ΑΙΟlika parka ΚΑtharas s.a. ΑΙΟlika parka ΑΝΑΤΟlis …...table 22: land use in the...

PPRROOJJEECCTT:: WWIINNDD FFAARRMMSS WWIITTHH TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 117744,,88 MMWW

LLOOCCAATTIIOONN:: SSOOUUTTHH--EEAASSTTEERRNN EEVVIIAA

SSTTAAGGEE:: EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL IIMMPPAACCTT AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT

IISSSSUUEE ΑΑ EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL IIMMPPAACCTT AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT

STUDY CONTRACTOR:

ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA ΚΚΑΑTTHHAARRAASS SS..AA.. ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA ΑΑΝΝΑΑΤΤΟΟLLIISS--PPRRIINNIIAASS SS..AA..

ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA SSPPIILLIIAASS SS..AA.. ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA ΜΜIILLIIAASS SS..AA..

ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA ΜΜΥΥΤΤΙΙΚΚΑΑ SS..AA.. ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA PPΑΑLLΙΙΟΟPPΥΥRRGGOOSS SS..AA..

ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA ΚΚΕΕRRAASSIIAASS SS..AA.. ΑΑΙΙΟΟLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA PPLLAATTAANNOOSS SS..AA..

AUGUST 2010

INSTALLATION & OPERATION OF 8 WIND FARMS WITH TOTAL CAPACITY 174,8 MW IN SOUTH-EASTERN EVIA

ISSUE A – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 18

1.1 Type and size of project .................................................................................................... 18

1.2 Body responsible for the implementation of the project ............................................... 19

1.3 Contractor for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) ........................................ 19

1.4 Signatures (Body for project implementation – Consultant Category 27) ................... 20

1.5 Legal framework for the preparation of the study .......................................................... 21

2 NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY .............................. .................................................................. 23

3 SUMMARY DESCRIPTION – OBJECTIVE, SIGNIFICANCE, NECES SITY & ECONOMIC DATA OF THE PROJECT – ASSOCIATION WITH OTHER PROJECTS ..................................... 27

3.1 Geographical position and administrative jurisdiction .................................................. 27

3.2 Summarized project description ....................................................................................... 30

3.3 Objective, significance and necessity of the project...................................................... 31

3.3.1 General ............................................................................................................................. 31

3.3.2 National targets for RES ................................................................................................... 32

3.3.3 Necessity of the proposed project .................................................................................... 32

3.4 Historical development of the project .............................................................................. 33

3.5 Economic data of the project ............................................................................................ 38

3.6 Association of the project with other projects and activities ........................................ 38

4 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE RES PROJECT (MAIN PROJEC T & ACCOMPANYING SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE) .............................................................................................. 43

4.1 General information – technical features of the project................................................. 43

4.1.1 General Information .......................................................................................................... 43

4.1.2 Coordinates of the proposed wind farms.......................................................................... 43

4.1.3 Type of Wind turbine ........................................................................................................ 44

4.1.4 Technical Description of Major Infrastructure Projects ..................................................... 47

4.1.5 Road construction works .................................................................................................. 51

4.1.5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 51

4.1.5.2 Description of access to each wind farm .................................................................. 53

4.1.5.3 Assessment of mass haul balance ........................................................................... 56

4.1.6 Connection with electricity system ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.1.6.1 Offer for Connection to the System (HTSO)............................................................. 58

4.1.6.2 Medium Voltage Network 20 kV or 33 kV................................................................. 59

4.1.6.3 Step-up Substations 20/150 kV ................................................................................ 60

4.1.6.4 High Voltage Network 150 kV (Overhead - Underground) ....................................... 61

4.1.6.5 High Voltage Network 150 kV (Submarine) (Karystos - Rafina) .............................. 65

4.1.6.6 High Voltage Network 150 kV (Underground) (Rafina – UHV Center of Pallini) ...... 66

4.2 Description of the construction phase of the project ..................................................... 70

4.3 Description of the operation phase of the project .......................................................... 70

4.4 Irregular and dangerous situations .................................................................................. 72



5 ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS .............................. .................................................................... 73

5.1 Zero solution ....................................................................................................................... 73

5.2 Alternative solutions (concerning wind farms & wind turbines) ................................... 74

5.3 Alternative solutions (for the road network construction for access and internal road network construction) .................................................................................................................... 83

5.4 Alternative solutions (for the medium voltage network 20 kV or 33 kV) ...................... 83

5.5 Alternative solutions (for the Step-up Substations 20/150 kV) ..................................... 84

5.6 Alternative solutions (for the high voltage network 150 kV) ......................................... 85

6 CONDITION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................... 89

6.1 Study area ........................................................................................................................... 89

6.2 Abiotic features .................................................................................................................. 90

6.2.1 Climate and bioclimatic features ...................................................................................... 90

6.2.2 Morphological and landscape characteristics .................................................................. 95

6.2.2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 95

6.2.2.2 Evaluation of the landscape in the study area ......................................................... 96

6.2.2.3 Evaluation of the landscape of the study area according to the Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development for Renewable Energy Sources ...................... 98

6.2.3 Geology, tectonic and soil characteristics ........................................................................ 99

6.3 Natural Environment ........................................................................................................ 104

6.3.1 General data ................................................................................................................... 104

6.3.2 Special areas .................................................................................................................. 106

6.3.3 Other areas ..................................................................................................................... 109

6.3.4 Location of the proposed wind farms in relevance to the statutory protected areas in or close to the study area ................................................................................................................... 119

6.3.5 Flora - Vegetation - Habitats .......................................................................................... 123

6.3.5.1 Introduction - Methodology ..................................................................................... 123

6.3.5.2 Habitat types in the Site of Community Importance Oros Ochi – Kampos Karystou – Akrotirio Kafirefs ............................................................................................................................. 124

6.3.5.3 Habitat types in the installation areas of the wind farms ........................................ 127

6.3.5.4 Flora elements in the study area ............................................................................ 129

6.3.6 Species of Fauna............................................................................................................ 131

6.3.6.1 General ................................................................................................................... 132

6.3.6.2 Presence ................................................................................................................ 132

6.3.6.3 Rarity and Protection .............................................................................................. 136

6.3.7 Avifauna of the area ....................................................................................................... 138

6.3.7.1 Aim of the Study ..................................................................................................... 138

6.3.7.2 Study Area .............................................................................................................. 138

6.3.7.3 Protection status of the area .................................................................................. 138

6.3.7.4 Methodology of recordings ..................................................................................... 139

6.3.7.5 Evaluation of impact assessment ........................................................................... 144

6.3.7.6 Results .................................................................................................................... 144



6.4 Human environment ......................................................................................................... 159

6.4.1 Physical Planning – Land Use ........................................................................................ 159

6.4.1.1 Regional Framework for Spatial & Sustainable Development ............................... 159

6.4.1.2 Special Framework for Spatial Planning & Sustainable Development for Renewable Energy Sources .............................................................................................................................. 162

6.4.1.3 Land use (ELSTAT Data) ....................................................................................... 163

6.4.1.4 Land use (Data of European Programme Corine Land Cover-2000) .................... 165

6.4.2 Built environment ............................................................................................................ 167

6.4.3 Historic and cultural environment ................................................................................... 167

6.4.4 Socio-economic environment ......................................................................................... 173

6.4.4.1 Administrative jurisdiction ....................................................................................... 173

6.4.4.2 Demography of study area ..................................................................................... 174

6.4.4.3 Social characteristics of the population .................................................................. 177

6.4.4.4 Productive sectors .................................................................................................. 178

6.4.4.5 Land values ............................................................................................................ 181

6.4.4.6 Administrative and social infrastructures ................................................................ 181

6.4.5 Τechnical Infrastructures ................................................................................................ 182

6.4.6 Anthropogenic pressures on the environment ............................................................... 183

6.4.7 Atmospheric Environment .............................................................................................. 190

6.4.8 Acoustic environment, vibrations, radiation .................................................................... 191

6.4.9 Surface water and groundwater ..................................................................................... 194

6.5 Evolution trends of the environment − Zero solution .................................................. 196

7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION ....... .................................... 199

7.1 Abiotic features ................................................................................................................ 199

7.1.1 Climate and bioclimatic features .................................................................................... 199

7.1.2 Morphological and landscape features........................................................................... 201

7.1.3 Geological, tectonic and soil features............................................................................. 205


7.2.1 Flora, vegetation, habitats .............................................................................................. 207

7.2.2 Fauna ............................................................................................................................. 210

7.2.3 Avifauna .......................................................................................................................... 211

7.3 Impact assessment pursuant to article 6 of the Directive 92/43/EEC ......................... 217

7.3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 217

7.3.2 Analysis of article 6 of the Directive ............................................................................... 219

7.3.3 General directions for the configuration of methodology ............................................... 220

7.3.4 Methodology configuration for the study area ................................................................ 221

7.3.5 Impact Assessment ........................................................................................................ 223

7.3.5.1 Assessment of indicator for loss of area ................................................................ 223

7.3.5.2 Habitats .................................................................................................................. 224

7.3.5.3 Flora........................................................................................................................ 225



7.3.5.4 Fauna...................................................................................................................... 225

7.3.6 Conclusions – Addressing of Impacts ............................................................................ 229

7.4 Anthropogenic environment ........................................................................................... 229

7.4.1 Land use ......................................................................................................................... 229

7.4.2 Built Environment ........................................................................................................... 230

7.4.3 Historic and cultural environment ................................................................................... 231

7.4.4 7.4.4 Socio-economic environment – Τechnical infrastructure ...................................... 232

7.4.5 Atmospheric environment ............................................................................................... 235


7.4.7 Surface water and groundwater ..................................................................................... 238

7.5 Summarized presentation of the environmental impacts in a matrix ......................... 239

8 MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT .. ............................ 252

8.1 Abiotic features ................................................................................................................ 252

8.1.1 Climatic and bioclimatic characteristics .......................................................................... 252

8.1.2 Morphological and landscape features........................................................................... 252

8.1.3 Geological, tectonic and soil characteristics .................................................................. 253


8.2.1 Flora, vegetation, habitat ................................................................................................ 254

8.2.2 Fauna ............................................................................................................................. 255

8.2.3 Avifuauna ........................................................................................................................ 255

8.3 Human environment ......................................................................................................... 256

8.3.1 Land Use ........................................................................................................................ 256

8.3.2 Built Environment ........................................................................................................... 257

8.3.3 Historical and Cultural Environment ............................................................................... 257

8.3.4 Socio-economic environment - Technical Infrastructure ................................................ 257

8.3.5 Atmospheric environment ............................................................................................... 259


8.3.7 Surface waters and groundwater ................................................................................... 261

8.4 Additional specific protective measures ....................................................................... 262

9 PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS .................. ................................................. 264

10 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING THE DEVEL OPMENT OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................................................... 294

11 MAPS – TOPOGRAPHICS ................................ .................................................................... 295

11.1 Maps .................................................................................................................................. 295

11.2 TOPOGRAPHICS ( A/Π = WF) .......................................................................................... 295

12 DOCUMENTS – APPROVALS .............................. ................................................................ 296

13 BIBLIOGRAPHY – SOURCES ............................. ................................................................. 298

13.1 Greek Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 298

13.2 Foreign Language Bibliography ..................................................................................... 299

13.3 Greek Bibliography (used for the preparation of the Special Ornithological Assessment) ................................................................................................................................. 302



13.4 Foreign language bibliography (used for the preparation of the Special Ornithological Assessment) ................................................................................................................................. 304

13.5 Data from official websites .............................................................................................. 313

14 PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION ......................... ........................................................ 314

15 ANNEXES .............................................................................................................................. 324

15.1 Annex I: Coordinates of polygon wind farms and wind turbine/control cabines locations ........................................................................................................................................ 324

15.2 Annex II: Noise contours curves study .......................................................................... 333

15.3 Annex III: Road earthworks detailed tables ................................................................... 334

TABLES

Table 1: WFs taken into consideration at the assessment of cumulative impacts. .......................... 39

Table 2: Route coordinates of the 1st Network subsection. .............................................................. 62

Table 3: Route coordinates of the 2nd Network subsection .............................................................. 63

Table 4: Route coordinates of the 3rd Network subsection. ............................................................. 64

Table 5: Average monthly and annual precipitation measurements (in mm) by the Weather Station in Karystos. ....................................................................................................................................... 91

Table 6: Average monthly and average annual temperatures. ........................................................ 91

Table 7: Meteorological data from the weather station of Karystos (Table 1/2). ............................. 93

Table 8: Meteorological data from the weather station of Karystos (Table 2/2). ............................. 93

Table 9: Pluviothermic quotient of Weather Station in Karystos. ..................................................... 94

Table 10: Important Bird Areas in the Prefecture of Evia. .............................................................. 116

