DOCSLIB.ORG

Galloper Wind Farm Project Environmental Statement - Chapter 11: Offshore Ornithology October 2011 Document Reference – 5.2.11

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Galloper Wind Farm Project Environmental Statement - Chapter 11: Offshore Ornithology October 2011 Document Reference – 5.2.11 Galloper Wind Farm Project Environmental Statement - Chapter 11: Offshore Ornithology October 2011 Document Reference – 5.2.11 Galloper Wind Farm Limited Document title Galloper Wind Farm Project Environmental Statement - Chapter 11: Ornithology Document short title Galloper Wind Farm ES Document Reference 5.2.11 Regulation Reference APFP Regulations, 5(2)(a) Version 4 Status Final Report Date September 2011 Project name Galloper Wind Farm Client Galloper Wind Farm Limited Royal Haskoning 9V3083/R01/303424/Exet Reference Drafted by Jenifer Snowball Checked by Rob Staniland & Peter Gaches Date/initials check RS / PG 27.09.2011 Approved by Martin Budd Date/initials approval MB 25.10.2011 GWFL Approved by Kate Harvey (GWFL) Date/initials approval KH 01.11.2011 - i - CONTENTS Page 11 OFFSHORE ORNITHOLOGY 1 11.1 Introduction 1 11.2 Guidance and Consultation 1 11.3 Methodology 11 11.4 Description of the Existing Environment 42 11.5 Assessment of Impacts - Worst Case Scenario 106 11.6 Assessment of Impacts during the Construction Phase 117 11.7 Assessment of Impacts during the Operational Phase 136 11.8 Potential Impacts during the Decommissioning Phase 176 11.9 Inter-relationships 177 11.10 Cumulative Impacts 179 11.11 Transboundary Effects 211 11.12 Monitoring 211 11.13 Summary 212 11.14 References 238 Technical Appendix 11.A Ornithological Technical Report Galloper Wind Farm ES 9V3083/R01/303424/Exet Final Report - iii - October 2011 11 OFFSHORE ORNITHOLOGY 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 This Chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) describes the existing environment with regard to offshore ornithological interest within the Galloper Wind Farm (GWF) site in the context of the wider regional study areas of the Outer Thames Estuary and southern North Sea. 11.1.2 The assessment serves to characterise the distribution, abundance and behaviour of ornithological species known to occur, or which have been recorded within the study area and wider region through site-specific boat- based and aerial seabird surveys. Through desk-based research, the subsequent assessment presents the potential impacts of construction, operation and decommissioning of the GWF project on the ornithological assemblage present, in particular species of conservation concern. 11.1.3 For the purposes of the Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009, Figures 11.5 and 11.6 taken together with this Chapter, fulfil the requirements of Regulation 5(2)(l) in relation to the effects of the proposed development on offshore ornithology. 11.2 Guidance and Consultation Legislation, policy and guidance 11.2.1 National Policy Statements (NPS) provide the primary basis on which the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) is required to make its decisions. In preparing this Chapter the following NPS’s are of relevance to offshore ornithology: Overarching NPS for Energy (EN-1); and NPS for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3) 11.2.2 The specific assessment requirements for offshore ornithology, as detailed within the NPSs, are repeated in the following paragraphs. Where any part of the NPS has not been followed within this assessment, it is stated within in the ES why the requirement was not deemed relevant or has been met in another manner. 11.2.3 Generic biodiversity considerations are provided within Section 5.3 of EN-1 and re-iterated in Paragraphs 2.6.58 to 2.6.71 of NPS EN-3. The following paragraphs provide detail from NPS EN-3 (June 2011), which contains specific requirements for the assessment of impacts on offshore ornithological species. Included within the stated specific requirements are references to the relevant section of this Chapter, where the concern has been addressed. Galloper Wind Farm ES 9V3083/R01/303424/Exet Final Report Chapter 11 - Page 1 October 2011 11.2.4 In relation to offshore ornithology, Section 2.6.101 of the NPS states that: “Offshore wind farms have the potential for the following effects on ornithology: Collisions with rotating blades; Direct habitat loss; Disturbance from construction activities such as movement of construction/decommissioning vessels and piling; Displacement during the operational phase, resulting in loss of foraging/roosting area; and Impacts on bird flight lines (i.e. barrier effect) and associated energetic expenditure for commuting flights between roosting and foraging areas.” (Sections 16.6 to 16.10). 