Detailed Air Quality Modelling and Analysis · 2015-07-23 · Document Title: Detailed Air Quality...

E.ON New Build & Technology GmbH

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.

ERM S.p.A.

Via San Gregorio, 38

20124 Milan - Italy

IAL00-ERM-643-Y-TAE-1021

Rev.: 00

Proponent: Trans Adriatic Pipeline AG

Author: Environmental Resources Management

Project Title:

Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP

Document Title:

Detailed Air Quality Modelling and Analysis

Rev. Purpose of Issue Description Auth. Date

0A Issued for Review ERM 2014-05-22

0B Issued for Approval Revised based on ENT comments ERM 2014-06-10

00 EIA procedures ERM 2014-06-18

Final Issue: EIA procedures

CONTRACTOR TSP East

Author Checked Approved Checked Approved

Name/Signature

Signorini, Jacopo

Bertolè, Lorenzo

Strippoli, Daniele

Fiore, Alessia

Date 2014-06-18 2014-06-18 2014-06-18 2014-06-17

Org./Dept. ERM ERM ERM ENT

Document Status Prepared Checked Approved Checked Approved


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.

Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP IAL00-ERM-643-Y-TAE-1021 Rev.: 00 Document Title: Detailed Air Quality Modelling and Analysis

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Detailed modelling of the Impact of the Construction Phase on Air Quality 4

1.1 Overview 4

1.2 Onshore Construction Phase 5 1.2.1 Dust Emissions from Earthworks and Vehicle Transit on Unpaved Roads 5 1.2.2 Emissions of Exhaust Gases from Vehicles 9

1.3 Offshore Construction Phase 17 1.3.1 Quantification of Vessel Emissions 17 1.3.2 Computational Domain 18 1.3.3 Results 20

1.4 Conclusion 21


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1 Maximum PM10 concentrations in the computational domain 8 Table 1-2 Emission factors for heavy duty vehicles (16-32 t) COPERT VI - Driving conditions in rural areas 11 Table 1-3 Results of the modelling analysis carried out using CALINE4 models: maximum hourly concentrations of CO, NOX and atmospheric particulate matter receptors. 14 Table 1-4 Vessels Involved in the offshore pipeline construction 17 Table 1-5 Estimation of atmospheric emissions of pollutants from vessels in the vicinity of the landfall area 18 Table 1-6 Maximum concentrations in the computational domain 20

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Simulation domain – Atmospheric dispersion of dust 7 Figure 1-2 Position of receptors 10 Figure 1-3 Position and ID of receptors 13 Figure 1-4 Vehicle Exhaust Dispersion Study - Maximum Hourly NOx

Concentrations 16 Figure 1-5 Simulation domain – Atmospheric dispersion of pollutants from construction activities 19

LIST OF BOXES

Box 1-1 Dust emissions from Construction Sites, Additional Estimates 6


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


1 Detailed modelling of the Impact of the Construction Phase on

Air Quality

1.1 Overview

This document constitutes a detailed study for the EIA Commission on the potential impact of the

construction phase of the Trans Adriatic Pipeline project on air quality and reports the results of

additional modelling to that included in the ESIA and the relative supplementary document, which

confirms the assessments already submitted by the Proponent.

Specifically, this document presents the results of the following models:

- temporary dust emissions from earthworks, excavation and the movement of construction

vehicles on unpaved surfaces. The emissions used in the model were estimated by

integrating the emission factors reported in US-EPA AP-42 13.2.3 "Heavy Construction

Operations" with those reported in AP-42 13.2.4 "Aggregate Handling and storage piles” and confirm the information provided in paragraph 37c (Section 2.39.3) of the document

“Additional Documents for Integration into the ESIA” submitted on 17 April 2014.

- temporary emissions of exhaust gases into the atmosphere from vehicles used to

transport materials. The traffic flows during the project construction phase were modelled

using the COPERT IV emission factors (Computer Programme to calculate Emissions

from Road Traffic) published on ISPRA’s SINAnet portal

(http://www.sinanet.isprambiente.it/it/sia-ispra/fetransp), which are more up-to-date than

the COPERT III emission factors used in the ESIA. The results obtained have already

been reported in the document "Responses to Observation of the Public" submitted on 17

April 2014 and in relation to which this document provides the technical detail.

