Polenergia Bałtyk II Sp. z o.o.
The pre-investment monitoring of birds
flying over the area of the offshore wind
farm Bałtyk Środkowy II
Final report with impact assessment for the variant
chosen for realisation and rational alternative
This report has been prepared under the DHI Business Management System certified by Bureau Veritas to comply with ISO 9001 (Quality Management)
The pre-investment monitoring of birds
flying over the area of the offshore wind
farm Bałtyk Środkowy II
Final report with impact assessment for three wind
farm variants
Prepared for
Polenergia Bałtyk II Sp. z o.o.
Represented by
Ms. Marta Porzuczek
Photo by Julius Morkūnas
Project manager Ramūnas Žydelis;
Authors Ramūnas Žydelis;
Henrik Skov Maj Høigaard Holst Stefan Heinänen
Quality supervisor Frank Thomsen, Andreas Brogaard Buhl
Project number 38800051-5 Approval date 11 December 2015
Revision Final 4.0
CONTENTS
1
Non-technical summary ... 1
1.1 Existing anthropogenic pressures ... 1
1.2 ‘Variant zero’ analysis ... 1
1.3 Methodology of the environmental impact assessment... 2
1.4 Potential impacts of the offshore wind farm ... 3
1.5 Species being subject to the environmental impact assessment ... 4
1.6 Environmental impact assessment ... 4
1.7 Cumulative impacts... 6
1.8 Natura 2000 Assessment ... 6
1.9 Transboundary impacts ... 7
1.10 Monitoring proposal ... 8
1.11 Technical deficiencies and gaps in the current knowledge ... 8
2
Introduction... 10
3
Description of the planned project ... 11
3.1 Basic parameters of the considered variants of the project ... 12
3.2 Accumulation of impacts from different projects in the described area ... 12
3.2.1 Offshore wind farms ... 13
3.2.2 Installations of oil and gas fields and exploration areas ... 15
3.2.3 Pipelines ... 16
3.2.4 Mining ... 16
4
Existing anthropogenic pressures ... 17
4.1 Fishing ... 17 4.2 Eutrophication ... 17 4.3 Pollution ... 18 4.4 Shipping ... 18 4.5 Hunting ... 19 4.6 Climate change ... 20
5
‘Variant zero’ analysis ... 21
6
Description of methodology of the environmental impact assessment ... 23
6.1 Environmental impact assessment preparatory activities ... 23
6.1.1 Identification / definition of the scope of assessment ... 23
6.1.2 Identification of impacts ... 24
6.2 Environmental impact assessment ... 24
6.2.1 Quantifying the subjects of an impact (natural resources) ... 24
6.2.2 Identifying characteristic and type of the impact ... 26
6.2.3 Identifying scale of the impact [also called “Impact magnitude”] ... 26
6.2.4 Significance of the impact ... 29
6.2.5 The unexpected impacts ... 31
6.3 Evaluation of the cumulative impacts ... 31
6.4 Evaluation of the transboundary impacts ... 33
6.5 Evaluation of the related impacts ... 33
6.6 Specific assessment methods for particular pressures ... 35
6.6.2 Estimating bird collision risk ... 39
6.6.3 Assessing barrier effects on birds ... 45
7
Potential impacts of the offshore wind farm ... 49
7.1 Construction phase ... 49
7.2 Operation phase... 50
7.3 Decommissioning phase ... 51
8
Species being subject to the environmental impact assessment ... 53
8.1 Staging birds ... 53
8.2 Migrating birds... 55
9
Environmental impact assessment ... 59
9.1 Construction phase ... 59
9.1.1 Staging birds: Habitat loss from footprint ... 59
9.1.2 Staging birds: Habitat change from sediment spill... 59
9.1.3 Staging birds: Reduction of water transparency ... 60
9.1.4 Staging birds: Disturbance from construction vessels ... 60
9.1.5 Staging birds: Barrier from construction vessels ... 72
9.1.6 Staging birds: Collision with construction vessels ... 72
9.1.7 Migrating birds: Barrier from construction vessels ... 72
9.1.8 Migrating birds: Collision with construction vessels ... 73
9.1.9 Mitigation measures for minimizing impacts during construction ... 81
9.1.10 Cumulative impacts during the construction phase ... 81
9.2 Operation phase... 82
9.2.1 Staging birds: Habitat loss and habitat change ... 82
9.2.2 Staging birds: Hydrographical changes ... 83
9.2.3 Staging birds: Disturbance / habitat displacement... 83
9.2.4 Staging birds: Barrier effect from the wind farm ... 89
9.2.5 Staging birds: collision risk ... 89
9.2.6 Migrating birds... 99
9.2.7 Mitigation measures for minimizing impacts during operation ... 115
9.2.8 Cumulative impacts during the operation phase ... 117
9.3 Decommissioning phase ... 126
9.3.1 Cumulative impacts during the decommissioning phase ... 126
9.4 Unexpected impacts ... 134
10
Impact assessment of the BŚ II project on integrity, coherence and subject
of Natura 2000 sites ... 135
10.1 Natura 2000 screening ... 136
10.1.1 Migrating birds... 136
10.1.2 Staging birds ... 137
10.1.3 Sites included in the screening ... 137
10.1.4 List of species recorded during monitoring and living in closely situated Natura 2000 sites ... 139
10.1.5 Ławica Słupska ... 140
10.1.6 Przybrzeżne wody Bałtyku ... 142
10.1.7 Pobrzeże Słowińskie ... 144
10.2 Natura 2000 Appropriate Assessment ... 146
10.2.1 Ławica Słupska ... 147
10.2.2 Przybrzeżne wody Bałtyku ... 152
11
Associated impacts ... 159
12
Transboundary impacts ... 161
13
Monitoring proposal ... 163
14
Summary and conclusions ... 165
15
Technical deficiencies and gaps in the current knowledge ... 173
16
References ... 175
List of figures……….. 183
List of tables……… 184
Appendix A: Methodological details of species distribution modelling...……… A1
Appendix B: collision risk calculations based on band (2012) model………. B1
Glossary
Seaducks – ducks of tribe Mergini Dabbling ducks – ducks of genus Anas Diving ducks – ducks of genus Aythya
Abbreviations
AA – Appropriate Assessment
AIC - Akaike Information Criterion BŚ II – Bałtyk Środkowy II
BP - Bałtyk Polnocny
EEZ – Exclusive Economic Zone
EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment
ESW – Effective Strip Width (Half-width of the survey transect under the distance detection curve)
GAM - Generalized Additive Model HELCOM – Helsinki Commission
IUCN – International Union for Conservation of Nature NATURA 2000 – EU network of protected areas OWF – Offshore Wind Farm
PBR - Potential Biological Removal
PSZW - License for construction and use of the artificial islands, installations and devices in the Polish maritime areas
SAC/SCIs – EU Habitats Directive Special Areas of Conservation SPA – EC Special Protection Area
1
Non-technical summary
This environmental impact assessment of the planned offshore wind farm “Bałtyk Środkowy II” on staging and migrating birds is based on the results from a preconstruction monitoring programme conducted in the area in 2012-2014. During the monitoring programme the
Pomarinus group surveyed staging waterbirds during a period of 17 months using ship surveys, while DHI with partners conducted monitoring of migrating birds from anchored ships during the spring and autumn bird migration seasons of 2013.
