E-273 ENVIRONMENT IMPACT AsSESSMENT FOR CHINA SMALLHOLDER CATTLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (Summary Report) China Agricultural University March, 1998 4 aW~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7 t1-~~~~~~V iiE X f- fi- 2B iLE -i v . is I - -- M , w ' ._.. e _ _ _ _ _ _ >W *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..... f TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction .................................................. 1 1.1 The origin of the project .................................................1 1.2 Basis for the EIA report ..................................................1 1.3 Scope of the assessment ................................................. l 1.4 Keypoints of the assessment ...................................................1 1.5 Methodologc for the assessment ..................................................l 2. Summary of the Project ..................................................2 2.1 Project scope ................................................. 2 2.2 Project area .................................................. . 2.3 Project investment ..................................................3 2.4 Stressor and impact identification ................................................9 2.5 Positive and negative impacts ................................. ..... 10 3. The Environmental Status quo of the Project Area . ........................................... 11 4. Environment Impact Assessment and Mitigative Measures of Cattle Slaughtering and Beef Processing ........................................ 12 4.1 Introduction .................................................. 12 4 2 Environment qualitv assessment of proposed project area ............ . ........................ 12 4.2.1 Air environment quality evaluation ................................................. 12 4.2.2 Noise environment quality evaluation ................................................. 12 4.2.3 Water environment quality evaluation ................................................. 12 4.3 Environment impact and mitigative measures analysis . .13.......................... 1 4.3.1 Environment impact analysis of gas emission .................................................. 13 4.3.2 Environment impact analysis of noise ................................................. 13 4.3.3 Environment impact analysis of waste water ................................................. 13 4.3.4 Environment impact analysis of solid wastes .................................. 14 4.4 Alternatives ................................................. 15 4.4.1 Alternative site for proposed newly built project ................................................1 5 4.4.2 Alternatives for waste control measures ................................................. 15 4.5 Environmental and economic analysis ................................................. 16 4.5.1 Social benefits ................................................. 16 4.5.2 Economic benefits ................................................. 16 4.5.3 Environmental investment costs ................................................. 16 4.6 Public involvement ................................................. 16 4.7 Environmental management plan ................................................. 17 5. Environment Impact Assessment and Mitigative Measures of Feed Production ................................................. 18 5.1 Introduction .................................................. 18 5.2 Environmental impact analysis and mitigative measures ...................................... 18 5.2.1 Dust pollution and mitigative measures ................................................. 18 5.2.2 Noise pollution and mitigative measures ................................................. 18 5.2.3 Fire hazard and control measures ................................................. 19 5.3 Environmental and economic analysis ................................................. 19 5.3.1 Social benefits .................................................... 9 5.3.2 Economic benefits ................................................... 19 5.3.3 Enviromnental investment costs ................................................... 19 5.4 Environment management plan ................................................... 20 6. Potential Environmental Impacts and Environmental Management Plans of Cattle Production and Marketing .................................................... 21 6.1 Scope and outline ................................................... 21 6.2 Potential environmental impacts ................... ......................... 21 6.2.1 Impacts on agroecosYstem ................................................... 21 6.2.2 Impacts on water environment ................................................... 23 6.2.3 Greenhouse gases generation ....................................................23 6.3 Environmental management plan for cattle production . ....................................... 25 6.3.1 Environmental management plan for households .............................................. 25 6.3.2 Environmental management plan for feedlots and cattle markets .. 25 6.3.3 Provincial management office .................................................... 28 6.4 Social environmental economic analysis ...................................... 28 6.4.1 Social benefits ................................................... 28 6.4.2 Some economic indicators ................................................... 28 6.4.3 Environmental economic analysis ................................................... 28 6.5 Public involvement, women's participation and resettlement . . 29 6.5.1 Public involvement ................................................... 29 6.5.2 \Vomen's participation ................................................... 30 6.5.3 Non-voluntarv resettlement ..............................3......................3 7. Conclusions and Suggestions ................................................... 32 7. 1 Conclusions ................................................... 32 7.2Suggestions ................................................... 33 Appendix 1 Resettlement Report of Hebei Province ................................................ 3 -5 Appendix 2 Resettlement Report of Henan Province ................................ 36 Appendix 3 Resettlement Report of Shanxi Province ................................................ 39 Appendix 4 Resettlement Report of Anhui Province ................................ 40 1. Introduction 1.1 The origin of the project A number of regions in Anhui, Hebei, Henan, and Shanxi provinces expect to use the World Bank loans to promote the beef cattle production, processing, marketing, and supportive service system in the regions. The Beef Cattle Development Project had been listed as one of the candidate projects in 1997-1999 fiscal year by relating agencies at both the Central and the Provincial levels. The World Bank experts and missions have inspected the project areas several times during 1996-1997, and expect to evaluate the project in the early 1998. 1.2 Basis for the ELA report This report is based on: (1) project documents, feasibility studies; (2) environmental protection laws and regulations of China; (3) technical guidelines for EIA, issued by the NEPA of China(HJIT2.1-2.3-93), and by the World Bank(OD4.0 1); (4) certificate of entrustment for doing the EIA. 1.3 Scope of the assessment What to be assessed are the impacts on the physical environment, ecosystem, and social economic situations of the 72 counties in 16 prefectures in the 4 provinces of Anhui, Hebei, Henan. and Shanxi. Surface water, ground water, ambient air, and noise relating to the feedlots, markets and slaughterhouses are among those assessed. 1.4 Keypoints of the assessment The EIA emphasizes the cattle production subproject and the beef processing subproject. For the cattle production, control and recycling of animal wastes are emphasized; for the beef processing, its waste water is highlighted. The project areas in Anhui and Henan provinces are located in the Huaihe River, which is under control but is still heavily polluted. So is the Haihe River, which runs through the Hebei project areas. 1.5 Methodology for the assessment (1) The subprojects of cattle production(raising), beef processing and feedrnills, marketing are of different types which belongs to husbandry, agroindustry, or commerce respectively. The assessments of these different subprojects fall * I into different work grades classified by the NEPA of China or the World Bank. The subprojects will be assessed respectively according to its work grade. (2) Both the positive and the negative impacts of the project are assessed. (3) Point, as well as non-point source pollution, is considered. 1 2. Summarv of the Project 2.1 Project scope The general objective is to promote cattle production, marketing, beef processing and support service systems in the project area (72 counties). The specific goals are: (1) increasing 43 1,100 heads of cattle on hand; (2) 166 feedlots to be built; (3) 4 slaughterhouses to be extended or built. (4) 2 feedmills to be built or extended; (5) 116 cattle markets to be improved or extended; (6) 403 service stations to be strengthened or built. The project scope can be summarized in Table 2-1. Table 2-1 The Project Scope (number) Scope Total Aihui Hebei Henan Shanxi Production System Households 131954 33904 39450 31150 27450 Feedlots 166 26 53 75 12 Marketing System Cattle Markets 116 3 97 4 12 Processing System Newly built slaughterhouses 1 I Expanded slaughterhouses 3 2 1 Service System Breeding Center I Vet Stations 403 88 97 105 113 Feedmills 2 1 1 2.2 Project Area The project area includes 72 counties in 16 prefectures in the 4 provinces of Anhui, Hebei, Henan, and Shanxi (Table 2-2). Figure 2-1 illustrates the 4 provinces in China, Figure 2-2, 2-3, 2-4 and 2-5 illustrates the counties in the 4 provinces. Table 2-2 The Project Area Province Prefecture/City County Numbers Anhui Fuyang, Suxian, Huaibei, Hefei 13 Hebei Shijiazhuang, Baoding, Langfang, Tangshan, Qinhuangdao 22 Henan Nanyang, Zhumadian, Zhoukou, Shangqiu 25 Shanxi Xinzhou, Jizhong, Linfen 12 Total 4 72 2 2.3 Project Investment (See Table 2-3) Table 2-3 The Project Investment in Each Province Province The World Bank- Loan(million) Total Costs(million) US $ RMB RMB Anhui 28 232 478.59 Hebei 26 216 433.04 Henan 24 199 462.41 Shanxi 22 182 365.20 Total 100 831 1739.24 3 ./ /- S' I o '1.