1 RPS Group Plc Europes leading environmental, planning and - - PDF document

1

1

Great Lakes Wind Council April 23rd 2009 Environmental Issues, Monitoring & Assessment: The European Approach Jonny Lewis Offshore Renewables Manager, RPS Energy

2

RPS Group Plc

1 2 Introduction to RPS Group Brief History of UK Offshore Wind 4 Project Development: Headline Issues 3 Offshore Wind: Key Environmental Issues

2

3

• Europe’s leading environmental, planning and

engineering consultancy

• Employing over 4,000 personnel in 80 offices (including

Houston, Calgary and Halifax) and over 800 associates

• Independent consultants operating worldwide
• In depth experience of nearshore and offshore surveys

and related offshore structures, engineering construction and installation (> 5000 projects)

• Projects in over 100 countries per year
• Trading since 1970 & FTSE250 Company
• One of only 12 companies on the LSE that have

increased revenue and profits every year in the past 10 years

• Capitalised at more than US$ 1 billion
• Revenue ~ US$ 700 million in 2007

RPS Group Plc

4

RPS: Offshore Renewables Project Experience

Key Clients:

Airtricity AMEC Bluewater Wind Centrica Crown Estate DONG E.ON Renewables Elsam Engineering Energi E2 GE Wind Energy Lunar Energy Marine Current Turbines Naikun Inc. NI Electricity Norsk Hydro Npower Renewables Open Hydro RES Scottish Power Scottish & Southern Electricity Shell Wind StatoilHydro

Selected Sites:

Burbo Bank Cromer Delaware, US Docking Shoal EMEC Gunfleet Sands 1 & 2 Gwynt y Mor Humber Gateway Kentish Flats Lincs London Array Long Island, US Lynn & Inner Dowsing Naikun, Vancouver Race Bank Rhyl Flats Scarweather Sands Shell Flats Sheringham Shoals Triton Knoll Walney West of Duddon Westernmost Rough

Over 100 offshore renewable energy projects since 2001

3

5

RPS Group Plc

1 2 Introduction to RPS Group Brief History of UK Offshore Wind 4 Project Development: Headline Issues 3 Offshore Wind: Key Environmental Issues

6

• Blyth Offshore became the UK's first offshore

wind farm when it was commissioned in December 2000.

• Crown Estate owns almost all the UK coastline
• ut to 12 nautical miles.
• ‘Round 1’ - 18 sites of up to 30 turbines (1.5GW)
• ‘Round 2’ - 15 projects of up to 7.2 GW
• ‘Round 3’ – Target of 25 GW by 2020

Brief History of Offshore Wind in the UK

4

7

Why go Offshore [in the UK]?

• Better wind resource compared to onshore
• Restricted availability of onshore sites
• Planning constraints onshore
• Offshore consents from Central Government
• Strategic framework (SEA) for offshore development
• Out of sight
• Capacity for larger projects & turbines (> 5MW?)
• Offshore expertise from UK N. Sea Oil & Gas Industry
• Increasing reliance on ‘energy imports’

8

Brief History of Offshore Wind in the UK

UK Offshore (Sept. 08)

• Operational

– 7 projects – 403.8 MW

• Under Construction

– 8 projects – 1130 MW

• Consented

– 9 projects – 3,413 MW

• In planning

– 4 projects – 1,570 MW

• Possess lease &

undergoing studies

– 5 projects – 2,740 MW

5

9

Round 3 – additional 25 GW by 2020

10

Round 3 – additional 25 GW by 2020

6

11

Round 3 – additional 25 GW by 2020

12

Round 3 – additional 25 GW by 2020 The Deeper Seas……

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 MW 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 Water Depth (m) Round 3 Round 2 Round 1

7

13

The Crowded Seas……

• Environmental issues addressed through strategic zonal development
• Marine Spatial Planning (no formal mechanism for MSP yet)
• SEA Process

14

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

• Issued on 26th January 2009 for

consultation

• Considered 3 scenarios:
• 1. Not to offer any areas for

leasing/licensing

• 2. To proceed with a leasing and

licensing programme

• 3. To restrict the areas offered for

leasing and licensing temporally or spatially

• Consultation period ends 22nd April

2009

• Key issues identified by the SEA

relate to proposing a 22km coastal buffer

8

15

Round 3 – Timescales for Development

16

UK Offshore Wind Capacity

9

17

Challenges

• Further Offshore - Rising Costs
• Supply Chain Bottlenecks
• Limited personnel with experience
• Lack of environmental data
• Grid connection constraints
• Limited choice of contractors/ suppliers
• Unproven technology (> 3.6MW)
• Rising O&M Costs
• Deep water engineering

18

RPS Group Plc

1 2 Introduction to RPS Group Brief History of UK Offshore Wind 4 Project Development: Headline Issues 3 Offshore Wind: Key Environmental Issues

10

19

Physical Environment (1)

• Extensive coastal process studies undertaken for projects to date
• Concentrated on effects on wave, tide and sediment transport
• Detailed data collection and computational modelling

20

Physical Environment (2)

• Extensive work also done on scour effects (impact on structures and

seabed habitats

• Current understanding: whilst near-field effects do arise, far-field

effects have not been identified. However, majority of data is from piled structures only

Arklow Bank Scroby Sands

11

21

Biological Environment - Overview

• Loss/damage to seabed habitats
• Damage to fish spawning habitats
• EMF effects on fish
• Collision risk and displacement of bird populations
• Noise impacts on fish and marine mammals
• Loss/damage to inter-tidal habitats (export cable laying)
• Damage to designated sites (European and UK Law)

Key Impacts (construction and operation)

• Seabed habitats
• Fish resources

(spawning grounds)

• Birds
• Marine mammals
• Inter-tidal seabed

habitats

• Designated

conservation sites

Key Receptors

22

Biological Environment - Seabed Habitats Case Study: Gunfleet Sands OWF (175MW)

• Extensive seabed surveys, using remote (geophysical) methods and

grab/trawl surveys

• Undertaken pre and post-construction
• Localised effects with no regional-scale impacts

12

23

Biological Environment – Turbine Colonisation Case Study: North Hoyle OWF (90MW)

• Photographs showing North Hoyle turbine towers and associated

young whiting (left) and dense settlement of mussels (right)

• bserved during 2004 monitoring surveys

24

Biological Environment – Protected Species/Habitats Case Study: Lincs OWF (250MW)

• Key issues surrounding a discrete reef habitat (Sabellaria spinulosa)
• Protected under European law, but

fishing activity can trawl over this habitat

• Presence of this ephemeral feature

has resulted in major changes to export cable routes and the need to micro-site turbine positions

• This is still a “live” issue and one that presents a key challenge

13

25

Biological Environment – Subsea Noise and Fish Spawning Case Study: London Array OWF (1000MW)

• Subsea noise impacts

from pile driving on fish spawning

• Project close to herring

spawning grounds

• Uncertain spatial

distribution of these grounds

• Underwater noise

attenuation modelling – variable water depths

• Shallow water depth

phased piling mid-Feb to mid-Apr

26

Biological Environment – Bird Collision Risk Case Study: Lynn & Inner Dowsing OWF

• Radar surveys undertaken pre and

post-turbine installation

• Focus on pink-footed geese, in

particular potential cumulative collision risk effects with other OWF projects

• Initial data indicates avoidance

reactions to turbines with minimal collision

• Follow-up surveys planned (Oct 09)

to add to knowledge base

14

27

Biological Environment – Bird Displacement Case Study: London Array OWF

• Developer-led surveys ID’s large

numbers of Red Throated Divers

• EIA determined that key potential

impact was displacement

• 1000MW project phased to enable

monitoring to be carried out

• Strict monitoring conditions now

imposed

28

Human Environment – Commercial Fishing

• Key objections to all OWF projects in UK

waters

• Key issues raised include loss of fishing

grounds, displacement of fishing activity, navigation risk, damage to fish stocks

• “Disruption payments” during construction

phase

• Fishing permitted within 50m of turbines

during operational phase

• Trials have demonstrated that this is

feasible but many fishermen will choose not to due to risk/insurance reasons

15

29

Human Environment – Commercial Shipping

• Significant issue for many UK

projects to date

• Robust Navigational Risk

Assessments need to be carried out

• Seasonal radar surveys to

assess baseline shipping traffic

• Traffic Separation Schemes have had to be implemented on some

projects (IMO approval required – timescale issue)

• Detailed specifications set out for turbine lighting and markings

30

Human Environment – Landscape & Visual

• One of the key issues to date for UK OWF projects
• Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments (LVIA) required for all

projects

• Use of visual exclusion buffers (8km, 13km, 22km..?) by UK

Government

• Organised “anti” lobby groups for some OWF projects
• No project yet refused on visual issues, although some have had to

revise site size and array layout to gain consent

• Reliance on photomontages and wireframes

16

31

Human Environment – Aviation & Radar

• Issue that has slowed issue of consents for many OWF projects
• Objections from MoD and NATS on radar issues
• Industry-wide technical solutions being sought
• High-level consultation via BWEA and MoD/NATS

32

Human Environment – Maritime Archaeology

• Desk-based data and geophysical

data used to ID wrecks

• Also a growing interest in “paleo-

environmental” issues

17

33

Human Environment – Maritime Archaeology

34

UK Offshore: Key Environmental Issues

• Knowledge base is rapidly growing due to monitoring of built projects
• Significance of issues is changing, with old issues becoming less sensitive

but new issues emerging

• Current view is that seabed impacts are less for OWF than for other

established UK offshore industries (O&G, port development, sand & gravel dredging)

• Uncertainties still exist however, e.g. effects of subsea noise on marine

mammal behaviour and fish spawning

• Offshore industry needs to utilise expensive monitoring data via “adaptive

management” to close out certain issues and ensure that we continue to “learn by doing”

18

35

UK Offshore: Rd3 Environmental Issues……?

• Calm water ahead……? Probably not!
• The move into deeper waters poses new challenges and different

physical, biological and human environment issues

• Increased scope for cumulative impacts exists due to step-change in

numbers of turbines built

• A need exists for continued monitoring of key issues to maintain the

knowledge base of offshore development

• Significant changes also face us offshore via changes in Planning and

Marine Legislation

36

RPS Group Plc

1 2 Introduction to RPS Group Brief History of UK Offshore Wind 4 Project Development: Headline Issues 3 Offshore Wind: Key Environmental Issues

19

37

Offshore Project Development: Headline Issues

• Timescales: 8-9 years from site selection to power generation
• Cost: High costs of development and construction ($4.3m/MW)
• Stakeholders: Conflicting interests offshore (fisheries, navigation,

military, oil & gas, sand dredging)

• Supply Chain: Key issue on UK projects. In particular, turbines and

installation vessels (problem will improve)

• Electrical Grid Infrastructure: High demand, limited capacity, changing

regime (OFTO)

• Policy and Legislation: No marine planning system; new IPC proposed,

introduction of National Policy Statements (NPS’s)

38

Project Development: Timescales (500MW project)

Power generation Offshore construction Onshore construction Award of contracts Construction procurement Full site geotechnical Installation of met masts Initial geotechnical Pre-FEED studies IPC determination stage Submission of ES to IPC Consultation on draft ES EIA (onshore & offshore) Baseline surveys EIA scoping b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a Yr9 Yr8 Yr7 Yr6 Yr5 Yr4 Yr3 Yr2 Yr1 Activity

20

39

Project Development: Timescales

• Minimum 24 months baseline bird data
• 6 months consultation on ES
• 9 months examination and determination stage by IPC
• Procurement linked strongly to consent award
• Offshore construction often affected by “environmental windows” – 4

month piling restriction on may UK projects = $25 million cost to project

• Offshore construction undertaken over multiple years

40

Project Development: Costs Example: 1200MW project Overall EIA cost (onshore & offshore): $1.2million (includes some surveys) Additional surveys: Geophysical: $600k Bird surveys: $1.1million Onshore cable option studies: $110k Metocean: $100k Navigation: $75k Does not include…..

• Geotechnical surveys
• Met mast construction and installation
• Grid applications
• Engineering design (pre-FEED)

21

41

Project Development: Stakeholders

• On-going issues with commercial

fisheries sector and military and civil aviation stakeholders

• Emerging issues with commercial

navigation sector (compensation)

• On-going debate with nature

conservation groups on key issues

• Recent SEA process has raised

visual issues high up the agenda (22km buffer proposed) so visual issues still important

42

Project Development: Supply Chain

• Key issue in recent years due to turbine problems and shortage of

suitable vessels

• Problem will improve with increase in turbine suppliers and new build
• f installation vessels

22

43

Project Development: Electrical Grid Infrastructure

• Key issue to be resolved (where do we “plug in” 25GW….?)
• New “OFTO” regime proposed (OFfshore Transmission Owner)
• Will create a defined boundary between offshore wind farm owner

and offshore grid owner

44

Project Development: Policy & Legislation

• Lots of uncertainty about nature and scope of the NPS’s and the IPC
• New “Marine Management Organisation” will also be introduced in

2009

• Marine Bill going through UK parliament may introduce Marine

Spatial Planning

• Marine Protected Area/Marine Conservation Zones legislation is

emerging: synergy with offshore renewables yet to be fully explored

23

45

UK Offshore:

“Many things have troubled me in life…but very few of them ever happened”

Mark Twain