1.1
Existing anthropogenic pressures
In the assessment by HELCOM (2010) of the Arkona Basin and the Bornholm Basin, which are in proximity to the Słupsk Bank area, the following most important anthropogenic pressures (not necessarily the most important determinants of bird distribution) were listed: extraction of species by bottom trawling, gillnet fishery, surface and mid-water trawling and fishing with coastal stationary gear; input of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous) and heavy metals (lead and cadmium); disturbance of the seabed by bottom trawling; underwater noise from shipping activities; and riverine input of organic matter. Of these fishing, eutrophication, pollution and shipping are important pressures for marine birds. Furthermore, hunting and climate change are also existing anthropogenic pressures affecting birds in the Baltic Sea.
Although the project area in the south-eastern part of the Baltic Sea within the Polish EEZ is situated in an area of currently moderate anthropogenic pressure, a number of projects and plans exist for the region, which potentially can have a cumulative impact together with impacts from BŚ II. Between 2011 and 2013 a large number of applications for offshore wind farms within the Polish EEZ have been submitted, and in the Swedish EEZ the offshore wind farm Södra Midsjöbanken is planned close to the Polish EEZ. LOTOS Petrobaltic holds eight
concessions for exploration and appraisal within the Baltic Sea and has concessions for oil and gas exploration and production from fields B3, B4, B6, and B8. Currently, there is production from field B3 and field B8 is undergoing the appraisal before production commences. In the southern part of the Baltic Sea near Słupsk Bank there are three platforms: one drilling rig (Petrobaltic) and two production rigs (Baltic Beta and PG-1). SwePol link is a high voltage power submarine cable between Poland and Sweden. Additionally, within the Słupsk Bank there are three deposits of sand and gravel with present and planned excavation activities.
1.2
‘Variant zero’ analysis
An analysis of “Variant zero” was undertaken, which describes three future scenarios where BŚ II has not been constructed; the first one assumes that offshore wind energy sector will not be developed in the Polish marine area. Under this scenario there will be no additional impacts on the environment, and bird populations continue developing being influenced by the current pressures (fishery, pollution, hunting, marine traffic) and current and future marine policies for management of marine environment. Current population trends indicate that some marine bird species are declining (seaducks, divers) while others are stable or increasing (gulls, cormorants, auks). It is not clear whether currently declining trends will be reversed via conservation and management actions.
The second scenario assumes that all other offshore wind farms will be developed, except the BŚ II. The possible impacts related to habitat displacement, barrier effect and collisions from the planned offshore wind farms on waterbirds are not expected to alter the baseline conditions significantly. However, reductions in available habitat may cause densities of waterbirds to increase locally near BŚ II, and barrier effects and collisions from these wind farms could cause
densities of migrating waterbirds at BŚ II to be reduced. Even in the presence of the above-mentioned impacts from other planned offshore wind farms near BŚ II, other pressures (e.g., fisheries, shipping) may constitute relatively large effects on waterbird populations in the Polish EEZ. The BŚ II is an important area for some staging bird species, particularly Long-tailed Duck, but is likely no different from other wind farms for migrating birds. Therefore, not building the BŚ II wind farm would have measurable benefits for Long-tailed Ducks, though cumulative effects would be only slightly smaller.
The third scenario assumes that wind energy will not be developed in the Polish marine area, but mining industry will. Mining of seabed sediments would disturb and displace resident birds due to work of dredging and transport vessels. Mining activities would destroy benthic
communities and subsequently food resources of benthivorous birds directly in the mining areas. Also, mining activities would cause sediment plumes, which could affect benthic communities in the larger area and influence foraging ability of bird species, which use vision for finding and capturing their prey. Disturbance, loss of benthic habitats and reduced visibility would primarily affect seaducks, divers and auks. The extent and significance of these impacts will highly depend on specific areas being mined, their size, mining work intensity and released sediment types and volumes. Staging gulls, terns and cormorants are unlikely to experience significant impacts. Impacts on migrating birds will be mostly negligible, but occasional collisions of low numbers will happen, particularly of nocturnally migrating passerines, some of which might be attracted by lights.
1.3
Methodology of the environmental impact assessment
The methodology for the assessment of impacts on birds followed the methodology for three variants of wind farm design assigning each subject of the impact to one of four values (low, medium, high or very high). For birds the assessment was as far as possible undertaken based on quantitative data. Accordingly, conservation and numeric criteria adapted in environmental impact assessments (following the Ramsar Convention and BirdLife International
recommendations) were applied to aid the classification of bird species to the importance categories. For the ornithological impact assessment, definitions of categories of the scale of impact exposure were extended for clarity and consistency by ascribing them specific values indicating the percentage of affected relevant population on the basis of the 1% criterion used for identifying concentrations of waterbirds of international importance. Classification of Scale of the impact (also termed “Impact magnitude”, which is used further in the report to avoid
confusion with similar term “Scale of exposure”) was assigned to one of five categories. Significance of individual impacts was evaluated taking into account the significance of the resource/subject of an impact and the size of the impact. Depending on the relationship between the significance of a resource/subject of an impact and the scope of the impact, each of the impacts was classified into one of six categories, as: no changes, negligible, low, moderate, high or very high. As a part of the environmental impact assessment, the residual significance of impacts (after implementing mitigation of negative impacts) was evaluated. If significant impacts were identified for bird species, an additional analysis was conducted aiming to verify whether application of formal assessment criteria were biologically sensible. Likely additional analysis included literature review, bioenergetic calculations and habitat modelling.
A number of specific analyses were carried out to make it possible to quantify various types of impacts on birds. Bird displacement from the wind farm was assumed being similar for the construction, operation and decommissioning phases. Numbers of displaced birds were
assessed for the 2 different zones: footprint area of the wind farm and 2 km buffer outside of the wind farm. The 2 km buffer area was chosen as representing potential impact area based on observed displacement effects of seabird at the existing wind farms. Predictive distribution modelling was applied for the two most prevalent seaduck species in the offshore waters of Polish EEZ, i.e. Long-tailed Duck and Velvet Scoter.
To be able to assess the species-specific collision risk for staging and migrating birds in the study area the widely used Band collision risk model (Band 2012) was applied. In this study the extended model was used for the three seaduck species for which we have enough data to define reliable flight height frequency distributions with intervals of 1 m. For all other species the “basic Band model” has been used and both models have been fitted in accordance with the guidelines (Band 2012). The collision calculations were made for three different wind farm variants and two turbine types in each: variant 1 (200 turbines with turbine tower height of 120 m
or 175 m and rotor diameter of 200 m), variant 2 (80 turbines with turbine tower height of 145 m or 175 m and rotor diameter of 250 m) and variant 3 (120 turbines with turbine tower height of
145 m or 175 m and rotor diameter of 250 m). The main difference between wind farm variants is the number of turbines involved and the height of the rotor above water level.
Barrier effects on movements and long-distance migration of birds resulting in a change of migration or flight routes and altitudes and thus in energetic costs to the birds have been well-described from existing offshore wind farms. In order to quantify these effects from BŚ II the migration paths were modified analytically assuming that birds perceive the BŚ II area as a barrier and deflect the wind farm at 1-2 km distance, and then the overall energetic cost of migration could be estimated with the additional costs incurred because of the wind farm. The energetic costs were modelled using Flight 1.24, which estimates the costs of flight using aerodynamic principles.
