Physical Processes

No

No

Proposed Development

Physical processes refer to the coastal and marine processes and includes tidal currents, wave climate and the sediment transport regime. The physical processes of the Proposed Development were numerically modelled using datasets collected from a series of site-specific bathymetric surveys, including grab sampling and a detailed desktop review of existing studies and datasets. Two potential impacts of physical processes on receptors were identified. These were noted as increased suspended sediment concentrations (SSCs) and associated deposition on physical features as a result of seabed preparation, foundation installation, cable installation, maintenance activity, and decommissioning. As well as the presence of infrastructure potentially leading to changes to tidal currents, wave climate, littoral currents and sediment transport which may result in changes to sediment transport pathways, bank morphology, and beach morphology.

An assessment was undertaken for the Proposed Development as described in volume 1, chapter 3 of the Offshore EIA Report which includes details of cable and scour protection. The potential impacts of impacts were assessed as being either of minor or negligible adverse significance.

Cumulative

Cumulative impacts of physical processes arising from each identified impact in combination with adjacent offshore wind farm developments were assessed and predicted to result in impacts of negligible to minor adverse significance (not significant in EIA terms).

Transboundary

No likely significant transboundary effects with regard to physical processes from the Project Development on the interests of other EEA States were predicted.

Water Quality

No

No

The Proposed Development

Water quality has the potential to effect ecological and human receptors.  The assessment has been undertaken under the legislative framework set out previously in Volume 2, Chapter 19. 

With mitigation, best practise and monitoring, no significant effects are predicted as a result of construction, operation and maintenance or decommissioning.

Cumulative and Transboundary

No significant cumulative effects are predicted.

Similarly, no likely significant transboundary effects with regards to water quality from the Proposed Development are predicted.

Climate Change

Yes

N/A

The carbon savings and climate change benefits that would result from the Project are summarised at section 6.2 below in relation to Project benefits.  The Project would result in a significant beneficial effect on climate.  The detailed assessment is set out in the EIA Report Appendix 21 ‘Climate Assessments Report’

Benthic Ecology

Yes (Short term only)

Yes (short term only)

Proposed Development

Overall conclusion for temporary subtidal habitat loss / disturbance in the construction phase the overall impact would be of moderate adverse significance in the short term, decreasing to minor adverse in the long terms as sediments and communities are predicted to recover.  No significant long-term effects are predicted.

For all other impacts it is concluded there will no significant effects arising during construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases.

No direct impacts to benthic intertidal receptors, including feature of the Barns Ness SSSI are predicted due to the Applicant’s commitment to using trenchless techniques to cross the intertidal zone.

Cumulative

Overall, for temporary subtidal habitat loss/disturbance in the construction phase the overall cumulative impact would be of a moderate adverse significance in the short-term, decreasing to minor adverse in the long term as sediments and communities recover.  No significant long-term effects are predicted.

For all other cumulative impacts, it is concluded that there will be no significance effects arising alongside other plans/projects.

European Sites

No adverse effect on integrity is predicted to occur on any sites designated for Annex I habitats below mean high water springs (MHWS), specifically: Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC. (as assessed within the Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment (RIAA), which equates to no significant likely effects in EIA terms).

As assessment of the individual qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex Marine Protected Area (FFBC MPA) finds the effect of temporary habitat disturbance to be moderate adverse significant in the medium term, decreasing to minor adverse in the long terms due to slower rates of recovery.  No significant long term effects are therefore predicted directly or cumulatively in this respect.    A full assessment of the effects on the FFBC MPA is presented in the MPA Assessment Report.  This concludes no significant risk of the Proposed Development and the relevant cumulative projects hinder the achievement of the conservation objectives of the FFBC MPA.

Transboundary

No potential significant transboundary effects are identified.

Fish & Shellfish Ecology

No

No

Proposed Development

A number of potential impacts on fish and shellfish receptors including temporary habitat loss / disturbance, increased suspended sediment, injury and /or disturbance from underwater noise and vibration, long term habitat loss, EMG from subsea cabling and colonisation of foundations were assessed as resulting in no significant effects.

Cumulative

No significant cumulative impacts are predicted upon fish and shellfish important ecological features (IEFs) within a 25km buffer of the Proposed Development fish and shellfish ecological study area. 

