internship report - kennisdelen rvo

VLIZ- FLANDERS MARINE INSTITUTE

Internship report Multiuse in offshore wind farms: State of the art

Author: Ivana Vukelic, Free University of Brussels-VUB

Supervisors: Chantal Martens and Dr. Fien De Raedemaecker, VLIZ December 2019

1

Table of contents 1) Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 3

2) Overview of policies for offshore wind farm development- Reference to multiuse in policy documents .................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 International level ............................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 The Law of the Sea Convention ................................................................................................... 4

2.2 EU level ............................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2.1 Renewable Energy Directives 2001; 2009; 2018.......................................................................... 6

2.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA Directive) ............................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2.3 Marine Spatial Planning Directive- MSPD (Directive 2014/89/EU).............................................. 6

2.3 Belgium ............................................................................................................................................... 7

2.3.1 Maritime Spatial Plan of Belgium................................................................................................. 7

2.3.2 The North Sea 2050 vision ........................................................................................................... 9

2.3.3 Belgium and renewable energy goals .......................................................................................... 9

3) Multiuse in offshore wind farms ......................................................................................................... 10

3.1 Reasons to look towards multiuse in offshore wind farms, now and in the future ......................... 10

3.2 Different countries- different ideas .................................................................................................. 11

3.3 General drivers and barriers for multiuse in offshore wind farms ................................................... 11

3.3.1 Actors, industries, and tools, which could enhance multiuse in offshore wind farms .............. 12

3.3.2 General barriers for multiuse in offshore wind farms ............................................................... 12

3.4 Significant factors to be taken into consideration when planning multiuse in the offshore wind farms ....................................................................................................................................................... 13

3.4.1 The importance of timing .......................................................................................................... 13

3.4.2 Capacity density ......................................................................................................................... 14

3.5 Multiuse research projects that include wind energy development ................................................ 15

4) In-depth analysis of multiuse combinations in the offshore wind farms ........................................... 18

4.1 MUOWF1: Offshore wind+ Commercial Fisheries/ Maritime transport .......................................... 18

4.1.1 Drivers, barriers and solutions/ mitigations for the MUOWF1 ................................................. 19

4.1.2 Case studies for the MUOWF1 combination- Experiences from other countries ..................... 22

4.1.3 State of play of MUOWF1 combination in Belgium and expert ideas for the future ................ 24

4.2 MUOWF2: Offshore wind + Aquaculture .......................................................................................... 25

4.2.1 Drivers and barriers for the MUOWF2 ....................................................................................... 25


2


4.3 MUOWF3: Offshore wind+ Conservation/ Building with nature ...................................................... 33




4.4 MUOWF4: Offshore wind + Wave energy ........................................................................................ 38




5) The relation between activities at sea and on the land ...................................................................... 43

Impact of multiuse at sea on port infrastructure ................................................................................... 43

Multiuse in ports ..................................................................................................................................... 47

6) Discussion/ Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 48

7) References & literature list ................................................................................................................. 51

3

1) Introduction This report aims to give insights into the current state of play of multiuse in offshore wind farms. Information presented in this report is obtained from a literature review and interviews with experts in the field. The literature overview can be found at the end of the report in the references chapter. The following experts were interviewed for this research: Marijn Rabaut - Independent expert - Blue Cluster, Belgium Bob Rumes - Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences - Direction of Natural Environment, Belgium Jeroen van Overloop - Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport, Belgium Wim Stubbe - AGHO Port of Oostende, Belgium Nancy Nevejan – Ghent University, Belgium Emile Lemey – Jan de Nul, Belgium Nico Buytendijk - Netherlands Enterprise Agency, RVO, Netherlands Thanos Gkritzalis – VLIZ - Flanders Marine Institute, Belgium Daniel Depellegrin – University of Exeter, United Kingdom Ivana Lukic – SUBMARINER Network/s.Pro-sustainable projects, Germany Andronikos Kafas - Marine Scotland Science, United Kingdom Increases in the global population, economic growth, trade, and rising income levels have caused the expansion of human activity at sea. Competition for limited marine space, conflicts among different users and increased stress on marine ecosystems are the result of this increased human activity. Multiuse is an antipode to a single sector viewpoint approach to issues between different users of the sea space. Conflicts between users reduced Blue Growth and innovation potential, and negative impacts on the marine environment can be a result of fragmented planning. Approaches to the development of maritime industries and the exploitation of marine resources remain limited (spatial efficiency and identification of environmental, economic and social synergies) as long as they are perceived as individual and separate activities. Using resources in close geographic proximity and sequential use by more users represent ocean multiuse (Schupp et al., 2019). Why multiuse in offshore wind farms? Different marine regions (with different characteristics) and different countries have different preferences when it comes to marine spatial planning and possible multiuse at sea. Choices depend on various factors: environmental characteristics and factors, size of the country sea space, economic and industrial preferences, degree of the development of MSP... However, it is common that, due to climate changes and an increase in renewable energy demands, more countries are developing offshore wind farms (in the EU North Sea area especially) and analyzing possibilities for efficient coastal defense solutions. Experts agree that offshore wind farms and coastal defense zones have the biggest potential for multiuse to happen since these are big offshore infrastructures that occupy a significant amount of sea space. In line with policies on international and EU levels and to tackle climate change and fulfill the Paris agreement, the energy sector needs to be fully decarbonized before 2050. A significant increase in the share of renewables is foreseen, including massive offshore wind energy build-out. By 2040, North Sea offshore wind power will reach a capacity of 70 to 150 gigawatts of electricity. This equals up to one-fifth of EUs power consumption and provides a large amount of energy to North Sea countries.

4

Therefore, there will be a need for more offshore wind farms in the North Sea countries in the coming years (MUMM Scientific Service, 2019). In this report, multiuse in offshore wind farms will be analyzed. The focus in the report will be on the North Sea countries. North Sea offshore wind development The first five countries with the largest amount of installed offshore wind farms in the EU are North Sea countries. 97% of all grid-connected turbines in the EU are in the North Sea countries. European offshore wind development was growing since the early 2000s. The 81 offshore wind farms with a total of 3,589 offshore turbines and a cumulative total of 12,631 MW have been installed and grid-connected in 10 European countries by the end of 2016. The UK has the largest amount of offshore wind capacity in Europe - 48 %. In Germany, it is 32.5% of all installations. Denmark is the third-largest market with 10.1%, followed by the Netherlands (8.8%) and Belgium (5.6%)(NorthSEE). Passive and active multiuse In this report, multiuse in offshore wind farms combinations are categorized as passive or active. In passive multiuse, along with offshore wind development, there is no introduction of a new activity. The idea is to preserve activity that potentially was already present before the offshore wind farm development happened. Commercial fishing, nature conservation and maritime transport in offshore wind farms are categorized as passive multiuse. Aquaculture and wave energy converters are categorized as active multiuse since the additional activity is introduced in offshore wind farm zones, either during planning or in later phases.

2) Overview of policies for offshore wind farm development- Reference to multiuse in policy documents

Policies that regulate activities at sea, especially those that govern and sometimes limit the development of the offshore wind farms on international, EU and Belgian level will be listed. The emphasis will be on policies or parts of policies that refer to multiuse.

2.1 International level On the international level, there are not many policies with explicit references to multiuse in offshore wind farms on an international level. In this report, policies will be listed chronologically, from earlier to more recent ones.

2.1.1 The Law of the Sea Convention The Law of the Sea Convention came into force in 1994. In 1994 offshore wind farm development was not yet in practice. Therefore, there are not many conditions regarding the development of blue energy in LOSC. Nevertheless, LOSC remains the legal basis for all activities at sea; rights and duties of countries; and coastal, port and flag state jurisdiction. Establishment of Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ), sovereign

5

rights of the country to set laws, regulate activities, and use of space and resources in the territorial sea are set by LOSC (De Gend, 2018). It is declared that the country has sovereignty over energy resources at sea, which is essential for offshore windfarm developments. Coastal states have sovereign rights to produce energy from the water, currents, and winds, including the exclusive right to construct and to authorize the construction, operation and use of artificial islands, installations, and structures for the production of energy from water, currents and winds. According to LOSC, foreign vessels in territorial water of another state have a “right of innocent passage”. Therefore, the country does not have the right to set installations and structures on recognized sea lanes essential to international navigation that are adopted by the IMO. Furthermore, the state is obliged to enable another country to lay cables on its seabed. Nevertheless, there are conditions that the country has the right to set when it comes to foreign pipelines and cables (De Gendt, 2018). “Safety zones” around artificial islands, installations (such as offshore wind farms), and structures on the sea are relevant for offshore wind development and established by LOSC. In these zones, the navigation is not allowed (as it is the case in Belgium), or it is limited. LOSC also regulates the removal of the installations (Maes, 2015). The MASPNOSE project represents MSP cross- border cooperation with the ecosystemic approach. In 2015, at the Paris climate conference (COP21), 195 countries signed a global climate deal- Paris agreement- which is legally binding. Countries agreed to “keep the increase in global average temperature below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels”. Each country has a determined plan, together with the regular reports about the progress. Belgium is working to further develop electricity generation from renewables, offshore wind farms mostly, to achieve the goals that have been set by the Paris agreement (EU Commission). Other international policies that apply to offshore wind farm development are listed below. 1972; 1977 (came into force)- Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG) 1972- Stockholm Declaration- Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment 1974; 1980 (came into force)- International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) 1982; 1994 (came into force) – United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) 1983- Bonn Convention - Protection of the environment 1991; 1997 (came into force)- Espoo Convention- Protection of the environment; Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context 1992- OSPAR Convention - Protection of the environment 1992- Rio Declaration- 27 principles intended to promote sustainable development around the world 1992- United Nations Agenda 21 plan- Non-binding action plan of the United Nations concerning sustainable development 1992; 1993 (came into force)- Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); a multilateral treaty: three main goals including 1) the conservation of biological diversity (or biodiversity); 2) the sustainable use of its components; 3) the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources 1994; 1998 (came into force)- Energy Charter Treaty- International instrument related to energy regulation 1995- FAO Code of Conduct for Fisheries- Behavior for responsible practices aiming at maintaining effective conservation, management, and development of living aquatic resources with respect for the ecosystem and biodiversity

6

1998- Aarhus Convention: Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters 2009/2010- Governments of the countries surrounding the North Sea signed a memorandum of understanding for regional cooperation on offshore wind energy 2015- Paris agreement- 195 countries adopted the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate deal.

2.2 EU level Three versions of renewable energy directives on the EU level that could influence the development of offshore wind farms and multiuse in it are significant to mention.

2.2.1 Renewable Energy Directives 2001; 2009; 2018 Electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market is promoted in the Renewable Energy Directive (EC Directive 2001/77/EC) from 2001. In the revised version of RED from 2009 (EC Directive 2009/28/EC), it is regulated that by 2020, a reduction of 20% in EU greenhouse gas emissions (GGE) from 1990 levels should be achieved. Also, it is directed that an increase of 20% in Renewable Energy Sources by 2020 should be established on the EU level. Besides, countries got individual targets to achieve by 2020 (Wind Europe, 2019). The revised Renewables Energy Directive from 2018 (EC Directive 2018/2001/EC) sets a new renewable energy share target to be achieved by 2030 on the EU level- 32% of the energy should come from renewable sources (Wind Europe, 2019).

2.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA Directive) On the European level, two main “assessment” processes are dealing with environmental considerations: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA Directive) (EU Commission).

2.2.3 Marine Spatial Planning Directive- MSPD (Directive 2014/89/EU) The Marine Spatial Planning Directive- MSPD (Directive 2014/89/EU) sets a goal that all coastal EU member states are obliged to prepare cross-sectorial marine spatial plans by 2021. An ecosystem-based approach and cross-border cooperation are fundamental during this process. The objectives of this directive are sustainable development, growth in the maritime sector, and the ecosystem-based method. Also, one of the purposes is the promotion of the coexistence of activities and uses, which refers to the multiuse concept. EU member states can determine how to achieve these goals. In different countries, there are various authorities (depending on the constitution and national legislation) that are dealing with MSP. However, there are minimum requirements that have to be fulfilled. Until 2021, member countries should finish their marine spatial plans, the participation of stakeholders and the public needs to be assured, data should be shared, transboundary cooperation is encouraged and each country should have a competent authority that will be in charge of MSP (EU Commission).

7

It is important to stress that the multiuse concept is included in the MSPD framework. Coexistence is mentioned in Article 5: “The Member States shall… promote the coexistence of relevant activities and uses”. In the MSPD, it is also stated: “Maritime spatial planning also aims at identifying and encouraging multi-purpose uses, following the relevant national policies and legislation” (EU Commission). EU policies on offshore wind development are outlined below: 1970s; 2014 (most recent version)- The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)- first introduced in the 1970s and went through successive updates, current version from 2014 1985- Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (EIA) 1992- Council Directive 92/43/EEC- Habitats Directive- wildlife and nature conservation- Natura 2000 2000- EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2001- EC Directive 2001/77/EC- promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market 2003- Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA Directive)- Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context 2007- Integrated Marine Policy 2008- Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2009- EC Directive 2009/28/EC- Renewable Energy Directive (RED) 2009- Birds Directive- wildlife and nature conservation 2012- Blue Growth Strategy 2014- Marine Spatial Planning Directive (MSPD) 2018- EC Directive 2018/2001/EC- the new revised Renewables Energy Directive

2.3 Belgium 2.3.1 Maritime Spatial Plan of Belgium Before the installation of offshore wind farms in Belgium, there is a need to designate zones for offshore wind farm development in MSP and MSP needs to be adopted. A clear legal framework that is in line with the Maritime Spatial Plan of Belgium must be present. According to the Royal Decree,the Belgium Marine spatial plan consists of the territorial sea, the continental shelf, and the EEZ. The act on the Protection of the Marine Environment of 20 January 1999 represents the legal base for the Belgian marine spatial plan. Conditions that Belgium government sets concerning MSP are: there is a need for comprehensive planning and public and stakeholder participation, a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) needs to be implemented and there is a need for evaluation and revision every six years (De Gendt, 2018). North Sea Masterplan 2003-2005 The first vital document, the predecessor of MSP in Belgium, is the North Sea Masterplan 2003-2005. In this period, the new function -Minister for the North Sea is established. An additional Marine protected area (MPA) was added to the adapted version of this document in 2012.

8

Maritime Spatial Plan 2014-2020 The Belgian federal government has developed a national maritime spatial plan that is looking up to 2020 in 2014. The project was adopted by the Council of Ministers, which is the authority in charge of MSP in Belgium. The plan is a legally binding planning document set by the Royal Decree (Belgian Federal Public Service Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment, 2014). Maritime Spatial Plan 2020-2026 In 2017, the participatory revision process of the first marine spatial plan started. The newly revised master plan considers the period 2020-2026. Changes that have been made in comparison to the earlier version of MSP are:

1) There are new zones designated for renewable energy development (offshore wind farms) in BNS, next to the French border.

2) New MPA has been defined - “Vlakte van de Raan”. 3) Renewable energy zone “Fairybank” has been expanded 4) Changes in the coastal defense zone 5) The Royal Decree no longer provides space for the test island

Even though there are no specially designated areas for multiuse in the revised MSP 2020-2026, according to “Appendix 1: Spatial analysis of the sea areas”, multiuse of activities and space in Belgium North Sea is strongly encouraged. Some of those activities are “marine aquaculture”, growth of fish, shellfish, seaweeds or other marine life in the renewable energy zone. The Edulis project is given as an example of a successful multiuse project in the North Sea. More about the Edulis project will be elaborated in chapter 4.2.3 of this report. Furthermore, in the “Appendix 1: Spatial analysis of the sea areas” of the MSP 2020-2026, various other prospective projects and options for future development are mentioned: alternative forms of energy storage and energy generation. The wind farms could be combined with the production of energy via waves or tides. In the renewable energy zone is also possible to establish infrastructure for the storage, transmission, and conversion of energy (high voltage station for example). However, while developing these kinds of activities, planners have to keep in mind the current limitation that involves prohibited shipping in the renewable energy zone. Moreover, in Appendix 1 is noted that there is no alternative energy storage in the Belgian North Sea at the moment, but that this can be subject to change in the future. Energy storage could be included in offshore wind farm zones in Belgium. Technological evolutions in the field of energy generation and storage make activities more profitable and efficient. The technological progress has increased the capacity of windmills and cables, making investments more cost-effective. Higher efficiency also allows fewer wind turbines to be installed to generate the same amount of power. In the Appendix of MSP 2020-2026, it is stressed that due to the increased amount of renewable energy, there will be a need for extra storage space. In line with this, experts explain that at the moment, the most significant problems regarding offshore wind farms in Belgium are grid reinforcement, grid integration, and energy storage. In the Belgian North Sea, there needs to be sufficient space for cables and pipelines, the storage and generation of energy and a power outlet at sea. Finally, in the Appendix of MSP 2020-2026, it is recommended that multiuse (conservation and aquaculture for example) should be established in the new zones for renewable energy (Ruimtelijke analyse van de zeegebieden. Marien Ruimtelijk Plan, 2017).