~~~~~~~~h Peop0'le'ics Reutc o ; I'c ,1 \\C11(filig ;f i gre 21Il 1 i r0 Mill) ,PAiI'hjc't P...2 iilXl\<~~~~~~Ikrii .;, ' X, ; . .. , . . .. . _ U ~mgt~./g . . af i,. ~~~~~~A ii, o ' 1 ni> I IiX Kr _ diiy 13IJ 1 P !J IJLi { 1[^t E. -< lu Cl 2-i 'IL I- it}w@ fi F' i gure 2- 1 '[b1e Adivli inslt-(il ion1 M~ip ol' Pro t ct Pi ovi 1CCS 2-2 Figure 2-2 Planning Layout of Cattle Raisina Project in Anhui Province L l LLJ t>; | \ > i~~-~ ' Sr.andong i _T ;E Z >/ : \~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - O i 1t Chusou j u Henan I -Hoi I \ i' tnhui , < h u ( _.---tiuki - -,~~~~~~~~~xa 0q 1: 285000 -n - N Chaohu 4 Anq C'Ciuj | | t}tr > ,/ ,i ,nhui _ -;, I 20 d Fe T-n _ g 2 X&nche ~~:Legend I-2 Anqing 0 C' i' 4u Protect.knfa A PocLssing Planc ub E\tending Feed- I ( * / | E\chaniac Markec } f / Jiangi , Zhejiang 5 2-3 -,-iJ it- k n J El Figure 2-3 Planing Layout of Cattle raising Project in Hebei Province I ----> / ) / - *t r /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4' E '-N j '. I ^sS 5 - ( r< j - CFengning 0 Chengde Zhangjijkou \ / --, a, ' --,/ X 't L i a o n i n a C,\r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r~uni N . ,,~Bain .t 8<, 1 > *&fl~~~a.z~~ inhuangdao g / + ,o B~g )Haihe River -. 5h/JIazhuzng// s :4E IFE~~~I. Heng%hue / W SdnT Snanx! , '/ s - SE9ij Legend 1:3300000 t / - > Rxe I Jingxino 2. Gaocheng 3. Zhaoxian 4. Xinji 5. ./v X i Jinzhou 6. Gaobeidian 7. Zhuozhou 8. %Vangdu P;ojec. at-Ca 9. Rongrcheng 10. Qingyuan 1 . Anguo 12. \ lHandan j ProvrinBoU ' enan 13. Xinghe 14. Dacheng I5. Guan 16. Ra,i'a' Qianan 17. Qianxi I S. Zunhua 19. Fengnan - | ' ' i r-' . 20. Liaoting '1. Lulong 22. Chancyli Henan 6 l-V24liJlttJl-l /-lir -@ f-f [-t l J,<,li;lia,1f1 S vSlict i I gL) 1 tlr e j l 2 '-i i i " o 1 ' u i '; , , , , 1> s - - , Sktl§Ci NL o'.tC il)vo.'ect c lmtcs v l',,, ,, \ /jg 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ gy _ ___ _ 7 __ Z v -~~~" Hed,~ Ciat,/ ,t,, .o>c Xveal e /\- ., A \ 1t}|sf1 71>_zs A t ,1 \ Sll.lil I zi o- -Z | ,.,,s,,.li't ', %gX,( AA^ ' \,!W ',1:''s,l:2l,1,X,^ n~~~~~~Yiighe 't ;''/'~~~~~~~~~~''~~~~~ /~~~~~~~' r. r..'ii * .l .] 3|ltt - lt , t !;i C , t I l J | g t X l l z y g l ' 8 Z A l i l i l t c j @ t i t Z ; t ; I I t s N , sy~~~~~~~T 1 I I I I l 9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 3 3 0t i 0 ! o ,2,1 _ I)SI11I,!1,SDI ''\ , , \ , 1 ,'i ,,,,,. -' --/--' ,',_,, _ - Ar>v0C>cfltt@|iiItM a||2-5 Planning Layout of Beef Cattle Development Project in Shanxi Province . , /~~~~~ / -'T I -I, SI-a,n k i ng - .' C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N 'I : ! 52 00 0 I-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- t ~~~~~~~Tai * hua .to'~ _laP Ar N River /' HebeR aNl>) i' S h arn x i : \ < < : < @~~~~~~Hreong t I,- -- *fas Afz 4 Aa S 1 v 't ---- >1 -n - l ~~~ 1:850000 > ; == : Leend ~~~~~~~~~-. - - 'i - Proxinc: Boun2a-e L ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~ ; I- \Rssc 8 2.4 Stressor and Impact Identification The environmental stressors and impacts of the project are identified as Table 2-4 shows. The positive impacts are labeled (+), the negatives are (-). The number of the +/- denotes the intensity of the impact when it has not been mitigated. Table 24 Stressors and Impacts Identification Category/Stressor Introducing and Beef cattle Slaughter and Vet. station Market Utilization of Feed breeding nrnduiction nrocecsing plant system stalk and w mil_ Gases: Organic/norganic toxic matter Greenhouse gases Dust (particles) _ + Rare delicacy __ _ _ Noise: _ _ Waste water: Organic/Inorganic toxic matter Pathogen __ __ _ BOD/COD __ Acidlalkaline solution Nutrients __ __ Peculiar smell __ __ _ _ Solid wastes: Ecosystem: Biodiversir- Terrestrial vegetation /farmland ecosystem Aquatic ecosystem __ __ Resources: Water resources Land resources - _ __ Wastes resources ++ ++ Welfare and social development: Human health Inhabitation enviro. Cultural relic Landscape _ Agri. development + 4+ ++ + ++ ++ + 9 2.5 Positive and negative impacts The project has positive impacts as well as negative impacts on the environment and human welfares: (1) positive impacts include * employment opportunities provided for the project area. especially for women m income increased with the project * human capital accrued for local animal husbandry * conversion of crop straw into manure which can lessen the overuse of fertilizers * reduction of mathane emission per beef product * reduction of pollution from crop straw burning (2) negative impacts include * water pollution from beef proceesing and cattle raising subprojects * odor inside or/and around the feedlots * dust pollution in feedmills 10 3. The Environmental Status quo of the Project Area The Project area's physical and social environmental status quo is outlined in Table 3- 1. Table 3-1 The Environmental Status quo of the Project Area Project Area Anhui Hebei Henan Shanxi Physical Environment location Central and Central and Central and Central part northern part northern part southern part topography Plain(800%) mixed Plain, basin basin. hill clinate warm-temperate to warm-temperate warm-temperate warm-temperate subtropics zone to subtropics zone average 14.5 °C 10-14 °C 14-15 °C 6-13 °C temperature annual rainfall 855 mm 340-800 mm 650-970 mm 350-600 mm soil Sandy loam, oess drab soil brown soil drab drab soil loess soil river Huaihe River Haihe River Huaihe River Huanghe River system system system system vegetation Cultivated land Cultivated land Cultivated land Cultivated land Social-economilical status counties included 13 22 22 12 population(X 103) 15958 10725 20816 4237 rural population 1448.2 9597 9291.8 3495.4 and proportion 90.76% 89.50/C 92.6% 82.5% land area(kmr) 23 189 19089 37983 20917 culti\ated area(kha) 1501.7 1019.7 1784.9 487.9 averaue area for 1.56 1.59 1.39 1.73 rural person(mu) gross grain 9240(1995) 7065(1996) 9127(1996) 1430 output(kton) average income of 1000 2476 1049 1515 rural person(RMB) transportation Jingjiu, J inghu Jingguang Jingguang Jingyuan. Shitai railways Jingchang railways Longhai railways raiiways others Rich in coal Changli tourism Nanyang tourism Wutaishan tourism Environmental Quality ambient ai- good in quality good in quality good in quality fair in quality water bad quality of river rivers polluted in bad quality of bad quality of water varied degrees water in branches Fenhe of Huaihe River River;good in Qinhe River 1 1 i 4. Environment impact assessment and mitigative measures of cattle slaughtering and beef processing 4.1 Introduction The processing subproject includes one newly-built slaughterhouse and three expanded plants. Qinhuangdao Huaxing Beef Processing Corporation is a newly-built beef processing project. Total investment is RNMB 49,885,400. The project includes: I workshop with the capacitv of processing 30,000 live cattle per annum; 1 freezing workshop with the capacity of 48 tons; 1 cold storage of 500 tons; 1 workshop of waste recvcling and 1 wastewater treatment plant of 250 tons per day. Area occupied by project is 3.094 ha, and total construction area is 9,062.25 m2 The information for expanded projects can be found in table 4-1. Table 4-1 The expanded projects Project Investment Item Current Scale Scale after (RMB million) (t/y) expansion Zhoukou General 52.14 Soft package 1000 2000 Food Corporation beef Ham 5000 Hejinlai Plant 33.43 Beef 2500-6400 Instant beef, 4750 beef sauce Guooyang Beef 49.31 Beef 8120 12.768 Processing Plant Zhoukou, Hejinlai and Guoyang project do not expand their current slaughtering capacity, instead of their beef processing capacity. 4.2 Environment quality assessment of proposed project are The focus is on the environmental qualitv of Qinhuangdao project area where the proposed new slaughterhouse is to be built. 4.2.1 Air environmental quality evaluation The monitoring of air environmental quality for Qinhuangdao plant was carried out in September 1997. The indicators are SO2 and TSP. The mean concentration of SO2 is 0.006-0.054 mg/m3, which is below grade I (0.05 mg/m3) of Ambient Air Quality Standard It indicated that air environment quality of project area is good . Because of wind and transportation during the monitoring period, TSP is below grade II or grade III, and it should be considered when workshop designed. 12 4.2.2 Noise environment quality evaluation The ambient noise of proposed plant boundary for Qinhuangdao plant is below 50 dB(A). far below grade IJ of Citi .4nbient Noise Standard It indicates that proposed project area is quiet. 4.2.3 Water environment quality evaluation The groundwater around proposed project area is polluted by coliforrn and nitrogen according potable water standard. So the water resources quality must be considered. 4.3 Environment impact and mitigative measures analysis 4.3.1 Environment impact analysis of gas emissions Main gas emissions source is boiler. The newly built project (Qinhuangdao beef processing corporation) installs 2 chain-drived boilers of 2 tph, (1 boiler for alternative use). After cyclone dust removal. the dust in exhaust gas can meet the grade II standard (250 mg/m') of Enission Standard of Gas Pollutants for Co/l- burning Boilers. Because SO2 is higher than emission discharge standard, sulfur removal system is necessary. Moreover, trees and grass should be planted around proposed factory area to absorb the dust. The impact on atmospheric quality of 3 expanded projects is from dust and SO2. The cas emissions of the projects can meet the emission standard of grade II. and have little influence on local atmospheric environment. 