Table 11: Habitat Types in the SCI GR2420001 according to SEA (1998) and Mapping of Habitat Types (1999-2001). ........................................................................................................................ 124

Table 12: Habitat types in the proposed wind farms installation area. ........................................... 127

Table 13: Habitat types per Wind Farm within the Site of Community Importance. ...................... 128

Table 14: Distribution of habitat types per Wind Farm within the SCI. ........................................... 128

Table 15: Endemic plant taxa of the study area and their protection status (P.D. 67/81, IUCN/WCMC and UNEP) ............................................................................................................... 131

Table 16: Species of land mammals in the area of SE Evia (Dimopoulos et al. 1998, Greek names by Mitchell-Jones et al. 1999). ........................................................................................................ 133

Table 17: Species of land reptiles in the area of SE Evia (Dimopoulos et al. 1998, Greek names by Valakos et al. 2008). ....................................................................................................................... 133

Table 18: The Vantage Points selected to cover the 8 wind farms ................................................ 143

Table 19: Data summary of the wider regional avifauna in the study area and specific categories of bird species. ................................................................................................................................... 145

Table 20: The avian species of the wider area based on bibliographical review (Kanellis et al. 1969, Zogaris 1985, Corine Biotopes 1987, Special Environmental Assessment 1998, Hellenic Ornithological Society 1989, Gaetlich 1992, Zogaris 1999) which were not observed during the field observations (2006-2010) in the study area (English names from Mullarney & Svensson 2007). 145

Table 21: Bird species observed during field recordings (2006-2010) (English names from Mullarney & Svensson 2007). ........................................................................................................ 150

Table 22: Land use in the municipality of Karystos (areas in thousands of acres). ....................... 164

Table 23: Land use in the Municipality of Marmari (areas in thousands of acres). ........................ 164



Table 24: Land use in the Community of Kafireas ( areas in thousands of acres). ....................... 165

Table 25: Locations of archaeological sites. .................................................................................. 168

Table 26: Ancient quarries of Ochi and Styra. ............................................................................... 172

Table 27: Evolution of population in the prefecture of Evia (ELSTAT, 1991-2001). ...................... 174

Table 28: Evolution of population in the Municipality of Karystos (ELSTAT, 1991-2001). ............ 174

Table 29: Evolution of population in the Municipality of Marmari (ELSTAT, 1991-2001). ............. 175

Table 30: Evolution of population in the Community of Κafireas (ELSTAT, 1991-2001). .............. 176

Table 31: Education level in the Municipality of Karystos (Pref. of Evia). ...................................... 177

Table 32: Education level in the Municipality of Μarmari (Pref. of Evia). ....................................... 177

Table 33: Educational level in the Community of Κafireas (Pref. of Evia). .................................... 178

Table 34: Occupation per sector of economic activity. .................................................................. 180

Table 35: Administrative and social infrastructures in the Municipality of Karystos. ...................... 182

Table 36: Administrative and social infrastructures in the Municipality of Μarmari. ...................... 182

Table 37: Τechnical Infrastructures. ............................................................................................... 183

Table 38: Hydrolithological classification of rocks. ......................................................................... 194

Table 39: Impact probability of the proposed project. .................................................................... 209

Table 40: Number of flora species with different impact levels per Wind Farm. ............................ 210

Table 41: Summary of the significance of each examined impact on important species, for the examined WF ................................................................................................................................. 216

Table 42: Losses of habitat type areas from the planned project. (Areas in sqm, Mapping of Study Group). ........................................................................................................................................... 224

Table 43: Species of fauna of Annex II in the SCI GR2420001. .................................................... 226

IMAGES

Figure 1: View of the study area....................................................................................................... 89

Figure 2: Climatogram Emberger-Sauvage for the weather station in Karystos. ............................. 94

Figure 3: Pluviothermic diagram for the weather station in Karystos. .............................................. 95

Figure 4: The hierarchical succession of three virtual "proximity zones" that were used in counting (VP Counts). Zone A includes the area of "direct influence" of the project on the avifauna .......... 142

Figure 5: Loss of area according to the technical specifications and the assessment model which was eventually used in this study. .................................................................................................. 223

MAPS

NUMBER NAME SCALE

1 ORIENTATION MAP 1:75.000 2A ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS MAP 1:85.000 2Β ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS MAP 1:85.000 2Γ ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS MAP 1:85.000 3 GENERAL AREA MAP 1:50.000 4 GEOLOGICAL MAP 1:50.000



NUMBER NAME SCALE

5A NATURAL HABITATS MAP according to habitat mapping project M.E.P.P.P.W. (now M.E.E.C.C)

1:30.000

5Β NATURAL HABITATS MAP according to field recordings 1:30.000 6A LAND USE MAP 1:25.000 6Β LAND USE MAP 1:25.000 7 IMPACT MAP 1:50.000 8 PHOTOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS MAP 1:40.000 9 CUMMULATIVE IMPACT MAP 1:50.000

DRAWINGS

NUMBER NAME SCALE MAP 1 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D1 - KATHARA, D2 ANATOLI 1:5.000 MAP 2 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D4 - MILIA, D7 KERASIA 1:5.000 MAP 3 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D3 - SPILIA, D8 PLATANOS 1:5.000 MAP 4 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D5 - PLATANISTOS 1:5.000 MAP 5 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D6 - PALIOPYRGOS 1:5.000



I. PREAMBLE

Τhe present study includes the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) concerning

the installation and operation of eight (8) wind farms , with total capacity of 174, 8 MW,

in the south-eastern part of Evia (municipality of Marmari, municipality of Karystos and

municipality of Kafireas). More specifically:

- D1 “KATHARA” Wind farm, total capacity32,2 MW.

- D2 “ANATOLI” Wind farm, total capacity 16,1 MW.

- D3 ”SPILIA” Wind farm, total capacity 29,9 MW.

- D4 ”MILIA” Wind farm, total capacity 18,4 MW.

- D5 “PLATANISTOS” Wind farm, total capacity 18,4 MW.

- D6 ”PALIOPYRGOS” Wind farm, total capacity 18,4 MW.

- D7 “KERASIA” Wind farm, total capacity 27,6 MW.

- D8 “PLATANOS” Wind farm, total capacity 13,8 MW.

Owners of the project are the companies DDAAMMCCOO EENNEERRGGYY SS..AA.. && DDIIEETTHHNNIISS CCOONN--

SSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN AA..TT..TT..NN..EE.. iinn ccooooppeerraatt iioonn wwii tthh EENNEELL,, tthhee iimmpplleemmeennttiinngg bbooddiieess tthheerreeooff

hhaavviinngg tthheeiirr hheeaadd ooffffiicceess iinn 3388--4400 KKaappooddiissttrriioouu ssttrreeeett,, PPCC 115511 2233 MMaarroouussii.. NNoonneetthheelleessss

tthhee ffoolllloowwiinngg ccoommppaanniieess hhaavvee bbeeeenn iinnccoorrppoorraatteedd ffoorr tthhee aabboovveemmeennttiioonneedd wwiinndd ffaarrmmss::

AIOLIKA PARKA KATHARAS S.A. AIOLIKA PARKA ANATOLIS – PRINIAS S.A.

AIOLIKA PARKA SPILIAS S.A. AIOLIKA PARKA MILIAS S.A. AIOLIKA PARKA

MYTIKA S.A. AIOLIKA PARKA PALIOPYRGOS S.A. AIOLIKA PARKA KERASIAS

S.A. AIOLIKA PARKA PLATANOS S.A.

The present document constitutes ISSUE A (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESS-

MENT), and is accompanied by the following: ISSUE B ((IINNTTEERRCCOONNNNEECCTTIINNGG SSYYSSTTEEMM

KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS –– RRAAFFIINNAA)), IISSSSUUEE CC ((RREEVVIIEEWW OOFF TTEERRMMSS//LLIIMMIITTAATTIIOONNSS OOFF TTHHEE SSPPEE--

CCIIAALL FFRRAAMMEEWWOORRKK FFOORR SSPPAATTIIAALL PPLLAANNNNIINNGG && SSUUSSTTAAIINNAABBLLEE DDEEVVEELLOOPPMMEENNTT FFOORR

RREENNEEWWAABBLLEE EENNEERRGGYY SSOOUURRCCEESS)), IISSSSUUEE DD ((MMAAPPSS -- DDEESSIIGGNNSS)),, IISSSSUUEE EE ((SSPPEECCIIAALL

OORRNNIITTHHOOLLOOGGYY SSTTUUDDYY)) and IISSSSUUEE FF ((CCHHAARRAACCTTEERRIIZZAATTIIOONN AACCTTSS))..

It is clarified that for the eight (8) wind farms of DAMCO ENERGY S.A. & DIETHNIS

CONSTRUCTION A.Τ.Τ.Ν.E. which are being planned as well as for eight (8) more wind

farms by ΤERΝA ENERGEIAKI A.Β.E.Τ.E., one single ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PRE-

ASSESSMENT (EIP) was submitted in the past (2007) concerning the first Assessment

and evaluation of the environmental impact deriving from the construction and operation

of sixteen (16), in total, wind farms in the south-eastern part of Evia. In the framework of



this procedure the favourable opinions no. 110580/15.12.20081 and 110592/15.12.2008

were issued by the Special Environmental Service of the Ministry for the Environment,

Physical Planning and Public Works (already Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate

Change) regarding the Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation (PEEE). As

far as document no. 110580/15.12.2008 by the Special Service of Environment is con-

cerned, as well as the certified copy of the accompanying map, which refer to the wind

farms of the Group DAMCO ENERGY S.A. & DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION, details are

presented in the attached copies (see Chapter 12 – Supporting documents-Approvals).

It is worth to mention that, since after the phase of PEEE the planning rhythms of the wind

farms and the elaboration times of the accompanying supporting studies were differentiat-

ed between the two Groups (DAMCO ENERGY S.A. & DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION

A.Τ.Τ.Ν.E. and ΤERΝA ENERGEIAKI A.Β.E.Τ.E.), it was decided that separate Environ-

mental Impact Assessments would be drawn up. Therefore this EIA refers solely and ex-

clusively to the presentation of all individual data of the project of the Group DAMCO EN-

ERGY S.A. & DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION A.Τ.Τ.Ν.E taking, however in consideration,

the synergetic environmental effects deriving from the eight (8) wind farms of the Group

ΤERΝA ENERGEIAKI A.Β.E.Τ.E .

This Environmental Impact Assessment is prepared also within the framework of issuance

of L.3851/2010 (Govt Gazette 85/A/04.06.2010) Accelerating the development of Renew-

able Energy Sources to deal with climate change and other regulations addressing issues

under the authority of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change”.

There will be used 76 WTs Enercon E-70 each at 2,3 MW for electricity generation, 14

thereof are to be installed in KATHARA WF, 7 in ANATOLI WF, 13 in SPILIA WF, 8 in

MILIA WF, 8 in PLATANISTOS WF, 8 in PALIOPYRGOS WF, 12 in KERASIA WF and 6

in PLATANOS WF.

For the overall construction and operation of the project a road network giving access to

the wind farm positions, and a road network within the field of each wind farm as well as

the improvement of specific parts of the existing road network, are planned. Detailed data

on the road construction works are set out in Chapter 4 of this Environmental Impact As-

sessment.

1

Subject: Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project: “Wind Farms for Electric Power Generation of total capacity 158 MW, of the companies Aiolika Parka Paliopyrgos S.A. capacity 12 MW, Κerasias S.A capacity 24 MW, Μytika S.A capacity 26 MW, Platanos S.A. capacity 12 MW, Μilias S.A capacity 16 MW, Spilias S.A. capacity 26 MW, Anatolis Prinias S.A capacity 14 MW, Κatharas S.A. capacity 28 MW, in the locations “Paliopyrgos, Kerasia, Platanistos, Platanos, Milia, Spilia, Anatoli, Kathara” respectively of the Municipalities of Κarystos, Μarmari and the Community of Kafireas in the Prefecture of Evia & Interconnecting Transmission Line 150 kV of the wind farms with the UHV Center of Pallini in the Pref. of Attica.



As far as the interconnection of the project with the Hellenic Transmission System Opera-

tor, is concerned, it should be known that for the needs of the project operation the follow-

ing is provided for:

- MMeeddiiuumm VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 2200 kkVV oorr 3333 kkVV ((uunnddeerrggrroouunndd)) between the control cabins

and the three step-up substations. The Medium Voltage Network follows mainly the

existing forest road and the new constructed road, as planned. The total route length

of the existing cable on the existing road is estimated to be approximately 99,7 km,

while its total route length on the newly designed road is estimated to be approximate-

ly 9,8 km. In addition, the installation of optical fibres in the same channel of the

planned route is provided for.

