Draft Sectoral Marine Plans for Offshore Renewable Energy in Scottish Waters - Sustainability Appraisal

3 Sustainability Appraisal: The Plan for Offshore Wind Energy

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 The following section provides a summary of the results of the technical assessments for the draft offshore wind plan. The SEA and HRA provide technical detail on the potential for effects environment and also for some of the human health aspects. The socio-economic assessment provides the potential social and economic consequences of effects on existing marine activities. Supporting technical assessment documents provide the detail of how conclusions have been made. The following sections provide a high level summary of these.

3.2 Environment

3.2.1 There are a range of potential interactions with the environment from the installation of wind devices in the marine environment. However, there is a degree of uncertainty regarding the precise level of effect in many cases. This is in part due to the often complex interactions in the marine environment, such as between the design of devices and mobile species, or the potential changes to marine hydrodynamics and patterns of sedimentation which interact with costal processes. Gaps in the understanding of these effects are being filled through research and the assessment and monitoring of demonstrator projects and initial commercial scale projects.

3.2.2 The following sections highlight some of the potential effects and environmental risks associated with wind devices. This is followed by a regional summary of the headline risks from the Draft Plan Options. The level of risk to environmental features is based on the potential effects of the technology and the sensitivity of the receiving environment.

Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

3.2.3 Potential collision with devices can result in of injury and mortality. Bird-strike with turbine blades may be an issue for seabirds and some migratory birds that fly at the heights of blades. There is some risk of collision and entanglement with structures above and below the water level for birds that fly along the water surface, diving birds, and mobile marine species such as seals, cetaceans, elasmobranchs and fish. There remain some gaps in the understanding of just how significant collision risk is for individual species. The ongoing HRA has looked at physical damage to species including Bottlenose dolphins and Harbour porpoise, Grey and Harbour seals, Atlantic salmon, Lamprey, Shad, seabirds and diving birds. The appraisal indicates further work at the project level will be required.

3.2.4 Furthermore barrier effects during operation for mobile species and visual disturbance to surface feeding and diving birds noted in the SEA also form part of the ongoing HRA.

3.2.5 The significance of impacts is based on the likelihood of collision and impact on viable population levels, which is difficult to determine at the plan level. Project level Environmental Impact Assessment ( EIA) and HRA will need to assess, as far as possible, the significant effects on European protected species and habitats and other priority marine features. Furthermore ongoing research should help to better inform the project stage of the likely significance of effects.

3.2.6 Collision risk could lead to some displacement of some species, as could noise and vibration associated with construction activity (particularly piling). Whilst the exact effects of noise and vibration are relatively unknown it is thought that some species could be attracted to noise sources and increase the chance of damage to their health. The HRA considers noise and vibration effects for species including Bottlenose dolphins, Harbour porpoise, Grey and Harbour seals, Atlantic salmon, Lamprey and Shad. It is considered that in some cases construction outside of breeding or migratory seasons might minimise effects.

3.2.7 Species health could also be impacted by the effects of electromagnetic fields ( EMF) from cabling, in particular elasmobranchs and fish. Although research on effects is ongoing the indication is effects could be minimal. Again these types of effects are also considered within the HRA.

3.2.8 There will be direct impacts to the seabed as a result of installation, which may vary between the types of base used ( e.g. gravity bases cover a greater area of the seabed than a device constructed on a monopile). Impacts include loss of benthic habitat at the site and potentially where dredging provides fill for gravity based devices, sediment dispersion and deposition, changes to water hydrology and turbidity, and potential release of contaminated materials. These could impact to on marine ecosystems in the locality of devices and will form part of project level assessment. The assessment does identify the potential for the creation of artificial habitats for marine organisms as a result of new structures in the water. This may be aided by potential reductions in other marine use in areas where wind technology is located. Direct and indirect physical damage to designated and potential sensitivity of habitats (reefs, subtidal sandbanks, intertidal habitats including saltmarshes, and supralittoral habitats) during the construction, operation and decommissioning phase also form part of the ongoing HRA as does contamination resulting from elevated turbidity.

Water and the Marine Environment

3.2.9 Effects on the water and the marine environment are, in general, related to the installation of turbine foundations and structures. Changes to turbidity, seabed disturbance from placement of gravity-based devices and from piling activities, contamination from installation equipment and maintenance vessels, could all impact on local water quality.

3.2.10 Furthermore pollution can affect the ability of fish species to spawn, respire and feed, and the health of shellfish growing waters. The significance of these effects will depend on the proximity of devices and polluted sediments to these waters. However, it is anticipated that effects will be of a lower significance

3.2.11 Effects can be mitigated largely through applying environmental controls during construction and from hydrodynamic modelling and design to reduce impacts such as turbidity.

Climatic Factors

3.2.12 Offshore wind is considered to contribute to the decarbonisation of electricity generation over the long-term which will be beneficial for climatic factors.

3.2.13 Some coasts and coastal processes are already impacted by climate change and project level assessments should consider how new devices may interact with this existing pattern of change.

Marine Geology and Coastal Processes

3.2.14 Preparation of the seabed for the installation of devices, such as dredging or piling, can result in effects, with some large gravity based devices, having potentially greater effects. Impacts on the seabed may also result from changes to turbidity, sediment disturbance, loss of geology, release of contaminated materials bonded to sediments. Installed devices can result in scouring, deposition and abrasion around foundation structures present on the seabed. However, it is assumed that scour protection would be used for such foundation structures and this may alleviate such risks.

3.2.15 Changes to hydrodynamics and water flows may have an interaction with coastal processes. Impacts would be of greatest significance where important coastal geological features including geological Sites of Special Scientific interest ( SSSI) and Geological Conservation Review sites ( GCRs) are located. Project level assessment will need to consider impacts on geology and coastal features based on the location of individual projects.

