified, assessed, and documented. The EIA Team carried out consultations with various stakeholders, particularly lead agencies, local authorities and the affected people.
Both the Turkish and World Bank's social safeguard policies have been considered during the assessment. The EIA study has been carried out according to requirements of the current EIA Regulation of Turkish Government (Official Gazette, No: 25318, 16.12.2003) and the Environmental Assessment Policies and Procedures of the World Bank OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment (Annex B - Content of EA and Annex C - Environmental Management Plan).
Aim of the EIA study is to meet both the requirements of the Turkish EIA Legislation and World Bank for a "Category A" Environmental Assessment Study (OP 4.01 Annex B Content of an EA Category A Report). For this purpose, EIA has been prepared according to the special EIA format regarding the requirements of the World Bank and Turkish Ministry of Environment and Forestry.
This EIA study has been conducted by ENÇEV and ITU Environmental Engineering Department and Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering Department Working Group.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 1
1.1 Project Description
The intended power plant will comprise 2 units of 283 MW SIEMENS SGT5-4000F gas turbines yielding a total capacity of 566 MW, which will be operated as simple cycle turbines that will be driven by natural gas only, with an actual output of 525,2 MW at site conditions. The plant will be constructed near the organized industrial district of Antalya.
The plant will cover a land of 100,000 m2. The land is registered as agricultural land in the land registry.
1.2 Project Impacts
The potential ecological impacts identified in the operation of the power plant are: (i) water pollution related to disposal of domestic solid wastes generated by the personnel and domestic wastewater generated by the personnel, (ii) water pollution from oil type wastes and/or spills used for the maintenance of equipment (iii) noise pollution resulting from the operation of turbines and other equipment (iv) air pollution resulting from the stack emissions during energy generation.
All those wastes with potential impacts on the environment will be treated with most recent technology available in accordance with the relevant national and international legal framework.
The positive impacts that will be benefited from the project are basically the additional power availability and reliability in the region which is currently experiencing frequent power outages. The impact of power reliability will improve infrastructural conditions for further investments, basically related to tourism sector, in the area.
Accordingly, this will enable increased employment opportunities to the youth in the area and hence help to improve the social well being also with improved life standards due to satisfactory electricity supply.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 2
1.3 Recommendations
A number of mitigation measures are recommended against the adverse activities during the construction and operation phases of the project. Measures recommended during the construction phase include control of noise pollutions from heavy equipment and vehicles through proper inspection and maintenance, and use of noise suppressors or mufflers for heavy equipment, control of air pollution from construction works and movement of vehicles through proper inspection and maintenance to reduce exhaust emissions, watering of unpaved roads, control of adverse impacts from construction debris by proper handling and immediate removal, control of water pollution through proper storage and handling of oil wastes and treatment of wastewaters at site, control of solid wastes through sanitary storage and frequent collection for sanitary disposal. Quality of air and water will be monitored on a regular basis where noise will be measured periodically.
While during the operation phase, emphasis has been on the control of; emission levels which will be treated with the use of gas turbine equipped with dry low-NOx technology, noise pollution (particularly for the workers) which will be treated with building a noise insulated power room and satisfactory maintenance of related equipment, possible water pollution from oil wastes which will be treated with employing proper handling and storage of oils/oil wastes and stringent management of oil spills, all of which will be assured with periodic monitoring of noise and emission levels and drinking water quality. All precautions against fire accidents and electrocution will also be taken.
In all phases occupational health and safety will be carefully considered and controlled through continuous inspection to prevent disease and accidents, and workers will undergo an environmental and safety briefing on safety, sanitation measures, and emergency rescue procedures before development begins. Adequate sanitary facilities, potable water, and garbage bins will be provided.
From the study findings, it has been concluded that the impacts of the proposed project are minor and easily mitigable. The developer is strongly advised to implement the recommendations made by the EIA Team.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 3
2. POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK
2.1 Policies
This chapter discusses the policy, legal and institutional arrangement/ framework within which this EIA was drawn.
2.1.1 National Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation
The Turkish Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulation (Regulation of December 16, 2003, Official Gazette No. 25318) was enacted in view of the national environmental policies as a result of the accepted need of identifying environmental impacts of the defined types of plants, before they are realized.
The EIA process in Turkey starts with applying to the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) with a file prepared according to the General Project Presentation Format given in the Annex III of the EIA Regulation, designed for projects under the categories defined in Annex I of the regulation. Following the receipt of the format specific to the project form MoEF, the EIA study has to be completed and submitted to MoEF in one year time.
For the projects that fall under the categories defined in Annex II of the EIA regulation, the Project Presentation file has to be prepared and application has to be made to MoEF and/or the Governorship. The specific format for the EIA study will be given after the public involvement, scope and identification of the specific format meetings.
Thermal power plants which require an EIA report are specified in Annex I of the EIA regulation as:
Article 2- Thermal power plants a) Thermal power plants and incineration systems with a total thermal power of 200 MWt and over.
This EIA has been prepared in strict compliance with the requirements of the Turkish environmental regulations.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 4
2.1.2 World Bank Policy on Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01)
The World Bank requires EIA of projects proposed for Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable in order to improve decision making of the Bank on the project. The Environment Strategy outlines the Bank’s approach to address the environmental challenges and ensures that Bank projects and programs integrate principles of environmental sustainability.
This study is in line with the Bank's requirements. The Bank's guideline regarding the conduct of an EIA has been adequately followed by the EIA Team.
2.2. Legal and Regulatory Framework
The relevant laws that promote environmental management in Turkey have been adequately reviewed and applied by the EIA Team including the following:
¾ Regulation on Prevention and Control of Industrial Air Pollution (Date: 22.07.2006, No: 26230)
¾ Regulation on Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise Pollution (Date: 01/07/2005, No: 25682)
¾ Water Pollution Control Regulation (Date: 31.12.2004, No: 25687)
¾ Regulation on Water for Human Consumption (Date: 17.02.2005, No: 22730)
¾ Solid Waste Control Regulation (Date: 14.03.1991, No: 20814)
¾ Environmental Impact Assessment regulation (Date: 16.12.2003, No: 25318)
¾ Regulation on Control of Hazardous Wastes (Date: 14.03.2005, No: 25755)
¾ Regulation and Guidelines on Occupational Health and Safety (Work Law No: 4857)
¾ Regulation on Control of Waste Oils (Date: 21.01.2004, No: 25353)
¾ Groundwater Law (Date: 23.12.1960, No: 10688)
¾ Electricity Market Law (Date: 20.2.2001, No: 4628)
¾ Natural Gas Market Law (Date: 18.4.2001, No: 4646)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 5
¾ Environment Law (Date: 9.8.1983, No: 2872)
¾ Regulation on Control of Excavation Soil, Construction and Debris Waste (Date: 18.03.2004; No: 25406)
¾ Related EU Directives
¾ Related International Conventions (as summarized below)
Bern Convention on Protection of Wildlife and Natural Habitats This convention aims to protect the wild plant and animal species together with their natural living environments, putting special emphasis on the endangered species. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1984.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) CITES Convention has developed a system which set up a condition of government permission for the trading of endangered species of wild fauna and flora. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1996.
Ramsar Convention on Wetlands The basic aim of the Convention is to emphasize the fact that ‘wetlands are important economic, cultural, scientific and social resources and their loss is irreversible’. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1994.
Biodiversity Convention (Rio Conference) The Convention establishes three main goals: the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the use of genetic resources. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1997.
Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage Paris The convention considers adoption of new provisions in the form of a convention establishing an effective system of collective protection of the cultural and natural heritage of outstanding universal value, organized on a permanent basis and in accordance with modern scientific methods. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1983.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 6
The Protocol for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution The Convention aims to protect the Mediterranean Sea against all sorts of pollution by the Mediterranean countries. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1981.
Convention on Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal The convention aims to protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects resulting from the generation, management, transboundary movements and disposal of hazardous and other wastes. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1994.
Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution To create an essential framework for controlling and reducing the damage to human health and the environment caused by transboundary air pollution. Turkey has become a party to the Convention on 1994.
2.3 Institutions
The related institutions related to the installation of a new natural gas driven power plant are listed as below:
• Ministry of Environment and Forestry • Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources • Ministry of Labor and Social Security • Ministry of Industry and Trade • Electricity Market Regulation Authority • State Planning Organization • General Directorate of Petroleum Works • General Directorate of Petroleum Transmission Lines Co. • Power Resources Development Administration • General Directorate of Turkish Electricity Transmission Lines Co. • General Directorate of Turkish Electricity Distribution Lines Co.
These institutions listed above are actually the stakeholders that form the framework conditions for encouragement and support of power market.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 7
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed plant consists of 2 units of 283 MW SIEMENS SGT5-4000F model gas turbine with a total capacity of 566 MW, which will be operated as simple cycle turbines. The power plant will be operated with natural gas fuel only.
The plant will be installed in Antalya city, Selimiye village, Surutme district covering a total of 120000 m2 on surveyed land, neighboring the Antalya Organized Industrial District. The general location of the power plant is illustrated in Figure 1.
The nearest residential area is at approximately 3 km distance from the power plant. The project site is identified as agricultural land in the land registry. The plant layout, road map and the 1/25000 scaled map showing the plant site is shown in Figure 2.
Figure1. Location of the Power Plant
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 8
Figure 2. Plant Layout
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 9
The land registries show that the land is owned by AKSA ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş.
The system will consist of the following units:
¾ Gas Turbines 2 Units of SGT 5-4000F Model and Auxiliaries ¾ Raw Water Tank for Fire Fighting, and Fire Pumps ¾ Gas Pressure Reduction Station ¾ Main Power and Auxiliary Transformer ¾ Switchyard
The process profile of the power plant is shown in Figure 3. It shows the flow of natural gas and the energy production.
Figure 3. Process Profile of the Power Plant
The plant will burn natural gas at 33 bars to produce electrical energy. The units are classified as industrial type gas turbines.
The natural gas will be taken from the national natural gas transmission lines at a 4 km distance from the plant. The natural gas will be piped directly to the system with branching from the main line without intermittent storage.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 10
Natural gas is a mixture of light molecular weight hydrocarbons (C1-C5) such as methane (CH4), ethane (C2H6), and propane (C3H8). A major portion of natural gas is methane. It may be found in underground alone, or as gas on top of petroleum reservoirs, or as dissolved in petroleum. Like petroleum, natural gas is present in the microscopic pores of rocks and it reaches the production wells flowing through the rocks. Natural gas is separated from the heavy hydrocarbons on surface. Natural gas is the cleanest fossil fuel that is used for domestic purposes. When natural gas is burnt, CO2, water vapor and NOx are formed. The compositions of natural gas and petroleum are given in Table 1.
Natural gas is an odorless, smokeless, economical, high efficiency, clean and environmental friendly gas which is free from toxic materials.
The utilization of natural gas has been increasing among other energy resources and it is anticipated that it will continue to be an alternative energy resource in the 21. Century. The share of natural gas grown to 22,5 % in 1982 from 16 % in 1960s, whereas the share of solid fossil fuels dropped to 32 % from 52 % in the same time interval. This trend is likely to be followed in the future.
Table 1. Components of Natural Gas and Petroleum
Component Molar Fraction of Molar Fraction of Natural Gas Petroleum Methane (CH4) 0.90 0.44
Ethane (C2H6) 0.05 0.04
Propane (C3H8) 0.03 0.04
Butane (C4H10) 0.01 0.03
Pentane (C5H12) 0.01 0.02
Hexane and heavier (>C6H14) << 0.01 0.43
The plant will not consume water for its operation as the gas turbine has a dry low NOx control and all cooling operations will be performed by air. Water consumption will only be in the form of domestic water consumption by the plant’s personnel. The water will be supplied from wells to be drilled on and around the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 11
Wastewater generated will not be discharged to any sewerage system. An independent wastewater treatment plant will be designed to treat the domestic wastewater discharges. The treatment system will be designed to meet the criteria defined for Sensitive Zones under the EU Council Directive Concerning Urban Wastewater Treatment (91/271/EEC) considering the potential sensitive character of the project area. The treated wastewater will be reused for irrigation purposes in the project area which is in line with the policies related to rational use of water resources.
New storm water drains will be constructed at the site which will be used together with the existing drains to direct storm water to the main drainage system.
The site is reached by land road which takes approximately 25 km from the Antalya City center and it is right next to the Antalya-Burdur highway.
The construction works will be completed in 1,5 years. The economical life of the plant is estimated as 30 years. The project time table is given in Table 2.
The numbers of workers to be employed during the construction and operation phases are given in Table 3. In the operation phase personnel will be a total of 200 workers.
It is planned to work in 3 shifts. In the operation phase 100 people will work in the plant. In the operation phase it is planned to arrange the working hours as 667 hours per month and for 12 months a year. Hence the plant will be able to work in full capacity.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 12
Table 2. Project Timetable of the Power Plant
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 13
Table 3. Number of Workers per Activity
Activity # of Workers Construction Operation Phase Phase Construction 60 30 Mechanics 60 30 Electrical 40 20 Administration 40 20 Total 200 100
The proposed power plant will not use materials that are classified as hazardous or toxic during the construction and operational phases of the project.
Oil tanks will be isolated with concrete lining to prevent any leakage and the waste oils, generated less than 10 m3/year, will be removed by a licensed hauler.
