Environmental effects of offshore wind power

1. Environmental effects of offshore wind power Dan Wilhelmsson Dept. of Zoology, Stockholm University

2. Offshore windpower:- less ”not in my back yard”problems- beneficial wind conditions

3. Modified from Fiskeriverket, 2003

4. Denmark aims for offshore windpower to supply 40% of energy needs by 2030. • Netherlands: 1360 MW by 2020 • Finland has assessed offshore windpower potential in Gulf of Bothnia, 2000 km2, 17 000 MW • Sweden: 10 % generated from wind power by 2010. Today around 1%. Plans for around 1000 offshore plants. 500-600 in the Baltic Sea. • Germany: Will double the amount of wind power in 25 years. Offshore wind power primarily in the North Sea, but around 1000 plants in the Baltic Sea (e.g. Kriegers flak) • - UK and Ireland...

5. 7000-10 000 off-shore windpower plants in Northern Europe.2000-3000 in the Baltic Sea

6. Today plants generate about 600 kw. New ones offshore= 3-5 MW Height: 100 m from sea level to tip of the blade Piles are 3 - 4.5 m in diameter Parks containing tens to houndreds of power plants

7. VINDKRAFTSREV

11. Principal issues to consider for establishment (modified from EcoServe, 2000) Nature of wind resource Seabed structure/geology Water depth Distance to shore Distance to service port Distance to grid connection Tide and currents Shipping/navigation routes Recreational boating Location of existing subsea cables and pipelines Fisheries Dredging Coastal landscape Local military activity (e.g. firing ranges,, offshore training)

12. Potential environmental impacts during construction (modified from Tougard et al. ) • Destruction of bottom area • Sediment spill and increased turbidity • Noise amd other disturbance due to construction activities • Potential impacts during operation • Noise and vibrations from the turbines • Electromagnetic fields • The physical presence of the turbines • Shade effects • Maintenance operations • Introduction of hard substrate (artificial reefs)

13. Major environmental concerns: • Birds • Marine mammals • Fish • Sea bed/areas of high conservation significance

14. Birds: • Disturbance during construction (sounds, feeding ability; season may be important) • Collision risks

15. Loss/gains of resting and foraging areas

16. Marine mammals • (seals, porpoises) • Primarily noise disturbance • May leave the area during construction (decline in abundance of porpoises in Nysteds in Denmark)

17. Invertebrates and algae: • Excavating activities during contruction cause destruction and disturbance of the bottom flora and fauna (construction phase) • Sedimentation and incresed turbidity disturb filter feeder and shade benthic vegetation (construction phase) • - Altered hydrodynamic conditions  erosion and deposition of sediment  changes in substrate (local effects) • - Introduction of new substrate  differentcommunity? Invasive species?

18. Fish • Noise, vibrations (avoidance? behavior disturbances? habituation?) • Electromagnetic fields (salmon, eel) • ”Reef effects” (artificial reefs)

19. ”INFLUENCE OF OFF-SHORE WIND POWER ON DEMERSAL FISH” Wilhelmsson, D., Malm, T., and Öhman M. 2006. ICES Journal of Marine Science 63.

20. ARTIFICIAL REEFS”Man made structures intentionally or uintentionally placed on the sea floor”

21. JAPAN JAPAN SOUTH-EAST ASIA USA SWEDEN….?

22. VINDKRAFTSREV Aabel et al. 1997, Beets, J. 1998, Nakamura et al. 1985 Hair et al. 1994, Rilov et al. 2002, Relini et al. 1994, White et al. 1990

24. FIELD SURVEY, 2003 KALMARSUND 8 windmill sites + 6 control sites

25. LINJETAXERING V B A V

26. 1038 adult fish, ~ 300 000 juveniles, 12 species Two-spotted goby, G. flavescens Sand Goby (Common goby?), Pomatoschistus sp. Black goby, G. niger Viviparous eelpout, Z. viviparus Sea scorpion, T. bubalis Bull-rout, M. Scorpius Fifteen-spined stickleback, S. spinachia Lump sucker, C. lumpus Greater sand-eel, H. lanceolatus Nine-spined stickleback, G. aculeatus Flounder, P. Flesus Deep-snouted pipefish, S. typhle SJUSTRÅLIG SMÖRBULT Gobiusculus flavescens Storlek: 6 cmFöda: plankton Nytta: föda för andra fiskar

27. P<0,05 (Wilcoxon´s)

28. *p<0,05 Wilcoxon´s *

29. p=0,012 Wilcoxon´s

30. DISCUSSION: • Monopiles + bottom = artificial reef system • Two-spotted goby uses the monopiles to resume in the shallow water column for enhanced flux of plankton (Wheeler 1980, Roundtree 1989, Wilkins and Myers 1992) • * Enhanced benthic productivity attracts and support higher abundances of benthic fish?(Bray et al. 1981, Kellison and Sedberry 1998)

31. Increased prey abundance (Two-spotted goby and Mytilus) and enhanced spawning habitats (shells from Blue mussels and gravel areas) (McGrath 1974, Fjosne and Gjosaeter 1996, Svensson et al. 2000, Jansson et al. 1985, Zander 1988) • Increased recruitment to the area?(Beets 1989, Rilov 2002)

32. Reef effects of only marginal significance?? • Perhaps not: • 1. long range of influence • 2. good feeding grounds for commercial fish • 3. Windpower parks = MPAs  Increased fish biomass  Refuges • (disturbance effects on more mobile fish are however not clearly established)

33. THANKS TO: Statens Energimyndighet, Vindforsk - FOI, Airicole AB, Torleif Malm, Maria Bodin, Saleh Yahaya, Sara Hallén, Sara Svensson, Måns Rutström, Kalmar University, Daladyk, Fire brigades in Torsås och Kalmar, Björkenäs Camping, Bergkvara

34. Aquaculture? Fish, mussels?

35. Monitoring programs: • e.g.: • - Nysteds Offshore Wind Farm/Horns rev • - Utgrunden II: • Vindval (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency)

36. Enhance the knowledge on the impacts on the marine environment • Facilitate EIAs and the expansion of offshore wind power • Capacity building at universities and institutes • Effects on fish, fisheries, benthos, birds, mammals

37. THANK YOU!

38. Management implications: Increased habitat heterogeneity  Baltic Sea: Increased fish abundance North Sea: Increased fish abundance and diversity?

39. OFF-SHORE WINDPOWER PLANTS – ARTIFICIAL REEFS?

40. IMPORTANT FACTORS: LOCATION COMPLEXITY SIZE MATERIAL VERTICAL RELIEF

41. WHY THESE ARTIFICIAL REEF EFFECTS?: SHELTER: main structure, epibiota FOOD: epibiota, water velocity BEHAVIORAL CUES

42. Reasons for deploying ARs: Enhance fisheries(aggregation or production) Restore marine habitats Protection of habitats Create dive sites ”Secondary ARs”