Wind Farm visit reports

Document Sample
Wind Farm visit reports Powered By Docstoc
					Wind farm Visit – September 2011
Turbine Visit September 2011

“On the 25th of September we travelled by ferry and
train to Glasgow. We met up with Morna and Ralf
from SPR on Monday morning. First we visited
Whitelee wind farm which was very impressive and
a very good use of land . I noticed that there was a
farm working in harmony around the turbines and
sheep grazing all round the wind farm. The offshore
wind farms at Walney Island Were very dense and
chaotic. I did not like the look of them as they were
all different heights and models of turbines. Also the
turbines in the closest of the four offshore wind
farms, Ormonde, were built on ‘Jacket’ foundations.
These foundations made the turbines look like they
were sitting on tables and were not visually pleasing. These turbines were much denser than the proposed
turbines off Tiree but I was surprised to hear that pot fishermen could fish as close as 50 meters around the
turbines – and it was only advisory that they didn’t go any closer for risk of damaging their boats. I was very
impressed by the DONG construction site and harbour. The whole operation was well run and the work ethic in the
base was very good. Everyone we talked to was positive and the running of the projects were smooth and on
schedule. There were a lot of local people working within the station which I thought was good. I think that a wind
farm development, if implemented correctly could be very good for Tiree, it could bring jobs to people on the
island. However, after visiting the Walney Island developments I do have slight concerns about the visual impact of
a turbine development off our island”

     Iain MacInnes, Ruaig

Trip To see turbines.

We left Tiree on Sunday the 25th of September on a trip to see an onshore wind farm and then an offshore Wind
farm. Although obviously I went on the trip interested in the turbines I did not go with very much knowledge on
the subject! I went with an open mind and wanted to discover how I felt about the machines when I was standing
amongst them. On Monday morning we drove to Whitelee onshore wind farm which was about twenty minutes
outside Glasgow. As we drove up to the huge wind farm my first reaction was how beautiful I found the turbines.
We went into the visitor centre where we learnt more about the turbines and then went on an electric bus tour
around the development. The staff were friendly and helpful and I would recommend anyone who is around
Glasgow to go up to Whitelee and visit – Its open every day and you can find out loads about turbines!

         On Monday afternoon we drove to Walney Island to see the offshore development. Off the Coast of
    Walney Island stand four different wind farm developments: Barrow wind farm, Walney 1, Walney 2 and
    Ormonde. The layout of the turbines is very dense and because one development is in front of another and I
    found the whole thing quite messy and unattractive. The Barrow wind farm – which was further left than the
    others and stood alone I found much more pleasing to my eye, these turbines were laid out nicely and I found
    as my eye grew used to the unusual site that I quite liked it! My other concern when looking at the turbines
    was that in one of the developments; Ormonde, the turbines stood on platforms or ‘jackets’. These platforms
    were clearly visible and were above sea level. These turbines did not look sleek like the others, infact they
    reminded me of pylons!

    On Tuesday morning we
    headed off to visit the
    construction base for the
    Walney 1 and 2 wind farms.
    The inspiring team of Danish
    developers at the construction
    site gave us a very interesting
    talk and showed us all round
    their base. We got to chat to everyone involved. The most positive thing I took from this part of the trip was
    how many local men and women from barrow were involved in the projects! Almost all of the staff used in the
    smaller construction jobs were local and would continue to get work in the years to come when the machines
    needed maintenance. Also the harbour had had to employ more staff because of increased traffic. They had
    created lots of jobs and opportunities for young people in an area which had high unemployment in past
    years. After speaking to a local young man working in the base he said the community obviously had concerns
    at the onset of the projects but now was very happy with the turbines - many local people had been involved
    with the work being carried out and the community was now getting financial support for all sorts of projects
    from the developers. Everyone working in the base had high motivation and a real sense of pride in what they
    were doing! Other points which I took from the meeting were that there hadn’t been any environmental
    impact – sea mammals had been carefully monitored during the construction of the turbines and as far as
    their current studies had shown the bird flight pattern had not been altered whatsoever. Also local pot
    fishermen were thrilled as they could now fish between the turbines and are catching a considerable amount
    more after the turbines had been constructed than they were before the turbines were there!
     What I took from the trip was that I liked wind turbines as long as they were laid out nicely and weren’t
     sitting on jackets, that offshore wind farms already in the U.K have brought jobs to local communities,
     increased fishing potential, not harmed the sea life and were good for our country and for the world. I still do
     feel concerned that life will change on Tiree and about the impact of such a huge development but am keen
     for our Island to develop and think that jobs for young people and increased training skills and opportunities
     on the island are the way forward! I would like to make it clear that these are my personal views after going
     on a trip to see wind turbines and would like to thank SPR for taking us on the trip.

