The UK’s making waves in offshore wind—literally. Giant projects like Hornsea 2 and Dogger Bank are already powering over seven million homes, showing just how game-changing sea-borne turbines can be. With over 14 GW of capacity (and counting), offshore wind now supplies around 40% of the UK’s electricity. And the target? A bold 50 GW by 2030, backed by strong North Sea winds, shallow waters, and the Contracts for Difference scheme.
It’s a booming industry—over £100 billion
invested, 26,000+ jobs created, and coastal towns like Grimsby turning into
green energy hotspots. But it’s not all plain sailing. Like any major
development, offshore wind comes with externalities—while it cuts emissions and
boosts economies, it can also disrupt marine life and traditional industries
like fishing. To truly harness its potential, we need long-term planning that
balances the positives with the hidden costs.
The
Wider Benefits of Offshore Wind: Exploring Positive Externalities
A major positive externality of offshore wind
is climate change mitigation. By displacing fossil fuel-based electricity, wind
power is currently preventing 30 million tonnes of CO₂ annually in the UK
(DESNZ, 2024). Simultaneously, cleaner energy lowers social costs linked to air
pollution, healthcare, and climate-related damages (IPCC, 2023). Since these
benefits aren’t captured in market prices, they highlight a classic market
failure where positive externalities are under-rewarded.
Offshore wind also strengthens energy security
by reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels—a vulnerability underscored by
the Ukraine crisis (IEA, 2023). In 2022, it contributed to a 15% drop in gas
imports, helping stabilize and shielding the economy from global shocks
(National Grid ESO, 2023).
Additional public health benefits arise from
lower air pollution, contributing to a 10% decline in pollution-related deaths
and reduced NHS costs (BMJ, 2023). Economically, offshore wind has sparked
growth in various sectors in the economy, with £60 billion projected by 2035
(ECIU, 2023). Each £1 invested generates £2.90 in economic output (Grantham
Institute, 2023). However, maximizing these benefits requires addressing
intermittency, grid capacity, and valuing externalities through policy support
and carbon pricing.
Negative
Externalities Beneath the Surface: Offshore Wind and Marine Life
Although wind farms play a key role in cutting
carbon emissions, their hidden economic downsides deserve more attention. These
negative externalities can throw off market efficiency, and possibly cause
market failure.
The construction phase is particularly harsh.
Pile-driving can reach over 200 dB, disorienting marine mammals such as
porpoises and seals (Zerrahn, 2017). Disturbing the seabed also reduces fish
stocks, which hits commercial fisheries by cutting supply and driving up costs.
Even after turbines go up, the effects linger.
Constant underwater noise and electromagnetic fields mess with fish behaviour,
lowering fishery productivity (Gill et al., 2005). Around 12,000 birds are also
killed each year by collisions, threatening biodiversity and delaying major
projects like the Scotland’s Berwick Bank wind farm, which pushes up capital
costs (Thomas, 2024).
Fishermen, in particular, are also heavily
affected. Australia’s Bass Strait wind zone, for example, limits key fishing
areas, putting AUD $500 million in future revenue at risk (Morton, 2024a;
2024b). With fish prices rising and jobs on the line, offshore wind brings
serious knock-on effects for the fishing industry (Morton, 2024).
Figure 1: Offshore wind farms and fishing
industry concerns (ABC News, 2024).
From
Theory to Action: Policies to Address Offshore Wind Externalities
In the UK, Environmental Impact Assessments
(EIAs) are implemented under the 2017 Regulations, following a structured
five-stage process. However, one of the key limitations of EIAs is that their
predictions often rely on expert judgment rather than precise modelling. For
example, assessments of socio-economic impacts related to North Sea wind farms
have been found to lack quantitative rigour, highlighting the need for improved
modelling techniques. To address this issue, Oxford Brookes University (2021)
developed gravity models to better forecast employment and housing impacts, as
demonstrated in projects like Sizewell B. Improving these methodologies can
make EIA outcomes more reliable and useful.
Marine Spatial Planning (MSP), managed by the
Marine Management Organisation, is another strategic approach used to reduce
conflicts among users of a shared marine space. A good example of MSP in action
is at Dogger Bank, where it facilitated the placement of wind turbines in a way
that avoided ecologically sensitive areas while allowing low-impact fisheries,
thereby optimizing space use. However, not all cases are as successful. For
instance, in the German Exclusive Economic Zone, inconsistencies between government
plans and spatial analysis revealed a need for better integration of spatial
data.
When it’s not possible to completely avoid
sensitive areas, compensation and mitigation strategies become essential to
manage the remaining externalities of offshore wind development. These
strategies may include financial compensation for fishers, co-management
approaches, and ecological restoration initiatives.