National Occupational Health and Safety Regulation will be strictly complied during the construction and operation phases of the Project.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 14
4. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE DATA
This chapter provides information on the physical, biological and socio-economic elements of the environment, which shall be used as benchmarks for future monitoring. The area considered for assessment of baseline conditions span the whole Antalya region which will be large enough in extent to include all potential impacts from the proposed project. Data were obtained as a result of literature and field surveys.
4.1. Physical Environment
4.1.1 Geology and Geomorphologic Characteristics
4.1.1.1. General Geological Structure
Stratigraphic and formational characteristics have been identified, the 1/25000 scale maps have been partially completed and the 1/100000 scale geological map of the region has been prepared. There have been hundreds of naming studies conducted in the West and Middle Taurus Mountains.
In order to form a uniform legend, the naming for similar rock types of similar ages have been unified in an appropriate approach and this has sometimes led to exceptions. The study area placed in the Antalya gulf (West Taurus Mountains) houses Antalya nappes and the Myocene- quaternary ranged plant covers that cover the Antalya nappes stratigraphically.
4.1.1.2. Stratigraphy
Beydagları Formation which represent the autochthonic rock units are placed in the north of the region. Beydağları and Antalya Miocene basins are developed partly independent of each other, and Antalya Upper Miocene-Pliocene basin which is developed totally independent from the others make up the main Antalya Neogene basin.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 15
The rock units of the Beydağları Miocene basin of Western Taurus start with; the Aquitanian Karabayır Formation which consists mainly of limestons with Rhodophyta and continue with the Burdigalian and Langhian Karakuş Formation consisting of flysch type sediments and the overlying deltaic conglomerate. This formation, which fills the basin, has been developed during the Middle Miocene while the Lycian nappes were thrusting.
The Antalya Miocene basin in the west of Middle Taurus lies between the Beydağları and Anamas-Akseki platforms. The basin consists of the Aksu Formation which includes terrigenous conglomerate-siltstone, marine; conglomerate-sandstone and reef limestone lenses; the Oymapınar Limestone of mainly reef limestone; the Çakallar Formation consisting of limestone breccia and packstone alternated with clayey limestone; the Geceleme Formation of limy claystone -sandstone alternation; and the Karpuzçay Formation which is composed of shale- sandstone-conglomerate alternation with occasional volcanic tuff interbeds.
This sedimentation period started in Upper Oligocene and ceased in Upper Tortonian as the basin was compressed first towards the-west and later towards the south by the Aksu phase. In the area elevated by this compression, the Taşlık Formation consisting of clayey limestone - limestone-blocky conglomerate (some are gypsum) has been deposited locally in Lower Messinian.
The Antalya Upper Miocene and Pliocene basin lies in the west of Middle Taurus. It appears in the south of the Aksu valley and along the Mediterranean coast as a post-tectonic unit. The Messinian Eskiköy Formation of conglomerate-sandstone, the Gebiz Limestone sometimes reefal showing lateral gradation into the Eskiköy Formation, the Yenimahalle Formation of Lower and Upper Pliocene age including limy claystone -sandstone, and the Upper Pliocene Alakilise Formation which consists of sandstone with volcanic tuff and conglomerate make up the rock succession of this basin.
Geological map of the project area and its close vicinity of 1/100 000 scale is given in Figure 4.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 16
Figure 4. Figure Geologicalof Map Projectthe Area(1/100 000)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 17
Beydagları autochthons
Beydağları which represent the autochthons of the West Taurus mountains, are generally composed of platform-type sediments. The study area consists of, from bottom to top, Upper- Middle Triassic aged Kuyubası dolomite, Beydaglari formation that is composed of Jura-Kretase aged neritic limestones, danien aged Camlıdere olistostrom, Upper Lutessian-Prabonien aged limestone, Karakustepe formation formed from sandstone, claystone and silt stones.
TRIASSIC Kuyubası Dolomite
The Upper- Middle Triassic aged formation form from old thick dolomites was named by Gunay et al. (1982). The surface mostrals of the Kuyubasi dolomite correspond partially to the Mentese dolomites and Leylek limestones on-bserved in the northeast and east. The unit consists of massive, middle thickness, dark grey colored, coarse particle and sometimes fine-middle particle, spread dolomites. Dolomite limestones can also be observed spead in these dolomites. The unit is transitive to Beydagi formation on the top side. The unit has been observed to be 2200 m thick. Involutina sp. was identified in the dolomite exploration along with the Megalodon sp. on the upper levels. Kuyubasi dolomite sedimented on shallow carbonate self environment.
JURA-CRESTACEOUS Beydağları Formation
Upper Cretaceous carbonates of the middle-northern part of the Bey Dağları autochthon (between Elmalı and Çamlıdere) show important sedimentary breaks and facies changes with respect to evolution of the platform. Biostratigraphic studies on the Upper Cretaceous carbonates indicate deposition in neritic, hemipelagic and pelagic environments.
The Upper Cretaceous sequence of the middle-northern part of the autochthon is represented by two formations. The Bey Dağları Formation comprises thick neritic limestones at the base and thin hemipelagic limestones at the top. Approximately 700 m thick, middle Cenomanian- Coniacian neritic part consists of shallow water platform limestones, which deposited in peritidal environment. 26 m thick, Coniacian-Santonian hemipelagic limestones gradually overlie the neritic limestones. Thin to middle bedded cherty pelagic limestones of the Akdağ Formation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 18
reach to the total thickness of 100 m and disconformably overlie the different stratigraphic levels of the underlying Bey Dağları Fromation. The pelagic marls of the Paleogene, which locally begin with a pelagic conglomerate levels, disconformably overlie the different stratigraphic levels of the Upper Cretaceous sequence. Two rudist formations have been observed in the neritic limestones. The lower rudist level observed in the eastern slope of the Katran Dağ is mainly composed of caprinids (caprinid-radiolitid lithosome). The rudist fauna comprises Ichthyosarcolites bicarinatus (Gemmellaro), Ichthyosarcolites triangularis Desmartes, Caprina schiosensis Boehm, Neocaprina gigantea Plenicar, Schiosia cf. schiosensis Boehm, Sphaerucaprina woodwardi Gemmellaro, Durania sp., Radiolites sp., Sauvagesia sp. and unidentified radiolitids, which indicate Middle-Late Cenomanian. Corals and gastropods accompany the rudist fauna.
Upper rudist level is dominated by hippuritids and found near the top of the platform limestones (hippuritid-radiolitid lithosome). The fauna is represented by the dominance of Vaccinites praegiganteus (Toucas), which is accompanied by rare Vaccinites inferus (Douvillé), Hippurites socialis Douvillé, Hippuritella resecta (Defrance) and radiolitids.
87Sr/86Sr values of well-preserved low-Mg calcite of the shells of V. praegiganteus show that the age of this level is of Late Turonian. The upper rudist level, which prominently occurs in the Korkuteli area, is observed in the stratigraphic sections measured in Büyükköy, Kızılağaç and Peçenek Boğazı throughout the northern part of the platform. Pseudorhapydionina dubia- Pseudorhapydionina laurinensis, Chrysalidina gradata-Pseudolituonella reicheli and Nezzazatinella picardi-Psudonummoloculina heimi biozones have been identified, which correspond to Middle-Upper Cenomanian, uppermost Cenomanian-lowermost Turonian and Middle- Upper Turonian respectively
PALEOCENE Camlıdere Olistostrom (Tpc)
The formation was named by Poisson (1977). It consists of limestone marn, claystone and sandstone on the bottom and olistolite particles of various sizes on the top. The base of the unit has rock types such as middle-thin, beige, cream, gray, yellow, pink colored limestone, marn, claystone, siltstone, kalkarenite, and sandstone. On top of it there is the Antalya nappes and turmis olsitostrom of the Beydaglari formation. This high level matrix has a caotic character on
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 19
the upper levels which is sometimes sandstone-claystone and sometimes conglomerate. The thickness ranges between 0 -200 m. The unit is assumed as Danien aged. The formation sedimented in the active basin environment on the front of the Antalya nappes.
EOCENE Kucukkoy Formation
The formation was named by Poisson (1977). It consists of claystone marn, siltstone, sandstone, clayey-sandstone and limestone. It is hard to distinguish the Kucukkoy formation due to the similarity to the Paleocene-Sub Eocene aged rocks and tectonics. The formation consist of middle thin, thick layered, white, yellow, grey, beige, greenish grey, pink and red colored calcarenite, sandstone, limestone and middle level claystone, siltstone, marn, and clayey- limestone rock types. Conglomerates can be observed on the bottom layers. The thickness of the unit ranges between 0-500 m. The formation is Upper- Lutessian-Priabonien aged. It sedimented in slope-basin environment.
MYOCENE Karabayır Formation
The formation forming from algae limestone was named by Poisson and Poignot (1974). The formation can be observed also in the Antalya nappes on the South of Sutculer. The unit consists of middle-thick layered, grey, beige, cream, yellow, and dark gren algae limestones. Conglomera or conglomeratic limestones can be observed on the bottom. Coral masses are observed in parts where algae are less dense. The formation ends with clayey limestones on the top. Its maximum thickness is 400 m. The formation is Akitanies Sub Burdigalien aged. It sedimented in shallow carbonate self environment.
Karakustepe Formation
The formation generally forming from consequtive lining of sandstone, claystone and siltstone was named by Poisson (1977). The formation can be observed also in the Antalya nappes on the South of Sutculer, where it is dominated by claystone. The unit consists of consecutive thin- middle-thick layered, grey, gren, beige, light Brown sandstone, claystone and siltstone. Clayey- sandy limestone, conglomer, marn types can also be observed in the unit. The maximum
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 20
thickness is 600 m. It is Burdigaliyen aged and also corresponding to Sub Langien. It sedimented on slope-basin environment with heavy turbid streams.
ANTALYA NAPPES
Antalya nappes were identified by Lefevre (1967). It was categorized as Lower Nap (Cataltepe unit), and Upper nap (Tahtalıdağ unit) and then re-categorized as Cataltepe nap, Alakırcay nap, Tahtalıdağ nap ve Tekirova ofiyolit nap by Senel et al. (1992,1996). In the study area, the Alakırcay nap, Tahtalıdağ nap ve Tekirova ofiyolit napa are surfaced. The Alakırcay nap formed from Alakırcay and Kumluca units, is structurally located on Cataltepe nap and below the Tahlalıdag nap. The Alakırcay nap named by Senel et al. (1981) is Anissien-Norien aged. It consists of overlaying Halobiali micrite, radyolarite, cort, planty sandstone and pillow shaped basalt, spilite type of rocks on vertical and horizontal directions. It has a chaotic structure due to fractures, which hardens identification of formations within the unit. It is Upper Anissien-Norien aged. It sedimented on basin environment. It consists of the Gokdere, Candir and Tesbihli formations.
Gökdere formation
This formation occupies an area of 35 km2. In many parts of the area the formation occurs in the uppermost levels of the Triassic rhythmic series. The formation consists of platy limestones containing silica nodules. Thickness of the formation is between 400-600 m. Limestones, which are whitish to milky-white-colored or pinkish to gray-colored, contain silica lenses; in places radiolarite layers can be observed within these limestones. This formation—which horizontally or vertically grades into radiolarites in the lower part—shows gradual transition into sandy limestones in the Körler Mahallesi, situated in the north of the area. In the eastern part of the area, in the vicinity of Gökdere, Deveboynu Geçidi, platy limestones which show lateral transition and are interbedded with radiolarites were observed. The radiolarites contain abundant Halobia, Daonella and small Ammonites and are overlain by marly limestones and sediments with plant remains; the contact is abnormal since the formation is thrust here over the Upper Cretaceous and limestone beds.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 21
Thin sections of fine-grained limestones with silica nodules were examined and the presence of the following fossils was established: Nodosaria sp., Glomospira sp., Duostominidae, Radiolaria sp., spicules, and pelagic lamellibranch fragments. Erol Öngüç, who determined these fossils, assigned them to a Triassic age. Macrofossils, such as Halobia, Daonella, and Ammonites (Ceratites sp.), were also found.
Sedimentological study of the thin sections of some samples showed that the rock is biocalcilutite (or aphanitic limestone). Biomicrite is generally well sorted and contains Radiolaria, Nodosaria and other small, deep-sea Foraminifera scattered in an orthochem consisting of thick calcareous ooze.
Dolomitization is very slight and secondary calcite mosaic and stylolite structures, which do not change the original texture of the rocks, are also observed. Study of the rocks shows that calm marine conditions predominated in this area. Alternations of thin limestone, radiolarite and sandstone beds reach sometimes several hundred meters of thickness. The Gökdere formation appears here as an anticline which is overlain by the white-colored and semicrystalline Karadağ limestones; the contact between the two formations is slightly faulted.
Going upward the boundary between the sandstone facies and the limestones is characterized by a gradual transition. This is a somewhat different form of rhythmic series. The area is characterized by numerous minor faults. In the limestone blocks, occurring within the lower portion of the limestone strata, silicified and brecciated parts are observed. Sedimentological study of the thin sections showed that the rock is mainly unconsolidated biomicrite containing radiolaria and pelagic lamellibranch fragments. Irregular calcite veins of various thicknesses are encountered in this formation.
Çandır formation.
