DOGGER BANK

DOGGER BANK
CREYKE BECK
April
2013
Environmental Statement
Chapter 6 Appendix A Offshore Project Boundary
Selection Report
F-ONC-CH-006 Appendix A Issue 1
Chapter 6 Page i
© 2013 Forewind
DOGGER BANK
CREYKE BECK
Title:
Contract No. (if applicable)
Dogger Bank Creyke Beck Environmental Statement Chapter 6
Appendix A - Offshore Project Boundary Selection Report
Forewind
Document Number:
Issue No:
Issue Date:
F-ONC-CH-006 Appendix A
1
12-Nov-12
Status:
Issued for 1st. Technical Review
Issued for PEI3
Issued for 2nd. Technical Review
Issued for Application
Submission
Prepared by (Forewind):
Checked by:
Kim Gould-Clarke, Sophie Barrell, Ed Ross,
Andrew Riley
Gareth Lewis, Michael Stephenson
Approved by:
Signature / Approval (Forewind)
Approval Date:
Gareth Lewis
12-Nov-12
Gareth Lewis
Revision History
Date
09-Jan-13
Issue No. Remarks / Reason for Issue
1
Author
Checked
Approved
Issued for Approval
F-ONC-CH-006 Appendix A Issue 1
Chapter 6 Page ii
© 2013 Forewind
Novem
mber 2012
Conte
ents
1 Intro
oduction ....................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Backgro
ound ........................ ................................................ .......................... 5 1.1.1 Forewind
d and the D
Dogger Ba
ank Zone .................. ......................... 5 1.1.2 Zone Appraisal and
d Planning
g (ZAP) ..................... ......................... 5 1.1.3 Zonal de
evelopmen t to date................................... ......................... 9 1.2 Aims off this reporrt .............. ................................................ ........................ 10 2 Keyy considerrations forr project id
dentificatio
on ................................................. 12 2.1 Introducction......................... ................................................ ........................ 12 2.2 Enginee
ering and Economic
E
ations ........................ ........................ 12 Considera
2.2.1 Project Capacities
C
and Overp
planting .................... ....................... 12 2.2.2 Offshore
e Project Description ................................ ....................... 13 2.2.3 Wind Turbine Tech
hnology .................................... ....................... 15 2.2.4 Location of the Exp
port Cables
s .............................. ....................... 15 2.2.5 Health and Safety Issues ..................................... ....................... 17 2.3 Environ
nmental and other Co
onsenting Considerat
C
tions ........ ........................ 18 2.3.2 Geologic
cal and Phyysical Environment .................. ....................... 19 2.3.3 Pipelines
s, cables a
and other th
hird party infrastructuure .................. 20 2.3.4 Benthic ecology
e
.... ................................................ ....................... 22 2.3.5 Commerrcial Fisherries .......................................... ....................... 24 2.3.6 Fish Eco
ology ........ ................................................ ....................... 26 2.3.7 Marine Mammals
M
. ................................................ ....................... 26 2.3.8 Birds ..................... ................................................ ....................... 27 2.3.9 Shipping
g and Navig
gation ...................................... ....................... 29 2.3.10 Marine Aggregates
A
s ............................................... ....................... 31 2.4 Summa
ary of Envirronmental and other Consentin
ng Consideerations ............ 32 3 Iden
ntification of Zone Capacity
C
........................................................................ 35 3.1 Introducction......................... ................................................ ........................ 35 3.2 Identificcation of a Dogger Ba
ank Develo
opable Are
ea ............. ........................ 36 3.3 Determination of Project
P
Ca
apacities ................................... ........................ 37 3.4 Determination of Project
P
Are
eas........................................... ........................ 40 3.4.1 Array De
esign ........ ................................................ ....................... 40 3.4.2 Turbine Spacing
S
... ................................................ ....................... 40 3.4.3 Project Area
A
......... ................................................ ....................... 42 3.5 Identificcation of Zo
one Capaccity ........................................... ........................ 43 4 Iden
ntification of Projec
ct Boundarries ............................................................... 45 4.1 Overvie
ew ............................ ................................................ ........................ 45 Final .01Appe
endix 6A Project Bo
oundary Report Fin
nal version 01
©2
2012 Forewind
Novem
mber 2012
4.2 Doggerr Bank Crey
yke Beck A .............................................. ........................ 47 4.3 Doggerr Bank Crey
yke Beck B .............................................. ........................ 48 4.4 Doggerr Bank Tee
esside A.... ................................................ ........................ 49 4.5 Doggerr Bank Tee
esside B.... ................................................ ........................ 51 5 Con
nclusion ...................................................................................................... 52 Table of tabless
Table 1 Key Wind
W
Farm Elementss ............................................... ........................ 14 Table 2 Indica
ative Turbine Dimenssions ........................................ ........................ 15 Table 3 Enviro
onmental and
a other cconsenting
g considera
ations ....... ........................ 18 Table 4 Cable
e and Pipelines in pro
oximity to Dogger
D
Ba
ank Zone .. ........................ 21 Table 5 Dogger Bank Creyke Bec k A key project chara
acteristics ........................ 47 Table 6 Dogger Bank Creyke Bec k A boundary coordin
nates ....... ........................ 47 Table 7 Dogger Bank Creyke Bec k B key project chara
acteristics ........................ 48 Table 8 Dogger Bank Creyke Bec k B key project chara
acteristics ........................ 48 Table 9 Dogger Bank Creyke Bec k B boundary coordin
nates ....... ........................ 49 Table 1
10 Dogger Bank Te
eesside A key projec
ct characte
eristics ...... ........................ 49 Table 1
11 Dogger Bank Te
eesside A boundary coordinate
es ............. ........................ 50 Table 1
12 Dogger Bank Te
eesside B key projec
ct characte
eristics ...... ........................ 51 Table 1
13 Dogger Bank Te
eesside B boundary coordinate
es ............. ........................ 51 Table of figuress
Figure 1 Dogger Bank Trranches ... ................................................ .......................... 7 Figure 2 Consenting hea
at map sho
owing Tranche B (Ma
ay 2011) ... .......................... 8 Figure 3 Dogger Bank Engineering
g Assessment Heat Map
M .......... .......................... 8 Figure 4 Dogger Bank Creyke Bec k Cable Co
orridor...................... ........................ 16 Figure 5 Dogger Bank Te
eesside Ca
able Corrid
dor ........................... ........................ 17 Figure 6 Dogger Bank Zo
one Existin
ng Cables and Pipelines .......... ........................ 21 Figure 7 Dogger Bank Oil
O and Gass Blocks .................................... ........................ 22 Figure 8 Trancche A and Dogger Ba
ank Creyke
e Beck Cab
ble corridoor biotopes (as at
November 2012
2 work in p
progress) .................................. ........................ 24 Final .01Appe
endix 6A Project Bo
oundary Report Fin
nal version 01
©2
2012 Forewind
Novem
mber 2012
Figure 9 Dogger Bank Shipping De
ensity indic
cating the predomina
p
ant sand ee
el
fisherry to the we
est of the Z
Zone ........................................ ........................ 25 Figure 10 Dogger Bank Bird Survey s showing high dens
sities on thee western edge of
the Zo
one (exam
mple shown
n Fulmar) ................................. ........................ 29 Figure 11 Dogger Bank Marine
M
Aggrregate Lice
ence Applications .... ........................ 32 Figure 12 Summ
mary of key
y consentin
ng issues associated
d with Projeect Bounda
ary
selection .......................... ................................................ ........................ 34 Figure 13 Dogger Bank Developable
e Area ...................................... ........................ 36 Figure 14 Variation in ene
ergy outputt due to ov
verplanting ................ ........................ 39 Figure 15 Variation in eco
onomic retu
urn due to overplantin
ng ............ ........................ 39 Figure 16 Wind farm productivity vs.. turbine sp
pacing ...................... ........................ 41 Figure 17 Econo
omic return
n vs. turbin
ne spacing
g ............................... ........................ 41 Figure 18 Turbine Spacing
g .............. ................................................ ........................ 42 Figure 19 Econo
omic return
n vs. Zone
e capacity ................................. ........................ 44 Figure 20 Exam
mple of mod
delled Zon e layout – please note this is n
not the prop
posed
solution but indiicates the differences
s in output for a partiicular scen
nario . 45 Figure 21 Project Boundaries .......... ................................................ ........................ 46 Figure 22 Summ
mary of key
y consentin
ng issues associated
d with Projeect Bounda
ary
selection .......................... ................................................ ........................ 52 Figure 23 Project Boundaries taken forward to
o EIA ........................ ........................ 53 Final .01Appe
endix 6A Project Bo
oundary Report Fin
nal version 01
©2
2012 Forewind
January 2
2012
1 Intro
oduction
1.1
Backg
ground
1.1
1.1
Forrewind an
nd the Do
ogger Ban
nk Zone
1.1
In 2008
8, The Crown Estate (TCE) ann
nounced proposals
p
fo
or the thirdd round (Round 3)
of offsh
hore wind farm
f
leasin
ng. Under the Round
d 3 proces
ss, TCE ideentified nin
ne large
areas o
of seabed around th
he UK whicch were co
onsidered the most ssuitable arreas for
develop
pment off wind farms (w
www.thecro
ownestate..co.uk/r3-ssite-selectio
on). A
compettitive tende
er process was run w
which awarrded these
e Round 3 zones to different
d
wind fa
arm developers.
2
1.2
Forewind is a consortium comprised
c
of four lea
ading international ennergy com
mpanies;
RWE, S
SSE, Stato
oil and Sta
atkraft. Forrewind was
s awarded
d the devellopment rights for
the Dogger Bankk Round 3 Zone in JJanuary 20
010. This Zone com
mprises an area of
2
8660km
m located
d in the North
N
Sea between 125km an
nd 290km off the coast
c
of
Yorkshire.
1.3
3
The de
elivery strattegy of Forrewind hass been stru
uctured aro
ound the ddelivery of 9GW of
offshorre wind farrm projects
s in the Do
ogger Bank
k Zone by 2023. At tthe time of
o award
of the site by Th
he Crown Estate in 2
2010, it was believe
ed that a ccapacity off 13GW
might b
be achieva
able if the Zone wass found to be complletely deveelopable and
a
with
limited constraintts. As this report goe
es on to diiscuss, a target capaacity of 9.6
6 GW is
now co
onsidered more
m
likely
y in the ligh
ht of inform
mation gath
hered overr the course of the
last two
o years. The
T 9.6 GW
W capacityy will be ac
chieved by
y a series of individu
ual wind
farm p
projects be
eing develo
oped in p
phases. Th
hese proje
ects will b e construc
cted by
differen
nt parties over
o
a phas
sed period
d that is antticipated to
o commencce in 2015
5.
1.4
4
The folllowing pro
oject boundary selecction proce
ess has uttilised bothh desk-bas
sed and
site spe
ecific surve
ey data ga
athered bo
oth for enviironmental and enginneering pu
urposes.
The environmen
ntal data have had
d the bigg
gest effec
ct on defifining the overall
pable area
a across the
t
Dogge
er Bank Zone. The engineerinng and ec
conomic
develop
criteria have had
d a greate
er influence
e in definiing the pro
oject bounndaries witthin the
identifie
ed develop
pable area.
1.1
1.2
1.5
5
Zon
ne Appraiisal and P
Planning (ZAP)
The Zo
one is larg
ge enough to accom
mmodate multiple
m
win
nd farm prrojects and
d offers
flexibilitty in space
e to selectt the most appropriatte areas within
w
the Z
Zone to sitte these
wind fa
arms. A full detailed survey
s
of tthe whole Zone
Z
has not been ppossible, although
a
sufficie
ent informa
ation has been
b
obtain
ned to pro
ovide the understand
u
ding of con
nstraints
necesssary for pro
oject location decisio
ons to be made. A phased
p
appproach ha
as been
taken tto the deve
elopment of
o the Zon e. This allows Forew
wind to ideentify a number of
Novemb
ber 2012
techniccal, econom
mic and en
nvironmen
ntal conside
erations to
o inform thhe identification of
sites fo
or offshore wind farm
m developm
ment. This commenc
ced with inddividual Trranches
being identified for survey
y purpose
es. The orriginal inte
ention wass to identtify four
tranche
es within th
he Zone (A
A, B, C and
d D) with the capability of sitingg up to thre
ee wind
farm projects in each. This
s process was part of the Forewind Zoone Appraisal and
Plannin
ng processs (ZAP).
1.6
6
1.7
7
Forewind identifiied Tranche A in 2
2010 (Tra
anche A selection
s
rreport, Fo
orewind,
1
Octobe
er 2010 ) and
a Tranch
he B in 20
011 (Tranc
che B selec
ction reporrt, Forewin
nd, May
2
2011 ).. These we
ere the firs
st and seccond areas
s respectiv
vely within the Dogge
er Bank
Zone to
o be selectted for offs
shore wind farm proje
ect develop
pment (Figgure 1)
-
T
Tranche A is approx
ximately 20
000km2 in area,
a
located in the S
South-Wes
st of the
Z
Zone, with the majoriity of waterr depths be
eing less th
han 30m LLAT (Lowest
A
Astronomiccal tide).
-
T
Tranche B has a tota
al area of 1
1500km2 and
a is locatted in the S
South-Eastt of the
Z
Zone, with the majoriity of waterr depths be
eing less th
han 35m LLAT.
Selectio
on of Tranche A and Tranch
he B was informed by inform
mation which was
collated
d during ZAP
Z
and presented
p
in the Zone Charac
cterisation Documen
nt (ZoC,
3
Decem
mber 2011 ). This identifies a number of acttivities annd environ
nmental
conside
erations accross the Dogger Ba
ank Zone. The ZoC (now in itts second edition)
primarily providess a baselin
ne understa
anding of the
t environ
nment acrooss the Zone. The
informa
ation is con
ntinuously evolving a
and a further edition of the ZoC
C will be prroduced
as Tranches C & D are id
dentified. T
The ZoC is
s supplem
mented by the production of
reportss such as this
t
which outline furrther steps
s in wind fa
arm spatiaal planning
g across
the Zon
ne underta
aken by Forewind.
1
http://ww
ww.forewind.co
o.uk/uploads/ffiles/tranche_a
a_selection_re
eport.pdf 2
http://ww
ww.forewind.cco.uk/uploads/files/Tranche%
%20B%20Sele
ection%20Rep
port.pdf 3
http://ww
ww.forewind.cco.uk/uploads/ffiles/Zonal%20ccharacterisation
n%20document%20 (second%
%20version).pdff. Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
6
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 1
1.8
8
Dogg
ger Bank Tranches
T
As partt of the Zone Apprais
sal and Pla
anning (ZA
AP) process a heat m
map was prroduced
to provvide a vie
ew of all known cconsenting considera
ations seee Figure 2. This
combin
ned inform
mation from
m existing desk bas
sed assess
sment worrk, inputs from a
series o
of stakeho
older works
shops held
d in 2010 and
a early zone
z
wide data colle
ected by
Forewind. Simulttaneously the Forew
wind engineering work stream produced a heat
map e
evaluating the varia
ation in co
ost of en
nergy acro
oss the Z
Zone, taking into
conside
eration the
e cost of fo
oundations , cost of export cable
es, strateggic and hea
alth and
safety implication
ns as well as predictted variatio
on in wind resource.. The engineering
heat m
map is pre
esented in Figure 3 . Both heat maps were
w
baseed upon th
he best
availab
ble information at the time.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
7
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 2
Cons
senting he
eat map sh
howing Trranche B (May 2011))
Figure 3
Dogg
ger Bank Engineerin
E
ng Assess
sment Hea
at Map
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
8
Novemb
ber 2012
1.1
1.3
1.9
9
Zon
nal develo
opment to
o date
This zo
one appraissal and pla
anning app
proach has
s subseque
ently led too the identification
of the ffollowing co
omponents
s associate
ed with pro
ojects to be
e located inn Tranches A and
B.
er Bank Crreyke Beck Projects
s
Dogge
1.10
Forewind has se
ecured agrreement w
with Nation
nal Grid fo
or 2GW oof grid con
nnection
capacitty at the Creyke Beck substatio
on in the East
E
Riding
g of Yorkshhire, in the form of
two 1G
GW conne
ections. This onsho
ore grid connection capacity of 2GW will be
sufficie
ent for two projects in the Dogge
er Bank Zo
one.
1.11
Following an initial Scoping
g exercise,, Forewind
d identified a 2km wi de offshorre cable
corridor from the southerrn section of Tranc
che A to a chosenn landfall on the
Holdern
ness Coasst. This ca
able corrido
or will con
nnect the offshore
o
coomponents
s of the
wind fa
arm to the shore.
s
A 32km long, 1km wide onshore cable
c
corriddor has als
so been
identifie
ed to connect the lan
ndfall area to the Nattional Grid substationn. A study area
a
for
the onsshore dire
ect current to alterna
ating curre
ent converrtor stationns has als
so been
identifie
ed.
1.12
The rattionale for selection of
o the abovve compon
nents is pre
esented in the Dogge
er Bank
Creyke
e Beck Pre
eliminary Environmen
E
ntal Inform
mation 1 (P
PEI1) docu ments (Fo
orewind,
Novem
mber 20114) and will be update
ed in the draft Envirronmental Statemen
nt which
Forewind will con
nsult on in 2013.
2
Dogge
er Bank Te
eesside prrojects
1.13
Forewind has secured agre
eement wiith Nationa
al Grid for grid conneection cap
pacity of
4GW a
at Teesside
e. This is enough fo
or four projjects in the Dogger Bank Zon
ne to be
conneccted to the national grid, althoug
gh as this report goe
es on to deescribe only
y two of
these cconnection
n will be ac
ccommoda
ated within
n Tranche A and B aand the other two
will be located in the Zone area
a
to the
e north of Tranche
T
A and B.
1.14
Forewind soughtt to identiify areas of the Te
eesside co
oastline beetween the Tees
Estuaryy and Salttburn-by-th
he-Sea wh
hich could accommo
odate landffall for up to four
export cable sysstems (up to 8 indivvidual cables). The landfall
l
haas been id
dentified
betwee
en Redcar and Marsk
ke-by-the-S
Sea.
1.15
Forewind has un
ndertaken an exerciise to identify poten
ntial conveerter statio
on sites
within tthe industrrial area to
o the south
h of the Te
ees Estuary at Teessside. A lon
ng list of
sites th
hat fitted Forewind’s
F
initial dessign criteria
a has subs
sequently been refin
ned to a
shortlisst of six po
otential site
es. Owing tto the unce
ertainty of the precisse landfall and the
4
http://ww
ww.forewind.cco.uk/uploads/files/20111122
2_CreykeBec
ck_PEI_20120.pdf Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
9
Novemb
ber 2012
precise
e converte
er station sites, deffining onsh
hore cable
e corridorss is still work
w
in
progresss.
1.16
The rattionale for selection of
o the abovve compon
nents was set out in the Dogge
er Bank
Teessid
de Prelimin
nary Enviro
onmental IInformation
n 1 (PEI1) documentts (Forewin
nd, May
5
2012 )..
1.17
The PE
EI1 docum
ments menttioned abo
ove for the identified componennts of the Dogger
Bank Creyke Beck
B
and Dogger Bank Te
eesside projects caan be fo
ound at
orewind.co.uk.
www.fo
1.2
Aims of
o this re
eport
1.18
Offshorre wind prrojects witthin the D
Dogger Bank Zone are
a classiffied as Na
ationally
Significcant Infrasttructure prrojects (NS
SIPs) unde
er the Plan
nning Act 22008 as am
mended
(the Pla
anning Actt).
1.19
This co
onsent reg
gime for NS
SIPs stron
ngly encourages app
plicants to clearly exp
plain all
elemen
nts of the design
d
of projects in tthe consen
nt application. It also introduces
s a front
loaded process where all consultattion and important
i
design deecisions must
m
be
underta
aken early in the dev
velopment phase, beffore the ap
pplication iss submitted.
1.2
20
Identificcation of project
p
bou
undaries iss an imporrtant eleme
ent of the ssite selecttion and
design of the offsshore wind
d farms. Th
he individual project boundariess define th
he limits
of wherre the offshore infras
structure (e
excluding export
e
cab
bles to sho re) can be
e placed
as well as any sp
pace betwe
een projectts. These boundaries
s allow thee full impac
ct of the
projectss to be asssessed in the
t Environ
nmental Im
mpact Asse
essments.
1.2
21
This re
eport descrribes the selection
s
off Forewind
d’s offshorre project boundaries of the
first fou
ur offshore
e wind farm
m projects to be dev
veloped in the Roun d 3 Dogge
er Bank
Zone, located within
w
Tranches A and B (F
Figure 1). Cable C
Corridor selection
processses are the subje
ect of se parate re
eports. The relevannt environ
nmental,
enginee
ering, com
mmercial an
nd consentting consid
derations that Forewiind has tak
ken into
accoun
nt in the selection of these
t
proje
ect bounda
aries are ex
xplained.
1.2
22
A phassed approach to the
e developm
ment of th
he first pro
oject bounndaries ha
as been
necesssary to enssure a robu
ust processs and selec
ction due to
t the exteent and com
mplexity
of the rrelevant co
onsiderations. Releva
ant enginee
ering and consenting
c
g constrain
nts were
conside
ered. The potential boundaries
b
of future projects
p
in the Zone aas well as the first
four pro
ojects werre also con
nsidered in
n the conte
ext of economic viabbility of the
e whole
Zone a
and for individual pro
ojects, how
wever further future boundaries
b
s are not in
ncluded
in this rreport and will be pre
esented folllowing furtther Zone Appraisal
A
w
work.
5
http://www
w.forewind.co.uk/uploads/filles/Teesside/T
Teesside%20PEI1%20Non%20Technicaal%20Summarry%20Lo
%20Res.pdf Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
10
Novemb
ber 2012
1.2
23
The arrea within each of the
t
four p
project bou
undaries is
s considerred neces
ssary to
accomm
modate th
he maximum numb
ber of win
nd turbines, collectoor and co
onverter
stationss, inter array cables
s, meteoro
ological ma
asts and offshore
o
o peration hubs
h
for
each p
project, allo
owing for the necesssary level of
o flexibility
y in the prroject desig
gn. The
final prroject design will be determine
ed after co
onsent is granted
g
ass part of the
t
final
design process. The
T precis
se, final de
esign of the offshore projects i s therefore
e out of
the sco
ope of this report.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
11
Novemb
ber 2012
2 Keyy considerattions ffor pro
oject id
dentifi cation
n
2.1
Introdu
uction
2.1
Identificcation of the
t
projectt boundarie
es for indiividual win
nd farms w
within the Zone is
compliccated by the lack of
o certaintyy on the precise te
echnology and engineering
solution
ns likely to
o be available at th e time of constructio
on. In adddition the Zone
Z
is
much ffurther offsshore and in deeper waters than the pre
evious Rouund 1 and 2 wind
farms. Together this resullts in high
her develo
opment, co
onstructionn and ope
erational
costs w
which pressent new challenges
c
to meetin
ng cost red
duction tarrgets and keeping
k
the cosst of energyy low.
2.2
2
Low co
ost of en
nergy is essential
e
i n order to ensure continuedd expansion and
develop
pment in supply
s
chains, encou
urage on going investment in thhe industry
y and to
reduce costs to the
t consum
mer. The D
Dogger Bank Zone and
a the sizze and cap
pacity of
projectss are mucch increase
ed in scale
e compare
ed to previous Roundd 2 offsho
ore wind
farm de
evelopmen
nts.
2.3
3
The ecconomics and
a potential environ
nmental efffects of the
e whole D
Dogger Ban
nk Zone
develop
pment nee
ed to be considered when deffining the boundaries
b
s of the individual
projectss. Therefo
ore, that th
he impactss of the first projects to be ddeveloped will be
conside
ered in com
mbination with
w impaccts of proje
ects developed later aand vice ve
ersa.
2.4
4
This section exp
plores the
e key eng
gineering, commercial, health and safe
ety and
environ
nmental co
onsiderations that the
e ZAP pro
ocess has identified tto date as
s having
the pottential to in
nfluence bo
oundaries o
of projects located in Tranche A and B.
2.2
Engine
eering and
a Econ
nomic Consider
C
rations
2.2
2.1
Pro
oject Capa
acities an
nd Overplanting
2.5
5
Each o
of the Dogger Bank projects h as a secu
ured grid connection capacity of
o 1GW
each. However, the offsho
ore generration capa
acity of each projecct may be
e up to
1.2GW
W. This allo
ows the pro
ojects to b
be optimise
ed for max
ximum efficciency tak
king into
accoun
nt electrica
al losses, turbine avvailability, and the natural
n
varriability of a wind
farm’s output. Th
his can be described
d as ‘overp
planting’ (a
adding addditional turb
bines to
offset lo
osses). Th
he turbines will be cu rtailed suc
ch that the connectionn point in National
N
Grid’s o
onshore su
ubstation does
d
not re
eceive morre than 1GW
W at any ppoint in time.
2.6
6
A more
e detailed explanatio
on of overp
planting an
nd the ide
entification of Zone capacity
c
may be
e found in Section
S
3.
2.7
7
The m
maximum installed capacity
c
offfshore is therefore fixed, buut the cap
pacities,
dimenssions, and detailed design of m
many of the
e electrical componennts of the projects
p
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
12
Novemb
ber 2012
may va
ary. For this reason, Forewind has adop
pted the Ro
ochdale ennvelope ap
pproach
to desccribing the range of possible
p
co
omponents and consttruction sceenarios.
2.8
8
Given tthe conside
erable disttance invollved, the electricity
e
generated w
will be tran
nsmitted
to shorre using Hiigh Voltage
e Direct Cu
urrent (HV
VDC) techn
nology. Ovver long dis
stances
this te
echnology provides significan
nt technic
cal advantages oveer High Voltage
Alterna
ating Current (HVA
AC) techno
ology, inc
cluding low
wer poweer losses. HVDC
technology also provides
p
a number off environm
mental bene
efits in com
mparison to
o HVAC
technology. HVD
DC transmiission systtems require smaller transmisssion cablin
ng than
equivallent HVAC
C transmiss
sion system
ms, reducing the imp
pact on thee site. This
s results
in lesss overall copper
c
req
quired forr the cabling system
m than H
HVAC tech
hnology,
lowerin
ng both cosst and environmenta l impact. HVDC
H
tech
hnology reqquires a co
onverter
substattion at eacch end of the exportt cable, to
o convert the power between AC
A and
DC. Th
herefore, each
e
proje
ect will incclude one offshore converter
c
pplatform and
a
one
onshorre converte
er substatio
on
2.2
2.2
2.9
9
Offsshore Pro
oject Desscription
The pro
oject boun
ndaries ide
entified for individual projects will
w need too accommodate a
number of differe
ent offshore
e compone
ents that comprise
c
th
he offshoree wind farm
m. Each
project will comprrise the ele
ements desscribed be
elow:

