Environmental Impact Assessment Process Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report Proposed ... PDF

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

PROPOSED IE MOORREESBURG WIND ENERGY
FACILITY, WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE
DEA REFERENCE NUMBER:
12/12/20/220
FINAL EIA REPORT

JUNE 2015
Prepared for:
Prepared for:
IE Moorreesburg Wind
PO Box 654
Melrose Arch
2076
Prepared by:
Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd
PO Box 148, Sunninghill, 2157
Tel: +27 (0)11 234 6621
Fax: +27 (0)86 684 0547
E-mail: info@savannahsa.com
PROPOSED MOORREESBURG WIND ENERGY FACILITY, WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE
Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report June 2015
PROJECT DETAILS
DEA Reference : 12/12/20/2200

No.
Title : Environmental Impact Assessment Process

Final Environmental Assessment Report: Proposed IE
Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility,
Western Cape Province
Authors : Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd

Jo-Anne Thomas
John von Mayer
Sub-consultants : Simon Todd of Simon Todd Consulting

Lourens Leeuwner (Endangered Wildlife Trust)
Ricardo Ramalho (Bioinsight)
Jon Marshal (Afzelia Environmental Consultants)
Tim Hart (ACO Associates)
Christo Lubbe (Auger Trac)
Morne de Jager (Enviro Acoustic Research)
Tony Barbour (Tony Barbour Environmental
Consulting and Research)
Project Developer : IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd
Report Status : Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report
Submission Date : June 2015
When used as a reference this report should be cited as: Savannah

Environmental (2015) Final EIA Report: Proposed Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility,
Western Cape Province
COPYRIGHT RESERVED
This technical report has been produced for Moorreesburg Wind Farm (Pty) Limited. The intellectual
property contained in this report remains vested in Savannah Environmental and IE Moorreesburg
Wind (Pty) Limited. No part of the report may be reproduced in any manner without written
permission from Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd and IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Limited.
PURPOSE OF THE EIA REPORT
IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd (a Joint Venture between INCA Energy and juwi
Renewable Energies (Pty) Ltd) is proposing to establish a commercial wind energy
facility and associated infrastructure on a site located approximately 4km south-
south east of Moorreesburg in the Swartland Local Municipality of the Western
Cape Province.
The Scoping Phase of the EIA process identified potential issues associated with
the proposed project, and defined the extent of the studies required within the
EIA Phase. The EIA Phase addresses those identified potential environmental
impacts and benefits associated with all phases of the project including design,
construction and operation, and recommends appropriate mitigation measures for
potentially significant environmental impacts. The EIA report aims to provide the
environmental authorities with sufficient information to make an informed
decision regarding the proposed project.
The release of a draft EIA Report provided stakeholders with an opportunity to

verify that the issues they have raised to date have been captured and
adequately considered within the study. The Final EIA Report now incorporates
all issues and responses prior to submission to the National Department of
Environmental Affairs (DEA), the decision-making authority for the project.
The following infrastructure is associated with the proposed facility:
» Up to 40 wind turbines (depending on the alterative selected for

implementation)
 Turbine hub height: up to 120m
 Concrete or steel towers
 Turbine rotor diameter: up to 132m
 Turbine capacity: up to 3.5MW
» Concrete foundations (26 x 26 m) to support the turbines.
» Subterranean cabling linking the turbines to an on-site substation will be
trenched at approximately 1 m next to the road and thereafter the area will
be rehabilitated.
» An on-site substation of ± 50 m x 50 m in extent to facilitate the connection
between the wind energy facility and the national electricity grid.
» Control building and workshop area for maintenance and storage purposes.
» An overhead power line to connect the facility to the electricity grid. Two
options are being considered (refer to Figure 2.1):
 Option 1: A connection to the existing Moorreesburg 132/66kV
substation at 66kV or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV power line or a 132kV
power line
Purpose of the Report Page ii

 Option 2: An overhead power line (66kV) likely to be connected to the

existing Eskom 66 kV power line located in close proximity to the
proposed site
» A main access road and internal service roads (approximately 7 m in width)
linking the wind turbines and other infrastructure on site (existing roads will
be used as far as possible).
» Fencing and access control.
» Temporarily affected areas comprising laydown areas at the foot of each
turbine and roads up to 11m in width to accommodate the crawler crane
during construction.
INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE EIA REPORT AS PER

EIA REGULATIONS
NEMA REGULATIONS 543, SECTION 28 CROSS REFERENCE IN

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CONTENT OF SCOPING THIS SCOPING REPORT
REPORTS
(a) details of— Section 1.6
(i) the EAP who prepared the report; and
(ii) the expertise of the EAP to carry out scoping procedures
(b) a description of the proposed activity Chapter 2 and Chapter 4
(c) a description of any feasible and reasonable alternatives Section 7.1
that have been identified
(d) a description of the property on which the activity is to Chapter 1
be undertaken and the location of the activity on the
property, or if it is—
(i) a linear activity, a description of the route of the activity;
or
(ii) an ocean-based activity, the coordinates where the
activity is to be undertaken
(e) a description of the environment that may be affected by Chapter 6
the activity and the manner in which activity may be
affected by the environment
(f) an identification of all legislation and guidelines that have Chapter 5
been considered in the preparation of the EIA report
(g) a description of environmental issues and potential Chapter 7
impacts, including cumulative impacts, that have been
identified
(h) details of the public participation process conducted in terms of regulation 27(a),
including—
(i) the steps that were taken to notify potentially interested Section 4.3
and affected parties of the application
Purpose of the Report Page iii

NEMA REGULATIONS 543, SECTION 28 CROSS REFERENCE IN

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CONTENT OF SCOPING THIS SCOPING REPORT
REPORTS
(ii) proof that notice boards, advertisements and notices Appendix E
notifying potentially interested and affected parties of the
application have been displayed, placed or given
(iii) a list of all persons or organisations that were identified Appendix C

and registered in terms of regulation 55 as interested and
affected parties in relation to the application
(iv) a summary of the issues raised by interested and Appendix E

affected parties, the date of receipt of and the response of
the EAP to those issues
(i) a description of the need and desirability of the proposed Section 1.2
activity
(j) a description of identified potential alternatives to the Chapter 7 and Chapter 9
proposed activity, including advantages and disadvantages
that the proposed activity or alternatives may have on the
environment and the community that may be affected by the
activity
(k) copies of any representations, and comments received in Appendix E
connection with the application or the scoping report from
interested and affected parties
(l) copies of the minutes of any meetings held by the EAP Appendix E
with interested and affected parties and other role players
which record the views of the participants
(m) any responses by the EAP to those representations and Appendix E
comments and views;
(o) any specific information required by the competent N/A
authority
(p) any other matters required in terms of sections 24(4)(a) N/A
and (b) of the Act.
The EAP managing the application must provide the See chapter 7
competent authority with detailed, written proof of an
investigation as required by section 24(4)(b)(i) of the Act
and motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives, as
contemplated in sub-regulation (1)(c), exist.
Purpose of the Report Page iv

INVITATION TO COMMENT ON THE DRAFT EIA REPORT
Members of the public, local communities and stakeholders were invited to

comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report which was made
available for public review and comment for a 40-day period at the following
locations:
» West Coast District Municipality foyer,

» Moorreesburg Library,
» Swartland Municipality and
» Farmers Co-opt in Moorreesburg.
» www.savannahSA.com
Purpose of the Report Page v

SUMMARY » Farm no. 1066 – Portion 0

» Farm Tontelberg no. 424 –
Background and Project Overview Portion 1
» Farm Biesjesfontein no 413 –
IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd (a Portion 9
Joint Venture between INCA Energy
and juwi Renewable Energies (Pty) The following infrastructure is
Ltd) is proposing to establish a associated with the proposed facility:
commercial wind energy facility and
associated infrastructure on a site » Up to 40 wind turbines
located approximately 4km south- (depending on the alterative
south east of Moorreesburg in the selected for implementation)
Swartland Local Municipality of the  Turbine hub height: up to
Western Cape Province. 120m
This development is proposed to  Turbine rotor diameter: up to
comprise a cluster of up to 40 wind 132m
turbines (typically described as a  Turbine capacity: up to
wind energy facility or a wind farm) 3.5MW
to be constructed within an area of » Concrete foundations (26 x 26 m)
approximately ~3830ha in extent. to support the turbines.
» Subterranean cabling linking the
The proposed wind energy facility turbines to an on-site substation
development, in its current form, will be trenched at approximately
considers two different layouts; one 1 m next to the road and
comprising 25 wind turbines thereafter the area will be
(preferred layout) and a second rehabilitated.
comprising 40 wind turbines » An on-site substation of ± 50 m x
(alternative layout), with each wind 50 m in extent to facilitate the
turbine having the capacity to connection between the wind
generate up to 3.5 megawatts (MW) energy facility and the national
electricity grid.
The wind energy facility is proposed » Control building and workshop
to be located on the following farm area for maintenance and storage
portions: purposes.
» Farm Zwartfontein no. 414 - » An overhead power line to
Portion 23 & Remainder of connect the facility to the
Portion 11, 12, 13, 17 & 18,8 electricity grid. Two options are
» Farm Zwartfontein no. 416 – being considered (refer to Figure
Portion 1, 7 and Remainder of 2.1):
Portion 3  Option 1: A connection to
» Farm Hartebeestfontein no the existing Moorreesburg
412- Portions 6 and 2 132/66kV substation at 66kV
Summary Page vi
or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV » Chapter 2 provides the project

power line or a 132kV power description, need and desirability
line and identified project alternatives
 Option 2: An overhead » Chapter 3 describes the strategic
power line (66kV) likely to context for energy planning
be connected to the existing » Chapter 4 provides a description
Eskom 66 kV power line of wind power technology
located in close proximity to » Chapter 5 outlines the process
the proposed site which was followed during the
» A main access road and internal Scoping and EIA Phase of the
service roads (approximately 7 m project, including the stakeholder
in width) linking the wind consultation programme that was
turbines and other infrastructure undertaken
on site (existing roads will be » Chapter 6 describes the existing
used as far as possible). biophysical and socio-economic
» Fencing and access control. environment
» Temporarily affected areas » Chapter 7 describes the
comprising laydown areas at the assessment of environmental
foot of each turbine and roads up impacts and cumulative impacts
to 11m in width to accommodate associated with the proposed
the crawler crane during Wind Energy Facility and
construction. recommended mitigation
measures
» Chapter 8 describes the
Savannah Environmental was assessment of cumulative
contracted by IE Moorreesburg Wind impacts associated with the
as the independent environmental proposed Wind Energy Facility
consultant to undertake both Scoping and recommended mitigation
and EIA processes for the proposed measures
project. The EIA process has been » Chapter 9 presents the
undertaken in accordance with the conclusions of the impact
requirements of the National assessments, recommendations
Environmental Management Act as well as an impact statement
(NEMA; Act No. 107 of 1998). » Chapter 10 contains a list
references for the EIA report and
This Environmental Impact specialist reports
Assessment Report consists of the
following sections: The Scoping Phase of the EIA process
identified potential issues associated
» Chapter 1 provides a project with the proposed project, and
overview and motivation for the defined the extent of the studies
proposed project and the required within the EIA Phase. The
environmental impact assessment EIA Phase addressed those identified
Summary Page vii

potential environmental impacts and » Identify and recommend

benefits (direct, indirect and appropriate mitigation measures
cumulative impacts) associated with for potentially significant
all phases of the project including environmental impacts.
design, construction and operation, » Undertake a fully inclusive public
and recommends appropriate involvement process to ensure
mitigation measures for potentially that I&APs are afforded the
significant environmental impacts. opportunity to participate, and
The EIA report aims to provide that their issues and concerns
sufficient information regarding the are recorded.
potential impacts and the
acceptability of these impacts in The conclusions and
order for the Competent Authority to recommendations of this EIA are the
make an informed decision regarding result of the assessment of identified
the proposed project. impacts by specialists, and the
parallel process of public
The release of a draft EIA Report participation. The public consultation
aims to provided stakeholders with process has been extensive and
an opportunity to verify that the every effort has been made to
issues they have raised through the include representatives of all
EIA process have been captured and stakeholders in the study area.
adequately considered. This Final
EIA Report has incorporated all The assessment of potential
issues and responses raised during environmental impacts presented in
the public review of the draft Scoping this report is based on a layout of the
Report for to submission to the turbines and associated
National Department of infrastructure provided by the
Environmental Affairs (DEA). developer. This layout includes 31
wind turbines as well as all
The EIA Phase aimed to achieve the associated infrastructure. No
following: environmental fatal flaws were
identified to be associated with the
» Provide an overall assessment of proposed wind energy facility.
the social and biophysical However, a number of impacts of
environments affected by the medium significance were identified
proposed project. which require mitigation (thereafter
» Assess potentially significant the impacts can be reduced to
impacts (direct, indirect and medium – low significance). Where
cumulative, where required) impacts cannot be avoided,
associated with the proposed appropriate environmental
wind energy facility and management measures are required
associated infrastructure. to be implemented to mitigate the
impact. Environmental specifications
Summary Page viii

for the management of potential for the recommendations of this

impacts are detailed within the draft report and the associated specialist
Environmental Management studies is taken during the final
Programme (EMPr) included within design of the project.
Appendix Q.
The following infrastructure would be
Based on the nature and extent of included within an authorisation
the proposed project, the local level issued for the project:
of disturbance predicted as a result
of the construction and operation of » Up to 25 wind turbines
the facility and associated substation,  Turbine hub height: up to
the findings of the EIA, and the 120m
understanding of the significance  Concrete or steel towers
level of potential environmental  Turbine rotor diameter: up to
impacts, it is the opinion of the EIA 132m
project team that the application for  Turbine capacity: up to
the proposed Moorreesburg Wind 3.5MW
Energy Facility and associated » Concrete foundations (26 x 26 m)
infrastructure can be mitigated to an to support the turbines.
acceptable level, provided » Subterranean cabling linking the
appropriate mitigation is turbines to an on-site substation
implemented and adequate regard will be trenched at approximately
for the recommendations of this 1 m next to the road and
report and the associated specialist thereafter the area will be
studies is taken during the final rehabilitated.
design of the project. » An on-site substation of ± 50 m x
50 m to facilitate the connection
Based on the nature and extent of between the wind energy facility
the proposed project, the local level and the national electricity grid.
of disturbance predicted as a result » Control building and workshop
of the construction and operation of area for maintenance and storage
the facility and associated purposes.
infrastructure, the findings of the  An overhead power line to
EIA, and the understanding of the connect the facility to the
significance level of potential electricity grid. Option 1 is
environmental impacts, it is the preferred: a connection to
opinion of the EIA project team that the existing Moorreesburg
the application for the proposed 132/66kV substation at 66kV
Moorreesburg Wind Farm and or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV
associated infrastructure can be power line or a 132kV power
mitigated to an acceptable level, line
provided appropriate mitigation is » A main access road and internal
implemented and adequate regard service roads (approximately 7 m
Summary Page ix
in width) linking the wind approval prior to commencing

turbines and other infrastructure with construction. No
on site (existing roads will be development is permitted within
used as far as possible). the identified No Go areas as
» Fencing and access control. detailed in Figure 1.
» Temporarily affected areas » Establish an on-going monitoring
comprising laydown areas at the programme to detect, quantify
foot of each turbine and roads up and manage any alien plant
to 11m in width to accommodate species that may become
the crawler crane during established as a result of
construction. disturbance.
» Bird and bat monitoring
The following conditions would be programmes, in line with the
required to be included within an latest version of the South African
environmental authorisation issued best practice bird and bat
for the project: monitoring guidelines, should be
commissioned during the
» All mitigation measures detailed operational phase to determine
within this report and the the actual impacts of the project
specialist reports contained on bird and bats.
within Appendices F - O must » Disturbed areas should be kept to
be implemented. a minimum and rehabilitated as
» The draft Environmental quickly as possible.
Management Programme (EMPr) » Adequate stormwater
as contained within Appendix N management measures to be put
of this report should form part of in place as the soils on the site
the contract with the Contractors are prone to erosion.
appointed to construct and » Implement site specific erosion
maintain the proposed wind and water control measures to
energy facility, and will be used prevent excessive surface runoff
to ensure compliance with from the site (turbines and
environmental specifications and roads).
management measures. The » Where feasible, training and skills
implementation of this EMPr for development programmes for
all life cycle phases of the locals should be initiated prior to
proposed project is considered to the initiation of the construction
be key in achieving the phase.
appropriate environmental » Use of fire prevention and fire
management standards as management strategies for the
detailed for this project. wind energy facility, to reduce
» Following the final design of the risks to landowners.
facility, a revised layout must be » Construction managers should be
submitted to DEA for review and informed before construction
Summary Page x
starts on the possible types of » Applications for all other relevant

heritage sites that may be and required permits if required
encountered and the procedures to be obtained by the developer
to follow should they encounter must be submitted to the
subsurface heritage artefacts/ relevant regulating authorities.
sites (as detailed in the EMPr). This includes permits for the
transporting of all components
(abnormal loads) to site, water
use licencing for disturbance to
any water courses/ drainage lines
and, permit to remove heritage
artefacts and/ disturbance of
protected vegetation.
Summary Page xi
Figure 1: Environmental sensitivity map for the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility in relation to the proposed Facility layout
Table of Contents Page xii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
PURPOSE OF THE EIA REPORT ................................................................... II
INVITATION TO COMMENT ON THE DRAFT EIA REPORT ............................. V
SUMMARY .................................................................................................. VI
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................. XIII
DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY ..........................................................XIX
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................ 23
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................... 24
1.1. PROJECT OVERVIEW ............................................................................ 25

1.2. ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITIES IDENTIFIED DURING THE SCOPING PHASE ............ 26
1.3. REQUIREMENT FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS ............... 28
1.4. OBJECTIVES OF THE EIA PROCESS ........................................................... 29
1.5. DETAILS OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER AND SPECIALIST TEAM .... 29
CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................... 31
2.1 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................. 31

2.2 NEED AND DESIRABILITY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ..................................... 34
2.2.1 Need for the Project at a National Level ....................................... 34
2.2.2 The Need for the Project at a Provincial Scale ............................... 34
2.2.3 Local Level Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) .......................... 35
2.2.4 The Desirability for the Wind Energy Facility ................................. 36
2.3 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES........................................................................ 37
2.3.1 Site Alternatives ....................................................................... 38
CHAPTER 3 STRATEGIC CONTEXT FOR ENERGY PLANNING .................... 44
3.1. STRATEGIC ELECTRICITY PLANNING IN SOUTH AFRICA .................................... 44

3.1.1 The Kyoto Protocol, 1997 ........................................................... 44
3.1.2. The National Energy Act (2008) ................................................. 45
3.1.3 White Paper on the Energy Policy of the Republic of South Africa,
1998 45
3.1.4 White Paper on the Renewable Energy Policy of the Republic of South
Africa (2003) .......................................................................................... 46
3.1.5 Final Integrated Resource Plan 2010 - 2030 ................................. 47
3.1.6 Integrated Energy Planning Report .............................................. 47
3.1.7 Department of Energy Process for Independent Power Producers (IPP)47
3.2 PROJECT PLANNING AND THE SITE-SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT . 48
CHAPTER 4 WIND ENERGY AS A POWER GENERATION OPTION ............. 50
4.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WIND RESOURCE FOR ENERGY GENERATION ................. 50
Table of Contents Page xiii

4.2 WHAT IS A WIND TURBINE AND HOW DOES IT WORK .................................... 54

4.2.1. Main Components of a Wind Turbine ............................................ 54
3.2.2. Operating Characteristics of a Wind Turbine ................................. 57
3.3 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PHASE .............................................................. 58
3.3.1 Conduct Surveys ....................................................................... 58
3.3.2 Establishment of Access Roads to the Site .................................... 59
3.3.3 Undertake Site Preparation ......................................................... 59
3.3.4 Construct Foundation ................................................................. 59
3.3.5 Transport of Components and Equipment to Site ........................... 61
3.3.6 Establishment of Laydown Areas on Site ...................................... 61
3.3.7 Construct Turbine...................................................................... 62
3.3.8 Construct Substation ................................................................. 62
3.3.9 Establishment of Ancillary Infrastructure ...................................... 63
3.3.10 Connection of Wind Turbines to the Substation ............................. 63
3.3.11 Commissioning ......................................................................... 63
3.3.12 Undertake Site Rehabilitation ...................................................... 64
3.4 PROJECT OPERATION PHASE................................................................... 64
3.4.1 Maintenance ............................................................................. 64
3.5 DECOMMISSIONING ............................................................................. 64
3.5.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................ 64
3.5.2 Disassemble Existing Turbine ...................................................... 65
CHAPTER 5 APROACH TO UNDERTAKING THE EIA PROCESS .................. 66
5.1. RELEVANT LISTED ACTIVITIES ................................................................ 66

5.2. SCOPING STUDY ................................................................................ 71
5.3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PHASE ............................................. 72
5.3. OVERVIEW OF THE EIA PHASE ................................................................ 72
5.3.1. Authority Consultation ............................................................... 73
5.3.2. Public Involvement and Consultation: EIA Phase ........................... 74
4.3.3 Identification and Recording of Issues and Concerns ...................... 76
4.3.4 Public Review of Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report .... 76
5.3.6. Final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report .................... 77
5.4. ASSESSMENT OF ISSUES IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE EIA PROCESS ...................... 77
5.5. REGULATORY AND LEGAL CONTEXT ........................................................... 79
5.5.1. Regulatory Hierarchy ................................................................. 80
5.5.2. Legislation and Guidelines that have informed the preparation of this
EIA Report ............................................................................................. 81
CHAPTER 6 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................. 98
6.1 REGIONAL SETTING AND LOCATION OF THE STUDY AREA ................................. 98

6.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA ............................. 100
6.3 SITE ACCESS................................................................................... 100
6.4 LAND-USE AND LAND-COVER OF THE STUDY AREA........................................ 100
6.5 TOPOGRAPHY .................................................................................. 102
Table of Contents Page xiv

6.7 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS....................................................................... 102

6.8 HYDROLOGY ................................................................................... 102
6.9 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ......................................................................... 102
6.10 AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL .................................................................. 103
6.11 ECOLOGICAL PROFILE OF THE STUDY AREA ............................................... 104
6.11.1. Vegetation ............................................................................. 104
6.11.2 Conservation Status .................................................................... 107
6.11.3. Terrestrial Fauna ..................................................................... 109
6.12 Bats 110
6.13 Avifauna ....................................................................................... 111
6.14 HERITAGE AND PALAEONTOLOGY................................................................ 114
6.15 SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA AND SURROUNDS ........................ 115
6.14.1. Population .............................................................................. 115
6.15.3. Education .................................................................................. 116
6.15.4. Employment and skills levels .................................................... 116
6.15.5. Household Incomes ................................................................. 117
6.15.6. Service Levels......................................................................... 117
CHAPTER 7 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS: .................................................. 118
7.1.1 QUANTIFICATION OF AREAS OF DISTURBANCE ON THE SITE ............................ 121

7.1.1 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON ECOLOGY...................................... 122
7.1.1 Comparative Assessment of Layout Alternatives .......................... 126
7.1.2 Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................... 126
7.2 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON AVIFAUNA ..................................... 127
7.2.1 Impacts associated with Construction ........................................ 130
7.2.2 Impacts associated with Operation ............................................ 132
7.3 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON BATS ........................................................ 136
Figure 7.6: Bat sensitive habitats within the study area (as determined by the
bat impact assessment) indicating the proposed layout – 40 turbine option .. 138
7.3.1. Potential Impacts .................................................................... 138
7.4 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON SOIL, LAND USE, LAND CAPABILITY AND
AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL.............................................................................. 143
7.5 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACTS ............................................ 147
7.5.1 Visual Exposure ...................................................................... 147
7.5.2. Visual impact assessment: primary impacts................................ 150
7.5.3. Comparative Assessment of Layout Alternatives .......................... 164
7.6. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS ............................................. 165
Table of Contents Page xv

7.6.1 Relevant Noise Receptors ......................................................... 165

7.6.2. Noise from Construction activities ............................................. 167
7.6.3. Noise Sources: Operational Phase ............................................. 171
7.7 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON HERITAGE ..................................... 175
7.7.1. Comparative Assessment of Layout Alternatives .......................... 176
7.8 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS ......................... 176
7.8.1. Key Issues associated with the Construction phase ...................... 176
8.12.1. Key Issues associated with the Operational phase ....................... 187
7.9 NO GO ALTERNATIVE ......................................................................... 195
CHAPTER 8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................................... 199
8.1. APPROACH TAKEN TO ASSESS CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................... 199

8.2. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON ECOLOGY ........................................................ 202
8.3. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON AVIFAUNA ....................................................... 202
8.4. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON BATS............................................................. 203
8.5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON SOILS AND AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL...................... 204
8.6. CUMULATIVE VISUAL IMPACTS .............................................................. 204
8.7. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON HERITAGE RESOURCES ........................................ 204
8.8. CUMULATIVE NOISE IMPACTS ............................................................... 205
8.9. CUMULATIVE SOCIAL IMPACTS .............................................................. 205
CHAPTER 9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................... 206
9.1. EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ................................................. 207

9.1.1. Visual Impacts associated with the Wind Energy Facility and
associated Infrastructure ....................................................................... 208
9.1.2. Local Site-specific Impacts ....................................................... 209
9.1.3. Impacts on Birds and Bats........................................................ 210
9.1.5 Impacts on the Social Environment ........................................... 211
9.1.6 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................ 211
9.2. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................................ 212
9.3. ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY MAPPING AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................... 213
9.4. ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS OF THE PROJECT VERSUS BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT ....... 218
9.5. OVERALL CONCLUSION (IMPACT STATEMENT) ............................................ 219
9.6. OVERALL RECOMMENDATION ................................................................ 220
CHAPTER 10 REFERENCES ............................................................... 222
FAUNA AND FLORA STUDY .............................................................................. 222

SOIL AND AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL STUDY......................................................... 223
AVIFAUNA STUDY ........................................................................................ 223
BAT STUDY................................................................................................ 227
HERITAGE STUDY ........................................................................................ 230
Table of Contents Page xvi

NOISE STUDY ............................................................................................. 230

VISUAL STUDY............................................................................................ 233
SOCIAL STUDY ........................................................................................... 233
Table of Contents Page xvii

APPENDICES
Appendix A: EIA Project Consulting Team CVs

Appendix B: Correspondence with DEA
Appendix C: I&AP Database
Appendix D: Adverts & Site Notices
Appendix E: Public Participation Information
Appendix F: Ecology Impact Assessment Study
Appendix G: Avifauna Specialist Study
Appendix H: Bird Monitoring Report
Appendix I: Bat Specialist Study
Appendix J: Soils and Agricultural Potential Specialist Study
Appendix K: Heritage Impact Assessment Study
Appendix L: Noise Impact Assessment Study
Appendix M: Visual Impact Assessment Study
Appendix N: Social Impact Assessment Study
Appendix O: Environmental Management Programme
Appendix P: A3 Maps
Table of Contents Page xviii

DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY
Alternatives: Alternatives are different means of meeting the general purpose and
need of a proposed activity. Alternatives may include location or site alternatives,
activity alternatives, process or technology alternatives, temporal alternatives or the
‘do nothing’ alternative.
Ambient sound level: The reading on an integrating impulse sound level meter
taken at a measuring point in the absence of any alleged disturbing noise at the end
of a total period of at least 10 minutes after such meter was put into operation.
Betz Limit: It is the flow of air over the blades and through the rotor area that
makes a wind turbine function. The wind turbine extracts energy by slowing the
wind down. The theoretical maximum amount of energy in the wind that can be
collected by a wind turbine's rotor is approximately 59%. This value is known as the
Betz Limit
Cumulative impacts: Impacts that result from the incremental impact of the
proposed activity on a common resource when added to the impacts of other past,
present or reasonably foreseeable future activities (e.g. discharges of nutrients and
heated water to a river that combine to cause algal bloom and subsequent loss of
dissolved oxygen that is greater than the additive impacts of each pollutant).
Cumulative impacts can occur from the collective impacts of individual minor actions
over a period of time and can include both direct and indirect impacts.
Cut-in speed: The minimum wind speed at which the wind turbine will generate
usable power.
Cut-out speed: The wind speed at which shut down occurs.
Direct impacts: Impacts that are caused directly by the activity and generally
occur at the same time and at the place of the activity (e.g. noise generated by
blasting operations on the site of the activity). These impacts are usually associated
with the construction, operation or maintenance of an activity and are generally
obvious and quantifiable
Disturbing noise: A noise level that exceeds the ambient sound level measured
continuously at the same measuring point by 7 dB or more.
‘Do nothing’ alternative: The ‘do nothing’ alternative is the option of not
undertaking the proposed activity or any of its alternatives. The ‘do nothing’
alternative also provides the baseline against which the impacts of other alternatives
should be compared.
Definitions and Terminology Page xix

Endangered species: Taxa in danger of extinction and whose survival is unlikely

if the causal factors continue operating. Included here are taxa whose numbers of
individuals have been reduced to a critical level or whose habitats have been so
drastically reduced that they are deemed to be in immediate danger of extinction.
Endemic: An "endemic" is a species that grows in a particular area (is endemic to

that region) and has a restricted distribution. It is only found in a particular place.
Whether something is endemic or not depends on the geographical boundaries of the
area in question and the area can be defined at different scales.
Environment: the surroundings within which humans exist and that are made up
of:
i. the land, water and atmosphere of the earth;
ii. micro-organisms, plant and animal life;
iii. any part or combination of (i) and (ii) and the interrelationships among
and between them; and
iv. the physical, chemical, aesthetic and cultural properties and conditions of
the foregoing that influence human health and well-being.
Environmental Impact: An action or series of actions that have an effect on the

environment.
Environmental impact assessment: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA),

as defined in the NEMA EIA Regulations and in relation to an application to which
scoping must be applied, means the process of collecting, organising, analysing,
interpreting and communicating information that is relevant to the consideration of
that application.
Environmental management: Ensuring that environmental concerns are

included in all stages of development, so that development is sustainable and does
not exceed the carrying capacity of the environment.
Environmental management programme/plan: An operational plan that

organises and co-ordinates mitigation, rehabilitation and monitoring measures in
order to guide the implementation of a proposal and its ongoing maintenance after
implementation.
Generator: The generator is what converts the turning motion of a wind turbine's
blades into electricity
Indigenous: All biological organisms that occurred naturally within the study area
prior to 1800
Definitions and Terminology Page xx

Indirect impacts: Indirect or induced changes that may occur as a result of the
activity (e.g. the reduction of water in a stream that supply water to a reservoir that
supply water to the activity). These types of impacts include all the potential
impacts that do not manifest immediately when the activity is undertaken or which
occur at a different place as a result of the activity.
Interested and Affected Party: Individuals or groups concerned with or

affected by an activity and its consequences. These include the authorities, local
communities, investors, work force, consumers, environmental interest groups and
the general public.
Nacelle: The nacelle contains the generator, control equipment, gearbox and
anemometer for monitoring the wind speed and direction.
Rare species: Taxa with small world populations that are not at present
Endangered or Vulnerable, but are at risk as some unexpected threat could easily
cause a critical decline. These taxa are usually localised within restricted
geographical areas or habitats or are thinly scattered over a more extensive range.
This category was termed Critically Rare by Hall and Veldhuis (1985) to distinguish it
from the more generally used word "rare".
Red data species: Species listed in terms of the International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List of Threatened
Species, and/or in terms of the South African Red Data list. In terms of the South
African Red Data list, species are classified as being extinct, endangered, vulnerable,
rare, indeterminate, insufficiently known or not threatened (see other definitions
within this glossary).
Regional Methodology: The Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs

and Development Planning (DEA&DP) have developed a guideline document entitled
Strategic Initiative to Introduce Commercial Land Based Wind Energy Development
to the Western Cape - Towards a Regional Methodology for Wind Energy Site
Selection (Western Cape Provincial Government, May 2006). The methodology
proposed within this guideline document is intended to be a regional level planning
tool to guide planners and decision-makers with regards to appropriate areas for
wind energy development within the Western Cape Province (on the basis of
planning, environmental, infrastructural and landscape parameters).
Rotor: The portion of the wind turbine that collects energy from the wind is called
the rotor. The rotor converts the energy in the wind into rotational energy to turn
the generator. The rotor has three blades that rotate at a constant speed of about
15 to 28 revolutions per minute (rpm).
Definitions and Terminology Page xxi

Significant impact: An impact that by its magnitude, duration, intensity or

probability of occurrence may have a notable effect on one or more aspects of the
environment.
Tower: The tower, which supports the rotor, is constructed from tubular steel. It is
approximately 80 m tall. The nacelle and the rotor are attached to the top of the
tower. The tower on which a wind turbine is mounted is not just a support structure.
It also raises the wind turbine so that its blades safely clear the ground and so it can
reach the stronger winds at higher elevations. Larger wind turbines are usually
mounted on towers ranging from 40 to 80 m tall. The tower must be strong enough
to support the wind turbine and to sustain vibration, wind loading and the overall
weather elements for the lifetime of the wind turbine.
Valley-bottom wetlands (Channelled or Unchannelled): These are flat valley-

bottom wetland areas with or without a major channel/stream running through them.
Water inputs are typically from an upstream channel, as the flow becomes dispersed,
and from adjacent slopes (if present) or groundwater. Water generally moves
through the wetland in the form of diffuse surface flow and/or interflow (with some
temporary containment of water in depressional areas), but the outflow can be in the
form of diffuse or concentrated surface flow. Infiltration and evaporation from
unchannelled valley-bottom wetlands can be significant, particularly if there are a
number of small depressions within the wetland area. Horizontal, unidirectional
diffuse surface-flow tends to dominate in terms of the hydrodynamics.
Wind power: A measure of the energy available in the wind.
Wind rose: The term given to the diagrammatic representation of joint wind speed
and direction distribution at a particular location. The length of time that the wind
comes from a particular sector is shown by the length of the spoke, and the speed is
shown by the thickness of the spoke.
Wind speed: The rate at which air flows past a point above the earth's surface.
Definitions and Terminology Page xxii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
BID Background Information Document

CDM Clean Development Mechanism
CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
CO2 Carbon dioxide
D Diameter of the rotor blades
DAFF Department of Forestry and Fishery
DENC Northern Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Nature
Conservation
DEA National Department of Environmental Affairs
DME Department of Minerals and Energy
DOT Department of Transport
DWS Department of Water and Sanitation
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EMPr Environmental Management Programme
GIS Geographical Information Systems
GG Government Gazette
GN Government Notice
GWh Giga Watt Hour
Ha Hectare
I&AP Interested and Affected Party
IDP Integrated Development Plan
IEP Integrated Energy Planning
2
km Square kilometres
km/hr Kilometres per hour
kV Kilovolt
2
m Square meters
m/s Meters per second
MW Mega Watt
NEMA National Environmental Management Act (Act No 107 of 1998)
NERSA National Energy Regulator of South Africa
NHRA National Heritage Resources Act (Act No 25 of 1999)
NGOs Non-Governmental Organisations
NIRP National Integrated Resource Planning
NWA National Water Act (Act No 36 of 1998)
SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency
SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute
SANRAL South African National Roads Agency Limited
Abbreviations and Acronyms Page 23

PROPOSED IE MOORREESBURG WIND FARM, WESTERN CAPE
Final EIA Report June 2015
INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1
IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd (a Joint Venture between INCA Energy and juwi
Renewable Energies (Pty) Ltd) is proposing to establish a commercial wind energy
south east of Moorreesburg in the Swartland Local Municipality of the Western Cape
Province (refer to Figure 1.1). The facility is proposed within the following farm
portions:
Farm Zwartfontein no. 414 - Portion 23 & Remainder of Portion 11, 12, 13, 17 &
18,8
Farm Zwartfontein no. 416 – Portion 1, 7 and Remainder of Portion 3
Farm Hartebeestfontein no 412- Portions 6 and 2
Farm no. 1066 – Portion 0
Farm Tontelberg no. 424 – Portion 1
Farm Biesjesfontein no 413 – Portion 9
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 2 3
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 1
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 2
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 3
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 7
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 8
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 7
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 3
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 6
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 1 2
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 4 0 0 0 0 1
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 9
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 6 0 0 0 1 1
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 0 8
The nature and extent of the proposed facility, as well as potential environmental
impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of
a facility of this nature is explored in more detail in this Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) Report. This EIA Report consists of ten sections:
» Chapter 1 provides a project overview and motivation for the proposed project
and the environmental impact assessment
» Chapter 2 provides the project description, need and desirability and identified
project alternatives
» Chapter 3 provides the strategic context for energy planning in South Africa
Introduction Page 24
» Chapter 4 describes wind energy as a power generation option and provides

insight to technologies for wind energy
» Chapter 5 outlines the process which was followed during the Scoping and EIA
Phase of the project, including the stakeholder consultation programme that
was undertaken
» Chapter 6 describes the existing biophysical and socio-economic environment
» Chapter 7 summarises the assessment of environmental impacts and
cumulative impacts associated with the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Energy
Facility and recommended mitigation measures
» Chapter 8 summarises the assessment of cumulative impacts associated with
the proposed Moorresburg Wind Energy Facility and recommended mitigation
measures
» Chapter 9 presents the conclusions of the impact assessments,
recommendations as well as an impact statement
» Chapter 10 contains a list references for the EIA report and specialist reports
1.1. Project Overview
In responding to the growing electricity demand within South Africa, as well as the
country’s targets for renewable energy, IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd is
proposing the establishment of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm to add new capacity to
the national electricity grid. The project is proposed to be part of the Department
of Energy’s (DoE) Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Programme
(REIPPP) and is expected to be bid in 2015. Should the project be selected by the
DoE for implementation, IE Moorreesburg Wind will be required to apply for a
generation license from the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA), as
well as a power purchase agreement from Eskom (typically for a period of 20 - 25
years) in order to build and operate the proposed facility. As part of the
agreement, IE Moorreesburg Wind will be remunerated by Eskom per kWh. Eskom
will be financially backed by government. Depending on the economic conditions
following the lapse of this period, the facility can either be decommissioned or the
power purchase agreement may be renegotiated and extended.
IE Moorreesburg Wind has indicated the proposed development site to be

particularly suitable for wind energy development due to the strength of the
prevailing wind resources, access to the electricity grid, current land use and land
availability (refer to Chapter 2 for more details in this regard). IE Moorreesburg
Wind has been measuring the wind resource at the Moorreesburg site for more than
a year and has determined the wind resource to be feasible for the development of
a wind energy facility on the site. The capacity of the proposed wind energy facility
will depend on the most suitable wind turbine (in terms of the turbine capacity)
selected by IE Moorreesburg Wind has indicated the proposed development site to
be particularly suitable. Depending on the final turbine selection, the estimated
total generating capacity for the proposed facility is up to 140MW.
The overarching objective for the planning process is to maximise electricity

production through exposure to the wind resource, while minimising infrastructure,
operational and maintenance costs, as well as social and environmental impacts.
As local level environmental and planning issues were not assessed in sufficient
detail through the regional level site identification process, these issues must now
be considered within site-specific studies and assessments through the EIA process
in order to delineate areas of sensitivity within the broader site and ultimately
inform the placement of the wind turbines and associated infrastructure on the site.
The detailed project description and the scope of the proposed Moorreesburg Wind
Farm (for the construction, operation and decommissioning phases) is discussed in
more detail in Chapter 2.
1.2. Environmental Sensitivities Identified during the Scoping

Phase
A scoping study was conducted for the project and completed in June 2014. The
scoping report identified areas of potential environmental sensitivity to inform the
design of the wind energy facility and for further investigation during the EIA
phase. These sensitive areas are shown in Figure 1.2 and include:
» Areas of visual exposure within (but not restricted to) 4 km of the proposed
wind energy facility site such as homesteads and observers travelling along
major and gravel roads,
» Potentially sensitive noise receptors,
» Areas of flora/fauna sensitivity, and
» Areas of Agricultural sensitivity.
The majority of potential impacts identified to be associated with the construction

and operation of the proposed wind farm are anticipated to be localised and
restricted to the proposed site. No environmental fatal flaws were identified to be
associated with the site at the scoping stage of the process, although areas of high
sensitivity which should be avoided were identified.
The scoping phase sensitivity map provides a rough scale estimate of sensitivity on
the site, and these areas were subject to survey and ground-truthing during the
EIA phase of the project. Based on the scoping environmental sensitivity map
(Figure 1.2) it was recommended that areas of high environmental sensitivity
should be avoided, while areas of medium and low environmental sensitivity could
be considered for the location of the wind turbines and associated infrastructure.
Figure 1.2: Scoping Phase environmental sensitivity map for the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm
1.3. Requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment

Process
The proposed wind energy facility is subject to the requirements of the EIA
Regulations published in terms of Section 24(5) of the National Environmental
Management Act (NEMA, Act No. 107 of 1998). This section provides a brief
overview of the EIA Regulations and their application to this project.
NEMA is the national legislation that provides for the authorisation of ‘listed
activities’. In terms of Section 24(1) of NEMA, the potential impact on the
environment associated with these activities must be considered, investigated,
assessed and reported on to the competent authority that has been charged by
NEMA with the responsibility of granting environmental authorisations. As this is a
proposed electricity generation project and thereby considered to be of national
importance, the National Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) is the
competent authority1and the Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs
and Development planning (DEA&DP) will act as the commenting authority. An
application for authorisation has been accepted by DEA under application reference
number 12/12/20/2200.
The need to comply with the requirements of the EIA Regulations ensures that
decision-makers are provided the opportunity to consider the potential
environmental impacts of a project early in the project development process and to
assess if potential environmental impacts can be avoided, minimised or mitigated to
acceptable levels. Comprehensive, independent environmental studies are required
in accordance with the EIA Regulations to provide the competent authority with
sufficient information in order to make an informed decision. IE Moorreesburg Wind
(Pty) Ltd appointed Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd as the independent
environmental assessment practitioner to conduct the EIA process for the proposed
project.
An EIA is an effective planning and decision-making tool for the project developer
as it allows for the identification and management of potential environmental
impacts. It provides the opportunity for the developer to be forewarned of
potential environmental issues, and allows for resolution of the issues reported on
in the Scoping and EIA Reports as well as dialogue with Interested and Affected
Parties (I&APs). In terms of sections 24 and 24D of NEMA, as read with
Government Notices R543, R544, R545 and R546, a Scoping and EIA process is
required for the proposed project (GG No 33306 of 18 June 2010).
1
In terms of the Energy Response Plan, the DEA is the competent authority for all energy related
applications.
This study concludes the EIA process and was conducted in accordance with the
requirements of the EIA Regulations in terms of Section 24(5) of the National
Environmental Management Act (NEMA; Act No 107 of 1998).
1.4. Objectives of the EIA Process
The Scoping Report dated April 2013 was accepted by the DEA on the 30 June
2014. The scoping phase included desk-top studies and served to identify potential
impacts associated with the proposed project and to define the extent of studies
required within the EIA Phase. The Scoping Phase included input from the project
proponent, specialists with experience in the study area and in EIAs for similar
projects, as well as a public consultation process with key stakeholders that
included both government authorities and interested and affected parties (I&APs).
The EIA Phase (i.e. the current phase) assesses identified environmental impacts
(direct, indirect, and cumulative) associated with the different project development
phases (i.e. design, construction, operation, and decommissioning). The EIA Phase
also recommends appropriate mitigation measures for potentially significant
environmental impacts. The final EIA Report will incorporate all issues and
responses raised during the public review phase prior to submission to DEA.
1.5. Details of Environmental Assessment Practitioner and

specialist team
Savannah Environmental was appointed by IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd as an

independent consultant to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
for the proposed project, as required by the NEMA EIA Regulations. Neither
Savannah Environmental, nor any of the specialist sub-consultants on this project
are subsidiaries of or affiliated to IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd. Furthermore,
Savannah Environmental does not have any interests in secondary developments
that may arise out of the authorisation of the proposed project.
Savannah Environmental is a specialist environmental consulting company

providing a holistic environmental management service, including environmental
assessment and planning to ensure compliance and evaluate the risk of
development; and the development and implementation of environmental
management tools. Savannah Environmental benefits from the pooled resources,
diverse skills and experience in the environmental field held by its team.
The Savannah Environmental team have considerable experience in environmental

impact assessments and environmental management, and have been actively
involved in undertaking environmental studies, for a wide variety of projects
throughout South Africa, including those associated with electricity generation.
The EAPs from Savannah Environmental who are responsible for this project are:
» Jo-Anne Thomas - a registered Professional Natural Scientist and holds a Master

of Science degree. She has 17 years of consulting experience in the
environmental field. Her key focus is on strategic environmental assessment
and advice; management and co-ordination of environmental projects, which
includes integration of environmental studies and environmental processes into
larger engineering-based projects and ensuring compliance to legislation and
guidelines; compliance reporting; the identification of environmental
management solutions and mitigation/risk minimising measures; and strategy
and guideline development. She is currently responsible for the project
management of EIAs for several renewable energy projects across the country.
» John von Mayer - a registered Professional Natural Scientist and holds a honours
of Science degree with 7 years of work experience in the environmental field.
The majority of his experience is in energy sector related projects.
Savannah Environmental has gained extensive knowledge and experience on

potential environmental impacts associated with electricity generation projects
through their involvement in related EIA Processes. Savannah Environmental has
developed a valuable understanding of impacts associated with the construction
and operation of renewable energy facilities.
In order to adequately identify and assess potential environmental impacts

associated with the proposed project, Savannah Environmental has appointed the
following specialist sub-consultants to conduct specialist impact assessments:
Specialist Area of Expertise

Simon Todd of Simon Todd Consulting Ecology
Lourens Leeuwner (Endangered Wildlife Trust) Avifauna
Ricardo Ramalho (Bioinsight) Bats
Jon Marshal (Afzelia Environmental Consultants) Visual impacts and GIS mapping
Tim Hart (ACO Associates) Heritage
Christo Lubbe (Auger Trac) Soils, erosion and agricultural
potential
Morne de Jager (Enviro Acoutic Research) Noise
Tony Barbour Environmental Consulting and Social
Research
Curricula vitae for the Savannah Environmental project team and its specialist sub-
consultants are included in Appendix A.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION CHAPTER 2
2.1 Project and Site Description
The site identified for consideration of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm is located
approximately 4km south-south east of Moorreesburg in the Swartland Local
Municipality of the Western Cape Province. The proposed development area is
located on the following farm portions (refer to Figure 1.1):
Farm Zwartfontein no. 414 - Portion 23 & Remainder of Portion 11, 12, 13, 17 &
18,8
Farm Zwartfontein no. 416 – Portion 1, 7 and Remainder of Portion 3
Farm Hartebeestfontein no 412- Portions 6 and 2
Farm no. 1066 – Portion 0
Farm Tontelberg no. 424 – Portion 1
Farm Biesjesfontein no 413 – Portion 9
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 2 3
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 1
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 2
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 3
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 7
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 8
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 7
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 3
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 6
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 1 2
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 4 0 0 0 0 1
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 9
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 6 0 0 0 1 1
C 0 4 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 4 0 0 0 0 8
These farm portions collectively make up a broader study area of approximately

3830 hectares which is being considered for the siting of the wind energy facility.
Depending on the final turbine selection, the estimated total installed capacity for
the proposed facility is up to 140 MW. The purpose of the proposed wind energy
facility is to sell the electricity generated to Eskom under the Renewable Energy
Independent Power Producers Procurement (REIPPP) Programme. The REIPPP
Programme has been introduced by the Department of Energy (DoE) to promote
the development of renewable power generation facilities by IPPs in South Africa.
The proposed wind energy facility development, in its current form, considers two
different layouts; one comprising 25 wind turbines (preferred layout) and a second
Project Description, Need and Desirability and Alternatives Page 31

comprising 40 wind turbines (alternative layout), with each wind turbine having the
capacity to generate up to 3.5 megawatts (MW) (refer to Figure 2.1).
» Up to 40 wind turbines (depending on the alterative selected for

implementation)
trenched at approximately 1 m next to the road and thereafter the area will be
rehabilitated.
 Option 1: A connection to the existing Moorreesburg 132/66kV substation
at 66kV or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV power line or a 132kV power line
existing Eskom 66 kV power line located in close proximity to the proposed
site
linking the wind turbines and other infrastructure on site (existing roads will be
used as far as possible).
» Temporarily affected areas comprising laydown areas at the foot of each turbine
and roads up to 11m in width to accommodate the crawler crane during
construction.
There will be no water borne sewage and on site- septic tanks will be serviced by
an appointed contractor and waste disposed in the municipal water treatment.
Potable water will be supplied by tankers for the personnelle. Water for construction
purposes is still in the process of being sourced, either as bulk from the
municipality, purchased from landowners or borehole.
The technical design and layout of the wind energy facility is illustrated in Figure
2.1. Appendix O contains A3 maps showing the detail of the layout of the facility.