The Çandır formation covers an area of about 27 km2. Going from the west, exposures of this formation are also observed at the northern and western flanks of Erendağ, in the vicinity of Çandır Mahallesi, between Çınarcık and Armutçuk, north of Menekişler, east and west of Girevit Dağ, in Gedeller Mahallesi, north of Sivridağ, west of Tahtacı and Körler Mahallesi, and on the coastline west of Dinek Çeşme.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 22
Çandır formation overlies conformably the Permian limestones and is overlain, in turn, by a radiolarite-bearing chert formation. No fossils were found in the Çandır formation; it contains numerous sills of extrusive submarine lavas. Although plant remains were encountered in some of the layers they could not be determined.
The formation is generally thick-bedded and grades into sandy limestone beds. In some localities, this formation alternates with radiolarite beds, while in the upper parts it gradually alternates with platy limestone beds. It occurs in the lower part of the thick Triassic rhythmic series, and its thickness varies between 300-600 meters. In the middle part of the formation alternations of marls and limestones are observed.
Çandır formation, which generally occurs on the flanks of the hills, consists of sandstone, sandy limestones and marls. Sandstone, which is dominant, occurs in the form of beds attaining some 100 cm in thickness. However it is thin-bedded when occurring in alternation with green-colored marls and silicified layers. The beds are generally yellowish, brown or sometimes gray-colored.
The sandstone layers, which overlie the Permian limestones and dolomites west of Dinek Çeşme along the coastline, are hard,-yellowish in color, and contain plant remnants; ripple marks are also observed. Sandstone layers are conformable with the Permian dolomites and are overlain by Cretaceous limestones.
Sandstones observed south of Gedeller Mahallesi are also found in the valley between Sivridağ and Karıncalı Dağ, but contact with the Permian layers is not normally observed due to thrusting. Further to the west, in the Sivridağ area, they are thrust over the Upper Cretaceous limestones. The boundary between the two formations is faulted.
In the lower levels of the Çandır formation, radiolarite and limestone layers, as well as crystallized limestone blocks, 20-30 meters in length, are observed in places; these do not show continuity and grade horizontally into the sandstones.
Tesbihli formation
This formation occupies an area of approximately 8 km2. It is encountered in many places in various levels of the Triassic rhythmic series, but its greatest thickness occurs in the middle part
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 23
of the Triassic. Exposures of this formation are observed in the following localities: On both sides of Sinan Değirmeni located north of the area; in the area between Erendağ and Karadağ; in the Çukurardıç locality; south of Çalbalı Dere; in the area between Akadamlar Korler Mahallesi and Sekli Tepe; to the south of the studied area, between Çınarcık-Filler Mahallesi, and between Akçaisa-Armutluk; between Palaz Mevki -Şalbalı Dağ (in thin bands); east and west of Girevit Dağ; and south of Gökdere. In these areas the formation grades vertically or laterally into sandstones and limestones. The formation is mainly red-colored; in places, green, gray or black color can also be observed.
The Tesbihli formation concordantly and gradually passes into the Çandır and Gökdere formations in the lower and upper parts, respectively. Its lithology is represented by cherts, radiolarites, radiolarite-bearing cherts, green and brown-colored, thin bedded marls and clays, pink-colored and thin-bedded limestone, as well as grayish marly limestones.
The thickness of radiolarites varies between 40 to 60 meters. Total thickness of the formation including other rocks encountered in the area amounts to approximately 200 meters. However, thickness of the formation shows some local changes. Abundant Daonella and Halobia are found in various parts of the area under investigation. Particularly rich in fossils are the following localities: Deveboynu -Çınarcık Mahallesi, Palamut Gediği and southern part of Tesbihli Tepe.
Fossils collected from the strongly folded and fractured red radiolarites, located south of Tesbihli Tepe, were identified by Mrs. Suzanne Freneix from the Paleontological Institute of France, who attributed this formation to Ladinian, based on the presence in these beds of Daonella indica Bittner.
The Tesbihli formation within the Triassic rhythmic series is tectonically the most affected formation in the area; in places it is fractured, folded and strongly deformed. The formation is not represented by continuous beds but is in the form of lenses, which attain sometimes 1 to 3 km in length. The general strike is in the NE-SW direction. Within this formation bituminous horizons and manganese ore beds are encountered.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 24
4.1.2. Soil Characteristics
Extensive soil classes have been formed in Antalya with the effects of the topography, climate, main materials, land cover and time. In addition, some land types devoid of soil cover and profile improvements are also observed.
The largest area of the Antalya basin is covered by red Mediterranean soil. It covers a land of 574332 ha in Antalya. It is common in especially north and central part of the basin and it extends to the north of Lake Egridir in the south. It is observed in northern direction beyond this point. It is mostly seen in combination with Red-Brown Mediterranean soil which is common in mid basin areas. These soils are in certain parts cut through with alluvial and colluvial soil.
The second prevailing soil type is Antalya basin is the Brown-Forest large soil type. It covers a land of 326.246 ha. It extends through the basin from one end to other, starting from Alanya in the south east of the basin, to northwest between Mediterranean land and Rendzinas. In addition, it is observed in combination with chestnut color land in the west and north (Lake Egridir) of the basin.
4.1.3. Climatology
Ambient Temperature
As the project site falls within the borders of Antalya city, meteorological data of Antalya city obtained from the State Meteorological Institute of years 1996-2005 were considered in this study. Monthly average ambient air temperatures recorded in Antalya are given in Table 4.
Precipitation
Annual average precipitation in Antalya was measures as 1286.4mm, where the maximum daily rainfall was measured as 227.6 mm in December (Table 5).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 25
Table 4. Monthly Temperature Variations in Antalya
Months Average Max Average Min Average Temperature (oC) Temperature (oC) Temperature (oC) January 10.1 15.2 6.3 February 10.6 15.9 6.4 March 12.7 18.2 8.0 April 15.9 21.2 11.2 May 21.3 26.9 16.0 June 26.2 32.2 20.4 July 29.2 35.1 23.8 August 28.5 34.5 23.4 September 24.8 31.2 19.7 October 20.3 27.0 15.6 November 15.3 21.8 11.1 December 11.6 16.7 8.0 Annual 18.9 24.7 14.2 Measured Station: Antalya, Altitude: 51 m, Latitude: 36o53’, Longitude: 30o42’
Table 5. Precipitation in Antalya
Months Average Total Max Daily Average Number of Precipitation (mm) Precipitation (mm) Snowy Days January 249.1 164.1 0.1 February 115.9 111.9 0.2 March 106.5 161.1 0.1 April 105.1 142.4 May 42.1 73.0 June 6.1 12.3 July 5.6 32.5 August 4.3 27.8 September 15.9 52.2 October 57.5 102.3 November 205.2 179.1 December 373.1 227.6 Annual 1286.4 227.6 0.4 Measured Station: Antalya, Altitude: 51 m, Latitude: 36o53’, Longitude: 30o42’
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 26
Cloudiness
The annual average number of cloudless days in Antalya was 158.7, whereas the average number of cloudy days was recorded as 26.3 (Table 6).
Humidity
Annual average relative humidity in Antalya is 61 % and the minimum relative humidity is 3 % (Table 7).
Wind
The annual average wind speed in Antalya is 2.7 m/s. The maximum wind speed is 43.2m/s in the SSE direction. The prevailing wind direction is NNW with an average wind speed of 3.5m/s and a frequency of 2311 blows (Table 8). The wind rose for Antalya according to blow frequencies and average wind directions are given in Figure 5 and Figure 6, respectively.
Table 6. Average Number of Clear, Cloudy and Closed-out Days in Antalya
Months Average Number of Average Number of Average Number of Clear Days Cloudy Days Closed-out Days (0.0 – 1.9) (2.0 – 8.0) (8.1 – 10.0) January 8.7 4.5 5.9 February 8.1 4.3 3.6 March 8.3 4.2 3.9 April 7.4 4.3 2.5 May 9.5 3.2 0.9 June 19.6 1.6 July 23.0 1.2 August 21.4 1.3 September 18.8 1.7 0.1 October 15.4 2.6 1.0 November 10.9 3.6 2.6 December 7.6 4.8 5.8 Annual 158.7 3.1 26.3 Measured Station: Antalya, Altitude: 51 m, Latitude: 36o53’, Longitude: 30o42’
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 27
Table 7. Monthly Relative Humidity in Antalya
Months Min. Relative Humidity (%) Avr.Relative Humidity (%) January 7 63 February 8 60 March 4 62 April 6 67 May 6 64 June 7 57 July 6 57 August 3 60 September 5 59 October 3 59 November 4 63 December 11 66 Annual 3 61 Measured Station: Antalya, Altitude: 51 m, Latitude: 36o53’, Longitude: 30o42’
Table 8. Wind conditions in Antalya
Months Average Maximum Wind Average Average Number of Wind Speed Number of Strong Wind Days (m/s) Stormy Days DirectionSpeed (m/s) January 3.1 SSE 43.2 2.9 6.2 February 3.3 SSE 30.8 2.6 7.1 March 3.1 S 27.8 1.7 7.7 April 2.6 NNW 24.5 0.9 6.0 May 2.3 N 16.1 3.8 June 2.7 N 17.0 4.4 July 2.5 N 19.1 0.4 6.1 August 2.4 WNW 21.8 0.4 2.9 September 2.5 NNW 19.5 0.3 3.4 October 2.5 N 21.3 0.6 2.8 November 2.4 S 25.0 1.4 3.6 December 2.7 SE 4.8 2.3 5.8 Annual 2.7 SSE 43.2 13.5 59.8
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 28
Figure 5. Wind Rose of Antalya according to the Blow Frequencies
Figure 6. Wind Rose of Antalya according to Average Wind Speeds
4.1.4. Topography
An average of 77,2 % of Antalya’s land is mountainous, 10,2 % is plateau and 12 % is undulating land. The Taurus Mountains which cover ¾ of the city, are higher than 2500 – 3000 m at several points. There are wide plateaus and basins in the western Teke region. The majority of these mountains and plateaus are formed from limestone. There are many caves, water springs and such structures in the regions formed from the melting of limestone structures. The topographic variety of the region creates different environments in terms of climate, agriculture, demography and residency.
The different areas can be distinguished as coastal and upland. The average elevation of the coastal sites range between 5-44 m, where as the elevation in upland regions range between 900-1000m.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 29
Major water bodies
Rivers and Streams
Rivers and streams in Antalya collect water from the southern slopes of the Taurus Mountains and they are basically observed like creeks. They have irregular regimes and dry-out towards the end of hot and dry summer months.
The major streams can be listed as:
Manavgat Creek: Originating from the mountains on the east of Gembos basin, the Manavgat Creek flows down to Manavgat falls. It has a very regular flowing regime. It is one of the streams with largest capacity in the South Anatolian region, other than the Seyhan and Ceyhan rivers. It has a greenish color.
Aksu Creek: It enters Antalya from the Isparta border. The velocity of stream is very fast along the Antalya basin following a rather narrow path. It is supplemented from an area of 3000 km2. The stream loses its strength after entering the basin. It is highly susceptible to the changes in the precipitation. It sometimes causes flooding on the both sides of the stream. It is used for transport of woods.
Kopru Creek: It enters Antalya from the Isparta border. The elevations in water level are more regular than Aksu creek. It becomes a river between November and May, carrying water at 100 m3/s and higher speeds. It generally has clear water.
Duden Creek: It originates 30 km away from the north of Antalya, flows through the underground and surface on its way and finally falls to sea. The flow regime is regular supplemented by the underground waters. The water level does not show much variance between summer and winter months.
Dim Creek: It passes through the Antalya basin. It carries a large amount of water supplemented by springs.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 30
Kargı Creek: It originates from the Akdağ Mountain. It is formed from the combination of Derince and Tasatan creeks. It has a strong flow but it almost dries out in summer months.
Alara Creek: It is supplemented from an area of 1000 km2. It carries large amount of water. The flow rate of water does not go below 20 m3/s between December and June. It passes through narrow passages until it flows near the flat plains near the sea.
Karpuz Creek: It forms from the combination of the Cengel Creek from the east and the Ahmetler Creek from the north. It has a strong flow during winter but very dry in summer moths hardly reaching to the sea.
Alağır Creek: It is formed from a few strong springs. It carries a large amount of water although it is short. It has a weaker flow during summer unlike winter.
Boğa Creek: This creek flows from the slopes of Bey Mountains where the Antalya basin starts. Turgut ve Cumalı creeks also flow into Boğa creek. It flows to the sea.
Buyuk Arapsuyu: It originates from the flat plains a few km away from the Boğa Creek and flows to the sea after running for 2 km.
Kucuk Arapsuyu: It originates 2 km away from the east of Buyuk Arapsuyu and flows to the sea after running for 1 km.
Lakes, Artificial Lakes, Reservoirs and Dams
There are no lakes of significant volume in Antalya.
Lake Soğut: It is in a cavity surrounded by the mountains on the Antalya-Burdur border at an altitude of 1 345 m. The length of the lake is approximately 13 km extending in the east-west direction, and 5 km in the south-north direction. It is supplemented basically by Karasu, Bozcay, Kocapınar ve Cığlık Creeks. The surface area of the lake is 40 km2. It dries significantly in summer months. It is covered with marshes and island of reeds. It freezes in winter months.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 31
Karagol Reed: It is located a few km away from the Elmali district. The surface area of the lake is 10 km2. It is indeed looks like a large swamp and reed. It is supplemented by Koca Creek and Cengel Spring. There are islands of reeds.
