SPECIAL ISSUE ON UNDERSTANDING THE EFFECTS OF OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ON FISHERIES

The Effects of Offshore Wind Farms on

Hydrodynamics and Implications for Fishes
By Joshua van Berkel, ABSTRACT. We review the state of knowledge about offshore wind farm (OWF)
Hans Burchard, development-related effects on hydrodynamics and their possible secondary effects on
Asbjørn Christensen, fishes derived from European studies. Theoretical, modeling, and observational stud-
Lars O. Mortensen, ies of OWF developments are relatively advanced and identify potential impacts result-
ing from OWF changes to local or regional hydrodynamics through modification of
Ole Svenstrup Petersen,
(1) the wind fields, and (2) oceanographic parameters including turbulence, mixing,
and Frank Thomsen
and vertical stratification. While limited, studies discuss local OWF (i.e., within the
OWF footprint) impacts on fishes due to sediment resuspension or sedimentation,
temperature change, nutrient transport, and substrate availability. These studies largely
neglect possible effects further afield and generally conclude that any hydrodynamic
impact of OWFs on fishes cannot be distinguished when compared to natural variabil-
ity. To further understanding of the cumulative risk from extensive OWF developments
requires additional research on OWF-related spillover effects on surrounding ecosys-
tems and on natural oceanographic connectivity. The use of dynamic habitat or agent-
based models coupled with refined hydrodynamic models can help quantify the scale of
spatial and temporal effects of hydrodynamic cues on the movement of fishes and their
habitats, which is not currently possible via conventional modeling, quantitative analy-
sis approaches, or field-based observational studies and surveys.

© Photocreo Bednarek / Adobe Stock

108 Oceanography | Vol.33, No.4

INTRODUCTION in the water column, often in large, less- depth, tides, currents, waves, meteoro-
Since the beginning of the twenty-first well-defined spawning grounds that may logical forcing, and stratification. Most of
century, European countries have been vary from year to year. Because pelagic the OWFs are installed in the North Sea,
leaders in large-scale installation of off- spawning takes place mostly at depths mainly in the southeastern part of the
shore wind farms (OWFs), and there of 20–100 m, hydrodynamic and hydro- German Bight and along the southeast-
are ambitious plans to further expand graphic conditions play an important role ern English coast. Additional OWFs are
the industry in Europe and beyond in regulating spawning ground boundar- located in the Southern Bight of the North
(see map at http://www.4coffshore.com/ ies. Hydrodynamics also influences refu- Sea near the west coast of Belgium and the
offshorewind). Given the scale of ongoing gia and migration/transportation routes, Netherlands, offshore from the mouth of
and planned OWFs and marine renewable as the eggs and/or larvae of both pelagic the Thames, in the English Channel, in
energy developments in general—wind, and demersal spawners passively or the Irish Sea near the English and Welsh
wave, and tidal power devices—the envi- actively drift with ocean currents. A vari- coasts, in the Skagerrak between Norway
ronmental impacts of such installations on ety of environmental factors such as cur- and Denmark, and in the western Baltic
ecosystem components require increasing rents, wind, turbidity, temperature, and Sea. OWFs installed outside these regions
attention (Boehlert and Gill, 2010). planktonic abundance regulate the trans- are relatively small. These European OWF
The construction, operation, and port and development of eggs and larvae. focus areas can be hydrodynamically
decommissioning phases of offshore Coastal areas provide habitats for a variety divided into five regimes summarized in
wind farms all exert pressures on marine of different species-dependent vital pro- Table 1. Figure 1 delineates areas where
environmental receptors (i.e., plankton, cesses, for example, nursery, settlement, these regimes occur.
benthos, fish, turtles, birds, marine mam- feeding, and refugia. Hydrodynamics
mals, and bats; see reviews by Gill, 2005; play a pivotal role in controlling turbid- IMPACTS OF OFFSHORE
Boehlert and Gill, 2010; Thomsen et al., ity, sedimentation, salinity, temperature, WIND FARMS ON COASTAL
2015). In this regard, the attraction of and nutrient uptake in coastal systems, HYDRODYNAMICS
benthos and fishes to newly introduced conditions known to influence survival OWFs may directly impact the hydro-
hard substrates, called the artificial reef success, even though precise biological dynamics inside of and near the OWF
effect (see Mineur et al., 2012; Degraer mechanisms often remain elusive. and close by through their underwater
et al., 2020, in this issue; Glarou et al., Here, we review the effects of OWFs infrastructure, or indirectly by chang-
2020), has been a focus of impact analy- on hydrodynamics and the associated ing the wind field. These local alterations
sis, but offshore wind development effects implications for fishes. We characterize result in a modified ocean response to
on hydrodynamics and their possible sec- the hydrodynamic conditions of typical surface wind stress. Methods for investi-
ondary effects on fishes have received less European OWF locations and provide a gating these impacts in situ and through
attention. Plans to expand OWF develop- synopsis of the results of studies concern- remote sensing, as well as via numerical
ment and the evident role hydrodynam- ing the hydrodynamic effects of OWFs model simulations, are available and are
ics plays in the life cycles of fishes suggest on fishes and their habitats. We conclude robust where appropriately applied. Both
that a systematic review of the current our review with a summary of the state of methods have their strengths and limita-
state of knowledge regarding these poten- knowledge and by offering potential areas tions such that most reliable results are
tial impacts is warranted. for further research. obtained by optimally combining obser-
The role and importance of hydro- vations and scenario modeling.
dynamics in the life cycles of fish spe- HYDRODYNAMIC
cies becomes evident when examining CHARACTERISTICS OF Effects of Underwater Structures
their habitats. Fishes can occupy single or EUROPEAN OFFSHORE Structure-induced friction and block-
multiple habitats during their life cycles, WIND FARM SITES ing are two locally generated effects of
but the most common habitual contexts According to Wind Europe (https:// the wind turbines’ underwater founda-
are spawning, nursery, settlement, feed- windeurope.org/), the European countries tions (Sumer and Fredsøe, 1997). The
ing, refugia, and migration/transport that have extensive OWFs are (in decreas- prototype of such a structure-flow inter-
routes. The two main spawning habitats ing amounts of installed megawatts) the action is the homogeneous flow past a
are demersal and pelagic. The spawning United Kingdom, Germany, Denmark, cylinder. Downstream of the foundation,
habitat preference of demersal spawn- Belgium, and the Netherlands. The coastal under ideal conditions, a von Kármán
ers is species specific, and eggs are typ- regimes in which the OWFs are installed vortex street should develop under ideal-
ically laid on the sedimented seafloor, exhibit a wide range of ecosystem types ized conditions, consisting of alternat-
algae, or boulders. Pelagic spawners pro- and are highly diverse in hydrodynamic ing eddies in the wake of the cylinder
duce free-floating eggs that are fertilized characteristics as a function of water (e.g., van Dyke. 1982). By using a hydro-

