2019/2158(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Recital A (new)

A. whereas it is essential to analyse the lifecycle of energy generation (from assembly of materials, transport, construction and maintenance of infrastructure, through to their disposal) in order to determine precisely the environmental impact of the energy generation in question;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the ~~EU’s sustainable~~ commitment to achieving ~~its zero-carbon climate target~~EU climate neutrality by 2050, as confirmed in the European Green Deal and the recovery plan;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that ~~renewable energy is a key driver of decarbonisation; recalls that at least 32 % of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by renewable energy by 2030~~there are two carbon-neutral power-generating technologies that result in decarbonisation of the electricity system -- nuclear and renewable energy; recalls that according to the current climate framework at least 32 % of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by renewable energy by 2030; believes that the EU should abandon this target and let Member States decide on their energy mix according to their own energy resources and needs which differ from country to country because of, among other things, geography;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. EHighlights that offshore wind energy is the most advanced and fast- growing of the emerging and innovative sectors of the blue economy; emphasises that renewable energy is a key driver of decarbonisation; recalls that at least 32 % of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by renewable energy by 2030;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that ~~renewable~~energy sources such as biomass, fuels of agricultural origin, wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric and nuclear energy ~~is a~~are key drivers of decarbonisation; recalls that at least 32 % of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by so-called ‘renewable’ energy by 2030;

Amendment 14 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that renewable energy ~~is a key driver of decarbonisation; recalls that at least 32 % of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by renewable energy by 2030;~~alongside energy savings are the drivers for reaching a net zero emissions economy; in this context, acknowledges that, by 2030, the share of EU renewable electricity production should at least double1a or even better triple2a from today's level; _________________ 1a Communication on ‘Stepping up Europe’s 2030 climate ambition’ 2a ‘Building a Paris Agreement Compatible (PAC) energy scenario’, CAN-Europe / EEB, June 2020

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that energy efficiency and renewable energy isare a key driver of decarbonisation; recalls that at least 32 8- 40% of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by renewable energy by 2030 as highlight in the communication on "Stepping up Europe's 2030 climate ambition";

Amendment 16 #

Morten PETERSEN, Mauri PEKKARINEN, Christophe GRUDLER, Ivars IJABS, Iskra MIHAYLOVA, Martin HOJSÍK, Klemen GROŠELJ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that renewable energy is a key driver of decarbonisation; ~~recall~~stresses that at least 328-40 % of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by renewable energy by 2030 to reach at least 55 % reduction of emissions;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that renewable energy is aone of the key drivers of ~~decarbonisa~~sustainable environmental protection; recalls that at least 32 % of the EU’s total energy needs should be met by renewable energy by 2030;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Highlights the fact that the expansion of renewable energy sources enhances the EU’s energy security and decrease the imports of hydrocarbons from countries that do not respect the rule of law and have a record in the abuse of human rights;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Stresses that the do no harm principle should be a key element of the new strategy and the Sustainable Taxonomy Regulation and should apply for future investments in offshore renewable energy schemes;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Recital B (new)

B. whereas it is essential to take into account the ‘rebound effect’ of any given energy policy, that is to say all the behavioural changes brought about, in this case in fisheries, in order to determine precisely the social and environmental impact of this policy;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights that an increase in offshore wind energy production is essential for the clean energy transition; stresses that, as offshore wind capacity currently stands at just 25 GW, the building of offshore wind farms must be accelerated so as to provide up to 450 GW of capacity by 2050; should be subject to a moratorium in each of the Member States — since they have a high carbon footprint: they produce intermittent energy which can ‘put a strain’ on power grids and all too frequently call for the activation of back- up thermal power stations — and that while they can be part of the energy mix to achieve the objectives of the clean energy transition, offshore wind turbines do not represent a credible and sufficiently holistic alternative in order to embody this transition; notes that offshore wind capacity currently stands at just 25 GW, and that this low proportion of electricity generation in the EU is due to the low efficiency and cost-effectiveness of offshore wind farms;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights that an increase in offshore wind energy production is essential for the ~~clean~~ energy transition; highlights that without a rapid phase out of fossil fuels and increase in offshore wind energy production realisation of renewable energy goals and limiting global warming to less than 1.5°C by the end of the century would be impossible; stresses that, as offshore wind capacity currently stands at just 253 GW, the building of offshore wind farms must be accelerated so as to provide ~~up to~~at least 450 GW of capacity by 2050;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights that an increase in offshore wind energy production is essential for the clean energy transition and to achieve competitive energy prices and guarantee affordable energy supplies; stresses that, as offshore wind capacity currently stands at just 25 GW, the building of offshore wind farms must be accelerated so as to provide up to 450 GW of capacity by 2050;

Amendment 23 #

Morten PETERSEN, Mauri PEKKARINEN, Christophe GRUDLER, Ivars IJABS, Iskra MIHAYLOVA, Klemen GROŠELJ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights that an increase in offshore wind energy production is not essential for the clean energy transition; ~~stresses that, as offshore wind capacity currently stands at just 25 GW, the building of offshore wind farms must be accelerated so as to provide up to 450 GW of capacity by 2050~~as there are viable other options such as nuclear energy;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights that an increase in offshore wind energy production is essential for the clean energy transition; stresses that, as offshore wind capacity currently stands at just 25 GW, the building of offshore wind farms must be accelerated ~~so as~~at least threefold by 2030 and beyond in order to be able to provide ~~up to~~at least 450 GW of capacity by 2050;

Amendment 25 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights that an increase in offshore wind energy production is essential for the clean energy transition; stresses that, as EU offshore wind capacity currently stands at just 125 GW, the building of offshore wind farms must be accelerated sto ~~as to provide up to~~reach the potential of 450 GW1a of capacity by 2050; _________________ 1a Communication on ‘Stepping up Europe’s 2030 climate ambition’

Amendment 26 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that the energy use of the sea, while ensuring environmental protection and the sustainable development of fisheries and other economic activities, requires joint planning and a rigorous assessment of cumulative impacts, including socio- economic effects;

Amendment 27 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Stresses that offshore wind farms for the production of electricity tend to be more efficient than onshore wind farms due to higher wind resources available in offshore areas compared to onshore areas;

Amendment 28 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that ~~the decision to find space for up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importanc~~while nuclear requires a tiny bit of land to provide a whole lot of power at a low cost, wind requires a whole lot of land to provide a tiny bit of power at a high cost; stresses that when searching for space for offshore wind energy capacity impacts on the fishery sector and/or the environment should be taken into account; reminds that it should not be forgotten that potential European offshore areas also have a biological and economic value;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the decision to find space for ~~up to~~ 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importance; underlines in this context the necessity of exploring all the EU offshore wind resources and promoting marine renewable energy projects in a way compatible with the rest of the uses of the maritime space, seeking synergies and protecting biodiversity;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Recital C (new)

C. whereas offshore wind turbines cause serious disturbance to the marine environment, with the result that fishing activities are also impacted, encouraging in particular overfishing in smaller areas to the detriment of small-scale fishing;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the decision to find space for up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importance; considers that the Member States have to declare, as soon as possible, their exclusive economic zones, according to the International Law of the Sea, in order to proceed with planning their offshore installations, without further due;

Amendment 31 #

4. Stresses that the decision to find space for up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importance; highlights that spatial expansion of offshore wind farm installations is accompanied by a sharp increase of conflict potential with other marine sectors, such as fisheries, over the next five years, especially in the North Sea, Baltic Sea, and Mediterranean;

Amendment 32 #

Morten PETERSEN, Mauri PEKKARINEN, Ivars IJABS, Iskra MIHAYLOVA, Martin HOJSÍK, Klemen GROŠELJ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the decision to find space for up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importance; highlights the offshore wind potential of 212 GW in the North Sea, 83 GW in the Baltic Sea, 85GW in the Atlantic Ocean and 70 GW in the Southern European Seas; notes that this potential will continue to grow due to technological developments;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that ~~the decision to find space for up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importance~~preserving the aesthetic and environmental nature of European coastlines is of the utmost importance; notes that the ambition to provide up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy by 2050 would correspond to the creation of an offshore wind farm of 22.5 km², given that wind farms provide on average 20 GW.h per km²;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the decision to find space for ~~up to~~at least 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importance; underlines in this context that to bring the EU on track to 450 GW in 2050, space for around 130 GW should be identified before 2023/2024 to allow construction by 2030;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the decision to find space for up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity in the limited areas where the continental shelf is sufficiently shallow is of the utmost importance;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the decision to find space for up to 450 GW of offshore wind energy capacity is of the utmost importance and should be considered a priority;

