Supplementary Air and Noise Assessment Report - Jervois ...

Supplementary Air and Noise Assessment Report - Jervois Base Metal Project

Nitro Solutions

Date of Issue: 8 July 2019

Prepared by:Air Noise Environment

ABN: 13 081 834 513

This document has been prepared and issued by Air Noise Environment Pty Ltd in accordance with

our Quality Assurance procedures. Authorship, copyright details and legal provisions relating to this

document are provided on the following page. Should you have any queries regarding the contents

of this document, please contact your nearest Air Noise Environment office:

Brisbane Office

A: Unit 3, 4 Tombo Street,

Capalaba, QLD 4157

T: +61 7 3245 7808

E: [email protected]

Sydney Office

A: Level 6, 69 Reservoir Street

Surry Hills, NSW 2010

T: +61 2 8217 0706

E: nsw @ane.com.au

Page 2 of 23 Nitro Solutions- Supplementary Air and Noise Assessment Report - Jervois Base Metal Project

/Network/Projects/4991.1/Reporting/4991.1report02.2.odt

mailto:[email protected]



DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET

Document Details

Project Reference: 4991.1report02.2.odt

Document Title: Supplementary Air and Noise Assessment Report - Jervois Base Metal Project

Client: Nitro Solutions

Document Reference: /Network/Projects/4991.1/Reporting/4991.1report02.2.odt

Revision History

Version: Issue Date: Author: Description: Approved by:

00 8/4/19 Samuel Wong Internal Draft -

01 9/4/19 Samuel Wong Draft

02 3/6/19 Samuel Wong Final

Revision: Issue Date: Author: Details of Revision:

02.1 24/6/19 Samuel Wong Minor text updates

02.2 8/7/19 Samuel Wong Update to GHG calculations

02.3

Copyright:

Air Noise Environment retains ownership of the copyright to all reports, drawings, designs, plans, figures and other workproduced by Air Noise Environment Pty Ltd during the course of fulfilling a commission. The client named on the cover of thisdocument shall have a licence to use such documents and materials for the purpose of the subject commission provided theyare reproduced in full or, alternatively, in part with due acknowledgement to Air Noise Environment. Third parties must notreproduce this document, in part or in full, without obtaining the prior permission of Air Noise Environment Pty Ltd.

Disclaimer:

This document has been prepared with all due care and attention by professional environmental practitioners according toaccepted practices and techniques. This document is issued in confidence and is relevant only to the issues pertinent to thesubject matter contained herein. Air Noise Environment Pty Ltd holds no responsibility for misapplication or misinterpretationby third parties of the contents of this document. If the revision history does not state that a Final version of the documenthas been issued, then it remains a draft. Draft versions of this document should not be relied upon for any purpose by theclient, regulatory agencies or other interested parties.

Where site inspections, testing or fieldwork have taken place, the report is based on the information made available by theclient or their nominees during the visit, visual observations and any subsequent discussions with regulatory authorities. It isfurther assumed that normal activities were being undertaken at the site on the day of the site visit(s).

The validity and comprehensiveness of supplied information has not been independently verified and, for the purposes of thisreport, it is assumed that the information provided to Air Noise Environment Pty Ltd for the purposes of this project is bothcomplete and accurate.



Table of Contents1 Introduction 6

1.1 Background 6

1.2 This Report 6

2 Proposed Pipeline and Borefields 7

2.1 Site Location 7

2.2 Description of Operations 8

3 Noise Assessment 9

3.1 Overview 9

3.2 Noise Prediction Methodology 9

3.3 Noise Predictions 10

4 Air Quality Assessment 11

4.1 Overview 11

4.2 Air Dispersion Prediction Methodology 11

4.3 Air Emissions Data 11

4.3.1 Construction 11

4.3.2 Operations 13

4.4 Predicted Air Quality Results 14

5 Deposited Dust Monitoring Locations 15

6 Greenhouse Gas Assessment 17

6.1 Overview 17

6.2 Emission Factors 17

6.3 Revised Emissions Inventory 17

7 Conclusion 19

Appendix A - Acoustic Glossary 20

Appendix B - Air Quality Glossary 22

Index of TablesTable 3.1 - Noise Predictions 10

Table 4.1 - Pipeline Construction - Emission Factors 12

Table 4.2 - Pipeline Construction - Estimated Emission Rates (g/s) 13

Table 4.3 - Operational - Estimated Emission Rates (g/s) 14

Table 4.4 - Air Quality Predictions - Construction 14

Table 4.5 - Air Quality Predictions - Operations 14

Table 6.1 - Construction - Scope 1 Emissions 17



Table 6.2 - Operations - Scope 1 Emissions 18

Index of FiguresFigure 2.1 - Proposed Water Pipeline and Borefield Facilities, and Nearest Sensitive Receptors 7

