Publication - Impact assessment

Offshore wind energy - draft sectoral marine plan: social and economic impact assessment

Published: 18 Dec 2019
Directorate:
Marine Scotland Directorate
Part of:
Energy, Marine and fisheries
ISBN:
9781839603792

A social and economic impact assessment to support development of the draft sectoral marine plan for offshore wind energy.

316 page PDF

4.9 MB

Contents
Offshore wind energy - draft sectoral marine plan: social and economic impact assessment
6 Potential Combined Impacts

6 Potential Combined Impacts

6.1 Potential Negative Economic Impacts on Marine Activities

Potential Combined Impacts by DPO

6.1.1 Within the plan there is a variation in impacts between different DPOs and regions, with some DPOs having significantly higher potential negative economic impacts, and therefore likely constraints on development. Table 44 summarises the present value of potential impacts across all sectors in terms of costs and direct GVA impacts (for commercial fisheries) for each DPO, broken down by sector in Figure 9 as present value potential impacts for the maximum development scenarios and Figure 10 as a present value potential cost per GW of installed capacity.

Table 44 Potential negative economic impacts across all sectors per DPO (present value of total costs and direct GVA over assessment period 2020-2059, £000s, 2019 prices)

DPO Maximum Development Scenario (GW) Cost (£000s) Cost per GW installed (£000s) Direct GVA cost (£000s) Direct GVA cost per GW installed (£000s)
SW1 1 17,642 17,642 432 432
W1 2 5,131 2,565 1,482 741
N1 2 8,896 4,448 1,392 696
N2 2 418 209 823 411
N3 2 318 159 1,991 995
N4 1 4,159 4,159 675 675
NE1 3 2,273 1,137 1,378 689
NE2 1 9,269 9,269 399 399
NE3 1 2,048 2,048 600 600
NE4 1 2,639 2,639 808 808
NE5 1 6,435 6,435 803 803
NE6 2 19,712 9,856 345 173
NE7 2 3,082 1,541 2,967 1,483
NE8 1 777 777 1,786 1,786
E1 3 1,916 639 326 109
E2 2 786 393 659 330
E3 1 5,456 5,456 74 74

6.1.2 The highest quantified potential negative economic impacts under the maximum development scenario are in NE6 at £19.7 million, whilst per GW SW1 is highest at £17.6 million.

6.1.3 As can be seen from Figure 9 and Figure 10, impacts on commercial shipping make up the vast majority of the total potential impacts at all DPOs with smaller impacts from watersports, tourism and power interconnectors within certain regions.

6.1.4 Impacts on commercial fisheries show relatively high impacts on direct GVA (Figure 11) (over £1 million present value over the assessment period) for a number of DPOs under the maximum development scenario (W1, N1, N3, NE1, NE7 and NE8). When considered in relation to the impact per GW installed (Figure 12), NE4, NE5 and N4 also have a relatively high impact per GW. These DPOs affect a range of different fleet segments (demersal trawl/seine, pelagic trawl, mechanical dredge, pots) mostly for over-12m vessels but some also for under-12m vessels (N4, NE4, NE5). The potential for a combined impact on individual fleet segments within a region is limited by the distribution of the DPOs, which tend to affect different fleet segments. The exceptions are NE4 and NE5, which are in close proximity and both affect over-12 mechanical dredgers, and N2 and N3 which both affect over-12m demersal trawlers and pelagic trawlers.

6.1.5 Whilst the quantified potential negative economic impact in certain DPOs is low this may, but does not necessarily, indicate a region of lower constraint, as unquantified impacts, such as the requirement to divert helicopter routes, may have the potential to be of significant constraint.

6.1.6 In addition, spatial planning within DPOs has the potential to avoid areas of larger impacts, and hence reduce overall potential costs to sectors. i.e. through the application of MGN 543 to design safe shipping lanes through offshore wind arrays and therefore reduce potential impacts on commercial shipping. The impact of such spatial planning cannot be assessed within this document, so a worst-case scenario has been used for the purposes of the calculations but has the potential to be defined at plan level as a requirement on project development.

