Publication - Progress report

Draft Sectoral Marine Plans for Offshore Renewable Energy in Scottish Waters: Socio - Economic Assesment

Published: 25 Jul 2013
Part of:
Marine and fisheries
ISBN:
9781782567509

The study reported here provides a high level socio-economic appraisal of the potential costs and benefits to activities that may arise as a result of offshore wind, wave or tidal development within the Draft Plan Options as part of possible future Scotti

383 page PDF

4.7 MB

383 page PDF

4.7 MB

Contents
Draft Sectoral Marine Plans for Offshore Renewable Energy in Scottish Waters: Socio - Economic Assesment
5. Assessment for Offshore Wind, Wave and Tidal Draft Plan Option Areas - West Region

383 page PDF

4.7 MB

5. Assessment for Offshore Wind, Wave and Tidal Draft Plan Option Areas - West Region

5.1 Offshore Wind

5.1.1 Quantification of Potentially Significant Impacts

Table 17 presents quantified estimates of impacts (Present Value ( PV) costs and GVA (fisheries)) for activities potentially affected by offshore wind development within Draft Plan Option areas OWW1, OWW2 and OWW3. Quantified cost estimates have been developed for commercial fisheries, recreational boating, shipping and tourism. Comments are also provided on activities for which quantified cost estimates could not be provided. No significant benefits have been identified for activities. The impacts of each activity highlighted are briefly described below and further the detail can be found in Appendix C.

Table 17. Present value ( PV) costs (and GVA for fisheries) in £millions for Offshore Wind in the West Region (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, numbers rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity Description of Measurement Scenarios
Low Central High
Commercial Fisheries Value of potentially lost landings 0.13 0.31 0.67
Shipping Additional fuel costs - 3.80 7.88
Tourism Reduction in expenditure - 0.01 0.06
Total costs 0.13 4.12 8.61

Commercial Fisheries

For OWW1, OWW2 and OWW3 Draft Plan Option areas, the area that would be occupied by arrays was calculated as being 4.8%, 11.6% and 25.1% for the low, central and high scenarios respectively. The total impact on commercial fisheries from offshore wind development in the West Region was £0.13m GVA for the low scenario, rising to £0.67m GVA for the high scenario (over the whole assessment period, discounted). These impacts mainly accrue to potters and Nephrops trawlers.

Shipping

The shipping costs have considered the costs to commercial shipping including ferry routes. The assessment has considered the additional fuel costs associated with route deviation for an average number of shipping movements based on the shipping density within the Draft Plan Option area. There are no ferry routes within the Draft Plan Option areas within the West SORER. No cost impacts are identified for the low scenario. The costs impacts are estimated to be £3.80m PV for the central and £7.88m PV for the high scenarios respectively.

Tourism

The shoreward boundary of the OWW3 Draft Plan Option area is within 10km of land and the visual impact has been assessed on a conservative basis as having some minor potential to affect tourism expenditure within the affected area. For the low scenario it has been assumed that spatial planning can be used to locate arrays within the Draft Plan Option areas so as to avoid impacts to tourism. For the central and high scenarios, it has been assumed that land areas within 10 and 13km of the Draft Plan Option areas respectively will experience some reduction in tourism expenditure, based on impact factors derived from Riddington et al (2008). The estimated cost impacts are estimated to be £0.01m in the central scenario and £0.06m PV in the high scenario.

It has not been possible to estimate the impact of the potential landside works that might be associated with development within the Draft Plan Option areas (operation and maintenance activity, onshore substations), as the location of such activity is not known.

5.1.2 Other Costs not Quantified

Aviation

The OWW1, OWW2 and OWW3 Draft Plan Option areas are within the line of sight of at least one of the primary surveillance radar used or operated by NATS, and in addition OWW2 also falls within 15nm of the safeguarding zone around the secondary surveillance radar around the nearest airport. NATS has advised that depending on the size, numbers and relative proximity of the turbines within the proposed developments, there is the potential for interference with any of the scenarios. The costs of mitigation measures would be borne by the developer.