11.2.5 The assessment requirements for ornithology are set out in Paragraphs 2.6.102 to 2.6.105 states that: 11.2.6 “The scope, effort and methods required for ornithological surveys should have been discussed with the relevant statutory advisor. (Section 11.2). 11.2.7 Relevant data from operational offshore wind farms should be referred to in the applicant’s assessment. (Section 11.3). 11.2.8 It may be appropriate for assessment to include collision risk modelling for certain species of birds. Where necessary, the assessments carried out by applicants should assess collision risk using survey data collected from the site at the pre-application EIA stage. The IPC will want to be satisfied that the collision risk assessment has been conducted to a satisfactory standard having had regard to the advice from the relevant statutory advisor. (Section 11.3 and 11.7). Policy and guidance 11.2.9 The following guidance documents have also been used to inform the assessment of potential impacts on offshore ornithology: Guidance on the Assessment of Effects on the Environment and Cultural Heritage from Marine Renewable Developments. Produced by: The Marine Management Organisation (MMO), Joint Nature Conservation Council (JNCC), Natural England (NE), the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) and Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science (Cefas) (In draft, December, 2010); Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in Britain and Ireland, Marine and Coastal (Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) (2010); Galloper Wind Farm ES 9V3083/R01/303424/Exet Final Report Chapter 11 - Page 2 October 2011 Guidelines for data acquisition to support marine environmental assessments of offshore renewable energy projects. Draft for consultation. Cefas. Report reference: ME5403 – Module 15. Issue date: 10th March 2011; Nature conservation guidance on offshore windfarm development. A Guidance Note on the Implications of the EC Wild Birds and Habitats Directives for Developers; Undertaking Offshore Windfarm Developments (Defra, 2005); and Developing Guidance on Ornithological Cumulative Impact Assessment for Offshore Wind Farm Developers (COWRIE, 2009). Legislation 11.2.10 Many species of seabird are protected under an assortment of national and international legislation, as summarised in Table 11.1. Table 11.1 National and international legislation in relation to offshore avifauna Legislation Protection Details Directive Protection for all species The Directive provides a framework for the 2009/147/EC on of naturally occurring birds conservation and management of, and the conservation in the wild state in Europe. human interactions with, wild birds in of wild birds (The Applies to birds, their Europe. It sets broad objectives for a wide Birds Directive) eggs, nests and habitats. range of activities, although the precise legal mechanisms for their achievement are at the discretion of each Member State. See paragraphs 11.2.15 – 18 for further details. The Wildlife and All wild birds, their nests Offences under the act include the Countryside Act and eggs are protected in intentional killing, injury or taking of any 1981 the UK under this act (a wild bird; intentionally taking or damaging wild bird is defined as any the nest of any wild bird whilst it is in use bird of a species that is or being built; intentionally taking or resident in or is a visitor to destroying the egg of any wild bird and the European Territory of intentionally or recklessly disturbing any any member state in a wild wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is state). nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young. The Countryside Part III of the act contains The Act enables the courts to impose and Rights of measures to strengthen heavier fines and prison sentences for Galloper Wind Farm ES 9V3083/R01/303424/Exet Final Report Chapter 11 - Page 3 October 2011 Legislation Protection Details Way (CRoW) Act the enforcement of the virtually all offences. The act also puts a 2000; species protection duty on all ministers to further the purpose provisions of the Wildlife of conserving biological diversity in and Countryside Act 1981. accordance with the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992 (see the UK Biodiversity Action Plan in the following table entry) The UK The UK BAP does not The UK BAP resulted from the UK’s Biodiversity afford specific legal commitment to the Convention on Action Plan (UK protection for species and Biological Diversity 1992, which came out BAP) habitats but it does of the Rio Earth Summit. highlight many species of conservation concern. Natural Section 40 of the Act This duty extends to all public bodies the Environment and requires all public bodies biodiversity duty of section 74 