Alien invasive species and t and gas indu

Transcription

1 Developing a Biodiversity Action Plan through an integrated and phased approach Natural gas transportation pipeline system operated by PERU LNG in the Peruvian Andes Identification of the relevant tip(s) Tip 1: Begin yesterday Allow time for undertaking scoping surveys, careful planning of multi-season data collection, and developing strategic collaborations. Start to build the capacity to enhance conservation and project delivery straight away. Opportunities may be missed if biodiversity risks are not identified early. Tip 2: Assess sensitive areas Understand the location and significance of protected areas, endangered species, sensitive habitats and key natural resources. This is critical to the early selection of facility locations and a project s overall biodiversity action planning. It will help keep projects on track and limit impacts. Tip 5: Think about whole landscapes Understand the scale at which different ecosystem processes occur in order to design sound impact assessments, mitigation measures and monitoring programmes. For large projects, assuming a landscape perspective assures that areademanding species and broad-scale ecological processes are adequately considered. Executive summary PERU LNG operations consist of a natural gas transportation pipeline that traverses the Andean mountains to a liquefaction plant and marine terminal located on the Pacific coast. The 408 km pipeline traverses many diverse Figure 1. Route of PERU LNG s pipeline landscapes and ecosystems from the montane forests to the high peaks of the Andes and finally down to the arid desert coastal zone. In order to provide a comprehensive strategy aimed at protecting biodiversity during the construction and operation of the pipeline, PERU LNG developed a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), utilising a phased approach (IPIECA, 2005) that started in the early planning stages and will continue through assessment, construction, operations, and closure. This phased approach has enabled the BAP to evolve through the different phases of the project and now includes the marine monitoring programme at the LNG loading jetty. Alien invasive species and t and gas indu Background PERU LNG is a liquefied natural gas (LNG) project operated by Hunt Oil Company on behalf of shareholders including SK Energy, Repsol YPF, and Marubeni. PERU LNG is a US$3.8 billion project consisting of a major pipeline, a 4.4 million tonne per annum LNG liquefaction facility and a marine loading terminal. The pipeline transports natural gas from Chiquintirca in the eastern Ayacucho region of Peru over the crest of the Andes to the Pacific coast at Pampa Melchorita, 170 km south of Lima. Guidance for prevention and ma The natural gas for the project originates from the gas fields in the Amazonian part of the Cuzco Region and is transported first through the existing Camisea gas pipeline (211 km) to a point near Chiquintirca at about 2,900 m above sea level. From there transport continues through PERU LNG s pipeline. The pipe, with a diameter of 86.4

2 Figure 2. Eastern Valleys Region cm (34 inch), runs in a 25 m wide right of way (RoW) for 408 km, transporting the natural gas over a 4,900 m pass in the Andes to a liquefaction plant on the desert plains of the Pacific coast at Pampa Melchorita. Here, the gas is liquefied and loaded onto ocean-going tankers at the PERU LNG marine terminal and port. Construction of PERU LNG s pipeline commenced in December 2007 and was completed in March Figure 3. Bofedales in the High Sierras Region The Pacific Watershed Region (Figure 4): arid slopes, narrow ridges, sand dunes and coastal plains. Sparse to no vegetation, including scrubland, cactus formations, localised wetlands, degraded riparian vegetation, bare ground and irrigated croplands. In this context, developing an appropriate Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) for the project was a considerable challenge. The Challenge: Geographical and Biodiversity Settings PERU LNG s pipeline traverses approximately 310 km of mountainous terrain with numerous river crossings, sensitive areas like bofedales (Andean wetlands), sward forming grasses, among others, and 98 km of coastal desert plain. The project traverses 36 Andean communities and several coastal localities. This scenario contributed to the complexity of the project. Also, the lack of published biological information for several of the sensitive species and habitats in the project area represented a challenge in terms of developing appropriate plans to assess, mitigate and manage possible impacts. The pipeline crosses three major ecological regions (comprised of a larger number of Ecological Landscape Units as discussed below): The Eastern Valleys Region (Figure 2): subtropical and temperate valleys and mountain ranges with significant rainfall and extreme topographic relief. Vegetation ranging from upper montane forests to subtropical dry forests, scrubland and moist grasslands. The High Sierras Region (Figure 3): cold to temperate high ridges, peaks, and plains, with frequent snow in some sectors and increasing aridity towards the west. Primarily herbaceous vegetation, including many high Andean wetlands (bofedales), grasslands and scarcely vegetated areas. Figure 4. Sand dunes in the Pacific Watershed Region Activities Considering the diverse range of environmental and social constraints, it was decided that neither an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) or a stand-alone plan would be sufficient to adequately manage the biodiversity aspects of the project. For this reason, PERU LNG followed the completion of the ESIA with six additional phases of work (see Figure 6) above and beyond the normal scope of an ESIA; the additional phases represented an interactive biodiversity-focused process closely linked to the microrouting process; fine scale changes to the pipeline s route to avoid sensitive sites. Collectively the ESIA and six subsequent phases represent the BAP. This approach ensured that biodiversity conservation focused on the avoidance of the most sensitive areas while detailed ecological information was collected to develop and implement the BAP.

