Download Power Development and Nature Conservation

Power Development and Nature
Conservation-Two scenarios
Gabriel Wetangula☨1,2
&
Joseph Ajayi‡1
Faculty of Science, University of Iceland1
Olkaria Geothermal Power Project, Naivasha, Kenya2
Email: [email protected]‡, [email protected]☨
Contents

Part I: Geothermal power development,
nature
conservation and tourism Hell’s Gate National Park, Olkaria,
Kenya

Part II: Environmental impacts of large
hydropower dams
Introduction: Olkaria geothermal area








Olkaria geothermal resource is located on the southern side of Lake
Naivasha, Kenya
The resource currently supports an existing 45 MWe power station
(Olkaria I), commissioned in 1980.
Important factor in EIA studies is existence of Hell's Gate National
Park, established in 1984
The park encloses Olkaia I power station (45 Mwe), new power station
(Olkaria II – 64 MWe), Olkaria III (currently 12 Mwe, but 64 Mwe at
fully commissioning) developed by OrPower4 Inc. an IPP
Land uses: livestock grazing, growing of foodstuffs and cutflowers for
export, conservation of wildlife within and around the Park, generation
of electricity
Environmental management:a vital component in geothermal resource
development.
KenGen, in its endeavour to comply with national, international
environmental laws/regulations, standards and global environmental
challenges, established a fully-fledged environmental section in 1985.
Tasks: monitoring environmental impacts, erosion control, sites
rehabilitation, monitoring of micro-climatic changes and pollution
Current & future power developments in the area
Olkaria I~45MWe
Olkaria III-12 ~ 64MWe
Olkaria II~64MWe
Proposed Olkaria IV
Hell’s gate National Park establishment



Hell's Gate and Longonot National Parks were
gazetted in 1984, 3years after Olkaria I Power Station
commissioned
Major constraints: management of the operation of
the power stations and the park
A (EIA) study based on the World Bank operational
directive 4.0 for the development of Olkaria II,
concluded feasibility of the within Hell's Gate Park.



The above EIA resulted in KenGen and Kenya Wildlife Service
(KWS) signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 1994
which outlines the harmonious operations of the two parties for
the mutual benefit of the country.
Envisaged environmental impacts and mitigation measures to be
undertaken that require collaboration between the two entities
to ensure no conflicts arise during operations are clearly stated in
the agreement.
MoU document is always attached to the tender document for
geothermal projects to inform contractors of the environmental
obligations within the Park.
Geographical location of the park
Park lies between longitudes 36 15´ and 36
25` E and latitude 0 50` S and 0 55` S
 Mau escarpment and Eburru
mountains(west), Mt. Longonot (southeast)
and Lake Naivasha (north)
 It is surrounded by private ranches; Kedong
(341.25 km2) & Kongoni (76.78 km2).

Map Hell´s gate National Park, Olkaria, Kenya
Park characteristics
Mean annual rainfall 625-697mm
 Mean monthly maximum temp. 21- 29 C
 Minimum temp.11-15C
 Landscape not uniform –plains, hilly areas & cliffs
 Cliffs-breeding & nesting grounds for various bird
species (verreaux’s eagles, Ruppell’s vulture and the
rare lammergeyer (bearded vultures).
 No significant surface water in the park thus
establishment of watering points for use by wildlife

Fauna in the park and adjacent areas
Rock hyrax
Topi
Zebras
Leopard
Warthog
Antelope
African jackal
Hyena
Thomson’s gazelle
Buffaloes
Zebras
Giraffee
Waterbuck
Baboon
Avifauna in the park and around the lake
White pelicans
Ostrich
White stork
Grey heron
African jacan
Hemakop
Fish eagle
Rupell vulture
Fly catcher
Twany eagle
Bearded vulture
Yellow billed stork
Other attractions
Steaming grounds
Rocky cliffs-hiking
1st geo plant in Africa Olk I
Olkaria hill + steam jet
Fischer´s tower
crater
Power company involvement in nature
conservation and tourism development in the
park
Development of road in the park
Kaffee (staff & tourists)
Waste management
Park rehabilitation
Soil erosion control
Wildlife pop. studies
Establish watering points
Day to day consultation between the
stakeholders in the area
Wildlife population studies