As collisions of birds with offshore turbines result in loss of individuals from affected populations the risk exists that project impacts and/or cumulative impacts will be at a level which will affect populations in NATURA 2000 sites (EC Special Protection Areas) of surrounding countries designated for the bird species concerned. In such a case there is a risk that the project significantly affects an International Nature Conservation designation, and according to EU Habitat Regulation Assessment (EU Habitats Directive 1992) an Appropriate Assessment has to be undertaken.
1.4
Potential impacts of the offshore wind farm
Impacts on birds during the construction, operation and decommissioning of an offshore wind farm are related to a wide range of structures, activities and exposures. The impacts assessed for birds in relation to BŚ II have been chosen on the basis of the experience from existing EIAs related to offshore wind farms. During the construction and decommissioning phases the following impacts on birds have been assessed:
Habitat loss from footprint of wind turbines
Habitat change from sediment spill
Reduction of water transparency
Disturbance from construction vessels
Barrier from construction vessels
Collision with construction vessels
During the operation phase the following impacts on birds have been assessed:
Habitat loss and habitat change
Hydrographical changes
Barrier effect from the BŚ II
Collision risk
1.5
Species being subject to the environmental impact assessment
The impact assessment was conducted on selected bird species using their conservation status and/or abundance as criteria for inclusion. International (IUCN), European (Annex I of EU Birds Directive, SPEC categories according to BirdLife International) and nationally protected bird species were considered. In total 13 staging bird species and 13 migrating bird species/species groups were selected and considered in the assessment.
1.6
Environmental impact assessment
Construction phase
The “Bałtyk Środkowy II” area represents an important site for staging Long-tailed Ducks, hosting relatively high numbers of this species by only low to moderate densities of others. The most abundant species in the area were Long-tailed Duck and Herring Gull. It is expected that the majority of staging birds, except gulls and cormorants, will be displaced from the wind farm area during the construction period because of disturbance from construction vessels, structures and associated works. This displacement, which will reduce the relative importance of the impact from habitat loss within the ‘footprint’ of the wind farm, will affect only small numbers of birds for most species and will be insignificant on their populations during the construction period. The impact magnitude of the anticipated displacement of Long-tailed Ducks will be moderate with an average of 6,038 individuals displaced during the wintering period, which accounts for 0.38% of the biogeographical population and is assessed as low impact significance during the construction phase. It is assumed that displacement effect will be the same for either of the considered wind farm variants.
Sediment dispersal caused by the earth works will only result in little deposition of sand, or less than 3.5 mm in the project area (DHI 2015a), and so smothering of mussels will only be at a level which does not affect their survival under any of the considered wind farm design scenarios. Hence, impacts on the food supply of benthic-feeding waterbirds will be negligible. The construction of the BŚ II wind farm using gravity foundations is assessed to have
insignificant impacts on changes of water transparency and the foraging conditions for diving waterbirds, as sediment spill and dispersal as concentrations of suspended sediment will not exceed 35 mg/l inside the wind farm and 10 mg/l outside the wind farm, the latter being within the range of the natural variation of the background concentration in this area (DHI 2015a). Local decrease of water transparency inside the wind farm area will be short-lived and the impact of that will be superseded by more pervasive impact due to disturbance, which will cause displacement of birds. The impact of the barrier effect from the construction vessels and collision with construction vessels is expected to be low to negligible for staging bird species at the BŚ II area.
With respect to migrating birds, barrier effects caused by construction vessels and structures are assessed as negligible during the construction phase, as the detour will constitute only a small fraction of the overall migration route and therefore the additional energetic costs will be very small. Collisions of birds with construction vessels are assessed to be negligible to low as the impact of construction vessels would be limited to a relatively small area at any time.
For reducing impacts on the most affected species, the Long-tailed Duck, during the construction period of BŚ II, the proposed mitigation measures include conducting the
construction works during the period that does not overlap with species presence, i.e. from May to October.
Operation phase
During the operation phase of the wind farm, it is anticipated that sensitive species (divers, seaducks and auks) will be mostly displaced from the wind farm area, or their densities will be greatly reduced. Because the area is important for the Long-tailed Duck, the overall number of affected individuals will be moderate (6,038 birds during average winter season) accounting for 0.38% of the overall population. Therefore, impact significance on this highly protected species is assessed as moderate. Displacement of other species will be low due to their generally low densities in the BŚ II area. Some resident (staging) birds are expected to collide with wind turbines, and estimated numbers of potential collisions are low for the majority of the species except for gulls. Gulls are not behaviourally sensitive to wind farms and often use them; therefore, they are at higher collision risk than other birds. Assuming 99% avoidance rate, estimates suggest that Herring Gull collisions will range between 141 – 1,372 birds per year depending on the wind farm variant, the number of collisions being lowest for the variant 2 with high turbine towers (175 m) and number of collision being highest for the variant 1 with low turbine tower (120 m). Yet, estimated collision impact for either of the design variants is assessed as being low for the large population of this species. Finally, staging birds which perceive wind farms or associated shipping activities as an obstacle, will experience a barrier effect as they will have to fly around or above the wind farm if it will be in their flight course. Additional flight distance will increase energetic costs of this activity, but it was concluded that additive energetic expenses will be negligible considering the overall daily energy budget of waterbirds.
Migratory birds that fly over the Baltic Sea are widely dispersed in a broad front and therefore also cross the BŚ II area in spring and autumn. The offshore wind farm may affect migrating birds by causing barrier effect and collision risk during the entire operation stage of the wind farm. Barrier effect is a low intensity impact to all assessed bird species, as migrating birds can fly around or above the wind farm (or construction ships) with little additive energetic costs and hence the barrier effect is judged as low or negligible for all species. Some migrating bird species are expected to occasionally collide with wind turbines during the operation phase, however impact is expected to be negligible or low for all assessed bird species. The collision risk assessment for Common Cranes received special attention in this EIA report as relatively large numbers of this species were found migrating over Polish EEZ and roughly half of the birds fly at rotor altitude. Several collision risk scenarios of cranes have been considered and the scenario of 98% overall avoidance rate was used to minimise the risk of either over- or under-estimating collision impacts. This yielded estimate of zero Common Crane collisions with the BŚ II wind farm considering only the bird passage that was registered during the monitoring campaign at this wind farm. However, if crane migration was actually higher, as observed elsewhere in Polish EEZ, the collision estimates could range into a few tens of birds.
Nevertheless, even such level of mortality would have low impact on this species. For geese, another group of waterbirds which pass the BŚ II area in relatively high numbers, the estimated annual number of collisions ranged between 4-11 birds depending on wind farm variant and assuming 99% overall avoidance rate. However, similarly as with Common Cranes, additional evidence suggest that geese migration could be substantially higher in the Polish EEZ than registered during the monitoring surveys at BŚ II, and possible collision risk could be several times higher than estimated. Yet, even the higher number of collisions would still be assessed as resulting in low impact significance because of large sizes of affected biogeographic geese populations.