Figure 9 Present value of quantified potential negative economic impacts per DPO under Maximum Development Scenario (cost impact, £000s, over 2020-2059)

Figure 9 Present value of quantified potential negative economic impacts per DPO under Maximum Development Scenario (cost impact, £000s, over 2020-2059)

Figure 10 Present value of quantified potential negative economic impacts normalised per GW of capacity installed (cost impact, £000s, over 2020-2059)

Figure 10 Present value of quantified potential negative economic impacts normalised per GW of capacity installed (cost impact, £000s, over 2020-2059)

Figure 11 Present value of quantified potential direct GVA impacts (commercial fisheries) per DPO under Maximum Development Scenario (£000s)

Figure 11 Present value of quantified potential direct GVA impacts (commercial fisheries) per DPO under Maximum Development Scenario (£000s)

Figure 12 Present value of quantified potential direct GVA impacts normalised per GW of capacity installed (£000s)

Figure 12 Present value of quantified potential direct GVA impacts normalised per GW of capacity installed (£000s)

Combined potential negative economic impacts, regional and national scaling

6.1.7 At regional and national scales it is recognised that not all DPOs will be developed, and not all to their maximum development scenario. Therefore, it is appropriate to scale the potential impacts identified above against individual DPOs when combining them at a regional and national scale. Table 45 summarises the total present value potential costs for all sectors assessed in section 3 (excluding commercial fishing which is included within Table 46 as direct GV

6.1.8 A impacts) combined and scaled as per the regional and national scenarios discussed in Section 2.1.3.

6.1.9 Figure 13 subsequently breaks these down into potential impact per sector against the regions, whilst Figure 14 presents the national breakdowns. Figure 15 and Figure 16 separately present the direct GVA impacts, which in this assessment covers only commercial fisheries.

Table 45 Potential negative economic impacts to all sectors (excluding fisheries) (present value of total costs over assessment period 2020-2059, £000s, scaled to regional and national scenarios)

Region Low Scenario (GW) Low Scenario (£000s) Medium Scenario (GW) Medium Scenario (£000s) High Scenario (GW) High Scenario (£000s)
South West 0.3 5,295 0.6 9,317 1 15,529
West 0.5 1,288 1 2,565 2 4,516
North 1 1,734 2 3,468 3 4,569
North East 1.5 5,372 3 9,241 4.5 13,861
East 1 1,360 2 2,502 3 3,463
National 3 8,638 5 13,636 10 27,704

Table 46 Potential direct GVA impacts (commercial fisheries) (GVA impacts over assessment period 2020-2059, £000s, scaled to regional and national scenarios)

Region Low Scenario (GW) Low Scenario (£000s) Medium Scenario (GW) Medium Scenario (£000s) High Scenario (GW) High Scenario (£000s)
South West 0.3 130 0.6 228 1 380
West 0.5 371 1 741 2 1,304
North 1 614 2 1,227 3 1,617
North East 1.5 1,000 3 1,756 4.5 2,634
East 1 177 2 311 3 409
National 3 1,353 5 2,125 10 4,284

6.1.10 The highest negative economic impacts are in the South West and North East regions (Table 45). As per the individual DPO analysis the majority of quantified potential impacts are driven by commercial shipping both at regional and national scales, whilst watersports (recreational boat angling), power interconnectors and tourism have a smaller contribution to overall potential impacts.

6.1.11 For direct GVA, the North East region has the highest quantified impacts (Table 46). This is a result of the high number of DPOs in the region, and therefore the higher presumed level of development in GW in that region under the scenarios assessed.

6.1.12 Whilst the North East region has high overall potential quantified impacts, this is based on a higher presumed level of development (4.5 GW under the upper scenario) than the other regions. In contrast, the relatively high level of cost impact in South West is driven by a much lower level of presumed development, and therefore the impacts per GW are highest in the South West, predominantly due to impacts on shipping.

6.1.13 For direct GVA impacts for commercial fishing, the North East region has the highest quantified potential impacts per GW developed, with the South West, West and North regions relatively similar to each other, and the lowest impacts per GW in the East region.

6.1.14 It is recognised that both regionally and nationally the high commercial shipping potential impacts tend to be driven by development in a small number of DPOs, and therefore at a regional and national scale the potential impacts may vary significantly depending on which DPOs become the focus for development.

Figure 13 Regionally-scaled sector potential negative economic impacts (present value of costs over assessment period (£000s)

Figure 13 Regionally-scaled sector potential negative economic impacts (present value of costs over assessment period (£000s)

Figure 14 Nationally scaled sector potential negative economic impacts (present value of costs over assessment period (£000s)

Figure 14 Nationally scaled sector potential negative economic impacts (present value of costs over assessment period (£000s)

Figure 15 Regionally-scaled direct GVA impacts on commercial fisheries (GVA impact over assessment period (£000s)

Figure 15 Regionally-scaled direct GVA impacts on commercial fisheries (GVA impact over assessment period (£000s)

Figure 16 Nationally-scaled direct GVA impacts on commercial fisheries (GVA impact over assessment period (£000s)

Figure 16 Nationally-scaled direct GVA impacts on commercial fisheries (GVA impact over assessment period (£000s)

Review of potential combined impacts

6.1.15 There is potential for combined socio-economic impacts to occur should multiple DPOs within a similar geographic region be developed.