Amendment 37 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that floating wind farms technology, capable of deployment in waters deeper than 60 metres have the potential to significantly increase the sea space available for offshore wind farms, especially in deep sea areas, such as the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Coast, without the constraints associated with turbines in shallower waters or closer to shore and to overcome some type of conflicts with other sectors; points out that floating wind farms could generate large amounts of energy, reduce visual impact, provide better accommodation for fishing and shipping lanes, act as fish aggregating devices and reach stronger and more consistent winds;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Recalls the offshore wind electricity production also creates an opportunity for clean hydrogen production as the "EU Strategy for Energy System Integration strategy" and “A hydrogen strategy for a climate- neutral Europe highlight; calls the Commission and the Member States to integrated the decarbonized hydrogen production plans into the development of the offshore wind capacity;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses the need to give priority to far-shore wind turbines, over 30 km from the coast, in order to limit their impact on fisheries and landscapes and increase their efficiency; especially since, with semi-floating structures, they are less costly and have a lower impact on posidonia and thus on the marine environment and consequently on fishing;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Recital D (new)

D. whereas human activities, in particular production, consumption and transport activities, are energy intensive and require, in the absence of profound societal changes, ever greater sustainable sources of energy;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that dedicated offshore wind farms for hydrogen production are a promising option to unlock the full potential of offshore wind energy, attain decarbonisation and energy security targets in electricity and other sectors, as well as cope with grid expansion constraints;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Believes that cooperation across sectors active in the offshore environment, will also be a driver for a just transition and that initiatives that activate local economies and find synergies between sectors can be the bedrock of a future-proof economic recovery;

Amendment 42 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Highlights that offshore wind electricity yields surpass those of onshore turbines while causing less acceptance problems with citizens; emphasises that if designed and built sensibly, offshore windfarms can benefit marine biodiversity;

Amendment 43 #

Sven SCHULZE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that offshore wind farms can also have positive aspects as regards fisheries, such as a possible use for aquaculture and the introduction of new species;

Amendment 44 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Highlights the need to exploit offshore renewable energy in deep waters; calls on the Commission and Member States to promote research, development, monitoring, and innovation efforts on innovative technologies such as floating platforms; stresses that is an outstanding opportunity for the EU to become a global leader in offshore renewable technologies that will be key for decarbonisation and will be exportable to a myriad of deep costal regions;

Amendment 45 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Recalls the significant potential of offshore wind for the production of renewable hydrogen; points out that this would not require undersea cables if plants to obtain hydrogen were to be placed in the seas or oceans; calls therefore the Commission and the Member States to fully integrate future hydrogen demand in offshore wind deployment plans;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Highlights that floating technology allows to access locations where wind speeds are higher and more constant. It can also minimize the turbine’s environmental impact and reduce the pressure associated with coastal planning; calls on the Commission and the Member States to assess these benefits and the possible impacts on fisheries and marine biodiversity and ecosystems;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Highlights the need to deploy offshore wind in deep waters of the EU (i.e. Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea, Atlantic Ocean), thus calls on the Commission and Member States to extend research, development and innovation efforts on floating wind farms and to assess the feasibility of establishing an IPCEI for a large-scale project;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights that a strong expansion of offshore wind energy production requires an intelligent approach to ensure its coexistence, co-location and cooperation with the activities that already take place in the affected areas; stresses that early stakeholder consultation, long- term planning and engagement of all relevant sectors, including local communities, but also research into potential synergies and selection of strategic solutions designed to prevent conflicts, as well as more localised solutions and measures for mitigating conflicts, such as compensation payments, creation of transparent guidelines and mutual agreements could contribute to the smooth expansion of offshore wind energy renewables;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. HStresses that in order to limit the devastating effects of global warming on marine aquatic ecosystems, rising water temperatures and ocean acidification, changes in water flow, and fish habitat loss, productivity of marine and freshwater species, combating climate change with the take up of offshore energy is vital; highlights however that a strong expansion of offshore wind energy production requires an intelligent approach to ensure its coexistence with the activities that already take place in the affected areas as well as to do least possible harm to environment;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the EU’s sustainable commitment to achieving its zero-carbon climate target by 2050, as confirmed in the European Green Deal and the recovery plan; stresses that tackling the problem of climate change requires global fossil energy consumption to be reduced by a factor of 2 to 4 as soon as possible and, in developed countries, by a factor of 4 to 12 (that is a reduction of 75% to 92%), and that wind power, which in 2013 replaced 1% of this consumption, continues to provide only marginal room for manoeuvre;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. HTaking into account that the development of OR varies greatly in size and capacities across the different European sea basins, highlights that a strong expansion of offshore wind energy production requires an intelligent approach to ensure its coexistence with the activities that already take place in the affected areas, especially since most of the European offshore wind capacity will be concentrated in the North and Baltic seas, where conditions are more favourable;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights that a strong expansion of offshore wind energy production ~~requi~~will de facto reduce fishing areas and that this strategy may in the long term lead to conflicts between stakeholders; stresses that an intelligent approach, revised to ensure ~~its coexistence with the activities that already take place in the affected areas~~the maintenance of fishing areas and their exploitation by artisanal fisheries, is essential for the proper coexistence with current and future energy production;

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights that a strong expansion of offshore wind energy production requires an intelligent approach to ensure its coexistence with the activities that already take place in the affected areas; calls for efficient spatial planning process, including the site selection constrained by technical (wind resource, coastal distance, seafloor) and environmental (impacts) factors and competence of uses;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights that a strong expansion of offshore wind energy production requires an intelligent approach to ensure its coexistence with the activities that already take place in the affected areas; believes that the European Institute of Innovation and Technology should have a role in the planning and deployment of the projects;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Draws attention to the recommendations of Horizon 2020 funded project on The Multi-Use in European Seas (MUSES) exploring the opportunities for multi-use in European seas across five EU sea basins; recalls its guidance that sustainable development of the ocean can no longer rely on a single- sector management, but requires a more holistic, integrated approach and that multi-use is not limited to sharing the ‘same’ maritime space, but could encompass joint use of installations and joint activities;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Points out that the quantitative growth of wind farms inevitably results in a reduction in or alteration of fishing areas, in particular as a result of the laying of cables connecting wind turbines to the grid and the building of infrastructure; notes, in this connection, that this results in a change and degradation of marine habitats, which may affect fish populations;

Amendment 56 #

Robert ROOS, Grzegorz TOBISZOWSKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Acknowledges that offshore wind farms in some cases co-occur with biodiverse marine ecosystems with high ecological, economic, and cultural value, however, there are many uncertainties about how wind farms affect marine organisms and their environment;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Points out that that when analysing the cost of offshore wind energy, all relevant costs should be taken into account, including the transmission and distribution costs and the costs of backup systems;

Amendment 58 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to assess the impact of the offshore wind farms, which are already in operation, on the regeneration of marine habitats and the biodiversity;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Member States to promote the development of offshore wind investments under the scheme of energy communities which ensures public participation and acceptance;