For the assessment, the densities of Long-tailed Ducks were averaged over two winter seasons to rule out that chance events such as occasionally high numbers of birds influence the final scoring too much. However, since densities can be high on occasion and consequently the numbers of affected birds are being high as well, a reduction of potential impacts implementing the proposed mitigation measure should be encouraged.In order to reduce the displacement of Long-tailed Ducks, a mitigation scenario was assessed where wind turbines are only built in the part of the BŚ II area. Implementing this scenario would reduce bird displacement by about 32% Such reduction would still be assessed as having moderate impact, but would affect fewer birds and increase distance between the protected area SPA Ławica Słupska and the BŚ II wind farm.
Decommissioning phase
Impacts on birds during the decommissioning phase are expected to be similar to the impacts as assessed for the construction phase for both staging and migrating birds. Because the course of construction works and scheduling during the decommissioning phase is unknown yet, the assessment of possible impacts on birds is analogous with that presented for the construction phase. Accordingly, the impact on all species during the decommissioning phase is assessed as negligible or low.
1.7
Cumulative impacts
Cumulative impacts were assessed considering not only the “Bałtyk Środkowy II” wind farm, but also other planned wind farms in the region (OWF Baltic II, OWF Bałtyk Środkowy III, OWF Baltica 1, OWF Baltica 2, OWF Baltica 3, C-Wind, OWF Bałtyk Północny, OWF Baltic Power and OWF Södra Midsjöbanken) as well as oil and gas concessions. While substantial
cumulative impacts are not expected during the construction phase, relatively large impacts are assessed during the operation phase of all wind farms. Estimated displacement effects suggest that if all projects are realised, nearly 50,000 Long-tailed Ducks and 400 Velvet Scoters would be displaced from their habitats, with the impact for Long-tailed Duck being rated as very high because the number of displaced birds represents 3% of the total bio-geographic population. In spite of the relatively large number of Herring Gulls estimated to be killed cumulatively due to collisions with all wind farm projects, all impacts are assessed as low on account of the size of the biogeographic population of the species. Cumulative Long-tailed Duck collisions using the most pessimistic wind farm design variant 1 would reach 324, geese collisions – up to 148 birds and Eurasian Wigeon collision – up to 122 birds. Collisions of other assessed staging and migrating bird species would include only single individuals. It is therefore assessed that cumulative collision risk would have negligible to low impact significance depending on species importance.
It should be noted, however, that cumulative collision numbers for migrating geese and cranes presented in the report could be underestimated, because only low numbers of these birds were recorded at BŚ II during the dedicated baseline monitoring programme in autumn 2013 and monitoring data was used in calculations. At the same time other observations suggest that more intensive migration of these species took place during the same period over Polish offshore waters and thus these species might have also crossed the BŚ II area, but were not detected during the dedicated monitoring campaign. Bearing this uncertainty in mind and serious lack of knowledge about behavioural reaction of Common Cranes to offshore wind farms, it is very important that data on crane behaviour is collected at the existing offshore wind farms (e.g., EnBW Baltic 2 in Krieger’s Flak area) and collision estimates reconsidered for the BŚ II if new information yields different knowledge than the assumptions used.
With respect to cumulative barrier effects the modelling results show that even with detour around several wind farms the increase in the overall migration distance and associated energetic costs would be very low and the associated cumulative impact would be negligible to low for all assessed migrating bird species.
Cumulative barrier effect is assessed being negligible to low for the majority of staging waterbirds species; low to moderate for auk species (Razorbill, Common Guillemot and Black Guillemot) and moderate to high for the most abundant species, the Long-tailed Duck.
1.8
Natura 2000 Assessment
For staging birds the Natura 2000 screening showed that a large impact on wintering bird species listed on the designation basis cannot be excluded for PLC990001 - Ławica Słupska, PLC990002 - Przybrzeżne wody Bałtyku and PLB220003 Pobrzeże Słowińskie. Hence an
appropriate assessment was prepared for these sites occurring within the 50 km range from BŚ II. The impacts on staging Long-tailed Ducks on one of these sites, Ławica Słupska, was assessed to be moderate but considering the assumed high capacity of the SPA to
accommodate the displaced birds and naturally occurring high fluctuation in numbers it was concluded that building the BŚ II wind farm would not cause deterioration of species for which the site was designated. This conclusion is the same for either of the considered wind farm design variants. Hence the project would not compromise the conservation objectives of the Natura 2000 site Ławica Słupska. If the proposed mitigation is implemented, the displacement of Long-tailed Ducks would be lower and also the gap between the SPA and the wind farm area would be larger. The main vector of impact on Long-tailed Ducks is caused by disturbance / habitat displacement, which affects the Natura 2000 site in two ways: (1) some birds will be directly displaced from part of Ławica Słupska that is located closest to the wind farm, and (2) moderate number of birds displaced from BŚ II will most likely resettle to Ławica Słupska, which is the nearest highly suitable habitat, and these relocated birds will increase densities of the species, which subsequently might induce density-dependence effects resulting in resource overexploitation and behavioural interference. Nevertheless, it was assessed that overall impact of Long-tailed Duck displacement would be insignificant and would not compromise integrity and coherence of SPA Ławica Słupska and other assessed Natura 2000 sites. Also, no significant impacts on other species were identified for any of the assessed Natura 2000 sites, and it was subsequently concluded that construction of the BŚ II wind farm would not compromise integrity and coherence of the assessed areas.
However, the cumulative impact on staging birds, and especially on Long-tailed Duck, if all planned offshore wind farms are established in the Polish EEZ and adjacent Swedish EEZ, could be at a level which could compromise the favourable status of the protected species and conservation objectives of the protected areas. This issue cannot be discussed in detail in the BŚ II EIA report, because there is not enough information about the final shapes of other OWF projects, which can cumulate the impacts with BŚ II. The topic of cumulative impacts on staging birds should be discussed and analysed in the EIA reports of the next project, not at the stage of the EIA procedure for BŚ II.
Migrating birds which are passing BŚ II area are potentially using the entire Baltic Sea as a migration route. Hence, Special Protection Areas designated in Poland and other EU member states to protect staging birds during migrations (following EU Birds Directive) can be affected by impacts due to the OWF BŚ II. The initial screening of impacts on migrating birds indicated that no impacts at BŚ II wind farm scale or cumulative scale were significant and therefore no Appropriate Assessment is required.
1.9
Transboundary impacts
The planned “Bałtyk Środkowy II” wind farm is not anticipated to have a transboundary impact on Long-tailed Ducks, which is the most affected species, as only about 0.38% of the
biogeographical population will be affected.
However, very high cumulative impact on migratory population of Long-tailed Duck cannot be rejected if all planned offshore wind farms considered in this impact assessment are built. It has to be noted, however, that displacement from wind farm areas other than BŚ II was based on extrapolated data, but not on the results of studies conducted for these particular projects, therefore the assessment of cumulative displacement has a rather high degree of uncertainty. Finally, it is not known to what extent the large-scale displacement of this seaduck species would have population effects in terms of reduction of individual fitness or added mortality and subsequently a population decline.
Bypassing large obstacles, such as offshore wind farms, may result in prolonged migration routes and increased energetic costs for migrating birds. However, both in the case of a single offshore wind farm, the BŚ II, and cumulative effect from a cluster of assessed wind farms in
Polish EEZ, it is concluded that increase of energetic expenditure and length migration route will be small and will not affect the viability of migrating bird populations.
