OSPAR Database on Wind-farms

Transcription

1 Agenda Item 6 English only OSPAR CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT OF THE NORTH-EAST ATLANTIC MEETING OF THE BIODIVERSITY COMMITTEE (BDC) BONN: FEBRUARY 2005 OSPAR Database on Wind-farms Presented by the Secretariat This document presents the annual update of the OSPAR Database on Wind-farms with the map associated to it prepared by Germany, as well as draft revised Explanatory Notes to the database for their finalisation and adoption. Update of the database 1. In adopting the OSPAR Database on Wind-farms, BDC 2003 agreed that Contracting Parties should update their data periodically on an annual basis, starting on 15 July For doing so, the Secretariat sent a reminder to Contracting Parties on 5 November 2004 requesting Contracting Parties (a) to provide the new information on area covered by offshore wind-farms that BDC had agreed should be included in the data-base; (b) to up-date both the information on current status and, more generally, the information that had already been provided and was reflected in the reporting format. 3. The Secretariat presented to EIHA 2004 (EIHA 04/4/6) the OSPAR database of offshore wind-farms updated with information received from Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK before the meeting. In the lack of further notice from Sweden and Spain the Secretariat had assumed that their previous data remained valid. 4. EIHA 2004 invited Contracting Parties to send to the Secretariat by 6 December 2004, their corrections to the OSPAR Database on Wind-farms at Annex 1 to EIHA 04/4/6, including the coordinates for locations of their wind-farms in the form indicated by Germany in EIHA 04/4/2. In the light of contributions from Contracting Parties (Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, UK) the Secretariat has updated the database as at Annex 1. However the Secretariat would like raise the following points: a. Belgium has reported as authorised under the column current status a wind-farm that says under notes authorisation suspended. Belgium has also reported on a dismissed application for a wind-farm by indicating refused under the column current status. At present this option is not considered by the Explanatory notes. Sweden has informed that currently there are nowindfarm in their part of the OSPAR maritime area and that the only application on which they had reported at Flanden bank has now been dismissed. The Secretariat has left and greyed these two entries that have been reported as dismissed applications indicating their current status as refused. There may be a value in keeping this information on the database when a wind-farm has previously been reported as application. If this is the case, BDC may wish to reflect in the Explanatory Notes in Annex 3 the possibility of using refused under the category current status as well as how to deal with applications temporarily suspended. b. the data submitted by Ireland does not follow the agreed reporting format. Therefore, Ireland would need to confirm the way in which the Secretariat has reflected on the database the information provided by them; c. Denmark has reported the year of authorisation under the column current status. This information has been inserted under notes in order to keep the number of possible status to the 5 agreed (when using the search option provided by an arrow in each column of the excel electronic version). In some cases the date of application is 2004 and Denmark and all the OSPAR Commission 1