4.3.2 Environmental impact analvsis of noise Noise is from the air blower of stream boiler, compressor of the cold storage, air blower of the waste water treatment plant. Sound level is 75-92 dB(A). By adopting the noise alleviation, combating measures and separate sound proof control. sound level can be controlled below 85 dB(A), which meet the demand of national environment standard. 4.3.3 Environment impact analysis of waste water (1) Newl built project The wastes of liquid effluents from beef processing are blood, tallow, faeces. The characteristics of waste water are: pH 6-9, COD 1300 mg/L, BOD5 800 mg/L and SS 700 mg/L. The teclnical process for waste water treatment is as follows. 13 I |Sludge t Disinfection| collection Discharge to sewage treatment plant The system can have the BOD and SS removal efficiency of 90%, and the effluent will go to Qinhuangdao sewage treatment plant for further treatment. (2) Expanded project The information for expanded projects is illustrated in Table 4-2. Table 4-2 Waste water treatment for beef processing projects Project Period Treatment Capacity (t/d) Zhoukou General Current Activated sludge 288 Food Corporation After construction Activated sludge 288 Hejinlai Plant Current Physical and chemical 1500 After construction Physical and chemical 1500 Guoyang Beef Current Primarv sedimentation -- Processing Plant After construction SBR 500 The efficiency of current waste water treatment facilities in Zhoukou General Food Corporation is low and the effluent can not reach the grade II standard of Discharge Standard of Water Pollutants for Meat Processing Industry(GB 13457-92). There should be improvement on treatment technology, and COD, BOD5 and SS of effluent can meet the demands. There is also one waste water treatment station in Hejinlai Plant, and its treatment capacity can meet the requirements of the project expansion. Mitigative measures of these 3 projects are practical and acceptable, but operation of the facilities should be in accordance with regulations for the guarantee of effluent quality. 4.3.4 Environment impact analysis of solid wastes Solid wastes are from boiler's clinker and cattle slaughtering. The amount of waste from boiler's clinker for the newly built project (Qinhuangdao project) is 492 tons per annum, and for the above mentioned three expanded projects are 278.4, 300, 1782 tons per annum respectively. Its destination can be cement brick manufacture. During the project operation, by-products can be further reused. Blood powder can be processed from blood; industrial oil can be from tallow and also can be raw materials for soap; the refined wastes can produce protein feed, bone gum, bone oil and bone powder as well. 14 I 4.4 Alternatives 4.4.1 Alternative site for proposed newl) built project The project has selected two sites as alternatives. The first site is located on the south of Dagaozhuang village, Haigang district, Qinhuangdao city. Current land use is a storage site for building materials. Area occupied by project is 3.094 ha, and landform is alluvial plain. The second site is located on the north of the Qinhuangdao-Shanhaiguan expressway, and the distance is 400 m. The site area is 7.3ha. Current land use is paddy field, and the site is O.5m lower than road. The Sino-arab Chemical Fertilizer Corporation is located on the west of the field, the distance from the field is 2-3 km; Qinhuangdao coal port is on the east of the field and the distance is 4-5 km. Both sites can meet the demands of transportation, water and electric power supply. The second site has larger area, but the land has been planned as chemical industry zone. The first site has smaller area, but its surrounding land is farmland. There is no pollution sources and living quarters beside the land. The environment quality is better than that of first site. Considering above analysis and comparison, the first site has been chosen as the project site. 4.4.2 Alternatives for waste control measures The control and cycling measures for the noise and solid waste in Qinhuangdao project are feasible and will reduce the impact into minimum and achieve the purpose of resource recycling. The activated sludge system with efflux aerator is put forward by feasible study, which has the advantages of high efficiency and short hydraulic residential time (HRT), but also has the disadvantages of high energy consumption and aerator jam. Because the effluent from beef processing has high concentration of organic matter and the effluent from plant will be discharged into Qinhuangdao municipal sewage treatment plant for further treatment, anaerobic treatment system is suggested for alternative method of waste water treatment. This system can meet the demand of environment protection and also decrease the energy consumption. The alternative system is upilow anaerobic filter. Its technology is illustrated as follows. Waste water--Screening--Adjustment--Upflow anaerobic filter--municipal sewage treatment plant The biogas from the system can be reused for cooking. The parameters for the system are: Organic load COD 1-3 klg/m'.d, Removal efficiency of COD: 70-90%, Biogas production rate: 0.25m3/m3.d. 15 4.5 Environmental and economic analysis 4.5.1 Social benefits After the project goes into operation. the social benefit is as that, 1) to promote the development of animal husbandry of local and surrounding area; 2) to perfect the agricultural industrv structure of local and surrounding rural area. 4.5.2 Economic benefits The processing project is feasible economically as the economic indicators show on Table 4-3 for both the newly built and the expanded beef processing plants. Table 4-3 Some economic indicators for beef processing plants economic newly built one expanded ones indicators Huaxing Plant Hejinlai Plant Guoyang Plant Zhoukou Plant IRR(%) 20.01 1 5 3 40.03 NPV(million Y/yr) 5.08 27.29 80.31 TP(vrs) 6.27 7.58 2.93 4.70 IRR-- Inner Rate of Return NPV-- Net Present Value 4.5.3 Environmental investment costs The investment for the prevention and control of waste water, gas emissions, solid wastes and noise is illustrated in table 4-4(for the newly built Qinhuangdao plant). The environmental investment costs for the expanded plants are: RMB 5,000.000 for Zhoukliou Plant. RMB 460,000 for Hejinlai Plant. RMB 900,000 for Guoyang Plant. The environmental investment costs are RMB 2,792,000 in total for both the newly built and the expanded plants. Table 4-4 Investment and cost of environment protection(newly-built project) ltein Fixed investment Operation cost (RMB (RMB 1000) 1 000/year) Waste w\ater treatment facilities 500 75 Sedimiientation tank 250 37 Sulfur removal facilities 50 7 Noise prevention 12 2 Environment monitoring 20 10 Planting tree and grass 100 15 Total 932 146 4.6 Public involvement The beef processing project relates to many aspects of the society, including local residents. corporations and governments. In order to find out the attitude, opinions and 16 suggestions from the public, 1 round-table discussion was held, 12 experts were consulted and 100 people were investigated in the form of poll. (1) Public Consultation Among the people questioned, there are 35% of farmers, 28% of intellectuals, 17% of government officials, 130% of worklers and 4% of individual businessman. (2) Public understanding of the project The public survey indicates that most of the related persons (72%) know about the project, 60% know "manyv of the project, 12% know the general information, 17% know? "little" and 11% do not know the project. There is still much work to do in exchanging with local residents about the project because 28% of the persons are not familiar with the project. (3) Public attitude and comments for the project Quit a lot of the inquired people (85%) believe that the project can promote the local economic development; althoughl 71% of the persons believe that the project has no negative effects on environment, 21% show their concerns about the possible environment pollution caused by the project. Among the environment stressors, water pollution or air pollution is listed by 93% of the persons. In short, most of the inquired people (73%) hope that the project should be implemented sooner. 4.7 Environmental management plan Local environmental protection bureaus draw up the plan, beef processing plants manage the plan. local animal husbandry bureaus enforce the plan, and the local environmental protection bureaus stupervise the plan enforcement through monitoring svtems. The plan includes: (1) To strengthen management and set up management office Everv proposed project should has one senior manager(specific one) responsible for the implementation of the environment protection regulations, and one technician person in charge of the facilities operation and monitoring. Training workshop on environment protection should be organized for workers. (2) To set up environment monitoring office The environment monitoring should be conducted in schedule by special staff, and the indexes are SS, BOD5, COD, oil, NH4-N, pH, coliform and amount of effluent. (3) To promote cleaner production To reuse the processing by-products. According to the processing parameter standards of GB13457-92, the rate of recovery should be: oil >75%, blood >80%, waste from stomach >60%. hair > 90%, and water >15%. (4) To plant trees and grass around plant area. 1 7 5. Environment impact assessment and mitigative measures of feed production 5.1 Introduction There is one proposed feedmill with the capacity of 20,000 tons of cattle feed per annum in Hebei province. It is located in High and New Technology Development Zone, Shijiazhuang city, Hebei province, and area occupied by project is 0.6547 ha. The other proposed feedmill has the capacity of 27,000 tons of grain based concentrate and premix per annum, which is located in Taiyuan city, Shanxi province, with area increased 2000 m2 . The total investment for two projects will be RMB 3 1,467,000. 