Figure 5.1 - Proposed and Recommend Dust Sampling Locations 16



1 Introduction

1.1 BackgroundNitro Solutions Pty Ltd previously commissioned Air Noise Environment Pty Ltd on behalf of KGL

Resources Limited to undertake an air quality and noise assessment for the proposed Jervois Base

Metal Project. The assessment report, completed in September 20181, formed part of the

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) submissions for the Project.

The assessment was subsequently reviewed by various stakeholders and further information was

requested, as follows:

⚫ Undertake an air quality and noise assessment for the proposed borefield and pipeline to

determine the potential impacts on nearby sensitive receptors during construction and

operations;

⚫ Demonstrate the suitability of the locations of the two air monitoring gauge sites and why

monitoring of dust emissions of the southern mining activities is not required;

⚫ Include quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from land clearing.

This supplementary report addresses the above information request items.

1.2 This ReportThis report presents the methodology, results and findings of the additional assessment tasks

undertaken for the proposed Jervois Base Metal Project. Where relevant, reference to the original

assessment report has been made (e.g. assessment criteria).

Sections 2 to 4 address the air and noise assessment of the proposed borefields and pipeline

facilities. Sections 5 and 6 present additional information with regards to the deposited dust

sampling locations and greenhouse gas emissions from land clearing.

Glossaries of Terms are provided in Appendices A and B to assist the reader.

1 Air Noise Environment, Air and Noise Assessment – Jervois Base Metal Project, 17 September 2018, Ref: 4991report2.3.pdf.



2 Proposed Pipeline and Borefields

2.1 Site LocationThe proposed pipeline for the Jervois Base Metal Project extends north and north-west of the mine

site. Two borefields are proposed (western and eastern). The nearest sensitive receptors to this

component of Project site includes the following:

⚫ Lucy Creek Homestead – 2.5 km north of the nearest borefield and pipeline section;

⚫ Maperte Community (unoccupied for a number of years) – 4.4 km east of the nearest pipeline

section and 10.4 km south-east of the nearest borefield.

Figure 2.1 presents the proposed pipeline and borefield locations and nearest sensitive receptors.

Figure 2.1 - Proposed Water Pipeline and Borefield Facilities, and Nearest Sensitive Receptors



2.2 Description of OperationsThe pipeline infrastructure will extract and transfer water to the main site. The pipeline will be

approximately 48 km in length and 6 well head sites are proposed across the two borefield sites

(located along the northern section of the pipeline). The western borefield will include 4 well heads,

while the eastern borefield will include 2 well heads. At any given time, 3 out of 6 well heads will be

in operation. It is noted that drilling will occur at 10 sites, however, only 6 sites will be used as

production bores.

The wells will be fitted with 150 mm downhole pumps with 18 kW motors. The wells will be powered

by diesel generators each with a solar capacity (estimated to provide 25% power). No compressor

facilities are required.



3 Noise Assessment

3.1 OverviewAn assessment of noise during construction and operation of the pipeline and wellhead infrastructure

has been undertaken.

Typically, the construction process for the pipeline involves the following stages:

⚫ clearing the ROW (Right of Way);

⚫ preparing the pipeline (e.g. stringing, bending, mainline welding);

⚫ excavating a trench for the pipeline;

⚫ lowering the pipeline;

⚫ backfilling; and

⚫ hydrotesting.

Noise during construction is associated with operation of various heavy machinery. During operation

of each well head, the main noise source is the well head pump and diesel generator. The following

section presents noise predictions for construction and operational scenarios.

