Environment - ތިމާވެށި
Browse
46 results
Search Results
Item First addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed harbour project in Nilandhoo, Faafu Atoll, Maldives(2016-07) SandcaysThis is the first Addendum to the EIA for the harbour project being undertaken in Nilandhoo, Faafu Atoll. The project is proposed by Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure. The project constitutes dredging of a large harbour for the people of Nilandhoo while at the same time creating land using dredged sand including additional dredging for proposed reclamation of 10hectares of land for housing and infrastructure development including semiindustrial activities. An environmental assessment was undertaken for this project in Nov 2015, which has been subsequently approved. According to the EIA report, the objective of the harbour project is to provide a sizeable harbour to accommodate the increasing number of vessels in the island and to restore the usability of the harbour that has been filled over time with the breakwater being damaged, especially following the tsunami of 2004. The harbour on the northeast side is too small given that Nilandhoo has a lot of large fishing vessels and has been serving as the regional hub with fuelling services established on the old (tsunamidamaged) harbour on the northwest. This addendum addresses the modification to the location of the borrow area. One of the main concerns is that the performance of the dredger is affected due to having to pump up to 1km from the borrow to the fill area. Therefore, it has been considered important to move the dredge (borrow) area closer to the fill area in order to enhance dredging performance and achieve cost-effectiveness. During the first Scoping Meeting, which was cancelled by EPA stating that the project justifications were not clear, EPA identified that the borrow area needs to be moved as far as possible from the proposed quaywall as there may be stability issues. Taking this concern into consideration, further alternatives to the borrow area were also considered by the Proponent in consultation with the Contractor and the representatives of Nilandhoo people. During discussions with the Council and people of Nilandhoo, they have raised concern regarding the need to protect the proposed harbour, which would involve huge costs if the proposed option were adopted although it had been mentioned in the original EIA that harbour protection will be considered in the future. Therefore, in order to reduce the overall cost of the proposed project and to increase the usability of the proposed harbour even during rough southwest monsoon, appropriate alternatives were considered to the harbour design as well although it is beyond the scope of this EIA. A number of alternatives to the proposed harbour design was considered in the original EIA report. Of these, the option of upgrading the existing harbour on the northwest has been given due consideration in the light of improving on social concerns related to limitations in land reclamation. An alternative analysis that have been done in the original EIA and during the current Addendum indicated that the preferred alternative to redesign the existing harbour would have several advantages over the proposed especially the ease of use during rough southwest monsoon while leaving the possibility of an external quaywall if it becomes necessary at a later stage. However, some stakeholders believe that the proposed option has advantages over the preferred alternative as it has better opportunities for future expansion and growth of the economic potential of the island. Some of the other alternatives considered in the original EIA report including the expansion of existing harbour on the northeast to the northwest has cost advantages while it has restrictions over future expansion that the recommended alternative in this Addendum provides. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phases of the project. Most of the direct, negative environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; the main impact being the impact on sedimentation from the proposed borrow area to the coral colonies in the vicinity and more importantly sedimentation during the filling of the proposed fill areas, which have already been covered in the original EIA report. Therefore, the impact of dredging has been considered in this Addendum. The main impact arising from the proposed new dredge area is the damage to the inner reef as a result of the dredging. There was a concern relating to the closeness of the dredge area to the proposed quaywall and the potential failure of the structure due to a collapse of the sides of the dredged basin. However, since the dredged basin would need to be dredged to less than 4m from the existing seabed, which is less than 6m in depth at present, there should not be such a problem. Only a few berths or quaywalls just adjacent to the reef edge dropping to 30m suddenly have failed whereas the proposed structure is over 110m from the dredge area, which will be dredged to only about 10m and not more than 13m under the current proposal. Furthermore, most of the naturally deep lagoon areas in similar islands would be about 10m in the middle areas with some areas having 15m depths. Therefore, the direct removal of some of the corals due to proposed option can be avoided by not dredging from the inner reef flat areas but the deep lagoon only, as in the proposed alternative. Reclamation of land considering current and future potential use is a favoured development activity in many islands today. However, based on the experience of most of the land reclaimed in many islands, the cost recovery of the project is low and taxpayers have reason to question the outcome of the project. Yet, if the project objectives were achieved by renting the reclaimed land for semi-industrial activities and housing developments, it may be a justifiable cost. It is sad to note that the proposed reclaimed land has yet to find itself a landuse plan and development scenario after several months of EIA approval that had passed by. This is a cause