LVPS EIA Executive Summary

CEB - Coal Fired Thermal Power Development Project - West Coast Page 0-1
Environmental Impact Assessment EIA
0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
0.1 The Project and its Location

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) concerns the development of a coal-fired
power plant. The plant’s intended location is about 1.0 km westwards of the Narakkalli
village on the Kalpitiya Peninsula. The plants western boundary is 100 m inland from the
shoreline, which borders the Indian Ocean. The full capacity of the plant will be completed
within three scheduled construction phases. The first phase comprises grading and
levelling a 330 m wide and 1.8 km long land strip, which is equivalent to an area of about
60 hectares. The overall width will protrude beyond 330 m eastward of the shoreline to
about 450 m eastwards, so as to accommodate an outdoor switch yard that has a length
of about 240 m (equivalent to an area of about 2.9 hectares). Additionally a buffer zone
will surround the entire eastward boundary of the power plant. The zone will have a width
of about 240 m east of the ash dump and the coal stock yard. The buffer's width will
decrease to about 120 m east of the outdoor switch-yard. The area of the buffer zone is
therefore about 39.7 hectares. Trees will be planted in the buffer zone, primarily to protect
the settlements from coal dust of the coal storage and to provide a pleasing appearance
to the site.
The prepared total area of land (about 102.6 hectares) will meet the full requirements of
the three construction phases, and no other land clearance is necessary (apart from the
transmission line corridor). The first phase comprises: (1) the construction of the plant and
the installation of a power generating unit of capacity 300 MW(e) (Mega Watt-electrical
output); (2) the construction of a transmission line; and (3) the construction of a jetty that
extends seawards from the shoreline to a distance of 4.2 km, up to the 15 m bathymetric
contour. The transmission line, which will extend from the power station to a proposed
substation at Veyangoda will be about 115 km long. Work on the first phase is planned to
commence in the first quarter of the year 2000. The power station is expected to provide
power to the national grid by mid 2003. The detailed schedule for upgrading the plant to
600 MW(e) in the second phase and finally to 900 MW(e) in the third phase is to be
determined.
The power plant will receive coal supplied from Australia, South Africa or Indonesia. The
coal will have a sulphur content that is 0.65% by weight or less. The coal will be shipped
to the jetty in bulk carriers. The jetty is equipped with a conveyor belt that transports the
off-loaded coal to an on-site coal stockyard. The power station area will also contain a
facility for disposing some of the ash, but it is planned to recycle most of the fly ash in
cement manufacture. Alternatively to the long jetty, barges could be used to transfer the
coal from the bulk carrier to a short jetty, which extends up to 500 m from the shore. Less
importance is given to the latter, and the project design concept concentrates on the first
option.
0.2 Structure of the EIA

The Coast Conservation Department (CCD) is the Project Approving Agency (PAA), and
the EIA content follows the Department’s Terms of Reference, with amendments
proposed by the Central Environmental Authority (CEA). The EIA comprises: the
applicable legal and administrative framework; the description of the existing environment;
Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

the identification and evaluation of impacts during construction and operation;

environmental monitoring and environmental management. A companion Concept Design
Report addresses the engineering and operational specifications of the plant. The basis of
the conceptual design is to provide a plant that is economical in the base load mode, and
that releases effluents with negligible quantities of pollutants. The environment is
considered to comprise: land, air, water, humans, animals and plants. A summary of the
power station’s predicted impacts on the environment, the mitigation measures to prevent
and minimise impacts, and the proposed monitoring programme to verify the impact
evaluation are summarised in Table 1. The main elements of this table are expanded
upon below.
0.3 The Power Station Land Take and Occupancy: Terrestrial Fauna
and Flora
0.3.1 Existing Conditions
The project site is essentially a sandy terrace with an elevation of about 3 to 4 metres
above a narrow width (about 3 m) beach. The site is covered with sparse dune vegetation,
comprising creeping grasses and shrubs. It does not contain any considerable amount of
natural vegetation, and no part of it is considered a valuable habitat in need of protection.
To the east, north and south of the construction site the natural dune vegetation is
superseded with managed plantations comprising coconuts, tobacco, chillies, onions,
sweet potatoes, beans and other home garden produce. In the absence of remarkable
amounts of natural vegetation, the fauna is limited to species capable of living on
cultivated land and sparsely vegetated dunes. No remarkable fauna was recorded on the
site, and in the surrounds of the site. Livestock were not observed on the construction site,
but are clearly present in the surrounding lands and villages.
0.3.2 Existing Impacts
The proposed project site does not harbour any endangered or protected animals or plant
species, and therefore there are no existing impacts. The natural vegetation is composed
of scrub forests and dune vegetation, and outside of the construction site these plants are
superseded by managed home garden produce. Thus the clearance of natural vegetation
for managed agriculture is the principal existing impact on the natural vegetation and
animals.
0.3.3 Construction Impacts
In view of the limited natural resources of animals and plant species, there will be no
measurable impacts either in the long or short term.
0.3.4 Operational Impacts
After construction of the power plant, the site will be landscaped for aesthetic reasons,
and planted with grasses and ornamental shrubs to provide a pleasing appearance. There
will be no important numbers of plants and animals on the site. Therefore there will be no
impacts on these resources.

0.3.5 Mitigation Measures
In view of the above discussion, mitigation is not required during construction. During
plant operations the plant will not exploit any land that is outside of its boundaries, and
therefore mitigation measures are not required.
0.4 The Transmission Line Land Clearance: Terrestrial Fauna and

Flora
0.4.1 Existing Conditions:
The transmission line corridor has a managed to semi-managed vegetation cover that
comprises coconut, fruit trees, vegetables, coconut, paddy fields and other home garden
produce. There is only a sparse human population bordering the planned route. The route
does not cross any nature reserve, or other areas that are important for the conservation
of endangered animal and plant species.
The clearance of natural vegetation for a managed agriculture based on the above plants,
is the principal existing impact on the natural vegetation and animals.
In view of the limited natural resources of animals and plants in the area, there will be no
measurable effects either in the long or short term. The corridor avoids protected sites,
cultural and historic resources, and places of worship.
0.4.4 Operation Impacts

The long term impacts of the transmission line on birds is potentially higher than on land
animals. Mainly within the wetland area birds are at risk from collissions with the towers
and lines.
The power line corridor will occupy land that is used for agricultural production, and
compensation will be made to farmers and land owners whose lands are cleared for the
transmission line. The most effective means for limiting the possibility of bird collisions
with the power transmission line in the wetland area, is by taking appropriate measures to
make the line visible to birds from its entering point into the lagoon till it leaves the Dutch
channel area. This measure will minimise the probability of collisions.