Historic Environment

3.2.16 Effects on designated and non-designated submerged archaeology, including wrecks have been identified. Impacts can be associated with direct damage during construction but also from scouring, siltation and deposition around assets located in the vicinity of devices or arrays. Careful location of devices in regards of historic assets can mitigate potential effects.

3.2.17 Wind devices, specifically masts, turbines and supporting infrastructure, could impact on the setting of features of the historic environment. The magnitude of visual effects depends on visibility and positioning of devices in regards to onshore features. Effects and appropriate mitigation can be applied through appropriate project design and location within Draft Plan Options.

Landscape and Seascape

3.2.18 Wind turbines and their supporting infrastructure have the potential for visual impacts on landscape and seascape, as a result of their presence in the water and also from associated infrastructure, marker buoys and lighting. The significance of effects depends on the setting of devices, distance from shore and the presence of other marine users (in particular for recreation). Project level assessment is required to determine the significance of effects within the Draft Plan Options. Development that will affect National Scenic Areas ( NSA) should avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the area or the qualities for which it has been designated.

Regional Issues

3.2.19 The environmental issues identified above are relevant for Draft Plan Options within all of the regions. The following sections highlight regions where the receiving environment may be particularly sensitive to potential effects and hence a higher risk of significance.

South West Region

3.2.20 Based on known presence of species there are risks to species based on the potential for collision, disturbance and displacement for seabirds, fish, and in particular elasmobranchs (including Basking Shark) and cetaceans (including whales) in the vicinity of OWSW1 which is understood to be close to migratory routes. The timing of construction activity may be one particular means to avoid the greatest impacts and should be based around the life cycles of species potentially impacted. Project level EIAs will need to determine the significance of effects and establish such mitigation measures. Ongoing research can help to provide more information to assist in this determination of significance.

3.2.21 The potential for effects on coastal habitats should be considered at the project level in relation to any impacts on the seabed, patterns of sedimentation and changes to hydrodynamics.

3.2.22 Landscape and seascape character and quality are considered high across the regions coastline. The height of wind devices makes them visible at a distance. A detailed impact assessment will need to form part of EIAs in order to determine the significance of impacts on landscape, including National Scenic Areas ( NSAs) and an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty ( AONB) on both sides of the Solway coastline. Furthermore, impacts on local communities and also the setting of historic features, such as those at Whitthorn Peninsula. Development that will affect NSAs should avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the area or the qualities for which it has been designated.

West Region

3.2.23 Given the presence of many important breeding and roosting sites for birds in the region there is a level of risk of collision and disturbance to birds during both construction and operation. These risks also extend to the many important mobile marine species found in the region, including amongst others Basking shark, Harbour porpoise, Minke whales and seal species.

3.2.24 The timing of construction activity may be one particular means to avoid the greatest impacts and should be based around the life cycles of species potentially impacted. Project level EIAs will need to determine the significance of effects and establish such mitigation measures. Ongoing research can help to provide more information to assist in this determination of significance.

3.2.25 Draft Plan Option OWW2 overlaps with existing and proposed designations as follows:

• Stanton Banks SAC - project level HRAs should demonstrate that development does not adversely affect the integrity of the designation alongside any other SPA/ SAC scoped into an assessment.
• Skye to Mull MPA search area (Basking shark and Minke whale interest features) - project level EIAs will need to demonstrate that development is compatible with the conservation objectives of the proposed MPA irrespective of its final boundary.

3.2.26 The potential for effects on coastal habitats should be considered at the project level in relation to any impacts on the seabed, patterns of sedimentation and changes to hydrodynamics.

3.2.27 Landscape and seascape character and quality are considered high across the regions coastline, with NSA designations and several areas considered to be wild land. The height of wind devices makes them visible at a distance and will result in change. Detailed impact assessment as part of EIAs can determine the significance of impacts on landscape. Development that will affect NSAs should avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the area or the qualities for which it has been designated. Impacts on local communities and also the setting of historic features, such as Skerryvore lighthouse will also need to be considered.

North West Region

3.2.28 The region is known to be frequented by many mobile marine species including White beaked dolphin, Risso Dolphin, Grey seal, Sand eels, whales, sharks and many important bird species. Risks to mobile species include collision and displacement during construction and operation. The level of risk to protected species will need to be established as part of the development planning and licencing process.

3.2.29 The timing of construction activity may be one particular means to avoid the greatest impacts and should be based around the life cycles of species potentially impacted. Project level EIAs will need to determine the significance of effects and establish such mitigation measures. Ongoing research can help to provide more information to assist in this determination of significance.

3.2.30 The potential loss of seabed and impacts on reef habitat, such as Solan Bank Reef, can be limited through site level survey, avoidance of important habitat, and project level assessment of changes to patterns of sedimentation and hydrodynamics.

3.2.31 Landscape and seascape character and quality are considered high across the regions coastline, with several areas considered to be wild land. The height of wind devices makes them visible at a distance and will result in change. Detailed impact assessment will need to form part of project assessment in order to determine the significance of impacts on landscape, including valued features such as the regions NSAs and local communities. Development that will affect NSAs should avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the area or the qualities for which it has been designated.

North Region

3.2.32 Based on known presence of species there are risks for the potential for collision, disturbance and displacement, both during construction and operation, for seabirds, fish (including Atlantic salmon and Sand eel), Common and Grey seals, whales, dolphins and elasmobranchs (including Basking Shark).

3.2.33 The timing of construction activity may be one particular means to avoid the greatest impacts and should be based around the life cycles of species potentially impacted. Project level EIAs will need to determine the significance of effects and establish such mitigation measures. Ongoing research can help to provide more information to assist in this determination of significance.

3.2.34 The potential for effects on coastal habitats should be considered at the project level in relation to any impacts on the seabed, patterns of sedimentation and changes to hydrodynamics.

3.2.35 Draft Plan Option OWN2 overlaps with the Pobie Bank cSAC. Project level HRA should demonstrate that development does not adversely affect the integrity of the designation alongside any other SPA/ SAC scoped into an assessment.