Up to 300 wind
w
turbine generattors and their
t
suppo
orting tow
wer structures per
projject. The wind
w
turbin
ne generattors conve
ert the kine
etic energyy in the wind
w
into
elecctrical enerrgy. Each wind
w
turbin
ne will be mounted
m
on a foundaation to sec
cure the
stru
ucture verttically whilst withsta
anding loa
ads from the wind and the marine
envvironment.

Up to four offsshore colle
ector statio
ons and the
eir associa
ated foundaations per project.
The
e offshore collector stations
s
recceive powe
er from the
e wind turbbines and step up
voltage for export to a HVDC
H
convverter statio
on.

A siingle offshore converrter station
n per project and its associated
a
d foundatio
ons. The
offsshore convertor statio
on convertss alternatin
ng current (AC) to dirrect current (DC).

Sub
bsea inter--array cab
bles will be
e installed
d within ea
ach projecct boundary. The
sub
bsea inter-a
array cabling transm
mits powerr between the wind turbines and
a
the
offsshore collecctor platforrms.

Inte
er-platform cables will
w be insta
alled withiin each prroject bouundary. The interplattform cablin
ng transmiits power b
between offfshore collector stattions and between
b
offsshore collecctor station
ns and the offshore converter
c
station.
s

Offsshore expo
ort cable sy
ystems, ca
arrying pow
wer from th
he offshoree HVDC co
onverter
sub
bstation pla
atform out of the prroject boun
ndary to the landfalll and pos
ssibly to
othe
er wind farrm projects
s or offshorre connecttion nodes..