3 Figure 5. Ecological Regions along the Pipeline Figure 6 shows the work phases; these are not strictly sequential and a number of phases are considered part of an iterative process, while others overlap or are otherwise inter-related. These linkages were developed to maximise synergies and benefits for the conservation of biodiversity. The BAP started with the evaluation of alternative pipeline routes, followed by the ESIA. Further work was undertaken to bring the biodiversity related plans up to the desired standard; additional ecological field surveys and management planning activities ensured that sufficient preconstruction baseline information was available to schedule and execute specific preventative and mitigation actions during construction. Evaluation of Alternative Pipeline Routes The selection and evaluation of alternative pipeline routes was completed in three stages: corridor selection (a desktop study that assessed risks and issues associated with, for example, extreme terrain earthquakes, slope failure, wetlands, river crossings and archeological sites); field reconnaissance (field work on the RoW by a team of technical experts) and site specific studies to identify the sensitive areas that needed to be avoided. Throughout the route selection process, ongoing risk assessment ensured appropriate mitigation measures could be identified and implemented. Environmental, community relations and cultural heritage experts worked with the topographical survey team and integrated applied ecological criteria in the identification of the route that minimised impacts to biodiversity, local communities and cultural heritage sites and reduced risks to pipeline integrity. These finer scale changes to the pipeline s route are known as the micro-routing process. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment The ESIA for the project included 128 monitoring sites studied during the wet and dry season along a three to seven kilometer wide corridor around the proposed RoW. Figure 6. BAP phased approach and principal interlinks