3.2.36 Draft Plan Option OWN1 overlaps with the North West Orkney MPA (proposed with Sand eel interest features). Project level EIA will need to demonstrate that development is compatible with the conservation objectives of the proposed MPA.

3.2.37 Landscape and seascape character and quality are considered high across the regions coastline, with several areas considered to be wild land. The height of wind devices makes them visible at a distance and will result in change and Draft Plan Options may be visible from the Shetland NSA and Hoy and West Mainland NSA. A detailed impact assessment will need to form part of project assessment in order to determine the significance of impacts on the NSAs. Furthermore assessment of effects on landscape and seascape in general, local communities and also the setting of historic features, particularly the Heart of Neolithic Orkney WHS will be required. Development that will affect NSAs should avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the area or the qualities for which it has been designated and avoid impacts on the outstanding unique value of the WHS.

North East Region

3.2.38 The region is known to be frequented by many mobile marine species including Grey seals, Bottlenose Dolphins, whales and important seabirds associated with European designated areas from the Firth of Forth to the Moray Firth. Risks to mobile species include collision and displacement during construction and operation. The level of risk to protected species and habitats will need to be established as part of the development planning and licencing process.

3.2.39 The timing of construction activity may be one particular means to avoid the greatest impacts and should be based around the life cycles of species potentially impacted. Project level EIAs will need to determine the significance of effects and establish such mitigation measures. Ongoing research can help to provide more information to assist in this determination of significance.

3.2.40 The potential for effects on coastal habitats should be considered at the project level in relation to any impacts on the seabed, patterns of sedimentation and changes to hydrodynamics.

3.2.41 Draft Plan Options OWNE1 and OWNE2 overlap with the Southern Trench Marine Protection Area ( MPA) area of search (proposed for Minke whale and White-beaked dolphin interest features). Project level EIA will need to demonstrate that development is compatible with the conservation objectives of the MPA.

3.2.42 Whilst landscape and seascape character is important for the region with sections of the coastline of high quality, the region does not contain national level coastal designations and fewer areas of wildness value than other regions. The height of wind devices makes them visible at a distance and will result in some change, however, with fewer high value landscape receptors and an already busy working seascape effects may be of lower significance than in other locations. Detailed impact assessment will need to form part of project assessment in order to determine the significance of impacts on landscape, local communities and also the setting of historic features.

3.3 Economy and other marine users

3.3.1 This section summarises the findings of the socio-economic assessment relating to the economic impacts of Draft Plan Options for offshore wind on other marine activities. Impacts are reported at the regional level, rather than at the level of specific Draft Plan Options. More detail on this analysis can be found in the socio-economic assessment.

Regional Issues

South West Region ¹¹

3.3.2 Based on a pro-rata share of the indicative scale of development shown in Table 3.1, it is assumed that the following proportions of Draft Plan Option areas OWSW1 and OWSW2 could be developed.

Table 3.1: Potential Portions of Draft Plan Options Developed in the South West Region (% of Spatial Area)

Scenario	OWSW1	OWSW2
Low	8.5%	26.5%
Medium	11.6%	26.5%
High	25.1%	26.5%

3.3.3 Such development could have the potential to interact with aviation, commercial fisheries, energy generation, military interests, recreational boating, shipping, tourism, and water sports.

Quantified Impacts

3.3.4 The socio-economic assessment was able to quantify aspects of the impacts on commercial fisheries, recreational boating, shipping, and tourism. These estimated costs are set out in Table 3.2 below. The most significant impact at a regional level was observed for shipping, as a result of additional fuel costs associated with route deviation. No impacts were recorded for tourism expenditure under the Low Scenario, as 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.

Table 3.2: Present value ( PV) costs for Offshore Wind in the South West Region, £m (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, values rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity	Description of Measurement	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Value of potentially lost GVA (derived from landed values)	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 tourism expenditure	-	0.03	0.33
Total PV costs		4.97	5.23	6.54

Non-Quantified Impacts

3.3.5 The study identified several other sources of cost that could arise to marine activities from development in the Draft Plan Option areas. However, it was not possible to monetise these costs, so these have been assessed qualitatively in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Non Quantified Impacts on Other Marine Activities for Offshore Wind in the South West Region

Marine Activity	Non-Quantified Impact
Aviation	Potential interference with NATS surveillance radar
Commercial Fisheries	Potential overlap with steaming routes; potential for knock on consequences from displacement of fisheries.
Energy Generation	Potential competition for space between offshore wind development and tidal development.
Military Interests	Potential overlap between proposed cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. Potential to interfere with underwater communications.
Recreational Boating	Potential for deterring sailing through areas, owing to increased difficulties for navigation arising from development.
Water Sports	Costs to water sports activities (diving, recreational angling) associated with offshore wind development in Draft Plan Option areas assessed as negligible.

West Region ¹²

3.3.6 Based on a pro-rata share of the indicative scale of development shown in Table 3.4, it is assumed that the following proportions of Draft Plan Option areas OWW1, OWW2 and OWW3 could be developed.

Table 3.4: Potential Portions of Draft Plan Options Developed in the West Region (% of Spatial Area)

Scenario	OWW1	OWW2	OWW3
Low	4.8%	4.8%	4.8%
Medium	11.6%	11.6%	11.6%
High	25.1%	25.1%	25.1%

3.3.7 Such development could have the potential to interact with aviation, commercial fisheries, energy generation, military interests, ports and harbours, recreational boating, shipping, tourism, and water sports.

Quantified Impacts

3.3.8 The socio-economic assessment was able to quantify aspects of the impacts on commercial fisheries, shipping, and tourism. These estimated costs are set out in Table 3.5 below. The most significant impact at a regional level was observed for Shipping, as a result of additional fuel costs associated with route deviation. No costs to shipping or tourism were recorded under the Low Scenario.