0.5 The Marine Resources and Sea Water Quality
0.5.1 Existing Conditions
There are no coral reefs immediately adjacent to the shoreline bordering the western
boundary of the project. The nearest coral reef is at Talawila, and the southern most edge
of this reef lies about 3 km to the north of the proposed northern boundary of the
construction site. Fishing is a major industry in the coastal waters, particularly during the
calmer north-east monsoon period (November to April). A large number of fish species
pass through these waters, particularly sardines, fin-fish, anchovies, flying fish, Indian
mackerel, and tuna. The coastal fishery is not over exploited. The high sediment load
moving either northwards or southwards on the sea bed adjacent to the planned power
plant, is unsuited to coral growth, the survival of marine plants and thus the survival of
crustaceans (for example lobsters, spiny lobsters, prawns and shrimps) and molluscs.
Therefore these species are not common in the adjacent offshore waters. 7 beach seines
are deployed from the beach adjacent to the proposed plant during the north-east
monsoon. The topography of the beach adjacent to the power station is unsuitable as a
nest site for turtles. The beach is narrow (about 10 m in width) and it backs onto a wave
cut dune terrace. The elevation of the terrace step above the beach is approximately 1
metre. Marine mammals (particularly dolphins) are recorded in the off-shore waters.
The Puttalam Lagoon is about 2 km eastwards of the proposed plant eastern boundary.
The power plant will neither utilise any resources of the lagoon, nor discharge into the
lagoon. The lagoon contains a variety of commercial fish, crustacean and mollusc species
and is currently over exploited by the fishing community. The lagoon has a vegetation of
sea grasses along its entire edge, and mangroves and salt marshes are also present at a
few locations. The lagoon is a temporary resting place for many bird species migrating
southwards from Continental Asia and Europe during October to December, and birds
migrating northwards during April to May (the return journey).
Talawila coral reef lies about 3 km northwards of the site northern boundary to the
coastline, and it is exploited for fish, ornamental fish, lobsters, shrimps, prawns and
corals. Kandakuliya coral reef lies about 8 km northwards of the site, and the fishing
communities aggressively exploit it. The reef’s condition is poorer than that of the Talawila
reef. Four species of turtles are recorded in the off-shore waters; namely the Hawksbill;
the Olive Green Ridley; the Logger Head; and the Green turtle. The Leather Back is not
observed in these waters. Thousands of Olive Green Ridley turtles are killed annually at
Kandakuliya, and all species are caught in nets deployed for catching fish. The pelagic
fish species are not over-exploited. The marked increase of fishing activity in the area
over the last few years, particularly with regard to drift nets deployed from motorised
boats, is a major concern for the dolphin and the turtle population. Prawn culture is
prevalent within Puttalam Lagoon. Mangroves and salt marshes are the main land
resources sacrificed to prawn culture, and vast areas of recently cleared habitat are
noticeable. Sea weeds (particularly the red Gracilaria) are heavily exploited for the
extraction of alginates.

The construction of the jetty and cooling water system will not measurably impact the
sediment load in the water. Boats and barges used for transporting jetty construction
materials will release fugitive quantities of hydrocarbon fuels and lubricants, and any
impact will be immeasurably small against the existing motorised traffic (about 1,600
boats) which traverse the Peninsula off-shore waters daily during the fishing season. The
jetties’ 10 to 11 metre elevation above the sea surface ensures the free passage of boats.
The proposed jetty alignment is within an area of pronounced sediment movement, where
corals cannot survive. The route avoids areas of extensive reef formations. Fishing
activities within the 1.8 km coastline adjacent to the construction could be affected during
the construction of the jetty and the cooling water system. As crustaceans, mollusc, turtles
and marine mammals are uncommon in the sea laying adjacent to the beach bordering
the project site, construction work is thus unlikely to harm any of these animals.
The principal environmental concern from unloading coal from a bulk carrier ship to the
hopper of a conveyor belt, at the end of a long jetty, is spillage. If no attempt was made to
catch dropped coal, the fuel would fall to the sea bed and could smother animals. During
unloading operations from a bulk carrier, a curtain will be hung between the ship and the
jetty. The curtain will intercept dropped coal, and thus prevent the spillage falling into the
sea.
When coal is off-loaded from a ship into a barge, and from a barge onto a short jetty, there
should be no loss of coal. The loading and unloading mechanisms for this mode of trans-
shipping are such that coal loss occurs rarely. Ships and barges are powered by diesel
engines that can release small amounts of fuels and greases. However the impact on
water quality of any loss of fuels and oils is likely to be immeasurable against losses from
the greater numbers of existing boat movements in the coastal waters. The coal bulk
carrier will anchor about 4.2 km offshore, and it will not disrupt the limited amount of
fishing activities that are carried at this location. Any barging movements associated with
coal transport will not significantly add to the existing coastal traffic, and will have an
immeasurable impact on fish, fishing activities, turtles, marine mammals and marine
vegetation.
The jetty will have a leg span (trestle span) of about 40 metres. This 40 metres distance
span will allow free movement of sediments at the sea bed, and will not interrupt the bulk
supply of sediment to the adjacent shoreline. Therefore, the jetty is most likely to have no
impact on the coastline.
The power station is set back 100 m from the shoreline and its operations will not impose
upon the beach and other users of the beach.
0.5.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures
All ships and other craft supplying the power station with services and raw materials will
comply with the provisions of the Maritime Pollution Prevention Act, Number 59 of 1981.
The Act establishes controls against pollution by oil and other toxic substances. An apron
slung between the ship and jetty is the most effective means of eliminating coal spillage to
the sea during the unloading operation. Spillage can also be minimised by using hydraulic

grabs with over-lapping jaws. The standard method for minimising coal dust is to wash
and crush coal before transport to a final uniform size of about 50 mm and allow an 8%
final moisture content. The moisture binds the dust and prevents its escape in the wind.
0.6 Ground Water Resources and Quality
0.6.1 Existing Condition
The ground water table is about 4 m below the site land surface, and it varies from
brackish to fresh water. A mains supply of piped water is not available, and the inhabitants
of the area rely on wells. The soils are sandy, and therefore permeability is high. Ground
water samples taken from the site during June to October 1997 had conductivity values of
between 500 and 2000 micro-Siemens per cm. The former value is unmistakably fresh
water, whereas the latter is indicative of contamination by salt. The present water quality
can sustain irrigation and household needs. Great demands made on the aquifer by the
cropping patterns to the east, north and south of the site. Annual current irrigation and
potable abstraction rates are not known, but are thought to be in excess of the recharge
rate.
The local aquifer, is probably over-exploited for irrigation needs, and there is an
unacceptable probability of sea water intrusion within the next few years.
The temporary de-watering of the ground water table for the construction foundations
could impact the supply of irrigation water. The direct influence on the yield of agricultural
wells will be limited to the duration of deep excavations and is unlikely to impact the
demand of the local agricultural wells. Fuels and other chemical spillage can contaminate
the aquifer. Similarly, there is a risk of sea water intrusion during the site excavations, and
when the deep foundations are prepared.
The power station will desalinate sea water and not rely on the limited potential of the
local aquifer. Therefore no demand will be made on the local ground waters, as the power
station will have its own supply of fresh water (namely, from a sea water desalinisation
plant). There will be no impacts on ground water from the coal stock piles and the ash
dump. The coal stock pile area will be fully bunded on concrete stands, which are made
impermeable to water infiltration. These bunded areas are equipped with drains and
sumps to run-off, and to channel the effluents to waste water treatment plants. The ash
dump is fully engineered to prevent the leakage of leachates through its walls into the
soils and ground water. The dump will be equipped with appropriate drainage and
pumping facilities to intercept run-off and leachetes, and channel these effluents to a
waste treatment facility. The waste treatment will remove particulates, organic matter and
inorganic elements, such as heavy metals. These actions will prevent any of the liquid
wastes from contaminating the underlying soils and aquifer.