2 Contracting Parties may wish to double check that the situation has not evolved from application to authorised or refused since the last reporting. Map of location of wind-farms in the OSPAR maritime area 5. With regard to the reflection of the total surface area occupied by each wind-farm in the OSPAR Database, BDC 2004 had agreed to report the latitude and longitude (in decimal degrees) of the points defining the polygon formed by the outermost elements of the wind farm. Contracting Parties which have offshore wind-farms had therefore been asked to report their coordinates accordingly. 6. Contracting Parties accepted the offer from Germany to assist the Secretariat in producing the OSPAR map associated with the OSPAR database of offshore wind-farms. However, in order to precisely reflect location and the total surface area of a wind-farm and its vertices, Germany explained that, subject to the agreement of Contracting Parties, the relevant geographical data should be collected differently: a. First, Germany recommended making use of the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) which is adopted internationally as the single world wide datum for marine navigation. As an exception if WGS84 data is not available, Germany would also be able to take the European Datum 1950 (ED50) and convert it into WGS84. b. Secondly, the coordinates (latitude/longitude) of the vertices of offshore wind-farms should be provided in Degree Decimal with 5 digits: e.g N / E. Germany was of the view that 2 decimal places (e.g. 57,05 ) will not be enough to fully reflect the total surface of a wind-farm. 7. After discussion, EIHA agreed on a procedure for the production of the map associated with the OSPAR database so that Germany will submit it to the Secretariat in order to be presented together with the revised OSPAR Database to BDC The maps provided by Germany are attached as Annex 2. Due to the large-scale of the overall OSPAR map, the wind-farms are in some cases difficult to discern. Therefore, some additional more "regional maps" have been added. So, altogether 5 maps are enclosed. The maps include information presented by Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, and the UK. As requested by BDC 2004, the map reflects the status of the wind-farms when reported by the corresponding Contracting Party. Revised Explanatory Notes with regard to Location 8. EIHA 2004 also agreed that the Secretariat should revise the Explanatory Notes to the Database in particular with regard to the submission of data on locations and present them to BDC 2005 for their adoption. This revised explanatory Notes at Annex 3 take good account of the recommendations made by Germany about submission of geographical data (see paragraph 6 and examples of calculations in EIHA 04/4/2) as well as of the possibility of inserting the option refused under the category current status. Action requested 9. BDC is invited to: a. adopt the OSPAR Database on Wind-farms at Annex 1 and advise the Secretariat on any corrections that should be made (see paragraph 4); b. examine the maps of locations of wind-farms in the OSPAR maritime area provided by Germany at Annex 2; c. accept the offer of Germany to produce the map in further updates of the database for offshore wind-farms in the OSPAR maritime area; d. adopt the draft revised Explanatory Notes at Annex 3; f. remind all Contracting Parties of the annual requirement to update their data in the OSPAR Database on Wind-farms by 15 July 2005 using the agreed reporting format and the agreed explanatory notes. OSPAR Commission 2