Figure 2.1: Layout map for the Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility showing both layout options and power line options (refer to
Appendix O for A3 Map)

2.2 Need and Desirability of the Proposed Project
According to the DEA Draft Guideline on Need and Desirability in terms of the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, 2010 (October 2012) the need
and desirability of a development must be measured against the contents of the
Integrated Development Plan (IDP), Spatial Development Framework (SDF) and
Environmental Management Framework (EMF) for an area, and the sustainable
development vision, goals and objectives formulated in, and the desired spatial form
and pattern of land use reflected in, the area's IDP and SDF.
2.2.1 Need for the Project at a National Level
The need for the proposed wind energy facility is linked to increasing pressure on
countries to increase their share of renewable energy generation due to concerns
such as exploitation of non-renewable resources and the rising cost of fossil fuels. In
order to meet the long-term goal of a sustainable renewable energy industry, a
target of 17.8 GW of renewables by 2030 has been set by the Department of Energy
(DoE) within the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2010 and incorporated in the
Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement (REIPPP) Programme
initiated by the DoE. This programme has been designed so as to contribute towards
a target of 3725 MW to be generated from renewable energy sources, required to
ensure the continued uninterrupted supply of electricity, towards socio-economic and
environmentally sustainable growth, and to start and stimulate the renewable
industry in South Africa. The energy procured through this programme will be
produced mainly from wind, solar, biomass, and small-scale hydro (with wind and
solar comprising the bulk of the power generation capacity). This 17,8GW of power
from renewable energy amounts to ~42% of all new power generation being derived
from renewable energy forms by 2030.
2.2.2 The Need for the Project at a Provincial Scale
At present, a significant quantity of power supplied to the Western Cape is generated

in the Eskom coal-fired power stations elsewhere in the country (predominantly
located in Mpumalanga) and transferred to the Cape via the national transmission
network. A portion of the Province’s electricity is however generated locally,
including energy from the Koeberg Nuclear Power Plant, the Acacia Gas Turbines, the
Palmiet Pumped Storage Facility, the Open Cycle Gas Turbine plants at Atlantis and
Mossel Bay (peaking power). The City of Cape Town also produces a small amount
of electricity through the Steenbras Pumped Storage facility and local gas turbines.
Although Eskom has transmission power line strengthening plans in place to assist in

securing electricity supply for the Western Cape, there are a range of other options
that may be preferable. This includes the diversification of the energy supply mix
and the broadening of the energy generation options.
At a provincial level, the proposed project would contribute towards the target of
15% renewable energy for the province and reduction in carbon emissions as set by
the White Paper on Sustainable Energy (the purpose of which is to create an enabling
policy environment in the Western Cape in order to promote and facilitate energy
generation from renewable sources, as well as efficient energy use technologies and
initiatives). In addition, it is in line with the Climate Change Strategy and Action
Plan for the Western Cape in that it would contribute to one of the four programmes
which are prioritised (i.e. the reduction of the province’s carbon footprint which is
identified as the key mitigatory response) and its associated strategies (including
promotion of energy efficiency (including demand management), and the
development of renewable and alternate sustainable energy resources)
The Western Cape Growth and Development Strategy (PGDS) lays great emphasis on
the extreme vulnerability of the province to climate change (generally hotter, drier
conditions are generally predicted for the WC), and is aligned with the Western Cape
Climate Change Strategy. The PGDS notes that, with current available budgeting a
key necessary intervention is that,...”assistance needs to be provided in the
development of new economic sectors e.g. renewable energy sector, solar, wind and
wave energy and water sector.”
Renewable energy projects are currently under development within the Western
Cape as part of the Department of Energy’s Renewable Energy Independent Power
Producer’s Programme (REIPPP). In addition, a number of projects are proposed for
development within the Province. The proposed project would provide a further
opportunity for a wind energy development, with the aim of contributing to the
Provincial target for renewable energy.
2.2.3 Local Level Integrated Development Plans (IDPs)
The site falls within the Swartland Local Municipality. The Swartland Local
Municipality’s IDP (2012) identified a number of key performance areas (KPAs).
These KPAs aim to utilise existing economic strengths and opportunities by
transferring these into workable programmes and projects. These programmes and
projects tend to reduce the current threats, and strengthen the weaknesses in the
local economic environment. The IDP KPAs that are relevant to the proposed energy
facility include:

» Basic Service Delivery: Energy is highlighted as one of the priority issues for the
local municipality with respect to basic services; and,
» Local Economic Development (LED): Micro and macro-economic development and
land use management are highlighted as one of the priority issues for the
municipality. Therefore the development of the wind energy facility is desirable
by the local and district municipality and is aligned with the IDP's.
These KPAs address the outcome of an analysis of the status quo across numerous
sectors within the local municipality and include the following:
» Basic Service Delivery;

» Local Economic Development;
» Environmental Management;
» Social Development;
» Good Governance and Public Participation;
» Safety and Security;
» Cross-Cutting Issues;
» Municipal Financial Viability and Management; and
» Municipal Institutional Transformation.
At a local level, the proposed project will assist the municipality in meeting these
KPAs.
2.2.4 The Desirability for the Wind Energy Facility
In terms of the energy yield predicted for the facility calculated from more than 12
months monitored wind data, the developer considers the Moorreesburg Wind Farm
to be financially viable. In the South African context, developmental and community
needs are often determined through the planning measures (IDP, SDF). As detailed
above, the wind energy facility could contribute indirectly to planning at a Provincial
and Local level. The project will contribute to the development of renewable enegy
and reduction of carbon footprint, and will create employment and business
opportunities, as well as the opportunity for skills development for the local
community. The project will result in benefits to the local community, in accordance
with the localisation requirements of the REIPPP Programme. In addition, indirect
benefits and spend in the local area will benefit the local community.
The proposed site located near Moorreesburg is considered by the developer to be

highly preferred for the development of a wind energy facility. The reasons include:

» Extent of site: Availability of land of sufficient area for wind enery development
can be a restraining factor. The proposed site is available for lease from the
landowners, and is approximately 3830ha in extent which is sufficient for the
construction of the facility allowing for avoidance of site sensitivities.
» Grid connection considerations: There are two options available for the
connection to the grid. Both are within close proximity to the site and have
sufficient capacity to accommodate the power generated at the wind energy
facility.
» Site access: the site can be readily accessed via the R341 Main Road that
traverses the site.
» Loss of current land use: There will be limited loss of cultivated agricultural land
in the study area.
» Climatic conditions: Climatic conditions determine the economic viability of a
wind energy facility as it is directly dependent on the wind resources in the area.
» At least two other authorized wind farms are proposed for the area, the Gouda
Wind Farm and the Hopefield Wind Farm. The area has been identified as a hub
for wind energy facilities due to the preferable wind resources in the area.
» Topographic conditions: The site conditions are optimum for a development of
this nature, with the project area being of a suitable gradient for a wind project
(i.e. flat).
2.3 Project Alternatives
In accordance with the requirements of the EIA Regulations, project alternatives

have been considered within the EIA process. These are detailed below.
Location alternatives:
» No feasible site alternatives were identified and will be considered in the EIA.
Activity alternatives:
» Wind Energy Facility, and
» “No-go” alternative – retained use as natural rangeland
Site layout alternatives:
» 25 turbine layout (technically preferred option)
» 40 turbine layout
Technology alternatives:
» No technology alternatives will be considered as the site and wind
characteristics will dictate appropriate turbine type. No other electricity
production technologies are deemed appropriate for the site.

2.3.1 Site Alternatives
As a prospective Independent Power Producer IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd, are seeking suitable sites
for Wind Energy facilities across South Africa.
IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd identifies suitable sites using the following drivers:
» Wind characteristics (Incl. speed);

» Site accessibility;
» Distance to the nearest grid connection point: a Function of power line limits,
substation capacity and load flows;
» An environmental fatal flaws analysis.
Identification of the Moorreesburg Area for Wind Energy Development
Wind resources in the Western Cape are believed to be amongst the best in South
Africa. Therefore, the potential to develop Wind Energy Facilities as part of the
Western Cape Sustainable Energy Strategy is considered to be high. In terms of the
Wind Atlas for South Africa (WASA), the average wind speed as measured across the
Province at a height of 12 m is between 5 and 7 m/s (refer to Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1: WASA map. The Moorreesburg area is indicated by the black circle
In light of this potential for wind energy for power generation within the Western
Cape, IE Moorreesburg (Pty) Ltd, as an independent power producer, is proposing to
establish a commercial Wind Energy Facility on a site near the town of Moorreesburg.
The proposed facility falls within an area identified as being Negotiable, Preferred or
Highly Preferred for wind energy development, with some small areas indicated as
being Restricted (refer to Figure 2.2) in terms of the Western Cape Regional
Methodology for Wind Energy Site Selection (May, 2006) 2. The methodology as
tested within the DEA&DP assessment is intended to be used as a tool for regulating
wind energy developments in the Province through an effective method of
determining appropriate locations for such projects based on a combined “criteria
based” and “landscape based” assessment method. A key step in the generation of
the final output map (refer Figure 2.2) is the merging of positive and negative
criteria relating to technical and environmental 'thresholds' with landscape issues
related to visibility, landform and land cover.
2
Note that an Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) based on this methodology has been compiled
by DEA&DP but has not been published

Figure 2.2: Final output map from the DEA&DP assessment illustrating the results
from the merging of positive and negative criteria relating to technical
and environmental 'thresholds'. The site near Moorreesburg is
contained within the yellow circle and shows ratings of Highly
Preferred, Preferred and Negotiable, with small areas shown as
Restricted
The use of colour shading is used to illustrate the degree of “positive” or the extent
of “negative” factors. The dark green areas illustrate areas where wind turbines
would face the least constraints in terms of all environmental and planning criteria
considered.

Identification of the Proposed Site for Wind Energy Development
Several sites were considered in lead up to the selection of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm site. The
Moorreesburg Wind Farm site was the only site in the area identified as being technically feasible and
viable to take forward to further investigation in support of an application for authorisation by way of EIA
due to a number of characteristics associated with the site (as detailed below).
» Wind resource: This is considered to be the main criteria determining the

feasibility of the proposed development, as the resource will affect the efficiency
and economic viability of the facility. Wind monitoring is currently taking place
on site using one 80 m wind monitoring mast to confirm the wind resource and
regime on the site and inform the turbine selection process. Currently the
average wind speed is above 7 m/s at hub height, and is considered to be an
excellent resource for Wind Farm Development. The environmental feasibility of
the site for the proposed development is to be determined through EIA process
currently being undertaken for the site.
» Extent of site: the properties desirable for and available for wind farm
development (as agreed with the landowner through a lease agreement) cover an
area of 3830 ha. This area is sufficient for the proposed development and allows
for avoidance of environmental sensitivities should these be present.
» Power transmission considerations: The proposed development area is
located close to the existing Moorreesburg substation and power line and Eskom
power line infrastructure, which provides a direct connection point to the
electricity grid. The capacity of the power line to be constructed to accommodate
the transmission of the power generated at the proposed facility to the electricity
grid is to be established by IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd in consultation with
Eskom.
» Environmental Considerations: The proposed development area was identified
as being an area which is potentially suitable for a development of this nature
from an environmental perspective. The site is currently being utilised for
agricultural purposes (wheat) and only a small portion of the farm is natural
vegetation. Minimal biodiversity sensitivities are therefore expected to be
present. The potential does however exist for impacts on agricultural potential

and activities on the site. The proposal for the establishment of a wind energy
facility is not however viewed to be in conflict (or result in unacceptable
opportunity costs) with current and/or planned future land uses. Due to the
nature of the facility, the land occupied by the facility is able to be utilised for
agriculture once the turbines are in place and operational.
» Site access: Access to the site is currently possible via existing farm access from
N7 and R311 at 3 different points. The recommended access to the site is via the
existing farm accesses off the R311 which diverts toward the south from the N7,
approximately 4km south-south east of Moorreesburg.
» Local labour and economic stimulus: the site is located close to the town of
Moorreesburg, which will act as a ready source of local labour during construction
of the proposed facility.
No feasible site alternatives have been identified by IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd
for the establishment of the proposed wind energy facility. Therefore no site
alternatives are assessed within this EIA Report.
2.3.2. Technology Alternatives
As IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd is an IPP, only renewable energy technologies are
being considered. Due to the local resources available (i.e. wind and solar
irradiation) for such technologies, the site is considered most suitable for the
establishment of a wind energy facility. This has been confirmed through the on-site
wind measurements undertaken by the developer.
Once environmental constraining factors have been determined through the EIA
process, and site-specific wind data is available from the wind monitoring on site, IE
Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd will be considering various wind turbine options. The
preferred option will be informed by efficiency as well as environmental impact (such
as noise associated with the turbine). In addition, the most optimal layout will be
determined in order to maximise the capacity of the site while minimising
environmental impacts. The turbines being considered for use at the proposed
Moorreesburg Wind Farm will be between 2MW and 3.5 MW in capacity. The turbines
are proposed to have a hub height of up to 120 m, and a rotor diameter of up to 132
m. The technology provider has not yet been confirmed and will only be determined
after the outcome of the EIA. Further wind analysis, specialist input and the
outcomes of a detailed tender process will further contribute towards the selection of
a turbine supplier.

2.3.3 Site-specific or Layout Design Alternatives
The overall aim of the layout of infrastructure within the site is to maximise
electricity production through exposure to the wind resource, while minimising
infrastructure, operation and maintenance costs, and social and environmental
impacts. Through consideration of the environmental sensitivities on the site
identified within the scoping phase, IE Moorreesburg Wind has undertaken a micro-
siting study in order to determine the optimum layout for the facility. Two
alternative layouts have been proposed:
» Alternative 1: 25 wind turbines (technically preferred alternative) and

» Alternative 2: 40 wind turbines
In addition, two alternatives have been identified for the the overhead power line
(refer to Figure 2.1):
» Alternative 1: A connection to the existing Moorreesburg 132/66kV substation at

66kV or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV or 132kV overhead power line
» Alternatives 2: An overhead power line (66kV) likely to be connected to the
existing Eskom 66 kV power line located in close proximity to the proposed site
The positioning of other ancillary infrastructure, including the access roads and
internal substation site/s, will be informed by the final positioning of the turbines and
power line.
2.4.5 The ‘do-nothing’ Alternative
The ‘do-nothing’ alternative is the option of not constructing the Moorreesburg Wind
Farm on the proposed site. This alternative would result in no environmental
impacts on the site or surrounding area. However, this alternative would mean that
an additional 140MW would not be generated for integration into the Eskom grid.
This alternative is assessed further in Chapter 7.

STRATEGIC CONTEXT FOR ENERGY PLANNING CHAPTER 3
3.1. Strategic Electricity Planning in South Africa
The need to expand electricity generation capacity in South Africa is based on

national policy and is informed by on-going strategic planning undertaken by the
Department of Energy (DoE). The hierarchy of policy and planning documentation
that support the development of renewable energy projects such as wind energy
facilities is illustrated in Figure 3.1. These policies are discussed in more detail in the
following sections, along with the provincial and local policies or plans that have
relevance to the development of the proposed wind energy facility.
Figure 3.1: Hierarchy of electricity policy and planning documents
3.1.1 The Kyoto Protocol, 1997
South Africa’s electricity is mainly generated from coal-based technologies. South

Africa accounts for ~38% of Africa’s CO2 (a greenhouse gas contributing to climate
change) from burning of fossil fuels and industrial processes. The Kyoto Protocol is
an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change. South Africa ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002. The Kyoto
Protocol requires developing countries to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions
through actively cutting down on using fossil fuels, or by utilising more renewable
Strategic Context for Energy Planning Page 44

resources. Therefore certain guidelines and policies (discussed further in the

sections below) were put in place for the Government's plans to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. The development of renewable energy projects (such as the
proposed wind energy facility) is therefore in line with South Africa’s international
obligations in terms of the Kyoto Protocol.
3.1.2. The National Energy Act (2008)
The National Energy Act was promulgated in 2008 (Act No 34 of 2008). One of the
objectives of the Act was to promote diversity of supply of energy and its sources.
The National Energy Act aims to ensure that diverse energy resources are available,
in sustainable quantities and at affordable prices, to the South African economy in
support of economic growth and poverty alleviation, taking into account
environmental management requirements and interactions amongst economic
sectors. The Act provides the legal framework which supports the development of
power generation facilities.
3.1.3 White Paper on the Energy Policy of the Republic of South Africa,
1998
Development within the energy sector in South Africa is governed by the White Paper
on National Energy Policy (the National Energy Policy), published by DME in 1998.
This White Paper identifies five key objectives for energy supply within South Africa,
i.e.:
» increasing access to affordable energy services;
» improving energy sector governance;
» stimulating economic development;
» managing energy-related environmental impacts; and
» securing supply through diversity.
Furthermore, the National Energy Policy identifies the need to undertake an

Integrated Energy Planning (IEP) process and the adoption of a National Integrated
Resource Planning (NIRP) approach. Through these processes, the most likely future
electricity demand based on long-term southern African economic scenarios can be
forecasted, and provide the framework for South Africa to investigate a whole range
of supply and demand side options.

3.1.4 White Paper on the Renewable Energy Policy of the Republic of South
Africa (2003)
Internationally there is increasing development of the use of renewable technologies

for the generation of electricity due to concerns such as climate change and
exploitation of resources. In response, the South African government ratified the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in August 1997
and acceded to the Kyoto Protocol, the enabling mechanism for the convention, in
August 2002. In addition, national response strategies have been developed for both
climate change and renewable energy.
Investment in renewable energy initiatives, such as the proposed wind energy

facility, is supported by the National Energy Policy (DME, 1998). This policy
recognises that renewable energy applications have specific characteristics which
need to be considered. The Energy Policy is “based on the understanding that
renewables are energy sources in their own right, and are not limited to small-scale
and remote applications, and have significant medium- and long-term commercial
potential.” In addition, the National Energy Policy states that “Renewable resources
generally operate from an unlimited resource base and, as such, can increasingly
contribute towards a long-term sustainable energy future”.
The White Paper on Renewable Energy (DME, 2003) supplements the Energy Policy,
and sets out Government’s vision, policy principles, strategic goals and objectives for
promoting and implementing renewable energy in South Africa. It also informs the
public and the international community of the Government’s vision, and how the
Government intends to achieve these objectives; and informs Government agencies
and organs of their roles in achieving the objectives.
The support for the Renewable Energy Policy is guided by a rationale that South
Africa has a very attractive range of renewable resources, particularly solar and
wind, and that renewable applications are, in fact, the least cost energy service in
many cases from a fuel resource perspective (i.e. the cost of fuel in generating
electricity from such technology); more so when social and environmental costs are
taken into account. In spite of this range of resources, the National Energy Policy
acknowledges that the development and implementation of renewable energy
applications has been neglected in South Africa.
Government policy on renewable energy is therefore concerned with addressing the

following challenges:

» Ensuring that economically feasible technologies and applications are

implemented;
» Ensuring that an equitable level of national resources is invested in renewable
technologies, given their potential and compared to investments in other energy
supply options; and
» Addressing constraints on the development of the renewable industry.
The White Paper on Renewable Energy states “It is imperative for South Africa to
supplement its existing energy supply with renewable energies to combat Global
Climate Change which is having profound impacts on our planet.”
3.1.5 Final Integrated Resource Plan 2010 - 2030
The current iteration of the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for South Africa, initiated
by the Department of Energy (DoE) after a first round of public participation in June
2010, led to the Revised Balanced Scenario (RBS) that was published in October
2010. A second round of public participation was conducted in November/December
2010, which led to several changes to the IRP model assumptions.
The document outlines the proposed generation new-build fleet for South Africa for
the period 2010 to 2030. This scenario was derived based on the cost-optimal
solution for new-build options (considering the direct costs of new build power
plants), which was then “balanced” in accordance with qualitative measures such as
local job creation. In addition to all existing and committed power plants (including
10 GW committed coal), the Policy-Adjusted IRP includes 9,6 GW of nuclear; 6,3 GW
of coal; 17,8 GW of renewables; and 8,9 GW of other generation sources.
3.1.6 Integrated Energy Planning Report
The DoE has released a draft Integrated Energy Planning Report (June 2013) for
public comment. The Draft Integrated Energy Planning Report gives insight on the
possible implications of pursuing alternative energy policy options in South Africa.
Once the implications of all the alternative options have been explored and evaluated
against each of the eight (8) key objectives, final recommendations will be made in
the form of the Final IEP Report.
3.1.7 Department of Energy Process for Independent Power Producers

(IPP)
In order to provide a mechanism for the development of renewables as part of the

power generation mix, as defined by the IRP, the Department of Energy has

established a programme for Independent Power Producers (IPPs), known as the

Renewable Energy IPP Procurement (REIPPP) Programme. Through this programme,
an IPP will take part in a bidding process in which the Department of Energy will
determine preferred bidders. A Preferred Bidder will be held to compliance with the
price and economic development proposals in its bid, with regular reporting to
demonstrate compliance during the life of the project.
The DoE REIPPP Programme is currently underway, with preferred bidders having
been awarded a total of 3 916MW across 7 of the 9 Provinces. Construction on many
of these projects has already commenced and some are already operational. The
government signed contracts for 47 IPP projects (in 2012 and 2013 from the Round
1 and Round 2 projects), and have awarded a further 17 projects in Round 3 (which
are all at various stages of completing their agreements with the DoE). It is the
intention of IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd to bid the Moorreesburg Wind Farm to
the DoE for the bid submission in 2015.
Should the project be selected as a preferred bidder project, IE Moorreesburg Wind

(Pty) Ltd will be required to apply for a generation license from the National Energy
Regulator of South Africa (NERSA), as well as enter into a power purchase
agreement with Eskom (i.e. typically for a period of 20 - 25 years) in order to build
and operate the proposed wind energy facility. As part of the agreement,
Moorreesburg Wind Farm would be remunerated per kWh by Eskom or subsequent
authority/market operator. Depending on the economic conditions following the
lapse of this period, the facility can either be decommissioned, or the power
purchase agreement renegotiated and extended.
3.2 Project Planning and the site-specific Environmental Impact

Assessment
In terms of the EIA Regulations under NEMA, a Scoping and EIA report (including an
environmental management programme (EMPr)) are required to be compiled for this
proposed project. The EIA is considered as an effective planning and decision-
making tool in the planning process of a new power generation facility. It allows
potential environmental consequences resulting from a technical facility during its
establishment and its operation to be identified and appropriately managed through
project design and implementation. The level of detail at a site-specific level is
refined through the process, and allows for resolution of potential issue(s) through
dialogue with affected parties.

The relationship between project development and the environmental assessment

and management process is depicted in the figure below.
Figure 3.2: Diagram depicting the relationship between project development and
environmental management
The environmental screening process considered a high-level, region for possible

development. Within this region, the developer proposed a site. This entire extent
of the site has been considered in this Draft Environmental Impact Assessment
Report to determine any environmental sensitivity and/or fatal flaws and to inform
the layout of the wind energy facility.

WIND ENERGY AS A POWER GENERATION OPTION CHAPTER 4
Compared with other renewable energy sources such as solar and bio-energy, wind
turbines generate the highest energy yield while affecting the smallest physical land
space. Wind technologies convert the energy of moving air masses at the earth's
surface to mechanical power that can be directly used for mechanical needs (e.g.
milling or water pumping) or converted to electric power in a generator (i.e. a wind
turbine).
Use of wind for electricity generation is essentially a non-consumptive use of a

natural resource, and produces an insignificant quantity of greenhouse gases in its
life cycle. A wind energy facility also qualifies as a Clean Development Mechanism
(CDM) project (i.e. a financial mechanism developed to encourage the development
of low carbon generating technologies technologies) as it meets all international
requirements in this regard.
Environmental pollution and the emission of CO2 from the combustion of fossil fuels
constitute a threat to the environment. The use of fossil fuels is reportedly
responsible for ~70% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. The climate change
challenge needs to include a shift in the way that energy is generated and consumed.
Worldwide, many solutions and approaches are being developed to reduce emissions.
However, it is important to acknowledge that the most cost-effective solution in the
short-term is not necessarily the least expensive long-term solution. This holds true
not only for direct project cost, but also indirect project cost such as impacts on the
environment. Renewable energy is considered a ‘clean source of energy’ with the
potential to contribute greatly to a more ecologically, socially and economically
sustainable future. The challenge now is ensuring wind energy projects are able to
meet all economic, social and environmental sustainability criteria.
4.1 The Importance of the Wind Resource for Energy Generation
The importance of using the wind resource for energy generation has the attractive
attribute that the fuel is free. The economics of a wind energy project crucially
depend on the wind resource at the site. Detailed and reliable information about the
speed, strength, direction, and frequency of the wind resource is vital when
considering the installation of a wind energy facility, as the wind resource is a critical
factor to the success of the installation.
Wind as a Power Generation Option Page 50

» Wind speed is the rate at which air flows past a point above the earth's surface.
Average annual wind speed is a critical siting criterion, since this determines the
cost of generating electricity. The doubling of wind speed increases the wind
power by a factor of 8, so even small changes in wind speed can produce large
changes in the economic performance of a wind farm. Wind turbines can start
generating at wind speeds of between ~3 m/s to 4 m/s, with wind speeds greater
than 6 m/s currently required for a wind energy facility to be economically viable.
Wind speed can be highly variable and is also affected by a number of factors,
including surface roughness of the terrain. The effect of height variation/relief in
the terrain is seen as a speeding-up/slowing-down of the wind due to the
topography. Elevation in the topography influences the flow of air, and results in
turbulence within the air stream, and this has to be considered in the placement
of turbines.
» Wind power is a measure of the energy available in the wind.
» Wind direction is reported by the direction from which it originates. Wind

direction at a site is important to understand, but it is not typically critical in site
selection as wind turbine blades automatically turn to face into the predominant
wind direction at any point in time.
A wind resource measurement and analysis programme must be conducted for the
site proposed for development, as only measured data will provide a robust
prediction of the facilities expected energy production over its lifetime. This is being
undertaken for the proposed site through the on-site monitoring of the wind
resource.
The placement of the individual turbines within a wind energy facility must consider
the following technical factors:
» Predominant wind direction, wind strength and frequency

» Topographical features or relief affecting the flow of the wind (e.g. causing
shading effects and turbulence of air flow)
» Effect of adjacent turbines on wind flow and speed – specific spacing is required
between turbines in order to reduce the effects of wake turbulence.
Wind turbines typically need to be spaced approximately 3 to 5 times the rotor

diameter apart in order to minimise the induced wake effect the turbines might have
on each other (refer to Figure 4.1). Once a viable footprint for the establishment of
the wind energy facility has been determined (through the consideration of both

technical and environmental criteria) the spacing requirements will be considered

through the process of micro-siting the turbines on the site.

Figure 4.1: Artists impression of a portion of a wind energy facility, illustrating the various components and associated
infrastructure. Note that distances shown are indicative only

4.2 What is a Wind Turbine and How Does It Work
The kinetic energy of wind is used to turn a wind turbine to generate electricity. A
wind turbine typically consists of three rotor blades and a nacelle mounted at the top
of a tapered tower. The mechanical power generated by the rotation of the blades is
transmitted to the generator within the nacelle via a gearbox and drive train.
Turbines are able to operate at varying speeds. The amount of energy a turbine can
harness depends on both the wind velocity and the length of the rotor blades. It is
anticipated that the turbines utilised for the proposed Morreesburg Wind Farm in the
Western Cape will have a hub height of up to 120 m, and rotor diameter of 132 m.
These turbines would be capable of generating in the order of up to 3.5 MW each (in
optimal wind conditions).
4.2.1. Main Components of a Wind Turbine
The turbine consists of the following major components (refer to Figure 4.2):
» The foundation
» The tower
» The rotor
» The nacelle
The foundation
The foundation is used to secure each wind turbine to the ground. These structures
are commonly made of reinforced concrete and are designed to withstand the
vertical loads (weight) and lateral loads (wind).
The tower
The tower is a hollow structure (steel or concrete or a combination of the two
materials) allowing access to the nacelle (between 80m and 120m in height). The
height of the tower is a key factor in determining the amount of electricity a turbine
can generate. Small transformers may occur outside each turbine tower, depending
on what make and model of turbine is deemed most suitable for the site. Such a
transformer would have its own foundation and housing around it. Alternatively, the
transformer could be housed within the tower. The transformers convert the
electricity to the correct voltage for transmission into the national energy grid.
The tower on which a wind turbine is mounted is not just a support structure. It also
raises the wind turbine so that its blades safely clear the ground and can reach the
stronger winds at higher elevations. The tower must be strong enough to support

the wind turbine and to sustain vibration, wind loading and the overall weather
elements for the lifetime of the wind turbine.
Figure 4.2: Illustration of the main components of a wind turbine
The rotor
The portion of the wind turbine that collects energy from the wind is called the rotor.
The rotor comprises of three rotor blades (the approximate rotor diameter is in the
range of up to 132m, and the length of blade is between 40m – 66m long). The
rotor blades use the latest advances in aeronautical engineering materials science to
maximise efficiency. The greater the number of turns of the rotor the more
electricity is produced. The rotor converts the energy in the wind into rotational
energy to turn the generator. The rotor has three blades that rotate at a constant
speed of about 15 to 28 revolutions per minute (rpm). The speed of rotation of the

blades is controlled by turning the blades to face into the wind (‘yaw control’), and
changing the angle of the blades (‘pitch control’) to make the most use of the
available wind.
The rotor blades function in a similar way to the wing of an aircraft, utilising the
principles of lift (Bernoulli). When air flows past the blade, a wind speed and
pressure differential is created between the upper and lower blade surfaces. The
pressure at the lower surface is greater and thus acts to "lift" the blade. When
blades are attached to a central axis, like a wind turbine rotor, the lift is translated
into rotational motion. Lift-powered wind turbines are well suited for electricity
generation.
The rotation of the rotor blades produces a characteristic ‘swishing’ sound as the
blades pass in front of the tower roughly once a second. The other moving parts,
the gearbox and generator, cannot be heard unless the observer is physically inside
the turbine tower.
The nacelle
The nacelle at the top of the tower accommodates the gears, the generator,
anemometer for monitoring the wind speed and direction, cooling and electronic
control devices, and yaw mechanism. Geared nacelles generally have a longer form/
structure than gearless turbines.

Figure 4.3: Illustration of the main components of a turbine with gears
3.2.2. Operating Characteristics of a Wind Turbine
A turbine is designed to operate continuously, unattended and with low maintenance

for more than 20 years or >120 000 hours of operation. Once operating, a Wind
Energy Facility can be monitored and controlled remotely, with a mobile team for
maintenance, when required.
The cut-in speed is the minimum wind speed at which the wind turbine will
generate usable power. This wind speed is typically between 10 and 15 km/hr
(~3 m/s and 4 m/s).
At very high wind speeds, typically over 90 km/hr (25 m/s), the wind turbine will
cease power generation and shut down. The wind speed at which shut down occurs
is called the cut-out speed. Having a cut-out speed is a safety feature which
protects the wind turbine from damage. Normal wind turbine operation usually
resumes when the wind drops back to a safe level.
It is the flow of air over the blades and through the rotor area that makes a wind
turbine function. The wind turbine extracts energy by slowing the wind down. The
theoretical maximum amount of energy in the wind that can be collected by a wind

turbine's rotor is approximately 59%. This value is known as the Betz Limit. If the
blades extracted 100% of the wind’s energy, a wind turbine would not work because
the air, having given up all its energy, would entirely stop. So, if a blade were 100%
efficient then it would theoretically extract 59% of the energy as this is the
maximum (due to Betz law). In practice, the collection efficiency of a rotor is not
100%. A more typical efficiency is 35% to 45%. A complete wind energy system
incurs losses through friction etc. and modern systems end up converting between
20-25% of the energy in the air into electricity which equates to 34-42% of the
maximum (due to Betz Law).
However, because the energy in the air is free, describing how efficiently the energy
is converted is only useful for system improvement and monitoring purposes. A
more useful measurement is the Capacity Factor which is also represented as a
percentage. The Capacity Factor percentage is calculated from the actual MWh
output of electricity from the entire wind farm over 1 year divided by the nameplate
maximum theoretical output for the same period. It therefore also takes wind
resource, wind variability and system availability (downtime, maintenance and
breakdowns) into account.
Wind turbines can be used as stand-alone applications, or they can be connected to a

utility power grid. For utility-scale sources of wind energy, a large number of wind
turbines are usually built close together to form a wind energy facility.
3.3 Project Construction Phase
The construction phase of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm in anticipated to take

between 12 – 18 months. In order to construct the proposed wind energy facility
and associated infrastructure, a series of activities will need to be undertaken. There
is likely to be more than one crew operating on the site at any one time during
construction, dependant on the phase of construction. Construction crews will
constitute primarily unskilled and semi-skilled workers. No contractors (other than
security personnel) will reside on the site at any time during the construction or
operational phases.
3.3.1 Conduct Surveys
Prior to initiating construction, a number of surveys will be required including, but

not limited to, geotechnical survey, site survey and confirmation of the turbine
micro-siting footprint, survey of on-site-substation site and survey of power line
servitude to determine tower locations.

3.3.2 Establishment of Access Roads to the Site
The proposed site is accessible from the R311. Access/haul roads to the site as well
as internal access roads within the site are required to be established prior to the
commencement of construction. As far as possible, existing access roads would be
utilised, and upgraded where required. Within the site itself, access will be required
between the turbines for construction purposes (and later limited access for
maintenance). Special haul roads, of up to 12m in width in places if a ‘crawler crane’
is used, may need to be constructed to and within the site to accommodate
abnormally loaded vehicle access and circulation. The internal service road
alignment will be informed by the final micro-siting/positioning of the wind turbines
and are up to 7m wide.
These access roads will have to be constructed in advance of any components being
delivered to site, and will remain in place after completion for future access and for
maintenance purposes. It is proposed that in preparing the access road, a portion of
it (up to 7m in width) will be constructed as a permanent access road and the
remainder as a temporary access road that can be de-compacted and returned to its
pre-construction condition through rehabilitation.
3.3.3 Undertake Site Preparation
Site preparation activities will include clearance of vegetation at the footprint of each
turbine, the establishment of internal access roads (as discussed in Section 3.3.2
above) and excavations for foundations (refer to Section 3.3.4 below). These
activities will require the stripping of topsoil, which will need to be stockpiled,
backfilled and/or spread on site.
Site preparation will be undertaken in a systematic manner to reduce the risk of the
open ground to erosion. In addition, site preparation will include search and rescue
of floral species of concern (where required), as well as identification and excavation
of any sites of cultural/heritage value (where required).
3.3.4 Construct Foundation
Concrete foundations will be constructed at each turbine location. The dimension of

a turbine foundation is approximately 40m2. Foundations will be mechanically
excavated to a depth of approximately 4 m, depending on the local geology.
Concrete may to be brought to site as ready-mix or batched on site if no suitable
concrete suppliers are available in the vicinity. The reinforced concrete foundation

will be poured and will support a mounting ring. The foundation will then be left up
to a week to cure.
Figure 3.2: Photograph illustrating the construction of the foundation for a

wind turbine (photo sourced from www.blm.gov)
Figure 3.3: Photograph illustrating a completed foundation for a wind

turbine (photo sourced from www.juwi.com)

3.3.5 Transport of Components and Equipment to Site
The wind turbine, including the tower, will be brought to the site by the turbine
supplier in sections on flatbed trucks. Turbine units which must be transported to
site consist of: the tower (in segments), hub, nacelle, and three rotor blades. The
individual components are defined as abnormal loads in terms of Road Traffic Act
(Act No 29 of 1989)3 by virtue of the dimensional limitations (abnormal length of the
blades) and load limitations (i.e. the nacelle). In addition, components of various
specialised construction and lifting equipment are required on site to erect the wind
turbines and need to be transported to site. In addition to the specialised lifting
equipment/cranes, the normal civil engineering construction equipment will need to
be brought to the site for the civil works (e.g. excavators, trucks, graders,
compaction equipment, cement trucks, site offices etc.).
The components required for the establishment of the substation/s (including

transformers) as well as the associated infrastructures will also be transported to site
as required.
The dimensional requirements of the load during the construction phase

(length/height) may require alterations to the existing road infrastructure (e.g.
widening on corners), accommodation of street furniture (e.g. street lighting, traffic
signals, telephone lines etc.) and protection of road-related structures (i.e. bridges,
culverts, portal culverts, retaining walls etc.) as a result of abnormal loading.
The equipment will be transported to the site using appropriate National and
Provincial roads, and the dedicated access/haul road to the site itself
3.3.6 Establishment of Laydown Areas on Site
Laydown areas, including crane hardstand areas, will need to be established at each
turbine position for the storage and assembly of wind turbine components (an area
approximately 70m X 30m =2100m2). The laydown area will need to accommodate
the cranes required in tower/turbine assembly. Laydown and storage areas will be
required to be established for the normal civil engineering construction equipment
which will be required on site.
3
A permit will be required for the transportation of these abnormal loads on public roads.