9

2.3.2 The North Sea 2050 vision The North Sea 2050 vision is a guiding policy document that is included as an appendix to the revised Marine Spatial Plan 2020-2026. This document from 2017 is a long term vision that is referring to the development of activities in the Belgian North Sea and looking up to 2050. It relies on three principles: naturalness, blue economy and innovation, and multiuse of space. The vision has been developed by the State Secretary for the Fight against Social Fraud, Privacy, and the North Sea, with competence over the North Sea. One of the general agreements in the document is that multiuse and working with nature represent the main components in the future development of the Belgium North Sea. When explaining the “core principles for sustainable management of the Belgium North Sea” in the document is stated that “by 2050, multi-use will be the norm for all activities taking place on the Belgian part of the North Sea” (European MSP Platform; Belgian Vision for the North Sea 2050, 2017). Multiuse Space working group In the scope of the North Sea 2050 Vision project, one of the working groups was- Multiuse Space working group. In the report of the Multiuse Space working group, it is foreseen that in the future, all the countries bordering the North Sea will have one comprehensive marine spatial plan with a vision for cross border planning processes. It is also predicted that by 2050, policies will be brought on a sectoral level. In the report, it is recommended that the multiuse concept should be applied to the renewable energy sector. Multiuse Space in the North Sea is facilitated by the international, European and national regulations. The Belgian part of the North Sea is smaller compared to neighboring countries; therefore, activities should be planned temporarily. The Belgian North Sea should serve as “a testing ground” for scientific projects such as “alternative ways of generating energy, experimenting with seaweed farming, fish farming, developing a natural sand motor, sea defenses” states report of this working group (Belgian Vision for the North Sea 2050, 2017).

2.3.3 Belgium and renewable energy goals

In the revised version of the RED from 2009 (EC Directive 2009/28/EC), countries got individual targets to achieve by 2020. Belgium's objective is that 13% of Belgium’s energy demand should come from renewables. However, the situation in 2019 is that renewables account for just 9.1% of Belgium’s energy demand (Wind Europe, 2019). The Revised Renewables Energy Directive from 2018 (EC Directive 2018/2001/EC) sets a new renewable energy share target to be achieved by 2030 on the EU level- 32% of energy should come from renewable sources. In line with that, in the current draft of the Belgian National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP), there is a promised share of 18.3% of total Belgium energy demand to come from renewable energy sources by 2030. According to the NECP, wind power will play an essential role in achieving this goal. The planned renewables share in Belgium will be 40.4% in electricity, 20.6% in transport, and 12.7% in heating and cooling. In the offshore wind farms, the plan is to install the total capacity of 4GW by 2030. That means that there will be approximately 51 MW of new installed capacity for offshore wind farms every year in the period 2020-2030. Having in mind that the Belgian North Sea accommodates many activities and that the Belgian EEZ is a small area (3454 km2), probably there will be demand for the

10

introduction of multiuse in offshore wind farms as well as in other areas (Belgium’s Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan, 2018). In Belgium, each of the three regions has jurisdictions over its energy policy. The federal-state is in charge of the territorial sea and the EEZ and can regulate offshore activities. According to “Belgium’s Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan 2021-2030,” the legal framework for the development of the offshore wind parks in Belgium is “settled under Articles 6 and 7 of the Electricity Act”. The developer does not need a production license for the construction of offshore wind farms, but an offshore domain concession. Offshore wind farms need the authorization of the Federal Minister of Energy and three main permits should be obtained: 1) domain concession, 2) marine protection permit 3) cable permits. Wind developers need to get a domain concession before constructing and operating a power plant using water, currents, solar or wind energy within the designated marine areas. The domain concession allows developers to occupy a parcel in the zone reserved for wind development. This part of the public domain is not accessible to the public afterward. With the concession, the developer gets occupation permits for the development and operation of offshore wind farms, but not for the offshore cables (De Gendt, 2018). According to changes made to the Electricity Act in 2014, it is possible to acquire a domain concession for the installation and exploitation of hydro-electrical energy storage facilities at sea- energy islands. It is also possible to get a domain concession for the construction and exploitation of installation necessary for the transmission of electricity- electricity sockets. The Modular Offshore Grid (MOG) is Elia’s first offshore project and the first in Belgium to group several offshore wind farms and connect them to the mainland. The switching platform is 40 km off the coast. By the end of 2020, it will combine electricity generated by four offshore wind farms (Rentel, Seastar, Mermaid and Northwester 2) for onward transmission to the mainland. Experts explain that this is more efficient than transmitting power via individual cables and improves the security of supply (Elia Group 2019). There are possibilities for the extension. The MOG-II (Modular Offshore Grid extension) project aims to develop and build new offshore grid infrastructure to link new wind farms in the Belgian part of the North Sea to the mainland grid. This is in line with Belgium’s energy strategy/pact and the Belgian government's commitment, in the Marine Spatial Plan for 2020-2026, to identifying new zones for the generation and transmission of electricity (Elia Group, 2019).

3) Multiuse in offshore wind farms 3.1 Reasons to look towards multiuse in offshore wind farms, now and in the future In line with technology innovation and an increase in the number of people on Earth, there will be a need for more energy, food production, and transportation in the future. The sea is an essential source of energy and food. Things are happening fast. In the future, it is expected that there will be an increase in the number of activities and actors on the sea. These activities and actors occupy sea space. Therefore, there will be an increased need for sea space. Having in mind that sea space is scarce, with spatial planning and more boundary conditions, a grouping of different activities in the same space will

11

be essential in the future. According to the Law of the sea, there are no property rights on the sea. The government has full control to decide which activity and during which period will occupy the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Experts agree that multiuse at sea will most probably be necessary for the future, especially in the North Sea area. For instance, a large space is needed for seaweed farming at sea. In Belgium, economically viable seaweed farms that can compete in the market would take almost one-third of the Belgium sea space, experts explain. Therefore, it is not recommended to do seaweed farming as a single activity at sea in Belgium or anywhere in the North Sea area. It should be combined with other sectors. The same can apply to other sectors at sea. Globally, if offshore wind farms provided the same amount of electricity produced today by other sources, these wind farms would occupy the marine area five times the size of Brazil. Offshore wind farms cannot be placed anywhere at sea- it has to be in the zones in a certain proximity to the coast due to technological, operational and economic aspects of the activities. Space, where offshore wind farms could be placed, is scarce. Therefore, it is not rational to dedicate large sea areas to wind farms (or any other activity) as a single activity. The coexistence of activities in the same sea space will likely be a prerequisite in the future.

3.2 Different countries- different ideas In different countries, there are different ideas on what constitutes multiuse in offshore wind farms. Belgium and the Netherlands will be taken as an example. According to some experts, in Belgium at the moment, there are three main ideas about what can be done inside wind farms in Belgium: aquaculture, wave energy converters (and other forms of renewable energy) and nature conservation. On the other hand, in the Netherlands, the focus is on fisheries inside the windfarms, marine transportation (there are plans to establish corridors inside windfarms where freight can still be moved), recreational navigation. An example of activities that constitute multiuse in these neighboring countries (Belgium and the Netherlands) show that the focus can be on different sectors (even in the case of countries with similar sea conditions). There are various ideas of what constitutes multiuse in offshore wind farms. Therefore, decisions on which activities will be introduced in the offshore wind farms are policy choices on the national level. Safety might be the main reason behind these policy choices. In Belgium, the idea is to keep users out of the wind farms if they do not necessarily have to be there (which is also beneficial for nature conservation and provides less disturbance). The assumption is that workers who would potentially be involved in aquaculture or wave energy in the future are trained on how to move inside wind farms and know how to minimize safety risks. In the Netherlands, there is a different point of view. There, policymakers want to preserve activities that were in place before wind farms existed. They let the original users, sailors and fishermen, stay and use the sea space as they did before. Activities and actors inside wind farms are managed, tracked, and monitored by the government.

3.3 General drivers and barriers for multiuse in offshore wind farms Drivers and barriers for different types of multiuse in offshore windfarms differ from country to country (different geographical, environmental, and socio-economical characteristics). Various combinations of multiuse have different drivers and barriers. Drivers and barriers for specific offshore wind farm multiuse combinations will be elaborated further in the report. The general drivers and barriers that can apply to most of the offshore wind farm multiuse combinations are identified below.

12

3.3.1 Actors, industries, and tools, which could enhance multiuse in offshore wind farms Some of the most significant actors in driving socio-economic factors (improvement of the local economy, acceptance, and awareness about the function and benefits of the offshore wind farms) for multiuse in offshore wind farms are offshore wind developers, municipal authorities, coastal and energy authorities, consultancies and research communities. However, interviewed experts agree that national authorities and sectoral ministries are the most nominated actors for driving multiuse in offshore windfarms. Different sectors (for instance: offshore wind, aquaculture, fisheries) and regulators are recognized as actors that are involved in multiuse in offshore wind farms. Minimum two out of three actors (two different sectors and regulator) willing to establish multiuse, either both sectors involved in multiuse or one sector and the regulator, are required to develop successful multiuse. In practice, it is more common that one sector and the regulator initiate multiuse. In a situation of the positive macroeconomic balance, one sector and the associated regulator might start multiuse. Both sectors could initiate multiuse if the potential for micro-economic benefit for both sectors exists (MUSES, 2018). In general, three sectors have the biggest potential to drive multiuse: offshore wind, environmental protection, and tourism. The presence of these sectors enhances multiuse. MSP plays an essential role as a driver for many multi uses. The multiuse in offshore wind farm concept could be supported under MSP (MUSES, 2018). Direction and guidance (both independently and collectively) for multiuse concepts could be provided by the funding organizations (European research funding, for example) and technology development initiatives. The strong institutional framework that establishes cooperation between different sectors and stakeholders should support development initiatives focused on multiuse, experts explain. Socio-economic drivers The combined investment represents a driver. Investment in infrastructure that both sectors use could be shared if activities coexist in the same space. Hence, there can be an economic benefit from the combination. Monitoring expenses could be reduced. Both sectors could use the same monitoring devices and infrastructure. CCTV coverage could be, for example, used by more than one activity. Drones could also be used for the inspection of both activities. Sectors could use the same vessels and staff for maintenance and observation. Therefore, companies could share expenses. In addition to that, when sea space is used twice, economic revenue per unit sea surface area is doubled (Michler & Kodeih, 2007).

3.3.2 General barriers for multiuse in offshore wind farms Barriers for multiuse in offshore wind development are related to insufficient legislation, administrative procedures, safety risks, insurance issues, economic constraints, lack of integrated policies, technological maturity. Insurance represents now, one of the main issues in multiuse in offshore wind farms. Interviewed experts have frequently referred to an unclear insurance policy framework. Grouping activities in the

13

same space increases the chances that one activity could cause damage to another. Therefore, high costs are related to insurance costs and securing the safety of multiuse activities. Some experts believe that wind developers have limited added economic benefits from multiuse in offshore wind farms. They make a profit out of generating renewable energy. If another activity is added, it does not change the profit margin a lot for wind developers, but it does increase the risk. If the production of energy for wind developers is already economically viable, it is questionable if there is a driver for introducing new activities inside wind farms. Sharing issues between sectors might appear. Experts agree that in general, the preference of wind developers is to claim space and manage it according to their needs. Since initiatives for multiuse will probably not come from wind developers, there are opinions that they should be induced on government level (policymakers). Technological progress and leasing and planning regime is a crucial barrier for multiuse combined with various types of renewable energy. Most experts agree that, at this moment, the barriers are more influential than the drivers for multiuse in offshore wind farms. One of the main arguments is that external support, in the form of funding policy support or legislation, plays a vital role in the development of multiuse related to renewable energy. If there is an ambition for the establishment of multiuse in offshore wind farms, policy support for the development of a multiuse project is needed.

3.4 Significant factors to be taken into consideration when planning multiuse in the offshore wind farms 3.4.1 The importance of timing In many countries, multiuse pilot projects are tested on already existing wind farms. However, experts agree that it is better to plan additional activities much before offshore wind development starts. Activities could be planned together from the beginning (beforehand), while wind development is still in the designing phase, ideally based on consultation with stakeholders involved in multiuse. Infrastructure should be conceived ready-made for additional activities. The choice of activities depends on the needs and technical feasibility. If the subsurface infrastructure is planned, it is possible to combine it with aquaculture, but not with energy storage. On the other hand, if the series of islands with offshore wind farms are planned, there is a possibility for energy storage and desalination to happen in the same space. Therefore, the first step would be to identify needs and then to find the means to adapt the design to make multiuse happen. If the infrastructure is not conceived to have other activities, it will be hard to add it in later stages during operational phases. If offshore wind and aquaculture are planned, poles have to be adapted to hold platforms or lines in between. Furthermore, if offshore wind and fishing are planned, the space between the turbines should be left sufficient for both activities. Wind production could be perceived as a primary activity. Wind farms should be adapted without harming the wind production, but increasing the potential for other activities to happen. Experts suggest that in the inception phase, different stakeholders (from sectors involved in the multiuse) should be brought together to negotiate the design of future multiuse offshore wind platforms and agree on how to make multiuse possible from the beginning of the planning process.

14

However, it is possible to add activities when wind farms are already in the operational phase. If additional activity is added in later stages, it is usually a small-scale research project (such as Edulis in Belgium) due to legal and technological limitations, technology readiness levels and availability of funding. Bringing more actors in the process, after the offshore wind is developed, is difficult. Before wind developers start developing, they get permission to perform their activity according to their proposal. Wind developers get the right to develop activities in one manner. Therefore, there is less motivation and more legal obstacles to developing additional activity afterward. Once developers have permission to develop offshore wind, money and insurance need to be found. Developers have boundary conditions with which they approach financial institutions. Insurance and loans are created according to these boundary conditions. Further changes are legally complicated. By keeping multi-use in mind at the early stages of the planning of offshore wind farms, instead of as an afterthought, multiuse could be possible faster. The regulators can bring several parties together that deliver activities at an early stage. Planning of different activities in multiuse could be defined much in advance (much before the development process start). First, it could be decided which activities will occupy the same space. After that, it could be to determine which actors will perform activities. Therefore, it could be predetermined how and when will the additional activity be introduced in the offshore wind farms and not leave it to wind developers to decide.

3.4.2 Capacity density Authorities are zoning for offshore wind farms in Marine Spatial Plans to achieve renewable energy targets. Capacity density is an essential factor for the energy production of a specific site. Capacity density represents the amount of energy produced per km2, expressed in megawatts per square kilometer (European MSP Platform). When turbines have a smaller energy capacity (3MW, for instance), there are more turbines on one square kilometer (to achieve planned capacity density) and less space in between. Sufficient space between turbines is recommended to allow activities inside windfarms and to reduce safety risks. When turbines have a larger energy capacity, they are bigger. Due to wakes generated by the wind farms and wind speed recovery, wind turbines with larger capacity are placed further apart. In this way, capacity density remains the same, but there is more physical space for activities between turbines. Furthermore, the safety risk for and from other activities inside the wind farms is reduced. In line with technology development, a larger energy capacity of turbines will become possible. Thus, there will be more space between the turbines and higher chances for other sectors to be introduced inside offshore windfarms. According to experts, in the more recent wind parks in Europe, there is a tendency to install turbines further apart. In the new wind parks, distances will be more significant and it will increase the potential to plan and manage additional activities.

15

3.5 Multiuse research projects that include wind energy development FP7-OCEAN (2010–2013) is the EU the Ocean of Tomorrow cross-thematic project. large-scale collaborative projects In the FP7-OCEAN have been established: TROPOS, MERMAID, H2Ocean, ORECCA and MARINA Platform. Designs, models for combining activities in terms of economic potential and environmental impact and technological solutions have been investigated in FP7-OCEAN. TROPOS - EU FP7 Project (2011-2015) TROPOS was a European collaborative project that aimed at developing a floating modular multi-use platform system for use in deep waters, with an initial geographic focus on the Mediterranean, Tropical and Sub-Tropical regions but designed to be flexible enough not to be limited in geographic scope. TROPOS gathered 19 partners from 9 countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, Germany, Portugal, France, Norway, Denmark, Greece, and Taiwan), under the coordination of PLOCAN. Due to its different modules, the floating platform system integrated a wide range of possible sectors: ocean renewable energy and food (aquaculture) resources were exploited, the platform was serving as a hub for maritime transport and innovations in the leisure sector, and also fulfilled functions for oceanic observation activities. The platform was composed of a central unit and functional modules, in particular, the floater concept (submersible, floating or deep submersible units), that was adapted to each area where it is implemented. Nevertheless, one conceptual design basis was developed for all versions of the platform. The Project has officially started on February 1st, 2012, and ended on January 31st, 2015 (TROPOS). MERMAID - EU FP7 Project (2012-2016) MERMAID looked at developing concepts for the next generation of offshore platforms to be used for multiple purposes, including energy extraction, aquaculture, and platform related to transport. The project did not build new platforms, but theoretically examined new concepts, such as combining structures and building new structures on representative sites under different conditions. The MERMAID project had 28 partners, including Universities, Research institutes, Large, Small and Medium Enterprises. The group represented a broad range of expertise in hydraulics, wind engineering, aquaculture, renewable energy, marine environment, project management as well as socio-economics. Inter alia, MERMAID project has examined the mussel aquaculture in between offshore wind turbines in the North Sea (MERMAID). H2Ocean - EU FR7 Project (2012-2014) European initiative to develop a wind-wave power open-sea platform equipped for hydrogen generation with support for multiple users of energy. The three-year project, called H2OCEAN, aimed to develop an innovative design for an economically and environmentally sustainable multi-use open-sea platform. Wind and wave power was harvested and part of the energy was used for multiple applications on-site, including the conversion of energy into hydrogen that can be stored and shipped to shore as a green energy carrier and a multi-trophic aquaculture farm. The unique feature of the H2OCEAN concept, besides the integration of different activities into a shared multi-use platform, lay in the novel approach for the transmission of offshore-generated renewable electrical energy through hydrogen. This concept

16

allowed effective transport and storage of the energy, decoupling energy production and consumption, thus avoiding the grid imbalance problem inherent to current offshore renewable energy systems. The consortium comprised 17 partners from five European countries (UK, Spain, Denmark, Germany and Italy). The project was funded by the European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), provided three-quarters (€4.5 million) of the total €6 million funding. H2OCEAN started its activities on the 1st of January, 2012 and ended on the 31st of December, 2014 (H20cean Project). ORECCA - EU FR7 Project (2010-2011) ORECCA - Offshore Renewable Energy Conversion platforms project. The objectives of the project were to create a framework for knowledge sharing and to develop a research roadmap for activities in the context of offshore renewable energy. In particular, the project stimulated collaboration in research activities leading towards innovative, cost-efficient and environmentally benign offshore renewable energy conversion platforms for wind, wave and other ocean energy resources for their combined use as well as for the complementary uses. The ORECCA project enabled collaboration of the stakeholders and defined the framework for future exploitation of offshore renewable energy sources by defining two approaches: pilot testing of technologies at an initial stage and large-scale deployment of offshore renewable energy farms at a mature stage. The ORECCA project finally developed a vision including different technical options for deployment of offshore energy conversion platforms for different target areas in the European seas and delivered integrated roadmaps for the stakeholders. The Project has started on March 1st, 2010, and ended on August 31st, 2011 (Cordis. EU, 2019). MARINA Platform - EU FR7 Project (2010-2011) Research in the MARINA Platform project aimed at establishing a set of equitable and transparent criteria for the evaluation of multi-purpose platforms for marine renewable energy. Using these criteria, the project produced a novel, whole-system set of design and optimization tools addressing, inter alia, new platform design, component engineering, risk assessment, spatial planning, platform-related grid connection concepts, all focused on system integration and reducing costs. The project combined deep-water engineering experience from European oil gas developments during the last 40 years, state-of-the-art concepts for offshore wind energy, and the most promising concepts in today’s research and development pipeline on wave energy and other marine renewables. The Project started in January 2010 and ended in January 2014 (MARINA Platform). Horizon 2020- To promote economic growth, sustainable development, and continue academic research of multiuse, Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (2014 - 2020) was established. MARIBE - Horizon 2020 Project (2015-2016) Marine Investment for the Blue Economy (MARIBE) was a Horizon 2020 project exploring cooperation opportunities for companies that combine different Blue Growth and Blue Economy sectors. The project was identifying opportunities to unlock the potential of multi-use of space and multi-use platforms in the offshore economy (the Blue Economy). The project formed part of the long-term Blue Growth strategy to support sustainable growth in the marine and maritime sectors as a whole;

17

something that is at the heart of the Integrated Maritime Policy, EU Innovation Union and the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable growth. The Blue Growth sectors have developed independently for the most part without pursuing cooperation opportunities with other sectors. MARIBE investigated cooperation opportunities (partnerships, joint ventures, etc.) for companies within the four key BG sectors to develop these companies and their sectors and to promote the multi-use of space in the offshore economy. The sectors are Marine Renewable Energy, Aquaculture, Marine Biotechnology and Seabed Mining. MARIBE linked and cross-cut with the Transatlantic Ocean Research Alliance and the Galway Statement by reviewing the three European basins (Atlantic, Mediterranean, and Baltic) as well as the Caribbean Basin. The project began with an assessment of the current Blue Growth economy. A socio-economic study of the various Blue Growth sectors was undertaken. Existing business models were mapped according to best practice methodology, cognizant of their value chains. The technical and non-technical challenges of the business were identified, and proposals made for their mitigation. The project lasted for 18 months and had a consortium of 11 partners from Ireland, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Malta, and the Netherlands. University College Cork coordinated the project. The Project has officially started on March 1st, 2015, and ended on August 31st, 2016 (MARIBE). MUSES (Multi-Use in European Seas) - Horizon 2020 Project (2016-2018) The Multi-Use in European Seas (MUSES) project is a Horizon 2020 funded project that is exploring the opportunities for multiuse in European seas across five EU sea basins (Baltic Sea, North Sea, Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea, and Eastern Atlantic). In the scope of the MUSES project, case studies, environmental, spatial and societal benefits of multiuse activities at sea were elaborated. MUSES builds on existing knowledge to explore the real opportunities for multiuse in European Seas, including the scope for innovation and Blue Growth potential and to present practical solutions on how to overcome existing barriers and minimize risks associated with Multi-Use development. MUSES was a two-year project, coordinated by Marine Scotland, that concluded in October 2018. There were ten project partners from across Europe (MUSES). ENTROPI - Horizon 2020 Project (2015-2018) The project aimed to find ways to significantly reduce costs of the development of multi-use facilities. The ENTROPI project analyzed the capabilities enabling multi-use offshore platforms to highlight where targeted innovation could achieve a significant cost reduction, and defined investment propositions to make those innovations happen. The ENTROPI Project addressed the challenge of marine activities moving further offshore by exploring: how the integration of multiple uses on a single platform could bring economies of scale and how innovation in key cost centers could make such platforms commercially viable. The project was dealing with the innovation that could significantly reduce the development costs of multiuse platforms: anchoring and mooring solutions, security and surveillance applications, and a concept platform supporting renewable energy devices and aquaculture facilities. The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund supported the project, under its Blue Technology program. The Project started in September 2015 and ended in November 2018 (ENTROPI). UNITED - Horizon 2020 Project (2020-2023) The UNITED (multi-use platforms and co-location pilots boosting cost-effective, and eco-friendly and sustainable production in marine environments) project provides evidence using pilot demonstrators that the development of multi-use platforms or co-location of different activities in a marine and ocean

18

space is a viable approach (economically, socially and environmentally) for European maritime industry and local ecosystems. The main activities center around five pillars - Technology, Economy, Legal/Governance/Policy, Society, and Environment). The Project will start in September 2020, and last until November 2023 (Cordis. EU, 2019). MUSICA - Horizon 2020 Project (2020-2023) The overall Aim of MUSICA- Multiple-use-of Space for Island Clean Autonomy, is to accelerate the roadmap to the commercialization of its multiuse platform and multiuse of space (MUS) combination for the small island market, and de-risk for future operators and investors. The MUSICA solution will be a decarbonizing one-stop-shop for small islands, including their marine initiatives (Blue Growth) and ecosystems. MUSICA will provide a full suite of Blue Growth solutions for the small island: • Three forms of renewable energy (wind, PV, and wave) (total 870kW), providing high renewable energy penetration and competitively affordable electricity. Three forms of renewable energy provide non-correlated supply. • Innovative energy storage systems on the multiuse platforms provide all required storage for power on the island and platform, as well as electrical output smoothening (compressed water/air storage and batteries). • Smart energy system for the island, including demand response, modeling and forecasting based on high flexibility services from distributed generation. • Desalinated water made by desalination unit on the multiuse platform powered by renewable energy sources providing 1000m3 fresh water for a water-stressed island. • The multiuse platform will provide “green” support services for island’s aquaculture (pilot 200 tones production) This project will demonstrate that the MUSICA multiuse platform is a viable enabling infrastructure for multiple renewable energy sources, desalination and Blue Growth aquaculture services for small islands that can share the same space and work synergistically together, sharing supply chains by reducing operating and maintenance costs and solving increasing demand for space. The Project will start in January 2020, and last until June 2023 (Cordis. EU, 2019).

4) In-depth analysis of multiuse combinations in the offshore wind farms

4.1 MUOWF1: Offshore wind+ Commercial Fisheries/ Maritime transport In this chapter, the combined use of offshore wind farms with fisheries and/or maritime transport will be analyzed. These multiuse combinations (wind + fisheries & wind + maritime transport) are analyzed together as they represent passive multiuse and require trespassing of vessels (which must meet specific criteria) through wind farms. These multiuse combinations also share some conditions, drivers, and barriers. Furthermore, in the event of multiuse in offshore wind farms, it is common that both fisheries activities and maritime transport are allowed simultaneously (Groenendijk, 2018). Hence, when maritime transport is allowed inside windfarms, there and higher chances that some types of fishing will

19

be allowed as well and vice versa. For instance, in the Netherlands, maritime transport, and a particular type of fishing were allowed simultaneously in 2018 (Groenendijk, 2018).

4.1.1 Drivers, barriers and solutions/ mitigations for the MUOWF1

Legal and socio-economic drivers for the MUOWF1

1) Legal Driver:

The “spatial conflict” between commercial fisheries/ maritime transport and offshore wind development During the MSP creation, the issue of space conflict between commercial fisheries and offshore wind farms is a burning topic in many countries (European MSP Platform). The fisheries sector considers itself the main loser in the marine spatial planning process. Fishermen state that they have lost a large area of the sea in favor of offshore wind sector (Pecceu, et al., 2015). There are perceptions that fishing interests are underrepresented in favor of offshore wind development (European MSP Platform). The offshore wind industry and commercial fishermen are generally competing for the same space because both sectors are relying on shallow waters in proximity to the coast with specific types of substrates. Possible consequences of this conflict are the exclusion of fisheries from windfarm zones or on the other hand, the lack of the necessary approvals for the development of offshore wind farms (MUSES, 2018). During the creation of an MSP, wind farms are generally designed to avoid maritime routes. In line with the increasing offshore wind farm development, especially in North Sea countries, there are potentially higher risks of disrupting maritime traffic. The increasing number of offshore wind farms that could hinder the marine traffic represent legal drivers to (through the maritime spatial plan and other legal tools) open windfarm zones to maritime transport (European MSP Platform).

2) Socio-economic drivers: The possibility to share equipment, technical resources, infrastructures and monitoring services The offshore wind farm sector and the fisheries sector could also share equipment (vessels), technical resources, infrastructures (port facilities), and, therefore share costs. Besides, the fishermen could offer monitoring services to the offshore wind farm industry. Monitoring systems, protocols, and emergency systems can be integrated (MUSES, 2018). Offshore wind farms represent “valuable fishing grounds” Offshore windfarm foundations represent “valuable fishing grounds” since they serve as artificial reefs that attract more fish (Langhamer, 2012; Degraer et al., 2018). Hence, areas around windfarm foundations represent an attractive area for fishermen to fish in. Opening up these areas to fishermen could increase catch and contribute financially to the fishery sector.

20

In the future, fueling stations or battery pack stations for vessels (fishery or maritime transport vessels) could be placed inside offshore wind farms and use the energy produced by a wind farm infrastructure.

Legal, socio-economic and spatial barriers for the MUOWF1

1) Legal barrier: Insurance issues Insurance issues represent one of the main barriers to combine fishing activities/maritime transport and offshore wind farm. If fishing is allowed in wind farm zones, for the fishery sector, it is extra profit and naturally more significant working area. However, if fishermen are responsible for paying insurance coverage for the risk of, e.g. unintentionally damaging the cables, the insurance cost is probably not proportional to the gain that they get. In this case, there is little added value for fishermen. The same insurance issue can be applied to the multiuse combination of offshore wind farms with maritime transport. For instance, if a turbine is scratched (however still operational) by some vessel, it is necessary to be repainted. Repainting the turbine is generally considered expensive. However, the main issue is that turbines are not working while they are being repaired (repainted in this case), which represent huge losses for the wind farm owner, having in mind that it is estimated that when the turbine is not operational, wind farms owner is losing a lot of money on daily basis. Experts explain that due to the high expenses that wind farm owners have when turbines are not operational during maintenance, insurance costs are very high. Usually, these costs are too high to be paid by stakeholders from marine traffic and the fisheries sector. Piloting multi-use solutions in the Netherlands In the Netherlands, in 2016, three offshore wind farms, OWEZ, Amalia and Luchterduinen, were to be opened for transit for vessels up to 24 meters in length and for multi-use. Bottom trawling was still to be prohibited. It was understood that implementing the regulations would require close cooperation between the Dutch government, fishers and the offshore wind farm owners. However, the wind farm operators and other involved stakeholders could not reach a consensus on the costs and benefits of the proposed regulation. Although extensive studies were carried out, the parties were not unanimous in how to interpret the risk assessment. Wind farm operators had the following concerns:

1) Who covers the costs of adapting the offshore facilities to the new situation, and how does this relate to the contract between the operator and the government;

2) Compensating for commercial aspects related to lost business, damage to wind farm infrastructure and increased operational expenses, which were not part of earlier business plans: Currently, there is no proposal for compensation in case these hazards occur;

3) Loss of work time of operational & maintenance (O&M) teams and risks to OWF personnel due to responding to third party safety infringements.

4) Damage to the image of the offshore wind energy sector and possibly the wind farm owner as a result of accidents and subsequent litigation.

Due to these unresolved concerns, the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy asked for an independent review (second opinion) of all relevant risk studies carried out. This was to assess the

21

residual risk after implementing the suggested management measures. It was also to assess whether risks were properly mitigated and whether risks might still be under- or overestimated. Once again, the focus of the risk assessment was on the three offshore wind farms to be opened for co-use and transit. The second opinion was published in early 2018 and provided some new insights. It found no serious research gaps and saw the proposed rules and regulations as sufficient. However, it also identified some additional hazards that could arise to the offshore wind farms from fishing:

1) Fishing with static nets and hook lines. Risk was identified related to the use of fishing gear and its possible interference with cables and other installations. Lost gear behaves in unpredictable ways, and fishers, attempting to recover their gear, may even cause (further) damage;

2) Fishing with pots and traps. Similar risk was identified for the wind farm as a result of anchoring and lost gear. Lost gear can move onto subsea cables, causing damage, or a fisherman may damage cables during recovery attempts.

The report recommended that risks should be further investigated, considering new methods of marking of the gear, collecting statistics on the loss of this kind of equipment, finding technical means of recovery without damages to cables, or how to provide compensation for abandoned gear. Because of the generally positive results of the second opinion, the Dutch government decided to open the offshore wind farms on 1st of May 2018, implementing the restrictions proposed for the activities in the 2015 legislation. The Dutch government has made arrangements with the wind farm owners on monitoring, incident management and policy evaluations. The official pilot will take 2 years, but will be automatically extended. The conditions for multi-use and transit of vessels might be adapted by then based on new insights. A longer-term solution is that new offshore wind farms will include a corridor which makes it possible for vessels up to 45 meters to transit through. These farms will be built in the period of 2019-2023 (EU MSP platform).

2) Socio-Economic barrier: Type and expenses of necessary gear and equipment of vessels to receive permission to enter wind farm areas There are special conditions for vessels that are allowed to enter windfarm areas- such as specific gear or equipment (imposed by legislation in some countries) in order to get permission to fish or sail inside wind farms which can be expensive. To be suitable to fish in offshore wind farm areas, some fishermen need to transfer to other types of fisheries, to change fishing gear or to replace fishing quotas. There is not enough strategic support to facilitate these transfers. Therefore, for the transition to an innovative fishery fleet or maritime transport vessels that could be allowed inside offshore wind farm areas, it is important to provide financial support (MUSES, 2018).

3) Spatial barrier: Cables of floating offshore wind generate risks for fishing activities and maritime transport In countries where sea depth is sufficient, there is a potential for the development of floating offshore windfarms. Floating offshore wind farms are particularly suitable for the Mediterranean countries where the water is already deep in proximity to the coast. Floating wind farms could be placed in deeper waters compared to fixed offshore wind turbines.

22

In case that there is not enough space near the coast, deep-sea areas that were previously not accessible can be suitable and used for the development of floating wind farms. However, moving further offshore means higher costs and more complicated management when it comes to the development and operation of offshore wind farms. Portugal, France, and Scotland are some of the countries where the potential development of floating offshore wind farms is considered (MUSES, 2018). The main barrier for combining floating offshore windfarms and fisheries/maritime transport is related to the wind turbine cables. While export cables are buried in fixed offshore wind turbines, floating offshore wind farms cables are usually deployed within the water column. Cables of these floating turbines could be potentially dangerous for vessels, fishing gear and marine species. For the vessels and fishing gear, there is a risk to entangle with cables. Solutions/ Mitigations for the MUOWF1 Allowing professional fishing in offshore wind farms could be a potential mitigation solution for the socio-economic barrier. It can partly compensate for the financial repercussions when fishers lose their traditional fishing grounds and long term income and need to cover high costs for fishery displacement. Small scale fisheries, in particular, are prone to experience loss of income when losing fishing grounds to the offshore wind industry. For small scale fishing vessels which usually operate close to the coast and do not have the capability or financial means to move further from the coast or switch to other fishing methods, this exclusion of fishing grounds is particular harmful (MUSES, 2018). There is currently a low acceptance of offshore wind development projects by local communities and not enough long-term local benefits from the offshore wind industry (MUSES, 2018). Allowing fishing in offshore windfarm can also give added value to local economies, build trust with local fishermen, support fisheries management, and improve the image of the offshore wind industry.

4.1.2 Case studies for the MUOWF1 combination- Experiences from other countries In Belgium and Germany, wind farm areas are considered as maritime exclusion zones for safety reasons and to protect the wind farm equipment. The reason is to prevent accidents or damages within wind farms. Therefore, at the moment, marine traffic and fishing are prohibited. On the other hand, in the UK and Denmark, it is possible to transit and use wind farm areas both in commercial and recreational uses. There are no requirements regarding vessel equipment or limitations when it comes to vessel size (Groenendijk, 2018). In France, there are no windfarms yet, but predictions are that it will also be allowed for fishermen to fish in the wind farm zones under certain conditions. Since 2018, in the Netherlands, fishing and marine traffic are permitted under certain conditions. In this report, the MUOWF1 combination in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom will be further elaborated. The Netherlands In the Netherlands, at the moment, there are four operational offshore wind farms. Before, only Dutch government ships and wind farm operators and maintenance ships were allowed to enter these zones. In 2015, the Dutch government decided to change this: “Multi-use options were to be considered that

23

would allow ships to pass through offshore wind farms and that would also allow some types of fishing to occur” (European MSP Platform). According to the plan of the Dutch government, there will be an increase in the number of offshore wind farms soon. It is predicted that there will be interference between the wind farm sector and marine traffic/ fisheries. To overcome those issues, some wind farms were opened for transit and co-use and the same will happen for wind farms that will be built in the future (Rijksoverheid, Netherlands). In May 2018, the Dutch government decided to open three out of four offshore wind farms for transit and certain types of fisheries. One of the four existing windfarms- “Gemini” will due to its distance from the coast and high costs of monitoring remain safety area (Groenendijk, 2018). Before opening the windfarms to transit and certain types of fisheries, the Dutch government carried out a risk assessment. Relevant stakeholders, among them windfarm owners as well, were consulted to prepare a package of mitigation measures. Risk analysis done by windfarm owners were also introduced to the process. According to this, the Dutch Government proposed regulations on the integration of transit vessels and fishing inside offshore wind farm areas (European MSP Platform). There is set of conditions to be fulfilled: these three wind farms will be open for ships up to 24m length only during day time, there has to be functional and active VHF and AIS installation on vessels, it is strictly forbidden to disturb the seabed, bottom disturbing gear should be carried above the waterline (to be visible) inside windfarm zones, professional fishery gear needs to be approved by the Dutch government, there still needs to be respected a 50m safety zone rule around the turbines and 500m safety zone around offshore transformer stations, recreational diving is prohibited (Groenendijk, 2018). Arrangements have been made with wind farm owners to monitor, manage the incident and evaluate policy. The idea is that this pilot will take two years, and after that, it will be automatically extended. According to findings during those two years, conditions for transit and fisheries could be adapted. There is also an idea that new wind farms that will be built from 2019 to 2023 will include a corridor through witch vessels up to 45 meters could transit (European MSP Platform). Before the wind farms are opened for fishing, there were conflicts between fishery and wind farm sectors. In 2018, there were fisherman protests against the government plan to develop more wind farms in the North Sea. The fishermen stated that “they are being crowded out of their waters” (Boffey, 2018). Fishing community leaders predicted that by 2025, one-quarter of Dutch waters will be offshore wind farm zones and that they will be further pushed out of the southern part of the North Sea. In the Netherlands, fishermen are claiming that they are “being squeezed out of the seas” and that their working area is getting smaller. To illustrate this, they explain that only 20 years ago, 45 boats were working in the Stellendam harbor for example, whereas today there are 9 left. They blame the wind farm sector for this situation (Boffey, 2018). United Kingdom In the UK, there are agreements between wind farm sector and local fisheries associations that specify what type of fishery can take place inside wind farms and under which condition. It is forbidden to fish inside windfarms only during the construction and maintenance phase. The fishermen are allowed to fish in most wind farms; it is their obligation and responsibility to be insured in case something goes wrong. According to interviewed experts, this is in practice the main reason why fishermen mostly stay outside of the windfarms. The fishermen do not want to increase their insurance costs or risk to damage wind farm cable. This demonstrates that it is not enough only to allow certain multi use activities, but also to find mitigation tools to overcome issues that come with multiuse, such as insurance issues. Scotland is considered to be a leading country that is providing solutions for offshore wind and commercial fisheries conflicts by creating an appropriate planning framework. Marine planning authorities in Scotland are committed to consider the potential economic and social impact of wind

24

industry development on fisheries and to enforce chances of coexistence between fisheries and other sectors. In Scotland, specific types of fisheries, with static gear, for instance, inside wind farms are allowed. Already during the planning process, technical solutions have been discussed with both fisheries and offshore wind sectors. The purpose is to identify the potential for the co-location and to enforce synergy between the sectors.

4.1.3 State of play of MUOWF1 combination in Belgium and expert ideas for the future Turbines that are currently in use in Belgium were built in close proximity, which creates safety issues for fishery/ maritime transport vessels that would potentially sail through wind farms Fishing is prohibited inside offshore wind farms in Belgium at the moment. According to expert opinion, the reason behind this is that some of the turbines established in the past had the capacity of 3MW (Northwind, 2014). Therefore, turbines that are currently in use in Belgium were built in close proximity which made it very difficult to have a search or rescue operation within the windfarms area (especially if helicopters are needed during operations). Because of scarce space, safety issues and the fact that it was difficult to have a search or rescue operation within the windfarms zones, any vessels going through the area were not allowed. However, it was proven that this does not always stop fishermen. Nowadays, when offshore wind farms are still exclusion zones, Belgium Coast Guard registers regular intrusion of the windfarms zones by the fisherman (Groenendijk, 2018). The possibility to allow certain types of fishing and maritime transport in the new offshore wind farm concessions that will be built in the future In Belgium, it is expected that some types of fisheries which do not harm the seafloor could be allowed inside windfarm areas that will be built in the future in zone 2. Predictions are that fishing with rots could be allowed. Since there is a danger for the cables, fishing with nets will be forbidden inside offshore wind farms. Some stakeholders indicate that the situation might be different in the future, in the new concessions that will be built on the border with France. If the turbines have a bigger capacity, there is more available space for activities between turbines- marine transport and commercial fisheries. According to technology developments at the moment, there is a possibility to make wind farm turbines with a capacity of 9.5 MW (Northwester 2), which allows turbines to be built much further apart. When it becomes possible to build larger capacity turbines, 15MW for instance, there will be more space between turbines and passing of vessels, search and rescue operations will be more feasible. Therefore it is highly possible that, due to technology development, marine transport through the windfarms and some sort of commercial fisheries will be allowed in the future (in the new concessions in Belgium). At the moment, tests are being done to look into the possibility of fishing in and near offshore wind farm zones in Belgium. A licensing system for fishing activities is recommended. There are proposed conditions that should be fulfilled, such as tracking system, requirements regarding size, and fenders must be installed. Aim of this is to guarantee safety (MUSES, 2018).

25

4.2 MUOWF2: Offshore wind + Aquaculture The MUOWF2 combination represents active multiuse. Drivers and barriers depend on many factors, such as geographical position, environmental conditions, types of aquaculture, and distance of wind farms from the coast. Different drivers and barriers characterize different types of aquaculture in combination with offshore wind.

4.2.1 Drivers and barriers for the MUOWF2 Legal, socio-economic, technological, spatial and biological drivers

Five drivers for the MUOWF2 combination have been identified in this report.

1. Legal driver: Increased chances for developers to get a concession and obtain permissions and licenses If aquaculture is combined with offshore wind farms, in some cases it could increase chances for wind developers to get a concession and necessary permissions and licenses (tender or licensing boundary conditions). For instance, according to some experts interviewed, there is a possibility of this in Belgium.

2. Socio-economic drivers: Sharing staff, equipment, technical resources, infrastructures and monitoring services Since some facilities could be shared between the offshore wind and aquaculture sector, the cost of operation, maintenance and staff could be reduced by integration of offshore activities (MARIBE). Furthermore, the cost of providing safety and emergency services could also be shared between the windfarm and aquaculture sector (MUSES project). When it comes to operational perspective, windfarms are characterized as nearly ideal places for some aquaculture existence (Buck et al., 2004). In places where the fishing industry is in decline, the fisherman could secure their business by becoming aquaculture operators as well. However, some experts argue that according to the results of some research projects, it is hard to find synergy between the production of wind and aquaculture at the moment. They argue that the requirements of mussel farms are different from the requirements of wind farms. For instance, the type of vessels needed for the maintenance of activities is diverse. Besides, skills that people working around wind farms should have are different from the skills required for aquaculture workers, experts explain. The existence of a strong market for some sorts of aquaculture The market value of aquaculture products depends on many factors (geographical region, particular market demands of particular countries, type of aquaculture…). When looking into the products from existing conventionally operated aquaculture farms in coastal waters, research showed that there is an existing strong market for the mussels, oysters, red, and brown algae. Besides, there is potential for expansion of this market in the future. For instance, red algae could be promoted as healthy bio food

26

and could be used in industry as well (Buck et al., 2008). Therefore, combining these types of aquaculture with offshore wind could create economic profit for the developers. Moreover, using energy from the offshore wind farms for aquaculture operations could allow aquaculture products to be marketed at a premium and ensure green credentials (MUSES). Aquaculture facilities protect offshore wind farm infrastructure and vice versa Aquaculture could be protected by wind farms since it is an area that is not accessible for other vessels (in case of maritime transport and fishing is prohibited in offshore wind farm area). Therefore, aquaculture facilities are less negatively affected by vessels. On the other hand, aquaculture also protects windfarms from unfamiliar vessels by making the area less accessible. Besides, some sorts of aquaculture can reduce fatigue for offshore wind farm structures (MARIBE project).

3. Technological driver: Innovation required for the combination is low

The level of technological innovation that is required for the MUOWF2 combination is low. Aquaculture can be deployed in the short term in existing wind farms (MARIBE). According to interviewed experts and reviewed literature, today, there are existing technical solutions to facilitate the cultivation of mussels and algae far offshore- in offshore wind farms (Michler-Cieluch et al., 2008). From the technological point of view, there are many options on how to connect aquaculture devices, such as longline and ring structures as well as different cage types, to the wind turbine foundations as well as to install it in the center of the free area between wind turbines. Experiments on drag forces originating from the aquaculture structure on the foundation and vice versa were investigated next to the system design (Buck et al., 2017). Furthermore, mussel farm lines could provide calmer seas for fixed wind and allow longer weather windows to access the turbine (MARIBE).

4. Spatial driver: More space available for scaling up aquaculture to reach national targets In 2013, the EU Commission published Strategic Guidelines presenting common priorities and general objectives at the EU level to boost the aquaculture sector through the Common Fisheries Policy reform. The main goal is to increase the aquaculture sector's production and competitiveness. Multiannual plans with national targets have been made by EU countries to promote aquaculture. The objective for the EU marine finfish aquaculture is to increase production to 480,000 tons by 2020, a 60% increase compared to production levels from 2016, and to increase shellfish production by 25% by 2020 (EU Commission). There is a lack of suitable space in sheltered inshore areas to reach these targets. Therefore, there is a need to move aquaculture activities further offshore, possibly inside offshore wind farms (MUSES). The emergence of scientific considerations and semi-commercial trials for offshore aquaculture started because of “the lack of inshore sites for aquaculture expansion in countries where capital for aquaculture development is available” (Mee, 2006). Furthermore, scarce sea space consumption is reduced when aquaculture facilities are placed inside offshore wind farms.

27

5. Biological driver: The excellent growth rate of some sorts of aquaculture in offshore environments Some research showed that the growth rate of mussels, oysters, and kelp was excellent in offshore environments. It differs depending on exposure sites, system designs, installation mode and season (Walter et al. 2008). According to biological and geo-physical parameters blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) and oysters (Ostrea edulis, Crassostrea Gigas) are the most suitable for commercial offshore aquaculture, since these species could be extensively maintained in the offshore region. Labor requirements for these species, as well as for some sort of seaweeds, are supposed to be low (Buck et al., 2008). Some research shows that offshore areas are good settlements with excellent growth rates for aquaculture (Manefeld 2006) and that in the offshore areas there are low infestations with macroparasites (Voss 2006), microparasites, bacteria and toxins (Brenner et al. 2007). For instance, there are excellent growth rates and satisfactory settlement success in different offshore locations in the North Sea for mussel larvae. No parasite infestation in mussels is found (Michler-Cieluch, 2009). Comparing to mussels that are grown closer to the coast, mussels that are growing offshore have a lower infestation with macro- and microparasites (Buck et al., 2008). Legal, socio- economic, technological, spatial and geographical barriers In this report, five barriers have been identified for the MUOWF2 combination.

1. Legal barrier: Permitting process and insurance issue At the moment, in many countries, there is an unclear permitting process regarding aquaculture inside offshore wind farms (Mee, 2006). There is a risk that wind farm infrastructure could be damaged by aquaculture infrastructure or maintenance vessels. The offshore wind insurance companies offer high insurance premiums and it is uncertain how these costs can be shared between the wind and aquaculture sectors. Insurance costs for damages that can be made to offshore windfarms could be high for small-scale aquaculture companies. Offshore wind farms are usually licensed for a specified period. After that period infrastructure has to be removed or renewed. A question that needs to be discussed is, in case that aquaculture activity is successful, what will happen with aquaculture after that period (MUSES). Furthermore, experts explain that there is a limited number of insurance companies willing to insure additional activity inside windfarms. Even in the case of the research project, insurance costs are high- high amounts should be paid for possible damages caused to wind turbines. Management of the risk is essential for wind farm developers and insurance companies. Therefore many precautions need to be done.

2. Socio-economic barrier: High financial risks leading to the lack of interest from wind developers The MUOWF2 combination represents potentially high investment requirements and high financial risks for the developers. There is lack of interest from wind developers, having in mind unclear regulations and insurance implications, lack of communication between the two sectors, lack of information about possible risks, cost-benefit assessment and business models, the lack of awareness of business

28

opportunities as well as the technical and financial capacity to initiate such projects (MUSES). The MUOWF2 projects are difficult to progress, as wind developers are unwilling to risk and diversifying their portfolio. Most of the projects available nowadays are research, pilot projects, many of them founded and co-founded by the European Commission (MARIBE). Small-scale aquaculture developers do not have investment and technical capacity to invest in the advanced technological solutions necessary for the MUOWF2 There are only a few examples of investors, mainly from the UK, interested in investing in the MUOWF2 combination. Except in the UK, existing aquaculture farms in the EU are mostly small scale or are in the pilot stage. Therefore, aquaculture developers individually have limited technical and investment capacity. On the other hand, the MUOWF2 combination would require considerable investments to make advanced technological solutions. Having this in mind, it is more likely that funding will come from joint or external ventures (MUSES). Economic profitability of MUOWF2 combination Offshore wind and aquaculture infrastructure life span in combination with aquaculture yield are the most important factors that determine the profitability of the MUOWF2 combination (Buck et al., 2008). Offshore wind farm developers favor extractive aquaculture (seaweed and shellfish) since it requires relatively low maintenance, less daily intervention and less frequent visits to offshore wind farm areas. However, the financial benefits of a seaweed farm are small compared to any projected risks and lower compared to fed aquaculture (fish). Fed aquaculture (fish) offers better financial returns but has high maintenance requirements. Besides, fed fish increases traffic at the site and impact on the environment, and the OWF installation itself is unknown yet (MUSES).

3. Technological barrier: Depending on aquaculture technology, there is an issue with the introduction of aquaculture activity in offshore wind farms in later stages Insufficient technology, in combination with offshore locations and harsh conditions, might create a problem in the case of aquaculture inside offshore wind farms. Two possible scenarios exist for offshore wind farms and aquaculture multi-use combination. One is that aquaculture is installed in the security zone of the offshore wind farm, and the other one is to attach cages or long-lines to wind farm turbine foundations directly. If aquaculture is placed in the security zones of an offshore wind farm, there are possibilities for implementation in different phases (during the operation phase as well), and there is a larger potential for different combinations (MUSES, 2018). Attaching aquaculture devices to foundations of wind turbines could be a cost-effective solution to issues caused by harsh conditions for aquaculture development offshore (Buck et al. 2006). However, in a situation when cages or long lines are directly attached to wind farm turbines, the timing is essential. It has to be taken into consideration that, according to experts involved in the MUSES project, it is not possible to implement aquaculture where cages or long lines are attached to windfarm foundations, in wind farms, which are already in operation phase or have already moved planning stage. Many “engineering adjustments” has to be done in the planning process to adapt windfarms for the extra load. Therefore, when aquaculture facilities are directly attached to wind turbine infrastructure, planning and designing have to happen much before offshore wind farms become operational.

29

Additional mechanical load for wind turbine foundations that may happen if aquaculture structures were anchored to them represents the main issue. For instance, in the case of the German Bight (which represents a high-energy environment); aquaculture structures would be highly covered in biomass. This would make the mechanical load an important boundary condition (Michler-Cieluch, 2009). In the case of anchoring aquaculture devices directly to renewable energy systems, there is a need for additional cost-intensive risk calculations, safety measures, and the use of special materials (Buck et al. 2008). Although today there are solutions that are technically and economically feasible (Buck et al. 2017), changes made to wind turbine foundations could modify their properties to that extent, that licensing procedures might have to be re-started. An alternative solution could be to construct special aquaculture anchoring devices between the wind turbines. Even though it would still serve the goal of spatial efficiency, the economic advantage of the co-use might be partially reduced (Michler-Cieluch, 2009). Experts agree that it is recommended that aquaculture in windfarms is planned well before the development of windfarms. It is common that during research projects, drilling or using screw anchors is forbidden inside wind farm areas to avoid the possibility of damaging cables. That can be an issue for aquaculture developers. In case that aquaculture and wind activities are planned simultaneously, the risk of damaging cables by screw anchors could be avoided. However, even with beforehand planning, expert opinions are that there are small changes to allow attaching aquaculture facilities directly to windfarm infrastructure in the future. Some experts explain that with the technologies available at the moment, the synergy between aquaculture and offshore wind is not apparent. The synergy between aquaculture and offshore wind industry may happen in the future, in line with the development of the new technologies. In the future, there might be possibilities to use drones for monitoring activities or underwater vehicles that can move autonomously. Underwater vehicles could be used for inspection of windmill foundations and aquaculture facilities simultaneously. Installation of 4G or 5G networks, for example, could be established and shared between both sectors. Experts explain that the use of new technology will result in more synergy between sectors.

4. Spatial barrier: Further distances from the coast can cause higher costs of transportations, maintenance, infrastructure and a limited number of working days Distance for the coast could be a barrier for the aquaculture and offshore windfarm multiuse. Aquaculture activity can be performed closer to the shore, which makes maintenance and observation of aquaculture activity much more feasible. Besides, the transportation of staff and products is easier and cheaper when aquaculture is closer to the shore. Having in mind that offshore wind farms are usually further from the coast (in Belgium, for instance, 30-40 km), placing aquaculture that far offshore could cause an issue. Shellfish (mussels, oysters, scallops), for example, usually require a 2-day window for distribution to the next step of the supply chain, the distributor. It is difficult to predict when harvesting and subsequent distribution can take place for offshore locations (MUSES). It can be possible that weather conditions determine the number of working days on aquaculture. Further from the coast, waves are higher. For instance, if waves are too big (more than 1m, for example), it can be inconvenient for the aquaculture crew to work that day. Therefore, due to weather conditions, the number of working days could be limited. Situations like this make offshore aquaculture unpredictable and hardly manageable. Furthermore, infrastructure for aquaculture offshore is more costly than the infrastructure needed near the coast.

30

5. Geographical barrier: Some marine regions, due to harsh weather conditions, are not suitable for aquaculture development Depending on the geographical position of the sea and the conditions therein, sometimes offshore conditions could be harsh for aquaculture development. This is especially applicable to the North Sea region since these areas are highly exposed to change in weather conditions, wind, currents, and waves. Dealing with harsh hydrodynamic conditions is one of the main issues when it comes to the development of offshore aquaculture (Bridger and Costa-Pierce 2003). Due to strong environmental concerns, combinations of offshore wind farms with aquaculture are found to be unsuitable in the Baltic Sea for instance (MUSES). 4.2.2 Case studies for the MUOWF2 combination- Experiences from other countries Several research projects are dealing with MUOWF2 commination. However, there is a limited number of pilots in the real environment. Most of the pilot projects are in the North Sea countries- UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany (Buck et al., 2017). Since there is a restriction on fish aquaculture, there are more mussels and seaweed cultivation in Baltic countries. According to the MARIBE project, multiuse combination fixed offshore wind farm and aquaculture in the Atlantic and the North Sea are scored with 5 out of 9, where 1 is the biggest potential of combination and 9 is the least potential. Relying on results from the MERMAID project, the goal of the MARIBE project was to examine the feasibility of incorporating mussels inside offshore wind farms with fixed foundations. In the scope of MARIBE evaluation, projects combining aquaculture with ocean energy turned out to have good financial performance and had high ratings. There were good financial results for the combination. It was proven that sectors are benefiting from each other and that their interaction could increase public image and position within MSP directives and licensing procedures (MARIBE). Germany In German MSP, aquaculture in combination with offshore wind farms, is very much encouraged. The German MSP “explicitly advice the combination of the two uses for both users to profit from synergistic effects”. Development of the aquaculture in the already existing wind power installations is allowed just in case the aquaculture site is not an obstacle for wind farm maintenance. Offshore wind developers have the right to pose veto against additional activities that may hinder their activities in the area (MUSES). There were a series of mussel and oyster cultivation experiments, which were conducted at different offshore test sites in the German Bight. There are no mariculture projects in the German EEZ and no approval procedure has been completed so far (Buck et al., 2017). At the moment, there is no big-scale aquaculture project inside offshore wind farms in Germany. The Netherlands

Somos project

The Somos project in the Netherlands was dealing with the technical standards for the production of food from marine plants and the safe use of ocean space. The focus of the Somos project was renewable energy production in combination with seaweed production. The project started in 2016 and finished in

31

2018. Wageningen University and Research led the project. Scientists have received funds to investigate the safety aspects of combined activities at sea. Development of the meaningful safety assessment and safety control to stimulate the production of energy and food at sea was the goal of the project. The goal was to demonstrate that multiple economic activities at sea could be done safely. Furthermore, the establishment of methods for assessing the safety of multiple economic activities and identifying the tools that must be used to carry out the analyses and assessment that is required to ensure an acceptable safety level. Furthermore, the project aimed to initiate a public debate with the stakeholders: politicians, financiers, businesses, operators, legal representatives, and societal groups on the issue of safety in multiuse of marine spaces and to create capacity in the marine and maritime community of policymakers, certifiers, and operators (SOMOS Project). The Gemini project In the scope of the MERMAID project (2011-2015), the North Sea case study had the combination of offshore wind energy and mussel and seaweed aquaculture. One of the study areas was located 55 km north of the Wadden Sea Islands north of the Netherlands - Gemini site. This site consists of three concessions, out of which two sites of 300 MW of installed capacity were under construction during the MERMAID project, enabling simultaneous involvement of all stakeholders. Inside Gemini concessions, during the commercialization phase of the project, installation of 98 ha of mussel aquaculture is proposed. In the Netherlands, an agreement was made by the Dutch mussel industry and NGO’s to collect mussels using long lines. There are estimations that by 2020, 5.5 million kg of mussel seed is to be collected annually in the North Sea. United Kingdom In the UK, the multiuse pilot was performed by Deepdock Ltd, a mussels cultivator. Mussel's bottom culture was tested in the windmill park of North Hoyle OWF (Wales) in 2010. The aim of the project was to investigate the potential for successful mussel aquaculture within an OWF. The activity was seabed cultivation, the growth, and harvesting of mussels. Mussels were taken from the wild and placed in the OWF. The North Hoyle wind park consists of 30 monopiles, and the depth of the sea is 10 m when the tide is low. The results of this pilot are that mussels grow well, but that unexplainable mortality occurred during harvest. Further mussels development inside offshore wind farms can be expected in the future in Wales, western England, and western Scotland (Buck et al. 2017). Estonia In Estonia, three possible sites for the development of aquaculture were identified. In the study, areas that are the most suitable for aquaculture development were identified. The development of relevant infrastructure and the applicability of innovative technologies is what is planned to be done next (MUSES, 2018). Denmark Policy on aquaculture and offshore wind farm development: In Denmark, similar to some other countries, the EIA (Environment Impact Assessment), HIA (Habitat Impact Assessments), permission for water use, and placement inland or sea should be obtained before

32

establishing a fish farm. Commonly, the process lasts for more than one year, including several public hearings. Getting permits for the fish farm companies is challenging. Three licenses are required for the development and establishment of offshore windfarm projects in Denmark. These licenses are granted by the Danish Energy Agency: (1) license to carry out preliminary investigations, (2) license to establish the offshore wind turbines, (3) license to exploit wind power for a given number of years. Approval is needed for electricity production for the case of wind farms more than 25 MW. Furthermore, an EIA (Environment Impact Assessment) has to be carried out. Regulations for offshore wind farms originate for those of oil and gas offshore platforms. Regulations for aquaculture reflect a different mindset. Different sets of authorities and regulations are governing the two sectors. Therefore, it is hard to get those two sectors working together towards the common goal (Struiver et al., 2016).

4.2.3 State of play of MUOWF2 combination in Belgium and expert ideas for the future Aquaculture in offshore wind farms in MSP in Belgium In Belgium's first MSP 2014-2020, aquaculture zones are provided in Belwind and Sea Power wind farms, where aquaculture initiatives have to be allowed, but developers do not necessarily need to promote them. The same regulation appears in the MSP2020-2026. In case of demand for aquaculture, wind developers have to meet with aquaculture stakeholders, to negotiate, to coordinate maritime transport routes and to make space for aquaculture development. Possibility of deployment of aquaculture in wind farms in Belgium in the future The opinions regarding the possibility of deployment of aquaculture in wind farms in Belgium differs. In Belgium, offshore wind farms are 30-40 km far from the coast. Therefore, according to some experts, it is not rational to place aquaculture that far from the coast. The general opinion is that aquaculture in combination with offshore wind, is not seen as an economically viable combination at the moment, at least not when it comes to Belgian waters. Various research projects that enhance knowledge are encouraged, but in order for a big scale, industry involved developments to happen, there is a need for economic viability in the first place. Poor economic viability is a result of geographical and market characteristics. Aquaculture is economically viable in many countries where it is possible to do it in a shelter environment and close by port and coast. Belgian wind farms do not represent these types of conditions. Mussels and salmon aquaculture are, for instance, already in the high quantity being done in other EU countries and there is no trouble to transport these products to the Belgian market. Therefore, some experts suggest that in Belgium, aquaculture in offshore wind farms could be high value, specialized, more exclusive (for instance, lobsters and oysters). To avoid excessive transportation, it could be a low volume product. Growing mussels that far away offshore in the North Sea (30-40km in Belgium) could be an expensive operation. Mussels are highly marketed in Belgium. Selling mussels does not leave many margins and there is competition with mussel production happening near shore, which is strong competition. Developing a business case could represent a challenge. Experts explain that many analyses of water (bacterial infection- E Coli or salmonella or toxins) are requested before the development of offshore mussel aquaculture start. There are no certified labs at the moment in Belgium and samples must be sent to the Netherlands. In addition to insurance costs, these costs could be high for aquaculture developers. In a short period, mussels should be harvested

33

(timing depends on weather conditions), send to the Netherlands for analysis and, if results are satisfactory, marketed. This can create time pressure for aquaculture developers. Some interviewed experts believe that one of the prerequisites for the development of mussel aquaculture in Belgium is the establishment of certified labs where water and mussels could be sent for analysis. Requirements imposed by the windfarms developers that aquaculture operators need to fulfill are an additional difficulty. In Belgium, maritime transport is not allowed inside the wind farm area. The only vessels permitted at the moment are crew vessels used for the technical maintenance of offshore wind farms. Therefore, in terms of safety, these areas could represent a suitable location for mussel aquaculture for instance. However, maintenance vessels that are entering wind farms have to fulfill a list of requirements: vessel has to have two engines and dynamic positioning systems (GPS). In case of the existence of aquaculture inside wind farms, these kinds of requirements could represent a high investment for aquaculture vessel owners. Furthermore, another advantage for aquaculture inside wind farms is there are no fishing vessels allowed in the wind farm areas in Belgium. Since there is no trawling, the risk of damaging aquaculture equipment is reduced. Experts explain that mussels, for instance, could grow in offshore wind farms in the Belgian North Sea at a very good growth rate. From a biological point of view, it is comparable to mussels that are grown near shore. There is a possibility to produce commercial mussels within (approximately) 14 days. Based on some test projects done in Belgium, it is clear what can be improved in test facilities to develop a commercial farm. Therefore, experts claim that from a biological and technical perspective, growing mussels inside offshore wind farms in Belgium is highly possible. Edulis project Project Edulis is dealing with the feasibility of mussel culture in the offshore wind farms in Belgium. The project aims to investigate if there is a future of mussel farming inside windfarms. The project started in 2017 when an experimental mussel culture system was installed in the C-Power wind farm. The project ended in August 2019. Researches are still compiling all the data. The study has not been finished yet. Therefore official results are unknown (Ghent University).

4.3 MUOWF3: Offshore wind+ Conservation/ Building with nature

4.3.1 Drivers and barriers for the MUOWF3 Legal and environmental drivers The MUOWF3 represents passive multiuse. In this report, two drivers for the MUOWF3 combination are identified. Unintentionally offshore wind farms are operating as MPA areas since many activities are prohibited inside wind farms. According to some studies, offshore wind farms are increasing biodiversity.

34

1. Legal driver: Placing offshore wind farms inside Natura 2000 areas can improve the environmental status In some countries (Belgium and France, for instance), according to the MSP, wind farms will be placed in the Natura 2000 area. Many aspects need to be taken into account when deciding where to put offshore wind farm concessions: avoiding boat lanes, harbors, areas where certain types of fish are found... Natura 2000 areas are often areas that have not been claimed to a large extent by other users. Windfarm industry is a new activity that is being set up in the areas that are not claimed by other users. Therefore, wind farms zones and Natura 2000 areas overlap. Space availability is the main reason for setting up offshore wind farms in Natura 2000 areas. When wind farms are placed in the Natura 2000 areas, to some extent, multiuse is already achieved. There will be wind energy production and nature conservation in the same place. Many interviewed experts agree that there can be many activities inside Natura 2000 areas and that some of them, such as offshore wind energy, can improve environmental status. For instance, in most of the existing wind farms (in Belgium as well), there is already some nature conservation involved- bottom trawling is prohibited. Therefore, if the wind farm is placed inside Natura 2000 area, there is no bottom trawling inside Natura 2000 area. This represents benefit since Natura 2000 areas inside windfarms are preserved as well. On the other hand, in the current Natura 2000 areas without wind farms, there is still bottom trawling. Therefore, the seafloor integrity inside Natura 2000 area could be increased by placing an offshore wind farm inside it.

2. Environmental drivers: Offshore wind farms are able to almost operate as an MPA (Marine Protected Area) unintentionally Offshore wind farm areas are strictly regulated areas. As many other (potentially damaging) activities are prohibited inside, some research has stated that offshore wind farms can “restore damaged ecosystems and increase biodiversity almost operating as an MPA (Marine Protected Area) unintentionally” (European MSP). Offshore wind farms are accelerating biodiversity There are arguments that wind farms are accelerating biodiversity by introducing species that appear due to the new conditions that are set with the installation of wind farms. Offshore wind farms could have a beneficial effect on biodiversity since new species are attracted by the turbine foundations and surrounding infrastructure (Degraer et al., 2018). Legal and environmental barriers Two barriers have been identified for the MUOWF3 combination. A more restrictive procedure while adding activities inside protected areas. The underwater noise, ramming of the seabed, damage of the fish stock, displace of local species, and attraction of invasive species are identified as the second barrier for the MUOWF3.

35

1. Legal barrier: The procedure of adding activities inside protected areas is sometimes restrictive and more administration is required In a situation where offshore wind farms are inside Natura 2000 areas, adding additional activity could represent a legal barrier. An appropriate assessment needs to be done in case of any developments in the Natura 2000 areas. The main reason is to determine whether the planned activity endangers the conservation objectives of Natura 2000. As long as there are no risks of not reaching conservation goals, the activity can be placed in Natura 2000 (EU Commission 2011). In case that, for example, the offshore wind farm is planned inside Natura 2000, appropriate assessment needs to be done. If aquaculture activity is added, in addition to appropriate assessment for offshore wind farms, appropriate assessment needs to be done to clarify if aquaculture activity is affecting conservation objective. Therefore, in the situation of adding another activity beside offshore wind activity inside the Natura 2000 area, more administration is required and the whole procedure is more restrictive.

2. Environmental barrier: Offshore wind farms can cause underwater noise, ramming of the seabed, damage of the fish stock, displace of local species and attraction of invasive species Dutch fishermen argue that underwater noise and ramming of the seabed, caused by offshore wind farms, harm the fish: “They claim that the area around the wind farms creates some kind of paradise of biodiversity. It is exactly the opposite. The acoustic sound from the turbines discourages fish and if it carries on long enough, they just don’t come back. There are lots of oysters and mussels around the turbines, but not fish. It’s a dead area” (Boffey, 2018). Underwater noise is too high, porpoises around windfarms are deafened and they die once they lose their hearing ability, state Dutch fishermen. Besides, they argue that the ramming of the seabed kills everything in the range of 6km surrounding wind farms. The changes in the behavior of a range of sea animals can be caused by noise disturbance during the construction phase. According to research in Germany and Denmark, the porpoises temporary migrate to other areas during pile driving (European MSP platform). The OWF areas are avoided by some some some species of offshore seabirds. Specific frequencies of underwater noise can disturb some mammals such as porpoises, bottlenose dolphins, Northern Right whale, harbor seals, and baleen whales (European MSP Platform). Some research shows that the use of pile drivers to pound holes into the seabed, the acoustic noise of the operating turbines, and the electromagnetic fields around the transmission cables affect sea life in proximity to it. However, there are different findings regarding the size of the damage. Offshore wind farms damage fish stock, displace local species, and attract invasive species (Petruny-Parker et al., 2015; Boffey, 2018).

36

4.3.2 Case studies for the MUOWF3 combination- Experiences from other countries The Netherlands Nature inclusive design In the Netherlands, the concept of “building with nature” is actual. To achieve nature inclusive building, there is a need for the integration of conservation in the design phase and the need for experiments. The Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality intends to use the development of offshore wind farms to strengthen the North Sea ecosystem. The enhancement of the ecological functioning in the offshore wind farms will improve the status of policy-relevant species. This is part of the North Sea 2050 Spatial Planning Agenda and is being operationalized through permit-obligations. This has resulted in Wind Farm Site Decisions (WFSD) for recently permitted wind farms. The Wageningen Marine Research conducts many research and projects regarding offshore windfarms, conservation, and building with nature. There are different types of design for nature inclusive building of the wind farm: 1. Adding structures that are larger than the usual protection against erosion. There should be large holes and gaps so that there is sufficient shelter for large species. These holes must be the 1-2m diameter or more so that there is enough living space. For example, this can improve the living environment of cod. 2. Adding or simulating natural substrate properties to facilitate species. For example, a calcium-rich substrate such as concrete with added chalk or a natural substrate as shell material. Specific target species can see this substrate as their natural substrate, and it makes it for them easier to settle. Flat oyster larvae, for example, settle on chalky substrates such as empty shells of oysters or mussels. 3. Active introduction of target species to strengthen the establishment of new populations. This makes recruitment possible at locations where reproduction by adults is on existent. An example is the active introduction of a population of flat oysters (Lengkeek, et al., 2017). Eco-friendly reef restoration pilots in offshore wind farms The ECO-FRIEND project in the Netherlands aims to monitor reef restoration pilots in the offshore wind farms. The project aims to develop and study new methods to re-introduce offshore flat oyster beds and related biodiversity in cooperation with industry. The Wageningen Marine Research leads the project. It will end in 2023. The goal is to develop new monitoring methods to assess the effectiveness of pilot projects, to reduce cost and increase scientific output and to understand the environmental background of the pilots by intensive monitoring and modeling of the surrounding parameters (e.g., temperature, salinity, food availability) (Wageningen Marine Research). In the future, it is foreseen that ecological requirements will become stricter regarding wind farm applications. The expected impacts from the ECO-FRIEND project are that it will increase the competitiveness of the involved industry partners in future wind farm applications. The competitive advantage for Dutch research organizations and industry will be provided by the cost-efficient methods developed to monitor the effectiveness of biodiversity stimulation through flat oyster re-introduction. The project will increase the feasibility of large-scale offshore flat oyster restoration, one of the aims of the OSPAR convention. Besides, it will establish a viable population of flat oysters in offshore wind farms and start oyster bed restoration in the Netherlands. Dutch research organizations and industry will get

37

the ability to export and facilitate similar initiatives in other North Sea countries based on the increased knowledge of flat oyster restoration gained through this project (Wageningen Marine Research). Biodiversity and multifunctional use of old production platforms and new offshore wind farms study The study aims to study the effect of hard substrates on biodiversity. The Wageningen Marine Research led the research. The role of hard substrates as stepping-stones for specific species will be investigated, together with the potential of hard substrates for marine products such as aquaculture of mussels. An important part of the study will focus on the question of whether decommissioned platforms can be deployed as artificial reefs to increase biodiversity (Wageningen Marine Research). Mitigation during construction in the Netherlands In the Netherlands, piling is temporarily stopped in periods of ecological importance (such as spawning). The competent authority has introduced conditions: 1) It is allowed to construct only one find farm per year; 2) there is a seasonal restriction of piling activities (construction is permitted between 1st July and 31st December). Furthermore, in Netherlands strategic ecological research program was developed. The five years long WOZEP (Dutch Governmental Offshore Wind Ecological Programme) has started in the Netherlands in 2016. The goal to fill the knowledge gaps regarding the ecological effects of offshore wind (European MSP platform).

4.3.3 State of play of MUOWF3 combination in Belgium and expert ideas for the future According to Belgium 2020-2026 MSP, some of the designated locations for the future windfarms concessions are situated inside Natura 2000 Areas. According to some interviewed experts, at the moment in Belgium, studies are being undertaken to impose the correct base conditions for the construction of offshore wind in these Natura 2000. Barriers could be possible costs relating to the construction of offshore wind farms (e.g., additional mitigation measures for noise reduction use of certain materials that can be more expensive…). Drivers are that if the studies find it possible, it will serve as a flagship project, which will prove that green energy and nature conservation can be successfully combined. This would bode well for achieving the energy goals in the entire North Sea region. North Sea Observatory project Two artificial reefs were installed in offshore wind farms on the Belgian part of the North Sea in the framework of the project North Sea Observatory. A monitoring network was set to evaluate their potential to increase biodiversity. Two artificial reefs, each existing out of 33 reef balls, were sank in August 2013 nearby the offshore wind parks of the companies Belwind and C-power to increase the ecological value of the area actively. The aim was to attract marine life and to follow up on the colonization process. Less than one year after installation, artificial reefs in the Belgian part of the North Sea already harbor excellent biodiversity (VLIZ).

38

4.4 MUOWF4: Offshore wind + Wave energy

The MUOWF4 is characterized as active multiuse. Additional activity, wave energy conversion is introduced in offshore wind farms.

4.4.1 Drivers and barriers for the MUOWF4 There are a couple of drivers for combining wave energy converters and offshore wind turbines occupying the same marine area.

Socio-economic, technological and environmental drivers

1. Socio-economic drivers: Shared logistics - The dimensions and distinctive characteristics of offshore wind and offshore wave renewable energy projects require the use of expensive specialist marine equipment and facilities, such as port space or installation vessels. A combined project where these are shared with the wind industry would contribute to reducing the costs. This combination, contrarily to other offshore wind combinations, presents many operational synergies and operations that can be conducted by the same entity, which is a significant advantage (MUSES, 2018). An increased energy yield - The combination of offshore wind and tidal energy will increase the energy yield per unit area of marine space and thereby contribute to better use of natural resources (Pérez-Collazo et al., 2014). The combination is driven by maximal energy generation from all the energy resources at the given sea space (MUSES, 2018). Increased predictability - The wave resource is more predictable and less variable than the wind resource. For day-ahead forecasts, waves are 23% more predictable than winds, the power output of WECs is 35% more predictable than for wind turbines, and the inclusion of wave energy in a wind-only system reduces balancing costs up to 35% resources (Pérez-Collazo et al., 2014). Common substructure or foundation systems - The combination of wave and offshore wind technologies on the same structure, on hybrid platforms or systems, would be a significant reduction in the cost of the substructures compared with separate projects. Cost of installation - The production of energy with wave converters is not high enough to justify the cost of installation and maintaining. Therefore, experts explain, it is not reasonable to develop wave energy installations individually, but to combine it with other energy infrastructure (offshore wind farms). It is unlikely that there will be wave energy farms soon, the cost is too high for the production output. Therefore, it is more reasonable to integrate wave energy installation into a system such as a wind farm. In that way, it is possible to make use of the existing wind infrastructure of the substation or electrical installation. Therefore, the wind and wave sector could share facilities and reduce investment in the development phase.

39

2. Technology drivers:

The shadow effects - The energy extraction of wave energy converters create a wake that modifies the local wave climate by reducing the mean wave height. By placing wave energy converters in offshore wind parks, shadow effect could be used to obtain a milder wave climate inside the wind park (with the proper design, by locating the wave converters along the perimeter of the offshore wind park). It may lead to more weather windows for accessing the wind turbines for operation and maintenance and to reduced costs and loads on the structures (Pérez-Collazo et al., 2013). A smooth and highly available power output - As well as being more predictable than winds, wave climates are less variable and peak wave potential lags some hours behind peak wind potential for the same weather system. Therefore a combined harness of the wind and wave resources at the same location allows for combined power output to avoid a rapid reduction in supply to the electric grid due to unpredictable wind resource variation. Furthermore, the combined use of the resources allows to design a grid connection able to absorb the maximum combined energy production with lower capacity than the combined power rated, like the wave and wind energy production peaks are delayed in time (Pérez-Collazo et al., 2014). Common grid infrastructure – Experts explain that the electric grid infrastructure represents one of the highest costs for an offshore project—up to one-third of the entire project. Therefore, the combined production of electricity using a shared grid infrastructure would become an essential factor in reducing energy costs.

3. Environmental driver: Reduced environmental impact – Experts explain that the environmental effects of wave and offshore wind energy are a significant consideration in the development of the MUOWF4 combination. The combined option (wind and wave) presents an essential advantage in ecological terms since it is likely to have a reduced environmental impact (compared to independent installations). It leads to better utilization of natural resources. Furthermore, a combination of offshore wind and wave energy could result in a transfer of knowledge on the environmental impacts from one sector to another. Legal, socio - economic and technological barriers Many new waves – wind combined concepts have been proposed in the previous years. However, none of these concepts and projects have reached the commercial stage. The main reason is that many manufacture and installation costs are already minimized in the wind industry. In the wave industry, this is not the case; the wave energy production industry is still in the early phase. Since two renewable sectors are in different development phases, there are several technological, legal and socio-economic barriers.

40

1. Legal barrier: Permitting regulations - Policy documents do not specifically address the MUOWF4 combination. Some of the significant challenges in terms of regulation in the licensing process present the EIA process. For example, in the UK, wind and wave hybrid technologies have to deal with permitting regulators twice (once for each technology). A significant challenge for this capital-intensive multiuse combination is unaligned government financial incentives (feed-in tariff) (MUSES, 2018).

2. Socio-economic barrier: Economically viable technology - The economic aspect is one of the critical challenges for accelerating innovation, increasing competitiveness, and shorten the time-to-market of wave technologies, despite the effort of engineers and researchers to develop Wave Energy Converter devices. CAPEX/OPEX with wave technology is still very high compared to other renewables. It makes stand-alone devices not cost-competitive in the global market (IMDC). According to experts, at the moment, there is no ripe market technology in wave energy development. The cost of bringing the necessary infrastructure is too high to make the project rentable. The business case for wave energy development does not exist at the moment. Therefore, it is tough for wave technology to find a place in the market. Insurance of the wind and wave combined technologies is one of the main issues. It is a consequence of a lack of practical experience when dealing with combined technologies. Therefore, it is an additional economic risk associated with combined projects.

3. Technological barriers Technology readiness - It is hard for the wave energy sector to attract investors since the industry has not reached the necessary level of technology readiness, experts explain. However, others believe that some of the most advanced wave energy concepts (Pelamis, Oyster, Wavestar and Wave Dragon) during the last couple of years have reached technology readiness levels suitable for a synergy industrial development. Lack of experience and absence of a contingency plan for a mooring - Mooring lines that are used at the moment are designed for traditional offshore applications (such as oil and gas). Their utilization under the dynamic loading of a wave energy convertors has not been clarified. Furthermore, placing wave energy converters in the offshore wind farm areas represent a high risk of impact between the wave energy converters and the wind turbines or substructures. The reason for this is a lack of experience and absence of a contingency plan for a mooring failure or collision event. The significant barrier represents a lack of full-scale experience and prototypes of combined wave and wind systems. Failure risk is higher due to the lack of real data supporting the reliability of wave energy converters and combined solutions. Solutions/ Mitigations for the MUOWF4 A common regulatory framework: Offshore wind and wave/tidal energy projects have long return investment periods, and face high energy costs in their early development stage. Therefore, the development of these projects is based on strategic decisions and political commitments such as

41

investment priorities and national or EU energy targets. A clear and stable framework fixing objectives, providing political support, and a stable legislative background would contribute to obtaining the environment to develop MUOWF4 combination (MUSES, 2018). A simplified licensing procedure: The lack of experience, knowledge and the public authorities licensing procedures are the main issues with offshore wind and wave energy combinations experts explain. The result of this is long consenting periods, in particular regarding the environmental impact assessment, which in some cases could be delayed for years until the final approval for on-site deployment. Due to the similarities between offshore wind and wave/tidal energy sectors, unifying the consenting procedures under the same regime through standard and simplified procedures could be a combined advantage. In this respect, the recently finished Streamlining of Ocean Wave Farm Impacts Assessment (SOWFIA) project has produced a set of recommendations and in-depth analysis of wave energy licensing procedures impact assessments and public consultation procedures in Europe (EU Commission).

4.4.2 Case studies for the MUOWF4 combination- Experiences from other countries Wave star machine The Wavestar machine draws energy from wave power with floats that rise and fall with the up and down motion of waves. Arms attach the floats to a platform that stands on legs secured to the seafloor. The motion of the floats is transferred via hydraulics into the rotation of a generator, producing electricity. Waves run the length of the machine. Powering the motor and generator in this way enables continuous energy production and a smooth output. It is one of the few ways to convert fluctuating wave power into the high-speed rotation necessary to generate electricity. Energy production with wave energy is more predictable than wind because waves come and go slowly and can be forecast 24 hours. The Wavestar machine could also be installed together with a wind turbine, which could further increase efficiency and reduce set-up costs (Wave star). W2Power W2Power is a hybrid wind and wave energy conversion plant - two corners of the triangle support one wind turbine each. The third corner houses the power take-off for the patented wave energy conversion system, using a conventional Pelton turbine driven by three lines of wave-actuated hydraulic pumps mounted on the platform’s sides. Using two 3.6 MW standard offshore wind turbines, one W2Power unit can be rated at more than 10 MW total in areas with a good wave climate. The ability to extract power from the waves in periods of low wind offers unparalleled regularity and extended baseline power. As larger offshore turbines become proven, the patented W2Power platform design allows extending the distance between wind turbines without adding proportionally to platform weight and cost. W2Power can be assembled in ports or yards and towed offshore, reducing both costs and logistics complexity and reducing the environmental load on wind farm sites (Pelagicpower).

42

Poseidon Floating Power (Poseidon 37) Poseidon is a concept for a floating power plant that transforms wave energy into electricity. The power plant furthermore serves as a floating foundation for off-shore windmills, thus creating a sustainable energy hybrid. The demonstration plant named Poseidon 37 is 37 meters wide, 25 meters long, 6 meters high (to deck) and weighs approximately 350 tons. Poseidon went into real sea test in 2008 off the shores of Lolland in southern Denmark and has completed 4 grid-connected tests, the last one ending in 2013. The test site was grid-connected with both a 690V and a 10 KV connection. The electrical infrastructure was installed in cooperation with DONG energy. In parallel with these testing activities the technology is currently being scale-up and engineered for the first full-scale commercial unit. A P80 (an 80-meter wide construction including 5-8MW wind turbine and 2-3,6 MW wave. This facility was installed in the UK together with DP energy. Two separate project companies have been established in the UK, one in Wales and one in Scotland (Tethys, 2016). X FPP’s floating wind/wave unit The company behind an innovative floating wind and wave power unit has signed a memorandum of understanding with a Spanish research facility to test a commercial-scale unit. Floating Power Plant (FPP) signed the memorandum of understanding with The Oceanic Platform of the Canary Islands (PLOCAN) and plans to deploy the unit offshore Gran Canaria. FPP said that apart from deploying a commercial-scale version of the hybrid floating wind and wave energy device at PLOCAN, it will also establish a research and development subsidiary in Gran Canaria. The tests will allow the technology to be proven at commercial scale, as well as providing a center for ongoing research and development into system components, control strategies, and auxiliary equipment for a number of years. FPP and PLOCAN will work together to assess the test facilities and identify a suitable deployment location, before conducting the necessary site studies and licensing and consenting activity. PLOCAN will also assist FPP in establishing the research and development subsidiary in Gran Canaria and in establishing an operational plan. It is anticipated that FPP’s technology could be constructed and deployed as early as late 2021 (Foxwell, 2019). Hexifloat 4 in 1 renewable energy platform The multi-purpose floating platform offers a solution for integrating wind, solar, wave and tidal energy devices in limited water space. Combining multiple renewable energy devices in such a manner could potentially offer stable electricity production 24/7, despite seasonal changes. The platform can start small and scale up in short periods. Its modular design enables remote production, assembly in situ and direct installation on water (Hann-ocean). Scotland There is already some experience in a combination of wave and tide energy in the Northern part of Scotland, while a pilot test hybrid wind and wave technology are to be applied in Caithness, Scotland. It is expected that the project will be commissioned by 2020. A study has developed a Search Group Algorithm (Bossuyt S. et al., 2017) to be applied to both wind and wave farm layout optimization. The algorithm allows calculating the optimal geometric layout of the devices within farms, to achieve an

43

optimal power output. At the same time, device interactions are taken into account and minimal distances between the devices are respected (necessary for maintenance) (MUSES, 2018). Denmark While testing of wave energy generation device was conducted in Denmark, this combination was never meant to be employed commercially in the Baltic Sea. The multiuse technology developed for the North Sea and Eastern Atlantic conditions were only tested in the Baltic (Danish Wave Energy Test Center). In Denmark, electricity from renewable sources is mainly promoted through a premium tariff and net-metering. The premium tariff for offshore wind parks is awarded through tenders (MUSES, 2018). 4.4.3 State of play of MUOWF4 combination in Belgium and expert ideas for the future In general, in Belgium, there is interest in wave energy conversion, but according to some experts, it is unlikely it will happen soon. The technology is not on the demanded level, and this kind of development is not economically viable at the moment. Mermaid concessions Belgium When bidding for the Mermaid concessions in Belgium, three similar bids were submitted. The offshore wind farm project with proposed wave energy convertors won the concessions. The developers proposed the installation of 50MW of wave energy converters. That seemed technically hardly feasible at the time. Therefore authorities licensed 20MW of wave energy converters. Authorities suggested wind developers to start developing 5MW of wave energy converters. However, until this moment, there are no wave energy convertors in Mermaid concessions. In this case, developers have proposed multiuse (wave converters inside wind farms) and used it as extra points to get the concession. Wind farms are developed, but it is questionable if and when will wave convertors appear in the concession. Therefore, some experts suggest that regulators should be more cautious. If there is proposed multiuse in projects, developers should ensure that it will happen.

5) The relation between activities at sea and on the land

Impact of multiuse at sea on port infrastructure

In offshore wind development activities, a connection with the land is usually the port, where assembling of turbines and management of offshore wind activities is happening. Ports are the principal provider of different activities at sea. Ports should provide sufficient space, infrastructure, and staff on land to serve actors and infrastructure operating at sea. Experts recommend avoiding monofunctional spaces in ports. Sectors should share port infrastructure as much as possible since costs are high, and space in ports is limited. Furthermore, ports could support offshore multiuse on the land.