Table 3.5: Present value ( PV) costs for Offshore Wind in the West Region, £m (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, values rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity	Description of Measurement	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Value of potentially lost GVA (derived from landed values)	0.13	0.31	0.67
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	-	3.80	7.88
Tourism	Reduction in tourism expenditure	-	0.01	0.06
Total PV costs		0.13	4.12	8.61

Non-Quantified Impacts

3.3.9 The study identified several other sources of cost that could arise to marine activities from development in the Draft Plan Option areas. However, it was not possible to monetise these costs, so these have been assessed qualitatively in Table 3.6.

Table 3.6: Non Quantified Impacts on Other Marine Activities for Offshore Wind in the West Region

Marine Activity	Non-Quantified Impact
Aviation	Potential interference with NATS surveillance radar; OWW2 lies within 15nm of safeguarding zone around secondary surveillance radar around nearest airport.
Commercial Fisheries	Potential overlap with steaming routes, resulting in deviation of navigation for affected vessels, particularly under high scenario, with associated costs. Vessels most likely to be affected expected to be those based in Oban. Potential for knock on consequences from displacement of fisheries.
Energy Generation	Potential competition for space between offshore wind development and wave development.
Military Interests	Potential overlap between all Draft Plan Option areas and proposed cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. Potential to interfere with underwater communications.
Ports and Harbours	Potential for temporary collision risk during cable laying or maintenance activities.
Recreational Boating	Potential for deterring sailing through areas, owing to increased difficulties for navigation arising from development.
Water Sports	Potential overlap between some indicative cable routes and scuba diving, although assessed as unlikely. Costs to water sports activities (diving, recreational angling) associated with offshore wind development in Draft Plan Option areas assessed as negligible.

North West Region ¹³

3.3.10 Based on a pro-rata share of the indicative scale of development shown in Table 3.7, it is assumed that the following proportions of Draft Plan Option area OWNW1 could be developed.

Table 3.7: Potential Portions of Draft Plan Options Developed in the North West Region (% of Spatial Area)

Scenario	OWNW1
Low	4.8%
Medium	11.6%
High	25.1%

3.3.11 Such development could have the potential to interact with commercial fisheries, energy generation, military interests, recreational boating, shipping, and water sports.

Quantified Impacts

3.3.12 The socio-economic assessment was able to quantify aspects of the impacts on commercial fisheries, and shipping. These estimated costs are set out in Table 3.8 below. The most significant impact at a regional level was observed for Shipping, as a result of additional fuel costs associated with route deviation.

Table 3.8: Present value ( PV) costs for Offshore Wind in the North West Region, £m (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, values rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity	Description of Measurement	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Value of potentially lost GVA (derived from landed values)	0.11	0.27	0.58
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	-	1.45	2.90
Total PV costs			0.11	1.72

Non-Quantified Impacts

3.3.13 The study identified several other sources of cost that could arise to marine activities from development in the Draft Plan Option area. However, it was not possible to monetise these costs, so these have been assessed qualitatively in Table 3.9.

Table 3.9: Non Quantified Impacts on Other Marine Activities for Offshore Wind in the North West Region

Marine Activity	Non-Quantified Impact
Commercial Fisheries	Potential overlap with significant navigation routes, resulting in deviation of navigation for affected vessels, particularly under high scenario, with associated costs. Vessels most likely to be affected expected to be those based in Stornoway, Lochinver, Kinlochbervie and possibly Ullapool. Potential for knock on consequences from displacement of fisheries.
Energy Generation	Energy generation from differing forms of technology will lead to competition for transmission capacity which would affect all Draft Plan Option areas
Military Interests	Potential overlap between the proposed cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. Potential to interfere with underwater communications.
Recreational Boating	Potential for deterring sailing through areas, owing to increased difficulties for navigation arising from development.
Water Sports	Potential overlap with scuba diving, windsurfing and surfing, though assessed as unlikely. Costs to water sports activities (including recreational angling) associated with offshore wind development in Draft Plan Option area assessed as negligible.

North Region ¹⁴

3.3.14 Based on a pro-rata share of the indicative scale of development shown in Table 3.10, it is assumed that the following proportions of Draft Plan Option areas OWN1 and OWN2 could be developed.

Table 3.10: Potential Portions of Draft Plan Options Developed in the North Region (% of Spatial Area)

Scenario	OWN1	OWN2
Low	4.8%	4.8%
Medium	11.6%	11.6%
High	25.1%	25.1%

3.3.15 Such development could have the potential to interact with aviation, carbon capture and storage, commercial fisheries, energy generation, military interests, oil and gas, ports and harbours, recreational boating, shipping, tourism, and water sports.

Quantified Impacts

3.3.16 The socio-economic assessment was able to quantify aspects of the impacts on commercial fisheries, shipping, tourism, and water sports (sea angling). These estimated costs are set out in Table 3.11 below. The most significant impact at a regional level, with the exception of the Low Scenario, was observed for shipping, as a result of additional fuel costs associated with route deviation for an average number of shipping movements based on the shipping density within the Draft Plan Option areas.

Table 3.11: Present value ( PV) costs for Offshore Wind in the North Region, £m (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, values rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity	Description of Measurement	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Value of potentially lost GVA (derived from landed values)	0.74	1.8	3.9
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	-	7.11	14.22
Tourism	Reduction in expenditure	-	0.22	0.59
Water sports - sea angling	Reduction in expenditure	-	-	0.47
Total PV costs			0.74	9.13

Non Quantified Impacts

3.3.17 The study identified several other sources of cost that could arise to marine activities from development in the Draft Plan Option areas. However, it was not possible to monetise these costs, so these have been assessed qualitatively in Table 3.12.