3.2 Noise Prediction MethodologyFor the purposes of predicting impacts associated with construction noise on nearby sensitive

receivers, noise predictions have been undertaken using the simplified method outlined in ISO

Standard 9613-2 (1996) Acoustics - Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors. The simplified

method is based on noise propagation calculations using total A-weighted sound power levels (as

opposed to detailed 1/1 octave band data). Atmospheric attenuation has been based on a 1.9 dB/km

rate for the 500 Hz frequency (as recommended in ISO 9613) and ground attenuation has been

based on Equation 10 of the standard.

Two prediction scenarios have been considered:

⚫ Well head operations:

⚫ Sound power level of 95 dB(A) for 18 kW well head pump (based on predictive source noise

equation for an 18 kW pump);

⚫ Sound power level of 97 dB(A) for 25 kVa diesel generator (based on representative of noise

source data for 25 kVa generator) ;

⚫ Assumed 3 well heads operating simultaneously;

⚫ Minimum separation distance of 2,500 m for the Lucy Creek Homestead and 10,400 m for

the Maperte Community.



⚫ Construction scenario:

⚫ Sound power level of 114 dB(A) for a typical pipeline construction scenario involving a

number of heavy machinery.

⚫ Minimum separation distance of 2,500 m for the Lucy Creek Homestead and 4,400 m for the

Maperte Community.

3.3 Noise PredictionsTable 3.1 presents predicted noise levels during operation and construction of the pipeline and well

heads. The assessment noise criteria is defined in the original air and noise assessment report (refer

to Section 4.1 of the report).

The results of the predictions indicate compliance with the relevant noise criteria by a significant

margin. The low noise levels at the nearest receptors are due to the very large separations distances

from the proposed infrastructure (at least 2.5 km).

Table 3.1 - Noise Predictions

Sensitive Receptor

Predicted LAeq Noise Levels dB(A)

Pump OperationsWorst-case Construction

Activity

Lucy Creek Homestead 18 29

Maperte Community < 10 20

Criteria 30 35



4 Air Quality Assessment

4.1 OverviewAn assessment of air emissions during construction and operation of the pipeline and wellhead

infrastructure has been undertaken.

During construction, potential air quality impacts are primarily associated with particulates, which

occurs during earthwork construction stages (e.g. excavation, backfilling). Earthworks and truck

movements over unpaved surfaces result in the disturbance of surface material, which may be

dispersed towards sensitive receptors during downwind conditions. Overall, there are only a limited

number of construction stages involving intensive earthwork activities. These stages include clearing

of ROW, trenching and backfilling. The key air quality indicators for the above mentioned activities

are Total Suspended Particulates, PM10 (particulate matter less than 10 microns) and PM2.5

(particulate matter less than 2.5 microns).

During operations, the main potential air emission source is a diesel generator at each well head.

Diesel generators emit combustion products, including nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO)

and particulates (PM10 and PM2.5).

The following sections present air quality predictions for construction and operational scenarios.

4.2 Air Dispersion Prediction MethodologyAir quality predictions have been undertaken using first principle Gaussian prediction equations

assuming the following:

⚫ source-to-receiver wind speed of 3 m/s;

⚫ Briggs dispersion coefficients for F Class stability conditions in a rural area;

⚫ all emissions modelled via a single point source; and

⚫ Source height of 2.0 m.

Emissions data has been estimated from available emission factor documentation and representative

equipment specifications as discussed in Section 4.3.

4.3 Air Emissions Data

4.3.1 Construction

As discussed, potential air quality impacts during construction primarily relate to particulate

emissions during earthwork construction stages (e.g. excavation, backfilling). For the purpose of the

assessment, particulate emissions from trenching have been considered.

In order to predict emission rates for trenching activity, a review of available published literature



most relevant to the proposed construction has been completed. The following documents have

been utilised to estimate emissions:

1. AP 42 (5th Edition), Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Vol. 1 Stationary Point and

Area Sources, Chapter 13.2.2, Unpaved Roads (November 2006).

2. National Pollution Inventory, Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Mining, Version 3.1

(January 2012).

Table 4.1 presents emission factors sourced from the above literature.

Table 4.1 - Pipeline Construction - Emission Factors

No. Activity/Source Units TSP PM10 PM2.5

F1 Trenching kg/Mg 0.00276 0.00131 0.00020

F2 Wind erosion over exposed areas kg/m2/hr 0.00004 0.00002 0.000003

F3 On-site truck routes g/VKT 3577 1056 106

Emission Factor F1 has been derived using Equation 16 and 17 from the NPI Mining Manual.