-- Three step-up substations 2200//115500 kkVV ((SSSS 11 ““AAmmyyggddaalleeaa””,, SSSS 22 ““AAnnttiiaass””,, SSSS 33

““PPllaattaanniissttooss””. At substation 1 “Amygdalea” wind power stations D1 Kathara , D2

Anatoli will be connected for the company DAMCO ENERGY S.A. & DIETHNIS

CONSTRUCTION A.Τ.Τ.Ν.E. as well as the wind farms of the company ΤERΝA

ENERGEIAKI A.Β.E.Τ.E. Τ1 Vios-Kalamaki-Bathriza and T9 Petra-Liofantiza total

capacity 90,3 MW, through the underground medium voltage cables. At substation 2

“Antias” wind power stations D7 Kerasia for the company DAMCO ENERGY S.A. &

DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION A.Τ.Τ.Ν.E. will be connected as well as the farms of the

company ΤERΝA EΝERGEIAKI A.Β.E.Τ.E. Τ4 Tsouka-Madriagara, Τ5 Tsouka-

Skoura,Τ7 Ntoukaz-Antia and Τ8 Mouriza-Petra Megali-Vranouli, total capacity 117,6

MW, through the underground medium voltage cables. At substation 3 “Platanistos”

the wind power stations D3 Spilia, D4 Milia, D5 Platanistos, D6 Palaiopyrgos, D8

Platanos will be connected for the company DAMCO ENERGY S.A. & DIETHNIS

CONSTRUCTION A.Τ.Τ.Ν.E. as well as the farms of the company ΤERΝA

ENERGEIAKI A.Β.E.Τ.E. Τ6 Milia and Τ10 Aidoni, total capacity 143,9 MW.

-- HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 115500 kkVV ((oovveerrhheeaadd -- uunnddeerrggoouunndd)).. The line, approximately

22,658 km long, starts from the first substation, “SS 1 Amygdalea”, next to the homon-

ymous municipal district, and reaches Mpouros, the southest end of the island, with

north-south direction. The line will be overhead except for one part of approximately

700 m at its southest edge, which will be underground.

-- HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 115500 kkVV ((ssuubbmmaarriinnee)) ((KKaarryyssttooss-- RRaaffiinnaa)).. This line constitutes a

part of the overall construction works for the new transmission line of 150 kV which

consists of three separate parts. The subsea connection Evia-Attica is the second part

of the High Voltage Line (HVT) 150 kV which will be sunk to the bottom of the greater

area of the Petalies Gulf in the South Evian Gulf. Its length reaches approximately 45

km and it will connect the first part of the line from the side of Evia at a landing point

on the rocky side of of “Mpouros” with one of the two alternative landing points in Atti-

ca at Rafina (one main and one alternative landing point). One alternative point was

designated within the port area of Rafina, the other one within “Velani” in Attica.



- HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 115500 kkVV ((uunnddeerrggrroouunndd)) ((RRaaffiinnaa –– UUHHVV CCeenntteerr PPaalllliinnii)).. The high

voltage transmission line between Rafina and the UHV Center of Pallini will be under-

ground in all its length– approximately 22 km – and will consist of two circuits. Regard-

ing the landing point of the line on the eastern coast of Attica and more specifically the

greater area of Rafina, it is mentioned that 2 alternative areas have been chosen. The

first one is within the land area of Rafina while the second one has been chosen to be

on the borders between the municipalities of Rafina and Artemida, and specifically in

the location Agios Nikolaos on the cape Velani. The selection of two alternative posi-

tions was effected after sedulous examination of all important environmental and so-

cio-economic circumstances of the greater area of Rafina. The selection of the final

landing point will be the result of constant communication and cooperation with the lo-

cal entities and notables of the area as well as with the competent environmental ser-

vices to which this study will be submitted.

Finally, it should be mentioned that for the implementation of the connection of single-

pole underground power cables with the triple three-phase bus duct 150 kV of the

UHV Center of Pallini (150/400 kV), its extension is required. On the extension area

grow currently several trees which have to be, necessarily, removed. The expansion

comprises the addition of two gates for the connection of the electric cables which

reach Pallini at the 150 kV side of the UHV Center as well as the installation of all re-

quired switchgear and measuring electromechanical equipment.

The particular intervention is going to take place in the west side of the UHV Center of

Pallini near its existing fence, which separates it from the neighbouring residences.

It is hereby clarified that analytical details and data about the way of connection with the

electric power network (underground medium voltage network, step-up substations, over-

head high voltage network with a part thereof being underground, submarine high voltage

network) are presented in ISSUE B which accompanies this Environmental Impact As-

sessment and in which: a) the overall impacts of the connection with the electric power

network are analysed and b) necessary measures for the treatment of such impacts are

drafted.

The installation area of the proposed wind farms is registered in the Ecological Network

Natura 2000 and is being qualified as:

√ Site of Community Importance (SCI) in accordance with the Directive 92/43/EEC and

the Committee Decision 2010/45/EE of 22nd December 2009 (served under no. C(2009)

10406) on the approval, according to Council Directive 92/43/EE, of a third updated list

with Sites of Community Importance for the Mediterranean bio-geographical region.

Specifically:

GGRR22442200000011,, OOrrooss OOcchhii,, KKaammppooss KKaarryyssttoouu,, PPoottaammii,, AAkkrroottiirriioo KKaaffiirreeffss,, PPaarraakkttiiaa



tthhaallaassssiiaa zzoonnii..

The majority of the planned wind farms (except for WF PALIOPYRGOS and the southern

part of WF PLATANISTOS) is situated within the borders of the above Site of Community

Importance (SCI).

√ Special Protection Area for Avifauna (SPA) according to the Directives 79/409/EC

and 2009/147/EEC. Specifically:

GGRR22442200001122,, OOrrooss OOcchhii,, ppaarraakkttiiaa zzoonnii kkaaii nniissiiddeess..

The total number of the planned wind farms is situated within the borders of the above

Special Protection Area for Avifauna (SPA). It is mentioned here that the location of wind

farms within Special Protection Areas for Avifauna is permitted pursuant to article 6, par.

32, of the Joint Ministerial Decision 49828 (Govt Gazette 2464/Β/03.12.2008).

Pursuant to the Joint Ministerial Decision Η.Π. 15393/2332/2002 the proposed project is

listed in the 10th Group “Special works”, in the 11th activity “Electricity generation from

wind and solar power”, in Category A and Subcategory 1. According to Decision nο. Oικ.

104247/Special Environmental Service/Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning

and Public Works (Govt Gazette 663/26.05.2006) “Procedure of Preliminary Environmen-

tal Assessment & Evaluation (PPEE) and Approval of Environmental Terms (AET) of

works for Renewable Energy Sources (RES) according to article 4 of L. 1650/1986, as

replaced by article 2 of L.3010/2002”, procedures provided for articles 3 and 4 will be fol-

lowed for the environmental licensing of the project.

For the preparation of the assessment were utilized the contents which are specified in

the file for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regarding a Renewable Energy

Sources project in decision no. “Oικ. 104248/Special Environmental Service / Ministry for

the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works” (Govt Gazette 663/Β/26.05.2006)

“Contents, supporting documents and other data of the Environmental Impact Pre-

assessments (EIP), the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), as well as related envi-

ronmental studies, Renewable Energy Sources projects (RES)”, Annex “Contents, sup-

porting documents and other data of the files”, Chapter A.

All available data and sources were utilized for the compilation of the texts of this assess-

ment. Specifically:

- Data from the in situ field investigations.

- Results of the specific recordings (flora/vegetation, habitat types, avifauna). 2 The location of wind farm installation is allowed within the Special Protection Areas (S.P.A.) of the avifauna of the Directive 79/409/EEC upon preparation of a special ornithological assessment and according to the specific terms and limitations stipulated in the relative environ-mental terms approval.



- Greek and international bibliography on Renewable Energy Sources (RES) pro-

jects and Assessment of their impact on the natural and human environment.

- Existing national and community statutory framework for Renewable Energy Sources

and Assessment of Environmental Impact Databases.

- Data obtained from official services and institutions.

- Internet (Greek and foreign websites).

The Competent authority for the examination of the file is the Special Environmental Ser-

vice ((SSSSEE)) ooff tthhee MMiinniissttrryy ooff EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt,, EEnneerrggyy aanndd CClliimmaattee CChhaannggee

This study was assigned to the Company:

with head offices in 91, Neratziotissis street, Maroussi, Attica, 151 24, Τel.: (210) 61 07

403,

Fax.: (210) 61 07 404, E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], Contact persons:

Alexandros Iatrou, Evangelos Pappas.



II. SPECIAL CENSUSES – FIELD SURVEY

For the needs of a full and complete approach of all issues dealt with in the chapters of

this Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) special censuses were carried out in the in-

stallation area of the wind farms (south-eastern Evia) by a group of specialized scientists.

The censuses were related to:

√√ CCeennssuuss ooff fflloorraa aanndd hhaabbiittaatt ttyyppeess

For the census of species of flora and habitat types, the relevant positions were visited;

flora elements and structure elements (dominant, typical species, height, thickness of

vegetation) were taken from all representative habitat types which form the mosaic of the

vegetation on order to substantiate the presence of each habitat type upon collection of

samples of data from each separate area.

Thereafter the spatial imaging of the habitat types, as included in the mapping of the net-

work Natura 2000 region, was confirmed-identified in the field. Finally an association be-

tween the presence of endemic species and specific types of habitats was made, taking in

consideration the geological substratum and the existing bibliography.

Detailed results of flora species and habitat types censuses are analyzed/presented in the

Section “Description of the Natural Environment of the Assessed region” of this Environ-

mental Impact Assessment (EIA).

√√ CCeennssuusseess ooff aavviiffaauunnaa ssppeecciieess iinn tthhee rreeggiioonn aanndd mmeeaassuurreemmeennttss ooff ppooppuullaattiioonnss aanndd bbee--

hhaavviioouurrss ooff bbiirrddss ppeerr WWFF

For the census of avifauna species a survey at the sites of the proposed wind farms up to

a radius of 2 kilometers from these sites was carried out to assess any impacts of the pro-

posed project. Moreover all species, which were observed during the surveyors move-

ment among the positions, were recorded.

The field survey examined the distribution of all the species of avifauna emphasizing on

the species of Annex I of the Directive 2009/147/EC and the Red Book (2009). Censuses

were carried out with the methods of “Point – Counts” and “Vantage Point Counts”) and

the respective recording forms were filled in. Additionally censuses of nocturnal species

were carried out with the method of “Nocturnal bird playback calls”.

The censuses cover part of the spring migration, the nesting and the autumn migration

and they were carried out during the period April 2006 – May 2010.

The detailed results of censuses of the avifauna species are analyzed/presented in the

Section “Description of the Natural Environment of the Assessed region” in this Environ-

mental Impact Assessment.



III. STUDY GROUP

This Environmental Impact Assessment was drafted with the cooperation of the following

special scientists:

-- EEvvaannggeellooss PPaappppaass, BSc Biology, MSc. Management of the Environment , Licence

Holder Cat. 27 (Environmental studies), Class C, Reg. no. 6691.

-- AAlleexxaannddrrooss IIaattrroouu, BSc Environmental science, MSc. Management of the Environ-

ment, Licence Cat.27 (Environmental studies), Class Β.

-- GGrriiggoorriiss KKaappssaallaass, BSc Environmental science, MSc. Conservation.

-- NNiikkooss KKaattssiimmaanniiss, BSc Environmental science, MSc. Environmental Biology, Li-

cence Cat.27 (Environmental studies), Class Β.

-- NNiikkooss PPaannaaggiioottoouu, BSc Environmental science, MSc. Geoinformatics.

- CChhaarraallaammbbooss AAlliivviizzaattooss, BSc Biology, Phd.

-- Dr. Panagiotis Dimopoulos, Professor, Botany and Plant Ecology, Department of En-

vironmental and Natural Resources Management, University of Ioannina.

-- VVaassssiilliiss XXaattzziirrvvaassssaanniiss, Forester, Consultant Category 24 (Forest studies), Class A

and Category 27 (Environmental studies), Class Β, Reg. no. 12340.

-- FFiilllliioo ZZaacchhaarraakkii, BSc Environmental science, MSc. Sustainable Management of Pro-

tected Areas.

- EEvvaanntthhiiaa AAlleexxaannddrrooppoouulloouu, BSc Environmental science.

As far as the competences and the distribution of tasks of the members of the study group

are concerned, the following applies:

Mr. Evangelos Pappas, was the Main Coordinator of the Environmetal Impact Assessment

(EIA). Among his direct duties were the final evaluation of the existing natural environment

status, the assessment and evaluation of the environmental impact and the suggestion of

the necessary measures addressing these impacts. The compilation of all environmental

data, the final drawing up and preparation of a Plan of Proposed Environmental Terms is

also included in Mr. Pappas duties.