- marine traffic generated by vessels that operate along the stretch of coast in front of the

pipeline landfall in Italy. The modelling analysis confirms the lack of significance of the

impacts already discussed in the ESIA and in the supplemental document.

The annex is then divided into two separate subsections, one for onshore activities (which

includes the first two points above) and one for offshore activities (which includes the third point

above).

http://www.sinanet.isprambiente.it/it/sia-ispra/fetransp


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


1.2 Onshore Construction Phase

1.2.1 Dust Emissions from Earthworks and Vehicle Transit on Unpaved Roads

The project construction phase involves temporary dust producing activities during the

preparation of the PRT construction site and along the pipeline working strip.

In general, during the construction phase, dust emissions are produced by the following activities:

pulverisation and abrasion of surfaces caused by trucks used to transport soil and other

materials;

resuspension of dust from stored loose materials caused by wind erosion;

mechanical action on loose and excavated materials with excavators, bulldozers, etc.;

involuntary transport of mud carried by truck wheels, which can produce dust when dry.

In the preparation phase of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (hereinafter ESIA)

(Chapter 8.5 of the ESIA), a quantitative assessment of dust production was performed using the

US EPA AP-42 methodology (AP-42 Fifth Edition, Volume I, Chapter 13, 13.2.4 Aggregate

Handling and Storage Piles). Following this methodology, dust emissions from the construction

phase were calculated, including emissions from the resuspension of dust caused by wind and

transit vehicles.

However, in order to more comprehensively estimate the dust emissions generated by

construction activities, including on the basis of requests made by the Ministry of the

Environment, the contributions of two specific activities were also considered, as set out in

section 13.2. 3 Heavy Construction Operations.

In particular, the emissions generated by earthworks (scrapers removing topsoil) and compacting

activities were calculated. The calculation methods and assumptions made are provided in the

box below.


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Box 1-1 Dust emissions from Construction Sites, Additional Estimates

Dust Emissions - Moving topsoil

To determine the contribution of earthworks dust emissions to overall emissions values, the following calculation

method was applied (AP-42 13.2.3 (Heavy Construction Operations):

Legend: veicolo=vehicle

where E is the emissions generated by a single means of transport (scrapers) for each kilometre travelled. In order to

identify the distance potentially travelled by a vehicle it was assumed that the entire area (PRT + Working Strip,

333,200 m2

in total) was machined by a vehicle able to operate at a width of approximately 3.5 m. By applying the

above equation for a duration of 250 days per year, daily dust emissions of about 2.17 kg/day were estimated for

earthworks.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

Dust emissions - Soil Compacting

To determine the contribution of soil compacting dust emissions to overall emissions values, the following equation

was applied (AP-42, 11.9):

E = kg/h PM10

S = silt content (silt load equal to 8.5%, as suggested by the AP-42 methodology for "Construction sites")

M = moisture content (10%)

Assuming a daily maximum of 10 working hours for soil compacting, an activity that will most affect the project area for

a limited period of time, additional dust emissions of 2.10 kg/day were estimated.

Therefore, taking into account earthworks dust emissions as well as those from the resuspension

of dust caused by transit vehicles already calculated in the ESIA (35.32 kg/day of PM10 will be

produced by the construction of the PRT site and 40.77 kg/day by the working strip activities), the

new additional contribution amounts to around 5.6% of what had already been considered and

evaluated by means of the modelling simulations performed.

The identified emissions values, updated compared to the previous documentation, were

subsequently used as input for a dust dispersion modelling study, carried out with the EPA

modelling system CALMET-CALPUFF to assess the impact on air quality of dust emissions

produced during the construction phase. It should be noted that the daily dust production values

were conservatively estimated as continuous for the entire simulation period (2010

meteorological year).

The construction of the PRT and the activities along the working strip were assumed to occur at

the same time in order to take into account any synergistic effects. The PM10 concentrations

were modelled over a 10 km x 8 km rectangular domain centred on the dust emission sources.

Figure 1-1 below shows the simulation domain used in the modelling analysis, highlighting the

location of the PRT and the working strip.