Lake Avlan: It is located in the south of Elmali district. The surface area of the lake is 10 km2. It is supplemented by Koca Akcay river.
There are also the Oymapınar, Alakır ve Korkuteli dam lakes in Antalya.
Oymapınar Dam: It is constructed on the Manavgat Creek and it is in operation since 1980. The dept is 185 m and the surface area of the lake is 470 ha. The storage volume is 300 million m3. It produces 102 Million kW of electrical power per year.
Alakır Dam: It is constructed on the Alakır Creek and it is in operation since 1973. The dept is 185 m and the surface area of the lake is 49,3 ha. The storage volume is 80 million m3. It protects an area of 1940 ha from flooding.
Korkuteli Dam: It is constructed on the Korkuteli stream and it is in operation since 1976. The dept is 70,2 m and the surface area of the lake is 670 ha. The storage volume is 4,5 million m3. It is used for the irrigation of an area of 5986 ha.
The springs of Antalya are listed below:
Demre Spring: It is in 5 km south of Demre. There are two springs on either side of the valley in Cayagazi area. Their hydrous are close to each other. The one on the East slope is named Burguc water and known as the spring by the locals. The other spring comes to surface from three points on a plain surrounded by concrete walls. Temperature of the water is 15˚C. It is a slightly sulfurous spring water.
Korkuteli Spring: It is at a 9 km distance from Korkuteli. It comes to surface from a number of points. It has a brackish nature and hard to drink. Temperature of the water is 18˚C.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 32
Sarisu Spring: It comes to surface at a slope a few km away from Ilıcakoy. The water is rich in carbon dioxide with a temperature of 16,5 ˚C.
Sınat Creek Thermal Waters: It is in Ilıca village in the Gazipasa district. It is an open pool surrounded by rocks. The pool is filled up with the stones brought by floods in winter. It is cleared in summer and allowed for usage. Temperature of the water is 24,5 ˚C.
Surface and Groundwaters
The major factor in the formation of groundwater in Antalya is the geological formation. There is Mediterranean Sea in the South, Beydağları of Taurus Mountains in the West, Aksu Valley in the East, and Taurus Mountains in the North. The groundwater formations are comprised of limestone and travertine formations.
Kırkgoz Springs Arapsuyu I Gurkavak Spring Arapsuyu II Mağara Spring Boğacayı Keson Wells Duraliler Spring Duden Selalesi Wells Iskele Spring (Mescit Alanı) Meydan Wells Hurma Springs
Water Usage
The drinking water supply of Antalya is supplied from groundwater resources. The water supply system consists of 45 deep wells, 9 pumping stations, 13 storage tanks and a transmission line of 2 km and the water distribution system.
4.1.5. Ambient Air Quality
All data relevant to assessment of existing ambient air quality have been gathered as shown in Table 9 and Table 10. These data is based on the basic environmental parameters of concern, which are SO2 and PM10 concentrations (Table 10).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 33
Table 9. Air Pollution Monitoring Data of Antalya (Ministry of Environment and Forestry)
Date PM10 Wind Wind Am. Rel. Hum Atm. Pres. SO2 (µg/m3) speed Direction Temp (%) (mbars) (µg/m3) (m/s) Deg (°C) 2.9.2007 4 197 34 45 1027 0 3.9.2007 4 222 32 58 1027 0 4.9.2007 5 235 31 69 1029 0 5.9.2007 5 203 30 81 1030 3 6.9.2007 4 199 29 75 1028 2 7.9.2007 4 171 29 65 1029 2 8.9.2007 75 5 192 31 49 1028 0 9.9.2007 49 5 167 29 58 1026 0 10.9.2007 47 5 232 27 66 1029 0 11.9.2007 56 5 172 27 48 1034 0 12.9.2007 71 5 198 27 56 1034 0 13.9.2007 68 4 172 26 63 1031 0 14.9.2007 84 4 204 26 65 1030 0 15.9.2007 68 5 178 29 35 1033 0 16.9.2007 54 5 188 28 45 1033 0 17.9.2007 65 4 169 27 60 1031 0 18.9.2007 60 4 196 29 35 1032 0 19.9.2007 80 4 194 28 41 1032 0 20.9.2007 97 4 196 27 52 1030 1 21.9.2007 80 4 157 26 69 1032 0 22.9.2007 78 4 161 26 75 1033 0 23.9.2007 80 4 176 26 70 1033 0 24.9.2007 64 4 186 26 71 1032 0 25.9.2007 49 5 169 28 51 1032 0 26.9.2007 80 5 167 28 45 1036 0 27.9.2007 76 5 157 27 62 1039 0 28.9.2007 89 4 162 25 62 1033 0 29.9.2007 113 4 149 27 52 1032 1 30.9.2007 95 4 153 31 36 1031 3 1.10.2007 64 5 184 30 47 1033
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 34
Table 10. Environmental Situation Report for Antalya- SO2 and PM Measurements (1995-2004)
# of # of DAYS AVERAGE MINIMUM MAXIMUM MONTHS STATIONS RECORDED SO2 PM SO2 PM SO2 PM JANUARY’01 4 31 73 98 57 79 85 119 FEBRUARY’01 4 28 72 97 62 85 87 125 MARCH’01 4 31 64 85 55 79 72 112 APRIL’01 4 30 57 74 37 45 70 91 MAY’01 4 31 35 45 22 34 43 58 JUNE’01 4 30 27 37 20 29 33 48 JULY’01 4 31 23 34 17 28 30 47 AUGUST’01 4 31 23 35 19 29 28 41 SEPTEMBER’01 4 30 23 36 19 30 28 42 OCTOBER’01 4 31 27 41 21 34 34 56 NOVEMBER’01 4 30 44 64 35 54 57 80 DECEMBER’01 4 31 70 92 36 79 88 132
JANUARY’02 4 31 71 98 61 85 82 116 FEBRUARY’02 4 28 70 96 63 87 86 111 MARCH’02 4 31 62 84 56 73 73 99 APRIL’02 4 30 54 78 41 50 74 98 MAY’02 4 31 34 44 26 56 45 56 JUNE’02 4 30 26 37 22 32 33 45 JULY’02 4 31 23 36 19 29 28 41 AUGUST’02 4 31 23 35 20 31 28 40 SEPTEMBER’02 4 30 24 37 20 31 28 42 OCTOBER’02 4 31 25 39 20 32 34 53 NOVEMBER’02 4 30 38 57 31 46 51 73 DECEMBER’02 4 31 71 96 54 76 86 127
JANUARY’03 4 31 69 93 83 81 99 109 FEBRUARY’03 4 28 63 84 54 74 72 95 MARCH’03 4 31 52 72 41 61 67 92 APRIL’03 4 30 43 60 34 45 51 70 MAY’03 4 31 29 39 21 30 38 49 JUNE’03 4 30 24 34 18 27 30 42 JULY’03 4 31 25 36 19 29 30 41 AUGUST’03 4 31 23 34 18 27 27 39 SEPTEMBER’03 4 30 24 35 19 30 28 42 OCTOBER’03 4 31 26 38 20 30 36 54 NOVEMBER’03 4 30 37 56 30 46 49 72 DECEMBER’03 4 31 62 85 48 70 72 97
JANUARY’04 4 31 58 79 48 69 68 90 FEBRUARY’04 4 29 63 84 52 71 75 98 MARCH’04 4 31 58 77 49 66 66 88 APRIL’04 4 30 40 52 30 40 50 66 MAY’04 4 31 28 37 21 30 37 48 JUNE’04 4 30 24 32 19 25 30 40 JULY’04 4 31 22 26 17 20 27 34 AUGUST’04 4 31 22 27 18 21 26 33 SEPTEMBER’04 4 30 23 28 16 22 27 35 OCTOBER’04 4 31 26 38 21 28 31 45 NOVEMBER’04 4 30 ------DECEMBER’04 4 31 ------
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 35
4.1.6. Noise
The area proposed for the construction of the power plant close to the Antalya Organized Industrial district. The closest residential area is 3 km away from the plant site.
Currently, the national noise standards of 70 dBA for day and 60 dBA for night conditions given for commercial/residential areas are not exceeded.
4.1.7. Flora and Fauna
Flora
According to the grid system made by Davis (flora of Turkey and the East Aegen Islands), the project land is located in C-3 square in the South Anatolia and it is under the influence of Mediterranean Phytogeographic Region.
The identification of the flora of the project site and its surroundings was made mainly based on the observations at the site (Project Description Report, 2007). The flora lists were prepared based on site observations along with considering the 10 Volumes of the reference namely, the ‘Flora Of Turkey And The East Aegean Island’. The flora lists are given in Table 11.
Fauna
The identification of the fauna of the project site and its surroundings was made mainly based on the observations at the site (Project Description Report, 2007). Data have been gathered from the local people as well. The fauna lists were formed based on the data which was supported by literature reviews.
The fauna lists were prepared in a format including the species of Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals and considering the national and international conventions in act (Bern Convention and decisions of the Central Hunting commission). The fauna lists are given in Table 12.
There are no endangered fauna identified in the proposed project site. The project impact area does not constitute a special living and breeding habitat for the fauna species.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 36
Table 11. List of Flora in the Area
FAMILY SPECIE Turkish Local Phytogeograph. Locality BERN Meth. HABITAT Cover/ END. Name Name region Conv. of Abundance Ident. (Braun- Balanquet Method) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 L B Y Delphinium RANUNCULACEAE Mevzek otu Kokar ot Mediterranean 0-250 m X X X staphisagria
Fumaria PAPAVERACEAE Şahtere otu Mediterranean 0-900 m X X parviflora
PAPAVERACEAE Roemeria hybrida Cin haşhaşı 0-1300 m L X X
PAPAVERACEAE Papaver gracile Gelincik Mediterranean 0-1300 m X X X Cardaria draba CRUCIFERAE Kedi otu Europa-Siberia 0-1300 m ssp draba
Erophilla verna sp CRUCIFERAE Çırçır otu 0-2300 m L X X vera Rapistrum CRUCIFERAE 0-1000 m L X X rugosum
CISTACEAE Cistus creticus Pamuk otu Karağı Mediterranean 0-1000 m L X X X
Silene vulgaris Gıvışgan CARYOPHYLLACEAE Europa-Siberia 0-3000 m X X X var vulgaris otu POLYGONACEAE rumex pulcher Labada Europa-Siberia 0-1300 m X X CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex lasiantha Sakız Europa-Siberia 0-1800 m X x X ANACARDİACEAE Pistacia lenticus Zivircik Mediterranean 0-200 m X X LEGÜMİNOSAE Anagyris foetida Mediterranean 0-1000 m X x X LEGÜMİNOSAE Calicotome vilosa Mediterranean 0-900 m X X X Dorycnium LEGÜMİNOSAE Mediterranean 0-900 m X X X X hirsutum LEGÜMİNOSAE Lens ervoides Mediterranean 20-610 m X x X LEGÜMİNOSAE Medicago rigidula Europa-Siberia 0-1800 m X X X IRIDACEAE Gladiolus illyricus Mediterranean 0-1200 m L X X X X X
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 37
Tamus communis 20-1600 DIOSCOREACEAE Sarmaşık Karaasma L X X X ssp communis m Aegilops GRAMINEAE triuncialis ssp Europa-Siberia 0-1900 m L X X X X triuncialis GRAMINEAE Briza maxima Europa-Siberia 0-320 m L X X X X X Bromus japonicus GRAMINEAE Europa-Siberia 0-2300 m L X X X X ssp japonicus Hordeum GRAMINEAE Europa-Siberia 0-2250 m L X X X bulbosum GRAMINEAE Poa trivialis Europa-Siberia 0-2210 m L X X X X
HABITAT CLASSES DANGER CLASS END./ENDEMISM COVER/ABUNDANCY CLASS 1. Forest EX: Extinct Endemic species 2. Maquis Ex: Extinct in nature L: Local endemic 1. Very rare B: Regional Endemic 2. Rare 3. Frigana CR: Critic Endemic Species 4. Cultural land (Garden, etc.) EN: Non-Endemic species under danger Y: widespread Endemic 3. Middle Degree Abundance 5. Pasture VU: Vulnerable species 4. Abundant 6. Humid grass, Swamp and Wetland LR: Plants under Low Risk 5. Very Abundant or forms pure 7. Steppe cd: Species that require protection populations 8. Rocky place nt: Species that may be under danger
lc: Least considered for danger METHODOLOGY OF IDENTIFICATION
Locality : Full address of the plant and DD: It is more important to gather information * : Site study
height about the plant than considerations for being L : Literature Screening
under danger *L: literature Screening and Site study NE: Not evaluated
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 38
Table 12. List of Fauna in the Area List of Bird Species Name in Latin English Name Turkish Name PDi PDo EVRDB IUCN END BERN AVL Reference Convention (2006-2007) ORDER: FALCONIFORMES Doğanlar FAM: FALCONIDAE Doğangiller Sp : Falco tinnunculus Kestel Kerkenez - - A-4 V - Annex- II Sp: Falco biarmicus Bıyıklıdoğan ORDER: GALLIFORMES Tavuklar FAM: PHASIANIDAE Tavuksular Sp: Coturnix coturnix Quail Bıldırcın - - A-4 V - - List -III O ORDER : COLUMBIFORMES Güvercinler FAM : PTEROCLIDAE Steptavukları Sp : Pterocles orientalis Black-Bailled Bağırtlak A-3 E Annex-II List-II L Sandgrouse FAM : COLUMBIDAE Güvercinler Sp : Columba livia Domestis Pigeon Kaya güvercini A-4 List-III Q Sp : Streptopelia decaocto Collarede Dove Kumru A-4 List-II Q ORDER : STRIGIFORMES Gece Yırtıcıları FAM : STRIGID Baykuşgiller Sp : Athena noctua Little Owl Kukumav A-4 E,V Annex-II List-I L Sp : Otus scops Scops Owl Cüce Baykuş A-3 E,V Annex -II List-I L Sp : Strix aluco Tawny Owl Alaca Baykuş A-3 E Annex -I List-I L FAM : TYTONIDAE Peçeli , Baykuşgiller Sp : Tyto alba Barn Owl Peçeli Baykuş A-2 E Annex -I List-I L AVES BIRDS Ötücü kuşlar ORDER : PASSERIFORMES Tarlakuşugiller FAM : ALAUDIDAE Kulaklı tarlakuşu Sp : Eremophila alpestris Shore Lark Ardıçkuşugiller A-4 E,V Annex -II List-I L FAM : TURDIDAE Taş kuşu Sp : Saxicola torquata Stonechat Kargagiller O Annex -II List-I L FAM : CORVIDAE Saksağan Sp : Pica pica Magpie Küçük karga O List-III L Sp: Corvus monedula Jackdaw O List-III L Sp :Corvus corone cornix Hooded Leş Kargası O List-III L FAM : STURNIDAE Sığırcıkgiller Sp : Sturnus vulgaris Starling Sığırcık O List-II O FAM : PASSERIDAE Serçegiller Sp : Passer domesticus House Sparrow Ev serçesi O List-III L PDi: Population Density in and around the project site PDo: Population Devsity outside the Project site EVRDB: European Vertabrate Red Data Book IUCN: The World Conservation Unit AVL (2006-2007): Central Hunting Comission Decision END: Endeimic References: Q: Questionnaire (Data from local people); O: Observation; H: Suitability of Habitat; L: Literature Table 12. List of Fauna in the Area (cont.)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 39