Compensation is required if the ground water supply for irrigation is reduced by the
construction activities. To avoid de-watering the surrounding area, sheet piling and
injection betonite wall barriers should be installed around deep foundations facing the
aquifer. Hydro-geological investigations are in progress and the survey results will allow a
better understanding of the aquifer hydrodynamics, including the flow patterns. The data
will be used to validate a computer ground water movement simulation model. Ground
water quality will be monitored during station operations, for compliance with the national
standards and to indicate whether the plant is having any impact on water quality. Fuels
and other noxious liquids will be stored in dedicated spillage controlled bunded areas, and
contaminated solids will be removed for disposal, preferably by incineration.
All waste water from the ash dump and coal storage facilities will be pump collected, or
freely drained to an effluent treatment facility. The final treated effluent could be recycled
for irrigation purposes or for controlling dust generation from the site.
0.7 Cooling Water Effluents
The Kalpitiya off-shore waters are vertically uniform in temperature. The sea temperature
ranges from 27 to 31 oC, and it has a mean vale of 27 oC in January and 29 oC in May.
During the north-east monsoon (November to April) water movement is generally
southwards with a mean velocity of about 8 cm s-1. During the south-west monsoon, water
movement is northwards with a mean velocity of 10 cm s-1.
Warm water is not currently discharged to sea from the site location.
Warm water will not be discharged to sea from the construction site.
Discharges of warmed cooling water will be made off-shore. A computer programme

simulated the behaviour of the plume. Immediately on discharge, the warmed water
temperature fell from plus 7 oC to plus 3.5 oC above ambient. The discharged warm water
was rapidly diluted with an ensuing loss of temperature. Computer modelling further
showed that only a small area of the sea (about 1 hectare; equivalent to 200 m eastward
and 50 m northward or southward of the discharge point) would warm to plus 1.5 0C
above ambient temperature. The resulting plume generally had a temperature of plus 0.5
o
C above ambient, and it did not extend beyond 3 km downstream (north or south) of the
discharge point. The plume will tend to move seawards rather than northwards or
southwards along the coastline. The diluted plume will not have any long term significantly

measurable or observable impact on marine organisms, and it will not impact Talawila
reef, which lies about 3 km northwards of the plant's northern perimeter.
The sea water cooling system will be dosed with hypochlorite (to a final concentration of
3-4 parts per million) for 20 to 30 minutes per day, to prevent the settlement of marine
organisms in the cooling system. Significant dilution will occur when the water is released
to the sea, and the resulting concentration at 100 m downstream of the outflow will not
impact any marine organism.
No mitigation methods beyond those incorporated within the planned engineering design
are required. However, the sea water temperature above Talawila reef will be monitored
monthly and the results made available to the appropriate authorities.
The diluted background concentration of the released hypochlorite will not impact marine
life, and consequently mitigation measures are not required. As a means of controlling
pollution, a water quality monitoring programme is proposed. The programme will start in
November 1997 and generate existing baseline reference data, with regard to the nutrient
content of sea water, and the heavy metal concentrations in the water and sediment. The
programme will run during the construction phase and operations phase of the plant, and
include the analyses of hydrocarbons in the water.
0.8 Solid and Liquid Wastes
The 73 households within the proposed development site area, produce small quantities
of waste. The wastes comprise essentially organic matter. Solid wastes are not observed
at the construction site, nor are such wastes observed to be accumulating in the near
vicinity of the project site.
There does not appear to be any existing impact due to either solid or liquid waste
material at the project site.
The principal sources of wastes arising from construction will be dust, domestic solids and
liquid wastes, and wastes from construction activities and vehicles. Solids comprise
excavated materials, and domestic wastes. Excavated materials are essentially medium
to fine sands, and most will be recycled to back-fill foundations. Dusts arise from mixing
concrete, excavating land and handling soils. Most of the dust produced will settle close to
the source of origin. Large volume fuel spills could percolate through the sandy soils and
reach the water table; though normal operational spills are unlikely to do so. These
potential impacts can be minimised through the implementation of appropriate mitigation
measures.

The principal solid wastes produced by the power plant are fly ash and bottom furnace
ash; coal and other dusts; domestic wastes, and sludge from the sewage treatment plant.
Liquid wastes that will be released to the sea, comprise: storm water overflow from the
coal stock yard; treated coal stock yard run-off; run-off from the jetty (carrying dusts and
hydrocarbons); storm water over flow from the ash run-off pond (carrying particulate
matter, and metals); treated ash run-off effluents; treated metal cleaning liquid wastes;
neutralised (pH) effluents from the water demineralisation plant (comprising essentially
salts of magnesium and calcium); hyper-saline water from the desalinisation plant;
sewage effluents from the sewage treatment plant and boiler blow down water. All the
effluents released to the sea are treated prior to disposal. The final effluent will comply
with the national standards for sea release, and therefore there should be no impact from
these liquids. Bottom ash will be disposed in a land-fill site. Any fly ash that cannot be
recycled (see below) will be disposed of in a similar manner. Potential impacts from all the
other referenced sources will be significantly minimised as reported below.
A maximum number of five desalinisation units will be installed. The brine by product will
be discharged to sea. As the effluent is essentially a concentrated sea water, there will be
no permanent impact on the marine environment.
The coal stock yard and fly ash dump will be fully bunded and engineered to prevent the
infiltration of effluents into the soils and ground water. Run-off and leachates will be
collected and drained to a waste water treatment facility where heavy metals, particulates
and organic matter will be removed from the effluents. The final treated effluents could be
used for irrigation, or controlling dusts on the site.
Coal dust will be suppressed by spraying stock-piles with water; compacting the piles;
employing de-dusting equipment; vacuums systems at the bunker filling platforms, and the
underground hoppers. The collected dust will be routed to the boiler bunker. Further
protection from the wind will be achieved by planting trees around the site perimeter.
Leachate and rain run-off from the coal stockpile will be intercepted by a drainage system,
and the solids recovered in a settlement and clarification pond. The pond effluent will
undergo further treatment to remove heavy metals, prior to sea discharge.
The project proponents are attempting to find industrial concerns, such as cement and
brick manufacturers that could recycle the fly ash within the finished factory product. The
furnace bottom wet ash cannot be recycled, and will be deposited in a dedicated land-fill
facility that is engineered with appropriate containment barriers and leachate controls.
Some fly ash will also be deposited in this facility. Leachates will be pump collected and
treated to remove heavy metals and other polluting substances, and finally discharged to
the sea. Alternatively the treated water effluents from all sources (including treated
domestic waste water effluents) could be used for crop irrigation. After decommissioning
of the plant, the fly ash land-fill facility will be covered with a textile membrane, clay,
organic soil and sown with a cover of grass and suitable shrubs. This measure will prevent
or minimise infiltration of water into the waste ash. An appropriate number of boreholes
will be drilled around the facility to monitor the quality of the surrounding ground water
Domestic solid waste will be incinerated on site, as appropriate, or collected for disposal
at a location distant from the site. Effluent from the sewage treatment plant will be routed