Figure 3.6: Photograph illustrating the laydown areas required during the erection
of one of the (photo courtesy of Eskom)
3.3.7 Construct Turbine
A large lifting crane and an assisting small crane will be brought onto site (refer to
Figure 3.6 above), these will be used to lift the various turbine components. These
two cranes will lift the tower sections into place, before the nacelle, which contains
the gearbox, generator and yawing mechanism, are placed on the top of the
assembled tower. The next step will be to assemble or partially assemble the rotor
(i.e. the blades of the turbine) on the ground which will then be lifted to the nacelle
and bolted into place.
3.3.8 Construct Substation
An on-site substation will be constructed within the site. The turbines will be
connected to the substation via underground cabling wherever possible. The position

of the substation will be informed by the final micro-siting/positioning of the wind

turbines. The layout of the turbines will determine the optimum position for the
substation.
The construction of the substation would require a survey of the site; site clearing
and levelling and construction of access road/s to the substation site (where
required); construction of substation terrace and foundations; assembly, erection
and installation of equipment (including transformers); connection of conductors to
equipment; and rehabilitation of any disturbed areas and protection of erosion
sensitive areas.
3.3.9 Establishment of Ancillary Infrastructure
A workshop as well as a contractor’s equipment camp will be required to be

constructed. Temporary storage areas and a construction compound will also be
established. Service buildings for site offices, storage and safe refuelling areas are
also required.
The establishment of these facilities/buildings will require the clearing of vegetation,

the levelling of the development site and the excavation of foundations prior to
construction. A laydown area for building materials and equipment associated with
these buildings will also be required.
3.3.10 Connection of Wind Turbines to the Substation
Each wind turbine will be connected to an optimally positioned on-site substation by

underground electrical cables wherever possible. The installation of these cables will
require the excavation of trenches, approximately 1-2 m in depth within which these
cables can then be laid. The underground cables will be planned to follow the
internal access roads, where possible.
3.3.11 Commissioning
Prior to the start-up of a wind turbine, a series of checks and tests will be carried
out. This will include both static and dynamic tests to ensure that the turbine is
working within appropriate limits. Grid interconnection and unit synchronisation will
be undertaken to confirm the turbine and unit performance. Physical adjustments
may be needed such as changing the pitch of the blades. The schedule for this
activity will be subject to site and weather conditions.

3.3.12 Undertake Site Rehabilitation
As construction is completed in an area, and as all construction equipment is

removed from the site, the site will be rehabilitated where practical and reasonable.
On full commissioning of the facility, any access points to the site which are not
required during the operation phase will be closed and prepared for rehabilitation.
3.4 Project Operation Phase
Approximately fifteen people will be responsible for monitoring and maintenance of

the facility. It is anticipated that there could be security and maintenance staff
required on site, though this will be evaluated as the need arises.
Each turbine within the wind energy facility will be operational except under
circumstances of mechanical breakdown, inclement weather conditions or
maintenance activities.
3.4.1 Maintenance
The wind turbine will be subject to periodic maintenance and inspection. Periodic oil
changes will be required. Any waste products (e.g. oil) will be disposed of in
accordance with relevant waste management legislation.
3.5 Decommissioning
The turbine infrastructure which will be utilised for the proposed wind energy facility
is expected to have a lifespan of approximately 20 - 30 years (with maintenance).
Equipment associated with this facility would only be decommissioned once it has
reached the end of its economic life. It is possible that refurbishment of the
infrastructure of the facility discussed in this EIA would comprise the disassembly
and replacement of the turbines with more appropriate technology/infrastructure
available at that time.
The following decommissioning activities have been considered to form part of the
project scope of the proposed wind energy facility.
3.5.1 Site Preparation
Site preparation activities will include confirming the integrity of the access to the
site to accommodate required equipment and lifting cranes, preparation of the site

(e.g. laydown areas, construction platform) and the mobilisation of decommissioning

equipment.
3.5.2 Disassemble Existing Turbine
A large crane will be brought on site. It will be used to disassemble the turbine and
tower sections. These components will be reused, recycled or disposed of in
accordance with regulatory requirements. All parts of the turbine would be
considered reusable or recyclable except for the blades.

APROACH TO UNDERTAKING THE EIA PROCESS CHAPTER 5
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process refers to that process (dictated

by the EIA Regulations) which involves the identification of and assessment of direct,
indirect and cumulative environmental impacts associated with a proposed project.
The EIA process comprises two phases: i.e. Scoping Phase and EIA Phase. The
EIA process culminates in the submission of an EIA Report (including an
Environmental Management Programme (EMPr)) to the competent authority for
decision-making. The EIA process is illustrated below:
Figure 5.1: Phases within the EIA Process
The EIA Phase for the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility and associated
infrastructure has been undertaken in accordance with the EIA Regulations published
in Government Notice 33306 of 18 June 2010, as amended in December 2010, in
terms of Section 24(5) of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA; Act
No 107 of 1998). The environmental studies for this proposed project were
undertaken in two phases, in accordance with the EIA Regulations. This chapter
serves to outline the EIA process that was followed.
5.1. Relevant Listed Activities
A table of the listed activities for the proposed projects in terms of GN R545, R544
and R546 (as amended in December 2010) is provided below:
Table 5.1: Listed Activities applicable to the Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility
Government Activity Description of listed activity Applicability to the Project
Notice No
GN544, 18 10 The construction of facilities or The construction of a
June 2010 infrastructure for the 66 kV/132kV overhead power
Approach to Undertaking the EIA Process Page 66


Notice No
transmission and distribution line from the wind facility to the
of electricity- Eskom electricity grid
(i) Outside urban areas or
industrial complexes with a
capacity of more than 33 but
less than 275 kilovolts.
GN544, 18 11 The construction of The construction of the
June 2010 (xi) infrastructure or proposed wind energy facility
structures covering 50 square will impede on drainage lines on
metres or more the site due to infrastructure
Where such construction such as storm water structures
occurs within a watercourse or and access roads.
within 32 metres of a
watercourse, measured from
the edge of a watercourse.
GN544, 18 18 The infilling or depositing of The proposed activity will
June 2010 any material of more than 5 require the infilling and
cubic metres into, or the deposition of materials within
dredging, excavation, removal watercourses.
or moving of soil, sand, shells,
shell grit, pebbles or rock or
more than 5 cubic metres from
(i). a water course
GN544, 18 22 The construction of a road, Access roads will be required to
June 2010 outside urban areas, the site and within the site.
(ii) where no road reserve
exists where the road is wider
than 8 metres,
GN545, 18 1 The construction of facilities or The wind facility will have a
June 2010 infrastructure, for the generation capacity of up to
generation of electricity where 140MW.
the output is 20 megawatts or
more.
GN546, 18 4 The construction of a road Roads wider than 4m will be
June 2010 wider than 4 metres with a required to be constructed for
reserve less than 13.5 metres the facility.
d (ii) all areas outside urban
areas
GN545, 18 15 Physical alteration of The proposed facility will have a
June 2010 undeveloped, vacant or developmental area of more
derelict land for residential, than 20 hectares.
retail, commercial,


Notice No
recreational, industrial or
institutional use where the
total area to be
transformed is 20 hectares
or more
GN546, 18 19 The widening of a road by Roads will be widened and
June 2010 more than 4 meters, or the lengthened during the pre-
lengthening of a road by more construction phase.
than 1 kilometre
d(ii).all areas outside urban
areas
GN544, 18 47 The widening of a road by Roads will be widened and
June 2010 more than 6 meters, or the lengthened during the pre-
lengthening of a road by more construction phase.
than 1 kilometre
i) Where the existing road
reserve is wider than 13.5m
The EIA Regulations were revised in December 2014 in terms of GNR 982 – 985. In
terms of Sub-Regulations 53(2) and 53(3) of these Regulations) Transitional
Arrangements):
" If a situation arises where an activity or activities, identified under the previous
NEMA Notices, no longer requires environmental authorisation in terms of the current
activities and competent authorities identified in terms of section 24(2) and 24D of
the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) or in terms
of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008),
and where a decision on an application submitted under the previous NEMA
regulations is still pending, the competent authority will consider such application to
be withdrawn".
and
"Where an application submitted in terms of the previous NEMA regulations, is

pending in relation to an activity of which a component of the same activity was not
identified under the previous NEMA notices, but is now identified in terms of section
24(2) of the Act, the competent authority must dispense of such application in terms
of the previous NEMA regulations and may authorise the activity identified in terms
of section 24(2) as if it was applied for, on condition that all impacts of the newly

identified activity and requirements of these Regulations have also been considered
and adequately assessed."
Therefore, similarly listed and additional activities relevant to the current application
have been identified and are listed in the table below.
Table 5.2 Activities relevant to the current application

Activity listed in GNR 544 - 546 Activity listed in GNR 983 - 985
GN544, activity 10 GN983, activity 11 (i)
The construction of facilities or infrastructure The development of facilities or infrastructure

for the transmission and distribution of for the transmission and distribution of
electricity – electricity-
Outside urban areas or industrial complexes (i) outside urban areas or industrial
with a capacity of more than 33kV but less complexes with a capacity of more than 33
than 275kV but less than 275 kilovolts
GN544, activity 11 GN983, activity 12
The construction of: The development of (xii) infrastructure or

(x) Buildings exceeding 50 m2 in size; or structures with a physical footprint of 100
(xi) Infrastructure or structures covering square metres or more;
50 m2 or more. where such development occurs-(a) within a
watercourse; or (c) if no development
Where such construction occurs within a setback exists, within 32 metres of a
watercourse or within 32 m of a watercourse, watercourse, measured from
measures from the edge of a watercourse. the edge of a watercourse; -
GN544, activity 13: GN983, activity 14:
The construction of facilities or infrastructure The development of facilities or

for the storage, or for the storage and infrastructure, for the storage, or for the
handling, of a dangerous good, where such storage and
storage occurs in containers with a combined handling, of a dangerous good, where such
3
capacity of 80 but not exceeding 500m . storage occurs in containers with a combined
capacity of 80 cubic metres or more but not
exceeding 500 cubic metres.
The infilling or depositing of any material of The infilling or depositing of any material of
more than 5 cubic metres into, or the more than 5 cubic metres into, or the
dredging, excavation, removal or moving of dredging, excavation, removal or moving of
soil, sand, shells, shell grit, pebbles or rock soil, sand, shells, shell grit, pebbles or rock of
or more than 5 cubic metres from: more than 5 cubic metres from-(i) a
(i) a watercourse watercourse

The construction of a road, outside urban The development of-

areas, (ii) a road with a reserve wider than 13,5
iii) Where no road reserve exists where the meters, or where no reserve exists where the
road is wider than 8 m road is wider than 8 metres
Physical alteration of undeveloped, vacant or The clearance of 20ha or more of indigenous

derelict land for residential, retail, vegetation, excluding where clearance of
commercial, recreational, industrial or vegetation is required for
institutional use where the total area to be i) undertaking a linear activity
transformed is 20 hectares or more ii) maintenance purposes undertaken in
accordance with a maintenance
management plan
The construction of facilities or The development of facilities or infrastructure

infrastructure, for the generation of for the generation of electricity from a
electricity where the output is renewable resource where the electricity
20 MW or more. output is 20 megawatts or more
GN545, activity 15: GN983, activity 28
Physical alteration of undeveloped, vacant or Residential, mixed, retail, commercial,

derelict land for residential, retail, industrial or institutional developments where
commercial, recreational, industrial or such land was used for agriculture or
institutional use where the total area to be afforestation on or after 01 April 1998 and
transformed is 20 ha or more. where such development:
(ii) will occur outside an urban area, where
the total land to be developed is bigger than
1 hectare
The construction of a road wider than 4 m The development of a road wider than 4
with a reserve less than 13,5m. metres with a reserve less than 13,5 metres.
(d) In Western Cape: f) in the Western Cape

(ii) all areas outside urban areas. i) Outside urban areas
aa) Areas containing natural vegetation
GN546. Activity 12 (b) GN983, activity 27:
The clearance of an area of 300 square The clearance of an area of 1 hectares or

metres or more of vegetation where 75% or more, but less than 20 hectares of indigenous

more of the vegetative cover constitutes vegetation
indigenous vegetation.
GN 985, activity 12
The clearance of an area of 300 square

metres or more of vegetation where 75% or
more of the vegetative cover constitutes
indigenous vegetation.
a) In the Western Cape

i) Within any critically endangered or
endangered ecosystem
ii) Within critical biodiversity areas
identified in bioregional plans
GN546, activity 19 GN 985, 18 (a) (ii) (bb) (ee) and 18 (f) (i)
(aa);
The widening of a road by more than 4 The widening of a road by more than 4
meters, or the lengthening of a road by more metres, or the lengthening of a road by more
than 1 kilometre than 1 kilometre.
d(ii).all areas outside urban areas (f) In Western Cape provinces
No additional listed activities within the EIA Regulations of December 2014 are
relevant to the project.
5.2. Scoping Study
The Scoping Study, which was concluded in June 2014 with the acceptance of the
Scoping Report by DEA, provided I&APs with the opportunity to receive information
regarding the proposed project, participate in the process and raise issues of
concern.
The Scoping Study aimed at detailing the nature and extent of the proposed
Moorreesburg Wind Farm, identifying potential issues associated with the proposed
project, and defining the extent of studies required within the EIA. This was
achieved through an evaluation of the proposed project, involving the project
proponent, specialist consultants, and a consultation process with key stakeholders
that included both relevant government authorities and interested and affected
parties (I&APs). The scoping phase of the process provided I&APs with the
opportunity to receive information regarding the proposed project, participate in the
process of identification of potential impacts, and raise any issues of concern.

The draft Scoping Report compiled was made available at public places for I&AP
review and comment. All the comments, concerns and suggestions received during
the Scoping Phase and the draft report review period were included in the Final
Scoping Report and Plan of Study for EIA. The Final Scoping Report was submitted
to the National Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), as the competent
authority, and was accepted in June 2014 (refer to Appendix B). In terms of this
acceptance, an Environmental Impact Assessment was required to be undertaken for
the proposed project in line with the Plan of Study for EIA, as detailed in the Scoping
Report.
5.3. Environmental Impact Assessment Phase
The EIA Phase aimed to achieve the following:
» Provide an overall assessment of the social and biophysical environments

affected by the proposed alternatives put forward as part of the project.
» Assess potentially significant impacts (direct, indirect, and cumulative, where
required) associated with the proposed facility.
» Comparatively assess identified feasible alternatives put forward as part of the
project.
» Identify and recommend appropriate mitigation measures for potentially
significant environmental impacts.
» Undertake a fully inclusive public participation process to ensure that I&APs are
afforded the opportunity to participate, and that their issues and concerns are
recorded.
The EIA addresses potential environmental impacts and benefits associated with all
phases of the project including design, construction, operation, and
decommissioning, and aims to provide the environmental authorities with sufficient
information to make an informed decision regarding the proposed project.
5.3. Overview of the EIA Phase
The EIA Phase is undertaken in accordance with the EIA Regulations published in GN
33306 of 18 June 2010, in terms of NEMA. Key tasks undertaken within the EIA
phase included:
» Consultation with relevant decision-making and regulating authorities (at

National, Provincial and Local levels).

» Undertaking a public participation process throughout the EIA process in

accordance with Regulation 54 of GN R543 of 2010 in order to identify any
additional issues and concerns associated with the proposed project.
» Preparation of a Comments and Response Report detailing key issues raised by
I&APs as part of the EIA Process (in accordance with Regulation 57 of GN R543 of
2010).
» Undertaking of independent specialist studies in accordance with Regulation 32 of
GN R543 of 2010.
» Preparation of a Draft EIA Report in accordance with the requirements of the
Regulation 31 of GN R543 of 2010.
These tasks are discussed in detail below.
5.3.1. Authority Consultation
The National DEA is the competent authority for this application. A record of all
authority consultation undertaken prior to the commencement of the EIA Phase is
included within the Scoping Report and EIA report. Consultation with the regulating
authorities (i.e. DEA and DEA&DP) has continued throughout the EIA process. On-
going consultation included the following:
» Submission of a Final Scoping Report (April 2014) following a public review

period (and consideration of stakeholder comments received).
» Correspondence with DEA and DEA&DP in order to clarify the findings of the
Scoping Report and the issues identified for consideration in the EIA process.
The following will be undertaken as part of this EIA process:
» Submission of a Draft Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report prior to

the commencement of the 40 day public review period in terms of Regulation
54(4).
» Provision of an opportunity for DEA and DEA&DP representatives to visit and
inspect the proposed site.
» Consultation with Organs of State that may have jurisdiction over the project,
including:
 Department of Energy
 CapeNature
 Department of Agriculture and Land Care
 Department of Water and Sanitation
 Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
 South African Heritage Resources Agency

 South African National Roads Agency Limited

 Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development
Planning (DEA&DP)
 Department of Land Affairs
 Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA)
 Swartland Local Municipality
 West Coast District Municipality
 The South African Airforce (SAAF)
 SANParks
 Eskom
 Sentech
 Square Kilometer Array (SKA)
 Heritage Western Cape
A record of all authority consultation undertaken prior to the commencement of the

EIA Phase is included within this EIAR. A record of the authority consultation in the
EIA process is included within Appendix C.
5.3.2. Public Involvement and Consultation: EIA Phase
The aim of the public participation process was primarily to ensure that:
» Information containing all relevant facts in respect of the proposed project was
made available to potential stakeholders and I&APs.
» Participation by potential I&APs was facilitated in such a manner that all potential
stakeholders and I&APs were provided with a reasonable opportunity to comment
on the proposed project.
» Comment received from stakeholders and I&APs was recorded and incorporated
into the EIA process.
Through on-going consultation with key stakeholders and I&APs, issues raised
through the Scoping Phase for inclusion within the EIA study were confirmed. All
relevant stakeholder and I&AP information has been recorded within a database of
affected. Adjacent landowners were identified and informed of the project. While
I&APs were encouraged to register their interest in the project from the onset of the
process, the identification and registration of I&APs has been on-going for the
duration of the EIA process and the project database has been updated on an on-
going basis.
Below is a summary of the key public participation activities conducted during the
EIA process.

» Identification of I&APs and establishment of a database

Identification of I&APs was undertaken through existing contacts and databases,
recording responses to site notices and the newspaper advertisement, as well as
through the process of networking. The key stakeholder groups identified include
authorities, local and district municipalities, public stakeholders and parastatals
(refer to Table 5.3).
Table 5.3: Key stakeholder groups identified during the EIA Phase
Stakeholder Group Department
National and Provincial » Department of Environmental Affairs and Development
Authorities and Organs Planning Western Cape
of State » Department of Energy
» Department of Water and Sanitation
» Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
» South African Heritage Resources Agency
» South African National Roads Agency Limited
» Department of Mineral Resources
» Heritage Western Cape
» Department of Land Affairs
» The South African Airforce (SAAF)
» SANParks
Municipalities » Swartland Local Municipality
» West Coast District Municipality
Public stakeholders » Adjacent and surrounding landowners
Parastatals & service » Eskom
providers » Sentech
» Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA)
» Square Kilometer Array (SKA)
Through on-going consultation with key stakeholders and I&APs, issues raised
through the Scoping Phase for inclusion within the EIA Phase were confirmed. All
relevant stakeholder and I&AP information has been recorded within a database of
affected parties (refer to Appendix C). While I&APs were encouraged to register
their interest in the project from the onset of the process, the identification and
registration of I&APs has been on-going for the duration of the EIA Process and the
project database has been updated on an on-going basis.
» Newspaper Advertisements
As part of the EIA phase a newspaper advert was placed in the Die Burger,
Weslander and Cape Times in order to inform the public of the review period for
the Draft EIA Report:

Copies of all the advertisements placed and notices distributed are contained in
Appendix C of this report. Copies of these letters distributed to the above
mentioned organs of state/ key stakeholders are included in Appendix C of this
report.
» Stakeholder Engagement
In order to accommodate the varying needs of stakeholders and I&APs, the
following opportunities have been provided for I&AP issues to be recorded and
verified through the EIA phase, including:
 Focus group meetings (stakeholders invited to attend)

 Public feedback meeting (public invited to attend)
 One-on-one consultation meetings where required (for example with
directly affected or surrounding landowners)
 Telephonic consultation sessions (consultation with various parties from
the EIA project team, including the project participation consultant, lead EIA
consultant as well as specialist consultants)
 Written, faxed or e-mail correspondence.
Record of all consultation undertaken during the EIA phase is included within
Appendix C.
4.3.3 Identification and Recording of Issues and Concerns
Issues and comments raised by I&APs over the duration of the EIA process have
been synthesised into a Comments and Response Report (refer to Appendix C for the
Comments and Response Reports compiled through the EIA Process to date). The
Comments and Response Report includes responses from members of the EIA
project team and/or the project proponent. Where issues are raised that the EIA
team considers beyond the scope and purpose of this EIA process, clear reasoning
for this view is provided.
4.3.4 Public Review of Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report
The Draft EIA Report was available for a 40 day public review period from 10 April
2015 – 21 May 2015 at the following locations:
» West Coast District Municipality foyer

» Moorreesburg Library
» Swartland Municipality
» Farmers Co-op in Moorreesburg.
» Available for download from www.savannahSA.com
In order to facilitate comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Assessment

Report, all registered I&APs were notified of the availability of the report by letter.
An advert was placed in the Die Burger and Die Weslander, to inform the public and
I&APs of the availability of the Draft EIAR for review. A public meeting and
additional focus group meetings were during the review period for the EIA report.
Registered parties will be notified of the dates of these meetings in writing, and the
date of the public meeting will be advertised once confirmed.
5.3.6. Final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report
The final stage in the EIA Phase entails capturing of responses from I&APs on the
Draft EIA Report in order to refine this report. This Final report is the report upon
which a decision is made regarding the proposed project. Once a decision has been
issued by the DEA, all registered I&APs will be notified in writing and the decision will
be advertised. This is the current phase.
5.4. Assessment of Issues Identified through the EIA Process
Issues which require further investigation within the EIA phase, as well as the
specialists involved in the assessment of these impacts are indicated in the table
below.
Specialist Area of Expertise Appendix

Simon Todd of Simon Todd Consulting Ecology Appendix
D
Ricardo Ramahlo of Bioinsight Bat Monitoring Programme and Appendix
impact assessment E
Ricardo Ramahlo of Bioinsight Bird Monitoring Programme Appendix
F
Lourens Leeuwner of EWT Avifauna Appendix
G
Christo Lubbe of Aurger Trac Agricultural potential Appendix
H
Jon Marshall of Afzelia Visual impacts Appendix I
Tim Hart of ACO Associates Heritage Appendix J
Morne de Jager of EAR Noise Appendix

K
Tony Barbour of Tony Barbour Environmental Social Impact Appendix
Consulting and Research L
Specialist studies considered direct and indirect environmental impacts associated

with the development of all components of the wind energy facility. Issues were
assessed in terms of the following criteria:
» The nature, a description of what causes the effect, what will be affected and
how it will be affected.
» The extent, wherein it is indicated whether the impact will be local (limited to
the immediate area or site of development), regional, national or international.
A score of between 1 and 5 is assigned as appropriate (with a score of 1 being
low and a score of 5 being high).
» The duration, wherein it is indicated whether:
 the lifetime of the impact will be of a very short duration (0–1 years) –
assigned a score of 1;
 the lifetime of the impact will be of a short duration (2-5 years) - assigned a
score of 2;
 medium-term (5–15 years) – assigned a score of 3;
 long term (> 15 years) - assigned a score of 4; or
 permanent - assigned a score of 5.
» The magnitude, quantified on a scale from 0-10, where a score is assigned:
 0 is small and will have no effect on the environment;
 2 is minor and will not result in an impact on processes;
 4 is low and will cause a slight impact on processes;
 6 is moderate and will result in processes continuing but in a modified way;
 8 is high (processes are altered to the extent that they temporarily cease);
and
 10 is very high and results in complete destruction of patterns and
permanent cessation of processes.
» The probability of occurrence, which describes the likelihood of the impact
actually occurring. Probability is estimated on a scale, and a score assigned:
 Assigned a score of 1–5, where 1 is very improbable (probably will not
happen);
 Assigned a score of 2 is improbable (some possibility, but low likelihood);
 Assigned a score of 3 is probable (distinct possibility);
 Assigned a score of 4 is highly probable (most likely); and
 Assigned a score of 5 is definite (impact will occur regardless of any
prevention measures).

» The significance, which is determined through a synthesis of the characteristics

described above (refer formula below) and can be assessed as low, medium or
high.
» The status, which is described as either positive, negative or neutral.
» The degree to which the impact can be reversed.
» The degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources.
» The degree to which the impact can be mitigated.
The significance is determined by combining the criteria in the following formula:
S=(E+D+M)P; where
S = Significance weighting
E = Extent
D = Duration
M = Magnitude
P = Probability
The significance weightings for each potential impact are as follows:
» < 30 points: Low (i.e. where this impact would not have a direct influence on
the decision to develop in the area);
» 30-60 points: Medium (i.e. where the impact could influence the decision to
develop in the area unless it is effectively mitigated); and
» > 60 points: High (i.e. where the impact must have an influence on the decision
process to develop in the area).
As IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd has the responsibility to avoid or minimise

impacts and plan for their management (in terms of the EIA Regulations), the
mitigation of significant impacts is discussed. Assessment of impacts with mitigation
is made in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation
measures.
5.5. Regulatory and Legal Context
The South African energy industry is evolving rapidly, with regular changes to
legislation and industry role-players. The regulatory hierarchy for an energy
generation project of this nature consists of three tiers of authority who exercise
control through both statutory and non-statutory instruments – that is National,
Provincial and local levels. As renewable energy development is a multi-sectoral
issue (encompassing economic, spatial, biophysical, and cultural dimensions) various

statutory bodies are likely to be involved in the approval process for renewable
energy facility project and the related statutory environmental assessment process.
5.5.1. Regulatory Hierarchy
At National Level, the main regulatory agencies are:
» Department of Energy: This department is responsible for policy relating to all

energy forms, including renewable energy, and are responsible for forming and
approving the IRP (Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity). It is the controlling
authority in terms of the Electricity Regulation Act (Act No 4 of 2006).
» National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA): This body is responsible for
regulating all aspects of the electricity sector, and will ultimately issue licenses
for wind energy developments to generate electricity.
» Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA): This Department is responsible for
environmental policy and is the controlling authority in terms of NEMA and the
EIA Regulations. The DEA is the competent authority for this project, and
charged with granting the relevant environmental authorisation.
» The South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA): The National Heritage
Resources Act (Act No 25 of 1999) and the associated provincial regulations
provide legislative protection for listed or proclaimed heritage sites.
» Department of Transport – South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA): This
department is responsible for aircraft movements and radar, which are aspects
that influence wind energy development location and planning.
» South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL): This department is
responsible for all National road routes such as the N7 which passes the
development site.
» Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS): The DWS is mandated to manage
South Africa’s water resources by ensuring the security and quality thereof. This
Department is responsible for evaluating and issuing licenses pertaining to water
use.
» The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF): This Department
is the custodian of South Africa’s agriculture, fisheries and forestry resources and
is primarily responsible for the formulation and implementation of policies
governing the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Sector. This Department has
published a guideline for the development of wind farms on agricultural land.
Deals with sub-division or registration of a long term lease on agricultural land.
Consent from this Department is required for the development and reckoning of
the land to be utilised by the wind energy facility.
» Department of Mineral Resources: A Section 53 Application is required in terms
to this Department. DMR consent required.

At Provincial Level, the main regulatory agencies are:
» Provincial Government of the Western Cape – Department of Environmental

Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP): This department is the commenting
authority for this project.
» Department of Transport and Public Works (Western Cape): This department is
responsible for roads and the granting of exemption permits for the conveyance
of abnormal loads on public roads.
» CapeNature: This Department’s involvement relates specifically to the
biodiversity and ecological aspects of the proposed development activities on the
receiving environment to ensure that developments do not compromise the
biodiversity value of an area. The Department considers the significance of
impacts specifically in threatened ecosystems as identified by the National Spatial
Biodiversity Assessment or systematic biodiversity plans.
» Heritage Western Cape (HWC) – This is the provincial authority responsible for
the management and conservation of heritage sites.
» Department of Agriculture and Land Care: This Department’s involvement relates
specifically to sustainable resource management and land care.
At Local Level the local and municipal authorities are the principal regulatory
authorities responsible for planning, land use, and the environment. In the Western
Cape, both Municipalities i.e. Swartland Local Municipality and West Coast District
Municipalities play a role.
» In terms of the Municipal Systems Act (Act No 32 of 2000) it is compulsory for all
municipalities to go through an Integrated Development Planning (IDP) process
to prepare a five-year strategic development plan for the area under their
control.
» Bioregional planning involves the identification of priority areas for conservation
and their placement within a planning framework of core, buffer and transition
areas. These could include reference to visual and scenic resources and the
identification of areas of special significance, together with visual guidelines for
the area covered by these plans.
» By-laws and policies have been formulated by local authorities to protect visual
and aesthetic resources relating to urban edge lines, scenic drives, special areas,
signage, communication masts, etc.
5.5.2. Legislation and Guidelines that have informed the preparation of

this EIA Report

The following legislation and guidelines have informed the scope and content of this
Scoping Report:
» National Environmental Management Act (Act No. 107 of 1998)

» EIA Regulations, published under Chapter 5 of the NEMA (GNR R543 in
Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010)
» Guidelines published in terms of the NEMA EIA Regulations, in particular:
 Companion to the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA)
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations of 2010 (Draft
Guideline; DEA, 2010)
 Public Participation in the EIA Process (DEA, 2010)
 Integrated Environmental Management Information Series (published by DEA)
» Municipal Integrated Development Plans;
» International guidelines – the Equator Principles and the International Finance
Corporation and World Bank Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for
Wind Energy (2007).
Several other Acts, standards or guidelines have also informed the project process
and the scope of issues evaluated in the scoping report, and to be addressed in the
EIA. A listing of relevant legislation identified at this stage of the process is provided
in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4: Initial review of relevant policies, legislation, guidelines and standards applicable to the proposed Moorreesburg
Wind Energy Facility EIA
Legislation / Policy / Applicable Requirements Relevant Authority Compliance requirements
Guideline
National Legislation
National Environmental » NEMA requires, inter alia, that: National Department of The final EIA report is to be
Management Act (Act No  Development must be socially, Environmental Affairs – lead submitted to the DEA and
107 of 1998) environmentally, and economically authority. Provincial Environmental
sustainable.” Department in support of the
Western Cape DEA&DP
 Disturbance of ecosystems and application for authorisation for the
loss of biological diversity are Moorreesburg Wind Farm.
avoided, or, where they cannot be
altogether avoided, are minimised
and remedied.”
 A risk-averse and cautious
approach is applied, which takes
into account the limits of current
knowledge about the
consequences of decisions and
actions.”
» EIA Regulations have been
promulgated in terms of Chapter 5.
Activities which may not commence
without an environmental authorisation
are identified within these Regulations.
» In terms of S24(1) of NEMA, the
potential impact on the environment
associated with these listed activities
must be considered, investigated,
assessed and reported on to the
competent authority charged by NEMA


Guideline
with granting of the relevant
environmental authorisation.
» In terms of GNR 543 of 18 June 2010,
a Environmental Impact Assessment
Process is required to be undertaken
for the proposed project.
National Environmental In terms of the Duty of Care provision in National Department of While no permitting or licensing
Management Act (Act No S28(1) the project proponent must ensure Environmental Affairs (as requirements arise directly by
107 of 1998) that reasonable measures are taken regulator of NEMA). virtue of the proposed project, this
throughout the life cycle of this project to section will find application during
ensure that any pollution or degradation of the EIA phase and will continue to
the environment associated with this apply throughout the life cycle of
project is avoided, stopped or minimised. the project.
In terms of NEMA, it has become the legal

duty of a project proponent to consider a
project holistically, and to consider the
cumulative effect of a variety of impacts.
National Environmental » The purpose of this Act is to reform Hazardous Waste – National » As no waste disposal site is to
Management: Waste Act the law regulating waste management DEA be associated with the
(Act No 59 of 2008) in order to protect health and the General Waste –DEA&DP proposed project, no permit is
environment by providing for the required in this regard.
licensing and control of waste » Waste handling, storage and
management activities. disposal during construction
» The Act provides listed activities and operation is required to be
requiring a waste license (GNR921). undertaken in accordance with
the requirements of this Act, to
be detailed in the project EMP.
» The volumes of waste to be
generated and stored on the


Guideline
site during construction and
operation of the facility will not
require a waste license
(provided these remain below
the prescribed thresholds).
Environment In terms of section 25 of the ECA, the National Department of There is no requirement for a noise
Conservation Act (Act No national noise-control regulations (GN Environmental Affairs permit in terms of the legislation.
73 of 1989) R154 in Government Gazette No. 13717 A Noise Impact Assessment is
Western Cape DEA&DP
dated 10 January 1992) were required to be undertaken in
promulgated. The NCRs were revised Swartland Local Municipality accordance with SANS 10328. This
under Government Notice No R55 of 14 must be completed as part of the
January 1994 to make it obligatory for all EIA process for the project.
authorities to apply the regulations.
Subsequently, in terms of Schedule 5 of

the Constitution of South Africa of 1996,
legislative responsibility for administering
the noise control regulations was devolved
to provincial and local authorities.
Provincial Noise Control Regulations exist
in the Western Cape Province.
National Water Act (Act Water uses must be licensed unless such Department of Water Affairs A water use license is required to
No 36 of 1998) water use falls into one of the categories be applied for or obtained, if
listed in S22 of the Act or falls under infrastructure such as access roads
general authorisation in terms of S39 and or cabling cross watercourses
GN 1191 of GG 20526 October 1999. (Section 21 c and i).
In terms of Section 19, the project

proponent must ensure that reasonable


Guideline
measures are taken throughout the life
cycle of this project to prevent and remedy
the effects of pollution to water resources
from occurring, continuing or recurring.
Minerals and Petroleum » A mining permit or mining right may Department of Mineral If borrow pits are required for the
Resources Development be required where a mineral in Resources construction of the facility, a
Act (Act No 28 of 2002) question is to be mined (i.e. materials mining permit or right is required
from a borrow pit) in accordance with to be obtained.
the provisions of the Act.
» Requirements for Environmental A S53 application is required to be
Management Programmes and submitted to the DMR for the
Environmental Management Plans are properties affected by the project.
set out in the Act.
» S53 Department of Mineral Resources:
Approval from the Department of
Mineral Resources (DMR) may be
required to use land surface contrary
to the objects of the Act in terms of
section 53 of the Mineral and
Petroleum Resources Development Act,
(Act No 28 of 2002): In terms of the
Act approval from the Minister of
Mineral Resources is required to ensure
that proposed activities do not sterilise
a mineral resources that might occur
on site.
National Environmental » S18, S19 and S20 of the Act allow National Department of While no permitting or licensing
Management: Air Quality certain areas to be declared and Environmental Affairs requirements are applicable to this
Act (Act No 39 of 2004) managed as “priority areas” project, this Act will find


Guideline
» Declaration of controlled emitters (Part Swartland Local Municipality application during the construction
3 of Act) and controlled fuels (Part 4 of phase of the project in terms of
Act) with relevant emission standards. dust management.
» Dust Control Regulations promulgated
in November 2013 requires the
implementation of a dust monitoring
plan should this be deemed necessary
by the air emissions officer.
» The Act provides that an air quality
officer may require any person to
submit an atmospheric impact report if
there is reasonable suspicion that the
person has failed to comply with the
Act.
National Heritage » S38 states that Heritage Impact » South African Heritage A heritage impact assessment is
Resources Act (Act No 25 Assessments (HIAs) are required for Resources Agency required to be undertaken as part
of 1999) certain kinds of development including (SAHRA) – National of the EIA process. A permit may
» The construction of a road, power heritage sites (grade 1 be required should identified
line, pipeline, canal or other sites) as well as all cultural or heritage sites on site be
similar linear development or historic graves and human required to be disturbed or
barrier exceeding 300 m in length; remains. destroyed as a result of the
» Any development or other activity » Heritage Western Cape – proposed development.
which will change the character of Issue of permits for
a site exceeding 5 000 m2 in removal or destruction of
extent heritage resources in the
» The relevant Heritage Authority must Western Cape.
be notified of developments such as
linear developments (i.e. roads and
power lines), bridges exceeding 50 m,
or any development or other activity


Guideline
which will change the character of a
site exceeding 5 000 m2; or the re-
zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m2
in extent. This notification must be
provided in the early stages of
initiating that development, and details
regarding the location, nature and
extent of the proposed development
must be provided.
» Standalone HIAs are not required
where an EIA is carried out as long as
the EIA contains an adequate HIA
component that fulfils the provisions of
S38. In such cases only those
components not addressed by the EIA
should be covered by the heritage
component.
National Environmental » Provides for the MEC/Minister to National Department of Specialist flora and fauna studies
Management: identify any process or activity in such Environmental Affairs have been undertaken as part of
Biodiversity Act (Act No a listed ecosystem as a threatening the EIA process.
10 of 2004) process (S53)
A permit may be required should
» A list of threatened and protected
any listed plant species on site be
species has been published in terms of
disturbed or destroyed as a result
S 56(1) - Government Gazette 29657.
of the proposed development.
» Three government notices have been
published, i.e. GN R 150
(Commencement of Threatened and
Protected Species Regulations, 2007),
GN R 151 (Lists of critically
endangered, vulnerable and protected


Guideline
species) and GN R 152 (Threatened or
Protected Species Regulations).
» Provides for listing threatened or
protected ecosystems, in one of four
categories: critically endangered (CR),
endangered (EN), and vulnerable (VU)
or protected. The first national list of
threatened terrestrial ecosystems has
been gazetted, together with
supporting information on the listing
process including the purpose and
rationale for listing ecosystems, the
criteria used to identify listed
ecosystems, the implications of listing
ecosystems, and summary statistics
and national maps of listed ecosystems
(National Environmental Management:
Biodiversity Act: National list of
ecosystems that are threatened and in
need of protection, (G 34809, GN
1002), 9 December 2011).
» This Act also regulates alien and
invader species.
» Under this Act, a permit would be
required for any activity which is of a
nature that may negatively impact on
the survival of a listed protected
species.
Conservation of » Prohibition of the spreading of weeds Department of Agriculture, This Act will find application during


Guideline
Agricultural Resources (S5) Forestry and Fisheries the EIA and will continue to apply
Act (Act No 43 of 1983) » Classification of categories of weeds & throughout the life cycle of the
invader plants (Regulation 15 of GN project. In this regard, soil erosion
R1048) & restrictions in terms of prevention and soil conservation
where these species may occur. strategies must be developed and
» Requirement & methods to implement implemented. In addition, a weed
control measures for alien and invasive control and management plan
plant species (Regulation 15E of GN must be implemented.
R1048).
The permission of agricultural
authorities will be required as
arable land may be ffected by the
project.
National Veld and Forest » Provides requirements for veldfire » Department of While no permitting or licensing
Fire Act (Act 101 of prevention through firebreaks and Agriculture, Forestry and requirements arise from this
1998) required measures for fire-fighting. Fisheries legislation, this act will find
Chapter 4 places a duty on landowners application during the operational
to prepare and maintain firebreaks, phase of the project in terms of
and Chapter 5 places a duty on all fire prevention and management.
landowners to acquire equipment and
have available personnel to fight fires.
» In terms of S21 the applicant would be
obliged to burn firebreaks to ensure
that should a veldfire occur on the
property, that it does not spread to
adjoining land.
» In terms of S12 the firebreak would
need to be wide and long enough to
have a reasonable chance of
preventing the fire from spreading, not


Guideline
causing erosion, and is reasonably free
of inflammable material.
» In terms of sS17ection 17, the
applicant must have such equipment,
protective clothing, and trained
personnel for extinguishing fires.
National Forests Act (Act » In terms of S5 (1) no person may cut, » Department of A permit would need to be
No 84 of 1998) disturb, damage or destroy any Agriculture, Forestry and obtained for any protected trees
protected tree or possess, collect, Fisheries that are affected by the proposed
remove, transport, export, purchase, project.
sell donate or in any other manner
acquire or dispose of any protected
tree or any forest product derived from
a protected tree, except under a
license granted by the Minister to an
(applicant and subject to such period
and conditions as may be stipulated”.
» GN 1042 provides a list of protected
tree species.
Aviation Act (Act No 74 of Any structure exceeding 45m above Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) This Act will find application during
th
1962) 13 amendment of ground level or structures where the top of the operational phase of the
the Civil Aviation the structure exceeds 150m above the project. Appropriate marking is
Regulations (CARS) 1997 mean ground level, the mean ground level required to meet the specifications
considered to be the lowest point in a 3km as detailed in the CAR Part
radius around such structure. 139.01.33. An obstacle approval
for the wind energy facility is
Structures lower than 45m, which are
required to be obtained from the
considered as a danger to aviation shall be
CAA.
marked as such when specified.


Guideline
Overhead wires, cables etc., crossing a
river, valley or major roads shall be
marked and in addition their supporting
towers marked and lighted if an
aeronautical study indicates it could
constitute a hazard to aircraft.
Section 14 of Obstacle limitations and

marking outside aerodrome or heliport –
CAR Part 139.01.33 relates specifically to
appropriate marking of wind energy
facilities.
Hazardous Substances This Act regulates the control of Department of Health It is necessary to identify and list
Act (Act No 15 of 1973) substances that may cause injury, or ill all the Group I, II, III and IV
health, or death by reason of their toxic, hazardous substances that may be
corrosive, irritant, strongly sensitising or on the site and in what operational
inflammable nature or the generation of context they are used, stored or
pressure thereby in certain instances and handled. If applicable, a license is
for the control of certain electronic required to be obtained from the
products. To provide for the rating of such Department of Health.
substances or products in relation to the
degree of danger; to provide for the
prohibition and control of the importation,
manufacture, sale, use, operation,
modification, disposal or dumping of such
substances and products.
» Group I and II: Any substance or

mixture of a substance that might by
reason of its toxic, corrosive etc.,


Guideline
nature or because it generates
pressure through decomposition, heat
or other means, cause extreme risk of
injury etc., can be declared to be
Group I or Group II hazardous
substance;
» Group IV: any electronic product;
» Group V: any radioactive material.
The use, conveyance or storage of any

hazardous substance (such as distillate
fuel) is prohibited without an appropriate
license being in force.
National Road Traffic Act The Technical Recommendations for » Provincial Department of An abnormal load/vehicle permit
(Act No 93 of 1996) Highways (TRH 11): “Draft Guidelines for Transport (provincial may be required to transport the
Granting of Exemption Permits for the roads) various components to site for
Conveyance of Abnormal Loads and for » South African National construction. These include:
other Events on Public Roads” outline the Roads Agency Limited » Route clearances and permits
rules and conditions which apply to the (national roads) will be required for vehicles
transport of abnormal loads and vehicles carrying abnormally heavy or
on public roads and the detailed abnormally dimensioned loads.
procedures to be followed in applying for » Transport vehicles exceeding
exemption permits are described and the dimensional limitations
discussed. (length) of 22m.
» Depending on the trailer
configuration and height when
Legal axle load limits and the restrictions
loaded, some of the power
imposed on abnormally heavy loads are
station components may not
discussed in relation to the damaging
meet specified dimensional
effect on road pavements, bridges and
limitations (height and width).


