Germany: A Mature Market with Comprehensive Planning
Germany aims for 30 GW of offshore wind capacity by 2030, 40 GW by 2035, and 70
GW by 2045.
The country’s approach is characterized by:
1. Utilizing Marine Spatial Planning (MSP), including the 2021 Maritime Spatial Plan for the North Sea, which allocates space for offshore wind energy (OWE), nature protection, and other uses.
2. Conducting Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) to evaluate environmental impacts of plans and programs, including cumulative and transboundary effects although to a limited extent.
3. Implementing the Site Development Plan as a central planning tool, specifying the timing and location of OWE project development.
4. Integrating EU directives such as the Habitats and Birds Directives and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MFSD) into national law.
5. Introducing Renewable Energy Acceleration Areas as part of efforts to streamline permitting and fast-track offshore wind expansion. These mechanisms may limit certain environmental assessments, raising concerns about safeguarding biodiversity.
Germany’s mature offshore wind sector and comprehensive planning approach provide valuable lessons for countries at earlier stages of development. However, the rapid expansion also presents challenges in managing cumulative environmental impacts.
How policy instruments set for the implementation of sectoral policies adequately internalize key-requirements of EU policies established to deliver healthy marine ecosystems (MSFD/WFD/MSPD)
Germany’s policy instruments, including including Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs), Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), and Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP), aim to integrate environmental considerations into offshore wind energy planning while aligning with key EU policies such as the MSFD, WFD, and MSPD. However, their implementation presents challenges in fully internalising the requirements necessary to ensure the protection of marine ecosystems. The SEA and EIA frameworks, transposed into German law through the UVPG (Environmental Impact Assessment Act), are intended to assess environmental impacts at both strategic and project levels.
While these assessments contribute to identifying risks and mitigation measures, their effectiveness in addressing cumulative and transboundary impacts has been questioned. Spatial and temporal mismatches between energy expansion goals and biodiversity objectives further hinder coherence. The MSP process, led by the BSH (Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency), seeks to balance multiple maritime uses, including offshore wind and environmental protection. However, biodiversity objectives are often subordinated to energy priorities and are treated as conditions to be managed rather than as guiding priorities. Renewables Acceleration Areas under RED III streamline permitting but allow exemptions from full EIAs, raising concerns about the adequacy of biodiversity safeguards.
How policy instruments set for the implementation of sectoral policies adequately internalize the EGD objectives
The policy instruments governing offshore wind energy expansion and biodiversity conservation, such as the SDP, Renewable Acceleration Areas (RAAs), SEAs, EIAs, and MSP, are designed to support Germany’s renewable energy and biodiversity goals. However, their implementation reveals tensions and challenges in achieving full alignment with the GD objectives.
The 2023 revision of the SDP designates areas for offshore wind energy development to meet Germany’s renewable energy targets, operating within the broader MSP framework. The 2023 update aligns with increased offshore wind capacity targets but also seeks to integrate offshore wind farm development with grid infrastructure planning.
RAAs aim to accelerate project approvals by exempting certain environmental assessments under specific conditions, raising concerns among stakeholders about potential biodiversity trade-offs. While SEAs and EIAs are meant to integrate environmental considerations into planning, SEAs in particular are criticised for limited cumulative impact assessments and gaps in transboundary environmental effects. Additionally, biodiversity objectives are often treated as secondary to energy priorities within MSP, limiting their role in mitigating environmental trade-offs.
List of abbreviations
- BSH Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (Bundesamt für Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie)
- GD/EGD Green Deal/ European Green Deal
- RAAs Renewable Acceleration Areas
- RED Renewable Energy Directive
- UVPG Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Umweltverträglichkeitsgesetz)