Migrating and staging birds may also occasionally collide with the wind turbines. However, collision estimates for migrating and staging species are assessed being low and will not affect viability of these populations for either single BŚ II wind farm or cluster of offshore wind farms in the Polish EEZ.
1.10
Monitoring proposal
The bird monitoring proposal has been based on the proposal suggested by prof. W. Meissner in Meissner (2015b).
Post-investment monitoring should include radar studies as well as diurnal bird counts within the area of wind farm. Radar survey should aim at recording detailed flight paths and responses to the wind farm as well as migration intensities to enable comparison with baseline data,
estimation of barrier effects and avoidance rates. The radar surveys should be focused on migration periods and should last from the beginning of July to the first half of November and from the beginning of March to the first half of May. Outside those periods migration is not intense (if any). During winter there is a need to monitor the frequency of bird flights through the wind farm. Optimal research variant should consist of simultaneous radar detection and
observations allowing identification of species: visual in daytime and acoustic at night. Recording sessions should preferably be made from a fixed platform (transformer station or wind turbine platform) or alternatively from a vessel anchored in a place allowing good view at the wind farm from the side where most migrating birds approach. In spring they move from western and southern directions flying to east and north; during autumn migration the direction is reversed. In each migration period number of circadian observations should not be less than 20 days. 2- to 5-day monitoring sessions should be evenly distributed over monitoring periods. Diurnal bird counts should be undertaken using the same basic survey methods (ship-based line transects) as during the baseline investigations. The route of survey cruises should cross the wind farm perimeter and a wide zone around wind farm borders to allow for an assessment of changes in densities of birds staging in different distances from wind farm and comparison of gained data with pre-investment monitoring results. That survey has to comprise, first of all, the period of most intensive use of southern Baltic region by birds that is from October to May with frequency not less than one cruise per month. In the remaining months the number of waterbirds in the area „Bałtyk Środkowy II” is very low so in summer period only two cruises are sufficient, adding one cruise in mid-August and one in mid-September. Together with counts of seabirds in the wind farm area, the monitoring of birds in “Słupsk Bank” must be carried out, as the impact of investment on the avifauna of this area is highly probable. The terms of research cruises should be synchronized so that counting on both of these reservoirs is carried out
simultaneously.
Detailed methodology of post-investment monitoring will be established after approval of the final version of planned investment.
1.11
Technical deficiencies and gaps in the current knowledge
One of the important deficiencies when assessing the environmental impacts of BŚ II on birds is lack of earlier knowledge about staging bird densities in the BŚ II area and areas included in the cumulative impact assessment and especially migration in the Polish offshore areas of the Baltic Sea. Thus, the EIA on birds has had to rely on pre-construction monitoring assuming that monitoring period was representative. Considering staging birds, there is a serious lack of knowledge about within season movements and home ranges of waterbird species staging offshore. This is especially important for the Long-tailed Duck, as absence of such knowledge
hinders the assessment of significance of barrier effect and possible connectivity to other areas that are also used by this species. Finally, it is not currently established whether bird species that are considered sensitive to wind farm presence (divers, seaducks, auks) will habituate (and if so to what degree) to an offshore wind farm and start using the area again.
Furthermore, baseline surveys of staging birds revealed high variability in Long-tailed Duck numbers in offshore habitats, which fluctuated substantially between different months and differed between the two investigated winter seasons. In this impact assessment a solution was chosen to base the assessment on averaged values which seem to be sensible approach to rule out that the assessment is solely based on chance events such as unusually high counts in one season or unusually low numbers in another year. The uncertainty here lies in the huge variation in Long-tailed Duck numbers from one year to the other. Based on this we recommended that although impacts were assessed being moderate for Long-tailed Ducks, the proposed mitigation measure should be adopted in order to be on the safe side and alleviate possible impacts during peak occurrences of birds.
In relation to the estimation of collision risk, there is a serious lack of knowledge about micro-avoidance behavioural reaction to wind turbines of basically all bird species. Because of this knowledge deficiency, collision risk is often assessed using the precautionary principle and therefore potential collisions could be over-estimated but also the other way around – underestimated. For some species, such as Common Cranes, there is almost no knowledge about avoidance reactions of offshore wind farms. There could also be attraction of some species (e.g. raptors, possibly cranes and other land birds) to offshore objects. All these uncertainties regarding behavioural reactions of cranes and other land birds mean that the estimated collision risks for these species groups should be re-considered once data on behavioural reactions to offshore wind farms become available.
There is insufficient knowledge for quantitative assessment of the effect of wind turbine lighting on collision probabilities of nocturnal migrants. And in general, collision rates of nocturnally migrating passerines and shorebirds are unknown with offshore wind turbines located in the southern Baltic Sea. And currently there are no reliable methods that would allow to fill the knowledge gaps about collision rates of nocturnal migrants.
Finally, there are no studies about habitat carrying capacity of the Słupsk Bank, and
subsequently it is unclear how many waterbirds, primarily Long-tailed Ducks, this SPA could sustainably support and what are the main driving forces responsible for fluctuating numbers of this species in the area.
2
Introduction
Polenergia Bałtyk II Sp. z o.o. plans to build the offshore wind farm “Bałtyk Środkowy II” (hereafter BŚ II) in the Polish Exclusive Economic Zone of the Baltic Sea. DHI is involved as a consulting company during the EIA process and assigned to conduct environmental research on marine mammals, background noise and birds, as well as to revise and consult research of other components and include results in the dedicated model. This report includes the results of the analysis of potential impacts of the BŚ II on birds flying over and staging birds within the area of the planned wind farm. The impact assessment has been carried out on the basis of the results of monitoring of birds flying over and staging birds within the area of the planned project, which was commissioned by Polenergia Bałtyk II Sp. z o.o. Monitoring of migrating birds was part of a complex programme of pre-investment studies of the marine environment, which was carried out for the procedure of environmental impact assessment.
The impact assessment on birds has been based on design parameters of the project prepared on the initial technical concept, which is fully presented in the main EIA report. In the report on birds only those parameters of the project which are important for the assessment of impacts on migrating birds are presented (chapter 3.1.). In the report the information about the projects, which can cumulate their impacts with BŚ II (chapter 3.2.) and the existing anthropogenic pressures on birds are also given (chapter 4). The results of a variant zero analysis are
presented in terms of the anticipated environmental effects in case of not developing the project. These effects are assessed considering two possible scenarios: 1) the BŚ II project is not developed but the offshore wind energy sector in the Polish EEZ is being developed and 2) the BŚ II project is not developed and the offshore wind energy sector in the Polish EEZ is not being developed (no offshore wind farms), but there are other types of investment developed in this area, e.g. the extraction of oil and gas (chapter 5).
On the basis of literature data potential impacts of offshore wind farms on migrating and staging birds at the stage of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the wind farm are presented in chapter 7. Based on the list of species identified in the project area (which are presented in the report with research results), the authors of the report selected the species which in their opinion should be the subject of the EIA (chapter 8). The environmental impact assessment for the three considered wind farm variants is presented in chapter 9. The
assessment of impacts on the integrity, cohesion and subject of the protections of Natura 2000 areas, which are identified within the range of the potential impacts of the project on birds, is presented in the chapter 10. Chapter 11 concerns the associated impacts and transboundary impacts are the subject of the analysis presented in chapter 12. Chapter 13 includes the proposed post-construction monitoring, while the summary and conclusions are presented in chapter 14.