3 ID No Country Name Location Distance from coast Operator No of wind turbines Current Status Capacity in MW Foundation type Water depth (m) Height (m) EIA Remarks Be01 Belgium Seanergy 11/12,5 * Electrabel-Jan De Nul 50 authorised 100 monopile less than 10 m 118 yes authorisation suspended by council of state Block 1: N/ E; N/ E; N/ E; N/ E; Block 2: Be03 Belgium C-power II (2 options) N/ E; N/ E; N/ E; N/ E 27 C-power 60 authorised monopile?/gravity-based? 10 to 25 m 130 yes authorisation for project layout in 2 blocks, groundsurvey finished in september 2004 Be05 Belgium SPE Zeebrugge 0-15 m SPE Power Company 14 refused 28 monopile o-less than yes project situated half on the harbour/half in the sea, permit refused Dk05 Denmark Vindeby 54,97427 N/11,12288 E;54,96378 N/11,1377 E;54,96312 N/11,13261 E;54, N/11,12072 E; no Operational since 1989 Dk06 Denmark Tunø Knob 55,97097 N/10,35076 E;55,9703 N/10,35715 E;55,96311 N/10,35701 E;55, N/10,35061 E; no Dk07 Denmark Middelgrund 55,70516 N/12,66686 E;55,68882 N/12,66925 E;55,67412 N/12,66686 E; less than 10 m 110 yes Operational since 1991 Dk08 Denmark Horns Rev 55,50134 N/7,79511 E;55,5021 N/7,87488 E;55,46721 N/7,88344 E;55, N/7,80374 E; yes Dk09 Denmark Rødsand 54,57 N/11,67 E;54,56 N/11,76 E;54,53 N/11,76 E;54,53 N/11,67 E 10 Energi E2 72 operational 150 gravity-based less than 10 m 110 yes Operational since 2003 Dk10 Denmark Samsoe, Palludans Flak 55,73351 N/10,58332 E;55,722 N/10,58333 E;55,70921 N/10,58333 E; less than 10 m 105 yes Dk11 Denmark Frederikshavn 57,4457 N/10,56588 E;57,4437 N/10,5656 E;57,44199 N/10,56534 E; less than 10 m 125 Dk12 Denmark Grenaa Havn 1 Jysk Vindkraft 9 authorised 18 monopile less than 10 m 99,5 yes Authorised in 2002 Dk13 Denmark Roenland 56,66853 N/8,21489 E;56,66 N/8,219 E;56,65132 N/8,22416 E; monopile less than 10 m 120 yes De15 Germany Borkum-West De17 Germany DanTysk De18 Germany Borkum Riffgrund West De19 Germany Borkum Riffgrund De20 Germany Amrumbank West De21 Germany Nordsee Ost De22 Germany Meerwind De23 Germany Offshore-Bürgerpark Butendiek De24 Germany Weisse Bank 2010 De25 Germany Forseti De26 Germany Globaltech 1 De27 De28 Germany Germany Offshore North Sea Windpower De29 Germany Sandbank 24 De30 Germany Gode Wind De31 Germany Uthland 6,57333 E/ 54,00000 N; 6,57333 E/ 54,02670 N;6,62167 E/ 54,02670 N; 6,62333 E/ 54,00000 N; 6,57333 E/ 54,00000 N 43 PROKON Nord Energiesysteme GmbH 12 authorised max. 60 tripod 25 to yes Distance to nearest island 7,16444 E/ 55,23610 N; 7,20722 E/ 55,22940 N; 7,23333 E/ 55,12750 N; 7,24167 E/ 55,09420 N; 7,25056 E/ 55,06030 N; 7,18000 E/ 5,04220 N; 7,17194 E/ 55,05670 N; 7,17028 E/ 55,09190 N; 7,16889 E/ 55,12330 N; 7,16444 E/ 55,23610 N 69 GEO mbh 80 application max. 400 tripod 10 to 25/25 to yes 6,17903 E/ 54,07220 N; 6,28753 E/ 54,06030 N; 6,28937 E/ 54,02250 N; 6,18087 E/ 54,03450 N; 6,17903 E/ 54,07220 N 52 Energiekontor GmbH 80 authorised max. 280 monopile/tripod or other 25 to yes 6,49111 E/ 53,99440 N; 6,56000 E/ 53,99440 N; 6,61694 E/ 53,96080 N; 6,61694 E/ 53,94030 N; 6,54833 E/ 53,94030 N; 6,49139 E/ 53,97390 N; 6,49111 E/ 53,99440 N 34 PNE 2 Riff I GmbH 77 authorised max. 230 tripod/other 10 to 25/25 to yes Distance to nearest island 7,63767 E/ 54,53670 N; 7,77283 E/ 54,53670 N; 7,77283 E/ 54,50380 N; 7,63767 E/ 54,50380 N; 7,63767 E/ 54,53670 N 36 Amrumbank West GmbH 80 authorised max. 400 other 10 to yes Distance to nearest island 7,64056 E/ 54,47080 N; 7,73917 E/ 54,47190 N; 7,73972 E/ 54,46110 N; 7,72639 E/ 54,43420 N; 7,64028 E/ 54,40080 N; 7,64056 E/ 54,47080 N 30 WINKRA mbh 80 authorised monopile/tripod 10 to yes Distance to nearest island 7,48583 E/ 54,40580 N; 7,48900 E/ 54,40000 N;7,51250 E/ 54,34680 N; 7,48850 E/ 54,33570 N; 7,43750 E/ 54,34320 N; 7,40650 E/ 54,35520 N 7,40650 E/ 54,37950 N; 7,48583 E/ 54,40580 N; 7,64767 E/ 54,40000 N; 7,70417 E/ 54,41810 N; 7,72883 E/ 54,41320 N; 7,71367 E/ 54,37530 N; 7,66000 E/ 54,35400 N; 7,64500 E/ 54,38130 N; 7,64767 E/ 54,40000 N 22 Windland Energieerzeugungs GmbH 75 application monopile/tripod 10 to 25/25 to yes Distance to nearest island 7,80000 E/ 54,96670 N; 7,78435 E/ 54,96670 N; 7,73750 E/ 55,01050 N; 7,73751 E/ 55,04120 N; 7,78446 E/ 55,06760 N; 7,80000 E/ 55,06760 N;7,80000 E/ 54,96670 N 35 Butendiek GmbH 80 authorised 240 monopile 10 to yes Distance to nearest island 6,90000 E/ 55,31670 N; 7,03333 E/ 55,26670 N; 7,20000 E/ 55,00000 N; 7,36667 E/ 55,00000 N; 7,38333 E/ 54,80000 N; 7,33333 E/ 54,75000 N; 7,03333 E/ 54,81670 N; 6,93333 E/ 54,86670 N; 6,93333 E/ 55,00000 N; 6,90000 E/ 55,31670 N 60 Butendiek GmbH 540 application 2700 monopile/tripod 10 to 25/25 to no 5,52833 E/ 54,81670 N; 5,52833 E/ 54,81670 N; 5,55667 E/ 54,40000 N; 5,03000 E/ 54,62670 N; 5,02833 E/ 54,76500 N; 5,52833 E/ 54,81670 N; 5,91667 E/ 54,54830 N; 6,36167 E/ 54,25830 N; 5,95833 E/ 54,22670 N; 5,60333 E/ 54,38170 N; 5,91667 E/ 54,54830 N 75 PROKON Nord Energiesysteme GmbH 1750 application max tripod 25 to no Data given reflects the full application with possible future expansion phases. Coordinates and other data for the preceding pilot phase (max. 80 wind turbines)are currently not available as the application procedure is not yet in an advanced stage. Distance to nearest island. Data given reflects the full application with possible future expansion phases. Coordinates and other data for the preceding pilot phase (max. 80 wind turbines)are currently not available as the application procedure is not yet in an advanced stage.distance to nearest island. 6,31810 E/ 54,54100 N; 6,39033 E/ 54,54100 N; 6,42643 E/ 54,51290 N; 6,33032 E/ 54,45680 N;6,31810 E/ 54,48490 N; 6,31810 E/ 54,54100 N 100 Nordsee Windpower GmbH & Co.KG 80 application 360 tripod 25 to yes Distance to nearest island 6,74000 E/ 54,07370 N; 6,79183 E/ 54,07370 N; 6,79183 E/ 54,00170 N; 6,74000 E/ 54,00170 N; 6,74000 E/ 54,07370 N 40 ENOVA Offshore Projektentwicklungs- GmbH & Co.KG 48 application max. 240 monopile/tripod/other 25 to yes Distance to nearest island Hochsee Windpark Nordsee 6,36111 E/ 54,49860 N; 6,36111 E/ 54,39170 N; 6,24250 E/ 54,46940 N; 54 25" 6,36111 E/ 54,49860 N 90 EOS Offshore AG 80 application 360 tripod 25 to yes Distance to nearest island 6,80039 E/ 55,27980 N; 6,81294 E/ 55,29050 N; 6,84386 E/ 55,29410 N; 6,90953 E/ 55,11840 N; 6,87861 E/ 55,11420 N; 6,85975 E/ 55,12130 N;6,80039 E/ 55,27980 N 100 Sandbank 24 GmbH & Co.KG 80 authorised max. 280 tripod/monopile 10 to 25/25 to yes Distance to nearest island 6,94167 E/ 54,05170 N; 6,94167 E/ 54,07080 N; 7,02278 E/ 54,07080 N; 7,04694 E/ 54,05670 N; 7,04694 E/ 53,99940 N; 7,03083 E/ 53,99940 N; 6,94167 E/ 54,05170 N 45 Plambeck Neue Energien AG 80 application 320 monopile/tripod 25 to no Distance to nearest island 