The large-scale impact of offshore wind farm structures on pelagic primary productivity in the southern North Sea
- 339 Downloads
The increasing demand for renewable energy is projected to result in a 40-fold increase in offshore wind electricity in the European Union by 2030. Despite a great number of local impact studies for selected marine populations, the regional ecosystem impacts of offshore wind farm (OWF) structures are not yet well assessed nor understood. Our study investigates whether the accumulation of epifauna, dominated by the filter feeder Mytilus edulis (blue mussel), on turbine structures affects pelagic primary productivity and ecosystem functioning in the southern North Sea. We estimate the anthropogenically increased potential distribution based on the current projections of turbine locations and reported patterns of M. edulis settlement. This distribution is integrated through the Modular Coupling System for Shelves and Coasts to state-of-the-art hydrodynamic and ecosystem models. Our simulations reveal non-negligible potential changes in regional annual primary productivity of up to 8% within the OWF area, and induced maximal increases of the same magnitude in daily productivity also far from the wind farms. Our setup and modular coupling are effective tools for system scale studies of other environmental changes arising from large-scale offshore wind farming such as ocean physics and distributions of pelagic top predators.
KeywordsOffshore wind farm Primary productivity North Sea MOSSCO Modular coupling Biofouling
This research is funded by the Marine, Coastal and Polar Systems (PACES I) of the Hermann von Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Deutscher Forschungszentren e.V. Kaela Slavik is funded by the European Commission Erasmus Mundus Masters Course in Environmental Sciences, Policy and Management (MESPOM). Carsten Lemmen, Onur Kerimoglu and Knut Klingbeil received support from the “Modular System for Shelves and Coasts” (MOSSCO) grant provided by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung under agreements 03F0667A and 03F0667B; Onur Kerimoglu and Kai W. Wirtz are also supported by the DFG priority programme 1704 “Flexibility matters: Interplay between trait diversity and ecological dynamics using aquatic communities as model system” (DynaTrait) under grant agreement KE 1970/1-1. Knut Klingbeil is furthermore supported by the DFG Collaborative Research Center “Energy Transfers in Atmosphere and Ocean” TRR181. We thank all co-developers of the model coupling framework MOSSCO, foremost M. Hassan Nasermoaddeli and Richard Hofmeister. The authors gratefully acknowledge the computing time granted by the John von Neumann Institute for Computing (NIC) and provided on the supercomputer JURECA at Forschungszentrum Jülich. We are grateful to the open source community that provided many of the tools used in this study, including but not limited to the communities developing ESMF, FABM, GETM and GOTM.
- Bessel A (2008) Kentish Flats Offshore Wind Farm Turbine Foundation Faunal Colonisation Diving Survey. Report No. 08/J/1/03/1034/0839. Tech. rep., Kentish Flats Limited, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
- Bohnsack, J. A., 1989. Are high densities of fishes at artificial reefs the result of habitat limitation or behavioral preference? Bulletin of Marine Science 44(2): 631–645.Google Scholar
- Bouma, S. & W. Lengkeek, 2012. Benthic communities on hard substrates of the offshore wind farm Egmond aan Zee (OWEZ). Tech. rep, Noordzeewind, Ijmuiden.Google Scholar
- Brasseur, S., G. Aarts & E. Meesters, 2012. Habitat preferences of harbour seals in the Dutch coastal area: Analyses and estimate of effects of offshore wind farms. Tech. Rep. Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies, Wageningen.Google Scholar
- Compton, T. J., S. Holthuijsen, A. Koolhaas, A. Dekinga, J. ten Horn, J. Smith, Y. Galama, M. Brugge, D. van der Wal, J. van der Meer, H. W. van der Veer & T. Piersma, 2013. Distinctly variable mudscapes: distribution gradients of intertidal macrofauna across the Dutch Wadden Sea. Journal of Sea Research 82: 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs Madruga, Y. Sokona & K. Seyboth, 2011. Renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation. Tech. Rep. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Emeis, K. C., J. van Beusekom, U. Callies, R. Ebinghaus, A. Kannen, G. Kraus, I. Kröncke, H. J. Lenhart, I. Lorkowski, V. Matthias, C. Möllmann, J. Pätsch, M. Scharfe, H. Thomas, R. Weisse & E. Zorita, 2015. The North Sea—a shelf sea in the Anthropocene. Journal of Marine Systems 141: 18–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- EON Climate & Renewables, 2011. EON Offshore Wind Energy Factbook. Tech. Rep. EON Climate & Renewables, Essen.Google Scholar
- Global Wind Energy Council, 2015. Global Wind Report 2015: Annual Market Update. Tech. Rep. Global Wind Energy Council, Brussels.Google Scholar
- Gräwe, U., G. Flöser, T. Gerkema, M. Duran-Matute, T. H. Badewien, E. Schulz & H. Burchard, 2016. A numerical model for the entire Wadden Sea: skill assessment and analysis of hydrodynamics. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 121(7): 5231–5251.Google Scholar
- Ho, A., A. Mbistrova & G. Corb, 2016. The European offshore wind industry key 2015 trends and statistics. Tech. Rep. February. European Wind Energy Association. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCA.1997.627749.