3
Description of the planned project
The project “BŚ II” is planned to be constructed in the Polish exclusive economic zone, about 37 km from the Polish coast, north of the city of Łeba (Figure 3.1).
Figure 3.1 Location of the planned OWF “Bałtyk Środkowy II” area. Source: own materials.
The total area of the farm is approximately 122 km2 according to PSZW (license for construction and use of the artificial islands, installations and devices in the Polish maritime areas, obtained on 15 January 2013).
This area, as defined in PSZW, is reduced by the 500 m buffer from the inner boundary of the project implementation area excluded from location of any structural elements of the farm. The size of the buffer 1 (500 m) is approximately 23 km2. Therefore, the maritime area available for
implementation of the project is the area defined by PSZW, reduced by the area of the buffer and comprises app. 99 km2.
3.1
Basic parameters of the considered variants of the project
Because one parameter, height of the turbine tower, remains variable in the considered wind farm variants, ornithological impact assessment was conducted considering the minimum and maximum towers heights for all three variants (Table 3.1). Turbine tower height determines the altitude of the rotor, which is a very important characteristic when assessing collision risk of different bird species. Table 3.1 Turbine fact sheet for three variants of the OWF BŚ II. Two designs of each variant are
considered with minimum and maximum tower heights. Only parameters that are relevant for the ornithological impact assessment are presented. Source: Polenergia Bałtyk II Sp. z o.o. 2015.
Turbine parameter
Variant 1 Variant 2 Variant 3
Min Tower height 120 m Max Tower height 175 m Min Tower height 145 m Max Tower height 175 m Min Tower height 145 m Max Tower height 175 m Number of blades 3 3 3 3 3 3 Rotation speed (rpm) 10 10 10 10 10 10 Rotor radius (m) 100 100 125 125 125 125 Hub height (m) 120 175 145 175 145 175 Time operational (%) 90 90 90 90 90 90
Max blade width (m) 5.4 5.4 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Pitch (degree) 30 30 30 30 30 30
Number of turbines 200 200 80 80 120 120
3.2
Accumulation of impacts from different projects in the described area
Cumulative impacts are the impact from the current project BŚ II in combination with other plans or projects in the area. Other plans and projects include those projects that have already been completed and those that have been approved by the planning authorities and those that are currently undergoing planning approval.
As seen from Figure 3.2 there are many activities in the southeastern part of the Baltic Sea within the Polish EEZ. Below is the list of projects and plans, which have been possible to identify, and which potentially can have a cumulative impact together with impacts from BŚ II described in chapter 7.
Figure 3.2 Present and planned use of the seabed space within the Polish EEZ.
3.2.1
Offshore wind farms
Between 2011 and 2013 a large number of application for offshore wind farms within the Polish EEZ have been sent to the Ministry for Transport, Construction and Marine Economy.
In the surrounding area of the Słupsk Bank nine areas are likely to be undergoing a licensing procedure parallel to the construction of BŚ II. The relevant wind farms and the status of the project are listed in Table 3.2. As of yet there are no operating offshore wind farms within the Polish EEZ. In the Swedish EEZ only one offshore wind farm can be relevant for the cumulative assessment; Södra Midsjöbanken. This wind farm is located close to the Polish EEZ and is currently in the planning phase. An Environmental impact Assessment has been prepared for the project. The maximum number of turbines will be 300 with a maximum height <200 metres including rotor (EON 2012).
Table 3.2 List of offshore wind farms which potentially can have a cumulate impact together with impact of OWF Bałtyk Środkowy II.
Type and name of the project
Shortest distance from OWF BŚ II boundary, km Maximal number of turbines/ maximal project capacity Status
Bałtyk Środkowy III 17
200/120 turbines (depending on the variant) 1200 MW Planning phase Baltica 2 0 300 turbines
1500 MW Concept / Early planning
Baltica 3 18 210 turbines
1050 MW Concept / Early planning
Type and name of the project
Shortest distance from OWF BŚ II boundary, km Maximal number of turbines/ maximal project capacity Status
C-Wind 52 200 MW* Planning phase
Södra Midsjöbanken 39 300 turbines
700 MW Planning phase
Baltica 1 49 Max 180 turbines
900MW Concept / Early planning
Bałtyk Północny 41 Max 200 turbines
1,200 MW* Concept / Early planning
Baltic II 1 70 turbines
Max 350 MW Concept / Early planning
Source:http://www.4coffshore.com/windfarms/windfarms.aspx?windfarmId=PL20 and KIPs for the corresponding OWF,
With regard to cumulative impacts of offshore wind farms, two development scenarios of neighbouring OWFs have been proposed, which are considered in the cumulative impact assessment of this report.
3.2.1.1
Scenario 1 of cumulative offshore wind farm development
Stage 1 of OWF BŚ II equals to Stage 2 of OWF BŚ III for variant chosen for realisation. Stage 2 of OWF BŚ II indicates new connecting capacity for OWF BŚ II (600 MW) and associated construction of the remaining turbines. OWF Baltica is built at 2 locations: in 2019-2021 construction of 300 MW in OWF Baltica 3 area, in 2023-2026 construction of 750 MW in OWF Baltica 2 area (Table 3.3). Table 3.3 Power and number of power plants and foundations possible to build on OWF which can
potentially have cumulative impacts with OWF BŚ II for Variant 1 and Variant 3 – Scenario 1.
Cumulative parameters OWF OWF BSIII OWF Baltica 3 OWF BŚ II V1/V3 OWF Baltica 2 Stage 1 construction 2023-2026 Power 0 0 600/600 750 Number of PP 0 0 60/100 125 Number of foundations 0 0 63/103 129 Operation 2026-2050 Power 600 300 600/600 750 Number of PP 60 50 60/100 125 Number of foundations 63 52 63/103 129
Stage 2 construction after 2025 (additional connection conditions)
Power 0 0 600/600 0
Number of PP 0 0 60/100 0
Number of foundations 0 0 63/103 0
Operation after 2025 (additional connection conditions)
Power 600 300 1200/1200 750
Number of PP 60 50 120/200 125
3.2.1.2
Scenario 2 of cumulative offshore wind farm development
Stage 1 and stage 2 of OWF BŚ II – new connecting capacity for OWF BŚ II (1200 MW); OWF BŚ III (1200 MW) is entirely built within the timeframe of OWF BŚ II. OWF Baltica is built at 2
locations: in 2019-2021 construction of 300 MW in OWF Baltica 3 area, in 2023-2026 construction of 750 MW in OWF Baltica 2 area (Table 3.4).
Table 3.4 Power and number of power plants and foundations possible to build on OWF which can potentially have cumulative impacts with OWF BŚ II for Variant 1 and Variant 3 – Scenario 2.