7,38333 E/ 55,00000 N; 7,53333 E/ 55,00000 N; 7,53333 E/ 54,89170 N; 7,38333 E/ 54,89170 N; 7,38333 E/ 55,00000 N 49 GEO mbh 80 application 400 tripod 25 to no Distance to nearest island De32 Germany Weiße Bank De33 Germany Jules Verne De34 Germany Ventotech Nord 1 De35 Germany Ventotech Nord 2 De36 Germany Nördlicher Grund Hochsee Windpark He De37 Germany dreiht 6,87917 E/ 54,77500 N; 6,84167 E/ 54,80420 N;6,83750 E/ 54,83750 N; 6,86667 E/ 54,87920 N; 6,89583 E/ 54,88170 N; 6,97083 E/ 54,84170 N;6,87917 E/ 54,77500 N 83 Energiekontor GmbH 170 application 595 other 25 to no 5,83198 E/ 54,89930 N; 6,17366 E/ 54,89930 N; 6,25699 E/ 54,74930 N; 5,83198 E/ 54,74930 N; 5,83198 E/ 54,89930 N 133 Plambeck Neue Energien AG 3000 application tripod/monopile 25 to no Data given reflects the full application with possible future expansion phases. Coordinates and other data for the preceding pilot phase (max. 80 wind turbines) are currently not available as the application procedure is not yet in an advanced stage. Distance to nearest island. Data given reflects the full application with possible future expansion phases. Coordinates and other data for the preceding pilot phase (max. 80 wind turbines)are currently not available as the application procedure is not yet in an advanced stage. Distance to nearest island. 5,85548 E/ 54,77900 N; 6,05650 E/ 54,77930 N; 5,89515 E/ 54,70210 N; 5,86034 E/ 54,72230 N; 5,85548 E/ 54,77900 N 130 Arcadis Consult GmbH 50 application 150 tripod 25 to no Distance to nearest island 6,10666 E/ 54,57030 N; 6,14561 E/ 54,59010 N; 6,32099 E/ 54,58550 N; 6,32221 E/ 54,57870 N; 6,19963 E/ 54,51640 N; 6,10666 E/ 54,57030 N 112 Arcadis Consult GmbH 50 application 150 tripod 25 to no Distance to nearest island 6,85103 E/ 55,08080 N; 6,98865 E/ 55,08080 N; 7,02500 E/ 55,00000 N; 6,88228 E/ 55,00000 N; 6,85103 E/ 55,08080 N 86 NEG Micon Deutschland Gmbh 80 application 360 monopile 25 to yes Distance to nearest island 6,13333 E/ 54,43690 N; 6,29167 E/ 54,32920 N; 6,13333 E/ 54,32920 N; 6,13333 E/ 54,43690 N 85 EOS Offshore AG 80 application 360 tripod 25 to yes Distance to nearest island

4 ID No Country Name Location De38 Germany TGB North De40 Germany WP Nordergründe De43 Germany WP Riffgat De48 Germany H2-20 De49 Germany BARD Offshore 1 De50 Germany Deutsche Bucht De51 Germany Austerngrund IE1 Ireland Arklow Bank Nl48 Netherlands Q7 WP Distance from coast Operator No of wind turbines Current Status Capacity in MW Foundation type Water depth (m) Height (m) EIA Remarks 6,27500 E/ 54,36670 N; 5,95000 E/ 54,57500 N;6,00833 E/ 54,60000 N; 6,35833 E/ 54,37500 N; 6,27500 E/ 54,36670 N; 5,91667 E/ 54,58330 N; 5,80000 E/ 54,64170 N; 5,60000 E/ 54,80830 N; 5,65000 E/ 54,82500 N; 5,98333 E/ 54,61670 N; 5,91667 E/ 54,58330 N 100 ep4 offshore GmbH 596 application max other 25 to 50? no Data given reflects the full application with possible expansion phases. Coordinates and other data for the preceding pilot phase (max. 80 wind turbines) are currently not available as the application procedure is not yet in an advanced stage. Distance to nearest island 8,15036 E/ 53,85290 N; 8,18386 E/ 53,83930 N; 8,18387 E/ 53,81250 N; 8,17759 E/ 53,81240 N; 8,14271 E/ 53,84840 N; 8,15036 E/ 53,85290 N 13 Energiekontor GmbH max. 25 application max. 125 monopile/tripod 10 to yes Distance to nearest island 6,43583 E/ 53,67700 N; 6,42750 E/ 53,69580 N; 6,53167 E/ 53,71080 N; 6,53917 E/ 53,69170 N; 6,43583 E/ 53,67700 N 14,5 ENOVA Offshore Projektentwicklungs- GmbH & Co.KG max. 44 application max. 220? 