 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Decision making process
Name of the case study
Middelgrunden offshore windfarm
Decision making process - stages
The initiative was taken in 1996. The first public hearing (visual impact) held in June - September 1997. The second public hearing (visual impact) took place June - September 1998.The Third public hearing (environment) took place July - October 1999. Planning permissions were obtained in May 1999 and the official opening of the wind farm in May 2001. A number of specific studies were used in the different stages, carried out by a number of specialists.
Decision making process - levels
Decision making process - sources of information
Decision making process - who are the decision makers
The decision process alters between technical decisions and political decisions.
Decision making process - who made the final decision for project implementation
The final decision was made by the Ministry of Energy and Environment in Denmark.
Name of tool
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), supported by WindPro
Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
The first public audit in 1997 resulted in public resistance, mainly due to the visual impact of the proposed 3 x 9 wind turbines. This lead to a very detailed study of a number of detailed alternative layouts of the wind farm, and subsequently a reduction of the number of turbines from 27 to 20, using WindPro to illustrate the visual impact of the different layouts.
The visualisation in 1998 was very realistic and has, according to the contact person in Copenhagen Environment and Energy office, had a positive impact on the second public audit. The Middelgrunden project obtained planning permissions in May 1999. The wind farm started production in February 2001, with the official opening in May 2001.
The goal was linked to the production of electricity. The energy production is estimated to 89 million kWh of electricity annually, corresponding to roughly 3% of the electricity consumption in Copenhagen.
Nature will be spared annually a pollution of 258 tons of sulphur dioxide, 231 tons of nitrogen oxides, 76000 tons of carbon dioxide and 4900 tons of dust and clinker. These figures are calculated of the basis of the emissions of a ‘normal’ Danish electricity production, using the estimated budget for electricity production. The average production is quite close to the budget.
Both the EIA and WindPro was – at the end – supporting the argument that Middelgrunden Wind Farm is an environmentally sound project.
Decision making process - how was the information for the dmp disseminated
Public authorities distributed the official information on the EIA, using the usual way of information in newspapers etc. Most of the information was, however, distributed by KMEK and Middelgrunden Vindmøllelaug. They distributed thousands of brochures, had campaigns in the streets of Copenhagen, and established a website: http://www.middelgrunden.dk
The fact that Middelgrunden Vindmøllelaug had to sell 40500 shares lead to publicity about the project. Middelgrunden Vindmøllelaug had an interest in putting the project on the public agenda in a positive way.
Decision making process - how was the public involved
The public was involved from the start in the project – it was necessary in order to be able to establish a co-operative with thousands of members. Even more people were involved in the hearings on the visual impact, which lead to a fierce debate in the mass media. The visualization of different alternative lay-outs using WindPro before the second public hearing was quite decisive for the positive outcome of the second hearing. This tool effectively supported the argumentation – that the visual impact was quite tolerable. Public participation was carried out in Sweden as well - as a consequence of the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary Context. http://www.unece.org/env/eia/eia.htm
Decision making process - was there public discussion over the project
There was a public debate at almost all stages of the project. It was not only the public audits in the EIA procedure that involved the public.
What tools were used to assess sustainability?
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), supported by WindPro
More information