Guideline
culverts.
The general conditions, limitations and

escort requirements for abnormally
dimensioned loads and vehicles are also
discussed and reference is made to speed
restrictions, power/mass ratio, mass
distribution and general operating
conditions for abnormal loads and vehicles.
Provision is also made for the granting of
permits for all other exemptions from the
requirements of the National Road Traffic
Act and the relevant Regulations.
Provincial Policies / Legislation
Western Cape Noise The control of noise in the Western Cape Western Cape DEA&DP In terms of Regulation 4 of the
Control Regulations: PN Province is legislated in the form of Noise Noise Control Regulations: “No
627 of 1998 Control Regulations promulgated in terms person shall make, produce or
of section 25 of the Environment cause a disturbing noise (greater
Conservation Act No. 73 of 1989. than 5 dBA), or allow it to be
made, produced or caused by any
person, animal, machine, device or
apparatus or any combination
thereof”.
Western Cape Land Use Details land subdivision and rezoning Western Cape DEA&DP Given that the wind energy
Planning Ordinance 15 of requirements and procedures Swartland Local Municipality development is proposed on land
1985 that is zoned for agricultural use, a
consent use application in terms of
Section 17 of LUPO to an
alternative appropriate zone will be


Guideline
required.
Rezoning is required to be
undertaken following the issuing of
an Environmental Authorisation for
the proposed project.
Western Cape Nature and The Nature and Environmental Ordinance Cape Nature Removal or relocation of protected
Environmental Ordinance 19 of 1974, (as amended by the Western plant or animal species requires a
19 of 1974, (as amended Cape Nature Conservation Laws permit to be obtained from the
by the Western Cape Amendment Act, Act 2 of 2000) defines the Cape Nature.
Nature Conservation protection status of plants as follows:
Laws Amendment Act,  ‘‘endangered flora’’ means flora of
Act 2 of 2000 any species which is in danger of
extinction and is specified in Schedule
3 or Appendix I of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora,
Washington, 1973; provided that it
shall not include flora of any species
specified in such Appendix and
Schedule 4; (thus all Schedule 3
species)
 ‘‘protected flora’’ means any species
of flora specified in Schedule 4 or
Appendix II of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora,
Washington, 1973; provided that it
shall not include any species of flora
specified in such Appendix and


Guideline
Schedule 3
 ‘‘indigenous unprotected flora’’
means any species of indigenous flora
not specified in Schedule 3 or 4;
Western Cape Noise The control of noise in the Western Cape Western Cape DEA&DP In terms of Regulation 4 of the
Control Regulations: PN Province is legislated in the form of Noise Noise Control Regulations: “No
627 of 1998 Control Regulations promulgated in terms person shall make, produce or
of section 25 of the Environment cause a disturbing noise (greater
Conservation Act No. 73 of 1989. than 5 dBA), or allow it to be
made, produced or caused by any
person, animal, machine, device or
apparatus or any combination
thereof”.
Noise Standards Four South African Bureau of Standards Local Municipality The recommendations that the
(SABS) scientific standards are considered standards make are likely to
relevant to noise from a Wind Energy inform decisions by authorities, but
Facility. They are: non-compliance with the standards
» SANS 10103:2008. ‘The measurement will not necessarily render an
and rating of environmental noise with activity unlawful per se.
respect to annoyance and to speech
communication’.
» SANS 10210:2004. ‘Calculating and
predicting road traffic noise’.
» SANS 10328:2008. ‘Methods for
environmental noise impact
assessments’.
» SANS 10357:2004. ‘The calculation of
sound propagation by the Concave
method’.


Guideline
The relevant standards use the equivalent

continuous rating level as a basis for
determining what is acceptable. The levels
may take single event noise into account,
but single event noise by itself does not
determine whether noise levels are
acceptable for land use purposes.

PROPOSED IE MOORREESBURG WIND FARM, WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE
DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT CHAPTER 6
This section of the Final EIA Report provides a description of the environment that may be
affected by the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm in the Western Cape Province. This
information is provided in order to assist the reader in understanding the possible effects of
the proposed project on the environment. Aspects of the biophysical, social and economic
environment that could be directly or indirectly affected by, or could affect, the proposed
development have been described. This information has been sourced from both existing
information available for the area as well as collected field data, and aims to provide the
context within which this EIA is being conducted. A more detailed description of each
aspect of the affected environment is included within the specialist reports contained within
Appendices F - M.
6.1 Regional Setting and Location of the Study Area
The proposed site for the Moorreesburg Wind Farm is located within the Swartland Local
Municipality of the Western Cape. The site is located approximately 4km south-south east
of the town of Moorreesburg, approximately 30km north east of Malmesbury, 30km south-
east of Hopefield and approximately 30km south of Picketburg in the Western Cape Province
(refer to figure 6.1).
Affected farms include:
» Farm Zwartfontein 414

 Portion 08 and 23,
 Remainder of portion 11, 12, 13, 17 and 18
» Farm Zwartfontein 416
 Portion 1, 7 and remainder of portion 3
» Portion 1 of the farm Tontelberg 424
» Portion 9 of the Farm Biesjesfontein 413
» Portion 2 of the Farm Hartebeestfontein 412
 Portion 6 of the Farm Klipheuwel/ Haartebeestfontein 412
Description of the Affected Environment Page 98

Figure 6.1 Map indicating the regional setting of the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Energy Farm

6.2 General Description of Site and Surrounding Area
The site is located within the farming lands of Moorreesburg and is zoned
Agriculture I. Moorreesburg is located within the Swartland Municipal area of the
Western Cape Province. The Swartland Local Municipality (SLM) is one of the five
Local Municipalities that make up the West Coast District Municipality (WCDM).
The town of Malmesbury is the administrative seat of the SLM and is located
~ 65 km to the south of Moorreesburg.
The wind energy facility is proposed to be developed in an area that can be

defined as slightly undulating plains, with the Voëlvleiberge mountain range lying
within a few kilometers of the study area.
The N7 and R311 national and provincial roads transect the area proposed for the
wind farm in the south-west with a gravel road transecting the site from the west
to the east. The N7 carries significant traffic that would influence the ambient
sound levels up to 500 meters from this road. There are other small gravel roads
leading from the identified larger roads traversing the area.
6.3 Site access
The site also be accessed by vehicle along the R311 which diverts toward the
south from the N7, approximately 6.5km south of Malmesbury.
6.4 Land-use and Land-cover of the study area
Apart from the steep, uncultivated parts that are not used for agriculture, land
use over the vast majority of the site is dryland cultivation of small grains in
rotation with grazing. This is by far the dominant land use of the entire
surrounding Swartland region. There is no irrigated land on site.
The land Cover data shows that the majority of the site consists of “Cultivated:
temporary - commercial dryland” (refer to figure 6.2). Urban and Residential
areas are also present near the site, in the vicinity of the town, Moorreesburg.

Figure 6.2: Land cover map within the proposed Moorreesburg wind farm and surrounding areas

6.5 Topography
The proposed site is located on land that ranges in elevation from 35m.a.s.l. to about
320ma.s.l. at the tops of the local hills. The topography of the study area is undulating,
typical of the west coastal plain, with a series of koppies running more-or-less north-
south through the centre of the study area. Further to the north, approximately 10km
from the site, is the Koringberg Mountain.
6.7 Climatic Conditions
The site falls into an annual mean rainfall category of between 400mm and 600 mm per
annum and an annual evaporation of between 2000mm and 2200 mm per annum
according to AGIS. Rainfall is given specifically as 443 mm per annum with a standard
deviation of 89 mm according to the South African Rain Atlas (Water Research
Commission, undated).
6.8 Hydrology
The non-perennial Sout Rivier and Moorreesburgspruit traverse the proposed site with
the perennial Grootberg River flowing more-or-less north-south, approximately 12km to
the east to the project site.
6.9 Geology and Soils
The soils of the site are residual soils developed on underlying schist, greywacke and
phyllite of the Moorreesburg Formation, Malmesbury Group. All soils grade into partially
weathered underlying rock with depth, and are limited in depth by this and/or by the
development of clay horizons above the rock.
There are six land type classifications across the site (refer Figure 4.3). The land type
classification is a nation-wide survey that groups areas of similar soil and terrain
conditions into different land types. The most important land types in terms of area of
coverage and likely impact are Ab24, Ab23 and Fb548. The three other land types cover
only small parts of the site which are unlikely to be impacted by the proposed
development. Turbines are proposed to be located on the higher lying, steeper ground
associated with the north south running ridge identified with land type Fb548, but will be
situated on all three of the above land types.
The soils of the site are residual soils developed on underlying schist, greywacke and
phyllite of the Moorreesburg Formation, Malmesbury Group. All soils grade into partially
weathered underlying rock with depth, and are limited in depth by this and/or by the
development of clay horizons above the rock.
The soils of land types Ab24 and Ab23 are predominantly moderately deep to shallow
(15 - 120 cm), well-drained, predominantly sandy loams (15-20% clay), but with lighter

and heavier soils also occurring. The dominant soil form is Hutton and other soil forms
in order of occurrence are Swartland, Mispah and Glenrosa.
The soils of land type Fb548 are associated with higher lying steeper land where there is
less soil development on shallow underlying rock. Soils are shallow (30-40cm), well-
drained, sandy loams. Rock outcrops cover 45% of the surface area of the land type.
In the remaining area, the dominant soil form is Swartland and other soil forms in order
of occurrence are, Glenrosa and Mispah.
Figure 6.3: The site (red outline) showing the six different land type classification
6.10 Agricultural Potential
Potential wheat yield provides a good indication of agricultural potential across the site
and is illustrated in Figure 6.4. It varies from 0 to 4.4 tons per hectare.

Figure 6.4: The potential wheat yield across the site
6.11 Ecological Profile of the Study Area
6.11.1. Vegetation
According to the national vegetation map (Mucina & Rutherford 2006), the site falls
within the Swartland Shale Renosterveld vegetation type (Figure 6.5). There are no
other vegetation types in proximity to the site that might be affected by the
development. Swartland Shale Renosterveld forms a large more or less continuous unit
covering the Swartland and Boland lowlands, from Het Kruis in the north, southwards
between Piketberg and Olifantsrivierberge, widening appreciably in the region around
Moorreesburg between Gouda and Hopefield, and encompassing Riebeck-Kasteel,
Klipheuwel, Philadephia, Durbanville, Stellenbosch to the south and Sir Lowry’s Pass
Village. Swartland Shale Renosterveld occurs on moderately undulating plains and
valleys, supporting low to moderately tall leptophyllous shrubland of varying canopy
cover as well as low, open shrubland dominated by renosterbos. Heuweltjies are a
typical and prominent feature of the vegetation with low trees and thicket often being
associated with the heuweltjies. Soils are clay soils of the Malmesbury Group derived
from shales. The rainfall is a strongly winter rainfall regime with the majority of rainfall
falling from May to August.

Typical and dominant species which occur in the area include tall shrubs such as
Aspalathus acuminata subsp. acuminata, Olea europaea subsp. africana, Searsia incisa
var. incisa, Euryops speciosissimus, Maytenus oleoides, Lebeckia cytisoides. Low shrubs
such as Anthospermum aethiopicum, Anthospermum spathulatum subsp. tulbaghense,
Dicerothamnus rhinocerotis, Eriocephalus africanus var. africanus, Euryops thunbergii,
Osteospermum spinosum, Aspalathus aculeata, Aspalathus pinguis subsp. pinguis,
Aspalathus tridentata subsp. staurantha, Aspalathus varians, Asparagus rubicundus,
Athanasia trifurcata, Felicia filifolia subsp. filifolia, Galenia africana, Leucadendron
lanigerum var. lanigerum, Passerina truncata subsp. truncata, Pteronia divaricata,
Pteronia incana, Senecio pubigerus. Succulent shrubs: Euphorbia burmannii,
Lampranthus elegans. Herbs: Berkheya armata, Berkheya rigida, Cotula turbinata,
Stachys aethiopica. Geophytes: Cyanella hyacinthoides, Melasphaerula ramosa, Albuca
maxima, Babiana melanops, Geissorhiza imbricata subsp. bicolor, Geissorhiza
purpureolutea, Geissorhiza tulbaghensis, Lachenalia longibracteata, Lachenalia pallida,
Ornithogalum thyrsoides, Romulea leipoldtii, Romulea rosea var. rosea, Romulea
tabularis. Graminoids: Cynodon dactylon, Ehrharta calycina, Merxmuellera stricta,
Ehrharta delicatula, Ehrharta thunbergii, Merxmuellera arundinacea, Tribolium hispidum,
Ischyrolepis capensis.
Vegetation-type endemic taxa which are known to occur in the area include Aspalathus
horizontalis, Serruria incrassata, Babiana angustifolia, Babiana odorata, Babiana
secunda, Hesperantha spicata subsp. fistulosa, Lachenalia mediana var. rogersii, Moraea
gigandra and Moraea tulbaghensis. They are too small to map, but there also numerous
‘special’ vegetation units embedded within the West Coast Renosterveld matrix,
composed of vernal pools, ferricrete gravels, quartz patches and seasonally wet
lowlands, all of which are highly threatened and contain an abundance of threatened
and endemic taxa. The presence of such unique and special habitats at the site will
need to be confirmed during the site visit. However, given the high threat status of the
Swartland Shale Renosterveld as a whole, the presence or lack thereof of such features
at the site is not likely to significantly impact the sensitivity of the intact remnants,
which are likely to considered no-go areas regardless.
Swartland Shale Renosterveld has been very heavily impacted by agricultural activities
and less than 10% of the original extent remains, mostly as small, isolated fragments.
Alien plants are also a problem with alien forbs and annual grasses being ubiquitous,
while woody species such as Eucalyptus, Prosopis and Acacia saligna are also a problem
in many areas.

Figure 6.5: Broad-scale overview of the vegetation in and around the Moorreesburg WEF site

6.11.2 Conservation Status
Although no systematic fine-scale conservation planning has been conducted in

the area, which falls within a gap between several other CBA maps, there are a
number of other conservation assessments that have been conducted in the area.
Of particular relevance is the Cape Lowlands Renosterveld Project (2003), which
identified renosterveld priority clusters in the area. The priority clusters consist of
Renosterveld remnants which were identified as priority areas based on their
known plant and animal species richness, presence of intact ecological process,
and habitat connectivity. As such, the priority areas consist of large renosterveld
fragments in proximity to one another or positioned along ecological gradients,
which are deemed to be critical for conserving biodiversity pattern and process in
the Cape Lowlands. Part of the Renosterveld remnants within the site fall within
one of the priority clusters as identified by the Cape Lowlands project, suggesting
that these fragments are both locally and regionally significant and any impact to
these fragments should be avoided.
Although it does not assign priority to different Renosterveld fragments, the

National List of Threatened Terrestrial Ecosystems (2011) with associated GIS
layers is also highly relevant to the current site, given the high threat status of
the vegetation types in the area. The remaining extent coverage available from
the BGIS website is based on various land cover maps and provides a map of the
current remaining extent of listed vegetation types. Less than 10% of the
original extent of Swartland Shale Renosterveld remains and this vegetation type
is classified as Critically Endangered. According to the coverage, there is
approximately 70ha of intact remnants within the site. The most significant
remnant, which is that identified as part of the priority cluster is 110ha in extent,
53ha of which is within the site. The remaining extent of threatened ecosystems
and the priority renosterveld clusters are depicted below in Figure 6.6.

Figure 6.6: Conservation status of remaining vegetation fragments according to the National List of Threatened Ecosystems within the
proposed site as mapped by SANBI (2011)

6.11.3. Terrestrial Fauna
Mammals
The site falls within the distribution range of 47 terrestrial mammals, indicating
that the mammalian diversity at the site is potentially moderate, but given the
high level of transformation in the area, the actual number of species present is
likely to be fairly low. Furthermore, there is likely to be a limited variety of
habitats present at the site and as a result, this is also likely to reduce the
number of species which are likely to occur at the site.
Diversity of mammals is likely to be closely linked to the level of vegetation

transformation at the site, with diversity within the cultivated areas being very
low compared to the Renosterveld fragments. Species present in the cultivated
areas are likely to be restricted to nocturnal species able to tolerate low
vegetation cover such as Cape Gerbil Gerbilliscus afra.
Two listed species occur in the area, the Honey Badger Mellivora capensis (SARDB
Endangered) and the White-tailed Mouse Mystromys albicaudatus (Endangered).
As both these species are widely distributed in the country, the development of
the site would not constitute significant habitat loss for these species. In
addition, given the high conservation value of the remaining Renosterveld
fragments in the area, the amount of currently intact habitat that would be lost as
a result of the development is likely to be very low. The major impacts on
mammals resulting from the development are likely to be associated with the
construction phase of the development, when a large amount of noise and
disturbance are likely to be generated at the site. This phase of the development
is however transient and during the operational phase, impacts in mammals are
likely to be low.
Reptiles
The site lies in or near the distribution range of 43 reptile species, indicating that
the reptile diversity at the site is likely to be of moderate diversity. Based on
distribution maps and habitat requirements, the composition of the reptile fauna
is likely to comprise 2 tortoises, 1 terrapin, 19 snakes, 14 lizards and skinks, one
chameleon and 6 geckos. Given the low variety of habitats likely to be present at
the site, as well as the high level of transformation, the diversity of reptiles at the
site is likely to be significantly lower than the potential diversity. Densely
vegetated riparian areas and rocky outcrops if present are likely to be the most
important areas for reptiles. The diversity of reptiles within the transformed
areas is likely to be very low and only development within the natural vegetation
would have a significant impact on reptiles.
Assessment of Impacts: Page 109

Wind Energy Facility & Associated Infrastructure
Amphibians
The site lies within the distribution range of eight amphibian species, of which at
least five are highly likely to occur at the site. The only listed species which may
occur in the area is the Cape Caco Cacosternum capense which is restricted to
low lying flat or gently undulating areas with poorly drained clay or loamy soils.
There does not appear to be any suitable breeding habitat for this species at the
site, but this would need to be confirmed in the field. There are a number of
small earth dams at the site as well as a water-filled quarry, all of which would
provide breeding habitat for amphibians. Species likely to be present include the
Raucous Toad, Cape River Frog and Common Plantanna. Development within the
transformed habitats is not likely to have a significant direct impact on
amphibians. The proximity of the dams and drainage lines as well as the intact
vegetation fragments in general is likely to be the most important areas for
amphibians at the site. The major threats to amphibians would stem from
increased erosion risk resulting from disturbance associated with the construction
phase of the development, as well as pollution related to construction activities
and the presence of heavy machinery with the associated risk of fuel and oil
spills.
6.12 Bats
Based on historically recorded and modelled distributions by Friedmann and Daly

2004 and Monadjem et al. 2010, the number of bat species with the potential to
occur in the study area numbers 41 species (refer to Table 1 within the specialist
report contained in Appendix F). Of the 18 bat species possible to occur in the
study area, approximately half (7 species) are considered to have low risk of
collision with wind turbines, due to their flight and foraging behaviour. In this
group of species with low risk of collision, 5 are considered to have a conservation
status of concern though only two have confirmed presence within the study area.
From the remaining species, 1 have a medium risk of collision, 7 have a medium
to high risk of collision with wind turbines, since they have medium or high flight
pattern and they are in general clutter-edge foragers, being possible that these
species use the area surrounding the moving blades to forage (particularly if
turbines are implemented in areas with tall vegetation), increasing the possibility
of mortality by collision or barotrauma.
The vegetation description and land use types partially helps to describe the
species likely to occur in the study area. Specific features within the landscape
will further affect which species occur there. These specifics, or “micro” habitats,
are formed by a combination of factors such as vegetation, land cover and man-
made structures. Micro habitats will be critically important in siting the proposed
turbines within the affected farms. The following micro habitats were identified
during the site survey and Google Earth satellite images were used to assess
areas inaccessible during the survey:

» Wetlands: Wetlands are characterized by slow flowing water and tall

emergent vegetation. Insects such as midges and mosquitoes often breed at
wetlands emerging in large numbers, creating a perfect feeding site for many
bat species. A number of small wetland-like areas occur on the site.
» Dams and reservoirs: Due to the standing nature of water in dams and
reservoirs many insects use dams as breeding sites. The presence of these
insects often attracts insect-eating bats. Many active dams and reservoirs
occur on the site.
» Thicket: Many of the bat species listed as possibly occurring on the site are
clutter and clutter-edge feeders. The presence of thicket or bush on the site
may increase the likelihood of such species being present and any alteration to
this habitat may have negative effects on the presence of bats in the area,
possibly even their survival. Although the majority of the site has been
transformed through cultivation a number of small thickets of vegetation do
still occur.
» Man-made structures: Buildings are favoured by many bat species as safe,
dry roost sites. They will often roost in the roofs of these structures. The farm
houses, staff houses and abandoned structures on the site all present suitable
roosting habitat for many bat species. An Eskom sub-station is present on the
site.
Bats are broadly divided into two groups, insect- and fruit-eating bats. Fruit-
eating bats are generally found in the warmer, eastern parts of the country where
fruit trees, often of a commercial nature, are commonly found. A number of
species do, however, occur in the Western Cape Province and it is possible that
some may occur at the study site. Insect-eating bats are found across the entire
country, including the study site. Therefore, anything that attracts insects is
likely to, in turn, attract bats. For example, wetlands, pans, rivers, dumping
sites, and animals such as cows, sheep and horses are all likely to attract both
insects and bats and the presence of these features should all be taken into
account when considering the siting of wind turbines.
6.13 Avifauna
Micro habitats are formed by a combination of factors such as vegetation, land

use, and others. These micro habitats will be critically important in siting the
proposed turbines within the affected farms.
» Streams and drainage lines: There do not appear to be any major rivers on
or in close vicinity to the site. However, numerous smaller non-perennial
streams as well as drainage lines may be present on the proposed site.
Although these water courses may seldom contain water, these systems are
important, as they may have a different vegetation composition to the

remainder of the site, often including woody, thicket areas. This habitat may
hold various smaller passerines, or may represent an important flight path for
many bird species such as cormorants, ducks, geese, and Ibises.
» Arable or cultivated land: Arable or cultivated land represents a significant
feeding area for many bird species in any landscape for the following reasons:
through opening up the soil surface, land preparation makes many insects,
seeds, bulbs and other food sources readily accessible to birds and other
predators; the crop or pasture plants cultivated are often eaten themselves by
birds, or attract insects which are in turn eaten by birds; during the dry
season arable lands often represent the only green or attractive food sources
in an otherwise dry landscape. Cultivated lands appear extensively in this
study area. Relevant bird species that may be attracted to these areas may
include Blue Crane, Ludwig’s Bustard, Secretarybird, Lesser Kestrel, White
Stork as well as the majority of the Raptors shown in table 3 below. In
particular the White Stork has a high affinity with arable lands, with 86% of
sightings in South Africa recorded on arable lands (Allan 1985, Allan 1989,
Allan 1997 in Hockey, Dean & Ryan 2005), while the Blue Crane will move
from roost sites (usually farm dams), to arable lands to feed.
» Hills and Ridges: An examination of Google earth imagery shows that there
are prominent hills in the east of the study area, upon which the proposed
turbines are likely to be placed. From a desk top level, no cliffs or excessively
steep ridges appear to be present. Slopes and Hills represent important
habitat for a number of species. Most relevant to this study are the aerial
species such as raptors and swifts/swallows – which favor flying along slopes
and ridges where there are favorable air currents. Raptors in particular are
likely to hunt along the ridge edge or hill top, which results in them being
distracted by potential prey, thereby making them more vulnerable to collision
with vertical structures such as wind turbines. The tops of these ridges and
hills are usually associated with higher winds, which assist in the effortless
gliding and soaring of hunting raptors however, these areas are therefore
usually preferred for turbine placement.
» Old Quarry: An old water-filled quarry is located at 330 9’ 36.6” S 180 42’
0.7” E (refer to figure 6.7). There are rocky “cliff” areas here that may be
used by various raptors as well as swallows, martins and swifts. Ducks and
Geese, as well as other waterbirds may also make use of this quarry area.

Figure 6.7:- A Google Earth image showing the presence of a water–filled

“quarry” on the site.
» Natural Renosterveld/Fynbos shrublands: Pockets of these open, natural

areas are likely to exist between agricultural fields and/or on the tops of hills
and ridges. They will consist of relatively low “shrub-like” Renosterveld or
fynbos plants, possibly interspersed with grasses. These areas may be
frequented by Black Harrier, Lesser Kestrel, Jackal Buzzard, Martial Eagle,
Verreaux’s Eagle Blue Crane, Secretarybird and Ludwig’s Bustard. Smaller
passerines such as Larks, Pipits, Chats, Robin-Chats and Prinia may also
occur. Terrestrial game birds such as Guineafowl and Spurfowl, will also
frequent this micro-habitat.
Table 2 of the avifauna report (contained in Appendix ?) shows the micro habitats
that each Red Data bird species, recorded in the SABAP1 data, typically frequents
in the study area. It must be stressed that birds can and will, by virtue of their
mobility, utilise almost any area in a landscape from time to time. However, the
analysis in Table 2 represents each species’ most preferred or normal habitats.
These locations are where most of the birds of that species will spend most of
their time – so logically that is where impacts on those species will be most
significant.

Table 6.1 List of bird species recorded on site
6.14 Heritage and Palaeontology
Paleontology
No known palaeontological resources are present in this area as it is all underlain
by Malmesbury Shale. The shales largely pre-date life forms.
Archaeology
The environment has been transformed by agriculture for more than 2 centuries.
In-situ archaeological resources are extremely sparse, although it is expected
that at least some Early Stone Age artefacts may be present in the fields. These
would likely be of very low significance. It is also possible that Later Stone Age
sites may be found along water courses but it is unlikely that turbines would be
placed in proximity to these areas. It is possible that some historical
archaeological resources may be present close to the various farmsteads in the

project area which will be protected by a 500 m buffer. Archaeological impacts

are expected to be of low significance.
Built environment
Many farm complexes occur in the area with at least 4 complexes of farm
buildings occurring on or close to the study area. The conservations status of
these buildings needs to be assessed during the EIA process. Although there is a
high likelihood that they are greater than 60 years of age, all appear to have
been adapted and modified over time.
Graves and graveyards

Farm graveyards are known to occur in the area. Given the shale substrate,
isolated unmarked pre-colonial graves are very unlikely to occur.
Landscape
The cultural landscape is one of agriculture (wheat and livestock) with farmsteads
and blue gum plantations dotted around and on the various hills. The gum
plantations, although not very tall, add vertical components to the landscape,
increase the visual clutter and will help to a limited degree with mitigation of
visual impacts.
Visual concerns
This is probably the most significant aspect of the project in heritage terms. The
proposed project will be visible from the N7 which can be considered a significant
scenic route. The proposed facility is moderate in size, which within the context of
the highly manicured Swartland landscape may not necessarily pose a major
visual or aesthetic impact.
6.15 Social Characteristics of the Study Area and Surrounds
6.14.1. Population
In 2001 the Swartland had the largest population in the WCDM. In 2006 it was
however overtaken by the Saldanha Municipality. In 2001 an estimated 17 402
households – approximately 23.6% of the WCDM total – resided in the Swartland
LM. According to Census 2001, 28.84% of the Swartland’s households were rural
and the remaining 71.6% urban. The Swartland’s population was estimated at
72 370 in 2001, and 76 225 in 2006 – an average annual growth rate of 2.38%.
The 2010 Swartland population was estimated at 83 900 people (SLM IDP 2011/
2012). Of this total ~40% of the SLM population (~34 000 in 2008) live in
Malmesbury and ~ 10% (8 574) live in Moorreesburg (SLM IDP 2008/2009). The
population of Malmesbury has therefore grown significantly since the 2001
Census.

6.15.3. Education
According to the 2007 StatsSA Community Survey, an estimated 24% of people

in the Western Cape Province aged 20 years and older had had less than nine
years of schooling. 2008 data indicated that the provincial matric rate declined
from 85% in 2004 to 78.6% in 2008 (PGWC: Department of the Premier, 2010).
A significant - estimated 31% - portion of the Swartland’s population older than
14 years was estimated to be illiterate.
According to Census 2001 data, 12.4% of the employed Swartland population

was employed in highly skilled positions (professionals, etc.), 35.7% in skilled
(trades and crafts), and 51.9% low skilled (elementary) positions. These
proportions were very similar to those for the WCDM. Both the Swartland and the
WCDM had more than half of their labor forces occupied in low-skilled
occupations.
Census 2001 data further indicated that 5.5% of the Western Cape’s population
of 20 years and older had had no formal education, 15.5% has less than a
primary qualification, 35% had received a secondary qualification, and 11% a
tertiary qualification. The relevant rates for the SLM were 10%, 23%, 18.5% and
7.5% respectively. General education levels for the Swartland were therefore
considerably lower than those for the Western Cape. This can be attributed to
the large rural population in the Swartland. Whites make up the majority of the
population with tertiary qualifications (Swartland LED Strategy, 2007).
6.15.4. Employment and skills levels
According to Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), during the second quarter of
2010, the unemployment rate for the Western Cape was estimated at 23.62%.
This figure represents a total of ~ 590 000 unemployed people. Of the total
unemployed, the majority are Coloured (272 852) and African (219 777) people
(PGWC: Department of the Premier, 2010). The average rate of unemployment
in the Swartland region was 10% in 2001 which compares favourably to the
Western Cape’s average rate of 26% (Swartland Municipality, 2007). The highest
rate of unemployment is among Black Africans (15%), followed by Coloureds
(11%), Whites (4%) and Indian/Asians (3%). Less than 70% of the population is
economically active and most households only have one income-earner
(Swartland Municipality, 2007).
Of all the nearby towns in the region, Moorreesburg and Malmesbury have
marginally higher unemployment rates (12%) than the region as a whole (10%).
In terms of employment opportunities, the agriculture sector was responsible for
35% of the jobs in the Swartland region followed by manufacturing (11%), trade

(11%) and community social and private services including public sector and
government (11%).
On the supply side, the skill base is relatively poor because of limited access to
secondary education. Over 30% of the population has had no or only some
primary schooling (Swartland Municipality, 2007). Moreover, despite the region’s
economic growth record and potential it has been unable to absorb the rising tide
of unskilled, mostly Black African, migrants which has meant more competition
for work and less bargaining power among unskilled job market entrants
(Swartland Municipality, 2005). Concurrently, there has been an exodus of
skilled individuals looking for economic opportunity outside the area, especially in
Cape Town.
Based on the findings of the 2005 Swartland Municipal Economic Profile study, a
significant portion of Black immigrants currently seeking employment
opportunities in the Swartland do not find jobs, but stay on as unemployed
persons due to a lack employment options elsewhere, coupled to a lack in
personal means to remain mobile. It would however appear that most Black
economic migrants currently penetrate no further than the southern Swartland
and the major towns of Malmesbury and Moorreesburg.
6.15.5. Household Incomes
According to the 2007 StatsSA Community Survey, an estimated 40% of the

Western Cape labour force earned no formal income (PGWC: Department of the
Premier, 2010). With regard to the Swartland, the 2011/ 2012 SLM IDP indicates
that a significant portion of household heads (44.6%) had no formal source of
income in 2007. In terms of income levels, the most significant clustering
occurred in the R801-R1 600/ month (17.3%) income bracket, followed by
R1 601-R3 200 (8.2%) income bracket. Information contained in the 2007 SLM
LED indicates that the White population group earned approximately 7.5 times
more per month than the poorest non-White group in the Swartland (Swartland
LED, 2007). According to the 2008-2009 SLM IDP, an estimated 26% of
Swartland households qualified as indigent in 2008.
6.15.6. Service Levels

The provision of an access to municipal services as measured in terms of flush
toilets, refuse removal, piped water and electricity, increased in both the West
Coast district municipality and Swartland local municpality for the period 2001 to
2011. However, despite the improvements in the number of households with
access to flush toilets, piped water inside their dwellings and electricity in the
local municipality, the level of services at the district municipal level are lower
than some of the provincial figures.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS:
WIND ENERGY FACILITY & POWER LINE CHAPTER 7
Environmental impacts associated with the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm

are expected to be associated with the construction, operation and
decommissioning of the facility. The significance of impacts associated with a
particular wind energy facility is dependent on site-specific factors, and therefore
impacts can be expected to vary significantly from site to site.
The construction of a wind energy facility project includes land clearing for site
preparation and access/haul roads; transportation of supply materials and fuels;
construction of foundations involving excavations and cement pouring;
compaction of laydown areas and roadways, manoeuvring and operating cranes
for unloading and installation of equipment; laying cabling; and commissioning of
new equipment. Decommissioning activities may include removal of the
temporary project infrastructure and site rehabilitation. Environmental issues
associated with construction and decommissioning activities may include, among
others, threats to biodiversity and ecological processes, including habitat
alteration and impacts to wildlife through mortality, injury and disturbance;
impacts to sites of heritage value; soil erosion; and nuisance noise from the
movement of vehicles transporting equipment and materials during construction.
Environmental issues specific to the operation of a wind energy facility include

visual impacts; noise produced by the spinning of rotor blades; avian/bat
mortality resulting from collisions with blades and barotrauma; and light and
illumination issues.
These and other environmental issues were identified through the scoping
evaluation. Potentially significant impacts identified have now been assessed
within the EIA phase of the study. The EIA process has involved input from
specialist consultants, the project proponent, as well as input from key
stakeholders (including government authorities) and interested and affected
parties engaged through the public consultation process. The significance of
impacts associated with a particular wind energy facility is dependent on site-
specific factors, and therefore impacts vary significantly from site to site.
This chapter serves to assess the identified potentially significant environmental

impacts associated with the proposed wind turbines and associated infrastructure
(substation, power line, access road/s to the site, internal access roads between
turbines, underground electrical cabling between turbines, turbine foundations),
and to make recommendations regarding preferred alternatives for consideration

by DEA, as well as for the management of the impacts for inclusion in the draft
Environmental Management Programme (refer to Appendix L).
The study area for the site (approximately ~3830 ha) is being considered as a
larger study area for the construction of the proposed wind energy facility. The
area to be occupied by turbines and associated infrastructure is illustrated in
Figure 7.1.
» Up to 40 wind turbines
trenched at approximately 1 m next to the road and thereafter the area will
be rehabilitated.
» An on-site substation of ± 50 m x 50 m to facilitate the connection between
the wind energy facility and the national electricity grid.
 Option 1: A connection to the existing Moorreesburg 132/66kV
substation at 66kV or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV power line or a 132kV
power line
existing Eskom 66 kV power line located in close proximity to the
proposed site
linking the wind turbines and other infrastructure on site (existing roads will
be used as far as possible).
» Temporarily affected areas comprising laydown areas at the foot of each
turbine and roads up to 11m in width to accommodate the crawler crane
during construction.
The assessment presented within this chapter of the report is on the basis of a
facility layout provided by the developer (as presented in Figure 7.1). The
assessment of issues presented within this chapter (and within the specialist
studies attached within Appendices E – K) considers the potential impacts.

Figure 7.1: Layout map for the Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility showing both layout options and power line options

7.1.1 Quantification of Areas of Disturbance on the Site
Site-specific impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed
wind energy facility relate to the direct loss of vegetation and species of special
concern, disturbance of animals and loss of habitat and impacts on soils. A wind
energy facility is, however, dissimilar to other power generation facilities in that it
does not result in whole-scale disturbance to a site. In order to assess the impacts
associated with the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm, it is necessary to
understand the extent of the affected area. The affected area primarily includes
the turbines, substation and associated access roads. A wind energy facility is
dissimilar to other power generation facilities in that it does not result in whole-
scale disturbance to a site.
A site of 3830ha was considered for the facility, the bulk of which would not suffer
any level of disturbance as a result of the required activities on site and the limited
extent of the facility footprint. This is explained further below.
Permanently affected areas comprise turbine footprints (up to 40 foundation areas

of 26 x 26m in the worst-case scenario – i.e. the implementation of Alternative 2),
access roads (up to 7 m in width), one 132 kV substation footprint (maximum of
50m x 50m) and an operations and service building area (maximum of 100m x
100m). The area of permanent disturbance is approximated as follows:
Facility component - permanent Approximate area/extent (in

m2)
40 turbine footprints (each 26m x 26m) 27040
Permanent access roads within the site (7 m width 140 000
and ~20 km in length)
One on-substation footprint (50m x 50m) 2500
Operations and service building area (100m x 100m) 10000
TOTAL 1795490 m2
(of a total area of
38300000m2)
i.e. 0.4%of site
It should be noted that the site currently has several existing access roads which
are used for farming activities. It is planned that where existing access roads are
able to be utilised within the development footprint, these are utilised, widened and
upgraded where possible.
Based on the above, it can be concluded that approximately 0.4% of the entire
extent of the site can be anticipated to be permanently transformed for the
development footprint of the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm.
Assessment of Impacts:
Temporarily affected areas comprise laydown areas for turbines (each laydown area
assumed to have a footprint of 60m x 60m) and a temporary crane travel track and
construction access roads utilising the same route as the permanent access road
(an additional 6m in width to the permanent road of 5 m (i.e. taking the total
roadway to be used during construction to 11m in width). The area of temporary
disturbance is as follows:
Approximate area/extent (in

Facility component - temporary
m2)
Up to 40 turbine laydown areas (60m x 60m per 144000
turbine)
Temporary crane travel track and construction access 60 000
roads utilising the same route as the permanent
access road (additional 3m in width) and ~20 km in
length
TOTAL 204000m2
(of a total area of 38300000)
= ~0.5% of site
Therefore, ~0.5% of the entire extent of the site can be anticipated to be

temporarily disturbed to some extent during the construction of the Moorreesburg
Wind Farm.
Considering permanent and temporary footprints, less than 1% of the total extent
of 3830 ha will be disturbed by the construction and operation phases of the
project.
7.1.1 Assessment of Potential Impacts on Ecology
Ecologically sensitive areas on the site relate to the presence of Swartland Shale
Renosterveld, a Critically Endangered vegetation type. The areas on the site
characterised by this vegetation are considered as being of very high sensitivity and
regarded as No Go areas. Figure 7.2 presents the Ecological Sensitivity Map for the
site.
Figure 7.2: Ecological sensitivity map
As most of the infrastructure associated with the project is located within areas
already disturbed through agricultural activities, impacts on ecology are expected to
be limited. However, the potential for impacts still exists. The ‘source of impacts’
are grouped into two groups based on how they will affect the vegetation and
ecology: (a) wind turbines, transformers and construction hard-standing areas (b)
internal access roads and underground cabling and (c) overhead power line.
Two principal direct impacts are assessed:
» Loss of vegetation: Swartland Shale Renosterveld (including the constituent

plant species and the habitat created by the plant communities).
» Loss of ecological processes, e.g. pollination and seed dispersal which may
occur due to construction or operational impacts.
Potential faunal and ecological impacts resulting from the development of the wind
energy facility would stem from mainly habitat destruction and disturbance during
the construction and operational phases of the project.
Impact Tables summarising Ecological impacts
Nature: Loss of Swartland Shale Renosterveld vegetation due to construction of

wind turbines, transformers and construction of lay-down areas
Construction of wind-turbines at the site would result in a large amount of disturbance at

each local wind turbine site. The topsoil would be stripped and excavated over an area of
400 m2 for each turbine foundation and 3600 m2 for each hard-standing area (4 ha per
turbine site).
Owing to the almost non-existent presence of Swartland Shale Renosterveld on site as a

result of intensive agriculture, as well as the location of infrastructure outside of areas of
remaining natural vegetation, the anticipated impact of the proposed turbines and associated
lay-down areas in terms of loss of this vegetation type would be Low negative without and
with mitigation.
Without mitigation With mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (2)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (2) Low (2)
Probability Improbable (2) Improbable (2)
Significance Low (16) Low (16)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Partially reversible Partially reversible
Irreplaceable loss of No. Swartland Shale
resources Renosterveld is Critically
Endangered and therefore
any loss is considered of
importance. However, no
further loss is anticipated
due to this project.
Can impacts be mitigated Not required
Mitigation:
No mitigation would be required since no Swartland Shale Renosterveld would be lost as a
result of the proposed project.
Cumulative impacts:
As the project infrastructure does not impact on any areas of sensitive Swartland Shale
Renosterveld, the project will not contribute to the cumulative impacts on this vegetation
type.
Residual impacts4:
Considering that the most important mitigation from a botanical perspective would be to
avoid and sites with natural vegetation, and assuming that this would happen as is currently
proposed, there would be no residual impacts.
Comparison of Alternatives:
As both alternative layouts and power line options avoid areas of natural vegtation, impacts
are expected to be similar for all alternatives.
4
Definition: Residual impact -- Potential impact remaining after mitigation measures have been adopted
into a project, (Dougherty and Wall, 1995).
Nature: Loss of ecological processes due to construction of wind turbines,

transformers, construction lay-down areas and cable laying in Swartland Shale
Renosterveld
Despite the fragmented nature of the Swartland Shale Renosterveld in the study area
ecological processes are probably still functional since these islands offer natural habitat
not only for threatened and endemic plants but also for birds, insects, reptiles, rodents etc.
As infrastructure is not planned within this sensitive vegetation, this impact is unlikely to
occur.
Extent Local (2) There would be no need
Duration Long-term (4) for other mitigation if the
Magnitude High (8) construction in sensitive
Probability Improbable (2) areas is AVOIDED.
Significance Low (28)
Status Negative
Reversibility Not reversible
Irreplaceable loss of resources Yes
Can impacts be mitigated Yes
Mitigation:
Swartland Shale Renosterveld must be completely avoided as is currently proposed.
Cumulative impacts:
As the project infrastructure does not impact on any areas of sensitive Swartland Shale
Renosterveld, the project will not contribute to the cumulative impacts on this vegetation
type.
Residual impacts:
Considering that the most important mitigation from a botanical perspective would be to
avoid and sites with natural vegetation, and assuming that this would happen as is
currently proposed, there would be no residual impacts.
As both alternative layouts and power line options avoid areas of natural vegtation,
impacts are expected to be similar for all alternatives.
Nature: Fauna will be directly impacted by the development as a result of

construction activities and human presence at the site during construction and
operation
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Duration Short-term (3) Short-term (3)
Magnitude Medium (5) Medium-Low (3)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (40) Low (21)
Reversibility High High
Irreplaceable loss of resources No No
Can impacts be mitigated? To some extent