10 to to 180 no Distance to nearest island 4,07806 E/ 55,79810 N, 4,19389 E/ 55,77890 N; 4,19361 E/ 55,61780 N; 4,07806 E/ 55,66000 N; 4,07806 E/ 55,79810 N 200 GEO mbh 80 application 400 tripod 25 to no Hydrogen production. Planned start of construction in ,00633 E/ 54,43290 N, 6,00476 E/ 54,32000 N; 5,95051 E/ 54,31610 N; 5,95185 E/ 54,43000 N; 6,00633 E/ 54,43290 N 89 Bard Engineering GmbH 80 application max. 400 monopile/tripod/gravitybased/jacket 25 to no Distance to nearest island 5,78122 E/ 54,28650 N; 5,57436 E/ 54,37670 N; 5,78122 E/ 54,37670 N; 5,78122 E/ 54,28650 N 89 Offshore Windpark Deutsche Bucht GbR 80 application 400 gravity-based 25 to no Distance to nearest island 5,78122 E/ 54,39470 N; 5,59724 E/ 54,39470 N; 5,78122 E/ 54,49350 N; 5,78122 E/ 54,39470 N 103 Offshore Windpark Deutsche Bucht GbR 80 application 400 gravity-based 25 to no Distance to nearest island 52,78269 N/5,9975 W; 52,67472 N/5,96417 W; 52,91805 N/5,93417 W; 52,91445 N/5,8975 W 10 km Arklow Energy subleased from Sure Partners 7? 25.2 Intended extension of the wind farm to Mw within the same area when closest distance to shore will be not less than 7 km 52,60778 N/4,24033 E; 52,58514 N/4,26447 E; 52,60536 N/4,19544 E; 52,56897 N/4,24814 E; 52,57669 N/4,18436 E 23 km E-Connection B.V. 60 authorised 120 monopile 10 to yes The coordinates in decimal degrees were calculated based on ED50 figures Nl49 Netherlands Near Shore Windpark (demonstration park) 52,60461 N/4,49472 E; 52,57381 N/4,48756 E; 52,57411 N/4,43097 E; 52,63117 N/4,35183 E; 52,63514 N/4,37986 E; 52,62575 N/4,39453 E; 52,63944 N/4,41819 E 11 km Noordzeewind 36 authorised 100 monopile 10 to yes The coordinates in decimal degrees were calculated based on WGS84 figures Es14 Spain Trafalgar 7.5 E.H.N., S.A. 225 application 450 monopile 20 to 30 m unknown (pending) Se50 Sweden Fladen Göteborg En-y 60 refused Total 300 MW gravity-based 10 to yes Application refused because Fladen is a Natura 2000 site. 52,65892N/1,78065E; 52,65869N/1,80280E; 52,63201N/1,79434E; 2km Powergen Renewables 30 operational 76 monopile less than 10m 100 yes UK50 UK Scroby Sands 52,62875N/1,78609E; 52,62884N/1,77870E 53,43100N/3,42067W; 53,41000N/3,41383W; 53,40317N/3,47283W; 5km NWP Offshore Limited 30 operational 90 monopile less than 10m 130 yes UK51 UK North Hoyle 53,42467N/3,48000W 53,39117N/3,65300W; 53,38150N/3,61000W; 53,36433N/3,620833W; 8km NWP Offshore Limited 30 authorised 100 monopile less than 10m 130 yes UK52 UK Rhyl Flats 53,38000N/3,69050W; 53,38883N/3,68617W; 53,38250N/3,65783W 54,01167N/3,30450W; 53,9875N/3,25933W; 53,97083N/3,28467W; 7km Warwick Energy Limited 30 authorised 108 monopile 10 to 25 m 125 yes UK53 UK Barrow 53,99500N/3,33017W 54,78267N/3,68317W; 54,75217N/3,67617W; 54,76283N/3,70033W; 9.5km Natural Power Limited 60 authorised 216 monopile less than 10m 130 yes UK54 UK Robin Rigg 54,77267N/3,668W 51,47287N/1,10635E; 51,45300N/1,13128E; 51,44797N/1,08143E; 8.5km Global Renewable Energy Partners Limited 30 authorised 129 monopile less than 10m 140 yes UK55 UK Kentish Flats 51,46783N/1,05648E 53,50222N/3,18722W; 53,48194N/3,15000W; 53,47472N/3,18500W; 6.4km SeaScape Energy Limited 30 authorised 90 monopile less than 10m 130 yes UK56 UK Burbo Bank 53,49500N/3,22222W; 53,50194N/3,21888W 53,14664N/0,47845E; 53,12878N/0,47924E; 53,12684N/0,43088E; 5.2km AMEC Offshore Wind Power Limited 30 authorised 108 monopile less