Rampers, page-2

Dbl
That was laughable post by the ramper.



Attached is metro tunnel report

****An estimated 2,033,500 m³ of spoil would be generated by the construction of Melbourne Metro (approximately 613,000 m³ from the tunnels, 104,200 m³ from the portals and 1,316,300 m³ from the stations). Of this, it is anticipated that 1,349,300 m3 would be clean fill.
During construction of Melbourne Metro, for all precincts, there would be limited opportunities to re-use excavated clean fill on-site. This spoil would have to be removed off-site as a waste or be directed for re-use at another site – a positive outcome from the project. Potential re-use would be subject to further testing to determine the final waste classification and geotechnical suitability of this spoil, in accordance with EPA regulations and guidelines.

As noted in Section 20.5.3, there is a high likelihood of Melbourne Metro encountering potential and actual acid sulfate soil and acid sulfate rock. This means that a high proportion of the spoil excavated from the tunnels (about 221,000 m³) would be expected to be acid sulfate soil or acid sulfate rock. The potential impacts from disturbing acid sulfate soil and acid sulfate rock include human health impacts, adverse effects on aquatic environments and the corrosion of concrete and steel infrastructure from acidified groundwater.
Acid sulfate impacts would be managed in accordance with EPA guidelines and the Industrial Waste Management Policy (Waste Acid Sulfate Soils). This would include implementing an environmental management plan that includes:
Identification of the location and extent of any acid sulfate soil and rock (primarily Fresh Melbourne Formation rock and Coode Island Silt) within the project boundary
Assessment of the potential environmental risks of disturbance
Identification of suitable sites for the re-use or disposal of any acid sulfate material.
Prevention of acid generation is the preferred management option. However, a number of off-site waste management options are available for treating acid sulfate material extracted during tunnelling activities, where prevention is not possible. These options include:
Treating spoil with limestone
Inhibiting oxidation of pyrite in spoil by underwater disposal or by encapsulation within a water saturated engineered cover
Preventing leaching of pyritic spoil by encapsulation within a long-term containment system designed to limit infiltration.
Further testing would be undertaken during the project’s detailed design and construction phases to determine the most effective management option.
Acid sulfate soil can only be disposed of or re-used on sites that have an EMP approved by the EPA or at a landfill with the appropriate licence. On-site re-use of this material is not considered practical.

Disposal of Prescribed Industrial Waste
While most of the spoil material encountered by the project would be clean fill, some material is anticipated to be prescribed industrial waste due to likely elevated heavy metal concentrations as a result of previous industrial activity. An estimated 133,200 m3 of prescribed industrial waste would be generated during construction (approximately 25,900 m3 from the portals and 107,300 m3 from the stations). It is anticipated that there would not be a significant volume of prescribed industrial waste generated during tunnelling.
Prescribed Industrial Waste generated by Melbourne Metro would be disposed of at facilities licenced to accept the waste or to a treatment facility that can reduce the concentrations of contaminants prior to disposal. Anticipated waste volumes are expected to be accommodated within the parameters of existing licenced facilities within greater Melbourne, minimising the impacts arising from the creation of new sites or intensifying the use of existing sites.
Most environmental impacts from waste management and landfilling relate to the disposal of municipal putrescible waste from within metropolitan Melbourne. The disposal of a relatively small volume of contaminated soil as a result of Melbourne Metro would be unlikely to lead to a significant additional impact.
The precinct-level assessments summarised in Sections 20.8 to 20.15 assume that each precinct would generate some Prescribed Industrial Waste, which would be disposed of as described above.