Amendment 6 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the EU’s ~~sustainable~~ commitment to achieving ~~its~~net zero~~-carbon climate~~ greenhouse gases emissions target by 2050, a~~s confirmed in the European Green Deal and the recovery plan~~t the latest; stresses that these emissions should be reduced by at least 65% by 2030 compared to 1990 emissions in order for the Union to contribute to limiting global warming to less than 1.5°C by the end of the century, in line with the latest scientific evidence;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Stresses that there are already examples of coexistence between the fishing sector and the offshore wind energy sector, and this experience should be used to find and share the best available practices for the entire life cycle of marine infrastructure;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Considers that multi-use needs should be pro-actively facilitated and incentivised through respective support programmes, going well beyond mere spatial planning solutions;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Reminds that the cost of offshore wind will increase, as the reservoir of plots that are easy to build on depletes;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that the displacement of fishing activities can be very harmful to fisheries; stresses, therefore, that the multiple use of sea areas must be considered from the outset, and that offshore wind farms must be positioned in a way that takes into account the needs of the fishing sector; stresses that integrated place-based management approaches, such as marine spatial planning should be used to favour offshore wind energy project proposals that enable synergies, co-existence with fishing activities both spatially and temporally; points out that marine spatial planning processes should give high priority on the assessment of co- location; underlines the importance of the development of an EU best practice guidance on the implementation of mitigation measures to ease conflict potential between offshore wind farms and fisheries and to promote co-operation between sectors; notes that artificial reef effects inside offshore wind farms could improve the opportunities for sea angling and increase a market for tourism and recreational fisheries;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 66 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that the displacement of fishing activities and over-fishing can be very harmful to fish stocks and fisheries; stresses, therefore, that the ~~multiple use of sea areas must be considered from the outset, and that offshor~~re is a need to tackle over-fishing and to consider the multiple use of sea areas from the outset, in a way that balances the win~~d farms must be positioned in a way that takes in~~terests of the offshore wind sector, the fishing sector a~~ccount the needs of the fishing sector~~nd the fulfilment of EU energy, climate and biodiversity objectives;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that the restrictions to or displacement of fishing activities can be very harmful to fisheries; stresses, therefore, that the multiple use of sea areas must be considered from the outset, and that offshore wind farms must be positioned in a way that takes into account the needs of the fishing sector;

Amendment 69 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that the displacement of fishing activities can be very harmful to fisheries; stresses, therefore, that ~~the multiple use of sea area~~all options must be considered from the outset, and that offshore wind farms must be positioned in a way that takes into account the needs of the fishing sector;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the EU’s sustainable commitment to achieving its zero-carbon climate target by 2050~~, as confirmed~~ at the latest; and that these emissions should be reduced by at least [60%] by 2030 compared to 1990 emissions as set in the [European ~~Green Deal and the recovery plan;~~ Climate Law] in order for the Union to contribute to limiting global warming to less than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

Amendment 70 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Highlights that collaboration is critical to the safe coexistence of fishing and wind farm operations: The wind industry should support the exchange of real-time data of exact location of wind farms, cables and related assets as well as exclusion areas (temporary or permanent) and security zones, while data from the fishing industry should also be shared at the project design stage;

Amendment 71 #

6a. Stresses that the cooperation across sectors active in the offshore environment and economy will also be a driver for a just transition; calls on the Commission to assess initiatives that activate local economies and economic activities offshore and find synergies between sectors that can be the bedrock of a future-proof economic recovery;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Underlines that support for using wind energy for local electricity supply is the most important predictor for local acceptance of renewable energy projects such as offshore wind farms, and this variable mediates the relationship between energy security and community acceptance;

Amendment 73 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Emphasises that the possibilities of storing energy are still very limited;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that long-term options for multiple uses of offshore areas must be explored at an earlier stage in order to enable the expansion of offshore wind farms while addressing their impact on fisheries; considers therefore the need to adopt guidelines and policies that promote co-existence of the offshore wind farms and fishery at the pre-planning stage and to ensure better involvement of the fishing sector in the offshore windfarms planning process to identify the most suitable long and short term options; points out the role of bi-sectoral national coordination body that could help to maintain regular dialogue and facilitate agreements for the industries involved; draws attention to good practices of granting concession to build and operate an offshore wind farm under the condition that the prior agreement with other stakeholders, such as fishing sector, is reached;

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that long-term options for multiple uses of offshore areas must be explored at an earlier stage in order to enable the expansion of offshore wind farms while addressing their ~~impact on fisheries~~direct and indirect impact on fisheries; highlights in this regard that co-design approaches for the co-location of offshore wind energy renewables with other uses can reduce the potential impact on fisheries, strengthen the relationship of the sectors of concern and enable beneficial co-operation between them;

Amendment 76 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that long-term options for multiple uses of offshore areas must be explored at an earlier stage in order to not to enable the expansion of offshore wind farms w~~hile addressing~~ithout first taking account of their impact on fisheries;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses that EU regulatory framework should contribute to ensure environmental impacts are monitored and actions are taken to prevent and minimize the impacts; climate, energy, fisheries and marine biodiversity policies should reinforce each other when developing an EU offshore wind strategy;

Amendment 78 #

Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Robert HAJŠEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. CStresses that space allocation should be the result of a joint maritime spatial planning (MSP) that goes beyond national borders; calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with Member States and neighbouring countries on maritime spatial planning and to make legislative proposals to establish mandatory cross- border MSP, with a view to optimising the use of sea space and cross-sector cooperation, and minimising spatial conflicts in this regard reminds and encourages Member States to provide their Marine Spatial Plans by 31 March 2021;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with Member States and neighbouring countries on maritime spatial planning, with a view to optimising the use of sea space and cross-sector cooperation, and minimising spatial conflicts; stresses that the maritime spatial plans ordered by Directive 2014/89/EU shall be established as soon as possible, and at the latest by 31 March 2021;

Amendment 8 #

Morten PETERSEN, Mauri PEKKARINEN, Christophe GRUDLER, Ivars IJABS, Iskra MIHAYLOVA, Martin HOJSÍK, Klemen GROŠELJ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the EU’s sustainable commitment to achieving its zero-carbon climate target by 2050, as confirmed in the European Green Deal and the recovery plan; takes note of Commission's proposal to increase reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to 55%, reminds of European Parliament's position to increase this target to 60% by 2030;

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to enable more research to understand the effect of OR and collaborate closely with Member States and neighbouring countries on maritime spatial planning, with a view to optimising the use of sea space and cross- sector cooperation, and minimising spatial conflicts;

Amendment 81 #

Sven SCHULZE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with Member States and neighbouring countries on maritime spatial planning and the development of innovative fisheries technologies and methods, with a view to optimising the use of sea space including in wind farms and cross-sector cooperation, and minimising spatial conflicts;

Amendment 82 #

Morten PETERSEN, Mauri PEKKARINEN, Christophe GRUDLER, Ivars IJABS, Iskra MIHAYLOVA, Martin HOJSÍK, Klemen GROŠELJ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with Member States ~~and neighbouring countries~~ on maritime spatial planning, with a view to optimising the use of sea space and cross- sector cooperation, and minimising spatial conflicts;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with the Member States ~~and neighbouring countries~~ on maritime spatial planning, with a view to optimising the use of sea space and cross-sector cooperation, and minimising spatial conflicts;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Insists that a proper Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) process needs to be accompanied with a solid approach to public participation so that all stakeholders’ and coastal communities' views are taken into consideration;

Amendment 86 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the EIB to examine the creation of funding schemes in order to support investments in large-scale projects in the EU seas;

Amendment 87 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. CRecognises that existing knowledge on the impact of offshore renewable installations on fisheries is focused mainly on ecological and environmental impacts and that current case studies often neglected the assessment of future expansions of offshore wind energy sector; stresses that integrated and spatially assessments of cumulative effects of offshore wind farms are indispensable in order to inform strategic planning and marine conservation and enable a sustainable integration of human activities; calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment to examine the expected direct and indirect economic, socio-cultural and environmental impacts of constructing new offshore wind facilities in areas where they are likely to come into conflict with the fishing sector.

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. CRecalls that EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 stipulates that that offshore wind projects will be possible only if in compliance with relevant environmental and nature protection legislation; calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment to examine the expected economic~~, social and environment~~ and social impacts of constructing new offshore wind facilities in areas where they are likely to ~~come into conflict with the~~interact with the fishing sector with a view of developing synergies between the energy and fishing sector.s;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment to examine the expected economic, social and environmental impacts ~~of constructing new offshore wind facilities in areas where they are likely to come into conflict with the fishing sector~~(in particular on climate and biodiversity) and benefits of constructing new offshore wind facilities in areas that are of interest of other economic activities such as aquaculture, fisheries or tourism and calls further on the Commission to provide regulatory guidance on the co-use of these areas.

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the EU’s sustainable commitment to achieving its zero-carbon climate target by 2050 at latest, as confirmed in the European Green Deal, the European Climate Law and the recovery plan;

Amendment 90 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment to examine the expected economic, social and environmental ~~impacts of constructing new offshore wind facilities in areas where they are likely to come into conflict with the fishing sector~~, in particular on climate and biodiversity, impacts and benefits of allocating offshore wind facilities in areas that are of interest of other economic activities such as aquaculture, fisheries or tourism; calls further on the Commission to provide regulatory guidance on the co- use of these areas.