Up to five meteorologica
al masts (m
met masts
s) may be installed w
within each project
bou
undary. The data collected by these mas
sts will be used to m
monitor the
e power
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
13
Novemb
ber 2012
perfformancess of projec
cts. It sho
ould be no
oted that these
t
proj ect masts
s are in
add
dition to tw
wo meteoro
ological ma
asts which
h are due to be instaalled in latte 2012
with
hin the Do
ogger Bank
k Zone. T
These will provide es
ssential m
meteorological and
oce
eanographic data, wh
hich will be utilised to optimise the
t design of the wind farms
prio
or to installa
ation.
2.10

Up to ten pre
e-installed permanen
nt vessel mooring
m
bu
uoys will bbe installed
d within
eacch project boundary at intervalls around the projec
ct area. Thhe mooring
g buoys
will allow vesssels to moo
or at the p
project for a variety of reasons including at
a night,
duriing lulls in work, to
o save fu
uel while station ke
eeping, or in the event
e
of
macchinery faillures.

If re
equired, sccour protec
ction will be
e installed around the offshore structures
s. Scour
prottection can
n be achiev
ved by a n umber of different
d
me
ethods, eitther individ
dually or
in ccombinatio
on, including but no
ot limited to: rock placemennt, frond mats
m
or
concrete matttresses.

Cab
ble protection measu
ures where
e necessarry. Cable protection
p
may be achieved
by a number of differen
nt methodss, either individually or
o in combbination, in
ncluding
but not limited
d to: rock or
o gravel b
burial, bagg
ged solutio
ons, protecctive aprons, frond
matts or concrrete mattresses; and

Up to two offfshore accommodatio
on or helic
copter plattforms andd their ass
sociated
foun
ndations may
m
be in
nstalled w
within each
h project. These w
will help facilitate
f
ope
eration and
d maintenance activit ies for the projects.
An indication of the
t numbers of the a
above com
mponents th
hat are exppected to be
b sited
within individual project
p
bou
undaries iss given in Table
T
1.
P
Parameter
Quantityy
Wind tu
urbine generators and foundatio
ons
Up to 3000
Collecttor substatiions
1 to 4
Converrter substa
ations
1
Meteorrological masts
m
Up to 5
Mooring buoys
Up to 100
Accommodation/h
helicopter platforms
Up to 2
Table 1
2.11
Key Wind
W
Farm
m Elementts
The fin
nal offshore
e project design
d
inclu
uding the layout of the turbinees, and oth
her wind
farm ccomponentts, will de
epend on a numbe
er of facttors includding: stak
keholder
feedback, seabe
ed obstruc
ctions, gro
ound conditions, water depth,, wind dynamics,
econom
mic factors, and the chosen
c
win
nd turbine generator.
g
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
14
Novemb
ber 2012
2.2
2.3
Win
nd Turbine Techno
ology
2.12
The offfshore win
nd industry
y is still in a develop
pmental ph
hase with new techn
nologies
and tecchniques continually
c
emerging . Due to this rapid developme
d
ent it is necessary
to main
ntain flexib
bility in the
e consent a
application
ns for the Dogger Baank projec
cts. This
will allow the final des
sign, consstruction methodolo
ogy, and operation
ns and
maintenance req
quirements
s to be op
ptimised for the tec
chnologiess available
e in the
future.
2.13
In iden
ntifying pro
oject bound
daries a kkey consideration is turbine diimensions.. These
dimenssions have an impactt of the spa
acing betw
ween turbines and connsequently
y on the
area re
equired for a project. Offshore w
wind turbin
ne technolo
ogy is evol ving rapidly and it
is anticcipated, in the time scales of the Dogge
er Bank projects, th at turbines
s in the
range o
of 4MW to
o 10MW will be availlable. Tablle 2 shows
s indicativee dimensio
ons and
quantities of the turbines
t
that may be built within
n a Dogger Bank prooject.
Turbin
ne Parameter
Up to
o 4MW
Maximu
um project to
otal
6MW
W
110MW or greater
g
120
00
generatting capacityy (MW)
Max number of wind
d turbine
generattors per proje
ect
3
300
200
0
120
Max hub height (m) above
highest astronomica
al tide (HAT)
1 15
130.5
154.5
1 83
214
4
262
1 36
167
7
215
Max up
pper blade tip
p
(m) abo
ove HAT
Max rottor diameter (m)
Table 2
Indicative Turb
bine Dime nsions
2.14
The sp
pacing of turbines wiithin wind farms is typically measured inn number of rotor
diamete
ers.
2.15
Spacing must be
b carefully conside
ered to av
void later developeed projects
s being
affected
d by ‘wake
e effects’ from earlie r develope
ed projects
s and vice versa. As well as
understanding wind
w
resourrce lossess associate
ed with la
arge arrayss, the cum
mulative
ects close
e together in the Doogger Ban
nk Zone
effects of clusterring wind farm proje
needs tto be conssidered.
2.2
2.4
2.16
Loccation of the
t Expo rt Cables
s
An offsshore cable
e corridor, 2km wide has been identified for
f the Doggger Bank Creyke
Beck projects. This include
es two exit points, fro
om the southwest corrner of Tranche A.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
15
Novemb
ber 2012
The so
outhernmosst exit poin
nt exceedss 2km width to form a cone s hape at th
he edge
Tranche A. This has
h been done
d
to alllow flexibility of cabling in the aabsence off known
location
ns of the Dogger Bank Creykke Beck wind
w
turbines. Thesee exit points were
conside
ered in the
e selection
n of the prroject boun
ndaries. Th
he exit po ints are sh
hown in
Figure 4 below.
Figure 4
Dogg
ger Bank Creyke
C
Be
eck Cable Corridor
2.17
The loccation of Dogger
D
Ban
nk Teessid
de export cable
c
corrid
dors and thhe associa
ated exit
points ffrom the Zone
Z
depen
nds on the
e locations of the Dogger Bankk Teesside
e project
bounda
aries and the location
n of the lan
ndfall area. Figure 5 below preesents the findings
f
for an e
export cab
ble corridor and exit points for the cable for Doggeer Bank Te
eesside,
the fina
al report for which is due
d for imm
minent pub
blication.
2.18
In identifying the first four project
p
bou
undaries, Forewind
F
has
h ensureed that it does not
limit op
ptions for the
t exit po
oints and e
export cablle routes for any futuure projectts to be
located
d outside of Tranches
s A and B.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
16
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 5
2.2
2.5
2.19
Dogg
ger Bank Teesside
T
C
Cable Corrridor
Hea
alth and Safety
S
Isssues
There are nume
erous health and s afety cons
siderations
s in the ddesign of project
bounda
aries. Some of the ke
ey conside rations are
e:
-
P
Project bou
undaries need to inco
orporate co
ollector and converteer stations as well
a
as helicoptter and acc
commodat ion platform
ms. The bo
oundary shhould allow
w these
sstructures, so far as practicable
p
e, to be arrranged in an
a easily u nderstandable
p
pattern with
h the wind turbines. T
This will he
elp to minim
mise naviggation risk.
-
P
Project bou
undaries need to be d
designed to
t prevent turbines beeing positioned in
a way that results in any
a asset being isola
ated outsid
de of an arrray, as this
s could
p
pose a hazzard to nav
vigation.
-
P
Project bou
undaries need to inco
orporate a buffer of 250m
2
for coonstruction
n and
o
operation purposes,
p
and
a must a
allow enou
ugh flexibility for turbi nes to be moved
tto avoid fea
atures on the
t seabed
d; and
-
P
Project bou
undaries must
m
make allowance
e for safe operations aand mainte
enance
o
of existing assets (su
uch as cab les and pip
pelines) wh
hich are noot part of th
he
o
offshore wiind projectt.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
17
Novemb
ber 2012
2.3
2.2
20
Enviro
onmenta
al and otther Con
nsenting
g Consid
derations
s
The folllowing bro
oad catego
ories were investigatted initially
y to assist with identification
of both
h Tranchess A and B as describ
bed in the ZoC (2011), and theen followin
ng more
recent environme
ental inforrmation ussed to reffine the de
evelopablee area witthin the
The develo
opable area
a being ke
ey to then determining
d
g Project B
Boundaries
s within.
Zone. T
E
Environmen
ntal and otther consenting considerations
Geolog
gy and phyysical environment
Nav
vigation and Shippingg
Benthicc Ecology
Com
mmercial Fisheries
F
Fish resource and
d ecology
Oil and
a Gas
Birds
Milittary, aviatio
on and raddar
Marine mammalss
Marrine aggreg
gates and ddisposal
Nature Conservation
Pipe
eline and cables
c
Archae
eology and cultural Heritage
Other marine users
Table 3
Envirronmentall and othe
er consentting considerationss
2.2
21
The ZA
AP processs identified
d and ana
alysed features within
n each of these cate
egories,
and thiis assessm
ment influe
enced the selection of
o project boundariees. More detailed
d
assesssment of impacts on
n featuress within prroject boun
ndaries w
will be undertaken
during EIA for ea
ach project. Review o
of these fea
atures in th
he ZoC dooes not pro
ovide an
assesssment of likkely impactts of projecct boundarries on the
e relevant ffeatures. Rather
R
it
serves to describ
be the impllication of the feature
e to the prroject bounndary, such as an
d consultattion effort or technic
cal and
increassed consenting efforrt or risk; increased
financia
al challeng
ges during installation
n and operration.
2.2
22
From tthe data collated in the ZoC a
and in the
e absence of a full E
EIA, the fo
ollowing
consen
nting param
meters werre identified
d as having the potential to inflluence the
e project
bounda
ary selectio
on within Tranches
T
A and B:

Geo
ological an
nd physical environme
ent

Pipe
elines and cables and other thi rd party infrastructure

Ben
nthic ecolog
gy (including the cSA
AC)

Com
mmercial fiisheries

Fish
h ecology

Marrine mamm
mals
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
18
Novemb
ber 2012
2.2
23

