Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report CONTENTS
Transkript
Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report CONTENTS
Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report CONTENTS A. Invitations 1. Invitation tracking table 2. Text of invitations or newspaper ads B. Meeting 1. Program 2. Non-technical summary 3. Participants i. list ii. feedback forms 4. Pictures 5. Outcomes of consultation i. Minutes of the meeting ii. Assessment of comments iii. Revisit sustainable development assessment iv. Summary of alterations based on comments C. Sustainable development matrix 1. Own sustainable development assessment 2. Outcome blind exercise stakeholders 3. Consolidated sustainable development matrix D. Preparation of Stakeholder Feedback Round Annex 1: Participant list Annex 2: Feedback forms Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report SECTION A. A.1. Invitations Invitation tracking table Category Code 1 Governmental 2 Governmental 3 Military 4 Governmental 5 Military 6 Governmental 7 Military 8 Governmental 9 Governmental 10 Governmental 11 Governmental 12 13 Governmental Lawyer 14 Governmental 15 Politician 16 Local headman 17 Local headman 18 Local headman 19 Local headman 20 Local headman 21 Local headman Organisation (if relevant) Governer of Karaburun province appointed by federal government Mayor Head of local armed force. Naval captain Federal prosecutor of Karaburun Head of rural security forces Mayor of Mordugan Head of Police Head of agriculture office (Govt appointed) Chief of Local forestry (Govt appointed) Forest protection Officer Head of Technical Office in Karaburun (under Mayor Office) City Planner Lawyer Environmental protection member Head of AKP in Karaburun (ruling party in Turkey) Headman (Muhtar) of village of Yagla Headman (Muhtar) of village of Yoyla Headman (Muhtar) of village of Comi Hocasi Headman (Muhtar) of village of Comi Hocasi Headman (Muhtar) of village of Comi Hocasi Headman (Muhtar) of village of Comi Hocasi Name of invitee Way of invitatio n post Confirmatio n received? Y/N Y Hamze Serdar Yasa Cemil Camanak Ahmet Celikkol Erkan Demir Ahmet Cakir Ali Ihsan Avci Erdal Cakici Selehattin Aydin Özer Kalabas Faik Cebel post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Tülin Aydin Bahadir Mete Meftun Bulunmaz Ahmet Degirmenci Post Post Y Y Post Y Post Y Yusuf Arici Post Y Ali Tokac Post Y Celalettin Yildirim Bekir Cevik Post Y Post Y Sükrü Sisman Hüseyin Demir Post Y Post Y Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 2 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report 22 Local inhabitant 23 Local inhabitant 24 Local inhabitant 25 Local headman 26 Local headman 27 Local headman 28 Local headman 29 Local headman 30 Local inhabitant 31 Technical 32 Technical 33 Governmental 34 Technical 35 NGO Local person of village of Halktan Local person of village of Halktan Local person of village of Halktan Headman (Muhtar) of village of Kucukhohce Headman (Muhtar) of village of Kugukhahce Headman (Muhtar) of village of Kugukhahce Headman (Muhtar) of village of Kugukhahce Headman (Muhtar) of village of Kugukhahce Local person – village of Yeyla Chamber of environmental engineers Registered office of meteorology in Izmir Ministry of Environment and Forestry Chamber of Turkish Engineers and Architects Society to protect nature 36 37 NGO NGO Society to protect nature WWF Turkey 38 NGO 39 NGO The Turkish foundation for combating soil erosion Greenpeace Akdeniz Hamza Tokac Zafer Tokac Mahmet Sarica Mehmet Kayali Ahmet Karaca Hüseysin Ak Ömer Civelek Mustafa Albayrak Mustafa Senbahar Neslihan Yazici Gul Sirin Merkez Ofisi Aysen Kaya Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post Y Post N Post N Post N Post N Post N Post Post N N Post N Post N 3 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 4 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report A. 2. Invitation text The following invitation letter was sent to all attendees: Dear ladies and gentlemen, LODOS ELEKTRIK ÜRETIM A. Ş., a fully owned affiliate of ALTO HOLDİNG A.Ş., would like to invite you to take part in a public consultation meeting concerning the Karaburun wind farm project, which our company is currently planning. The project aims at producing electricity from climate friendly and ecologically sound domestic sources. A more detailed description is provided below. The meeting will take place on Tuesday, 18th September 2008 at 15:00 at Karaburun Municipality Meeting Hall. The purpose of the meeting is to present our project to the public and to give you and everyone interested the opportunity to tell us any considerations or concerns on our project activity with respect to its ecologic, social and economic effects. Generating electricity from wind resources contributes to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, we want to generate so-called “carbon credits” for our project. To assure a high quality of the carbon credits we chose to apply the so-called Gold Standard for our project. This standard was developed by international environmental and development NGOs and focuses on a significant positive effect of climate protection projects on sustainable development in the host country. If you wish to give comments but cannot attend the meeting, you may contact us by calling us, sending