44

Experts believe that ports could provide services to different offshore sectors and create added value by recognition of synergies among sectors and the continuation of multiuse of space on land. Furthermore, ports could support research, innovation and the blue industry. The result could be the development of new skills, new competencies, new investments and inducing offshore multiuse. Ports could attract companies that can give added value to services and to make innovation together with the academia In this report, a case study for the relationship between land and sea activities, multiuse of land (port) infrastructure, space, and staff will be the port of Ostend in Belgium. Investments in the ports Ports will need to invest up to 1 billion EUR to adapt, upgrade and redesign facilities and buy new infrastructure to enable the growth of the EU offshore wind capacity. With those new investments, ports would be able to offer efficiencies, accommodation for vessels that are capable of completing installations faster for instance. Furthermore, investments will enable consolidation of operations, maintenance and service in ports (Foxwell, 2018). Offshore wind turbine components are getting larger and installation volumes are increasing. Therefore new facilities at European ports are urgently needed. Ports are deploying innovations continuously. Adapted port infrastructure is catering to large components, multifunctional vessels and an increased number of activities (Wind Europe Ports Platform). Belgium North Sea Vision 2050- Multiple space working group, Belgium In the scope of the North Sea Vision 2050, a Multiple space use working group was formed. The report of this working group is also referring to the relation between sea and land activities. It states that by 2050, there should be mutual planning processes on the sea and the land. In the report, it is suggested that during the planning process, activities on the sea that affect land, and another way around, should carefully be considered. Compared to the neighboring countries, the Belgian part of the North Sea is small. Limited sea space must be allocated optimally. In the North Sea Vision 2050 document it is emphasized that “taking into consideration limited sea space, when it is possible, activities should be transferred from the sea on the land”. Every activity at sea has a relation with the activities on land. Activities on land should be approached from a multiuse perspective. In the report, the importance of the common use of land infrastructure is emphasized (Belgian Vision for the North Sea 2050, 2017). Case study- Port of Ostend in Belgium The Port of Ostend in Belgium is transformed into a service port to support Blue Growth activities at the sea (offshore wind industry in particular). According to the Port Authorities, there are a lot of possibilities for sea multiuse to expand on land (VISION, 2018). Multifunctional teams; Multiuse of port space, infrastructure and staff in the port of Ostend Experts explain that today, every wind developer in the port of Ostend has its own maintenance team. It is possible that in the future, there will be multifunctional teams made out of different wind developer companies working on wind farms. High costs can lead to creating multifunctional teams. Staff and

45

service vehicles could operate for more than one wind park and, in the meantime, check other activities on the sea. The offshore wind market is growing in the port of Ostend and there will be an increase in the number of activities, staff, infrastructure, and vessels needed for the offshore wind industry. If all the investments now planned are realized, there will not be enough staff and service vessels to carry out the necessary activities, experts claim. Experts further explain that, in the port of Ostend, the number of ship movements at the moment is 10000 movements per year (offshore wind sector). In the first years of wind development, there were 3000 movements per year. If this trend in increasing the number of ships continues (taking into consideration plans for building wind farms in the zone 2), there will be a need for multiuse of space, staff, and infrastructure, not just on the sea, but in the port as well. Staff and storage space in the port of Ostend serving different companies and offshore sectors According to experts, storage space inside the Ostend port is scarce. At the moment, each wind company has proper storage and engineers. Storage space could be shared between sectors and companies. However, competition issues might appear in case that different companies operating in the same sector (such as offshore wind) share storage space. Company MultiTech in the port of Ostend provides services for different offshore sectors. MultiTech has a steel metal treatment plant in the port. The company is working for the government, by making buoys for operations at sea, but also serve the offshore wind sector. Furthermore, the company is organizing storage space for multiple industries. According to experts, this is understandable from a competition point of view own. On the other hand, it is not unusual that employees are often changing wind companies as companies are operating in physical proximity. Decommissioning of wind turbines and stimulation of circular economy on the backside of the Ostend port To facilitate operations for the annual decommissioning of 750 MW of capacity and to recycle more than 600 turbines annually in the EU (number of turbines that have reached the end of life between now and 2030), there will be a need for the new port facilities in the EU ports. Ports will be essential players in the future market- decommissioning of offshore wind farms. It will secure the port's position in the offshore wind supply chain and give visibility to their operations (WindEurope Ports Platform). Regarding the Circular economy in the port of Ostend, several companies in the port of Oostende have developed new technologies for the reconversion of non-ferrous metal and ferrous metals, asphalt and construction materials into new materials. On the backside of the port of Ostend, recycling of blades and other metal components is already possible. Companies work on the recuperation of different metals and send it back to companies working on steel production or to the construction sector, experts explain. These new technologies can be significant for the decommissioning phase of offshore wind farms when parts of the wind turbines could be recycled. Fishery dock in Ostend port The Fisheries Dock is a large dock (700 m long and 125 m wide). It is accessible through a lock with a length of 91 m. Fisherman and offshore wind sectors are using the fishery dock in Ostende at the moment. The dock is underused and has a lot of free space since fisheries have steadily declined over

46

the last years. The wind farm O&M companies are leaving their boats used for maintenance and preparation in the dock. The dock is also used by the crew transfer vessels (CTVs) for overnight stay. However, conflict in the use of the dock space exists. Shipowners and crew prefer to leave vessels behind the lock, as they can leave their ship in safety and stay in an apartment or hotel in town. Offshore wind operation and maintenance companies, however, focus on the time lost for passing the lock (minimum 30’ per pass), which is time lost for working within the 12 hours per day maximum allowance (VISION 2018). Therefore, port authorities propose to turn the fisheries dock into the tidal dock. The lock stays open, but the water is still secluded, avoiding swells and waves coming in. Inside the dock, the tidal difference is 4.5m. This solution requires infrastructure work. To fully transfer this dock from the fisheries dock into a tidal dock, there is a need to do dredging works and take out the contaminated silt and protect the existing quay walls by rock deposits. An area is reserved for fishing boats unloading their catch at the fish auction on the west quay. Port authorities are planning to transfer the docks into space with the capacity to serve simultaneously multiple offshore sectors (VISION 2018). Experiences from other countries Building the necessary infrastructure for the floating wind turbines in Scotland and Spain Logistical challenges relating to floating offshore wind were examined in the Floating Wind Joint Industry Report. In areas where the sea is too deep for fixed foundations, floating offshore wind will enable development in high-wind zones. It is noted that few European ports are capable of accommodating manufacturing and assembly activities required for large-scale floating windfarms. The largest floating offshore wind farm has a capacity of 30 MW at the moment. Organized infrastructure planning will be essential to accommodate more significant projects and allow the floating offshore wind industry to reach commercial viability. A port must meet specific criteria to supply the quayside construction of a large-scale floating wind farm. There is a need for a suitably big onshore area for component set-down and production lines. The port should be close to other operation-capable ports, and space for wet storage of assembled units is needed. Existing port infrastructure in the EU is mainly insufficient. Out of 96 European ports that have been analyzed, a few European ports in Scotland, Norway and Spain were suitable for developing and operating floating offshore windfarms. In Spain and Scotland, one of the activities is building the necessary infrastructure for the floating wind turbines in port areas, in water. There is a lot of interaction between the traditional port construction industry and the new energy industry. This interaction is an example of reusing traditional port functions to develop and support the new (wind) industries. Furthermore, tests for new types of ships which serve to monitor wind parks are made inside ports. Lengthy and costly tow operations will be necessary if an assembly port is further from the windfarm site. Current installation and support vessels used for fixed foundation wind farms are likely to be insufficient for floating wind farms. Thus new ones will need to be developed to meet the demands of floating offshore projects. If better towing systems that are capable of bringing over components from nearby port assembly sites are developed, the issue of limited port space could be solved. In line with industry development of the necessary technologies to make floating offshore wind commercially viable, investment in port infrastructure to avoid delays in the deployment of large-scale floating offshore wind farms is needed.

47

Multiuse in ports Wave energy converters in the ports: ‘Sustainable Energy at Sea Ports’ project The ‘Sustainable Energy at Sea Ports’ (SE@Ports) project explores the idea of integrating wave energy convertor devices in port infrastructure. The project received funding through the Ocean Energy ERA-NET Cofund initiative from European Union under the Horizon 2020 Programme for Research and Innovation. The project is comprised of six partners from Belgium, Portugal, and Spain. Key objectives of the SE@Ports projects are to assess existing wave energy convertors on their suitability to be integrated into port infrastructure and to demonstrate the win-win solution of incorporating wave energy convertor devices into port infrastructure. Wave converters could increase levels of operational efficiency and structural survivability during normal conditions and storm events. The project explores the possibility of device hybridization, through the combination of an Oscillation Water Column (OWC) and an Overtopping Wave Energy Converter (WEC) under a novel hybrid system concept, as a way to help overcome the limitations of the individual technologies and to increase the level of operational efficiency (IMDC). The project is dealing with some of the key challenges identified for the sector by incorporating an adequate balance between research and design and testing activities with commercialization aspects. The two case study ports for this project are the port of Leixões (the rubble-mound north breakwater) and the port of Las Palmas (Nelson Mandela vertical breakwater). In these ports, the developed tools, wave energy convertors, were demonstrated. Hvide Sande In the Danish port Hvide Sande wind farms were built on the beach and in the sea. Wind technology combined with wave technology is supplying the port and the city of Hvide Sande with energy. The wind and wave energy sectors are working together with the energy company of the city to contribute to the energy production and distribution system of the city. Furthermore, the authorities of the port of Hvide Sande are looking into the possibility of using wave technology in the production of hydrogen that can be used by various sectors in the city of Hvide Sande. The idea is to make a “full green circle of energy” for local city consumption. The port makes a lot of money from housing the three wind turbines on the beach- five million Danish kroner a year (700 000 EUR). Port of Hvide Sande gets the largest share of profit. The rest of the profit goes to 400 local shared owners of the wind turbines. This local initiative (sharing ownership of the wind turbines) is a new model called the “Hvide Sande Model.” It won the European Solar Prize in 2013. The three wind turbines are contributing to the continued economic growth of the port and the city of Hvide Sande and are therefore much endorsed by the local population. Significant port expansion and a secure future for the port with a 148 million Danish kroner investment is a result of this. Furthermore, these beach wind turbines produce a lot of green energy. Surf on the beach drowns out the noise that the turbines make. The local business and tourism industry in the Ringkøbing Skjern Municipality is benefiting from the money generated through these wind turbines (Hvide Sande).

48

6) Discussion/ Conclusion The report gave an overview of state of the art in multiuse in offshore wind farms. Information in the report is obtained through a literature overview and interviews with experts in the field. The focus was on the North Sea countries. An overview of policies for offshore wind farm development regarding multiuse in policy documents is analyzed in the second part of the report. Policies are analyzed on international, European, and Belgium level. Reasons to look towards multiuse in offshore wind farms and general drivers and barriers for multiuse in offshore wind farms are elaborated in the third part of the report. Furthermore, significant factors for the multiuse in offshore wind farms, such as the importance of timing and capacity density, are reviewed. Overview of the multiuse research projects is in the same chapter. An in-depth analysis of the multiuse combinations is given in chapter five of this report. Multiuse in offshore wind farms combinations are categorized as passive or active. Offshore wind farms in combination with aquaculture and wave energy converters, are classified as active multiuse combinations, while offshore wind and fishing/ marine transport and conservation are categorized as passive multiuse. Multiuse combinations are analyzed through drivers, barriers, case studies and experiences from other countries and state of the play of multiuse combinations in Belgium with expert ideas for the future. Methods, incentives or actions to facilitate multi-use in offshore wind farms If there is a need to facilitate multiuse in offshore wind farms, experts agree that regulators and policymakers play an essential role. The policymakers and responsible ministries are important actors that can positively impact or influence multiuse development. Regulators have a crucial role in promoting multi-use developments and improving communication by spreading information and bringing together different sectors. The government permits the establishment of activities in sea space. The government can use policy options to regulate activities related to offshore wind development: the legal framework (such as MSP) and tendering procedures. Experts from Belgium agree that there is a stimulus from the national government in Belgium to promote multiuse at sea and especially in offshore wind farms. However, experts that are interviewed for this report have different opinions regarding the role of the government in multiuse in windfarm developments. 1. Multiuse could be made a condition in the policy if there is clear economic viability for both sectors involved in the multiuse. The government could be responsible for reducing the burden for multiuse developers and actors. The suggestion is that the government could reduce the insurance risk by taking part in the risk and being responsible in the case that, for instance, small aquaculture projects go wrong. The government could be financially involved: by taking the burden of the added insurance or by promoting, subsidizing these multiuse activities. The government could pay for the risks of multiuse only in the case that it is demonstrated that a multiuse combination is capable of providing an added economic benefit. It is not rational to put activities that can be placed closer to the coast in wind farm zones. In Belgium, for instance, wind farms are far away from the coast (30-40km). The cost of transportation during the maintenance and operation of multiuse activities would be high. Therefore, only if it is proven that multiuse activities could be economically viable, the government could step in and promote multiuse activities by

49

shouldering some of the burdens. The government should not force a subsidized sector to do actions in which there is no economic benefit for all stakeholders involved. 2. The government's role could be to connect various stakeholders with the wind farm sector and to bring them in contact. Regulators could act as mediators that will point out benefits to stakeholders and help them to learn from each other. Most of the wind developers are focused on gaining as much energy possible and making a profit out of it. Regulators could demonstrate to wind developers that cooperation might bring economic benefit and that resources and costs of investment can be shared and combined. Sectors do not have enough information to understand that multiuse could bring benefits for stakeholders from both sides. The argument of not having economic benefits is not valid. Regulators could provide the right regulatory framework to allow multi-use. This framework must ascertain that safety is not jeopardized and ease an administrative burden stifling for multi-use. Regulators could also undertake studies to explore which combinations of multi-use are possible in offshore windfarms. 3. The government could force multiuse in offshore wind farms through policy. Authorities are defining boundary conditions. The government could make a condition: if multiuse is not included, there is no right to use sea space. The MSP legal framework can be used by regulators to create a condition: if there is a designated area for offshore wind development, the same area has to be used for additional activities. Ideally, both policy options, MSP and tendering procedure, could be used together. The MSP could specify how many activities could be planned in the same space. Afterward, in the tendering procedure, it could be steered towards particular activities: aquaculture, energy, environmental protection, fisheries. The government could also make multi-use criteria for awarding new tenders. Laws could be incorporated in MSP and MSP could be integrated with the tendering procedure. Many argue about the economic viability of multiuse in offshore wind farms. However, some experts believe that multiuse could be a condition in the policy. If it is a condition, developers and companies will make an innovative technological solution and find economical models to make it economically viable. For instance, in the past, in Belgium, it was believed that it is hardly possible to develop offshore wind without subsidies. According to policy today, it has to be done without state subsidies, and it will be done without subsidies in new concessions on the French border. Therefore, experts explain this example shows, if there is a policy through which companies and developers are obliged to make changes, they will find a way how to make it economically viable (through technology innovation, for example) and implement it. Furthermore, some of the suggestions for the facilitation of the multi-use in offshore wind farms are also a reconsideration of the administrative procedures for smoothing multiuse in offshore wind farms (unified licensing and permitting processes). Well-thought-out and properly programmed field experiments involving sectors and regulators could be used to examine potential added values of multiuse. Minimum investment size and legal arrangements are barriers in offshore wind farm multiuse and must be examined concerning the ambitions of different public policies. The dedicated financial investments are required for multiuse deployment due to high transactional costs (MUSES, 2018). Further research and development is necessary when combining offshore wind with different sectors in the same space, on crucial technology components such as new materials for mooring lines; new concepts of mooring systems, which include anti failure safety systems; anti-collision systems, to avoid damage of the wind turbines in the event of mooring failure and minimize the collision risks. However, on the other hand, there is the need to develop a full-scale concept of combined technologies to prove the validity of the synergies and their economic impact on a real project and to understand the interaction between offshore wind technologies and different sectors (Pérez-Collazo et al., 2013).

50

It is the task of further research to analyze possible scenarios for the multiuse in offshore wind farms for countries individually and the setup of a framework for the evaluation of those scenarios. Another point of entry for further research could be the evaluation and prioritization of the scenarios that could result in short-mid and long-term recommendations for future multi-use in the wind farm zones. Still, this paper has shown a first entry point into analyzing the current state of play of multiuse in offshore wind farms based on literature overview, existing multiuse research projects and experts' opinions.