List of Reptiles, Mamals Latin Name Turkish Name ERL END IUCN BERN AVL (2006- Reference HABITAT Observation Convention 2007) Station MAMMALIA MEMELILER ORDER : INSECTIVORA Böçekçiller FAM : SORICIDAE Sivrifareler GENERA : Neomys Sp : Neomys anomalus Bataklık Nt - Nt Annex -III Swamp, humid grass siviifaresi FAM : TALPIDAE Köstebekler GENERA : Talpa Sp : Talpa levantis levantis Körköstebek Nt Nt L Prefer sandy, loose, humid soil ORDER : CHIROPTERA Yarasalar SUB-ORDER : Böcekçil MICROCHIROPTERA yarasalar FAM : VESPERTILIONIDAE Düzburun yarasa GENERA : Myotis Sp : Myotis capaccinii Uzunayaklı V V Annex -II List-I Caves and dikes yarasa GENERA : Pipistrellus Sp : Pipistrellus Cüce yarasa V V Annex -III L Forests, close to pipistrellus residential areas REPTILIA Sürüngenler ORDER : SQUAMATA Kertenkeleler SUB-ORDER : LACERTILIA Kertenkeleler FAM : SCINCIDAE Parlak Kertenkeleler GENERA : Mabuya Sp : Mabuya vittata Şeritli Nt Nt Annex -III List-I L Open lands, woods, Kertenkele under rocks REPTILIA Kertenkeleler
ORDER : SQUAMATA Kertenkeleler SUB- ORDER : LACERTILIA Asıl Kertenkeleler FAM : LACERTIDAE GENERA : Lacerta Toros kertenkelesi
Sp : Lacerta danfordi Nt Nt Annex -III List-I Forests, woods,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 40
pelesgiana rocky lands, walls SUB- ORDER : OPHIDIA Yılanlar Yılanlar FAM : COLUBRIDAE GENERA : Elaphe
Sp : Elaphe quartuorlineta Sarı yılan Nt Nt Annex -II List-I L Stoney lands, sauromates gardens, crop fields GENERA : Coluber Sp : Coluber najadum Ok yılanı Nt Nt Annex -II List-I L Hot places, rocky, woods, dry biota GENERA : Natrix Sp : Natrix natrix persa Küpeli su Nt Nt List-I L Rocky places and yılanı woods near water AMPHIBIA Amfibiler ORDER : ANURA Kuyruksuz kurbalar SUB-ORDER : PROCOELA FAM : BUFONIDAE Kara kurbaları GENERA : Bufo Sp : Bufo bufo Siğili kurbalar Nt Nt Annex -III A On land, under rocks, in soil
Observation station : The Points and Areas where the species are identified in site studies in and around the Project site HABITAT : Specific characteristics of the living area of identified species ERL : European Red List
PDi: Population Density in and around the project site PDo: Population Devsity outside the Project site EVRDB: European Vertabrate Red Data Book IUCN: The World Conservation Unit AVL (2006-2007): Central Hunting Comission Decision END: Endeimic
References: Q: Questionnaire (Data from local people); O: Observation; H: Suitability of Habitat; L: Literature
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 41
4.1.8. Archaeological and Cultural Resources
There are no archeological sites or recreational areas in or near the project site.
4.1.9. Land Use
The power plant is planned to be constructed in the Antalya city, Merkez District. The intended project area is neighboring the Antalya Organized Industrial District. The map showing the site of 1/25000 scale is given in Figure 1.
The proposed project site is agricultural land according to the Land Registry. The scanned copies of land registry documents are given in Annex 1.
4.1.10. Sensitive Zones
The project site and its surroundings, upon investigation also considering the Annex-V (List of Sensitive Zones) of the EIA Regulation, is not classified as ‘Protection Zones as required by national regulation’ according to the Article 1 of the list, not classified as ‘Protection Zones as required by the conventions ratified by Turkey’ according to the Article 2 of the list, and not classified as ‘Protection Zones’ according to the Article 3 of the list.
4.2. Biological Environment
4.2.1. Wetlands
There are no wetlands in or around the project area.
4.2.2. Vegetation
The project site neighbors the Antalya Organized district on one side. The land located in the north and west part of the plant consists of short plantation.
The remaining side is devoid of any vegetation of conservation concern.
The project land is unimproved agricultural land.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 42
4.2.3. Wildlife
The land proposed for the project is highly modified by human activities that there is no wildlife of major conservation concern in the area.
4.2.4. Social Environment
The selected location for the plant is near the Antalya Organized Industrial District, and there are no residential areas in the 3 km radius of the plant.
Demography
According to the 2000 census the population of Antalya is 1726205 of which 933847 live in urban region and 792358 live in rural sites. Population data is shown in Table 13 The population has grown by approximately 44 % in the last decade and it is anticipated that it will be growing at a similar rate in the future due to several facts. The major motive of population growth is the migration to the city as a result of developing tourism sector, which is already the main income source of the city.
Table 13. Urban and Rural Population Development in Antalya
Total Urban Rural 1990 2000 % + 1990 2000 % + 1990 2000 % + Centre 448 773 714 129 46,44 378 208 603 190 46,67 70 565 110 939 45,23 Akseki 36 137 42 467 16,14 11 023 10 563 -4,26 25 114 31 904 23,92 Alanya 129 396 257 671 68,86 52 460 88 346 52,11 76 936 169 325 78,86 Elmalı 35 324 40 041 12,53 12 384 14 561 16,19 22 940 25 480 10,50 Finike 34 576 42 087 19,65 6 700 9 746 37,46 27 876 32 341 14,85 Gazipaşa 40 840 44 541 8,67 13 697 16 536 18,83 27 143 28 005 3,13 Gündoğmuş 20 119 21 513 6,70 4 554 5 021 9,76 15 565 16 492 5,78 İbradi 8 052 10 826 29,59 4 215 6 991 50,58 3 837 3 835 -0,05 Kale 20 880 22 170 5,99 13 793 13 900 0,77 7 087 8 270 15,43 Kaş 40 245 47 519 16,61 4 560 6 361 33,28 35 685 41 158 14,26 Kemer 23 268 55 092 86,17 8 449 17 255 71,39 14 819 37 837 93,71 Korkuteli 46 115 51 580 11,20 13 381 16 521 21,07 32 734 35 059 6,86 Kumluca 44 834 61 370 31,39 17 166 25 081 37,91 27 668 36 289 27,12 Manavgat 118 897 199 385 51,68 38 498 71 679 62,14 80 399 127 706 46,26 Serik 84 755 109 360 25,48 23 106 30 579 28,01 61 649 78 781 24,51 Total 1 132 211 1 719 751 41,79 602 194 936 330 44,13 530 017 783 421 39,07
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 43
5. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
5.1. Construction Phase
5.1.1. Physical and Chemical
This section of the report describes the potential environmental impacts, both negative and positive, that are likely to result from the construction and operation of the thermal-power plant in Antalya. The possible mitigation measures identified for the significant negative impacts are presented in the next section of this report.
Physical and chemical impacts of power plant construction may include those on geology, soils, topography, landforms, and meteorology, climate, air and water quality, and noise. Potential environmental impacts on each are presented as the following:
5.1.1.1. Geology and Soils
There will be no significant soil disturbances and no significant impacts on local geology since the site will not need any preparation activities such as drilling, blasting. The whole system will be brought to site as a compact unit requiring no heavy construction at site. There will be minor work in the construction of the site which will cause insignificant amount of excavation soil, construction and debris waste, which will be handled according to the Regulation on excavation soil, construction and debris waste.
5.1.1.2.Topography and Landforms
Local topography will not be altered.
5.1.1.3. Climate and Meteorology
Impacts on the microclimate and meteorology of the local area will be negligible. There will be no changes in surface albedo and no aerodynamic disturbances.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 44
5.1.1.4. Air Quality
Air quality emissions problems resulting from the construction activities will be limited to fugitive windblown dust, internal combustion engines in heavy equipment and onsite power generators. These impacts will be low and short-lived.
There will be no burning of vegetation and/or other refuse.
5.1.1.5. Noise
Noise impacts may occur as a result of operation of heavy equipment, pile drivers, and onsite power generation.
Estimated noise level outputs were obtained from equipment manufacturers and the impacts are assessed to be insignificant since the national and World Bank standards will not be exceeded. The article of national ‘Evaluation and Management of Environmental Noise Regulation’ (Date: 1.7.2005, and No: 25862) will be considered and complied.
5.1.1.6. Hydrology
Groundwater
Fresh water required by the personnel will be supplied from the wells to be dug at and/or around the site with necessary permissions taken from the State Hydraulic Works as required by the Groundwater Law (Date: 23.12.1960, No: 10688). The daily discharges from the well will not have any adverse affect on the local hydrology.
The water demand is estimated based on the assumption of 75 l/cap/day consumption. The number of workers together with possible visitors is estimated as 250 people. Hence the water demand is calculated as:
250 x 75 lt/cap/day= 18 750 lt/day
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 45
Surface Water
There will be no surface water use. There will be no discharges to a receiving surface body. The wastewater generated at the site will be treated by independent compact treatment units and the treated wastewater will be used for irrigation.
5.1.1.7. Water Quality
Water quality issues associated with power plant construction are often minor. In this particular case, there will be no liquid or solid wastes generated from the plant which will be disposed directly to cause any adverse affect on environment.
The amount of domestic wastewater generated by the plant’s personnel is assumed to be equal to the estimated amount of water usage, which is approximately 20 m3/day. The wastewaters generated at the plant will be treated with individual treatment units to give an effluent appropriate for irrigational purposes.
Use of treated wastewater for irrigation and the possible percolation will not be a problem since the treatment unit will ensure safe use for irrigation pursuant to the Article 28 of the Water Pollution Control Regulation (Date: 21.12.2004, no: 25687) and the standards set out in Technical Procedures Notification (Date: 7.1.1991, No: 20748).
Storm water will be channeled and removed through the storm drains.
5.1.1.8. Solid Waste
Solid waste during the construction phase will be minimal since the system will be installed as a whole unit. Solid wastes such as rejected components and materials, packing and shipping materials (pallets, crates, Styrofoam®, plastics, etc.), and human garbage will be disposed properly to sanitary landfills as required by the national Solid Waste Control Regulation (Date: 14.3.1991, No: 20814).
The amount of solid was generated by the personnel is estimated based on 1 kg/cap/day solid waste generation assumption. Hence the generated solid waste is calculated as:
250 x 1 kg/cap/day= 250 kg/day
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 46
5.1.2. Biological
The presence of local flora and fauna were determined and evaluation of construction impacts was made.
5.1.2.1. Flora and Fauna
There are no endangered flora and fauna determined on the project site; therefore, construction should have no adverse affects on endangered flora and fauna.
The plant patterns in the project site will be removed from as a result of clearance for construction. The project site is near the industrial zone, therefore there will be no concerns for wild life disturbance as there is no suitable habitat in terms of suitable natural flora cover and related fauna. There are no endangered species present at the project site. There will be very minor impacts on fauna due to the construction of the plant.