Oceanography | December 2020 109

static ocean model in an idealized con- sity stratification (Rennau et al., 2012; that strongly varies in time and space.
figuration, Grashorn and Stanev (2016) Floeter et al., 2017). Although it has been Rennau et al. (2012) derived param-
reproduced the von Kármán vortex streets long neglected in fluid dynamics, strat- eterizations for structure-induced mix-
behind cylinders in steady flow. Because ified flow past fixed structures needs to ing to use in ocean models of nontidal
these vortex streets are expected to be be considered when constructing OWFs. density-driven flow, which has different
largely nonhydrostatic, it can be assumed In a first large-scale, in situ experiment, mixing properties than tidal flow, by con-
that these results are quantitatively unre- Lass et al. (2008) collected observations of ducting LES analysis of stratified flow past
liable. The observed locally enhanced lev- flow properties in stratified waters down- 10 m diameter cylinders and calculat-
els of turbulence in the wake of the cylin- stream of the western part of the Great ing the structure-induced vertical buoy-
der found by Grashorn and Stanev (2016) Belt Bridge in Denmark. They found ancy flux. To permit a range of structure-
and the resulting increased sediment ero- strong vertical mixing and internal wave induced mixing efficiencies by shapes
sion and turbidity in the water column generation close to the bridge pylons. other than circular cylinders, Rennau
therefore require further investigation by Typical bottom-to-surface salinity differ- et al. (2012) considered cases of weak
means of Large Eddy Simulations (LES). ences for these salinity-dominated weakly mixing and strong mixing, where the lat-
A more significant environmental tidal regimes are about 5–10 g kg–1 (corre- ter was considered an upper limit. For
issue potentially caused by OWFs is the sponding to a density difference of about seasonally stratified tidal flow, Carpenter
alteration of the seawater’s vertical den- 3.5–7 kg m–3) at depths of 20–40 m, a value et al. (2016) followed a similar approach

TABLE 1. Description of five dynamic offshore wind farm regimes in the North Sea and the Irish Sea.
REGIME

Well-mixed shallow Tidal regions of Permanently

Seasonally Intermittently
tidally dominated freshwater influence stratified weakly tidal
stratified shelf seas stratified tidal areas
coastal sites (ROFIs) shelf seas

• Two-layer thermal • Water depths • Depths <20 m, away • Situated downstream • Occurs in waters
stratification in summer, from influences of river of large freshwater between North Sea
• <40 m depth, strongly
fully mixed in winter runoff discharges from rivers and Baltic Sea
depending on local
• Water depths of conditions • Comparably simple • Horizontal density • Horizontal salinity
>40–100 m, strongly hydrodynamics gradients generated by gradient drives residual
• Located near tidal fronts
depending on local the river runoff induce exchange flow
between seasonally • Wave influences
conditions periodic stratification
stratified and well- significant when long • North Sea water enters
that interacts with the
• Stratifying agent: mixed regions (Simpson wind waves impact the the Baltic Sea near the
tides (Simpson et al.,
summer surface and Hunter, 1974) bottom (Mellor, 2002) bottom and brackish
1990)
warming surface water leaves
DYNAMICS

• Tidal fronts move with

• Strong implications the Baltic Sea (Burchard
• De-stratifying agent: the spring-neap cycle,
for vertical mixing and et al., 2018)
autumn cooling, tidal the wind forcing and
residual transports
energy, and wind stress the seasonal cycle of • Strong modifications
(Burchard et al., 2002) heating and cooling by episodic Major
Baltic Inflows (MBIs)
• Thermocline in summer • Tidal fronts are hotspots
occurring on average
inhibits vertical for primary production
at decadal timescales
exchange between (Tett, 1981)
(Mohrholz, 2018)
bottom and surface
layers. After spring • MBIs ventilate anoxic
bloom, surface waters basins of the Central
are nutrient-depleted Baltic Sea (Reissmann
and bottom waters are et al., 2009)
nutrient-rich.
Europe: • Southern North Sea • Shallow coastal regions • Liverpool Bay • Baltic Sea
EXAMPLES

(Dogger Bank, Oyster of North Sea, Irish (Simpson et al., 2002)

• Central North Sea • Kattegat
Ground, Outer German Sea, English Channel,
• Rhine (Simpson and
• Central Irish Sea Bight regions) Celtic Sea
Souza, 1995)
• Celtic Sea • Irish Sea (intermediate
• Elbe-Weser
depths)
(Chegini et al., 2020)
• Sørlige Nordsjø • Hornsea Project One • Robin Rigg • Burbo Bank • Anholt (Denmark)
EXAMPLE

(Norway) (United Kingdom) (United Kingdom) (United Kingdom)

OWF

• Arkona (Germany)
• Arklow Bank Phase 2 • Horns Rev (Reef) 3 • Norther (Belgium)
(Ireland) (Denmark)

110 Oceanography | Vol.33, No.4

of structure-induced turbulence produc- the model domain). Compared to the ing 160 turbines in the German Bight in
tion. For the German Bight, they calcu- variability with a standard deviation of 2016 would not significantly decrease
lated that the loss of tidal energy to tur- about 2 g kg–1 from the mean of 14 g kg–1 stratification there. Locally (i.e., inside
bulence is between 4% and 20% of the observed in model results with and with- OWFs), stratification would be reduced
energy loss due to bottom friction. A out OWFs, these reductions were, how- by an amount dependent on the ratio of
recent study by the same group (Schultze ever, negligible. A stronger reduction the time a water parcel remained inside an
et al., 2020) using an LES model to quan- in salinity by 0.42 g kg–1 of waters flow- OWF and the time required for full mix-
tify structure-induced mixing found that ing across the sill into the Baltic Sea was ing of the water column. These theoreti-
about 10% of the turbulence generated by found to occur only for unrealistically cal estimates could be partially supported
the structure is used for mixing. extensive OWFs modeled for the western by in situ observations in the German
In a model application to the western Baltic Sea. With this large-scale regional Bight carried out by Floeter et al. (2017),
Baltic Sea, comparing scenarios with- effect on salinity, the ventilation of the although admittedly, natural variability
out OWFs and with the OWFs planned bottom waters in the central Baltic Sea and OWF impacts could only partially
in 2010 (>1,000 wind turbines), Rennau could be reduced, intensifying anoxia, if be separated. However, extensive installa-
et al. (2012) concluded that strong mixing large parts of the western Baltic Sea were tions covering large parts of the German
reduced the mean salinity of the bottom covered with OWFs. Bight could lead to a measurable large-
waters flowing from the western Baltic For the German Bight, at a site of scale reduction in stratification, with
Sea toward the Baltic proper by 0.02 g kg–1 about 40 m water depth and a bottom-​ as yet unknown environmental conse-
for a scenario with strong mixing that was to-​
top density difference of about quences (Carpenter et al., 2016).
due to OWFs. Also, the maximum salinity 3 kg m–3, the order-of-magnitude estimate Cazenave et al. (2016) applied an
was reduced. This reduction was visible by Carpenter et al. (2016) found compara- unstructured grid model to the Irish Sea
in the model results at a sill about 100 km ble results in the sense that only massively that included the shelf seas around Britain,
further into the Baltic Sea, and it can be extended OWFs could cause a significant thereby enabling resolution of individual
assumed that it would also be measurable environmental effect by increasing mix- (cylindric) wind turbine foundations. No
in the central Baltic Sea (located outside ing and reducing stratification. The exist- specific parameterization of structure-​

FIGURE 1. Example areas of five dynamic regimes in the North Sea and the Irish Sea.