          Sophie Isaacson, Ruaig


Turbine Visit Report

The day started well enough with a visit to Whitelee Windfarm near
Glasgow which generates enough clean electricity for 180,000 homes.
Eaglesham Moor where the windfarm sits now has a network of paths, well
used by walkers and cyclists and half the 55 sq km area is a nature reserve
managed with RSPB and SNH. Scottish Power Renewables finance a well-
designed and eco-built Visitor Centre with café, shop and all the buttons
and toys to press that you would expect from Glasgow Science Centre who
run it. For me it was both interesting and the 140 turbines a not
unattractive addition to a beautiful landscape.
A few hours later and we were met with a quite different scene.
Walney Island lies off the Cumbrian coast, over a bridge at Barrow-in-
Furness. It is roughly eight miles long, a mile wide and low lying, but there
the similarity to Tiree ends. It has one long beach edged by huge caravan
parks, with Blackpool Tower visible to the south and the Sellafield nuclear
reprocessing plant to the north.
The tide was out and cockle-shell diggers were working half a mile away at
the shore-line. We were just round the corner from Morecombe Bay. Beyond them a jumble of four offshore wind
farms with different sizes, styles and grids. Turbines are set 500 metres apart and with multiple sub-stations the
overall presentation was a depressing sight in the setting sun. Nine kilometres away the turbines sat on ‘jackets’,
but there was nothing cosy or elegant about them - a better description would be metal bar stools or oilrig
platforms. We drove to the south of Walney Island, past an alpaca farm, to the RSPB reserve where the wind farm
was closer inshore (7km) and here, jacket-less turbines seemed graceful and a more acceptable addition to the
seascape. There was no wind so we were unable to see or hear turning blades. After sunset it was back to
depressing sights, masses of lights, every turbine having two white spots and a red beacon. But, this is a busy
shipping area a few miles from Blackpool Illuminations and we were assured by SPR that they would try to
mitigate the lighting on a Tiree Array.
The following day in Barrow we were guests of the Danish company, DONG, who have just completed building
their second offshore windfarm in the area. The Barrow that we saw was Govan without the nice bits and with an
added nuclear submarine factory. This visit convinced me that basing windfarm construction on Tiree would be
impossible, due to the sheer scale of the operation and luckily the developer agrees. Two cranes weighing 950
tons each would surely sink Tiree beneath the waves!
     We met several Barrovians, for whom the windfarms have presented only opportunity and employment. The
     fisherman who had converted his 20ft vessel to carry workers out to the turbines, the guys in Stores who
     kitted us out with protective gear, the ex-teacher now in Health & Safety, the secretarial staff and the hotel
manager who had been retrained to deal with Marine Operations were all local employees who now have the
skills to continue working 8.30-4.30 during the Operations and Maintenance phase. In Barrow O&M is based
in ugly factory units but Whitelees Visitor Centre shows that SPR can commission sensitive and attractive