Mr. AAlleexxaannddrrooss IIaattrroouu, has been the Coordinator of the project group for the Environmen-

tal Impact Assessment (EIA). Among his direct responsibilities were the analysis and de-

scription of the study area, the evaluation of the proposed project in relation with the crite-

ria of the Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development for Re-

newable Energy Sources, the assessment and evaluation of the environmental impact

and the suggestion of the necessary measures addressing these impacts and the partici-

pation in the preparation of the Plan of Proposed Environmental Terms. The compilation



of all environmental data and the final drawing up is also included in Mr. Iatros’ responsi-

bilities.

Mr. Grigoris Kapsalas has been a member of the project team. Among his direct respon-

sibilities were the analysis and description of the study area, the evaluation of the pro-

posed project in relation with the criteria of the Special Framework for Spatial Planning

and Sustainable Development for Renewable Energy Sources, the assessment and eval-

uation of the environmental impact on flora/vegetation and on the various habitats of the

region. The evaluation of the impact on flora and habitat types in accordance with the pro-

visions of article 6 of the Directive 92/43/EEC, the compilation of all environmental data

and the drawing up of maps/designs were also included in the direct responsibilities of Mr.

Kapsalas.

Mr. PPaannaaggiioottiiss DDiimmooppoouullooss (Coordinator of the field works regarding the species of flora

and the types of habitats) has been member of the study group and member of the group

for Flora – Vegetation – Habitats & Mapping. The preparation of a special report on the

results of the field census, the assessment and evaluation of the environmental impact of

the project on the species of flora-vegetation and on field (including the assessment of

impact in accordance with article 6 of the Directive 92/43/EU), the drawing up of maps

with the census results in the area, the assessment and evaluation of the maintenance

status of the species of flora, vegetation and habitats and the suggestion of the necessary

measures for the protection of flora-vegetation and habitats.

Mr. NNiikkooss KKaattssiimmaanniiss,, MMrr.. NNiikkooss PPaannaaggiioottoouu,, MMrr.. CChhaarraallaammbbooss AAlliivviizzaattooss, have been

members of the study group and members of the group which recorded the species of avi-

fauna in the project area (from 2008 till 2010). Furthermore, the preparation of a special

ornithological assessment with the results of the field census, the assessment and evalua-

tion of every environmental impact of the project on the species of avifauna and the sug-

gestion of the necessary measures for the protection of the avifauna was included in their

directs responsibilities.

Mr. VVaassssiilliiss CChhaattzziirrvvaassssaanniiss, has been a member of the study group. The evaluation of

the impact of the project on the wooded areas, the suggestion of the necessary manage-

rial forest measures, the analysis/description of the main landscape features of the region,

as well as the assessment and evaluation of the impact of the proposed project on the

landscape and the landscape features were included in his direct responsibilities.

MMrrss.. FFiilllliioo ZZaacchhaarraakkii has been member of the study group. The description of the human

environment elements of the region (built environment, historic environment, infrastruc-

tures, human pressures etc) were included in her direct responsibilities.



Mrs. EEvvaanntthhiiaa AAlleexxaannddrrooppoouulloouu, has been a member of the study group and participated

in the management of the relevant map data and the preparation of the environmental

maps which accompany this study.

It is hereby mentioned that part of the data regarding avifauna which are presented in the

Special Ornithological Assessment was collected by censuses made in the past (census-

es during 2006-2007 and provision of older data) by the following specialized scientists:

-- GGiiaannnniiss RRiiggaass, BSc Environmental science, MSc. Management & maintenance of natu-

ral environment.

-- SSttaammaattiiss ZZooggaarriiss, BSc Geography - Biology, Msc.

- AAlleexxiiss VVllaammiiss, BSc Biology, Phd.



11 IINNTTRROODDUUCCTTIIOONN

11..11 TTyyppee aanndd ssiizzee ooff pprroojjeecctt

DD11 ““KKAATTHHAARRAA”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 3322,,22 MMWW..

DD22 ““AANNAATTOOLLII”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 1166,,11 MMWW..

DD33 ““SSPPIILLIIAA”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 2299,,99 MMWW..

DD44 ““MMIILLIIAA”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 1188,,44 MMWW..

DD55 ““PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 1188,,44 MMWW..

DD66 ““PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 1188,,44 MMWW..

DD77 ““KKEERRAASSIIAA”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 2277,,66 MMWW..

DD88 ““PPLLAATTAANNOOSS”” WWIINNDD FFAARRMM,, TTOOTTAALL CCAAPPAACCIITTYY 1133,,88 MMWW..

TTYYPPEE AANNDD SSIIZZEE OOFF PPRROOJJEECCTT

TTIITTLLEE:: EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL IIMMPPAACCTT AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT ((EEIIAA))

FFOORR TTHHEE IINNSSTTAALLLLAATTIIOONN AANNDD OOPPEERRAATTIIOONN OOFF 88

WWIINNDD FFAARRMMSS IINN SSOOUUTTHH –– EEAASSTTEERRNN EEVVIIAA..

PPRROOJJEECCTT TTYYPPEE:: PPuurrssuuaanntt ttoo JJMMDD ΗΗ..ΠΠ..:: 1155339933//22333322//22000022 ((Govt GGaazzeettttee

11002222//ΒΒ//0055..0088..22000022)) ““CCllaassssiiffiiccaattiioonn ooff ppuubblliicc aanndd pprriivvaattee

wwoorrkkss aaccccoorrddiinngg ttoo aarrtt 33 ooff LL..11665500//8866 aass rreeppllaacceedd bbyy aarrttii--

ccllee 11 ooff LL..33001100//22000022 ““HHaarrmmoonniizzaattiioonn ooff LL..11665500//8866 wwiitthh

tthhee DDiirreeccttiivveess 9977//1111//EEEE aanndd 9966//6611//EEEE eettcc ((AA’’9911))””,,tthhee pprroo--

jjeecctt iiss ccllaassssiiffiieedd iinn tthhee 1100tthh GGRROOUUPP ““SSPPEECCIIAALL PPRROO--

JJEECCTTSS”” iinn tthhee1111tthh AAccttiivviittyy ““EElleeccttrriicc ppoowweerr ggeenneerraattiioonn ffrroomm

wwiinndd aanndd ssoollaarr eenneerrggyy””,, CCaatteeggoorryy AA,, 11sstt ssuubbccaatteeggoorryy

TTOOTTAALL PPOOWWEERR:: 117744,,88 MMWW ((7766 wwiinndd ttuurrbbiinneess –– eeaacchh 22,,33 MMWW))..

NNUUMMBBEERR OOFF WWIINNDD FFAARRMMSS:: EEiigghhtt ((88))..

NNAAMMEESS OOFF WWIINNDD FFAARRMMSS:: -- KKAATTHHAARRAA ((DD11))

-- AAΝΝAATTOOLLII ((DD22))

--SSPPIILLIIAA ((DD33))

-- MMIILLIIAA ((DD44))

-- PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS ((DD55))

-- PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS ((DD66))

-- ΚΚEERRAASSIIAA ((DD77))

-- PPLLAATTAANNOOSS ((DD88))

PPRROOJJEECCTT AARREEAA:: SSoouutthh--eeaasstteerrnn EEvviiaa



AADDMMIINNIISSTTRRAATTIIVVEE JJUURRIISSDDIICCTTIIOONN:: TThhee pprroojjeecctt bbeelloonnggss aaddmmiinniissttrraattiivveellyy ttoo tthhee MMuunniicciippaalliittiieess

ooff KKaarryyssttooss aanndd MMaarrmmaarrii,, aass wweellll aass tthhee CCoommmmuunniittyy ooff

KKaaffiirreeaass ((PPrreeffeeccttuurree ooff EEvviiaa))..

PPRROOTTEECCTTEEDD AARREEAA ((SSIITTEE OOFF

CCOOMMMMUUNNIITTYY IIMMPPOORRTTAANNCCEE,, SSCCII,,

OOFF DDIIRREECCTTIIVVEE 9922//4433//EEEECC))::

GGRR22442200000011 ““OOrrooss OOcchhii,, KKaammppooss KKaarryyssttoouu,, PPoottaammii,,

AAkkrroottiirriioo KKaaffiirreeaass,, PPaarraakkttiiaa tthhaallaassssiiaa zzoonnii”” ((SSiittee ooff CCoomm--

mmuunniittyy IImmppoorrttaannccee ((SSCCII)) ooff tthhee DDiirreeccttiivvee 9922//4433//EECC))..

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**TThhee mmaajjoorriittyy ooff wwiinndd ffaarrmmss iiss ssiittuuaatteedd wwiitthhiinn tthhee bboorrddeerrss

ooff tthhee aabboovveemmeennttiioonneedd aarreeaa ooff tthhee NNeettwwoorrkk NNaattuurraa 22000000,,

eexxcceepptt ffoorr WWFF PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS aanndd tthhee ssoouutthheerrnn ppaarrtt ooff

WWFF PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS..

PPRROOTTEECCTTEEDD AARREEAA ((SSPPEECCIIAALL

PPRROOTTEECCTTIIOONN AARREEAA FFOORR AAVVII--

FFAAUUNNAA,, SSPPAA,, OOFF DDIIRREECCTTIIVVEESS

7799//440099//EEEECC && 22000099//114477//EECC

GGRR22442200001122,, OOrrooss OOcchhii,, ppaarraakkttiiaa zzoonnii kkaaii nniissiiddeess..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**AAllll ppllaannnneedd wwiinndd ffaarrmmss aarree ssiittuuaatteedd wwiitthhiinn tthhee bboorrddeerrss ooff

tthhee aabboovveemmeennttiioonneedd SSppeecciiaall PPrrootteeccttiioonn AArreeaa ffoorr AAvviiffaauunnaa

((SSPPAA))..

11..22 BBooddyy rreessppoonnssiibbllee ffoorr tthhee iimmpplleemmeennttaatt iioonn ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

Owners of the Project are the companies DDAAMMCCOO EENNEERRGGYY SS..AA.. && DDIIEETTHHNNIISS CCOONN--

SSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN AA..ΤΤ..ΤΤ..ΝΝ..EE iinn ccooooppeerraatt iioonn wwii tthh EENNEELL.. NNoonneetthheelleessss ffoorr tthhee wwiinndd ffaarrmmss iinn

qquueessttiioonn the following companies have been incorporated: AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA KATHARAS

S.A. AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA ANATOLIS S.A. – PRINIAS S.A. AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA SPILIAS S.A.

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA MILIAS S.A. AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA MYTIKA S.A. AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA

PALIOPYRGOS S.A. AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA KERASIAS S.A. AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA PLATANOS

S.A. wwiitthh ccoommmmoonn sshhaarreehhoollddeerr ssttrruuccttuurree aass mmeennttiioonneedd aabboovvee aaccccoorrddiinngg ttoo tthhee PPrroodduuccttiioonn

LLiicceenncceess..

Address: 38-40, Kapodistriou street PC 151 23, Maroussi.

Telephone: (210) 61 01 150, Fax: (210) 61 01 164.

E-mail: [email protected]

Contact: Mr. S. Konstantinidis, Mr. N. Valtis.

11..33 CCoonnttrraaccttoorr ffoorr tthhee EEnnvvii rroonnmmeennttaall IImmppaacctt AAsssseessssmmeenntt ((EEIIAA))

Company: OOIIΚΚOOΜΜ LLTTDD

Name of Consultant Cat. 27 (Environmental Studies): Evangelos Pappas.

Licence : Category 27 (Environmental studies), Class C, Reg, no. 6691.

Address: 91, Neratziotissis, 151 24, Maroussi, Attica

Telephone: (210) 61 07 403, 61 07 458, Fax: (210) 61 07 404.

E-mail: [email protected], [email protected].



Contact: Alexandros Iatrou, Evangelos Pappas.

11..44 SSiiggnnaattuurreess ((BBooddyy ffoorr pprroojjeecctt iimmpplleemmeennttaatt iioonn –– CCoonnssuull ttaanntt CCaatteeggoorryy 2277))

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA KKAATTHHAARRAASS SS..AA..

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA AANNAATTOOLLIISS-- PPRRIINNIIAASS SS..AA..

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA SSPPIILLIIAASS SS..AA..

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA MMIILLIIAASS SS..AA..

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA MMYYTTIIKKAA SS..AA..

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS SS..AA..

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA KKEERRAASSIIAASS SS..AA..

AAIIOOLLIIKKAA PPAARRKKAA PPLLAATTAANNOOSS SS..AA..

EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL SSTTUUDDIIEESS LLTTDD

EVANGELOS PAPPAS, BSc BIOLOGY, MSc. MANAGEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT CONSULTANT CATEGORY 27 (ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES) Reg No. 6691



11..55 LLeeggaall ff rraammeewwoorrkk ffoorr tthhee pprreeppaarraatt iioonn ooff tthhee ssttuuddyy

The main legal framework, which defines the necessity as well as the specifications of this

particular study, is the following:

- L.3851/2010 (Govt Gazette 85/A/04.06.2010) “Accelerating the development of Renew-

able Energy Sources to deal with climate change and other regulations addressing is-

sues under the authority of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change”.

- Decision no. Oικ. 104247/Special Environmental Service/Ministry for the Environment,

Physical Planning and Public Works (Govt Gazette 663/Β/26.05.2006) “Procedure of

Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation (PPEE) and Approval of Environ-

mental Terms (AET) of works for Renewable Energy Sources (RES) according to article

4 of L. 1650/1986, as replaced by article 2 of L.3010/2002”.

- Decision no. Oικ. 104248/Special Environmental Service/Ministry for the Environment,

Physical Planning and Public Works (Govt Gazette 663/Β/26.05.2006) “Contents, sup-

porting documents and other data of the Environmental Impact Pre-assessments (EIΡ),

the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), as well as related studies for the Envi-

ronment, for Renewable Energy Sources projects (RES)”.

- Decision no. 49828 (Govt Gazette 2464/Β/03.12.2008) “Approval of Special Framework

for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development for Renewable Energy Sources and

of the strategic study of its environmental impact”.

- L.3468/2006 (Govt Gazette 129/A/27.06.2006) “Electric power generation from renewa-

ble energy sources (RES) and high efficiency cogeneration of electricity and heat, and

other provisions ”.

- Circular 107100 (Ref. οικ. 107100/29.08.2006) “Clarifications regarding the procedure of

environmental licencing of Renewable Energy Sources Projects ”.

- L. 1650/1986 (Govt Gazette 160/A/16.10.1986) “About the protection of the environ-

ment”.

- L. 3010/2002 (Govt Gazette 91/A/25.04.2002) “HHaarrmmoonniizzaattiioonn ooff LL..11665500//8866 wwiitthh tthhee DDii--

rreeccttiivveess 9977//1111//EEEE aanndd 9966//6611//EEEE,, procedure of delimitation and regulation of matters re-

garding water streams, and other provisions”.

- Joint Ministerial Decision: 15393/2332 (Govt Gazette 1022/05.08.2002) “CCllaassssiiffiiccaattiioonn ooff

ppuubblliicc aanndd pprriivvaattee wwoorrkkss aaccccoorrddiinngg ttoo aarrtt 33 ooff LL..11665500//8866 aass rreeppllaacceedd bbyy aarrttiiccllee 11 ooff

LL..33001100//22000022 “Harmonization of L.1650/86 with the Directives 97/11/EE and 96/61/EE,

and other provisions” (A’ 91)”.

- Joint Ministerial Decision: 11014/703/Φ104 (Govt Gazette 332/20.03.2003) “Procedure

of Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation (PEEE) and Approval of Envi-

ronmental Terms (AET) of works for Renewable Energy Sources (RES) according to ar-



ticle 4 of L. 1650/1986 (A’ 160), as replaced by article 2 of L.3010/2002” “Harmonization

of L.1650/86 with the Directives 97/11/EU and 96/61/EU, and other provisions” (A’ 91)”.



22 NNOONN TTEECCHHNNIICCAALL SSUUMMMMAARRYY

This chapter deals with the summarization of the assessment in a non- technical language

so that it is comprehensible to the general public. Below follows a concise, without spe-

cialized technical terminology, description of the project under study, of the status of the

natural and human environment, of the parameters based on which the environmental im-

pacts were investigated and of the measures for the protection of the environment. Fur-

thermore data regarding the benefits for the local and national economy, and generally the

environment, deriving from the implementation of the project, are presented. More specifi-

cally:

Τhe project under study regards the installation and operation of eight wind parks of the

Group Damco Energy S.A. & Diethnis Construction A.Τ.Τ.Ν.E in cooperation with ENEL

for the generation of electric power with the use of the wind energy potential in the instal-

lation area. The project is located in south-eastern Evia, in the administrative borders of

the municipalities of Marmari and Karystos, and the community of Kafireas. For the gen-

eration of electric power 76 wind turbines will be used totally, each of which with nominal

capacity 2,3 ΜW. The overall installed capacity of the project is estimated at 174,8 MW.

For the construction and the operation of the project a road network for access to the wind

farm sites, an internal road network within the field of each wind farm as well as the im-

provement of specific parts of the existing road network are planned.

Regarding the interconnection of the project with the Hellenic System of Electricity Trans-

mission, it is mentioned that for the operational needs of the project the following is

planned: a) construction of an underground Medium Voltage Network at 20 kV or 33 kV

between the control cabins and the three step-up substations. The Medium Voltage Net-

work will follow mostly the existing forest road and the newly constructed road connection,

as planned, b) the construction of three step-substations at 20/150 kV (SS 1 “Amygdalea,

SS 2 “Antia”, SS 3 “Platanistos”), c) the construction of an overhead High Voltage Net-

work at 150 kV, approximately 22,658 km long, which will start from the first northest sub-

station (SS 1 Amygdalea) and will reach the position Mpouros at the southest edge of the

island, with north-south direction. The line will be overhead except for one segment ap-

proximately 700 m on its southest edge, which will be underground, d) the construction of

a submarine High Voltage Line at 150 kV. This line constitutes the second part of the

greater construction project of a new transmission line at 150 kV which consists of three

separate parts. The subsea connection Evia-Attica is the second part of the High Voltage

Line (HVL) 150 kV which will be sunk to the bottom of the greater area of the Petalies Gulf

in the Southern Evoikos Gulf. Its total length amounts approximately to 45 km and it will

connect the first part of the line from the side of Evia in a landing point on the rocky side of

the position “Mpouros” with one of the two alternative landing points of Attica in Rafina

(one main and one alternative landing point). One alternative point is designated within



the port area of Rafina, the other in the region “Velani” of Attica and e) the construction of

an underground High Voltage Line at 150kV, which will follow the route mainly under the

local road network and will connect the landing point at Rafina with the High Voltage Cen-

ter of PPC in Pallini, where the generated electricity is eventually injected, according to

the relevant connection offer of HTSO.

The wider installation area of the wind farms is usually under the status of environmental

protection since the area is usually included in the Ecological Network Natura 2000 and is

qualified as a Site of Community Importance [SCI, Directive 92/43/EEC and Decision

2010/45/EU], while recently (March 2010) it was also characterized as Protection Area for

avifauna [SPA, Directive 79/409/EEC and Directive 2009/147/EC]. The project is situated

totally within the Special Protection Area for Avifauna (SPA) and partly within the Site of

Community Importance (SCI) (*The PALIOPYRGOS WF and the southern part of the

PLATANISTOS WF is outside the SCI. The remaining WFs are situated within the particu-

lar SCI). Regarding the protected areas in question of the Network Natura 2000 the follow-

ing data are concisely added:

In the Site of Community Importance (SCI) 17 habitat types are found, according to the

study “Recognition and description of the habitat types in areas of interest for the conser-

vation of nature” (1999-2001) of the Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and

Public Works (already Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change). In the pro-

posed installation sites of the wind farms 8 habitat types are met (habitats of Annex I of

92/43/EEC and Greek habitat types) according to the updated results of the field survey in

the framework of this Environmental Impact Assessment. No species of flora of Annex II

are being mentioned. As far as fauna is concerned, 8 species of Annex II of 92/43/EEC

have been recorded. It is noted that in the installation site of the project (WF fields), habi-

tats and priority species of 92/43/EEC do not exist .

Furthermore, as was also mentioned above, the region was recently (March 2012) estab-

lished also as Special Protection Area for Avifauna (SPA) with code GR2420012. The

borders of the SPA are different from those of the SCI and include Mount Ochi with the

coastal areas of Kafireas and of Potami, as well as the Mandilos islet. The importance of

the SPA is that it conserves important populations of predatory species (such as the

Bonelli’s eagle and the Short-toed snake eagle) and important populations of the Eurasian

Eagle Owls. In addition, the area is important for nesting passerines of community im-

portance (Woodlark, Tawny Pipit, Cretzschmar’s Bunting) but also other important species

which nest on the islet of Mandilos (Eleonora’s Falcon, Audouin’s Gull).

In addition to the above and taking into consideration the environmental sensitivity of the

area, special field surveys were conducted (habitats, flora/vegetation, avifauna) for the

needs of the project and real field data were collected so that the assessment of the im-

pact and the countermeasures would be realistic and suitable for the actual protection of



the biodiversity and of the area itself.

The environmental impact (of the main project and the accompanying supporting infrastruc-

ture) were evaluated at phases – the construction phase and the operation phase of the

project. The accumulated impacts of the project were also examined.

According to the results of the analysis, impacts are tracked during the construction phase

as well as the operation phase of the project. The impacts which were examined were re-

lated to parameters of the natural environment (e.g. habitats, flora/vegetation, fau-

na/avifauna, water resources, soil, land use etc.), but also to other elements related to the

human environment (e.g. distance from human settlements, noise levels etc). Any impacts

are minimized even more by taking appropriate protection measures or precautionary

measures. It is mentioned that the majority of impacts were examined as to the installation

sites of the wind farms and the areas were technical works will be carried out for the con-

struction of new roads, the connection with the electricity network etc.

Particularly regarding the operation phase it could be mentioned that also positive impacts

are tracked concerning the creation of new jobs and also the electric power generation

from renewable sources replacing a part of the conventional fossil fuels which contribute

to global environmental phenomena like the greenhouse effect and the climate change.

Finally, as far as the importance of the examined project at local and national level is con-

cerned, it could be mentioned that project implementation would have notably positive im-

pact related to:

Improvement of life quality in the area, since it utilizes an inexhaustible natural re-

source and does not burden the environment with pollution or waste.

Energy autonomy.

Growth of the region.

Increase of the rate of use of the wind potential in the area which is particularly de-

sirable as far as energy policy is concerned.

Electric power production with low production costs.

Participation in the National Energy Programming.

Deficit reduction of the country’s energy balance.

At its overall assessment of the project from a strictly environmental point of view, it has to

be pointed out that its environmental balance is clearly positive for the general environ-

ment. Namely, the environmental benefits regarding the limitation of the greenhouse gas

emission, the contribution to the management of the climate change as well as the limita-



tion of the production of the polluting PPC factories and the consequent reduction of

emissions of polluting load ashes etc are evaluated as being significantly more important

compared to the small or medium disturbance of the local populations of fauna -as well as

avifauna- and the small and fully reversible burden on the overall environment which

characterizes the installation area of the project at its construction phase.



33 SSUUMMMMAARRYY DDEESSCCRRIIPPTTIIOONN –– OOBBJJEECCTTIIVVEE,, SSIIGGNNIIFFIICCAANNCCEE,, NNEECCEESSSSIITTYY && EECCOONNOOMMIICC DDAATTAA OOFF TTHHEE PPRROOJJEECCTT –– AASSSSOOCCIIAATTIIOONN WWIITTHH OOTTHHEERR PPRROOJJEECCTTSS

33..11 GGeeooggrraapphhiiccaall ppoossii tt iioonn aanndd aaddmmiinniissttrraatt iivvee jjuurr iissddiicctt iioonn

The region of south-eastern Evia belongs to the areas with the highest wind energy poten-

tial in Greece. The proposed project consists of totally eight (8) wind farms which will gen-

erate energy with the use of air turbines. The project aims, thus, to energy production from

a renewable energy source (wind) and its disposal to the market.

Insg

The project under study is located wholly within the Special Protection Area (SPA) for avi-

fauna (Directives 79/409/EEC and 2009/147/EC), GGRR22442200001122,, OOrrooss OOcchhii,, ppaarraakkttiiaa zzoonnii

kkaaii nniissiiddeess, and partially within the Site of Community Importance (SCI) (Directive

92/43/EEC and Decision 2010/45/EU), GGRR22442200000011,, OOrrooss OOcchhii,, KKaammppooss KKaarryyssttoouu,,

PPoottaammii,, AAkkrroottiirriioo KKaaffiirreeffss,, PPaarraakkttiiaa tthhaallaassssiiaa zzoonnii..

The following image presents a view of the abovementioned protected areas of the Eco-

logical Network Natura 2000.



At this point it is worth mentioning that the beginning and during the biggest period of this

assessment’s preparation, the site was not included in a Special Protection Area (SPA) of

the Network Natura 2000. Nevertheless, in March 2010, the general study area, along

with 65 other areas of the region, was included in the network Natura 2000 and was quali-

fied as an SPA with code GR2420012 and name “Oros Ochi, Paraktia zoni kai Nisides”.