Oceanography | December 2020 111

induced hydrodynamics and mixing was (2008) showed that regional wind stress IMPLICATIONS FOR FISHES
included, so the results should be inter- deficits in OWF wakes could lead to Based on the studies noted above, it is
preted with caution. Hindcast scenarios upwelling/downwelling dipoles of the evident that the hydrodynamic-related
without OWFs and with 242 wind tur- order of a meter per day in vertical veloc- impacts of OWFs are relatively well stud-
bines installed in the eastern Irish Sea ity at moderate wind speeds, if the size of ied and can be broadly categorized as
were compared. The semi-diurnal tidal the wake were comparable to the internal being either local, within an OWF, or
range increased by an unrealistic 0.2 m in Rossby radius of deformation (5–20 km regional, at the periphery of an OWF and
large parts of the Irish Sea. in the German Bight, Krause et al., 1986; further afield, with the related impacts
In a recent study focusing on dynamic and 4–7 km in the western Baltic Sea, outlined in Box 1.
effects of OWF foundations in a stratified Fennel et al., 1991). These results were Assessing the implications of the
region of the North Sea, Schultze et al. confirmed by a modeling study con- OWF-induced hydrodynamic changes
(2020) found that wakes can be quite ducted by Nerge and Lenhart (2010) described above should ideally be possi-
narrow and energetic. The wake extent that applied reduced wind stresses in the ble through BACI (before-after-​control-​
depends not only on ambient stratifica- wake area of an OWF in the North Sea. impact) surveys (Smith, et al., 1993).
tion but also on specifying what actu- At the extreme, Ludewig (2015) showed The aim of the BACI method is to esti-
ally belongs to the wake. Depending that the wind wake effect may result in mate the state of the environment before
on the sizes of the wakes, Floeter et al. a reduction in wind speed in a region and after (BA) any change and to com-
(2017) suggest there could be a joint up to 100 times larger than the OWF pare changes at reference sites (or con-
blocking effect involving an entire OWF. area itself. Applying such modified wind trol sites) with the actual area of impact
Consequently, part of a water mass stress fields to a realistic model of the (CI; the wind farm area). Any set of
approaching an OWF could tend to part North Sea resulted in strong upwelling/​ ecosystem/​ environmental variables can
and flow around the OWF and rejoin after downwelling dipoles at the edges of the be monitored within a BACI-type sur-
passing the area. This blocking could lead wake area, with associated vertical veloci- vey, but investigations are usually limited
to a wake effect comparable to the island ties of up to 3–4 m per day. to abundance and diversity metrics for
mass effect discussed by Simpson et al. Van der Molen et al. (2014) simu- fauna. If sampling is sufficiently represen-
(1982), with increased mixing down- lated the effect of a hypothetical large tative, the measurements should, in prin-
stream of the OWF leading to destratifi- wind farm located in well-mixed shal- ciple, allow the disentanglement of OWF
cation and upwelling effects that impact low waters by reducing the wind speed impacts from exterior regional trends.
primary production. The observations by inside the wind farm by 10%. The decline A number of factors make it difficult
Floeter et al. (2017) do not, however, give in wind speed led to locally reduced wave to extract hydrodynamic impacts on fish
clear evidence of such large-sale regional height and sediment erosion inside the from BACI surveys, including the spatio-
effects, which are probably small (due to wind farm, which decreased turbidity and temporal variability of the natural sys-
the relatively low OWF blocking effect) increased primary production. This result tem (Bergström et al., 2013; Floeter et al.,
compared to natural variability and the disagrees with the findings by Grashorn 2017), regional/global trends (e.g., accel-
wind wake effect (see below). and Stanev (2016) and Rivier et al. (2016), erating climate change), and the focus
who reported increased turbidity caused of investigations on selected fish species
Effects of Wind Turbines by OWF foundations. (e.g., Wahlberg and Westerberg, 2005;
on the Wind Field Lampert et al. (2020) provide airborne Wilhelmsson et al., 2006; Reubens et al.,
OWF wind power extraction results in observations of a large-scale regional 2011, 2013; van Deurs et al., 2012). These
reduced wind speeds locally inside the reduction in wind stress downwind of factors, as well as altered management that
installation’s footprint and regionally as the OWF in the German Bight, confirm- limits fishing inside OWFs (Bergström
a downwind wake. This process leads to ing results of previous studies (e.g., Djath et al., 2014), make it difficult to segregate
wind stress curl at the edge of the wake, et al., 2018; Djath and Schulz-Stellenfleth, the variables behind positive and negative
which is known to drive upwelling/ 2019; Cañadillas et al., 2020; Siedersleben impacts across species. This challenge is
downwelling dipoles (adjacent regions of et al., 2020). Consistent with the obser- clearly evident in terms of spatiotemporal
upward and downward vertical velocity vations by Lampert et al. (2020), atmo- variability alone, given the hydrodynamic
in the water driven by friction and Earth’s spheric model simulations by Siedersleben variability in OWF areas described above
rotation). Such wakes can extend 5–20 km (2019) show a reduction of wind speed and the documented annual variability
in the downwind direction, depending on by 5%–25% inside the wind wake 5 km in recruitment of juveniles, which can,
weather conditions (Christiansen and downwind of a wind farm. The wake for example, differ by a factor of five for
Hasager, 2005). effect may be highly variable and strongly plaice, 50 for sole, and more than 100 for
In an idealized model study, Broström depends on atmospheric conditions. haddock (OSPAR, 2000). Due to this nat-