to the sea or used for irrigation. The separated solid sewage effluent wastes, after a
period of free standing to reduce smells, could be recycled as an agricultural fertiliser.
Other collected and pumped liquid effluents (e.g. from the coal stock yards; the ash pond
run-off; metal cleaning liquid wastes; boiler blow down water; etc.,), after preliminary
treatment to remove metals, will be pumped to the sewage treatment plant.
A detailed monitoring plan for evaluating the quality of the ground water, and the quality of
treated effluents is described in this Report. Treated process effluents will be sampled and
monitored regularly for compliance with the statutory regulations regarding disposal to
sea. A detailed sampling and monitoring programme is described in the Environmental
Impact Assessment.
0.9 Quarrying
The construction site is about 2 to 3 metres above mean sea level, and this platform
requires levelling to about 4.5 metres above mean sea level. Therefore some 500,000 to
750,000 cubic metres of sand are required for elevating the plant ground platform.
Quarrying activities are not presently carried out in the vicinity of the proposed
construction site.
Three options are available for sand supply; namely the dunes running from the north of
the site towards Talawila; a bay at Pavalipaduwa, which is silting at an alarming rate; and
off-shore dredging from the sea bed. The Coast Conservation Department is the
authorising and licensing department for regulating off-shore dredging and on-shore sand
mining within the coastal zone. Sand dunes are barriers to wind blown sand and sea
spray. Thus mining dunes could diminish any protective effect they have in preventing
sand and sea spray blowing inland. The dunes also act as a wind-break.
0.9.4 Operational Impact
After the power station is completed, there will be no further high demand for sand.
Consequently the operational phase will have no impact on sand sources.
The project proponents will undertake detailed studies and assessments of the potential
locations of the sediment source, and consult with the authorising and licensing
departments at all stages of the assessments. If sand should be mined from a dune, a
range of pollution preventive measures will be practised. Such measures would include
restrictions on storing fuels on site; proper maintenance of vehicles; staged excavation of

sand; avoiding deep excavations; and finally re-planting the excavated surface with a
vegetation cover, so as to minimise the probability of sand erosion. If sands are dredged
from off-shore, measures will be implemented to prevent infiltration of salt water into the
aquifer. The activity will be undertaken as prescribed by the authorising department(s),
with due regard to other sea users and the marine resources.
0.10 Air Quality and Noise
The ambient air quality at the site location is not disturbed. The concentration of pollutants
as found on the occasion of air quality measurements is far below the admissible levels
set by the respective air quality standards.
There are no important noise sources at or close to the site. Noise measurements
undertaken at the site recorded levels of 35 to 38 dB(A), compared to levels of 46 dB(A) at
the Narakkalli village. The main source of noise was the wind and waves breaking on the
beach. These noise levels approximate to those generally found in rural areas.
The only significant impact on the air quality in the study area is resulting from the
Puttalam Cement Factory, 16.5 km East-Southeast of the site. The Puttalam Cement
Factory is by far the most important source of air pollution in the study area. More than
90% of the Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) and of the Particulate Matter and almost 80% of the
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) are resulting from this cement factory.
Site activities will generate noise and dust. The main sources are earth moving
equipment, excavations, vehicle movements, and a range of construction activities. Most
of the re-suspended sandy sediment will settle within a short distance. As construction
dust is not respirable, it does not pose a significant health risk. Vehicle exhaust fumes will
have a very localised impact on the air quality, and will not affect villages 500 m away
from the site.
Stack gas emissions as well as ground level concentrations of particulate matter, sulphur
and nitrogen oxide gases will fully comply with the national standards (see Table 2). The
calculated maximum concentrations of SO2 resulting from 1 unit (300 MW) are in the
amount of about 40% with respect to the 1-hour ambient air quality standard and of about
50% with respect to the 24-hour standard. If all 3 units (900 MW) are taken into
consideration, the pollution resulting from the power plant reaches about 80% of the 1-
hour or the 24-hour standard. The expected maximum concentrations of NO2 resulting
from 1 unit (300 MW) are not higher than about 15% of the 1-hour as well as of the 24-
hour ambient air quality standard. In case of 3 units (900 MW) the resulting maximum
NO2-concentration will still remain lower than 30% of the standard. The impact of particles

emitted from the stack on the ground level air quality is negligible. Even with 3 units, the
resulting concentration of ground level suspended particulate matter is not above 3 to 4%
of the respective ambient air quality standards.
All the control measures included in the plant-design are based on a careful evaluation of
alternatives, taking into account environmental, technical and economic evaluation
criteria. The recommended stack height is 150 m. This is sufficient to avoid influence from
turbulences around the plant structures as well as to meet all the ambient air quality
standards. As the selected alternatives are fully complying with the air quality
requirements, no further mitigation measures are to recommend. Noise levels at the site
boundary will be similar to those measured at the Narakkalli village. With respect to the
national regulations, the following gases will be continuously monitored at the stack:
sulphur dioxide; nitrogen dioxide; and opacity; whereas total suspended particulate matter
will also be measured. Appropriate details of the monitoring programme and methodology
are described in the relevant sections of this report.
0.11 Historical, Archaeological and Scenic Protected Areas
A historic church, namely St. Anne’s, built by the Portuguese several hundred years ago,
stands at Talawila. Talawila is more than 9 km northwards from the northern boundary of
the proposed power station. Kalpitiya town boasts a historic church and fort. The Coast
Conservation Department classifies the beaches at Talawila and Kandakuliya as areas of
high scenic and recreational value. The Department of Archaeology has not investigated
the site for artefacts of high historical and archaeological interest.
The coastline at Talawila was eroding in the past, but has stabilised in the latest years.
Just several hundred metres southwards of the Church the coast is accreting. The erosion
is due to oceanographic processes, and to the earlier destruction, by man and cyclones,
of certain reef sections. These sections when previously present trapped sediment at the
shoreline and thus protected the coastline from erosion.
The construction of the power station and transmission line corridor will not have any
impact on existing sites of historical, archaeological, religious and scenic importance.
The power station and the transmission line will have no impact on the historical,
archaeological, religious and scenic protected areas.

If any buried objects of historical value are found at the site during the site excavations,
appropriate officials from the Department of Archaeology will be promptly consulted and
invited to inspect the site.
0.12 Socio-Economics
0.12.1 The Existing Condition
The population density in Kalpitiya Division is rather high with 534 inhabitants per km2 and
respectively 845 per km2 including the refugees. All the main ethnic groups are
represented similarly in the region, but within the project site area almost all people are
either of Sinhala (55%) or Tamil (37%) ethnicity. The most numerous religious group are
the Christians. The education level is rather low in the project site area as children often
work in the fields instead of attending school. Secondary eduation is also limited due to a
lack of teachers.
Many health problems in the region are related to the insufficient drinking water quality
and lack of sanitation facilities. Malaria is still one of the main health concerns. Like in the
whole country, immunisation of children is quite high in Kalpitiya Division. However, the
Division hospital in Kalpitiya is lacking laboratory facilities to carry out clinical tests.
By means of a household survey the number, location and the main features of the
households to be potentially affected by the proposed project was identified. This included
73 households occupying the project site area which includes the plant site, a buffer zone
of 240 m eastwards of the projected site and the area 100 m north and 200 m south of the
plant. The inhabitants of the project site area almost exclusively depend on agriculture.
Most of the families do not have a sufficient area of land to grow enough to be self-
subsistent and therefore have to work on a temporary basis in the fields and plantations of
others. These job opportunities are generally found outside the project site area. Fishing is
the second most important economic activity in Kalpitiya Peninsula, however, only three
families from the project site area have reported to fish in certain occasions and only few
others work temporary as assistants of fishermen. 7 beach seines are deployed from the
beach extending from Narakkalli to Erukkiliyadi at a shore length distance of about 2
kilometres.
About 60% of the project site area is Government land, which is either baren, encroached
or cultivated with permit. The total cultivated area of the 73 relevant households amounts
to about 41 ha, with an average plot size of 0.56 ha per family. The main crops grown in
the area are coconut, onions, tobacco, chillies, sweet potatoes and others. Within the
project site area coconut and red onion cover more than respectively 25% and 30% of the
cultivated land. The agricultural production is highly dependent on irrigation with
groundwater. Livestock husbandry is of almost no significance at all in the project site
area.
Main income is derived from employment in agriculture or self-cultivation. The income

level as well as income disparity are low in the project site area. Consequently almost one
third of the households have no valuable properties at all, while the majority has at least
some commodities such as radios, TVs, bicycles and sewing machines.