Amendment 91 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Considers its essential to ensure integrated approach to the life cycle processes of offshore windfarms and that decommissioning strategies envisaging alternative future use or removal of the constrictions must be integrated into design and installation plans from the beginning and long-term sustainable impact must be considered to adhere to the principles of a circular economy;

Amendment 92 #

Sven SCHULZE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of combining the construction of offshore wind farms and marine nature conservation, for example, by setting up wind farms in marine areas where a fishing ban is particularly relevant for marine protection;

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Clarifies that the creation of refugia can increase the number of fish in the region; highlights that the recovery of dumped ammunition during construction of windfarms and cables increases fishers’ safety.

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Stresses the necessity to establish a collaborated and co-ordinated research and innovation programme to ensure suitable data collection and monitoring, technology innovations (e.g. cable installations, moorings, fishing friendly cable protection measures), and managements strategies and technologies to minimise risks, and testing in the real environment;

Amendment 95 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Highlights that in order to ensure significant deployment of new offshore wind energy capacities, further research on the multiple use of sea space as well as on enhancing generation efficiency of offshore wind turbines must be continued;

Amendment 96 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 d (new)

9d. Draws attention to need for capacity, project pipelines and supporting policies for floating offshore wind (FOW) fast-maturing technology, which enables wind turbines to be deployed at much greater depths and therefore opens opportunities for using areas that were not previously accessible and minimise the potential of maritime spatial conflicts.

source: 654.067

2021/03/29 PECH 181 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)

— having regard to the Agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP21) in Paris on 12 December 2015 (the Paris Agreement),

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 g (new)

— having regard to the European Parliament adopted opinion on the European Climate Law1a, _________________ 1a P9_TA(2020)0253

Amendment 100 #

Søren GADE, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Takes the view that when deciding where to locate offshore renewable energy production units, consideration shall be paid to preferential fishing grounds and the dynamics of the distribution and spatial movement of fish species, so as to ensure that such infrastructure does not hinder fishing vessels' access to existing fishing grounds;

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Insists on the establishment of dialogue and cooperation with fishers at an early stage in the process; emphasises the need to take into account local ecosystems and specificities of the local community; highlights the need for proper compensation for fishers if the establishment of OWFs affects their activities

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Takes note that in the Communication of the Commission on the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 "... The EU will prioritise solutions such as ocean energy, offshore wind, which also allows for fish stock regeneration …" the possibility for a combination of OWFs and protected areas is considered;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Stresses that the environmental, social and economic impact of OFWs depends on site specific conditions, ecosystems and human activities and that stakeholder collaboration in the design, implementation and management of OFW is key to resolving issues of common interest;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Notes that the small-scale, coastal and artisanal fishing sector may bear the brunt of the impact of the installation of these offshore renewable energy production units, given their relative proximity to the coast;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that small-scale fish~~ing enterpris~~ers will be particularly affected byin case of displacement as they may not have the capacity to move to fishing grounds further afield or to change fishing method; recommends therefore the exclusion of large scale vessels above 12 metres from inshore waters in order to mitigate the displacement effect on small-scale fishers;

Amendment 106 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that small-scale fishing enterprises will be particularly affected by displacement as they may not have the capacity to move to fishing grounds further afield or to change fishing method, particularly if offshore wind farms are located in territorial seas (12 nautical miles from the coast);

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that small-scale fishing enterprises will be particularly affected by displacement ~~as they~~, suffering socio-economic damage to their activities, especially coastal communities, whose fishers may not have the capacity to move to fishing grounds further afield or to change fishing method;

Amendment 108 #

Søren GADE, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that small-scale fishing enterprises will be particularly affected bywhen displacement takes place as they may not have the capacity to move to fishing grounds further afield or to change fishing method; calls for tailor-made compensation in this regard;

Amendment 109 #

France JAMET, Rosanna CONTE, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that small-scale and coastal fishing enterprises will be particularly affected by displacement as they may not have the capacity to move to fishing grounds further afield or to change fishing method;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9

~~— having regard to the North Sea Advisory Council (NSAC) advice of 28 December 2020 on the development of offshore wind farms and fisheries interactions,~~deleted

Amendment 110 #

Søren GADE, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that small-scale fishing ~~enterprises will~~fleet could be particularly affected by displacement as they may not have the capacity to move to fishing grounds further afield or to change fishing method;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses thate need to facilitate access to insurance for fishing vessels operating in wind farms as it today is very problematic owing to the insufficient indemnity levels offered by fishing vessels’ insurance policies;

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that insurance for fishing vessels operating in or sailing through wind farms is very problematic owing to the insufficient indemnity levels offered by fishing vessels’ insurance policies;

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that, in some cases, insurance for fishing vessels operating in wind farms is very problematic owing to the insufficient indemnity levels offered by fishing vessels’ insurance policies;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points out that any restriction on access to traditional fishing grounds directly affects the livelihoods of EU fishers and dependent jobs ashore, and that it undermines the responsible and sustainable provision of food security; points out, therefore, that it is wise to choose energy sources that require as little space as possible;

Amendment 115 #

Søren GADE, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points out that any restriction on access to traditional fishing grounds directly affects the livelihoods of EU fishers and dependent jobs ashore~~, and that it undermines the responsible and sustainable provision of food security~~;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points out that any restriction on access to traditional fishing grounds, without appropriate compensation, directly affects the livelihoods of EU fishers and dependent jobs ashore, and that it undermines the responsible and sustainable provision of food security;

Amendment 117 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points out that any restriction on access to traditional fishing grounds directly affects the livelihoods of EU fishers from the different EU Member States and dependent jobs ashore, and that it undermines the responsible and sustainable provision of food security;

Amendment 118 #

Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points out that any restriction on access to traditional fishing grounds directly affects the livelihoods of EU fishers and dependent jobs ashore, and that it could undermines the responsible and sustainable provision of food security;

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Calls on Member States to designate specific historical and traditional fishing grounds of local fishers as areas that are to remain free of offshore renewables;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU is aiming to become climate neutral by 2050 at the latest; whereas the Commission has proposed a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction objective of at least 55% by 2030, while the Parliament has called for a GHG emission reduction target of 60% by 2030; whereas offshore renewable energy should play a key role in achieving thisese objectives;

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Stresses that the closure of OWFs to fisheries allows for the restoration of certain species, with knock-on and spill- over benefits for wider ecosystems and fishers;

Amendment 121 #

Søren GADE, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that overlap analysis of offshore renewables and fisheries suggests a sharp increase in special conflict potential in European waters over the coming years, calls for consultation, dialogues and networks to be set up at an early stage, in order to reduce and avoid conflicts;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Stress~~Notes that overlap analysis of offshore renewables and fisheries suggests a sharp increase in specatial conflict potential in European waters over the coming years; stresses in this regard the need for early and inclusive spatial planning, both with regards to placement and lay-out of OFWs

Amendment 123 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that overlap analysis of offshore renewables and fisheries suggests a sharp increase in special conflict potential in European waters over the coming years as further space would be taken away from fisheries in areas already subject to other constraints;

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that overlap analysis of offshore renewables and fisheries suggests a sharp increase in special conflict potential in European waters over the coming years, if not mitigated;

Amendment 125 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that overlap analysis of offshore renewables and fisheries suggests a sharp increase in special conflict potential in certain European ~~water~~sea basins over the coming years;

Amendment 126 #

France JAMET, Rosanna CONTE, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that today~~, fishing activities (active or passive) in OWFs are limited or prohibited in most Member States;~~ there are some examples of cooperation of (active or passive) fishing activities in offshore wind farms; stresses that co-operative co-design approaches regarding the siting of OWFs to combine them with other uses can reduce the potential impact on fisheries, strengthen the relationship between the various sectors involved and allow for beneficial cooperation between them.