112 Oceanography | Vol.33, No.4

ural variability, it is evident that investiga- BOX1. SUMMARY OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL
tions of OWF impacts on fishes have con- HYDRODYNAMIC IMPACTS
centrated on the local-scale impact where
these contrasts are most easily resolved.
• Increased turbulence at and downstream of the foundation
of the wind turbine
Implications at the Local Scale
• Changes in the remobilization of sediments, or areas of
When reviewing hydrodynamic implica- erosions and accretion
tions for fishes at the local scale, stressors
• Increased water residence time inside OWF due to
include changes in temperature, nutrient reduced flow
transport, turbulence, and stratification, Local
• Increased vertical turbulent exchange of matter in stratified
and resulting impacts on sediment resus- flow leading to downstream reduction in stratification
pension or sedimentation. While the
• Reduction in near-bottom salinity in estuarine systems
effects of each hydrodynamic parameter
on fish ecology are well studied in gen-
• Vertical redistribution of water temperatures
eral (Liao and Cotel, 2013; Kjelland et al., • Changes in nutrient upwelling and related primary
productivity
2015; Wenger et al., 2017), studies of the
effects specifically related to OWFs are
less comprehensive. This section focuses
on documented hydrodynamic effects
• Losses in tidal energy and changes in tidal dynamics
studied in and around OWFs. • Decreased stratification downstream of OWFs, with
reduced bottom salinity in estuarine systems
Changed current and chlorophyll pro-
files close to OWFs are well documented • Wind wake effects leading to reduced wind stress and
wave energy downwind of an OWF and upwelling/​
(Maar et al., 2009), but such perturba- downwelling dipoles at the edge of the wake, leading to
tions were not discernible at larger scales Regional increased vertical exchange and nutrient supply to the
(>200 km) against a background of natu- euphotic zone
ral spatiotemporal variability. At the same • Theoretical island effects (i.e., where turbine spacing is
time, changes in the demersal commu- sufficiently close to create a cumulative effect) with mixing
in behind the OWF destratification and upwelling effects
nity were observed close (<50 m) to the
impacting on primary production (i.e., an effect seemingly
OWF, likely in this case due to increased negligible compared to wind-wake effects)
local fecal pellet excretions from mussels
(Maar et al., 2009). Increased verti-
cal mixing within OWFs leads to dom-
ing of the thermocline and subsequent inside the impact area between founda- pelagic fish, most likely mackerel, within
transport of nutrients into the surface tions, due to significant temporal vari- 100 m of underwater construction sites
mixed layer. Floeter et al., (2017) found ation and patchiness in the distribution (Schröder et al., 2013).
that nutrients were rapidly consumed by patterns of fish densities and biomass Hydrodynamic resuspension of sedi-
primary producers. (Stenberg et al., 2015). ments alters turbidity, thereby affecting
A study of Horns Reef in the North Gray and Kingsford (2003) indicated the outcome of predator-prey encoun-
Sea after deployment of the wind farm that thermocline depth is not a cue for ters. Prey may evacuate the affected area
there revealed changes in densities of larvae to regulate their vertical posi- to avoid predation risk while predators are
the most commonly occurring fish, tions. Also, it is unclear how thermocline attracted to areas where they experience
whiting (Merlangius merlangus) and dab doming may affect vital rates of local increased ambush success. This is evident
(Limanda limanda), but the changes larvae/fish (mortality, growth, cost of in lakes where visibility changes resulting
mostly reflected the general trend of responding). For the local pelagic habitat, from plankton blooms may cause trophic
these fish populations in the North Sea, OWF-induced hydrodynamic changes cascades (Scheffer et al., 2001). Laboratory
as indicated by the International Council did not appear to have a significant direct and field investigations of coastal OWFs
for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) fish or indirect influence on pelagic fish, as showed that pelagic species such as her-
stock assessment. No significant changes inferred from hydroacoustic records that ring and smelt began to flee areas when
in the abundance or distribution patterns did not show any OWF effects on pelagic the concentration of fine-grained sus-
of pelagic and demersal fish were found fish distribution (Floeter et al., 2017). pended sediment reached approximately
in acoustic surveys, neither between a However, a single cruise from another 10 mg l –1 and 20 mg l –1, respectively
control site and the wind farm site nor study found elevated abundances of (COWI/VKI, 1992). In contrast, flatfish

Oceanography | December 2020 113

are generally very tolerant of high concen- study (Slavik et al., 2019) concluded that could be expected to be important in a
trations of suspended sediment. Studies of primary production will decline because specific impact assessment:
plaice with suspended sediment concen- OWFs provide new habitats to filter feed- 1. The accumulated physical area occu-
trations of 3 g l–1 showed no effect after a ers like blue mussels. An increase in fil- pied by OWF installations
14-day exposure (Moore, 1991). ter feeders could counteract the stirring 2. The accumulated area affected by
Increased downstream turbulence effect that should increase primary pro- hydrographic changes beyond a
modifies predator-prey encounter rates duction in stratified areas. threshold
for planktonic species. An early study There has been limited study of the 3. The habitat area fraction per spe-
by Kiørboe and MacKenzie (1995) indi- hypothesis that OWF development cies affected by hydrographic changes
cated that increased turbulence lev- disturbs fish larvae transport path- caused by OWF installations
els increase fish larval encounter rates, ways. This area of influence has been The latter scale is expected to determine
and thus growth rates, if growth locally explored numerically in the North Sea the ecosystem response, which is gener-
is encounter-limited. Simple estimates (Figure 2), where local spawning and ally thought to be nonlinear and medi-
of passive larval residence time at OWF the destinations/​origins of settling larvae ated indirectly via trophic interactions
installations will likely reveal negligible were traced in the vicinity of the Horns from the most affected species. Further
effects. Late larvae with developed swim- Reef OWF. It is not clear whether the exploration of this “spillover effect” and
ming ability may, however, feed there for potential perturbation of marine connec- disturbance of natural oceanographic
extended periods. To our knowledge, this tivity by man-made offshore structures connectivity of certain fish species is rec-
hypothesis has not been tested in situ. would exceed the natural temporal vari- ommended. This research would enhance
ability in dispersal patterns. the knowledge base and stakeholder per-
Implications at the Regional Scale ceptions of OWF-induced hydrodynamic
Empirical demonstration of OWF RECOMMENDED FURTHER risks and impacts on fishes.
impacts at the regional scale is even more ANALYSES
challenging due to natural spatiotempo- When comparing identified hydro- Spillover Effects on
ral variability of the systems (Bergström dynamic impacts against available fish Surrounding Ecosystem
et al. 2013; Floeter et al., 2017), as well studies, it is apparent that some local A key idea of marine protected areas
as regional/global trends driven by other OWF-​related hydrodynamic-​induced (MPAs) is that they create a spillover
factors. Consequently, this review can impacts have been explored, but not effect (export) of protected species to the
only report a few findings regarding the those categorized as regional. When surrounding ecosystem. The hypothesis
impacts of OWFs on ecosystems sur- looking specifically at knowledge gaps that OWF impacts on some species cre-
rounding OWFs. One regional modeling in this regard, three coupled area scales ate a spillover effect on the surrounding