an e-mail, a fax or a letter. The respective contact data is provided below. If you would like to come to the meeting, please confirm your attendance. We would be grateful for any comment you would like to make! Yours sincerely, LODOS ELEKTRIK ÜRETIM A. Ş. Mustafa Ilhan Bankalar Yanikapi Tenha Sk. Ucarlar Han. No. 10 34420 Karaköy-Istanbul E-mail: Tel.: Fax: mustafailhan@lodoselektrik.com.tr +90 212 2568-194 +90 212 2568-199 The following invitation posted on the Karaburun village public hall wall: Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 5 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Newspaper announcement The following invitation appeared on two Turkish newspapers. It was published in the Yeni Asır newspaper on the 2nd of September 2008 and in the Yeni Cesme newspaper on the 3rd September 2008. Invitation LODOS ELEKTRIK ÜRETIM A. Ş. invites all interested people to join us in a meeting which will take place on Thursday, 18th September 2008, at 15:00 at the Karaburun Municipality meeting hall to discuss the Karaburun wind farm project which we are currently planning. The purpose of the meeting is to give you the opportunity to get information about our project and give comments or tell us your concerns, as the case may be. For further questions please call 0212-2568194. We welcome your attendance LODOS ELEKTRIK ÜRETIM A. Ş. Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 6 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Yeni Asir Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 7 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Yeni Cesme Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 8 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report SECTION B. Meeting B. 1. Agenda of the meeting A. Opening of the meeting B. Explanation of the project C. Questions for clarification about project explanation D. Sustainable development assessment E. Discussion on monitoring sustainable development F. Closure of the meeting B. 2. Non-technical summary LODOS ELEKTRIK ÜRETIM A. Ş., a fully owned affiliate of ALTO HOLDİNG A.Ş., intends to erect and operate a wind farm in the area Yaylaköy village in Karaburun district in the province of Izmir in Turkey. The wind farm shall consist of 60 wind turbines of the type Enercon E-82 with a capacity of 2 MW each, amounting to a total capacity of 120 MW and a projected annual generation of approximately 324 GWh/a. The project location is very remote with only very small villages in the surrounding. The area is located in the north of the Karaburun peninsula and is characterised mainly as mountain land with only scarce vegetation of ilex and pine forest. Erection of the wind farm is scheduled to start in July 2010. The first electricity will be fedin to the Turkish grid in the same year. It is expected that 2012 will be the first year in which the above mentioned expected annual generation is fully reached. The power production license for the project has been obtained from the Energy Market Regulatory Authority (EMRA or EPDK in Turkish) in May 2008. Also, by decision of the Turkish Ministry of Environment and Forestry, the Karaburun wind farm project was released from the duty to perform an Environmental Impact Assessment. The project significantly contributes to the further dissemination of renewable energy resources in Turkey. This is important given the fact that notwithstanding Turkey’s very favourable wind conditions, this power source still represents a negligible fraction of total generation. Contribution to sustainable development Building a wind farm will contribute to a sustainable expansion path of the Turkish energy system, as it serves the steadily growing electricity demand in an environmentally suitable way. The project will contribute to dissemination of state-of-the-art new renewable energy technology. This helps strengthening those pillars of Turkish energy supply that are based on ecologically sound and domestically sourced technology. Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 9 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report No significant negative ecological impacts can be expected from the proposed project activity. Rather, there will be essential positive effects, as highly polluting electricity generation technologies will be displaced by the project. This refers not only to greenhouse gases but also to other local air pollutants (such us SO2, NOx etc). As for social impacts, significant positive employment effects are expected especially during the construction and installation period, not only directly in terms of temporary construction worker employment, but as well indirectly. In fact, material supplies such as foundations, cables and access roads will be locally sourced so that the project will also contribute to employment of external supplier companies. Operation and maintenance of the wind farm will have positive job effects, too. The experiences with operating a wind farm in Turkey will help building capacity and know-how on state-of-the-art renewable energy technology. B. 3. Participants i. List of participants The complete and original list in Turkish language is attached in Annex 1. Find below the English translation of the blank form which was distributed during the meeting. Participant list stakeholder consultation for Karaburun wind farm project Date and time: Thursday, 18th September 2008, 15:00 Location: Belediye Toplanti Salonu, Karaburun village, Izmir province Please see Annex 1 for the full list. Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 10 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Comments accompanying Annex 1 Instead of translating every single entry to the participant list, a short summary of the attendants list is provided below in order to show the tyoe of the audience which attended the meeting. Altogether 45 people attended the meeting, of which 9 are women. Amongst the attendants were a) local representatives of political parties AK and CHP b) local press representatives c) local villagers from Tayakadin, Karaburun, and Ödemis d) representatives of Karaburun mayoralty e) headman of Yaylaköy village and mayor of Karaburun Unfortunately, none of the invited representatives of local environmental organisations were present, because of unavailability of dedicated personnel and lack of involvement of local NGOs in carbon credit generating projects. Nevertheless, we consider the number of attendants as a sign of intense public interest in the project and think that due to the high participation of private local inhabitants the meeting can be considered as very representative. ii. Evaluation forms The table below represents the general template of the evaluation form which was handed out to each of the attendants during the meeting. Two filled evaluation forms in Turkish language are attached as Annex 2 in order to provide an example of the answers that were received. A complete summary of the comments received via these forms is shown and assessed in section B.5.ii. below. Name What is your impression of the meeting? What do you like about the project? What do you not like about the project? Signature B. 4. Pictures Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 11 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 12 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report B. 5. Outcome of consultation i. Minutes of the meeting The meeting started almost in time at 15:09. The mayor of Karaburun opened the meeting and introduced Mr. Mustafa Ilhan, who is responsible at LODOS for the project. Mr. Ilhan welcomed the audience and expressed the wish to get information and comments from the attendants to improve the planned project activity. He then introduced Mr. Mustafa Burc, a consultant for LODOS on this project who was going to conduct the meeting together with Mr. Ilhan. Several attendants shortly introduced themselves. After a short explanation of the project design based on the non technical summary the attendants were asked for comments. The attendants then asked questions and initiated an intensive discussion of the project. Questions on general project design: Technical questions focused on the actual area used by the project, on the data sources for the wind yield estimation, and on the connection to transmission lines. The area covered by the project is about 20 cadastres. An explanation of the procedure of the wind measurements with measurement masts on three different locations and in different heights (10m, 20m, 30m) was given. Connection point will be Urla, where the project will be connected to the Çeşme-Alaçatı-Uzundere transmission line. High voltage overhead transmission lines (380kV) from the project will be installed at a height of 12 meters. The wish to connect Karaburun town directly to the project was expressed by the mayor. However, this very likely to be impossible, as connection issues are based on the decision of the grid operator and the local energy provider. The influence of the project developer is minimal. Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 13 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Environmental questions: Several attendants expressed some concerns about impairment of landscape, disturbances for animals and birds, effects on animal husbandry, and tree logging. Some of these concerns were based on experiences with other projects, like e.g. olive tree logging at a pond project at Eğlenhoca. All these comments are listed, assessed, and answered to in detail in section B.5.ii. below. Further questions: One attendant mentioned a planned barrage project in the area and asked if it interfered with the wind farm project, but the mayor of Karaburun could clarify, that there is no mutual influence between the projects and the barrage project will be outside the wind farm project’s boundaries. As there was a mentioning of the relatively high amount of temporary local demand for workers during the construction phase of the project while most of the young people stemming from Karaburun peninsula have moved to Izmir, the mayor of Karaburun offered to initiate a cooperation between the mayoralty, the Yaylaköy village head office and Lodos for training local young people to enable them to work for the project. During the meeting, blank forms of the sustainability matrix were distributed to the attendants. Indicators were shortly explained and discussed. The attendants then documented their assessment by scoring each indicator on the forms. At the end of the meeting, the evaluation forms were filled in by several attendants. Mustafa Ilhan thanked everyone for coming and for giving comments and