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that today, fishing activities (active or passive) in OWFs are limited or prohibited in most Member States, thus reducing the authorised fishing area;

Amendment 128 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that today, fishing activities (active or passive) in OWFs are currently limited or prohibited in ~~most~~all Member States;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Recognises the potential for aqua- and algaculture as well as for passive fishing within OWFs, however stresses that more research is necessary to assess the ecological impact;

Amendment 13 #

France JAMET, Rosanna CONTE, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU is aiming to become climate neutral by 2050 in line with the Green Deal objectives; whereas offshore renewable energy should play a key role in achieving this objective through an integrated approach taking into account the three pillars of sustainability;

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Is concerned about the fact that fishers tend to avoid fishing in OWFs even if access is permitted because of the risk of accidental damage, snagging and loss of fishing gear, and that consequently the fear of potential exposure to prosecution is a source of concern that hinders co- existence and reduces the authorised fishing area, particularly for small-scale coastal fishing;

Amendment 131 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Is concerned about the fact that, separately from prohibitions and restrictions to fishing activities, fishers tend to avoid fishing in OWFs even if access is permitted because of the risk of accidental damage, snagging and loss of fishing gear, and that consequently the fear of potential exposure to prosecution is a source of concern that hinders co- existence;

Amendment 132 #

Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, France JAMET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Expresses concern about the safety of shipping and maritime transport owing to the lengthening of routes, which is not only dangerous for fishers but also has repercussions on pollution;

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Stresses that outermost regions and islands energy mixes are highly dependent on fossil fuels imports despite their local characteristics which are conducive to the development of renewables; calls, therefore, on the Commission and Member States to pay special attention and dedicate specific funding to the development of offshore renewable energy in these territories in order to minimize dependency on fossil energy;

Amendment 134 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Acknowledges the potential of floating offshore wind devices which launch opportunities for installations in areas with deep waters together with greater distance from the coastline, less visual impact and less potential spatial overlap with fishing areas;

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Stresses that the decommissioning of offshore wind turbines must neither generate enduring environmental impacts nor pose safety risks to fishing vessels due to any remaining sub-seabed infrastructure; considers it essential to ensure an integrated approach to the life cycle processes of offshore windfarms and that decommissioning strategies envisaging alternative future use or removal of the constructions must be integrated into design and installation plans from the beginning and long-term sustainable impact must be considered to adhere to the principles of a circular economy;

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Stresses that the decommissioning of offshore wind turbines must neither generate enduring environmental impacts nor pose safety risks to fishing vessels due to any remaining sub-seabed infrastructure; recommends therefore that such areas either remain OWF through repowering or that decommissioned areas be designated as strictly protected areas to mitigate potential safety issues and preserve artificial reefs;

Amendment 137 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Stresses that the decommissioning of offshore wind turbines must neither generate enduring environmental impacts nor pose safety risks to fishing vessels due to any remaining sub-seabed infrastructure, points out, in addition, that recycling methods should be developed to reduce the impacts on the environment;

Amendment 138 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Stresses that the decommissioning of offshore wind turbines must neither generate enduring environmental impacts for the ecosystem created nor pose safety risks to fishing vessels due to any remaining sub-seabed infrastructure;

Amendment 139 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA, France JAMET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Points out that the materials used in wind farms are often difficult to dispose of and that construction projects must provide for the proper recycling of materials, along with regular ex ante and ex post environmental, social and economic impact assessments;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas ~~the EU is aiming to become climate neutral by 2050; whereas offshore renewable energy should play a key role in achieving this objective~~offshore renewable energy is not a viable means to sufficiently reduce carbon emissions;

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Urges to have an international standard created that defines how to decommission turbines, that gives a comprehensive overview of the rules and regulations on decommissioning whilst adhering to the principles of a circular economy;

Amendment 141 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Emphasis that financial arrangements should be in place to cover long term risks arising from abandoned offshore infrastructure which might be removed so that fishing may safely return;

Amendment 142 #

Søren GADE, Emma WIESNER, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12 b. Stresses that any sub-seabed infrastructure left in-situ should be subject to appropriate monitoring;

Amendment 143 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Highlights that assessments of the economic and socio-cultural effects of offshore renewables on fisheries are lacking in recent empirical studies; urges the Commission, therefore, to carry out further research looking beyond environmental impacts in order to assess the possible negative economic and social impacts on fisheries of investments in ~~OWF~~offshore renewables and identify proper ways to overcome these negative impacts;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Highlights that assessments of the economic, socio-economic and socio- cultural effects of offshore renewables on fisheries are lacking in recent empirical studies; urges the Commission, therefore, to carry out further research looking beyond environmental impacts in order to assess the possible negative economic and social impacts on fisheries of investments in OWFs;

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Highlights that assessments of the economic and socio-cultural effects of offshore renewables on fisheries are lacking in recent empirical studies; urges the Commission, therefore, to carry out further research ~~looking beyond~~in addition to environmental impacts in order to assess the possible negative economic and social impacts on fisheries of investments in OWFs;

Amendment 146 #

Søren GADE, Emma WIESNER, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Highlights that assessments of the economic and socio-cultural effects of offshore renewables on fisheries are lacking in recent empirical studies; urges the Commission, therefore, to carry out further research looking beyond environmental impacts in order to assess the possible ~~negative~~ economic and social impacts on fisheries of investments in OWFs;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Proposes that Member States increase coordination in the field of OWF research in order to facilitate the collection and exchange of research findings and data; recalls that offshore wind energy is one of the most advanced technologies, but that other technologies are promising and sometimes more appropriate in some areas where fishing activities takes place;calls for additional support for research and development in this regard;

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Proposes that Member States increase coordination in the field of OWF research in order to facilitate the collection and exchange of research findings and data, as well as exchange of best practices;

Amendment 149 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to improve on cross-border cooperation in Maritime Spatial Planning, including with the United Kingdom, the largest producer of offshore wind in Europe, in order to find solutions to common problems, integrate electricity connections and learn from best practices;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU is aiming to become climate neutral by 2050; whereas offshore renewable energy ~~should play a key role in~~is one of the options that Member States can choose to achiev~~ing~~e this ~~objective~~target;

Amendment 150 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. States that maritime spatial planning must play a key role, by distinguishing each maritime area with regard to its own characteristics (Baltic Sea, North Sea,Channel, Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea) and has to put greater emphasis on the assessment of achieving co-location options, which is of the utmost importance in achieving a win- win situation for both sustainable fisheries and the offshore energy sector and including the effective participation of fisheries in the decision making process (as opposed to the overly vague notions of “consultation” and “observers”), the satisfaction of commitments made and the prior resolution of usage conflicts;

Amendment 151 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA, France JAMET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. States that maritime spatial planning must play a key role, taking into account the specific characteristics of every marine area, and has to put greater emphasis on the assessment of achieving co-location options, which is of the utmost importance in achieving a win- win situation for both sustainable fisheries and the offshore energy sector;

Amendment 152 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. States that maritime spatial planning must play a key role and has to put greater emphasis on the assessment of achieving co-location options and shared usage of wind farms, which is of the utmost importance in achieving a win- win situation for both sustainable fisheries and aquaculture and the offshore energy sector;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. calls on Member States, in their national maritime spatial plans to be delivered by 2021, to take into account the need to ensure that the negative effects of offshore windmills on fisheries are avoided and that therefore they are placed away from fishing grounds;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Promotes the application of an ecosystem-based approach in Maritime Spatial Planning, with the intention of providing a systems-based framework for understanding and managing marine ecosystems and their interaction with socio-economic activities;

Amendment 155 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16 b. Highlights the importance of community energy production schemes which allow coastal communities and co- operatives, including fishers, to generate their own electricity and reinvest profits back into the community;

Amendment 156 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that OWFs should only be built if the exclusion of negative environmental and ecological, as well as economic and socio-cultural impacts to fishermen, aquaculture producers and coastal communities is guaranteed, in line with the objectives of the Blue Economy and the European Green Deal;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that ~~OWFs should only be built if the exclusion of~~in the development of OWFs the negative environmental and ecological, as well as economic and socio- cultural impacts ~~is guarante~~should be minimised and where possible mitigated, in line with the objectives of the Blue Economy and the European Green Deal;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that OWFs should only be built if the exclusion of negative environmental and ecological, as well as economic, socio-economic and socio- cultural impacts is guaranteed, in line with the objectives of the Blue Economy and the European Green Deal;

Amendment 159 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that OWFs should only be built if the exclusion of negative environmental and ecological, as well as economic and socio-cultural impacts is guaranteed, in line with the objectives of the Blue Economy ~~and the European Green Deal~~;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