European Sites

No adverse effect on integrity is predicted to occur on any sites designated for diadromous fish specifically: The Tweed Estuary SAC; The River Tweed SAC; The River South Esk SAC; the River Tay SAC; the River Dee SAC and the river Teith SAC (as assessed within the Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment (RIAA), which equates to no significant likely effects in EIA terms.

Transboundary

No likely significant transboundary effects with regard to fish and shellfish ecology from the Proposed Development on the interests of other EEA States were predicted.

Marine Mammals

No

No

Project and Cumulative

A number of potential impacts on marine mammal receptors were identified, including injury and disturbance from elevated underwater noise associated with piling, site investigation surveys, clearance of UXOs, vessel use and other construction-related activities. An increased risk of injury of marine mammals could also arise due to collision with vessels. In consideration of the wider ecosystem, the assessment also considered potential indirect effects due to changes in fish and shellfish communities which could affect prey availability for marine mammals

The overall conclusion in the EIA is that the effects on marine mammals during construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning, (after implementation of secondary mitigation), will result in no significant effects either in isolation or cumulatively.

European Sites

RIAA concluded that no adverse effect on integrity is predicted to occur on any European sites designated for marine mammals, specifically:

Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC

Isle of May SAC

Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC

Moray Firth SAC

Southern North Sea SAC.

Transboundary

No significant transboundary effects have been identified in regard to effects of the Proposed Development.

Ornithology

Yes

Yes

Proposed Development

A number of potential impacts on offshore and intertidal ornithology receptors were identified associated with the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning of the Proposed Development. 

No significant effects are identified from construction and decommissioning activities. 

For displacement, barrier and collision effects in the operation phase, population modelling was undertaken to support the assessment and to investigate any long-term effects on population size of any key species.

Displacement and barrier effects in the operation phase were assessed to be of no more than minor adverse significance for gannet, kittiwake, razorbill and puffin. These effects are therefore not significant in EIA terms. For guillemot, displacement and barrier effects in the operation phase were considered to be minor adverse, however for the more precautionary ‘Scoping Approach B’, the effect was considered to be moderate adverse, which is significant in EIA terms. It is considered that the displacement mortality rates used in Scoping Approach B are likely to be highly precautionary, for the reasons outlined in Volume 3, Appendix 11.4

Collision effects from wind turbines during the operation phase were assessed to be of no more than minor adverse significance for gannet, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull, little gull, common tern, Arctic tern and great skua. These effects are therefore not significant in EIA terms. For kittiwake, collision effects were assessed under expert judgement to also be minor adverse, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Inter-related effects of multiple stressors were also assessed with one main stressor identified – overall effects on foraging seabirds from potential changes in prey communities.  The assessment concluded that due to the high mobility of the birds and their ability to exploit different prey species, the small scale of potential habitat changes relative to the wider habitat, are unlikely to have significant effect.

Cumulative

The cumulative effects assessed included displacement and barrier effects from offshore infrastructure and collision effects from wind turbines during the operation phase. Overall, it was concluded that there will be a likely significant effect on guillemot and razorbill for Scoping Approach B arising from cumulative displacement effects from the Proposed Development alongside other projects/plans. In addition, there will also be a likely significant effect on gannet and kittiwake for Scoping Approach B from combined displacement and collision effects from the Proposed Development alongside other projects/plans.

European Sites

20 breeding seabird SPAs, 17 migratory waterfowl SPAs and one marine SPA were screened in to Stage Two HRA assessment, with results presented in the Report to Inform the Appropriate Assessment. Adverse effects has been concluded for eight sites (The Forth Islands SPA, Fowlsheugh SPA, St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA, Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA, East Caithness Cliffs SPA, Troup, Pennan & Lions Head SPA, Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA and Farne Islands SPA) and four species (kittiwake, guillemot, razorbill, puffin).  Of these sites, AEOI on three sites supporting kittiwake and guillemot have been identified as a result of the project alone.  AEOI on the other five sites are as a result of in-combination effects.  These conclusions are based on predicted rates of collision and displacement using the assessment parameters agreed under the Scoping Approach which are considered to the highly precautionary.  The number of sites where AEOI are concluded using the ‘Developer Approach’ reduces to five, four of which are as a result of in-combination effects. 