closed the meeting at 17:30. ii. Assessment of comments Stakeholder Comment Assessment Oral comments during the meeting The Karaburun mayoralty This comment is to be should get a share of the taken seriously, as the revenues obtained by the claim of the local administration to some project shares of the revenue of a project is based on social and distributional issues. Trees should be planted around the project site to This comment is very important for the Response to comment All land use rights for the project have already been paid for by the project developer. This comment will be considered by the board of Alto Holding. LODOS has already considered spending a certain amount of money to support the Karaburun municipality football team. LODOS has already bought 20 pair of football shoes (1.620,40 YTL) for the players The wind farm layout is very carefully prepared in terms of Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 14 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report offset logging occurring due to the project project as it is relevant for its sustainability effects. There is a danger that the whole landscape will be filled with wind turbines This comment addresses the landscape effects which are relevant part of the ecological sustainability of the project. Precautions should be taken to prevent negative effects on animal husbandry This is a very important concern, as it is highly relevant for social sustainability of the project. There is a danger that animals and birds could be affected This concern is very important and highly relevant for ecologic sustainability. ecological criteria and especially with respect to logging of trees. Most of the turbines will be located on ridges which are mostly not covered by any vegetation. Where vegetation exists, a special type of tree grows there called maki and very few of these tree will be cut. This is because the overall area covered by the turbines is 1200 m2 (20m2 for each foundation times 60 turbines) and turbines will not be fenced (hence minimising the area occupied by turbines). Nevertheless, the logging of trees will be carefully monitored during the construction phase, so that suitable offset actions are undertaken. For example olive tree planting along the turbine road sides and around the wind farm control building will be considered. As the project area is very remote and the project is very far away from any settlement on the peninsula, serious negative effect in terms of visibility of the turbines and of disturbance effects to the landscape are not expected. As the landscape is anyway very mountainous, the visual effect will even be less. Wind farm layout has been designed very carefully with respect to the issue of animal husbandry. No grassland nor agricultural land will be affected by the project. When preparing the application for relief from the duty to perform an EIA, the project area was carefully Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 15 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report examined by the project developer in terms of ecological impacts. As turbines are of 2 MW each and located in a wide area there is much less risk of collision with birds compared to smaller turbines very next to each other. Comments from the evaluation forms The acceptance of the Advantages for the village are not really clear project by the local community is an to understand important indicator for social sustainability of the project. If the project would affect or cover agricultural land or grassland, it would be negative for village people Turbines erected at the borders of Tayakadin village will cause a problem to the villagers. This concern is highly important both in ecological and in social terms. The project should be financed through equity rather than loans. Although we take this concern seriously, the means of financing of the project are to be decided by the project developer and its sponsor as to ensure the financial viability of the project. The project is very good, ecologically sound, and should be implemented as soon as possible. The project design is This is highly important, as visibility disturbances and shadow casting are severe disturbances. It is important for any It is emphasized, that the project draws labour demand into the region which is heavily characterised by migration to the cities, especially Izmir. Although most of it temporary, the job creation can lead to income, training and know how building. It was secured during the project design, that none of the mentioned feared negative effects will occur. The turbine which is located closest to Tayakadin is in a distance of roughly 700m from the village boundary. This distance is high enough to assure that no negative effects will occur. The project developer believes that it is sensible to use credit capital for implementing renewable energy projects. It reduces risk, forces the project developer to have someone to check the project design from an outside perspective, and it is economically more attractive. The project developer is very grateful for the support expressed by the attendants. The project developer puts all Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 16 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report project development activity to take care that