of the Rural to have regard to CRoW Act, which placed a duty on Communities biodiversity conservation Government and Ministers. The list is used (NERC) Act 2006 when carrying out their to guide decision makers in implementing functions. Section 41 of their duty to have regard to the NERC requires the conservation of biodiversity in England. A Secretary of State to total of 56 habitats and 943 species publish a list of habitats (including birds) are included on the list, and species which are of these are the habitats and species that principle importance for have been identified as requiring the conservation of protection in the UK BAP. biodiversity in England. The Habitats and Birds Directive 11.2.18 The most important wildlife legislation in relation to marine renewable energy and offshore avifauna is Directive 2009/147/EC (The ‘Birds Directive’) on the conservation of wild birds (the codified version of Council Directive 79/409/EEC as amended).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • *** DRAFT ** Sustainable Development and CO2 Capture and Storage
    *** DRAFT ** Sustainable Development and CO2 Capture and Storage A report for UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Prepared by Dr Paul Freund 31 August 2007 Executive Summary The threat of climate change and the importance of fossil fuels in global energy supply have recently stimulated much interest in CO2 capture and storage (CCS). The most important application of CO2 capture would be in power generation, the sector which is responsible for 75% of global CO2 emissions from large stationary industrial sources. Two options for capture are based on well established technology - post-combustion capture using chemical solvent scrubbing would be used in current designs of power stations; pre-combustion capture using physical solvent separation involves a small modification to the design of gasification based systems which are increasingly being considered for future power plants. A third approach, oxyfuel combustion, has not yet been demonstrated at full scale but several pilot plants are under construction. Captured CO2 would be transported by pipeline to storage in geological formations – this might be in disused oil or gas fields or in deep saline aquifers. Use of the CO2 to enhance oil or gas production offers the possibility of generating some income to offset part of the cost of CCS. CCS increases the energy used for power generation by about 25-50% and reduces emissions by about 85%. The levelized cost of electricity generation would be increased by between 40% and 90% depending on the design of the plant and type of fuel. There is sufficient capacity worldwide for CO2 storage to make a substantial contribution to reducing global emissions, although the capacity is not distributed evenly.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Windfarm Load Factors 2006 by Site
    UK Windfarm Load Factors 2006 By Site The most recent date of ROC issue on the Renewable Obligation Certificate Register available from the Ofgem web site included in the analysis was 25th April 2007. The two monthly figures shown are the actual number of ROC's issued and this figure expressed as a percentage of the the ROC's which could be issued if the output was continually at the at the maximum DNC value, without interruption, for the complete month. The cumulative annual figures are included, where the figures given against each location are the actual number of ROC's issued during the year, the possible number of ROC's which could be issued if the output was continually at the maximum DNC value and actual output expressed as a percentage of this figure. This is the annual load (capacity) factor of each location. Most recent ROC issue date 25 April 2007 For year 2006 Annual output by technology Actual Possible % Median of Individual MWh MWh Monthly % Values Biomass 985214 1759199 56.00 55.19 Co-firing of biomass with fossil fuel 2456733 230290215 1.07 0.91 Biomass and waste using ACT 11496 26114 44.02 48.59 Micro hydro 55815 121504 45.94 46.23 Hydro <20 MW DNC 2049389 4977685 41.17 37.68 Landfill gas 4168045 6718018 62.04 63.76 Waste using an ACT 1224 11529 10.62 11.44 Off-shore wind 685819 2503109 27.40 27.18 On-shore wind 3530914 13767395 25.65 26.58 Wind 4216733 16270504 25.92 Sewage gas 333578 655003 50.93 51.91 Wave power 9 1452 0.62 0.56 PV 131 1770 7.40 7.45 Contribution to annual total renewable energy generation Biomass
    [Show full text]
  • Structure, Equipment and Systems for Offshore Wind Farms on the OCS
