Appendix Gs. Codrilla Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment Addendum Report

Transcription

1 Appendix Gs Codrilla Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment Addendum Report

2 Codrilla Coal Mine Project Valkyrie Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx 05/05/2011 Prepared for Macathur Coal Limited ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd ABN: ACN: PO Box 3901, South Brisbane. QLD P: F: W: E: mail@askconsulting.com.au

3 Document Control W:\5800\5843\Reports ASK Advice\R02V01_draft - AQ\5843R02V01_draft2.docx Revision No Date of Issue Method of Issue Status Prepared by Reviewed by 5843R02V01 05/05/2011 Draft Dave Claughton Frits Kamst This report and the copyright thereof are the property of ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd (ABN ). It must not be copied in whole or in part without the written permission of ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd. This report has been produced specifically for the Client and project nominated herein and must not be used or retained for any other purpose. Valkyrie Page 2 of 51

4 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Project Description Project Description Sensitive Locations Air Quality Environmental Values Existing Environment Air Quality Modelling Methodology Dust Emission Sources and Controls Impacts at Sensitive Receptors PM PM TSP Dust Deposition Discussion Dust Mitigation Measures GHG & Energy Summary GHG and Energy Emission Factors Liquid Fuel Emissions Explosive Emissions Coal Extraction Emissions Consumption of Electricity GHG & Energy Summary Conclusions References Appendix A Proposed Mining Scenarios Appendix B Emission Estimates Appendix C Predicted Dust Contour Levels Valkyrie Page 3 of 51

5 1 Introduction ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd (ASK) was commissioned by Macarthur Coal Limited (MCL) to prepare an air quality and greenhouse gas addendum report for the Codrilla Coal Mine Project Environmental Impact Study (EIS). The proposed operation is to be located approximately 55 km east-southeast of Moranbah and 45km to the south-southwest of Nebo, as shown on Figure 1.1. This addendum report is to be read in conjunction with the original ASK air quality and greenhouse gas report 5001R02V03 dated 20/08/2010. This report is based on latest mine schedule and equipment information provided to ASK, and addresses the Department of Environmental Resource Management s (DERM) response to the original ASK report. Due to the extent of the modeling and criteria changes, this report is a substantial re-writing of the majority of the original ASK air quality and greenhouse gas report. Figure 1.1 Approximate Location of Codrilla Coal Mine Project (Source: Google Maps) Valkyrie Page 4 of 51

6 2 Project Description The project information has changed since the original ASK air quality and greenhouse gas report 5001R02V03. This section presents the latest details. 2.1 Project Description The proposed bulk sample maximum Run of Mine (ROM) is 5.25 Mt per annum of product coal. The life of the mine is proposed to be mined over 16 years. Mining and processing plant will operate 7 day a week, 24 hours a day. Mining will be open pit using conventional truck and shovel excavation methodology, with potential for future underground activities. The proposed Project infrastructure and pit layout is shown in Figure A.1 to A.3 in Appendix A. ROM will be hauled to the processing plant via haul roads from the pits. Waste material will be stacked on out of pit waste dumps adjacent to the pits until sufficient room becomes available in the pit at which stage waste will be placed in mined out pit areas. Excavators will load material from the pits into dump trucks for transport to the stockpile. Front end loaders will load the crushed ROM coal into the haul trucks. Road transport trucks will enter the site to load product coal at the coal handling process plant (CHPP) and travel along a haul road between the CHPP and Moorvale Mine for loading onto trains. Associated pieces of equipment such as drills will also be operating at the face. Service vehicles and water trucks will operate on the haul roads. All these sources are included in the model. The equipment utilisation is included in Table 2.1 as well as the proposed areas of operation and operation hours per year. The onsite operation can be described as: Mining 24 hours a day CHPP 24 hours a day Road Transport 24 hours a day Mining Fleet as per Table 2.1 ROM 5.25 Mt per annum Overburden 55,000,000 bcm per annum Table 2.1 Equipment Utilisation Maximum Production Year Type Mobile Equipment Type Excavator Excavator Model # Location # of PC RH340B Scheduled to work from existing surface to approx 60m below surface. Scheduled to extract overburden until the PC8000's are commissioned. Then Yearly Operational Hours per Vehicle Valkyrie Page 5 of 51

