Work package 2. Analysis of national MSP Instruments. Planning for Offshore RES in the North Sea Regional Workshop. Brussels, 16 March 2011

Transcription

1 Planning for Offshore RES in the North Sea Regional Workshop Brussels, 16 March 2011 Work package 2 Analysis of national MSP Instruments Andreas Wagner Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE German Offshore Wind Energy Foundation

2 Content Introduction to SOW Overview of WP2 Structure Analysis of MSP in North Sea countries -Germany -UK -Denmark - the Netherlands -Belgium Conclusion

3 I. Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE (SOW) German Offshore Wind Energy Foundation (GOWEF) Created in 2005 (supported by Min. of Environment) Communication platform for politics, industry, R/D, business and finance Acquired permits for test site alpha ventus in 2005 Mediation and PR activities to overcome obstacles Promoting public acceptance (e.g. POWER Cluster, SB OFF.E.R) Initiates and contributes to R/D and policy initiatives (e.g. RAVE, WINDSPEED, SEANERGY 2020)

4 II. Work Structure of WP2 MSP for offshore RES in the EEZ/territorial waters Objective/ Methodology: Analyse national policies for the Atlantic, North Sea, Baltic and the Mediterranean Sea consisting of: National Energy Policies Existing Spatial Planning procedures affecting offshore energy projects and offshore electricity grids. Criteria for assessment: Policy and legal framework Information management Permitting and Licensing Stakeholder Consultation Sector conflict management Cross-border cooperation Implementation of MSP Comparison of best practices for policies and MSP procedures in the different Member States, based on the results of national MSP reports and the results of the WINDBARRIERS project

5 II. Work Structure of WP 2 Task 2.1: Definition of MSP Indicators/Criteria Developed a detailed list of the main criteria for assessing the MSP practices affecting the deployment of marine renewable energy sources, covering - Policy and legal framework - Data and information management - Permitting and Licensing - Consultation - Sector conflict management - Cross-border cooperation (and sub-national boundaries) - Implementation of MSP

6 II. Work Structure of WP 2 Task 2.2 Analysis of MSP in the North Sea SOW (D), ECN (NL), UoB (UK), 3E (B), EWEA (Dk) Task 2.3 Analysis of MSP in the Baltic Sea SOW (D), CORPI (PL, LIT, EST, LAT), EWEA (S, SF) Task 2.4 Analysis of MSP in the Atlantic Coast and the Irish Sea LNEG (P, E, IRL), UoB (UK), 3E (F) Task 2.5 Analysis of MSP in the Mediterranean Sea LNEG (E), CRES (GRL, I)

7 II. Work Structure of WP 2 Task 2.6 Comparison of best practices EWEA assessment of existing MSP practices (as identified by WINDBARRIERS and the consortium); Reviewed by subcontractor - Coordinated by SOW Task 2.7 Policy Recommendations addressing best practices and barriers/obstacles, based on 2.1 (indicators)

8 III. SEANERGY 2020: North Sea Workshop The North Sea area EEZ borders Countries covered by SEANERGY-Partners: France and Belgium Denmark, Sweden, Finland Germany The Netherlands Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland Greece and Italy Portugal, Spain, Ireland UK

9 III. MSP in Germany Installation targets (for offshore wind): 10 GW by 2020 (NREAP), 25 GW by 2030 (offshore strategy of 2002, energy concept) Installed capacity: 180,3 MW (offshore wind energy) as of 31 Dec Policy and legal framework: - Comprehensive approach for the EEZ with one key authority in charge (BSH - Bundesamt für Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie), Since 2010: BfN (Federal Agency for Nature Protection) co-decision on new permits (as regards environmental impact) - Support scheme: Feed-in system (defined by EEG/Renewable Energy Act) Data and Information Management: Biological, socio economic and geological data in GIS format

10 III. MSP in Germany Permitting and licensing: Different authorities and approval procedures for the EEZ (BSH) and the 12-nautical-mile-zone (coastal states/länder) No permits given in national park Wadden Sea/Natura 2000 areas Existing standardized procedures TSOs obliged to ensure timely grid connection separate permitting processes for grid connection Consultation: Stakeholders are integrated in the approval procedure at an early stage (public hearings application conferences ) Sector conflict Management: Clearly defined and binding procedures

11 III. MSP in Germany MSP draft of 2008: Priority areas with preclusive effect for offshore wind energy use MSP of 2009 (for the EEZ): Designated priority areas for shipping, pipelines/cables, and the use of offshore wind energy Natura 2000 areas with preclusive effect Monitoring system (on environmental impacts) Evaluation report by early 2012 (demanded in National Energy Concept of 2010)

12 II Case study German North Sea NATURA 2000 and Nature Protection Areas

13 III. MSP for the German North Sea (EEZ) Source: BSH, 2009

14 III. MSP in the UK (England, Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland) Offshore installation targets: 33 GW by 2020 (25 GW offshore wind) announced by govt. However, only 13 GW committed to EU (as of NREAP) Installed capacity offshore renewables: 1341 MW (as of 31 Dec. 2010) Policy and legal framework (offshore wind energy): Different authorities and legislation for different regions (England, Wales, N. Ireland), e.g. Marine Coastal Access Act of 2009 sets out MSP policy implementation not before 2013 expected Scotland one marine planning agency (Marine Scotland) Criteria based planning approach no formal exclusion zones Support scheme: Green Certificates (ROC system, debate about FIT) Wave and tidal: demo sites for 30 MW, leases awarded for up to 1,600 MW