5.2 Environmental impact analysis and mitigative measures 5.2.1 Dust pollution and mitigative measures The sources of dust are listed in table 5-1. Table 5-1 Dust sources and mitigative measures Sources Concentration (mg/m3) Mitigative measures Raw materials entrance 16 ventilation, dust removal Crusher 150 ventilation, dust removal Distributor 50 ventilation, dust removal Packaging room 69 Inside plastic bag Delivery room 34 Water spraving Every dust outlet has dust absorption cover and pipeline system, connected to dust collector. The dust removal efficiency of proposed dust collector is 95-98%. According to the lowest efficiency (95%). dust concentration of workshop will be at the level of less than 10 mglm3, which can meet the standards of Sanitation Standard of Industry Design (TJ36-79). Dust in flue gas will be less than 150 mg/m3, which can meet the demand of GBJ4-73. 5.2.2 Noise pollution and mitigative measures The significant sources of noise are listed in table 5-2. Table 5-2 Noise sources and mitigative measures Sources Sound level dB(A) Measures Crusher 85 Crusher to be sunk into the ground Mixers 85 Anti vibration base, noise absorption materials Air compressor Build separate compressor room, sound insulation The pipeline system is arranged rationally. Silencers, noise proof and other facilities are installed. In high noise areas, regulations should be observed for the use of protection equipment. 18 5.2.3 Fire hazard and control measures When organic dust reaches to certain concentration in air, specific area will be huge, and potential fire disaster would happen if there were fire sources. In hazard areas of high ambient dust, dust bag filters are installed to lower the dust concentration. In workshop area, dust monitoring and alarm systems are installed, special person will be in charge of the systems. In hazard areas, hydrants, fire extinguishers and pressure equalization openings are installed to prevent the fire. No smoking is permitted in the plant area. The plant layout and the distances between buildings meet national fire prevention standards. 5.3 Environmental and economic analysis 5.3.1 Social benefits (1) Feed production is a link between animal husbandry and crop production chains. The proposed feed project can change the low utilization efficiency of agricultural bv- products, improve the nutrition level and beef quality, and promote the development of cattle raising industry. (2) to promote the local economic development, increase farmer's income. 5.3.2 Economic benefits From the financial valuation, feed production project has good economic benefits. Sales income: RMB 59,000,000/yr Profit and tax: RMB 6,890,000/yr Value Added Taxes: RMB 1,155,000/yr Income Taxes: RMB 1,538, 000/yr NPV: RMB 23,510,000 IRR: 25.74% TP: 5.12 years 5.3.3 Environment protection investment and costs (Table 5-3) Table 5-3 Environment protection investment and costs Facility Number Unit Price Cost (set) (RMB 1000/set) (RMB 1000) Dust removal 8 17.8 142.4 Fan 10 2 20 Dust collector 1 19.8 19.8 Anti vibration 4 6.3 25.2 Training 26.2 Planting trees 200 Dust monitoring 2 5 10 Noise monitoring 4 5 20 Fire extinguisher 5 10 50 EIA 10 Environment management 30 Total 31 553.6 19 5.4 Environment management plan Local environmental protection bureaus draw up the plan, feedmills manage the plan, local animal husbandry bureaus enforce the plan, and again the local environmental protection bureaus supervise the plan enforcement through monitoring sy-tems. The plan includes: (1) To establish environment protection sector responsibility for the monitoring and management. (2) To organize environment protection workshop for staff. (3) To formulate environment protection regulations. (4) To purchase environment monitoring instruments, to monitor groundwater, the dust and noise regularlv. (5) To plant trees and grasses in plant area. (6) To install screen window for the prevention of dust. (7) To clean and maintain the dust removal facilities at regular intervals. (8) To clean the workshop, storehouse regularly. (9) To provide gauze mask and earplug for workers in areas of high level dust and noise. (10) To convey the raw materials and product in day time to control the noise poll ltion. 20 6.Potential Environmental Impacts and Environmental Management Plans of Cattle Production and Marketing 6.1 Scope and outline See Table 6- . Table 6-2. Table 6-1 Outline of the cattle production subproject Project Area Total Anhui Hebei Henan Shanxi CN* IN" CN IN CN IN CN IN CN IN Productioll Scale(I0-' head/a) Cattle on land 11344 370.4 3492 1075 1075 1385 6340 597 437 b,47 offatteningcattie 3667 128.0 1010 470 398 288 2114 267 14 5 I5 of breading cows 6015 131.9 1781 339 418 645 3635 200 181 13 5 of calves 1662 110.5 701 26.6 259 45.2 591 130 111 I 57 Cattle sold 4714 353.6 1187 94.3 942 984 2482 84.2 103 767 Butilt-uip Area(] 0 Cm2) 3 55 . 8.s i8 0& 350 5 771 2 254 3 Water Demanded( I On'Ia) 7987.6 2331 4 14780 14825 26957 Feed Demanded( I 0't/a) Feed -rain 626.8 255 0 162 7 59 9 149 2 RoughaLoe 1371.0 357 2 468 6 2135 331 7 Note: *CN=Current Number: #IN=lncreased Number by the project Table 6-2 Outline of the cattle market subproject Project Area Number of Markets Level Total investment Scale to build (RMB 103) (103 head) Anhui 3 Prefecture 1 165.0 180.0 Hebei 97 Counts, Township 1630.0 360(estimated) H en an 4 Prefecture 1354.9 68.8(increased) Shanxi 12 CoLunty 4864.4 541.8 Total 116 9014.3 1150.6 6.2 Potential environmental impacts 6.2.1 Impacts on agroecosystem (I) Fitness analysis of cattle production subproject within local agroecosystems The fitness degree of cattle production in a local agroecosystem is judged with the ratio RIP, where R denotes feed resources demanded by the agroecosystem. A very high ratio of R/P means that the stress of cattle production on the local agroecosystem might be stringent. Calculation indicates a low R/P ratio (0.27-0.50) for each project county. which means a big potential for cattle production in each project county. (2) The effect of manure increased and fertilizer decreased in local farmland It is constant that one head of grown cattle produces about 15-20 kg of excrement and 10 kg of urine a day. Fresh cattle excrement contains 0.32% of nitrogen(N), 0.25% of 21 phosphorus(P205), and 0.15% of potassium (K2O). Cattle urine contains 0.50% of N. 0.03% of P20>. 0.650% of KiG. The corresponding nutrient and fertilizer equivalent to the cattle manure could be calculated based on the active constituents of urea, superphosphate, and potassium chloride fertilizers. With the cattle production scale in each model and in each project area, the total volumes of manure and its fertilizer equivalent could be calculated for each production model, and for each province as a .\hole. Table 6-3 anid Table 6-4 present the results and details of the calculation. Table 6-3 Volume of cattle manure and its nutrient equivalent for each production model Manure Volume Manure Volume Nutrient Equivalent Model (kg/head/day) (ton/year) (ton/vear) excrement urine excrement urine N P,Oi KlO Household 2-cow 20** 10 14.6 7.3 0.08 0.04 0.07 1-cow, 2-calf* 20 10 14.6 7.3 0.08 0.04 0.07 3-feeder 15 10 16.4 11.0 0.11 0.04 0.10 Feedlot 100-head 15 -- 547.5 -- 1.75 1.37 0.82 200-head 15 -- 1095.0 -- 3.50 2.74 1.64 300-head 15 -- 1642.5 -- 5.26 4.11 2.46 400-head 15 -- 2190.0 -- 7.00 5.48 3.29 500-head 15 -- 2737.5 -- 8.76 6.84 4.11 Note: * 2 calves produce the same manure as I cow. 1* Cows produce more manure than feeders do. -- = Cattle urine in feedlots is collected and incorporated with the manure. Table 6-4 Volume of cattle manure and its fertilizer equivalent in each project province Project Cattle Manure Volume Fertilizer Equivalent Farmland to be Applied Area on hand X (I 0; ton/vear) (C 0' ton/year) (I 03 ha/year) (103 head) excrement urine urea SP* PC** Hiah-vield Low-yield Anhui: CN 3851 .6 21087.5 9156.2 202.96 209.11 174.26 366.20 915.62 IN 109.9 601.7 261.3 5.79 5.97 4.97 10.45 26.13 Hebei: CN 1127.9 6175.3 4115.2 99.35 99.35 113.76 159.64 399.25 IN 144.9 793.3 528.7 12.76 12.76 14.62 20.51 51.29 ] Henan: CN 7353.1 48289.8 26843.2 555.91 573.63 476.17 1000.97 2504.19 IN 62.0 407.2 226.3 4.69 4.84 4.02 8.44 21.11 Shanxi: CN 460.3 2520.1 1322.9 28.41 29.28 24.37 51.23 128.09 IN 60.6 331.8 174.2 3.74 3.85 3.21 6.75 16.86 Total: CN 12792.9 78072.7 41437.5 886.63 911.37 788.56 1578.04 3947.15 IN 377.4 2134.0 1190.5 26.98 27.42 26.82 46.15 115.39 *SP = Superphosphate fertilizer. ** PC Potassium Chloride fertilizer I fattening cattle=l standard cattle; I breeding cow=1.33 standard cattle; I calf=0.67 standard cattle 22 I If all the cattle manure is applied in local farmlands on which the manure is well distributed, thev can replace 26.98 thousand tons of urea. 27.42 thousand tons of superphosphate. and 26.82 thousand tons of potassium chloride fertilizers each vear. These manure can be applied in 46.15 thousand hectares of high-yield farmland. or 115.39 thousand hectares of low-yield farmland to meet the needs of crops while monitoring the groundwater carefully. It reduces the potential pollution from fertilizer and increases soil organic matter. 6.2.2 Impacts on water environment It is definite that every feedlot discharges waste water which comes from cattle urine. shed washing. cattle cooling in summer time, and worker living. Table 6-5 calculated the waste water discharges of a standard feedlot for each of the 5 models. A 100-head model of feedlot discharges 555 tons of waster water a year. Table 6-5 Wastewater discharges of a feedlot in 5 models (t/v) Model Total fiom Urine from Shed Washing from Cooling from Living 100-head 555 365 100 15 75 200-head 1110 730 200 30 150 300-head 1665 1095 300 45 225 400-head 2220 1460 400 60 300 500-head 2775 1825 500 75 375 Note: Urine. 