offshore renewable energy in scottish...

Offshore Renewable Energy in Scottish Waters

Policy, Planning and Licensing for the Present and Future

Licensing context: Development applications for wind farms in the Moray Firth and the requirement

for CIA

Gayle HollandMarine Scotland, Marine Laboratory, Aberdeen

The Moray Firth Wind Farms

BOWL application:• up to 1000 MW (277 turbines) • received April 2012• addendum submitted May 2013

MORL – 3 wind farm applications • Telford, Stevenson and MacColl• total of up to 1500 MW (339 turbines)• received August 2012 • additional information submitted June 2013

Rochdale envelope and CIARochdale (design) envelope approach made CIA even more challenging• Numbers and dimensions of turbines• Foundation types• Installation methods

Both developments consented March 2014Consents granted: • BOWL 750 MW (140 turbines) • MORL 1,116 MW (186 turbines)

CIA – issues to be resolvedThroughout the consultation CIA was identified as the main concern:

• Marine mammals• Birds• Migratory fish• Marine fish and commercial fisheries• Navigation• Aviation • Defence• Visual impacts

Basis for Cumulative Impact Assessment for Moray Firth

offshore wind farms

Ian Davies

Marine Scotland Science

Planning authority

Licensing authority

Science support

Marine Scotland’s roles in renewable energy

EC EIA Directive. Assess effects on:

Human beingsFauna and flora

Landscape/seascapeMaterial assetsCultural heritage

EC Habitats Directive: Effects on protected sites and species

Special Protection AreasSpecial Areas of Conservation

Requirement for CIA

Moray Firth wind farms

Marine mammal cumulative impact assessments

Species and SACs considered

© University of Aberdeen© University of Aberdeen

© University of Aberdeen

Seabird species of negligible concern

Black‐legged kittiwake, Northern fulmar, Great skua and Arctic skua

SNCBs advised no adverse effect on site integrity using a qualitative assessment due to the minimal predicted effects.

Great black‐backed gull, Herring gull, Puffin, Razorbill and Guillemot)

Full quantitative assessment required

Seabird species of greater concern

• Kate Brookes –Marine mammals

• Jared Wilson ‐Seabirds

Details of issues and approaches

Cumulative Impact Assessment of effects of renewables developments on mammals in the Moray Firth

Kate Brookes


Structure

• Species and SACs considered

• Methodology 1: seal assessment framework

• Methodology 2: fine scale “days of disturbance”

• Addressing gaps in understanding


Species and SACs considered




Developed by Aberdeen University and Moray Firth wind farm developers

Assess effects to individuals and puts into the context of the wider population

Used by each development individually and also cumulatively


Methodology 1: seal assessment framework

Overlays noise contours on species abundance and distribution maps, in order to calculate the number of animals exposed to particular “doses” of noise





Consequence of noise exposure at different levels is determine by expert judgement, in the absence of empirical data

Reduced survival and breeding success included as parameters in population model with the effects applied throughout the period of construction

Harbour seal scenarios, run on simultaneous piling at MORL and BOWL for 4 years

Sensitivity of PTS and disturbance levels tested by running with different parameters




Methodology 2: Fine scale “days of disturbance”

25 days piling

36 days piling

4 years piling

Increased vessel traffic

For the whole east coast population, more than 50% of simulations had recovered to original size by the time wind farm piling ended

For subset of population within the SAC, declined by between 4 and 6 individuals compared with undisturbed model runs

Invergordon and Nigg both committed to significant reductions in impact piling



East coast passive acoustic monitoring, carried out by Marine Scotland Science

Provides baseline of dolphin and porpoise distribution

Developers’ site specific monitoring can supplement to assess changes in distribution resulting from pile driving


Addressing gaps in understanding

Public/private funding – Scottish Government funded baseline data collection prior to consent being granted


Addressing gaps in understanding

CIA of effects of renewables developments on mammal & seabirds in the Moray Firth:

