Residual effects

  1. Residual effects are defined as the effects remaining once all mitigation measures have been taken into consideration. Following the identification of secondary mitigation measures as described above, in addition to primary and tertiary mitigation, the assessment re-evaluates the significance of effect utilising the methodology outlined above. The assessment of likely significance of residual effects provides the following conclusions for the purposes of the assessment:
  • a level of significance of residual effect of moderate or more will be considered a ‘significant’ effect in terms of the EIA Regulations; and
  • a level of significance of residual effect of minor or less will be considered ‘not significant’ in terms of the EIA Regulations.

6.5. Cumulative Effect Assessment

6.5.1.    Overview

  1. Under the EIA Regulations, a CEA is required to provide consideration of the impacts arising from the Proposed Development alone and cumulatively with other relevant plans, projects and activities. Cumulative effects are therefore the combined effect of the Proposed Development with the effects from a number of different plans, projects and activities, on the same receptor group or resource.
  2. The term cumulative assessment is used in this Offshore EIA Report to describe the assessment of incremental changes caused by other reasonably foreseeable actions alongside the Proposed Development. The term ‘in-combination’ is reserved for use in the context of the separate HRA requirements. Therefore, to avoid confusion the term ‘in-combination’ is not used in this Offshore EIA Report.
  3. This section provides an overview of the legislation and guidance associated with the CEA and the approach to CEA.

6.5.2.    Cumulative Effect Assessment Legislation and Guidance

  1. An assessment of cumulative effects is required in accordance with the EIA Directive (2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU) and the EIA Regulations.
  2. The EIA Directive (Annex IV, Article 5e) states: “A description of the likely significant effects of the project on the environment resulting from:… the cumulation of effects with other existing and/or approved projects, taking into account any existing environmental problems relating to areas of particular environmental importance likely to be affected or the use of natural resources”.
  3. Article 5 of the EIA Directive (Annex IV) also states: “The description of the likely significant effects on the factors specified in Article 3(1) should cover the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, transboundary, short-term, medium-term and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the project. This description should take into account the environmental protection objectives established at Union or Member State level which are relevant to the project”.
  4. This is transposed directly into domestic law through the EIA Regulations.
  5. There are several other relevant guidance documents which have been considered in the development of the CEA, including:
  • A Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment: Guidance for Competent Authorities, Consultees and Others Involved in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process in Scotland (NatureScot, 2018);
  • Environmental Impact Assessment for Offshore Renewable Energy Projects (BSI, 2015); and
  • Renewable UK Cumulative Impact Assessment Guidelines. Guiding Principles for Cumulative Impacts Assessment in Offshore Wind Farms (Renewable UK, 2013).

6.5.3.    Approach to the Cumulative Effect Assessment

  1. This section describes the approach taken for the identification and screening of other projects, plans and activities, before outlining the approach to carrying out the cumulative effects assessment. Full description of how the CEA has been carried out is found in volume 3, appendix 6.4.
  2. The methodology for the screening of potential projects, plans and activities to provide cumulative effects is also presented in Figure 6.2.