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


For more information regarding the modelling tools used and the specific parameters of this

modelling analysis, please refer to the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment in Appendix

1 to Annex 6

Figure 1-1 Simulation domain – Atmospheric dispersion of dust

Source: ERM (2013)

LEGEND

WORKING STRIP

METEOROLOGICAL DOMAIN

PIPELINE RECEIVING TERMINAL

SIMULATION DOMAIN

ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES

MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


The model produced PM10 ground level concentration values over the simulation domain, the

results of which, downstream of the mitigation already proposed in the Environmental and Social

Impact Assessment (Section 8.5.1.2.2), are presented in Table 1-1 and compared with national

and international air quality standards.

Table 1-1 Maximum PM10 concentrations in the computational domain

Source Parameter Simulated

concentrations [µg/m³]

IFC [µg/m

3]

2008/50/EC and

Legislative Decree

155/2010 [µg/m³]

PRT + Working strip

PM10 90.4th percentile of daily average concentrations(2) 19.7 50

(1)

Maximum daily PM10 concentrations

35.25 50

PRT Maximum annual PM10 concentrations

10.44 40

(1) Maximum daily average concentration limit, which should not be exceeded more than 35 times per calendar year

(2) Corresponds to the daily concentration limits for the protection of human health, which should not be exceeded

more than 35 times per calendar year.

The long-term PM10 concentrations estimated by the model (annual average concentrations),

relating only to the construction of the PRT, comply with national and international air quality

standards. Similarly, the short-term PM10 concentrations estimated by the model (daily

concentrations), relating to simultaneous construction activities (peak emissions) at the PRT site

and along the working strip, comply with national and international air quality standards.

Figure 1 in Appendix 1 contains a map showing the impact of the maximum daily PM10

concentrations and locates the maximum concentrations the immediate vicinity of the PRT site.

Based on this additional modelling analysis, it can be concluded that even in relation to a more

detailed review of the estimation methods used to calculate the potential dust emissions rate

during construction activities, the impact assessment does not vary in substance from the values

submitted in the ESIA and it confirms the Low residual impact estimate of dust emissions from

construction activities.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32008L0050:EN:NOT


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


1.2.2 Emissions of Exhaust Gases from Vehicles

The project construction phase envisages the use of different types of vehicles for the

construction of the PRT site (site preparation, excavation, construction of roads, fences and

gates, etc.) and the onshore section of the pipeline.

The total vehicle emission load (CO, NOx and PM10) during the project construction phase, and

reported herein, was estimated using COPERT IV emission factors (Computer Programme to

calculate Emissions from Road Traffic) published on ISPRA’s SINAnet portal (http://www.sinanet.isprambiente.it/it/sia-ispra/fetransp), which are more recent than the

COPERT III emission factors used in the ESIA. The results obtained had already been reported

in the document "Responses to Observations of the Public" submitted on 17 April 2014 and in

relation to which this document provides the technical detail.

The vehicle exhaust emissions value identified was subsequently used as input for a dispersion

modelling study using the CALINE model, a Gaussian-based dispersion model developed by the

California Department of Transportation. The dispersion study estimated the maximum

concentration of pollutants produced by vehicular traffic during the project construction phase,

allowing a quantitative assessment of the impacts on local air quality.

For further details regarding the technical features of the COPERT software (Computer

Programme to calculate Emissions from Road Traffic) and the CALINE 4 dispersion model,

please refer to Section 8.5 of the ESIA.

1.2.2.1 Road axis and position of receptors

The simulation was modelled to assess the impacts of a generic stretch of road potentially used

by the entire number of vehicles expected.

In accordance with the CALINE code, the stretch of road was considered as a series of linear

links with the hourly vehicular traffic due to construction activities estimated at 16 vehicles per

hour.

The receptors were located on a grid laid out perpendicular to the road. They were placed at a

distance of 5 to 200 metres from the road, with the distance been each receptor increasing the

further their location from the road. The layout of receptors adopted is presented in the Figure

below.

Receptors located at a distance of more than 200 metres from the road were not considered

since beyond that distance, the concentrations calculated by the model for the limited volume of

traffic anticipated are negligible.

The closest group of receptors, located at 5 metres from the road, were deliberately placed in the

immediate vicinity of the roadway in order to represent the worst possible conditions in terms of

the spatial relationship between the source of the emissions and the receptor.



ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Figure 1-2 Position of receptors

Emissions scenario

The emissions estimate considered a conservative volume of traffic of 50 vehicles per day along

the working strip, and a worst case scenario was modelled, with the 50 vehicles in transit at the

same time on the same stretch of road. Therefore, assuming two transits per vehicle per day and

10 working hours per day, an average traffic volume of 10 vehicles per hour was calculated and a

vehicle of speed of 40 km per hour was assumed.

This (conservative) estimate of the number of vehicles in circulation is similar to the details

reported in the ESIA and is also conservative with respect to the update of the document

“Excavated Soils and Rocks" contained in Annex 6 of the Supplemental Document to the ESIA

submitted on 17 April 2014 (in which a peak of about 40 trucks/day is estimated for a period of 4

months corresponding to the preparation phase of the areas of the PRT construction site).

For the purposes of estimating emissions of micropollutants by applying the COPERT IV

programme, in order to assess the maximum possible interference, a conservative assumption

was made that all 50 vehicles potentially involved in the construction activities described below

are heavy trucks (32 t) powered by diesel engines that comply with EURO III emission standards.

This is a conservative hypothesis due to the fact that more stringent guidelines concerning the

limits of pollutant emissions for vehicles operating in the EU (EURO IV - V - VI) will be in place

when the Project construction phase begins.

RECEPTOR

ROAD


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


SOx emissions were not considered since they are not included in the COPERT IV database of

emission factors. Given current regulations regarding the presence of sulphur in automotive fuels,

the SOx values can be considered to be negligible. Therefore, only the concentrations of NOx, CO

and atmospheric particulate matter were simulated.

Table 1-2 Emission factors for heavy duty vehicles (16-32 t) COPERT VI - Driving

conditions in rural areas

Type of vehicle: HDV/Diesel/28-32 t

Pollutant Emission factor [g/km*vehicle]

NOx 6.977

CO 1.770

PM10 ** 0.212

The emission factors presented in Table 1-2 were subsequently multiplied by the number of

vehicles per hour, and the value obtained was associated with each link (linear stretch of road)

input into the CALINE4 model.

Again, it should be noted that conservative assumptions were made in estimating the number

and type of vehicles and their transit conditions in order to maximise the emissions considered in

the model and therefore the simulated ground level pollutant concentrations.

Meteorological data

The simulation model was set up using meteo-diffusive conditions that maximise the impact of

ground-level pollutants. To achieve this, a sensitivity analysis was carried out to identify the worst

weather conditions while maintaining constant emissions sources and road geometry.

Based on the results obtained, the most critical conditions require a minimum wind speed of 0.5

m/s, and stability class A or F; simulations were then conducted using stability class F, which in

absolute terms allowed the calculation of the maximum concentrations at all receptors selected.

The boundary layer height was conservatively set to 100 m, since traffic emissions are unlikely to

spread upwards. Boundary layer values of greater than 100-150 metres do not produce any

significant variations in ground-level concentrations.

With regard to wind direction, the WORST CASE WIND ANGLE was used, which was specifically

developed to identify the wind angle, maximising the ground-level pollutant concentrations at

each receptor.

The following meteorological conditions were used as input to the CALINE4 run performed in this

study:

Atmospheric Stability (Pasquill Gifford): F


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Wind speed: 0.5 m/s

Temperature: 20°C

Boundary layer height: 100 m.

Results

The simulation performed using the CALINE4 model produced the maximum hourly

concentrations from vehicular traffic during onshore pipeline construction activities. The results

are presented in both tabular and graphical format. An ID was associated with each receptor so

that results could be unambiguously analysed at each receptor.

Figure 1-3 below shows the position of each receptor along with their IDs, whereas Table 1-3

presents the concentrations of pollutants simulated at each receptor. These concentrations are

compared with national and international air quality standards.

It should be noted that when comparing the results with air quality standards, the simulated NOx

concentrations were considered as Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), but in reality only a part of NOx

converts to NO2, depending on different factors (solar radiation, temperature, concentration of

hydrocarbons in the atmosphere, etc.). Therefore, the simulated concentrations of NO2 have

been overstated. Moreover, the simulated TSP concentrations were assumed to be PM10 for the

purposes of comparing them with air quality standards, since the relationship between total

atmospheric particulate matter and PM10 is not known for vehicular traffic emissions. This

assumption is conservative as not all atmospheric particulate matter is PM10, therefore, the

simulated PM10 concentrations have been overstated.