It would be great to be able to report that we all saw the windfarms and said “Oh that’s not as bad as I’d
feared” but that is not the case. I was reminded of my first trip to Tiree in 1986 when the sight of the golfball
filled me with the same horror. Now it is part of my landscape, a workplace for people I know and a source of
pride that a small place like Tiree can contribute to international air safety. The Tiree that I moved to twenty-
five years ago was very different to now, a place where no-one was a stranger, where there was Gaelic gu leor
and anyone could have the beach to themselves. Back in 1985 ‘peak oil’ was unheard of and few bothered
about climate change, but times have changed and I would like to think that Tiree could be proud of it’s place
in the planet’s future, whilst still providing the environment we all love and the tranquillity that brings so
many back to Tiree year after year.
I had volunteered to go to Barrow unsure as to whether SPR’s proposals could be good for Tiree, required
only to report back my views to my neighbours. I can say nothing to reassure its detractors about the visual
effect of the Tiree Array, but I do now think that windfarm O& M and perhaps a visitor centre would present
benefits, lasting twenty or so years into the future. Turbines will not be a permanent feature of our seascape
and may later be replaced by alternative marine energy technologies. There again the Tiree Array may be an
engineering, business or political step too far which mean it may never be built, so I hope that I do not lose
friends from having expressed these opinions!

Clare Jones, Balephuil

NTA visits Morecombe Bay Arrays
Posted on October 7, 2011 by ed-admin

Visit to Off shore Windfarms in Morecombe Bay Sept 25-28 Sep 2011

(Note: I did not have a suitable camera . All photos here are library images )


Visual Impact:-

Day Time :- Massively negative. The „Row’s of London Gherkins„ analogy
is apparent.

Night Time :- At night, the Array resembled an oil refinery operating at
night.Each turbine looked like a light-up Xmas Tree. This is a “major” Tiree
issue. (Marine Scotland Scoping Opinion p19)

Erroneous Visualisations: SPR visualizations shown in June 28 SPR‟s
Public Information Day were based on an unlikely turbine foundation type
.The probable foundation type is a 4-legged jacket structure which adds
significantly to the negative visual impact. Subject to tide etc this structure
rises to about 15-20m above sea level

Construction Issues : - Anchoring foundations ,and cabling, present
considerable technological challenges,still to be overcome.

Sound:- Audible sound in operation would appear not to be an issue, but
will be an issue during construction.

Employment Benefit :- The jury is still out.

Barrow vs Tiree:- No comparison… contest !!!

Clare Jones, Sophie Isaacson. Iain MacInnes ,and myself were the party organized by SPR to visit to Barrow-in-Furness 25-28 Sept. This was

to view the various off-shore Arrays constructed, or being constructed, in Morecombe Bay, off Walney Island
Array Location:-


These Arrays are:-

(1)Barrow Offshore /30 X 3 MW turbines / Area 10 sqKm / closest 7 km offshore/one offshore substation

(2)Walney 1 and 2 / 2×51(102)X 3.6 Mw Turbines / Area 73 sqKm /closest 14.4km-furthest 24 km offshore /max blade tip to sea level approx

150m/2 off-shore substations

(3) Ormonde/30×5 MW turbines /Area 8.7sqkm/closest 9.7Km furthest 14km off shore / max blade tip height approx 160m/one offshore


(Note : Ormonde‟s turbines are the largest “proven technology” turbines deployed offshore. These turbines ( upgraded to

6/6.5MW) are the current proposed „model- size ‟ for Tiree Array, if consented.)
                                                 Walney Array(closest turbine 14.5km)

Reportage /Background:-


But first we had fun getting off Tiree! Monday‟s plane was full, so SPR booked us on Sunday‟s ferry to link with the evening train to Glasgow.

On Sunday it was blowing a hoolie, the ferry just made it into Tiree, and after a rough trip, entered Oban Bay, over an hour late, making

catching the Glasgow train an intangible concept.. but we got there … hi-jacking a lift from Andy Wright!!