Screening stage

  1. A fundamental requirement of undertaking the CEA is to identify those foreseeable developments or activities with which the Proposed Development may interact to result in cumulative effects. There is the potential for an interaction to occur at all phases (construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning) of the Proposed Development to lead to cumulative effects. The process of identifying those projects, plans or activities for which there is the potential for an interaction to occur is referred to as ‘screening’.
  2. A specialised process has been developed to methodically and transparently screen the projects, plans and activities that may be considered cumulatively alongside the Proposed Development. This involved a staged process that considers the level of detail available for projects, plans and activities, as well as the potential for interactions on a conceptual, physical and temporal basis.
Compiling the CEA long list
  1. To ensure a thorough and comprehensive approach to identification of potential plans, projects and activities considered in the CEA, an initial ‘long list’ of projects within a defined Zone of Influence (ZoI) was developed based on the below listed criteria (paragraph 75). The ZOI for the Proposed Development has been based on the Ornithology study area, which is the largest topic specific study areas.
  2. The Marine Scotland (2018) Consenting and Licensing Guidance: For Offshore Wind, Wave and Tidal Energy Applications states that “Engagement with MS-LOT is required to identify which plans/projects/ongoing activities should be included in the in-combination element of the cumulative effects assessment (CEA)”.
  3. The offshore wind projects in the Firth of Forth and Tay region have been considered in the long list, alongside other developments including those which:
  • projects which have become operational since baseline data was collected
  • are under construction;
  • have consent;
  • are the subject of an application for consent that has been submitted but not yet determined;
  • are in scoping or have a Scoping Opinion; and
  • are plans and projects which are “reasonably foreseeable” (i.e. developments that are being planned, such as in the case of offshore renewable energy developments, projects which have a Crown Estate AfL).
    1. The CEA has considered all other relevant plans, projects and activities that are publicly available three months prior to the Proposed Development application.
    2. The Applicant is also developing an additional export cable and grid connection to Blyth, Northumberland (hereafter the “Cambois connection”). Applications for the necessary consents (including marine licences) will be applied for separately once further development work has been undertaken on this offshore export corridor. The Cambois connection has been included as a cumulative project (under Tier 3) for the purposes of the offshore EIA and assessed based on the information presented in the Cambois connection Scoping Report submitted in October 2022 (SSER, 2022e). Where publicly available, information such as project name, information source, confidence in project data, scale/capacity, status of the development, known planned construction programme, and distance to the Proposed Development was recorded for each of the projects, plans or activities included on the long list.
    3. The CEA long list for the Proposed Development is provided in volume 3, appendix 6.3. This long list has been developed using datasets from MS-LOT, The Crown Estate (TCE) and the Crown Estate Scotland (CES) (amongst others), to identify projects and plans in the vicinity of the Proposed Development relating to certain topics such as commercial fisheries, cables and pipelines, energy and oil and gas.
    4. As explained in volume 1, chapter 1, Seagreen was consented with permission to install 150 turbines. These 150 turbines are allocated to two subprojects to facilitate connections to the grid at different locations: ‘Seagreen 1’ refers to the installation of 114 turbines that will connect to the grid at Tealing (via the cable route to Carnoustie); ‘Seagreen 1A Project’ refers to the other 36 turbines that will connect to the grid at Cockenzie via a new cable route (the ‘Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor’).
Screening of the CEA long list
  1. For a cumulative effect to occur, it must be established that a cumulative effect has the potential to directly or indirectly affect the receptor(s) in question (i.e. there must be an impact-receptor-pathway). The plans, projects and activities listed on the CEA long list were considered on a topic by topic basis to ensure the potential for a relevant receptor-impact pathway in screening each of the plans, activities or projects was identified.
  2. The initial CEA long list was reduced following consideration of potential for cumulative effects for each potential impact-receptor pathway staged process as set out below:
  • conceptual overlap – in instances where an impact has the potential to directly or indirectly affect the receptor(s) in question. In EIA terms this is described as an impact-receptor pathway and is defined here as a conceptual overlap;
  • physical overlap – ability for impacts arising from the Proposed Development to overlap with those from other projects/plans on a receptor basis. This means that an overlap of the physical extents of the impacts arising from the two (or more) projects/plans must be established for a cumulative effect to arise. Exceptions to this exist for certain mobile receptors that may move between, and subject to, two or more separate physical extents of impact from two or more projects; and
  • temporal overlap – for a cumulative effect to arise from two or more projects, a temporal overlap of impacts arising from each must be established. It should be noted that some impacts are active only during certain phases of development, such as piling noise during construction. The absence of a strict overlap however may not necessarily preclude a cumulative effect, as receptors may become further affected by additional, non-temporally overlapping projects. This will be considered for each topic with projects being screened in for cumulative assessment if required.
    1. This screening stage was based on the experience and knowledge of technical specialists, and the current guidance and regulations. The plans, projects and activities that remain after review of the long list are taken forwards to the assessment stage.