for concern in terms of the afore-mentioned socio-economic impact of the project, although it is beyond the scope of the EIA. If the land is appropriately managed, the project is considered to have several socio-economic benefits that will certainly outweigh the negative environmental impacts, which are of low significance. Although the impacts are not significant due to the absence of sensitive ecological elements that would be directly impacted, some project-specific mitigation measures have been discussed. These include consideration of the preferred alternative (which is also the or one of the alternatives discussed in the original EIA report) to mitigate the impacts of wave activity at the proposed quaywall, to consider shore protection as the reclamation progresses to minimize erosion and to move any live corals that may be directly affected into safer locations. General mitigation measures, involving appropriate construction management such as working during low-tide as much as possible and rigorous supervision during project implementation are also recommended. It is recommended to carry out regular monitoring as proposed in this Addendum, which replaces the monitoring programme given and approved in the original EIA report. It would be important to assess the movement of the sediment plume regularly and to ensure that sediment plume does not severely affect the reef areas. Turbidity levels are expected to be measured within the sedimentation zone on a regular basis up to 6 months after the project. In conclusion, it appears justified, from a technical and environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed project. Since alternatives have not been considered or discussed with the relevant stakeholders including the Council, it is recommended to consider all potential alternatives, including those identified by the EIA Consultants, before proceeding with the project. The preferred alternative borrow areas including the existing harbour on the northwest is recommended.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed water supply and sewerage system in Hulhumalé Phase II, Malé City, Kaafu Atoll, Maldives(2016-02) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the proposed water supply and sewerage system project in the newly reclaimed Phase II of Hulhumalé. The project is proposed by Malé Water and Sewerage Company Ltd. The project entails establishment of a comprehensive water and sewerage system in Hulhumalé Second Phase. The proposed system is similar to the existing system in phase 1 and includes the provision of water and sewerage services to all of the proposed neighbourhoods and commercial areas including the proposed Tourism District, Yacht Marina and Knowledge Park. The project takes place in the newly reclaimed phase 2 of Hulhumalé on the north of existing phase 1. Hulhumalé is part of the nation’s capital Malé, developed as a separate island but soon to be connected by the largest bridge in the Maldives. The existing size of the island is approximately 320 hectares including the reclaimed area of Phase 2. Hulhumalé is the most planned development in the Greater Malé Region so far. The proposed water supply system incorporates desalination facility with a total capacity of 10,000 m3 per day to be installed in different phases of the project. All requested facilities will be provided with metered connections. HDPE pipes will be laid on the roads as shown. In addition, a number of alternatives to the proposed project components have been identified in this document. Some of these alternatives consider alternative means of wastewater disposal including ground disposal, alternative means of water supply and alternative outfall locations. The most preferable alternative to the proposed desalination only water scheme is integration of a rainwater harvesting component. Though this alternative has few advantages over the proposed, at this stage in development of Hulhumale’ Phase II, it would be impractical to implement it. It has also been recommended to use solar desalination technologies since the initial demand would be low and production capacity minimal. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phase of the project. Most of the environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; these include excavation and its impact on the landscape of reclaimed land and sedimentation from installing the outfalls. However, the impacts identified for the operational phase of the project were mostly moderate to major positive; averting possible contamination and salinization of ground water and reduction of related health hazards. Disposal of sewage via a sea outfall is considered as minor negative impact while the alternative of disposing to ground has numerous major negative impacts. The provision of safe and adequate supply of potable water enhances living environment and provides economic opportunities such as tourism establishments including guest houses and city hotels. The main mitigation measures for this project during the construction phase are similar to other water and sewerage projects such as dust control plans, working during low- tide as much as possible and rigorous supervision. The design shall also ensure that dewatering is minimized. As for the operational phase trained maintenance staff to service the water and sewerage system and regular check-ups has been suggested in addition to monitoring water quality as well as reef health for potential impacts. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical, administrative, socio-economic, health and an environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed water and sewerage system development project. It is recommended to proceed the project as proposed.Item First addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed sewerage system in Hulhudheli, Dhaalu Atoll, Maldives(2016-07) SandcaysThis report addresses the environmental concerns of the proposed changes to the vegetation clearance component in the vegetated areas of the island, the details of which were not provided in the original EIA for the Proposed Sewerage System in Dh. Hulhudheli. During the construction phase it was found necessary to remove some vegetation, which had not been considered in the initial planning and design. In order to provide some of the newly registered plots with sewerage connections, the pipe network in these areas required vegetation clearance consisting mainly of coconut palms. Compensation has to be paid for some of the trees which are owned by the community. Therefore, a special announcement was made by the Council and only 2 members of the community claimed ownership of 2 coconut palms. According to the Council, they would make the necessary arrangements to pay compensation to these 2 parties. Since the trees in consideration being mature coconut palms with a few younger palms, the younger palms will be replanted and the rest will be used for timber wood. For each tree that is cut down, two trees will be planted in the newly reclaimed area where extensive plantation of coconut palms have been already carried out by the community in the recent past. Therefore, the proposed vegetation clearance would not have any additional impacts and no additional mitigation measures would be necessary. There are also no additional requirements for monitoring. However, the number of coconut palms cut down and those transplanted as well as the number of coconuts planted as compensation will be included within the revised monitoring programme provided in this report.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed shore protection project in Kurendhoo, Lhaviyani Atoll, Maldives(2015-12) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the shore protection project proposed for Kurendhoo in Lhaviyani Atoll. The project is proposed by Ministry of Environment and Energy. The project comprises of the protection of the eroding area on the southeast corner end of the island, adjoining the football ground. Shoreline at this part of the island has to be protected for safeguarding the football ground and protect the area from severe erosion. A 220m long rock boulder revetment has been proposed. The project also involves backfill of the proposed revetment area and behind the previously proposed breakwater on the north by getting sand from approved borrow areas. The project will be undertaken together with the ongoing harbour project and is estimated to take about 120 days with a manpower requirement estimated at 27 and involving heavy machinery including excavator, dump truck, loader and crane. A number of alternatives to the proposed project components have been identified in this document. Of these, the preferred alternative is a groyne field with a nearshore submerged breakwater. The cost of the preferred alternative is similar and the protection to updrift and downdrift locations are further enhanced by appropriately-designed groyne field. Other alternatives include just a groyne field or a semi-submerged breakwater. Rock boulders is the preferred material for the proposed shore protection while geotextile bags or geotextile tubes may be used as a cheaper alternative but would not be as effective as rock boulders. There are not many options to be identified as borrow areas since the island is surrounded by quite narrow reef flats and there are no lagoon areas with fine sand. Therefore, the alternative would be to bring material from a lagoon nearby and have the material taken to the fill location in trucks or pumped to fill location. However, due to the small scale of the project, alternative borrow areas have not been considered except those areas that have already been approved. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phases of the project. Most of the direct, negative environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; the main impact being sedimentation during the filling of the proposed fill areas. However, these impacts are of low significance while the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the negative impacts including the protection to the football field, shore protection to the beach in the area as well as downdrift locations. The fill areas shown in the proposed project are the same areas identified in the EIA and the EIA Addendum for the harbour project. Therefore, in principle those areas have been approved. However, for the purpose of this EIA, the borrow areas are different from those proposed earlier. According to the Council, the area identified on the SW side is preferable for dredging because this area is more suitable for a creating an area for swimming since the reef extent on this area is greater than in other areas. Since it does not have adequate swimming depths, deepening this area provides the required fill for the southeast end while creating swimming area for the island that lacks swimmable area around the island. The creation of the swimming area or an artificial beach in the proposed area, however, is not within the scope of this EIA report. The impact on coral reef is also less in this area since the net flow in this area is generally towards the eroded southern end and the reef flat and slope are devoid of live coral and mainly with bedrock. For the fill area on the north, the harbour area would be quite suitable as it would provide sufficient material for the proposed fill area while keeping the impacts to an already impacted area. Therefore, it is considered most suitable to dredge material for the northern fill from the harbour area and that for the southeast fill from the southwest lagoon. The small borrow area shown on the north may be considered only if adequate fill material cannot be obtained. Since there are a few impacts, there are no specific mitigation measures for the proposed project. General mitigation measures, involving appropriate construction management such as working during low-tide as much as possible and rigorous supervision during project implementation are recommended Since monitoring has not been undertaken in the past for the harbour project, it is recommended to carry out monitoring for this project. This project has linkages with the harbour project and therefore the recommended mitigation measures and monitoring programmes in the EIA and Addendum for the harbour project shall be undertaken in conjunction with the proposed shore protection project. In conclusion, it appears justified, from a technical and environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed shore protection project. Since alternatives have not been considered or discussed with the relevant stakeholders including the Council, it is recommended to consider all potential alternatives to shore protection, including those identified by the EIA Consultants, before proceeding with the project.