Commercial Fisheries

OWW1 and OWW3 Draft Plan Option areas overlap with moderate concentrations of steaming pings. There may be some deviation of navigation required to avoid wind arrays in OWW1 and OWW3, particularly under the high scenario, in which 25% of the areas area expected to be occupied by arrays. This implies a cost to the fishing industry in terms of steaming time and increased fuel costs to reach fishing grounds, and additional impacts on fishing time available for those vessels limited by days-at-sea regulations. This is most likely to affect vessels from Oban port, where 55 under-15m vessels and 14 over-15m vessels are based ( MMO, 2013). No significant interactions with cables were identified. It is expected that cables would be laid in consultation with the fishing industry, and a Memorandum of Understanding is being developed between the fishing industry and Subsea Cables UK (see Appendix C4.2.4). Where fishing vessels' effort is displaced to new areas, rather than lost (as assumed in the worst-case impact assessed quantitatively), there may be impacts in terms of conflict with other fishing vessels, environmental impacts in targeting new areas, longer steaming times and increased fuel costs, changes in costs and earnings, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs.

Energy Generation

There is a significant degree of overlap between Draft Plan Option areas OWW1, OWW3 and WW1 which could result in competition for space between the different technologies. Energy generation from differing forms of technology will also lead to competition in the transmission capacity which would affect all Draft Plan Option areas.

Military Interests

There is a potential overlap between all Draft Plan Option areas and with all cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. In addition all Draft Plan Option areas have the potential to interfere with underwater communications. The Defence Infrastructure Organisation ( DIO) stated that it was not possible to quantify the economic cost impact that would arise from the loss of military testing facilities, should activity be displaced through wind, wave or tidal arrays. At the time of writing no further information had been received regarding any specific areas of concern in relation to interference with radar or underwater communications.

Ports and Harbours

The main identified impact to ports and harbours associated with offshore wind development within the Draft Plan Option areas relates to increases in marine risk, specifically the temporary collision risk while cable laying or maintenance is being carried out. However the assessment considers that it would be possible to avoid conflict with port access routes and channels through careful planning of cable laying and maintenance activities.

Recreational boating

The potential impact of future offshore wind development within the Draft Plan Option areas on investment in recreational boating supply chains has been assessed qualitatively. It is recognised that development in areas which are already challenging to navigate may deter sailors and reduce expenditure in the Region. The risk can be mitigated to some extent through passage planning and awareness, plus the update and circulation of up to date navigational information via charting publications.

Water sports

Scuba diving is carried out in the potential locations of the cable routes from both OWSW1 and OWSW2 Draft Plan Option areas. Most of the diving activities are associated with areas of interest and in particular wrecks and where these are known it is highly unlikely that arrays will be placed on or in proximity to wrecks due to potential turbine damage or boat navigation risk. While recreational angling is an important activity within the South-West Region, no significant cost impacts have been identified. It is recognised that there is some uncertainty surrounding the potential environmental impacts of offshore renewables development on fish populations, but it is considered that sufficient management mechanisms are in place to limit such impacts and therefore that no significant socio-economic impacts to recreational angling interests should occur. Therefore the cost to water sports activities associated with offshore wind development within the Draft Plan Option areas is assessed as negligible

Social Impacts

Each of the above effects could have social impacts. Table 18 identifies the areas of social impact that could be affected, with main impacts likely to be on employment (as a result of the impact of increased costs or reductions in turnover), the environment (mainly due to increased emissions or changes in environmental quality), and culture and heritage (related to changes in seascape). In most cases, it has not been possible to quantify the impacts, although employment impacts for fisheries are estimated (based on use of multipliers, which are uncertain, see also Section 2.5). Other impacts, such as on access to services, health, and culture and heritage could largely be mitigated, although there may be minimal impacts on recreational boaters and tourists/visitors to the coast.

Those impacts identified as being slightly significant or greater are carried forwards for assessment in the distributional analysis. Five different aspects are assessed:

  • location;
  • age;
  • gender;
  • income; and
  • social group (covering minorities and special interest groups).

Tables 19 and 20 summarise the results of the distributional analysis, showing where impacts are likely to be greater for a particular social group, equal, or lower than the overall impact. For example, impacts on recreational boating may be more significant on settlements with a harbour or marina, or on boat users. For most groups, though, the impacts are minimal and are unlikely to result in noticeable effects.