Assessment stage

  1. Following the screening stage, a list of all projects, plans and activities screened in for assessment was produced. This list is specific to each topic (although several plans, projects and/or activities will be relevant to multiple topics) and presents all plans, projects and activities considered in each topic chapter’s CEA.
  2. In the undertaking of the CEA for the Proposed Development, a tiered approach was adopted. This provides a framework for placing relative weight on the potential for each project/plan to be included in the CEA to ultimately be realised, based upon the project/plan’s current stage of maturity and certainty in the project’s parameters.
  3. The approach utilised within the Proposed Development CEA employed follows a tiered approach, as described in Figure 6.2.
  4. All projects/plans that have been screened in via the previously described screening process were allocated into one of the above Tiers and assessed in the CEA. It is worth noting that the data collection is assessed against the source of this data (i.e. data confidence) to verify its accuracy and reliability.
  5. The CEA presented in this Offshore EIA Report has been undertaken on the basis of information presented in the EIA Reports (or other similar planning documents) for the other projects, plans and activities. Projects, plans and activities often seek consent for a maximum design scenario, which may be refined during the determination/examination period of the application and during the post consent phases of the development. For example, a project may seek consent for 300 turbines and assess this within their EIA Report, gain consent for 250 turbines and the ultimate ‘as built’ project may consist of 180 turbines. Changes made to a project’s design since the publication of the EIA Report for that project have not generally been included in the CEA long list or assessed within the topic chapters due to the uncertainty surrounding whether these are ultimately implemented or not. Where topic or project specific advice has been received in relation to the project design, this will be identified in the topic assessment. In addition, Neart Na Goithe (NnG) and Seagreen 1 and Seagreen 1A Project, both original 2014 consents and subsequent 2019 consents have been considered in the CEA to ensure the maximum adverse scenario has been assessed. For Inch Cape the 2019 consent will be used as part of the CEA.
  6. Where practicable, the CEA methodology follows the Proposed Development assessment of effects methodology as described in section 6.4.5. By following this approach, a level of consistency is maintained throughout the topic chapters and relevant comparisons can be made. This approach however differs between topic chapters according to several factors, such as the nature of the topic, the cumulative projects, plans and activities included for that topic, the data available for each project, plan and activity, and the specific practicalities around undertaking CEA for that discipline. Therefore, although all topics have aimed to undertake a quantitative cumulative assessment, where this has not been possible the assessment presented comprises a mix of qualitative and quantitative, or wholly qualitative assessment.
  7. Where the potential significant effect for the Proposed Development alone is assessed as negligible, or where an impact is predicted to be highly localised, these will not generally be considered within the Proposed Development CEA, as there is not considered to be a potential for cumulative effects with other plans, projects or activities. This will be confirmed at a topic specific assessment level. Furthermore, any projects which are operational at the time of baseline characterisation have been screened out of the CEA.
  8. It may not be possible to discount the potential for Adverse Effects on [site] Integrity (AEoI) of Special Protected Areas (SPAs) and their designated features (i.e. seabirds) from the Proposed Development. In such an event, the Applicant would need to access the ‘derogation provisions’ of the Habitats Regulations to proceed to consent. A ‘without prejudice’ derogations case for the Proposed Development is therefore provided alongside the Application, which includes potential compensatory measures. At the request of MS-LOT, the Applicant has considered the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed compensation measures under the EIA process (reported in the ‘Derogation Case – Compensation Measures EIA’) and HRA process (the ‘Derogation Case – Compensation Measures HRA’).

6.6. Transboundary Effects

  1. The potential for transboundary effects to arise is a result of an impact from the Proposed Development which has the potential to significantly affect the environment of an EEA state(s). Full description of how the transboundary effects assessment has been carried out is found in volume 3, appendix 6.6.
  2. To assist with this process, a screening exercise for potential transboundary impacts was undertaken at the scoping stage and presented in the Berwick Bank Wind Farm Offshore Scoping Report (SSER, 2021a).
  3. Volume 3, appendix 6.6 presents the update to the transboundary screening work undertaken at the scoping stage, considering the more recent project information.
  4. This exercise identified that the following receptors may experience transboundary impacts from the Proposed Development:
  • fish and shellfish ecology (volume 2, chapter 9);
  • marine mammals (volume 2, chapter 10);
  • offshore and intertidal ornithology (volume 2, chapter 11);
  • commercial fisheries (volume 2, chapter 12);
  • shipping and navigation (volume 2, chapter 13); and
  • offshore socio-economic and tourism (volume 2, chapter 18).
    1. Each of the above topic chapters provides an assessment of transboundary effects for each receptor group, which also considers the inter-relationships between effects. The inter-related effects identified within each topic chapter have been summarised in a standalone inter-related effects chapter (volume 2, chapter 20). Assessments within the topic chapters are based on the screening undertaken by the Applicant and also consider the instances where project information has developed or matured in the meantime, or consultation responses have provided further detail or direction.