Transboundary

No transboundary effects are identified.

Commercial Fisheries

No

No

Proposed Development

Potential effects of the Proposed Development are identified in the assessment process including loss or restricted access to fishing grounds, displacement of fishing activities to other areas, increase steaming times, snagging risk, potential impacts on exploited species.

No significant EIA effects are identified after the implementation of appropriate designed in measures including safety zones, good communication and management measures.

Cumulative

No significant cumulative effects are predicted.

Transboundary

No likely significant transboundary effects are predicted.

Shipping & Navigation

No

No

Proposed Development

An assessment of potential impacts, mitigation measures and residual effects in respect of shipping and navigation includes consideration of vessel displacement, increased collision risk, access, reduction of under keel clearance and interaction with cables.  No significant effects are determined to arise in isolation or cumulatively.  

Transboundary

A potential transboundary impact has been identified regard vessel displacement for commercial routeing between international ports.   This effect is not significant.

Aviation

No

No

The Proposed Development

Information on aviation, military and communications within the relevant study areas was collected and assessed in consultation with stakeholders.  The impacts assessed include the creation of physical obstacles affecting air traffic, impact on NERL ATC radars, impact on military ATC radars and the impact on military AD radars.  It is concluded due to the design of two important secondary mitigations (ATC radar and designation of TMZ) that there will be no likely significant residual effects arising from the Proposed Development individually or cumulatively. 

Cumulative

The cumulative impacts assessed include the creation of physical obstacles affecting air traffic.

Transboundary

No potential transboundary impacts have been identified.

Seascape Landscape and Visual Receptors

Yes (in optimal conditions only)

No

Proposed Development

The SLVIA considered effects within a large study area of 60km radius.

The siting of the Proposed Development at long distance offshore forms the key designed-in measure to minimise potential for significant landscape and visual effects experienced in coastal views.  The spatial extent of the northern part of the array areas has been reduced during project design which further increased its distance offshore from the coast of Aberdeenshire, Angus and Fife, thereby reducing effects on receptors in these areas.

No significant effects are predicted for Angus, Fife or East Lothian and Northumberland, the overall effects in these areas are long distance and reduced due to the existence of existing offshore wind features within the key receptor viewpoints.

Significant effects will arise on the perceived character of the coastline and views/visual amenity between Fast Castle Head and Eyemouth, including the Berwickshire Coastal Path and views from Fast Castle, Turn Law, St Abb’s head and Eyemouth in the Scottish Borders area.  The visual effects will be relatively higher in these areas due to the elevation of the coast which has views over the seascape and the Proposed Development due to its aspect.  Furthermore, the addition of the Proposed Development in the seascape context will influence the open and exposed character of the wide views out to sea.  However, due to the offshore positioning of the Proposed Development, it avoids the dramatic coastline scenery and rocky coastline and cliff views along the coast.

The effect of the Proposed Development lighting at nights is assessed as being significant in views from the coastline around St Abb’s Head, due to the combination of its higher sensitivity and the change resulting from the lighting to the dark seascape in the view off this coast at night.  The lights would however be low to the horizon and do not extent or impede the wider expanse of night sky.  The distance of the coastlines of the study areas from the potential sources of light reduces the overall effects and viewers are considered unlikely to perceive the aviation lights to any degree of intensity.

The assessments concludes that the effects will vary according to the weather and prevailing visibility.  As such effects that may be assessed as being significant under very good or excellent visibility may not be significant under moderate or poor visibility conditions.  The assessed worst case optimum visibility does not occur often and for the majority of time the clarity of long distance views will not be part of the experience of those enjoying the coast and as such, under the more frequent sub-optimal conditions, the effects of the turbines will not be significant.

Cumulative

A tiered approach to the cumulative effects assessment was adopted. This concluded that the majority of receptors will not experience tier 1 (whole project) cumulative effects since they have either no visibility, or very limited/distant  visibility, of either the onshore infrastructure or the Berwick Bank Wind Farm offshore. The main tier 1 cumulative effect during construction is likely to occur in views experienced by walkers along a short section of the John Muir Way between Torness and Chapel Point, and visitors to Skateraw Harbour, where the construction of the landfall will be visible at close range in combination with the construction of the Berwick Bank Wind Farm offshore and the construction of the onshore substation in inland views, which are assessed to be significant (major/moderate), although temporary during construction.