Table 18. Identification of the social impacts and their significance

Offshore Wind (West)

Sector

Direct effects

Area of social impact affected

Costs ( PV £ million or GVA for fisheries)

Mitigation

Significance of social impact

Access

Experience

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

Employment (reduced turnover)

Culture and heritage (impact on traditions)

Health (increased risks due to moving to lesser known areas)

Low: £0.13

Central: £0.31

High: £0.67

xxx

Low: 0.20 to 0.22 jobs affected

Central: 0.5 jobs affected

High: 1.4 to 1.5 jobs affected

x

Obstruction of navigation routes

Employment (increased costs)

Environment (increased emissions from deviation to avoid arrays)

Impacts not quantified

Careful location of devices may help to avoid impacts, but some deviation likely in OWW1 and OWW3

xx

Potentially 0

Fouling of fishing gear on cables or seabed infrastructure

Employment (increased costs to replace gear)

Environment (impacts of fouled gear)

Impacts not quantified

Expected that cables would be laid in consultation with the fishing industry

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Consequential impacts to fish processors

Employment (reduced turnover)

Culture and heritage (loss of connection of places with sea and history of area)

Impacts not quantified

x

0

Energy generation

Competition for space and for transmission capacity

Employment (reduced opportunity for future development)

Environment (reduced opportunity for use of renewable energy)

Impacts not quantified

Potential to collaborate rather than compete for grid connection, minimising impacts

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Recreational boating

Additional fuel costs

Access to recreational opportunities

Impacts not quantified

Passage planning and awareness, plus the update and circulation of up to date navigational information via charting publications

x

x

Shipping

Additional fuel costs

Access to services (increased costs passed onto users, especially ferries)

Environment (increased emissions)

Low: none

Central: £3.80

High: £7.88

Arrays should seek to be sited to avoid hindering ferry services

Additional emissions unlikely to be significant in terms of climate change, and will be offshore so should not affect air quality

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Displacement of anchorage areas

Access to services (if ferry routes are changed)

Environment (increased emissions)

Impacts not quantified

Arrays should seek to be sited to avoid hindering ferry services

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Tourism

Reduction in expenditure

Culture and heritage (may affect cultural interpretation of coastline and seascapes)

Employment (negative impacts on numbers of tourists affecting income of tourism businesses) Wind only

Health (impacts may affect recreational trips taken by locals, affecting their health)

Low: none

Central: £0.01

High: £0.06

Spatial planning used to locate arrays to minimise impacts, but maybe some impacts on medium and high scenarios in OWW3 for land within 10km (but area of impact is very small)

x

x

Water sports

Spatial overlap between cable routes and water sports activity (scuba diving)

Health (reduction in recreational opportunities)

Employment (impacts on services if boat owners choose to relocate their water sports activities to elsewhere)

Impacts not quantified

Unlikely that arrays will be placed close to dive sites, such that impacts should be minimised

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Notes: The likely areas of social impact are based on the key areas identified by the GES/ GSR Social Impacts Taskforce

Definition of ratings: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

Table 19. Distributional analysis (location, age and gender)

Sector

Impact

Location

Age

Gender

Urban

Rural

Settlement

Children

Working age

Pensionable age

Male

Female

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

0

xxx

More significant for OWW1

xxx

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

xxx

x

xxx

Fishermen more likely to be male

x

Obstruction of navigation routes

0

xxx

More significant for OWW1 and OWW3

xxx

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

xxx

x

xxx

Fishermen more likely to be male

x

Consequential impacts to fish processors

x

xx

xx

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

xx

x

x

xx

Processors more likely to be female

Recreational boating

Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate

0

x

x

Oban, Dunstaffnage marinas could be affected if number of boaters reduces (but others could benefit)

0

x

x

x

x

Tourism

Reduction in expenditure

0

x

No specific settlements affected

x

x

x

x

x

Impacts: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

Table 20. Distributional analysis (income and social groups)

Sector

Impact

Income

Social groups

10% most deprived

Middle 80%

10% most affluent

Crofters

Ethnic minorities

With disability or long-term sick

Special interest groups

Other

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

xxx

xxx

xx

xxx

Where fishing provides additional income

xx

0

Unlikely to be employed in fisheries

xxx

Potters

xxx

Nephrops trawlers

Obstruction of navigation routes

xxx

xxx

xx

xxx

Where fishing provides additional income

xx

0

Unlikely to be employed in fisheries

xxx

Potters

xxx

Nephrops trawlers

Consequential impacts to fish processors

xx

xx

x

x

xx

0

x

x

Recreational boating

Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate

x

x

x

xx

May be more likely to have smaller boats

x

x

xx

Could mean they need to relocate to maintain level of access for recreational boating

xx

Potentially greater impact on less affluent sailors with smaller, less powerful boats without electronic aids. They may be more likely to reduce activity if navigation risks increase