Subsequently as its is understandable, for the project under study to comply additionally

with the provisions of the Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Devel-

opment for Renewable Energy Sources (MD 49828/ Ministry for the Environment, Physi-

cal Planning and Public Works Govt Gazette 2464/ Β/03.12.2010) an ornithological cen-

sus becomes essential. The Group of companies, despite the non-inclusion until recently

of the general project area under study in an SPA, in cooperation with the consultants of

the Environmental Impact Pre-assessment had long time ago understood the necessity of

an ornithological census and the preparation of a Special Ornithological Assessment.

The assessment in question was considered useful –due to the particular features of the

ecosystems in the area- so that the compatibility of the specific project with the conserva-

tion of the natural environment would be ensured at the maximum possible level (consid-

ering that the study area is an Important Bird Area of Greece), as well as the adoption of

the precautionary principle. The Special Ornithological Assessment and its specific con-

clusions accompany this Environmental Impact Assessment (see ISSUE E – SPECIAL

ORNITHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT).



The existing qualifications or establishments which are applicable to the area under study

regard the following:

-- SSiittee ooff CCoommmmuunniittyy IImmppoorrttaannccee iinn tthhee nneettwwoorrkk NNaattuurraa 22000000 (SCI, Directive 92/43/EEC

and Decision 2010/45/EU, GR2420001, Oros Ochi, Kampos Karystou, Potami,

Akrotirio Kafirefs kai Paraktia Thalassia Zoni). A view of the borders of the Site of

Community Importance of the network Natura 2000 is also presented on the maps in

ISSUE D (“Maps & Designs”) which accompanies this Environmental Impact Assess-

ment.

-- SSppeecciiaall PPrrootteeccttiioonn AArreeaa ffoorr AAvviiffaauunnaa (SPA, Directives 79/409/EEC and 2009/147/EC,

GR2420012, Oros Ochi, Paraktia Zoni kai Nisides). A view of the borders of the Spe-

cial Protection Area for Avifauna of the network Natura 2000 is also presented on the

maps in ISSUE D (“Maps & Designs”) which accompanies this Environmental Impact

Assessment.

-- IImmppoorrttaanntt BBiirrdd AArreeaa (Oros Ochi and surroundings). A view of the borders of the Im-

portant Bird Area is presented on the map in Chapter D (“Maps & Designs”) which ac-

companies this Environmental Impact Assessment.

-- AArreeaass ooff SSppeecciiaall NNaattuurraall BBeeaauuttyy (It is hereby clarified that: 1) this qualification refers to

parts of the study area, and 2) the qualification of these areas derives from a study of

the National Technical University prepared for the Ministry for the Environment, Physi-

cal Planning and Public Works without, however, any existing legal status).

- WWiillddlliiffee RReeffuuggee ((WWRR)). A view of the Wildlife Refuges is presented in the picture below

It is also mentioned that for the area under study a draft presidential decree exists, on the



basis of which it is proposed that the area is divided in three zones as follows:

-- ZZoonnee AA:: PPrrootteecctteedd AArreeaass ooff NNaattuurree,, with the following sub-zones: A1: Dimosari

gorge (Faraggi Dimosari), A2: Peaks of Mount Ochi (Periochi Korfon Ochis), A3:

Kastanologgos area (Periochi Kastanologgou), A4: Archampolis area (Periochi

Archampolis).

-- ΖΖoonnee ΒΒ:: SSppeecciiaall RReegguullaattiioonnss AArreeaass, with the following subzones: Β1: Greater area

of Dimosari gorge (Evriteri periochi Faraggiou Dimosari), Β2: Greater area of

Kastanologgos and valley of Komito (Evriteri periochi Kastanologgou kai koilada

Komitou), Β3: Area of Rouklia (Periochi Rouklion), Β4: Valley and Potami of

Platanistos (Koilada kai Potami Platanistou), Β5: Southern feet of Ochi (Notioi

Propodes tis Ochis), Β6: Agios Dimitrios gorge (Faraggi tou Agiou Dimitriou), Β7:

Area of Archampolis (Periochi Archampolis), Β8: Cape Kafireas (Akrotirio Kafirefs),

Β9: Anemopyles of Cavo d’oro, Β10: Wetland of “Kampos Karystou” plain

(Ygrotopos of Kampos Karystou).

- ΖΖoonnee CC:: MMiilldd ggrroowwtthh aarreeaass.

A view of the abovementioned protection zones are presented on a map in Issue D

(“Maps & Designs”) which accompanies this Environmental Impact Assessment.

None of the finally proposed for licencing wind farms is sited within the borders of

Zone A. On the contrary, their sites refer to Zones B and C.

Detail on the protection areas as well as on the elements of natural and human environ-

ment which compose the area under study are presented in the following chapters.

33..22 SSuummmmaarr iizzeedd pprroojjeecctt ddeessccrr iipptt iioonn

The proposed investment regards the iinnssttaall llaatt iioonn aanndd ooppeerraatt iioonn ooff eeiigghhtt ((88)) wwiinndd

ffaarrmmss ooff tthhee GGrroouupp DDaammccoo EEnneerrggyy && DDiieetthhnniiss CCoonnssttrruuccttiioonn AAΤΤΤΤΝΝEE in the region of south-

eastern Evia. The total capacity of the project is 117744,,88 MMWW, which will be generated from

the installation and operation of totally seventy six (76) wind turbines EEnneerrccoonn EE--7700,, eeaacchh

ooff ccaappaacciittyy 22,,33 MMWW.

The coordinates (HGRS 87, ΗAΤΤ) of the polygons of the wind farms and of the positions

of the wind turbines are presented in tables in Annex I which accompanies this Environ-


FFoorr tthhee aacccceessss to the wind farm sites the structure of a new road network (internal and

access) been designed, with a total length of ~31,5 km. The alignment choice was based

on the following:

a) The maximum possible minimization of impacts on the natural environment of the ar-



ea.

b) The maximum possible utilization of the existing local, rural and forest road network.

c) The existing morphological soil features so that the roads follow the terrain with com-

posite profile, as visible in the typical profile (see attached road construction studies) so

that heavy impacts on the ground are avoided.

d) The main lines should be straight and parallel to the polygonal line that connects the

wind turbines and they should pass as close as possible to them having as an obvious

benefit the cutting short of the routes and the lineation of the pipes of transmission of the

generated electric power to the control cabin.

It should be mentioned that detailed information about the road construction works serving

the access and the internal road network are presented in the Chapter “Detailed descrip-

tion of the RES project (main project and accompanying supporting infrastructure)”, aswell

as in road construction studies attached to this Environmental Impact Assessement Study.

Finally, as far as the transmission of the generated electric power is concerned the follow-

ing is planned to be constructed: An underground Medium Voltage Network at 20 kV or 33

kV, control cabins, three step-up substations at 20/150 kV (SS 1 “Amygdalea”, SS 2

“Antia”, SS 3 “Platanistos”), an overhead High Voltage Network at 150 kV (except for a

segment of approximately 700 m in the southmost edge which will be underground) and a

submarine High Voltage Network at 150 kV. Detailed data about the electric power trans-

mission network are presented in ISSUE B – INTERCONNECTION NETWORK

KARYSTOS-RAFINA.

33..33 OObbjjeecctt iivvee,, ssiiggnnii ff iiccaannccee aanndd nneecceessssii ttyy ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

33..33..11 GGeenneerraall

The development of electricity production from Renewable Energy Sources (RES) in

Greece remains much lower than the desired one considering the relevant objective [as

such is established in the recent law about RES [L.3468/2006 (Govt Gazette

129/A/27.06.2006) and its amendment pursuant to L.3851/2010 (Govt Gazette 85/04-06-

2010] and the energy sources potential of the country. This failure is caused by a combi-

nation of factors. Amongst them are included the time-consuming licencing procedure of

RES projects, the lack of social consent due to missing or incomplete information of the

local societies and bodies, the lack of infrastructures, such as electricity transmission net-

works, (especially in areas with high potential RES like Thraki, Evia, Lakonia and the is-

lands of Greece), etc.

This problem as presented above might result in the imposition of large fines to the coun-

try from the EU because of the breach of the obligation arising from the relevant European



Directive. Furthermore the failure to replace the conventional fuel with renewable energy

sources will lead to the intensification of an important – and acknowledged by the global

community - environmental problem: the greenhouse effect. At this point it is noted that

the environmental problem of the greenhouse effect is considered a top priority also in

other Greek documents regarding the strategy in protection of the environment and pro-

motion of sustainable development.

Nowadays, greenhouse gas emissions have been increasing in Greece, especially during

the past decade, following the increase rate of the GNP. Carbon dioxide (CO2) and me-

thane (CH4), with 80% and 8% contribution rates respectively, are the most important of

the 6 greenhouse gases. Energy generation and use are the most important greenhouse

gas sources and especially of CO2, while waste disposal and the agricultural sector have

the biggest share of responsibility in the production of CH4. Last, the industry share of re-

sponsibility lies in CO2, emissions (e.g. from the cement production) as well as in fluorides

emissions.

33..33..22 NNaatt iioonnaall ttaarrggeettss ffoorr RES

Pursuant to article 1 of L.3851/2010 (Govt Gazette 85/A/04.06.2010) “Accelerating the

development of Renewable Energy Sources to deal with climate change and other regula-

tions addressing issues under the authority of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and

Climate Change”, the climate protection, through the promotion of electric power

generation from RES, is an environmental and energy priority of the highest im-

portance for the country.

The national targets for RES, pursuant also to the Directive 2009/28/EC (EEL, 140/2009),

are defined as follows till 2020:

- Share of energy from RES in overall gross energy consumption 20%.

- Share of energy from RES in gross electricity consumption at least 40%.

- Share of energy from RES in overall energy consumption for heating and cooling at

least 20%.

- Share of energy from RES in overall energy consumption in transport at least 10%.

33..33..33 NNeecceessssii ttyy ooff tthhee pprrooppoosseedd pprroojjeecctt

In the framework of the analysis above it is essential to mention the following:

aa)) RReenneewwaabbllee EEnneerrggyy SSoouurrcceess ((RES)) aatt nnaattiioonnaall lleevveell

A short-term significant increase of electricity production from Renewable Energy Sources

(RES) is mandatory in our country. This increase is and shall continue to be of priority due

to the international obligations of the country but also due to the national strategy choices



concerning the greenhouse gases problem which is of global importance. Furthermore

there should be implementation of policies, actions and measures for the limitation of

greenhouse gases produced by conventional fuel.

bb)) PPrroojjeecctt uunnddeerr ssttuuddyy ((wwiinndd ffaarrmmss iinn ssoouutthh--eeaasstteerrnn EEvviiaa))

The impacts from the implementation of this specific project will be particularly positive at

national level. They comprise the following:

- Improvement of the overall balance of energy supply and demand, along with second-

ary positive energy consequences (reduction of instability etc) as well as improvement

of the “mixture” of energy sources in favour of the RES against those which produce

greenhouse gases, with positive impacts at environmental level (but also on the com-

pliance with of international obligations and avoidance of payment of large fines and of

the degradation of the country’s prestige).

- Creation of new jobs related with the construction and operation of the project. Alt-

hough only a percentage of these positions will be created in Greece (the rest will be

created in the installation places of the wind turbine manufacture industries), in any

case there will be a contribution to the employment in the country (sum of the local po-

sitions and of those which will be created at a national, regional or local level).

- Direct capital inflow in the installation site of the wind farms.

- Creation of direct revenues for Local Authorities from the operation of wind power sta-

tions in south-eastern Evia. The respective amounts will be substantial, they will clear-

ly contribute to the improvement of the local financial data, and can be used for the fi-

nancing of projects and interventions which will upgrade the level of development and

competitiveness as well as the quality of life of the residents. Hence, significant com-

pensatory benefits will arise from the utilization of the wind energy potential of the ar-

ea.

- Utilization of an area (south-eastern Evia) due its wind energy potential, where up till

today the exploitation of the wind power remains low in relation to the national needs

for the development of RES.

33..44 HHiissttoorr iiccaall ddeevveellooppmmeenntt ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

On 29.3.2005 applications for the granting of Generation Licences for five (5) out of eight

(8) wind farms of the Group DAMCO ENERGY S.A. – DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION

AΤΤΝE were submitted to the Regulatory Authority of Energy (RAE) and more specifically

for the following companies:

”AIOLIΚA PARΚA SPILIAS S.A.” with Ref. No. Γ883/29.03.2005.

“AIOLIΚA PARΚA MILIAS S.A.” Ref. No. Γ877/29.03.2005.

“AIOLIΚA PARΚA KERASIAS S.A.” Ref. No. Γ887/29.03.2005.



“AIOLIΚA PARΚA KATHARAS S.A.” Ref. No. Γ884/29.03.2005.

“AIOLIΚA PARΚA AΝAΤOLI - PRINIAS S.A.” Ref. No. Γ885/29.03.2005.

while on 24.1.2006 applications for the remaining three (3) wind farms were submitted:

“AIOLIΚA PARΚA ΜYΤIΚA S.A.” Ref. No. Γ/24.01.2006.