5.1.2.2. Ecosystems
Impacts of construction on ecosytem will be negligible since there will be:
• No removal or interference with prey of predatory animals; • No effluent discharges; • No significant siltation from run-off, altering aquatic and marine flora and fauna populations and hence population dynamics of dependent organisms; •No noises disrupting breeding behavior or use of breeding grounds, resulting in shifts in population dynamics; and • No removal of predatory animals resulting in increased prey populations that exceed the carrying capacity of the local environment.
5.1.3. Socio-economic
5.1.3.1. Demographic
The construction of plant will have limited effects on the demographic conditions since the number of workers in the construction phase will be 200 people. There will be no permanent
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 47
living quarters associated with this power plant. Hence there will be no increased demand on local infrastructure, such as utilities, housing, medical facilities, schools, water, and food.
The project will not cause any displacement of individuals whose livelihood depends on the land that will be occupied by the Project.
The labor force for the construction of the plant will be supplied also from Antalya, which will result in increased disposable income of plant employees.
5.1.3.2. Land Use
The primary changes in land use during the construction will be basically at the plant site, which is currently registered agricultural land. However, the project site is in the close vicinity of Antalya Organized Industrial District and unimproved agricultural land devoid of any agricultural plantation.
Outside the project site, change in land use will be limited to infrastructures that will be installed to support the plant such as the road access and storm water collection system.
5.1.4. Occupational Health and Safety
Health and safety impacts of the project on workers and communities in the area of influence of the project will be reasonably managed according to the national Occupational Health and Safety Regulation (Date:9.12.2003, No: 25311) in order to reduce the likelihood of accidents and work-related illnesses on the job as well as accidents occurring between construction-related equipment and local vehicles. Since the project site is near the industrial district and minimum 3 km away from the nearest residential area possible impacts on local people and pedestrians are assumed to be negligible.
5.2. Operation Phase
Environmental impacts from the power plant operation that will be quantified and reported include those on existing air, water, and soil quality, and the disposal of solid wastes. Long and short-term impacts on flora, fauna, human populations, and the health and safety of workers in the surrounding community were evaluated.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 48
5.2.1. Physical and Chemical
Physical and chemical impacts of thermal power plant operation typically include those on geology, soils, topography, landforms, meteorology, climate, air and water quality, and noise. These impacts for this particular case are estimated as follows.
5.2.1.1 Geology and Soils
Soil impacts consist of negligible effects of windblown fugitive dust. Since the plant will run on natural gas only, and the plant will be equipped with dry low NOx technology hence deposition of sulphates, nitrates and metals from the stack plume, as adsorbed or incorporated into particles, will cause negligible effects.
5.2.1.2. Topography and Landforms
Local topography will not be altered and there will be no possible effects on landforms such as swamps and shorelines.
5.2.1.3. Climate and Meteorology
There will be no significant impact on the microclimate and meteorology of the local area caused by changes in surface albedo and aerodynamic disturbances. There will be no significant impact on precipitation patterns by increased availability of condensation nuclei downwind of the power plant as there will be no particulates in the stack plume.
5.2.1.4. Air Emissions
Air quality impacts during operation of a thermal power plant consist primarily of stack gases emitted following fuel combustion. Emissions will be comprised of particulate matter (PM), sulphur dioxide (SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), the greenhouse gases
(GHGs), carbon dioxide (CO2), and methane (CH4), trace amounts of various metals, and trace amounts of organic and inorganic compounds.
The proportions and amounts of pollutants emitted depend on the fuel quality and combustion strategy.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 49
In this particular case, the plant will operate on natural gas only, which proves the advantages of low carbon dioxide and NOx emissions, negligible release of SO2 and TSPM (Total Suspended Particulate Matter), and no ash or other hazardous wastes.
Emission levels of SIEMENS SGT5-4000F gas turbine obtained from the manufacturer together with the relevant limits are given in Table 14.
Table 14. SIEMENS Gas Turbine Emission Performance (Natural Gas)*
SGT5-4000F World Bank Pollutant Turkish Standards Gas Turbine Guidelines NOx 51.5 mg/Nm3 a 75 mg/Nm3 125 mg/Nm3 (25 ppmvdb) CO < 10 mg/Nm3 100 mg/Nm3 N.A. Soot (Bacharach Nr.) - 3 N.A. 3 3 3 SO2 < 10 mg/Nm 60 mg/Nm 2000 mg/Nm Unburned Hydrogen Carbons 4 ppm N.A N.A. PM-10 N.A. N.A (given as soot) 50 mg/Nm3
*Values are for base load operation at lower turbine inlet temperature, and dry exhaust with 15 % O2; Regulation on Prevention and Control of Industrial Air Pollution (Date: 22.07.2006, No: 26230) N.A.: not applicable a:Normal; temperature of 0oC and pressure of 1.013 bar, when 1 mole ideal gas has a volume of 22.4 liters. b: parts per million, volumetric, dry c: Particulate Matter of size 10µ and less
Air Pollution Modeling Studies
The aim of the modeling studies is to determine the effects of exhaust gases discharged by the natural gas power plant on the air quality of Antalya region and determine the highest average concentration values and their coordinates on monthly and annual bases.
The air pollution modeling results of SIEMENS SGT5-4000F model gas turbines are compiled in a separate report given in Annex 2. In this report, the impacts of three pollutants of concern, which are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide compounds (NOx) and hydrocarbons (HC) have been investigated according to the meteorological and topographical data of Antalya region and the proposed power plant parameters with the help of ISCLT 3 (Industrial Source Complex
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 50
Model - Long Term) Modeling Program. The monthly and annual maximum five average concentrations and their coordinates are given for each pollutant in the report.
The concentration distribution results show that the highest monthly and annual average concentration values will be lower than standards for each pollutant.
The 2 – D and 3 – D annual average concentration distribution graphs of each pollutant are given in Figures 7 to 12, respectively.
Figure 7. 2-D Concentration Distribution of Carbon Monoxide (CO)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 51
Figure 8. 3 – D Concentration Distribution of Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Figure 9. 2 – D Concentration Distribution of Nitrogen Oxide Compounds (NOx)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 52
Figure 10. 3 – D Concentration Distribution of Nitrogen Oxide Compounds (NOx)
Figure 11. 2-D Concentration Distribution of Hydrocarbons (HC)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 53
Figure 12. 3-D Concentration Distribution of Hydrocarbons (HC)
5.2.1.5 Noise
Noise sources from the plant during energy production will include the generators and turbines. However the power house will be insulated for noise and vibration and hence it is estimated that the workers will not be affected.
The Power Plant will be located approximately 3 km away from the nearest residential area and the gas turbine packages are equipped with standard silencing to keep noise levels below 85 dBA at 1 meter and below 55 dBA at 154 meter. In addition, the noise insulation will ensure compliance with the Turkish Standards and World Bank Guidelines as shown in Table 15.
Table 15. Noise Standards
Turkish Standards World Bank Guidelines Limits in Decibels, dB(A) Location Category Day time Night Time Day time Night Time Residential, Institutional, Educational 60 50 55 45 Commercial/Industrial 70 60 70 70
The article of national ‘Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise Regulation’ (Date: 1.7.2005, and No: 25862) will be considered and complied.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 54
5.2.1.6. Hydrology
Groundwater
Groundwater will be exploited from the wells to be dug at and around the site with necessary permissions taken from the State Hydraulic Works as required by the Groundwater Law (Date: 23.12.1960, No: 10688). Groundwater use during the operation phase will be limited to domestic use by the personnel. The estimated total amount of water use by the personnel is calculated on the basis of assumed per capita water consumption rate of 75 lt/cap/day. The total number of people using freshwater is assumed as 150, of which 100 will be the staff and 50 is assumed to be visitors.
150 x 75 l/cap/day = 11 250 L/day
The water discharge rates from the wells will not affect local hydrology.
Surface Water
There will be no use of surface water during the operation of the plant. All cooling operations will be performed only with air.
5.2.1.7 Water Quality
The plant will only generate domestic wastewater sourced by a number of 100 employees and an assumed number of 50 visitors. The amount of wastewater discharges are assumed to be equal to amount used for domestic purposes as calculated in the previous part of the study as 11 250 lt/day.
An independent wastewater treatment plant will be designed to treat the domestic wastewater discharges. The treatment system will be designed to meet the criteria defined for Sensitive Zones under the EU Council Directive Concerning Urban Wastewater Treatment (91/271/EEC) considering the sensitive character of the project area. The treated wastewater will be reused for irrigation in the project area pursuant to the Article 28 of the Water Pollution Control Regulation (Date: 21.12.2004, no: 25687) and the standards set out in Technical Procedures Notification (Date: 7.1.1991, No: 20748), which is in line with the policies related to rational use of water resources.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 55
Oil tanks will be isolated with concrete lining to prevent any leakage and the waste oils, generated less than 10 m3/year, will be removed by a licensed hauler.
New storm water drains will be constructed at the site which will be used together with the existing drains to direct storm water to the main drainage system.
There will be no cooling water discharges.
5.2.1.8. Solid Waste
The solid waste generated by the plant will be only domestic solid waste which will be properly disposed of in sanitary landfills as required by the national Solid Waste Control Regulation (Date: 14.3.1991, No: 20814).
The amount of solid waste generated in the operation phase is estimated based on the daily generation rate of 1 kg/cap/day. Accordingly the amount of solid waste generation is estimated as:
150 x 1 kg/cap/day = 150 kg/day.
5.2.2. Biological
5.2.2.1. Flora and Fauna
It is accepted that the air emissions majorly affect the land biota. Whereas the fauna specie can move away from the discomforting sources, plants will have to respond physiologically. Pollution damaged their tissues and may even kill them.
In the operation phase, the effects on flora will be basically from NOx emissions. NOx emissions were found to be causing discoloration in plant leaves and then to lesions (Brown or dark Brown spots). The loss of carotene and reduction of chlorophyll are the major responses from plant exposed to NOx emissions. The type, severity and extend of the impact of NOx on plants vary depending on both internal and external factors. Environmental conditions, presence of other pollutants and the existing plant condition affect the responses of the plant to NOx exposure.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 56
The results of emission estimates show that the NOx emissions will be below the limit values set out in the Air Pollution Prevention Regulation (Date: 02.11.1986, No: 19269) and the World Bank standards.
Accordingly, NOx emissions originating from the plant will not have any adverse effects on the flora and fauna. Operation of the plant will supply reliable electrical energy to the users in the region which will limit the use of operation of diesel type or other type of energy production units i.e. diesel generators that have adverse effects on the environment. Hence the current pollution load that arises from the use of other fossil fuels will be reduced.
There are no endangered flora and fauna on the project site to be affected from air emissions.
There will be no particulate emissions and no cooling water discharges to affect flora and fauna.
5.2.2.2. Ecosystems
Impacts of operation of the plant on ecosystem will be negligible since there will be:
• No removal or interference with prey of predatory animals; • No wastewater discharges to receiving bodies; • Limited emission of stack gases well below the national and World bank standards; • No significant siltation from run-off, altering aquatic and marine flora and fauna populations and hence population dynamics of dependent organisms; • No noises disrupting breeding behavior or use of breeding grounds, resulting in shifts in population dynamics; and • No removal of predatory animals resulting in increased prey populations that exceed the carrying capacity of the local environment.
The frequent power outages experienced in Antalya caused increased use of fossil powered generators which discharge greenhouse gasses. The operation of power plant will result in continuous power availability, which will reduce the adverse effects of additional pollutants from such applications.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 57
5.2.3. Socio-economic Structure
5.2.3.1. Demographic
The operation of plant will have limited effects on the demographic conditions since the number of workers in the operation phase will be around 100 people. There will be no permanent living quarters associated with this power plant. Hence there will be no increased demand on local infrastructure, such as utilities, housing, medical facilities, schools, water, and food.
The project will not cause any displacement of individuals whose livelihood depends on the land that will be occupied by the Project.
The labor force for the operation of the plant will be supplied also from Antalya, which will result in increased disposable income of plant employees.
The Antalya city has been experiencing frequent power outages in the last years due to the insufficient power supplies. This has been a major problem in the city which heavily depends on tourism sector. The seasonal fluctuation of population due to tourism activity could not be compensated in terms of electricity supply.
The power plant, by itself, will be able to meet the electrical energy demand of the whole city, as the only producer of electricity in the area. Hence it will positively impact the social economical environment for tourism and service sectors by providing improved power availability and reliability.
The use of clean energy i.e. natural gas will also help to improve local conditions to support the development of tourism sector.
5.2.3.2. Land Use
The plant’s site is currently unimproved agricultural land, hence the shift in land use is from unimproved land to industrial area. Additional changes in land use may occur as a result of the development of new industries in the area, constructed to take advantage of local, reliable, and oftentimes cheaper electrical power.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 58
There may be increased local industrial development as a result of additional power availability and reliability in the future.