Mitigation
» Any fauna directly threatened by the construction activities should be removed to a
safe location by the ECO or other suitably qualified person.
» The collection, hunting or harvesting of any plants or animals at the site should be
strictly forbidden. Personnel should not be allowed to wander off the construction site.
» No fires should be allowed on the site.
» No fuel wood collection should be allowed on-site.
» No loose dogs should be allowed on site.
» If the site must be lit at night for security purposes, this should be done with low-UV
type lights (such as most LEDs), which do not attract insects.
» All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent
contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the
site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of the
spill.
» No unauthorized persons should be allowed onto the site.
» All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit to avoid collisions with
susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises.
Cumulative Impacts
The construction of the facility will contribute to faunal disturbance in the area, but the
impact will be transient and the overall long-term significance is likely to be low.
Residual Impacts
Residual impacts for fauna can be mitigated to a large degree, although some mortality of
a few immobile species can be expected.
Construction of layout Alternative 1 will comprise fewer turbines and is expected to take
place over a shorter timeframe than Alternative 2. Therefore, it is expected that
Alternative 1 would result in a lower impact on fauna and is thus preferred over Alternative
2.
7.1.1 Comparative Assessment of Layout Alternatives
From a botanical perspective both wind turbine layout options would have a similar
impact, i.e. Low Negative as long as all areas of high ecological sensitivity are
avoided. The 25 turbine layout option however is preferred as impacts in general
will be lower due to the fewer number of turbines to be constructed.
From a botanical perspective both power line route options would have a similar
impact, i.e. Low Negative. There is therefore no preferred alternative.
7.1.2 Conclusions and Recommendations
Infrastructure associated with the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm would be

located mainly in areas of low ecological sensitivity (low negative impacts). Areas
of very high sensitivity should be regarded as No Go areas, and any planned
development within these areas would be considered as a fatal flaw to the project.
All infrastructure should therefore avoid these areas.
Mitigation measures that should be implemented as general good practice include

the following:
» Strict control of impacts to ensure that they are contained within the footprint of
the proposed wind turbine development area and hard-standing areas.
» All construction, concrete batching etc. must take place in designated
construction areas.
» There should be no unauthorised traversing of any natural vegetation off
designated construction areas and roads.
» Fire-hazard protection (no open flames near vegetation) must be in place at
construction sites, together with fire-control equipment.
» All solid and liquid waste must be removed from the construction areas and not
discarded on the site.
» Any areas that can be restored after construction must be actively rehabilitated
under the direction of a qualified restoration practitioner.
» An important objective should be to reduce negative edge effects.
» Any building materials brought onto site would require monitoring for
propagules of invasive plant species.
» Monitoring of the introduction of alien invasive plant and insect species must be
carried out and infestations contained and eradicated.
» Access to the site should be restricted and only permitted staff and maintenance
crews allowed on-site.
» No access should be allowed to the site at night apart from security personnel.
» Any fauna encountered during maintenance activities should be allowed to move
off on their own. Tortoises and other slow-moving animals can be carefully
moved to a sheltered site out of the way.
» If the site must be lit at night for security purposes, this should be done with
low-UV type lights (such as most LEDs), which do not attract insects.
» All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent
contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur
at the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the
nature of the spill.
» All maintenance vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit to avoid collisions
with susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises.
» No herbicides should be used to control indigenous flora.
7.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts on Avifauna
Potential impacts on avifauna associated with the proposed Moorreesburg Wind

Energy Facility could include:
» Disturbance of birds and habitat destruction during construction and

maintenance of the facility and associated infrastructure;
» Displacement of birds from the area, or from flying over the area;
» Collision of birds with turbine blades during operation; and
» Collision and electrocution of birds on associated electrical infrastructure.
The impact assessment has been informed by the findings of the pre-construction
monitoring programme completed for the site. The pre-construction bird
monitoring programme spanned over a period of 16 months, because additional
areas were considered for potential development after the 4 first months of
monitoring. Thus, with the 16 month programme it was guaranteed that every
area would be covered for a period of at least 12 months. During the pre-
construction bird monitoring completed at the site, various techniques were
implemented to define the local bird communities, and to assess possible risks
coming from the construction and operation of the project (in accordance with the
Best Practice Guidelines for avifauna monitoring). The following techniques were
applied at the wind project installation area and its immediate surroundings: a
desktop and bibliographic review, walked transects, vantage points, vehicle based
transects, and water body and nest search and monitoring (refer to the bird
monitoring report contained in Appendix G for more details).
During the field surveys, 28 species of birds considered sensitive were confirmed on
the site and its surroundings. Ten of these species are especially sensitive due to
an unfavourable conservation status. In terms of sensitive species, most attention
is directed towards a varied community of raptors as well as fairly abundant, and
most likely breeding, Blue Cranes. Several endangered raptors were recorded on
site, with the Black Harrier being the most frequently observed.
Regarding passerines and small bird species, the communities are represented by
open habitat species, well adapted to relatively altered habitats, such as pastures
and dry cereal crops. Larks are especially common and abundant, including the
Cape Long-billed Lark, which is an endemic, range restricted species, although
recorded in very low numbers. Regarding this species and other species of larks
and pipits, some concerns arise towards possible collision with turbines of
displaying individuals.
In terms of sensitive areas, the hills running northwest to southeast, covered by

natural vegetation are defined as the most sensitive location (refer to Figures 7.3
and 7.4). Potential risk indexes calculated for these areas are the highest in the
study area, especially for raptors, which probably use the slopes for their
movements as well as the intersection between natural vegetation and croplands
for hunting. On the other hand, species such as the Black Harrier are highly
dependent on natural vegetation patches, which are scarce in the Western Cape.
For these reasons it is recommended that areas of natural vegetation, which are
highly associated with hills and steep slopes in the area, should be avoided.
Figure 7.3: Sensitive areas for birds defined for the Moorreesburg wind energy
facility Layout Option 1 (25 WT) during the pre-construction
monitoring programme
Figure 7.4: Sensitive areas for birds defined for the Moorreesburg wind energy
facility Layout Option 2 (40 WT) during the pre-construction
monitoring programme
7.2.1 Impacts associated with Construction
During the construction phase several activities will occur that might result in
impacts on birds. The platform construction and installation of the turbines;
internal access roads construction; substation construction, underground cabling
installation, installation of overhead power line and installation of the workshop
area are all necessary activities for the wind energy facility installation that might
have potential impacts on the bird community.
Although 12 months of post construction monitoring has not yet been completed on
a large WEF in South Africa, specialist are reporting the return of bird species to the
area during operation, including Blue Crane pairs returning to nest sites. At least
three such cases are on record. Keeping disturbance to a minimum will however
improve the chances of birds returning to the area post construction.
Nature of the Impact: Disturbance of birds

Noise and movement, from staff and machinery, may disturb avifauna, and nests may be
disturbed
Extent Local – site & immediate Local – site &
surrounds only (2) immediate surrounds
only (2)
Duration short term (2) short term (2)
Magnitude high (8) moderate (6)
Probability highly probable (4) probable (3)
Significance Medium (48) Medium (30)
Reversibility Medium High
Irreplaceable loss of No No
Resources?
Can impacts be mitigated? Partially. It is difficult to mitigate thoroughly for this as
some disturbance is inevitable as a result of the use of
equipment and heavy vehicles.
Mitigation:
» Strict control should be maintained over all activities during construction, in particular
heavy machinery and vehicle movements, and staff.
» Sensitive zones identified in the preconstruction monitoring (Figures 7.3 and 7.4)
should be avoided where possible.
» During the construction phase a site walkthrough is recommended so that the ECO
can identify any additional breeding sensitive bird species in close proximity to
specified turbines and associated infrastructure positions.
Cumulative impacts:
Low – the closest proposed developments is more than 30km from Moorreesburg WEF and
even if construction is undertaken simultaneously at these sites, the impact is not likely to
be significant.
Residual impacts:
Low
Impacts associated with both layout and power line alternatives are considered to be
similar.
Nature of the Impact: Habitat destruction

Permanent removal of habitat that is used, or may be used, by avifauna.
Extent Site (1) Site (1)
Duration Permanent (5) Permanent (5)
Magnitude Moderate (6) Moderate (6)
Probability Definite (5) Highly Probable (4)
Reversibility Low Low
Irreplaceable loss of Yes Yes
Resources?
Can impacts be mitigated? Partially, outside of areas designated for infrastructure or
by moving certain turbines
Mitigation:
» Strict control over contractors, to ensure only the minimum required area is cleared.
» No off-road driving.
» Minimize footprint areas, road lengths, road widths, wherever possible during the final
layout design.
» Where possible existing roads must be used and batching plants, labour camps,
equipment storage, etc. should be situated in areas that are already disturbed.
» Area of natural vegetation should not be considered for development as certain
species may rely heavily on patches of natural vegetation within the already disturbed
landscape.
Cumulative impacts:
Low – the closest proposed developments is more than 30km from Moorreesburg WEF and
even if construction is undertaken simultaneously at these sites, the impact is not likely to
be significant.
Residual impacts:
Low
similar, although the fewer number of turbines associated with Alternative 1 could
potentially result in lower impacts with regards to habitat disturbance.
7.2.2 Impacts associated with Operation
Nature of the Impact: Collision with turbines

Birds collide with turbine blades during the operational life facility
Extent Site- Impact will occur Site- Impact will occur
locally, but have national locally, but have national
implications for certain implications for certain
species (2) species (2)
Duration Long term (4) Long term (4 )
Magnitude Very high (10) Very high (10 )
Probability Highly Probable (4 ) Probable (3)

Significance High (64) Medium (48)
Reversibility Irreversible Irreversible
Resources?
Can impacts be mitigated? Partially
Mitigation:
» The most important mitigation option is the correct positioning of turbines outside of
the identified high sensitivity zones, and where possible, outside of the medium
sensitivity zones (refer to Figures 7.3 and 7.4).
» A post-construction monitoring programme will be vital to determine additional
mitigation measures or the behaviour of the bird species.
» Additional mitigation options include curtailment, i.e. shutting down certain turbines at
certain times or the installation of automated collision detection systems.
Cumulative impacts:
The cumulative impact of bird collisions in the area may be significant. As reports of
operational facilities are slowly becoming clear, raptor collisions (specifically Jackal
Buzzard, Steppe Buzzard and Amur falcons) are making a regular appearance. The
cumulative impact of large scale WEFs in the province are difficult to quantify at the
moment but will certainly be a reality that we need to address going forward
Residual impacts:
Undetermined. As more data becomes available, the potential impact on bird populations
will be much better understood.
similar, although the fewer number of turbines associated with Alternative 1 could
potentially result in lower impacts with regards to collision risk.
Nature of the Impact: Disturbance during operation and maintenance

Disturbance of birds during operational activities and routine maintenance at
Moorreesburg Wind Farm
Extent site only (1) site only (1)
Duration short term (1) short term (1)
Magnitude moderate- low (5) low (4)
Probability Highly probable (4) probable (3)
Reversibility Medium High
Resources?
Mitigation:
» Strict control should be maintained over all maintenance activities, in particular heavy
machinery and vehicle movements, and staff.
» Operating procedures and maintenance schedules must be properly followed.
» Vehicles should be fitted with standard noise damping exhaust systems and
maintenance should be avoided during breeding season at turbines where birds are
found to be nesting.
» Operating procedures must indicate that maintenance personnel should not interfere
with fauna, including birds on site.
» During maintenance and operation, if any of the “Focal Species” identified in this
report are observed to be roosting and/or breeding in the vicinity, or if any carcasses
of these species are found, an appropriately qualitied specialist is to be contacted for
further instruction.
» A post-construction or operational monitoring program is recommended.
Cumulative impacts:
Low
Residual impacts:
Low
Impacts associated with both layout alternatives are considered to be similar.
Nature of the Impact: Collision with associated overhead power lines

Collision of birds with associated overhead power lines at Moorreesburg Wind Farm (within
WEF site only)
Extent Site- Impact will occur Site- Impact will occur
locally, but have national locally, but have national
implications for certain implications for certain
species (2) species (2)
Duration Long term (4) Long term (4)
Magnitude Very high (10) Very high (10 )
Probability Probable (3) Improbable (2)
Resources?
Mitigation:
» Distribution Lines connecting turbines should be placed underground where possible.
» Mark relevant sections of overhead line (i.e. within the Medium-High Sensitivity zones)
with appropriate marking devices.
» Consider power line option 1 as the preferred alternative as it has been deemed to
result in the lowest impact.
Cumulative impacts:
The cumulative impact of bird collisions in the area is likely to be significant. Many of the
target species for this study are species that are in all likelihood already significantly
impacted upon by collisions/electrocutions with overhead cables in the area. If additional
power lines in the broader are built, they may further impact on these target species’
populations. The power lines proposed at Moorreesburg WEF may however be situated
alongside existing lines which will reduce the impact, especially if lines are clearly marked
for increased visibility.

Residual impacts:
Medium
Impacts associated with power line Alternative 1 are expected to be lower than those
associated with power line alterative 2. Therefore, this is considered to be the preferred
alternative.
Nature of the Impact: Electrocution on associated overhead power lines

Electrocution of birds on associated overhead power lines at Moorreesburg Wind Farm
(within WEF site only)
Extent Site- Impact will occur locally, Site- Impact will occur
but have national implications locally, but have
for certain species (2) national implications
for certain species (2)
Duration Long term (4 ) Long term (4)
Magnitude Very high (10 ) Very high (10)
Probability Probable ( 3) Very improbable (1)
Resources?
Can impacts be mitigated? Yes
Mitigation:
Associated power-lines should be placed underground where possible. Any overhead
power lines which are built, and which are above ground and are 132kV or lower, should
use a “bird friendly” monopole structure, fitted with a bird perch, as per Eskom standard
guidelines.
Cumulative impacts:
Moderately significant.
Residual impacts:
Low
similar.
From an avifaunal perspective, wind turbine layout Alternative 1 is preferred (25

turbine option) due to the lower number of wind turbine to be constructed. This will
significantly reduce any potential impacts associated with construction and
operation of the wind farm on avifauna.
Both power line route options would have a similar impact, i.e. Low Negative.
However, Alternative 1 is expected to have a lower impact in terms of collision
risk and is therefore considered to be the preferred alternative.
In terms of general sensitivity the study site is considered as a medium sensitivity

area. Considering the sensitivity of the area it is recommended that all the
sensitive areas identified (refer to Figure 7.3 and 7.4) are avoided in terms of
infrastructure placement, and the recommendations in relation to adaptive
management are followed. Layout Alternative 1, with 25 turbines proposed, is
recommended to be implemented as it is considered to have lower conflicts with the
sensitive areas identified and lower impacts on bird communities in comparison to
layout Alternative 2 (with 40 wind turbines proposed). An adequate monitoring of
the impacts during the operational phase of the facility is recommended in order to
better understand the effects of subsequent phases of the project on the bird
community and prevent and/or mitigate any negative effects. Mitigation measures
are proposed within this report for construction and operation phases of the project,
considering the potential negative effects identified.
Power line Alternative 1 is recommended for implementation as a result of the

expected lower impact in terms of collision risk.
7.3 Assessment of Impacts on Bats
The occurrence of 10 bat species and the potential occurrence of 8 additional

species in the study area has been confirmed through the bat monitoring
programme undertaken on the site. Three of the species confirmed in the study
area have high risk of collision with wind turbines (Sowler & Stoffberg 2014) due to
their behaviour. Although these species are considered as “Least Concern” their
potential higher risk of collision is related with their foraging behaviour as open-air
foragers, which increases the likelihood individuals using the turbine blade swept
area, therefore increasing the probability of collision.
Two other species with confirmed presence in the area raise concerns regarding
their probability of fatalities, as they both have a medium to high risk of collision
with wind turbines and are the most abundant species in the study area. These
species are in general clutter-edge foragers with known wind turbine collisions in
Europe and USA, from the same or similar genus.
The analysis conducted indicated that bat activity in the study area is similar and
slightly above the average for the Western Cape, presenting some seasonal peaks
of activity of reasonably high activity (more than 5 passes per hour). These peaks
were primarily observed in spring and summer season, potentially related with
higher food availability as well as with the birth season of most bat species
occurring on site.
Potential bat sensitive areas on the site were identified through the pre-
construction monitoring programme. These are reflected in Figures 7.5 and 7.6.
Figure 7.5: Bat sensitive habitats within the study area (as determined by the bat
impact assessment) indicating the proposed layout – 25 turbine
option
Figure 7.6: Bat sensitive habitats within the study area (as determined by the
bat impact assessment) indicating the proposed layout – 40 turbine
option
7.3.1. Potential Impacts
Potential impacts on bats that may arise from the implementation of

Moorreesburg Wind Farm include:
» Bat fatalities by collision with wind turbines, turbine blades or barotrauma;

» Bat displacement from feeding areas;
» Disturbance and/or destruction of roosts;
» Mortality of frugivorous bat species by collision with power lines;
» Reduction of ecosystem services provided by bats;
» Cumulative impacts.
The consequences of bat fatalities or bat species displacement of the study area
are beyond the simple impact on bat populations. Bats provide important

services for the human population, especially through arthropod suppression, and
pollination of a wide variety of plants (Kunz et al. 2011).
This environmental assessment is based on a pre-construction monitoring

programme, covering one full year period and all the relevant seasons for the bat
community on the site, as recommended by the South African Good Practice
Guidelines for Surveying Bats in Wind Farm Developments (Sowler & Stoffberg
2012), therefore providing a solid baseline for the establishment of the present
assessments.
Impact tables summarising potential impacts on bats that may arise from
the construction phase
Nature: Destruction of agricultural areas due to platforms construction,

workstation and substation construction, internal access roads construction, and
turbines, underground cabling and overhead power lines installation
Extent 1 (Local) 1 (Local)
Duration 5 (Permanent) 3 (Medium-term)
Magnitude 4 (Low) 2 (Minor)
Probability 5 (Definite) 5 (Definite)
Significance 50 (Medium) 30 (Medium)
Reversibility Reversible Reversible
Irreplaceable loss of Possible No
resources?
Can impacts be mitigated? Yes -
Mitigation:
» The minimization of this impact is mainly achieved through the avoidance of
infrastructure siting, especially turbines, in the sensitive areas, in the layout planning
phase, or through the minimization of the affected areas as far as possible in the
activities of clearance and removal of vegetation.
» Existing roads and infrastructure should be used in order to minimize landscape
changes.
» If large portions of sensitive areas are affected, measures should be taken to restore
vegetation as soon as possible after construction is completed.
» Movements of machinery, vehicles and persons should be restricted to the existing roads
and avoid the existing natural areas.
Cumulative Impacts:
Several other Wind Energy Facilities are being planned and/or are being constructed and/or
are operational very close to the study area (within a 30km radius). Habitat destruction is
therefore a cumulative impact between all these locations, since more area will be affected
and bat population will have less suitable area to forage in the proximities of the study area.
Residual Impacts:
Once the construction ceases and the mitigation measures are implemented no residual
impacts are expected.

Impacts are considered to be similar. The lower number of turbines associated with
Alternative 1 will however lower the extent of the impact at a local scale and is therefore
preferred.
Nature: Destruction of natural vegetated areas and water features due to

platforms construction, workstation and substation construction, internal access
roads construction, and turbines, underground cabling and overhead power lines
installation
Duration 5 (Permanent) 5 (Permanent)
Magnitude 6 (Moderate) 4 (Low)
Probability 5 (Definite) 5 (Definite)
Reversibility Irreversible Reversible
Irreplaceable loss of Possible Possible
resources?
Mitigation:
» The minimisation of this impact is mainly achieved through the avoidance of
infrastructure siting, especially turbines, in the sensitive areas, in a layout planning
phase, or through minimisation of the affected area as far as possible as a result of the
activities of clearance and removal of vegetation.
» The beneficiation of existing accesses should be conducted strictly to the extent
necessary.
» Movement of machinery, vehicles and persons should be restricted to the existing roads
and avoid the existing natural areas.
Cumulative Impacts:
Several other Wind Energy Facilities are being planned and/or are being constructed and/or
are operational very close to the study area (within a 30km radius). Habitat destruction is
therefore a cumulative impact between all these locations, since more area will be affected
and bat population will have less suitable area to forage in the proximities of the study
area.
Residual Impacts:
Once the construction ceases and the mitigation measures are implemented no residual
impacts are expected.
Both alternatives avoid natural vegetation and the impact is therefore considered to be
similar.
Nature: Disturbance of bat community due to the increase of people and vehicles
in the area, and destruction of roost locations


Duration 1 (Very short) 1 (Very short)
Probability 3 (Probable) 2 (Probable)
Significance 18 (Low) 8 (Low)
resources?
Mitigation:
» Avoid the presence of people and vehicles in the high sensitivity areas as possible.
» Whenever possible schedule activities in order not to cause disturbance during the
breeding season.
» Lower the levels of noise whenever possible around the high sensitivity areas
» Avoid construction works during the night and avoid the destruction or disturbance of
identified roosting sites.
Cumulative Impacts:
Other are being planned and/or are being constructed and/or are operational very close to
the study area (within a 30km radius). Therefore, if the construction of the WEF planned
for the area occurs simultaneously with or after the construction of Moorresburg WEF it is
likely that this impact will persist and increase its duration and magnitude.
Residual Impacts:
Not likely once the construction ceases.
Impacts are considered to be similar. The lower number of turbines associated with
Alternative 1 is however expected to limit the extent of the construction period, thereby
reducing the duration of the impact. This alterntive is therefore preferred.
Impact tables summarising potential impacts on bats that may arise from
the operation phase
Nature: Fatality of individuals due to collision with turbine blades or barotrauma

caused by turbines operation
Magnitude 6 (Moderate) 4 (Low)
Probability 4 (Highly probable) 3 (Probable)
resources?
Mitigation:
» The minimisation of fatalities caused by wind turbines can be achieved through the

avoidance of turbines installation in sensitive areas for bats (as detailed in Figures 7.5
and 7.6).
» From the proposed layouts, 11 of the 25 turbines of Option 1 and 12 of the 40 turbines
of Option 2 are sited within sensitive areas. Therefore relocation of these turbines is
considered necessary to minimise fatalities.
» No tall vegetation should be allowed within the 200m buffer around the wind turbines to
reduce the suitability of the areas for bat foragers.
» An operational bat monitoring program should be implemented in order to determine the
actual impacts of the wind energy facility on the bat community.
» Utilise red lights in the turbines, instead of white, in order to minimise insect attraction
and bat foraging behaviours near the turbines.
Cumulative Impacts:
Since other are being planned and/or are being constructed and/or are operational very
close to the study area (within a 30km radius). Therefore, cumulative impacts result from
fatalities of bats caused by the operation of all facilities simultaneously. A bat monitoring
program should be implemented and should allow for the determination of the actual
cumulative impacts of the wind energy facility on the bat community.
Residual Impacts:
Some collisions are expected despite the implementation of mitigation. This will result in bat
fatalities which have potential to result in residual impacts.
Considering the number of wind turbines of layout Alternative 1 in relation to layout
Alternative 2 it is considered that the first alternative is likely to result in lower negative
impacts on bat populations, reducing the collision risk.
Nature: Disturbance of bat community due to noise and movement generated by

turbines operation and increase of people and vehicles in the area associated with
maintenance activities.
Probability 3 (Highly probable) 2 (Improbable)
Significance 30 (Medium) 16 (Low)
resources?
Mitigation:
» The minimisation of bat community disturbance can be achieved through the avoidance
of presence of people and vehicles in the sensitive areas.
» Maintenance operations, during the operation phase should avoid the periods most
sensible for bats (e.g. breeding season).
Cumulative Impacts:
Other are being planned and/or are being constructed and/or are operational very close to
the study area (within a 30km radius). Therefore, cumulative impacts result from the

operation of all facilities simultaneously are expected. A bat monitoring program should be
implemented and should allow for the determination of the actual cumulative impacts of the
wind energy facility on the bat community.
Residual Impacts:
Some species may move away from the area regardless of any mitigation measures
implemented. A bat monitoring program should be implemented in order to determine the
actual impacts of the wind energy facility on the bat community.
Impacts are expected to be similar with both alternatives.
From a bat perspective, wind turbine layout Alternatives 1 (25 turbine option) is
preferred due to the lower number of wind turbines to be constructed. This will
significantly reduce any potential impacts associated with construction and
operation of the wind farm on bats.
There is no evidence to suggest that bats which are common to the area are
affected by power lines in any way. For this reason the alternative power line
routes were not assessed as part of this study and there is no nominated
preferred power route.
The proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm is located in a medium to high sensitivity

area for bats, according to the results of the pre-construction monitoring
programme. Expected impacts these will likely be related to habitat destruction,
disturbance caused by construction activities and operational activities, and
fatalities due to turbine operation. The main recommendation is to avoid all
sensitive areas identified for the bat community from any infrastructure
placement. Additional mitigation measures are also proposed to minimise any
residual impacts remaining from the avoidance phase.
Layout alternative 1 (25 wind turbines proposed) is considered as the least

impact layout alternative as it considers a substantially reduced number of
turbines (layout alternative 2 considers 62.5% more turbines to be installed) and
fewer wind turbines are sited within areas of high sensitivity and of medium
sensitivity. Therefore, Layout alternative 1 is recommended to be implemented.
7.4 Assessment of Potential Impacts on Soil, Land Use, Land

Capability and Agricultural Potential
There are six land type classifications across the site (refer Figure 4.3). The land
type classification is a nation-wide survey that groups areas of similar soil and

terrain conditions into different land types. The most important land types in
terms of area of coverage and likely impact are Ab24, Ab23 and Fb548. The
three other land types cover only small parts of the site which are unlikely to be
impacted by the proposed development. Turbines are proposed to be located on
the higher lying, steeper ground associated with the north south running ridge
identified with land type Fb548, but will be situated on all three of the above land
types.
Landforms
Based on the field data collected, the soil types follow a specific catena, shown in
the photo below:
Landforms 1 and 4
Consist of shallow sandy soils restricted by rock and a high percentage stone or
gravel appears in the soil profile.
Landform 5
Is characterised by red and yellow sandy clay soils, restricted by stone and gravel
in the soil profile with a luvic character in the sub soil (increase of more than 5%
clay in the sub soil). The Effective depth is 40 to 70 cm.
Landform 7
Landform 7 as deep soils in the valley bottom with structured sub soil.
Agricultural Potential:

Effective soil depths are limited to 20-50 cm, on a restricted stone layer. Top and
sub-soil contain more than 40% stones/fragments. The soil depth can be
ameliorated with tine implements. The soil texture increases with more than 5%
in clay from top to sub soil. Soil characteristics follow specific catena:
Shallower and lower agricultural potential

1
2
Deeper and higher agricultural potential

4
5
6
Soil Catena
Impact tables
Nature: Loss of agricultural potential and land capability through the following
mechanisms:
1. Loss of agricultural land on development footprint for duration of project

2. Degradation of natural drainage
3. Deterioration of vegetation and veld
4. Soil erosion
5. Disruption of contour banks
6. Disturbance of cultivation practices due to division of existing camps
7. Prevention of crop spraying by aircraft
Duration Permanent (5) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Moderate (6) Minor (3)
Reversibility Medium Medium
Irreplaceable loss of resources No
Can impacts be mitigated Yes
Mitigation:
» Micro-site turbines and access roads to prevent disturbance to existing contour banks

and to prevent unnecessary sub-division of fields.

» Minimize footprint of disturbance during construction.
» Strip and stockpile all topsoil from disturbed areas for replacement during
rehabilitation.
» Implement effective run-off control measures and stormwater management at all
times
» Sow oats as cover crop on all construction areas left bare by disturbance to stabilise
soils.
Cumulative impacts:
Cumulative impacts can be considered possible due to the likelihood of other projects
(renewable energy or other) in the area that will also lead to loss of agricultural land. This
cumulative impact is however considered to be of low significance. The footprints of such
projects are small in relation to available land. Non-irrigated land is not a particularly
limited resource in the area, and relatively small losses of no-irrigation land to agricultural
will have very little impact on the total agriculture of the area.
Residual impacts:
Residual impact is considered low because the land will be able to be returned to
agriculture after closure with very little change in agricultural potential.
Impacts associated with Layout Alternative 1 are expected to be lower than those
associated with Alternative 2 due to fewer turbines being associated with this alternative.
Alternative 1 id therefore considered to be the preferred alternative.
Power line alternative 1 follows an existing servitude and would be preferred over
Alternative 2. However, in order to minimise impacts on agriculture further, an alternative
along cadastral boundaries (as recommended within the SIA) would be preferable.
Impacts associated with Layout Alternative 1 are expected to be lower than those
associated with Alternative 2 due to fewer turbines being associated with this
alternative. Alternative 1 id therefore considered to be the preferred alternative.
Power line alternative 1 follows an existing servitude and would be preferred over
Alternative 2. However, in order to minimise impacts on agriculture further, an
alternative along cadastral boundaries (as recommended within the SIA) would be
preferable.
Due to the physical soil characteristics and slope, the land potential is expected to
be low. The farming practices applied in combination with climatic conditions
however raises the potential and wheat yields of four tons per hectare are
reached.

The impact on land will be low as most of the area is already cultivated and
provided with conservation structures, although the lack of waterways increases
erosion and is the reason for donga erosion. Structures of a wind farm may
decrease the availability of such land – the possibility to utilise areas around the
wind facilities must be considered.
The significance of agricultural impacts is influenced by two factors. The first is

the fact that the wind farm only impacts directly on a very small portion of the
land - wind farm infrastructure, including access roads, typically occupies less
than 1% of a farm (as detailed in Section 7.1.1). The second is that the land has
limited agricultural capability and there is no potential for irrigation. Most
impacts are therefore likely to be of low significance.
In order to ensure that the mitigation measures and good agricultural practice
guidelines are followed and appropriately applied, it is strongly recommended that
an agricultural specialist in natural resources be part of the installation team and
periodically visit the site to recommend specific measures as may be required
during the construction phase. No specific monitoring guidelines are required
during the operational phase, other than monitoring adherence to the DAFF
guidelines. The Department of Agriculture reserves the right to visit the
renewable energy site at any time without prior arrangement to review the status
of the natural resource base and the impact of the renewable energy structures.
7.5 Assessment of Potential Visual Impacts
7.5.1 Visual Exposure
An initial estimate indicated that the proposed wind farm might be visible for
approximately 39km. This estimate was confirmed by on site observations of two
existing wind farms which indicated that they were visible for greater than 30km.
39km was therefore set as the approximate visual horizon and study area limit
(refer to Figure 7.7).
As the wind farm is proposed on a ridgeline that extends across a broad

undulating valley, sections of the facility will be visible over a broad area.
However, because the ridgeline is at least partially screened from most possible
sensitive receptors and because of the surrounding undulating topography, it will
be difficult to obtain a clear view of the entire wind farm from close range and
medium range. Views over the entire wind farm will generally only be possible
from a distance of no greater than 10km and then only from undeveloped
ridgelines. Broader visibility of the entire wind farm is only likely to be possible
from 20 – 30 km at which distance the visual impact will be at least part
mitigated by distance and possibly atmospheric conditions and sun angle.


Final EIA Report March 2015
Figure 7.7: Viewer

exposure map

7.5.2. Visual impact assessment: primary impacts
Nature of impact: Potential visual impact on users of arterial and secondary roads
to which the proposed facility will be visible
Impact on linear receivers (roads) that run through the area. These include;
» The N7 Cape to Namibia Route
» The R311 which is a surfaced road between Moorreesburg and Riebeeck Kasteel to
the south east and Moorreesburg and Hopefield to the north west
» The R307 which is largely an unsurfaced road in the vicinity of Moorreesburg
between Moorresburg and Darling to the west.
» A local gravel road that runs between Moorreesburg and the R44 close to the
settlement of Gouda
The N7 is by far the busiest route carrying a mix of local and regional traffic. It is a key
tourism route. The R311 also has importance for tourism. Other routes predominantly
carry local traffic.
The impact relates to the possible change in the character of the view from the road from
a rural agricultural landscape to an industrialised / developed landscape. The impact on
individual users will only be for the short period they are utilising the road in the vicinity of
the site.
Extent Site and immediate surroundings (2) No mitigation possible
Duration Long term (4) No mitigation possible
Magnitude The rural landscape will still be evident (8) If ground level
development is
minimised (6)
Probability Definite (5) No mitigation possible
Significance High (62) High (60)
Status The character of the rural landscape will be N/A
changed. It is likely that the loss of rural
characteristics will be viewed by the
majority of people as negative. However,
it is possible that a proportion of the
population who may benefit and may view
the development as a positive addition to
the local landscape.
Irreplaceable Impacts are greatest in the vicinity of
loss Moorreesburg. This area has been
impacted by development already including
the settlement, a quarry site adjacent to
the propose development and a substation
with numerous associated overhead power
lines. It is therefore not the most cohesive
example of a rural landscape in the region.
The proposed development can also be
dismantled and it is assumed that
productive agriculture might replace the

development again.
Can impacts be The proposed impact can be part mitigated by minimising ground level
mitigated? development and maintaining existing rural land uses below the
turbines. This is only likely to have a significant benefit from areas in
the immediate vicinity of the project. However from beyond this
range, impacts are at least part mitigated by landform.
Mitigation / Management:
Planning:
» Ensure that ground level development is minimised.
Operations:
» Maintain existing uses below the development.
Decommissioning:
» Remove infrastructure not required for the post-decommissioning use of the site.
» Return all affected areas to productive agricultural use.
Monitor rehabilitated areas post-decommissioning and implement remedial actions.
Favoured Alternative:
» The selection of the 25 turbine alternative will result in a reduced intensity of impact
particularly from close views when compared to the 40 turbine alternative.
» The selection of power line alternative 1 will result in a reduced impact when compared
with alternative 2.
Nature of impact: The potential visual impact on urban centres and populated
places in close proximity to the proposed wind farm (i.e. Moorreesburg)
The town of Moorreesburg is largely located on an east facing slope overlooking the
proposed site.
Whilst occasional views over the entire ridgeline on which the wind farm is proposed will be
possible as indicated in the View Point 4, the most common type of view will be one that is
channelled down a road that runs directly downhill towards the development. This will
produce views of small sections of the wind farm at any one time. This will be part
mitigated by street trees which in areas could largely screen views of the development.
Magnitude The rural landscape will still be evident and If ground level
the majority of uses in Moorreesburg are development is
unlikely to be sensitive to the change in minimised (6)
view. Not all uses within the town are likely
to be sensitive include residential areas and
the small tourism sector (6 - 8).
Probability Definite (5) No mitigation possible
Significance High (62) High (60)

population who may benefit and may view

the development as a positive addition to
the local landscape.
Irreplaceable Impacts are greatest in the vicinity of the
loss southern access to Moorreesburg and on
roads within the town that run directly
downhill towards the development.
Views from this area have been impacted
by development already including the
settlement, a quarry site adjacent to the
proposed development and a substation
with numerous associated overhead power
lines. It is therefore not the most cohesive
development again.
turbines. This is only likely to have a significant benefit from areas in
the immediate vicinity of the project. However from beyond this
range, impacts are at least part mitigated by landform.
Planning:
 Ensure that ground level development is minimised.
Operations:
 Maintain existing uses below the development.
Decommissioning:
 Remove infrastructure not required for the post-decommissioning use of the site.
 Return all affected areas to productive agricultural use.
Monitor rehabilitated areas post-decommissioning and implement remedial actions.
» The selection of the 25 turbine alternative will result in a reduced intensity of impact
particularly from close views when compared to the 40 turbine alternative.
» A hybrid alternative that would go some way to mitigating impacts on Moorreesburg
would be to reduce the numbers of turbines on the ridgeline closest to the town on
which views along the majority of north west / south east aligned roads will focus
views.
with alternative 2.
Nature of impact: The visibility of the proposed wind farm from, and potential
visual impact on residences and homesteads in close proximity to the wind farm
and within the region
Five farm steads are located within the area that the turbines are proposed. A further six

farm steads are located within one kilometre and a further 27 farm steads will have a view
over the wind farm from within the high impact zone.
The level of impact for each of these groups will differ significantly;
» Residents within the turbine field will have their outlook changed the most. Turbine
structures and associated infrastructure will dominate and industrialise the landscape.
» Residents close to the edge of the turbine field will experience a similar degree of
impact over approximately 50% of their outlook. They will at least be able to maintain
their rural outlook over the remainder of their view.
» Residents outside the immediate vicinity of the turbines are likely to read the rural
landscape between the structures more readily and to some extent the turbines will
recede (the greater the distance the more this will occur). Associated lower level
infrastructure is likely to be the main hindrance in this regard.
Magnitude  Residents located in the turbine field (10)
(10).
 Residents located close to the turbine (8)
field (8).
 Residents located outside the (6)
immediate vicinity of the turbine field
(6)
Probability  Residents located in the turbine field N/A
(5).
 Residents located close to the turbine
field (4).
 Residents located outside the
(3)
Significance  Residents located in the turbine field High (80)
(80).
 Residents located close to the turbine Medium (56)
field (56).
 Residents located outside the Medium (36)
(36)
population particularly those who may
benefit may view the development as a
positive addition to the local landscape.
On balance however the status is likely to
be negative.
Irreplaceable This area has been impacted by

loss development already including the

settlement, a quarry site adjacent to the
propose development and a substation with
numerous associated overhead power lines.
It is therefore not the most cohesive
development again.
There will therefore be no irreplaceable
loss, however, given the long term nature
of the project, it is likely that a proportion
of residents will view the loss of view as
irreplaceable.
turbines.
The use of vegetation to screen views of the wind farm maybe possible
particularly for residents outside the immediate vicinity of the facility.
Planning:
 Ensure that ground level development is minimised.
 Screen planting around home steads.
Operations:
 Maintain existing uses below the development.
Decommissioning:
 Remove infrastructure not required for the post-decommissioning use of the site.
 Return all affected areas to productive agricultural use.
 Monitor rehabilitated areas post-decommissioning and implement remedial actions.
» The selection of the 25 turbine alternative will result in a reduced intensity of impact.
with alternative 2.
Nature of impact: The potential visual impact of shadow flicker on observers

residing on or in close proximity to the proposed wind farm
The term “shadow flicker‟ refers to the flickering effect caused when rotating wind turbine
blades periodically cast shadows over neighbouring properties as they turn, through
constrained openings such as windows
The analysis has shown that a number of farmsteads could be affected by shadow cast by
the turbine structures.
If buildings are in shadow during clear weather when the turbine is turning then they are
likely to be affected by shadow flicker.

The buildings that are at risk of this impact are indicated in section 4. This indicates that
13 farmsteads are at risk with the 25 turbine alternative and 15 farmsteads are at risk
with the 40 turbine alternative.
It has to be stated that farmsteads close to the edges of the defined areas are only likely
to be subject to shadow for short periods of the year and so the risk of shadow flicker is
low. Whereas farmsteads over which shadow is cast for long periods of the year are at
greater risk of the impact.
Shadow flicker is primarily a nuisance related impact which has the potential to last as long
as shadow is cast on the subject. It is also possible that in some people suffering from
epilepsy an epileptic seizure may be triggered by light flickers (photosensitive epilepsy).
Several mitigation measures are indicated as being possible including sensitive site design,
installation of blinds, and wind turbine shut-down strategies.
Magnitude  Residents located within and close to (2)
the southern edge of the turbine field.
(6)
 Residents located within and close to (2)
the east north eastern and west north
western edges of the turbine field. (4)
Probability  Residents located within and close to N/A
(4)
 Residents located within and close to
western edges of the turbine field. (2)
Significance  Residents located within and close to Medium (32)
Medium (48)
 Residents located within and close to Low (16)
western edges of the turbine field.
Low (20)
Status All affected parties are likely to consider N/A
this to be a negative impact.
Irreplaceable The proposed development can be
loss dismantled and if this occurs then the
impact will be removed.
There will therefore be no irreplaceable
loss, however, given the long term nature
of the project, it is likely that a proportion
of residents will view the loss of view as
irreplaceable.

Can impacts be The proposed impact can be part mitigated by;

mitigated?  Sensitive site design to minimise risk,
 Installation of blinds on affected windows,
 Adopting wind turbine shut-down strategies for turbines that
are at risk of causing the impact.
Planning:
» Undertake consultation with affected parties to inform them and offer mitigation.
» Sensitive design to minimise risk of impact.
» Investigate / plan mechanism to shut down individual turbines in high risk
conditions.
Operations:
» Install blinds on affected windows.
» Shut down individual turbines in high risk conditions.
Decommissioning:
» No mitigation necessary.
» The selection of the 25 turbine alternative will result in a marginally reduced impact
area.
Nature of impact: The potential visual impact of the proposed wind farm and
ancillary infrastructure on the scenic visual character of the landscape and the
sense of place of the region, with specific reference to the high quality pastoral
landscape
The landscape in which the development is proposed is a relatively cohesive rural

agricultural landscape which in general has been little affected by infrastructure or built
development.
The significance of this landscape is made greater by its relationship with the rugged
upland landscape of the Cederberg with which it provides a strong contrast.
The area close to Moorreesburg in which the windfarm is proposed is one of the areas that
is affected by development and infrastructure within the character area.
The greatest degree of impact is likely to be limited to by a series of ridgelines. Outside of

these ridgelines the visibility of the proposed development is intermittent and partial until
the viewer is approximately 20km away. From this distance whilst the development will be
visible, the impact is mitigated by distance and possibly by atmospheric and lighting
conditions.
Extent Local landscape, site and immediate N/A
surroundings (2)
Medium range views from within the
surrounding valley floor, (3)
Long range views from the elevated areas
to the east and west (3)

Duration Local landscape, site and immediate N/A

surroundings (4)
Medium range views from within the
surrounding valley floor, (4)
to the east and west (4)
Magnitude Short range views within the local
landscape, site and immediate surroundings
(8) (6)
Medium range views from within the valley
floor, (4) (2)
to the east and west (2) (0)
Probability Short range views within the local N/A
landscape, (5)
floor, (4)
to the east and west, (3)
Significance Short range views within the local
landscape, High (70) High (60)
floor, Medium (44) Medium (36)
to the east and west, Low (27) Low (21)
changed, however, the degree of change
will be greatest within the identified high
impact area and will reduce significantly
with distance.
It is likely that the loss of rural
characteristics within the high impact area
will be viewed by the majority of people as
negative.
However, it is possible that a proportion of
the population particularly those who may
benefit may view the development as a
positive additional landmark in the
landscape particularly when viewed from a
distance.
Irreplaceable The proposed development can be N/A
impact will be removed. There will
therefore be no irreplaceable loss.
Can impacts be It is not possible to hide the turbines in the landscape. It is however
mitigated? possible to;
 Ensure that visual clutter at the base and around the turbine
structures is minimised, and

 Minimise reflection both from the turning blades and supporting

structure.
Reducing the impact of infrastructure around the turbine base will have
the most benefit for short range views from which these elements are
likely to be most obvious.
Reducing the reflectivity of blades and structure will have most benefit
from medium and long range views particularly when the structures are
viewed against a landform.
The wind farm development at Gouda is utilising concrete towers which
have a matt finish. It may also be possible to finish the blades with a
matt coating.
Planning:
» Plan associated infrastructure to minimise visual clutter around the turbine
structures.
» Investigate the use of concrete towers and a matt coating for the turbine housing
and blades.
Operations:
» Maintain existing uses below the development.
Decommissioning:
» Remove infrastructure not required for the post-decommissioning use of the site.
» Return all affected areas to productive agricultural use.
» Monitor rehabilitated areas post-decommissioning and implement remedial actions.
» The selection of the 25 turbine alternative will result in fewer structures in the
landscape and hence a reduced impact for short range views.
Nature of impact: The visibility of the facility from and potential visual impact on
tourist access routes (i.e. the N7, the R311, R45 and secondary roads) and tourist
destinations within the region
All known tourist locations are some distance from the proposed wind farm. Only long
distance views are therefore likely to be possible.
Extent Regional extent, (3) N/A
Duration Long term, (4) N/A
Magnitude Minor and will not result in a significant (0)
impact, (2)
Probability Definite, (1) N/A
Significance Low, (7)
Status The impact will be so low that it will be N/A
negligible.
Irreplaceable There will be no irreplaceable loss. N/A
loss
Can impacts be It is likely that the proposed wind farm will be visible from the
mitigated? mountainous areas that overlook the coastal plain. However, these
areas are approximately 30km from the site and the turbine structures

will be viewed against the landform and so are unlikely to be obvious.