6.1.16 Within the East region, the development of both E1 and E3 has the potential for additive in-combination effects requiring multiple diversions of the Eastern HVDC. Similarly, the development of multiple DPOs in the North East region (particularly NE6, NE8 and NE4) has the potential to require commercial shipping to undertake a much larger diversion around multiple arrays than currently assessed within an individual site assessment.

6.1.17 Development of DPOs across different regions is not expected to result in cumulative impacts on commercial shipping, as the DPOs in different regions tend to affect different shipping routes.

6.1.18 Development of multiple DPOs in any region has the potential to have cumulative impacts on commercial fisheries, particularly in the North East and North regions.

6.1.19 There are also a number of factors external to the plan that could also have in-combination impacts. For example fisheries restrictions around designated sites or currently consented renewables developments, particularly in the North East region around the Moray Firth, have the potential to displace fishing activities in combination with developments within the DPOs. This could lead to a greater combined impact on commercial fisheries landings and the associated economic impacts on Scottish communities.

6.2 Positive Economic Impacts

6.2.1 The positive economic impacts resulting from the level of spend retained in the Scottish supply chain are estimated based on three scenarios involving different level of development. The total GVA impacts (in Present Value for 2020-2059) are presented in Table 47 covering total spend at the regional level, and then re-scaled at the national level. The Table shows that the biggest GVA impacts are seen in the North East region, followed by East, then North with West and South West having similar level of impacts. The difference between the Type I (direct and indirect impacts) and Type II (direct, indirect and induced impacts) gives an indication of the level of GVA impacts that are derived from the amount of increased income that is re-spent on final goods and services.

Table 47 GVA impacts in Present Value (discounted) terms by region and nationally (Type I and Type II) (£ millions)

Scenario East North East North West South West National
Low, Type I £389 £645 £139 £49 £30 £515
Low, Type II £497 £760 £170 £61 £38 £631
Medium, Type I £790 £1,280 £278 £98 £72 £874
Medium, Type II £997 £1,506 £339 £123 £89 £1,069
High, Type I £1,103 £1,921 £420 £239 £121 £1,748
High, Type II £1,386 £2,259 £497 £288 £149 £2,137

6.2.2 Employment impacts associated with the retained GVA are presented as maxima in any one year. It is not appropriate to sum the number of jobs over the appraisal timeframe as many jobs will last for more than one year so the same job would be counted numerous times. Table 48 presents the maximum number of jobs in any one year for each region, and then re-scaled at the national level. The table shows that the North East would see creation of the largest number of jobs, with this ranging from 1,255 (low scenario, Type I) to 4,250 (high scenario, Type II). Many of these jobs are associated with construction so may be more temporary in nature than operational jobs (although construction in the North East is projected to last for 12 years). This is the maximum number of jobs that would be created in any one year. Overall economic impacts will depend on access to jobs, through training for example, and whether the jobs are short or long-term and are skilled or unskilled. These could affect who is impacted (local versus relocated) as well as the duration of the positive economic effects. There may also be some negative impacts on other industries, if employees leave those sectors to take up employment in the wind industry.

Table 48 Maximum employment impacts in any one year by region and nationally (Type I and Type II) (FTEs)

Scenario impacts East North East North West South West National
Low, Direct 247 938 296 41 31 696
Low, Type I 282 1,255 373 51 38 864
Low, Type II 444 1,684 521 71 53 1,229
Medium, Direct 832 1,588 593 82 147 1,075
Medium, Type I 1,020 2,066 745 103 180 1,357
Medium, Type II 1,468 2,834 1,042 143 256 1,911
High, Direct 1,044 2,382 639 463 245 2,151
High, Type I 1,262 3,099 798 568 300 2,714
High, Type II 1,849 4,250 1,126 808 426 3,821

6.2.3 The pattern of job creation is generally a small number of jobs from 2020 to 2025 when development and project management activities dominate. The number of jobs increase as construction work begins in 2027 (balance of plant, and installation and commissioning), the increases again when wind turbine supply begins (2028). Depending on the scenario and the number of activities that are running concurrently, the maximum number of jobs typically occurs in 2033 and 2034 when all five activities may be running concurrently, i.e. when construction works are on-going in some DPOs while others have moved to operation, maintenance and service. Thus the maximum job estimates relate to the following years for each region:

  • East: 2033 and 2034 (also 2038 and 2039 for high scenario)
  • North East: 2032 and 2033 (also 2036 and 2037 for mid and high scenarios)
  • North: 2033 and 2034 (also 2038 and 2039 for high scenario)
  • West: 2033 and 2034 (high scenario only)
  • South West: 2033 and 2034 (for mid and high scenarios only)
  • National: 2033 and 2034 and 2038 and 2039 (or 2031 and 2032 , 2034 and 2035, 2037 and 2038 and 2040 and 2041 for mid and high scenarios)

6.3 Social Impacts on Individuals, Communities and Society

6.3.1 The social impact assessment identifies the positive and negative impacts across 15 different clusters. The combined impacts are assessed by considering what the overall impacts might be across all clusters. In undertaking this combined impact assessment, there is an implied equal weighting of all clusters. Clusters are aggregated for the individual, community and wider political and environmental context impacts.

6.3.2 Overall the combined social impacts are expected to be slightly significant nationally and in the East and North East, and not very significant for the North, West and South West.

6.3.3 Positive community impacts range from negligible (+) to moderate (+ + +). Again, there is a regional split with communities in the North, West and South West generally seeing negligible to minor positive effects. The largest positive impacts are seen in the East and North East in terms of local industries, community sustainability and education. An influx of new people to take up jobs in the North East could also help support services such as shops, again helping to improve community sustainability. Overall, impacts in the North East and to some extent the East and nationally will see expansion of some services helping to positively affect local communities. Overall, the impacts are expected to be not very significant in the North, West and South West and slightly significant in the East and North East. The impacts may be affected by the transition from construction to operational phase if there is a significant reduction in number of workers.

6.3.4 Negative community impacts range from negligible (-) to moderate (- - -). Moderate negative impacts occur in the North East due to potential impacts on ferry services and possible congestion due to large numbers of people moving into the area to take up jobs. The peak number of jobs are associated with construction so these may be more temporary in nature (than operational jobs) and so may result in additional social problems through increases in demands for housing and services. Expansion of such services may positively impact on the community where jobs have a reasonable duration. Although most negative impacts in the North, West and South West are minor (i.e. noticed by the community but accepted by the majority), there may be some local unease over changes to landscapes and seascapes, and perceived impacts on recreational opportunities that may have some distributional effects on specific groups within local communities. Nationally, the overall negative impacts are expected to be negligible (-) to minor (- -). Overall, the impacts are expected to be slightly significant in the North East and not very significant in the East, North, West, South West and nationally. Some groups within the North, West and South West who are particularly sensitive to changes in seascapes or who are involved in recreational boating that may be displaced may see slightly significant impacts.

6.3.5 Taking the wider political and environmental context, there is significant potential for positive impacts associated with uptake of renewable energy and concerns about climate change and the environment on a more national and international scale. The impacts are projected to be minor (+ +) to major (+ + + +), with overall impacts nationally rated as moderate (+ + +). Impacts vary across the regions depending on the scale of development, from minor in West and South West, to major in the North East. Other factors may also affect the actual social impacts, including cross-regional concerns that may enable those in regions other than North East to also be impacted positively to a greater extent due to the knowledge that Scotland is taking a leading role in renewable energy. Overall impacts for those with a specific interest or concern for the environment, such as members of environmental organisations, may be significant. For the majority of the population the impacts may be slightly significant. Impacts on local decision-making may depend on how the projects are managed, including the extent to which engagement and consultation help to empower local communities. This could, if managed well, lead to knock-on impacts for wider engagement with local politics.

6.3.6 Negative impacts in the wider political and environmental context range from no impacts to minor (- -). Impacts at the landscape scale are considered in detail at the community cluster level, with no significant effects expected at the wider scale due to the actual area of sea that would be developed as a proportion of total sea area. In addition, mitigation measures will be required to minimise impacts on wildlife. Impacts on political decision-making may be linked to the extent to which concerns about proposed developments are seen to influence which areas are taken forwards, especially in relation to impacts on commercial fishing which are expected to be the most significant. Overall impacts are expected to be not very significant, nationally and regionally.