58°N

56°N

54°N

52°N

50°N

58°N

56°N

54°N

52°N

50°N

0° 5°E 10°E 0° 5°E 10°E

FIGURE 2. Simulation results for passive drift of 100,000 greater sand eel larvae
(H. lanceolatus), illustrated via the red shaded areas. (upper left) 2005 forecast sim-
ulation of passive drift of larvae. (upper middle) 2006 forecast simulation. (lower
left) 2005 backtracking simulation. (lower middle) 2006 backtracking simulation.
(right) Locations of Horns Reef. From Stenberg et al. (2011)

114 Oceanography | Vol.33, No.4

ecosystem is related to the observation enable descriptions of the assumed non- puting and data assimilation, these data
that OWFs are de facto MPAs with respect linear relationships between the observed and computationally heavy models can
to traditional fishing activity. Therefore, species and measured environmental improve impact prediction and support
studies of OWF and MPA impacts on predictors (Skov et al., 2016) to deter- real-time environmental monitoring and
surrounding ecosystems may learn from mine habitat preference. With ABM, the management applications.
each other. Initial attempts to quantita- movements of particles, called agents, are
tively model the spillover hypothesis in modeled using a Lagrangian approach CONCLUSIONS
relation to OWFs have been accomplished that permits the distinct modeling of an During the last decade, a number of mod-
(Halouani et al., 2020), and they may, in activity. This model is then coupled with eling and observational studies attempt-
fact, improve current MPA design guides a classic Eulerian framework that simu- ing to quantify hydrodynamic and asso-
(Halpern, 2003). Conversely, MPA stud- lates the hydrodynamics of the aquatic ciated ecosystem impacts of OWFs have
ies on regional connectivity (Christensen system. The simulated agents within the been conducted. It can be concluded that
et al., 2009), their impacts on fisher- model domain, which can be fish or other hydrodynamic impacts are transferred to
ies (Pérez-Ruzafa et al., 2008), and their marine species, are capable of reacting the ocean via two routes: (1) modification
potential socioeconomic consequences at to Eulerian gradients such as water tem- of the wind field and, consequently, the
regional scales (Hoff et al., 2013) may pro- peratures or flow velocities (see Thomsen wave and current fields due to the direct
vide evidence on the scale of OWFs. et al., 2019; Figure 3). effect of power extraction from the wind,
Integrated dynamic habitat and agent- and (2) wind turbine foundations’ effects
Further Studies Through Advanced based modeling approaches make it pos- on ocean currents and consequently on
Numerical Modeling sible to investigate the potential effects turbulence, mixing, and vertical strati-
Future research would benefit from, and of hydrodynamic cues on the movement fication. The two routes interact nonlin-
should ultimately also entail, intensi- of aquatic organisms at complex spatial early. Hydrodynamic studies of this com-
fied integrated modeling that combines scales over time. In the context of OWF plex problem have thus far concentrated
hydrodynamic and marine ecosystem hydrodynamic impacts on fishes, they on two aspects of these impacts, modifi-
parameters (e.g., as shown in Figure 3). would permit quantification of the ben- cations of the wind field and structure-
In this regard, hydrodynamic models thic and pelagic habitat area affected induced friction in the water column.
integrated with dynamic habitat and/or for each species, which is not currently With regard to fishes, the data sampling
stochastic agent-based models (ABM) possible using conventional modeling density of typically applied BACI studies
link the distribution models (dynamic approaches or simple quantitative anal- make it difficult to disentangle hydro-
habitat and agent-based) with habitat ysis. Using either modeling approach dynamic impacts from natural variability.
variables (oceanographic cues) produced would inform related decision-making Existing peer-reviewed studies provide
by the high-resolution hydrodynamic processes regarding environmental risk limited coverage of local OWF-induced
model.1 With dynamic habitat modeling, and impact within a context of natural (e.g., within the OWF footprint) turbu-
generalized additive models (GAMs) variability. Using high performance com- lence and destratification impacts on
1
These integrated models can also be integrated with environmental stressor models, for example, underwater noise or oil spill models.

6172400

6172200

6172000

6171800

6171600

6171400

6171200

6171000

6170800

6170600

6170400

6170200

354000 354500 355000 355500 356000 356500 357000 357500

FIGURE 3. (left) Example of a generic hydrodynamic model mesh. (right) Example of an agent (blue triangle) navigating grid cells of a
generic hydrodynamic model mesh. From Thomsen et al. (2019)