6.7. Inter-Related Effects

  1. The EIA Regulations require consideration of the inter-relationships between EIA topics that may lead to environmental effects. For example, the separate impacts of noise and habitat loss may have an effect upon a single receptor group such as fish and shellfish or marine mammals.
  2. The assessment of potential inter-related effects has been carried out concurrently considering two levels of potential effect:
  • project lifetime effects: effects that occur throughout more than one phase of the project (construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning) interacting to potentially create a more significant effect upon a receptor than if just assessed in isolation in a single phase; and
  • receptor led effects: effects that interact spatially and/or temporally resulting in inter-related effects upon a single receptor. For example, the effect of subsea noise on marine mammals may be greater when multiple sources of impact interact or combine to produce a different or greater effect upon this receptor than when single sources of impact are considered in isolation, or where potential impacts on a key prey resource (e.g. sandeels from multiple impact pathways such as habitat disturbance and underwater noise impacts), results in a greater impact on the receptor species than one impact pathway alone. Receptor led effects might be short term, temporary or transient effects, or incorporate longer term effects.
    1. Within the Offshore EIA Report, assessment of inter-related effects has been undertaken with specific reference to the potential for such effects to arise in relation to receptor groups. The term ‘receptor group’ is used to highlight the fact that the proposed approach to the inter-relationships assessment will, in the main, not assess every individual receptor assessed at the EIA stage, but rather, potentially sensitive groups of receptors. Receptor groups considered and assessed in the Offshore EIA Report include:
  • physical processes;
  • benthic subtidal and intertidal ecology;
  • fish and shellfish ecology;
  • marine mammals;
  • offshore and intertidal ornithology; and
  • commercial fisheries;
  • shipping and navigation;
  • aviation, military and communications;
  • seascape, landscape, visual resources and cultural heritage;
  • infrastructure and other users; and
  • offshore socio-economics and tourism.
    1. Inter-related effects are identified and assessed in volume 2, chapter 20. This chapter provides a descriptive assessment outlining the potential for individual effects to combine, incorporating qualitative and, where reasonably practicable, quantitative assessments, to potentially create additional effects that may be of greater significance than the individual effects acting in isolation.
    2. The approach for assessing the potential inter-related effects on each receptor or receptor group follows the key steps below:
  • review of the topic chapters of the Offshore EIA Report to identify receptors or receptor groups requiring assessment and the likely effects on each receptor or receptor group; and
  • assessment of how individual effects may combine to create inter-related effects on each receptor or receptor group for project lifetime effects and receptor-led effects and conclusion on likely significant inter-related effects.
    1. Where the significance of an effect within the topic-specific assessment has been identified as ‘negligible across all stages of the project’, the assumption has been made that these effects can not contribute to any inter-related effects. These effects will therefore not be included in the inter-related effects assessment as any effect is predicted to be negligible for the Proposed Development over the lifetime of the project.
    2. The inter-related assessment considers only effects from the Proposed Development and not those from other projects, which will be considered in the CEA.
    3. Additional detail on the approach and methodology followed for the assessment of inter-related effects relating to the Proposed Development are provided in volume 2, chapter 20.

 

6.8. References

British Standards Institute (BSI) (2015). Environmental Impact Assessment for Offshore Renewable Energy Projects – Guide. Available at: http://shop.bsigroup.com/upload/271276/PD%206900.pdf. Accessed on: 06 June 2020.

Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) (2012). Guidelines for Data Acquisition to Support Marine Environmental Assessments of Offshore Renewable Energy Projects. Available at: https://tethys.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CEFAS_2012_Eenvironmental_Assessment_Guidance.pdf. Accessed June 2020. Accessed on: 07 June 2020.

Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) (2018). Guidelines for ecological impact assessment in the UK and Ireland: terrestrial, Freshwater, Coastal and Marine. Available at: https://cieem.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Combined-EclA-guidelines-2018-compressed.pdf. Accessed on: 17 September 2021

CIEEM (2019). Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland. Terrestrial, Freshwater, Coastal and Marine. September 2019. Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester.

Highways Agency, Transport Scotland, Welsh Government and the Department for Infrastructure (2008). Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11: Environmental Assessment. Available at: https://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/DMRB/vol11/index.htm. Accessed on: 17 September 2021.

Highways Agency, Transport Scotland, Welsh Government and the Department for Infrastructure (2020). Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB): LA104 – Environmental Assessment and Monitoring. Available at: https://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/search/0f6e0b6a-d08e-4673-8691-cab564d4a60a. Accessed on: 17 September 2021.

HM Government (2019a). The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. Available at: The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (legislation.gov.uk). Accessed on: 20 September 2021.

HM Government (2019b). The Marine Environment (EU Exit) (Scotland) (Amendment) Regulations 2019. Available at: The Marine Environment (EU Exit) (Scotland) (Amendment) Regulations 2019 (legislation.gov.uk). Accessed on: 20 September 2021.

Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) (2015). IEMA Environmental Impact Assessment Guide to Shaping Quality Development. Available at: https://www.iema.net/assets/uploads/iema_guidance_documents_eia_guide_to_shaping_quality_development_v7.pdf. Accessed on: 06 June 2020.

Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) (2016). IEMA Environmental Impact Assessment Guide to Delivering Quality Development. Available at: https://www.bing.com/search?q=IEMA+2016&qs=n&form=QBRE&msbsrank=1_1__0&sp=-1&pq=iema+2016&sc=1-9&sk=&cvid=ECC03FA251704349954C57C9FC533BE2

Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) (2020). IEMA Environmental Impact Assessment Guide to Climate Change Resilience and Adaptation. Available at: https://www.iema.net/resources/reading-room/2020/06/26/iema-eia-guide-to-climate-change-resilience-and-adaptation-2020 Accessed on: 30 June 2022.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007): Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Maclean I.M.D., Wright L.J., Showler D.A. and Rehfisch M.M. (2009). A Review of Assessment Methodologies for Offshore Wind farms (COWRIE METH-08-08). Available at: https://tethys.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Maclean-et-al-2009.pdf. Accessed on: 07 June 2020.

Marine Scotland (2018). Marine Scotland Consenting and Licensing Guidance: For Offshore Wind, Wave and Tidal energy Applications. Available at: https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/consultation-paper/2018/10/marine-scotland-consenting-licensing-manual-offshore-wind-wave-tidal-energy-applications/documents/00542001-pdf/00542001-pdf/govscot%3Adocument/00542001.pdf. Accessed on: 07 June 2020.

Marine Scotland (2022). Berwick Bank Wind Farm: Offshore Scoping Opinion. Available at: Scoping Opinion – Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm | Marine Scotland Information. Accessed: 01 March 2022.

MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) (2020). Marine Life Information Network. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available from: www.marlin.ac.uk. Accessed on: 20 December 2020.

NatureScot (2012). Assessing the Cumulative Impact of Onshore Wind Energy Developments. Available at: https://www.nature.scot/guidance-assessing-cumulative-impact-onshore-wind-energy-developments. Accessed on: 15 November 2020.

NatureScot (2018). A Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment: Guidance for Competent Authorities, Consultees and Others Involved in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process in Scotland. Available at: https://www.nature.scot/handbook-environmental-impact-assessment-guidance-competent-authorities-consultees-and-others. Accessed on: 15 November 2020

Planning Inspectorate (PINS) (2012). Advice Note Nine: Rochdale Envelope. Available online: https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Advice-note-9.-Rochdale-envelope-web.pdf. Accessed on: 15 November 2020.

Planning Inspectorate (PINS) (2015). Advice Note Twelve: Transboundary Impacts. Available online: https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Advice-note-12v2.pdf. Accessed on: 15 November 2020.

Planning Inspectorate (PINS) (2019). Advice Note Seventeen: Cumulative Effects Assessment Relevant to Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects. Available online: https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Advice-note-17V4.pdf. Accessed on: 15 November 2020.

Renewable UK (2013). Cumulative Impact Assessment Guidelines: Guiding Principles for Cumulative Impacts Assessment in Offshore Wind Farms. June 2013. Available online: http://www.nerc.ac.uk/innovation/activities/infrastructure/offshore/cumulative-impact-assessment-guidelines/. Accessed on: 15 November 2020.

SBC (2016). Scottish Borders Council, 2016 - Update of Wind Energy Landscape Capacity and Cumulative Impact Study. November 2016. Available at: Ironside Farrar - Wind Energy Landscape Capacity study (Part 1) | Scottish Borders Council (scotborders.gov.uk). Accessed on: 17 September 2021.

Scottish Government (2021). Marine Scotland Licensing Operations Team: Scoping Opinion for Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm. Available at: https://marine.gov.scot/data/scoping-opinion-berwick-bank-offshore-wind-farm. Accessed on: 17 September 2021.

SSER (2021a). Berwick Bank Wind Farm: Offshore Scoping Report. Available at: https://berwickbank-eia.com/offshore-scoping/. Accessed on: 18 October 2021.

SSER (2022e). Cambois connection Scoping Report.

 

[1] This applies between 12 and 200nm.

[2] Case law (i.e. R v Rochdale MBC ex parte Milne (No1.) [1999] 5 WLUK 67 and R v Rochdale MBC ex parte Milne (No.2) [2000] 7 WLUK 955).

[3] As defined in IEMA (2016)