“AIOLIΚA PARΚA PLAΤAΝOS S.A.” Ref. No. Γ1328/24.01.2006.

“AIOLIΚA PARΚA PALIOPYRGOS S.A.” Ref. No. Γ1329/24.01.2006.

Thereafter the electric power Generation Licence no. ∆6/Φ17.1391/οικ. 19515/2.10.2006

was granted to the company “AIOLIKA PARKA PALIOPYRGOS S.A.” by the Ministry of

Development regarding the wind energy station in the position “Paliopyrgos”, the single

project which is not sited in an area Natura 2000.

Thereupon the common Environmental Impact Pre-Assessment (EIP) for all eight (8) pro-

jects was submitted to RAE No. I-42396/17.10.2006 (Serv. Ref. No.) and was forwarded,

in accordance with the applicable legislation, to the Special Environmental Service of the

Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works no. O-

15136/31.10.2006 (RAE Ref. No.) for the process of the procedure of issuance of a deci-

sion on the Preliminary Environmental Assessment and Evaluation (P.E.A.E.).

The Special Environmental Service forwarded with its instrument no. 126207/12.2.2007,

the file of the PEA to the co- responsible authorities so that they would issue an opinion.

Hence, having gathered the opinions on the projects and the EIP from the below

corresponsible authorities:

the Directorate A2 of the Hellenic Navy General Staff,

the Department of National Infrastructure, Sec. B/Directorate for Infrastructures of

the Hellenic National Defence General staff,

the Secretariat for the Environment of south-eastern/eastern Attica,

the Secretariat for Physical Planning of the Ministry for the Environment, Physical

Planning and Public Works,

the Civil Aviation Authority,

the Directorate of Environmental Planning of the Ministry for the Environment,

Physical Planning and Public Works,

the Ephorate of Contemporary and Modern Monuments of Attica,

the 11th Ephorate of Pre-historic and Classical Antiquities,

the 23rd Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities,

the Directorate of Pre-historic & Classical Antiquities of the Hellenic Ministry of



Culture,

the Organization for the Master Plan of Athens,

the Directorate of Certification of the General Directorate of Communication of the

Hellenic Ministry of Transportations and Communications,

the Prefectural Committee for Spatial Planning and Environment of south-eastern/

eastern Attica

the Directorate of Touristic Installations of the HNTO, Ministry of Touristic Devel-

opment,

the Prefectural Committee for Spatial Planning and Environment of south-eastern

Evia,

the Directorate of Aesthetic Forests, National Parks and Game Management of the

Ministry of Rural Development and Food, and

the Directorate of Port Infrastructures of the Ministry of Mercantile Marine.

it issued the Preliminary Environmental Assessment and Evaluation decision no.

110580/15.12.2008 which included small amendments and limitations compared to the

initial planning of all projects. The particular amendments were based mainly on the

maintenance of the criterion of carrying capacity for the municipalities of Karystos and

Marmari as well as for the community of Kafireas which was reviewed by the RAE in the

framework of the Preliminary Environmental Assessment and Evaluation, in accordance

also with the provisions of the Special Framework of Spatial Planning and Sustainable

Development for Renewable Energy Sources (MD 49828/ Ministry for the Environment,

Physical Planning and Public Works, Govt Gazette 2464/Β/03.12.2010). The above deci-

sion includes amongst others the attached project of the submarine interconnection of the

substations of the wind farms which will be constructed (to which also the wind farms of

the Group TERNA Energeiaki ABETE will be connected) with the Ultra-High Voltage Cen-

ter of Pallini.

Thereupon after having taken the above Preliminary Environmental Assessment and

Evaluation decision, RAE proceeded to the issuance of positive opinions to the Ministry of

Development as regards the seven (7) wind farms (a Generation Licence had already

been issued for the project in the location “Paliopyrgos”) and more specifically:

positive opinion no. 122/2009 for the company “AIOLIΚA PARΚA MYTIKA S.A.” for

the wind farm in the location Platanistos,

positive opinion no. 122116/2009 for the company “AIOLIΚA PARΚA MILIAS S.A.”

for the wind farm in the location Milia,

positive opinion no. 122121/2009 for the company “AIOLIΚA PARΚA KERASIAS

S.A.” for the wind farm in the location Kerasia,



positive opinion no. 122118/2009 for the company “AIOLIΚA PARΚA KATHARAS

S.A.” for the wind farm in the location Kathara,

positive opinion no. 122119/2009 for the company “AIOLIΚA PARΚA ANATOLIS-

PRINIAS S.A.” for the wind farm in the location Anatoli-Prinia,

positive opinion no. 122117/2009 for the company “AIOLIΚA PARΚA SPILIAS

S.A.” for the wind farm in the location Spilia, and

positive opinion no. 122120/2009 for the company “AIOLIΚA PARΚA PLATANOS

S.A.” for the wind farm in the location Platanos.

Thereafter the Ministry of Development issued the following seven (7) generation Licenc-

es:

Generation Licence no. ∆6/Φ17.1392/οικ.13258/16.6.2009 to the company

“AIOLIΚA PARΚA MYTIKA S.A.” for a wind farm of capacity 16 MW in the location

Platanistos,


“AIOLIΚA PARΚA MILIAS S.A.” for a wind farm of capacity 16 MW in the location

Μilia,


“AIOLIΚA PARΚA KERASIAS S.A.” for a wind farm of capacity 24 MW in the loca-

tion Κerasia,


“AIOLIΚA PARΚA KATHARAS S.A.” for a wind farm of capacity 28 MW in the loca-

tion Κathara,


“AIOLIΚA PARΚA ANATOLIS-PRINIAS S.A.” for a wind farm of capacity 14 MW in

the location Anatoli-Prinia,


“AIOLIΚA PARΚA SPILIAS S.A.” for a wind farm of capacity 26 MW in the loca-

tion Spilia, and


“AIOLIΚA PARΚA PLATANOS S.A.” for a wind farm of capacity 12 MW in the loca-

tion Platanos.

In the framework of the above Generation Licences and the capacity of each wind farm it

is worth to mention that the Group proceeded to the:

Upgrade of the proposed type of wind turbines, in all wind farms, from Enercon E-

70/2MW to Enercon E-70/2,3MW, without any relocation of the approved positions

of the wind turbines or any change in the location and the size of the considered



polygons of the wind farms under development. The two types of wind turbines are

exactly identical in all their dimensions. Additionally it is here added that the re-

quired opinions regarding the amendment of the above Generation Licences

(Generation Licence no. ∆6/Φ17.1392/οικ.13258/16.6.2009, Generation Licence

no. ∆6/Φ17.1158/οικ.13263/16.6.2009, Generation Licence no.

∆6/Φ17.1159/οικ.13259/16.6.2009, Generation Licence no. ∆6/Φ17.1162/

οικ.13262/16.6.2009, Generation Licence no. ∆6/ Φ17.1160/οικ.13261/16.6.2009,

Generation Licence no. ∆6/Φ17.1145/οικ.13264/16.6.2009, Generation Licence

no. ∆6/Φ17.1393/οικ.13260/16.6.2009) of the Regulatory Authority for Energy

(RAE) were issued.

Upgrade of 6 wind turbines from Enercon E-70/2MW to Enercon E-70/2,3MW and

addition of 2 extra wind turbines of type Enercon E-70/2,3MW for WIND FARM

PALIOPYRGOS without change of installation field, resulting in the increase of ca-

pacity from 12 MW to 18,4 MW. In this framework the respective positive opinion

regarding the amendment of the Generation Licence of the wind farm in question

(Generation Licence no. ∆6 / Φ17.1391 / οικ.19515 / 02.10.2006) was issued by

the Regulatory Authority for Energy.

Besides the above it is mentioned that the Group of the eight (8) companies proceeded to

the preparation and submission of a complete file for interconnection with all supporting

documentation to HTSO, so that the latter would issue the Offer of Connection Terms.

With the document of HTSO no. 8920/29.12.2009 (subject: Offer for Connection to the

System of sixteen (16) wind farms (WFs) with total capacity 325 MW of the companies of

the Group DAMCO ENERGY SA & DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION AΤΤΝE and of the com-

pany ΤERΝA EΝERGEIAKI AΒEΤE in the prefecture of Evia). Offers for Connection were

issued for sixteen (16) wind farms with total capacity 325 MW. The Offers of Connection

refer to eight (8) wind farms of the Group Damco Energy SA & DIETHNIS Construction

AΤΤΝE and (8) wind farms of the Group ΤERΝA Energeiaki AΒEΤE.



33..55 EEccoonnoommiicc ddaattaa ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

WIND FARM Κ

AT

HA

RA

AΝ

AΤ

OLI

SP

ILIA

MIL

IA

PLA

TA

NIS

TO

S

PA

LIO

PY

RG

OS

KE

RA

SIA

PLA

TA

NO

S

TO

TA

L

Capacity (MW)

32,2 16,1 29,9 18,4 18,4 18,4 27,6 13,8 174,9

Total Investment (Κ€)

36.021 18.010 33.448 20.583 20.583 15.437 30.875 15.437 190.394

Annual Production (MWh)

83.650 38.627 77.629 45.867 43.569 32.100 71.485 36.873 429.800

Annual sales (Κ€)

6.704 3.096 6.221 3.676 3.492 2.572 5.729 2.955 34.444

NOTE: Annual sales are calculated at rates of 2009, 1 KWh = 0,08785.

33..66 AAssssoocciiaatt iioonn ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt wwii tthh ootthheerr pprroojjeeccttss aanndd aacctt iivvii tt iieess

In this section projects of similar or different nature (existing or under construction) in the

installation site of the WFs are mentioned or related to the project under question as re-

gards the complementarity, the compatibility or not, and the cumulation. More specifically,

an association of the project under study with the following is being carried out for the full

and complete approach of the issues which are being dealt with in this section:

a) projects of different nature which exist or are going to be constructed in the installa-

tion area of the proposed WFs, and

b) projects of similar nature which exist or are going to be constructed and are situated

within a radius of 10 km (*circles of radius 10 km were designed from the positions of

the proposed installation fields (polygons) of the wind farms). It is clarified here that as

projects of similar nature are considered the wind farms (WFs) of other investors. It is

also mentioned that those which are in some stage of the licencing procedure (e.g.

application for Environmental Impact Pre-assessment, positive opinion, generation li-

cence, installation and operation licence).

More specifically:

As regards point (a) of the above paragraph mention is made that during the visit which

was carried out in the area of the project no other projects of different nature, existing or

planned to be constructed, were noted. No other projects of different nature were noted in

the installation locations of the proposed wind farms or near them.



As regards point (b) of the above paragraph the following are mentioned:

- For the association of the project with projects of similar nature (WFs) initially a survey

was conducted concerning all WFs for which applications for EIP or positive opinions

have been submitted or which have been granted generation licences. Τhe respective

data was obtained from the official website of the Regulatory Authority For Energy

(RAE).

- Thereupon WFs which have been granted a generation licence or operation licence

were reviewed. Data was also obtained from the official website of the Regulatory Au-

thority For Energy (RAE).

- Finally, circles of radius 10 km were designed around the location of the proposed in-

stallation fields (polygons) of the wind turbines so that projects of similar nature exist-

ing within the abovementioned distance and being in some stage of the licencing pro-

cedure, as mentioned above, and acting possibly cumulatively with the project under

study (in positive or negative way) would be located.

Hence, in the framework of the above it is mentioned that the assessment of cumulative

impacts is conducted considering the WFs of the Group Damco Energy SA & Diethnis

Construction AΤΤΝE (8 WFs), the WFs of the Group ΤERΝA Energeiaki AΒEΤE (8 WFs)

and the WFs of the other investors (see table below).

Table 1: WFs taken into consideration at the assessment of cumulative impacts.