No Government or private sector offices are located within the project site area itself. Only
a few stretches of dirt roads and no electricity and communication systems are found
within the area. A small Hindu shrine situated about 140 m south of the plant site is the
only place of worship within the project site area.
There are no current developments on the site area except an increasing trend in
developing land for agriculture in the north, south and east of the proposed site. However,
all existing environmental impacts mentioned in this EIA affect the local population in one
way or another and with more or less direct consequences. The cause of these impacts
are often human activities, which again have their indirect effect on the population. The
most important factors affecting the human population in the area of the proposed project
are the high population density, the strong dependency of regional economy on
agriculture and fisheries, the overexploitation of the Puttalam Lagoon, the limits of
cultivable land and the insufficient quantity and quality of drinking water.
The most relevant socio-economic impact is the impact on the population presently living
within the proposed plant site and its closest vicinity. The establishment of the plant will
require the resettlement of 43 households within the plant site and the closest buffer zone
area and potentially further 10 families within the buffer zone if they wish so. The affected
families will loose their huts, some water supply facilities (e.g. water pipes) and a part or
the whole of their cultivated land. The exact area of agricultural land to be lost within the
site will be defined by the detailed mapping during the Detailed Design stage. All the
losses however will be compensated so that the families can at least recuperate, but
preferably improve their living standard.
Some landowners living outside the area will also lose the portions of their land (some
incl. field huts), which are within the perimeter. These losses will be compensated
accordingly. No major impact on the employment opportunities within the plant area is
expected on landless labour from outside the site area, as there are no or very few such
opportunities.
7 beach seines are operated from along the beach bordering the proposed power station
site, during the north east monsoon (November to April). During the construction of the
jetty and other works undertaken at the sea bed, it may not be possible to deploy the nets
from the beach. The construction works will potentially chase the fish in the vicinity of work
activities, but will not reduce the fish populations and potential fish yield.
The power station will enhance job opportunities within the area for both skilled and un-
skilled workers, and thus be of positive benefit to the local community. To guarantee a
maximum local benefit some specific conditions to employ local labour should be included
in every contract for the power plant. Indirect benefits will result from the wider commercial
opportunities to supply the work force with essential living items and services and so
generate income in various population groups. Other benefits will arise from provisions of
improved infrastructure and health care facilities. On the other hand, the presence of work
force might also involve certain social disadvantages such as tensions with the residents,
prostitution and spread of diseases brought in from outside.

The population of Sri Lanka will benefit from the project in terms of energy provided and
overall economic development. After construction and a proper compensation and
resettlement the local people will mainly benefit from job opportunities at the power station
and indirect income generation induced by the power plant staff. However, due to the
considerably lower staff number during operation (about 500 jobs compared to 2000
during construction) these benefits will be smaller than during construction phase, yet on a
long-term basis. The benefits from improved infrastructure such as health care facilities,
schools, roads and electrification will remain during the operational phase.
No or no relevant impacts are expected for the fisheries during plant operation. The 100 m
coastal strip between plant and sea will be also accessible and open for use to fishermen.
The short jetty established for unloading heavy equipment during construction might even
benefit the fishing community.
The indirect impacts of the project, such as potential secondary effects of air and water
pollution on the population can be found under the respective sections. However, the
implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and the compliance with the air and
water quality standards which are established in order to keep or restore a healthy
environment guarantee a low level of environmental impacts.
Compensation through proper resettlement will be established and carried out according
to a detailed Compensation and Resettlement Plan. The plan will be prepared during the
Detailed Design stage. Compensation will be given with respect to the loss of homes,
land, yield and income according to the principles and guidelines recommended by
international organisations. One of these principles is also, that the resettled population
should by no means suffer any economic loss, but possibly be better-off after the
relocation.
The plot size shall be one hectare for those with presently smaller land plots, regardless of
land title. Larger agricultural lands have to be compensated according to their present
extent. This also applies to all landowners who are not going to be relocated. If only a
small portion of their total land will be affected compensation by cash can be considered.
The compensated land has to have the same land title as the previous plot, but if possible
permits and encroachments shall also be compensated with a proper land title. The new
agricultural land will need to be prepared and properly equipped for cultivation before the
relocation of the families. Any loss of yields during the transition phase will have to be
compensated. The new houses need to be at least of the same size and value as the
previous ones. The resettlement costs for 43 households including land acquisition, land
preparation, houses, sanitation and water supply facilities are roughly estimated at some
500,000 US$. Further costs for assistance to the resettlers, compensation of landowners
from outside, infrastructure, fishing activities and loss of yields are to be calculated at
Detailed Design stage.
During the Detailed Design stage suitable land plots for resettlement will be identified
within the surroundings of the project area with the relevant authorities. Already some
plots of land of varying extent which would provide ideal sites for resettlement have been
identified. Initially the Divisional Secretary has indicated the availability of 80 acres of

undeveloped Government land in Daluwa, some 8 km south of the project site, for the
resettlement.
To mitigate the impacts on the fisheries during construction alternative sites for beach
seines in the vicinity are to be identified and discussed with the fishermen. If any
disadvantage results from the shifting of the beach seine location compensation will be
required additionally to the compensated permanent structures such as houses, water
tanks, wells and sanitary facilities. To ensure that the local population benefits from the
economic opportunities induced by the project, the employment of local labour has to be
stated within all project related contracts as well as considered already during the
preparatory phases.
The whole resettlement and compensation process will require three stages: planning,
implementation and monitoring. It is essential that the concerned population has proper
influence on the whole process. This involvement can be achieved by regular meetings
and discussions with the affected people. Furthermore, a representative of the population
should participate regularly in meetings of the compensation planning team. A committee
will be formed to monitor the resettlement process and compensation procedures.
Besides representatives of administrative and executive authorities the committee will
include representatives of the affected population and a locally active NGO.
0.13 Visual Aspects
0.13.1 The Existing Condition
The site area extends from the village of Narakkalli northwards for about 2.0 km and
terminates about 100 m southwards of Erukkiliyadi. The construction site is essentially flat
with low relief dunes, which are covered with sparse vegetation of (dune) grasses and
shrubs. Coconut and other plantation produce (onion, cucumbers, chillies, tobacco, and
sweet potatoes) exist to the north and east of the power station proposed boundaries. The
existing homes on the proposed site are temporary constructions made from coconut
leaves (cajan). The western boundary of the proposed power station lies about 100 m
inland from the shore line and Indian Ocean. The site is therefore undeveloped.
The site is undeveloped, and, therefore, there are no current impacts on the aesthetic and
visual qualities.
The power plant site area (excluding the buffer zone) will occupy about 62 hectares of
land, and the jetties, high buildings (about 60 m), the chimney stack height (about 150
metres), the plant infrastructure and car parks will completely alter the visual aspect of the
site area. A buffer zone of about 40 hectares will surround the entire plant eastern
boundary, and it will be planted with coconut and local shrubby trees.

