We received the following information from SOLARRESERVE:

Transcription

1 Olievenhoutbosch Solar Photovoltaic Facility Avifaunal review 20 September Introduction This project consists of a Solar Photovoltaic facility in Olievenhoutbosch south-west of Centurion in Gauteng Province. This project has already obtained Environmental Authorisation but now needs an amendment to include the solar photovoltaic component in the project description. SOLARRESERVE appointed WildSkies Ecological Services to review the work done to date and avifaunal risks at the site. SOLARRESERVE informed WildSkies that the solar power generation proposed does not trigger a listed activity in the EIA Regulations as it is below the generation capacity threshold. Our understanding is that this conclusion was made on the basis that the proposed generation capacity is <10MW and although >1ha it consists of PV panels and is in an urban area (EIA Regulations amendment April listed Activities). We received the following information from SOLARRESERVE: 1. KMZ file of site outline 2. Floral & Faunal Ecological Assessment (Scientific Aquatic Services 2015) 3. Pdf map of project layout 4. Jpeg map of site outline and grid connection (see Figure 1) 5. Olievenhoutbosch project description

2 Figure 1. Site outline & route of grid connection. The project will consist of the following: o The Olievenhoutsbosch Project will have a contracted capacity of 8.00MW AC o The Olievenhoutsbosch Project and associated infrastructure will be located on the Part of the Remainder of Portion 2 of the Farm Olievenhoutsbosch 389 JR (District of Tshwane) with a total size of ha. The project will be constructed on a smaller, ha portion leased area cut out of the Olievenhoutsbosch farm. o PV array comprising of the photovoltaic modules/panels, mounting structures and associated balance of system (tracking/fixed hardware, protection systems i.e. masts and electronica); o Vanadium flow batteries housed in 40 ft. containers consisting of cell stacks and vanadium electrolyte contained in tanks with all associated balance of plant (piping, pumps, and control equipment). o Inverters, transformers and switchgear with battery storage; o An on-site substation consisting of a 40ft container split with Project and City of Tshwane equipment in each respective section of the substation. 11KV cable from City of Tshwane (USF on-site) substation to Olievenhoutsbosch substation connecting into City of Tshwane s 11KV; o Cabling between the project components; o Prefabricated housing for administration offices, security and guard houses, maintenance and storage; o Temporary man-camp; o Temporary laydown areas;

3 o Raw water tank; o Project primary and/or secondary access road/s, associated access point/s, internal distribution roads and crossings; and o Fencing and perimeter security system around the project development footprint, and all other necessary related infrastructure. o Buried 11kV power line of approximately 1km 2. Methods We reviewed the available documentation to assess the risk to avifauna at the site. In addition to the information supplied by SOLARRESERVE we consulted the following; the First and Second Southern African Bird Atlas Projects data for the area ( the Important Bird & Biodiversity Area data (Marnewick et al, 2015); Google Earth imagery; and Birds & Solar Energy: Guidelines for assessing and monitoring the impact of solar power generating facilities on birds in southern Africa by BirdLife South Africa. 3. Findings Key findings of the Faunal Assessment and Floral & Faunal Assessment (Scientific Aquatic Services 2015) relevant to avifauna are as follows: o No other sensitive faunal or floral species are expected to occur in these areas, mainly due to significant habitat transformation. As a result it is doubtful that this habitat unit, in its present ecological state will provide suitable refuge for a great diversity of faunal species or habitat for floral species. Therefore, the transformed grassland habitat unit has a low conservation importance and the proposed development will not have a significant impact on the Egoli Granite Grassland vegetation type o No threatened RDL avifaunal species were identified during the site survey. It is highly unlikely that the development will have any significant impact on avifaunal SCC along the proposed route or within the surrounding areas, mainly due to the lack of suitable speciesspecific habitat, but also due to the historical and present anthropogenic disturbances. o Although the study area contains habitat that may be capable of supporting Tyto capensis (African Grass Owl), Falco naumanni (Lesser Kestrel), Eupodotis senegalensis (White-bellied Korhaan), Polemaetus bellicosus (Martial Eagle), Sagittarius serpentarius (Secretarybird), and Ciconia nigra (Black Stork) the levels of disturbance and anthropogenic activities will most likely preclude these species from the area.