Ornithological Common Approach

Jared Wilson

Seabird speciesSpecies East

Caithness Cliffs SPA

North Caithness Cliffs SPA

Hoy SPA

Fulmar

Shag

Red‐throated diver

Great black‐backedgull

Herring gull

Kittiwake

Great skua

Arctic skua

Guillemot

Razorbill

Puffin

Different ApproachesDisplacement Collision% of birds displaced avoidance ratebirds on water or all potentially vulnerable breeding season% of birds adult nocturnal activity% of adults breeding flap/ gliding flight% of adults from Colony X, Y and Z Flight speedmean, peak or mean peak abundance estimate attraction to survey vessels% of displaced birds that fail to breed successfully rotor speed – annual mean, seasonal meanApportioning ThresholdsSNH guidance note Population Viability Analysis (PVA)At‐sea flight direction information Potential Biological Removal (PBR)GPS tracking data Starting population usedStarting populations used What is acceptable effectSPA vs non‐SPA colonies included Maintain +ve trajectory

f‐value for use in PBRPBR in relation to productivity effects

Does it matter?

• Difficult to identify differences in approaches taken.• Lack of transparency if different approaches used without clear

rationale• Unclear whether different approaches can be combined for CIA• May artificially bias conclusions for/ against one project• May result in CIA conclusions being opaque or open to challenge

Common Currency• Discussions between developers, SNCBs and MSS

• Aim to reconcile any differences where possible

• Clarification of reasons for any remaining differences

• Re‐running collision or displacement effect assessments using Common Currency as required

Collision ExampleHERGU ECC HERGU ECC

CRM MORLRunning

Total BOWLRunning

TotalBird ParametersBird Length 0.61 0.61Wing span 1.44 1.44Flight speed 12.8 12.8Noct Activity 2 2Flap/Glide Flapping FlappingOption 1, 2, 3 3 3Avoidance Rate 98% 98%Windfarm scenario WCS MLSAnnual Collisions 136.1 182.09Breeding Season Collisions 20.4 12.72Non breeding season Collisions 115.7 169.37

Collision ApportioningCRM collisions 20.4 20.40 12.72 12.72Prop from SPA 0.375 3.83 0.851 5.41Prop immature birds 0.43 1.64 0.625 3.38Prop adults 0.57 2.18 0.375 1.32exclude sabatical adults 0.35 1.42 0.35 0.46Total SPA birds 3.83 5.41

Thresholds of Change

ABC Tool

Likelihood Term Likelihood of the occurrence Probability (P)

Virtually certain > 99.1% >0.991

Extremely likely 95.1-99.0% 0.951-0.990

Very likely 90.1-95.0% 0.901-0.950

Likely 66.1-90.0% 0.661-0.900

About as likely as not 33.0-66.0% 0.330-0.660

Unlikely 10.1-32.9% 0.101-0.329

Very unlikely 5.1-10.0% 0.051-0.100

Extremely unlikely 1.1-5.0% 0.011-0.050

Exceptionally unlikely < 1% <0.01

What Next?

• Lessons learned to feed into advice and guidance.

• More strategic approach e.g. PVAs for key colonies/ populations, estimating effects at a regional scale?

Licensing context: Development applications for wind farms in the Moray Firth and the requirement

for CIA

Roger MayMarine Scotland, Marine Laboratory, Aberdeen

Migratory fish• ISSUES – HRA. Concerns principally around Construction Noise and EMF Fields.

Whilst the ES did not raise serious issues the stakeholders involved were concerned about the high level of unknowns.

• ACTIONS – Developer interaction with stakeholders did not provide a way forward and ASFB objected. Marine Scotland Science therefore took forward the need for a strategy to provide reassurance to stakeholders and a means to identify and mitigate against impacts.

• SOLUTIONS‐ Group‐ Following publication of a Marine Scotland scoping report, Marine Scotland initiated a process to develop a national strategy to coordinate and align research and monitoring in this area. The overall aim is to develop a national strategy to investigate the potential for interactions between diadromousfish and wind, wave and tidal renewable energy developments. This process was commenced in May 2013 with facilitated stakeholder engagement. The areas of research and monitoring prioritised through this engagement process are being incorporated in to proposed National Strategy work packages. The work packages identified in the proposed national strategy will be assessed and scoped to identify project feasibility and costing's by MSS. The National Strategy is currently being finalised for publication shortly.

• CONSENT CONDITIONS – Annex D/annex 2/30, Piling strategy Annex D/annex 2/11

Marine fish• ISSUES ‐ EIA assessment found impacts from the two projects on fish and shellfish

species to be primarily around construction. Herring (Spawning), Cod, Scallops, Sandeels.