The site northern area will house coal stock yards, coal handling equipment and an ash
pond. The buildings in the southern area is generally fabricated with brick and other
cladding materials. The chimney stack and other plant infrastructure will intrude upon the
visual aspect of the coastline. It is possible to mitigate against the visual intrusions, as
described below.
The boundaries of the site will be planted with a variety of appropriate shrubs and trees to
enhance the visual appearance of the power station. The enclosing vegetation will act as
a wind-break and minimise the wind’s potential to suspend dusts. The landscape planning
will be carried out during detail design phase.
0.14 Alternatives
The discussion of alternatives is restricted to other potential construction sites on the West
Coast of Sri Lanka, and to thermal power technology options.
Alternative sites were investigated at Negombo, Marawila, Mundel and along the coast
extending northwards from Narakkalli. The main environmental reasons for selecting the
proposed site are that it has a small permanent human population, it is undeveloped and
does not contain significant vegetation and animal resources. The coastline is not eroding,
and the 4.2 km off-shore 15 m bathymetric contour allows for the economical construction
of a jetty compared to the other alternatives which would require longer jetties. The site
provides more than the 103 hectares required for the plant full development (this area
comprises about 63 hectares for the plant full development; and about 40 hectares for the
buffer zone, which will be planted with coconut trees and a variety of lower shrubs). There
will be only minimal disturbance to humans and the impacts on the vegetation and
animals will be insignificant.
The main technological choices concerning the thermal power generation were: fuel
transportation; combustion technologies; flue gas treatment; ash handling; the cooling
water system; and the water supply and waste water treatment. The thermal option study
reported that from the point of economics view (taking account of investments and
operation costs, and the need to comply with Sri Lanka air quality standards), a low
sulphur fuel (0.65% sulphur or less) was the best choice. Such coals are exported from
Australia, Indonesia and South Africa.
Colombo Port is too small and the development plans do not allow the through-put of coal
required to operate the power station. Additionally to the upgrading of the port the road
and the rail infrastructure would have to be improved and extended. Therefore the
construction of a jetty was evaluated to provide the best economical option. Ship bulk
carriers will off-load coal at the end of the jetty, and a conveyor belt will transport the coal
to the power station site.
Options for burners are considered in detail within the Concept Design Report. The final
decision in the choice of burner, was based on one that could meet the Sri Lanka air
emission standards with regard to nitrogen oxide (NOx) gases. A range of low NOx
technologies is reviewed. The most economical burner for the plant is one that can use

pulverised coal, and is equipped with low NOx technology. The compliance for meeting
Sri Lanka sulphur oxide emissions and ground air quality standards is achieved by
burning coal with a low sulphur content (0.65% or less).
Control of fly ash emissions is normally based on installing electrostatic precipitators or

fabric filters. The Concept Design Report concludes that electrostatic precipitators could
both satisfactorily and economically meet the Sri Lanka standards.
In the absence of the 300 MW plant construction, 2,000 GWh of electrical energy will be
unavailable in the year 2003. In the absence of the 900 MW plant capacity some 6,000
GWh would be unavailable from about the year 2008 onwards. These values correspond
to about 22% of the total electrical energy demand in Sri Lanka at year 2003, and 42% of
the demand in year 2008. It is beyond the scope of the EIA to assess the consequences
of serious shortages of electricity supply on the Sri Lanka economy. Finally, neither
hydropower nor renewable energy sources can adequately substitute for the capacity
available from the thermal development plant option.
0.15 Summary of Main Pollutants

The main potential pollutants associated with the development are sulphur oxide (SOx),
nitrogen oxides (NOx) and suspended particulates. Appropriate mitigation measures will
be incorporated into the engineering design and plant operations to maintain their
potential negative impacts within inconsequential limits. The mitigation measures are
briefly outlined in the text above and in Table 1. A brief summary of the plant operational
emission rates of SOx, NOx, and particulates and the expected ground level
concentrations of these substances, as well as the measured present ground level
concentrations, are given in Table 2. The summary includes the Sri Lanka current
regulatory standards for SOx, NOx and particulate emissions, and to their defined ground
level concentrations. Reference is also made to noise and noise standards, and to
standards for effluent releases to the sea. It is expected that noise levels at the site
perimeter fence will be below 50 dB(A), and this value is the current urban standard for
residential areas at night. All effluents released to sea will be staged treated, to remove
metals, organics, suspended solids, BOD, and the pH will be neutralised. A sewage
treatment plant will be built on site prior to the capital works. All effluents that are released
to the sea will comply with the tolerance limits for marine coastal discharges.
0.16 Conclusions
The Environmental Impact Assessment analyses find that the proposed coal fired power
station development will have no serious adverse impacts on the environment. The
environment comprises the air, soils, surface water, ground water, humans, animals and
plants. All potential impacts will be reduced to inconsequential magnitude through
appropriate mitigation measures. Mitigation measures are based on integrating sensible
environmental protection engineering technologies into the station design and operational
modes. With respect to the latter, the power station will comply with all of the relevant
standards relating to protection of soils, water, air, humans, animals and plants.
About eighty-two families, who presently live in cadjan huts, occupy the proposed
development site. These families will be resettled in permanent accommodation, with
other benefits and compensation awarded through the resettlement action plan. The
project will have a net positive impact on the economy by providing employment

opportunities for about 1000 jobs during the construction phase. About 500 permanent
jobs will be available during the final operation phase of the 900 MW plant. The project's
main beneficiaries are electricity consumers; namely households, commercial and
industrial enterprises. In a wider sense, the development's expected socio-economic
effects comprise facilitating the expansion of industries and commerce, and the
construction of new homes. The project therefore has great potential for creating job
opportunities throughout all levels of society. The project will also enhance the potential
for electrifying rural areas, and this will ultimately bring improvements to the basic
infrastructure of rural communities, and to their living standards..
An environmental programme for monitoring the quality of the soil, ground water, sea
water and air is developed within the Report, and the programme shall operate through
out the life of the power plant, and during its decommissioning. The programme aims to
verify the environmental impact assessments, and it will serve to indicate whether
additional mitigation is required to further enhance the well-being of the environment.

Table 1: Synopsis of impacts and mitigation measures
Topic Impact Mitigation Monitoring

• Kind • Measure • yes/no
• Caused by • Effectiveness of the • Monitoring program
• Importance and magnitude proposed measures, and
magnitude of the residual
impact
Water During construction:
resources • Temporary disruption of • Minimise dewatering and • Ground water level monitoring
regime pumping regime of agrowells adopt alternative techniques campaign in agrowells during
by dewatering works is a for deep foundation Detailed Design and during
serious concern. construction. construction works.
• Compensation for losses of • Model assisted detailed
well yield. evaluation at the Detailed
Design stage.
During operation:
• No concern • No mitigation required. • A water quality monitoring
programme is proposed
below.
Ground During construction:
water • Moderate risk of percolation • Minimise dewatering and • Installation of piezometers
quality and of fuel and wastewater. adopt alternative techniques around the site.
soils • Spills of light fuels may for deep foundation • Continuous monitoring of
contaminate both soils and construction. wastewater effluent.
ground water. • Storage of fuel oil and other • Regular monitoring of the
• Intrusion of sea water during chemicals in specifically ground water physical and
time extended dewatering for designed containers and chemical properties.
foundation construction is a areas.
serious concern. • Good maintenance of
vehicles.
• Immediate removal of
contaminated soil in the case
of an oil spill.
During operation:
• Risk of contamination • Sealing of the base of the ash • Continuing maintenance of
because of proximity of landfill and coal stockyards piezometers.
ground water level to surface and provision with bottom • Regular monitoring of the
and of very permeable soil. leachate drains. ground water physical and
• Percolation of uncontrolled chemical properties.
spills of fuel oils and of • Provide continuous
contaminated leachate enhancement to marketing
through ash landfill and coal issues for both fly and bottom
stockpile is a serious ash.
concern.
• Risk of contamination by
wastewater is a minor
concern (see "Wastewater“).