Table 3.12: Non Quantified Impacts on Other Marine Activities for Offshore Wind in the North Region

Marine Activity	Non-Quantified Impact
Aviation	Potential for overlaps between the siting for offshore wind turbines and helicopter routes, particularly under central and high scenarios. OWN2 also falls within 15nm of the safeguarding zone around the secondary surveillance radar around the nearest airport, and the site intersects with the suggested 17km CAA consultation around airports
Carbon Capture and Storage	Potential overlaps with possible carbon and storage sites. In addition, the cable corridors have the potential to overlap or lie inshore of potential storage areas. Particularly significant under the central and high scenarios.
Commercial Fisheries	Potential overlap with significant navigation routes, resulting in deviation of navigation for affected vessels, particularly under high scenario, with associated costs. Vessels most likely to be affected expected to be those based in Scrabster, Kirkwall and Lerwick. Potential for knock on consequences from displacement of fisheries.
Energy Generation	Potential competition for space between offshore wind development in and wave development.
Military Interests	Potential overlap between the Draft Plan Option areas and the proposed cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. Potential to interfere with underwater communications. In addition, potential for overlap with a Low Priority Military Low Flying Area.
Oil and Gas	Should offshore wind farm export cables cross over existing oil and gas pipelines or cables, it has been assumed that the costs would be borne by the offshore wind developer. While the oil & gas industry's interests will largely be protected by the relevant cable crossing agreements, it is currently unclear whether all of the industry's liabilities may be covered by such agreements.
Ports and Harbours	Potential for temporary collision risk during cable laying or maintenance activities.
Recreational Boating	Potential for deterring sailing through areas, owing to increased difficulties for navigation arising from development.
Water Sports	Potential overlap with scuba diving, windsurfing and surfing. Costs to water sports activities associated with offshore wind development in Draft Plan Option area assessed as negligible.

North East

3.3.18 Based on a pro-rata share of the indicative scale of development shown in Table 3.13, it is assumed that the following proportions of Draft Plan Option areas OWN1 and OWN2 could be developed

Table 3.13: Potential Portions of Draft Plan Options Developed in the North East Region, % of Spatial Area

Scenario	OWN1	OWN2
Low	4.8%	4.8%
Medium	11.6%	11.6%
High	25.1%	25.1%

3.3.19 Such development could have the potential to interact with aviation, carbon capture and storage, commercial fisheries, energy generation, military interests, oil and gas, ports and harbours, power connectors, recreational boating, shipping, and water sports.

Quantified Impacts

3.3.20 The socio-economic assessment was able to quantify aspects of the impacts on carbon capture and storage, commercial fisheries, recreational boating, and shipping. These estimated costs are set out in Table 3.14 below. The most significant impact at a regional level, with the exception of the Low Scenario, was observed for shipping, as a result of additional fuel costs associated with route deviation.

Table 3.14: Present value ( PV) costs for Offshore Wind in the North East Region, £m (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, values rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity	Description of Measurement	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Carbon Capture and Storage	Additional costs of constructing cable crossings	1.85	4.32	9.27
Commercial Fisheries	Value of potentially lost GVA (derived from landed values	0.18	0.43	0.92
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	-	0.66	0.81
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	-	48.57	98.61
Total PV costs		2.03	53.98	109.61

Non Quantified Impacts

3.3.21 The study identified several other sources of cost that could arise to marine activities from development in the Draft Plan Option areas. However, it was not possible to monetise these costs, so these have been assessed qualitatively in Table 3.15.

Table 3.15: Non Quantified Impacts on Other Marine Activities for Offshore Wind in the North East Region

Marine Activity	Non-Quantified Impact
Aviation	Potential for overlaps between the siting for offshore wind turbines and helicopter routes, particularly under central and high scenarios. Potential interference with NATS surveillance radar; OWNE1 and OWNE2 lie within 15nm of safeguarding zone around secondary surveillance radar around nearest airport. OWNE1 intersects with the suggested 17km CAA consultation around airports.
Commercial Fisheries	Significant overlap with steaming grounds and major navigation routes, resulting in deviation of navigation for a significant number of vessels, with associated costs. Vessels most likely to be affected expected to be those based in Fraserburgh and Peterhead. Potential for knock on consequences from displacement of fisheries.
Energy Generation	There is potential for OWNE1 and OWNE2 to compete for transmission capacity.
Military Interests	Potential overlap between the proposed cable routes and military practice and exercise areas. Potential to interfere with underwater communications.
Oil and Gas	Should offshore wind farm export cables cross over existing oil and gas pipelines or cables, it has been assumed that the costs would be borne by the offshore wind developer. While the oil & gas industry's interests will largely be protected by the relevant cable crossing agreements, it is currently unclear whether all of the industry's liabilities may be covered by such agreements.
Ports and Harbours	Potential increase in marine risk, specifically the temporary collision risk while cable laying or maintenance is being carried out.
Power Interconnectors	Should offshore wind farm export cables cross over existing power interconnector cables, it has been assumed that the costs would be borne by the offshore wind developer. While the power interconnector asset owner/operator will largely be protected by the relevant cable crossing agreements, it is currently unclear whether all of the industry's liabilities may be covered by such agreements.
Recreational Boating	Potential for deterring sailing through areas, owing to increased difficulties for navigation arising from development.
Water Sports	Water sport activities of scuba diving, windsurfing and surfing are carried out in the North East Region. Costs to water sports activities (including Recreational Angling) associated with offshore wind development in Draft Plan Option area assessed as negligible.

3.4 People and Health

3.4.1 This section summarises the findings of the socio-economic assessment relating to the potential social impacts of Draft Plan Options for offshore wind that could arise from impacts on other marine activities. These impacts are reported at 'planning region' level, rather than at the level of specific Draft Plan Options. More detail on this analysis can be found in Chapters 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, 7.1, 8.1 and Appendix C of the socio-economic assessment, and within the population and human health section of the Environmental Report.

Population and Human Health

3.4.2 As discussed within the previous section there is potential for conflicts of space with commercial, fishing and recreational vessel movement and thus there is a level of collision risk. Measures including exclusion zones, lighting and marker buoys can mitigate for some accident risk.