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed sewerage system in Ihavandhoo, Haa Alifu Atoll, Maldives(2015-11) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the proposed sewerage system project at HA. Ihavandhoo. The project is proposed by Ministry of Environment and Energy. The project entails establishment of a proper island-wide sewerage system with a sea outfall. The proposed project will involve installing a pipe network to collect sewage from all the households on the island and necessary pumping stations. Currently raw sewage is disposed onto the ground via house-level soak-pits; polluting groundwater greatly. The proposed outfall will pump wastewater beyond the house-reef at over 7m depth. A number of alternatives to the proposed project components have been identified in this document. Of these, the preferred alternative is to change the outfall location. It is also proposed to consider a treatment plant in the design, though the consultants are of the opinion, proposed system without a treatment plant but changed outfall location is the best option. Other alternatives include considering different disposal options; ground and lagoon, which are not recommended for reasons of greater environmental pollution. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phase of the project. Most of the environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; these include sedimentation from installing the outfall and temporary salinization of groundwater from de-watering to lay out the pipe network and pump stations. However, the impacts identified for the operational phase of the project were mostly moderate to major positive; improvement of groundwater quality from stopping the current sewage disposal practise and reduction of related health hazards. Disposal of sewage via proposed sea outfall is considered to have a minor negative impact. The main mitigation measures for this project during the construction phase are similar to other sewerage projects such as dust control plans, working during low- tide as much as possible and rigorous supervision. In case of deterioration of groundwater quality due to potential dewatering during construction of lifting stations in residential area, measures to water plants in the area that may be affected due to dewatering shall be in place. The design shall also ensure that dewatering is minimized. As for the operational phase trained maintenance staff to service the sewerage system and regular check-ups has been suggested in addition to monitoring water quality as well as reef health for potential impacts. Increasing awareness on groundwater conservation and promoting sustainable groundwater aquifer management, especially the skimming well technology has been suggested. The Proponent is willing to undertake monitoring during and after the construction phase in addition to undertaking the mitigation measures proposed by the consultants. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical, administrative and to some extent environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed sewerage system development project. The alternative of wastewater treatment will involve greater operational costs; therefore, it is recommended to proceed the project as proposed while keeping the option open for future wastewater treatment, as and when required.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed sea water cooling system in Addu City, Maldives(2016-05) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the proposed sea water cooling system for the electrical generator sets in the central power station of Addu city. Central Power House at Addu City requires Engine cooling by using saline water. The system will require installing three boreholes with multi stage submersible pumps, supply line for pressure header and feeding lines with valves and flanges. The proponent of this project is Fenaka Corporation Ltd. Rotary-mud drilling will be employed for the construction. The depth of borehole will be determined in accordance with the existing guidelines; i.e. if electrical conductivity of discharge water has reached 50-60mS/cm before reaching 30m depth, drilling will continue until it has reached 30m. Furthermore, if electrical conductivity of discharge water at 30m depth is measured less than 50-60mS/cm, drilling will be continued until electrical conductivity reaches to 50-60mS/cm. The extracted earth and saline water from drilling activities will be deposited on a purpose-built plastic sheet and water will be separated from the solids. The water extracted from this is proposed to be disposed off into the lagoon via the reject line in the operational phase. The most significant impact from the proposed project would be temporary deterioration of local freshwater quality during borehole installation and seawater quality at the disposal site. The impact on groundwater during borehole construction is of low magnitude and temporary. The impact is also of little significance. The impact of seawater quality at discharge location is almost negligible given that the discharge water has similar characteristics to the lagoon water in terms of salinity although the water would be hot at the time of discharge. Since the discharge location is a reef flat area with no coral the impact is negligible. Furthermore, the area gets dry at low tide and there is no recreational value in this area as it is the rim reef flat. Alternatives have been identified in the EIA, however it is seen that the best method to carry