results are as close to plans as possible This is important as it addresses core issues of ecological sustainability. good, but I hope that implementation and operation will also be successful The exclusion from EIA obligations is problematic. There is a danger that roads will be harmed during transportation of material and parts to the construction site This is important, as it concerns social and economic sustainability. The project developer must secure forestation activities to account for tree losses due to logging If the project area would cover protected areas, that would be very negative This is important, see above. Very important comment, as it is highly important with respect to ecological sustainability of the project. the efforts to construct and implement the wind farm on time The relief from the EIA for wind farm projects is defined in Turkish law. The project developer has prepared the application for EIA relief very carefully and has taken into account the biosphere at and around the project location. It is in the project developer’s own vital interest to avoid any harm to the roads used because the very same roads will be of important use during the whole operation time of the wind farm. Access to the wind farm and each single turbine must be safe, quick and easy to assure optimal performance. the project developer will use any roads carefully and help repair any damage which might occur. See above. Before applying for relief from performing EIA, it was clearly proven that no protected area is anywhere near the project site. Comments on the meeting itself Finally, all the attendants were asked to answer the question “What is your impression of the meeting?” (referring to the stakeholder meeting that they have just attended to) . The received comments are basically positive. Two attendants emphasized that questions were answered in a good way. Five attendants expressed their impression that the meeting delivered valuable information to the audience. However, one attendant expressed the wish to have been shown a map of the project locations while another one would have preferred the use of more modern presentation methods like projector or PC slide show. Another attendant mentioned it would have been better to conduct the Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 17 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report meeting in Yaylaköy village, which is the closest settlement to the wind farm. Lodos has considered these concerns. More graphical information material will be sent to the attendants like maps etc. so that they can get a better and more concrete picture of the wind farm layout. Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 18 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report iii. Revisit sustainability assessment Yes No Are you going to revisit the sustainable development assessment? Give reasoning behind decision. Although there have been several concerns about the project, the project developer is deeply convinced that all of them have been appropriately and carefully addressed. Most of the risks mentioned have been remedied by a diligent project design. Wherever risks remain, suitable mitigation and offset measures are at hand to be applied if necessary. Concluding, it is believed that the project contributes to sustainable development in the project region as well as in Turkey in general. This is also reflected in the outcome of the blind exercise on sustainable development which will be discussed below in section C. iv. Summary of alterations based on comments The basic project design will not change. However, there will be mainly two issues to be considered during the further progress of the project: First, Lodos will seriously consider tree planting as a potential mitigation and offset measure for any tree logging which may occur during construction. Secondly, will evaluate other possible beneficial actions which can be undertaken for the community and discuss these with the municipality, taking into account that at present some social actions such as support to the local football team are already undertaken. Lodos. SECTION C. C.1. Sustainable Development Matrix Own sustainable development matrix Indicator Air quality Water quality and quantity Mitigation measure Relevance to achieving MDG Chosen parameter and explanation Preliminary score MDG 7 target A “Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources” Turkey’s 2005 MDG report of mentions air pollution as one issue in this context. MDG 7 target C “Halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.” Parameters: Sulphur and nitric oxid emissions from fossil fuel power plants (FFPPs) as compared to the project’s emissions. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. + Parameters: Amounts of discharged cooling water and warming of waterbodies due to the operation of FFPPs; amount of process water leakages from FFPPs. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. + Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 19 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Soil condition MDG 7 target A. MDG “Proportion of land area covered by forest” is an official MDG indicator. Lower space intensity of WPPs as compared to FFPPs means lower risk of tree-cutting and land use change. MDG 7 target A. Although MDG report does not refer to these pollutants, we still consider them as relevant for the “loss of environmental resources”. Other pollutants Parameters: Waste produced by FFPPs, area covered by FFPPs in relation to their average power production. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. + Parameters: Emissions of harmful heavy metals due to the operation of FFPPs. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. + Biodiversity Quality of employment Livelihood of the poor Access to affordable and clean energy services Human and institutional capacity Quantitative employment and income generation Balance of payments and investment 0 0 Implementation and application of suitable safety protocols by company responsible for erection of the wind farm 0 0 0 MDG 1 target B: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people MDG 8 target A: “Develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system” Explanation: Improving balance of payments and reducing import Parameter: Wages paid to employees. Explanation: WPP electricity generation is commonly deemed more labour intensive than power generation from FFPPs. So, the parameter seems a good indicator for the welfare effects of the project. Parameter: Amount and cost of Natural Gas necessary to be imported to produce the same amount of electricity as the project. Explanation: Expansion of electricity generation capacity in Turkey significantly relies on natural gas imports, so with the above mentioned parameter we can measure the Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD + + 20 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report dependency strengthens Turkey’s position in the international trading and financial system project’s positive impact on reducing import dependency and on foreign currency savings and thus on balance of payments.. Technology transfer and technological self-reliance + Comments accompanying own sustainable development matrix Wherever the score is 0, the project developer assesses that no significant change will be made with respect to the respective indicator when comparing the project to the baseline. As for the indicator “Technology transfer and technological self-reliance” it was hard to define a parameter to measure or at least demonstrate the positive effect of the project. Still, the project developer believes that due to the introduction of wind energy technology a good effect in this respect will be generated. C.2. Outcome Blind sustainable development exercise Indicator Mitigation measure Chosen parameter and explanation Score given by stakeholders Gold Standard indicators of sustainable development. If relevant copy mitigation measure from "do no harm" – table, or include mitigation measure used to neutralise a score of ‘–‘ Defined by project developer Negative impact: score ‘-‘ in case negative impact is not fully mitigated score 0 in case impact is planned to be fully mitigated No change in impact: score 0 Positive impact: score ‘+’ Air quality + (13 times) Water quality and quantity + (12 times) Soil condition + (11 times) 0 (twice) Other pollutants + (10 times) 0 (once) 0 (3 times) Biodiversity Quality of employment Livelihood of the poor Access to affordable and clean energy Plant new trees to offset tree logging effects during construction. Implementation and application of suitable safety protocols by company responsible for erection of the wind farm + (4 times) 0 (7 times); - (twice) + (seven times) 0 (6 times) + (11 times) 0 (twice) + (13 times) Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 21 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report services Human and institutional capacity Quantitative employment and income generation Balance of payments and investment Technology transfer and technological self-reliance + (11 times) 0 (once) - (once) + (12 times) 0 (once) + (10 times) 0 (3 times) + (13 times) Comments resulting from the blind sustainable development exercise During the meeting, blank forms of sustainability matrix were distributed to the attendants. 14 of these forms were returned, of which one was not filled in with scores. As can be seen, the blind exercise has resulted in clear majorities for a positive score for nearly almost all indicators except for two: “Biodiversity” effects of the project where scored rather neutral than positive, even one negative score was given. Effects on “quality of employment” where scored almost as often “neutral” as “positive”. A single negative score on “Human and institutional capacity” should be mentioned, too. Analysis of difference between own sustainable development table and the one resulting from the blind exercise with stakeholders. Explanation of way of consolidation. As for the environmental section of the matrix, the assessment is rather alike, whereas it should be mentioned, that there is one single negative score on “Biodiversity” which will have to be taken into account during further project progress. The social sustainability section was assessed clearly more positively by the audience than by the project developer. The deviations for each indicator separately: “Livelihood of the poor”: The deviation of the blind exercise score from teh project developer’s score is due to the fact that there was a misunderstanding about the poverty definition. The attendants