- Hofmeister, R., C. Lemmen, O. Kerimoglu, K. W. Wirtz, & M. H. Nasermoaddeli, 2014. The predominant processes controlling vertical nutrient and suspended matter fluxes across domains – using the new MOSSCO system form coastal sea sediments up to the atmosphere. In: Lehfeldt, R. & R. Kopmann (eds), 11th International Conference on Hydroscience and Engineering, vol. 28, Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar
- Howarth, M., 2001. North Sea circulation. In: Steele, J. H., S. A. Thorpe & K. K. Turekian (eds), Ocean Currents: A Derivative of the Encyclopedia of Ocean Sciences. Elsevier Science, London.Google Scholar
- Inger, R., M. J. Attrill, S. Bearhop, A. C. Broderick, W. James Grecian, D. J. Hodgson, C. Mills, E. Sheehan, S. C. Votier, M. J. Witt & B. J. Godley, 2009. Marine renewable energy: potential benefits to biodiversity? An urgent call for research. Journal of Applied Ecology 46(6): 1145–1153.Google Scholar
- International Renewable Energy Agency, 2012. Renewable energy technologies: cost analysis series. Tech. Rep. International Renewable Energy Agency, Bonn.Google Scholar
- Kerckhof, F., B. Rumes, A. Norro & J. Houziaux, 2012. A comparison of the first stages of biofouling in two offshore wind farms in the Belgian part of the North Sea. In: Degraer, S., R. Brabant & B. Rumes (eds), Offshore Wind Farms in the Belgian Part of the North Sea: Heading for an Understanding of Environmental Impacts. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels: 17–39.Google Scholar
- Krause, D. & P. Thörnig, 2016. JURECA: general-purpose supercomputer at Jülich Supercomputing Centre. Journal of Large-Scale Research Facilities (JLSRF) 2: Article 62. https://doi.org/10.17815/jlsrf-2-121
- Krone, R., 2012. Offshore Wind Power Reef Effects and Reef Fauna Roles. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Bremen.Google Scholar
- Lemmen C, Hofmeister R, Klingbeil K, Nasermoaddeli MH, Kerimoglu O, Burchard H, Kösters F, Wirtz KW (2018) Modular system for shelves and coasts (MOSSCO v1.0) a flexible and multi-component framework for coupled coastal ocean ecosystem modelling. Geoscientific Model Development 11(3):915–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Leonhard, S., J.Pedersen, B.Moeslund & G. Spanggaard, 2006. Benthic Communities at Horns Rev Before, During and After Construction of Horns Rev Offshore Wind Farm: Final Report. Tech. Rep. Vattenfall AS, Aarhus.Google Scholar
- Liaw, A. & M. Wiener, 2002. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2(3): 18–22.Google Scholar
- Nasermoaddeli, M., C. Lemmen, G. Stigge, O. Kerimoglu, H. Burchard, K. Klingbeil, R. Hofmeister, M. Kreus, K. Wirtz & F. Kösters, 2017. A model study on the large-scale effect of macrofauna on the suspended sediment concentration in a shallow shelf sea. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2017.11.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nehls, G., S.Witte, H. Buttger, N. Dankers, J.Jansen, G.Millat, M. Herlyn, A. Merkert, P. S. Kristensen, M. Ruth, C. Buschbaum & A. Wehrmann, 2009. Beds of blue mussels and Pacific oysters, vol 11. Thematic Report, Wadden Sea Ecosystem, Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven, Germany.Google Scholar
- Newell, R., 2004. Ecosystem influences of natural and cultivated populations of suspension-feeding bivalve molluscs: a review. Journal of Shellfish Research 23(1): 51–62.Google Scholar
- Orbis Energy Centre, 2013. Monopiles Support Structures, 4C Offshore 2013-5-5. Online resource. Lowestoft, UK. http://www.4coffshore.com/windfarms/monopiles-support-structures-aid4.html [accessed 2018–05–05].