6.3.7 Consideration has also been given to specific groups, communities and locations that may be affected from supply chain development and that may incur impacts due to effects on other sectors and social impacts. Ports seeing potential positive impacts from development in each region have been identified, as have ports, harbours and marinas that may be negatively impacted by changes to fish landings, commercial shipping routes, tourism, recreational boating, sea angling and water sports. It is important to assess the impacts against the critical mass for service provision. Similarly, the impacts on smaller and micro-enterprises may be larger in specific sectors, such as fishing and small tourism services providers, with impacts on specific groups and communities at specific location. These are described in turn.

6.3.8 In the East, positive economic impacts are expected to be concentrated in ports such as Aberdeen, Dundee, Eyemouth, Grangemouth, Leith, Methil, Montrose and Rosyth[49]. Negative impacts on fishing[50] are expected to be concentrated in Aberdeen and Eyemouth, although neither is affected by more than 1% of total impacts. Therefore, although there may be loss of jobs associated with the fishing industry these could be replaced by wind farm jobs, e.g. in Aberdeen. The communities positively affected by economic impacts may also see some negative impacts from increased demand for services as people move into the area to take up new jobs. However, most of these locations are already reasonably sized and may be better able to cope with additional people than in other regions. As a result, overall positive impacts on these ports may be slightly significant and negative impacts are likely to be not very significant.

6.3.9 In the North East, positive economic impacts are expected to be concentrated in ports such as Buckie, Cromarty Firth, Fraserburgh, Inverness, Kirkwall and Hatston, Macduff, Nigg and Wick. Negative impacts on fishing are expected to be concentrated in Buckie, Fraserburgh, Kirkwall, Lerwick, and Peterhead. However, those ports that may see a small loss of fishing jobs are also most likely to see additional wind farm jobs. The North East also sees the largest number of jobs likely to be taken up by people relocating to the region (permanently or temporarily) which may result in increased pressure on housing, education services, and healthcare services. Overall positive impacts are expected to be slightly significant while overall negative impacts are expected to be significant in those locations since pressures on housing and services may disproportionately affect more vulnerable groups.

6.3.10 In the North, positive economic impacts are expected to be concentrated in ports such as Kishorn, Lerwick, Lyness, Scrabster, Stornoway and Sullom Voe. Impacts on fishing in the North in terms of home ports may be seen at Kinlochbervie, Scrabster, Stornoway and Ullapool; impacts on landings also affect these ports plus Stromness. Some of these ports may be positively affected by wind farm jobs, but not all. The number of people moving into the North region to take up wind farm jobs is not expected to be significantly high (up to 1,739 people under the high scenario) such that social impacts on services and housing may be limited. As a result, overall positive impacts for these ports may be slightly significant and negative impacts are likely to be slightly significant since any effects on housing or services are likely to disproportionately affect vulnerable groups within what are reasonably small communities.

6.3.11 In the West, positive economic impacts are expected to be concentrated in ports such as Ardrishaig, Ardrossan, Campbeltown, Corpach, Fairlie, Greenock, Hunterston and Oban. Impacts on fish landings are small at home ports except in Oban, but reductions in landings at ports such as Islay, Fionnphort and Port Ellen could be noticeable. These ports are also less likely to be positively affected bywind farm development. Communities on Islay and Jura may be the most likely to be affected by impacts on seascapes but they may not be positively impacted from people moving into the area to bring additional support to services, or conversely, to put additional demand onto services. Ports like Oban may see the largest increase in population (permanently or temporarily) and may also be impacted by changes in recreational boating demand if these activities are displaced. As a result, overall positive impacts are expected to be slightly significant with overall negative impacts being slightly significant, which specific effects on some local communities.

6.3.12 In the South West, positive economic impacts are expected to be concentrated in Ayr. Impacts on fish landings are also expected to be greatest at Ayr, although the overall effects in terms of loss of jobs is low (0.5 FTE low scenario, Type I to 2.2 FTE high scenario, Type II). People moving into the area to take up jobs are also likely to migrate in and around Ayr with potential impacts due to increased demand for housing and other services, but also potential positive effects from the increased population helping to support local shops. Negative impacts from changes to seascapes or displacement of tourism and recreational activities may be seen along the southern coast of Dumfries and Galloway, so these communities may feel that they incur many of the negative impacts without experiencing any direct economic positive effects from the level of spend. Overall positive impacts are expected to the slightly significant while overall negative impacts are expected to be slightly significant. Some specific groups associated with recreational boating or having specific concerns about seascapes may be significantly affected, but these groups should be reasonably small in number.


Contact

Email: drew.milne@gov.scot