10 klo'head/day; Washing, I kg/head/day; Cooling, 0. 15 kg!head/sumrmer day; Living. 15 ton/person/year The pollutants in the wastewater are SS (Suspended Solid), COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand), coliform group bacteria, and ammonia nitrogen, etc.. Untreated wastewater w ould pollute the surface water and ground water, resulting in eutrophication and fislhing losses. It may affect drinking water quality and human health. The pathogens in the untreated wastewater may survive in the soil for a long time. harming crops and human health. 6.2.3 Greenhouse Gases Generation If this project is not adopted. 2 things might happen: (i) most of the strawsare burned in the field; (ii) cattle husbandry develops conventionally in low productivety to meet the grow,nino demand for beef. What could be proved are: * that conventionally raising of cattle generates more methane(CH4) than the project does in terms of CH4 than the project does in terms of CH4 emission for a unit beef product; and * that straw burning emets a great deal of greenhouse gases too, so the project can prevent the CH4 emission from straw burning. This project is more efficient in beef production relation to CH4 emission. (1) Efficiency in beef producton relating to CH4 emission per unit beef In terms of CH4 emission for a unit beef product this project generates less CH4 than that from conventionally raised cattle. This is because the project promotes the productivity of cattle husbandry with the applicaton of ammoniated straw and Al 23 techniques. These techniques shorten the period a calf grows to an adult, lessen the amount of breeding bulls, and eventually raise the rate of sold cattle in all raised cattle per y'ear. This formula can be used to calculate the CH4 emission per kilogram of beef product: R =M /(BC) Here. R is used to denote the CH4 emissioin per kilogram of beef product; M denotes the CH4 emission bv an average head of cattle per year, B denotes the amount of beef product for an average head of sold cattle, C denotes the rate of sold cattfe in all raised cattle per year. In a major study on the CH4 emission cutting effect of roughage ammoniation. which was conducted by the Institute of Environmental Protection and Monitoring, the Ministry of Agriculture. China, in 1995, shows the following results( where i--denotes the amoniation group, o denotes the control group): M =66.14kg/head/year; Cij=32.5%; Bi=350kgxx3 7%=l 29.5kg/head Ri = Mi /(B, C)=1.577kgCH4/kgbeef; M,=49.03kgu/head/year; CO=012.5%0: BQ=350kgx37%=I 29.5kg/head Ro= M, /(B,CO)=3.03kgCH4/kgbeef; Thus, Ri=0.52R0 This proposed beef cattle development project will use amoniated roughage to feed cattle. so an aboLut 50% lower CH4emission in terms of CH4 emission for a unit beef product(R) can be expected for the project than conventionally raised cattle. Wheni the Al breeding techniques and other advanced services are taken into consideration, more cutting of CH4 emission as measured in the relative indicator(R) can be expected. (2) Preventing CH4 emission from straw burning Another possible conduct to the straw is burning in the field when the project is not adopted. Burning of straw also emits CH4 besides CO2. The amount of CH4 emission fiom straw burning, and from the project can be calculated for comparison. * the amount of CH4 emission from the cattle raising project The proposed project will increase heads of cattle on hand by 431.14 thousand a year. The CH4 emission per year by an average head of cattle raised in high productivity(R,) is 66.14kg/head/year. The amount of CH4 emission from the project can be calculated by multipling these 2 figures. the result is 28.5 thousand tons of CH4 annually. * the amount of CH4 emission from straw burning The amount of CH4 emission from straw burning can be calculated with the formula which is recommended by IPCC 'as follows: N=S F - D - H - G - 16/12 Dafang Zhang (1993). An Estimate of CH4 and N20 emission from straw burning in China. Agro-envirom77ental Protection, 1993. 12(2): 57-61 (in Chinese) 24 . Here N is used to denote the amount of CH4 emission per year from burning of straw which otherwise will be used as roughage in the project, S denotes the amount of straw which wvill be used as roughage in the project, F denotws the percentage of straw burned in all the straw S, D denotes the percentage of dry matter in straw, H denotes the percentage of carbon in dry straN.G denotes the percentage of carbon which is used to generate CH4 among the total carbon in straw. Now S=10.6481million tons per year, F is assumed to be 80%, D=50%, H=47%, the high G(Gh) is 1.17%, the lowG(G;) is 0.63%. When the G(GI,) used, we get the high N(Nh); when the G(GI) is used, we get the low N(N1): NIl=3 1.2 thousand tons per year N 1=l 6.8 thousand tons per year With the preceding formula, CO, emission from the straw burning could be calculated assuming 80% of carbon in straw are used to generate CO2. The result is 5.87 million tons of CO2 are emitted from the straw burning per year. Thus. 16.8 - 31 I.2 thousand tons of CH4 are generated from straw burning per year. in additon to 5.87 million tons of CO2 emission, if the project is not adopted. Some 28.5 thousand tons of CH4 are emitted from the raised cattle if the project is adopted. Almost no more CH4 is emitted from the project than straw burning. 6.3 Environmental Management Plan For Cattle Production Local environmental protection bureaus draw up the plan, households or feedlots in question manage the plan. local animal husbandry bureaus enforce the plan. and again the local environrmental protection bureaus supervise the plan enforcement through monitoring svtems. The plan includes what follows. 6.3.1 Environmental Management Plan for Households Management Plan: I)Households selection criteria: The households should have enough labors to raise cattle: There should not be drinking water well around livestock shed also. 2)Training programs will be provided for individual households on cattle management, especially on environment protection by knowledgeable veterinarian and environment scientists. Animal husbandry bureaus must have the training plan for increasing environmental protection awareness of farmers. Administrative Agency: At least one technician or veterinarian in each county will be responsible for the implementation of the plan under the guidance of County Animal Husbandry Bureau and County Environment Protection Bureau and environment experts. 6.3.2 Environment Management Plan for Feedlots and Live Cattle Markets Management Plan: I)Site selection: household or enterprise wishing to set feedlot or live cattle market 25 should provide the follow^ ing materials for County Animal Husbandry Bureau. Approval should be provided by the County Environmental Protection Bureau. * Description of the proposed feedlot or market, including the heads of cattle on hand, the source of feed. the sources of breeding cowA; and yearling calf, and the likely destination of the finished cattle. * A site layout which denotes the main composition of the feedlot/market such as (i)adjacent roads, buildings; (ii) slope, drainage, and way water drains off the site: (iii) sheds. feed storage barn, and worker's living areas; (iv) location of manure storage and handling. (v) other important features. * Physical environmental status quo of the site and around including (i)water and its quality: (ii) precipitation and other relevant climatic data; (iv) groundwater depth and quality; (v) soil properties such as soil texture, soil layers. * The mitigative measures, including (i)estimate of the waste water from daily watering and site cleaning, and the quality of the water; (ii) the sources of odor, noise, flies and dust. the mitigative measures; (iii) the location and design details for sedimentation ponds. berms dikes or any other structures intended to treat the sewage; (iv) operational procedures to manage the environmental affairs. - Manure management plan that identifies: the volumes of manure that will be produced and disposal way. _ Public consultation. The evidence of consultation from adjacent residents and a-enits. their support or rejection or suggestions for the site location and development plans should be provided. The requirements for the feedlot and market site are: * The site should be away from the drinking water resources. e Thie odor attenuates obviously with the distance. The site of feedlot should be at least 200m away from living quarters. * The soil properties of site. especially soil texture and soil layers, can ensure the groundwater is not contaminated by water leaching. * The occupation of farmland and resettlement issues can be resolved according to related regulations and laws. 2)Public consuiltation: To consult with local and affected residents for their opinions and suLgestions about the site and project. These opinions and suggestions should be taken into account during the site selection. 3)Training: The training program on environment issues for director and staff member should be provided along with other training programs. The training program aims to facilitate their awvareness of environment protection. The program includes: * related regulations and laws on environmnent protection * environment issues and mitigative measures during the cattle production * prevention measures for diseases 4)Lavout of feedlot/market * To build brick wall of 2-3m around feedlot, 26 * To plant tree and grass with the width of 1 Om inside the feedlot, * The sick cattle disposal region should be outside the feedlot with the distance of 30-50m. * To set up disinfection tank at the feedlot gate. 5)Mitigative measures: including environment sanitation and waste disposal. Waste treatment: The cleaning water and waste can be treated by compost technology or anaerobic digestion svstem. Take 300 head feedlot as example. If anaerobic digestion system is applied, the volume of tank can be 180-200 m3. the average amount of waste and biogas(through the vear) will be 4.5 ton/day and 120-150 m3/day respectively. For compost technology, the cattle waste and feed residual can be mixed and piled. After 30 days or longer in winter, the waste will become excellent organic fertilizer. 