Bird
ds

Ship
pping and navigation
n

Marrine aggreg
gates
Other ffactors no
ot included in the lisst above, whilst
w
will influence individual project
impact assessme
ents were not
n deeme d to affect spatial pro
oject bounddary selec
ction.
2.3
3.2
Geo
ological and
a Phys ical Envirronment
2.2
24
To intro
oduce win
nd farms to
o the Dog
gger Bank Zone the depths off water, se
ediment
types a
and seabed ecology and archa
aeology ne
eeds to be understoood. Wind farms
f
in
deeperr water ressult in hig
gher costs , whilst diifferent sediment typpes pose varying
degree
es of challe
enge for ca
able and fo
oundation installation, resulting in higher costs in
more cchallenging
g areas.
2.2
25
Forewind has undertaken
u
n extensive
echnical
e bathymetric, geophysical aand geote
surveyss of the Dogger
D
Ba
ank Zone tto determine the de
epth of waater (bathy
ymetry),
seabed
d ecology and
a archae
eological fe
eatures an
nd to chara
acterise thee seabed and
a sub
seabed
d sedimentts. Tranche
e A surveyy data has been interrpreted. Intterpretation of the
Tranche B surveyys is ongoing.
2.2
26
majority of
Bathym
metry surveys have establishe
ed that Trranche A has the m
o water
depths of less th
han 30m LAT (Lowesst Astrono
omical Tide
e) whilst Trranche B has the
majorityy of waterr depths le
ess than 3
35m LAT. Sidescan sonar suurveys hav
ve been
conduccted within tranches A and B. T
This produc
ces a black and whitte photogra
aph-like
(acousttic) image of the sea
abed. It is u
used to he
elp charactterise areaas of sand ripples,
sandwa
aves, gravvels and cobles,
c
wre
ecks and manmade
m
infrastructture and used
u
for
ecologyy, seabed processes
s and archa
aeology as
ssessments
s.
2.2
27
For the
e installatiion and burial
b
of c ables, suitable grou
und condittions need
d to be
identifie
ed which extend be
elow the sseabed to a maximu
um depth of three metres.
Shallow
w soils data from sub
b-bottom p
profiler data
a is used to
o identify aareas of grravels &
cobbless, boulderss, sand un
nits and cl ays etc. In
n addition to remote sensing (seismic
(
data), g
ground tru
uthing from
m grab sam
mples, bore
eholes and
d Cone Peenetromete
er Tests
has be
een underta
aken at intervals thrroughout both
b
Tranch
hes A andd B and ha
as been
used to
o help interrpretation of
o the geop
physical su
urvey data.
2.2
28
Ultra high resoluttion (UHR)) seismic d
data is use
ed to evalu
uate the fooundation zone.
z
In
genera
al, the larg
ger the turbine, th
he deeper (monopile) or widder (gravitty base
structures) the fo
oundation type.
t
To acccommoda
ate all type
es of founddations the
e survey
data exxtends to more
m
than 70m belo
ow seabed, which is much deeeper than the
t data
needed
d for installling cables
s.
2.2
29
So far,, the surve
ey findings
s have be
een signific
cantly diffe
erent to anny other previous
p
understandings of
o the Dogg
ger Bank, and prove
e that Dogg
ger Bank iss predomin
nantly a
mound of clay, with
w thin sands over m
most of the
e surveyed
d area. It hhas howeve
er been
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
19
Novemb
ber 2012
found tthat within the shallo
ower waterrs within Tranche
T
A, towards tthe southeast and
east off the Tranche there is a thickker layer of
o sandy sediments
s
which ma
ay allow
easier ccable insta
allation.
2.3
30
In the west of th
he Zone th
here is co
omplex geo
ology, whic
ch would require ex
xtensive
drilling of boreholles to unde
erstand an
nd characte
erise it fully
y. This reggion has ex
xtensive
geological faults associated
d with it a
and is therrefore considered a more challenging
(expensive) area
a for the lo
ocation off wind farm projects
s. Other tthan this area of
comple
ex geologyy, the rema
ainder of T
Tranche A is considered suitaable for win
nd farm
develop
pment. There are ho
owever, are
eas less desirable th
han others due to the
e higher
econom
mics associated witth installin
ng turbine foundatio
ons and ccables in certain
sedime
ent types.
2.3
31
During the bound
dary selecttion processs there was
w continu
uous feedbback between the
Forewind engine
eering desiign team a
and geotechnical an
nd geophyysical expe
ertise to
improve
e the long
g term cos
st effective
eness of de
evelopmen
nt and the categorising and
defining
g of hazarrds for improved econ
nomic risk managem
ment assocciated with ground
conditio
ons. The avoidance
e of the arrea of com
mplex geology was considered when
selectin
ng project boundaries
s as detaile
ed below.
2.3
3.3
Pipe
elines, ca
ables and
d other th
hird party infrastruccture
2.3
32
Operattional pipelines and cables
c
are considered hard con
nstraints too wind farm
ms. This
is beca
ause wind farm struc
ctures can
nnot be sitted on these structu res. Buffer zones
are pro
ovided to ensure the safety of th
he existing
g infrastruc
cture duringg the cons
struction
operations assocciated with the wind farm. Forr example, anchor sppreads or jack-up
feet fro
om vesselss engaged in the con
nstruction of
o the wind
d farm will only be pe
ermitted
to encrroach up to
t a certain
n buffer fro
om the ca
able or pipe
eline to ennsure they
y do not
damage the exiisting infra
astructure.. Additionally, during operaation, buffe
ers are
require
ed to ensurre the safety of vesse
els working
g on repairr or mainteenance ope
erations
in close
e proximityy to the surface wind
d farm structures and
d to ensuree adequate
e space
for the repair and
d maintenance of the cable or pipeline
p
is provided.
p
2.3
33
Consultation hass indicated
d that the buffers re
equired for out of seervice cables and
es are eith
her not nec
cessary or significanttly smaller than for o perational assets.
pipeline
This is because the same level of m
maintenanc
ce and hence accesss to the cable
c
or
pipeline
e is not exxpected or required. However,, where the
ese are chharted, note is still
made o
of out of se
ervice cables and pip
pelines to ensure tha
at consultaation captures any
concerns relating
g to these assets.
a
2.3
34
Early d
data collecction from published sources and
a the output of connflict checks from
The Crrown Estatte identified
d active an
nd inactive
e cables an
nd pipelinees within proximity
to the Dogger Bank Zon
ne. The a
assets that could potentially influence project
aries within
n Tranches
s A and B a
are shown in Table 4 and Figurre 6.
bounda
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
20
Novemb
ber 2012
Cable
Op
perator
Active
A
or In
nactive
Cable/Pipe
C
eline
In
nteraction with Trancches
TATA N
North
Europe
e
TA
ATA
Active
A
Potential
P
to
o influence projects lo
ocated in
th
he south of tranche A
UK –
Germany 6
BT
T/Cable
and
d
Wireless
Active
A
Potential
P
to
o influence projects lo
ocated in
th
he south of tranche A
SEAL
SH
HELL
UK
K
Active
A
Potential
P
to
o influence projects lo
ocated in
th
he west of tranche A
UK –
Denma
ark 4
BT
T
Inactive
Proximity
P
to
o Dogger B
Bank Creyk
ke Beck
B’s
B NW corrner but firsst 12nm off cable
re
emoved an
nd the restt is left inac
ctive
Table 4
2.3
35
Cable
e and Pipe
elines in p
proximity to
t Doggerr Bank Zon
ne
On-going dialogu
ue betwee
en Forewin
nd and th
he operato
ors of theese pipelin
nes and
cables has help
ped to info
orm the b
boundary design of projects to be loc
cated in
Tranches A and B. A dialogue on cro
ossing and
d proximity
y agreemeents is currrently in
progresss with ope
erators.
Figure 6
Dogg
ger Bank Zone
Z
Existting Cable
es and Pip
pelines
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
21
Novemb
ber 2012
2.3
36
2.3
37
There are no acctive oil or
o gas field
ds located
d within Tranche
T
A and Tran
nche B.
Numero
ous explo
oration we
ells have been driilled, but have beeen plugge
ed and
abando
oned, or re
eleased as a dry hole
es.
There a
are seven oil and ga
as blocks ccurrently lic
censed (as
s part of thhe existing
g or 26th
licensin
ng round) for oil and
d gas explo
oration and development that intersect with
w the
south e
eastern bo
oundary of Tranche A and th
he southerrn boundaary of Tran
nche B,
Figure 7.
Figure 7
2.3
38
The close proximity of oil and ga
as operatio
ons to a wind farm
m could in
ncrease
navigattional risk and vess
sel collisio ns or hav
ve implicattions for hhelicopter access.
Consultation with
h the oil and gas deve
elopers of any developments eemerging from
f
the
26th Liccencing Ro
ound has suggested
d that any plans for any
a oil andd gas disc
coveries
made w
would not be known until 2015
5. Conside
eration of the
t presennce of any
y known
existing
g or plan
nned struc
ctures sho
ould be considered
c
d when ddesigning project
bounda
aries. How
wever, if loc
cations of p
potential in
nfrastructure are not yet known
n, these
cannot be accoun
nted for wh
hen design
ning project boundarie
es.
2.3
3.4
2.3
39
Dogg
ger Bank Oil
O and Ga
as Blocks
Ben
nthic ecollogy
The Do
ogger Ban
nk is a ra
aised seab
bed that falls
f
into Dutch,
D
Daanish, Britiish and
German areas off the North
h Sea. The
e UK sectio
on of the Dogger
D
Bannk qualifies under
the European Co
ouncil Dire
ective for th
he conserv
vation of habitats
h
annd wild fau
una and
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
22
Novemb
ber 2012
flora (E
European Commissio
C
on Habitatts Directive
e 92/43/EE
EC). This is because
e it has
‘sandba
anks which
h are sligh
htly covere
ed by seaw
water all the time. Thhis has res
sulted in
this area being classified as a can
ndidate Sp
pecial Are
ea of Con servation (cSAC)
6
(JNCC, 2012 ). This
T
identiffied site ovverlaps with the who
ole of Trannches A and B of
the Do
ogger Bankk Zone an
nd thus, ass will be seen
s
in the
e followingg benthic section,
s
does no
ot provide reason to differentia te project boundaries
s.
2.4
40
The pro
ocedure fo
or the desig
gnation of Special Arrea of Conservation ((SAC) begins with
the ide
entification of draft siites for Sp
pecial Area
a of Conse
ervation (ddSAC). The
ese are
then co
onsidered by the UK
K governm
ment and renamed
r
as
a possiblee Special Area of
Conserrvation (p
pSAC). If accepted
d they arre recomm
mended too the Eu
uropean
Commiission (EC
C) as candiidate Speccial Areas of Conserrvation (cS
SAC). The Dogger
Bank Z
Zone is currently at the
t cSAC stage. The submiss
sion of thee cSAC to the EC
occurre
ed in August 2011.
2.4
41
Benthicc ecology is
i the study of the eccology livin
ng on or just in the seeabed. It includes
the sed
diment surface level and the organisms living on
n and withhin the se
ediment.
Installa
ation of fou
undations, cables and
d other stru
uctures can cause d irect physical loss
and/or disturbance of the seabed. This, as well as any
a
increasse in sus
spended
sedime
ent in the water column from
m cable an
nd foundattion installlation can impact
benthicc communities. The footprint o
of foundation and ca
able installlation can lead to
perman
nent loss of
o habitat.
2.4
42
Forewind commissioned an initial Zo
one wide coarse resolution g eophysics survey
followe
ed by more
e detailed surveys of Tranche A and Tranche B
B. From th
he data
collecte
ed and in conjunctio
on with ZA
AP work the northe
ern edge oof the Zone was
deemed more se
ensitive from
m a benth ic perspec
ctive due to
o the preseence of slo
ope reef
habitat.
2.4
43
Forewind furtherr commissioned ben
nthic ecolo
ogy survey
ys to estaablish the benthic
commu
unities pressent within
n the Dogg
ger Bank Zone.
Z
The aim of thhe surveys was to
identifyy the baseline benthic commu nities, esp
pecially tho
ose of connservation interest
and in particular those
t
listed
d in Annexx 1 of the Habitats
H
Directive.
2.4
44
The Tra
anche A surveys we
ere comple
eted in Nov
vember/De
ecember 20011. An indicative
biotope
e map is given
g
in Fig
gure 8. Th
he Tranche
e B surveys are curre
rently takin
ng place
and aw
waiting data
a interpreta
ation, altho
ough the Zone wide geophysics
g
s data colle
ected in
2010, suggests similar as
ssemblage
es of bioto
opes acros
ss the twoo Tranche
es. The
surveyss consisted
d of grab and
a video ssamples of
o the seabed. A propportion of the grab
sample
e stations were
w
also sampled
s
fo
or chemica
al analysis.
2.4
45
From tthe resultss and inte
erpretation
ns available at the time of iddentifying project
bounda
aries, the majority off the habittats were generally tolerant too disturban
nce and
6
http://jnccc.defra.gov.uk/pd
df/DoggerBank_C
ConservationObjeectivesAdviceonO
Operations_6.0.pdf Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
23
Novemb
ber 2012
showed
d high reccoverability
y and thuss did not merit
m
highly
y in termss of being able to
determ
mine prefere
ence for on
ne project area over another. The
T only eexception to
o this is
the lesss developa
able area id
dentified to
o the north of the Zon
ne.
Figure 8
2.3
3.5
Tranc
che A and
d Dogger B
Bank Crey
yke Beck Cable
C
corrridor bioto
opes
(as att November 2012 w
work in pro
ogress)
Com
mmercial Fisherie s
2.4
46
Forewind believe
es that com
mmercial ffisheries ca
an co-exis
st with offsshore wind
d farms.
Since tthe award of the Zo
one to Forrewind, con
nsultation with the ffishing com
mmunity
has be
een conducted to diiscuss how
w co-existtence migh
ht be bestt achieved
d. It is
acknow
wledged th
hat the con
nstruction of an offshore wind farm cou ld preventt fishing
continu
uing within the wind farm shou
uld turbines
s be too close togethher for ves
ssels to
manoeuvre betw
ween them, or if stru
uctures pre
esent a sig
gnificantly increased
d health
and sa
afety risk (i.e. risk
k of snag
gging on unprotecte
ed and uunburied cables).
c
Consultation has provided information
n on the ty
ypes and levels of fisshing occu
urring in
the Do
ogger Ban
nk Zone, and thiss information has been
b
useed to info
orm the
identificcation of project
p
boundaries. M
More spec
cific work re
elating to tthe impactts of the
proposed detailed
d paramete
ers for eacch project will
w then fo
orm part of the EIAs for
f each
project area.
2.4
47
Consultation with
h National and Interrnational fishing partties conceerning com
mmercial
fishing in the Zon
ne is on-going and ccommercia
al fish and
d fish ecoloogy survey
ys have
been in
nformed by consulta
ation with T
The Marin
ne Manage
ement Orgganisation (MMO),
The Ce
entre for Environme
E
nt, Fisheri es and Aq
quaculture Science ((Cefas), th
he Joint
Nature Conservation Comm
mittee (JNC
CC) and Na
atural England.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
24
Novemb
ber 2012
2.4
48
The na
ationalities of fishing
g vessels operating across Dogger Bannk are principally
Danish, Dutch, Belgian, British, Sw
wedish, Norwegian
N
and Fre nch. Therre is a
concen
ntrated san
nd eel fishery focuse
ed on the western margins
m
of the Dogge
er Bank
Zone see Figure 9, which predominan
p
ntly consis
sts of Danis
sh, Swedissh and Norrwegian
vesselss. This has been a key spatia
al differentiator acro
oss the Zoone in influ
uencing
Projectt Boundaryy selection..
Figure 9
Dogg
ger Bank Shipping
S
D
Density indicating the predom
minant sand eel
fishery to the west
w
of the
e Zone
2.4
49
Shippin
ng densityy surveys between April 2010 and De
ecember 22011 have been
conduccted, as well
w as des
sk based sstudies of existing data. This has includ
ded AIS
(Autom
matic Identification Sy
ystem) and
d satellite tracking. Shipping suurveys esta
ablished
that 44% of trafficc in the Dogger Bankk was due to
t commerrcial fishingg.
2.5
50
Surveyys have fo
ound that in additio
on to the sand eel fishery, ffishing ac
ctivity is
domina
ated by bea
am trawling year rou
und for plaice, lemon sole, turboot, skate and
a rays
and Do
over sole on a sea
asonal bassis. Demerrsal seine fish nettinng and de
emersal
trawling
g also occu
urs.
2.5
51
Overalll Forewind
d believes, apart from
m on the west
w
of the zone, the density off fishing
across the Zone is relatively low. Datta made available
a
to
o Forewindd in the lea
ad up to
selectin
ng project boundaries suggest no reason
n to amend
d the bounndaries in terms
t
of
any are
ea having more sign
nificance o
over anothe
er in terms
s of fisheriies. Forew
wind has
recentlyy received
d proposa
als from th
he Fishing
g Industry regardingg co-existe
ence of
fishing and renew
wables and
d these willl be discussed. It is not anticippated that this will
lead to
o changess in the boundary, but will in
nvolve disc
cussions oon layouts
s within
bounda
aries. Fore
ewind is se
eeking to cco-exist witth the fishiing commuunity and remains
r
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
25
Novemb
ber 2012
committted to asssessing the impaccts of pro
ojects on commerccial fisheries and
maintaining active
e dialogue.
2.3
3.6
Fish
h Ecology
y
2.5
52
Noise a
and suspe
ension of sediment in
n the water column caused
c
by the installation of
foundations and cables can
n potentiallly affect fiish spawning or nurssery groun
nds and
lead to
o the displlacement of
o fish ressource in the Zone. The founndation and cable
footprin
nts will also
o lead to a small, butt permanen
nt loss of habitat,
h
whhich could result
r
in
a change in the species co
omposition
n around th
hese struc
ctures. Althhough understood
to be o
of limited project bo
oundary se
election sig
gnificance, some sppecies of fish
f
are
sensitivve to ele
ectromagne
etic fieldss. The HVDC tech
hnology t hat Forew
wind is
conside
ering using
g for the Dogger
D
Ba nk projects
s is consid
dered to haave lower Electro
Magnetic Field (E
EMF) emiss
sions than alternative
e technologies.
2.5
53
To esta
ablish the numbers and speccies of fish
h present (including the prese
ence of
potentia
al nursery and spawning groun
nds) Forew
wind comm
missioned a range of surveys
in the Dogger Bank
B
Zone covering spring, su
ummer and autumn 2010, 20
011 and
2012.
2.5
54
With th
he exception of the Sandeel ffish populations on the westeern margin
n of the
Zone, none of th
he fish ecology data
a to date with respe
ect to nurssery or sp
pawning
grounds providess key spatial eviden
nce that would
w
influe
ence one project bo
oundary
over an
nother. Th
he triangle area betw
ween Dogg
ger Bank Creyke Beeck A and
d B and
Doggerr Bank Te
eesside B,, may ben
nefit from being und
developedd due to Sandeel
S
densitie
es being higher altho
ough not ass high as the Western margin.
2.3
3.7
Marrine Mam
mmals
2.5
55
Wind ffarm consstruction activities
a
ssuch as foundation
n construcction (parrticularly
monopiling) activities can re
esult in ele
evated nois
se levels th
hrough thee water column. At
its mosst severe itt could imp
pact marin
ne mamma
al mortality
y, or irrepa rable harm
m, down
to distu
urbance off the norm
mal behavio
our of the animal. This
T
range of effects
s will be
due to a number of variable
es includin
ng the size of the pilin
ng equipm
ment, the su
ubstrate
the foundation is being builtt in and the
e distance of the marrine mamm
mal from th
he noise
source.
2.5
56
Vessel activity in
ncreases the
t
risk off collisions
s with marrine mamm
mals, and turbine
structures can ca
ause barrie
ers to marrine mamm
mal movem
ment. Electtromagnetic fields
producced from exxport and inter-array cables can
n interfere with the n avigation of
o some
marine mammalss. Key prey
y species for marine
e mammals in the D ogger Ban
nk Zone
include
e a number of flatfish
h and sand
d eel species. Any significant l oss of these prey
sourcess could ressult in indirrect effectss on marine
e mammals.
2.5
57
Prior to
o 2010 th
he Crown Estate ca
arried out aerial surrveys acrooss the Round
R
3
Programme (inclu
uding the Dogger Ba
ank Zone) that captu
ured data oon both birds and
marine mammalss. After th
he Crown Estate’s survey
s
work finishedd in March
h 2010,
Forewind commissioned HiDef
H
Aeria