have focused in their assessment on the fact that there will be of course some positive income effects, as labour will be demanded and jobs will be created at least temporarily. But the indicator clearly focuses on absolute poverty in terms of e.g. a daily per capita income of 1US-$ etc. “Access to affordable and clean energy services”: The attendants misunderstood the meaning of the indicator and just focused on the “cleanness” of wind energy in terms of environmental harm. But the indicator actually focuses on issues like rural electrification rates and avoidance of unhealthy effects in the context of energy use like e.g. inside cooking with wood stoves posing risks of respiratory illness etc. “Human and institutional capacity”: The one negative score for the indicator is difficult to interpret. The project developer will reach the person who gave this score and find out about the reasons behind this score. the outcome of this discussion will be documented in the report on the stakeholder feedback round, and if an important concern will be noted then a respective mitigation measure and project design modification will be formulated. In the techno-economic section the scoring of the meeting again corresponds with the scoring of the project developer. Consolidation will take place in just deciding upon which scoring should be taken for final scores in cases where scoring between the two matrixes is not equal and justify this decision with appropriate arguments. This will be done in the respective section of the final SD matrix below. Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 22 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report C.3. Consolidated sustainable development matrix Indicator Mitigation measure Air quality Water quality and quantity Soil condition Relevance to achieving MDG Chosen parameter and explanation Preliminary score MDG 7 target A “Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources” Turkey’s 2005 MDG report of mentions air pollution as one issue in this context. MDG 7 target C “Halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.” Parameters: Sulphur and nitric oxid emissions from fossil fuel power plants (FFPPs) as compared to the project’s emissions. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. + Parameters: Amounts of discharged cooling water and warming of waterbodies due to the operation of FFPPs; amount of process water leakages from FFPPs. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. Parameters: Waste produced by FFPPs, area covered by FFPPs in relation to their average power production. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. + Parameters: Emissions of harmful heavy metals due to the operation of FFPPs. Explanation: FFPPs representing a main part of the baseline pose severe risks related to these parameters as compared to the project. + MDG 7 target A. MDG “Proportion of land area covered by forest” is an official MDG indicator. Lower space intensity of WPPs as compared to FFPPs means lower risk of tree-cutting and land use change. MDG 7 target A. Although MDG report does not refer to these pollutants, we still consider them as relevant for the “loss of environmental resources”. Other pollutants Biodiversity Quality of employment + 0 Implementation and application of suitable safety protocols by company responsible for erection of the wind farm Livelihood of the poor 0 0 Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 23 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Access to affordable and clean energy services Human and institutional capacity Quantitative employment and income generation Balance of payments and investment Technology transfer and technological self-reliance 0 0 MDG 1 target B: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people MDG 8 target A: “Develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system” Explanation: Improving balance of payments and reducing import dependency strengthens Turkey’s position in the international trading and financial system Parameter: Wages paid to employees. Explanation: WPP electricity generation is commonly deemed more labour intensive than power generation from FFPPs. So, the parameter seems a good indicator for the welfare effects of the project. Parameter: Amount and cost of Natural Gas necessary to be imported to produce the same amount of electricity as the project. Explanation: Expansion of electricity generation capacity in Turkey significantly relies on natural gas imports, so with the above mentioned parameter we can measure the project’s positive impact on reducing import dependency and on foreign currency savings and thus on balance of payments. German manufactured ENERCON turbines will be imported to Turkey due to this project, so significant foreign technology transfer will occur thanks to this project. . + + + Justification choices, data source and provision of references Air quality Water quality and quantity Soil condition Other pollutants Biodiversity Source: Regulation of Air Quality Control (Official Journal 19269; 02.11.1986; Annex 8 lists A and B); scoring was confirmed by the blind exercise at the LSC meeting Source: Regulation of Water Pollution Control (Official Journal: 25687, 31.12.2004; table 9.3); scoring was confirmed by the blind exercise at the LSC meeting