4 Ecological Field Surveys (EFS) The objective of the EFS was to determine key species and habitats which would be affected by construction activities. EFS enabled the corridor studied in the ESIA to be narrowed to a 50 m wide strip where detailed information on species and habitats was collected. EFS were performed by a multidisciplinary team who walked the entire RoW, determining species sensitivity based on four characteristics: conservation status, endemism, use by local communities and mobility. Figure 7. Andean wetlands (bofedales) The sampling process aimed to identify potential hot spots of ecological value and a heavy emphasis was placed on high Andean wetlands (bofedales), which are unique high elevation systems associated with glacial moraines or volcanic cones in which water is retained. Biodiversity was also integrated into the social baseline studies. Participative Rural Appraisal workshops with local stakeholders were held to gather information from communities on uses of natural resources within the project s area of influence (social and biological area that might be influenced by the project s activities). Environmental and social impacts were identified in detail and the ESIA was approved by the Ministry of Energy and Mining in November of Ecological region Eastern Valleys High Sierras Pacific Watershed Ecological Landscape Units Apurimac River Valley Montane Forest Ecotone Campana Watershed Torobamba River Valley Sillaccasa Sierra Yucay River Valley Huamanga-Vizchongo Watershed Divide Vinchos River Valley Apacheta High Sierras Pampa-Palmitos River Basin Huaytará High Plains Pisco-Ica Watershed Coastal Bat Hills Pisco Sand Plains Ica Lima Coastal Plain Table 1. The fourteen Ecological Landscape Units EFS identified an additional 34 species that were added to the preliminary lists of species defined in the ESIA. Using Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and ecological criteria, the EFS divided the three major ecological regions into fourteen Ecological Landscape Units (ELUs) (Table 1) within the RoW and defined the habitat/vegetation types within each ELU. This fine detail was then used as the basis for all subsequent phases of BAP development: Ecological Management Plans (EMPs) EMPs were developed to define specific ecological mitigation measures. The final 25 m wide RoW was thoroughly studied, identifying sensitive flora and fauna species and building on the mitigation measures identified in the ESIA. The EMPs describe the overarching biodiversity conservation requirements and the specific mitigation measures that must be implemented in the 14 ELUs. With the main aim of protecting ecological integrity within the project s area of influence, 14 stand-alone field ecological action plans one for each ELU were produced. Biorestoration Management Plan The Biorestoration Management Plan was designed to ensure effective revegetation of the pipeline RoW and associated facilities (such as base camps, dump sites, access roads etc.) as quickly as practicable and thus ensure the reestablishment of the dominant ecosystem processes. The short term objective is to prevent soil erosion and to protect the integrity of the pipeline. For this, the ground surface was stabilised through the establishment of vegetation cover immediately following construction. The long term objective is to reestablish native vegetation and undertake restoration that allows the reestablishment of natural ecological processes and the progressive recovery of pre-construction biodiversity, structure and functionality. Biorestoration activities commenced during the topsoil stripping stage of construction. By stripping and protecting the topsoil the natural seed bank held within the topsoil was protected, so that native seeds would germinate when the topsoil was replaced on the RoW. These activities were complemented with soil improvement techniques, seeding and translocation of native species.

5 Biodiversity Monitoring and Assessment Plan (BMAP) The primary aim of the BMAP is to evaluate mitigation measures and potential impacts on biodiversity in the PERU LNG area of influence. The BMAP is being developed and implemented in collaboration with the Smithsonian Institution. Figure 8. Biorestoration activities on the RoW PERU LNG is now undertaking periodic monitoring and maintenance of revegetation in previously disturbed areas, which will continue until adequate vegetation cover and soil stability have been achieved. Long term monitoring of native species vegetation recovery is being integrated into the Biodiversity Monitoring and Assessment Plan (BMAP). Camelid Management Plan (CMP) During the ESIA public consultation process, it became clear that communities in the highlands placed considerable value on the protection of camelids (Andean mammals such as llamas, alpacas and vicuñas) and were concerned about the potential impacts of construction activities. To address these concerns, the CMP was developed with the participation of potentially affected communities. Data were gathered directly from communities through workshops with over 630 participants. Participants gave information on the ranges of herds, commonly used water sources and grazing areas. Camelid censuses along the RoW were undertaken by specialists, as well as a study of vegetation and water resources used by herds, to rank them in terms of quantity, quality and longer term viability. As a result, camelid sensitivity maps were developed and specific mitigation methods were defined for camelid areas. After six months of construction and implementation of the CMP, results were shared with communities. No significant impacts on camelid populations were observed, thus the CMP proved effective for protecting camelids and building trust with communities. The specific objectives of the BMAP are: 1) assess and monitor the distribution and abundance of the species and habitats selected and determine the potential impacts of the project; 2) determine the progress of biodiversity restoration and ecosystem integrity; 3) increase knowledge of the selected species and habitats; 4) formulate recommendations for the conservation of species and habitats; and 5) provide capacity building for Peruvian professionals on monitoring methods and applied ecological and conservation goals. Using the biodiversity information gathered in the earlier studies, the BMAP applied sensitivity criteria to select species and habitats that would serve to answer scientific questions about the possible impacts of the project. Research questions and monitoring protocols were developed for 18 species and habitats, led in most cases by Peruvian researchers and reviewed by national and international experts under a process of adaptive management. This process allowed the protocols to be reviewed based on the results, thus achieving a better understanding of how to tailor methodologies to specific objectives. In turn this enabled the correct balance to be found between gaining knowledge to improve management in the future and achieving the best short-term outcome based on current knowledge (Allan & Stankey 2009). Environmental Investment Programme (EIP) The EIP was based on the environmental and social data gathered throughout the development of the BAP. The primary purpose was to capitalise on opportunities to conserve and improve natural resource use. The first programme focused on improving the health of camelid populations within the area of influence and improving the quality of vicuña fibre, using training workshops on care and handling of newborns, treatment of infectious and parasitic diseases and vicuña handling methods. This programme benefited 1,048 families and 90 breeders and yielded positive results. Further environmental investment activities were later incorporated into the Social Investment Programme.