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Figure 1-3 Position and ID of receptors

RECEPTOR

ROAD


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Table 1-3 Results of the modelling analysis carried out using CALINE4 models:

maximum hourly concentrations of CO, NOX and atmospheric particulate

matter receptors.

Receptor ID CO

[µg/m3]

NOx [µg/m

3]

TSP [µg/m

3]

1 8.26 32.53 0.99 2 8.26 32.53 0.99 3 8.26 32.53 0.99 4 8.26 32.53 0.99 5 8.26 32.53 0.99 6 7.82 30.82 0.94 7 1.74 6.85 0.21 8 1.74 6.85 0.21 9 1.74 6.85 0.21 10 1.74 6.85 0.21 11 1.74 6.85 0.21 12 1.74 6.85 0.21 13 1.30 5.14 0.16 14 1.30 5.14 0.16 15 1.30 5.14 0.16 16 1.30 5.14 0.16 17 1.30 5.14 0.16 18 1.30 5.14 0.16 19 0.87 3.42 0.10 20 0.87 3.42 0.10 21 0.43 1.71 0.05 22 0.43 1.71 0.05 23 0.87 3.42 0.10 24 0.87 3.42 0.10 25 0.43 1.71 0.05 26 0.43 1.71 0.05 27 0.43 1.71 0.05 28 0.43 1.71 0.05 29 0.43 1.71 0.05 30 0.43 1.71 0.05 31 0.43 1.71 0.05 32 0.43 1.71 0.05 33 0.00 0.00 0.00 34 0.00 0.00 0.00 35 0.43 1.71 0.05 36 0.43 1.71 0.05 37 8.26 32.53 0.99 38 8.26 32.53 0.99 39 8.26 32.53 0.99 40 8.26 32.53 0.99 41 8.26 32.53 0.99 42 7.82 30.82 0.94 43 1.74 6.85 0.21 44 1.74 6.85 0.21 45 1.74 6.85 0.21 46 1.74 6.85 0.21 47 1.74 6.85 0.21 48 1.74 6.85 0.21 49 1.30 5.14 0.16 50 1.30 5.14 0.16 51 1.30 5.14 0.16 52 1.30 5.14 0.16 53 1.30 5.14 0.16 54 1.30 5.14 0.16 55 0.87 3.42 0.10


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Receptor ID CO

[µg/m3]

NOx [µg/m

3]

TSP [µg/m

3]

56 0.87 3.42 0.10 57 0.43 1.71 0.05 58 0.43 1.71 0.05 59 0.87 3.42 0.10 60 0.87 3.42 0.10 61 0.43 1.71 0.05 62 0.43 1.71 0.05 63 0.43 1.71 0.05 64 0.43 1.71 0.05 65 0.43 1.71 0.05 66 0.43 1.71 0.05 67 0.43 1.71 0.05 68 0.43 1.71 0.05 69 0.00 0.00 0.00 70 0.00 0.00 0.00 71 0.43 1.71 0.05 72 0.43 1.71 0.05

2008/50/EC and Legislative Decree 155/2010

[µg/m³] 10000

(1) 200

(2) 50

(3)

IFC [µg/m³]

200 50

(4)

(1) Daily maximum 8-hour moving average CO levels

(2) Maximum hourly NOx concentrations, which should not be exceeded more than 18 times per year.

(3) Maximum daily PM10 concentrations, which should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year.

(4) Refers to PM10

The results in Table 1-3 clearly show that, for the receptors included in the model, the CALINE 4

values calculated are considerably lower than the respective regulatory limits, even for receptors

located 5 m from the centre of the roadway.

Furthermore, the results in terms of maximum hourly concentrations were compared with stricter

regulatory limits, referring to a longer averaging period (8 hours, daily average concentrations).

In this regard, reflecting the limited emissions of the vehicles involved, it should be noted that the

maximum hourly dust concentrations calculated in the worst meteorological conditions are still

lower than the maximum average daily concentrations allowed, which can be exceeded 35 times

in one year. Therefore, considering the conservative approach adopted in this analysis, the

ground-level concentrations of pollutants produced by vehicular traffic are negligible.