• ACTIONS – Developer engaged with stakeholders principally Marine Scotland Science. Additional surveys were carried out prior to ES submission.

• SOLUTIONS – Individual ‐Monitoring post consent to include further monitoring (dependent on Rochdale Envelope if gravity bases used do not require herring Spawning to be monitored). Potential Limits on activities around spawning times. To be captured as part of Project Environmental Monitoring Programme Plan (PEMP). Covers Birds, Cod, Herring, Sandeels, Diadramous Fish, Benthic Communities and Seabed Scour.

• Group‐ To be established Moray Firth Regional Advisory Group (MFRAG) to advise on outputs of monitoring. (27)

• Group – Scottish Strategic Marine Environment Group (SSMEG) (28)• CONSENT CONDITIONS ‐ Annex D/annex 2 /26, 33, 34

Commercial fisheries• ISSUES – EIA – Commercial fishing takes place both on the area of the

developments and along the cable routes to shore. Whitefish, Squid, Scallops and Shellfish

• ACTIONS – Developers met with local fishermen and established the working group

• SOLUTIONS Group – Moray Offshore Wind Developers Group‐ Commercial Fisheries Working Group. Marine Scotland will model socio economic impacts on fishermen of reduced fishing opportunities both short and longer term. Marine Scotland will commission a report to look into the real impacts of the construction and operation of offshore windfarms.

• CONSENT CONDITIONS‐ Annex D/ annex 2/ 31, Fisheries Liaison Annex D/ annex 2/ 32

Navigation

• ISSUES – EIA – Chamber of Shipping stated that the projects were in an area of relatively low shipping but raised concerns over cumulative impacts of the two projects. NLB unable to finalise requirements (Rochdale envelope) for lighting but will feed into the Development Specification and Layout Plan.

• ACTIONS – Did not require additional actions post ES• SOLUTIONS – Individual developer to provide DSLP for consultation, Navigational

Safety Plan, Lighting and Marking Plan (LMP)• CONSENT CONDITIONS Annex D/ annex 2/ 12, NSP Annex D/ annex 2/ 17, LMP

Annex D/ annex 2/ 19

Aviation

• ISSUES – EIA – Principal issue was impact on Radar but also concerns on Helicopter routes National Air Traffic Services (NATS) objected 28/08/2012 removed 2/12/13 (16 months from submission). Major Risk to timelines. No major problems from CAA for individual airports

• ACTIONS‐ Developer worked with NATS to agree and formalise a mitigation system this required not just an agreement in principal but a formal legal agreement.

• SOLUTIONS –Individual – Agreement between NATS and Developer• CONSENT CONDITIONS –Annex D/ annex 2/ 21, 22

Defence MOD/DIO

• ISSUES – EIA – Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) Principal issue was impact on Radar objected 1/11/2012 removed final 3/6/2013 (10 months from submission). Major Risk to timelines.

• ACTIONS‐ Developer worked with DIO to agree and formalise a mitigation system this required not just an agreement in principal but a formal legal agreement.

• SOLUTIONS –Individual – Agreement between DIO and Developer. Whilst combined solutions might be feasible consented projects may not be built out on time or at all.

• CONSENT CONDITIONS –Annex D/ annex 2/ 20

Visual impacts

• ISSUES – EIA – The cumulative visual impact of the two projects was assessed in the context of their individual Rochdale Envelopes.

• ACTIONS – In early phases of the EIA this required a lot of cooperation between principal stakeholders (SNH/JNCC/Local Authorities) to agree methodologies and viewpoints. Did not require additional actions post ES.

• SOLUTIONS – Individual ‐ Development Specification and Layout Plan – to give final details of what is being built (remove Rochdale envelope). Design Statement (DS) to show final visual layout. Ensure removal at end of use decommissioning plan to DECC. Ensure that inactive turbines are repaired or removed. NB while the cumulative visual impact was looked at there is no attempt to co‐ordinate the combined visual impact of the two projects.