Oceanography | December 2020 115

fishes, for example, sediment resuspen- rem and the Total Exchange Flow analysis frame- dance and diversity. Journal of Marine Science
work applied to the Baltic Sea. Progress in and Engineering 8(5):332, https://doi.org/10.3390/
sion or sedimentation, temperature, and Oceanography 165:268–286, https://doi.org/​ jmse8050332.
nutrient transport. Regional impacts are 10.1016/j.pocean.2018.04.004. Grashorn, S., and E.V. Stanev. 2016. Kármán vortex
Cañadillas, B., R. Foreman, V. Barth, S. Siedersleben, and turbulent wake generation by wind park piles.
largely neglected. Studies that have been A. Lampert, A. Platis, B. Djath, J. Schulz-Stellenfleth, Ocean Dynamics 66:1,543–1,557, https://doi.org/​
J. Bange, S. Emeis, and T. Neumann. 2020. 10.1007/s10236-016-0995-2.
undertaken tend to indicate that the eco- Offshore wind farm wake recovery: Airborne mea- Gray, C.A., and M.J. Kingsford. 2003. Variability in
system impacts are of comparable scale surements and its representation in engineer- thermocline depth and strength, and relation-
ing models. Wind Energy 23(5):1,249–1,265, ships with vertical distributions of fish larvae and
to natural variability given the currently https://doi.org/​10.1002/we.2484. mesozooplankton in dynamic coastal waters.
existing or planned extent of OWFs. Carpenter, J.R., L. Merckelbach, U. Callies, S. Clark, Marine Ecology Progress Series 247:211–224,
L. Gaslikova, and B. Baschek. 2016. Potential https://doi.org/​10.3354/​meps247211.
Considering essential decision-making impacts of offshore wind farms on North Sea strat- Halouani, G., C. Villanueva, A. Raoux, J.C. Dauvin,
processes regarding environmental risk ification. PLoS ONE 11(8):e0160830, https://doi.org/​ F.B. Lasram, E. Foucher, F.L. Loc’h, G. Safi,
10.1371/journal.pone.0160830. E. Araignous, J.P. Robin, and N. Niquil. 2020. A spa-
and impact, as well as suggested cumula- Cazenave, P.W., R. Torres, and J.I. Allen. 2016. tial food web model to investigate potential spill-
Unstructured grid modelling of offshore wind over effects of a fishery closure in an offshore
tive risks from extensive OWF develop- farm impacts on seasonally stratified shelf wind farm. Journal of Marine Systems 212:103434,
ment in coastal regions, we recommend seas. Progress in Oceanography 145:25–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2020.103434.
https://doi.org/​10.1016/j.pocean.2016.04.004. Halpern, B.S. 2003. The impact of marine reserves:
further analyses of accumulated and spill- Chegini, F., P. Holtermann, O. Kerimoglu, M. Becker, Do reserves work and does reserve size
over effects on surrounding ecosystems M. Kreus, K. Klingbeil, U. Gräwe, C. Winter, and matter? Ecological Applications 13(1):117–137,
H. Burchard. 2020. Processes of stratification https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2003)013​
as well as disturbances to natural ocean- and destratification during an extreme river dis- [0117:tiomrd]2.0.co;2.
charge event in the German Bight ROFI. Journal Hoff, A., J.L. Andersen, A. Christensen, and
ographic connectivity. We further rec- of Geophysical Research 125(8):e2019JC015987, H. Mosegaard. 2013. Modelling the eco-
ommend that these analyses include inte- https://doi.org/10.1029/2019jc015987. nomic consequences of marine protected
Christensen, A., H. Mosegaard, and H. Jensen. areas using the BEMCOM model. Journal of
grated modeling of the combined effects 2009. Spatially resolved fish population analy- Bioeconomics 15:305–323, https://doi.org/10.1007/
of wind field modification and in situ sis for designing MPAs: Influence on inside and s10818-012-9135-3.
neighbouring habitats. ICES Journal of Marine Kiørboe, T., and B. MacKenzie. 1995. Turbulence-
structure friction and fish responses to Science 66:56–63, https://doi.org/10.1093/​ enhanced prey encounter rates in larval fish:
icesjms/fsn191. Effects of spatial scale, larval behaviour and size.
hydrodynamic predictors relevant to their Christiansen, M.B., and C.B. Hasager. 2005. Wake Journal of Plankton Research 17:2,319–2,331,
key habitats and life-cycle stages. Before effects of large offshore wind farms identi- https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/17.12.2319.
fied from satellite SAR. Remote Sensing of Kjelland, M.E., C.M. Woodley, T.M. Swannack, and
impacts of OWFs can be tested, these Environment 98:251–268, https://doi.org/10.1016/​ D.L. Smith. 2015. A review of the potential effect
models must demonstrate through, for j.rse.2005.07.009. of suspended sediment on fishes: Potential dredg-
COWI/VKI. 1992. Öresund impact assessment. ing-related physiological, behavioural, and trans-
example, uncertainty analyses, that they Sub-report nr. 2. The Öresundskonsortiet. generational implications. Environment Systems
do in fact recreate realistic natural vari- Environmental impact assessment for the fixed link and Decisions 35:334–350, https://doi.org/10.1007/
across the Öresund. s10669-015-9557-2.
ability. The increased application of such Degraer, S., D.A. Carey, J.W.P. Coolen, Z.L. Hutchison, Krause, G., G. Budeus, D. Gerdes, K. Schaumann,
F. Kerckhof, B. Rumes, and J. Vanaverbeke. 2020. and K. Hesse. 1986. Frontal systems in the
integrated modeling could also be used Offshore wind farm artificial reefs affect eco- German Bight and their physical and biolog-
to optimize data collection in relation to system structure and functioning: A synthesis. ical effects. Pp. 119–140 in Marine Interfaces
Oceanography 33(4):48–57, https://doi.org/​ Ecohydrodynamics, Elsevier Oceanography Series
future OWF impact assessments. 10.5670/​oceanog.2020.405. vol. 42, J.C.J. Nihoul, ed., https://doi.org/10.1016/
Djath, B., J. Schulz-Stellenfleth, and B. Cañadillas. s0422-9894(08)71042-0.
2018. Impact of atmospheric stability on X-band Lampert, A., K. Bärfuss, A. Platis, S. Siedersleben,
REFERENCES and C-band synthetic aperture radar imagery of B. Djath, B. Cañadillas, R. Hunger, R. Hankers,
Bergström, L., F. Sundqvist, and U. Bergström. 2013. offshore windpark wakes. Journal of Renewable M. Bitter, T. Feuerle, and others. 2020. In situ air-
Effects of an offshore wind farm on temporal and and Sustainable Energy 10:043301, https://doi.org/​ borne measurements of atmospheric and sea sur-
spatial patterns in the demersal fish community. 10.1063/1.5020437. face parameters related to offshore wind parks
Marine Ecology Progress Series 485:199–210, Djath, B., and J. Schulz-Stellenfleth. 2019. Wind speed in the German Bight. Earth System Science
https://doi.org/10.3354/meps10344. deficits downstream offshore wind parks – A new Data 12(2):935–946, https://doi.org/10.5194/
Bergström, L., L. Kautsky, T. Malm, R. Rosenberg, automised estimation technique based on satel- essd-12-935-2020.
M. Wahlberg, N.A. Capetillo, and D. Wilhelmsson. lite synthetic aperture radar data. Meteorologische Lass, H.U., V. Mohrholz, M. Knoll, and H. Prandke.
2014. Effects of offshore wind farms on marine Zeitschrift 28(6):499–515, https://doi.org/10.1127/ 2008. Enhanced mixing downstream of a
wildlife—A generalized impact assessment. metz/2019/0992. pile in an estuarine flow. Journal of Marine
Environmental Research Letters 9:034012, Fennel, W., T. Seifert, and B. Kayser. 1991. Rossby radii Systems 74:505–527, https://doi.org/10.1016/​
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034012. and phase speeds in the Baltic Sea. Continental j.jmarsys.2008.04.003.
Boehlert, G., and A. Gill. 2010. Environmental Shelf Research 11:23–36, https://doi.org/​10.1016/​ Liao, J.C., and A. Cotel. 2013. Effects of turbulence
and ecological effects of ocean renewable 0278-4343(91)90032-2. on fish swimming in aquaculture. Pp. 109–127
energy development: A current synthesis. Floeter, J., J.E. van Beusekom, D. Auch, U. Callies, in Swimming Physiology of Fish. A. Palstra and
Oceanography 23:68–81, https://doi.org/10.5670/ J. Carpenter, T. Dudeck, S. Eberle, A. Eckhardt, J. Planas, eds, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,
oceanog.2010.46. D. Gloe, K. Hänselmann, and others. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31049-2_5.
Broström, G. 2008. On the influence of large wind Pelagic effects of offshore wind farm founda- Ludewig, E. 2015. On the Effect of Offshore
farms on the upper ocean circulation. Journal tions in the stratified North Sea. Progress in Wind Farms on the Atmosphere and Ocean
of Marine Systems 74:585–591, https://doi.org/​ Oceanography 156:154–173, https://doi.org/​ Dynamics. Hamburg Studies on Maritime
10.1016/j.jmarsys.2008.05.001. 10.1016/j.pocean.2017.07.003. Affairs, vol. 31, Springer, 162 pp., https://doi.org/​
Burchard, H., K. Bolding, T.P. Rippeth, A. Stips, Gill, A.B. 2005. Offshore renewable energy: 10.1007/978-3-319-08641-5.
J.H. Simpson, and J. Sündermann. 2002. Ecological implications of generating elec- Maar, M., K. Bolding, J.K. Petersen, J.L. Hansen,
Microstructure of turbulence in the northern tricity in the coastal zone. Journal of Applied and K. Timmermann. 2009. Local effects of blue
North Sea: A comparative study of observa- Ecology 42:605–615, https://doi.org/​10.1111/​ mussels around turbine foundations in an eco-
tions and model simulations. Journal of Sea j.1365-2664.2005.01060.x. system model of Nysted off-shore wind farm,
Research 47:223–238, https://doi.org/10.1016/ Glarou, M., M. Zrust, and J.C. Svendsen. 2020. Denmark. Journal of Sea Research 62:159–174,
s1385-1101(02)00126-0. Using artificial-reef knowledge to enhance https://doi.org/​10.1016/j.seares.2009.01.008.
Burchard, H., K. Bolding, R. Feistel, U. Gräwe, the ecological function of offshore wind tur- Mellor, G. 2002. Oscillatory bottom boundary layers.
K. Klingbeil, P. MacCready, V. Mohrholz, L. Umlauf, bine foundations: Implications for fish abun- Journal of Physical Oceanography 32:3,075–3,088,
and E.M. van der Lee. 2018. The Knudsen theo- https://doi.org/​10.1175/​1520-​0485​(2002)​032​<3075:​
OBBL>​2.0.CO;2.