5.1.4. Occupational Health and Safety
Health and safety impacts of the project on workers and communities in the area of influence of the project will be reasonably managed according to the national Occupational Health and Safety Regulation (Date: 9.12.2003, No: 25311) in order to reduce the likelihood of accidents and work-related illnesses on the job as well as accidents occurring between construction- related equipment and local vehicles. Since the project site is near the industrial district and minimum 3 km away from the nearest residential area possible impacts on local people and pedestrians are assumed to be negligible.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 59
6. MITIGATION MEASURES
The purpose of impact mitigation is to look for alternative and better ways of implementing the proposed project or associated activities so that the negative impacts are eliminated or minimized, while benefits are enhanced. Impact mitigation requires that the full extent of the anticipated environmental problems are understood. In view of this, this section of the EIA presents mitigation measures resulting from the impacts identified. The mitigation measures are presented for the construction phase and the operation phase in Table 16 and Table 17, respectively. AKSA ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş. will be responsible for all mitigation measures presented in this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 60
Table 16. Environmental Impacts and Planned Mitigation Activities in the Construction Phase
Environmental Impacts Mitigation Physical and Chemical Geology and Soils No mitigation needed Topography and Careful reshaping, landscaping will be made to restore the landforms aesthetic quality of the area Climate and Meteorology No mitigation needed Air Quality All heavy equipment, delivery trucks, vessels will be inspected and maintained to reduce exhaust emissions. Unpaved roads will be watered twice a day to minimize dust. Air Quality will be monitored on a regular basis. Noise All noise-generating equipment will be inspected and maintained to reduce noise emissions. Use of noise suppressors or mufflers will be required for heavy equipment. Generators and compressors will be provided with enclosures. Noise levels at the site and at the closest residential area will be measured on a regular basis. Hydrology No mitigation needed Water Quality Domestic wastewater generated will be treated by individual treatment units and the effluent will be used for site irrigation. Storage and routine handling of fuels, lubricants and other potentially contaminating substances in a weather-protected area having containment for spills. All equipment and materials required to execute a clean-up will be available on-site. The quality of well water will be monitored periodically. Solid Waste All sorts of solid waste (of domestic type) will be collected systematically and protected-storage will be provided. Solid wastes will be disposed of to a sanitary landfill. No burning of wastes will be permitted. Biological Flora and Fauna The project will secure permits for any trees to be cut. Socio-economic Demographic No mitigation needed Land use No mitigation needed Occupational Health and To prevent disease and accidents, workers will undergo an Safety environmental and safety briefing on safety, sanitation measures, and emergency rescue procedures before development begins. Adequate sanitary facilities, potable water, and garbage bins will be provided. Safety rules and regulations will be implemented during construction. All workers will be required to wear protective gear and equipment that conforms to safety standards. Security of the project site will be imposed at all times.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 61
Table 17. Environmental Impacts and Planned Mitigation Activities in the Operation Phase Environmental Impacts Mitigation Physical and Chemical Geology and Soils No mitigation needed Topography and No mitigation needed landforms Climate and Meteorology No mitigation needed Air Quality Although atmospheric emissions will not be a major concern for the project, continuous monitoring of the stack emissions and ambient air quality will be undertaken during operations. NOx emissions will be controlled using a dry low NOx combustor. Air Quality will be monitored on a regular basis. Noise The selected gas turbine packages are equipped with standard silencing. The plant will comply with noise standards (national and WB) for an industrial area. The powerhouse will be noise insulated. Noise levels at the site and at the closest residential area will be measured on a regular basis. Hydrology No mitigation needed Water Quality Domestic wastewater generated will be treated by individual treatment units and the effluent will be used for site irrigation. Oil tanks will be isolated with concrete lining to prevent any leakage and the waste oils will be removed by a licensed hauler. Dumping of any contaminating material into the environment including waste oils will be prohibited. Storage and routine handling of fuels, lubricants and other potentially contaminating substances in a weather-protected area having containment for spills. All equipment and materials required to execute a clean-up will be available on-site. The quality of well water will be monitored periodically. Solid Waste All sorts of solid waste (of domestic type) will be collected systematically and protected-storage will be provided. Solid wastes will be disposed of to a sanitary landfill. No burning of wastes will be permitted. Biological Flora and Fauna With the use of clean fuel i.e. natural gas and dry low NOx technology, adverse impacts on flora and fauna will be insignificant. Socio-economic Demographic No mitigation needed Land use No mitigation needed Occupational Health and To prevent disease and accidents, workers will undergo an Safety environmental and safety briefing on safety, sanitation measures, and emergency rescue procedures before development begins. Adequate sanitary facilities, potable water, and garbage bins will be provided. Precautions will be taken against fire accidents and electrocution. Security of the project site will be imposed at all times.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 62
7. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
The purpose of the analysis of alternatives as part of the EIA process is to select the best among all possible project options. The assessments and recommendations made by the EIA Team are presented below:
7.1. Site
1. Land has already been identified and is free of conflict. 2. The site is well located in regard to the following: a. Easy access. b. Close proximity to the Antalya organized industrial district c. Close proximity to the already existing national electric transmission lines d. Close proximity to the already existing natural gas transmission lines e. Has no settlements in close vicinity.
7.2. Fuel Types
Natural gas has the obvious advantages over coal or diesel, of low carbon dioxide and NOx emissions, negligible release of SO2 and TSPM (Total Suspended Particulate Matter), and no ash or other hazardous wastes. The intended power plant should have a significant positive impact on air quality compared to any fossil fuel burning power plant.
7.3. Technology
Alternative for gas turbines are gas motors and diesel generators.
There are no suitable hydropower sites available in the vicinity of Antalya city. Construction of dams and reservoirs would also involve rehabilitation issues. Hence, the hydropower choice was not pursued. The thermal power source was the only alternative left. As far as the generation technology was considered, the project proposes to use advanced class turbines having more than 55% thermal efficiency. This class of turbines has been in service all over the world and is well proven.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 63
7.4. The "Do Nothing" Scenario
If the project would be assumed to fail to meet the required environmental conditions the alternative would be the transfer of energy from a distant power plant via construction of energy transmission lines, which will not be an economically and environmentally sound option.
It is therefore recommended that the project goes ahead but should take into consideration all the suggested mitigation measures.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 64
8. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP)
AKSA ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş. is committed to minimizing any adverse impacts that could arise from the construction and operation of the project. To achieve this, an environmental management plan (EMP) was formulated to manage impacts, to adopt the best available proven control technologies and procedures, to ensure a continuing process of review and positive action in the light of available monitoring results, and to consult with local communities on a continued basis. An environmental and safety officer will be hired to oversee implementation of the EMP, the environmental monitoring program, and compliance with ECC conditions. The officer will closely coordinate with the plant general manager, the management staff, and the monitoring team.
The EMP will aim to achieve an exemplary environmental performance during construction and operation. To meet this goal, the following activities, measures and programs will be implemented in AKSA ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş.: (i) environmental policy; (ii) application of all mitigation and management measures; (iii) an environmental monitoring program; (iv) an emergency and contingency plan (v) an institutional plan (vi) an environmental and safety officer.
Environmental monitoring is an important component of the EMP. It provides the information for periodic review and refinement modification of the EMP as necessary, ensuring that environmental protection is optimized at all project phases. Through monitoring, unwanted environmental impacts are detected early and remedied effectively. It will also validate the impacts predicted in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures. Lastly, it will also demonstrate compliance with national and World Bank regulatory requirements.
A comprehensive monitoring program for the plant complex has been developed, covering the measurement of relevant environmental indicators. At the plant, it will involve noise, safety concerns, site drainage, solid waste and wastewater disposal, groundwater abstraction, and structural integrity of the tanks and buildings. The results of the monitoring program, which will be implemented by the Monitoring Team (MT) to be created for the project, will be used to optimize plant operations and adjust to management practices.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 65
The monitoring of required parameters to check the environmental impacts, frequency of their measurement, recording and reporting to related national authorities will be carried out strictly as required by the related national regulations. The legal framework to be complied for environmental monitoring is provided in Table 18.
Table 18. Legal Framework for Environmental Compliance
Monitoring of; Regulation to be complied Air Emissions Regulation on Prevention and Control of Industrial Air Pollution (Date: 22.07.2006, No: 26230) Well water quality Regulation on Water Intended for Human Consumption (Date: 17.02.2005, No: 25730) Wastewater quality used for Water Pollution Control Regulation (Date: 21.12.2004, no: irrigation 25687) and standards set out in Technical Procedures Notification (Date: 7.1.1991, No: 20748). Handling and disposal of oil Regulation on Control of Waste Oils (Date: 21.01.2004, No: wastes 25353)
All measurements for the required parameters will be done with methods described under Turkish Standards (TS), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Deutsches Institut für Normung (DIN) and European Committee for Standardization (CEN) norms.
In the event that monitoring indicates that any environmental quality is deteriorating to unacceptable levels, the proponent will correct operation procedures that are contributing to the problem and/or undertake necessary engineering installations.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR ANTALYA-TURKEY POWER PLANT 66
ANNEX 2
AIR POLLUTION MODELLING OF ANTALYA POWER PLANT (SIEMENS GAS TURBINES)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Plant Description
The plant is designed to generate electricity power as a base-loaded plant.
The power plant will be installed at the industrial zone of Antalya. It is going to be based on two units of 283 MW SIEMENS SGT5-4000F gas turbine packages as simple cycle during the first phase. No liquid fuel system is being considered for the project. The operation is going to be only on natural gas fuel.
Natural gas simple cycle ISO base load conditions are given in Table 1.
Table 1. ISO Base Load Conditions of Simple Cycle for Natural Gas
Turbine Inlet Temperature 15 oC Ambient Pressure (Sea Level) 1.013 bar Relative Humidity of the Air 60 % Load Level 100 % Turbine Rotor Speed 3000 min-1 Design Pressure Loss Exhaust Gas 9 mbar System Generator Power Factor 0.85 Lower Heating Value 50035 kJ/kg Fuel Mass Flow 13.9 kg/s Emission Control dry
Two SGT5-4000F gas turbine units include dry low NOx technology to control
NOx emissions.
Dry low NOx technology utilizes lean premix combustion in conjunction with a pilot zone. The intense mixing and overall lean conditions result in lower flame temperatures and minimal NOx generation. The conventional diffusion-flame zone is used to meet the operational requirements of the gas turbine: ignition, fuel staging sequence through the engine load range and flame stability.
SIEMENS Gas Turbine System has a standardized base design and base scope of supply which is aimed in this project. Although this base design could meet project and site specific conditions, it can also be improved to meet increased operational flexibility. Heat recovery applications including, re-powering, combined cycle and cogeneration in a wide range of environments and requirements.
2 This system also offers part-load and fast start-up capabilities.
In the choice of specific systems, options are available for fuels used, emissions reduction, power output enhancement, efficiency enhancement, generator type, air intake system, exhaust gas system and noise abatement.
Emission Performance Emission levels of SIEMENS SGT5-4000F gas turbine are illustrated in Table 2. Gas turbine emission levels meet the required emission values of Turkish Industry Related Air Pollution Control Regulation.
Table 2. SIEMENS Gas Turbine Emission Performance – Simple Cycle (Natural Gas)*
Pollutant SGT5-4000F Turkish Standarts 3 3 NOx 51.5 mg/Nm 75 mg/Nm CO < 10 mg/Nm3 100 mg/Nm3 Soot < 2 mg/Nm3 3 mg/Nm3 (Bacharach Nr.) 3 3 SO2 < 10 mg/Nm 60 mg/Nm Unburned 4 ppm N/A Hydrocarbon
* Values are for base load operation at lower turbine inlet temperature, and dry exhaust with 15 % 02 .
Thermal Performance
Thermal performance values of SIEMENS SGT5-4000F gas turbine are illustrated in Table 3.
Table 3. SIEMENS Gas Turbine Thermal Performance at Base Load Conditions – Simple Cycle (Natural Gas)
Gross* Power Output 283 MW Gross* Effieciency 39.2 % Gross* Heat Rate 9175 kJ/kWh Exhaust Flow 687 kg/s Exhaust Temperature 581 oC * at generator terminals
3 AIR POLLUTION MODEL DESCRIPTION
BREEZE AIR ISCLT 3 was used to assess the impacts of the emissions on the ambient air quality.
The software is a Windows based program for the development of EPA long term industrial source complex (ISCLT 3) model. The software is capable of analyzing the emissions of up to 1000 point, area, volume and open pit sources which may be grouped. Receptor grids as well as discrete receptor can be defined to assess the air quality in a particular urban location. Concentrations can be calculated for all terrain elevations up to stack height and for receptors above ground elevations. It requires meteorological data in a frequency distribution of wind speed, stability class and wind direction (star data).
Star data was prepared from the long term monthly average climate data published by the Turkish Meteorology Office. The stability classes have been calculated by considering the rules in AQPR and EPA regulatory options. Topography was investigated and relevant file was prepared by reading elevations on a 1/25.000 chart in 250 m distances for a grid of 5 km by 5 km. The locations of the emission sources are indicated in the same grid file.