• CONSENT CONDITIONS DSLP Annex D/ annex 2/ 12, DS Annex D/ annex 2/ 13, Decommissioning Annex D/ annex 2/ 3, removal of devices that do not operate Annex D/ annex 2/ 5

Good Practice for CIA

• Greater emphasis on the pre‐application process

• Regional developer groups

• Work collaboratively to address key issues

• Early engagement and continued communication with stakeholders

• Sharing/standardising approaches and information gathering – across agencies and industry

• Using lessons learned from the Moray Firth to inform future applications

Contact

• Marine Scotland – Licensing Operations Team• Marine Laboratory PO Box 101• 375 Victoria Road Aberdeen AB11 (DB• Direct Line +44 (0)1224 285579• Fax +44 (0) 1224295524• [email protected]• Web:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/Licensing/marine/Applications

Scenario Mapping for Offshore Renewable Energy in Scottish Waters

David PrattProject Lead – Sectoral Marine Planning & Scenario Mapping for Offshore Renewable Energy

Blues Seas Green Energy (BSGE)Plan for Offshore Wind Energy ‐ 2011

Projects at LicensingStage‐ Islay‐ Inch Cape‐ Neart na Gaoithe ‐ Forth Array‐ Beatrice

25 Medium-Term Areas of Search – starting point for current Sectoral Plan development process

In addition to BSGE:- 2 Round 3 Zones

- Seagreen- MORL

Draft Sectoral Marine Plans – Wind, Wave & Tidal Options - 2013

• Ports– National Renewables Infrastructure Plan– National Renewables Infrastructure Fund

• Strategic Grid– Route to Market ‐Marine Grid – Cable landing corridors?

• Raw materials– Aggregate extraction – marine / terrestrial?

• Human Resources– Colleges / Re‐training?

• Community Engagement– Implications? Benefits?

Offshore Renewables – Onshore Planning

‘ Tiree Scenario Mapping’

Argyll Array – Tiree Scenario MappingOnshore implications due to proposed offshore development

Scenario 1 – O&M Base Scenario 2 – Offshore Platform

Scenario 3 – Offshore Mothership Scenario 4 – O&M Base / Mothership

Scenario 1‐4Projected needs

4321

Jobs on Tiree

Houses on Tireenew build

School Pupilsprimary & secondary

Built Development

Helicopter Flightsper day return flights

Population Growth

‘ Potential Roll‐out Scenario Mapping / Masterplanning’

October 2012 1

2

3

4

5

6

1. Forth & Tay

2. Moray Firth

3. Pentland Firth & Orkney Waters

4. Solway Firth?

5. Western Isles

6. Shetland?

7. Argyll?

• Pan Scotland and Regional Issue ‐ Realising economic development potential – Consultants appointed Sept 2013 – CH2M Hill

• Scottish Public Sector Initiative– Marine Scotland, The Scottish Government, The Crown

Estate, East Coast Renewables, Scottish Enterprise, and Highlands & Islands Enterprise

• Need to: – Respect confidentiality – Enterprise Agency initiatives – Respect Local Government competitiveness to attract

manufacturing

• Timetable for completion – Summer 2014

Project – East and North East Regions

Project Scenarios

• Mapping of Developer Scenarios• 4 Offshore Wind Developers

– EDPR, Repsol, Mainstream, SSE• Competition vs Co‐operation, time to work together• Developers will benefit from local supply chain evidence Base

• Project EIAs –• Scope of Rochdale Envelopes• Socio‐economic Impact Chapters• Access development phasing• Project pipeline and orders profiling

• Supply Chain, Resource Mapping & Assessment

East and North East Regions• Manufacturing and Assembly Port Strategies

• Developers, Manufacturers, Ports and Local Government • SE, HIE and SDI

– GEG identified exemplar, but others well placed

• However, there are significant market challenges….• EMR ‐ Developers require CfD to achieve FID

– Grid Connection– Environmental Consent– Economic Case

• Reduce CAPEX and OPEX, bigger turbines, less structures• Access to greater wind resource• Improve ‘affordability’ ‐ increased Rates of Return

– Supply Chain Plan

• Benefit realisation – master‐planning?

Questions?

• Further Information ‐

• Offshore Renewable Energy Planning Webpage• http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marineenergy/Planning

• Offshore Renewable Energy Planning Mailbox• [email protected]

offshore renewable energy in scottish...

Documents