6 Outcomes The following specific programmes targets were achieved: EFS allowed the identification of critical species along the RoW and the description of 14 ELUs, thus introducing a landscape perspective. The EMP developed 14 stand-alone ecological action plans to protect ecological integrity, which were incorporated into construction activities. BMAP developed 18 research protocols along 14 ELUs on the RoW, ensuring that critical habitats and species are assessed as an indicator of biodiversity management and protection. A total of 52 professional researchers belonging to 13 research institutions and universities are involved in the programme, representing an important contribution to capacity building. To date, 60% of the vegetation of the RoW has been returned to its original condition. Biorestoration maintenance activities will continue until all disturbed areas show satisfactory recovery. Specific mitigation measures were implemented in camelid areas to effectively reduce and manage potential impacts on camelid herds. The participatory programme approach built significant trust among rural communities. Developing an appropriate BAP for PERU LNG required the full integration and coordination of technical, environmental and social aspects from the outset, including route selection. Regular refinement during the course of the engineering and construction process was also essential. The BAP addresses the various critical phases of the project from early planning through assessment and construction into operations and closure of the RoW. The phased approach to the BAP has provided the flexibility for increased integration of related programmes throughout the project to ensure all key aspects of biodiversity are adequately addressed. Lessons learned Early studies helped the design of sound environmental impact assessment, mitigation measures and monitoring programmes. The phased approach allowed the early identification of environmental, social and archaeological sensitive areas. Most of these areas were avoided in the final pipeline route selection and the development of environmentally sound techniques reduced potential impacts during construction activities. The challenges faced by PERU LNG are not unique; other pipeline projects have traversed different ecosystems and faced similar challenges. This is especially true when linear projects are in remote and understudied environments. Therefore PERU LNG s BAP approach could serve as a model for similar projects in South America and beyond. Contact details For general information related to PERU LNG, please contact: perulnginfo@perulng.com References and Further Reading Allen, C., Stankey, G.H., Adaptive Environmental Management: A Practitioner s Guide. DOMUS Consultoría Ambiental Ecological Field Survey for the PERU LNG Natural Gas Pipeline Project PLNG PTO6028 IPIECA A Guide to Developing Biodiversity Action Plans for the Oil and Gas Sector. International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association: London Morris P. and Therivel R.: Editors, Methods of Environmental Impact Assessment, (2004) PERU LNG Biodiversity Action Plan. Environment, Social, Health and Safety Management System (ESHSMS). Document Number 02/ES/PJ/PN/009/A01. PERU LNG. n/d. Biorestoration Management Plan. Document Number: 02/ES/PL/PN/018/D01 Ramsar COP9 DOC. 26; Regional Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of High Andean Wetlands (2005) Walsh Peru Preliminary Environmental Evaluation for the Route Design of a Gas Pipeline. Walsh Peru: Lima. Walsh Peru Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of the Natural Gas Pipeline Project from Ayacucho to the Liquefaction Plant. Walsh Peru: Lima. Even though the pipeline RoW is 25 m wide, conducting studies with a landscape perspective (prior to construction phase) positively contributed to understanding the broadscale ecological processes in the area of influence.