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

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

4.1 Offshore Wind

4.1.1 Quantification of Potentially Significant Impacts

Table 9 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 OWSW1 and OWSW2. 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 detail can be found in Appendix C.

Table 9. Present value ( PV) costs (and GVA for fisheries) in £millions for Offshore Wind in South 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	0.05	0.06	0.13
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0.05	0.06	0.10
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	4.87	5.08	5.98
Tourism	Reduction in expenditure	-	0.03	0.33
Total costs		4.97	5.23	6.54

Commercial Fisheries

The commercial fisheries assessment considered the worst-case impact of total loss of fishing grounds from the potential offshore wind development in the South-West Region. This was quantified as the value of fish landings from the proportion of the Draft Plan Option areas likely to be developed under each scenario. For OWSW1 and OWSW2 Draft Plan Option areas this area was calculated as being 8.5% and 26.5% (low scenario), 11.6% and 26.5% (central scenario) and 25.1% and 26.5% (high scenario) respectively. The total impact on commercial fisheries from offshore wind development in the South-West region was £0.05m GVA for the low scenario, rising to £0.13m GVA for the high scenario (over the whole assessment period, discounted). These impacts mainly accrue to the over-10m sector, and mainly on dredgers and potters that are active in the region, targeting shellfish.

Recreational Boating

The potential overlap of recreational boating within OWSW1 and OWSW2 in the South West SORER will occur in the central and high scenarios where up to three medium RYA cruising routes will be impacted. The estimated cost impact on recreational boating based on additional fuel costs associated with route deviations ranges from £0.05m PV in the low scenario to £0.10m PV in the high scenario.

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 South West SORER. The costs impacts are estimated to be £4.87m PV for the low scenario increasing to £5.98m PV for the high scenario.

Tourism

The shoreward boundary of both OWSW1 and OWSW2 Draft Plan Option areas are 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 £0.03m in the central scenario and £0.33m 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 locations of these activities are not yet known.

4.1.2 Other Costs not Quantified

Aviation

The OWSW1 and OWSW2 Draft Plan Option areas are within the line of sight of at least one of the primary surveillance radar used or operated by NATS who 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

Based on information from VMS 'steaming' pings, the main fishing navigation routes in the South-West Region do not overlap with the Draft Plan Option areas, however there is some steaming that overlaps with wind area OWSW1. It is expected that impacts could be largely mitigated through careful location of devices, although there may be some deviation required particularly under the high scenario. No specific interactions with export cables have been identified owing to a lack of information on the precise location of inshore fishing activity. 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. 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 OWSW1 and TSW1 which could result in competition for space between the different technologies. Energy generation from differing forms of technology will also lead to competition for transmission capacity which would affect all Draft Plan Option areas.

Military Interests

There is a potential overlap between OWSW2 Draft Plan Option area and with the 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 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 10 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, while others are likely to be minimal, for example, on recreational boaters.

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 11 and 12 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 noticeable on settlements with a harbour or marina, or on boat users, although they are still likely to be small. For most groups, though, the impacts are only minimal and are unlikely to result in noticeable effects.

Table 10. Identification of the social impacts and their significance

Offshore Wind (South 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. 05 Central: £0.06 High: £0.13		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 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, increasing costs and reducing number of jobs) 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
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	Health (reduction in recreational opportunities) Employment (impacts on boating services if boat owners choose to relocate their boating activities to elsewhere) Environment (change in opportunity for access)	Low: £0.05 Central: £0.06 High: £0.10	Passage planning and awareness, plus the update and circulation of up to date navigational information via charting publications	x	x
	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	Access to recreational opportunities
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	Access to services (increased costs passed onto users, especially ferries) Environment (increased emissions)	Low: £4.87 Central: £5.08 High: £5.98	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
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: £0.03 High: £0.33	Spatial planning used to locate arrays to minimise impacts, but maybe some impacts on medium and high scenarios in OWSW1 and OWSW2	0	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) Environment (change in opportunity for access)	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 11. 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	x	xx	xx Ayr, Campbeltown	x	x	x	xx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	x	x	x Ayr, Campbeltown	x	x	x	x	xx Processors more likely to be female
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	x	x	x	x
	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	0	x	xx Wigtown, Kirkcudbright, Whitehaven could be particularly affected	0 Not relevant in SW	x	x	x	x
Tourism	Reduction in expenditure	0	x	No specific settlements affected	0 Not relevant in SW	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 12. 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	0 Not relevant in SW	x	0 Unlikely to be employed in fisheries	xx Dredgers and potters	xx Vessels >10m length x Vessels <10m in length
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	x	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	x	0	x	x
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0 Unlikely to own boat	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	x	x	xx Boat users	No other specific group identified
	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	x	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	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

4.2 Tidal

4.2.1 Quantification of Potentially Significant Impacts

Table 13 presents quantified estimates of impacts (Present Value ( PV) costs and GVA (fisheries)) for activities potentially affected by tidal within Draft Plan Option area TSW1. 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 detail can be found in Appendix C.