Tourism

Reduction in expenditure

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

No other specific group identified

Impacts: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

5.2 Wave

5.2.1 Quantification of Potentially Significant Impacts

Table 20 presents quantified estimates of impacts (Present Value ( PV) costs and GVA (fisheries)) for activities potentially affected by wave development within Draft Plan Option areas WW1, WW2 and WW3. Quantified cost estimates have been developed for commercial fisheries only. Comments are also provided on activities for which quantified cost estimates could not be provided. No significant benefits have been identified for activities. The impacts of each activity highlighted are briefly described below and further the detail can be found in Appendix C.

Table 21. Present value ( PV) costs (and GVA for fisheries) in £millions for Wave Energy in the West Region (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, numbers rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity Description of Measurement Scenarios
Low Central High
Commercial Fisheries Value of potentially lost landings 0.01 0.01 0.03
Total costs 0.01 0.01 0.03

Commercial Fisheries

For WW3 and WW4 Draft Plan Option areas, the area that would be occupied by arrays was calculated as being from 0.59% for WW3 in the low scenario to 0.95% in the high scenario. The total impact on commercial fisheries from wave energy development in the West Region was relatively small - £0.01m GVA for the low scenario, rising to £0.03m GVA for the high scenario (over the whole assessment period, discounted). These impacts mainly accrue to potters and Nephrops trawlers.

5.2.2 Other Costs not Quantified

Commercial Fisheries

WW4 overlaps with moderate concentrations of steaming pings, indicating overlap with fishing navigation routes. As less than 1% of the Draft Plan Option area would be occupied by arrays under the high scenario, careful location of devices is expected to be able to avoid impacts for this wave area. No significant interactions with cables were identified. It is expected that cables would be laid in consultation with the fishing industry, and a Memorandum of Understanding is being developed between the fishing industry and Subsea Cables UK (see Appendix C4.2.4).

Energy Generation

There is a significant degree of overlap between Draft Plan Option areas WW1 and OWW1 and OWW3 which could result in competition for space between the different technologies. Energy generation from differing forms of technology will also lead to competition in the transmission capacity which would affect all Draft Plan Option areas.

Military Interests

There is a potential overlap between all Draft Plan Option areas and with all cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. In addition all Draft Plan Option areas have the potential to interfere with underwater communications. The Defence Infrastructure Organisation ( DIO) stated that it was not possible to quantify the economic cost impact that would arise from the loss of military testing facilities, should activity be displaced through wind, wave or tidal arrays. At the time of writing no further information had been received regarding any specific areas of concern in relation to interference with radar or underwater communications.

Recreational Boating

The potential impact of future wave energy development within the Draft Plan Option area on investment in recreational boating supply chains has been assessed qualitatively. It is recognised that development in areas which are already challenging to navigate may deter sailors and reduce expenditure in the Region. The risk can be mitigated to some extent through passage planning and awareness, plus the update and circulation of up to date navigational information via charting publications.

Water sports

Sea kayaking activities overlap with all wave Draft Plan Option areas in the West Region. In addition scuba diving overlaps with area WW2 and with the potential cable routes of all three Draft Plan Option areas. None of the Draft Plan Option areas are considered to be in the top ten sites for sea kayaking and as sea kayaks are highly manoeuvrable, wave devices are unlikely to physically displace this activity. Based on these factors it is unlikely that sea kayakers will be displaced due to overlap with a Draft Plan Option area and so economic and social impacts are assessed as negligible. Most of the scuba diving activities are associated with areas of interest and in particular wrecks and where these are known it is unlikely that arrays will be placed on or in proximity to wrecks due to potential turbine damage or boat navigation risk. Therefore costs associated with the impacts of wave devices are assessed as negligible. While recreational angling is an important activity within the West Region, no significant cost impacts have been identified. It is recognised that there is some uncertainty surrounding the potential environmental impacts of offshore renewables development on fish populations, but it is considered that sufficient management mechanisms are in place to limit such impacts and therefore that no significant socio-economic impacts to recreational angling interests should occur. Therefore the cost to water sports activities associated with wave developments within the Draft Plan Option areas is assessed as negligible.