2 For 300 head feedlot, the land area for compost is 200 m2, including temporary waste storage area of 1O m2 and compost storage area of 50 m2. The amount of waste from market is little. During marketing day, farmers can be employed for the collection and cleaning of market. Sanitation: Stockmen clean the livestock shed in time every day; to sterilize shed according to cattle heath and environment conditions; to plant trees around feedlot and market of 2-4 lines. 6)Monitorino: * in the loan contract environmental protection article should be included to ensure full compliance of the feedlot/market with .the terms of its construction and operation; * In the feedlot or market, special person should be named for taking responsibility for environment protection under the supervision of the mainager: * The indicators, time, and frequency of environment monitoring should be set and carried out by the local Environmental Protection Bureau. * Manure heap and distribution must be carefully managed. Regular monitoring of groundwater near manure heap and manure-distributed farmlands should be conducted. Administrative AgencV: During the site selection, cattle production and live cattle marketing. County Animal Husbandry Bureau will sign agreement with feedlots and markets operators for the implementation of the above environment management plans. Provincial animal husbandry bureau and Provincial environment protection bureau and environment professionals will supervise and provide technical guidance. 27 i 6.3.3 Provincial Management Office Provincial Manaoement Office (PMO) will be responsible for the implementation of environment management plan for cattle production in the province. PMO consists of officials from animal husbandry bureau and environment protection bureau. PMO will invite experts including environment scientists and animal husbandry experts to establish Advisory Group for the technical guiding and consultation. 6.4 Social Environmental Economic Analysis 6.4.1 Social Benefits Cattle production and marketing are the main part of the whole Project, from which the followvine social benefits could result: (1) providing 149.5 thousand of employment opportunities for the project area, where there is a larger amount of implicit unemployment in the rural areas. At least 75 thousand of the opportunities could be provided to rural women. (2) the training program included in the Project helps accumulate the human capitals on cattle breeding. production, marketing, and Al services which will benefit the local communities for a long time. (3) increasing the income of the households attending the project by RMB 988- 2 170 annually which would attenuate the poverty in project areas. (4) driving the related industries such as crop planting, processing and services for cattle production. 6.4.2 Some Economic Indicators Known fiom the financial feasibility studies. the project is significantly profitable. The net present value(NPV) of the project will be RMB 1.139 billion(1996 RMB yuan. the social discount rate 12%). The project could pay RMB 51.94 million of sales taxes and RMB 47.8 million of income taxes annually. The project is economically appealing. 6.4.3 Environmental economic analysis (I) The remarkable environmental benefits from the cattle production project are the conversion of crop straw into manure by cattle production. The large amount of crop straw is usually burned in the field because the multiple cropping system leaves no time for farmers to treat the straw properly, and leaves no time for farmland to digest the straw. Straw burning causes air pollution and wastes organic resources. To compensate the nutrient loss in the soil, large amounts of fertilizers are applied which also contaminate the environrment(the surface water and ground water). 28 The cattle production project helps solve the environmental problems by converting the straw into manure. As the opportunity cost of the crop straw is effectively zero. the environmental benefits of cattle production includes: (i)the avoidance of air pollution from straw burning; (ii) the manure produced which could replace some of fertilizers; (iii) the avoidance of the environmental contamination resulting from the fertilizers replaced by manure. In the 3 components of benefits, the first is difficult to estimate. The second one could be estimated the following way. Through Table 6-3, it has been calculated that the manure produced by one head of grown cattle annually could replace 200 kg of fertilizers( urea. superphosphate. and potassium chloride) equivalently. Assuming there is a loss of 24% of manure during its treating and processing, then 152.6 kg(200 x 76%) of equivalent fertilizers are left available for application. Based on the prices of the fertilizers in 1996, the amount(152.6 kg) of fertilizers are worth RMB 183.0. TlLus, the manure produced by one head of grown cattle annually is worth RIMB 183.0. The third one is also difficult to estimate. The increased heads of cattle on hand by the project are 370.4 thousand in standard cattle(see Table 6-1), multiplying which with RMB 183.0/head equals RMB 67.78 million in environmental benefits annually. The cattle production project generates RMB 67.78 million or more in environmental benefits annually. (2) Environmental Protection Investment See Table 6-6. Table 6-6 Environmental Protection Investment in the Project Item Investment(RMB 10') Operating costs(RMB IO0/a) Feedlots(l 66) se%wage treatmenlt 1363.3 422 manure treatment 300.0 891 .areeriin- 150.0 225 .. .... . .... ... 1. ... . .. . .... . .. .. ....... . e.e.n..... ... .. ...... ... ... ...... ...... .. . ..... ....... .. ... .. . ........... ......... .... 5.00..... 5 Cattle Markets(l 16) sewage treatment 31.6 250 manlure treatmlient 7.2 40 Total 1852.1 1828 Those investments and operation costs are necessary for carrying out the environmental management plan and meeting the environmental standards. 6.5 Public involvement, women's participation and resettlement 6.5.1 Public involvement The project influences a large population and wide area of the four provinces. In order to find out the attitude, opinions and suggestions from the public, 4 round-table discussions with local people were held. The public survey has also consulted 30 experts and inquired 2314 people in the project area. 29 (1) Public Consultation Among the people questioned, farmers account for 60%, intellectuals 13%, workers I I%. government officials 7%, congressman 3o% and individual businessman 6%. (2) Public understanding for the project The public survey indicates that most of the people (89%) know about the project. Among them, 28% know "many" of the project, 61% know "general", 9% know "little" and 2% did not know anything of the project. (3) Public attitude and opinions for the project 97% of the people questioned believe that the project can benefit the local economic development; 84% believe that the project can improve the soil fertility; 60% think that the project can improve the environmental quality, instead 40% think that the project has little or negative effects on environment. 85% hope that the project has distinctive improvement on local people's daily life. (4) Conclusion of the public survey The public survey has got much response and opinions from local and related peoples in the project area, and the raised questions and suggestions deserved careful study. Prom the survey. we can find that public knows about the project, and they believed the project can have improvements on local economic development, ecological environment and people's life. Although most of the people (60%) believed that the project has positive effects. many of them (40%) show their concern for its negative effects. Concerning the public's worry about the project, pollution control and environment monitoring should be reinforced, public should be informed about the environmental management plan and mitigative measures, opinions and proposals from public should be taken into consideration. During the consultation process. experts suggested that the cattle project have great potential ecological benefits on the utilization of crop straw and organic materials return to the farmland, it can have good social benefits on the adjustment of agricultural industry structure as well. The officials showed great interests on the economic benefits. and believed that the project can improve the farmer's daily life and economic situation. In a word, public and government departments both hoped that the project should be implemented as soon as possible. 6.5.2 Women's participation A'omen are the main part of rural labors. In some regions, women account for more than half of rural labors. Women play significant role in the agriculture production and promotion of rural economic development. Also, women are the main operators of household cattle raising project. Because of the important status of animal husbandry in rural development, women's participation can strengthen women's access to economic opportunity. The project can offer rural women at least 75,000 employment opportunities. 30 Vormen can protect the environment sanitation of households and monitor the pollution prevention and control. Generally, because women are main victims of environment degradation, they are more sensitive to the change of environment quality. The initiatives of the Women's Federation (WF) will be brought into full play. The Women's Federation will organize and educate the women in cattle raising. environnmental mana-ement and gJuarantee their economic benefits. 