al Surveyin
ng Limited
d to perforrm aerial surveys
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
26
Novemb
ber 2012
and G
Gardline to
o perform boat bassed survey
ys starting
g in Januuary 2010 (these
coincided with th
he ornitholo
ogy surveyys). These
e surveys gathered
g
innformation
n on the
numbers of species and dis
stribution o
of marine mammals
m
present in the Dogge
er Bank
Zone. F
Forewind has
h discus
ssed metho
odology an
nd prelimin
nary findinggs with the
e JNCC
and ha
as presente
ed its finds
s to a num
mber of non-governm
ment organnisations in
ncluding
The W
Whale and Dolphin Conservattion Socie
ety, WWF and Greeenpeace. Further
dialogu
ue will follow the impa
act assesssment work
k on the firs
st projects .
2.5
58
Bird an
nd marine mammal surveys
s
ha
ave covere
ed the entirre Dogger Bank Zon
ne. Both
the aerrial and boat method followed a series off transect lines evenl y spread out
o over
the wh
hole Zone. In Janua
ary 2011 F
Forewind commence
c
ed a moree intensive survey
effort o
over Trancche A with
h more tra
ansect line
es flown fo
or the aerrial survey
y and a
priority given to th
he transec
cts within th
he Tranche
e A area fo
or the boatt survey. The
T rest
of the Z
Zone was surveyed at a lesse
er effort. Tranche
T
B was
w subseequently id
dentified
and fro
om July 20
011 an inte
ensive 12 m
month surv
vey effort commenceed running
g on the
same p
principles as
a Tranche A. Survveys have revealed that
t
there are minke
e whale,
white b
beaked dolphin, harb
bour porpo
oise and Grey
G
seal present
p
in the Dogge
er Bank
Zone. Harbour porpoise,
p
being
b
the m
most comm
monly reco
orded, havve been id
dentified
through
hout the Zone.
Z
Other species have been
n recorded
d but at tooo low num
mbers to
underta
ake sufficie
ent density
y plots.
2.5
59
As previously disscussed Tranches
T
A and B are within a cSAC unnder the Habitats
H
Directivve due to having sa
andbanks w
which are slightly co
overed by sea waterr all the
time. T
The JNCC considers harbour p
porpoise to
o be a generally ubiqquitous and
d highly
mobile species within the
e North S
Sea and therefore these m
mammals are
a
not
conside
ered as a qualifying
q
feature
f
of tthe cSAC in
i the UK sector.
s
2.6
60
However, the Dogger Bank geolog
gical feature extends into Duutch, Danish and
German waters. The Dutch
h Doggerssbank pSC
CI and Klaverbank ppSCI and German
G
Doggerr Bank SC
CI special conserva
ation areas
s lie on the easterrn borders of the
Doggerr Bank Zo
one. Thes
se non UK
K areas have
h
includ
ded harboour porpoiise and
harbour seal an
nd the Dutch sites also inclu
ude grey seal withinn their qu
ualifying
feature
es. Whilst this
t
does not
n directlyy influence
e project boundary
b
sselection, projects
p
nearer to these sites may be more inffluenced du
uring the Im
mpact Asssessment phases
p
2.3
3.8
Bird
ds
2.6
61
The inttroduction of an offsh
hore wind farm pose
es a numbe
er of potenntial risks to
t birds.
The priimary riskss on the Dogger Ban
nk are thou
ught to be from poteential collision with
turbine blades or other structures in th
he wind farm and dis
splacemennt of seabirrds from
ea of a wind
d farm.
the are
2.6
62
Turbine
es can be physical barriers to
o birds fee
eding within or migrrating throu
ugh the
Doggerr Bank Zo
one. Consttruction an
nd operatio
on phases bring incrreased noise and
human presence. This has the potenttial to distu
urb and dis
splace bird species and their
prey an
nd provide
e foraging opportuniti
o
ies for othe
er opportunistic speccies of bird
ds. This
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
27
Novemb
ber 2012
can ressult in com
mpetition and
a
displaccement of existing species
s
in the Dogge
er Bank
Zone. Other spe
ecies could
d actively avoid the wind farm
m, displaci ng them to
t other
location
ns where they
t
would
d have to ccompete fo
or prey res
source or eexpend ad
dditional
energyy on feeding and could lead to increased mortality or
o a failuree in their breeding
b
successs.
2.6
63
The Crown Esta
ate initiated aerial a
and boat based orn
nithologicall surveys for the
Round 3 Programme in 2009.
2
Aeria
al surveys
s utilised high
h
defin ition digita
al video
camera
a technolog
gy, whilst boat based
d surveys rely on vis
sual obserrvation tech
hniques
countin
ng and ide
entifying sp
pecies and
d geograph
hically refe
erencing thhe records
s. Aerial
and bo
oat based surveys
s
of the Dogge
er Bank Zo
one have been
b
continnued by Fo
orewind
since 2
2010. Survveys have
e covered tthe entire Dogger Bank Zone.. In January 2011
Forewind comme
enced a more
m
inten
nsive surve
ey effort over
o
Trancche A witth more
transecct lines flow
wn for the aerial surrvey and a priority given
g
to thee transects
s within
the Tra
anche A area
a
for the
e boat surrvey. The rest of th
he Zone w
was survey
yed at a
lesser e
effort. Tra
anche B wa
as subsequ
uently iden
ntified and from July 22011 an in
ntensive
12 mon
nth surveyy effort was
s commen ced runnin
ng on the same
s
princciples as Tranche
T
A.
2.6
64
Surveyys have revvealed high numberss of birds throughout
t
t the Doggger Bank Zone.
Z
Of
particular significcance is the recurring
g presence
e of high concentrat
c
ions of some bird
speciess on the western
w
ma
argins of tthe Zone, see Figure 10 below
w. This arrea also
coincides with a commercia
al sand ee
el fishing ground (ref Figure 9),, and is clo
osest to
the main breeding
g colonies along the east coastt of Englan
nd and Scootland.
2.6
65
Surveyys have ide
entified significant co
oncentrations of spec
cies that m
may be affe
ected by
displaccement su
uch as guillemot, razorbill, little auk and pufffin. The species
conside
ered to be the most sensitive tto collisions
s in the Do
ogger Ban k Zone are
e blacklegged kittiwake, northern gannet,
g
lessser black
k-backed gull, and grreat black--backed
gull.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
28
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 10 Dogg
ger Bank Bird
B
Surve
eys showing high densities o
on the wes
stern
edge of the Zone (examp
ple shown
n Fulmar)
2.6
66
Recurring areas of higher densities
d
to
o the westtern edge of
o the Zon e have wa
arranted
a revisiion of the design
d
of the develop
pable area
a, see Figure 12.
2.6
67
In concclusion, birrds are gen
nerally loc ated acros
ss the who
ole zone; pproject bou
undaries
will avo
oid high bird
b
densitties in the
e west of the zone through rrefinementt of the
develop
pable area
a, see Figu
ure 12 and
d; in the absence
a
off other speecific high density
bird are
eas within the remaining devellopable are
ea, birds are
a not a kkey factor in other
bounda
ary spatial decisions.
2.3
3.9
2.6
68
Shipping and
d Naviga
ation
The inttroduction of an offfshore win
nd farm to an area of sea cuurrently de
evoid of
offshorre installattions and structuress can incre
ease the navigationnal safety risk for
mariners navigatting through the arrea. The main haz
zard to m
mariners from the
presence of offsh
hore wind farms is a
an increas
sed collisio
on risk to both vessels and
wind fa
arm structu
ures. This risk is crreated by transit dev
viations, sttructures creating
c
visual cconfusion, structure presence
p
i mpairing small
s
vesse
el detectio n (visual or
o radar)
system
ms, and the
e potential to impact e
emergency
y response
e capabilityy. As a res
sult, it is
necesssary to asssess the
e baseline
e environm
ment inclu
uding the identifica
ation of
navigattional features, deffining exissting users such as fishingg operato
ors and
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
29
Novemb
ber 2012
determ
mining historical com
mmercial sshipping routes
r
(bo
oth regulaar operato
ors and
denselyy used rou
utes).
2.6
69
Marine traffic da
ata, charte
ed informa
ation and consultatio
on feedbaack were used
u
to
identifyy the baseline environ
nment of th
he Doggerr Bank Zon
ne. The maarine traffic
c survey
data ussed for the
e baseline
e navigatio
on review of
o the assessment aarea includ
ded two
datasetts of AIS data
d
(21 da
ays in Sprin
ng/Summe
er 2011 and 28 days in Autumn
n/Winter
2011/2012) and one datas
set of Rad
dar data (28
(
days in August , Septemb
ber and
Octobe
er 2010). These
T
data
a were reccorded from survey vessels w
working at the site
during the given periods and
a
form p
part of a la
arge data set of oveer 500 days data
collecte
ed by Fore
ewind.
2.7
70
Naviga
ation was considered
c
as part off the Tranc
che B area
a selection , when a shipping
s
channe
el through the Zone was
w being contempla
ated. However, sincee that time
e further
discusssions have
e taken pla
ace with th
he shipping commun
nity as welll as the Maritime
M
and C
Coastguard Agency (MCA) a nd Trinity
y House. Generallyy the majority of
potentia
ally affecte
ed ship op
perators ha
ave all statted that the
ey would nnot have an
a issue
with the
ere NOT being
b
a cha
annel throu
ugh the win
nd farm Zo
one and thhat there would
w
be
relative
ely little imp
pact on the
eir operatio
ons in the absence
a
off such a chhannel.
2.7
71
Also diiscussionss with the MCA in p
particular have
h
focus
ssed on hoow compa
aratively
light the shipping
g activity is
s in the Do
ogger Bank
k Zone compared too elsewhere in the
North S
Sea. Thuss there is no eviden
nce that “A
Areas to be
b avoidedd” or similar area
restrictions would
d be require
ed. Whilst Forewind is still carrying out im
mpact asse
essment
work in
n relations to Navigattional Riskk Assessme
ent, we consider the biggest in
nfluence
for the wind farm
ms will be
e on layou
ut and aids
s to navig
gation suchh as lightiing and
marking
gs rather than the bo
oundaries.
2.7
72
Data a
analysis ha
as shown that the Dogger Bank Zone has relattively few, vessel
transitss through the
t
Zone in relation to both its size and
d other Noorth Sea Round
R
3
projectss. Due to
o the Zone’s distan
nce offsho
ore, recrea
ational saiiling is als
so low.
However, as disccussed abo
ove, there is a stron
ng commerrcial fishingg presence
e within
the Zon
ne, in particular sand
d eel fishing
g to the we
estern boundary of thhe Zone.
2.7
73
In orde
er to addre
ess the cumulative isssues aris
sing from multiple
m
larrge offshore wind
farm de
evelopmen
nts in the Southern
S
N
North Sea, Forewind joined
j
the developerrs of the
Hornse
ea and East Anglia zones
z
in fo
forming the
e Southern
n North Seea Offshorre Wind
Forum (SNSOWF). The grroup recog
gnised tha
at the cumulative im pacts of all
a three
zones should be accounted
d for when
n considering selection of suitaable projec
ct areas
and co
ommissioned a repo
ort into th
he effects. Additionally consuultation wa
as also
underta
aken with UK
U and tra
ansbounda ry regulato
ors.
2.7
74
The marine traffiic survey identified only 10 main
m
routes
s operatin g within 10nm of
Tranches A and B. The majority
m
off vessel ty
ypes transiting on thhese route
es were
identifie
ed as tankkers and cargo
c
vesssels. Fishin
ng activity was recoorded across both
tranche
es with a high
h
densitty of vesse
els to the west
w
of Do
ogger Bankk during th
he sand
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
30
Novemb
ber 2012
eel fish
hing season (April, May and Ju ne). The le
evel of recreational vvessel activ
vity was
noted a
as being ve
ery low.
2.7
75
Althoug
gh vesselss may be displaced
d
b
by the pre
esence of Dogger
D
Baank wind farms, a
maximu
um increasse in trans
sit time for any vesse
el would be
e about twe
wenty two minutes,
m
or 1.2%
% of total jo
ourney disttance for th
he average
e route. Th
his was callculated wiithin the
Naviga
ational Risk Assessm
ment (NRA
A). Conse
equently no
o areas oof the Zon
ne were
identifie
ed at this stage
s
as being
b
unsu
uitable for wind farm developm
ment as a result
r
of
shippin
ng activity and henc
ce no area
as were ru
uled out on this bassis for the project
bounda
ary selection proces
ss. It was noted tha
at site des
sign, includding prese
ence of
periphe
eral structu
ures, lighting and ma
arking, nee
eded to be
e considerred to ensu
ure that
the pro
ojects do no
ot pose additional rissk to shippiing.
2.3
3.10 Marrine Aggrregates
2.7
76
Marine aggregatte extractiion is gen
nerally no
ot possible
e within w
wind farms
s since
anchorring of dredging vessels close
e to cables
s and dred
dging nearr to buried cables
could re
esult in damage to both vessel s and cablles.
2.7
77
At pressent there are no lice
ensed area
as within th
he Dogger Bank Zonne itself. Ho
owever,
there iss currentlyy an application for an aggre
egate dredging grou nd approx
ximately
600m n
northwest of Tranche
e A (see F
Figure 11). This will cover
c
an aarea of 11..13km2.
Consultation with
h the applic
cation hold
ders has confirmed
c
that
t
a buffe
fer zone off 2km is
preferre
ed betwee
en the pro
oposed ag
ggregates area and any windd farm stru
uctures.
Currently this diiscrete are
ea will be
e avoided and no other influuence on project
bounda
aries is anticipated other tha
an conside
eration of the posssible prese
ence of
vesselss associate
ed with this
s dredging site.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
31
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 11 Dogg
ger Bank Marine
M
Ag gregate Licence
L
Ap
pplicationss
2.4
Summ
mary of Environm
E
mental and
a othe
er Conse
enting
Consid
deration
ns
2.7
78
Forewind’s underrstanding of
o the enviironmentall, consenting and spaatial issues within
the devvelopable area and in the abssence of the
t
full res
sults of anny project specific
Environ
nmental Im
mpact Asse
essment is as follows
s:
2.7
79
Based on availab
ble data, Dogger
D
Ba
ank Creyke Beck B is locatedd near to an
a area
identifie
ed as be
eing pote
entially se
ensitive frrom an environme
e
ntal perspective,
particularly releva
ant to effe
ects on the
e sand eel fishery an
nd on birdds. This se
ensitivity
has be
een taken into accou
unt by movving the western edg
ge of deveelopable arrea and
thus prroject boun
ndary to the east of tthe SEAL pipeline. Further
F
undderstanding of the
bird co
ollision risk and bird
d densitie
es in this area will inform anny further spatial
require
ements with
hin each project boun
ndary.
2.8
80
Whilst all Tranche A and
d B projeccts fall within the candidate
c
A
of
Special Area
Conserrvation dessignated area
a
for sh
hallow sand bank ha
abitats, theere have been
b
no
exceptiionally into
olerant or sensitive h
habitats id
dentified an
nd as suchh all areas
s so far
are currently dee
emed to be
b of low or neglig
gible sensitivity. Connsideration
n of the
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
32
Novemb
ber 2012
Habitatts Regulattions and appropriate
a
e assessm
ment requirements w
will be undertaken
on a project basis in the context
c
of p
potential cumulative
c
issues forr the first projects
p
identifie
ed.
2.8
81
Harbou
ur porpoise
e is consid
dered (by JJNCC) as being a generally
g
uubiquitous species
within tthe North Sea and as
a such is not identiffied as a primary
p
quualifying fea
ature of
the Dog
gger Bankk cSAC. Th
he Dutch a
and Germa
an authorities have, hhowever, in
ncluded
harbour porpoise
e within the
eir Dogger Bank designations. Interpretattion of data so far
does not indicate
e any one area
a
of the
e Zone as being at more
m
risk thhan any oth
her with
ur Porpoise
e.
respectt to Harbou
2.8
82
From e
early consideration of
o the imp
plications of
o the Habitats Direcctive on th
he Zone
with re
espect to birds,
b
habittats and m
marine mammals and with thee exception
n of the
remova
al of the western
w
edg
ge of the Z
Zone from
m the devellopable areea, the rem
maining
areas a
across the Zone hav
ve relativelyy equal lev
vels of con
nstraint. Ass such the
e further
selectio
on of proje
ect bounda
aries has n ot had to be
b influenc
ced directlyy by these
e factors
other th
han removval of the western
w
edg
ge of the Zone.
Z
2.8
83
Uncerta
ainty of de
evelopmentt activities within the newly lice
ensed oil a nd gas blo
ocks will
remain until seismic survey
ys are und
dertaken and
a
oil and
d gas deveelopers de
etermine
any potential reso
ource. Con
nsultation with the oil and gas developerrs of these
e blocks
has sug
ggested th
hat any plans for any discoverie
es made would
w
be likkely to be finalised
f
in 2015
5. The ren
newable in
ndustry is investigatting wheth
her a com
mpensation clause
could b
be included
d in the ag
greement fo
or lease with
w the Cro
own Estatee in the event of a
discove
ery being made.
m
A wa
atching briief will be maintained
m
d.
2.8
84
Whilst clarity on any MoD issues ha
as not been forthcom
ming, theree are curre
ently no
indications that there
t
are any
a issuess that wou
uld affect wind
w
farm siting acrross the
Zone.
2.8
85
The ‘triangular’ area
a
betwe
een Dogge
er Bank Creyke
C
Bec
ck A, Doggger Bank Creyke
Beck B and Dogg
ger Bank Teesside
T
B
B, see Figure 12, ha
as been ideentified pre
eviously
as an area for seine
s
netting and th
hus avoidin
ng develop
pment in tthis area may be
beneficcial to the fishery
f
(as this gear ttype could not be used in a winnd farm). Itt should
be note
ed that European fishermen, iff required to
t make a choice, haave sugge
ested so
far thatt avoidance
e of the sa
and eel are
ea would be
b their pre
eference. H
However itt should
be note
ed that diffferent coun
ntries have
e interests in the two types of ffishing. Wh
hilst this
‘triangle
e’ might no
ot be ideal from a sh
hipping and navigatio
on perspecctive, the majority
m
of shipp
ping activitty will be outside of th
he project boundaries.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
33
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 12 Summ
mary of ke
ey consen
nting issue
es associa
ated with Project
Boun
ndary sele
ection
2.8
86
Overalll Forewind
d believes the densiity of fishin
ng across the Zonee is relative
ely low.
Forewind is seekking the goal of co-exxistence wiith the fishing commuunity and remains
r
committted to assessing the
e impacts o
of projects and mainta
aining activve dialogue.
2.8
87
The majority of potentially affected ship opera
ators have
e all statedd there wo
ould be
relative
ely little imp
pact on the
eir operatio
ons. Also discussion
d
s with the MCA in pa
articular
have fo
ocussed around how
w compara
atively lightt the shipp
ping activitty is. The biggest
influencce for the wind farms will be o
on layout and
a aids to
o navigationn such as lighting
and ma
arkings rath
her than th
he boundarries.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
34
Novemb
ber 2012
3 Iden
ntificattion off Zone
e Capacity
3.1
3.1
Introdu
uction
In orde
er to be ab
ble to identify projectt boundaries, it is ne
ecessary too first understand
the full potential capacity of
o the Zone
e for offsho
ore wind. In order too do this th
here are
four pa
arameters that
t
must be
b establis hed:
i. Identificatio
on of developable are
ea of the Zone.
Z
ii. D
Determinattion of optimal projecct capacitie
es
iii. D
Determinattion of optimal projecct areas
iv. Identificatio
on of optim
mal Zone ca
apacity.
2
3.2
In addition to envvironmenta
al considerrations the
e economic
cs of wind farm proje
ects are
an important facttor in the determinati
d
ion of the developab
ble area, siize of the projects
p
and Zo
one capaccity. As such, Forew
wind has developed an analyssis tool called the
Forewind Cost Analysis
A
To
ool (FCAT)). This ana
alyses the impact thaat differentt project
layoutss and engineering de
esigns havve on the economics
s of the Doogger Ban
nk Zone
and the
e individual projects within
w
the Z
Zone.
3.3
3
The FC
CAT mode
el tested the sensittivities of Zone and project eeconomics
s to the
followin
ng:
3.4
4