impact
Waste During construction:
water • Limited amounts of waste • Early construction of waste • Continuous monitoring of
water constitute a minor water treatment plants. effluents from waste water
concern. • Pre-treatment of waste water treatment systems to comply
effluents before discharging with national standards.
into the sea during • Implement ground water
construction. quality program as above.
• Proper operation and • Controlled re-use of treated
maintenance of waste water and disinfected waste water
treatment systems. for irrigation of green areas.
During operation:
• Waste water with different • Five different types of • Monitoring of waste water
degree and kind of wastewater will be treated by effluent quality.
contamination from various means of separate, specific
sources (ash pond and coal treatment and neutralisation
stock percolation; cleaning; systems. Wastewater does
desalination residues; not constitute a serious
domestic waste water). concern provided the various
treatment systems will be well
operated and monitored.
Solid waste During construction:
manage- • Moderate amounts of • Incineration of combustible • Monitoring of drainage water
ment domestic and special waste wastes and/or disposal in well effluent from disposal areas.
constitute a risk of pollution of designed landfill, opened in
soil and ground water. the area selected for the.
During operation:
• Fly and bottom ash as main • Dust suppression by • Active market promotion for
waste material. adequate handling equipment both fly and bottom ash.
and procedure and by
sprinkling if required.
• Proper design and
management of ash deposit.
• Use of fly ash in the cement
and concrete industry.
• Integrated use of the ash
landfill as multiple purpose
disposal site; maximisation of
incineration.
• Maximise commercialisation
of ash.


impact
Air Quality During construction:
and Noise • Dust and noise. • Spraying water onto areas • Continuous monitoring of
• Heavy duty equipment and from which dust arise. ambient air quality including
vehicles. • Cleaning and good house dust settling as part of the
keeping. ambient air quality monitoring.
• Acoustical attenuation of
construction equipment.
During operation:
• Coal dust from all coal • Minimisation of dust through • Regular measurements of
handling devices and engineering design and coal dust suspended in the
processes. water sprays. air.
• Coal dust blown in and by the • Planting tall perimeter trees • Continuous monitoring of
wind. to form a wind-break. stack gas emissions as well
• Air pollutants caused by coal • Using good quality, low ash as all components of ambient
burning, released over a coal with a sulphur content of air quality.
150m high stack. 0.65% or less.
• Noise from various plant • Low NOx burners based on air
components. staging.
. • Electrostatic precipitators
(ESP) with 99.3% collection
efficiency.
• Employing an optimum stack
height.
• Use of low noise machinery
components, and noise
screens.
Land use, During construction:
aesthetics • Occupation of about 63 ha of • Give preference to alternative • Secure proper irrigation and
land (excl. workers camps). sand sources. If sea sand maintenance of the green belt
• Obtaining sands from dunes, dredging is preferred apply and of the resurfaced land at
a silting bay or from an dry lying. If sand mining of the ash pond.
offshore dredging. Dune dunes is preferred, observe
quarrying will diminish the safe distance from ground
protective barrier influence of water and resurface soil with
the dunes. Off-shore dredging adequate vegetation and
could potentially contaminate plantation.
inland soils and ground water • Revegetation of landfilled
with salt. surface and constitution of a
green belt.
During operation:
• Occupation of about 63 ha of • Maintain tree belt around • No specific monitoring.
land by plant facilities, coal whole plant site; protects
stock and ash pond. against coal dust from
Additionally, the plant stockyard and reduces
operators will control a buffer visibility of the plant.
zone of about 40 hectares,
comprising planted trees.
• High buildings (60 m) and
stacks (150 m). Coal
stockpiles.


impact
Terrestrial During construction:
animals • Destruction of habitat • No mitigation required • No monitoring
• Minor impact on a very small
insignificant animal
population.
During operations:
• No concern • No mitigation required • No monitoring
•
Terrestrial During construction:
vegetation • Destruction of vegetation by • No mitigation required, • No monitoring.
area occupancy of the plant. though trees will be planted
• Minor impact: small area (0.2 around the site boundaries in
hectares), existing vegetation order to achieve a wind-
already much degraded by break.
human influence.
During operations:
• No impacts • No mitigation required • No monitoring
Socio- During construction:

economy • Area occupancy of the plant, • Compensation through proper • Monitoring unit to be set up
therefore need to resettle 43 resettlement which will have which will accompany and
families and possibly further to be carried out according to monitor the whole
10 in the buffer zone. the Compensation Plan to be compensation and
• Loss of land of people not established during the resettlement process.
living within the site itself. detailed design phase. • Unit must be composed of
• Disturbance of fishing • Compensation for houses and representatives of the
activities during the land in general in kind, only responsible agencies and
construction phase. exceptionally in cash. representatives of the
• Positive benefits from • Compensation Plan to be affected population.
providing increased job established according to Participation of an NGO
opportunities. accepted (e.g. World Bank) active in the social field is
• Positive benefits from better standards. recommended. It must be
work-force medical • Compensation to guarantee independent from the body
provisions. that the affected people suffer responsible for planning and
no economic losses. implementing resettlement
• Compensation for some and compensation.
permanent structures of • The activities of the unit must
beach seines and temporal reach at least a few years
losses (disturbance to fishing beyond the end of any
activities) best to be done in resettlement activities.
cash (compensating for loss
of yield).
During operations:
• Positive benefits by providing • No mitigation required • No monitoring required
employment opportunities
• Positive benefits from rural
electrification
Marine During construction:

animals • No discernible impact • No mitigation required • No monitoring
During operation:
• No discernible impact • No mitigation required • No monitoring


impact
Marine During construction:
water • Fugitive oil and fuel leakage, • All vessels to comply with the • Periodic monitoring of the
quality and sediment re-suspension. marine pollution prevention coastal waters for oil
• Minor impact. authority regulations for pollution.
minimising pollution of the
sea by oil and other
substances.
During operation:
• Cooling water outfall and • All discharged effluents will • Periodic monitoring of coastal
effluent releases from sewage comply with the national water and sediments for
and plant processes. regulations and standards for heavy metals and nutrients.
• Minor impact due to waste waste effluents. • Monitor water temperature
processes waters. • Mitigation is engineered into north, south and west of the
• A very small area of sea (less the engineering design. discharge point. Monitor
than 1000 m2 ) is warmed to temperatures at Talawila reef.
2.0 oC.
Coal During operation:
unloading • Low probability of coal falling • Drape a canvas curtain • Periodic monitoring of the sea
from ships into the sea, and escape of between the unloading ship bed, by either camera or
coal dust. Ships could release and jetty to catch falling coal. diving observations.
fuels and oils to water. • Minimise dust suspension by • Monitor coal dust
• Spills could smother shipping coal with a water concentrations in air during
sedentary animals living on content of up to 12%, but 8% unloading.
the sea bed. Coal dust is a is sufficient. • Periodic monitoring of total
risk to the health of ship’s • Compliance with the marine hydrocarbon concentrations
crew. pollution prevention authority in the water.
• Fugitive emissions of oils and regulations for minimising oils
fuels will have a very small and fuel releases to sea.
impact on the water quality.