3.4.3 Some displacement of activities is possible. In terms of recreational activities these may be particularly acute if devices are placed in near shore areas where recreational use can be more concentrated. Several of the wind Draft Plan Options are located far enough from the coast that these recreational impacts might be reduced. Collision and displacement risks are also considered to be reversible and would reduce upon decommissioning.

3.4.4 Other potential impacts on human health are noise and shadow flicker effects, which can cause nuisance and irritation to people who live or travel through areas. The significance of effects will depend on the proximity of wind farms to the shore line and its inhabitants and users, and the location of turbines in relation to the sun, particularly when low in the sky. Impacts on mobile sea users could be magnified if they are in closer proximity to the turbines. Effects can only however be reasonably established at the project design stage.

Regional Issues

3.4.5 The following sections highlight regional social issues identified in the assessments.

South West Region

3.4.6 The socio economic assessment found that social impacts within the region might arise through interactions between development and the following sectors: commercial fisheries, recreational boating, and tourism. The SEA also identified that the area is popular for recreational boating and that there is potential for displacement of activities with human health benefits. Consultation with the sector during project planning is recommended to reduce the likelihood of impacts.

Quantified Impacts

3.4.7 None of the social impacts within the South West Region have been quantified.

Non Quantified Impacts

3.4.8 Tables 3.16 and 3.17 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. Dredgers and potters within commercial fisheries in Ayr and Campbeltown may possibly be impacted due to potential lost landings. Recreational boating may possibly be impacted in Wigtown, Kirkcudbright and Whitehaven due to increased fuel costs and decreased access to sites. For most groups, the impacts are only minimal and are unlikely to result in noticeable effects.

Table 3.16: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the South West Region (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 to2access 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 3.17: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the South West Region (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.

West Region

3.4.9 The socio economic assessment found that social impacts within the region might arise through interactions between development and the following sectors: commercial fisheries, recreational boating, and tourism. The main impacts are 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). 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.

3.4.10 The SEA identified that area is popular for recreational boating and cruising with several popular routes between islands and the mainland. It concluded that there is potential for some displacement of some activities, although impacts on some activities may be reduced as Draft Plan Options are not located in near shore areas. Consultation with the recreation sector during project planning is recommended to reduce the likelihood of impacts.

Quantified Impacts

3.4.11 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) and shown in Table 3.18 below.

Table 3.18: Employment Impacts arising from interaction with Offshore Wind Draft Plan Options in the West Region ( FTE per annum, rounded to nearest 0.5 FTE)

Sector	Social impact	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Employment ( FTE per annum)	0	0.5	1.5

Non Quantified Impacts

3.4.12 Tables 3.19 and 3.20 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. Potters and Nephrops trawlers within commercial fisheries in Oban, Mallaig and Stornoway will probably be impacted due to potential lost landings and obstruction of navigation routes. There may possibly be a consequential impact to fish processors in these areas too. For most groups the impacts are minimal and are unlikely to result in noticeable effects.

Table 3.19: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in West Region (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	xxx Oban, Mallaig, Stornoway	x	xxx	x	xxx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Obstruction of navigation routes	0	Xxx	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 3.20: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in West Region (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

North West Region

3.4.13 The socio-economic assessment found that social impacts within the region might arise through interactions between development and the following sectors: commercial fisheries and recreational boating. The main impacts are 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). Other impacts, such as on access to services, health, and culture and heritage could largely be mitigated.

3.4.14 The SEA also identified the region is popular for recreational boating and also commercial shipping routes and there is potential for displacement of activities. There is potential for some displacement of activities, although impacts on some activities may be reduced as Draft Plan Options are not located in near shore areas. Consultation with the recreation sector during project planning is recommended to reduce the likelihood of impacts.

Quantified Impacts

3.4.15 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) and shown in Table 3.21 below.

Table 3.21: Employment Impacts arising from interaction with Offshore Wind Draft Plan Options in the North-West Region ( FTE per annum, rounded to nearest 0.5 FTE)

Sector	Social impact	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Employment ( FTE per annum)	Impacts on jobs not quantified as regional effects do not exceed 5% threshold	Impacts on jobs not quantified as regional effects do not exceed 5% threshold	1.5

Non Quantified Impacts

3.4.16 Tables 3.22 and 3.23 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. The pelagic sector and herring vessels within commercial fisheries in Kinlochbervie, Lochinver and Ullapool may possibly be impacted due to potential lost landings. For most groups the impacts are at worst minimal and in many cases are unlikely to be noticeable.

Table 3.22: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the North West Region (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 Kinlochbervie, Lochinver, Ullapool	x	xx	x	xx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Obstruction of navigation routes	0	x	x Kinlochbervie, Lochinver, Ullapool	0	x	0	x Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	x	x	x Kinlochbervie, Lochinver, Ullapool	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 Pontoon facilities, e.g. at Kinlochbervie could be affected if number of boaters reduces (but others could benefit)	0	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 3.23: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the North West Region (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	xx Where fishing provides additional income	x	0 Unlikely to be employed in fisheries	xx Pelagic sector x Potters, demersal trawls	xx Vessels >15m (herring) x Vessels <15m
	Obstruction of navigation routes	x	x	x	xx Where fishing provides additional income	x	0 Unlikely to be employed in fisheries	xx Pelagic sector x Potters, demersal trawls	xx Vessels >15m (herring) x Vessels <15m
	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	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

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

North Region

3.4.17 The socio-economic assessment found that social impacts within the region might arise through interactions between development and the following sectors: carbon capture and storage, commercial fisheries, recreational boating, tourism, and water sports (sea angling). The main impacts are 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). Other impacts, such as on access to services, health, and culture and heritage could largely be mitigated, although there may be some noticeable impacts, such as on sea anglers or recreational boaters.

3.4.18 The SEA identified that the region is popular for recreational boating and cruising with several popular routes between islands and the mainland. Furthermore there are commercial shipping routes. There is potential for some displacement of activities, although impacts on some activities may be reduced as Draft Plan Options are not located in near shore areas. Consultation with the commercial and recreation sector during project planning is recommended to reduce the likelihood of impacts.