than 10m 150 yes UK57 UK Lynn 53,14344N/0,43036E 53,21297N/0,46017E; 53,16949N/0,46023E; 53,16947N/0,43273E; 5km Offshore Wind Power Limited 30 authorised 120 monopile less than 10m 145 yes UK58 UK Inner Dowsing 53,21295N/0,43265E 53,03297N/1,37812E; 52,97930N/1,39040E; 52,97758N/1,36988E; 6.5km Norfolk Offshore Wind Limited 30 authorised 108 monopile 10 to 25 metres 140 yes UK59 UK Cromer 53,03125N/1,35758E 51,74943N/1,24447E; 51,73573N/1,25634E; 51,71442N/1,20175E; 7km GE Wind Energy 30 authorised 108 monopile less than 10m 150 yes UK60 UK Gunfleet Sands 51,72819N/1,18982E 53,87493N/3,22781W; 53,87417N/3,16395W; 53,82921N/3,16550W; 7.1km Cirrus Energy 90 application 324 monopile/gravity based less than 10m/ yes UK61 UK Shell Flat 53,82996/3,22931W; 53,85087N/3,34354W mettes 51,4851N/3,8854W; 51,4806N/3,8835W; 51,4762N/3,8813W; 7km United Utilities Green Energy 30 application 108 monopile/gravity based less than 10m 130 yes UK62 UK Scarweather Sands 51,4896N/3,8751W; 51,4761N/3,869W; 51,4939N/3,8646W; 51,4759N/3,8565W; 51,4946N/3,8531W; 51,4754N/3,8435W; 51,4953N/3,8416W; 51,475N/3,8302W; 51,4943N/3,8345W; 51,4917N/3,8286W; 51,4876N/3,8267W; 51,4837N/3,8242W; 51,4798N/3,8213W; 51,4762N/3,8179W UK63 UK Blyth 55,13503N/1,48965W; 55,13725N/1,49083W 1km Blyth Offshore Wind Ltd 2 operational 4 drilled monopile less than 10m 91 yes Operational since 2000

5 Annex 2 1

6 2

7 3

8 Annex 3 Draft revised Explanatory Notes to the Reporting Format for the OSPAR Database on Offshore Wind-farms (Source: Annex 3 of Annex 7 to BDC 2003) When filling in the reporting format, Contracting Parties are kindly requested to adhere to the following terminology : 1. The column Name should reflect the name (or other designation) of each offshore windmill installation ( wind-farm ) under the jurisdiction of the Contracting Party concerned, as used by the competent national authority. Note: The term wind-turbine is used to describe each separate structure that carries rotors or equivalent equipment to capture wind energy. It includes the whole structure from the foundation to the top of the rotor or equivalent equipment. The term wind-farm is used to describe a group of one or more wind-turbines, which is physically separated from other such groups and/or which is regarded by the competent national authority as a separate unit for regulatory purposes. 2. The column Location should be completed by giving the decimal degrees of longitude and latitude in each sub-column and in this order of the points defining the polygon formed by the outermost elements of the wind farm (. Ddecimal degrees should be calculated by dividing minutes of a degree by 60 and adding to it seconds of a degree divided by 3 600, and expressing the result to five two decimal places (Example 1: will be / /3600 = ; Example 2: will be /60 = ). Contracting Parties should make use of the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84). As an exception if WGS84 data is not available, data can be presented in the European Datum 1950 (ED50) for its conversion into WGS84. Where there are several wind-turbines in a wind-farm, the coordinates of the approximate centre of the wind-farm should be given. Note: This information will enables the creation by Germany of GIS maps maps which reflect the total surface of the wind-farms reported. The map and will enable the location of wind-farms to be compared easily with GIS descriptions of routes that may be relevant from a biodiversity point of view (bird migration routes, spawning grounds etc). There may be a case in future for collecting information on the total surface area between the most widely separated windturbines in a wind-farm, since this may be of interest, for example since fishermen will not usually be allowed to fish among the wind-turbines. 