Additional mitigation can be used to minimise reflection from the
structures and blades by using concrete towers and matt coatings on
blades and turbine housing
Planning:
 Investigate the use of concrete towers and a matt coating for the turbine housing
and blades.
Neither alternative are likely to have a significant impact.
Nature of impact: The potential visual impact of operational, safety and security
lighting of the facility at night
From reference to manufacturer’s specifications, it appears that wind turbine obstruction

lighting has an intensity and performance requirement range of up to 4 nautical miles
which is approximately 8km. Subject to weather conditions, lighting at night may be
visible at a greater distance but the performance is likely to deteriorate significantly with
distance.
From discussion with the applicant, it has been indicated that security lighting will only be
utilised around the control building.
The areas that are likely to be most sensitive to lighting are the mountainous wilderness
areas that overlook the coastal plain. These areas are in excess of 30km from the
proposed wind farm.
Wind turbine obstruction lighting and security lighting will also be visible from areas
surrounding the proposed site. If security lighting is located to the west of the ridgeline on
which the turbines are proposed, this will not be out of keeping with lights from the near-
by urban area, lights from traffic on the relatively busy N7 as well as security lighting at
the adjacent quarry and Moorreesburg substation. However if security lighting is on the
eastern side of the hill, this area is more tranquil and is less developed hence the general
level of lighting is relatively low. The addition of a bright patch of security lighting on this
side of the ridgeline is likely to add to be more obvious.
Extent Wind turbine obstruction lighting, Regional N/A
extent, (3)
Security lighting, site and immediate
surroundings, (2).
Duration Wind turbine obstruction lighting, long N/A
term, (4).
Security lighting, long term, (4).
Magnitude Wind turbine obstruction lighting, will have N/A
no impact, (0).
Security lighting, could impact, (4) (2)
Probability Wind turbine obstruction lighting , N/A

improbable impact, (2)

Security lighting could have an impact (3)
Significance Wind turbine obstruction lighting, Low, (7). N/A
Security lighting, medium, (30) (24) low.
Status Wind turbine obstruction lighting - N/A
there is unlikely to be an impact, if there is
it will be negligible given the extent of
lights in the area that are likely to be visible
from the mountain range.
Security Lighting – creating additional

light pollution in an area that is relatively
dark on the eastern side of the ridge would
be seen as a negative impact. However if
additional lighting were to occur on the
western side of the ridge this is likely to be
viewed by most people as negligible.
Irreplaceable Wind turbine obstruction lighting will create N/A
loss no irreplaceable loss.
The lighting of the eastern side of the ridge

is likely to be seen by some as a loss. The
proposed development can be dismantled
and if this occurs then the impact will be
removed. There will therefore be no
irreplaceable loss.
Can impacts be No
mitigated?
Planning:
 Plan to locate the control building as on the western side of the ridge.
 Plan to use security lighting with shaded to prevent as much light radiating
upwards and away from the area to be secured.
Neither alternative are likely to have a a significantly greater impact than the other.
Nature of impact: Potential visual impacts associated with the construction phase
on observers in close proximity to the proposed wind farm.
The construction process is likely to follow the following sequence:

» Site establishment including setting up of site offices and storage areas. It is important
that these are established close to the site access point and off major ridgelines and
areas requiring cut.
» Site clearance and grading of construction areas. There is a danger that if the
contractor is not adequately controlled unnecessary clearance could occur which will
extend the visual footprint.
» Excavation and concrete work for tower bases. If concrete is batched on site this will

create an additional messy operation that has potential to create significant

disturbance. If on site batching is required, strict controls must be in place.
» Moving prefabricated towers, turbines and blades onto site. It is likely that these will
all arrive within a short period and a large storage area will develop.
» Erection of towers in a progressive manner. Erection requires the use of a mobile crane
to hold prefabricated elements in position. This process is relatively rapid as material is
prefabricated off site. The storage area will diminish as towers and turbines are
erected.
» Cable laying buried cables and erection of overhead power lines is likely to be
undertaken in parallel with the installation of the turbines.
Extent Site and immediate surroundings, (2). N/A
Duration The construction period is likely to be N/A
relatively short (1).
Magnitude Towards the end of construction, the full
visual impact of the facility will be
experienced (8). (6)
Probability The construction period will have a definite N/A
visual impact, (5)
Significance Medium, (55) Medium, (45).
Status Construction operations are often messy N/A

and require disturbance. This is generally
considered to be a negative impact.
therefore be no irreplaceable loss.
Can impacts be The impact can only be partly mitigated. Mitigation generally depends
mitigated? on undertaking strict site management and effective rehabilitation.
Planning:
» Retain and maintain natural vegetation in all areas outside of the development
footprint.
Construction:
» Ensure that vegetation is not unnecessarily removed during the construction
period.
» Reduce the construction period through careful logistical planning and productive
implementation of resources.
» Plan the placement of lay-down areas and temporary construction equipment
camps in order to minimise vegetation clearing (i.e. in already disturbed areas)
wherever possible.
» Preferably use ready mix concrete
» Restrict the activities and movement of construction workers and vehicles to the
immediate construction site and existing access roads.
» Ensure that rubble, litter, and disused construction materials are appropriately
stored (if not removed daily) and then disposed regularly at licensed waste

facilities.
» Reduce and control construction dust using approved dust suppression techniques
as and when required (i.e. whenever dust becomes apparent).
» Restrict construction activities to daylight hours whenever possible in order to
reduce lighting impacts.
» Rehabilitate all disturbed areas immediately after the completion of construction
works.
The 25 turbine alternative is likely to have a shorter construction period and is therefore
favoured.
Nature of impact: The potential cumulative visual impact of the proposed wind
farm and associated infrastructure
There are two obvious possible areas of cumulative impact:

» The proposed wind farm will further increase the extent of development within the
Rural Agricultural LCA. A key consideration is that the proposed wind farm will be
developed close to an area that is already developed (Moorreesburg). Whilst it will
extend the footprint of development in the area it will not be an isolated development.
If key infrastructure such as the overhead power line can largely be developed on the
western side of the ridge within the valley that is overlooked by the town, this also will
help limit the apparent spread of development into areas that are already impacted.
» The proposed wind farm will increase the influence of wind farms in the landscape and
transform the overall impression of the landscape as being influenced on an increasing
scale by wind farm development. There are two other existing wind farms within
approximately 30km of the proposed site. These existing facilities are on roads that
run parallel with the north south running N7 and whilst they are connected by minor
roads, it is likely that the majority of people passing through the area would use one or
other of the parallel running roads. Another key consideration is the fact that due to
distance and topography, more than one of the wind farms will not be obvious to a
viewer at any one time.
Extent Increase the extent of development within N/A
the Rural Agricultural LCA (3).
Increase the influence of wind farms in the

Rural Agricultural LCA (3).
Duration Increase the extent of development within N/A

Magnitude Increase the extent of development within
the Rural Agricultural LCA (2). (0)


Probability Increase the extent of development within N/A


Significance Increase the extent of development within Medium, (35).
the Rural Agricultural LCA, medium (45).

Rural Agricultural LCA, medium (45).
Status This is generally likely to be considered to N/A
be a negative impact.
therefore be no irreplaceable loss directly
associated with the project. However, once
land is developed, even if the current
project is dismantled, it is possible that
another developed use might be applied to
the site.
Can impacts be Increase the extent of development within the Rural Agricultural LCA
mitigated? can only be part mitigated by ensuring that the balance of
infrastructure development is on the west side of the ridgeline on which
the wind farm is proposed.
Increase the influence of wind farms in the Rural Agricultural LCA is not
possible to mitigate.
Planning:
Ensure that the balance of infrastructure development associated with the proposed wind
farm is located on the west side of the ridgeline on which the wind farm is proposed.
There is no favoured alternative.
Nature of impact: Potential residual visual impacts after the decommissioning of

the proposed wind farm
Possible impacts relates to not rehabilitating the development site to its current state as an
agricultural unit on the dismantling / decommissioning of the wind farm.
One of the risks associated with this is highlighted in 6.2.10 in that once a site is
developed, even if the current development is no longer required, the act of development
sets a precedent for another development to occur.
Another danger is allowing the developer to leave major elements such as the overhead
power lines and concrete bases in place and perhaps to skimp on rehabilitation.

These risks are real and it is difficult to address them at the outset of a relatively long term
project.
One approach might be to ensure that the current agricultural land use is maintained
below the turbines. If the area continues to be a productive agricultural unit, this might
add to the argument for effective rehabilitation on decommissioning.
Extent Site only (1). N/A
Duration Degradation is possibly permanent (5). N/A
Magnitude If not rehabilitated adequately this will (0)
prevent a return to agriculture (4).
Probability Probable (3). N/A
Significance Medium (30) Low, (18)
Status This is generally likely to be considered to N/A
be a negative impact.
Irreplaceable The loss of the agricultural landscape to N/A
loss permanent development would result in
irreplaceable loss of the affected landscape.
Can impacts be Ensure that the need for rehabilitation on decommissioning is
mitigated? entrenched in legal agreements and approvals.
Planning:
Ensure that legal agreements and approvals contain adequate rehabilitation requirements.
There is no favoured alternative.
7.5.3. Comparative Assessment of Layout Alternatives
In terms of the best visual alternative (25 turbine or 40 turbine alterative), the 40
turbine alternative is likely to predominantly increase impacts over the 25 turbine
alternative within the high impact zone. The difference between the alternatives
is likely to be reduced with distance as smaller sections of the development are
obvious due to the undulating topography, however the 25 turbine alternative
(Alternative 1) is preferred.
The selection of power line alternative 1 will result in a reduced impact when
compared with alternative 2.
Whilst the proposed Moorreesburg wind farm will be visible over a wide area,
topography will significantly modify its impact to the extent that high levels of
impact may only be experienced in a relatively small area that is defined by
surrounding ridgelines. The landscape of a large part of the high impact zone has
already been modified by development. Even though the facility may appear to

be quite prominent in the landscape, the facility would be considered to be

acceptable from a visual perspective.
Considering all factors, it is recommended that the development of the facility as

proposed be supported, subject to the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures and management programme.
7.6. Assessment of Potential Noise Impacts
Wind turbines produce sound, primarily due to mechanical operations and

aerodynamic effects at the blades. Modern wind turbine manufacturers have
virtually eliminated the noise impact caused by mechanical sources and instituted
measures to reduce the aerodynamic effects. But, as with many other activities,
the wind turbines emit sound power levels at a level that can impact on areas at
some distance away. When potentially sensitive receptors are nearby, care must
be taken to ensure that the operations at the wind farm do not cause undue
annoyance or otherwise interfere with the quality of life of the receptors.
It should be noted that this does not suggest that the sound from the wind
turbines should not be audible under all circumstances - this is an unrealistic
expectation that is not required or expected from any other agricultural,
commercial, industrial or transportation related noise source – but rather that the
sound due to the wind turbines should be at a reasonable level in relation to the
ambient sound levels.
7.6.1 Relevant Noise Receptors
Potential noise-sensitive development are illustrated Figure 7.8 as green dots.

Some of the receptors staying on properties are participating with the developer
on the project. They will financially gain from the project and they would have a
positive attitude towards the project. However, there will be other receptors
staying on these properties (employees and workers, family) that may feel that
the noise levels are annoying or disturbing.

Figure 7.8: Aerial image indicating potential noise sensitive receptors and property boundaries for the Moorreesburg Wind Farm

7.6.2. Noise from Construction activities
Noise sources during construction include the following:
» Establish internal access roads - the internal road alignment is governed by

the positioning of the wind turbines;
» Site preparation activities will include clearance of vegetation at the footprint
of each turbine. These activities will require the stripping of topsoil which will
need to be stockpiled, backfilled and/or spread on site;
» Construct foundations – it is expected that the volume of concrete required for
each turbine foundation will be in the order 300 - 800 m³. Due to the volume
of concrete that will be required, an on-site batching plant could be required
to ensure a continuous concreting operation. The source of aggregate is yet
undefined;
» Transport of components & equipment to site – all components will be brought
to site in sections by means of flatbed trucks. Additionally, components of
various specialised construction and lifting equipment are required on site to
erect the wind turbines and will need to be transported to site. The typical
civil engineering construction equipment will need to be brought to the site for
the civil works (e.g. excavators, trucks, graders, compaction equipment,
cement trucks, etc.). The components required for the establishment of the
overhead power line (including towers and cabling) will be transported to site
as required.
» Establishment of laydown & hard standing areas - laydown areas will need to
be established at each turbine position for the placement of wind turbine
components. Laydown and storage areas will also be required to be
established for the civil engineering construction equipment which will be
required on site. Hard standing areas will need to be established for operation
of the crane. Cranes of the size required to erect turbines are sensitive to
differential movement during lifting operations and require a hard standing
area;
» Erect turbines - a crane will be used to lift the tower sections into place and
then the nacelle will be placed onto the top of the assembled tower. The next
step will be to assemble or partially assemble the rotor on the ground; it will
then be lifted to the nacelle and bolted in place. A small crane will likely be
needed for the assembly of the rotor while the large crane will be needed to
put it in place;
» Construct substation - the underground cables carrying the generated power
from the individual turbines will join at the substation. The construction of the
substation would require a site survey; site clearing and leveling and
construction of access road/s (where required); construction of a substation
terrace and foundation; assembly, erection and installation of equipment
(including transformers); connection of conductors to equipment; and
rehabilitation of any disturbed areas and protection of erosion sensitive areas;

» Establishment of ancillary infrastructure - A workshop as well as a contractor’s

equipment camp may be required. The establishment of these
facilities/buildings will require the clearing of vegetation and leveling of the
development site and the excavation of foundations prior to construction. A
laydown area for building materials and equipment associated with these
buildings will also be required;
» Connection of wind turbines to the substation - each wind turbine will be
connected to the on-site substation via electrical cables, to be lain
underground where possible. The installation of these cables will require the
excavation of trenches of approximately 1 m deep within which they can then
be laid. The underground cables will be planned to follow the internal access
roads, where possible;
» Construction of an overhead power line to connect to the Eskom’s
infrastructure; and
» Site rehabilitation - once construction is completed and once all construction
equipment is removed, the site will be rehabilitated where practical and
reasonable.
The equipment likely to be required to complete the above tasks will typically
include:
» excavator/graders, bulldozer(s), dump trucks(s), vibratory roller, bucket

loader, rock breaker(s), drill rig, flatbed truck(s), pile drivers, concrete
truck(s), crane(s), fork lift(s) and various 4WD and service vehicles.
Material supply: Concrete batching plants and use of Borrow Pits

There exist three options for the supply of the concrete to the development site.
These options are:
1. The transport of “ready-mix” concrete from the closest centre to the

development.
2. The transport of aggregate and cement from the closest centre to the
development, with the establishment of a small concrete batching plant
close to the activities. This would most likely be a movable plant.
3. The establishment of a small quarrying activity, where aggregate will be
mined, crushed and screened and used onsite. Cement will still be
transported to the site, where there will be a small movable concrete
batching plant.
Blasting
Blasting may be required as part of the civil works to clear obstacles or to prepare
foundations. However, blasting will not be considered during the EIA phase for
the following reasons:

» Blasting is highly regulated, and control of blasting to protect human health,

equipment and infrastructure will ensure that any blasts will use the minimum
explosives and will occur in a controlled manner. The breaking of obstacles
with explosives is also a specialized field and when correct techniques are
used, causes significantly less noise than using a rock-breaker.
» People are generally more concerned over ground vibration and air blast
levels that might cause building damage than the impact of the noise from the
blast. However, these are normally associated with close proximity
mining/quarrying.
» Blasts are an infrequent occurrence, with a loud but a relative instantaneous
character. Potentially affected parties generally receive sufficient notice
(siren) and the knowledge that the duration of the siren noise as well as the
blast will be over relative fast results in a higher acceptance of the noise.
Note that with the selection of explosives and blasting methods, noise levels
from blasting is relatively easy to control.
Traffic
A significant source of noise during the construction phase is additional traffic to
and from the site, as well as traffic on the site. This will include trucks
transporting equipment, aggregate and cement as well as various components
used to develop the wind turbine.
Construction traffic is expected to be generated throughout the entire

construction period, however, the volume and type of traffic generated will be
dependent upon the construction activities being conducted, which will vary
during the construction period. Noise levels due to additional traffic will be
estimated using the methods stipulated in SANS 10210:2004 (Calculating and
predicting road traffic noise).
Results of Noise Modelling – Construction Noise
Only the calculated daytime ambient noise levels are presented, as construction
activities that might impact on sensitive receptors should be limited to the 06:00
– 22:00 time period. The worst case scenario is presented with all activities
taking place simultaneously at each proposed wind turbine location during wind-
still conditions, in good sound propagation conditions (20 oC and 80% humidity).
Even though construction activities are projected to take place only during day
time, it might be required at times that construction activities take place during
the night (particularly for a large project). Below is a list (and reasons) of
construction activities that might occur during night time:
» Concrete pouring: Large portions of concrete do require pouring and vibrating

to be completed once started, and work is sometimes required until the early

hours of the morning to ensure a well-established concrete foundation.

However the work force working at night for this work will be considerably
smaller than during the day.
» Working late due to time constraints: Weather plays an important role in time
management in construction. A spell of bad weather can cause a construction
project to fall behind its completion date. Therefore it is hard to judge
beforehand if a construction team would be required to work late at night.
As it is unknown where the different activities may take place, it was selected to
model the impact of the noisiest activity (laying of foundation totalling 113.6 dBA
cumulative noise impact) at all locations where wind turbines may be erected,
calculating how this may impact on potential noise-sensitive developments as well
as mapping this modelled construction activity over distance. Overall, noise
impacts during construction will have a low impact on the identified potential
noise-sensitive receptors.
Impact tables summarising the significance of noise impacts (without

mitigation) during Construction
Nature of Impact: Numerous simultaneous construction activities that could

impact on receptors.
Acceptable Rating Level: Rural district with little road traffic (excluding construction
traffic):
45 dBA outside during day.
Use of LReq,D of 45 dBA for rural areas.
Ambient sound level = 28 dBA.
No mitigation Mitigation considered
Extent Local (2) – Change in ambient Not required.
(ΔLAeq,D>7dBA) sound levels would not extend
further than 1,000 meters from
activities.
Duration Short term– Noisy activities in the Not required.
vicinity of the receptors would last a
portion of, or the duration of the
construction period (2)
Magnitude Low (2) to High (10) - ambient Not required.
noise levels <Rating Level.
Probability Improbable (1) to Possible (2) - Due Not required.
to change in ambient sound levels
there is a possibility that NSD03
may complain.
Significance Low (12) n/a
Status Negative. n/a
Reversibility High. n/a
Irreplaceable loss of Not relevant. n/a

resources?
Can impacts be Yes, though mitigation not required.
mitigated?
Mitigation:
» Not required.
Cumulative impacts:
This impact is cumulative with existing ambient sound as well as other noisy activities
conducted in the same area.
Residual impacts:
This impact will only disappear once construction activities cease.
The 25 turbine option will reduce noise impacts but both alternatives are considered
acceptable in terms of noise impacts.
7.6.3. Noise Sources: Operational Phase
Noise emitted by wind turbines can be associated with two types of noise
sources:
» Aerodynamic sources: due to the passage of air over the wind turbine blades;
and
» Mechanical sources that are associated with components of the power train
within the turbine, such as the gearbox and generator and control equipment
for yaw, blade pitch, etc. These sources generally have different
characteristics and can be considered separately. In addition there are other
lesser noise sources, such as the substations themselves, traffic
(maintenance) as well as transmission line noise.
» Noise from the Wind Turbines: Aerodynamic sources 5

Aerodynamic noise is emitted by a wind turbine blade through a number of
sources such as:
 Self noise due to the interaction of the turbulent boundary layer with the
blade trailing edge
 Noise due to inflow turbulence (turbulence in the wind interacting with the
blades)
 Discrete frequency noise due to trailing edge thickness
 Discrete frequency noise due to laminar boundary layer instabilities
(unstable flow close to the surface of the blade)
 Noise generated by the rotor tips
These types of noise are discussed in more detail in the Noise Impact Assessment
report contained in Appendix M.
5
Renewable Energy Research Laboratory, 2006; ETSU R97: 1996

Results of Noise Modelling – Operational Phase
The noise study focuses on the impacts on the surrounding sound environment
during times when a quiet environment is highly desirable. Noise limits are
therefore appropriate for the most noise-sensitive activity, such as sleeping, or
areas used for relaxation or other activities (places of worship, school, etc.).
Appropriate Zone Sound Levels are therefore important, yet it has been shown
that the SANS recommended (fixed) Night Rating Level (L Req,N = 35dBA) might be
inappropriate due to the increased ambient sounds relating to wind action. A
more appropriate method to determine the potential noise impact would be to
make use of the projected noise levels due to the operation of the WEF as well as
the likely ambient sound levels due to wind induced noises.
Impact tables summarising the significance of noise impacts (without

mitigation) from the wind turbines – operational phase
Nature of Impact: Numerous wind turbines operating simultaneously during a

period when a quiet environment is desirable (Receptors within 1200 m of more
than 2 wind turbines)
Acceptable Rating Level Rural district.
Magnitude Noise levels are less than 42 dBA (at 10 m/s) and less than
the MoE noise limit for all wind speeds at these receptors
(NSD05, 04, 12, 11, 15 and 14 – based on the 40 turbine
layout). The noise level will not be higher than 7 dBA of the
SANS 10103 night-time rural rating level. The magnitude of
the noise impact is set at Medium (6)
Duration Facility will operate for a number of years. Long term – (4)
Extent (ΔLReq,n>7dBA) Regional from the closest wind turbines. (3)
Probability Ambient sound levels were measured in similar areas
ranging between 20 – 65 dBA at night (at a 10 m/s wind)
with a mathematical average being 42.4 dBA. Noise rating
levels were predicted less than 41 dBA for these receptors.
It is therefore likely that the wind turbines may be audible
for less than 50% of the time at these receptors. It should
be noted that audibility should not be confused with Noise
Impact.
The probability of a noise impact occurring is estimated at

Possible (2), raised by 1 to Likely (3 – precautionary
principle)
Significance 39 (Medium) for NSD05, 04, 12, 11, 15 and 14
Status Negative.
Reversibility High.
Irreplaceable loss of Not relevant.
resources?

Comments -
Can impacts be Yes
mitigated?
Mitigation:
» Establish a line of communication and notify all stakeholders and NSDs of the means of
registering any issues, complaints or comments.
» Notify potentially sensitive receptors about work to take place at least 2 days before
the activity in the vicinity (within 500 meters) of the NSD is to start. Following
information to be presented in writing:
 Description of Activity to take place;
 Estimated duration of activity;
 Working hours;
 Contact details of responsible party.
» Ensure that all equipment is maintained and fitted with the required noise abatement
equipment.
» When any noise complaints are received, noise monitoring should be conducted at the
complainant, followed by feedback regarding noise levels measured.
» The construction crew must abide by the local by-laws regarding noise.
Cumulative impacts:
This impact is cumulative with existing ambient background noises.
Residual Impacts:
This impact will only disappear once the operation of the facility stops, or the sensitive
receptor no longer exists.
Nature of Impact: Numerous wind turbines operating simultaneously during a

period when a quiet environment is desirable (Receptors further than 1200 m of
wind turbines)
Acceptable Rating Level Rural district
Magnitude Projected noise levels are presented in Error! Reference
source not found.. Noise levels are less than 38 dBA (at 10
m/s) and below the SANS 10103 night-time rating level for
rural areas. The magnitude of the noise impact is set at
Low (2)
Duration Facility will operate for a number of years. Long term –
(4)
Extent (ΔLReq,n>7dBA) Regional– Impact could extend further than 1,000 meters
from the closest wind turbines. (3)
Probability Ambient sound levels were measured in similar areas
ranging between 20 – 65 dBA at night (at a 10 m/s wind –
see Error! Reference source not found.) with a
mathematical average being 42.4 dBA. Noise rating levels
were predicted less than 38 dBA for these receptors. The
wind turbines might be audible at times at these receptors.
It should be noted that audibility should not be confused

with Noise Impact.
International studies indicate that approximately 5 – 15%

of receptors staying close to wind farms may complain
(although this is likely people staying within 1,000 meters
although that data has not yet been defined in an industry
wide formal study). The probability of a noise impact
occurring is estimated at Possible (2), raised by 1 to Likely
(3 – precautionary principle)
Significance 27 (Low) for other receptors not previously covered
Status Negative.
Reversibility High.
Irreplaceable loss of Not relevant.
resources?
Comments -
Can impacts be Yes but not required
mitigated?
Cumulative impacts:
This impact is cumulative with existing ambient background noises.
Residual Impacts:
This impact will only disappear once the operation of the facility stops, or the sensitive
receptor no longer exists.
Construction activities are highly dependent on the final operational layout. The
noise assessment has been conducted for the 40 turbine layout as this represents
a worst case scenario for noise impacts. The 25 turbine option will reduce noise
impacts but both alternatives are considered acceptable in terms of noise
impacts.
There will be no difference for noise impacts between either of the power line
alternatives proposed.
This study uses the noise emission characteristics of the Vestas V117 3.3 MW
wind turbine (and the Acciona AW125 wind turbine). With the input data as used,
this assessment indicated that the potential noise impact would be of a low
significance during the construction phase. The noise impact could be of medium
significance for a receptors 3 and 9 during the operational phase.

There are a number of options available to the developer to decrease the

magnitude (and subsequently the significance) of the noise impact, including
refining of the layout in order to avoid impacts on NSDs.
It is recommended that the developer measures the ambient sound levels prior to
the development as well as during the operational phase. Ambient sound
measurements should be recorded at NSD04/NSD05, NSD11/NSD12,
NSD14/NSD15 and NSD22 before the development of this facility using a
methodology such as one defined by ETSU-R97. Noise measurements are also
recommended during the operational phase over a period of at least 72 hours
during a period that the wind turbines are operational. Measurements should be
collected in 10 minute bins and co-ordinated with the wind speeds as measured
by the developer. If a valid and reasonable noise complaint is registered relating
to the operation of the facility additional noise monitoring should be conducted by
an acoustic consultant during the noise measurement. Noise monitoring must be
continued as long as noise complaints are registered.
The developer should re-evaluate this study if the layout is changed (where any
wind turbines are moved closer, or turbines are added within 1200 meters from
any potential noise-sensitive receptor).
7.7 Assessment of Potential Impacts on Heritage
No heritage sites of significance were noted on the site.
Impact Tables – Impact of Construction on heritage resources
Nature: During the construction phase activities resulting in disturbance of surfaces

and/or sub-surfaces may destroy, damage, alter, or remove Historical Material or objects
from its original position.
Magnitude High (8) Low (2)
Probability Improbable (2) Improbable (3)
Significance 30 (Medium) 24 (Low)
Status (positive or Negative Negative
negative)
Reversibility Not reversible Not reversible
resources?
Can impacts be Yes
mitigated?
Mitigation:
No tower is located close to the sites and no direct impact is foreseen on the site. The area

should be demarcated to avoid impact on the site.

Cumulative impacts:
Archaeological sites are non-renewable and impact on any archaeological context or
material will be permanent and destructive.
Residual Impacts:
Depletion of Archaeological record of the area.
Although both alternative layouts and power line routes are considered acceptable from a
heritage perspective, Alternative layout 1 would result in a lower potential for impacts on
heritage sites as a result of the lower number of turbines proposed.
7.7.1. Comparative Assessment of Layout Alternatives
Although both alternative layouts and power line routes are considered acceptable
from a heritage perspective, Alternative layout 1 would result in a lower potential
for impacts on heritage sites as a result of the lower number of turbines
proposed.
» If any unmarked graves or human remains are uncovered during the

construction of the site, work should stop in that area and Heritage Western
Cape must be notified.
» If there are any significant changes to the layout of the Moorreesburg Wind
Farm as presented through the HIA, further archaeological survey work may
be necessary.
7.8 Assessment of Potential Social and Economic Impacts
7.8.1. Key Issues associated with the Construction phase
The nature of the construction phase impacts for both the 25 and 40 turbine
options will be the same. Where relevant the SIA comments on implications in
terms of significance ratings for each alternative. The key social issues
associated with the construction phase are the following:
Potential positive impacts

» Creation of employment and business opportunities, and opportunity for skills
development and on-site training;
» Benefits associated with providing technical advice on wind energy to local
farmers and municipalities.
Potential negative impacts

» Impacts associated with the presence of construction workers on local
communities;

» Impacts related to the potential influx of job-seekers;

» Increased risks to livestock and farming infrastructure associated with the
construction related activities and presence of construction workers on the
site;
» Increased risk of grass fires associated with construction related activities;
» Noise, dust, waste and safety impacts of construction related activities and
vehicles;
» Impact on productive farmland.
Impact Tables summarising social impacts during the Construction Phase
Nature: Creation of employment and business opportunities during the

construction phase
Based on the information from other WEF projects the construction phase for a 140 MW
WEF is expected to extend over a period of 18-24 months and create approximately 300
employment opportunities during peak construction. The work associated with the
construction phase will be undertaken by contractors and will include the establishment of
the WEF and the associated components, including, access roads, substation, services and
power line. It is anticipated that approximately 55% (165) of the employment
opportunities will be available to low skilled workers (construction labourers, security staff
etc.), 30% (90) to semi-skilled workers (drivers, equipment operators etc.) and 15% (45)
for skilled personnel (engineers, land surveyors, project managers etc.). For a 75MW WEF
the employment figure would be ~ 150-200.
Members from the local community in the area are likely to be in a position to qualify for
the majority of the low skilled and semi-skilled employment opportunities. The majority
of these employment opportunities are also likely to accrue to Historically Disadvantaged
(HD) members from the local SLM community. As indicated above, the levels of
unemployment in the SLM are relatively high. The creation of potential employment
opportunities, even temporary employment, will represent a significant, if localised, social
benefit. However, in the absence of specific commitments from the developer to
maximise local employment targets the potential opportunities for local employment will
be limited. The majority of the skilled employment opportunities are likely to be
associated with the contactors appointed to construct the WEF and associated
infrastructure.
The capital expenditure associated with the construction of a 140 MW WEF will be in the
region of R 2.5 billion (2015 Rand value). For a 75MW WEF the capital expenditure would
be ~ 1.25 billion. A percentage of the capital expenditure associated with the construction
phase will benefit local companies. In this regard given the proximity of the site to towns
such as Paarl, Wellington, Malmesbury and the City of Cape Town there are likely to be a
number of suitably qualified and experienced local engineering companies and contractors.
Implementing the enhancement measures listed below can enhance these opportunities.
However, the potential opportunities for local companies are likely to be limited due to the
high import content associated with WEF projects.

The total wage bill for the 18-24 month construction phase of a single 140 MW WEF will be
in the region of R 75 million (2015 Rand value). For a 75MW WEF the wage bill would be
~ R 38 million (2015 Rand value). This is based on a monthly wage of R 8 000 for low-
skilled workers, R 12 000 for semi-skilled workers and R 30 000 for skilled workers over a
period of 20 months. A percentage of the wage bill will be spent in the local economy and
will create opportunities for local businesses in Moorreesburg and Malmesbury. The sector
of the local economy that is most likely to benefit from the proposed development is the
local service industry. This is confirmed by the experience with the other renewable
projects, such as the Abengoa solar energy project near Pofadder in the Northern Cape
Province. The potential opportunities for the local service sector would be linked to
accommodation, catering, cleaning, transport and security, etc. associated with the
construction workers on the site. The benefits to the local economy associated with the
establishment of a 140 MW WEF will be confined to the construction period (18-24
months).
The implementation of the proposed enhancement measures listed below would also
enable the establishment of the proposed WEF to support co-operation between the public
and private sectors which would support local economic development in the SLM.
The hospitality industry in the area is also likely to benefit from the provision of
accommodation and meals for professionals (engineers, quantity surveyors, project
managers, product representatives etc.) and other (non-construction) personnel involved
on the project. Experience from other renewable energy projects indicates that the
potential opportunities are not limited to on-site construction workers but also to
consultants and product representatives associated with the project.
Without Mitigation With Enhancement
Extent Local – Regional (3) Local – Regional (4)
Duration Short term (2) Short term (2)
Magnitude Moderate (6) High (8)
Probability Highly probable (4) Highly probable (4)
Status Positive Positive
Reversibility N/A N/A
Irreplaceable loss of N/A N/A
resources?
Can impact be enhanced? Yes
Enhancement:
In order to enhance local employment and business opportunities associated with the
construction phase the following measures should be implemented:
Employment
» Where reasonable and practical, the proponent should appoint local contractors and
implement a ‘locals first’ policy, especially for semi and low-skilled job categories.
However, due to the low skills levels in the area, the majority of skilled posts are likely
to be filled by people from outside the area.
» Where feasible, efforts should be made to employ local contactors that are compliant
with Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) criteria;
» Before the construction phase commences the proponent should meet with

representatives from the Swartland Local Municipality to establish the existence of a

skills database for the area. If such as database exists it should be made available to
the contractors appointed for the construction phase.
» The local authorities, community representatives, and organisations on the interested
and affected party database should be informed of the final decision regarding the
project and the potential job opportunities for locals and the employment procedures
that the developer intends following for the construction phase of the project.
» Where feasible, training and skills development programmes for locals should be
initiated prior to the initiation of the construction phase.
» The recruitment selection process should seek to promote gender equality and the
employment of women wherever possible.
Business
» IE Moorreesburg Wind should liaise with the Swartland Local Municipality with regards
the establishment of a database of local companies, specifically BEE companies, which
qualify as potential service providers (e.g. construction companies, catering
companies, waste collection companies, security companies etc.) prior to the
commencement of the tender process for construction contractors. These companies
should be notified of the tender process and invited to bid for project-related work;
» Where possible, the developer should assist local BEE companies to complete and
submit the required tender forms and associated information.
» The Swartland Local Municipality, in conjunction with the local business sector and
representatives from the local hospitality industry, should identify strategies aimed at
maximising the potential benefits associated with the project.
Note that while preference to local employees and companies is recommended, it is

recognised that a competitive tender process may not guarantee the employment of local
labour for the construction phase.
Cumulative impacts:
Opportunity to up-grade and improve skills levels in the area.
Residual impacts:
Improved pool of skills and experience in the local area.
Nature: Potential impacts on family structures and social networks associated

with the presence of construction workers
The presence of construction workers poses a potential risk to family structures and social
networks. While the presence of construction workers does not in itself constitute a social
impact, the manner in which construction workers conduct themselves can impact on local
communities. The most significant negative impact is associated with the disruption of
existing family structures and social networks. This risk is linked to potentially risky
behaviour, mainly of male construction workers, including:
» An increase in alcohol and drug use;

» An increase in crime levels;
» An increase in teenage and unplanned pregnancies;
» An increase in prostitution;

» An increase in sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).
Employing members from the local community to fill the low-skilled job categories will
reduce the risk and mitigate the potential impacts on the local communities. These
workers will be from the local community and form part of the local family and social
network and, as such, the potential impact will be low. The use of local residents to fill the
low skilled job categories will also reduce the need to provide accommodation for
construction workers. In this regard the developer has indicated that no construction
personnel will be accommodated on the site.
While the risks associated with construction workers at a community level will be low, at
an individual and family level they may be significant, especially in the case of contracting
a sexually transmitted disease or an unplanned pregnancy. However, given the nature of
construction projects it is not possible to totally avoid these potential impacts at an
individual or family level.
(Rated as 2 due to potential (Rated as 1 due to potential
severity of impact on local severity of impact on local
communities) communities)
Duration Very short term for community as a Very short term for community as
whole (1) a whole (1)
Long term-permanent for Long term-permanent for
individuals who may be affected by individuals who may be affected
STDs etc. (5) by STDs etc. (5)
Magnitude Low for the community as a whole Low for community as a whole
(4) (4)
High-Very High for specific High-Very High for specific
individuals who may be affected by individuals who may be affected
STDs etc. (10) by STDs etc. (10)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low for the community as a Low for the community as a
whole (21) whole (18)
Moderate-High for specific Moderate-High for specific
individuals who may be affected individuals who may be
by STDs etc. (51) affected by STDs etc. (48)
Reversibility No in case of HIV and AIDS No in case of HIV and AIDS
Irreplaceable Yes, if people contract HIV/AIDS.
loss of Human capital plays a critical role in
resources? communities that rely on farming
for their livelihoods
Can impact Yes, to some degree. However, the
be mitigated? risk cannot be eliminated
Mitigation:
The potential risks associated with construction workers can be mitigated. The detailed
mitigation measures should be outlined in the Environmental Management Programme
(EMP) for the Construction Phase. Aspects that should be covered include:

» Where possible, the proponent should make it a requirement for contractors to

implement a ‘locals first’ policy for construction jobs, specifically for semi and low-
skilled job categories;
» The proponent should consider the establishment of a Monitoring Forum (MF) in order
to monitor the construction phase and the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures. The Monitoring Forum should be established before the
construction phase commences, and should include key stakeholders, including
representatives from local communities, Local Municipality Councillors, farmers and
the contractor(s). The Monitoring Forum should also be briefed on the potential risks
to the local community associated with construction workers;
» IE Moorreesburg Wind and the contractor(s) should, in consultation with
representatives from the Monitoring Forum, develop a code of conduct for the
construction phase. The code should identify which types of behaviour and activities
are not acceptable. Construction workers in breach of the code should be dismissed.
All dismissals must comply with the South African labour legislation;
» IE Moorreesburg Wind and the contractor should implement an HIV/AIDS awareness
programme for all construction workers at the outset of the construction phase;
» The movement of construction workers on and off the site should be closely managed
and monitored by the contractors. In this regard the contractors should be responsible
for making the necessary arrangements for transporting workers to and from site over
weekends or after hours;
» The contractors should make the necessary arrangements for allowing workers from
outside the area to return home over weekends and/ or on a regular basis. This would
reduce the risk posed to local family structures and social networks;
» It is recommended that no construction workers, with the exception of security
personnel, should be permitted to stay over-night on the site.
Cumulative impacts:
Impacts on family and community relations that may, in some cases, persist for a long
period of time. Also in cases where unplanned / unwanted pregnancies occur or members
of the community are infected by an STD, specifically HIV and or AIDS, the impacts may
be permanent and have long term to permanent cumulative impacts on the affected
individuals and/or their families and the community.
Residual impacts:
Impacts on family and community relations that may, in some cases, persist for a long
period of time. Also in cases where unplanned / unwanted pregnancies occur or members
of the community are infected by an STD, specifically HIV and or AIDS, the impacts may
be permanent and have long term to permanent cumulative impacts on the affected
Nature: Potential impacts on family structures, social networks and community

services associated with the influx of job seekers
Large construction projects tend to attract people to the area in the hope that they will
secure a job, even if it is a temporary job. These job seekers can in turn become
“economically stranded” in the area or decide to stay on irrespective of finding a job or
not. While the proposed WEF on its own does not constitute a large construction project,

the proposed establishment of a two other WEFs in the area may attract job seekers to
the area. As in the case of construction workers employed on the project, the actual
presence of job seekers in the area does not in itself constitute a social impact. However,
the manner in which they conduct themselves can impact on the local community.
The two main areas of concern are associated with the influx of job seekers:
» Impacts on existing social networks and community structures;

» Competition for housing, specifically low cost housing;
» Competition for scarce jobs;
» Increase in incidences of crime. The concern is that these job seekers may not leave
town immediately and, in some cases, may stay indefinitely.
In some instances the potential impact on the community may be greater given that they
are unlikely to have accommodation and may decide to stay on in the area. In addition,
they will not have a reliable source of income. The risk of crime associated with the influx
of job seekers it therefore likely to be greater.
However, the findings of the SIA indicate that potential for economically motivated in-
migration and subsequent labour stranding in Moorreesburg is likely to be low. The
majority of job seekers from outside of these towns are likely to come from nearby towns
in the area, such as Piketburg, Porterville, Malmesbury etc. Due to the proximity of these
towns to the site the risk of labour stranding is likely to be low. The risks associated with
the influx of job seekers are therefore likely to be low.
(For job seekers that stay on the (For job seekers that stay on the
town) town)
Magnitude Minor (2) Minor (2)
Reversibility No in case of HIV and AIDS No in case of HIV and AIDS
Irreplaceable Yes, if people contract HIV/AIDS.
loss of Human capital plays a critical role in
resources? communities that rely on farming
for their livelihoods
Can impact Yes, to some degree. However, the
be mitigated? risk cannot be eliminated
Mitigation:
It is impossible to stop people from coming to the area in search of a job. However, IE
Moorreesburg Wind should ensure that the employment criteria favour local residents in
the area. In addition IE Moorreesburg Wind should:
» As indicated above, IE Moorreesburg Wind, in consultation with the Local Municipality,

should investigate the option of establishing a Monitoring Forum to monitor and
identify potential problems that may arise due to the influx of job seekers to the area.