7 Type Equipment Type Excavator Dump Truck Dump Truck Dump Truck Drill Track Dozer Track Dozer Wheel Dozer Grader Grader Model # Location # of EX2500 Komatsu 930E Komatsu 830E Cat 789C Reedrill SKSS16 Cat D11T Cat D10T Cat 854K Cat 24M Cat 16M Water Cart Cat 777 FEL Cat 993 Service Truck Light Vehicles scheduled to work from 60m below surface down to the pit floor. Scheduled to only extract coal and partings in pit. Assumed to work with the PC8000. Taking weathered material from surface to 60m below surface, to the OB dump and then upper levels of the in-pit dump. Assumed to work with the RH340's taking OB from the box cut to the OB dump, then material from 60m below surface to pit floor, to the in-pit dump. Working with the EX2500's, taking parting material to the in-pit dump, coal to the ROM area. Assumed that the drills will be working in-pit at various depths. 2 on the OB dump/in-pit dump. 4 In-pit on bulk push 1 On the ROM area, 2 on general duties. 2 clean up around the excavators in-pit. General haul road maintenance in and around the pit area. General haul road maintenance in and around the pit area. Dust suppression work in and around the pit area. Working on the ROM area only. Yearly Operational Hours per Vehicle AH400D Mining Lease Landcruiser Mining Lease Valkyrie Page 6 of 51

8 Type Fixed Equipment Yearly Operational Model # Location # of Type Hours per Vehicle Coaster Bus TBA Mining Lease Haulage Trucks Highway type Haul route CHPP TBA ROM Area Pump TBA ROM Area Lighting TBA ROM Area Diesel Generator TBA ROM Area MIA/Admin TBA ROM Area The CHPP plant consists of the following items: Primary and Secondary Crushing Stations Washers Pumps Rejects Bin Products Bin Blasting would be required and would be carried out 70 times per annum with the following characteristics for each blast: Blast area of 25,000m 2 with 312 holes Blast hole width of 0.229m and depth will be a maximum of 35m Stemming Height of 2.0m Maximum Instantaneous Charge (MIC) 39 kg Valkyrie Page 7 of 51

9 2.2 Sensitive Locations The nearest sensitive locations (see Figure 2.1) are summarised in Table 2.2 including the approximate distances from (i) the nearest Pit; and (ii) the main plant. Table 2.2 Nearest Sensitive Receivers Location Coordinates (MGA Zone 55) Distance from Project (km) ID# Location East North Nearest Pit Main Plant 1 Devlin Creek Lillianvale Regalo Weamber Codrilla Moorpeth School School House Bundarra Iffley Deveril Valkyrie Note: The Location ID s listed as L1 to L12 are shown in Figure 3.1 as locations 1 to 12. Valkyrie Page 8 of 51

10 Figure 2.1 Monitoring and Sensitive Receiver Locations Valkyrie Page 9 of 51

11 3 Air Quality Environmental Values The proposed air quality criteria has not changed since the original ASK air quality and greenhouse gas report 5001R02V03. A summary of the relevant air quality indicators for particulate emissions is shown in Table 3.1 Table 3.1 Air Quality Criteria Air Quality Indicator Units Design Ground Level Averaging Period Source Allowable Exceedances Particulate PM2.5 g/m hours 8 1 year EPP(Air) Particulate PM10 g/m hours EPP(Air) 5 days each year Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) g/m year EPP(Air) Particles (deposited) g/m 2 /month 4 30 days DERM Valkyrie Page 10 of 51