Social Impacts

Each of the above effects could have social impacts. Table 22 identifies the areas of social impact that could be affected, with main impacts likely to be on employment (as a result of the impact of increased costs or reductions in turnover). In most cases, it has not been possible to quantify the impacts, although employment impacts for fisheries are estimated (based on use of multipliers, which are uncertain, see also Section 2.5). Other impacts, such as on access to services, health, and culture and heritage could largely be mitigated, such that the only noticeable effects are expected to be on fisheries.

Those impacts identified as being slightly significant or greater are carried forwards for assessment in the distributional analysis. Five different aspects are assessed:

  • location;
  • age;
  • gender;
  • income; and
  • social group (covering minorities and special interest groups).

Tables 23 and 24 summarise the results of the distributional analysis, showing where impacts are likely to be greater for a particular social group, equal, or lower than the overall impact. For example, impacts may be greater on sea kayakers as they could be directly affected however even here the impacts are unlikely to be significant.

Table 22. Identification of the social impacts and their significance

Wave (West)

Sector

Direct effects

Area of social impact affected

Costs ( PV £ million or GVA for fisheries)

Mitigation

Significance of social impact

Access

Experience

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

Employment (reduced turnover)

Culture and heritage (impact on traditions)

Health (increased risks due to moving to lesser known areas)

Low: £0.01

Central: £0.01

High: £0.03

x

Impacts on jobs not quantified as regional effects do not exceed 5% threshold

x

Obstruction of navigation routes

Employment (increased costs)

Environment (increased emissions)

Impacts not quantified

Impacts should be minimised through careful location of devices

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Fouling of fishing gear on cables or seabed infrastructure

Employment (increased costs to replace gear)

Environment (impacts of fouled gear)

Impacts not quantified

Expected that cables would be laid in consultation with the fishing industry

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Consequential impacts to fish processors

Employment (reduced turnover)

Culture and heritage (loss of connection of places with sea and history of area)

Impacts not quantified

x

0

Loss of traditional fishing grounds

Employment (reduced turnover)

Culture and heritage (impact on traditions)

Health (increased risks due to moving to lesser known areas)

Low: £0.024

Central: £0.035

High: £0.068

x

Impacts on jobs not quantified as regional effects do not exceed 5% threshold

x

Energy generation

Competition for space and transmission capacity

Employment (reduced opportunity for future development)

Environment (reduced opportunity for use of renewable energy)

Impacts not quantified

Potential to collaborate rather than compete for grid connection, minimising impacts

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Ports and harbours

Spatial overlap between cable routes and maintained navigation channels: competition for space

Employment (reduced turnover)

Impacts not quantified

Cables routes will need to be located to avoid navigation routes

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Shipping

Displacement of anchorage areas

Access to services (if ferry routes are changed)

Environment (increased emissions)

Impacts not quantified

Devices should seek to be sited to avoid hindering ferry services

Additional emissions unlikely to be significant in terms of climate change, and will be offshore so should not affect air quality

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Water sports

Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sport activity (sea kayaking and scuba diving)

Health (reduction in recreational opportunities)

Environment (change in opportunity for access)

Impacts not quantified

Unlikely that devices or cables will be placed close to dive sites, such that impacts should be minimised

xx

(sea kayaking)

xx

(sea kayaking)

Spatial overlap between cable routes and water sports activity (scuba diving)

Health (reduction in recreational opportunities)

Employment (impacts on services if boat owners choose to relocate their water sports activities to elsewhere)

Environment (change in opportunity for access)

Impacts not quantified

Unlikely that devices or cables will be placed close to dive sites, such that impacts should be minimised

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Notes: The likely areas of social impact are based on the key areas identified by the GES/ GSR Social Impacts Taskforce

Definition of ratings: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

Table 23. Distributional analysis (location, age and gender)

Sector

Impact

Location

Age

Gender

Urban

Rural

Settlement

Children

Working age

Pensionable age

Male

Female

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

0

x

x

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

x

x

xx

Fishermen more likely to be male

x

Consequential impacts to fish processors

x

x

x

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

x

x

x

xx

Processors more likely to be female

Water sports

Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sport activity (sea kayaking)