15 III. UK Offshore Wind Farm Sites (Round 1-3)

16 III. MSP in the UK (England, Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland) Data and Information Management: Most data are available in GIS format, Central database (MaRS) managed by the Crown Estate Access only granted to developers who have been awarded leases Permitting Procedure: Standardized process in Wales, England and Scotland: Marine License (FEPA, CPA) and Electricity Act License, N. Ireland: legislation is under development Different authorities in charge for permitting in England and Wales, in Scotland (Marine Scotland in charge of EEZ and territorial waters)

17 III. MSP in the UK (England, Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland) Consultation: Scoping surveys conducted by developers (part of consenting process) Statutory consultees (defence, aviation authorities) have effective veto rights Sector Conflict Management: No generally agreed compensation measures foreseen MSP Implementation: MSP has not been implemented yet, but the legislation is in place: The Marine Coastal Act (2009) and the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 Monitoring mechanisms do exist

18 III. MSP in Denmark Installation targets: 30% RES until 2020, with 1,339 MW offshore wind (as of NREAP) Installed capacity: 853,70 MW (offshore wind energy) by Dec Policy and legal framework: Different agencies in charge: Different initiatives: Integrated Marine Strategy Concerning Offshore renewables: Offshore Wind Turbine Action Plan: Identification of demonstration areas for 5 offshore projects Support scheme: a) standard tariff b) competitive tenders

19 III. MSP in Denmark Data and Information Management: Only geotechnical data available in GIS format Permitting and Licensing (offshore wind EEZ): Only one authority in charge: Danish Energy Agency Wave and tidal: Limited experience, mostly test and demonstration projects

20 III. MSP in Denmark Consultation: Public consultation process, stakeholders can give feedback during 8 weeks after the process Sector conflict management: Compensation measures for potential conflicts (e.g. payments for fishermen) MSP legislation: Adopted (future offshore wind turbine location), but not with a legal character. MSP is not implemented yet Sectoral legislation for MSP (different legislation and different authorities)

21 III. MSP in the Netherlands Installation target: 14,5 % RES by 2020, with 5,178 MW offshore wind (as of NREAP) Installed capacity: 246,80 MW offshore wind (by Dec. 2010) Policy and legal framework for MSP: National Water Plan adopted in early 2011 comprehensive approach Support scheme: feed-in premium (SDE), lack of stability/reliability Data and Information Management: No integrated comprehensive GIS central data facility

22 III. MSP in the Netherlands Permitting and Licensing: Single authority in charge for permitting in the EEZ: Ministry of Transport and Water Affairs (VenW) Consultation: Consultation of limited number of representative stakeholders Sector conflict management: Non-binding guidelines for dealing with/reducing conflicts Implementation of MSP: The existing National Spatial Strategy is fully implemented, National Water Plan is awaiting parliamentary approval

23 III. MSP in Belgium Installation targets: 13 % RES until 2020, with 2,000 MW offshore wind (according to NREAP) Installed capacity: 195 MW (offshore wind energy) by Dec Policy and legal framework: Regulated by sector-specific laws and royal decrees Maritime Spatial Plans cover the EEZ and territorial waters Sectoral legislation for MSP Support scheme: Green certificates

24 III. MSP in Belgium Data and Information Management: All data in GIS format, integrated comprehensive GIS based data system Permitting and Licensing: Responsible approval authorities in the EEZ: Ministry of Energy, MUMM, Flemish Planning Administration Consultation: Frequent stakeholder meetings coordinated by the Coast Guard Consortium Sector conflict management: No compensation measures for stakeholders

25 IV. Conclusion A European approach

26 IV. Integrated approach needed (combine MSP with infrastructure needs)

27 IV. Comparison of MSP in North Sea countries 1- Policy and legal framework 2 - Data and information management 3 - Permitting 4 - Consultat ion 5 - Sector conflict manament 6 - Cross border cooperatio n 7 - implementat ion of MSP AVERAGE Belgium 3,00 4,50 3,50 4,00 1,50 2,00 3,50 3,14 Denmark 3,00 3,00 5,00 4,50 2,50 2,00 4,00 3,43 Germany 4,50 4,50 5,00 4,50 4,00 2,00 4,50 4,14 The Netherlands 4,00 4,00 5,00 2,50 2,00 2,00 5,00 3,50 UK - England 3,00 4,00 3,50 4,00 2,50 2,50 3,50 3,29 UK - Wales 3,00 3,50 3,50 3,29 UK - Scotland 3,50 4,00 4,00 3,50 UK - Ireland 2,00 1,00 2,50 2,64 AVERAGE 3,25 4,00 3,81 3,90 2,50 2,10 3,81

28 SEANERGY 2020 Conclusions and Next Steps Need for integrated MSP Highlight best national practices for spatial planning Investigate opportunities for a coordinated spatial planning policy at the interface of EEZ and territorial waters Integrate future pan-european grid planning in MSP Analysis of the relevant international agreements with impact on spatial planning practices with a focus on transnational electricity interconnectors (WP3)

29 SEANERGY 2020 Questions for Discussion 1. Practical need for European MSP coordination? 2. Major challenges for MSP in North Sea Countries? (DE, UK, DK, NL, BE) - If yes, in which areas? 3. Grid issues Integration with MSP (Planning for North Sea Grid Who and how?) 4. Is availability of data a hot issue for offshore RES? 5. Further concerns/issues?

30 WP 2 - National MSP practices THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Stiftung Offshore-Windenergie Oldenburger Str. 65 D Varel T F a.wagner@offshore-stiftung.de 30