6.5.3 Non-voluntarv resettlement Resettlement issue should be given enough attention so that the affected persons do not suffer from the loss because of the resettlement. The resettlement plan should be prepared and its main parts are as follows. (1) The detailed informationi of the land or other property losses, including the identification of the households or units affected, the land area lost, the quality of the land lost. (2) The agency and procedure responsible for the implementation of resettlement and compensation, including the name of the agency, administrative procedure and other laws or regulations. (3) The detailed information of the compensation package, including the type of compensation (provided land, work, housing and cash compensation), the legal certification and valuation of lost assets. (4) Implementation schedule. Resettlement plans have been provided by the Project Management Office (PMO) of four provinces. Resettlement report of each province is presented in Appendix 1-4. Reference: * Dafang Zhang (1993). An Estimate of CH4 and N20 emission from straw burning in China. Agro-em'ironn2ental Protection, 1993, 12(2): 57-61 (in Chinese) 31 7. Conclusions and Suggestions 7.1 Conclusions (1) China smallholder cattle project uses the World Band loan and domestic counterpart fund to construct the cattle production, processing, marketing and technical support services systems. The proposed project areas have good natural, social and economic conditions, and have enough roughage and feed grain supplies for the cattle raising. The environmental quality can meet the demands of cattle production and beef processing. Surface water (Huaihe River and Fenhe River) in some proposed project area can not meet the national environmental quality standards, and has limited water environment capacity, which should be taken into consideration during the period of project operation. (2) The individual households and feedlots use the agricultural by-products (after ammoniation and silage pits treatment) as feed. There is no grass grazing in proposed project area. This will reduce the pollution caused by stalk and straw burning, and prevent the ecological degradation. Cattle manure which apply to farmland can improve the soil fertility and soil texture, reduce the possible contamination imposed by the overuse of chemical fertilizer, promote the crop production, benefit the cycle of agricultural production. The project can reduce Cl-4 emission in terms of per unit of beef product with the application of advanced raising technologies such as ammoniation and Al breeding techniques.The main effects on environrnent and ecosystems are positive. Because household is small scale, it has little influences on environment; feedlots range from 100 to 500 heads, its negative effects come from animal manure and waste water, odor and epidemic diseases, which can be controlled by environmnent management and appropriate measures. (3) In respect of greenhouse gas emission, methane emission per unit beef production in proposed project will be less than conventionally-raised cattle (- 50%). Because the project promotes the productivity of catle husbandry with the application of ammoniated straw and other sophisticated techniques. These techniques shorten the period a calf grows to an adult, lessen the amount of breeding bulls, and eventually raise the rate of sold cattle in all raised catle per year. Also, the project will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide and methane from straw burning. (4) Beef processing system includes one newly built and three expanded cattle slaughtering and beef processing plants. It is the main sub-project that has potential environment pollution, and its chief issue is water pollution. The newly built plant (Qinhuangdao plant) should abide by national environment protection regulations and laws, and adopt cleaner production technology. The effluent can meet the national standards after secondary treatment. The three expanded plants, which are located in Zhoukou city (Henan province), Guoyang city (Anhui province) and Lingbi city (Anhui province), should increase their waste water treatment capacity and limit the discharge amount of principal pollutants within the amount required by the Standards. Because of the small capacity (2-4 tph) of boilers of these four plants, the flue gas dust and sulfur dioxide can meet the standards after mitigative measures. The solid waste 32 from beef processing can be recycled. The pollution prevention and control measures of four beef processing plants are feasible. (5) Two feedmills, which are located in Shijiazhuang city, Hebei province and Taiyuan city, Shanxi province, respectively, have the pollutants of dust and noise. Advanced production technology, dust collection and removal system and noise combating systems are used and can reduce influences on environment and staff health. Pollution prevention and control measures of two feedmill plants are feasible. (6) The influences of cattle markets are from manure, waste water, odor and epidemic disease. Reasonable layout, environment management, sanitation management can diminish the negative effects to minimum. The waste water treatment technology, the recycling of cattle manure and odor control measures are practical and acceptable. (7) The project has good social, economic and environmental benefits. It can promote the development of animal husbandry, processing industry and crop production,. It will increase the farmer's income and improve the economic and social status of women. (8) The public survey indicates that most of the related people show their support for this project, especially about its promotion of local economic development and more employment for residents. They believe that the project has little environment pollution and can be under control. While showing their concerns for the possible environment influences, they give some valuable suggestions. They hope the project can be implemented sooner. (9) The cattle production, cattle market, technical support service and beef processing use household owned land, or waste land. The project does not occupy any farmland. The selected site for newly built beef processing plant has good atmospheric, water and soil environment, and is suitable for the project. (10) The environment management plan and monitoring plan have been formulated, the agency and responsibility have been clarified also. The training plan for household and project administration staff have been formulated. These plans are all in accordance with the practical situation of project area and are acceptable. The project has clear purpose and remarkable benefits. The selected sites are reasonable and the pollution mitigative measures are feasible. The public offer their support for the project. If the related laws and regulations are abode by conscientiously, its positive effect can be brought into play and the negative effects can be reduced to minimum. The project should be implemented. 7.2 Suggestions (1) The beef processing sub-projects are located in Qinhuangdao city and Huaihe River basin, the key area of national environment protection. These four plants should abide by national laws and regulations on environment protection, adopt cleaner production technology, recycle the production waste and select suitable pollution 33 control technology. The pollutants in effluent should not only meet the national discharge standards. but also decrease in later years. which can reduce the pollution load on local water environment. (2) The project construction department should enforce the environment management and monitoring during build-up and operation period under the guiding of local environment administrative department. especially for the waste water treatment facilities. In addition, environment training and education should also be provided for farners and other staff. (3) The investment on environment protection for some sub-projects is low, there should be more investment to control the negative influences effectively. (4) The potential influences of cattle production should be taken into consideration. The cattle population density should be reasonable, especially on village level, so that the shortage of feed and water resources and village environment degradation can be avoided. 34 Appendix I Resettlement Report of Hebei Province This information is providled byl Hebei Provincial Animal HusbandrY Bureaui which guarantees its accuracy and will inform the World Bank if anv- resettlement occurs that has not been foreseen Investigations into the proposed feedlots, marklets, service stations and slaughterhiouses have been carried out according to the World Bank-'s requirement and suggestions concerning resettlement issues. Result shows that no re settlement will take place in Anhui project areas. see table A 1-2. 1. Feedlots All the 97 feedlots are to be built or extended using wastelands or disused sites of other purposes. Of 22 feedlots with 300 cattle positions each, 10 feedlots are to be built on wasteland. 12 feedlots are to be built on the land disused by others. Of 75 feediots with 100 cattle positions each, 14 feedlots are to be built on wasteland, others are to be built on disused and. No resettlement is necessary in building the feedlots. The location and land requirement details are presented on table Al-1. 2. Support service system In the proposed system, 22 breeding centers and 22 vet stations at the county level, 75 breedina centers and 75 vet stations at the township level are to be built or expanded. They are all to improve the service functions of existing centers and stations, without building any new ones. No more land is needed. 