- OSPAR Commission, 2010. Intertidal Mytilus edulis beds on mixed and sandy sediments. In: Quality Status Report 2010: Case Reports for the OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats Update. Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic Commission, Texel.Google Scholar
- Platis, A., S. K. Siedersleben, J. Bange, A. Lampert, K. Bärfuss, R. Hankers, B. Cañadillas, R. Foreman, J. Schulz-Stellenfleth, B. Djath, T. Neumann & S. Emeis, 2018. First in situ evidence of wakes in the far field behind offshore wind farms. Scientific Reports 8(1): 2163.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Purkiani, K., J. Becherer, K. Klingbeil & H. Burchard, 2016. Wind-induced variability of estuarine circulation in a tidally energetic inlet with curvature. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 121(5): 3261–3277.Google Scholar
- Riisgård, H. U., C. Kittner & D. F. Seerup, 2003. Regulation of opening state and filtration rate in filter-feeding bivalves (Cardium edule, Mytilus edulis, Mya arenaria) in response to low algal concentration. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 284(1–2): 105–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rijkswaterstaat, 2017. Waterbase. http://live.waterbase.nl. [last accessed 2017–03–30].
- Seed, R. & T. H. Suchanek, 1992. Population and community ecology of Mytilus. In: Gosling, E. (ed.) The Mussel Mytilus: Ecology, Physiology, Genetics, and Culture. Elsevier, Amsterdam: p. 589.Google Scholar
- Thieltges, D., M. Strasser & K. Reise, 2003. The American slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata (L.) in the northern Wadden Sea 70 years after its introduction. Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen 57: 27–33.Google Scholar
- Tougaard, J., S. Tougaard, R. C. Jensen, T. Jensen, J. Teilmann, D. Adelung, N. Liebsch, M. Museum & G. Müller, 2006. Harbour seals at Horns Reef before, during and after construction of Horns Rev Offshore Wind Farm. Final report to Vattenfall A/S. Biological Papers from the Fisheries and Maritime Museum No. 5, Esbjerg, Denmark, 2006. Available at http://www.hornsrev.dk.
- Waite, R. P., 1989. The Nutritional Biology of Perna canaliculus with Special Reference to Intensive Mariculture Systems. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.Google Scholar
- Walday, M. & T. Kroglund, 2002. The North Sea. Europe’s biodiversity – biogeographical regions and seas. Tech. Rep. European Environment Agency, Brussels.Google Scholar
- White, P. & S. Pickett, 1985. The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. Academic Press. Academic Press, London: 3–13.Google Scholar
- Wirtz, K. W. & O. Kerimoglu, 2016. Autotrophic stoichiometry emerging from optimality and variable co-limitation. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2016.00131.
- Zhang, W. & K. Wirtz, 2017. Mutual dependence between sedimentary organic carbon and infaunal macrobenthos resolved by mechanistic modeling. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences 122(10): 2509–2526.Google Scholar