4
PROJECT PARAMETERS
5 A) STACK PROPERTIES
Stack Height: 62 m
Stack Diameter: 5,5 m
Flue Gas Density: 0,7 kg/m3
Flue Gas Flow Rate: 687 kg/s
Flue Gas Average Velocity: 41.3 m/s
B) FLUE GAS EMISSION DATA
According to the SIEMENS SGT5-4000F gas turbine technical data, the flow rate of gas emissions are given as follows;
Carbon Monoxide → 6.87 g/s
Nitrogen Oxide Compounds → 10.2 g/s
Hydrocarbon → 4.1 g/s
6 C) TOPOGRAPHICAL DATA
PERIOD MONTHLY ANNUAL
CARTESIAN COORDINATE SYSTEM X 85000 [m] Y 8000 [m] XY INCREMENT 250 [m] NUMBER OF POINTS 21
ELEVATIONS [m]
ELEV 1 340.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 306.0 305.0 306.0 306.0 305.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 ELEV 2 330.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 306.0 305.0 306.0 306.0 305.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 ELEV 3 310.0 330.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 305.0 306.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 308.0 307.0 307.0 ELEV 4 320.0 330.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 303.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 307.0 308.0 308.0 310.0 308.0 308.0 ELEV 5 360.0 330.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 303.0 305.0 303.0 305.0 307.0 307.0 305.0 307.0 310.0 310.0 311.0 310.0 309.0 ELEV 6 325.0 325.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 307.0 300.0 300.0 307.0 310.0 311.0 312.0 311.0 310.0 ELEV 7 320.0 320.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 305.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 308.0 310.0 312.0 312.0 311.0
7 ELEV 8 310.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 310.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 302.0 300.0 305.0 308.0 310.0 312.0 312.0 312.0 ELEV 9 310.0 300.0 300.0 303.0 305.0 310.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 302.0 300.0 305.0 310.0 310.0 312.0 312.0 313.0 ELEV 10 410.0 310.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 307.0 307.0 300.0 303.0 300.0 302.0 302.0 300.0 302.0 300.0 305.0 309.0 310.0 311.0 311.0 313.0 ELEV 11 410.0 310.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 306.0 303.0 303.0 300.0 304.0 303.0 301.0 302.0 300.0 300.0 309.0 311.0 311.0 310.0 311.0 ELEV 12 410.0 300.0 305.0 303.0 305.0 305.0 306.0 303.0 303.0 303.0 304.0 305.0 302.0 302.0 300.0 305.0 310.0 311.0 311.0 311.0 311.0 ELEV 13 320.0 310.0 305.0 300.0 303.0 305.0 305.0 303.0 303.0 303.0 305.0 305.0 303.0 302.0 300.0 305.0 310.0 311.0 310.0 311.0 311.0 ELEV 14 300.0 300.0 305.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 305.0 303.0 303.0 305.0 305.0 306.0 304.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 310.0 310.0 310.0 311.0 311.0 ELEV 15 330.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 340.0 305.0 304.0 305.0 307.0 307.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 307.0 310.0 310.0 311.0 311.0 ELEV 16 390.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 304.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 310.0 310.0 307.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 307.0 310.0 310.0 311.0 312.0
8 ELEV 17 360.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 304.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 310.0 310.0 310.0 308.0 310.0 305.0 305.0 310.0 310.0 312.0 312.0 ELEV 18 320.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 313.0 310.0 315.0 310.0 310.0 305.0 310.0 310.0 312.0 312.0 313.0 ELEV 19 320.0 310.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 310.0 315.0 315.0 315.0 315.0 310.0 310.0 310.0 312.0 313.0 314.0 ELEV 20 305.0 305.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 305.0 304.0 305.0 305.0 310.0 315.0 317.0 317.0 320.0 320.0 310.0 310.0 310.0 313.0 314.0 ELEV 21 305.0 305.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 305.0 304.0 304.0 305.0 305.0 310.0 315.0 317.0 321.0 320.0 320.0 310.0 310.0 312.0 313.0 314.0
MODEL PARAMETERS AVERAGE SPEED FOR EACH WIND SPEED CATEGORY [m/s] 1.50, 2.50, 4.30, 6.80, 9.50, 12.50
WIND PROFILE EXPONENTS STABILITY WIND SPEED CATEGORY CATEGORY 1 2 3 4 5 6
A .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 B .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 .15E+00 C .20E+00 .20E+00 .20E+00 .20E+00 .20E+00 .20E+00 D .25E+00 .25E+00 .25E+00 .25E+00 .25E+00 .25E+00 E .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00 F .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00 .30E+00
9 VERTICAL POTENTIAL TEMPERATURE GRADIENTS [DEGREES K/m]
STABILITY WIND SPEED CATEGORY CATEGORY 1 2 3 4 5 6
A .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 B .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 C .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 D .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 .00E+00 E .20E-01 .20E-01 .20E-01 .20E-01 .20E-01 .20E-01 F .35E-01 .35E-01 .35E-01 .35E-01 .35E-01 .35E-01
10 D) METEOROLOGICAL DATA
ANEMOMETER HEIGHT 10.0 [m]
WIND SPEED CATEGORIES 1.50 2.50 4.30 6.80 9.50 12.50 [m/s]
AVERAGE AMBIENT AIR TEMPERATURE [DEGREES K]
JAN 288.2 288.2 288.2 283.1 279.3 279.3 FEB 288.9 288.9 288.9 283.6 279.4 279.4 MAR 291.1 291.2 291.2 285.7 281.0 281.0 APR 294.2 294.2 294.2 288.9 284.2 284.2 MAY 299.9 299.9 299.9 294.3 289.0 289.0 JUN 305.2 305.2 305.2 299.2 293.4 293.4 JUL 308.1 308.1 308.1 302.2 296.8 296.8 AUG 307.5 307.5 307.5 301.5 296.4 296.4 SEP 304.2 304.2 304.2 297.8 292.7 292.7 OCT 300.0 300.0 300.0 293.3 288.6 288.6 NOV 294.8 294.8 294.8 288.3 284.1 284.1 DEC 289.7 289.7 289.7 284.6 281.0 281.0 ANNUAL 297.7 297.7 297.7 291.9 287.2 287.2
AVERAGE MIXING LAYER HEIGHT [m]
ANNUAL AND MONTHLY
A 250 400 950 1200 2200 7000 B 250 400 950 1200 2200 7000 C 250 400 950 1200 2200 7000 D 250 400 950 1200 2200 7000 E 550 1000 1200 1500 2800 9000 F 1300 1750 2300 2500 3300 9000
AVERAGE SURFACE ROUGHNESS
ANNUAL AND MONTHLY 2
11
Figure 1. Wind Rose of Antalya According to the Blow Frequencies
12
RESULTS OF AIR POLLUTION MODEL
13
CARBON MONOXIDE IMPACTS ON AIR POLLUTION
In this model; 2 Emission Sources 21 Receptor Points
Emission Unit: g/s
Output Unit: µg/m3
14 RESULTS
JANUARY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .045884 88750 8000 2 .041813 89000 8000 3 .037688 89250 8000 4 .037278 88750 8250 5 .035518 88500 8000
FEBRUARY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .051327 88750 8000 2 .044566 89000 8000 3 .040898 88750 8250 4 .039769 88500 8000 5 .037335 89250 8000
MARCH
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .036748 88750 8000 2 .033632 89000 8000 3 .030500 89250 8000 4 .029908 88750 8250 5 .028443 88500 8000
APRIL
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .014326 87500 12250 2 .013691 87750 12500 3 .013406 87750 12750 4 .013319 87500 12500 5 .013084 88000 12750
15 MAY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .013376 87500 12250 2 .012443 87500 12500 3 .012426 87750 12500 4 .012227 87750 12750 5 .012224 87500 12750
JUNE
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .033095 88750 8000 2 .028731 89000 8000 3 .026370 88750 8250 4 .025644 88500 8000 5 .024064 89250 8000
JULY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .033899 88750 8000 2 .030528 89000 8000 3 .027410 88750 8250 4 .027050 89250 8000 5 .026248 88500 8000
AUGUST
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .015408 87500 12250 2 .014953 87750 12500 3 .014626 87750 12750 4 .014461 88000 12750 5 .014408 88000 12250
16 SEPTEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .015001 88000 12250 2 .014661 88250 13000 3 .014294 88000 12500 4 .014231 88250 12750 5 .014088 88000 12750
OCTOBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .008347 87500 10750 2 .002982 87500 11250 3 .001827 87750 10750 4 .001093 87250 11250 5 .001020 87750 11250
NOVEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .009937 87500 10750 2 .002803 87500 11250 3 .001606 87750 11250 4 .001332 87750 10750 5 .000722 87250 11250
DECEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .007722 87500 10750 2 .005670 87000 12250 3 .005594 86750 12750 4 .005214 86750 12500 5 .005116 86750 13000
17 ANNUAL
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .036915 88750 8000 2 .032050 89000 8000 3 .029414 88750 8250 4 .028603 88500 8000 5 .026847 89250 8000
Figure 2. 2 – D Concentration Distribution of Carbon Monoxide
18
Figure 3. 3 – D Concentration Distribution of Carbon Monoxide
19
NITROGEN OXIDE COMPOUNDS IMPACTS ON AIR POLLUTION
In this model; 2 Emission Sources 21 Receptor Points
Emission Unit: g/s
Output Unit: µg/m3
20 RESULTS
JANUARY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .068125 88750 8000 2 .062080 89000 8000 3 .055956 89250 8000 4 .055347 88750 8250 5 .052733 88500 8000
FEBRUARY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .076205 88750 8000 2 .066167 89000 8000 3 .060723 88750 8250 4 .059045 88500 8000 5 .055432 89250 8000
MARCH
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .054560 88750 8000 2 .049934 89000 8000 3 .045284 89250 8000 4 .044405 88750 8250 5 .042230 88500 8000
APRIL
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .021270 87500 12250 2 .020327 87750 12500 3 .019905 87750 12750 4 .019775 87500 12500 5 .019426 88000 12750
21 MAY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .019859 87500 12250 2 .018474 87500 12500 3 .018449 87750 12500 4 .018154 87750 12750 5 .018150 87500 12750
JUNE
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .049137 88750 8000 2 .042658 89000 8000 3 .039153 88750 8250 4 .038075 88500 8000 5 .035728 89250 8000
JULY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .050330 88750 8000 2 .045325 89000 8000 3 .040696 88750 8250 4 .040161 89250 8000 5 .038971 88500 8000
AUGUST
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .022876 87500 12250 2 .022201 87750 12500 3. .021716 87750 12750 4 .021471 88000 12750 5 .021391 88000 12250
22
SEPTEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .022272 88000 12250 2 .021767 88250 13000 3 .021223 88000 12500 4 .021129 88250 12750 5 .020917 88000 12750
OCTOBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .012393 87500 10750 2 .004427 87500 11250 3 .002712 87750 10750 4 .001623 87250 11250 5 .001514 87750 11250
NOVEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .014754 87500 10750 2 .004162 87500 11250 3 .002385 87750 11250 4 .001978 87750 10750 5 .001073 87250 11250
DECEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .011465 87500 10750 2 .008419 87000 12250 3 .008306 86750 12750 4 .007741 86750 12500 5 .007596 86750 13000
23
ANNUAL
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .054809 88750 8000 2 .047586 89000 8000 3 .043672 88750 8250 4 .042468 88500 8000 5 .039860 89250 8000
Figure 4. 2 – D Concentration Distribution of Nitrogen Oxide Compounds
24
Figure 5. 3 – D Concentration Distribution of Nitrogen Oxide Compounds
25
HYDROCARBON IMPACTS ON AIR POLLUTION
In this model; 2 Emission Sources 21 Receptor Points
Emission Unit: g/s
Output Unit: µg/m3
26 RESULTS
JANUARY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .027384 88750 8000 2 .024954 89000 8000 3 .022492 89250 8000 4 .022248 88750 8250 5 .021197 88500 8000
FEBRUARY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .030632 88750 8000 2 .026597 89000 8000 3 .024408 88750 8250 4 .023734 88500 8000 5 .022281 89250 8000
MARCH
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .021931 88750 8000 2 .020072 89000 8000 3 .018202 89250 8000 4 .017849 88750 8250 5 .016975 88500 8000
APRIL
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .008550 87500 12250 2 .008171 87750 12500 3 .008001 87750 12750 4 .007949 87500 12500 5 .007808 88000 12750
27 MAY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .007983 87500 12250 2 .007426 87500 12500 3 .007416 87750 12500 4 .007297 87750 12750 5 .007295 87500 12750
JUNE
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .019751 88750 8000 2 .017147 89000 8000 3 .015738 88750 8250 4 .015304 88500 8000 5 .014361 89250 8000
JULY
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .020231 88750 8000 2 .018219 89000 8000 3 .016358 88750 8250 4 .016143 89250 8000 5 .015665 88500 8000
AUGUST
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .009195 87500 12250 2 .008924 87750 12500 3 .008729 87750 12750 4 .008631 88000 12750 5 .008598 88000 12250
28 SEPTEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .008952 88000 12250 2 .008750 88250 13000 3 .008531 88000 12500 4 .008493 88250 12750 5 .008408 88000 12750
OCTOBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .004981 87500 10750 2 .001779 87500 11250 3 .001090 87750 10750 4 .000652 87250 11250 5 .000609 87750 11250
NOVEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .005931 87500 10750 2 .001673 87500 11250 3 .000959 87750 11250 4 .000795 87750 10750 5 .000431 87250 11250
DECEMBER
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .004608 87500 10750 2 .003384 87000 12250 3 .003339 86750 12750 4 .003112 86750 12500 5 .003053 86750 13000
29 ANNUAL
THE MAXIMUM 5 AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES
No Concentration [µg/m3] X Y
1 .022031 88750 8000 2 .019128 89000 8000 3 .017554 88750 8250 4 .017071 88500 8000 5 .016022 89250 8000
Figure 6. 2 – D Concentration Distribution of Hydrocarbons
30
Figure 7. 3 – D Concentration Distribution of Hydrocarbons
31