Equations 16 and 17 calculates emissions from material handling as follows:

⚫ Emission Factor (kg/T) = k x S1.2 / M1.3

⚫ k = 0.26 and 0.34 for TSP and PM10

⚫ S = silt content (%)

⚫ M = material moisture content (%).

Silt and moisture contents of 10% and 1% respectively have been adopted for the purpose of the

assessment. The silt content is based on the default values typical of Australian mines identified in

the NPI Mining Manual. A 1% moisture content for soil is considered conservative.

The F2 wind erosion emission factor for exposed trenching areas has been based on the values

presented in Section 1.1.17 of the NPI Mining Manual. This NPI document presents wind erosion

emission factors associated with coal mines and are likely to be conservative when applied to a

general excavation area.

Emission Factor F3 for haul routes has been derived using Equation 1a from the US EPA AP 42

Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (Chapter 13.2.2, Unpaved Roads). Equation 1a is as

follows:

⚫ Emission Factor (g/VKT) = 281.9 x k x (s/12)a x (W/3)b

⚫ k = 4.9 and 1.5 for particle sizes less than 30 microns and 10 microns

⚫ a = 0.7 and 0.9 for particle sizes less than 30 microns and 10 microns

⚫ b = 0.45



⚫ s = silt content (%)

⚫ W = vehicle weight (tons)

A silt content of 10.0 % has been adopted which is based on the default value identified in the NPI

Mining Manual and is considered typical of an unpaved road. A truck weight of 30 tonnes has been

adopted.

In order to derive emission rates using the above emission factors, the following information has

been considered:

⚫ hourly trench material excavation rate of 337.5 tonnes per hour, based on the following:

⚫ volume of material trenched per day of 2250 m3 (assumes 1.5 x 1.5 m trench x 1000 m

length);

⚫ soil density of 1,500 kg/m3;

⚫ typical construction day (7 am to 5 pm).

⚫ exposed excavation area of 20,000 m2 (assume 20 m Right of Way x 1000 m section);

⚫ haul route vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) of 1.0 km/h – assumes at least one truck travels the

length of the pipeline construction section every hour.

The modelling accounts for a typical 10-hour construction day and 1,000 m per day construction

rate. Table 4.2 presents the estimated emission rates adopted in the air dispersion modelling.

Table 4.2 - Pipeline Construction - Estimated Emission Rates (g/s)

Activity/SourceFactor

ValueFactor Unit TSP PM10 PM2.5

Excavation at trench 337.5 tonnes/hr 0.259 0.122 0.019

Wind erosion over exposed areas 20,000 m2 0.222 0.111 0.017

Haul truck on unpaved surface 1.0 VKT/hr 0.994 0.293 0.029

Total 1.475 0.527 0.0647

4.3.2 Operations

Well pumps are expected to be operated using diesel generators. It is assumed that the US EPA

Tier 4 non-road diesel emissions standard (or equivalent) would be applicable, which was introduced

in 2008 (for engines less between 19 kW and 37 kW).



Table 4.3 - Operational - Estimated Emission Rates (g/s)

PollutantDiesel Pump Emission Factor (g/

kWh)Adopted Emission Rate (g/s)a

CO 5.5 0.0382

NOx 7.5 0.0521

Total PM 0.3 0.0021

4.4 Predicted Air Quality ResultsTables 4.4 and 4.5 present predicted air quality results for construction and operational scenarios.

The results of the calculations confirm that concentrations are significantly below the relevant

ambient air quality criteria at the nearest sensitive receptors. Background concentrations have not

been included in the calculations. However, compliance is still predicted even when considering

background concentrations for the Darwin area (the nearest ambient monitoring stations to site), as

presented in Section 3.2 of the original assessment. It is also noted that 1-hour average predictions

have been compared against long-term criteria (8-hour, 24-hour and annual averages) as a

conservative approach.