    Structure, Equipment and Systems for Offshore Wind Farms on the OCS Part 2 of 2 Parts - Commentary pal Author, Houston, Texas Houston, Texas pal Author, Project No. 633, Contract M09PC00015 Prepared for: Minerals Management Service Department of the Interior Dr. Malcolm Sharples, Princi This draft report has not been reviewed by the Minerals Management Service, nor has it been approved for publication. Approval, when given, does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Service, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Offshore : Risk & Technology Consulting Inc. December 2009 MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE CONTRACT Structure, Equipment and Systems for Offshore Wind on the OCS - Commentary 2 MMS Order No. M09PC00015 Structure, Equipment and Systems: Commentary Front Page Acknowledgement– Kuhn M. (2001), Dynamics and design optimisation of OWECS, Institute for Wind Energy, Delft Univ. of Technology TABLE OF CONTENTS Authors’ Note, Disclaimer and Invitation:.......................................................................... 5 1.0 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................... 6 MMS and Alternative Energy Regulation .................................................................... 10 1.1 Existing Standards and Guidance Overview..................................................... 13 1.2 Country Requirements. ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Information Report Section 36 Consent Variation
    ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT SECTION 36 CONSENT VARIATION DAMHEAD CREEK 2 POWER STATION Name Job Title Signature Date Environmental John Bacon / Consultant / February Prepared Associate Director, 2016 Andrew Hepworth Aecom Technical Technical Director, February Kerry Whalley Review Aecom 2016 February Approved Richard Lowe Director, Aecom 2016 AMENDMENT RECORD Issue Date Issued Date Effective Purpose of Issue and Description of Amendment 1.0 January 2016 January 2016 S36 Variation Draft EIR for review 2.0 February 2016 February 2016 S36 Variation Final for Issue DHC2 Environmental Information Report 4-Feb-16 Page 2 of 116 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 9 1.1 Purpose of this Document 10 1.2 Planning history of DHC2 10 1.3 Environmental Assessment 11 2. Description of the Development 15 2.1 Proposed Development 15 2.2 Site Location 16 2.3 Application Site Context 17 2.4 Main Buildings and Plant 18 2.5 Process Description 19 2.6 Operational Information 21 2.7 Environmental Permit 22 2.8 Combined Heat and Power (CHP) 23 3. Legislative Framework 26 4. Status of Pre Commencement Planning Conditions 27 4.1 Operational Noise 27 4.2 Contamination of Watercourses 27 4.3 Ecological Enhancement and Protected Species 27 4.4 Ground Contamination 28 4.5 Landscaping and Creative Conservation 28 4.6 Archaeology 29 4.7 Layout and Design 29 4.8 Green Travel Plan 29 4.9 Construction and Construction Traffic 30 4.8 Other Planning Conditions 30 4.8 Other Planning Consents 30 5. Stakeholder Consultation 31 6. Environmental Appraisal 33 6.1 Methodology 33 6.2 Air Quality 35 6.3 Noise and Vibration 42 6.4 Landscape and Visual Amenity 48 6.5 Ecology 61 6.6 Water Quality 75 6.7 Geology, Hydrology and Land Contamination 82 6.8 Traffic and Infrastructure 93 6.9 Cultural Heritage 98 6.10 Socio-Economics 104 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Medway Local Development Framework
    ATTACHMENT 9 Medway Local Development Framework Statement of Community Involvement January 2012 1 2 Summary This document is a new revised version of the Statement of Community Involvement or SCI for Medway. It sets out how the Council will involve local people in planning and development issues affecting Medway. The Council adopted its original SCI in 2006. Since then there have been further changes to the development planning system and consultation bodies have come and gone. For these reasons it is appropriate to update and refresh it now. It includes a short description of the development planning system and Medway Council’s role. However most of the document describes the methods the Council will use to engage with the public and other stakeholders and it lists the main organisations that have expressed an interest in being involved. Getting involved: There are a number of ways in which you can give us your views, check progress on the preparation of this and other LDF Documents and get involved in planning and development issues: • Telephone: 01634 331629 (Office hours are 9 a.m. – 5 p.m. Monday to Thursday and 9 a.m. – 4.30 p.m. Friday) • Email: [email protected] • Post: Development Policy and Engagement Team, Regeneration, Community and Culture, Medway Council, Gun Wharf, Dock Road, Chatham, Kent ME4 4TR • Website: http://www.medway.gov.uk/ldf . This is our front page and you will find numerous links to published documents, our Limehouse system etc. • Limehouse: This is an online consultation system and we would strongly encourage you to “register” as a user.