12 4 Existing Environment The original ASK air quality and greenhouse gas report 5001R02V03 based background pollutant levels on a literature review of previous Queensland air quality studies in the Bowen Basin. The studies reviewed were the air quality section from the EIS s compiled for the Caval Ridge Project, Daunia Mine Project and Millennium Mine Expansion. All reviewed air quality assessments are located within the Bowen Basin and included background dust monitoring for their impact studies. A summary of the background dust levels from by each of the reviewed projects and the proposed background dust levels from the original ASK air quality and greenhouse gas report 5001R02V03 are shown in Table 4.1 below. Table 4.1 Summary of Background Dust Levels from similar Projects in the Bowen Basin Project TSP Annual Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) PM10 Concentrations ( g/m 3 ) 24hr Average PM2.5 Concentrations ( g/m 3 ) Annual Average 24hr Average Dust Deposition (g/m 2 /month) Caval Mine Daunia Mine N/A N/A 4.4* Millennium Mine Expansion Proposed Codrilla Mine Note: N/A Not applicable due to no PM2.5 assessment undertaken for Daunia Mine study * The background dust deposition measurements in the Daunia Mine study exceed the DERM dust deposition limits. Considering the localised nature of dust deposition the elevated background deposition rates may be considered not representative of regional background dust deposition levels. Based on a comparison with other similar projects the background pollutant levels proposed in the original ASK air quality and greenhouse gas report 5001R02V03 and reproduced in Table 4.1 are considered to be a reasonable representation of the existing air quality in the Bowen Basin. Valkyrie Page 11 of 51

13 5 Air Quality Modelling The air quality modelling has been substantially revised in accordance with the latest scenario and fleet information from Macarthur Coal Limited. 5.1 Methodology The dust predictions undertaken for this assessment are based on the following: Dust emissions estimates were based on accepted methods and data consolidated by the National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) and the Environmental Protection Agency of The United States of America (USEPA) Shown in Appendix B; Prediction of input meteorology using TAPM developed by the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research. TAPM has a prognostic 3 dimensional meteorological component which can be used to generate hourly meteorological data for input into Gaussian plume models. Prediction of dust concentrations and depositions with CALPUFF developed by Earth Tech; and Predicted levels are compared against criteria presented in Section 3. The modelling scenarios used to predict emissions from the proposed mine include: Year 1 As per Section 2.1 and pit cutting face at the eastern end of the eastern pit as shown in Figure A.1 in Appendix A. Year 6 As per Section 2.1 and pit cutting face at the western end of the eastern pit as shown in Figure A.2 in Appendix A. Year 11 As per Section 2.1 and pit cutting face at the western end of the western pit as shown in Figure A.3 in Appendix A. The equipment used in the modelling scenarios is included in Table 2.1, which also includes the modelled location of the equipment and the operation of haul trucks on the haul route. 5.2 Dust Emission Sources and Controls The project operations have been characterised into the main particulate generating activities. This allows the estimation of dust emissions to be undertaken. A particulate emissions summary of the main dust generating activities used as input into the CALPUFF dispersion model for each modelled year is presented in Tables 5.1 to 5.3. Tables 5.1 to 5.3 do not include the dust emission control factors. Table 5.4 lists the dust suppression techniques/controls to be utilised to reduce particulate emissions, as well as the estimated reduction in the dust emissions. Valkyrie Page 12 of 51

