1 / 15

Jericho Project

Jericho Project. Air Quality Assessment. TOPICS. METHODOLOGY EMISSION SOURCES RESULTS AND ASSESSMENT MITIGATION AND MONITORING CONCLUSION. METHODOLOGY. CLIMATOLOGY METEOROLOGY MODEL SELECTION MODELLING PROTOCOL. CLIMATOLOGY METEOROLOGY.

avalbane-dargan
Download Presentation

Jericho Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Jericho Project Air Quality Assessment

  2. TOPICS • METHODOLOGY • EMISSION SOURCES • RESULTS AND ASSESSMENT • MITIGATION AND MONITORING • CONCLUSION

  3. METHODOLOGY • CLIMATOLOGY • METEOROLOGY • MODEL SELECTION • MODELLING PROTOCOL

  4. CLIMATOLOGY METEOROLOGY • Cloud cover & ceiling measured during daytime at Lupin • Wind & temperature recorded at the Jericho site • The available data do not allow us to calculate hourly atmospheric stability class • therefore Environment Canada agreed to use of a screening meteorological data set, which consists of all possible weather conditions.

  5. MODEL SELECTIONMODELLING PROTOCOL • To simulate dispersion of emissions from multiple point, area & volume sources: • model selected:Industrial Source Complex Model • protocol used: • actual terrain elevations • receptor grid 100 m to 1 km, 250 m to 2km, 500 m to 5 km & 1,000 m to 1 km • mechanical mixing height

  6. EMISSION SOURCES • POINT SOURCES • generators, ore dryer and incinerator; AP-42 Emission Factors and manufacturer’s values used • MOBILE SOURCES • dozers, ore trucks, loaders and trucks: US EPA Emission Factors for heavy-duty and non-road engines • some mobile sources on the road and others in one general location

  7. EMISSION SOURCES - Continued • FUGITIVE SOURCES • storage piles, material drops, blasting and road dust; AP-42 Emission Factors and Air Pollution Engineering Manual • SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION • stockpiles/area, blasting and material drops/volume, mobile & roads/lines as adjacent volumes, stationary stacks/point

  8. RESULTS AND ASSESSMENT • BACKGROUND AIR QUALITY • local ambient monitoring not available • monitoring at other northern communities indicates background values are low

  9. RESULTS & ASSESSMENT - Continued • EXHAUST GASES • Greenhouse Gases - 48,582 t/y (0.0067% of Canada Total) • note Greenhouse Gases (GHG) do not have ambient guideline levels - the interest in GHG is because of climate change. • Nitrogen Dioxide - 537 t/y • NO2 concentrations below guidelines beyond the mine property except for a few cases.

  10. RESULTS & ASSESSMENT - Continued • EXHAUST GASES • Sulphur Dioxide - 216 t/y • SO2 concentrations generally below maximum desirable guidelines beyond the mine property and does not exceed maximum acceptable guidelines beyond 500 m from the pit. • PARTICULATE MATTER • modelled concentrations are high due to fugitive dust and based on very conservative assumptions - all sections of the road constantly creating dust, all parts of a stockpile constantly creating dust

  11. RESULTS & ASSESSMENT - Continued • CONCENTRATIONS IN THE MINE PIT • stable, low-level inversions could, at times, cause a build up of emissions in the pit, which may exceed ambient guidelines. However, they will likely not exceed WCB levels. Concentrations in the pit can be monitored, for example the workers can wear CO badges (CO is a good surrogate for combustion gases)

  12. MITIGATION AND MONITORING • Only particulate emissions show any indication of potentially high ambient concentrations - mitigation and monitoring can include: • watering of roads and stockpiles • controlling of vehicle speeds • install dust fall monitors to assess if fugitive dust is an issue • install PM10 or PM2.5 monitor

  13. MITIGATION AND MONITORING - Continued • To minimize equipment and vehicle emissions: • operate equipment at rated loads • follow routine maintenance procedures • turn off equipment, if practical, when not in use

  14. CONCLUSION • Potential ambient concentrations of NO2 and SO2 generally within guidelines. • Highest concentrations isolated within the project site. • Fugitive dust may be an issue, likely in the summer, but can be mitigated. • Cumulative impact with Lupin predicted to be minimal.

  15. CONCLUSION • Impact of Jericho emissions expected to be: • negative in direction, • local in extent, • low in magnitude, • medium-term in duration, • occasional in frequency, • impact can be reversed after the duration of the project, • overall consequence is low to moderate, • likelihood of adverse effect is unlikely.

More Related