PPC MAY 2011

PPC propose to replace large sections of the existing plant over the next three years creating a factory which can produce 40% more cement (green- new equipment; red- old equipment which is being removed off-site).

PPC have withdrawn their application to build a large factory on a new site at Ongegund. However they still need to do something with the existing plant which is old and is reaching the end of its life. Additionally it cannot be modified to meet new regulations which come into force in 2015.

So PPC propose to replace large sections of the existing plant over the next three years creating a factory which can produce 40% more cement but only employing about the same number of workers as at present. To achieve this up to 800 construction workers (at any one time) will be employed.

Before they can start, an environmental impact assessment (EIA) has to be prepared and approved. And before this can be done a scoping report has to be written. The scoping report covers the questions that must be answered in the environmental impact assessment some of which is carried out by specialist consultants. This is the stage reached at the moment. PPC have appointed Aurecon (who work as independently) as lead consultants to carry out this work.

Aurecon are at present preparing the final scoping report which will be issued for public comment in due course. Once this is approved by DEA&DP the EIA will commence. When finished, the draft will be made available for public comment. Amendments will then be made as necessary and the final EIA submitted to DEA&DP who will then make a decision on whether the project should go ahead. This process is likely to take until the end of the year. It is important to note that the public has the opportunity to comment at each stage of the process. It is even possible to appeal at the end of the process against any decisions made by DEA&DP.

So what are the main areas of concern? We list below some of the issues that have been identified by local groups such as the Riebeek Valley Environmental Forum. A lot of these have been covered in the draft scoping report but even if they have, there may be aspects on which you may wish to comment.

Accommodation during the construction phase

It is likely that many low/unskilled workers will be employed locally. Managers can probably be accommodated in hotels, self catering units or whatever. But what about the rest? It is important to note that most workers will not be employed for the entire construction period. Many will come in, complete a job over a month or so, and then leave.

Transport

An increase in production of 40% means that 40% more material has to be shifted in and out. PPC have said that traffic through the villages will not exceed 2007 levels. Any surplus will be routed north on the R311 and onto the N7. PPC’s last application triggered a local road survey (published in September 2010) which makes interesting reading (it is included as an annexure to the draft scoping report). The following points are made:

The R311 carries about 1000 vehicles a day of which 15-20% are heavy vehicles. Current growth rate is 6-7% per annum. The road has the capacity to carry more traffic but this will be increasingly environmentally damaging given the road’s route through Riebeek West and Riebeek Kasteel.
35% - 40% of the heavy traffic is generated by PPC
The report says: “There is a real need for bulk manufacturers such as PPC to be able to use rail services but costs and reliability of the service often result in road freight being used.” Although PPC are investigating the possibility of expanding their Montague Gardens rail depot evidence suggests that dealing with Transnet can be very difficult. Indeed one gets the impression that Transnet would be much happier if all their customers simply vanished!
Speed and noise calming measures should be implemented on the R311 where the road passes through Riebeek West and Riebeek Kasteel. Ongegund – not mentioned in the report - should be included.

Additionally sand is at present transported by road from Piketberg. In future supplies may be sourced from land bordering the Berg River. If this happens heavy trucks will use the dirt road which runs from Gouda to Riebeek West.

Electricity

The new factory will require more electricity. Eskom will need to build a new sub-station. This is not included in the draft scoping report since we are told that this is Eskom’s responsibility. If this new sub-station needs an EIA it should be conducted in conjunction with PPC’s application.

Visual impact

There are two areas of concern – the tower and new overburden dumps. The existing chimneys are 76 metres high. These will be removed. In their place will be a tower between 80 and 90 metres high (see illustration at beginning of this article). Additionally new overburden dumps will be created (see below). Ongegund is to the right of the picture with the R311 between the housing estate and the dump. The rugby pitch will be left intact. The Vlakkerug dump (towards top of picture) may vary in size. The dump can be relatively small but high. This will create slopes of 1 in 5 which would mean that it could not be used for agriculture after rehabilitation. On the other hand it could cover a greater area in which case it will be lower and the slopes will be less precipitous and it could be used for wheat. It is important that visual impact is measured from all angles including the Hermon- Tulbagh road.

Noise

The noise study must to take into account the rural nature of the Valley (urban levels are unacceptable). This noise study must cover the possibility of sand trucks from Gouda. The previous noise report concentrated on loudness (if that is the right word!) while failing to take account of the fact that repetitive noise at much lower decibel levels can be equally, if not more, disturbing. Patrick Kane of the Riebeek Valley Environmental Forum mentions reversing beepers on the dump trucks as an example (where the noise pollution could continue from 6am until 10pm).