14 Table 5.1 Mining Dust Emissions Year 1 (No Control Technology) Activity TSP Emissions (kg/yr) PM10 Emissions (kg/yr) PM2.5 Emissions (kg/yr) Loading to trucks with Overburden 40,617 19,211 1,345 Loading to trucks with Coal 49,924 23,613 2,834 Bulldozing Coal 166,129 52,729 6,328 Bulldozers on Overburden 43,173 8,498 4,504 Truck Unloading Overburden 40,617 19,211 8,069 Truck Unloading Coal 1, Drilling 12,886 6, Blasting 49,354 25,664 1,540 Wheel Dust Generation from Unpaved Roads 2,334, ,767 63,977 Use of Grader 16,650 7,446 1,042 Plant Activities 19,612 7,921 1,113 Wind Erosion From Stockpiles 13,940 6, Total 2,789, ,634 91,547 Table 5.2 Mining Dust Emissions Year 6 (No Control Technology) Activity TSP Emissions (kg/yr) PM10 Emissions (kg/yr) PM2.5 Emissions (kg/yr) Loading to trucks with Overburden 40,617 19,211 1,345 Loading to trucks with Coal 49,924 23,613 2,834 Bulldozing Coal 166,129 52,729 6,328 Bulldozers on Overburden 43,173 8,498 4,504 Truck Unloading Overburden 40,617 19,211 8,069 Truck Unloading Coal 1, Drilling 12,886 6, Blasting 49,354 25,664 1,540 Wheel Dust Generation from Unpaved Roads 2,334, ,767 63,977 Use of Grader 16,650 7,446 1,042 Plant Activities 19,612 7,921 1,113 Wind Erosion From Stockpiles 13,940 6, Total 2,789, ,634 91,547 Valkyrie Page 13 of 51

15 Table 5.3 Mining Dust Emissions Year 11 (No Control Technology) Activity TSP Emissions (kg/yr) PM10 Emissions (kg/yr) PM2.5 Emissions (kg/yr) Loading to trucks with Overburden 40,617 19,211 1,345 Loading to trucks with Coal 49,924 23,613 2,834 Bulldozing Coal 166,129 52,729 6,328 Bulldozers on Overburden 43,173 8,498 4,504 Truck Unloading Overburden 40,617 19,211 8,069 Truck Unloading Coal 1, Drilling 12,886 6, Blasting 49,354 25,664 1,540 Wheel Dust Generation from Unpaved Roads 2,216, ,500 60,750 Use of Grader 16,650 7,446 1,042 Plant Activities 19,612 7,921 1,113 Wind Erosion From Stockpiles 13,940 6, Total 2,658, ,835 87,994 Valkyrie Page 14 of 51

16 Table 5.4 Mining Dust Emission Controls (Environment Australia, 2001) Emission Source Control(s) Utilised Control Efficiency Applied Loading to trucks with Overburden No control Utilised 0% Loading to trucks with Coal No control Utilised 0% Bulldozing Coal No control Utilised 0% Bulldozers on Overburden No control Utilised 0% Truck Unloading Overburden No control Utilised 0% Truck Unloading Coal No control Utilised 0% Drilling No control Utilised 0% Blasting No control Utilised 0% Wheel Dust Generation from Unpaved Roads Watering roads at >2L/m2/hour 75% Use of Grader No control Utilised 0% Plant Activities Partially enclosed and Mist sprays on transfer points 75% Wind Erosion from Stockpiles Progressive Rehabilitation 99% Also pit retention factors of 50% for TSP and 5% for PM10 were utilised for activities located within the pit. 5.3 Impacts at Sensitive Receptors The predicted mining case dust concentrations and depositions at the nearest sensitive receptors to the project are shown in Table 5.1, Table 5.2 and Table 5.3 for production years 1, 6 and 11 respectively. For a cumulative assessment against the project air quality criteria the predicted levels include the assumed background levels for dust concentration (TSP, PM10 and PM2.5) and deposition as outlined in Section 4. The predicted regional results of the CALPUFF dispersion modelling for the project are presented as dust contour plots in Appendix C. The dust contours show the predicted dust concentrations for years 1, 6 and 11 of the proposed Codrilla Project. The predicted dust contours are to visually show the predicted regional influence of the proposed mining operation and do not include the assumed background levels identified in Section 4. The annual average concentrations are the average of 8760 one hour concentrations, the monthly average concentrations are the average of 720 one hour concentrations while the 24 hour concentration is the 24-hour midnight to midnight concentration. Maximum 24hr averaged concentrations are generally experienced under adverse meteorological conditions when mixing height is reduced due to a winter inversion. Valkyrie Page 15 of 51