Varrying degre
ees of overrplanting

Varrying projecct areas an
nd turbine spacing

Varrying turbin
ne arrays

Varrying projecct shapes and
a sizes

Varrying Zone capacities
s
Some a
assumption
ns were us
sed on whiich to base
e the FCAT
T model:

Con
nstruction costs
c
base
ed on 2012
2 prices.

All p
projects asssumed to be constru
ucted and commissio
c
oned at thee same time.

A prroject lifetime of 25 years.
y

All p
projects su
uffer from the wake e
effects of a fully developed Dog ger Bank Zone.
Z

Inco
ome is bassed on pred
dicted marrket value of
o energy generation
g
n.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
35
Novemb
ber 2012

Cossts for foun
ndations, in
nstallation, operations and main
ntenance aare adjuste
ed for
eacch specific turbine loc
cation in th e Dogger Bank Zone
e.

The
ere may be
e interconnections be
etween pro
ojects.

7MW
W turbiness were trea
ated as the
e base cas
se turbine
3.5
5
FCAT a
acts as a modelling
m
node
n
accep
pting outpu
uts from a number off other spe
ecialised
modelss and then
n amalgam
mating the
em with FCATs
F
own modellinng criteria before
underta
aking a simulation. This allow
ws Forewin
nd to take
e a holisticc approach to its
analysis by incorp
porating many
m
variab
bles into on
ne model.
3.6
6
The FC
CAT tool was
w used in
n the iden tification of
o the proje
ect capacitties, projec
ct areas
and Zo
one capacitty.
3.2
3.7
7
Identiffication of
o a Dog
gger Ban
nk Deve
elopable
e Area
Based on the analysis
a
prrovided in section 2 above, and an eexercise in
nvolving
Forewind and gu
uidance fro
om parent organisations, a wo
ork stream
m which co
ombined
consen
nting, engineering and econom
mic consid
derations to establissh a deve
elopable
area w
within the Dogger
D
Ba
ank Zone w
was underrtaken. The developaable area can be
conside
ered as the
e regions within
w
the D
Dogger Ba
ank Zone th
hat projectss may be located.
Figure 13 Dogg
ger Bank Developab
D
ble Area
3.8
8
Figure 13 showss the deve
elopable a
area within
n the Dog
gger Bankk Zone. Alll areas
outside
e the red lin
ne bounda
ary were elliminated from
f
the po
otential prooject development
area prrior to designing any project bo
oundaries.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
36
Novemb
ber 2012
3.9
9
The are
ea in the west
w
of the Zone wass eliminated despite its relative ly shallow waters,
good w
wind resou
urce and being
b
close
est to the grid conne
ection poinnts. Due to these
feature
es this area
a had som
me of the some of the stronge
est techniccal and ec
conomic
cases iin favour of
o its inclus
sion in the developab
ble area. However,
H
F
Forewind opted
o
to
exclude
e the wesstern region from the
e developa
able area due to thhe fishing activity,
particularly for sa
and eel, and high num
mbers of ke
ey species of birds.
3.10
The re
emoval off this area
a, whilst forgoing an area well
w
suite d for win
nd farm
develop
pment, will reduce the impacct on imp
portant env
vironmentaal receptors. The
exclusion of the
e western margin o
of the Dog
gger Bank
k Zone wiill help to create
separation betwe
een some
e fishing a
activities and
a
wind farm activvities. This
s could
reduce vessel trraffic in the area, an
nd reduce
e any pote
ential for hhealth and
d safety
impactss that fish
hing activitty within a wind farrm could cause
c
succh as dam
mage to
equipm
ment, collisiions and uncovering of buried cables.
c
The avoidancce of placing wind
farm prrojects in this weste
ern area co
ould help to
t reduce potential ddisplaceme
ent and
lower ccollision rattes of birds
s with turbiines.
3.11
The no
orthern and
d north we
estern area
a of the Dogger Ban
nk Zone haas been ex
xcluded
due to the depth of water and
a the prresence off slope hab
bitat speciees which are
a less
tolerant to disturrbance. Water
W
depth
hs in exce
ess of 50m
m would ppose a sig
gnificant
techniccal challeng
ge to any projects be
eing consttructed in them.
t
As tthe majority of the
Zone w
would allow
w technolo
ogy types ssuitable fo
or shallowe
er water thhe northern
n edges
would require th
he develop
pment of d
different te
echnical solutions
s
too the restt of the
Doggerr Bank Zone. This would
w
place
e greater commercia
al challengges on pro
ojects in
the dee
eper waterrs. These fa
actors com
mbined lead
d to the ex
xclusion of northern areas
a
of
the Dog
gger Bank Zone.
3.12
Whilst a
any points within the red line bo
oundaries of Figure 13 are currrently cons
sidered
as deve
elopable area it shou
uld be note
ed this may
y be altered
d in the futture as furtther
studiess and invesstigations proceed.
p
C
Consultation through the
t Enviro nmental Im
mpact
Assesssment mayy identify otther constrraints whic
ch alter the developabble area off the
Doggerr Bank Zon
ne.
3.3
Determ
mination
n of Project Cap
pacities
3.13
Forewind underto
ook a serie
es of exerrcises to determine if “overplannting” wou
uld be a
viable option for projects within
w
the Dogger Bank
B
deve
elopable a rea. Overp
planting
means that the in
nstalled generation ca
apacity exc
ceeds the grid conneection capa
acity.
3.14
For con
nventional power pla
ants, the grrid connec
ction will eq
qual the insstalled gen
neration
capacitty of the project.
p
En
nergy gen eration fro
om offshorre wind is dependen
nt on a
fluctuatting wind climate, resulting
r
i n lower energy
e
generation w
when lowe
er wind
speedss occur. Reduced
R
en
nergy gene
eration is also norm
mal when inndividual turbines
t
are sw
witched off expectedly or unexxpectedly due to op
perations aand mainttenance
activitie
es. For conventional power pla
ants the entire
e
gene
eration cappacity can be lost
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
37
Novemb
ber 2012
during operationss and maiintenance activities. A wind fa
arm may oonly lose a small
proporttion of generation capacity duri ng operations and maintenanc
m
ce activities
s.
3.15
Electriccal losses occur thro
ough the in
nter array and
a export cables, w
with longerr cables
resultin
ng in large
er losses. Overplantting turbin
nes can co
ounteract these losses, by
exceed
ding the griid connection capacitty onshore
e, therefore
e optimizin g daily pro
oduction
of the w
wind farm.
3.16
The usse of overp
planting alllows the p
projects to be optimis
sed for maaximum effficiency
taking into accou
unt electric
cal losses, availability
y, and the natural vaariability off a wind
farm’s output. In the event of the ove
erplanted full capaciity being aachieved, turbines
t
e turned offf to equal the grid ca
apacity.
can sellectively be
To dettermine th
he optimal level of overplanting Forewind conduucted a se
eries of
modelliing exercisses. These
e exercisess were based upon the benefiits of overp
planting
turbines on a 1G
GW projec
ct, with a b
base case
e consisting of 143 7MW turb
bines. A
ent variable
es were facctored into
o the mode
elling to exxplore theirr effects
number of differe
on overplanting:
3.17