Cumulative parameters OWF OWF BSIII OWF Baltica 3 OWF BŚ II V1/V3 OWF Baltica 2 Stage 1 construction 2023-2026 Power 600 0 600/600 750 Number of PP 60 0 60/100 125 Number of foundations 63 0 63/103 129 Operation 2026-2050 Power 1200 300 600/600 750 Number of PP 120 50 60/100 125 Number of foundations 126 52 63/103 129
Stage 2 construction after 2025 (additional connection conditions)
Power 0 0 600/600 0
Number of PP 0 0 60/100 0
Number of foundations 0 0 63/103 0
Operation after 2025 (additional connection conditions)
Power 1200 300 1200 750
Number of PP 120 50 120/200 125
Number of foundations 126 52 126/206 129
3.2.2
Installations of oil and gas fields and exploration areas
LOTOS Petrobaltic holds eight concessions for exploration and appraisal within the Baltic Sea (Table 3.5) and has concessions for oil and gas exploration & production from fields B3, B4, B6, and B8 (Figure 3.2, Lotos 2014).
Currently, there is production from field B3, and field B8 is undergoing appraisal before production commences. In the eastern offshore waters of the Polish EEZ there are three platforms; one drilling rig (Petrobaltic) and two production rigs (Baltic Beta and PG-1). Baltic Beta is anchored in the centre of infield B3. They all belong to Poland and the oil is transported by ships to the harbour of Gdansk (Lotos 2014). For Słupsk E and W areas, licence applications for exploration of “shale” natural gas have been submitted.
Table 3.5 Specification of concessions for exploration and appraisal licenses for oil and gas in the Baltic Sea.
Type and name of the project Area (km2)
Gotlandia 881
Rozewie 1,172
Leba 1,154
Type and name of the project Area (km2) Sambia W 888 Sambia E 1,092 Słupsk W 1,021 Słupsk E 1,139
3.2.3
Pipelines
SwePol link is a high voltage power submarine cable between Poland and Sweden (Figure 3.2). The cable was commissioned in 2000. The Nord stream pipeline is a gas pipeline which transports gas from Russia to Europe.
3.2.4
Mining
Within the Słupsk Bank, there are three deposits of sand and gravel (Figure 3.2). There is no information of current excavation activities at these sites (B.-R-B 2007).
Impacts from other projects that may cumulate with the impacts from the construction, operation and eventual dismantling of the Bałtyk Środkowy II offshore wind farm, have for marine birds been identified from two major sources, other offshore wind farms, and oil and gas activities.
4
Existing anthropogenic pressures
Helcom (2010a) established a list of anthropogenic pressures for the Baltic Sea. For the Arkona Basin and the Bornholm Basin (and to some extent the Gulf of Gdansk), which are the defined areas closest to the Słupsk area, the most important area-specific anthropogenic pressures (not
necessarily the most important determinants of bird distribution) were:
• Extraction of species by bottom trawling, gillnet fishery, surface and mid-water trawling and fishing with coastal stationary gear (standing nets, fykes)
• Input of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous) and heavy metals (lead and cadmium) • Disturbance of the seabed by bottom trawling
• Underwater noise by shipping activities (coastal and offshore) • Riverine input of organic matter
Of these fishing, eutrophication, pollution and shipping are important for bird species. Furthermore, hunting and climate changes are also existing anthropogenic pressures which are present in the Baltic Sea.
4.1
Fishing
Both extraction of species and disturbance of the seabed due to deployment of heavy fishing gear affect seabirds by directly reducing the available supply of prey and changing the food web
structure. The Baltic pelagic food web has shown clear signs of a lack of resilience towards changes in fishing pressures, and together with other anthropogenic pressures such as eutrophication and climate change it has resulted in a complex series of changes in the Baltic Sea, which has been observed in all Baltic basins over the last 30 years (HELCOM 2010a).
Gulls and other birds that follow ships profit from the discarded bycatch in their wake. Hüppop et al. (1994) assumes that the affected bird species have adapted their life-cycle strongly to fishing. Scavenging on discards and offal is a widespread phenomenon in the Baltic Sea as it is in other shelf areas of Europe, but the number of bird species involved is generally lower and strongly biased towards gulls, especially Herring Gulls (Garthe 2003).
A lot of seabirds die in the fishing nets in the Baltic Sea, including Polish waters (Žydelis et al. 2009, 2013). Overall fisheries-induced bird mortality, termed bycatch, is unknown for the entire Polish EEZ and surrounding waters, as locally conducted studies were limited to the Gulf of Gdansk
(Stempniewicz 1994). Besides a residual effect on birds in general, fishing directly affects the mortality of diving bird species. On account of intensive gillnet fishing there is a regular loss of benthic-feeding and piscivorous seabirds. Gillnets are frequently used in shallow coastal zones, which are also the preferred resting places for wintering birds. Divers, seaducks and alcid birds drown in great numbers in gillnets (Olsson et al. 2000, Schirmeister 2003, Dagys and Žydelis 2002). Žydelis et al. (2009) estimated that a total of 76,000 birds drown in gillnets annually in the Baltic Sea. Kirchhoff (1982) estimated losses of waterbirds, mainly seaducks, in set nets along the Baltic coast of Schleswig-Holstein to be at least 15,000 birds per year. In unsystematic controls in 4 seaward harbours on the island of Usedom, Schirmeister (2003) registered over 1,000 dead birds each year (50-100 diving birds, 1,000-2,000 seaducks, 10-20 Guillemots). Stempniewicz (1994) estimated that about 17,500 birds die annually in nets in the Gulf of Gdansk, majority of the victims being Long-tailed Ducks (Clangula hyemalis) and Velvet Scoters (Melanitta fusca).
4.2
Eutrophication
All parts of the Baltic Sea, with the exception of the Gulf of Bothnia and the north-eastern part of the Kattegat are impacted by eutrophication (enrichment due to nitrogen and phosphorus). The Baltic Sea is particularly vulnerable to eutrophication because of the relatively low exchange of water through the Danish Straits compared to the overall volume of the Baltic Sea itself. Furthermore, the
catchment area is comparatively large and intensively used by humans. Consequently, the concentration levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus are high in most parts of the Baltic Sea, including the areas off the Polish coast (HELCOM 2009). The efforts of HELCOM countries to reduce the nutrient input into the Baltic Sea have led to a 30% decrease of nitrogen and 45% of phosphorus concentration levels from 1990 and onwards to 2006 (HELCOM 2010a).
Possible impacts on waterbird populations due to eutrophication include a decrease in population size for species feeding on submerged vegetation (due to shadowing effects) and an increase in population size for species feeding on macro-zoobenthos (due to increasing supply of phytoplankton (Skov et al. 2011). These responses have been indicated in the Baltic Sea, and linked to the
observed long-term reduction in loads of nitrogen and phosphorus since 1993.
4.3
Pollution
Most areas of the open Baltic Sea were found to be contaminated with toxic persistent chemical compounds and heavy metals during the latest reported observation period from 1999 to 2007 (HELCOM 2010b). In fish and bivalves, which is the primary food source for many bird species, the threshold values for cadmium and mercury were exceeded in almost the entire Baltic (HELCOM 2010b).
Besides the contamination from various toxic chemical compounds and heavy metals, all seabird species are potentially exposed to oil pollution released either as a consequence of shipping accidents, or incidents of illegal spills. The numbers of recorded oil spills have decreased since 1995, but still chronic oil pollution prevails, and even an increase in the Central Baltic Sea is reported (Skov et al. 2011). The intensity of shipping in the Baltic Sea is likely to increase further (e.g. Rytkönen et al. 2002) and the export of Russian oil through the Baltic Sea is expected to rise. As a consequence, the probability of large-scale oil spill accidents in the region is high and will most likely rise in the future (HELCOM 2010a).