Quantified Impacts

3.4.19 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) and shown in Table 3.24 below.

Table 3.24: Employment Impacts arising from interaction with Offshore Wind Draft Plan Options in the North Region ( FTE per annum, rounded to nearest 0.5 FTE)

Sector	Social impact	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Employment ( FTE per annum)	1.0	4 - 4.5	9 - 10

Non Quantified Impacts

3.4.20 Tables 3.25 and 3.26 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. The pelagic and demersal sector within commercial fisheries in Orkney, Scrabster and Shetland will probably be impacted due to potential lost landings and possible obstruction of navigation routes. There will probably be an impact on the shellfish sector due to potential lost landings and a consequential impact to fish processors in these areas too. Recreational boating may possibly be impacted in Bressay Lerwick and Pierowall due to decreased access to sites. Sea angling may possibly be impacted due a reduction of expenditure in this region. For most groups the impacts are likely to be minimal.

Table 3.25: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the North Region (location, age and gender)

Sector	Impact	Location			Age			Gender
		Urban	Rural	Settlement	Children	Working age	Pensionable age	Male	Female
Carbon capture and storage	Competition for space: Draft Plan Option areas and/or cable corridors overlap or lie inshore of potential storage areas	0	x Could have impact on rural economy if investment goes elsewhere	0 Unlikely to affect specific locations	0	x Could have impact on employment opportunities if investment goes elsewhere	0	x	x
Commercial fisheries	Value of potentially lost landings	0	xx	xxx Orkney, Scrabster, Shetland	x	xxx	x	xxx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Obstruction of navigation routes	0	x	xx Orkney, Scrabster, Shetland	x	xx	x	xx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	x	xx	xxx Orkney, Scrabster, Shetland	x	xxx	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	xx Bressay, Lerwick and Pierowall could be affected	0	x	x	x	x
Tourism	Reduction in expenditure	0	x	No specific settlements affected	x	x	x	x	x
Water sports- Sea Angling	Reduction in expenditure	xx	xx	xx	xx	xx	xx	xx	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 3.26: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the North Region (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
Carbon capture and storage	Competition for space: Draft Plan Option areas and/or cable corridors overlap or lie inshore of potential storage areas	xx economic impacts could affect this group more than others	x	x	x Unlikely to be employed in this industry (but may be for extra income)	x	0 Unlikely to be affected, economic impacts likely to be small	0 None likely to be affected	xx Local businesses that might otherwise have been involved
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 Pelagic, demersal sector xx Shellfish	xxx Vessels >15m xxx Vessels <15m
	Obstruction of navigation routes	x	x	x	xx Where fishing provides additional income	x	0 Unlikely to be employed in fisheries	xx Pelagic, demersal sector x Shellfish	xx Vessels >15m xx Vessels <15m
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	xx	xx	x	x	x	0	x	x
Recreational boating	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	x Where employed in this area	x	x	0 Unlikely to be employed in this area	x	xx Could affect ability to support trips for disabled/ sick	xx Could mean they need to relocate to maintain services	No other specific group identified
Tourism	Reduction in expenditure	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	No other specific group identified
Water sports - Sea Angling	Reduction in expenditure	xx	xx	xx	xx	xx	x Level of sea angling activity may be lower for sick	xxx	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

North East Region

3.4.21 The socio-economic assessment found that social impacts within the region might arise through interactions between development and the following sectors: carbon capture and storage, commercial fisheries, and recreational boating. The main impacts are 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). Other impacts, such as on access to services, health, and culture and heritage could largely be mitigated, although there may be some noticeable impacts, such as on carbon capture and storage (mainly due to additional costs of rerouting pipelines, such that the social impacts might be minimal) and recreational boaters.

3.4.22 The SEA identified is has some recreational boating and also commercial shipping routes and there is potential for displacement of activities consultation with the commercial and recreational sector during project planning is recommended to reduce the likelihood of impacts.

Quantified Impacts

3.4.23 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) and shown in Table 3.27 below.

Table 3.27: Employment Impacts arising from interaction with Offshore Wind Draft Plan Options in the North East Region ( FTE per annum, rounded to nearest 0.5 FTE)

Sector	Social impact	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Commercial Fisheries	Employment ( FTE per annum)	Impacts on jobs not quantified as regional effects do not exceed 5% threshold	Impacts on jobs not quantified as regional effects do not exceed 5% threshold	1.5

Non Quantified Impacts

3.4.24 Tables 3.28 and 3.29 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. Dredgers and potters within commercial fisheries in Fraserburgh and Peterhead will probably be impacted due to obstruction of navigation routes. There may possibly be an impact in Aberdeen, Buckie, Fraserburgh and Peterhead due to potential lost landings. Recreational boating may possibly be impacted in Peterhead, Banff and Whitehills marinas due to decreased access to sites. For most groups the impacts are likely to be minimal.

Table 3.28: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the North East Region (location, age and gender)

Sector	Impact	Location			Age			Gender
		Urban	Rural	Settlement	Children	Working age	Pensionable age	Male	Female
Carbon capture and storage	Competition for space: Draft Plan Option areas and/or cable corridors overlap or lie inshore of potential storage areas	0	x Could have impact on rural economy if investment goes elsewhere	0 Unlikely to affect specific locations	0	x Could have impact on employment opportunities if investment goes elsewhere	0	x	x
Commercial fisheries	Value of potentially lost landings	0	xx	xx Aberdeen, Buckie, Fraserburgh, Peterhead	x	xx	x	xx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Obstruction of navigation routes	0	xx	xxx OWNE2 (Fraserburgh and Peterhead)	x	xxx	x	xxx Fishermen more likely to be male	x
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	x	xx	xx Aberdeen, Buckie, Fraserburgh, Peterhead	x	xx	x	x	xx Processors more likely to be female
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	0	x	xx Peterhead, Banff and Whitehills marinas could be affected	0	x	x	Increased deterrent to access in sites that are already challenging to navigate	0