116 Oceanography | Vol.33, No.4

Mineur, F., E. Cook, D. Minchin, K. Bohn, A. Macleod, Siedersleben, S.K., A. Platis, J.K. Lundquist, B. Djath, http://digital.ecomagazine.com/publication/
and C. Maggs. 2012. Changing coasts: Marine A. Lampert, K. Bärfuss, B. Cañadillas, J. Schulz- frame.php?i=598395&p=&pn=&ver=html5&view=​
aliens and artificial structures. Oceanography and Stellenfleth, J. Bange, T. Neumann, and S. Emeis. articleBrowser&article_id=3416331.
Marine Biology: An Annual Review 50:189–234. 2020. Turbulent kinetic energy over large off- van der Molen, J., H.C. Smith, P. Lepper, S. Limpenny,
Mohrholz, V. 2018. Major Baltic inflow statistics shore wind farms observed and simulated by the and J. Rees. 2014. Predicting the large-scale con-
– Revised. Frontiers in Marine Science 5:384, mesoscale model WRF (3.8.1). Geoscientific Model sequences of offshore wind turbine array devel-
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2018.00384. Development 13:249–268, https://doi.org/10.5194/ opment on a North Sea ecosystem. Continental
Moore, P.G. 1991. Inorganic particulate suspensions gmd-13-249-2020. Shelf Research 85:60–72, https://doi.org/10.1016/​
in the sea and their effects on marine animals. Simpson, J.H., and J.R. Hunter. 1974. Fronts in the j.csr.2014.05.018.
Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Irish Sea. Nature 250:404–406, https://doi.org/​ van Deurs, M., T.M. Grome, M. Kaspersen, H. Jensen,
Review 15:335–363. 10.1038/250404a0. C. Stenberg, T.K. Sørensen, J. Støttrup, T. Warnar,
Nerge, P., and H. Lenhart. 2010. Wake effects in ana- Simpson, J., P. Tett, M. Argote-Espinoza, A. Edwards, and H. Mosegaard. 2012. Short- and long-term
lyzing coastal and marine changes: Offshore wind K. Jones, and G. Savidge. 1982. Mixing and phyto- effects of an offshore wind farm on three species
farming as a case study. Pp. 68–73 in Zukunft plankton growth around an island in a strati- of sandeel and their sand habitat. Marine Ecology
Küste - Coastal Futures Synthesis Report. LOICZ fied sea. Continental Shelf Research 1:15–31, Progress Series 458:169–180, https://doi.org/​
Research & Studies No. 36, GKSS Research Center, https://doi.org/​10.1016/0278-4343(82)90030-9. 10.3354/meps09736.
Geesthacht, 212 pp. Simpson, J.H., J. Brown, J. Matthews, and G. Allen. van Dyke, M. 1982. An Album of Fluid Motion.
OSPAR. 2000. Quality Status Report 2000, Region II 1990. Tidal straining, density currents, and stir- Parabolic Press, Stanford, CA, 176 pp.
– Greater North Sea. OSPAR Commission for the ring in the control of estuarine stratification. Wahlberg, M., and H. Westerberg. 2005. Hearing
Protection of the Marine Environment of the North- Estuaries 13:125, https://doi.org/10.2307/1351581. in fish and their reactions to sounds from off-
East Atlantic, London, 136 pp. Simpson, J.H., and A.J. Souza. 1995. Semidiurnal shore wind farms. Marine Ecology Progress
Pérez-Ruzafa, A., E. Martín, C. Marcos, J.M. Zamarro, switching of stratification in the region of Series 288:295–309, https://doi.org/10.3354/
B. Stobart, M. Harmelin-Vivien, S. Polti, S. Planes, freshwater influence of the Rhine. Journal meps288295.
J.A. García-Charton, and M. González-Wangüemert. of Geophysical Research 100:7,037–7,044, Wenger, A.S., E. Harvey, S. Wilson, C. Rawson,
2008. Modelling spatial and temporal scales for https://doi.org/​10.1029/95jc00067. S.J. Newman, D. Clarke, B.J. Saunders, N. Browne,
spill-over and biomass exportation from MPAs Simpson, J.H., H. Burchard, N.R. Fisher, and M.J. Travers, J.L. Mcilwain, and others. 2017. A criti-
and their potential for fisheries enhancement. T.P. Rippeth. 2002. The semi-diurnal cycle of dis- cal analysis of the direct effects of dredging on fish.
Journal for Nature Conservation 16:234–255, sipation in a ROFI: Model-measurement compari- Fish and Fisheries 18(5):967–985, https://doi.org/​
https://doi.org/​10.1016/j.jnc.2008.09.003. sons. Continental Shelf Research 22:1,615–1,628, 10.1111/faf.12218.
Reissmann, J.H., H. Burchard, R. Feistel, E. Hagen, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-4343(02)00025-0. Wilhelmsson, D., T. Malm, and M.C. Öhman. 2006.
H.U. Lass, V. Mohrholz, G. Nausch, L. Umlauf, Skov, H., S. Heinanen, C.B. Thaxter, A.E. Williams, The influence of offshore wind power on demersal
and G. Wieczorek. 2009. Vertical mixing in the S. Lohier, and A.N. Banks. 2016. Real-time species fish. ICES Journal of Marine Science 63:775–784,
Baltic Sea and consequences for eutrophication: distribution models for conservation and manage- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icesjms.2006.02.001.
A review. Progress in Oceanography 82:47–80, ment of natural resources in marine environments.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2007.10.004. Marine Ecology Progress Series 542:221–234, ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Rennau, H., S. Schimmels, and H. Burchard. 2012. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11572. We are grateful for the assistance of Iris Tiong
On the effect of structure-induced resistance and Slavik, K., C. Lemmen, W. Zhang, O. Kerimoglu, (DHI Water & Environment Inc.) in creating several
mixing on inflows into the Baltic Sea: A numeri- K. Klingbeil, and K.W. Wirtz. 2019. The large-scale of the figures/tables.