Monday morning we were picked up by Morna Cannon and Ralph Thornton of SPR . First stop was Whitelee, outside Glasgow, SPR and

Europe‟s largest windfarm is located on Eaglesham Moor just 20 minutes from central Glasgow. The windfarm originally 140 turbines, is

under expansion to 215 units, over 80 sqkm, to generate 593 MW.

Whitelee is SPR‟s UK control centre. Tiree Array, if consented, will be controlled from Whitelee. I found the windfarm an overwhelmingly,

ugly, invasive intrusion upon open moorland. The visibility was superb with Tinto,the Galloway Hills, Arran and Goatfell in clear sight.

Winds were light

Thence on to Barrow via the M74. It is 5 years since I was last on this stretch of the M74. Current, and future, intensive windfarm

development dominates. An outcome of the Scottish Government‟s s 2005 report on „The economic impacts of wind farms on Scottish

Tourism‟ was apparent. One of this report‟s major propositions is ‘displacement theory’. This can be articulated as follows:-transiting a

windfarm area can provoke negative tourist reactions, particularly with regard to visual impact, but once transited, these negative reactions

may diminish as an issue for the tourist transitee.

Developers will always offer displacement theory ie the capacity to move on, or get away from sighting turbines, as a premis to avoid

mitigating negative visual impact. Displacement theory cannot, and does not, apply to Tiree tourism

Barrow: Barrow in Furness is an industrial town. The town has a population of approx 55000 and its immediate hinterland approx 75000 .

Its current unemployment rate is 4.1% compared to England‟s national rate of 3.8%. Approx 3000 people are claiming job-seeker‟s

allowance. Major employer‟s, include BAE at its nuclear submarine construction yard, Kimberley Clarke‟s Paper Mill, Centrica‟s gas fired

power station. Morecombe Bay is the UK‟s most significant off shore gas field with various rigs, and installations scattered around the

Bay,some within the Arrays.

The Ormonde Array is a unique concept, it is a „dual-fired‟ Array ie when its wind turbines are not generating at full capacity, its gas turbines

kick-in, to maintain load into the Grid.

The Port of Barrow imports wood-pulp, and exports granite/limestone /aggregate. It is the home port for vessels transporting Japanese

nuclear waste to the Sellafield Nuclear re-processing plant. The port has a draft of 7.5m maintained by lock gates. The tidal range in the

channel is 10m/the tidal range offshore is about 8m

Beyond the port,in sight, is Heysham Nuclear power station, with the Lancashire coast, and Blackpool Tower in stark relief ,stretching into

the distance.

Entering Barrow, the only sight of the off shore turbines was a short glimpse passing the Kimberley Paper Mill. To sight the Arrays, one

passes over the Barrow estuary, a depressingly ugly, muddy, creek to Walney Island. It was only after crossing over the bridge to Walney

Island, and to within 100m of the promenade, that any off-shore turbines could be sighted.

    (View from aerial view-point over BAE‟s nuclear submarine yard. The buildings in foreground are 51m high. The

                                  turbines in the background are approx 15Km distant/150m tall )
Walney Island ,pop approx 13000, is flat low lying, scrub, with a rocky foreshore still with its abandoned cracked sewage outlets in

place,leading to a brown, and not too clean beach. The only semblance of any tourist industry,was a rundown caravan park. On closer

examination it proved to be a static caravan site.

Upon our arrival, the immediate contrast between on shore and offshore wind farm development was apparent. This indicated that the

capacity to mitigate or minimise visual impact of an offshore windfarm is, near as damn it, ZERO. Ormonde Array‟s first row of 5MW

turbines was 9.7km offshore. To use current patois, the turbines „were right in your face‟ !! Unlike on shore, at Whitelee, where

undulating re-forested moorland offered some potential to mitigate visual impact.

The Barrow-Walney area is not pretty…it is not Tiree!!

It is possible to live, and go about one‟s daily life, in Barrow-Walney, without sighting a single turbine, let alone an Array! The contrast with

Tiree is stark. SPR‟s visualizations of Tiree Array show clearly that Tiree‟s topography makes it impossible for anyone on Tiree to live, and go

about one‟s daily life, without sighting significant sectors of the proposed Array. This will be exacerbated at night time.