The Monitoring Forum should also include the other proponents of renewable energy
projects in the area;
» IE Moorreesburg Wind should implement a “locals first” policy, specifically with regard
to unskilled and low skilled opportunities;
» IE Moorreesburg Wind should implement a policy that no employment will be available
at the gate.
Cumulative impacts:
» Impacts on family and community relations that may, in some cases, persist for a long
period of time.
» Also in cases where unplanned / unwanted pregnancies occur or members of the
community are infected by an STD, specifically HIV and or AIDS, the impacts may be
permanent and have long term to permanent cumulative impacts on the affected
Residual impacts:
» Impacts on family and community relations that may, in some cases, persist for a long
period of time.
» Also in cases where unplanned / unwanted pregnancies occur or members of the
community are infected by an STD, specifically HIV and or AIDS, the impacts may be
permanent and have long term to permanent cumulative impacts on the affected
Nature: Potential loss of livestock, poaching and damage to farm infrastructure

associated with the presence of construction workers on site
The presence on and movement of construction workers on and off the site poses a
potential safety threat to local famer’s and farm workers in the vicinity of the site threat.
In addition, farm infrastructure, such as fences and gates, may be damaged and stock
losses may also result from gates being left open and/or fences being damaged or stock
theft linked either directly or indirectly to the presence of farm workers on the site. The
local farmers in the area interviewed indicated that the presence of construction workers
on the site increased the exposure of their farming operations and livestock to the outside
world, which, in turn, increased the potential risk of stock theft and crime. The local
farmers did, however, indicate that the potential risks (safety, livestock and farm
infrastructure) can be effectively mitigated by careful planning and managing the
movement of construction on the site workers during the construction phase.
Duration Short term (2) Short term (2)
Magnitude Medium (6) Low (4)
Reversibility Yes, compensation paid for stock Yes, compensation paid
losses etc. for stock losses etc.
resources?
Can impact be Yes Yes

mitigated?
Mitigation:
» IE Morreesburg Wind should enter into an agreement with the local farmers in the
area whereby damages to farm property etc. during the construction phase will be
compensated for. The agreement should be signed before the construction phase
commences;
» IE Morreesburg Wind should consider the option of establishing a Monitoring Forum
that includes local farmers and develop a Code of Conduct for construction workers.
This committee should be established prior to commencement of the construction
phase. The Code of Conduct should be signed by the proponent and the contractors
before the contractors move onto site;
» IE Morreesburg Wind should hold contractors liable for compensating farmers and
communities in full for any stock losses and/or damage to farm infrastructure that can
be linked to construction workers. This should be contained in the Code of Conduct to
be signed between the proponent, the contractors and neighbouring landowners. The
agreement should also cover loses and costs associated with fires caused by
construction workers or construction related activities;
» The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) must outline procedures for managing
and storing waste on site, specifically plastic waste that poses a threat to livestock if
ingested;
» Contractors appointed by IE Morreesburg Wind must ensure that all workers are
informed at the outset of the construction phase of the conditions contained on the
Code of Conduct, specifically consequences of stock theft and trespassing on adjacent
farms.
» Contractors appointed by IE Morreesburg Wind must ensure that construction workers
who are found guilty of stealing livestock and/or damaging farm infrastructure are
dismissed and charged. This should be contained in the Code of Conduct. All
dismissals must be in accordance with South African labour legislation;
» The housing of construction workers on the site should be strictly limited to security
personnel.
Cumulative impacts:
None, provided losses are compensated for.
Residual impacts:
None, provided losses are compensated for.
Nature: Potential noise, dust and safety impacts associated with movement of
construction related traffic to and from the site
The movement of heavy construction vehicles during the construction phase has the
potential to damage local farm roads and create dust and safety impacts for other road
users in the area. The project components will be transported to the site via the N7. The
N7 provides the key link between the Western Cape and Namibia and is an important
commercial and tourist route. The transport of components of the WPP to the site
therefore has the potential to impact on other road users travelling along the N7.
Measures will need to be taken to ensure that the potential impact on motorist using the

N7 is minimised.
Duration Short Term (2) Short Term (2)
Magnitude Medium (6) Minor (2)
Reversibility Yes
Irreplaceable loss No No
of resources?
Can impact be Yes
mitigated?
Mitigation:
IE Moorresburg Wind should enter into an agreement with the affected landowners
whereby the company will compensate for damages to internal farm roads. In addition,
the potential impacts associated with heavy vehicles and dust can be effectively mitigated.
The aspects that should be covered include:
» The transport of components to the site along the N7 should be planned to avoid
weekends and holiday periods;
» Dust suppression measures must be implemented for heavy vehicles such as wetting
of gravel roads on a regular basis and ensuring that vehicles used to transport sand
and building materials are fitted with tarpaulins or covers;
» The contractor must ensure that damage caused by construction related traffic to local
farm roads is repaired on a regular basis throughout the construction phase. The
costs associated with the repair must be borne by the contractor;
» All vehicles must be road-worthy and drivers must be qualified and made aware of the
potential road safety issues and need for strict speed limits;
» The Contractor should ensure that workers are informed that no waste can be thrown
out of the windows while being transported to and from the site. Workers who throw
waste out windows should be fined;
» The Contractor should be required to collect waste along the road reserve on a weekly
basis;
» Waste generated during the construction phase should be transported to the local
landfill site.
Cumulative impacts:
If damage to roads is not repaired then this will affect the farming activities in the area
and result in higher maintenance costs for vehicles of local farmers and other road users.
The costs will be borne by road users who were no responsible for the damage.
Residual impacts:
If damage to roads is not repaired then this will affect the farming activities in the area
and result in higher maintenance costs for vehicles of local farmers and other road users.
The costs will be borne by road users who were no responsible for the damage.
Nature: Damage to farmlands and result in a loss of farmlands for future

farming activities.

The activities associated with the construction phase have the potential to result in the
loss of land available for grazing and other agricultural activities. Based on the comments
from the affected landowners, avoiding or minimizing potential impacts on wheat cropping
operations is the key and overriding concern of all farmers interviewed, both with regard
to turbine placement and the 132 kV line Alternatives. Only Mr Hanekom (who does not
actively farm) is of the opinion that losses to agricultural production could be sufficiently
offset by income from leasing land to the developer (turbine locations, etc.).
The proposed site is located in one of the best winter wheat cropping area in South Africa
and it would appear that the majority of the soils have high agricultural potential. The
farming operations are highly mechanized which require large clearance distances. In
addition, aerial crop spraying operations require an obstacle-free environment for pilot
safety reasons. In addition, the no/ limited tillage systems require the least possible
disturbance to surface and sub-surface soils in order to avoid a 1-2 decade restoration
period and associated localized losses in productivity.
Duration Long term-permanent if disturbed Medium term if damaged areas
areas are not effectively are rehabilitated (3)
rehabilitated (5)
Magnitude High (8) Minor (2)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Highly Probable (4)
Significance High (68) Low (24)
Reversibility Yes, disturbed areas can be Yes, disturbed areas can be
rehabilitated rehabilitated
Irreplaceable Yes, loss of farmland. However, Yes, loss of farmland.
loss of disturbed areas can be However, disturbed areas can
resources? rehabilitated be rehabilitated
Can impact be Yes, however, loss of farmland Yes, however, loss of farmland
mitigated? cannot be avoided cannot be avoided
Mitigation:
The potential impacts associated with damage to and loss of farmland can be effectively
mitigated. The aspects that should be covered include:
» The footprint associated with the construction related activities (access roads,
construction platforms, workshop etc.) should be minimised.
» An Environmental Control Officer (ECO) should be appointed to monitor the
establishment phase of the construction phase.
» All areas disturbed by construction related activities, such as access roads on the site,
construction platforms, workshop area etc., should be rehabilitated at the end of the
construction phase.
» The implementation of a rehabilitation programme should be included in the terms of
reference for the contractor/s appointed.
» The implementation of the Rehabilitation Programme should be monitored by the ECO.
Cumulative impacts:
Overall loss of farmland could affect the livelihoods of the affected farmers, their families,

and the workers on the farms and their families. However, disturbed areas can be
rehabilitated and loss of income from farming would be offset by income from WEF paid to
affected farmers.
Residual impacts:
Loss of productive farmland and impact on farming operations if rehabilitation is not
successful
8.12.1. Key Issues associated with the Operational phase
The nature of the operational phase impacts for both the 25 and 40 turbine
options will be the same. Where relevant the SIA comments on implications in
terms of significance ratings for each alternative. The following key social issues
are of relevance to the operational phase:
Potential positive impacts

» Creation of employment and business opportunities. The operational phase
will also create opportunities for skills development and training;
» Benefits associated with the establishment of a Community Trust;
» The establishment of renewable energy infrastructure.
Potential negative impacts

» Impact on productive farmland;
» The visual impacts and associated impact on sense of place;
» Potential impact on tourism though the area is not a tourism destination.
Nature: Creation of employment and business opportunities associated with the

operational phase
Based on information from other wind projects the establishment of a 140 MW WEF would
create ~ 30 employment opportunities for over a 20 year period. Of this total
approximately 20 will be low skilled, 8 semi-skilled and 2 high skilled positions. The
annual wage bill for the operational phase would be ~ R 3 million. The 75 MW option will
create ~15-20 employment opportunities. The majority of employment opportunities
associated with the operational phase is likely to benefit HD members of the community.
However, given that the wind energy sector in South Africa is relatively new, the skilled
positions may need to be filled by people from other parts of South Africa or even
overseas.
It will also be possible to increase the number of local employment opportunities through
the implementation of a skills development and training programme linked to the
operational phase. Such a programme would support the strategic goals of promoting
employment and skills development contained in the SLM IDP.
Given the location of the proposed facility the majority of permanent staff is likely to
reside in Moorreesburg, Piketburg and or Malmesbury. In terms of accommodation
options, a percentage of the non-local permanent employees may purchase houses in one

of these towns, while others may decide to rent. Both options would represent a positive
economic benefit for the region. In addition, a percentage of the monthly wage bill
earned by permanent staff would be spent in the regional and local economy, which will
benefit local businesses in these towns. The benefits to the local economy will extend
over the 20 year operational lifespan of the project. The local hospitality industry in
Moorreesburg is also likely to benefit from the operational phase. These benefits are
associated with site visits by company staff members and other professionals (engineers,
technicians etc.) who are involved in the company and the project but who are not linked
to the day-to-day operations.
Extent Local and Regional (1) Local and Regional (2)
Magnitude Minor (2) Minor (2)
Reversibility N/A
Irreplaceable loss of No
resources?
Enhancement:
The enhancement measures to enhance local employment and business opportunities
during the construction phase (as discussed above), also apply to the operational phase.
In addition:
» IE Moorreesburg Wind should implement a training and skills development programme

for locals during the first 5 years of the operational phase. The aim of the programme
should be to maximise the number of South African’s and locals employed during the
operational phase of the project;
» IE Moorreesburg Wind, in consultation with the Swartland Local Municipality, should
investigate the options for the establishment of a Community Development Trust.
Cumulative impacts:
A number of similar developments in the area would result in the creation of permanent
employment and skills and development opportunities for members from the local
community and creation of additional business and economic opportunities in the area
Residual impacts:
Increased wage spending in local economy
Nature: Establishment of a community trust funded by revenue generated from

the sale of energy. The revenue can be used to fund local community
development
In terms of the Request for Proposal document prepared by the Department of Energy all
bidders for operating licences for renewable energy projects must demonstrate how the
proposed development will benefit the local community. This can be achieved by
establishing a Community Trust which is funded by revenue generated from the sale for
energy.

Community Trusts provide an opportunity to generate a steady revenue stream that is

guaranteed for a 20 year period. This revenue can be used to fund development initiatives
in the area and support the local community. The long term duration of the revenue
stream also allows local municipalities and communities to undertake long term planning
for the area. The revenue from the proposed WEF plant can be used to support a number
of social and economic initiatives in the area, including:
» Creation of jobs;
» Education;
» Support for and provision of basic services;
» School feeding schemes;
» Training and skills development;
» Support for SMMEs.
In addition, the establishment of a WEF plant is not likely to have a significant impact on
the current agricultural land uses that underpin the local economic activities in the area.
The loss of this relatively small area will not impact on the current and future farming
activities. Experience has however also shown that Community Trusts can be
mismanaged. This issue will need to be addressed in order to maximise the potential
benefits associated with the establishment of a Community Trust.
Although the income generated by a 140 MW WEF for a Community Trust would be
greater than a 75 MW facility, the significance would still be High Positive with
enhancement. This is due to the long term nature of the benefit and the focus of the Trust
on local needs.
6
Extent Local (2) Local and Regional (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Moderate (6)
Probability Probable (3) Definite (5)
Significance Medium (30) High (70)
Reversibility N/A
resources?
Enhancement:
In order to maximise the benefits and minimise the potential for corruption and
misappropriation of funds the following measures should be implemented:
» The SLM should be consulted as to the structure and identification of potential trustees
to sit on the Trust. The key departments in the SLM that should be consulted include
the Municipal Managers Office, IDP Manager and LED Manager.
» Clear criteria for identifying and funding community projects and initiatives in the area
should be identified. The criteria should be aimed at maximising the benefits for the
6
Enhancement assumes effective management of the community trust

community as a whole and not individuals within the community;

» Strict financial management controls, including annual audits, should be instituted to
manage the funds generated for the Community Trust from the WPP plant;
Cumulative impacts:
Promotion of social and economic development and improvement in the overall well-being
of the community
Residual impacts:
Promotion of social and economic development and improvement in the overall well-being
of the community
Nature: Promotion of clean, renewable energy
South Africa currently relies on coal-powered energy to meet more than 90% of its energy
needs. Much of the coal used has a high sulphur content. As a result South Africa is the
nineteenth largest per capita producer of carbon emissions in the world, and Eskom, as an
energy utility, has been identified as the world’s second largest producer carbon
emissions.
The overall contribution to South Africa’s total energy requirements of the proposed WEF
is relatively small. However, the 75-140 MW produced will help to offset the total carbon
emissions associated with energy generation in South Africa. Given South Africa’s reliance
on Eskom as a power utility, the benefits associated with an IPP based on renewable
energy are regarded as an important contribution.
(The provision of renewable
energy infrastructure is in itself
a mitigation measure)
Extent Local, Regional and Local, Regional and National
National (4) (4)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Highly Probable (4)
Reversibility Yes
Irreplaceable loss of Yes, impact of climate
resources? change on ecosystems
Can impact be mitigated? Yes
Enhancement:
The establishment of the proposed facility is a mitigation measure in itself. In order to
maximise the benefits of the proposed project the developer should:
» Use the project to promote and increase the contribution of renewable energy to the
national energy supply;
» Maximise the public’s exposure to the project via an extensive communication and
advertising programme;
» Implement a training and skills development programme for locals during the first 5

years of the operational phase. The aim of the programme should be to maximise the
number of South African’s employed during the operational phase of the project.
Cumulative impacts:
A number of similar developments would result in reduced carbon emissions via the use of
renewable energy and associated benefits in terms of global warming and climate change.
Residual impacts:
Reduced carbon emissions via the use of renewable energy and associated benefits in
terms of global warming and climate change.
Nature: Visual impact associated with the proposed wind facility and the
potential impact on the areas rural sense of place.
The findings of the SIA indicate that a number of turbines will be clearly visible from the
N7 and local farms roads in the area. The visual integrity of the area has to some extent
been impacted by the existing power lines that cross sections of the site.
While a number of turbines will be visible the issue of visual impact is a complex issue and
is not simply linked to visibility, but also to individual perceptions. While some may view
the turbines as a negative impact on the existing landscape, others may perceive them as
a positive addition to the landscape. The SIA spcialist’s experience with this issue is that a
number of people have commented positively on a number of wind energy facilities that
have been established in the last 12-24 months, such as the facilities located near
Caledon and Humansdorp in the Western and Eastern Cape respectively. Both of these
facilities are clearly visible from the N2. Some observers have however commentated that
the turbines have a negative impact on the visual quality of the landscape. The visual
impact and the significance thereof associated with a 140 MW WEF on the areas sense of
place is therefore likely to vary from individual to individual. In terms of local landowners,
the issue of visual impacts was only raised as an issue by the owners of Swartfontein
(Carstens). None of the other affected farm owners raised concerns regarding visual
impacts.
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
Reversibility Yes, wind facility can be
removed.
Irreplaceable loss of resources? No
Can impact be mitigated? Yes
Enhancement:
The recommendations contained in the VIA should be implemented. In addition, the 2011
Amended LUPO Regulations (mandatory) makes provision for various measures to address
potential visual impacts, including siting, lay-out, height of ancillary structures, screening
and lighting. The provisions are mandatory, and it is therefore assumed that these
measures will be implemented.

Cumulative impacts:
Numerous developments in the area would have a potential impact on current rural sense
of place
Residual impacts:
None as the visual impact would be removed with the decommissioning of the facility
Nature: Potential impact of the WEF on local tourism
The N7 is an important tourism route linking Cape Town with Namibia. However the area
is not a tourism destination in itself. The N7 also provides access to a number of
established tourism destinations, including the Cedarberg, Namakwaland and areas of the
West Coast. There appear to be no major tourism activities and or destinations in the
immediate vicinity of the site and the town of Moorreesburg. The potential impact on
tourism may be linked to the visual impact of the site on motorists traveling along the N7.
However, in the opinion of the author, the establishment of the proposed wind energy
facility is not likely to impact on the decision of tourists to use the N7 to access tourist
destinations located north of Moorreesburg. The impact is therefore likely to be limited.
A reduced number of wind turbines combined with careful placing would reduce the overall
visual impact of the proposed WEF on the areas sense of place. However, a reduced
number of turbines is unlikely to change the significance rating in terms of impact on
tourism.
Without Mitigation With Enhancement /
Mitigation
Significance Low (24) (Applies to both – Low (27) (Applies to both
and +) – and +)
(Potential to distract from the (Potential to distract from
tourist experience of the area) the tourist experience of the
Positive area) Positive
(Potential to attract people to (Potential to attract people
the area) to the area)
Reversibility Yes
resources?
Can impact be Yes
enhanced?
Enhancement:
The recommendations contained in the VIA should be implemented. In addition, the 2011
Amended LUPO Regulations (mandatory) makes provision for various measures to address
potential visual impacts, including siting, lay-out, height of ancillary structures, screening
and lighting. The provisions are mandatory, and it is therefore assumed that these
measures will be implemented.

Cumulative impacts:
The cumulative impacts are likely to be limited due to the location of the site
Residual impacts:
None as the impact would be removed with the decommissioning of the facility
Layout
In terms of potential negative impacts the visual impact on the areas sense of
place associated with layout Alternative 2 (40 turbines) will be greater than the
impact associated with Alternative 1 (25 turbines). Alternative 2 is also likely to
result in a greater loss of productive agricultural land. It is therefore
recommended that the Moorreesburg WEF be supported, subject to the
implementation of the recommended mitigation measures and management
actions contained in the report. The preferred layout alternative should be
informed by the findings of the other specialist studies, specifically the VIA and
agricultural assessment.
Power line
Two power line options are being considered:
» Alternative 1: A connection to the existing Moorreesburg 132/66kV substation
at 66kV or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV power line or a 132kV power line;
» Alternative 2: An overhead power line (66kV) likely to be connected to the
site
Alternative 1, which essentially follows the existing 66 kV Moorreesburg-

Ongegund line alignment, is only acceptable to Mr Hanekom. All other affected
owners as well as Mr Bester indicated that the current alignment would sterilise
too much arable land from effective mechanical cropping. Alternative 1 is
therefore not regarded as an acceptable option. The most affected owner is Mr
Pool. He has proposed an alternative alignment along cadastral boundaries and
the R311 (Figure 7.8).
Alternative 2 is not acceptable to any of the affected landowners. All of the

landowners indicated that Alternative 2 would traverse, and therefore fragment/
sterilize portions of highly productive land. Alternative 2 is therefore not
regarded as an acceptable option. Mr Hanekom has proposed an alternative
alignment, namely along the decommissioned 66 kV Gouda line. The owners of
Swartfontein have indicated that they would never agree to such an alignment, as
it would impact on sense of place (including views from farm house) and ease of
cropping. Buried powerline options should also be considered.

Based on the findings of the SIA both Alternative 1 and 2 are regarded as
unsuitable options. The option identified by Mr Pool that follows existing
cadastral boundaries and the R311 is recommended (Figure 7.8).
132 kV ALT 1
132 kV ALT 2
HANEKOM DEVIATION
POOL DEVIATION
Figure 7.8: Proposed alternative alignments proposed by landowners (blue line)
The findings of the SIA indicate that the development of the Moorreesburg WEF
will create employment and business opportunities for locals during both the
construction and operational phase of the project. The establishment of a
Community Trust will also benefit the local community. The enhancement
measures listed in the SIA should be implemented in order to maximise the
potential benefits. In addition, the proposed establishment of a number of
renewable energy facilities in the Swartland Local Municipality area will create
socio-economic opportunities, which, in turn, will result in a positive social
benefit. The significance of this impact is rated as High Positive.
The proposed development also represents an investment in clean, renewable

energy infrastructure, which, given the challenges created by climate change,
represents a positive social benefit for society as a whole. The establishment of
the proposed IE Moorresburg WEF is therefore supported by the findings of the
SIA.

However, the potential impacts associated with large, wind energy facilities on an
area’s sense of place and landscape cannot be ignored. These impacts are an
issue that will need to be addressed by the relevant environmental authorities,
specifically given the large number of applications for renewable facilities in the
area.
7.9 No Go Alternative
South Africa currently relies on coal-powered energy to meet more than 90% of
its energy needs. As a result South Africa is one of the highest per capita
producers of carbon emissions in the world and Eskom, as an energy utility, has
been identified as the world’s second largest producer carbon emissions.
The No-Development option would represent a lost opportunity for South Africa to
supplement is current energy needs with clean, renewable energy. Given South
Africa’s position as one of the highest per capita producer of carbon emissions in
the world, this would represent a negative social cost. In addition, the No-
Development option would compromise the objectives of the Swartland
Municipality IDP and LED to create employment and support economic
development.
However, at a provincial and national level, it should be noted that the

Moorreesburg Wind Farm is not unique. In this regard, a significant number of
wind energy facility developments are currently proposed in the Western Cape
Province. Foregoing the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm would therefore not
necessarily compromise the development of renewable energy facilities in the
Western Cape or South Africa. However, the benefits to the Swartland Local
Municipality and the local communities would be lost should the facility not be
developed.
The primary considerations pertaining to the do-nothing alternative relate to:

1. The current land-use regime of the site; and
2. The need to diversify the energy mix in South Africa.
These are discussed in further detail below.
1. The agricultural potential of the site is mainly determined by climatic

parameters such as rainfall distribution and frequency as well as wind
prevalence. The site is considered to have moderate to high agricultural
potential. The current land-use on the site is agriculture (dryland cultivation
of small grains in rotation with grazing). The development of the wind energy
facility would allow the on-going current crop production on areas of the farm
portions which will not be occupied by wind turbines and associated
infrastructure. Therefore the current land-use will be retained, while also

generating renewable energy from the wind. In addition, the landowner

would obtain an income from the facility (as the developer would pay a
percentage of the revenue generated to the landowner in accordance with the
lease agreement for the use of the land). This would contribute towards the
financial stability of the landowner which would in turn contribute to the
financial viability of the farming practices on the property. The “do nothing”
alternative would retain the current land-use, fore-going the opportunity to
generate renewable energy from the wind and at the same time continue
current agricultural activities on areas that fall outside of the proposed wind
energy facility infrastructure. The do nothing alternative would result in a lost
opportunity for the landowner (in terms of revenue) and the country (in terms
of renewable energy).
2. The electricity demand in South Africa is placing increasing pressure on the

country’s existing power generation capacity. There is, therefore, a need for
additional electricity generation options to be developed throughout the
country. The decision to expand South Africa’s electricity generation capacity,
and the mix of generation technologies is based on national policy and
informed by on-going strategic planning undertaken by the national
Department of Energy (DoE) and the National Energy Regulator of South
Africa (NERSA). The support for renewable energy policy is guided by a
rationale that South Africa has a very attractive range of renewable resources,
particularly solar and wind and that renewable applications are in fact the
least-cost energy service in many cases - and more so when social and
environmental costs are taken into account.
The generation of electricity from renewable energy in South Africa offers a

number of socio-economic and environmental benefits. These benefits are
explored in further by NERSA (March 2009), and include:
» Increased energy security: The current electricity crisis in South Africa

highlights the significant role that renewable energy can play in terms of
supplementing the power available. In addition, given that renewables
can often be deployed in a decentralised manner close to consumers, they
offer the opportunity for improving grid strength and supply quality, while
reducing expensive transmission and distribution losses.
» Resource saving: Conventional coal fired plants are major consumers of
water during their requisite cooling processes. It is estimated that the
achievement of the targets in the Renewable Energy White Paper will
result in water savings of approximately 16.5 million kilolitres, where
compared with wet cooled conventional power stations. This translates into
revenue saving of R26.6 million. As an already water stressed nation, it is
critical that South Africa engages in a variety of water conservation

measures, particularly as the detrimental effects of climate change on

water availability are experienced in the future.
» Exploitation of our significant renewable energy resource: At
present, valuable national resources (including biomass by-products, solar
insulation and wind) remain largely unexploited. The use of these energy
flows will strengthen energy security through the development of a diverse
energy portfolio.
» Pollution reduction: The releases of by-products of fossil fuel burning for
electricity generation have a particularly hazardous impact on human
health, and contribute to ecosystem degradation.
» Climate friendly development: The uptake of renewable energy offers
the opportunity to address energy needs in an environmentally responsible
manner, contributing to the mitigation of climate change through the
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. South Africa as a nation is
estimated to be responsible for 1% of global GHG emissions and is
currently ranked 9th worldwide in terms of per capita CO2 emissions.
» Support for international agreements and enhanced status within
the international community: The effective deployment of renewable
energy provides a tangible means for South Africa to demonstrate its
commitment to its international agreements under the Kyoto Protocol, and
for cementing its status as a leading player within the international
community.
» Employment creation: The sale, development, installation, maintenance
and management of renewable energy facilities has significant potential for
job creation in South Africa.
» Acceptability to society: Renewable energy offers a number of tangible
benefits to society including reduced pollution concerns, improved human
and ecosystem health and climate friendly development.
» Support to a new industry sector: The development of renewable
energy offers an opportunity to establish a new industry within the South
African economy.
» Protecting the natural foundations of life for future generations:
Actions to reduce our disproportionate carbon footprint can play an
important part in ensuring our role in preventing dangerous anthropogenic
climate change; thereby securing the natural foundations of life for
generations to come.
At present, South Africa is some way off from exploiting the diverse gains
from renewable energy and from achieving a considerable market share in
the renewable energy industry. South Africa’s electricity supply remains
heavily dominated by coal-based power generation, with the country’s
significant renewable energy potential largely untapped to date.

DoE’s macroeconomic study on renewable energy, developed under the now

completed Capacity Building in Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
(CaBEERE) project, has established that the achievement of this target would
provide a number of economic benefits, including increased government
revenue amounting to R299 million, increased GDP of up to R1 billion per
year and the creation of an estimated 20 500 new jobs. In addition, the
development of renewable energy beyond the 10 000 GWh target holds
further employment benefits and would maximise the number of jobs created
per TWh (NERSA, March 2009).
The Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan for the Western Cape (2008)
identified solar and wind energy as suitable renewable technologies for the
Western Cape. The White Paper on Sustainable Energy for the Western Cape
(2008) compliments the Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan, specifically
by setting targets for renewable energy generation for the province. The
Western Cape’s target for electricity generated from renewable sources is
that 15% of the electricity consumed in the Western Cape will come from
renewable energy sources by 2014. Through research, the viability of the
Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility has been established, and the developer
proposes that up to 40 turbines (depending on the turbine selected) can be
established as part of the facility. The ‘do nothing’ alternative will not assist
the South African government in reaching the set targets for renewable
energy. In addition the Western Cape’s power supply will not be
strengthened by the additional generated power being evacuated directly into
the Provinces’ electricity grid.
The ‘do nothing’ alternative is not a preferred alternative, as the result of not
developing the wind energy facility will be that the following positive impacts will
not be realised:
» Job creation from the construction and operational phases.

» Economic benefit to participating landowners due to the revenue that will be
gained from leasing the land to the developer.
» Utilisation of clean, renewable energy in an area where it is optimally
available.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS:
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS CHAPTER 8
Cumulative impacts in relation to an activity are defined in the Environmental

Impact Assessment Regulations (Government Notice R543) as meaning “the
impact of an activity that in itself may not be significant, but may become
significant when added to the existing and potential impacts eventuating from
similar or diverse activities or undertakings in the area”.
There has recently been a substantial increase in renewable energy developments

in South Africa as legislation is evolving to facilitate the introduction of
Independent Power Producers (IPPs) and renewable energy into the electricity
generation mix. Due to the recent substantial increase in interest in renewable
energy developments in South Africa, it is important to follow a precautionary
approach in accordance with NEMA to ensure that the potential for cumulative
impacts are considered and avoided where possible.
The Department of Energy has, under the REIPPP Programme, released a request
for proposals (RFP) to contribute towards Government’s renewable energy target
of 3725 MW and to stimulate the industry in South Africa. The bid selection
process will consider the suggested tariff as well as socio-economic development
opportunities provided by the project and the bidder.
There is a legislated requirement to assess cumulative impacts associated with a

proposed development. This chapter looks at whether the proposed project’s
potential impacts become more significant when considered in combination with
the other known or proposed solar farm projects within the area.
8.1. Approach Taken to Assess Cumulative Impacts
Significant cumulative impacts that could occur due to the development of the
wind energy facility and its associated infrastructure in proximity to other similar
developments include impacts such as:
» Loss of vegetation and impacts on ecology;

» Impacts on avifauna and bats;
» Soil and agricultural potential impacts;
» Heritage impacts;
» Visual impacts; and
» Social impacts.

Cumulative Impacts
Figure 8.1 indicates the proposed location of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm in
relation to other known renewable energy applications in the area. Two of these
have been constructed under the DoE REIPPP Programme, i.e. the Gouda Wind
Energy Facility and the Hopefield Wind Energy Facility (shown in green on Figure
8.1). Cumulative impacts are summarised below and have been considered
within the detailed specialist studies, where applicable.
As there is uncertainty as to whether all the proposed developments in the area

will be implemented, it is also difficult to quantitatively assess the potential
cumulative impacts. It is, however, important to explore the potential cumulative
impacts qualitatively as this will lead to a better understanding of these impacts
and the possible mitigation that may be required. As these cumulative impacts
are explored in more detail the trade-offs between promoting renewable energy
(and the associated benefits in terms of reduction in CO 2 emissions – a national
interest) versus the local and regional environmental and social impacts and
benefits (i.e. landscape, ecology, tourism, employment etc.) will become evident.

Cumulative Impacts
Figure 8.1: Map showing other renewable energy projects in the region

Cumulative Impacts
8.2. Cumulative Impacts on Ecology
The major cumulative impact on vegetation would be related to the contribution to

the loss of Swartland Shale Renosterveld which harbours many endemic and
threatened species. This could result from on-site construction activities as well as
possibly from the construction of the power line across sensitive vegetation. Any
loss of Swartland Shale Renosterveld or impact on this Critically Endangered
vegetation type in any part of its range would have negative cumulative effects. The
contribution of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm to this impact is expected to be limited
as a result of the avoidance of placing infrastructure within areas of natural
vegetation.
8.3. Cumulative Impacts on Avifauna
The effects of a number of projects in the area would add to impacts on the bird
communities of the region and would affect similar species in similar contexts such
as Blue Crane and Black Harrier. Impacts are expected to relate to loss of habitat as
a result of construction activities, and impacts as a result of mortality during the
operational phase.
Loss of Habitat
The available habitat for bird species is expected to be reduced and therefore the
general displacement from the area of the most sensitive species is likely to occur.
The Blue Crane utilises agricultural areas and therefore the installation of the
turbines may reduce the availability of suitable habitat. The Black Harrier uses
fynbos and renosterveld as well as agricultural lands and pastures. While the effects
on the Blue Crane are still unknown, it is obvious that a species with serious habitat
loss concerns, such as the Black Harrier, would be negatively affected by the
destruction of its scarce habitat at a regional level. Although the footprint of a wind
energy facility is not significant, the construction of roads and building platforms can
affect significant portions of natural vegetation and habitat.
The contribution of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm to this impact is expected to be

limited as a result of the avoidance of placing infrastructure within areas of natural
vegetation. However, as it is important to limit the potential impact as far as
possible, and therefore the construction of fewer turbines would be favoured. As a
result Layout Alternative 1 is expected to have a lower impact than layout Alternative
2.

Cumulative Impacts
Impacts during Operation
The cumulative impact of bird collisions in the area is likely to be moderately

significant should all proposed projects be approved and developed. Many of the
target species for this area are species that are in all likelihood already significantly
impacted upon by collisions/electrocutions with existing overhead cables in the area,
primarily as a result of their flight patterns and physical characteristics. Should
additional proposed wind projects in the broader area be constructed, these may
further impact on target species’ populations. An additional mortality factor such as
collision with turbines may prove detrimental to local populations of these species.
Additional wind energy facilities will also increase the overall distance and spans of
overhead lines in the area to connect with the nearest substation.
8.4. Cumulative Impacts on Bats
The main activities or projects, relevant to the cumulative impacts analysis known in
the broader area of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm study area are as a result of
human activities, primarily agriculture activities, as well as other proposed wind
energy facilities.
Human activities:
The study area falls within a transformed habitat used for agricultural purposes.
Presently the area is mostly used for wheat and other cereals production. There are
however some areas with remaining natural vegetation, mostly concentrated
alongside the watercourses and on the hilltops. Further expansion of agricultural
activities and/or other developments could impact negatively on the remaining
patches of natural vegetation.
Other wind energy facilities:

The ‘sum of’ the fatalities with the other wind developments could have a detrimental
effect at the macro scale for most affected species. These may include widespread
and common species such as the Cape Serotine or the Egyptian free-tailed bat, with
fatalities already recorded at other facilities in South Africa. Although the species is
currently of Least Concern in terms of its conservation status, the detrimental impact
this impact may have on the large scale population is currently unknown. For other
species of major conservation concern, such as the Natal long-fingered bat, the
presence of more facilities in an area increases the chances of collision with a wind
turbine. Baseline information on migration and dispersion of bat species in South
Africa is still lacking and it is likely that the individuals of this species recorded within

Cumulative Impacts
the study area were not using the area while on migration, but rather as a foraging
area. This reduces the probability of cumulative impact on these species.
8.5. Cumulative Impacts on Soils and Agricultural Potential
Cumulative impacts can be considered possible due to the likelihood of other projects
(renewable energy or other) in the area that will also lead to loss of agricultural land.
This cumulative impact is however considered to be of low significance since the
footprints of such projects are small in relation to available land. Non-irrigated land
is not a particularly limited resource in the area, and relatively small losses of non-
irrigated land to the development will have very little impact on the total land
available for agriculture of the area.
8.6. Cumulative Visual Impacts
The proposed wind farm will further increase the extent of development within the
Rural Agricultural LCA. A key consideration is that the proposed wind farm will be
developed close to an area that is already developed (i.e. Moorreesburg). Whilst it
will extend the footprint of development in the area it will not be an isolated
development. If key infrastructure, such as the overhead power line, can largely be
developed on the western side of the ridge within the valley that is overlooked by the
town, this will also aid in limiting the apparent spread of development into areas that
are already impacted.
The proposed wind farm will increase the influence of wind farms in the landscape
and transform the overall impression of the landscape as being influenced on an
increasing scale by wind farm development. There are two other existing wind farms
within approximately 30km of the proposed site. These existing facilities are on
roads that run parallel with the north south running N7 and whilst they are
connected by minor roads, it is likely that the majority of people passing through the
area would use one or other of the parallel running roads. Another key consideration
is the fact that due to distance and topography, more than one of the wind farms will
not be obvious to a viewer at any one time.
8.7. Cumulative Impacts on Heritage Resources
Development of a wind farm on the study site would have an impact on the rural
landscape character of the site and its environs. However, in addition to the
anticipated visual impact of the approved wind farms in the area, establishment of
another wind farm is likely to have some cumulative impact, although this would be

Cumulative Impacts
limited due to these other facilities being ~30km from the site. A moderate
cumulative impact on the visual landscape is expected.
Cumulative impacts on archaeological sites could be associated with the loss of

artefacts and sites, although none were found on the site. These impacts could be of
significance if appropriate mitigation measures are not implemented.
The cumulative impact on fossils from the Moorreesburg Wind Farm and other
projects in the area will not have a significant impact on paleontological resources
due to the low sensitivity of the area in this regard. The site is underlain by shales
which do not contain fossils.
8.8. Cumulative Noise Impacts
There are no other wind energy facilities proposed within the immediate vicinity of
the Moorreesburg Wind Farm. Therefore, there will be no cumulative noise impacts
associated with numerous facilities.
8.9. Cumulative Social Impacts
The establishment of two or more wind energy facilities in the area will impact
negatively on the landscape and the area’s rural sense of place and character. The
cumulative impact will, however, be of moderate significance due to the relatively
low incidence of visual receptors in the region. On the other hand, cumulative
positive socio-economic impacts from the development of a number of wind energy
facilities in terms of job creation and economic growth and development of
infrastructure will occur in a local and district municipality (that is in need of this
growth and development) may be significant.

Cumulative Impacts
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER 9
IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd is proposing to establish a commercial wind energy

south east of Moorreesburg in the Swartland Local Municipality of the Western Cape
Province
The facility is proposed within the following farm portions:
» Farm Zwartfontein no. 414 - Portion 23 & Remainder of Portion 11, 12, 13, 17 &
18
» Farm Zwartfontein no. 416 – Portion 7 and Remainder of Portion 3
» Farm Zwartfontein no. 414 - Portion 23 & Remainder of Portion 11, 12, 13, 17 &
18,8
» Farm Zwartfontein no. 416 – Portion 1, 7 and Remainder of Portion 3
» Farm Hartebeestfontein no 412- Portions 6 and 2
» Farm no. 1066 – Portion 0
» Farm Tontelberg no. 424 – Portion 1
» Farm Biesjesfontein no 413 – Portion 9
Infrastructure associated with the wind energy facility is proposed to include:
» Up to 40 wind turbines (depending on the alterantive selected for

implementation)
 Concrete, steel or combination of concrete/steel towers
rehabilitated.
» An overhead power line to connect the facility to the electricity grid. Two options
are being considered (refer to Figure 2.1):
 Option 1: A connection to the existing Moorreesburg 132/66kV substation at
66kV or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV power line or a 132kV power line.
Conclusions and Recommendations Page 206


site.
construction.
The environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the proposed Moorreesburg Wind
Farm has been undertaken in accordance with the EIA Regulations published in
Government Notice 33306, in terms of Section 24(5) of the National Environmental
Management Act (NEMA; Act No 107 of 1998) and the EIA Regulations of June 2010.
The EIA Phase aimed to achieve the following:
» Provide an overall assessment of the social and biophysical environments affected

by the proposed development as part of the project.
» Assess potentially significant impacts (direct, indirect and cumulative, where
required) associated with the proposed wind energy facility.
» Identify and recommend appropriate mitigation measures for potentially
significant environmental impacts.
» Undertake a fully inclusive public involvement process to ensure that I&APs are
afforded the opportunity to participate, and that their issues and concerns are
recorded.
9.1. Evaluation of the Proposed Project
The preceding chapters of this report together with the specialist studies included
within Appendices F - M provide a detailed assessment of the environmental impacts
on the social and biophysical environment as a result of the proposed project. This
chapter concludes the EIA Report by providing a summary of the conclusions of the
assessment of the Moorreesburg Wind Farm and associated infrastructure, including
the power line alternatives, and the layout alternatives considered for the turbines.
In so doing, it draws on the information gathered as part of the EIA process and the
knowledge gained by the environmental team during the course of the EIA and
presents an informed opinion of the environmental impacts associated with the
proposed project.

Based on the specialist findings, no environmental fatal flaws were identified to be

associated with the proposed wind energy facility provided that the recommended
mitigation measures are implemented, specifically in terms of avoidance of impacts
on remaining patches of natural vegetation. A number of impacts of medium to high
significance were identified which require mitigation in order to reduce the impact to
medium – low significance. Where impacts cannot be avoided, appropriate
environmental management measures are required to be implemented to mitigate
the impact. Environmental specifications for the management of potential impacts
are detailed within the draft Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) included
within Appendix L.
The most significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, as
identified through the EIA, include:
» Visual impacts on the area imposed by the components of the facility.

» Local site-specific impacts as a result of physical disturbance/modification to the
site with the establishment of the facility.
» Impacts on the birds and bats.
» Impacts on the social environment.
» Cumulative Impacts
9.1.1. Visual Impacts associated with the Wind Energy Facility and
associated Infrastructure
The most significant impact associated with the proposed wind energy facility and
associated infrastructure is the visual impact on the surrounding area imposed by the
components of the facility. Visual impacts might include:
» General landscape change or degradation which might entail the introduction of

elements that would modify the character of the landscape. Of all the Landscape
Character Areas (LCAs) identified, the mountainous wilderness areas far to the
north, east and south of the study area are the most important as these
generally have a protected status. The simple and open character of the
agricultural LCA in which the proposed site is located also has some importance
due to its cohesive consistent nature and the fact that it provides a strong
contrast with the adjacent mountainous zone, although the entire site has been
transformed by agriculture.
» Change in specific views of identified visual receptors that might spoil the
enjoyment of a view or restrict a current or potential use of the area. Identified
receptors include:

 Area Receptors such as urban areas and the wilderness landscape to the
northeast and south.
 Linear Receptors which include main routes through the area. It is likely
that these routes will be mainly used by local people however, the N7
Cape to Namibia Route is used extensively by tourists. The R311 and R44
are also likely to carry a proportion of tourist traffic.
» Point Receptors that include isolated and small groups of homesteads that are
generally associated with and located within the Agricultural Landscape that
surrounds the proposed development site.
Whilst the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm will be visible over a wide area,
topography will significantly modify its impact to the extent that high levels of impact
may only be experienced in a relatively small area that is defined by surrounding
ridgelines. The landscape of a large part of the high impact zone has already been
modified by development. It is recommended that further modification, particularly
associated with ancillary infrastructure is concentrated in this area.
In terms of the preferred alternative (25 turbine or 40 turbine alternative), the 40

alternative within the high impact zone. The difference between the alternatives is
likely to be reduced with distance as smaller sections of the development are obvious
due to the undulating topography. Power line Alternative 1 is recommended for
implementation as this route follows an existing power line for much of its route.
There may be benefits in reducing the numbers of turbines in close proximity to

Moorreesburg and the N7 particularly with respect to the potential risk of shadow
flicker whilst maintain the denser layout in other areas.
9.1.2. Local Site-specific Impacts
Site-specific impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed
wind energy facility relate to the direct loss of vegetation and species of special
concern, disturbance of animals and loss of habitat and impacts on soils. A wind
energy facility is, however, dissimilar to other power generation facilities in that it
does not result in whole-scale disturbance to a site. In order to assess the impacts
associated with the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm, it is necessary to understand
the extent of the affected area. The affected area primarily includes the turbines,
substation and associated access roads.
A site of 3830ha was considered for the facility, the bulk of which would not suffer
any level of disturbance as a result of the required activities on site and the limited
extent of the facility footprint. In the worst-case scenario (considering the

construction of 40 wind turbines), approximately 0.3% of the entire extent of the site
can be anticipated to be permanently transformed for the development footprint of
the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm, while ~0.5% of the entire extent of the site
can be anticipated to be temporarily disturbed to some extent during construction.
Ecologically sensitive areas on the site relate to the presence of Swartland Shale
Renosterveld, a Critically Endangered vegetation type. The areas on the site
characterised by this vegetation are considered as being of very high sensitivity and
regarded as No Go areas. As most of the infrastructure associated with the project is
located within areas already disturbed through agricultural activities, impacts on
ecology (vegetation and faunal habitats) are expected to be limited.
In terms of the preferred alternative (25 turbine or 40 turbine alternative), the 40

alternative due to the larger area of disturbance associated with the construction of
more turbines. The difference between the alternatives is not significant as both
alternatives do not impact directly on areas of natural vegetation.
9.1.3. Impacts on Birds and Bats
Impacts on bird and bat communities in the study area are associated with
disturbance of habitats during construction and mortality as a result of collisions with
the turbines and power line (relevant to birds) and barotrauma (relevant to bats)
during operation. A number of bird and bat species sensitive to impacts associated
with wind energy facilities were confirmed as being present in the study area.
Impacts can be significantly reduced through the relocation of infrastructure outside
of identified sensitive areas on the site as well as through the implementation of
other mitigation measures proposed within this EIA study.
Layout Alternative 1, with 25 turbines proposed, is recommended to be implemented

as it is considered to have lower conflicts with the sensitive areas identified and
lower impacts on bird and bat communities in comparison to layout Alternative 2
(with 40 wind turbines proposed). An adequate monitoring of the impacts during the
operational phase of the facility is recommended in order to better understand the
effects of subsequent phases of the project on the bird and bat communities and
prevent and/or mitigate any negative effects.
Power line Alternative 1 is recommended for implementation as a result of the

expected lower impact in terms of collision risk for birds. There is no evidence to
suggest that bats which are common to the area are affected by power lines in any
way. For this reason there is no nominated preferred power route in this regard.