17 Table 5.3 Predicted Dust Levels for Year 1 of Operation ID# Location TSP Annual Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) PM10 24h Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) Maximum 6th Highest PM2.5 Concentrations ( g/m 3 ) Annual Average 24h Average Monthly Dust Deposition (g/m 2 /month) Criterion Devlin Creek Lillianvale Regalo Weamber Codrilla Moorpeth School School House Bundarra Iffley Deveril Valkyrie Table 5.3 Predicted Dust Levels for Year 6 of Operation ID# Location TSP Annual Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) PM10 24h Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) Maximum 6th Highest PM2.5 Concentrations ( g/m 3 ) Annual Average 24h Average Monthly Dust Deposition (g/m 2 /month) Criterion Devlin Creek Lillianvale Regalo Weamber Codrilla Moorpeth School Valkyrie Page 16 of 51

18 ID# Location TSP Annual Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) PM10 24h Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) Maximum 6th Highest PM2.5 Concentrations ( g/m 3 ) Annual Average 24h Average Monthly Dust Deposition (g/m 2 /month) Criterion School House Bundarra Iffley Deveril Valkyrie Table 5.3 Predicted Dust Levels for Year 11 of Operation ID# Location TSP Annual Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) PM10 24h Average Concentration ( g/m 3 ) Maximum 6th Highest PM2.5 Concentrations ( g/m 3 ) Annual Average 24h Average Monthly Dust Deposition (g/m 2 /month) Criterion Devlin Creek Lillianvale Regalo Weamber Codrilla Moorpeth School School House Bundarra Iffley Deveril Valkyrie Valkyrie Page 17 of 51

19 5.3.1 PM2.5 The predicted annual average PM2.5 concentrations are below the EPP(Air) guideline value of 8 g/m 3 for all locations during all three modelled years (refer to Table 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3). The predicted maximum annual average PM2.5 concentration is 4 g/m 3, which occurs at Locations 5, 7 and 8 during years 1 and 6. The predicted highest PM hour concentrations are below the EPP(Air) guideline value of 25 g/m 3 for all locations during all three modelled years (refer to Table 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3) The highest predicted PM hour concentration is 21 g/m 3, which occurs at Locations 7 and 8 during year PM10 The predicted maximum 24hr average PM10 concentrations are below the EPP(Air) guideline value of 50 g/m 3 for all locations during all three modelled years (refer to Table 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3) except at Locations 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 during year 1, Locations 3, 5, 7 and 8 during year 6 and Locations 5, 7 and 8 during year 11. The predicted maximum 24hr average PM10 concentration is 129 g/m 3, which occurs at Locations 7 during year 11 operations. The predicted 6 th highest 24hr average PM10 concentrations are below the EPP(Air) guideline value of 50 g/m 3 for all locations during all three modelled years (refer to Table 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3) except at Locations 7 and 8 during years 1 and 6 and Locations 5, 7 and 8 during year 11. The predicted maximum 6 th highest 24hr average PM10 concentration is 79 g/m 3, which occurs at Locations 7 during year 11 operations TSP The predicted annual average TSP concentrations are below the EPP(Air) guideline value of 90 g/m 3 for all locations during all three modelled years (refer to Table 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3). The predicted maximum annual average TSP concentration is 43 g/m 3, which occurs at Locations 7 and 8 during year Dust Deposition The predicted monthly dust deposition rates are below the EPP(Air) guideline value of 4 g/m 2 /month for all locations during all three modelled years (refer to Table 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3). The predicted maximum monthly dust deposition rate is 3 g/m 3, which occurs at Locations 7 and 8 during year 1. Valkyrie Page 18 of 51