In the wind farm turbine debate, the developers will always offer „displacement theory’ ie the capacity to move on or getaway from

sighting turbines, as a methodology to mitigate negative visual impact. Displacement theory cannot apply to Tiree.

The Arrays:-

(a) The Barrow Array was a distinct entity, separated from the Walney and Ormonde Arrays.

(b) The 3 Arrays in immediate view, Ormonde /Walney1 /Walney2 combine to have a higher density of turbines than would be the case with

the Tiree Array. Ormonde( 30 turbines in 8.7sqm) is positioned in front of Walney1 and 2 (132 turbines in 73 sqkm) plus 30 in 8.7 sqkm.

(c) There is a gap, approximating to twice the Ormonde Array between it ,and the Walney Array, consequently the area of visual impact is

therefore is 73 + 3×8.7 = 99 sqkm

(d) Combined Array is 162 turbines in 99 sqkm.

(e) Tiree array proposed 320 turbines in 362 sqkm.

The turbine ratio of these 3 Arrays is 1.6 compared to 0.88 for proposed Tiree, as proposed . The combined Array‟s turbine density, in this

small sector of the Arrays, was twice the turbine density of the proposed Tiree Array.

The furthest 3.5 MW turbine (a smaller unit than planned for Tiree) at 24 Km was clearly visible.

The closest Ormonde turbine (5MW) was 9.7km off-shore compared to 5km proposed for Tiree Array.
Note : Ormonde‟s turbines are the largest “proven technology” turbines deployed offshore. These turbines ( upgraded to

6/6.5MW) are the current proposed „model‟ for Tiree Array if consented.

                                                      Ormonde under construction

As with Tilley the turbines had greater, and lesser visual impact, depending on the time of day, and the prevailing light conditions.

Day 3: Visit to DONG‟s s construction site and offices. DONG ( Danish Oil and Natural Gas) is the developer of Walney 1&2. (Note this was

the construction site and not the O&M Base).

SPR confirmed from the outset that “The construction and assembly on Tiree of windturbines , offshore substations ,offshore

convertor stations or their respective foundations is ruled out …” ( SPR Scoping Request Aug 2010) . This visit was very useful as it gave

an insight into construction issues which will have a considerable input to some of the outcomes of Tiree Array, if consented. It highlighted

the contrast between the developer planning, supervising , and controlling, via individually appointed subcontractors, every aspect of the

construction, as opposed to appointing one contractor on a turn-key basis. This contrast is apparent from the current threatened delay to the

Greater Gabbard offshore wind farm, as a consequence of a £300m million dispute between the developers (SSE and RWE

npower), and the turn-key contractor Fluor.

DONG executives,in their power point presentation, emphasized that offshore windfarms were a temporary solution to meeting

energy requirements. This raises the very obvious Q re Tiree Array. If consented, and is de-commissioned after 25 years, what happens

then?. No one is giving this Q any consideration.

Itemised critique:-

Day-light visual impact: Viewing period approx 15.00-19.00 hrs. Notwithstanding the proximate area‟s depressing,and ugly industrial

backdrop, the visual impact was massively negative. We were blessed with superb visibility, and varying light conditions The latter hi-

lighted the capacity of even the farthest turbine (22km), during our day light, to emerge from comparative obscurity, to being a starkly

visible industrial structure, in clear relief on the horizon. We viewed the Arrays from 3 different viewpoints. None ameliorated, or mitigated,

the negative visual impact. This was compounded by the Ormonde Array, in the foreground, having a 4 legged jacket foundation as opposed
to the monopile of the Walney 1&2 turbines in the background ( see foundation discussion below). Our 4th visualization viewpoint was at

night time.

Donnie C stated in a recent AnT that “ .. a big visual impact isn’t necessarily bad just because it is man–made. An awe inspiring view can be

man-made as well as natural, a testament to human skill and endavour “ .