A a. Whereas the EU has the responsibility under the Treaties to ensure security of supply, Member States are responsible for determining the structure of their energy supply and their choice of energy sources, while respecting the EU targets for energy neutrality by 2050;

Amendment 160 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Highlights the importance to vehicle investments on research and development of tidal energy conversion systems, which could have a less damaging impact on economical, social and envirnomental aspects

Amendment 161 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Urges Member States to take into account the impact of offshore renewable energy on the marine ecosystem and fisheries when determining the energy mix;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)

17 b. Urges Member States to also continue working on the development and usage of other forms of renewable energy;

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment to examine the expected economic, social and environmental consequences of constructing OWF facilities where they are likely to come into conflict with both the fishing sector and the sustainability of marine life, including considerations of the consequences of inaction with regard to climate change;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to carry out an impact assessment to examine the expected economic, social and environmental consequences of constructing OWF facilities where they are likely to come into conflict with both the fishing sector and the sustainability of marine life;

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18 a. Stresses that cooperation across the sectors active in the offshore environment and economy will also be a driver for a just transition; calls on the Commission to assess initiatives that stimulate local economies and economic activities offshore and find synergies between sectors that can serve as a basis for a future-proof economic recovery;

Amendment 166 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)

18 b. Highlights that there already are examples of coexistence between the fishing sector and the offshore wind energy sector, and this experience should be used to find and share the best available practices for the whole life cycle of marine infrastructure;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Stresses that effective and early stakeholder consultation and participation, proper socio-economic impact assessments, the creation of transparent guidelines and the payment of compensation, particularly to small-scale coastal fisheries affected by the proximity of wind farms, could alleviate the potential for conflict and create a level playing field between fisheries and offshore renewables;

Amendment 168 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Stresses that early equitable and effective stakeholder consultation and participation, notably of the fishers and aquaculture producers and coastal communities, the creation of transparent guidelines and the payment of compensation could alleviate the potential for conflict and create a level playing field between fisheries and offshore renewables;

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Stresses that early and continuous stakeholder consultation and participation, the creation of transparent guidelines and the payment of compensation could alleviate the potential for conflict and create a level playing field between fisheries and offshore renewables;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas according to the Commission’s estimates, 30 % of the EU’s electricity demand in 2050 will be met by offshore wind, corresponding to an increase from the current 12 GW offshore wind capacity in the EU-27 to a target of 300 GW in 2050, and to reach 40 GW of ocean energy capacity by 2050;

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19 a. Calls for the EU to promote and support OWF in its external action, in particular with third countries where access to energy remains uneven and limited, in line with the Green Deal’s objectives;

Amendment 171 #

Søren GADE, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Emphasises that the precautionary principle, in accordance with Article 191(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, should apply if decisions have to be taken before the required knowledge or information is available; calls therefore for a moratorium on the construction of new windfarms in fishing areas;

Amendment 172 #

Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. NStresses that stakeholders should have a right to participate and a say in the maritime spatial planning; notes that further EU legislation might be required in case Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheries and other stakeholders;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Notes that further EU legislation might be required in case Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion and, where appropriate, compensation of fisheries;

Amendment 174 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. ~~Not~~Urges th~~at further EU legislation might be required in case Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheries~~e Commission and the Member States to ensure that maritime spatial plans fairly reflect the legitimate interests of fishermen, shellfish gatherers and the rest of the sea-industry supply chain;

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Notes that further EU legislation ~~might be~~is required ~~in case~~given that evidence suggests that Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheries;

Amendment 176 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Notes that ~~further EU legislation might be required in case Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheri~~maritime spatial planning is and remains a competence that belongs to the Member States;

Amendment 177 #

France JAMET, Rosanna CONTE, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Notes that ~~further EU legislation might be required in case Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheries~~Member States need to be given support for the fair inclusion of fisheries in their maritime spatial planning;

Amendment 178 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Notes that ~~further EU legislation might be required in case~~it is imperative that Member States’' maritime spatial planning ~~does not~~ guarantees the fair inclusion and preservation of fisheries;

Amendment 179 #

François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Notes that further EU legislation ~~might be~~is required in case Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheries;

Amendment 18 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, according to the Commission’s overly optimistic estimates, 30 % of the EU’s electricity demand in 2050 will be met by offshore wind, corresponding to an unlikely an increase from the current 12 GW offshore wind capacity in the EU-27 to a target of 300 GW in 2050;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Notes that further EU legislation ~~might~~will be required in case Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheries;

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21 a. Calls on Member States to consider nuclear energy as a viable, stable low-carbon solution for the clean energy transition;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas according to the Commission’s estimates, 30 % of the EU’s electricity demand in 2050 will be met by offshore wind, corresponding to an increase from the current 12 GW offshore wind capacity in the EU-27 to a target of 300 GW in 2050n increase in offshore wind energy is not essential to reach the goal of climate neutrality by 2050, as there are other viable low-carbon options such as nuclear energy;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3

~~— having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’(COM(2019)0640),~~deleted

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas according to article 194 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the European energy policy shall ensure the functioning of the energy market, ensure security of energy supply, promote energy efficiency and savings and the development of renewable energy and promote the interconnection of energy networks; whereas the definition of the energy mix of Member States remains a national competence, and therefore energy mixes are highly diversified;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas the Northern Seas (North Sea, Baltic Sea and North East Atlantic) account for more than 85 % of all offshore wind capacity in EU27 waters;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

B b. whereas the geographical characteristics of Member States and European sea basins vary greatly across the EU; whereas the development of offshore wind farms and other renewable energy systems is currently concentrated in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea, where conditions are more favourable; whereas, in the future, the possibility or desirability of creating, or of increasing the size or capacity of offshore renewable energy installations will equally be very different in each basin and Member State;

Amendment 23 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas it was agreed in the EU- UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement that EU fishing vessels would continue to have reciprocal access to UK waters and would therefore continue to share the European marine space which currently contains 110 offshore wind farms with more than 5 000 wind turbines;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C a. Whereas the supply of wind energy can be irregular and unstable, due to changing weather circumstances;

Amendment 25 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

C b. Whereas the possibilities of storing wind energy are still very limited;

Amendment 26 #

Søren GADE, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas other offshore renewable energy sources such as wave or, tidal ~~technology play an important role in the Commission’s offshore renewable energy strategy, although there are currently no large-scale commercial wave or tidal technology installations in operation~~and thermal technologies, floating offshore wind, floating photovoltaic installations and the use of algae to produce biofuels play an important role in the Commission’s offshore renewable energy strategy, as they can contribute to reach climate neutrality and enhanced European leadership in these promising technologies, and create new jobs, whereas it is necessary to continue research and innovation as other offshore renewable energy could have less impact on fishing activities, fish stocks and marine environment;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas other offshore renewable energy sources such as wave or tidal technology play an important role in the Commission’s offshore renewable energy strategy, although there are currently no large-scale commercial wave or tidal technology installations in operation, many of these other energy sources could be promising and more appropriate in some areas where fishing activities takes place if given the right research and development support;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

D a. Whereas nuclear energy requires a tiny bit of space to provide a whole lot of power; while wind enery requires a whole lot of space to provide a tiny bit of power;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas offshore wind turbines have an average life cycle of 25 to 30 years; whereas very few turbines have so far been decommissioned, whereas a long- term vision based on a circular economy and life-cycle approach is necessary in order to assess the impacts on other activities, such as fishing, and on local communities and ecosystems, at the end of the project, whereas eco-conception through specific materials and designs of the infrastructures can foster the development of local biodiversity, whereas recycling methods or maintaining infrastructures as artificial reefs have to be assessed at an early stage of the conception of the project;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)

— having regard to Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources,

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas offshore wind turbines have an average life cycle of 25 to 30 years; whereas very few turbines have so far been decommissioned and recycling is still very complex with only 85-90% of a dismantled wind turbine recycled;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas no rigorous study has been carried out on the financial and environmental cost of dismantling wind turbines, and whereas there is a bias in favour of offshore wind turbines which distorts the scientific debate;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the most cost- and space- efficient way to achieve the 2050 offshore capacity target would be through multiple use of the same maritime space by different sectors; , by considering a co-benefit approach, according to which, each activity benefits from the other, as cohabitation of activities can be positive regarding the environment and socio- economic profits ;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the most cost- and space- efficient way to achieve the 2050 offshore capacity target would be through multiple use of the same maritime space by different sectors; whereas, however, a solution of this kind is purely notional and, in practice, often impossible to implement;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas there is increasing competition between different uses of maritime space which often causes historical uses of evident historical, cultural, social and economic value, such as fishing, to be overlooked;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive (2014/89/EU) states that Member States must take into consideration the interactions of activities and uses such as aquaculture, fishing, and installations and infrastructures for the production of energy from renewable sources, as well as submarine cables, and promote the coexistence of relevant activities, and apply an ecosystem-based approach;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

G a. whereas, through their maritime spatial plans, Member States should aim to contribute to the sustainable development of energy sectors at sea, of maritime transport, of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, and the preservation, protection and improvement of the environment including the resilience to climate change impacts; whereas, Member States are required to establish their maritime spatial plans before 31 March 2021.