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

Table 3.29: Distributional analysis for Offshore Wind in the North East Region (income and social groups)

Sector	Impact	Income			Social groups
		10% most deprived	Middle 80%	10% m ost affluent	Crofters	Ethnic minorities	With disability or long-term sick	Special interest groups	Other
Carbon capture and storage	Competition for space: Draft Plan Option areas and/or cable corridors overlap or lie inshore of potential storage areas	xx economic impacts could affect this group more than others	x	x	0 Not relevant in NE	x	0 Unlikely to be affected, economic impacts likely to be small	0 None likely to be affected	xx Local businesses that might otherwise have been involved
Commercial fisheries	Value of potentially lost landings	xx	xx	xx	0 Not relevant in NE	xx	0 Unlikely to be employed in fisheries	xx Dredgers, potters x Demersal, pelagic sectors, Nephrops	xx Vessels >15m xx Vessels <10m x Vessels <15m
	Obstruction of navigation routes	xxx	xxx	xxx	0 Not relevant in NE	xxx	0 Unlikely to be employed in fisheries	xxx Dredgers, potters xxx Demersal, pelagic sectors, Nephrops	xxx Vessels >15m xxx Vessels <10m xxx Vessels <15m
	Consequential impacts to fish processors	xx	xx	x	0 Not relevant in NE	x	0	x	x
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0 Unlikely to own boat	x	x	0 Not relevant in NE	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 NE	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

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

3.5 Summary of Effects

3.5.1 The SEA cannot predict with certainty the precise significance of effects on the environment as opportunities to mitigate and minimise effects exist at the project level, primarily through project design and location. Furthermore the significance of predicted effects may only be fully understood as initial projects are monitored. The headline environmental effects of the draft plan for offshore wind are summarised in the bullets below:

• Potential effects on biodiversity as a result of collision with devices, particularly blades, barriers to movement of mobile species. Noise impacts on sensitive mobile species from the construction of devices (seabirds, cetaceans, seals, elasmobranchs, and fish species). Additionally there may be direct loss of seabed habitat from the installation of devices and effects associated with potential changes to patterns of tidal and sediment movement on marine habitats.
• Scope for impacts on water quality from contamination as a result of changes to turbidity and seabed disturbance in areas of existing contamination, or cross contamination of material used to fill gravity based devices. The significance of effects will depend on the proximity of devices to sensitive areas such as areas, such as those for fish spawning and feeding and shellfish growing waters.
• Positive effects for climate change mitigation through moving to decarbonisation of energy supply.
• Changes to turbidity, sediment disturbance, and loss of geology in placing devices may have secondary impacts on coastal processes. The significance of effects will depend on the proximity of devices to more sensitive coastlines such as those with geological SSSI and GCRs.
• Potential direct effects on submerged archaeology during construction and in some cases potential for effects on the setting of features of the historic environment.
• Visual impacts on landscape and seascape character. Wind devices will result in change, however the magnitude of visual effects depends in general on visibility and positioning of devices in regards to onshore features. Visual effects for other sea users, such as recreation vessels, may increase if constructed in popular recreational locations. Effects from lighting at night time are possible although of greater significance for plan options in greater proximity to onshore and offshore receptors.
• In some locations new structures could increase collision risk for some vessels, including with each other as a result of narrowed channels of use due to potential exclusion zones. The likelihood of effects are considered to be of lower significance and able to be mitigated.

3.5.2 Table 3.30 sets out the quantified economic impacts of Draft Plan Options for offshore wind on other marine activities at a national level. These figures are aggregated from the regional level analyses.

Table 3.30: Present value ( PV) costs for Offshore Wind in at a national level, £m (costs discounted over assessment period, 2012 prices, values rounded to nearest £0.01m)

Activity	Description of Measurement	Scenarios
		Low	Central	High
Carbon Capture and Storage	Additional costs of constructing cable crossings	1.85	4.32	9.27
Commercial Fisheries	Value of potentially lost GVA (derived from landed values	1.21	2.87	6.2
Recreational boating	Additional fuel costs	0.05	0.72	0.91
Shipping	Additional fuel costs	4.87	66.01	129.59
Tourism	Reduction in expenditure	0	0.26	0.98
Water sports - Sea Angling	Reduction in expenditure	0	0	0.47
Total PV costs		7.98	74.18	147.42

3.5.3 The majority of quantified impacts of the Draft Offshore Wind Plan fall upon the shipping industry, particularly within the North East region. Other industries with significant costs include carbon capture and storage and commercial fisheries.

3.5.4 In addition to the above, there are a number of non-quantified impacts. They impact on the following marine activities: aviation, carbon capture and storage, commercial fisheries, energy generation, military interests, oil and gas, ports and harbours, power interconnectors, recreational boating, shipping, tourism and water sports. The nature of these does not lend itself to them being aggregated at a national level, but the relevant information is presented within the regional sections above.

3.5.5 There will also be a number of social impacts, as discussed in the previous section. These will fall almost entirely at a regional (or sub-regional) level, but may include national impacts on coastal communities, the 10% most income deprived decile and some specific social groups.

3.5.6 Nonetheless, most of the social impacts are likely to be felt at a very local level. The real significance of the local impacts could only be fully explored through a specific, local assessment, which is beyond the scope of this appraisal. For example, it has not been possible to explore whether a local area might become increasingly deprived if there were impacts on jobs, partly because the impacts are generally small but also because the specific locations of the impacts cannot be clearly identified. In addition, the 5% threshold for assessing quantitative impacts may under-estimate effects on certain businesses that may be disproportionately affected as impacts are unlikely to be evenly distributed across a sector.

3.5.7 Social impacts have generally been assessed as knock-on impacts from the direct effects on activities. This means that areas such as employment, environment and health have been included to a greater extent than the much more indirect effects on crime or education. Again, these indirect effects may become more evident in a specific, local assessment.