10.07.2015 Views

FEIR for Boitshepi Landfill Site .pdf - Zitholele.co.za

FEIR for Boitshepi Landfill Site .pdf - Zitholele.co.za

FEIR for Boitshepi Landfill Site .pdf - Zitholele.co.za

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

August 2010 428848Alternative 1In the case of alternative 1, where there will be no buffer zone, the surrounding land userswill be highly affected and there will be a significant impact as a result of the activities, asthere will be no distance between the <strong>co</strong>mmunity and the waste disposal site. The site willhave an additional 3,221,113 m³ of airspace available with an additional estimated lifespanof approximately 8 years.Alternative 2In the case of Alternative 2, where there will be 50 meter buffer zone, the site would gain anextra 2,576,113 m³ of airspace and have an additional lifespan of approximately 6-7 years.Although the GDARD has approved the SR and PoS based on alternative 3, after careful<strong>co</strong>nsideration, <strong>Zitholele</strong> Consulting and the appointed specialists <strong>for</strong> the project <strong>co</strong>llectivelysee alternative 2 as the most feasible (socially, e<strong>co</strong>nomically and environmentally) andpreferred option.Alternative 3If the extension of the waste disposal site footprint is the 100 metre buffer zone, the<strong>co</strong>mmunity would be less impacted on <strong>co</strong>mpared to a 0 m buffer zone. An addition of710,475 m³ airspace would be available and the expected additional life of the waste wouldbe approximately 1-2 years. A letter of approval of the SR and the PoS has been receivedfrom the GDARD. The report has been approved based on this alternative as the preferredalternative. This alternative is no longer feasible as it would not ac<strong>co</strong>mmodate the disposalneeds in the area until the <strong>co</strong>mmissioning of the new site.Refer to Appendix D4 <strong>for</strong> the airspace calculations <strong>for</strong> all the a<strong>for</strong>ementioned alternatives.6.3 The No Go AlternativeIn the case that none of the three design alternatives is suitable <strong>for</strong> the proposed extensionof the <strong>Boitshepi</strong> Waste Disposal <strong>Site</strong>, the re<strong>co</strong>mmendation would be that a new wastedisposal site be <strong>co</strong>nstructed immediately as there will be no further airspace available <strong>for</strong> thedisposal of waste in the region. However, the site will still require a closure waste license interms of the NEM:WA, 2008. It is a Listed Activity 20 in GN. No. 718, and falls withinCategory “A” of the Schedule.As described in detail in the S<strong>co</strong>ping Report, the <strong>Boitshepi</strong> Disposal <strong>Site</strong> is currentlyoperating without a waste license. It is currently accepting urban and industrial waste. Thereis a huge demand <strong>for</strong> the <strong>Boitshepi</strong> Waste Disposal <strong>Site</strong> extension as that would mean moreairspace <strong>for</strong> disposing of the waste, and there<strong>for</strong>e more lifespan to <strong>co</strong>ntinue disposing. The‘no-go’ alternative is likely to result in the needs <strong>for</strong> extension not being met, with<strong>co</strong>n<strong>co</strong>mitant potentially significant impacts from an e<strong>co</strong>nomic and social perspective <strong>for</strong> siteusers. The site cannot be closed until a new site has been authorised and licensed to meetthe waste disposal needs <strong>for</strong> the area. Consultants have been appointed to site, obtain EA,design, establish and license a new GLB+ waste disposal site in ELM. Once operational, thisnew site will replace the <strong>Boitshepi</strong> Waste Disposal <strong>Site</strong>.ZITHOLELE CONSULTING

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!