    [Show full text]
  • Core Vision November 2009
    The Thames Gateway Core Vision November 2009 Sir Terry Farrell The purpose of the Core Vision… The Core The Core The Core Vision: Vision: Vision: ● to develop a visual ● refreshes the ● supports characterisation Thames Gateway investment plans (based on the narrative Parklands Model) ● helps inform ● shapes the future policy delivery strategy ● supports project delivery ● commissioned by the HCA / CLG The key questions… • What is the Thames Gateway’s role and what is its future? • Why should Government continue to support the Thames Gateway? Wealth and quality of life is place-based “Place is actually more important to the world economy than ever before …” Richard Florida London’s wealth enables the Greater South East to compete globally Growth in London and the Greater South East is critical to the UK’s future prosperity 1 The highest return on investment for public and private sectors in the UK 2 The highest GVA per capita in the UK £30k £20k £10k East of England Rest of UK South East £0k London Table comparing GVA per capita in the UK Thames Gateway has the region’s greatest potential… The largest designated The most available land and a 1 growth area in the region 2 willingness for sustainable growth 1 Milton Keynes and South Midlands Basildon 2 London Stansted and Cambridge East London 3 Thames Gateway Kent 4 Ashford Thameside Medway ● Immediately adjacent to London ● 20% of the Greater South East’s brownfield land ● A critical part of the London economy – London’s engine ● in only 3% of the Greater South room East Region …to deliver
    [Show full text]
  • Local. International
    Andrew Annual Report Part I/II 2008 Company Report Laura Jacob Local. International. Peter 2008 Company Report E.ON Olga Eric Sarah Michael Lewis Sven Monica Financial Calendar Dimitrii May 6, 2009 2009 Annual Shareholders Meeting May 7, 2009 Dividend Payout May 13, 2009 Interim Report: January – March 2009 August 12, 2009 Interim Report: January – June 2009 November 11, 2009 Interim Report: January – September 2009 March 10, 2010 Release of 2009 Annual Report Isabelle May 6, 2010 2010 Annual Shareholders Meeting May 7, 2010 Dividend Payout May 11, 2010 Interim Report: January – March 2010 August 11, 2010 Interim Report: January – June 2010 November 10, 2010 Interim Report: January – September 2010 International. It sounds far away. Big. Impersonal. Unreachable. Actually, the opposite is true. International is everywhere. In Madrid and in Düsseldorf. Off the coast of Scotland. In Malmö. In Datteln. In Bratislava. In Livorno Ferraris. At OGK-4 in Moscow. Why? Because everything we do locally benefi ts from the way we work together across our international organization. Because that’s how we learn from each other, create synergies, and fi nd the best solutions. For the environment. For a reliable and secure supply of energy. For our employees and our investors. But especially for our customers. At E.ON, there are countless examples of this kind of collaboration. Our 2008 Company Report introduces you to a few of them. We want you to see how local international can be. 6 Smart Product Workshop: part of our groupwide Smart Metering Program 11 Employee opinion survey: an important management and communications tool 17 R&D Steering Group meets in the United Kingdom 25 Protective clothing that meets uniform standards 2 Our Company.
    [Show full text]
  • After the Coal Rush:Layout 1.Qxd
    WWW.IPPR.ORG AftertheCoalRush: Assessingpolicyoptionsforcoal-fired electricitygeneration byMatthewLockwood July2008 ©ippr2008 InstituteforPublicPolicyResearch Challengingideas– Changingpolicy 2 ippr|AftertheCoalRush:Assessingpolicyoptionsforcoal-firedelectricitygeneration Contents Aboutippr........................................................................................................................................... 3 Abouttheauthor ................................................................................................................................ 3 Acknowledgements.............................................................................................................................. 3 Abbreviationsandacronyms................................................................................................................ 4 Executivesummary .............................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 10 1.Coal-firedpowergenerationintheUK:anoverview .................................................................... 12 2.Whyenergycompanieswanttobuildnewcoal-firedpowerstations........................................... 15 3.Theroleofcarbonpricing............................................................................................................. 24 4.Theroleofthe2020renewableenergytarget.............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Low Cost Systems for Co-Utilisation of Biomass in Large Power Plant
    DEVELOPMENT OF LOW COST SYSTEMS FOR CO-UTILISATION OF BIOMASS IN LARGE POWER PLANT MID TERM REVIEW REPORT B/U1/00726/00/00 URN 03/1440 Contractor Mitsui Babcock Technology and Engineering Prepared by W R Livingston The work described in this report was carried out under contract as part of the DTI New and Renewable Energy Programme, which is managed by Future Energy Solutions. The views and judgements expressed in this report are those of the contractor and do not necessarily reflect those of the DTI or Future Energy Solutions. First Published 2003 © Crown Copyright 2003 dti EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There has been a fairly dramatic increase over the past two years in the interest in the co­ firing of biomass materials with coal in the large coal-fired power plants in Britain, in response to the significant additional incomes available from the generation of Renewables Obligation Certificates. All of the operators of coal-fired plants have registered with Ofgem, and by the end of 2003, it is anticipated that most, if not all, of the coal-fired power plants in Britain will have the capability to co-fire biomass materials. The major constraint on co-firing activities will be the availability of suitable supplies of biomass materials at acceptable delivered fuel prices. The route to fully commercial operation of a coal-fired station on biomass co-firing involves a number of stages, viz: • The securing of the biomass fuel supply, • The preparation of the application to the Environment Agency/SEPA for a Variation to the Authorisation under Section 11 of the EPA, the definition of the test burn requirements and obtaining agreement to hold the test burn from the EA/SEPA, • The performance and reportage of the test burn, and • The final agreement from the Environment Agency/SEPA on the variation to the Authorisation, and proceeding to commercial operation on co-firing.