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

G a. whereas, in the context of spatial planning, fisheries and aquaculture interests should receive special attention and should not be marginalised;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)

G b. whereas the Commission proposal for an EU Biodiversity Strategy affirms that "ocean energy, including offshore wind, (…) allows for fish stock recovery", while a recent study of the European Parliament (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData /etudes/STUD/2020/652212/IPOL_STU(2 020)652212_EN.pdf) reveals that "potential fisheries benefits as a consequence of Offshore Renewables installations are not well understood and empirical evidence is pending";

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)

G b. whereas the Commission, in its communication entitled ‘An EU Strategy to harness the potential of offshore renewable energy for a climate neutral future’, called on public authorities to plan in the long term and from an early stage the deployment of offshore renewable energies, assessing their environmental, social and economic sustainability and ensuring coexistence with other activities, such as fisheries and aquaculture, and making sure the public accept planned deployments;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)

— having regard to the Commission communication of 8 July 2020 on a Hydrogen Strategy for a Climate-Neutral Europe (COM(2020)301,

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas around 80 % of all fishing ~~companie~~vessels in the EU are small-scale ~~enterpri~~vessels, with most being family-run businesses that go back generations, operating mainly in coastal waters;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

H a. whereas fisheries have a relatively small impact on the GDP, whereas it is of utmost importance for fishing communities in many Member States;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

H a. whereas the European Union has failed to comply with the legal obligation to end overfishing by 2020;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)

H b. whereas the 2030 EU biodiversity strategy calls for a legally binding objective to protect at least 30 % of the Union’s seas as Marine Protected Areas, and for 10 % of the Union's sea area to be strictly protected where no economic activities should take place; whereas in the remaining 20% of the designated MPAs economic activities could be allowed but only if compatible with both the climate targets of the Union and the conservation objectives, in particular of the area, according to the Birds and Habitats Directives and the 2020 Commission guidance on wind energy developments and EU Nature legislation1a; _________________ 1a Commission notice: Guidance document on wind energy developments and EU nature legislation, C(2020) 7730 final, 18.11.2020

Amendment 44 #

Søren GADE, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas, according to the 2020 EPRS study on the ‘Impact of the use of offshore wind and other marine renewables on European fisheries’, the cumulation of current and future offshore renewable development~~s has the biggest impact on~~ affects mostly trawling fleets targeting mixed demersal species and crustaceans¸ whereas the composition of fishing effort varied greatly across fleets at individual planning sites; whereas bottom trawling has the biggest impact on the ocean seafloor;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the cumulation of current and future offshore renewable developments has the biggest impact on ~~trawling fleet~~fishing operations targeting demersal species and crustaceans;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

I a. Highlights that harnessing offshore energy, while ensuring environmental protection and the sustainable development of fisheries and other economic activities, requires joint planning and a rigorous assessment of cumulative impacts, including socio- economic effects;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas the impact on marine biodiversity and migratory birds of these large wind farms is not sufficiently taken into account in studies by the Commission and the lobby groups which promote such installations;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

I a. whereas additional research is needed on the marine environment and fisheries resources effects caused by OWFs and other offshore renewable energy systems;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

I a. whereas the European Parliament demands that the Union’s 2030 target for climate shall be an economy-wide GHG emission reduction of 60 % compared to 1990;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)

— having regard to the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030, set out in the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 – Bringing nature back into our lives’ (COM(2020)0380),

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)

I b. Underlines the necessity of exploring EU offshore wind resources and promoting marine renewable energy projects in a manner compatible with other uses of the maritime space, primarily fisheries, seeking synergies and protecting biodiversity;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)

I b. whereas monitoring and empirical analysis of fishing practices before, during and after the construction of OWFs is important to create better understanding on co-existence;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)

I c. whereas foundations of offshore renewable energy devices might attract marine life and coud have an artificial reef effect;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I d (new)

I d. whereas the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) recommends avoiding fishing activities at a minimum distance of 0,25 nautical miles (463 meters) either side of a submarine cable to minimise risks;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Is concerned about the~~Notes the need to assess the potential negative long-term impact that offshore wind turbines may have on ecosystems, fish stocks and biodiversity, and consequently on fisheries as a whole, over their life cycle, from construction through operation and decommissioning; stresses that only a few studies have analysed the potential negative impacts of offshore wind farms on the fisheries sector;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is concerned about the ~~negative~~potential long-term impact that offshore wind turbines have in certain cases on ecosystems, fish stocks and biodiversity, and consequently on fisheries as a whole, over their life cycle, from construction through operation and decommissioning; recalls that these impacts can be strongly reduced by taking appropriate and widely applied measures;

Amendment 56 #

Søren GADE, Emma WIESNER, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is concerned about the negative ~~long-term~~ impact that offshore wind turbines have on certain ecosystems, fish stocks and biodiversity, and consequently on fisheries as a whole, over their life cycle, from construction through operation and decommissioning; hence the importance of rigorous and detailed studies to assess such impacts in existing windmills;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Is concerned about the~~Highlights the need to avoid negative long-term impact ~~that~~caused by offshore wind turbines ~~have~~ on ecosystems, fish stocks and biodiversity, and consequently on fisheries as a whole~~, over their life cycle~~; emphasises the need for a life cycle approach on its development, from construction through operation and decommissioning;

Amendment 58 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Massimo CASANOVA, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is concerned about the negative long-term impact that offshore wind turbines have on ecosystems, bird migration flows, fish stocks and biodiversity, and consequently on fisheries as a whole, over their life cycle, from construction through operation and decommissioning;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is concerned about the negative long-term impact that offshore wind turbines have on ecosystems, migratory birds, fish stocks and biodiversity, and consequently on fisheries as a whole, over their very short life cycle, from construction through operation and decommissioning;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 c (new)

— having regard to the Commission communication of 17 September 2020 ‘Stepping up Europe’s 2030 climate ambition – Investing in a climate-neutral future for the benefit of our people’ (COM(2020)0562),

Amendment 60 #

Søren GADE, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recalls the EU’s commitment to achieving net zero greenhouse gases emissions target by 2050 at the latest; stresses that these emissions must be reduced by at least 65% by 2030 compared to 1990 emissions in order for the Union to contribute to limiting global warming to less than 1.5° C by the end of the century, in line with the latest scientific evidence;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Emphasises that offshore renewable energy should be deployed creating opportunities for other activities, through an environmental, social and economic co-benefits approach, ensuring benefits for fishers and local communities

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Warns that offshore renewable energy will only be sustainable if it has no negative impact on the environment and on economic, social and territorial cohesion, especially in fisheries- dependent regions;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Is concerned about the lack of research done regarding the decommissioning of offshore wind turbines and regarding what the effects of decommissioning will be on the environment.