Source: Regulation of Soil Pollution Control (Official Journal 25831; 31.05.2005; Annex 1A); scoring was confirmed by the blind exercise at the LSC meeting Source: Regulation of Hazardous Wastes Control (Official Journal 25722; 14.03.2005; Annex 7 section 10); scoring was confirmed by the blind exercise at the LSC meeting Although the blind exercise has resulted in one negative score out of 13 scores, the project developer’s assessment is that the score should be neutral. This si because the risk to biodiversity posed by the fossil fuel plants that would have been used in the baseline scenario instead of the proposed project would be just as high as the ones caused by our project. In addition, tree planting is added as l mitigation measure by the project developer for possible tree losses due to logging caused by constructing access roads and transmission lines or due to turbine erection activities. With this, the project developer believes that any possible negative effects to biodiversity can be neutralised. Also, the care with which the project developer has assessed the biosphere around the project location before applying for relief from EIA obligations and the positive decision of the ministry on this Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 24 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Quality of employment Livelihood of the poor Access to affordable and clean energy services Human and institutional capacity Quantitative employment and income generation Balance of payments and investment Technology transfer and technological self-reliance application leads to the same conclusion that no significant harm will be done by the project activity to animals, birds, and plants. As for all typical parameters concerning this indicator like access to collective bargaining and forming of associations etc. the legal framework in Turkey guarantees that employees will have good and suitable work whether they work for our project or for power plants representing the baseline scenario. As for further incentives like training and education etc. the situation in the companies representing the baseline scenario cannot be judged. So, although we aim for being an outstanding employer in terms of thisit was decided to keep a neutral score, although there has been a significant amount of positive scores during the blind exercise. Our project clearly is no poverty alleviation project in terms of providing better access to health care, sanitation, food etc. Although there are some positive income effects, this project is not linked to absolute poverty in terms of the poverty line of 1$ a day income. And , income effects are accounted for below at the indicator “quantity of employment”. Concluding, the initial neutral score is maintained. Turkey has an almost 100% electrification rate, no additional household will be connected to the grid because of this project. Concluding, no change as compared to the reference scenario can be seen. Thus the neutral score is maintained despite the positive assessment at the blind exercise. No change with respect to gender equality, improved primary education, or empowerment of discriminated parts of the population can be identified for the project. There might be an effect on awareness on ecologic issues, but this seems impossible to measure, so the initial neutral score is maintained notwithstanding the positive assessment at the blind exercise. Wind energy is more labour intensive than conventional electricity production. The assessment has been confirmed by the outcome of the blind exercise during the LSC meeting. Relevant data source: National electricity generation and transmission statistics. Our positive assessment has been confirmed by the outcome of the blind exercise at the LSC meeting. Relevant data source: the contract to be signed with ENERCON, the provider of turbines for this project. SECTION D. Preparation of Stakeholder Feedback Round Besides preparing this report in English language and uploading it to the GS registry together with further documentation on the project this report will be translated into Turkish and provided to the attendants of the meeting and to the stakeholders that were invited but who did not attend the meeting. Most of the attendants left some contact data and most of them have access to the internet, so the general way of providing the report will be to provide it on a website and inform the attendants about how to download it. In cases a download is impossible, we printed versions will be sent by post upon respective request by the stakeholder. Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 25 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Annex 1: Participant list Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 26 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 27 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 28 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 29 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 30 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Annex 2: Feedback forms Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 31 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 32 Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report Gold Standard Passport version 2.0 July 2008 Developed by Ecofys, TÜV-SÜD and FIELD 33