    [Show full text]
  • (For Official Use Only) PUBLIC PETITION NO. PE1188 Should You Wish to Submit a Public Petition for Consideration by the Public P
    (For official use only) PUBLIC PETITION NO. PE1188 Should you wish to submit a public petition for consideration by the Public Petitions Committee please refer to the guidance leaflet How to submit a public petition and the Guidance Notes at the back of this form. 1. NAME OF PRINCIPAL PETITIONER Nick Dekker 2. TEXT OF PETITION Nick Dekker calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to investigate the circumstances whereby it agreed that 60 hydro-power stations could be accredited for subsidy under the Renewables Obligation scheme and that generation capacity could be cut to below the 20megawatt qualification threshold at others to enable accreditation and whether, in the interests of electricity consumers, it will rescind these accreditations. 3. ACTION TAKEN TO RESOLVE ISSUES OF CONCERN BEFORE SUBMITTING THE PETITION I have contacted and have been in correspondence with AuditScotland, OFGEM, Scottish & Southern Energy PLC and ScottishPower PLC. Alex Neil MSP also corresponded with Scottish & Southern Energy. 4. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION See— “The war on climate change – A licence to print money?” “Subsidies and Subterfuge – Hydro-power and the Renewables Obligation” (also on www.swap.org.uk) “ROCs earned by Alcan, SSE and ScottishPower from 'old build' hydro, April 2002 to December 2007” (a report by the petitioners); “Renewable Energy Data for Scotland (Hydro), May 2008” Correspondence generally pertinent to the petition but esp to Question 3 OFGEM’s “Annual Reports on the Renewables Obligation” 2004 to 2008; Press releases and other material referred to in “The war on climate change – a licence to print money?” and elsewhere 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of Environmental Impacts of Offshore Wind Energy
    Concerted action for offshore wind energy deployment (COD) Overview of Environmental Impacts of Offshore Wind energy Authors: E.M. Roth L.A. Verhoef M.W.L. Dingenouts EC Contract: NNE5-2001-00633 Novem contract number: 2002-03-01-03-002 New-Energy-works Project number: N0335 September 2004 Neither the Consortium of the Concerted Action for Offshore Wind Energy Deployment, nor any person acting on its behalf: a. makes any warranty or representation, express or implied with respect to the information contained in this publication; b. assumes any liability with respect to the use of, or damages resulting from this information. COD Overview of Environmental Impacts of Offshore Wind energy NNE5-2001-00633 Index 1 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 3 1.1 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 QUESTIONS ADDRESSED ..................................................................................................... 3 1.3 STRUCTURE OF THE DATABASE ............................................................................................ 3 1.4 METHODOLOGY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT APPLIED TO OFFSHORE PROJECTS 6 1.5 LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 7 2 WHAT KINDS OF STUDIES HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN AND WHICH ISSUES HAVE BEEN STUDIED? .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Uniper UK Limited (Formerly E.ON UK) Have Not Undertaken Any Operations in Zone 5 Since the Environmental Permit Was Issued
    Application SCR evaluation template Name of activity, address and NGR Kingsnorth Power Station Hoo PO Box 15 Rochester Kent ME3 9LD Centre of the site is at NG Ref. TQ 8115 7203 Document reference of application SCR Partial Surrender Application for Kingsnorth Power Station 09/12/2019 Ground Investigation Interpretative Report Kingsnorth Power Station On Behalf of E.ON UK Limited Date: May 2014 Ref: JER5486 JER5981 RPS Validation report for Coal Stock 131017 Date and version of application SCR N/A 1.0 Site details Has the applicant provided the following information as required by the application SCR template? Site plans showing site layout, drainage, surfacing, receptors, sources of emissions/releases and monitoring points NA. This is an application for Surrender 2.0 Condition of the land at permit issue To be completed by GWCL officers (Receptor) Has the applicant provided the following information as required by the application SCR template? a) Environmental setting including geology, hydrogeology and surface waters b) Pollution history including: pollution incidents that may have affected land historical land-uses and associated contaminants visual/olfactory evidence of existing contamination evidence of damage to existing pollution prevention measures c) Evidence of historic contamination (i.e. historical site investigation, assessment, remediation and verification reports (where available) d) Has the applicant chosen to collect baseline reference data? Condition of Land at the Point of Permit Issue The environmental setting is
    [Show full text]