To make these solutions work, strong policy
frameworks are necessary to ensure environmental protection. The U.S. NEPA and
BOEM frameworks are good examples, as they effectively regulate offshore wind
developments with thorough EIAs and long-term monitoring. Similar UK reforms,
like independent monitoring bodies and public data access, could be beneficial.
Incentives, such as tax breaks for low-impact technologies or funding for
biodiversity, could further encourage developers to exceed the minimum legal requirements.
Final
Thoughts: Balancing Progress and Preservation
Offshore wind plays a crucial role in helping
the UK reach its Net Zero targets, delivering wide-ranging benefits such as
lower carbon emissions, improved public health, stronger energy security, and
economic growth in coastal communities. But these gains come with costs—like
damage to marine biodiversity and disruption to traditional industries such as
fishing—making it essential to strike the right balance.
According to the Environmental Kuznets Curve,
environmental harm often rises with economic growth before falling as better
technologies and institutions take hold. Offshore wind is at that crossroads.
We now have the tools to minimise its negative effects—but action is what
counts. To keep progress sustainable, we recommend three key steps: fund
long-term independent research into ecological impacts (especially on migratory
species), encourage collaboration between developers, fishers, and
environmental groups, and introduce Pigouvian taxes to account for
environmental costs while driving green innovation.
References
ABC News (2024) Offshore wind farms and
fishing industry concerns. Available at:
https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/157e15e755a480bfad033228c29ec4c8?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=533&cropW=800&xPos=0&yPos=33&width=862&height=575
(Accessed: 11 March 2025).
Dogger Bank D Offshore Wind Farm (2023) EIA
Scoping Report. SSE Renewables & Equinor.
Gill, A.B., Gloyne-Phillips, I., Neal, K.J.
and Kimber, J.A. (2005) The potential effects of electromagnetic fields
generated by sub-sea power cables associated with offshore wind farm
developments on electrically and magnetically sensitive marine organisms – a
review. COWRIE-EM FIELD 2-06-2004, pp. 1–90.
Kumar, A., Khan, M.Z.U. and Pandey, B. (2018)
‘Wind Energy: A Review Paper’, Gyancity Journal of Engineering and Technology,
4(2), pp. 29–37.
Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2022)
Spatial Assessment of Offshore Wind Energy and Marine Protected Areas.
Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64ff10281886eb000d9770b7/220331_MMO1274_Final_Report_Spatial_Assessment.pdf
(Accessed: 2 April 2025).
Morton, A. (2024a) ‘Wind zone an “energy boon”
but wildlife worry’, The Australian, 5 January.
Morton, A. (2024b) ‘Offshore wind farms will
“destroy” fisheries’, The Australian, 20 February.
Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy
(2023) Offshore Wind Licensing Framework.
Oxford Brookes University (2021) Building
Local Socio-Economic Impacts into Energy Project Assessment. Available at:
https://results2021.ref.ac.uk/impact/3c6a5e6e-e15d-4f9b-b1b2-d95a7817ad38/pdf
(Accessed: 2 April 2025).
Ørsted (n.d.) Hornsea 2. Available at:
http://orsted.co.uk/energy-solutions/offshore-wind/our-wind-farms/hornsea2
(Accessed: 2 April 2025).
Pace, F. (2015) ‘Did You Hear That? Reducing
Construction Noise at Offshore Wind Farms’, Renewable Energy World, 21 July.
RINA (2024) How Big Bubble Curtains Help Keep
the Noise Down. Available at:
https://rina.org.uk/publications/ship-and-boat-international/how-big-bubble-curtains-help-to-keep-the-noise-down
(Accessed: 2 April 2025).
UK Government (2021) UK Hydrogen Strategy.
Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-hydrogen-strategy
(Accessed: 2 April 2025).
UK Government (2022) British Energy Security
Strategy. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/british-energy-security-strategy
(Accessed: 2 April 2025).
UK Parliament (2008) Climate Change Act 2008.
Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/27/contents (Accessed:
2 April 2025).
Wendt, H., Schmid, S., Lange, M. and Ratter,
B.M.W. (2024) ‘Maritime Spatial Planning for Offshore Wind in the German EEZ’,
Marine Policy, 158, 105783. Available at:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X24000447 (Accessed:
2 April 2025).
Zerrahn, A. (2017) ‘Wind Power and
Externalities’, Ecological Economics, 141, pp. 245–260.
NCEL (2023) Offshore Wind Policy Options.
Available at:
https://www.ncelenviro.org/resources/offshore-wind-policy-options/ (Accessed: 2
April 2025).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.