20 5.4 Discussion It is noted that the annual concentration and deposition limits are predicted to be generally met at sensitive locations. Therefore the long term impact of the proposed mine may be considered to be acceptable. Short term (24 hour) PM10 concentrations are predicted to exceed the PM10 criterion. This means that while for most days of the year the impacts are acceptable, from time to time 24 hour concentrations are predicted to be exceeded. These would predominantly be associated with specific weather conditions, such as being downwind of the mine on a winter s night, when the dispersive capacity of the atmosphere is limited. To minimise dust impacts at sensitive receivers, the options are as follows: Apply additional dust mitigation measures to the mining operations. Dust mitigation measures are discussed further in Section 6. Relocate dwellings at receivers 3, 4, 5, 7 & 8 further away from the mine footprint such that the resulting dust levels are compliant. Once the mine is operational the following steps should be undertaken: 24hr average PM10 dust monitoring is to be undertaken at sensitive receivers 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8, unless otherwise relocated, or any other receiver from where a non-vexatious dust complaint is received. Results from this monitoring should be compared against the dust limits in the Environmental Authority. Care should be taken to ensure that measurement levels are representative of dust from the Codrilla mining operations, and are not from regional or localized events (e.g. dust storm, bushfire, non mining vehicles on dirt roads, etc). Measurement results should be reported in conjunction with weather data. Given the range of potential meteorological conditions and therefore the range in predicted dust levels, it is likely that several monitoring periods would be required to establish compliance or exceedance. This is generally the case with environmental dust, as the dust transportation variations can be significant occurring over long periods of time (e.g. seasonal variations). Thus any dust monitoring to determine compliance or otherwise should be conducted over a minimum 7 day period and may be required to be conducted over several seasons. Should dust levels indicate exceedances then a mitigation strategy should be developed, using the guidance provided in Section 6. Valkyrie Page 19 of 51

21 6 Dust Mitigation Measures To reduce the likely hood of complaints and the dust impacts on the surrounding environment, the following additional dust mitigation measures could be undertaken in addition to those identified in section. Enclosure of conveyor transfer points; Misting sprays on conveyor transfer points and crushing stations; Watering of product stockpiles to maintain a relatively high moisture content (>7%) Increase moisture content of active stockpiles with temporary water sprayers; If dust levels are shown to be in exceedance of EPP (Air) air quality objectives at sensitive receivers then scaling down of mining operations may be required during adverse meteorological conditions. All engineering dust mitigation measures implemented are required to be maintained and in good working order for the life of the mine. Valkyrie Page 20 of 51

22 7 GHG & Energy Summary The Greenhouse Gas and energy emission calculations have been revised in accordance with the latest scenario and fleet information from Macarthur Coal Limited. 7.1 GHG and Energy Emission Factors Liquid Fuel Emissions Diesel fuel will be used by mining equipment during operations. Light vehicles and pumps as well as lighting will also consume diesel. Estimates of annual diesel use by the plant/equipment have been supplied to ASK and are 47,158 kl for mobile equipment and 17.5 kl for stationary equipment. Emission factors for liquid fuel consumption are shown in Table 7.1. Table 7.1: Diesel Emission Factors Fuel Type Energy Content (GJ/kL) Scope 1 Emission Factor (kg CO2-e/GJ) Diesel (stationary) Diesel (mobile) Explosive Emissions The combustion of fossil fuels within explosives proposed to be used in the mining process will result in emissions of greenhouse gases. As the explosives are manufacturing onsite emission factors are base on the consumption of material to make Ammonium Nitrate/Fuel Oil (ANFO) and Emulsion blast products. Emission factors are based on the fuel oil content of ANFO and are taken as stationary emissions from Table 7.1. Quantities of fuel oil in the manufacturing process are based on a 5.7% of ratio of fuel oil. The annual consumption of fuel oil to make ANFO would be 57.1 kl Coal Extraction Emissions Open-pit coal extraction releases gaseous emission. In addition energy production is based on the energy potential of the product coal. ASK have been informed that the production black coal would be 4.05 Mt per annum. Emission factors associated with production of black coal are shown in Table 7.2. Valkyrie Page 21 of 51