out the project is the proposed method of using boreholes. The alternative is to use a seawater intake, however, due to the distance of a feasible intake location with the rim reef closest to the location, boreholes are considered to be more suitable. The consultations with the Council also revealed that the proposed route for the discharge pipeline is not suitable, as there is no road in the proposed route. Therefore, as per the Council’s recommendation, it is proposed to consider the alternative route that would dispose at the same location as the existing brine discharge pipe. Since there were no significant environmental impacts identified for the proposed project, mitigation measure were general construction phase guidelines such as dust control measures and appropriate waste management. The alternative route for the discharge pipe may also mitigate some social concerns and is recommended to consider the alternative route. There would not be additional costs associated with this alternative route, and even if there is, there would not be a considerable cost difference. Environmental monitoring is not considered necessary for this project. However, monitoring has been proposed for about one year to assess and examine changes to the environment, if any. It covers the monitoring of marine water quality at the discharge location for temperature and salinity only at 3-monthly intervals for a maximum of 2 years. This can be integrated within a monitoring programme for the powerhouse. Water quality testing that may be necessary to be performed upon completion of the borehole, which has been indicated in the Borehole Guidelines shall also be performed. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical and environmental point of view to carry out the proposed project to construct a cooling water system for the existing powerhouse in Hithadhoo, Addu City. However, it is recommended to consider the alternative route for discharge pipeline, as recommended by Addu City Council.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed sea cucumber aquaculture project in Boduhaikondi, Raa Atoll(2016-06) SandcaysThis report addresses the environmental concerns of the proposed mariculture project for the farming of sea cucumber in the lagoon of Boduhaikondi, Raa Atoll. Sea cucumber juveniles and grouper fingerlings will be bought from local hatcheries such as the sea cucumber hatchery at Nalandhoo until the proposed hatchery has been established. Sea cucumber juveniles (over four months old) will be put in the lagoon to grow out in its natural habitat to the adult size. The sea cucumber will grow to adult size in a year. The Project is proposed by Ali Ahroosh Ibrahim, M. Meadows. Boduhaiykondi is a small island towards the middle of Raa Atoll close to Dhuvaafaru. It has been leased for agricultural/fishery purposes by the Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture. With the potential for mariculture with a sizeable lagoon with a small deep lagoon, acting as a natural habitat for sea cucumber, the proposed aquaculture or mariculture project has been considered as a potential investment. Sea cucumber production using fingerlings from Nalandhoo will form the initial component of the proposed project. A hatchery will be later established on the island for improved productivity. Sea cucumbers will be fed with food that will be imported to some extent but locally available seagrass and other food sources will be given priority. Sea cumber will be at the right size in 9 to 10 months following which they will be harvested, processed, packed and exported. A processing facility will be established on site. In addition to staff accommodation, power house, fuel storage, water supply and sewerage, telecommunication services, jetty and channel, the following investments directly targeted at sea cucumber production will be established. Sea cage fish farm in the lagoon Sea cucumber boiling and processing facility Ice making facility Storage facility for processed sea cucumbers Environmental concerns from the proposed project include: Sedimentation of some degree during channel dredging and jetty installation. The channel being about 3m on average, it will require only the removal of rock outcrops in the channel. Therefore, impact will be small. The impact of disease transmissions on wild populations. This impact is considered to be minor negative and depends on stocking densities and feeding. Environmental controls shall be established from the very onset of the project to mitigate disease prevalence and ensure a healthy environment. The impact cages may have on wild fish populations. Although this impact is not considered to be significant, this impact has to be studied in detail during the implementation stage. The genetic or competitive effect escapees may have on wild stock. Since juveniles that are not able to escape are used and exotic species would not be imported, this impact is unlikely to occur. In the case of cage culture using locally found species, genetic pollution will not be a concern even in case of escapees and new diseases will not be introduced to the wild stock. However, an incubation of local diseases present in the wild stock may be a potential cause for concern in case of high stocking densities. Therefore, stocking densities shall be kept to an optimum at all times. The likelihood for habitat modification could occur in case of imported broodstock causing stress and related disease prevalence. However, this is a minor impact not considered to be significant. The proposed project is expected to be managed in conformity with local and international regulations and standards of relevance, especially environmental regulations and standards. Therefore, environmental impacts will be well managed, minimized and mitigated. The overall environmental impacts of the project have been assessed using appropriate matrices and the results indicated that the proposed project had net positive impact. That is, the project has no major adverse impacts on the environment as far as current knowledge is concerned. Given that the project has moderate level of socio-economic benefits and possible environmental benefits, it is recommended to allow the project to proceed as proposed. However, due to the project being among a few of its kind in the country, it is important to consider uncertainties and continue to monitor the project impacts and undertake appropriate mitigation measures in consultation with the EPA and other relevant government agencies.