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. States that it remains the competence of a Member State to decide about the national energy mix and technologies;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Emphasises that renewable energy and energy efficiency are among the key drivers for reaching a net zero-emissions economy; highlights that in order to meet the 2030 renewable energy target, offshore renewable electricity infrastructure capacity and production need to be increased accordingly;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Highlights that without a rapid phase out of fossil fuels and increase in wind energy production, the realisation of renewable energy goals and limiting global warming to less than 1.5° C by the end of the century would be impossible; recalls that burning fossil fuels have negative impacts on marine life, including fish stocks, due to acidification of seas and oceans;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Highlights the important potential of renewable hydrogen, including from wind and solar energy, in reaching the Union’s climate neutrality objective;

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1 e. Stresses that floating wind farms have the potential to be developed in deep water areas, which expands the viable zone for wind energy development while reducing visibility from shore; calls therefore on the Commission and Member States to support the upscale and commercialisation of sustainable floating offshore wind technology that reduces further the impact on fisheries;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 f (new)

1 f. Stresses the importance of expanding the development of OWFs in all European seas basins, including the Mediterranean, to achieve the emission reduction goals necessary to mitigate global warming;

Amendment 7 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 d (new)

— having regard to its resolution of 16 January 2018 on international ocean governance: an agenda for the future of our oceans in the context of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals,

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the large-scale roll-out of offshore wind farms (OWFs) risks harming the physical functioning of the sea basin, leading to potential direct, indirect or induced effects, in particular sea and air currents, which might contribute to a mixing of the stratified water column and consequently influence the nutrient cycle, wave generation, tidal amplitudes and bedload sediment transport, while infrasonic noise from rotating blades could chase fish away from OWFs, and electromagnetic fields from underwater cables, as well as underwater noise from pile driving, could have severe negative impacts on marine life; as a result, inter alia, of maintenance activities and the consequent risk that pollutants (paint or sand) or copper may be dispersed owing to wear on turbine bearings.

Amendment 71 #

Søren GADE, Emma WIESNER, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses th~~at the~~e need to minimize the risk of large-scale roll-out of offshore wind farms (OWFs) ~~risks~~ harming the physical functioning of the sea basin, in particular sea and air currents, which might contribute to a mixing of the stratified water column and consequently influence the nutrient cycle, wave generation, tidal amplitudes and bedload sediment transport, while infrasonic noise from rotating blades could chase fish away from OWFs, and electromagnetic fields from underwater cables, as well as underwater noise from pile driving, could have severe negative impacts on marine life; stresses in this regard the need for further development and research on how to avoid and mitigate these negative effects;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the large-scale roll-out of offshore wind farms (OWFs) risks ~~harm~~, in certain cases, affecting the physical functioning of the sea basin, in particular sea and air currents, which might contribute to a mixing of the stratified water column and consequently influence the nutrient cycle, wave generation, tidal amplitudes and bedload sediment transport, and the effects of these must be closely monitored, while infrasonic noise from rotating blades could chase fish away from OWFs, and electromagnetic fields from underwater cables, as well as underwater noise from pile driving, could have severe negative impacts on marine life if not mitigated;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the large-scale roll-out of offshore wind farms (OWFs) risks harming the physical functioning of the sea basin, in particular sea and air currents, which might contribute to a mixing of the stratified water column and consequently influence the nutrient cycle, wave generation, tidal amplitudes and bedload sediment transport, while infrasonic noise from rotating blades could chase fish, marine mammal species and crustaceans away from OWFs, and electromagnetic fields from underwater cables, as well as underwater noise from pile driving, could have severe negative impacts on marine life;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Stre~~Notes the need to assess the impact that the large-scale roll-out of offshore wind farms (OWFs) ~~risks harming~~may have on the physical functioning of the sea basin, in particular sea and air currents, which might contribute to a mixing of the stratified water column and consequently influence the nutrient cycle, wave generation, tidal amplitudes and bedload sediment transport, while infrasonic noise from rotating blades could chase fish away from OWFs, and electromagnetic fields from underwater cables, as well as underwater noise from pile driving, could have severe negative impacts on marine life;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the large-scale roll-out of offshore wind farms (OWFs) risks harming the physical functioning of the sea basin, in particular sea and air currents, which might contribute to a mixing of the stratified water column and consequently influence the nutrient cycle, wave generation, tidal amplitudes and bedload sediment transport, while infrasonic noise from rotating blades could chase fish and birds away from OWFs, and electromagnetic fields from underwater cables, as well as underwater noise from pile driving, could have severe negative impacts on marine life;

Amendment 76 #

2 a. Notes the importance of implementing best practices in minimising disruption and mitigating damage to local ecosystems in the planning, operational and decommissioning stages of offshore activity;

Amendment 77 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Takes the view that the installation of marine renewable energy production units shall be incorporated into and respond to the development strategies and energy sovereignty of each state;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Highlights the importance of taking into consideration morphological and geographical characteristics of areas in where OWFs should be settled in.

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Takes the view that decisions to install offshore renewable energy production infrastructure (wind, tidal or wave power) should be informed by the best scientific assessments of the associated impacts and involve all stakeholders in the exploitation of the areas to be occupied, in particular the associated fishing communities and their organisations;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 e (new)

— having regard to the 2019 special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate,

Amendment 80 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Notes that the potential negative impact of OFWs on fisheries and the marine environment is much less significant than offshore oil and gas extraction which contribute to global warming while also potentially polluting surrounding waters;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Stresses that the Mediterranean Sea should be evaluated separately taking into account its own characteristics with regard to the potential and the requirements for the development of offshore renewable energy.

Amendment 82 #

Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

~~3. Stresses that potential artificial reef effects are limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that decommissioning may make any benefits temporary;~~deleted

Amendment 83 #

Søren GADE, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses th~~at potential artificial reef~~e need to investigate the potential benefits of offshore renewable installations for fisheries; stresses that empirical evidence of the ecological benefits resulting from the construction of artificial reefs is gradually increasing, but that these effects armay be limited to the operational phase of ~~an offshor~~the wind turbine and that decommissioning may ~~mak~~cause any benefits to be temporary;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that potential artificial reef effects are limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that ~~decommissioning may make any benefits temporary;~~these positive effects must be taken preserved when decommissioning takes place; underlines that when OWFs are decommissioned the sites need to be left in a state that allows fishing activities and protects and respects the environment.

Amendment 85 #

Catherine CHABAUD, Emma WIESNER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that potential artificial reef effects are limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that decommissioning may make any benefits temporary, unless a long-term vision assessment of the project offers the choice to leave the infrastructure after its operation;

Amendment 86 #

Emma WIESNER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that potential artificial reef effects are currently limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that ~~decommissioning may make any benefits temporary;~~more research is needed on how to preserve these positive effects on the marine ecosystem after the decommissioning of the OWFs.

Amendment 87 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that, if not strategically planned with a long-term perspective, potential artificial reef effects arcould be limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that decommissioning may make any benefits temporary;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that potential artificial reef effects are in particular not confirmed for commercial species and are limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that decommissioning may make any benefits temporary;

Amendment 89 #

France JAMET, Rosanna CONTE, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that potential artificial reef effects are limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that decommissioning may make any benefits temporary and very costly;

Amendment 9 #

Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 f (new)

— having regard to the Paris Agreement reached at the 21st Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21),

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that the visual impact would have a significant effect on the coastline, taking into account the warning lights on turbines, among other factors, and this visual impact, together with the noise impact, would drive away both birds and fish;

Amendment 91 #

Søren GADE, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Points out the need to consider the characteristics of the sea bottom when deploying offshore wind farms so as not to build infrastructure where it would risk altering the local habitat and ecosystem;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Proposes to assess the combination and integration of OWFs within mari~~tim~~ne protected areas (MPAs) against clearly defined climate, habitat and biodiversity conservation objectives, including those pertaining to fisheries resources, while excluding OWFs in protected areas designated hitherto as well as excluding any economic activity, also OWFs, in strictly protected areas;

Amendment 93 #

Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Predrag Fred MATIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Proposes to assess the combination and integration of OWFs within maritime protected areas (MPAs) against clearly defined habitat and biodiversity conservation objectives, including those pertaining to fisheries resources, underlines that management committees should be set up in these MPAs for better coexistence of activities;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Proposes to assess the combination and integration of OWFs within maritime protected areas (MPAs) against clearly defined habitat and biodiversity conservation objectives, including those pertaining to fisheries resources;prohibit the settlement of OWFs in MPAs, which role is fundamental to preserve biodiversity

Amendment 95 #

Søren GADE, Catherine CHABAUD, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Pro~~Opposes ~~to assess~~ the combination and integration of OWFs within maritime protected areas (MPAs) ~~against~~in view of the clearly defined habitat and biodiversity conservation objectives, including those pertaining to fisheries resources;

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Stresses that OWFs should, whenever possible, be placed in zones where fishing is not permitted, in order to minimize negative impacts on the fishing industry.

Amendment 97 #