23 Table 7.2: Coal Extraction Emission Factors Fuel Type Energy Content (GJ/t) Scope 1 Emission Factor Qld (t CO2-e/t ROM Coal) Black Coal Consumption of Electricity Consumption of purchased electricity is to occur in order to power the processing plant. ASK has been provided information regarding the consumption of purchased electricity being 31,575,000 kwh. Emission factors associated with consumption of purchased electricity are shown in Table 7.3. Table 7.3: Consumption of Purchased Electricity Emission Factors State, Territory or grid description Scope 2 Emission factor (kg CO2-e/kWh) Queensland GHG & Energy Summary The emission factors outlined in Section 7.2 have been used to estimate the greenhouse gas emissions for the life of the bulk sample project. Table 7.4 summarises the emissions expressed as kilo-tonnes of CO2 equivalent and energy expressed as terajoules (TJ). Valkyrie Page 22 of 51

24 Table 7.4: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Summary Year Source Type Quantity Prod. Year Total Liquid Fuel Purchased Electricity Coal Energy CO2-e kt Scope 1 Scope 2 Energy Energy Energy CO2-e Cons. Prod. Cons. kt TJ TJ TJ Diesel - Mobile kl 47,158 Diesel - Stationary kl 17.5 ANFO Diesel - Stationary 57.1 kl Energy Consumption TJ , Qld kwh 31,575,000 ROM Mt 4.05 Energy Production TJ 109,350 CO2-e kt Consumption TJ Production TJ 109,350 The Project as shown in Table 7.4 is estimated to consume annual maximum energy of TJ. Through the extraction of coal energy production is estimated to be 109,350 TJ. Project is expected to generate annual emissions of kt CO2-e (see Table 7.4). The annual maximum emissions represent a contribution of less than 0.12% to the reported QLD greenhouse gas emissions in 2007 (DCC, 2009a) and less than 0.04% of Australia s reported greenhouse emissions in 2008 (DCC, 2009b). Valkyrie Page 23 of 51

25 8 Conclusions ASK Consulting Engineers has undertaken an air quality and greenhouse gas assessment based on the latest proposed operation at the proposed Codrilla Coal Mine, Valkyrie. ASK has also addressed the issues raised by DERM regarding the previous EIS report prepared by ASK for Codrilla Coal mine and has implemented the recommendations from those comments into this addendum report accordingly. The air pollutant impacts from the project were assessed against typical DERM dust deposition guidelines and Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2008 goals with the following results: The predicted PM2.5 concentrations are within acceptable guidelines; The maximum 24hr average PM10 concentrations meet the acceptable guidelines at all locations except at receivers 3-Regalo, 4-Weamber, 5-Codrilla, 7-School & 8-School House; The 6 th Highest 24hr average PM10 concentrations meet the acceptable guidelines at all locations except at receivers 5-Codrilla, 7-School & 8-School House; The predicted TSP concentrations are within acceptable guidelines; and The predicted dust deposition rates are within acceptable guidelines. In addition to the above findings, a range of recommendations and mitigation options have been presented within Sections 5 and 6 of the report. Please contact the undersigned with any queries on Yours faithfully ASK Consulting Engineers Dave Claughton Project Engineer Valkyrie Page 24 of 51