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed sewerage system in Nolhivaram, Haa Alifu Atoll, Maldives(2016-06) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the proposed sewerage system project at HDh. Nolhivaram. The project is proposed by Ministry of Environment and Energy. The project entails establishment of a proper island-wide sewerage system with a sea outfall. The proposed project will involve installing a pipe network to collect sewage from all the households on the island and necessary pumping stations. Currently raw sewage is disposed onto the ground via house-level soak-pits; polluting groundwater greatly. The proposed outfall will pump wastewater beyond the house-reef at over 7m depth. A number of alternatives to the proposed project components have been identified in this document. Of these, the preferred alternative is to change the outfall location directly north of the island. It is also proposed to consider a treatment plant in the design, though the consultants are of the opinion, proposed system without a treatment plant but alternative outfall location is the best option. Other alternatives include considering different disposal options; ground and lagoon, which are not recommended for reasons of greater environmental pollution. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phase of the project. Most of the environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; these include excavation and related difficulties to road uses, sedimentation from installing the outfall and temporary salinization of groundwater from dewatering to lay out the pipe network and pump stations. However, the impacts identified for the operational phase of the project were mostly moderate to major positive; improvement of groundwater quality from stopping the current sewage disposal practise and reduction of related health hazards. Disposal of sewage via a sea outfall is considered as minor negative impact while the lack of multiple lagoon outfalls will help to improve the quality of the lagoons which is a primary recreational area of the island. The main mitigation measures for this project during the construction phase are similar to other sewerage projects such as dust control plans, working during low-tide during pipe installation and rigorous supervision. In case of deterioration of groundwater quality due to potential dewatering during construction of lifting stations in residential area, measures to water plants in the area that may be affected due to dewatering shall be in place. The design shall also ensure that dewatering is minimized. As for the operational phase trained maintenance staff to service the sewerage system and regular check-ups has been suggested in addition to monitoring water quality as well as reef health for potential impacts. Increasing awareness on groundwater conservation and promoting sustainable groundwater aquifer management, especially the skimming well technology has been suggested. The Proponent is willing to undertake monitoring during and after the construction phase in addition to undertaking the mitigation measures proposed by the consultants. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical, administrative and to some extent environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed sewerage system development project. The alternative of wastewater treatment will involve greater operational costs; therefore, it is recommended to proceed the project as proposed while keeping the option open for future wastewater treatment, as and when required.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed water and sewerage system in Dhiffushi, Kaafu Atoll, Maldives(2016-10) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the proposed water and sewerage system project at K. Dhiffushi. The project is proposed by the Secretariat of Dhiffushi Council. The project entails establishment of a proper island-wide water supply and sewerage system. The proposed project will involve installing a pipe network to collect sewage and wastewater from all the households on the island and necessary pumping stations. Currently, raw sewage and wastewater is disposed to the lagoon via multiple outfalls polluting the nearshore environment while there are a few house-level soak-pits polluting groundwater. The proposed outfall will pump wastewater beyond the house-reef at over 7m depth. The proposed water supply network will be an integrated system consisting of harvested rainwater from roofs of community buildings with desalinated water which will be treated and distributed to households through the water supply network. Rainwater is the main source of potable water used in the island as each house has a 2500 litre tank. For other uses groundwater is used which is either pumped out by electric pump or rarely by manually using a handcrafted bucket (dhaani). Water intake will be by using boreholes. The boreholes will be drilled and installed according to the Borehole Drilling Guidelines administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. The brine discharge will be inside the harbour. It is important to provide adequate supply of potable water and provide appropriate wastewater disposal systems to provide safe and adequate supply of water and to minimize faecal contamination and foul smell in the groundwater, which the community is highly dependent upon. Furthermore, the small water storage facilities at household level presents water shortage issues during the dry season while contamination of the groundwater lens with wastewater effluent and salinization of the lens has become an increasingly important issue. Several alternatives to the proposed project components have been identified in this report. Some of these alternatives consider alternative means of wastewater disposal including treatment, alternative means of water supply and alternative outfall locations. Since groundwater wells are fixed with electric pumps to draw water which has been the main reason for excessive drawdown and subsequent salinization of the freshwater lens, alternatives involving sustainable groundwater use such as skimming wells have been recommended. Wastewater treatment is considered as a favourable option while it has been argued that if the effluent can be disposed of at an appropriate location, there would not be a need for treatment since there will be good mixing and flushing in such areas. It has also been recommended to use solar desalination technologies since the initial demand would be low. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phase of the project. Most of the environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; these include excavation and related difficulties to road uses, sedimentation from installing the outfall and temporary salinization of groundwater from dewatering to lay out the pipe network and pump stations. However, the impacts identified for the operational phase of the project were mostly moderate to major positive; improvement of groundwater quality and nearshore environment from stopping the current sewage disposal practise and reduction of related health hazards. Disposal of sewage via a sea outfall is considered as minor negative impact while the lack of multiple lagoon outfalls will help to improve the quality of the lagoons which is a primary recreational area of the island. The main mitigation measures for this project during the construction phase are similar to other water supply and sewerage projects such as dust control plans, working during low-tide during pipe installation and rigorous supervision. In case of deterioration of groundwater quality due to potential dewatering during construction of lifting stations in residential area, measures to water plants in the area that may be affected due to dewatering shall be in place. The design shall also ensure that dewatering is minimized. As for the operational phase trained maintenance staff to service the sewerage system and regular check-ups have been suggested in addition to monitoring water quality as well as reef health for potential impacts. Increasing awareness on groundwater conservation and promoting sustainable groundwater aquifer management, especially the skimming well technology has been suggested. The Proponent is willing to undertake monitoring during and after the construction phase in addition to undertaking the mitigation measures proposed by the consultants. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical, administrative and to some extent environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed water supply and sewerage system development project. The alternative of wastewater treatment will involve greater operational costs; therefore, it is recommended to proceed with the project as proposed while keeping the option open for future wastewater treatment, as and when required.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed beaching area in HA. Dhidhdhoo, Maldives(2015-12) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed development of a beaching area in HA. Dhidhdhoo. The project is proposed by Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure. At present, unavailability of space has forced boat owners to travel great distances to do small scale servicing to boats. In cases where boats are beached on Dhidhdhoo, being too close to residential areas has made these activities a public nuisance and a health hazard. The project aims at providing a suitable space for boat owners of Dhidhdhoo and nearby islands for vessel beaching and related work on the island away from residential areas. The proposed project entails dredging a 24m by 266m access channel, 110m by 76m manoeuvring area and reclamation of 0.54Ha at the southwest side of the island. There are very few practical alternatives to the proposed project; alternatives to reclamation shape and location are assessed in the report. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operation phase of the project. Most of the environmental impacts of the project have been identified as positive resulting mainly from improved socio-economic situation of Dhidhdhoo. The main negative environmental impact of the project is identified to be the possible movement of low to moderate levels of sediment on the reef during dredging and reclamation. Movement and settlement of fine sediments are expected to occur on the reef flat to a small degree. However, effects of this would not be severe as sediment plume is not expected to last longer and live coral cover at the location is minimal. Overall, the negative environmental impacts of the project are short-term and of moderate significance while long term socio-economic benefits are numerous. Hence the impact matrices done for the project indicates a net positive impact. Impact mitigation measures are few. In order to mitigate movement of sediment plume onto the reef, bunds around reclamation area and creating settlement ponds during reclamation is suggested. Regular environmental monitoring and reporting is an essential element of the EIA process. During the construction phase, in-situ monitoring of total suspended solids and turbidity is usually undertaken in dredging and reclamation projects to ensure that water quality criteria are met and sedimentation on the reef does not occur. It is recommended to incorporate these into an island-wide monitoring programme, which is not within the scope of this EIA report. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical and environmental point of view to carry out the proposed project to develop a beaching area in Dhidhdhoo. However, before start of construction phase, the consultants recommend evaluating alternative reclamation shape proposed in this report; as to reduce potential impact of interrupting longshore sediment movement.