0

x

No specific settlements affected

x

x

x

x

x

Impacts: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

Table 24. Distributional analysis (income and social groups)

Sector

Impact

Income

Social groups

10% most deprived

Middle 80%

10% most affluent

Crofters

Ethnic minorities

With disability or long-term sick

Special interest groups

Other

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

x

x

x

x

Where fishing provides additional income

x

0

Unlikely to be employed in fisheries

x

Potters

x

Nephrops trawlers

Consequential impacts to fish processors

x

x

x

x

x

0

x

x

Water sports

Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sport activity (sea kayaking)

x

x

x

x

x

x

xx

Sea kayakers could have to change routes or look for alternatives

No other specific group identified

Impacts: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

5.3 Tidal

5.3.1 Quantification of Potentially Significant Impacts

Table 24 presents quantified estimates of impacts (Present Value ( PV) costs and GVA (fisheries)) for activities potentially affected by tidal development within Draft Plan Option areas TW1 and TW2. Quantified cost estimates have been developed for commercial fisheries, recreational boating and shipping. Comments are also provided on activities for which quantified cost estimates could not be provided. No significant benefits have been identified for activities. The impacts of each activity highlighted are briefly described below and further the detail can be found in Appendix C.

Table 25. Present value ( PV) costs (and GVA for fisheries) in £millions for Tidal Energy in the West Region (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, numbers rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity Description of Measurement Scenarios
Low Central High
Commercial Fisheries Value of potentially lost landings 0.02 0.05 0.1
Shipping Additional fuel costs - - 1.89
Total Costs 0.02 0.05 1.99

Commercial Fisheries

For TW1 and TW2 Draft Plan Option areas this area was calculated as being 0.8% and 0.9% respectively for the low scenario, 2.6% for the central scenario and 5.1% for the high scenario and accounted for a total impact on commercial fisheries of £0.02m GVA for the low scenario rising to £0.1m GVA for the high scenario (over the whole assessment period, discounted). These impacts mainly accrue to potters and Nephrops trawlers, and to a lesser extent, dredgers.

Shipping

The shipping costs have considered the costs to commercial shipping including ferry routes. The assessment has considered the additional fuel costs associated with route deviation for an average number of shipping movements based on the shipping density within the Draft Plan Option area. It is considered that spatial planning will seek to locate tidal developments to minimise interactions, which is especially important where ferry services provide lifeline connections to island communities. There is one ferry route within the Draft Plan Option area between Campbeltown and Ballycastle. The costs impacts for route deviation are estimated to be £1.89m PV for the high scenario, with no costs being associated with the low and central scenarios.

5.3.2 Other Costs not Quantified

Commercial Fisheries

Tidal area TW2, off the south west tip of the Mull of Kintyre, overlaps with a significant navigation route for vessels steaming around this area. Coupled with the strong currents experienced in this location, this may pose a potential navigation hazard. This is most likely to affect vessels from Ayr (44 under-15m vessels and 26 over-15m vessels are registered here as their home port) and Campbeltown (59 under-15m vessels and 13 over-15m vessels) ( MMO, 2013). No significant interactions with cables were identified. It is expected that cables would be laid in consultation with the fishing industry, and a Memorandum of Understanding is being developed between the fishing industry and Subsea Cables UK.

Energy Generation

Energy generation from differing forms of technology will lead to competition in the transmission capacity which would affect all Draft Plan Option areas.

Military Interests

There is a potential overlap between all Draft Plan Option areas and with all cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. In addition all Draft Plan Option areas have the potential to interfere with underwater communications. The Defence Infrastructure Organisation ( DIO) stated that it was not possible to quantify the economic cost impact that would arise from the loss of military testing facilities, should activity be displaced through wind, wave or tidal arrays. At the time of writing no further information had been received regarding any specific areas of concern in relation to interference with radar or underwater communications.

Ports and Harbours

There is the potential for tidal development within all Draft Plan Option areas to interact with all the ports and harbours within the West SORER. There is spatial overlap between and the maintained navigation channels and the high scenario at site TW1, and similarly with cable routes from TW1 and TW2 and all the Region's ports and harbours.. In addition there is the potential for reduced port development opportunities to occur with the presence of the Draft Plan Option area TW2 under the high scenario. However the assessment has identified that due to the scale of the development within under any scenario within the Draft Plan Option areas it would be possible to avoid conflict with port access routes and channels through careful planning.