Table 4.4 - Air Quality Predictions - Construction

PollutantHighest Predicted Sensitive

Receptor Concentrations (mg/m3) – 1 hour averages

AverageTime Criteria

PM10 27.2 24 hour 50

PM2.5 3.3 24 hour 25

Table 4.5 - Air Quality Predictions - Operations

PollutantHighest Predicted Sensitive

Receptor Concentration (mg/m3)– 1 hour averages

AverageTime Criteria

TSP 0.11 Annual 90

PM10

0.11 24 hour 50

0.11 Annual 25

PM2.5

0.11 24 hour 25

0.11 Annual 8

CO 1.97 8 hour 11,000

NO2

2.69 1 hour 250

2.69 Annual 62



5 Deposited Dust Monitoring LocationsThe two deposited dust sampling locations identified in the EIS are presented in Figure 5.1 (D1 and

D2). It is understood that deposited dust sampling has been undertaken at these locations and

sampling will recommence during construction of the mine. The sampling locations are noted to be

on the western and eastern side of the mine and would provide an indication of dust levels for mining

operations near the mine camp facilities (east position, D1) and near the processing plant and

Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) (west position, D2).

In addition to these sampling positions, it is recommended that future sampling is also completed at

two additional locations to the north and south of the mine site operations (Positions D3 and D4) to

quantify deposited dust levels near the topsoil and waste stockpiles. Position D2 and D4 are located

north-west of operations as dust is most likely to be dispersed in this direction, due to the prevailing

south-easterlies in the project area (see Jervois wind rose data in Section 3.4 of the original air and

noise assessment).

It is noted that the nearest off-site sensitive receptors are at a significant distance from the mining

operations (at least 16 km away). Therefore, the purpose of the dust sampling is to provide

information in relation to on-site dust levels and the effectiveness of dust emission controls being

implemented on site.

All deposited dust sampling shall be undertaken in accordance with the latest version of AS/NZS

3580.10.1 - Methods for sampling and analysis of ambient air - Determination of particulate matter -

Deposited matter - Gravimetric method.

Figure 5.1 presents the existing (D1 and D2) and recommended additional (D3 and D4) dust

sampling locations.



Figure 5.1 - Proposed and Recommend Dust Sampling Locations



6 Greenhouse Gas Assessment

6.1 OverviewThis section provides an updated assessment of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the

Project. The updated assessment considers the following:

⚫ land clearing activity at the mine site and along the pipeline route; and

⚫ the proposal to utilise 20-30% solar power (the source of solar power will be in the form of on-

site photovolatic cells).

The following sections discuss the revised calculations in further detail.

6.2 Emission FactorsLand clearing is associated with greenhouse gas emissions through release of carbon dioxide from

decaying plant matter and the reduction in carbon sequestration provided by trees. For the

estimation of emissions associated with land clearing, the Full Carbon Accounting Model (FullCAM)

was utilised. FullCAM evaluates potential carbon stocks for various types of vegetation as defined by

the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS).

Information provided by the proponent indicates that approximately 236 hectares of land clearing

will occur around the mine site to account for the development. Minimal land clearing is required

along the proposed pipeline and borefield, as existing road easements, tracks and previously

disturbed areas will be utilised.

Based on FullCAM2, the carbon stock for the mine site is 4.38 tC/ha. With a disturbed area of 246 ha,

the total carbon stock is 1077 tC. The estimated total carbon to be removed is 3,954 tC (tonnes of

carbon). This value has been factored by 3.67 (CO2:C ratio) to estimate the potential CO2 emitted.

6.3 Revised Emissions InventoryTables 6.1 and 6.2 presents the estimated Scope 1 emissions for construction and annual operations.

Table 6.1 - Construction - Scope 1 Emissions

Stage Total Energy Consumed GJ Total CO2-e (tonnes)

Construction 115,800 8,164

Land Clearing - 3,954

2 Vegetation – Acacia Shrublands as per NVIS database (Version 5.1), coordinates – 136.2553, -22.655.



Table 6.2 - Operations - Scope 1 Emissions

Equipment Total Energy Consumed GJ Total CO2-e (tonnes)

Power Generation (assuming 20%

solar power)324,240 22,859

Other Operational Equipment 613,740 43,269

Lube and Hydraulic Oil 815 11

Total Per Annum 938,795 66,139

Total for Project Life (15 years) 14,081,925 992,085

Based on the estimated emissions presented above, the Project is expected to trigger the NGER

reporting threshold for a single facility of 25 kilotonnes CO2-e (25,000 tonnes CO2-e) of greenhouse

gases and 100,000 MJ of energy consumed. Further analysis indicates that, assuming 20-30% solar

power, results in 8-12% less greenhouse gas emissions.