51

7) References & literature list Belgian Federal Public Service Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment (2014). Something is moving at sea… A marine spatial plan for the Belgian part of the North Sea

Belgian Offshore Platform. Northwester 2. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.belgianoffshoreplatform.be/nl/projects/northwester-2/

Belgian Offshore Platform. Northwind. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.belgianoffshoreplatform.be/en/projects/northwind/

Belgian Vision for the North Sea 2050 (2017). Report Working Group Multi-Use. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.thinktanknorthsea.be/downloads?permalink=mrg

Boffey D. (2018). Dutch fishermen to sail fleet into Amsterdam in wind turbine protest. The Guardian. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/01/dutch-fishermen-to-sail-fleet-into-amsterdam-in-wind-turbine-protest

Bossuyt S. (2017). Een ‘Search Group Algoritme’ voor de optimalisatie van offshore windmolenparken. Book of abstracts – VLIZ Marine Scientist Day

Brenner M. et al. (2007). New concept combines offshore wind farms, mussel cultivation. Global Aquac Advocate

Bridger C. & Costa-Pierce A. (2003). Open Ocean Aquaculture: From Research to Commercial Reality. World Aquaculture Society

Buck et al. (2004). Extensive open ocean aquaculture development within wind farms in Germany: the prospect of offshore co-management and legal constraints. Ocean & Coastal Management

Buck et al. (2006). Technical Realization of Extensive Aquaculture Constructions in Offshore Wind Farms: Consideration of the Mechanical Loads. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering

Buck et al. (2008). Meeting the quest for spatial efficiency: progress and prospects of extensive aquaculture within offshore wind farms. Helgoland Marine Research

Buck et al. (2017). Aquaculture Perspective of Multi-Use Sites in the Open Ocean. SpringerOpen. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/856c/d066ed9f403572462031356daabeb516f19b.pdf

CarbonTrust (2018). Floating Wind Joint Industry Project. Phase I Summary Report. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.carbontrust.com/media/675868/flw-jip-summaryreport-phase1.pdf

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (2013). Marine Renewable Integrated Application Platform. Deliverable D1.12 Final Summary Report. Seventh framework program

https://www.belgianoffshoreplatform.be/nl/projects/northwester-2/

https://www.belgianoffshoreplatform.be/en/projects/northwind/

http://www.thinktanknorthsea.be/downloads?permalink=mrg

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/01/dutch-fishermen-to-sail-fleet-into-amsterdam-in-wind-turbine-protest

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/01/dutch-fishermen-to-sail-fleet-into-amsterdam-in-wind-turbine-protest

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/856c/d066ed9f403572462031356daabeb516f19b.pdf

https://www.carbontrust.com/media/675868/flw-jip-summaryreport-phase1.pdf

52

Degraer et al. (2013). Environmental impacts of offshore wind farms in the Belgian part of the North Sea: Learning from the past to optimise future monitoring programmes. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences

Degraer et al. (2018). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF OFFSHORE WIND FARMS IN THE BELGIAN PART OF THE NORTH SEA. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINS)

Elia Group (2019). Modular Offshore Grid. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.elia.be/en/infrastructure-and-projects/infrastructure-projects/modular-offshore-grid

ENTROPI (2019). Could Multi-Use Platforms at Sea offer one solution for ocean sustainability?. Press Release. Marine Southeast

EU Commission (2011). Wind energy development and Natura 2000. EU Guidance on wind energy development in accordance with the EU nature legislation. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/Wind_farms.pdf

EU Commission (2016). Summary of the 27 Multiannual National Aquaculture Plan. DG MARE. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/docs/body/27-multiannual-national-aquaculture-plans-summary_en.pdf

EU Commission (2019). Marine Renewable Integrated Application Platform. CORDIS EU. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/241402

EU Commission (2019). Multi-Use offshore platforms demoNstrators for boostIng cost-effecTive and Eco-friendly proDuction in sustainable marine activities. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/862915

EU Commission (2019). Multiple-use-of Space for Island Clean Autonomy. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/862252

EU Commission (2019). Off-shore Renewable Energy Conversion platforms – Coordination Action. CORDIS EU. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/241421

EU Commission (2019). Streamlining of Ocean Wave Farm Impacts Assessment (SOWFIA). Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/projects/en/projects/sowfia

EU Commission. Paris Agreement. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/paris_en

European Commission (2018). Belgium’s Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan 2021-2030. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/ec_courtesy_translation_be_necp.pdf

European MSP Platform (2019). Conflict fiche 8: Offshore wind and area-based marine conservation. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.mspplatform.eu/sites/default/files/8_offshore_wind_conservation_0.pdf

https://www.elia.be/en/infrastructure-and-projects/infrastructure-projects/modular-offshore-grid

https://www.elia.be/en/infrastructure-and-projects/infrastructure-projects/modular-offshore-grid

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/Wind_farms.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/docs/body/27-multiannual-national-aquaculture-plans-summary_en.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/docs/body/27-multiannual-national-aquaculture-plans-summary_en.pdf

https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/241402




https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/projects/en/projects/sowfia

https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/paris_en

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/ec_courtesy_translation_be_necp.pdf

https://www.mspplatform.eu/sites/default/files/8_offshore_wind_conservation_0.pdf

53

European MSP Platform (2019). OFFSHORE WIND AND CONSERVATION. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.msp-platform.eu/sector-information/offshore-wind-and-conservation

European MSP Platform (2019). OFFSHORE WIND AND FISHERIES. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.msp-platform.eu/sector-information/offshore-wind-and-fisheries

European MSP Platform (2017). Belgian Vision for the North Sea 2050. Think Thank North Sea. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.msp-platform.eu/practices/belgian-vision-north-sea-2050

European MSP Platform. Capacity Densities of European Offshore Wind Farms. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.msp-platform.eu/practices/capacity-densities-european-offshore-wind-farms

European MSP Platform (2019). Story 4: The Netherlands (Offshore Wind and Fisheries). Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.msp-platform.eu/story-4-netherlands-offshore-wind-and-fisheries

Foxwell D. (2018). Ports need to shape up to manage offshore wind growth. Riviera. Retrieved in October 2019: https://www.rivieramm.com/opinion/opinion/ports-need-to-shape-up-to-manage-offshore-wind-growth-23220

Foxwell D. (2018). Ports pose potential problems for floating offshore wind plans. Riviera. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/ports-pose-potential-problems-for-floating-offshore-wind-plans-23270

Foxwell D. (2019). MoU signed to test hybrid wind/wave unit at offshore facility. Riviera. Retrieved in October 2019: https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/news-content-hub/mou-signed-to-test-

Fórum Oceano (2016). ENTROPI - ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES AND ROADMAPS FOR OFFSHORE PLATFORM INNOVATION. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.forumoceano.pt/p113-entropi-enabling-technologies-and-roadmaps-for-offshore-platform-innovation-en

Ghent University (2017). Edulis: Offshore mussel culture in wind farms. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.aqua.ugent.be/edulis

Groenendijk F. (2018). REVIEW ON RISK ASSESSMENT ON TRANSIT AND CO-USE OF OFFSHORE WIND FARMS IN DUTCH COASTAL WATER. Arcadis

HVIDE SANDE (2019). The Three Windmills in Hvide Sande. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.hvidesande.com/hvide-sande/north-sea-vacation/three-windmills-hvide-sande

Hann-Ocean (2019). A FLOATING SYSTEM INTEGRATING WIND, SOLAR, WAVE AND TIDAL ENERGY GENERATORS. Retrieved in October 2019: http://www.hannocean.com/index.php/products/hexifloat.html

IMDC. Blue Energy & Interconnectors. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://imdc.be/en/field/blue-energy

IMDC. Se@Ports: Wave Energy Converters in Port infrastructure. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://imdc.be/en/reference/se-ports-wave-energy-converters-in-port-infrastructure

Langhamer O. (2012). Artificial Reef Effect in relation to Offshore Renewable Energy Conversion: State of the Art. The Scientific World Journal

https://www.msp-platform.eu/sector-information/offshore-wind-and-conservation

https://www.msp-platform.eu/sector-information/offshore-wind-and-fisheries

https://www.msp-platform.eu/practices/belgian-vision-north-sea-2050

https://www.msp-platform.eu/practices/capacity-densities-european-offshore-wind-farms

https://www.msp-platform.eu/story-4-netherlands-offshore-wind-and-fisheries

https://www.rivieramm.com/opinion/opinion/ports-need-to-shape-up-to-manage-offshore-wind-growth-23220

https://www.rivieramm.com/opinion/opinion/ports-need-to-shape-up-to-manage-offshore-wind-growth-23220

https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/ports-pose-potential-problems-for-floating-offshore-wind-plans-23270

https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/ports-pose-potential-problems-for-floating-offshore-wind-plans-23270

https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/news-content-hub/mou-signed-to-test-

http://www.forumoceano.pt/p113-entropi-enabling-technologies-and-roadmaps-for-offshore-platform-innovation-en

http://www.forumoceano.pt/p113-entropi-enabling-technologies-and-roadmaps-for-offshore-platform-innovation-en

http://www.aqua.ugent.be/edulis

https://www.hvidesande.com/hvide-sande/north-sea-vacation/three-windmills-hvide-sande

http://www.hannocean.com/index.php/products/hexifloat.html

https://imdc.be/en/field/blue-energy

https://imdc.be/en/field/blue-energy

https://imdc.be/en/reference/se-ports-wave-energy-converters-in-port-infrastructure

54

Lengkeek et al. (2017). Eco-friendly design of scour protection: potential enhancement of ecological functioning in offshore wind farms. Towards an implementation guide and experimental set-u. Bureau Waardenburg

MARIBE. Marine Investment for the Blue Economy. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://maribe.eu/

MUMM Scientific Service. Management of the marine environment. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://odnature.naturalsciences.be/mumm/en/windfarms/

MUSES (2018).Ocean multi-use action plan. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.submariner-network.eu/images/projects/MUSES/MUSES_Multi-Use_Action_Plan.pdf

MUSES (2018). SEA BASIN OVERVIEW. Factsheets. Multi-Use in European Seas MUSES (2018). Multi-Use Analysis. Deliverable D4.2.1

Manefeld T. (2006). Ansiedlungspotential von Miesmuschellarven (Mytilus edulis) an verschiedenen Substraten freihängender Brutkollektoren. University of Applied Sciences Bremerhaven Germany

Mee L. (2006). Complementary benefits of alternative energy: Suitability of offshore wind farms as aquaculture sites. Report of Project 10517. Seafish

Michler T. & Kodeih S. (2007). Integration of mariculture in offshore wind farms . Coastline Magazine

Michler-Cieluch T. & Kodeih S. (2008). Mussel and seaweed cultivation in offshore wind farms: an opinion survey. Coast Manage

Michler-Cieluch T. & Krause G. (2008). Perceived concerns and possible management strategies for governing wind farm–mariculture integration. Mar Policy

Michler-Cieluch et al. (2009). Marine aquaculture within offshore wind farms: Social aspects of multiple use planning. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society

NorthSEE. Offshore renewable energy developments - Offshore Wind. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://northsearegion.eu/northsee/e-energy/offshore-renewable-energy-developments-offshore-wind/

Official Journal of the European Union (2014). DIRECTIVE 2014/89/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0089&from=EN

Pecceu et al. (2015). Governance analysis of MPAs in the Belgian part of the North Sea. Marine Policy. Elsevier. Retrieved in October 2019 from: file:///C:/Users/IvanaVu/Downloads/282584%20(1).pdf

Perez-Collazo et al. (2013). Synergies for a wave-wind energy concept. Proceedings of the European offshore wind energy conference

Petruny-Parker et al. (2015). Identifying Information Needs and Approaches for Assessing Potential Impacts of Offshore Wind Farm Development on Fisheries Resources in the Northeast Region. U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Office of Renewable Energy Programs.

https://maribe.eu/

https://odnature.naturalsciences.be/mumm/en/windfarms/

https://www.submariner-network.eu/images/projects/MUSES/MUSES_Multi-Use_Action_Plan.pdf

https://www.submariner-network.eu/images/projects/MUSES/MUSES_Multi-Use_Action_Plan.pdf

https://northsearegion.eu/northsee/e-energy/offshore-renewable-energy-developments-offshore-wind/

https://northsearegion.eu/northsee/e-energy/offshore-renewable-energy-developments-offshore-wind/

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0089&from=EN

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0089&from=EN

55

Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/environmental-stewardship/Environmental-Studies/Renewable-Energy/Identifying-Information-Needs-and-Approaches-for-Assessing-Potential-Impacts-of-Offshore-Wind-Farm-Development-on-Fisheries-Resources-in-the-Northeast-Regi.pdf

Pirlet et al. (2014).The Mermaid project - Innovative Multi-Purpose Offshore Platforms. Flanders Marine Institute (VLIZ). Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277650484_The_Mermaid_project_-_Innovative_Multi-Purpose_Offshore_Platforms

Port Oostende (2018). VISION. Retrieved in October 2019: file:///C:/Users/PC/Downloads/334325.pdf

Pérez-Collazo et al. (2014). CO-LOCATED WAVE AND OFFSHORE WIND FARMS: A PRELIMINARY APPROACH TO THE SHADOW EFFECT. The 5th International Conference on Ocean Energy (ICOE)

Schupp et al. (2019). Toward a Common Understanding of Ocean Multi-Use. Frontiers in Marine Science

Seventh framework program (2019). H2OCEAN (Development of a wind-wave power open-sea platform equipped for hydrogen generation with support for multiple users of energy). Final Report Summary

Shari De Gendt (2018). Legal challenges concerning offshore wind installations along the coastline of the North Sea. UGhent

Stuiver M. (2016). The Governance of Multi-Use Platforms at Sea for Energy Production and Aquaculture: Challenges for Policy Makers in European Seas. Sustainability

TROPOS (2012).The Tropos project. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.troposplatform.eu/

Tethys (2016). Poseidon Floating Power (Poseidon 37). Retrieved in October 2019: https://tethys.pnnl.gov/annex-iv-sites/poseidon-floating-power-poseidon-37

Towers L. (2014). Shellfish Aquaculture in Welsh Offshore Wind Farms The Potential for Co-location. The Fish site. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://thefishsite.com/articles/shellfish-aquaculture-in-welsh-offshore-wind-farms-the-potential-for-colocation

United Nations. Oceans and the Law of the Sea. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/oceans-and-law-sea/

VLIZ. Artificial reefs in the North Sea show good prospects for biodiversity. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.vliz.be/en/2014-04-23-artificial-reefs

VLIZ. Artificial reefs. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.vliz.be/en/artificial-reefs

VLIZ. The Legal and Policy context of Multi-use Offshore Platforms. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.vliz.be/wiki/The_Legal_and_Policy_context_of_Multi-use_Offshore_Platforms

Voss D. (2006). Parasitierungsgrad der Miesmuschel (Mytilus edulis) in Abhängigkeit zur Tiefenzonierung und Entfernung zur Küste. University of Applied Sciences Bremerhaven Germany

W2Power (2010). Mobilising the total offshore renewable energy resource. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://www.pelagicpower.no/

https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/environmental-stewardship/Environmental-Studies/Renewable-Energy/Identifying-Information-Needs-and-Approaches-for-Assessing-Potential-Impacts-of-Offshore-Wind-Farm-Development-on-Fisheries-Resources-in-the-Northeast-Regi.pdf




https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277650484_The_Mermaid_project_-_Innovative_Multi-Purpose_Offshore_Platforms

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277650484_The_Mermaid_project_-_Innovative_Multi-Purpose_Offshore_Platforms

http://www.troposplatform.eu/

https://tethys.pnnl.gov/annex-iv-sites/poseidon-floating-power-poseidon-37

https://thefishsite.com/articles/shellfish-aquaculture-in-welsh-offshore-wind-farms-the-potential-for-colocation

https://thefishsite.com/articles/shellfish-aquaculture-in-welsh-offshore-wind-farms-the-potential-for-colocation

https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/oceans-and-law-sea/

http://www.vliz.be/en/2014-04-23-artificial-reefs

http://www.vliz.be/en/artificial-reefs

http://www.vliz.be/wiki/The_Legal_and_Policy_context_of_Multi-use_Offshore_Platforms

http://www.pelagicpower.no/

56

Wageningen University & Research (2019). Biodiversity and multifunctional use of old production platforms and new offshore wind farms. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.wur.nl/en/show/Biodiversity-and-multifunctional-use-of-old-production-platforms-and-new-offshore-wind-farms.htm

Wageningen University & Research (2019). Eco-friendly reef restoration pilots in offshore wind farms. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.wur.nl/en/project/ecofriend.htm

Wageningen University & Research (2019). SOMOS: Technical Standards for Safe Production of Food and Feed from marine plants and Safe Use of Ocean Space. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://www.wur.nl/en/project/SOMOS.htm

Walter et al. (2008). Ethnobiology, socio-economics and management of mangrove forests: A review. Aquatic Botany

Wassink M. (2018). Een onderzoek naar de eisen die medegebruik in windparken stelt. Van Hall Instituut

Wavestar (2011). The Wavestar machine. Retrieved in October 2019 from: http://wavestarenergy.com/concept

Wind Europe (2017). A statement from the offshore wind ports. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://windeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/files/misc/Offshore-wind-ports-statement.pdf

Wind Europe (2018). Investments in port facilities could help offshore wind cut costs by 5.3%. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://windeurope.org/newsroom/press-releases/investments-in-port-facilities-could-help-offshore-wind-cut-costs-by-5-3-percent/

Wind Europe (2019). Belgian energy and climate plan proposes renewables target of 18.3% by 2030. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://windeurope.org/newsroom/news/belgium-energy-and-climate-plan-proposes-renewable-energy-target-of-18-3-by-2030/

Yde et al. (2014). Experimental and Theoretical Analysis of a Combined Floating Wave and Wind Energy Conversion Platform. DTU library. Retrieved in October 2019 from: https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/90445334/Experimental_and_Theoretical_Analysis.pdf

https://www.wur.nl/en/show/Biodiversity-and-multifunctional-use-of-old-production-platforms-and-new-offshore-wind-farms.htm

https://www.wur.nl/en/show/Biodiversity-and-multifunctional-use-of-old-production-platforms-and-new-offshore-wind-farms.htm

https://www.wur.nl/en/project/ecofriend.htm

https://www.wur.nl/en/project/SOMOS.htm

http://wavestarenergy.com/concept

https://windeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/files/misc/Offshore-wind-ports-statement.pdf

https://windeurope.org/newsroom/press-releases/investments-in-port-facilities-could-help-offshore-wind-cut-costs-by-5-3-percent/

https://windeurope.org/newsroom/press-releases/investments-in-port-facilities-could-help-offshore-wind-cut-costs-by-5-3-percent/

https://windeurope.org/newsroom/news/belgium-energy-and-climate-plan-proposes-renewable-energy-target-of-18-3-by-2030/

https://windeurope.org/newsroom/news/belgium-energy-and-climate-plan-proposes-renewable-energy-target-of-18-3-by-2030/

https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/90445334/Experimental_and_Theoretical_Analysis.pdf

https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/90445334/Experimental_and_Theoretical_Analysis.pdf

internship report - kennisdelen rvo

Documents