Recreational Boating

The potential impact of future tidal energy development within the Draft Plan Option area on investment in recreational boating supply chains has been assessed qualitatively. It is recognised that development in areas which are already challenging to navigate may deter sailors and reduce expenditure in the Region. The risk can be mitigated to some extent through passage planning and awareness, plus the update and circulation of up to date navigational information via charting publications.

Water sports

Sea kayaking occurs within TW1 and TW2 Draft Plan Option areas while scuba diving also overlaps with the route corridor between these Draft Plan Option areas and the potential landfall together with surfing and windsurfing in TW2. None of the Draft Plan Option areas are considered to be in the top ten sites for sea kayaking and as sea kayaks are highly manoeuvrable, wave devices are unlikely to physically displace this activity. Based on these factors it is unlikely that sea kayakers will be displaced due to overlap with a Draft Plan Option area and so impacts are assessed as negligible.

Most of the diving activities are associated with areas of interest and in particular wrecks and where these are known it is highly unlikely that arrays will be placed on or in proximity to wrecks due to potential turbine damage or boat navigation risk. Most of the impacts will result during the construction of the cable routing and will be short lived, any changes in climate regime will also impact on the suitability of these areas to sea kayaking and surfing however any changes are considered to be insignificant and therefore costs associated with the impacts of tidal energy are assessed as negligible.

While recreational angling is an important activity within the West Region, no significant cost impacts have been identified. It is recognised that there is some uncertainty surrounding the potential environmental impacts of offshore renewables development on fish populations, but it is considered that sufficient management mechanisms are in place to limit such impacts and therefore that no significant socio-economic impacts to recreational angling interests should occur. Therefore the cost to water sports activities associated with tidal developments within the Draft Plan Option areas is assessed as negligible.

Social Impacts

Each of the above effects could have social impacts. Table 26 identifies the areas of social impact that could be affected, with main impacts likely to be on employment (as a result of the impact of increased costs or reductions in turnover) and the environment (mainly due to increased emissions or changes in environmental quality). In most cases, it has not been possible to quantify the impacts, although employment impacts for fisheries are estimated (based on use of multipliers, which are uncertain, see also Section 2.5). Other impacts, such as on access to services, health, and culture and heritage could largely be mitigated, although as shown in Table 28 there may be some minimal impacts on recreational boating and sea kayaking.

Those impacts identified as being slightly significant or greater are carried forwards for assessment in the distributional analysis. Five different aspects are assessed:

  • location;
  • age;
  • gender;
  • income; and
  • social group (covering minorities and special interest groups).

Tables 27 and 28 summarise the results of the distributional analysis, showing where impacts are likely to be greater for a particular social group, equal, or lower than the overall impact. For example, impacts on recreational boating may be more significant on settlements with a harbour or marina, while special interest groups such as sea kayakers may also see an impact. For most groups, though, the impacts will be minimal at worst.

Table 26. Identification of the social impacts and their significance

Tidal (West)

Sector

Direct effects

Area of social impact affected

Costs ( PV £ million or GVA for fisheries)

Mitigation

Significance of social impact

Access

Experience

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

Employment (reduced turnover)

Culture and heritage (impact on traditions)

Health (increased risks due to moving to lesser known areas)

Low: £0.02

Central: £0.05

High: £0.01

xx

Impacts on jobs not quantified as regional effects do not exceed 5% threshold

x

Obstruction of navigation routes

Employment (increased costs)

Environment (increased emissions)

Health (increased navigation risks)

Impacts should be minimised through careful location of devices, but some navigation risks may remain in poor weather

xx

Potentially 0

Fouling of fishing gear on cables or seabed infrastructure

Employment (increased costs to replace gear)

Environment (impacts of fouled gear)

Expected that cables would be laid in consultation with the fishing industry

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Consequential impacts to fish processors

Employment (reduced turnover)

Culture and heritage (loss of connection of places with sea and history of area)

Impacts not quantified

x

0

Energy generation

Competition for transmission capacity

Employment (reduced opportunity for future development)

Environment (reduced opportunity for use of renewable energy)

Impacts not quantified

Potential to collaborate rather than compete for grid connection, minimising impacts

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Ports and harbours

Obstruction of maintained navigation channel(s)

Access to services (if number of ferry services were to be reduced or routes were changed)