cal model study. Coastal Engineering 60:53–68, impact of offshore wind farm structures on pelagic
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2011.08.002. primary productivity in the southern North Sea.
Reubens, J.T., S. Degraer, and M. Vincx. 2011. Hydrobiologia 845(1):35–53, https://doi.org/10.1007/
AUTHORS
Joshua van Berkel ([email protected]) is Director
Aggregation and feeding behaviour of pout- s10750-018-3653-5.
of Environmental Projects (Canada and United
ing (Trisopterus luscus) at wind turbines in Smith, E.P., D.R. Orvos, and J. Cairns Jr. 1993. Impact
States), DHI Water & Environment Inc., Vancouver,
the Belgian part of the North Sea. Fisheries assessment using the before-after-​control-​
BC, Canada. Hans Burchard is Professor, Leibniz
Research 108:223−227, https://doi.org/10.1016/​ impact (BACI) model: Concerns and comments.
Institute for Baltic Sea Research, Warnemünde,
j.fishres.2010.11.025. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Germany. Asbjørn Christensen is Senior Scientist,
Reubens, J.T., F. Pasotti, S. Degraer, and M. Vincx. Sciences 50(3):627–637, https://doi.org/10.1139/
DTU Aqua, Lyngby, Denmark. Lars O. Mortensen is
2013. Residency, site fidelity and habitat use f93-072.
Spatial Ecologist, Ole Svenstrup Petersen is Senior
of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) at an off- Stenberg, C., M.V. Deurs, J. Støttrup, H. Mosegaard,
Engineer, and Frank Thomsen is Senior Marine
shore wind farm using acoustic telemetry. T. Grome, G.E. Dinesen, A. Christensen,
Scientist, all at DHI A/S, Hørsholm, Denmark.
Marine Environmental Research 90:128−135, H. Jensen, M. Kaspersen, C.W. Berg, and
https://doi.org/​10.1016/​j.marenvres.2013.07.001. others. 2011. Effect of the Horns Rev 1 Offshore
Rivier, A., A.C. Bennis, G. Pinon, V. Magar, and Wind Farm on Fish Communities. Follow-up ARTICLE CITATION
M. Gross. 2016. Parameterization of wind tur- Seven Years after Construction. S.B. Leonhard, van Berkel, J., H. Burchard, A. Christensen,
bine impacts on hydrodynamics and sediment C. Stenberg, J. Støttrup, eds. DTU Aqua Report, L.O. Mortensen, O. Svenstrup Petersen, and
transport. Ocean Dynamics 66:1,285–1,299, No. 246-2011, 30 pp. F. Thomsen. 2020. The effects of offshore wind
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-016-0983-6. Stenberg, C., J. Støttrup, M. van Deurs, C. Berg, farms on hydrodynamics and implications for fishes.
Scheffer, M., S. Carpenter, J.A. Foley, C. Folke, G. Dinesen, H. Mosegaard, T. Grome, and Oceanography 33(4):108–117, https://doi.org/10.5670/
and B. Walker. 2001. Catastrophic shifts in eco- S. Leonhard. 2015. Long-term effects of an offshore oceanog.2020.410.
systems. Nature 413:591–596, https://doi.org/​ wind farm in the North Sea on fish communities.
10.1038/35098000. Marine Ecology Progress Series 528:257–265, COPYRIGHT & USAGE
Schröder, A., L. Gutow, T. Joschko, R. Krone, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11261. This is an open access article made available under
M. Gusky, M. Paster, and M. Potthoff. 2013. Sumer, B., and J. Fredsøe. 1997. Hydrodynamics the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
Benthosökologische Auswirkungen von around Cylindrical Structures. World Scientific, International License (https://creativecommons.org/
Offshore-Windeneregieparks in der Nordsee Singapore. licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adap-
(BeoFINO II). Abschlussbericht zum Teilprojekt B Tett, P. 1981. Modelling phytoplankton production tation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium
‘‘Benthosökologische Auswirkungen von Offshore- at shelf-sea fronts. Philosophical Transactions or format as long as users cite the materials appro-
Windenergie-parks in Nord- und Ostsee. Prozesse of the Royal Society of London A 302:605–615, priately, provide a link to the Creative Commons
im Nahbereich der Piles”. BMU Förderkennzeichen https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1981.0186. license, and indicate the changes that were made to
0329974B (hdl:10013/epic.40661.d001). Thomsen, F., A. Gill, M. Kosecka, M. Andersson, the original content.
Schultze, L.K.P., L.M. Merckelbach, J. Horstmann, M. Andre, S. Degraers, T. Folegot, J. Gabriel,
S. Raasch, and J.R. Carpenter. 2020. Increased A. Judd, T. Neumann, and others. 2015. MarVEN
mixing and turbulence in the wake of offshore – Environmental Impacts of Noise, Vibrations
wind farm foundations. Journal of Geophysical and Electromagnetic Emissions from Marine
Research 125(8): e2019JC015858, https://doi.org/​ Renewable Energy, Final Study Report. EUR 27738
10.1029/2019jc015858. EN, European Commission, Directorate General for
Siedersleben, S.K. 2019. Numerical Analysis of Research and Innovation, Brussels, 72 pp.
Offshore Wind Farm Wakes and Their Impact on Thomsen, F., L.O. Mortensen, and J.J. van Berkel.
the Marine Boundary Layer. PhD thesis, University 2019. Agent-based modeling: Dynamic map-
of Köln, 108 pp., https://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/​ ping of the movements of marine life.
10558/​1/Siedersleben_2019_Dissertation.pdf. ECO - Environment Coastal and Offshore,

Oceanography | December 2020 117