2017年-世界发展银行全球_Tafila_Region_Wind_Power_Projects___Cumulative_Effects_Assessment_200页_3mb

Tafila Region Wind Power Projects Cumulative Effects Assessment Summary

Core Content

This document outlines the Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) conducted for the Tafila Region Wind Power Projects (TRWPPs) in Jordan. The CEA was initiated by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to promote sustainable wind energy investments by identifying and managing the highest environmental and social risks, particularly those affecting biodiversity. The assessment was the first of its kind in the Eastern Europe, Middle East, and North Africa (EEA) region, and it was carried out through IFC's Enhanced Client Support Program, involving collaboration between developers, conservation organizations, government agencies, and international experts.

Main Objectives

• To identify the potential cumulative effects of the TRWPPs on biodiversity in the study area.
• To propose mitigation, monitoring, and management measures to address the highest risks.
• To develop a six-step CEA framework that can be applied to other renewable energy projects in the region.

Key Information

Study Area and Scope

• The CEA study area is located approximately 200 km south of Amman, primarily within the Tafila Governorate.
• It includes the Dana Biosphere Reserve (BR) and the Dana Important Bird and Biodiversity Area (IBA), which are of national and international significance.
• The temporal scope of the assessment covers three years from the start of operations at each wind power project (WPP).

Identified Valued Environmental and Social Components (VECs)

• Birds: 13 priority VECs were identified, including 11 raptors and 2 passerine species.
  • Raptors: Steppe Eagle, Egyptian Vulture, Eastern Imperial Eagle, Booted Eagle, Short-toed Snake-eagle, Griffon Vulture, Golden Eagle, Verreaux's Eagle, Bonelli's Eagle, Long-legged Buzzard, and Lesser Kestrel.
  • Passerines: Syrian Serin and Eurasian Goldfinch.
• Bats: 2 priority VECs were identified: Desert Pipistrelle and Ruppell's Pipistrelle.
• Habitats and Other Species: Four habitat types and four other species were initially considered, but only Thorny Salt Brush was found to have a minor risk from WPPs, and thus no habitats were identified as priority VECs.

CEA Framework and Process

• A six-step CEA framework was developed for birds, involving:

  1. Species Population List: Identified species populations at risk.
  2. Species Sensitivity: Evaluated relative importance and vulnerability.
  3. Likelihood of Effect (LoE): Assessed the probability of cumulative effects on each species.
  4. Fatality Threshold Setting: Determined thresholds based on demographic data, CRM results, and ERP estimates.
  5. Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP): Created site-specific and joint measures.
  6. Institutional Arrangements: Proposed arrangements for data management and collaboration.

• A 3-step framework was used for bats and habitats, focusing on monitoring and management due to limited data on population size and status.

Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

• Project-specific on-site measures: Include post-construction flight activity monitoring, turbine-specific shutdown protocols, and carcass searches.
• Inter-site monitoring: Facilitates data sharing and allows for a broader assessment of cumulative impacts.
• Joint management plans: Focus on priority bird VECs and involve collaboration between developers and authorities.
• Adaptive management: Responds to scenarios such as exceeded thresholds, near-miss incidents, and changes in ecological conditions.
• Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) fund: Recommended to support biodiversity offset initiatives if needed.

Collaboration and Support

• The CEA was supported by multidisciplinary experts from Jordan and the UK, including ECO Consult, Natural Research Projects Ltd (NRP), and Claverton Associates Ltd.
• The Advisory Committee and Expert Review Panel (ERP) provided critical input, particularly on bird and bat populations and habitat conservation.
• Developers contributed project-specific bird survey data, which was essential for the CEA process.

Conclusion

The CEA provides a comprehensive and innovative approach to managing the cumulative environmental and social impacts of wind power projects in Jordan. It emphasizes the need for collaboration, data sharing, and adaptive management to ensure that renewable energy development aligns with biodiversity conservation goals. The methodology and framework developed can be applied to other renewable energy projects in middle-income and developing countries, especially where regional biodiversity data are limited. The recommendations are in line with IFC's Performance Standards and international environmental and social standards, and they aim to support the long-term sustainability of wind energy investments in Jordan and the broader region.