Impact Assessment and Onshore Pipelines Imogen Crawford.

Impact AssessmentImpact Assessmentand Onshore Pipelinesand Onshore Pipelines

Imogen CrawfordImogen Crawford

Proposition

• EIA as it stands is not effective

• EIA doomed to failure in some legal systems

Qualified:• EIA as it relates to Construction of Onshore Pipelines• Not necessarily the same in other contexts

Onshore Pipelines

• Cross country for 100’s of KilometresCross country for 100’s of Kilometres• Approx 50m wide cleared stripApprox 50m wide cleared strip• Many different habitatsMany different habitats• Seasonal constraints - hibernation, salmon runSeasonal constraints - hibernation, salmon run• Habitat fragmentation and barrier to species Habitat fragmentation and barrier to species

movementmovement• Barrier to stock movementBarrier to stock movement• Social impactsSocial impacts – traffic, camps in traditional – traffic, camps in traditional

villagesvillages

Onshore Pipelines

• Tight control difficult with many work Tight control difficult with many work fronts and equipment movementfronts and equipment movement

• Pipelaying is fast moving and multifacetedPipelaying is fast moving and multifaceted

• BUT – it can be put back together:BUT – it can be put back together:

• Reinstatement starts at the beginningReinstatement starts at the beginning

Environmental Impact Assessmentessential but………

• EIAs are written at early conceptual stage

• Purpose - for the approval process

• Of necessity, generic in scope

• Often with no/minimal field visit

• A ‘one off’ piece of work

• Package of specialist reports, not synthesised

• Produced by ‘experts’, so not critically reviewed by other parties

Environmental Impact Assessment..falling short

• A ‘finshed’ piece of work• Disconnected from Construction phase• Often stalls at this point, now legal requirement

satisfiedUnless…• A company’s Environmental Management System

continues the concept as a processOr• It is driven on by stakeholder interest, like Lending

Banks

Environmental Impact Assessmentin the real world

Next stage is a process and the most exciting….

Identification – Mitigation – Monitoring – Review

It is:• Job specific• Location specific• Participatory, involving other, non environmental

professionals• Dynamic, ongoing and integrated process• A Training tool for Environmental Awareness

Impact RegisterRECEPTOR RECEPTOR

ACTIVITY/ SOURCE

IMPACT

Air

Water

Land

Wildlife

Resources

Community

PREVENTION, CONTROL AND MITIGATION MEASURES

RESIDUAL IMPACT AND RISK

Air

Water

Land

Wildlife

Resources

Community

RoW land clearance and trench excavation

Destruction of existing ecology for length and width of RoW. Vegetation cover removed Watercourses disrupted Potential to impact on unrecorded sensitive locations/species (eg rare species, archaeological sites) Habitat fragmentation. Impassable corridor created for some species. Bat flight paths disrupted, exposure for small animals and increased predation. Wetland degradation. Change in surface water chemistry. Barrier to traditional migratory routes. Noise and disturbance impact on hibernating animals. Disruption to local land management, herding routes, access to fields. Open trench a hazard for animals and people Increased dust and emissions into virgin areas Disturbance from people and vehicles through lifetime of project. Previously isolated areas opened up for hunting, poaching, tree cutting

Design and Pre-Condition Careful route selection imperative. Line walking to conduct baseline surveys and final tweaking of route essential prior to RoW preparation. Establish location of sensitive areas and design appropriate mitigation measures. Reduce footprint as much as possible. Hardware Fences as extra protection for adjacent sensitive locations and information signs. Temporary erosion control measures and watercourse protection. Trench open minimal time. Management Provision and implementation of detailed documentation and Procedures which establish the required mitigation measures. Behaviour Strict adherence and implementation on site to Procedures and awareness of wildlife sensitivities, especially during critical phases – nesting/ hibernating. Awareness training given regularly. No encroachment off RoW. Offsets Explore potential for habitat creation and compensatory planting schemes.

RoW ecology changed permanently in forest areas as no tree planting allowed over pipe. Change in land use need not necessarily be detrimental as pasture and forest edge can be more biodiverse than forest. Negligible impact for farmers after reinstatement. Negligible landform change if ground stabilisation achieved during reinstatement

Legislative Context

• EIA developed within European legal system

• Integrated Environmental Management

• Ease of process implementation dependant on legal context

Legislative ContextIn natural environment contexteg English Law is:• Focussed on damage avoidance• Choice of mitigation measures at the time of impact• Uses the concept of IEM and ‘Best Practice’

eg Russian Law is:• Based on compensatory system, pre-supposes damage• Prescriptive, rigid and and • Set limits and payments rather than preventive

mitigation• Mitigation likely to be inappropriate, but locked into

the Permit/License to operate

Legislative Context

In Russia EIA is impossible to implement

• Command and control ethos• Compensation for damage pre-paid• Inflexible and rigid mind set• Generic approach, denying the specific

And of course,• Compensation system – suits

large companies

Discussion Points

• Has the EIA stalled in practice?

• Does the success of an EIA process depend on its legislative context?