4 o The likelihood of these species utilising the area for foraging is relatively low because no sightings have been recorded for the area in SABAP 2. o It is highly unlikely that the development will have any significant impact on avifaunal SCC or within the surrounding areas, mainly due to the lack of suitable species-specific habitat, but also due to the historical and present anthropogenic disturbances. o Two channelled valley bottom wetland systems were identified within the study area, namely a tributary to the Rietspruit and the Rietspruit itself. The wetlands have been transformed by historic agriculture, quarries, urban development and alien floral invasion, resulting in severe topographic, geomorphological, hydrological and vegetation alteration. Although transformed, the wetland features in their present state still provide habitat for various wetland floral and faunal species as well as migratory corridors for more mobile faunal species. o In terms of conservation value of the channelled valley bottom wetlands, the moderate ecological functionality and the fact that the wetlands provide habitat for faunal and floral species and are connected to a larger system, thus providing migratory connectivity, increase the conservation importance of these features. In terms of floral SCC, none were encountered, however the possibility exists that certain floral SCC may occur within the wetland habitat unit, further increasing the sensitivity of these features. If the wetlands are effectively rehabilitated and incorporated into the layout of the proposed development, their habitat integrity and ecological service provision potential can be increased. o Most of the site is classified as an ESA, with a small portion CBA. (Gauteng Conservation Plan C-Plan v ). ESAs are required to be maintained in an ecologically functional state to support Critical Biodiversity Areas and/or Protected Areas. o The site falls outside of any Important Bird Areas, the closest being 5.8km north-west of site. o A sensitivity map was prepared which identified the only high sensitivity areas as being off the current proposed site to the east and south-east. Our own desktop based findings: o The proposed site is not in an Important Bird & Biodiversity Area (Marnewick et al, 2015), the closest being approximately 6km north-west of site. o Approximately 345 bird species have been recorded in the broader area within which this site is located by the First and Second Southern African Bird Atlas Project Of these 18 species are Red Listed. This does not mean that all these species utilise the proposed site, but they could possibly occur there if conditions are right. o Key species amongst those Red Listed which could utilise the proposed site, if habitat were in suitable condition, include: White-bellied Korhaan Eupodotis senegalensis; African Grass-Owl Tyto capensis; and Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus.

5 o Our judgement is that the habitat on and near site is too impacted already to sustain populations of these species. Since Lanner Falcon can range widely it could occasionally visit the site, although the site is unlikely to be important for its survival. o Although this report is not a full specialist study we feel it important for the project to comply with the GDARD requirements for Biodiversity Assessments Version 3 which state: o The SOC (Specialist Ornithological Consultant) must determine whether the proposed development site falls within the known or expected distribution of any of the following Red List bird species prioritized by GDARD:- Cape Vulture, Blue Crane, Lesser Kestrel, African Grass-Owl, African Marsh-Harrier, White-backed Night-Heron, White-bellied Korhaan, Martial Eagle, African Finfoot, Lesser Flamingo, Secretarybird, Black Stork, Half-collared Kingfisher and Greater Flamingo. o The SOC must determine whether suitable habitat occurs on the proposed development site or neighbouring properties for those priority Red List species whose distribution overlaps with the proposed development site. o Where distribution and habitat availability suggest a high probability of one or more priority Red List bird species occurring on site, the SOC must map suitable habitat (see Sensitivity Mapping rules for Biodiversity Assessments (spatial rules for birds) and indicate the number of individuals/pairs that could potentially be supported, given that it is unlikely that all birds will be located during a limited survey. o As described above, we conclude that there is a very low likelihood of any of these priority species occurring on site. We conclude that there is no need for a full avifaunal specialist study in terms of GDARD requirements. o The BirdLife SA Guidelines state: These guidelines are aimed at all SEFs that require environmental authorisation for electricity generation. These guidelines are not intended for small-scale, distributed solar facilities. Reading this in conjunction with the conclusion in Section 1 that environmental authorisation for the proposed solar generation is not needed, we conclude that this project does not need to comply with the BirdLife Guidelines. 4. Conclusion We conclude that the proposed site is severely degraded and does not offer suitable habitat to any Red Listed or otherwise priority bird species. We do not believe it necessary to conduct a full avifaunal impact assessment for this site. Since the grid connection power line will be buried there is no need for any avifaunal mitigation measures on that.

6 5. References GDARD GDARD Requirements for Biodiversity Assessments Version 3. GDARD Technical Report for the Gauteng Conservation Plan (Gauteng C-Plan v3.3). Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development: Nature Conservation Directorate. 60 pages. Jenkins, A.R., Ralston-Paton, S., & Smit-Robinson, H Best Practice Guidelines: Birds and Solar Energy: Guidelines for assessing and monitoring the impact of solar power generating facilities on birds in southern Africa. Marnewick MD, Retief EF, Theron NT, Wright DR, Anderson TA Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas of South Africa. Johannesburg: BirdLife South Africa. Scientific Aquatic Services Floral and Faunal Ecological Assessment as part of the Environmental Assessment and Authorisation process for the proposed development of the Samrand Pahse 3 Township on the Remainder of Portion 2 of the Farm Olievenhoutbosch No. 389-JR, Gauteng Province.