A very conservative approach was used, which resulted in the overestimation of both the flow of

traffic and the pollutants emitted.

Even the hourly NOx concentrations modelled were well within regulatory limits. A map of

maximum hourly NOX concentrations (Figure 1-4) was produced to identify the receptors located

in areas with maximum hourly NOX concentrations



ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Figure 1-4 Vehicle Exhaust Dispersion Study - Maximum Hourly NOx Concentrations

Source: ERM (2013)

LEGEND

SIMULATION DOMAIN

MAXIMUM HOURLY NOx CONCENTRATIONS [µg/m³]


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


The map of ground-level concentrations in Figure 1-4 shows how the highest hourly NOx

concentrations modelled – approximately 32 μg/m3 – were exclusively confined to 5 m either side

of the roadway, while concentrations decreased significantly at greater distances.

1.3 Offshore Construction Phase

The Project construction phase anticipates the use of marine vessels for the construction of the

offshore section of the pipeline. In order to confirm the analysis (reported in the ESIA and the

Supplement Document) of the impact that these emissions can have on the receptors located

along the coast and, in general, on the mainland, a modelling study was carried out based on the

emissions estimation method already presented in the ESIA. With regard to the other

assessments carried out, the atmospheric dispersion of pollutants was analysed using the

CALMET-CALPUFF modelling system (version 5.8).

1.3.1 Quantification of Vessel Emissions

The following table shows the number and type of vessels required for the project. It also

indicates the vessels that will operate in the area surrounding the pipeline landfall in Italy, which

were therefore considered in the estimation of the ground-level impact of costal emissions (as a

precaution, all vessels were considered to be operating simultaneously at a distance of about 1

km from the coast).

Table 1-4 Vessels Involved in the offshore pipeline construction

Type of vessel Number Power [MW]

Presence in San Foca

Backhoe dredge 1 18 X

Motopontoon 4 8 X

Pielay barge 1 20.5 X

Anchor Handling Tug 3 12 X

Pipe carrier barge 3 7

Supply vessel 3 12

Survey vessels 1 8 X Crew boat 1 2 Dive Support Vessel 1 11.5 X

Fall pipe vessel 1 6.5 X

The calculation of ship emissions in the area surrounding the pipeline landfall site in Italy (which

is the portion of ship emissions that may have a potential impact on the air quality of the coast) is

based on the Methodology for Estimating Air Pollutant Emissions from Transport (hereinafter

MEET), described in detail in Annex 6 of the ESIA, which should be consulted for further details.

The results of the estimates are shown in Table 1-5.

The potential impact of NOx and CO emissions was analysed in relation to the significance of the

emissions reported and national and international air quality standards, as they are the main

pollutants, increased by an order of magnitude compared to PM and SOx due the fuel used by

the vessels involved.


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Table 1-5 Estimation of atmospheric emissions of pollutants from vessels in the

vicinity of the landfall area

Pollutant Tonnes emitted

NOx 36.8 CO 80.3

1.3.2 Computational Domain

The concentrations of pollutants caused by the emissions of vessels operating during the

construction phase in the area surrounding the pipeline landfall were simulated on a

computational domain of 20 km x 20 km. Figure 1-5 below shows the simulation domain used in

the modelling analysis, highlighting the location of the offshore activity.


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Figure 1-5 Simulation domain – Atmospheric dispersion of pollutants from construction

activities

Source: ERM (2014)

LEGEND

EXIT POINT OF THE MICROTUNNEL AND PRE-TRENCHING POINT

SIMULATION DOMAIN

ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES

MUNICIPALITIES

METEOROLOGICAL DOMAIN


ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


1.3.3 Results

The results of the modelling study are summarised in the table below. The conservative approach

adopted for the study is described below as well as a comparison with the respective regulatory

limits:

When comparing the results with air quality standards, the simulated NOx concentrations

were considered as Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), but in reality only a part of NOx converts to NO2,

depending on different factors (solar radiation, temperature, concentration of hydrocarbons in

the atmosphere, etc.). Therefore, the simulated concentrations of NO2 have been overstated.

The model does not account for dry and wet deposition of pollutants or photochemical

reactions, which take place in reality and would reduce the atmospheric concentrations of

pollutants. Thus, the CO and NOx emissions levels reflect this overestimation of the actual

contribution of emission sources.