9.1.4 Noise impacts
In terms of the layout options assessed, there is the potential for noise impacts on
some of the noise sensitive developments (NSDs) identified in the study area. These
impacts can be effectively avoided through the relocation of turbines more than
1200m from these NSDs. Should the final layout result in the location of turbines
within 1200m of any NSD, a noise monitoring programme should be established for
the site.
9.1.5 Impacts on the Social Environment
The findings of the SIA indicate that the development of the proposed Moorreesburg
Wind Farm will create employment and business opportunities for local communities
during both the construction and operational phase of the project. The
establishment of a Community Trust will also benefit the local community. The
enhancement measures listed in the report should be implemented in order to
maximise the potential benefits. The proposed development also represents an
investment in clean, renewable energy infrastructure, which, given the challenges
created by climate change, represents a positive social benefit for society as a whole.
9.1.6 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts of a development project consider impacts resulting from

incremental actions from the development, in addition to other past, present or
future impacts resulting from other developments/actions/projects. This assumes
the knowledge of other developments or actions whose effects could be cumulative
to the ones resulting from the project being assessed. As it is not reasonably viable
to consider all the varying existing or proposed developments for a certain area, the
consideration of cumulative impact will focus on impacts arising from developments
which are similar in nature.
There are no other similar developments proposed in close proximity to the proposed
Mooorreesburg Wind Farm. However, there are two wind farms constructed within
30km of the site (i.e. Hopefield Wind Farm and Gouda Wind Farm). Considering the
findings of the specialist assessments undertaken for the project, the cumulative
impacts for the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Energy Facility have been summarised
below:

Cumulative impacts Significance rating
Visual impact Medium

Noise impact Low
Social impact- positive impact (social and High (+)
economic value)
Social Impact- negative impacts (visual, sense Low
of place, noise and disturbance during
construction)
Ecological Impact Low
Impact on soil and agricultural potential Low
Impact on Bats Medium
Impact on Birds Medium to high
Heritage impact Low
9.2. Comparison of Alternatives
Based on the findings of the specialist studies undertaken, the following tables
provide a summary of the preferred alternatives for the facility layout and power
line.
Table 9.1: Comparison of Layout Alternatives

Impact Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Visual impact Preferred Less preferred

Noise impact Preferred Less preferred
Social impact- positive impact No preference No preference
(social and economic value)
Social Impact - negative impacts Preferred Less preferred
(visual, sense of place, noise and
disturbance during construction)
Ecological Impact Preferred Less preferred
Impact on soil and agricultural Preferred Less preferred
potential
Impact on Bats Preferred Less preferred
Impact on Birds Preferred Less preferred
Heritage impact No preference No preference
On the basis of the above summary, layout Alternative 1 (25 turbines) is nominated
as the preferred alternative.

Table 9.2: Comparison of Power Line Alternatives

Impact Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Visual impact Preferred Not preferred

Noise impact No preference No preference
Social impact- positive impact No preference No preference
(social and economic value)
Social Impact - negative impacts Not preferred – alternative Not preferred –
(visual, sense of place, noise and proposed along cadastral alternative proposed
disturbance during construction) boundaries along cadastral
boundaries
Ecological Impact Less Preferred Preferred
Impact on soil and agricultural Preferred Not preferred
potential
Impact on Bats No preference No preference
Impact on Birds Preferred Not preferred
Heritage impact No preference No preference
On the basis of the above summary, power line Alternative 1 is nominated as the
preferred alternative largely due to this alternative being proposed largely parallel to
an existing power line, as long as the power line footprint avoids all high sensitive
ecological areas.
9.3. Environmental Sensitivity Mapping and Recommendations
From the specialist investigations undertaken for the proposed Moorreesburg Wind
Farm development site, a number of potentially sensitive areas were identified (refer
to Figure 9.1). The following sensitive areas/environmental features have been
identified on the site and are able to be mapped:
» Ecology: The majority of the site comprises transformed habitats of low

sensitivity. There are however some significant remnant patches of Swartland
Shale Renosterveld at the site. This vegetation type is classified as Critically
Endangered. Furthermore, the large Renosterveld remnant present at the site
has been identified as being part of a priority renosterveld cluster with regional
significance for biodiversity pattern and process. More than 100 listed species
are known from the area, which further highlights the likely sensitivity of the
intact Renosterveld fragments at the site. These areas are regarded as No Go
areas.

» Bat sensitive areas: Bat sensitive areas identified on the site include areas of
natural vegetation, areas characterised by woodland vegetation and 500m
around confirmed bat roosts.
» Bird Habitat and Sensitive Areas:
 Areas of natural vegetation are associated to hills and slopes, they are
frequently used by raptors and present high potential collision risk
indexes. Furthermore, they represent important habitat for sensitive,
endangered species, such as the Black Harrier. These areas must be
considered No-Go.
 A 300m buffer around hills and slopes dominated by natural vegetation
are considered as being of medium to high sensitivity and it is
recommended that, as far as possible, no turbines should be sited within
these areas. If not technically feasible to relocate these turbines, then
additional mitigation (such as the installation of automated collision
detection systems) must be implemented.
 A 300m buffer around water bodies, as these features may attract birds
under certain conditions and are the only places were certain sensitive
species such as Greater and Lesser Flamingos were observed. These areas
must be avoided and are considered NO-GO areas.
 A 500m buffer around the water body on the site where the highest
number of bird contacts were recorded (i.e. WBAD08) and where the
Greater Flamingos were observed must also be considered NO-GO.
 500m - 1000m around the active Jackal Buzzard nests identified during
the pre-construction monitoring period. 500 metres around active raptors
nests must be considered NO-GO areas. A buffer of 1000 m around these
should be considered as of medium to high sensitivity and turbine
placement should be avoided as far as possible. If turbines are to be
placed within the buffer from 500 m to 1000 m around these areas,
additional mitigation (such as the installation of automated collision
detection systems) must be implemented.
» Noise Sensitive Developments (NSDs): Noise sensitive developments do
occur in and around the site and may be impacted by the proposed development
depending on the final layout.
Planning of infrastructure location on the site needs to take some factors into
account with respect to existing disturbance on site. Existing road infrastructure is
planned to be used as far as possible for providing access to proposed turbine
positions. Where no road infrastructure exists, new roads should be placed within
existing disturbed areas or environmental conditions must be taken into account to
ensure the minimum amount of damage is caused to natural habitats and that the

risk of erosion or down-slope impacts are not increased. Road infrastructure and
underground cable alignments should coincide as much as possible.
Based on the findings of the EIA studies undertaken and the recommendations
above, the original proposed layout for the project (as presented within this EIA) was
revised in order to avoid areas of high sensitivity (refer to Figure 9.2). This layout
reflects the preferred 25 turbines, and effectively avoids or mitigates all impacts
identified within this EIA and is considered the preferred layout for implementation.

Figure 9.1: Environmental sensitivity map for the project study area illustrating sensitive areas in relation to the proposed development
footprint for the Moorreesburg Wind Farm

Figure 9.2: Revised layout designed to avoid identified sensitive areas on the site. This is the preferred layout for implementation.

9.4. Environmental Costs of the Project versus Benefits of the

Project
Environmental (natural environment, economic and social) costs can be expected to

arise as a result of the project proceeding. This could include:
» Direct loss of biodiversity, flora, fauna and soils due to the clearing of land for the
construction and utilisation of land for the wind energy facility (which is limited to
the development footprint). The cost of loss of biodiversity has been minimised
through the careful location of the development to avoid key areas of sensitivity.
» Visual impacts associated with the wind energy facility. The cost of loss of visual
quality to the area is reduced due to the area already being visually impacted to
some extent by other developments.
» Change in land-use and loss of land available for agriculture on the development
footprint. The cost in this regard is expected to be limited due to the limited
footprint of the facility (0.3% of the site), the low agricultural potential of the
property and the fact that current agricultural activities can continue on the
remainder of the property during construction and operation.
These costs are expected to occur at a local and site level and are considered
acceptable provided the mitigation measures as outlined in this EIA and the EMPr are
implemented.
The positive implications of establishing the Moorrreesburg Wind Energy Facility on

the demarcated site include:
» The project will result in important economic benefits at the local and regional
scale through job creation, procurement of materials and provision of services
and other associated downstream economic development. These will persist
during the preconstruction, construction and operational phases of the project.
» The project contributes towards the Provincial and Local goals for the
development of renewable energy as outlined in the respective SDFs and IDPs.
» The project serves to diversify the economy and electricity generation mix of
South Africa by addition of wind energy to the mix.
» South Africa’s per capita greenhouse gas emissions are amongst the highest in
the world due to reliance on fossil fuels. The proposed project will contribute to
South Africa achieving goals for implementation of renewable energy and ‘green’
energy.
The benefits of the project are expected to occur at a national, regional and local
level. As the economic costs to the environment have been largely limited through

the appropriate placement of infrastructure on the site within lower sensitivity areas,
the expected benefits of the project will partially offset the localised environmental
costs of the project.
9.5. Overall Conclusion (Impact Statement)
The EIA process has been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the EIA
Regulations and all effort has been made to involve interested and affected parties,
stakeholders and relevant Organs of State such that an informed decision regarding
the project can be made by the Regulating Authority. The general objectives of
Integrated Environmental Management have been taken into account for this EIA
process through the identification, prediction and evaluation of the potential impacts
of the project on the biophysical environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural
heritage. The risks, consequences, alternatives as well as options for mitigation of
activities have also been considered with a view to minimise negative impacts,
maximise benefits, and promote compliance with the principles of sustainable
environmental management.
Through pre-feasibility assessments and research, the viability of establishing the

Moorreesburg Wind Farm in the Western Cape has been established by IE
Moorrreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd. The findings of the specialist studies undertaken
within this EIA to assess both the benefits and potential negative impacts anticipated
as a result of the proposed project conclude that:
» There are no environmental fatal flaws that should prevent the proposed wind
energy facility and associated infrastructure from proceeding on the identified
site, provided that no development occurs within the identified no go areas, and
that the recommended mitigation, monitoring and management measures are
implemented.
» The proposed development represents an investment in clean, renewable energy,
which, given the challenges created by climate change, represents a positive
social benefit for society as a whole.
The significance levels of the majority of identified negative impacts can generally be
reduced to acceptable levels by implementing the recommended mitigation
measures. With reference to the information available at this planning approval
stage in the project cycle, the confidence in the environmental assessment
undertaken is regarded as acceptable.

9.6. Overall Recommendation
Based on the nature and extent of the proposed project, the local level of
disturbance predicted as a result of the construction and operation of the facility and
associated infrastructure, the findings of the EIA, and the understanding of the
significance level of potential environmental impacts, it is the opinion of the EIA
project team that the application for the proposed Moorreesburg Wind Farm and
associated infrastructure can be mitigated to an acceptable level, provided
appropriate mitigation is implemented and adequate regard for the recommendations
of this report and the associated specialist studies is taken during the final design of
the project.
The following infrastructure would be included within an authorisation issued for the
project:
» Up to 25 wind turbines
rehabilitated.
» An on-site substation of ± 50 m x 50 m to facilitate the connection between the
wind energy facility and the national electricity grid.
 An overhead power line to connect the facility to the electricity grid. Option 1
is preferred: a connection to the existing Moorreesburg 132/66kV substation
at 66kV or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV power line or a 132kV power line.
construction.
» The power line footprint must avoid all high sensitive ecological areas identified.

The following conditions would be required to be included within an environmental

authorisation issued for the project:
» All mitigation measures detailed within this report and the specialist reports
contained within Appendices F - O must be implemented.
» The draft Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) as contained within
Appendix N of this report should form part of the contract with the Contractors
appointed to construct and maintain the proposed wind energy facility, and will
be used to ensure compliance with environmental specifications and
management measures. The implementation of this EMPr for all life cycle phases
of the proposed project is considered to be key in achieving the appropriate
environmental management standards as detailed for this project.
» Following the final design of the facility, a revised layout must be submitted to
DEA for review and approval prior to commencing with construction. No
development is permitted within the identified No Go areas as detailed in Figure
9.1.
» Establish an on-going monitoring programme to detect, quantify and manage any
alien plant species that may become established as a result of disturbance.
» Bird and bat monitoring programmes, in line with the latest version of the South
African best practice bird and bat monitoring guidelines, should be commissioned
during the operational phase to determine the actual impacts of the project on
bird and bats.
» Disturbed areas should be kept to a minimum and rehabilitated as quickly as
possible.
» Adequate stormwater management measures to be put in place as the soils on
the site are prone to erosion.
» Implement site specific erosion and water control measures to prevent excessive
surface runoff from the site (turbines and roads).
» Where feasible, training and skills development programmes for locals should be
initiated prior to the initiation of the construction phase.
» Use of fire prevention and fire management strategies for the wind energy
facility, to reduce risks to landowners.
» Construction managers should be informed before construction starts on the
possible types of heritage sites that may be encountered and the procedures to
follow should they encounter subsurface heritage artefacts/ sites (as detailed in
the EMPr).
» Applications for all other relevant and required permits if required to be obtained
by the developer must be submitted to the relevant regulating authorities. This
includes permits for the transporting of all components (abnormal loads) to site,
water use licencing for disturbance to any water courses/ drainage lines and,
permit to remove heritage artefacts and/ disturbance of protected vegetation.

REFERENCES CHAPTER 10
Fauna and Flora Study
Alexander, G. & Marais, J. 2007. A Guide to the Reptiles of Southern Africa. Struik Nature,
Cape Town.
Branch W.R. 1998. Field guide to snakes and other reptiles of southern Africa. Struik, Cape
Town.
Du Preez, L. & Carruthers, V. 2009. A Complete Guide to the Frogs of Southern Africa. Struik
Nature., Cape Town.
IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>.
Downloaded on 19 January 2012.
Marais, J. 2004. Complete Guide to the Snakes of Southern Africa. Struik Nature, Cape Town.
Nel, J.L., Murray, K.M., Maherry, A.M., Petersen, C.P., Roux, D.J., Driver, A., Hill, L., Van
Deventer, H., Funke, N., Swartz, E.R., Smith-Adao, L.B., Mbona, N., Downsborough, L. and
Nienaber, S. (2011). Technical Report for the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas
project. WRC Report No. K5/1801.
Mucina L. & Rutherford M.C. (eds) 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
Skinner, J.D. & Chimimba, C.T. 2005. The mammals of the Southern African Subregion.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps (available on BGIS website:
http://bgis.sanbi.org.
Von Hase, A. et al., 2003. A Fine-scale Conservation Plan for Cape Lowlands Renosterveld.
Conservation Unit, Report 2/03. See Section 13. Botanical Society of SA, Cape Town. Available
on http://bgis.sanbi.org.

Soil and Agricultural Potential Study
Agricultural Research Council. Undated. AGIS Agricultural Geo-Referenced
Information System available at http://www.agis.agric.za/.
Water Research Commission. Undated. South African Rain Atlas available at
http://134.76.173.220/rainfall/index.html.
Avifauna Study
Acha, A. 1997. Negative impact of wind generators on the Eurasian Griffon Gyps fulvus in
Tarifa, Spain. Vulture News 38:10-18
Acocks, J.P.H. 1953. Veld types of South Africa. Memoirs of the Botanical Society of South
Africa 28, pp 1-192.
Anderson, M.D. 2001. The effectiveness of two different marking devices to reduce large
terrestrial bird collisions with overhead electricity cables in the eastern Karoo, South Africa.
Draft report to Eskom Resources and Strategy Division. Johannesburg. South Africa.
Australian Wind Energy Association www.auswea.com.au (accessed 25/04/07)
Avian Literature Database – National Renewable Energy Laboratory – www.nrel.gov
Avian Powerline Interation Committee (APLIC). 1994. Mitigating bird collisions with power
lines: the state of the art in 1994. Edison Electric Institute. Washington DC.
Barnes, K.N. (ed.) 1998. The Important Bird Areas of southern Africa. BirdLife South Africa:
Johannesburg.
Barnes, K.N. (ed.) 2000. The Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg.
Cade, T.J. 1994. Industry research: Kenetech Windpower. In Proceedings of the National
Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting, 1994.
Colson & associates 1995. Avian interaction with wind energy facilities: a summary. Prepared
for the American Wind Energy Association. Washington DC

Crockford, N.J. 1992. A review of the possible impacts of wind farms on birds and other
wildlife. Joint Nature Conservation Committee. JNCC Report number 27. Peterborough. United
Kingdom
Curry & Kerlinger, LCC www.currykerlinger.com (accessed 27/04/07)
Curry, R.C., & Kerlinger, P. 2000. Avian mitigation plan: Kenetech model wind turbines,
Altamont Pass WRA, California. In Proceedings of the National Avian-Wind Power Planning
Meeting III, San Diego California, May 1998.
Desholm, M. & Kahlert, J. 2005. Avian collision risk at an offshore wind farm. Biology Letters
(2005) 1. 296-298.
Erickson, W.P., Johnson, G.D., Strickland, M.D., Kronner, K., & Bekker, P.S. 1999. Baseline
avian use and behaviour at the CARES wind plant site, Klickitat county, Washington. Final
Report. Prepared for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Erickson, W.P., Johnson, G.D., Strickland, M.D., Young, D.P., Sernka, K.J., Good, R.E. 2001.
Avian collisions with wind turbines: a summary of existing studies and comparison to other
sources of avian collision mortality in the United States. National Wind Co-ordinating
Committee Resource Document.
Erickson, W.P., Johnson, G.D., Strickland, M.D., Young, Good, R., Bourassa, M., & Bay, K.
2002. Synthesis and comparison of baseline avian and bat use, raptor nesting and mortality
from proposed ans existing wind developments. Prepared for Bonneville Power Administration.
European Wind Energy Association www.ewea.org (accessed 27/04/07)
Everaert, J. 2003. Wind turbines and birds in Flanders: Preliminary study results and
recommendations. Natuur. Oriolus 69 (4): 145-155
German Wind Energy Association – www.wind-energie.de
Gill, J.P., Townsley, M. & Mudge, G.P. 1996. Review of the impact of wind farms and other
aerial structures upon birds. Scottish Natural Heritage Review. Number 21.
Hanowski, J.M., & Hawrot, R.Y. 2000. Avian issues in development of wind energy in western
Minnesota. In Proceedings of the National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting III, San Diego
California, May 1998.

Harrison, J.A., Allan, D.G., Underhill, L.G., Herremans, M., Tree, A.J., Parker, V & Brown, C.J.
(eds). 1997. The atlas of southern African birds. Vol. 1&2. BirdLife South Africa,
Johannesburg.
Hockey, P.A.R., Dean, W.R.J., Ryan, P.G. (Eds) 2005. Roberts – Birds of Southern Africa, VIIth
ed. The Trustees of the John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town.
Hodos, W. 2002. Minimization of motion smear: Reducing avian collisions with turbines.
Unpublished subcontractor report to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/SR 500-
33249
Howell, J.A. 1995. Avian mortality at rotor sweep areas equivalents Altamont Pass and
Montezuma Hills, California. Prepared for Kenetech Wind Power, San Francisco, California.
http://www.waveguide.org/archives/waveguide_3/birdkill.html.
Hunt, W.G. 2002. Golden Eagles in a perilous landscape: predicting the effects of migration for
wind turbine blade strike mortality. Report to the California Energy Commission. Pier grant
number 500-97-4033 to the University of California.
Janss, G. 2000. Bird behaviour in and near a wind farm at Tarifa, Spain: Management
considerations. In Proceedings of National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting III, San Diego
California, May 1998
Jaroslow, B. 1979. A review of factors involved in bird-tower kills, and mitigation procedures.
In G.A. Swanson (Tech co-ord). The Mitigation symposium. A national workshop on mitigation
losses of Fish and Wildlife Habitats. US Forest Service General Technical Report. RM-65
Jenkins, A.R., van Rooyen, C.S., Smallie, J.J., Anderson, M.D., & Smit, H.A. 2011. Best
practice guidelines for avian monitoring and impact mitigation at proposed wind energy
development sites in southern Africa. Wildlife & Energy Programme of the Endangered Wildlife
Trust & BirdLife South Africa.
Karlsson. 1983. as cited in Winkelman 1995.
Kemper, C.A. 1964. A tower for TV: 30 000 dead birds. Audubon Magazine 66 (1): 86-90
Kerlinger, P. 2001. Avian issues and potential impacts associated with wind power
development of near shore waters of Long Island, New York. Prepared for Bruce Bailey, AWS
Scientific.

Kerlinger, P. 2003. Addendum to the Phase I avian risk assessment for the Flat Rock Wind
Power Project, Lewis County, New York: Phase One and Phase Two. March 31, 2003. Report
to Flat Rock Wind Power, L.L.C
Kerlinger, P. & Dowdell, J. 2003. Breeding bird survey for the Flat Rock wind power project,
Lewis County, New York. Prepared for Atlantic Renewable Energy Corporation.
Kingsley, A & Whittam, B. 2005. Wind turbines and birds – A background review for
environmental assessment. Unpublished report for Environment Canada/Canadina Wildlife
Service.
Kuyler, E.J. 2004. The impact of the Eskom Wind Energy Demonstration Facility on local
avifauna – Results from the monitoring programme for the time period June 2003 to Jan 2004.
Unpublished report to Eskom Peaking Generation.
McIsaac, H.P. 2001. Raptor acuity and wind turbine blade conspicuity. Pp. 59-87. National
Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting IV, Proceedings. Prepared by Resolve, Inc., Washington
DC
Mucina & Rutherford. 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia
19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
National Wind Co-ordinating Committee. 2004. Wind turbine interactions with birds and bats:
A summary of research results and remaining questions. Fact Sheet Second Edition.
New Zealand Wind Energy Association www.windenergy.org.nz (accessed 25/04/07)
Orloff, S., & Flannery, A. 1992. Wind turbine effects on avian activity, habitat use and
mortality in Altamont Pass and Solano County Wind Resource Areas, 1989-1991. Prepared by
Biosystems Analysis Inc, Tiburon, California. Prepared for the California Energy Commission,
Sacramento, Grant 990-89-003.
Retief, E.F, Diamond, M., Anderson, M.D., Smit, Dr. H.A., Jenkins Dr. A. & Brooks, M. 2012.
Avian Wind Farm Sensitivity Map for South Africa: Criteria and Procedures Used
Richardson, W.J. 2000. Bird migration and wind turbines: Migration timing, flight behaviour
and collision risk. In Proceedings of the National Avian-wind Power Planning Meeting III, San
Diego, California, May 1998.

Smit, I. 2007. Personal communication. Eskom Research and Innovation Department, Eskom
Resources and Strategy Group.
Taylor, P.B., Navarro, R.A., Wren-Sargent, M., Harrison, J.A., & Kieswetter, S.L. 1999. TOTAL
CWAC Report: Coordinated Waterbird Counts in South Africa, 1992 – 1997. Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.
Van Rooyen, C. 2001. Bird Impact Assessment Study – Eskom Wind Energy Demonstration
Facility, Western Cape South Africa. Prepared for Eskom Enterprises, TSI Division.
Van Rooyen, C.S. 2004a. The Management of Wildlife Interactions with overhead lines. In The
fundamentals and practice of Overhead Line Maintenance (132kV and above), pp217-245.
Eskom Technology, Services International, Johannesburg.
Van Rooyen, C.S. 2004b. Investigations into vulture electrocutions on the Edwardsdam-
Mareetsane 88kV feeder, Unpublished report, Endangered Wildlife Trust, Johannesburg.
Weir, R. D. 1976. Annotated bibliography of bird kills at manmade obstacles: a review of the
state of the art and solutions. Canadian Wildlife Services, Ontario Region, Ottawa.
Winkelman, J.E. 1995. Bird/wind turbine investigations in Europe. In Proceedings of the
National Avian- wind Power Planning Meeting 1994.
Young, D.J., Harrison, J.A., Navarro, R.A., Anderson, M.D., & Colahan, B.D. (Eds). 2003.Big
Birds on Farms: Mazda CAR report 1993-2001. Avian Demography Unit, Cape Town.
1)http://www.wind-energy-the-facts.org/en/part-i-technology/chapter-3-wind-turbine-
technology/evolution-of-commercial-wind-turbine-technology/growth-of-wind-turbine-
size.html
Bat Study
ARNETT, E.B., BROWN, W.K., ERICKSON, W.P., FIELDER, JK., HAMILTON, BL., HENRY, T.H.,
JAIN, A., JOHNSON, G.D., KERNS,J., KOFORD, R.R., NICHOLSON, C.P., O’CONNELL, T.J.,
PIORKOWSKI, M.D. AND TANKERSLEY, R.D. 2008. Patterns of bat fatalities at wind energy
facilities in North America. The Journal of Wildlife Management 72: 61-78.

BAERWALD, E.F., D’AMOURS GH, KLUG BJ AND BARCLAY RMR. (2008). Barotrauma is a
significant cause of bat fatalities at wind turbines. Current Biology Vol 18 No 16.
BARCLAY, R.M.R., AND HARDER, L.D. (2003). Life histories of bats: life in the slow lane. In
Kunz T.H. and Fenton M.B. (eds) Bat Ecology. University of Chicago Press.
BARCLAY, R.M.R., BAERWALD, E.F. AND GRUVER, J.C. 2007. Variation in bat and bird fatalities
at wind energy facilities: assessing the effects of rotor size and tower height. Canadian Journal
of Zoology 85: 381-387.
BOYLES, J.G., CRYAN, P.M., MCCRACKEN G.F. AND KUNZ, T.H. (2011). Economic importance
of bats in agriculture. Science 332:41-42
CRYAN, P. Undated. Bat Fatalities at Wind Turbines: Investigating the causes and
consequences. http://www.fortusgs.gov/BatsWindmills/. Viewed 9 October 2009.
CRYAN, P.M. (2011). Wind turbines as landscape impediments to the migratory connectivity of
bats. Environmental Law 41: 355-370.
ERICKSON, W.P., JOHNSON, G.D., STRICKLAND, M.D., KRONNER, K., &BEKKER, P.S. (1999).
Baseline avian use and behaviour at the CARES wind plant site, Klickitatcounty, Washington.
Final Report. National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
FENTON, M.B. (1990). The foraging ecology of animal eating bats. Canadian J. Zoology
68:411-422
FRIEDMANN, Y. & DALY, B. (eds.) (2004). Red data book of the mammals of South Africa: A
conservation assessment. CBSG Southern Africa, Conservation Breeding Specialist Group
(SSC/IUCN). Endangered Wildlife Trust, Johannesburg.
HANDWERK, B. (2008). Wind Turbines Give Bats the ‘Bends,’ Study Finds. National
Geographic News 25, August 2008.
HERSELMAN, J.C. & NORTON, P.M. (1985). The distribution and status of bats (Mammalia:
Chiroptera) in the Cape Province. Annals of the Cape Province Museum (Natural History) 16:
73-126
HOWELL, J.A. (1995). Avian mortality at rotor sweep areas equivalents Altamont Pass and
Montezuma Hills, California. Prepared for Kenetech Wind Power, San Francisco,
California.http://www.waveguide.org/archives/waveguide_3/birdkill.html.

JONES, G., JACOBS, D.S., KUNZ, T.H., WILLIG, M.R., AND RACEY, P.A. (2009). Carpe noctem:
the importance of bats as bioindicators. Endangered Species Research 8:93–115
KUNZ, T.H., DE TORREZ, E.B., BAUER, D., LOBOVA, T. AND FLEMMING, T.H. (2011).
Ecosystem services provided by bats. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1233: 1-
38
LONG, R., SIMPSON, T., DING, J., HEYDON, S. AND REILL, R. (1998). Bats feed on crop pests
in Sacramento Valley. California Agriculture 52: 8-10
MITCHELL-JONES, T. AND CARLIN, C. 2009. Bats and onshore wind turbines. Interim
guidance. Natural England Technical Infirmation Note TIN051. 9pp. Accessed from
http://www.naturalengland.org.za.
MONADJEM, A., TAYLOR P.J, COTTERILL F.P.D AND SCHOEMAN M.C. (2010). Bats of Southern
and Central Africa: A Biogeographic and Taxonomic Synthesis.Wits University Press
NORBERG, U.M., REYNER, J.M.V. (1987). Ecological morphology and flight in bats (Mammalia:
Chiroptera): wing adaptions, flight performance, foraging strategy and echolocation. Phil.
Trans. R.Soc. Lond. B 316: 335-427
OUTEN, A.R. (1998). The possible ecological implications of artificial lighting. Hertfordshire
Biological Records Centre
RODRIGUES, LL., BACH, M.J., DUBONG-SAVAGE, GOODWIN, J. AND HARBURSCH, C. 2008.
Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects. EUROBATS. Publication Series No. 3
(English version). UNEP/EUROBATS. Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, 51pp.
RYDELL J & RACEY, P.A. (1993). Street lamps and the feeding ecology of insectivorous bats.
Recent Advances in Bat Biology Zool Soc Lond Symposium abstracts
SCHNITZLER, H.U. KALKO, E.K.B. (2001). Echolocation by insect eating bats. BioScience
51:557-569.
SIMMONS, N.B. (2005). Order Chiroptera. In Wilson D.E. and Reeder D.M. (eds) Mammal
Species of the World, vol. 1, 3rd edition. John Hopkins University Press.
SOWLER, S. & STOFFBERG, S. (2012). The South African Good Practice Guidelines for
Surveying Bats in Wind Farm Developments. A guideline document distributed by and
produced in cooperation with the Wildlife & Energy Programme of the Endangered Wildlife
Trust.

SWIFT, S.M. (1980). Activity patterns of pipistrelle bats Pipistrellus pipistrellus in northeast
Scotland. Journal of Zoology, London 190: 285 – 295.
TAYLOR P.J. 2000. Bats of Southern Africa. University of Natal Press, Pietermaritzburg
VAN DER MERWE M. (1973). Aspects of social behaviour of the Natal Clinging bat, Miniopterus
schreibersi natalensis (A. Smith, 1934). Mammalia 37: 380-389.
Heritage Study
Athiros, G and L, Turner., M. 2011. Riebeeks Castle. Tokai: Historical Media.
Baumann, N. & Winter, S. 2005. Guideline for involving heritage specialists in EIA process.
Edition 1. CSIR report No ENV-S-C 2005 053E. Provincial Government of the Western Cape:
1
Department of Environmental Affairs and Developmental Planning. Worden, N, Van
Heyningen, E & V. Bickford-Smith, 1998: Cape Town: The Making of a City: an Illustrated
Social History, D. Philip, South Africa.
Molsbergen, 1916:45-62 & Mosop 1931: 6-11, in Rookmaker, L.C. Zoological Exploration of
Southern Africa 1650-1790, Balkema, Rotterdam.
Penn, N. 1987. The Frontier in the Western Cape, 1700-1740. In Parkington, J.E. & Hall, M.
(eds). Papers in the Prehistory of the Western Cape, South Africa. Oxford: British
Archaeological Reports International Series 332, 462-503.
Worden, N, Van Heyningen, E & V. Bickford-Smith, 1998: Cape Town: The Making of a City:
an Illustrated Social History, D. Philip, South Africa.
Noise Study
Acoustics, 2008: A review of the use of different noise prediction models for wind farms and
the effects of meteorology
Acoustics Bulletin, 2009: Prediction and assessment of wind turbine noise
Audiology Today, 2010: Wind-Turbine Noise – What Audiologists should know
Autumn, Lyn Radle, 2007: The effect of noise on Wildlife: A literature review

BWEA, 2005: Low Frequency Noise and Wind Turbines – Technical Annex
Bolin, Karl, 2006: Masking of Wind Turbine Sound by Ambient Noise. KTH Engineering
Sciences
Bowdler, Dick, 2008: Amplitude modulation of wind turbine noise: a review of the evidence
DEFRA, 2003: A Review of Published Research on Low Frequency Noise and its
Effects, Report for Defra by Dr Geoff Leventhall Assisted by Dr Peter Pelmear and Dr Stephen
Benton
DEFRA, 2007: Research into Aerodynamic Modulation of Wind Turbine Noise: Final Report
DELTA, 2008: EFP-06 project: Low Frequency Noise from Large Wind Turbines, a procedure for
evaluation of the audibility for low frequency sound and a literature study, Danish Energy
Authority
Delta, 2009: Measurement of Noise Emission from a Vestas V90 3 MW wind turbine “Mode 0”
Duncan, E. and Kaliski, K. 2008: Propagation Modelling Parameters for Wind Power Projects
Enertrag, 2008: Noise and Vibration, Hempnall Wind Farm
(http://www.enertraguk.com/technical/noise-and-vibration.html)
ETSU R97: 1996. ‘The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms: Working Group on
Noise from Wind Turbines’
Fégeant, Olivier, 2002: Masking of Wind Turbine Noise: Influence of wind turbulence on
ambient noise fluctuations. Royal Institute of Technology, Report 2002:12
HGC Engineering, 2006: Wind Turbines and Infrasound, report to the Canadian Wind Energy
Association
HGC Engineering, 2007: Wind Turbines and Sound, report to the Canadian Wind Energy
Association
ISO 9613-2: 1996. ‘Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2:
General method of calculation’
Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 2009: Response to noise from modern wind farms in
the Netherlands
Kamperman, GW. and James, RR, 2008: The “How to” guide to siting wind turbines to prevent
health risks from sound

Milieu, 2010: ’Inventory of Potential Measures for a Better Control of Environmental Noise’, DG
Environment of the European Commission
Minnesota Department of Health, 2009: Public Health Impacts of Wind Farms
Ministry of the Environment, 2008: Noise Guidelines for Wind Farms, Interpretation for
Applying MOE NPC Publications to Wind Power Generation Facilities
Noise-con, 2008: Simple guidelines for siting wind turbines to prevent health risks
Noise quest, Aviation Noise Information & Resources, 2010:
http://www.noisequest.psu.edu/pmwiki.php?n=Main.HomePage
Norton, M.P. and Karczub, D.G.: Fundamentals of Noise and Vibration Analysis for Engineers,
Second Edition, 2003
Pedersen, Eja; Halmstad, Högskolan I (2003): ‘Noise annoyance from wind turbines: a
review’. Naturvårdsverket, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm
Renewable Energy Research Laboratory, 2006: Wind Turbine Acoustic Noise
Report to Congressional Requesters, 2005: Wind Power – Impacts on Wildlife and Government
Responsibilities for Regulating Development and Protecting Wildlife
SANS 10103:2008. ‘The measurement and rating of environmental noise with respect to
annoyance and to speech communication’.
SANS 10210:2004. ‘Calculating and predicting road traffic noise’.
SANS 10328:2008. ‘Methods for environmental noise impact assessments’.
SANS 10357:2004 The calculation of sound propagation by the Concave method’.
USEPA, 1971: Effects of Noise on Wildlife and other animals
Van den Berg, G.P., 2003. ‘Effects of the wind profile at night on wind turbine sound’. Journal
of Sound and Vibration.
Van den Berg, G.P., 2004. ‘Do wind turbines produce significant low frequency sound levels?’.
11th International Meeting on Low Frequency Noise and Vibration and its Control
Van den Berg G.P., 2011. ‘Health based guidelines for wind turbine noise in the Netherlands:
Fourth International Meeting on Wind Turbine Noise’.
Vestas, 2010: ‘1/1 Octaves According to the General Specification – V90-1.8/2.0 MW’.
Denmark

Windtest, Kaiser-Wilhelm-Koog GmbH, 2005: ‘Report of acoustic emission of a wind turbine
generator system of the Type V90-3MW, Mode 0 near Bökingharde (Germany), Report WT
4224/05’
Whitford, Jacques, 2008: Model Wind Turbine By-laws and Best Practices for Nova Scotia
Municipalities
World Health Organization, 2009: Night Noise Guidelines for Europe
World Health Organization, 1999: Protection of the Human Environment; Guidelines for
Community Noise
Visual Study
Chief Director of Surveys and Mapping, varying dates. 1:50 000 Topo-cadastral maps and
digital data.
CSIR/ARC, 2000. National Land-cover Database 2000 (NLC 2000)
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, 2001. Environmental Potential Atlas for the
Western Cape Province (ENPAT Western Cape).
Mucina, L. and Rutherford, M.C. (eds). 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Strelitzia 19.
National Botanical Institute (NBI), 2004. Vegetation Map of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland (Unpublished Beta Version 3.0)
Oberholzer, B. (2005). Guideline for involving visual and aesthetic specialists in EIA
processes: Edition 1.
Scenic Landscape Architecture (2006). Cullerin Range Wind Farm; Visual Impact Assessment.
Unpublished Report.
Social Study
Growth Potential of Towns in the Western Cape (2004);

Guideline for the Management of Development on Mountains, Hills and Ridges in the Western
Cape (2002);
Provincial Government Western Cape: Department of Environmental Affairs and
Development Planning (2009). Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework.
Provincial Government Western Cape: Department of Environmental Affairs and
Development Planning (2008). Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (Final Draft);
Provincial Government Western Cape: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development
Planning (2008). White Paper on Sustainable Energy for the Western Cape – Final Draft.
Provincial Government Western Cape: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development
Planning (2007). Sustainable Energy Strategy and Programme of Action for the Western Cape.
Provincial Government Western Cape: Provincial Treasury (2006). Socio-economic profile:
West Coast District Municipality.
Republic of South Africa (2008). National Energy Act, Act nr. 34 of 2008.
Republic of South Africa (2003). White Paper on Renewable Energy.
Swartland Integrated Development Plan (2007/2011) and review (2011/2012);
Western Cape Amended Zoning Scheme Regulations for the establishment of Commercial
Renewable Energy Facilities (2011);
West Coast District Municipality (2010). West Coast District Municipality Integrated
Development Plan 2010-2014.
Western Cape Amended Zoning Scheme Regulations for the establishment of Commercial
Renewable Energy Facilities (2011);
www.capegaetway.gov.za (Municipal profile information).
www.demarcation.org.za (Census 2001 data).
Google Earth 2010

Environmental Impact Assessment Process Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report Proposed ... PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Impact Assessment Process Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report Proposed ... PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

FINAL EIA REPORT

DEA Reference : 12/12/20/2200

Title : Environmental Impact Assessment Process

Authors : Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd

Sub-consultants : Simon Todd of Simon Todd Consulting

Project Developer : IE Moorreesburg Wind (Pty) Ltd

Report Status : Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Submission Date : June 2015

When used as a reference this report should be cited as: Savannah

PURPOSE OF THE EIA REPORT

The release of a draft EIA Report provided stakeholders with an opportunity to

The following infrastructure is associated with the proposed facility:

» Up to 40 wind turbines (depending on the alterative selected for

Purpose of the Report Page ii

 Option 2: An overhead power line (66kV) likely to be connected to the

INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE EIA REPORT AS PER

NEMA REGULATIONS 543, SECTION 28 CROSS REFERENCE IN

Purpose of the Report Page iii

NEMA REGULATIONS 543, SECTION 28 CROSS REFERENCE IN

(iii) a list of all persons or organisations that were identified Appendix C

(iv) a summary of the issues raised by interested and Appendix E

Purpose of the Report Page iv

INVITATION TO COMMENT ON THE DRAFT EIA REPORT

Members of the public, local communities and stakeholders were invited to

» West Coast District Municipality foyer,

Purpose of the Report Page v

SUMMARY » Farm no. 1066 – Portion 0

or 132kV via a 3.5km 66kV » Chapter 2 provides the project

Summary Page vii

potential environmental impacts and » Identify and recommend

Summary Page viii

for the management of potential for the recommendations of this

in width) linking the wind approval prior to commencing

starts on the possible types of » Applications for all other relevant

Table of Contents Page xii

PURPOSE OF THE EIA REPORT ................................................................... II

INVITATION TO COMMENT ON THE DRAFT EIA REPORT ............................. V

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................. XIII

DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY ..........................................................XIX

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................ 23

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................... 24

1.1. PROJECT OVERVIEW ............................................................................ 25

CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................... 31

2.1 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................. 31

CHAPTER 3 STRATEGIC CONTEXT FOR ENERGY PLANNING .................... 44

3.1. STRATEGIC ELECTRICITY PLANNING IN SOUTH AFRICA .................................... 44

CHAPTER 4 WIND ENERGY AS A POWER GENERATION OPTION ............. 50

Table of Contents Page xiii

4.2 WHAT IS A WIND TURBINE AND HOW DOES IT WORK .................................... 54

CHAPTER 5 APROACH TO UNDERTAKING THE EIA PROCESS .................. 66

5.1. RELEVANT LISTED ACTIVITIES ................................................................ 66

CHAPTER 6 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................. 98

6.1 REGIONAL SETTING AND LOCATION OF THE STUDY AREA ................................. 98

Table of Contents Page xiv

6.7 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS....................................................................... 102

CHAPTER 7 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS: .................................................. 118

7.1.1 QUANTIFICATION OF AREAS OF DISTURBANCE ON THE SITE ............................ 121

Table of Contents Page xv

7.6.1 Relevant Noise Receptors ......................................................... 165

CHAPTER 8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................................... 199

8.1. APPROACH TAKEN TO ASSESS CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................... 199