The Tier 2 assessment considers projects consented and submitted but not yet determined. These consist of offshore and onshore wind farms within the SLVIA study area but the primary impact interactions result from the Proposed Development with the consented Inch Cape offshore wind farm and Seagreen 1A, The contribution of the Proposed Development to the cumulative effect with tier 2 projects on views and perceived character of the South-East Aberdeenshire, Fife and Angus coastline of the SLVIA study area has been found to be medium-low to low with effects not significant (moderate to minor), due to it being visually recessive at long distance offshore partially behind Inch Cape and Seagreen 1A, with Inch Cape  contributing most to the overall cumulative effect on the views given its closer proximity and larger vertical  scale. The cumulative effect of the Proposed Development with tier 2 projects is also assessed as medium low and not significant

Transboundary

No transboundary effects with regard to SLVIA were predicted

Cultural Heritage

No

No

Proposed Development

The assessment of cultural heritage refers to historic monuments, building and sites that are valued for their architectural, historic or archaeological interest.  The cultural significance of such assets draws to varying degrees upon their setting.  The assessment identified assets where the Proposed Development might result in change that would adversely affect cultural significance.  The assessments drew heavily upon visual relationships with the seascape.  The assessment concluded that the proposed Development will result in visual changes in the setting of cultural heritage receptors, but that this will not affect the cultural significance of the receptors. This reflects the distance of the Proposed Development from receptors. 

Cumulative Impacts

The potential for cumulative effects to arise in combination with other offshore wind farms within 60km was considered to give rise to no effects.

Transboundary

No likely transboundary effects with regard to marine archaeology were predicted.

Infrastructure & Other Users

No

No

Proposed Development

A number of potential impacts on infrastructure and other users were identified.  These include other offshore wind farms and limited recreational users (due to the distance offshore).  The potential impacts including displacement of recreational craft, recreations vessels and activities, and restriction of access to cables and pipelines associated with the NnG offshore wind farm and Easter Link 1 offshore export cables.  With the proposed mitigation measures in place, there will be negligible significant effects arising from the array areas and export cable corridor.   In reference to the displacement of recreation vessels and activities the impacts is predicted to be of local spatial extent only and therefore of low significance.  Likewise temporary restricted access to the other offshore cables is precited to be of local spatial extent, short to medium term duration, intermittent and highly reversible.

Cumulative

Cumulative impacts associated with the Proposed Development were assessed as being of minor adverse significance.

Transboundary

No transboundary effects are predicted.  

Socio-Economic. Recreation and Tourism

Yes

Scotland Wide Positive effect with other projects.

Proposed Development

A number of potential impacts on socio-economics and tourism activities, associated with the Proposed Development were identified.  These included: supporting employment and GVA across Scotland and within the identified support facilities locations, including creating employment opportunities for local workers; increasing demand for short term, medium term and long term accommodation and housing from workers migrating into selected support locations; and potential impacts on the tourism and recreation sector. Following assessment the vast majority of effects will be beneficial, ranging from minor to major significance.

Summary details of predicted socio-economic effects are presented in Chapter 6 of this Planning Statement.

Cumulative

Cumulative impacts from offshore energy developments were assessed and predicted as likely to result in no adverse change to the levels of significance assessed when considering the Proposed Development in isolation.

Transboundary

No likely significant transboundary effects with regard to socio-economics and tourism from the Project on the interests of other EEA States were predicted

Major Accidents and Disasters

No

No

The Proposed Development

The assessment of the likely significant effects both that the Proposed Development presents, and is susceptible to, from the existing environment regarding major accidents and disasters has been undertaken.  The assessment of effects established that for all risks identified, designed in measures would be sufficient to appropriately manage the risk. Potential risks included:

• Collision and allision (vessels and aircraft)
• Snagging (fishing vessels)
• Unexploded ordnance
• Pollution of the marine environment (from vessels and structures), and
• Fire at the OSP / Offshore convertor station platform.

No likely significant effects are identified after consideration of designed in measures.

Cumulative and Transboundary

No assessment of cumulative or transboundary effects has been undertaken.