There was nothing “ awe-inspiring” in the view offered by these Arrays. It was ugly, and depressing.

The foundations of the turbines in the foreground were “ jacket type” . This is the more likely foundation type for Tiree Array if consented.

The visualizations presented by SPR to the Tiree Community on their 28June Public Info Day were not of this type. It is of paramount

importance that this issue be addressed, and SPR be required to re-present visualization of the Array basis „jacket-type‟ foundations

Winds were light. The Turbines were barely rotating, by evening had stopped.

Night-time visual impact :- Viewing period from dusk to dark(19.00 -20.00 hrs). Massively negative and intrusive . The night time

visual impact was infinitely worse than expected. At night ,the visual impact of the Array was much more invasive than during the day. The

visual impression was of an oil refinery at night, or a forest of light-up Xmas trees . Even Ralph Thornton of SPR was having difficulty

rationalizing what we saw before us!!

                                                        Ormonde in the Crepescule

Sound: Inaudible. Notwithstanding the light winds, and therefore comparative slow rotation of the turbine blades, direct turbine sound

from the Arrays was inaudible. This was not the case on shore @ Whitelee. Background noise from the Arrays mainly came from a
construction boat working within the Array . There were several helicopter movements during our visit . There were several take-offs, and

landings, from the nearby Walney Airfield . This is owned and operated by BAE and averages 5 flight movements/day. BAE utilizes it to move

staff around the UK.(SPR take note .. we cud have flown direct to Barrow !!! )

Infrasound; continues to be an on-going issue. Infrasound is sound lower in frequency than 20 Hz cycles per second, the “normal” limit of

human hearing. It is characterized by an ability to cover long distances, and get around obstacles with little dissipation.There is on going

research into impacts on the human and marine environment.

O&M: We did not visit an O&M base. SPR, prior to this visit, had advised that the O&M strategy is derived, mainly, from the guarantee

terms the developer negotiates with the turbine manufacturer. Examples given by SPR varied from 2-to 5 years. SPR reconfirmed this over-

arching perspective during this visit. This turn offers a further insight into the current Tiree On-Shore-Mapping exercise ie whatever the

outcome it has to be derived from a tri-partite debate (1) the Tiree community presumably supported by some statutory authority (2) the

developer (SPR) and (3) the turbine manufacturer eg Siemens /Gamesa etc. This explanation goes some way to explain why the O&M strategy

for Tiree Array is a post consent issue, and why the current onshore mapping exercise, currently,is no more than an assessment exercise.

O&M at Walney is shore based working from day-boats. Day boats are chartered in through the maintenance subcontractor(s)

Wave height:At Walney the wave/swell height restriction for boat- to- turbine transfers, is limited to 1.5m. Anything in excess of this

height, then boats are re-called to base. This was the case on our visit, with the skipper of a boat returning shore- side with a swell forecast

height closer to 2m. (This skipper was memorable for his haircut !! In his earlier life he had been the base guitar player for Shakin‟ Stevens.)

The contrast with Tiree Array is self evident its mean swell height of 2.5m. The Carbon Trust has recently short listed 13 research projects to

allow safe boat to turbine transfer in wave /swell heights in excess of 3 m. Anything in excess of these heights favours adopting the within

Array O&M strategy portrayed on the SPR info board at SPR‟s 28 June public information day. This provides minimum inter-action with

Tiree ( MS Scoping response p78 ).

Foundation Types;- The 2 Arrays in view contrasted the 2 basic foundation types namely monopile vs jacket . The latter is the most likely

option to apply to Tiree Array,if consented. This has a significant contrast in visual impact .This is not the foundation type shown in SPR


Tiree must demand that SPR re-present their Tiree Array visualisations based on jacket foundations:-
The Array‟s negative night –time visual impact was far greater from jacket foundation type turbines than monopile .

Monopile Type:-
Note:- These are library images of the Arrays viewed on our visit.