7 ConclusionThis supplementary report addresses air and noise issues raised in stakeholder comments on the air

and noise assessment submitted with the draft EIS for the Jervois Base Metal Project. The outcomes

of the assessment are summarised below.

Proposed Water Pipeline and Borefield

The proposed water pipeline and well head infrastructure is to be located north of the main mine

site, and runs within 3 km of the nearest sensitive receptor (Lucy Creek Homestead). Noise and air

dispersion predictions have been undertaken for both construction activities and operation of the

well head pumps (using diesel generator). The predictions confirm predicted compliance with the

relevant air quality and noise criteria for the Project.

Proposed Deposited Dust Sampling Locations

The current dust sampling positions are considered appropriate for monitoring dust levels at the

mine camp and at operations around the TSF and processing plant. It is recommended that dust

sampling is also completed at two additional positions to assess dust levels from the topsoil and

waste stockpiles areas to the north and south of the site.

Greenhouse Gas Calculations

Revised greenhouse gas calculations have been undertaken with consideration of land clearing and

the proposed used of solar power (20-30% of total power). The revised calculations show that

greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced by 8-12% by sourcing 20-30% of total from solar sources.



Appendix A - Acoustic Glossary



APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTIC TERMINOLOGY

A-Weighting A response provided by an electronic circuit which modifies sound in such a way

that the resulting level is similar to that perceived by the human ear.

dB (decibel) This is the scale on which sound pressure level is expressed. It is defined as 20

times the logarithm of the ratio between the root-mean-square pressure of the

sound field and the reference pressure (0.00002N/m2).

dB(A) This is a measure of the overall noise level of sound across the audible spectrum

with a frequency weighting (i.e. ‘A’ weighting) to compensate for the varying

sensitivity of the human ear to sound at different frequencies.

Facade Noise Level Refers to a sound pressure level determined at a point close to an acoustically

reflective surface (in addition to the ground). Typically a distance of 1 metre is

used.

Free Field Refers to a sound pressure level determined at a point away from reflective

surfaces other than the ground with no significant contribution due to sound from

other reflective surfaces; generally as measured outside and away from buildings.

Hertz (Hz) A measure of the frequency of sound. It measures the number of pressure peaks

per second passing a point when a pure tone is present.

LAeq

Equivalent Continuous

Sound Level

This is the equivalent steady sound level in dB(A) containing the same acoustic

energy as the actual fluctuating sound level over the given period. For a steady

sound with small fluctuations, its value is close to the average sound pressure level.

LA90,T This is the dB(A) level exceeded 90% of the time, T.

LA10,T This is the dB(A) level exceeded 10% of the time, T.

LA50, T This is the dB(A) level exceeded 50% of the time, T.

LWA The A-weighted sound power level in dB.



Appendix B - Air Quality Glossary



APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY OF AIR QUALITY TERMINOLOGY

Conversion of ppm to

mg/m3

Where R is the ideal gas constant; T, the temperature in Kelvin (273.16

+ T°C); and P, the pressure in mm Hg, the conversion is as follows:

mg m-3 = (P/RT) x Molecular weight x (concentration in ppm)

= P x Molecular weight x (concentration in ppm)

62.4 x (273.2 + T°C)

g/s Grams per second

mg/m3 Milligrams (10-3) per cubic metre.

μg/m3 Micrograms (10-6) per cubic metre.

ppb Parts per billion.

ppm Parts per million.

PM10, PM2.5, PM1 Fine particulate matter with an equivalent aerodynamic diameter of less

than 10, 2.5 or 1 micrometres respectively. Fine particulates are

predominantly sourced from combustion processes. Vehicle emissions

are a key source in urban environments.

50th percentile The value exceeded for 50 % of the time.

NOx Oxides of nitrogen – a suite of gaseous contaminants that are emitted

from road vehicles and other sources. Some of the compounds can react

in the atmosphere and, in the presence of other contaminants, convert

to different compounds (eg, NO to NO2).

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds. These compounds can be both toxic and

odorous.



Date post:	14-Apr-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Supplementary Air and Noise Assessment Report - Jervois ...

Documents