3. The column Distance from the coast should give the shortest distance in km between the nearest coast and the wind-turbine closest to the coast. Note: This information may be important for assessing the impact on landscape and bird migration. 4. The column No of wind turbines refers to the number of wind-turbines in the wind-farm. Note: The aim of the database is not to create an endless listing of individual wind-turbines, but there may be a need to identify single units in some cases. 5. In completing the column Current status, the terms used should be limited to the following phases: application cases where a formal application for permission to construct or operate has been filed but a decision is still pending; authorised cases where permission to construct or operate has been given, but operations have not started; 1 OSPAR Commission

9 refused cases where a formal application for permission to construct or operate has been dismissed. operational cases where at least one wind-turbine in the wind-farm is operating; operating (and related words) should be understood to be a level of activity where some energy is supplied from the wind-farm to land; out of service cases where operation of all the wind-turbines in the wind-farm has temporarily ceased; decommissioned cases where all operations in the wind-farm have permanently ceased. Any more detailed comments on dates of expected authorisation, dates of expected operation, reasons for not being in service, planned reuse or future removal of the wind-farm should be made under the heading Remarks ; 6. The column Capacity in MW refers to the maximum possible operational output of the windfarm when working at full capacity. Note: There may be a case in future to create a further heading for the actual annual average output in MWh, in order to estimate the scale of the actual activity, and thus its impact of the activities on marine biodiversity, which would the be reflected in vibration, noise, etc. 7. In the column Foundation type, the descriptions should be limited to: monopile, tripod, gravity-based, pre-existing structure (this includes any re-used oil and gas installations), other (this includes floating structures) Any further details should be given in the column Remarks. 8. In the column Water depth, the depth of the water at the site should be described broadly in one of the following five ranges: less than 10 m, 10 to 25 m, 25 to 50 m, 50 to 100 m over 100 m. 9. In the column Height, there should be given the height in metres above mean sea level of the highest point reached by a rotor blade during its rotation. If some other part of the structure is higher, its height should then be the one given. 10. In the column Environmental Impact Information, Contracting Parties should answer yes or no as to whether available information exists on the assessment or evaluation of the environmental impact of the wind-farm before approval was granted and/or on its monitoring during construction, operation and decommissioning. If yes, a brief reference to the documentation available should be given under the column Remarks. 2 OSPAR Commission