Wildlife conservation; a key environmental
management component in geothermal power
development
In an attempt to harmonize different resource
use in the area,the two entities and other
stakeholders have pursued knowledge on
wildlife population in the area
The knowledge-fundamental to successful
management and conservation of wildlife
Achieved by gathering data on wildlife
population dynamics area through a joint
quarterly wildlife census.
Wildlife populations of selected wildlife spp in 1st
quarter census
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
C.hartebeest
Waterbuck
Warthog
Giraffe
Buffalo
G.gazelle
Population numbers
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Jan.'99
Jan.'00
Jan.01
Wildlife populations of selected wildlife spp in
2nd quarter census
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
C.hartebeest
Waterbuck
Warthog
Giraffe
March.'97
March.'98
Buffalo
G.gazelle
Population numbers
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
March.'96
April.'99
April.'00
April.'01
Wildlife populations of selected wildlife spp in
4th quarter census
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
Buffalo
C.hartebeest
Waterbuck
Warthog
Giraffe
G.gazelle
Population numbers
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Sept.'96
Oct.'99
Sept.'00
Sept.'01
Figure Kedong ranch March/April wildlife
population census
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
C.hartebeest
Waterbuck
Warthog
Giraffe
Buffalo
G.gazelle
Population numbers
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
March.'96
March.'97
March.'98
April.'99
April.'00
Population numbers
Figure Kongoni sanctuary March wildlife census
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
C.hartebeest
Waterbuck
Warthog
Giraffe
Buffalo
G.gazelle
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
March.'96
March.'97
March.'98
April.'99
April.'00
Figure Wildlife population density Hell's Gate
National Park
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
G.gazelle
C.hartebeest
Warthog
Giraffe
Buffalo
12
8
6
4
2
Time
Sept.'01
Apr.'01
Jan.'01
Sept.'00
Apr.'00
Jan.'00
Oct.'99
Apr.'99
Jan.'99
Mar.'98
Mar.'97
Sept.'96
0
Mar'96
Density-per sq.km
10
Figure Wildlife population densities in Kedong
cattle ranch
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
G.gazelle
C.hartebeest
Warthog
Giraffe
Buffalo
16
Density-per sq.km
14
Area=341.25km
2
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Mar'96
Sept.'96
Mar.'97
Mar.'98
Time
Apr.'99
Apr.'00
Jan.'01
Figure Wildlife population densities in Kongoni
game sanctuary
Zebra
T.gazelle
Impalla
Eland
G.gazelle
C.hartebeest
Warthog
Giraffe
Buffalo
18
Density (per sq. km)
16
Area=76.8km
2
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Mar.'96
Sept.'96
Mar.'97
Mar.'98
Apr.'99
Time
Apr.'00
Sept.'00
Jan.'01
Environmental management aspects
Surface disturbance-rehabilitation and afforestation
 Noise monitoring
 Solid waste management
 Wildlife population studies
 Chemical discharge monitoring (wastewater, trace
elements, gases)
 Gravity and Seismicity studies

Other geothermal power plants in popular tourist
resorts worldwide
Zunil, Guatemala
Fang, Thailand
Rotorua (NZ)
Introduction
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
OF LARGE DAMS
Ecosystem impact can be classified into 3 orders
1. Physical, chemical and geomorphological effects of
river blockage & alteration of natural distribution
and timing of stream flow
2. Changes in primary productivity of ecosystems i.e.
effects on riverine plant life, down stream habitat
e.g. wetlands.
3. Alterations of fauna (e.g. fish ) caused by 1st
impact( blocking migration) or 2nd impact (⇓
availability of plankton)


Impacts
Modified ecosystems⇒ changes the biochemical cycle
in the natural riverine system.
Interrupted flow of OC ⇒Emissions of GHGs gases (
CH3, CO2) ⇉Climate change
Environmental Impacts
Terrestrial Ecosystems and Biodiversity.
•Construction & inundation of the reservoir destrys fauna &
flora
•Impoundment eliminate unique wildlife habitats & affect
populations of endangered spp
•Flooding a reservoir⇒ clearing of upstream catchment areas,
habitat loss, elimination of flora and fauna, land degradation
& alterations in hydrologic function.
•Loss of vegetative cover ⇒ ⇑ in sedimentation, storm flow,
annual water yield, ⇓ in water quality
Impacts
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions



Arise from reservoirs
due to rotting
vegetation and carbon
inflow from the
catchment
Estimated gross global
emissions 1% -28%
All reservoirs not only
hydropower reservoirs
emit GHGs
Fig. GHG emission from reservoir (WCD, 2000)
impacts
Downstream Aquatic Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Alter natural distribution & timing of stream flow
 Compromises dynamic aspects of rivers that maintain the
character of aquatic ecosystems
 Natural rivers, their habitats and species are a function of the
flow.
 Introduction of non-native species, modified water quality
(temperature, oxygen, nutrients), loss of system dynamics, and
loss of the ability to maintain continuity of an ecosystem

Impacts of changes in flow regimes.
•Flow regime is factor for downstream aquatic ecosystems.
•Flood timing, duration and frequency are all critical for the survival of
communities of plants and animals living downstream.
–Small flood are biological triggers for fish and invertebrates
migration
impacts


Water temperature and chemistry are altered by storage
Algal growth due to nutrient loading of the reservoir releases
Fig. Modification of flow regime due to hydropower dam, Colorado River,
USA (WCD, 2000)
impacts
Impacts of trapping sediments and nutrients



Impacts on channel, floodplain, coastal delta morphology, loss
of aquatic habitat for fish & other species
Degradation of the river channel below the facility⇒
elimination backwaters that provide native fish habitat;
elimination of riparian vegetation that provides nutrients and
habitat for aquatic animals
Changes river water turbidity may affect biota directly
Blocking migration of aquatic organisms
•Disrupts the movement of species thus changes in
up/downstream species composition & species loss.
•Impeding the passage of migratory fish species
–Anadroumous (eel)
–Catadromuous (salmon)
Floodplain Ecosystems
impacts

Reduced flooding affects the natural productivity of riparian
areas, floodplains and deltas.

Control of floodwaters⇒discontinuity in river system with
impact on fish diversity & productivity

Other impacts are: loss of silt and nutrient replenishment;
reductions in bird species; reduction in groundwater recharge in
floodplain
Bujagali Hydroelectric Project controversy
A Message from H.E. Edith Ssempala, Ugandan
Ambassador to the United States
"A viable industrial base, modern communications
and well-equipped hospitals are the norm in the
United States, but in many parts of Uganda such
things are considered luxuries. In many of our
towns and villages, children are taught by
candlelight, workers are paid by the penny, and
patients have access to only the most basic of
medical care ..." http://www.bujagali.com
Which way? Nature,
Power or both but
harmonious!
Links

http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/energy/geothermal/cas
e_studies.htm
 http://www.dams.org