The nature of Tiree Array‟s bedrock will require these foundations to be drilled into the bedrock. There is little experience, or success in this

regard. Both foundation types at Barrow were hammered ,or pile driven, into the Morecombe Bay seabed. This is essentially „soft-bed‟ mud

and clay. There is no rock on Walney. Some the positions (6 pcs) showed hard seabed. The developer (DONG) hired drilling equipment, but

it was not used. All 102 positions ware „hammered‟ as planned.

Gravity Type:- The alternative foundation type is “gravity“. This can offer the partial profile of a monopile turbine above sea surface but

requires massive dredging of the seabed, to level it to less than a 1m variation in height . SPR indicate this foundation type may not be

an option for Tiree Array eg:-

Alternatively as gravity type foundations deployed on the Thornton Bank Array (30Km off the Belgian Coast)
HVDC Converters:Two of these HVDC converters were within the Arrays we viewed. These are significant structures. Up to 4 of them

could be positioned within the Tiree Array. There is significant negative visual impact pollution from these structures particularly at night .

Scouring Protection /Foundations/ Cable anchoring:- Around the base of the „foundation‟, due to tidal movement, scouring can

occur. In existing Arrays large scour holes have developed, often 1 m to 2 m deep, in some cases more. The have been known to „lower‟ the

turbine!! To prevent this occurring various methods of scour protection are adopted . Currently this is achieved by depositing a barrier of

aggregate, several metres high around the monopile foundation base.
This scouring provision applies to monopile foundations pile driven into what I will call soft ground .This will not apply to Tiree Array as

they will be drilled into rock. But an issue of foundation security may arise if,due to storm conditions, lose rock is moving around

Cable anchoring is also achieved in the same way ie over-layered with aggregate. This is not a practical option for Tiree Array, if consented .

What is currently under consideration is 12 ton bags of granite rock, lowered onto, and to cover, the Array cables . SPR concede the perfect

solution has yet to be derived, and developments in the Pentland Firth Tidal Power Project will have a considerable input to deriving any


Many technical issues remain unresolved with regard to any possible construction of a Tiree Array

Marine Habitat:- Dong put considerable emphasis on the Walney Arrays improving the local marine environment . Dong‟s Marine Co-

ordinator , a master mariner with 12 years experience fishing shell fish off Greenland, emphasized that the artificial reefs created by the

scouring and cable protection, had enhanced local „ pot fishing‟. On understanding that the Tiree Array, if consented, would not add reefs, but

would be built by destroying and/or damaging an existing highly productive reef, he conceded any gain to Tiree shell fishing would be


Employment:- It has to be remembered that we were visiting the developer‟s construction site offices with the project very close to

completion. A lot of people had left. The main positions were held by Danish head office personnel, who lived temporarily in the Barrow area.

(Intriguingly all of them had chosen to live outside Barrow, furthest away from the windfarm, with not a turbine in sight!!!)

SPR during the visit expanded on the relationship between the O&M strategy and the detailed guarantee terms negotiated with the turbine

manufacturer. These can be anything from a 1 to 5 year guarantee . The outcome will dictate what O&M strategy is adopted. Therefore the

possible employment benefit to Tiree, if the Array is consented, is dependent on negotiations with a 3rd party , without community


Some locals had been trained-up, but it appeared the employment opportunities were limited, and either low skilled, or easily acquired skills

eg a marine operations assistant had come from hotel management!! The local unemployment statistic of 4.1% does not suggest that off-shore

wind farm development has made a significant contribution to reducing local unemployment.

What was not identifiable was the employment created /sustained by any subcontracting directly into Barrow‟s industrial hinterland. Such

indirect employment opportunities will not apply to Tiree Array, if consented.


(1) SPR to present night time visualisations of existing day time
(2) SPR to present further set of visualisations of 6MW and 10MW
turbines with jacket foundations, in both day and night light conditions.

NTA would like to thank SPR for the opportunity to visit these Arrays

Shared By: