Offshore wind policy statement 2020 update: consultation analysis

3. Additional Actions

This section presents an analysis of responses to question two of the consultation:

What additional actions do you believe should be taken by the Scottish Government, UK Government and agencies in order to realise the full potential of Scotland’s offshore wind sector?

Almost two thirds of responses (51 – 12 individuals and 39 organisations) suggested further action should be taken, while the remaining 28 responses (23 individuals and 5 organisations) noted that no further action should be taken. One response did not comment on what further action should be taken.

Further action required

This section covers the 51 responses (12 individuals and 39 organisations) that suggested further action should be taken in response to the proposal to increase the Scottish Government’s offshore wind ambition:

Many responses highlighted the importance of actions to reduce any impact on environment associated with increasing the Scottish Government’s offshore wind ambition:

• A few individual and several organisational responses expressed concern over the cumulative impacts of offshore wind farms on the environment. Actions identified suggested: only progressing the least carbon intensive projects, using locations and technology which cause minimal disruption to the environment, and using expertise in subsea engineering to develop solutions which minimise environmental impact.
• A few organisational responses noted that environmental compensation may be financially unviable and highlighting that the Sectoral Marine Plan for Offshore Wind Energy (SMP-OWE) takes what is termed a “precautionary approach” towards environmental assessments which could impact the delivery of offshore wind.
• Some responses said the environmental impacts of offshore wind developments should be considered in more detail, with one organisational response noting inclusive decision making would make the development process more robust and transparent and contribute to feelings of shared ownership.
• A few organisational responses asked for more work to be undertaken on understanding the environmental effects offshore wind development has on the marine environment and sea birds, prior to ambitions being consulted on and further decisions being made about projects.

Some responses also suggested that associated action should be taken to ensure that new developments directly benefit communities:

• Some individual responses suggested local content should be used in offshore wind farms to ensure jobs, skills, and expertise remain in Scotland, and that Scotland should receive the revenue generated from offshore wind.
• Several organisational responses noted the importance of windfarms being community or nationally owned. This included suggestions that a portion of a windfarms’ profit should go to the local community, that public ownership should be a condition of lease, and to rebalance the ownership of offshore wind projects away from multinational private companies by creating a public energy company. The Scottish Government was also urged to work with the offshore wind sector to develop good practice for community benefits and shared ownership.

Many organisational responses and a few individual responses also called for greater alignment of policy between the Scottish Government, the UK Government and agencies such as NESO and Ofgem:

• It was noted, for example, that: the Transmission Network Use of Service (TNUoS) charges are causing uncertainties to projects and resolution of this issue requires collaboration across governments and agencies and suggested that the consenting process needs to be streamlined and departments better resourced to support offshore wind deployment.

No further action should be taken

This section covers the remaining 28 responses (23 individuals and 5 organisations) that suggested no further action should be taken in response to the proposal to increase the Scottish Government’s offshore wind ambition. Among these responses:

• Some individual responses expressed concern that overseas investors would benefit more from offshore wind development than local communities, therefore no further action should be taken to develop offshore wind.
• Two individual responses argued that development should be stopped until the government has a clear strategy to deliver it.