Usin
ng differen
nt turbine ty
ypes

HVD
DC loses (from the export cable
e);

Inte
er array losses (electric
cal losses from the in
nter array cables);
c

Wake losses (caused
(
by
y loss of w
wind resource to a turbine in thee wake of another
a
turb
bine influen
nced by spacing betw
ween the tu
urbines);

Grid
d connectio
on downtim
me; and

Tota
al cost for the turbine
es, includin
ng cost of constructio
c
on, operatioon and
maintenance.
Figure 14 and Figure
F
15 shows the
e results from Fore
ewind’s annalysis. Fig
gure 14
shows, as would be expec
cted, increa
ased enerrgy output as additioonal wind turbines
t
are add
ded. As wo
ould also be
b expecte
ed, the gra
adient decrreases as m
more turbines are
added. This is du
ue to the additional
a
turbines being unable to expoort all their energy
her turbine
es are at ffull output. In effect the grid co
connection can be
output as the oth
viewed as being “maxed
“
ou
ut” more oft
ften and cu
urtailment is necessaary more offten.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
38
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 14 Varia
ation in energy outp
put due to overplantting
3.18
Figure 15 showss the econ
nomic retu
urn rate fo
or overplan
nting. It shhows that adding
addition
nal turbine
es does provide a fin
nancial ben
nefit to the
e projects. However, as can
clearly be seen in the figurre the addiition of too
o many turrbines reduuces this financial
f
benefit. Where to
oo many additional
a
tturbines are added they are nnot able to
o export
their full energy output
o
and as such prroduce a poorer
p
econ
nomic retuurn.
Figure 15 Varia
ation in economic re
eturn due to overpla
anting
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
39
Novemb
ber 2012
3.19
The priincipal drivvers for the
e level of o
overplantin
ng are the capital exxpenditure (capex)
for the additional turbines, operations
o
s and main
ntenance availability aand the de
egree of
project interconn
nections within
w
the
e Dogger Bank Zone. Thee exact le
evel of
overpla
anting will be depend
dent on the
e unique characterist
c
tics of eacch project and
a can
only be
e determined once specific
s
win
nd turbines
s have bee
en selecteed for the site
s and
the exa
act, site-sp
pecific wind
d regime iss understoo
od. The optimal level of overpla
anting is
a carefful balance
e of the increased con
nstruction and opera
ation and m
maintenanc
ce costs
offset a
against the
e additional revenue tthat can be
e generated.
20
3.2
Forewind determ
mined that an offsho
ore installe
ed capacity
y of up 1..2GW per project
would a
assist in op
ptimising th
he 1GW grrid connections that have
h
been secured.
3.4
Determ
mination
n of Project Area
as
3.4
4.1
Arra
ay Design
n
3.2
21
Wind tturbines extract
e
ene
ergy from the wind
d and this
s process creates a wake
downsttream from
m the turb
bine wherre wind speed is reduced
r
aand flow is more
turbulent. As the flow proce
eeds down
nstream the
e wake spreads out and the en
nergy is
recovered from the
t
surrou
unding air, thus the wake dec
creases w
with distanc
ce. The
reductio
on in enerrgy is comm
monly refe
erred to as wake loss
s. The sizee of the wa
ake loss
is prop
portional to
o the roto
or diamete
er, with la
arger wind turbines requiring greater
separation, allowing a minim
mum spaciing betwee
en turbines
s to be estaablished.
3.2
22
The im
mpact each
h turbine has
h on the
e productio
on capacity
y of other turbines within
w
a
project and neigh
hbouring projects
p
ne
eeds to be
e taken into accoun t when de
esigning
optimum project boundaries
s. The arra
ay design needs
n
to re
esult in thee highest possible
p
w
balan
ncing the a
associated
d higher costs of interr array cab
bles that
energyy capture, whilst
increassed turbine
e spacing causes.
c
3.4
4.2
3.2
23
Turrbine Spa
acing
As partt of the mo
odelling wo
ork underta
aken by Forewind sc
cenarios w
were run ex
xploring
the sen
nsitivities of
o spacing between tturbines. This
T
modelling was bbased upo
on 7MW
turbines which we
ere spaced
d between 7 and 14 rotor
r
diame
eters apartt. 1 rotor diameter
(1D) off a 7MW turbine is 164m. Byy increasin
ng the spa
acing the eenergy capture is
improve
ed for each
h turbine. The
T resultss of which can be seen in Figurre 16.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
40
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 16 Wind
d farm productivity v
vs. turbine
e spacing
3.2
24
These results wo
ould imply that the o
optimal is to
t space the
t
turbinees as far apart
a
as
physica
ally possible. However this improvementt in wind farm produuctivity is counter
balance
ed by the associated
d higher co
osts of intter-array ca
ables that increased turbine
spacing
g causes. Figure 17 shows the
e results for
f econom
mic return against increased
turbine spacing.
Figure 17 Econ
nomic retu
urn vs. turb
bine spac
cing
3.2
25
The an
nalysis und
dertaken by
b Forewin
nd identified that th
he highest economic
c return
occurs in the regiion of 11D spacing b
between turrbines.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
41
Novemb
ber 2012
3.2
26
However, this conclusion is
s depende nt on num
mber of ass
sumptions, most nota
ably the
costs o
of inter-arra
ay cables. An increasse or decre
ease in the
ese costs w
would chan
nge this
optimal spacing. For the Do
ogger Ban
nk Creyke Beck and Teesside pprojects Fo
orewind
has op
pted to usse 11D sp
pacing as the basis for project area caalculations
s where
possible.
3.4
4.3
3.2
27
Pro
oject Area
a
Using 11D spaccing betwe
een turbine
es Forewind has determined that an area of
558km2 is the mo
ost desirab
ble for eacch 1.2GW project witthin the Doogger Bank Zone.
This asssumes tha
at each turrbine within
n a projectt can be treated as iff it was centred in
a squa
are with sid
des 11D lo
ong, an illu
ustration off this can be seen inn Figure 18Error!
Refere
ence sourrce not fo
ound. From
m the cen
ntre of a turbine too the centre of a
neighbo
ouring turbine is a distance of 11D. From
F
the centre of a turbine
e to the
bounda
ary of its ne
eighbour is
s a distancce of 5.5D.
5.5D
5.5D
5.5D
5
5.5D
Figure 18 Turbiine Spacin
ng
3.2
28
In addition to con
nsidering energy
e
cap
pture there
e are a number of faactors thatt should
also be
e taken into
o account when
w
conssidering pro
oject area:

Projject shape
e – The shapes of th e projects themselve
es may nott lend them
mselves
conveniently being
b
filled
d with squ ares. For example, the southeernmost prroject is
constrained byy developa
able area b
boundaries
s into a tria
angular shaape.

Projject conse
entability - In addittion to improve con
nsentabilityy of the projects
p
Fore
ewind’s developmen
nt team h
has made a numbe
er of recoommendations on
turb
bine positio
oning. For example, turbines should
s
not be positio ned in a way
w that
resu
ults in an isolated turbine
t
outtside of a straight array
a
as t his could pose a
hazzard to navvigation.

Bou
undary bufffer – Whils
st a buffer of 5.5D is not requirred betweeen the turb
bine and
the project bo
oundary a buffer of ssome type
e will be re
equired forr construction and
ope
eration purp
poses.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
42
Novemb
ber 2012

3.2
29
3.3
30
Loccal site Issu
ues – Loca
alised featu
ures on the
e seabed may
m requiree that turbines are
possitioned in new
n
locatio
ons. For exxample the
e presence
e of a form
mer river be
ed in the
middle of a string
s
may
y require ssome turbiines to be
e moved reesulting in
n empty
spa
aces within the arrays
s.
In addiition to the
e factors listed above
e each pro
oject should be ablee to encom
mpass a
number of other componen
c
ts that mayy be requirred by an offshore
o
wiind farm, such
s
as:

Up to four colllector platfforms;

1 co
onverter platform;

Up to two acccommodatio
on/helicop ter platform
ms;

Up to five metteorologica
al masts; a
and

Up to ten moo
oring buoys
s.
As a ba
aseline an
n area of 558km2 is ssufficient fo
or all turbines and p rovides the
e ability
to com
mpensate fo
or the facttors and co
omponents
s listed ab
bove. This baseline may be
altered for individ
dual projectts dependiing on their specific criteria.
c
3.5
Identiffication of
o Zone Capacitty
3.3
31
Using tthe FCAT tool Forew
wind underrtook a ran
nge of modelling exeercises to explore
the tota
al capacityy that may reasonablly be insta
alled within the devel opable are
ea. This
was ba
ased upon a wide ra
ange of hyypothetical scenarios
s ranging ffrom covering the
entire a
area in a single con
ntinuous g
grid with 15GW (an exaggeraated maxim
mum) of
turbine capacity to populatting the arrea with prrojects usin
ng star shhaped arrays. The
scenarios also allowed fu
urther com
mparison between projects w
with and without
anting.
overpla
3.3
32
These modelling activities found
f
that regardless
s of the sce
enario whi lst it was possible
p
to insta
all large capacities
c
(in excesss of 10GW
W) within the develoopable zo
one, the
reductio
on in enerrgy output due to wa
ake losses
s reduced the econoomic return
n of the
projectss. This tren
nd can be seen in Fiigure 19, below,
b
whic
ch shows hhow the ec
conomic
return d
decreases with overu
utilization o
of developa
able area.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
43
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 19 Econ
nomic retu
urn vs. Zon
ne capacitty
3.3
33
3.3
34
In addittion to the benefits in
n terms of project economics of
o reducing the Dogge
er Bank
Zone p
potential ca
apacity from the 13G
GW commu
unicated in
n 2010, it iis considered that
having fewer turb
bines and foundatio ns installe
ed in the Zone
Z
will hhave a num
mber of
other b
benefits:

A re
eduction in
n environmental effeccts due to turbines.
t

Few
wer disturbances to seabed
s
hab
bitats.

The
ere should be more space for bird populattions displa
aced to reccover.

Envvironmenta
al impact on birds wo uld be reduced.

Morre space will
w be availlable for otther marine
e users suc
ch as fisheermen.

Low
wer risk of health an
nd safety isssues. Forr example collisions between vessels
and
d wind farm
m compone
ents due to
o navigational inciden
nts and unccovering of
o buried
cab
bles due to trawling activity.

Lesss noise fro
om installin
ng fewer fo
oundations is favorab
ble to marinne mamma
als such
as h
harbour po
orpoise.