Table 13. Present Value ( PV) costs (and GVA for fisheries) in £millions for Tidal Energy in South 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	0.03	0.06
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	-	-	0.06
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	-	-	1.07
Total costs		0.01	0.03	1.19

Commercial Fisheries

For TSW1 Draft Plan Option area, the area to be developed was calculated as 0.8% (low scenario), 2.6% (central scenario) and 5.1% (high scenario). The total impact on commercial fisheries from tidal energy development in the South-West region was assessed as £0.01m GVA for the low scenario, rising to £0.06m GVA for the high scenario (over the whole assessment period, discounted). These impacts mainly accrue to the over-10m sector, and mainly on dredgers and potters that are active in the region, targeting shellfish.

Recreational Boating

The potential overlap of recreational boating within TSW1 in the South West SORER occurs in high scenario where up to five high RYA cruising routes will be impacted. The estimated cost impact on recreational boating based on additional fuel costs associated with route deviations is £0.06m PV.

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. No cost impacts are identified for the low and central scenarios. The costs under the high scenario are estimated to be £1.07m PV.

4.2.2 Other Costs not Quantified

Commercial Fisheries

Based on information from VMS 'steaming' pings, the main fishing navigation routes in the South-West Region do not overlap with the Draft Plan Option areas. There is some steaming that overlaps with TSW1, but due to the small proportion of the area that would be occupied with tidal devices, impacts are expected to be avoidable. No significant interactions with cables were identified, in particular because 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

There is a significant degree of overlap between Draft Plan Option areas TSW1 and OWSW1 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 potential for the TSW1 Draft Plan Option area to interfere with underwater communications, however 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 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 and scuba diving occur with the TSW1 Draft Plan Option area while scuba diving also overlaps with the route corridor between this Draft Plan Option area and the potential landfall. 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 tidal developments within the Draft Plan Option areas is assessed as negligible.

Social Impacts

Each of the above effects could have social impacts. Table 14 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 environment and health, in relation to sea kayaking. 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 14 there may be some minimal impacts, for example, on recreational boaters.

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 15 and 16 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, there are possible impacts on sea kayakers where devices are located in popular kayaking areas. The impacts for recreational boaters may also be slightly more significant on settlements with a harbour or marina, should boat users choose to relocate. For most groups, though, the impacts are only slightly significant and are unlikely to result in any noticeable effects.

Table 14. Identification of the social impacts and their significance

Tidal (South West)
Sector	Direct effects	Area of social impact affected	Costs ( PV £ million or GVA 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: £0.03 High: £0.06		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 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)		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 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	Health (reduction in recreational opportunities) Employment (impacts on boating services if boat owners choose to relocate their boating activities to elsewhere) Environment (change in opportunity for access)	Low: none Central: none High: £0.06	Passage planning and awareness, plus the update and circulation of up to date navigational information via charting publications	x	x
	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	Access to recreational opportunities
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	Access to services (increased costs passed onto users, especially ferries) Environment (increased emissions)	Low: none Central: none High: £1.07	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)	Health (reduction in recreational opportunities) Environment (change in opportunity for access)	Impacts not quantified		xx	xx
	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 15. 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	x	xx	xx Ayr, Campbeltown	x	x	x	xx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	x	x	x Ayr, Campbeltown	x	x	x	x	xx Processors more likely to be female
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	x	x	x	x
	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	0	x	xx Wigtown, Kirkcudbright, Whitehaven could be particularly affected	0 Not relevant in SW	x	x	x	x
Water sports	Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sport activity (sea kayaking)	0	x	No specific settlements affected	0 Not relevant in SW	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 16. 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	0 Not relevant in SW	x	0 Unlikely to be employed in fisheries	xx Dredgers and potters	xx Vessels >10m length x Vessels <10m in length
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	x	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	x	0	x	x
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0 Unlikely to own boat	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	x	x	xx Boat users	No other specific group identified
	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	x	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	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
Water sports	Spatial overlap between Draft Plan Option areas and water sport activity (sea kayaking)	x	x	x	0 Not relevant in SW	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