Employment (reduction in jobs associated with ports)

Impacts not quantified

Devices should seek to avoid navigation channels through spatial planning

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Reduced development opportunities

Access to services (if number of ferry services were to be reduced or routes were changed)

Employment (reduction in jobs associated with ports due to loss of investment)

Impacts not quantified

Devices should seek to minimise impacts on ferries through spatial planning

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Spatial overlap between cable routes and maintained navigation channels: competition for space

Employment (reduced turnover)

Impacts not quantified

Cables routes will need to be located to avoid navigation routes

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Recreational boating

Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate

Access to recreational opportunities

Impacts not quantified

x

x

Shipping

Additional fuel costs

Access to services (increased costs passed onto users, especially ferries)

Environment (increased emissions)

Low: none

Central: none

High: £1.89

Arrays should seek to be sited to avoid hindering ferry services

Additional emissions unlikely to be significant in terms of climate change, and will be offshore so should not affect air quality

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Reduced turnaround times due to increased steaming times for vessel routes

Access to services (if number of ferry services were to be reduced)

Employment (reduction in jobs associated with ferries)

Displacement of anchorage areas

Access to services (if ferry routes are changed)

Environment (increased emissions)

Impacts not quantified

Arrays should seek to be sited to avoid hindering access to anchorages

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Water sports

Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sport activity (sea kayaking)

Health (reduction in recreational opportunities)

Environment (change in opportunity for access)

Impacts not quantified

x

x

Spatial overlap between cable routes and water sports activity (surfing and windsurfing, and scuba diving)

Health (reduction in recreational opportunities)

Employment (impacts on services if boat owners choose to relocate their water sports activities to elsewhere)

Environment (change in opportunity for access)

Impacts not quantified

Unlikely that devices or cables will be placed close to dive sites, such that impacts should be minimised. Care needed when siting arrays to minimise impacts on wave climate and avoid changes in the coastline. The only impacts may be during construction and are likely to be minimal over that period

Potentially 0

Potentially 0

Notes: The likely areas of social impact are based on the key areas identified by the GES/ GSR Social Impacts Taskforce

Definition of ratings: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

Table 27. Distributional analysis (location, age and gender)

Sector

Impact

Location

Age

Gender

Urban

Rural

Settlement

Children

Working age

Pensionable age

Male

Female

Commercial fisheries

Value of potentially lost landings

0

xx

xx

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

xx

x

xx

Fishermen more likely to be male

x

Obstruction of navigation routes

0

xx

xx

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

xx

x

xx

Fishermen more likely to be male

x

Consequential impacts to fish processors

x

x

x

Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway

x

xx

x

x

xx

Processors more likely to be female

Recreational boating

Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate

0

x

x

Oban, Dunstaffnage marinas could be affected if number of boaters reduces (but others could benefit)

0

x

x

x

x

Water sports

Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sports activity (sea kayaking)

0

x

No specific settlements affected

x

x

x

x

x

Impacts: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected

Table 28. Distributional analysis (income and social groups)

Sector

Impact

Income

Social groups

10% most deprived

Middle 80%

10% most affluent

Crofters

Ethnic minorities

With disability or long-term sick

Special interest groups

Other

Commercial fisheries

Loss of traditional fishing grounds

x

x

x

xx

Where fishing provides additional income

x

0

Unlikely to be employed in fisheries

xx

Potters

xx

Nephrops trawlers

Obstruction of navigation routes

x

x

x

xx

Where fishing provides additional income

x

0

Unlikely to be employed in fisheries

xx

Potters

xx

Nephrops trawlers

Consequential impacts to fish processors

x

x

x

x

x

0

x

x

Recreational boating

Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate

xx

Where employed in this area

xx

xx

xx

May be more likely to have smaller boats

xx

xxx

Could affect ability to support trips for disabled/ sick

xxx

Could mean they need to relocate to maintain services

xxx

Potentially greater impact on less affluent sailors with smaller, less powerful boats without electronic aids. They may be more likely reduce activity if navigation risks increase

Water sports

Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sports activity (sea kayaking)

x

x

x

x

x

x

xx

Sea kayakers could have to change routes or look for alternatives

No other specific group identified

Impacts: x x x : significant negative effect; x x : possible negative effects; x: minimal negative effect, if any; 0: no noticeable effect expected


Contact