3. feedlmill The expaLision of a feedmill is included in the project. The proposed expansion needs no more and thani the feedmill's existing yard. 4. Slaughterhiouse The newly-built Huxing Beef Processing Plant will use 4.3 hectares of land as its site whichi was formerly Llsed to store solid wastes by a bLuilding company. No people live there. No resettlement is inl\olved. Table Al-i Location and Land Requirement of Hebei Feedlots with 300 Cattle Position Each Citv/Countv Location of Land Land features feedlot required Waste Presentk (rnmu) land(mu) catlc arm(mu) 1. Shiliazi-uang 25 5 20 Gaocheno- WulizIluang. Lianzhou 5 Zhaoxian Beilitan, Nanbaishe 5 v Xinji Dongzludaie, Xinji 5 Jinzhou MianmacangkLu, Jinzhou S5v Jinxinlg Beipingwang. Weizhou D __ ._ _ 2. Baoding j30 30 Anguo Nongveiu, Xifuluo 5 v Rongcheng Xiveqiao, Nanzhang 5 v Qingyuan Sipingzhuang, Wuyi 5 v 35 VW'angdu Dongnanjiao, Xiancheng 5 v Gaobeidian Liangjiaying 5 v Zhuozlhou Dashiqiao S v 3. Langfang 20 5 15 Vi'enan Xianclien-, Wenan 5 Xianuhe Wubaihuxiang 5 Dacheno Zusicun, Wangcun 5 Guan Dongchang, Lirangdian 5 4. Tan2shan , 25 10 1 5 Fengznan Dazaizhuang. YinfengS 5 Qianan RuoVuan. KoL,1LIlai 5 Laotina IJiaxuzihan. Chengouan 5 Qianxi lDongg(uan. Santunyino 5 v Zunhlua Zhuslianzhuang, XiliucIlun5 v 5. QinhLiangdao 10 10 Chanmg]i Datianzhuang. Anshan 5 LLIlon-I 1Dadaowangzhuang, Yinzhuang 5 Total I 10 50 60 Appendix 2 Resettlement Report of Henan Province This i s17tOrlOiOn iS provided by Henan Provincial Animal Husbandr; Bureau which guarantees il. CICCra01Cv an2d will inform the T"orld Bank if anv resettlement occurs that has not been fbredUe) in this docunent. Investigations into the proposed feedlots, markets, service stations and slaughterhouses have been carried out according to the World Bank's requirement and suggestions concerning resettlement Issues. Result shows that no re settlement will take place in Anhui project areas. see table A2-2. 1. Feedlots In all the 75 feedlots wlhichi are proposed to be built, 36 of them will use wasteland as their sites. IS will use collective reserve land, 21will use the disuded land which was the former sites of other purposes. No resettlement is expected to occur. Locations and land use details are presented on table A2-l. 2. Other subprojects The following subprojects are all to be rebuiilt or expanded within their existing borders, which are the Zhoukou Beef Processing Plant, cattle markets at prefecture ortownship level, the Provincial Breeding Center, the Nanyang Breeding Center, Service centers or stations at prefecture, county. township or village level. No more land is needed for these subproject development. No resettlentment is involved. 36 Table A2-1 Location and Land Requirement of Henan Feedlots with 100 Cattle Position Each CirN/Coun\' Location of Land Land features feedlot required Waste presently (mu) land cattle farn Fangcheng Shangying, Qinglie 3 Xifeng. Liulle 3 _ Gutun. Guzhuanadian 3 _ Neixiang Baliaan. Shigong 3 V Xiezai, Yuguan 3 Dongwvangou. Tuandong 3 Xichuanu | Xitou. Shangji 3 _Houying. Gaoping 3 Xianuxang. Huan_zhuang 3 Slheqi Rundianuang, Taihe 3 Zhangchangzhuang, Qiaotou 3 Shangkou, Xiawua 3 Tangaie Lisongzhuang, Dongzaipu 3 Xiaochenzhuang, ShanIgtun 3 'Y'ufeicliang HuLyano 3_ _ Xinve Shouvizhan, Wanji 3 Majicun, Shangzihuang 3 Shouvizhan, LihepLi 3 YLuchen g Shouvizhan. Dianji 3 LicaiVuan. Duji 3 v Shouvizhan. GLIShU 3 Shanigiu Dulizhuang. Luile 3 Houcaolou, Fengqiao 3 v Suilou, Maogudui 3 Suixiall Xumuzlian. Bailou 3 Qianjii Youjitun3 Xumucaochang. Dichou 3 Xiavi Beijie, Huiting 3 _ Xiaohuqiao. Qihe 3 _ Wanving H uqiao 3 _ Tuocheng CllengzhLlang, Chenji 3 V YuLwangzhuang. Qitai 3 Cuiloucun, Huxiang 3 Yongclieng Xinqiaocun. Xinqiao 3 Jilincun, Jiangkou 3 _ Qiaozhuang, Peiqiao 3 _ lShanshlLli ShouLizhan, Bacun 3 37 LincLin. ShuzhUanc- 3 Gailiangzhan. Yaoji 3 I Taikang 1Niuchana. VVangji 3 _ LLuzIluang. Machang 3 Shizhuan-. Shanglang 3 LLIvi Taiginggong 3 K_ a aifaqu. XuanwLI 3_ Chenlou. Chenejiao 3 Huaivanc ZhouzIluang. BanekoL 3V BeitoL. Ahliane 3 Qiaolao 3 _ Slhenqiiu Liufucun, Liufu 3 LiLuvinacun. Zhaodevine 3 . - Lianegudone. Fengvine 3 Queslian |Gonglou. HulIliao 3 H_L__UiLI. Yifene 3 _ _GucIlengcun. Guchieng 3 Biyang Jizhuang, Yangce 3 ErpucLin, Yangojaji 3 _ Dongzhong, Chenzhuang 3 Suipino_ 0 LixiangloLI. HuaislIu 3 L Nonochancg. Chavasihan 3 v Linchang, Yushan 3 Runai Laocon, LLuodian 3 Zhangl izhuang. Shuitong 3_ _ DuzIluang, Laoqunmniao 3 P IIt u LWeiloucun, LitLin 3 Xindiancun. Xindiancun 3 Liangqiaocun, Shuanggiao 3 Xincai YuLLuanglu, Huanglou 3 v Zhenbei. Liqiao 3 Gailiangzhan. MitoLIsi 3 Wanchena Xiawanzhuang. Xindian 3 ChangdouIving. Hongniwan 3 Guodian, Lihe 3 Nanzhao Xudian. Nanhedian 3 Cuizhiangcun, Cuizhang 3 Zhengzhuang- Huanglludian 3 _ 38 Appendix 3 Resettlement Report of Shanxi Province This inl/Ur-mwion i.s provided by Shanxi Provincial A;niimal Husbandry BUI-eaU Wi'hiCh guarantees irs aIccuracI and 'will inZfornm tlhe Tt'ovid Bank iJ anu resetulemenm occurs that has n0o been foreseen in this document. Investigations into the proposed feedlots. markiets, service stations and slaughterhouses have been carried oLvt according to the World Bank's reqLiirement and suggestions concerning resettlement issues. Result sho,\s that no re settlement t, ill take place in Anhui project areas. see table A3-1. 1. Feedlots In all the 12 feedlots which are proposed to be built, 10 of them will use the disused land which was the former sites of other development projects, 2 will use wasteland. No resettlement is expected to occur. Locations and land use details are presented on table A3-1. 2. Other subprojects The folloc,ing subprojects are all to be rebuilt or expanded within their existing borders, which are 12 cattle markets at countN level, 3 service centers at prefecture level, 12 service centers at count! level, 100 service centers at township level, and a feedmill. No more land is needed for these subproject development. The expansion of the Provinceal BeefCattle Service Center requires 7.5 mu more land. A piece of flood land along the Fenlie River has been selected as the expanded site. No resettlentment is involved. Table A3-1 Resettlement Issues Outline for Shanxi Province Subpr-oject Amount of Current Number of Loss of Loss of Whether a Compensation land land use |persons dwellings income compensation or agencies required affected plan is in responsible (mu) p lace 12 feedlots 96 see Table / / / / A3-2 12 count%y60 existing I / / / County markets imarket Animal land Husbandrr BureaLu 1.0 flood land / / / / Provincial provincial Animal service Husbandry centel Bureau 12 county state- I / / / County service owned land Service center Center 100 state- / / / / Township township owned land Service service Center cenitel . cent ferd l state- / I / / |the Feedmill 39 |owned land Table A3-2 Location and Land Requirement of Shanxi Feedlots Citv/Count\ Location of Land Land featules feedlot req Luired Waste Presently LI(mu) land cattle farim Daixian NangLIan. Yangmingpu !0 Fanzhi Xiangnan. Xingvuan 10 WLItai Dongye 12 Xinzhou Yongmllaozlhuao. Bomina 1I Xi\ ang Nongcchang. Duzhuang 9 Shouvang Yousengzhluan. Pingtou 10 Pin2vao Lijiagiao, Wanjiazhuang ]0 v Qixian JTaicun. XiliuzIli 13 _ Hongdong Xingwang. Dicun 9 v Xianmfen Niuchang. Xijia 11 v Anze Lingnancun, Hechun 10 v Linfen Liangcun, Tunli 10 O Appendix 4 Resettlement Report of Anhui Province This informnalion is provided by Anhui Plrovincial Animal Husbandry Bur eau Mwhich guarantees its aCCurl'aCt ' and r'ill inform7n the 'or-ld Bank if any resettlement occurs thal has not been foreseen in this doculnent, Investigations into the proposed feedlots, markets, service stations and slaughterhouses have been carried out according to the World Bank's requirement and suggestions concerning resettlement issues. ResLIlt shows that no re settlement will take place in Anhui project areas. see table A4-2. 1. Feedlots 20 feedlots are to be bulilt with the land leased from the collective authorities or other sources of laud. The lent incomiies become a part of financial incomes of the village communes whicih own the land. Democratic measures are to be tak-en to prevent the rent incomes from being used by some individuals. Details are presented in table A4-1. Table A4-1 Land use of feedlots Location of feedlot Number of feedlot Scale of each Land required for Land acquisition feedlot(cattle eaclh feedlot(mu) approach heads) Suixi County 8 200 5 disused kiln yard wasteland I 500 30 the sponsor is the 40 state farm itself SLIxian PrefectuL-e 10 500 30 leased collective land with rent of 2000 _________________ Y~~~~~~ ~~uani/year/m-u Hefei Cit\ 1 400 10 leased collective land with rent of 2000 yuan/year/in Li 2. Service centers The Provincial Breeding Center and the Fuyang Breeding Center are strengthened without any more land expansion.Township service stations are to be improved within existing locations. 3. Cattle marliets LiLIlin Market in Mengcheng COunty and WVuyu Mark-et in Sixian County are to be rebuilt x\ithin each existing borders. Sanhe Market in Changfeng County. Hefei City is to be expanded witlh the hilly land not suitable for farming. 4. Slaughterhouses GuoNang Beef Processing Plant and lHejinlai Plant are to be extended within their former plant yards. No resettlemilent is necessary for Anhui project area. T able A4-2 Resettlement Issues Outline for Anhui Province Subproject Amount of Current Number of Loss of Loss of Whether a Compensation lahd land use persons dwellings income compensatio or agencies reqUired(rn affected n plan is in responsible ____ ____ __ L) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ p lace building 20 330 wasteland 0 N N Y relit 2no( NUa,a/m.L feedlots disused paid to \illanc kiiln yard comilmilnee service existing 0 N N N centers Center land bLlilding 3 240 existing 0 N N Y veiit 2000) La markets nmarket land paid to viliage hilly ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~commitlee wasteland expanding 2 existing 0 N N N slaughter- Plant yard houses 41