Table 2: Summary of main pollutants by type
Pollutant Sri Lanka Standards Present Levels 300 MW Phase 900 MW Phase
at Site
Stack Emission
Concentration
TSP 40 mg/MJ - 34.5 mg/MJ 34.5 mg/MJ

(28.5 g s-1) (85.5 g s-1)
Opacity 20% Continuous. -
SOx 520 mg/MJ - 520 mg/MJ 520 mg/MJ
(430 g s-1) 1290 g s-1)
NOx 300 mg/MJ - 256 mg/MJ 256 mg/MJ
(210 g s-1) (630 g s-1)
Ground Level 24 Hour Levels
Concentrations (1 hour Levels)
Maximum Values
TSP 300 μg m-3 11 to 24 μg m-3 4.8 μg m-3 7.5 μg m-3
(500 μg m-3) (10.0 μg m-3) (19.0 μg m-3)
SO2 80 μg m-3 < 6 μg m-3 43.0 μg m-3 65.0 μg m-3
(200 μg m-3) (84.0 μg m-3) (162 μg m-3)
NO2 100 μg m-3 < 3 μg m-3 20.0μg m-3 39.0 μg m-3
(250 μg m-3) (37.0 μg m-3) (73.0 μg m-3)
Noise Day and
(Night)
Rural areas 50 dB(A) 35 dB(A) - -

(45) dB(A)
Industrial areas 70 dB(A) - < 50 dB(A)** < 50 dB(A)**

(60) dB(A)
Aqueous Effluents
Discharged to Sea
Temperature 45 oC 29 oC < 36 oC < 36 oC
TSS 150 mg l-1 - < 35 mg l-1 < 35 mg l-1
BOD 100 mg l-1 - < 25 mg l-1 < 25 mg l-1
pH 6 to 8.0 - 6-8 6-8
** : Predicted values at the perimeter of the plant.

BOD : 5 day Biological Oxygen Demand.
TSP : Total Suspended Particulates.
TSS : Total Suspended Solids.
SOx : Sulphur oxides (sulphur dioxide and sulphur trioxide).
NOx : Nitrogen oxides (mostly nitrogen dioxide - NO2).
The given ground level concentrations of TSP, SO2, and NO2 during the operational 300 MW and 900 MW
phases, are the maximum determined values due to only the plant emissions and no other source.
The present TSP concentrations at the site and around the site (namely, 11 to 24 μg m-3) are due principally
to salt spray and wind blown sands from the sea and dunes.

CEB - Coal Fired Thermal Power Development Project - West Coast Page 0-i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Table of Contents:
0.1 THE PROJECT AND ITS LOCATION ............................................................................................................1
0.2 STRUCTURE OF THE EIA .........................................................................................................................1
0.3 THE POWER STATION LAND TAKE AND OCCUPANCY: TERRESTRIAL FAUNA AND FLORA ...............................2
0.3.1 Existing Conditions ...........................................................................................................................2

0.3.2 Existing Impacts ...............................................................................................................................2
0.3.3 Construction Impacts ........................................................................................................................2
0.3.4 Operational Impacts..........................................................................................................................2
0.3.5 Mitigation Measures..........................................................................................................................3
0.4 THE TRANSMISSION LINE LAND CLEARANCE: TERRESTRIAL FAUNA AND FLORA ..........................................3
0.4.1 Existing Conditions: ..........................................................................................................................3

0.4.4 Operation Impacts ............................................................................................................................3
0.4.5 Mitigation Measures..........................................................................................................................3
0.5 THE MARINE RESOURCES AND SEA WATER QUALITY................................................................................4
0.5.1 Existing Conditions ...........................................................................................................................4

0.5.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures .................................................................................................5
0.6 GROUND WATER RESOURCES AND QUALITY ............................................................................................6
0.6.1 Existing Condition .............................................................................................................................6

0.7 COOLING WATER EFFLUENTS .................................................................................................................7


CEB - Coal Fired Thermal Power Development Project - West Coast Page 0-ii

0.8 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTES ....................................................................................................................8

0.9 QUARRYING......................................................................................................................................... 10
0.9.1 Existing Condition ........................................................................................................................... 10

0.9.2 Existing Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 10
0.9.3 Construction Impacts ...................................................................................................................... 10
0.9.4 Operational Impact ......................................................................................................................... 10
0.9.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures ............................................................................................... 10
0.10 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE .................................................................................................................... 11
0.10.1 Existing Condition................................................................................................................... 11

0.10.2 Existing Impacts ..................................................................................................................... 11
0.10.3 Construction Impacts .............................................................................................................. 11
0.10.4 Operational Impacts ............................................................................................................... 11
0.10.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures ....................................................................................... 12
0.11 HISTORICAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND SCENIC PROTECTED AREAS ......................................................... 12
0.11.1 Existing Condition................................................................................................................... 12

0.11.5 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................... 13
0.12 SOCIO-ECONOMICS........................................................................................................................... 13
0.12.1 The Existing Condition ........................................................................................................... 13

0.13 VISUAL ASPECTS ..............................................................................................................................16
0.13.1 The Existing Condition ........................................................................................................... 16

0.14 ALTERNATIVES.................................................................................................................................. 17

CEB - Coal Fired Thermal Power Development Project - West Coast Page 0-iii
0.15 SUMMARY OF MAIN POLLUTANTS ....................................................................................................... 18
0.16 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................. 18
List of Tables:
Table 1: Synopsis of impacts and mitigation measures ................................................................................................... 20

Table 2: Summary of main pollutants by type ................................................................................................................. 25

LVPS EIA Executive Summary

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

LVPS EIA Executive Summary

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CEB - Coal Fired Thermal Power Development Project - West Coast Page 0-1

Environmental Impact Assessment EIA

0.1 The Project and its Location

0.2 Structure of the EIA

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

the identification and evaluation of impacts during construction and operation;

0.3.1 Existing Conditions

0.3.2 Existing Impacts

0.3.3 Construction Impacts

0.3.4 Operational Impacts

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.3.5 Mitigation Measures

0.4 The Transmission Line Land Clearance: Terrestrial Fauna and

0.4.1 Existing Conditions:

0.4.2 Existing Impacts

0.4.3 Construction Impacts

0.4.4 Operation Impacts

0.4.5 Mitigation Measures

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.5 The Marine Resources and Sea Water Quality

0.5.1 Existing Conditions

0.5.2 Existing Impacts

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.5.3 Construction Impacts

0.5.4 Operational Impacts

0.5.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.6 Ground Water Resources and Quality

0.6.1 Existing Condition

0.6.2 Existing Impacts

0.6.3 Construction Impacts

0.6.4 Operational Impacts

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.6.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

0.7 Cooling Water Effluents

0.7.1 Existing Condition

0.7.2 Existing Impacts

0.7.3 Construction Impacts

0.7.4 Operational Impacts

Discharges of warmed cooling water will be made off-shore. A computer programme

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.7.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

0.8 Solid and Liquid Wastes

0.8.1 Existing Condition

0.8.2 Existing Impacts

0.8.3 Construction Impacts

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.8.4 Operational Impacts

0.8.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.9.1 Existing Condition

0.9.2 Existing Impacts

0.9.3 Construction Impacts

0.9.4 Operational Impact

0.9.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.10 Air Quality and Noise

0.10.1 Existing Condition

0.10.2 Existing Impacts

0.10.3 Construction Impacts

0.10.4 Operational Impacts

Electrowatt Engineering Ltd. 20/3/98/ 12548 / EIA Executive Summary / DD

0.10.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

0.11 Historical, Archaeological and Scenic Protected Areas

Industrial areas 70 dB(A) - < 50 dB(A) < 50 dB(A)