4.4
Shipping
There is heavy ship transport in the Baltic Sea as seen from Figure 4.1 and much traffic passes by the wind farm area. Yet, according to the baseline measurements, the BŚ II area is not located directly on the shipping routes and can be characterised as one with relatively low pressure from to ship traffic. The main shipping lanes pass the area to the south and north from it, and main fishing area is also located to the north from BŚ II (Hac & Koszałka 2015). It is primarily fishing vessels which currently cross the area when heading to the harbours of Łeba and Ustka, but still it was estimated that only 127 fishing vessels cross the area per year (Hac & Koszałka 2015).
Figure 4.1 AIS data representing shipping intensity and showing main shipping routes in the southern Baltic Sea (source: Søfartsstyrelsen 2013)
Waterbird species differ in their responses to ship traffic; however, there are only a few studies on the topic. Divers appear as being the most sensitive species as they flush from approaching ships at a median distance of 400 m and a 90% percentile over 1,000 m (Bellebaum et al. 2006). A passing ship thus causes disturbances within a radius of about 2 km. These disturbance distances and avoidance zones have different consequences and can range from a brief disturbance by single ships to permanent avoidance of intensively navigated shipping routes. Schwemmer et al. (2011) found that divers showed clear avoidance of areas with high shipping intensity. Common Scoters are also sensitive to ship traffic. Their flight reactions have been recorded at a distance of 1,000 m (Garthe 2003). Higher flushing distances from 1,000 to 2,000 m for Common Scoters were recorded by Kaiser et al. (2006). Schwemmer et al. (2011) found a median flushing distance of 804 m for Common Scoters, 404 m for Velvet Scoter, 293 m for Long-tailed Duck and 208 m for Common Eider. Waterbird reaction to the approaching ship also depends on bird flock size, bigger flocks being more sensitive (Schwemmer et al. 2011), and also on the approaching ship size and sailing speed.
4.5
Hunting
Leisure hunting affects virtually all migratory waterfowl (swans, geese, ducks) in the Baltic Sea region. According to the Danish hunting statistics, the number of annually shot Common Eiders has been declining steadily since the mid-1980s from 190,000 birds shot in 1982 to 47,700 in 2009 (http://www.dmu.dk/dyrplanter/dyr/vildtudbytte/). A total of 66,350 Common Eiders were bagged in the Baltic Sea area in 2007 (Skov et al. 2011). This equates to 8.7% of the winter population of 760,000 individuals (Desholm et al. 2002). A large portion of the shootings in Germany and Denmark are wintering gulls from the Baltic Sea area. In Germany, around 90% of the shooting of migrating Woodcocks take place in Northern Germany, whereby mainly the Scandinavian breeding birds are affected (IfAÖ 2010). The Great Cormorant populations in Estonia, Germany, Finland and Sweden are reduced annually. Between 10,000 and 15,000 cormorants were shot in 2006
(HELCOM 2009), and in Poland about 6000 cormorants are shot annually (CSO 2013).
Of other relevant species 10,929 individuals of wild geese and 105,072 individuals of wild ducks were shot in Poland in the season 2013/2014 according to data by Polish Hunting Association. In Pomeranian Voivodeship and West Pomeranian Voivodeship numbers are as follows:
district of Słupsk – 252 geese, 1,343 ducks,
district of Koszalin – 177 geese, 1,569 ducks,
district of Szczecin – 2,013 geese, 1,091 ducks.
4.6
Climate change
As all other species, bird species are adapted to the local environment under current climatic conditions and are as a consequence of this expected to adapt to the global climate changes if these happen gradually. Recent model studies predict that the potential breeding ranges of many European bird species are likely to move 100s of kilometres in mainly northeasterly direction (Huntley et al. 2007). Non-breeding distributions of waterbirds – just like breeding ranges – will be affected by shifting climatic conditions in addition to food availability and disturbance, e.g. (Huntley
et al. 2006, 2008, Doswald et al. 2009). It is predicted that non-breeding distributions of many
waterbird species will shift northwards in the Baltic Sea under the current climate change scenarios (FEBI 2013b).
5
‘Variant zero’ analysis
Analysis of “Variant zero” describes three future scenarios where BŚ II has not been constructed: 1. It is assumed that the wind energy sector will not be developed in the Polish marine area, so
these will have no impact on the environment. The possibility course of this scenario is described below in this chapter. Current population trends indicate that some marine bird species are declining (seaducks, divers) while other are stable or increasing (gulls, cormorants, auks). It is not clear whether currently declining trends will be reversed via conservation and management actions.
2. It is assumed that wind energy will be developed in the Polish marine area, but the BŚ II project will not be implemented. Other projects assessed in the cumulative impact assessment will be implemented. In this case, we refer to the cumulative assessments undertaken in chapter 9 and compare relative impacts of BŚ II in the light of cumulative impacts of all other offshore wind farms and other activities. Reductions in available habitat due to other constructions may cause densities of waterbirds to increase locally near BŚ II, and barrier effects and collisions from these wind farms could cause densities of migrating waterbirds at BŚ II to be reduced. Even in the presence of the above-mentioned impacts from other planned offshore wind farms near BŚ II, other pressures (e.g., fisheries, shipping) may constitute relatively large effects on waterbird populations in the Polish EEZ. The BŚ II is an important area for some staging bird species, particularly Long-tailed Duck, but is likely no different from other wind farms for migrating birds. Therefore, not building the BŚ II wind farm would have substantial benefits for Long-tailed Ducks, though cumulative effects would be only slightly smaller.
3. It is assumed that wind energy will not be developed in the Polish marine area, but mining industry is being developed. Mining of seabed sediments would disturb and displace resident birds due to work of dredging and transport vessels. Mining activities would destroy benthic communities and subsequently food resources of benthivorous birds directly in the mining areas. Finally, mining activities would cause sediment plumes, which could affect benthic communities in the larger area and influence foraging ability of bird species, which use vision for finding and capturing their prey. Disturbance, loss of benthic habitats and reduced visibility in water would primarily affect seaducks (Long-tailed Ducks, Velvet Scoters), Red-throated and Black-throated Divers and auks (Razorbills, Common Guillemot and Black Guillemot). The extent and significance of these impacts will highly depend on specific areas being mined (and species densities there), their size, mining work intensity and released sediment types and volumes. Staging gulls, terns and cormorants are unlikely to experience significant impacts. Impacts on migrating birds will be mostly negligible, as the majority of them will be able to fly around the working ships with minimal extra energetic costs. However, occasional collisions of low numbers will happen, particularly of nocturnally migrating passerines, some of which might be attracted by lights.
The first ‘Variant zero’ scenario (wind energy sector is not developed in the Polish marine area) will be influenced by human-induced changes that will take place between the period of the baseline study and in a future scenario (e.g. within 15-20 years). When defining how the future most likely will look like it involves identifying and quantifying human induced changes that could significantly change the situation described in the baseline studies.
A number of factors have been identified as predictable and very likely to occur. Furthermore, they can be predicted and quantified with a reasonable level of certainty.
1. Human induced pressures, which affect landscape, habitats and species 2. Changes due to implementation of new regulations and management practices