Few
wer cumula
ative wake
e effects ffrom cluste
ering wind
d farms tooo close to
ogether,
such as unforeseen wak
ke effect.
Based upon the
e results from the Forewind
d modellin
ng scenarrios it has
s been
conclud
ded, using overpla
anted proj
ojects of 1.2GW each,
e
thatt a capa
acity of
approxximately 9.6
6GW should be the m
maximum for
f the Dog
gger Bank Zone.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
44
Novemb
ber 2012
4 Iden
ntificattion off Proje
ect Bo
oundaries
4.1
Overvview
4.1
Using tthe projectt capacities
s, project a
area and Zone
Z
capacity outlineed in Sections 3.3
to 3.5 Forewind undertook
k a seriess of modellling exerc
cises to iddentify the project
bounda
aries. The aim of the
ese modell ing exercis
ses was to
o identify thhe optimal project
bounda
aries for th
he Dogger Bank Zon
ne taking in
nto accoun
nt engineeering, comm
mercial,
health and safetyy and environmentall considera
ations. The
e modellinng exercise
es were
aking in the
e FCAT too
ol describe
ed previous
sly in Section 3.1.
underta
4.2
2
The modelling process
p
un
ndertaken was iterattive, with results froom earlier layouts
used to
o inform the
t
later modelling
m
results. Fo
orewind modelled
m
Z
Zone layou
uts with
differen
nt combina
ations of project
p
bou
undaries within
w
them
m. Over 1000 potentia
al Zone
layoutss have bee
en modelle
ed in FCAT
T to date. It should be noted that a num
mber of
these modelled layouts were
w
used in the as
ssessmentt of the pproject cap
pacities,
project area and Zone capa
acity discusssed previously. Figu
ure 20 shoows an exa
ample of
a mode
elled Zone layout.
Figure 20 Exam
mple of mo
odelled Zo
one layoutt – please note this is not the
e
propo
osed solution but in
ndicates the
t differences in ou
utput for a
partic
cular scen
nario
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
45
Novemb
ber 2012
Figure 21 Proje
ect Boundaries
4.3
3
The m
modelling activities
a
fo
ocused on
n producin
ng optimis
sed projecct boundaries for
Doggerr Bank Cre
eyke Beck A & B and
d Dogger Bank
B
Teess
side A & B as they would
w
be
the firstt projects to
t enter the
e consent application
n process. Shown in Figure 21 are the
project boundarie
es for Dogg
ger Bank C
Creyke Be
eck A & B and Doggeer Bank Teesside
A & B which will be used further in
n the EIA process. It should bbe noted that
t
the
remaining 2GW connection
ns to Teessside and further 2 GW connnections ye
et to be
determ
mined will need to be located in the develo
opable are
ea to the n orth of Tra
anche A
and will be
e subject to
o further Zo
one appraisal in the future.
f
and B a
4.4
4
These project boundaries and
a their co
orresponding areas are
a describbed in morre detail
ollowing se
ections.
in the fo
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
46
Novemb
ber 2012
4.2
4.5
5
Dogge
er Bank Creyke Beck A
Doggerr Bank Creyke Beck
k A is loca
ated within
n the southern portioon of the Dogger
Bank Z
Zone in Trranche A. The key characteristics are listed in E
Error! Refference
source
e not found..
Parame
eter
Value
e
Project ssize
515km
m2 / 199 sq. miles
m
Project C
Capacity
Up to 1200MW
Grid Con
nnection Poin
nt
Creyk
ke Beck
Distance
e from shore (closest poin
nt)
131km
m
Predomiinant water depth
d
range
20 to 35m below LAT
L
Table 5
4.6
6
Dogg
ger Bank Creyke
C
Be
eck A key project ch
haracteristtics
The are
ea for Dog
gger Bank Creyke Be
eck A is 51
15km2, whiich is less than the baseline
b
area id
dentified prreviously in
n Section 3
3.4.3. The reduction in area is primarily due the
presence the TAT
TA North Europe
E
tel ecommuniications ca
able. To ennlarge the Dogger
2
Bank C
Creyke Beck A area
a beyond 5
515km a number off cable croossings would be
require
ed over the
e telecomm
munication cable. The
ese would incur addittional costts to the
project and pose greater en
ngineering and conse
enting challenges. Thhe smallerr project
area off Dogger Bank
B
Creyk
ke Beck A would no
ormally imp
pose a finaancial pena
alty due
to wa
ake effectts of turrbines re
educing energy
e
ca
apture. H owever, this is
counterbalanced by the go
ood wind resource that is present in tthis region
n of the
Doggerr Bank Zon
ne and the shallow w
water depth
hs.
Eassting
Latitude
L
LLongitude
1 4122
236.67
607
77313.00
54
4° 44.501' N
1°° 37.973' E
2 4469
976.61
607
77122.61
54
4° 50.114' N
1°° 38.014' E
3 4503
338.84
607
73777.73
54
4° 50.305' N
2°° 10.464' E
4 4340
004.72
605
57358.87
54
4° 48.522' N
2°° 13.640' E
5 4119
989.45
606
66904.47
54
4° 39.557' N
1°° 58.617' E
Table 6
4.7
7
No
orthing
Dogg
ger Bank Creyke
C
Be
eck A boun
ndary coo
ordinates
It shou
uld be note
ed that there is a d
degree of uncertainly of deve lopment activities
a
within tthe newly licenced oil
o and gass blocks south
s
of th
he Dogger Bank Zon
ne. This
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
47
Novemb
ber 2012
may re
equire additional area to be ad
dded to th
he project at a later date.The relative
coordin
nates of the
e Dogger Bank
B
Crey ke Beck A are shown
n in Table 6
4.3
Dogge
er Bank Creyke Beck B
Parame
eter
Value
e
Project ssize
599km
m2 / 231 sq. miles
m
Project C
Capacity
Up to 1200MW
Grid Con
nnection Poin
nt
Dogge
er Bank Crey
yke Beck
Distance
e from shore (closest poin
nt)
131km
m
Predomiinant water depth
d
range
20 to 35m below LAT
L
Table 7
4.8
8
Doggerr Bank Cre
eyke Beck B is locate
ed within the western
n portion oof the deve
elopable
area in Tranche A.
A The key
y characterristics are listed in Ta
able 7.
Parame
eter
Value
e
Project ssize
599km
m2 / 231 sq. miles
m
Project C
Capacity
Up to 1200MW
Grid Con
nnection Poin
nt
Dogge
er Bank Crey
yke Beck
Distance
e from shore (closest poin
nt)
131km
m
Predomiinant water depth
d
range
20 to 35m below LAT
L
Table 8
4.9
9
Dogg
ger Bank Creyke
C
Be
eck B key project ch
haracteristtics
Dogg
ger Bank Creyke
C
Be
eck B key project ch
haracteristtics
The arrea for Do
ogger Bank Creyke Beck B is 599km2 which is greater th
han the
baselin
ne area ide
entified pre
eviously in Section 3.4.3. The additional
a
aarea is to provide
the pro
oject with greater flexibility fo
or environm
mental and engineeering issue
es. The
project economiccs of Dogg
ger Bank C
Creyke Bec
ck B are im
mproved bby locating it in as
westerlly position
n as poss
sible. How
wever, due
e to the presence of birds, marine
aggregates and fishing
f
activities, disccussed pre
eviously in Section 2..3, on the western
w
most m
margin of the
t
Dogge
er Bank Zo
one there are a num
mber of poossible con
nsenting
issues. Appropria
ate positio
oning of tu
urbines and other offfshore asssets may help to
mitigate
e these isssues. In addition,
a
th is area of Dogger Bank
B
has bbeen identtified as
being m
more geote
echnically complex,
c
w
which will have
h
an im
mpact on tu rbine posittioning.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
48
Novemb
ber 2012
4.10
Additional projecct area will give flexxibility to re
eposition turbines
t
annd other offshore
o
assets..
Eassting
55
5° 4.471' N
1°° 30.330' E
2 4079
932.49
610
04435.45
55
5° 4.688' N
1°° 33.473' E
3 4153
336.85
610
06757.60
55
5° 6.018' N
1°° 40.388' E
4 4269
942.73
610
06757.60
55
5° 6.129' N
1°° 51.299' E
5 4269
942.73
607
79720.87
54
4° 51.554' N
1°° 51.712' E
6 4020
068.30
608
81499.47
54
4° 52.258' N
1°° 28.434' E
7 4032
256.30
609
92275.55
54
4° 58.080' N
1°° 29.327' E
8 4032
239.31
609
92720.00
54
4° 58.319' N
1°° 29.302' E
Dogg
ger Bank Creyke
C
Be
eck B boun
ndary coo
ordinates
The relative coord
dinates of the Dogge
er Bank Cre
eyke Beck
k B are shoown in Table 9.
Dogge
er Bank Teessid
de A
Parame
eter
Value
e
Project ssize
560km
m2 / 216sq. miles
m
Project C
Capacity
Up to 1200MW
Grid Con
nnection Poin
nt
Lacke
enby
Distance
e from shore (closest poin
nt)
196km
m
Predomiinant water depth
d
range
22 to 32m below LAT
L
Table 1
10
4.13
LLongitude
610
04103.14
4.4
4.12
Latitude
L
1 4045
579.90
Table 9
4.11
No
orthing
Dogg
ger Bank Teesside
T
A key projject characteristics
Doggerr Bank Te
eesside A is located
d within the
e eastern portion off the deve
elopable
area in Tranche B.
B The key
y characterristics are listed in Ta
able 10.
The area for Dog
gger Bank
k Teesside
e A is 560k
km2 which is slightlyy greater than the
baselin
ne area ide
entified pre
eviously in Section 3.4.3. It is envisaged
e
that this area
a
will
be suffficient for Dogger
D
Ban
nk Teessid
de A. Howe
ever, it sho
ould be nooted that th
here is a
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
49
Novemb
ber 2012
degree
e of uncerta
ainty of de
evelopmentt activities within the
e newly liceenced oil and
a gas
blocks south of th
he Dogger Bank Zon
ne. This ma
ay require additional area to be
e added
to the p
project at a later date
e.
Easting
Latitude
L
LLongitude
1
472908.41
6107993.37
55
5° 7.074' N
2° 34.514' E
2
506307.53
6107993.37
55
5° 7.116' N
3° 5.934' E
3
506002.84
6106691.82
55
5° 6.414' N
3° 5.645' E
4
505580.86
6104889.29
55
5° 5.443' N
3° 5.246' E
5
505158.89
6103086.77
55
5° 4.471' N
3° 4.848' E
6
504736.91
6101284.24
55
5° 3.499' N
3° 4.449' E
7
504314.93
60
099481.72
55
5° 2.528' N
3° 4.051' E
8
503892.96
60
097679.19
55
5° 1.556' N
3° 3.654' E
9
503470.98
60
095876.67
55
5° 0.584' N
3° 3.256' E
10
503083.60
60
094221.93
54
4° 59.692' N
3° 2.892' E
11
502644.70
60
092347.11
54
4° 58.682' N
3° 2.479' E
12
502627.03
60
092271.62
54
4° 58.641' N
3° 2.463' E
13
502205.05
60
090469.09
54
4° 57.669' N
3° 2.066' E
14
502040.72
60
089767.14
54
4° 57.291' N
3° 1.912' E
15
500892.28
60
089795.09
54
4° 57.306' N
3° 0.836' E
16
498624.07
60
089846.94
54
4° 57.334' N
2° 58.711' E
17
498367.08
60
089852.81
54
4° 57.337' N
2° 58.470' E
18
472908.41
60
090434.55
54
4° 57.607' N
2° 34.614' E
Table 1
11
4.14
No
orthing
Dogg
ger Bank Teesside
T
A boundarry coordin
nates
The relative coord
dinates of the Dogge
er Bank Te
eesside A are
a shown in Table 11.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
50
Novemb
ber 2012
4.5
Dogge
er Bank Teessid
de B
Parame
eter
Value
e
Project ssize
593km
m2 / 229sq. miles
m
Project C
Capacity
Up to 1200MW
Grid Con
nnection Poin
nt
Lacke
enby
Distance
e from shore (closest poin
nt)
165km
m
Predomiinant water depth
d
range
23 to 35m below LAT
L
Table 1
12
4.15
Dogg
ger Bank Teesside
T
B key projject characteristics
Doggerr Bank Te
eesside B crosses th
he border between Tranche
T
A and Tran
nche B,
with the majorityy of the prroject loca
ated in Tra
anche B. The
T
key ccharacteristics are
listed in
n Table 12.
Ea
asting
Latitude
L
LLongitude
1 4455
523.19
6108971.30
55
5° 7.466' N
2° 8.743' E
2 450126.03
6109539.01
55
5° 7.801' N
2° 13.068' E
3 468113.39
60
091644.50
54
4° 58.242' N
2° 30.113' E
4 4670
043.01
60
090568.58
54
4° 57.658' N
2° 29.117' E
5 4536
618.96
60
077074.88
54
4° 50.319' N
2° 16.670' E
6 4526
689.43
60
077081.56
54
4° 50.317' N
2° 15.801' E
7 433143.11
60
096526.98
55
5° 0.666' N
1° 57.272' E
Table 1
13
4.16
No
orthing
Dogg
ger Bank Teesside
T
B boundarry coordin
nates
The are
ea for Dog
gger Bank Teesside B is 593k
km2 which is greater than the baseline
b
area identified prreviously in
n Section 3
3.4.3. The additional area is duue to the potential
p
for the export ca
able from Dogger
D
Ba
ank Teess
side A to be
b located along the
e southeastern
n margin of
o the Dogg
ger Bank Z
Zone. This would req
quire Dogg er Bank Teesside
A to be
e located fu
urther from
m the Dogg
ger Bank Zone
Z
edge to providee adequate
e space
for the
e export cable.
c
How
wever, thiss would otherwise
o
reduce thhe project energy
capture
e. By consenting a larger arrea allows a greater level off project fllexibility
depend
dent on the
e cable rou
ute. The re
elative coorrdinates off the Dogg er Bank Teesside
B are sshown in Table 13.
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
51
Novemb
ber 2012
5 Con
nclusio
on
5.1
The prroject bou
undary selection pro
ocess has
s utilised both deskk-based and
a
site
specificc survey da
ata gatherred both fo
or environm
mental and engineeri ng purposes. The
environ
nmental da
ata have had
h the big
ggest effec
ct on defining the ovverall deve
elopable
area accross the Dogger
D
Bank Zone. T
The engine
eering and economicc criteria ha
ave had
a greatter influencce in defining the proj
oject bound
daries within the idenntified deve
elopable
area.
Figure 22 Summ
mary of ke
ey consen
nting issue
es associa
ated with Project
Boun
ndary sele
ection
5.2
2
The removal of the
t
westerrn edge off the Zone
e whilst yie
elding poteentially ide
eal wind
farm arrea from an economiic perspect
ctive, takes
s account of
o a key saandeel area
a that is
used byy the fishin
ng industry
y as well ass being a feeding
f
gro
ound for keey bird spe
ecies on
the Zon
ne.
5.3
3
It is co
onsidered that the project are
eas are broad
b
enough to loccate the offshore
o
components requ
uired by each
e
proje ct and allo
ow a degrree of flexxibility in the final
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
52
Novemb
ber 2012
project design. It is consid
dered thatt the spac
ce betwee
en the proojects is sufficient
enough
h to reduce
e cumulativ
ve wake efffects and allow
a
wind recovery.
5.4
4
In sum
mmary ove
er the cou
urse of the
e last thre
ee years Forewind has defin
ned two
Tranches, A and B. Forewind has re--evaluated the developable areea on the basis
b
of
informa
ation gathe
ered and has
h modiffied the de
evelopable area of tthe Zone. Further
detailed
d work pre
esented within
w
this report has
s led to th
he selectioon of four project
bounda
aries, for th
he first Dogger Bankk projects. These pro
oject bounddaries will now be
used w
within the Environme
ental Impa
act Assess
sments (EIAs) whereeupon further site
specificc data will be used to
o optimise
e turbine an
nd project asset layoouts and minimise
m
environ
nmental im
mpacts whe
erever posssible. It should
s
be noted thaat full cons
sultation
and dia
alogue will continue for these EIAs as they progrress. Furthher work will
w also
continu
ue to evalu
uate the op
ptimum bou
undaries fo
or the rema
aining projjects 5, 6, 7 and 8
to the n
north of Tra
anches A and
a B.
Figure 23 Proje
ect Boundaries take
en forward
d to EIA
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
53
Novemb
ber 2012
For m
more info
ormation
n
Visit w
www.fo
orewind.co.uk
Forew
wind Ltd
Davidsson Housse
Forbury Square
e
Reading
3EU
RG1 3
Final.01 Appendix
A
6A Projecct Boundary Reporrt Final version 01
©2012 Forewind
54