26 9 References ACARP (1999), Fine Dust and the Implications for the Coal Industry, Report C7009. Department of Climate Change (2007), National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act Office of Legislative Drafting and Publishing, Attorney-General s Department, Canberra. Department of Climate Change (2008a), National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Regulations Office of Legislative Drafting and Publishing, Attorney-General s Department, Canberra. Department of Climate Change (2008b), National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Guidelines. Department of Climate Change, Canberra. Department of Climate Change (2008c), National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) Factors November Department of Climate Change, Canberra. Department of Climate Change (2009a), State and Territory Greenhouse Gas Inventories Department of Climate Change, Canberra. Department of Climate Change (2009b), National Greenhouse Gas Inventory accounting for the KYOTO target May Department of Climate Change, Canberra. Department of Climate Change (2010). National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting System Measurement Technical Guidelines for the estimation of greenhouse gas emissions by facilities in Australia, June 2010, Department of Climate Change, Canberra EPA (2007), Queensland 2007 air monitoring report. Queensland Environmental Protection Agency. EPA (2008), Environmental Protection Air Policy, Queensland Environmental Protection Agency. Environment Australia (1999), National Pollutant Inventory Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Fugitive Emissions. Environment Australia (2001), National Pollutant Inventory Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Mining Version 2.3. National Environmental Protection Council (NEPC) (2003). National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure, Attorney-General s Department, Canberra. Scire J, Strimaitis D, Yamartino R (2000a), A User s Guide for the CALPUFF Dispersion Model (Version 5). Earth Tech Inc., Concord. USEPA (1999), Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, EPA AP-42, Emission Factor and Inventory Group, 7th Ed. Valkyrie Page 25 of 51

27 Appendix A Proposed Mining Scenarios Valkyrie Page 26 of 51

28 East Pit Mining Progression Year 1

29 East Pit Mining Progression Year 6

30 West Pit Mining Progression Year 11

31 Appendix B Emission Estimates Emission rate estimation equations for significant dust generating activities are provided below. Transfer Points / Where: E = Emission factor k = Particle size multiplier (0.74 for TSP and 0.35 for PM10) U = Mean wind speed (m/s) M = Soil moisture content (%) Coal Loading by Shovel or Front End Loader Where: /. E = Emission factor k = Particle size multiplier (1.56 for TSP and 0.74 for PM10) M = Soil moisture content (%) Bulldozing Coal TSP /. PM /. Where: E = Emission factor s = Material silt content (%) M = Soil moisture content (%) Valkyrie Page 30 of 51

32 Bulldozing Overburden TSP 2.6. /. PM /. Where: E = Emission factor s = Material silt content (%) M = Soil moisture content (%) Drilling Emission rate factors of 0.59 kg/hole for TSP and 0.31 kg/hole for PM10 as outlined in the NPI emission estimation technique manual. Blasting Where: /. E = Emission factor A = Area blasted (m 2 ) M = Soil moisture content (%) D = Depth of the blast holes (m) Wheel Dust Generation from Unpaved Roads 12 3 / Where: E = Emission factor k = Constant (4.9 for TSP and 1.5 for PM10) a = Constant (0.7 for TSP and 0.9 for PM10) b = Constant (0.45 for TSP and 0.45 for PM10) s = Material silt content (%) W = mean vehicle weight (tons) Note lb/vmt was converted to kg/vkt by multiplying lb/vmt by Valkyrie Page 31 of 51

33 Use of Grader / Where: E = Emission factor k = Constant (2.5 for TSP and 2.0 for PM10) S = Mean Vehicle Speed (km/hr) Miscellaneous Transfer and Conveying Where: E = Emission factor k = Constant (0.74 for TSP and 0.35 for PM10) U = Mean wind speed (m/s) M = Material moisture content (%) / Wind Erosion from Active Stockpiles Where: / / 15 E = Emission factor k = Constant (0.74 for TSP and 0.35 for PM10) U = Mean wind speed (m/s) M = Material moisture content (%) Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2 Valkyrie Page 32 of 51

34 Appendix C Predicted Dust Contour Levels Valkyrie Page 33 of 51

35 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 34 of 18

36 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 35 of 51

37 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 36 of 51

38 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 37 of 51

39 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 38 of 51

40 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 39 of 51

41 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 40 of 51

42 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 41 of 51

43 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 42 of 51

44 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 43 of 51

45 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 44 of 51

46 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 45 of 51

47 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 46 of 51

48 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 47 of 51

49 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 48 of 51

50 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 49 of 51

51 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 50 of 51

52 Codrilla Coal Mine Project - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment - Addendum Report 5843R02V01_draft2.docx Valkyrie Page 51 of 51