Although the actual activity of the compressors will last less than a month, the timeframe

chosen for meteorological purposes was the full year 2010 (8760 hours). This choice is

conservative as it allows the assessment of ground-level concentrations of pollutants in the

worst weather conditions that occurred during the simulated year.

It should be noted that the analysis of the results reported in the following Table was conducted

on the entire simulation domain. However, the maximum impact calculated by the model is

located offshore and the onshore concentrations are lower, as can be seen in the ground-level

concentrations of pollutants (Figure 2) presented for the most significant parameter (maximum

hourly NOx concentrations).

Table 1-6 Maximum concentrations in the computational domain

Parameter Simulated concentrations [µg/m³] IFC

Standard µg/m³]

Limit 2008/50/EC

and Legislative

Decree 155/2010 [µg/m³]

NOx 99.8th percentile of hourly average concentrations

(1)

38.3 200 (1) (3)

Maximum hourly NOx Concentrations 77.0 200

Annual average hourly NOx Concentrations

2.6 40

maximum 8-hour moving average CO levels(2)

59.0 10000

(1) Corresponds to the maximum hourly NO2 concentrations, which should not be exceeded more than 18 times per

year. (2)

daily maximum 8-hour moving average CO levels (3)

Limits specified for NO2



ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


The Table clearly shows that the pollutant concentrations modelled fully comply with national and

international air quality standards. The analysis in Figure 2 (maximum hourly NOx concentrations)

shows that the maximum impact is offshore, near the area that will be affected by the activities of

vessels and the corresponding values calculated on the coast are even lower than the limit (with

maximum average hourly NOx concentrations equal to 51 µg/m³]).

1.4 Conclusion

This document provides a detailed study on the potential impact of the construction phase of the

Trans Adriatic Pipeline project on air quality and reports the results of additional modelling to that

included in the ESIA and in the relative supplementary document.

These additional models confirm the assessments already submitted by the proponent, and in

particular the following:

Onshore Construction Phase

- temporary dust emissions from earthworks, excavation and the movement of construction

vehicles on unpaved surfaces. The emissions used in the model were estimated by

integrating the emission factors reported in the US-EPA AP-42 13.2.3 "Heavy

Construction Operations" with those reported in the AP-42 13.2.4 "Aggregate Handling

and storage piles” and confirm the information provided in paragraph 37c (Section 2.39.3)

of the document “Supplements to the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment” submitted on 17 April 2014. It can therefore be concluded that even with the more

detailed use of the US-EPA estimation methods to calculate the potential dust emissions

rate during construction activities, the impact assessment does not vary in substance from

the values submitted in the ESIA and it confirms the Low residual impact estimate of dust

emissions from construction activities.

- temporary emissions of exhaust gases into the atmosphere from vehicles used to

transport materials. The traffic flows during the project construction phase were modelled

using COPERT IV emission factors (Computer Programme to calculate Emissions from

Road Traffic) published on ISPRA’s SINAnet portal

(http://www.sinanet.isprambiente.it/it/sia-ispra/fetransp), which are more up-to-date than

the COPERT III emission factors used in the ESIA. The results obtained from this

modelling analysis have already been reported in the document "Responses to

Observations of the Public" submitted on 17 April 2014 and in relation to which this

document provides the technical detail. The modelling analysis performed shows that the

maximum hourly ground level concentration of pollutants (PM10, NOx, CO) produced by

vehicles used to transport materials are considerably lower than the respective regulatory

limits, even at 5 metres from the centre of the roadway.



ERM S.p.A.

of 22

Area Code

Comp. Code

System Code

Disc. Code

Doc. Type

Ser. No.


Offshore Construction Phase

- marine traffic generated by vessels that operate along the stretch of coast surrounding the

pipeline landfall in Italy. The modelling analysis performed shows that the ground level

concentrations of pollutants (NOx and CO) fully comply with national and international air

quality standards. This confirms the lack of significance of the impacts already discussed

in the ESIA and in the supplemental document.

Detailed Air Quality Modelling and Analysis · 2015-07-23 · Document Title: Detailed Air Quality...

Documents

Transcript of Detailed Air Quality Modelling and Analysis · 2015-07-23 · Document Title: Detailed Air Quality...