Company Status Capacity Municipality Location

ΖEFYROS LTD Generation Licence

1,2 ΜARΜARI & ΚARYSΤOS

ΜAVRAΝΤOΝI

ΖEFYROS LTD Generation Licence

1,8 ΜARΜARI ΜPOYRLARI PARADEISIOU

ENERGI E2 AIOLIΚA PARKA ΚARYSΤIAS SINGLE MEMBER LTD

Generation Licence

1,8 ΚARYSΤOS & ΜARΜARI

ΚARPASTONI- MOYLITHI KALIVION


Generation Licence 4,2 ΜARΜARI PROFITIS ILIAS


Generation Licence

3,6 ΜARΜARI ΚAMPIA PARADEISIOY

ENERGI E2 AIOLIKI SOCIETE ANONYME

Generation Licence

9 ΜARΜARI ΤOYRLA

ROΚAS AIOLIΚI AVEE Generation Licence

12,6 C. KAFIREFS AG. VASSILEIOS /MEGALI RACHI KOMI


11,4 C. KAFIREFS& ΚARYSΤOS

TSOYKA KOMITOY OF KAFIREAS

AIOLIKA PARKA ΚYΚLADON ΜΠOYRLARI SA

Generation Licence


ΜPOYRLARI SPATA

ΜELΤEΜI ΚASTRI AΒEΤE

Generation Licence

5 ΚARYSΤOS ΚASTRI




AIOLIKI PLAΤAΝISΤOY LTD

Generation Licence

36 ΚARYSΤOS ΚOYΚOYVAGIES - ΜARΚOYRI ISIOMA

WRE HELLAS SA Generation Licence

3,6 ΜARΜARI ΠΡOFITIS ILIAS-LOGOTHETI IN STOYPPAIOI

AIOLIKA ΚARYSΤIAS EVIAS GP

Generation Licence

15 C. KAFIREFS& ΚARYSΤOS

AIDONI

EΝERGEIAKI ΚAFIREOS EVIAS GP

Generation Licence

21 C. KAFIREFS ΤSOYKA/MANTRIAGARA


Generation Licence


ΚARPASTONI-ΜOYLITHI OF KALYVIA

YORK RESEARCH HELLAS

Generation Licence

24,65 ΚARYSΤOS

PORTES/ KOKKINOCHOMA/ LOYMPARDA/ PLAKOTA

YORK CONSTRUCTIVE LTD

Generation Licence

24,42 ΚARYSΤOS STAVROS

ELLINIKI AIOLIKI ENERGEIAKI SA

Generation Licence

12 C. KAFIREFS PYRGOS


Generation Licence 6,8 ΜARΜARI KSEROPOYSI


Generation Licence


LYKOYRDI/ PLAKOTA


Generation Licence

16,15 ΚARYSΤOS& ΜARΜARI

LYKOYRDI/ PLAKOTA

AIOLIKI EVIAS - PYRGOS SA

Generation Licence

15,3 ΜARΜARI PYRGOS

AIOLIKI EVIAS- HELONA SA

Generation Licence

9,35 ΜARΜARI HELONA

AIOLIKI ΚARYSΤIAS EVIAS GP

Generation Licence

15 C. KAFIREFS MEGALI PETRA – LIOFANTIZA

AIOLIΚA ΜARΜARIOY EVIAS GP

Generation Licence

6,3 ΜARΜARI PYRGARI/ ΝΤARDIZA

AIOLIΚA ΜARΜARIOY EVIAS GP

Generation Licence

19,8 ΜARΜARI GALOSSI/RIKEZA

AIOLIΚI ΜARΜARIOY EVIAS GP

Generation Licence

19,8 ΜARΜARI ΚARAΜPILA-KYMI


Generation Licence

27 C. KAFIREFS VIOS/ΚALAΜAΚI/ΜΠATHRIΖA/PRINIA


Generation Licence

12 C. KAFIREFS ΝΤOYGZA-AΝΤIA


Generation Licence 30 C. KAFIREFS ΜILIA


Generation Licence

30 C. KAFIREFS ΤSOYΚA/SKOYRA


Generation Licence

27 C. KAFIREFS ΜOYRIΖA/PETRA-MEGALI/VRANOYLI


12,6 C. KAFIREFS ASPRI RACHI/ MISOCHORIA

AIOLIKA PARKA MILIAS SA

Generation Licence

18,4 C. KAFIREFS MILIA

AIOLIKA PARKA SPILIAS SA

Generation Licence


SPILIA

AIOLIKA PARKA ΚATHARAS SA

Generation Licence

32,2 ΜARΜARI & C. KAFIREFS

ΚATHARA




AIOLIKA PARKA AΝAΤOLIS PRINIAS SA

Generation Licence

16,1 C. KAFIREFS AΝAΤOLI

AIOLIKA PARKA KERASIAS SA

Generation Licence 27,6

C. KAFIREFS& ΜARΜARI ΚRASIA

AIOLIKA PARKA PLATANOS SA

Generation Licence

13,8 ΜARΜARI PLATANOS

AIOLIKA PARKA PALIOPYRGOS SA

Generation Licence

18,4 ΚARYSΤOS & C. KAFIREFS

PALIOPYRGOS

AIOLIKA PARKA ΜYΤIΚA SA

Generation Licence

18,4 ΚARYSΤOS PLATANISTOS

PPC RENEWABLES SA

Generation Licence


ΜARΜARI

Thereupon follows a map with the WFs of the Group Damco Energy SA & Diethnis Con-

struction AΤΤΝE, as well of the other investors. Each of these wind farms is accompanied

by its licencing status.



44 DDEETTAAIILLEEDD DDEESSCCRRIIPPTTIIOONN OOFF TTHHEE RES PPRROOJJEECCTT ((MMAAIINN PPRROOJJEECCTT && AACCCCOOMMPPAANNYYIINNGG SSUUPPPPOORRTTIINNGG IINNFFRRAASSTTRRUUCCTTUURREE))

44..11 GGeenneerraall iinnffoorrmmaatt iioonn –– tteecchhnniiccaall ffeeaattuurreess ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

44..11..11 GGeenneerraall IInnffoorrmmaatt iioonn

The project under study regards eight (8) wind farms which will be installed in the greater

area of the Community of Kafireas and the Municipalities of Karystos and Marmari in

Southern Evia. Specifically:

(D1) “KATHARA” WF.

(D2) “ANATOLI” WF.

(D3) “SPILIA” WF.

(D4) “MILIA” WF.

(D5) “PLATANISTOS” WF.

(D6) “PALIOPYRGOS” WF.

(D7) ”KERASIA” WF.

(D8) “PLATANOS” WF.

The total number of wind turbines which are included in the wind farms under study are 76

and the total generated power is 174,8 MW. The type of wind turbine which is going to be

used in the Group’s wind farms is Enercon E-70/2,3MW.

A new road network (internal and access) with a total length of ~31,5 km has been de-

signed for access to the wind farm sites.

For the transmission of the generated electricity the following constructions have been

planned: an underground Medium Voltage Network at 20 kV or 33 kV, control cabins,

three step-up Substations at 20/150 kV (SS 1 “Amygdalea”, SS 2 “Antia”, SS 3

“Platanistos”), an overhead High Voltage Network at 150 kV (except for a segment of ap-

proximately 700 m on the southmost edge which will be underground), a submarine High

Voltage Network at 150 kV and an underground High Voltage Network at 150 kV from the

landing point in Rafina to the UVC Center in Pallini.

44..11..22 CCoooorrddiinnaatteess ooff tthhee pprrooppoosseedd wwiinndd ffaarrmmss

The coordinates (HGRS 87 and ΗAΤΤ) of the polygons vertices (fields) of the wind farms,

the positions of the wind turbines and the control cabins are presented in detail in Annex I

which accompanies this Environmental Impact Assessment



44..11..33 TTyyppee ooff WWiinndd ttuurrbbiinnee

a) ENERCON E-70/2,3MW.

For the wind farms (WFs) KATHARA, ANATOLI, SPILIA, MILIA, PLATANISTOS,

PALIOPYRGOS, KERASIA and PLATANOS the proposed type of wind turbine within the

scope of this assessment is ENERCON E-70.

The E-70 is a three-blade wind energy converter, with active pitch control, variable rota-

tional speed, of rated power 2.300 kW. The exploitation of the wind energy potential for

electricity generation is achieved through a rotor with diameter 71 m and hub height 64 m.

The rotor as well as the mechanical parts have been designed in accordance with the

specifications of Wing Class IA.

The main goal at developing and designing all wind energy converters of ENERCON is

the mitigation of loads. In view of this, all components have been developed and designed

accordingly. The result is a wind turbine which is characterized, amongst others, by low

stress loads.

The pitch control combined with the variable rotational speed (6-21 rpm) conduce to:

the maximization of the performance efficiency of the conversion,

the mitigation of fatigue even when operating with medium load,

the elimination of undesirable spikes.

Therefore increased energy production, long life and high quality of power which is fed to

the grid are achieved.

b) Operational and Technical Features of Wind Turbines

The main data about the operational and technical features of the wind turbines are listed

as follows:

Rated power 2.300 kW Wind Class IEC / IA Rated voltage 400 Volt Nominal frequency 50 Hz Power adjustment Variable speed – blade angles adjustment

Rotor diameter 71 m Number of blades 3 Speed of blade tips 22 - 80 m/s Cut-in wind speed 2,5 m/s approx. Cut-out wind speed 28 – 34 m/s approx. Hub height 64 m



c) Blades / Rotor

The wind turbines Enercon E-70 are equipped with three variable pitch blades. The blades

are attached to the hub with flush bolts.

Manufacturer Enercon Τype E-70 Blade length 32,8 m

Brake systems 3 independent pitch control systems with emergency power supply

Brake activation By electronic control through electromotors. Stoppage time at highest speed Approximately 1 complete rotation Blade material GRP (epoxy resin) integrated lightning protection Swept area 3.959 m2 Power control pitch

d) WT Hub

The blades are attached to the hub and this assembly forms the rotor which is connected

directly to the main axis of the WT, through a conical bearing which both parts have. It is

manufactured by Enercon and the construction material is steel.

e) Mechanic and Aerodynamic Brake

The braking of the WT E-70 is effected completely aerodynamically with adjustment of the

rotors blades pitch (pitching). Three independent pitch control systems act within seconds

and bring the blades into a vertical position. The rotor continues to rotate, however at a

very slow rate. This way the axis and the rotor suffer much smaller stress than if it

stopped. The rotor is immobilized only for its maintenance or in case of emergency. In this

case a mechanical brake system acts after the aerodynamic brake has been activated

and the rotation rate has significantly reduced.

f) Generator

This specific WT disposes of a double row tapered / two speed electric generator for the

best possible exploitation and maximization of the wind energy.

Τype Modern gearless annular generator (direct link with hub)

Exit power kW 0 - 2.000

Rotation speed variable

Connection frequency 50Hz

Voltage (V) 400



g) Rotation system

The shell is based on the tower with an external, slewing bearing. Six gears are fixed to

this ring and allow the shell to adjust to the direction of the wind. Additionally this ring

transfers the weight of the shell and of the rotor to the tower.

h) Pillar

The pillar is made of steel, it is divided in three parts and it has a conical form. Inside the

pillar is a vertical ladder with safety belt which allows access to all levels which are in-

stalled in its inside for safety reasons. The panel which contains all control systems is

placed on the base of the pillar and inside it.

Access to the inner part is prevented by a door which can be locked.

Pillar height 62,85 m Hub height 64 m Weight 153 t Top diameter 2,00 m Base diameter 4,20 m Paint material 3-layer polyester resin

i) Central Panelboard

All electric functions of the wind turbine are controlled by the equipments which are inside

the central electric panel and which also contains all switch and safety mechanisms.

j) Control Systems

All functions of the WT are controlled by a microprocessor. The central computer stores

various data during the operation of the WT which can be assessed from the base of the

WT where it is installed. Moreover there is the possibility of remote monitoring and remote

control as well of storage of all operational data in the central computer of the WT.

The manufacturing company of the power control systems is Enercon.

k) Description of Control System and Remote Monitoring of Wind Turbines

The control system provides remote control of the wind turbines & data collection regard-

ing the generation of each wind turbine. Every wind turbine is equipped with a micropro-

cessor which provides communication between the wind turbines & the Control System.

The data base which is created contains the efficiency, the operation & the record of each

wind turbine.

The equipment of the system is the following:

Central Computer: Intel Pentium, AT compatible PC, Industry Standard.



Cable for 4 telephone lines between each wind turbine in parallel order.

Modem: Hayes compatible, max. 14,400 band .

Printer.

Pager.

On - line UPS (feeding from the network without disruptions) in the wind farm.

l) Aviation lights of WT

On the basis of studies specific WTs have been selected to be equipped with suitable avi-

ation lights on their top, in accordance with the recommendations of opinions issued about

the wind farms under study by the Civil Aviation Authority. This serves the tracking of WTs

during the night and the protection of all flights which may be conducted in the area above

the WF site.

44..11..44 TTeecchhnniiccaall DDeessccrr iipptt iioonn ooff MMaajjoorr IInnff rraasstt rruuccttuurree PPrroojjeeccttss

The construction of the abovementioned wind farms requires the construction of major

infrastructure projects as follows:

a) Squares

The installation of wind turbines requires the configuration of the surrounding space

around the installation position of each wind turbine. Hence for each WT an even plateau

with surface 2.000 to 2.500 m2 (40 x 50 m to 50 x 50 m) is formed. This plateau must be

relatively flat with small permissible pitches.

Experience from numerous similar projects shows that this area is adequate for carrying

out the construction works (assembly and up-lifting of WT), the manoeuvres of the ma-

chinery and the transportation means of the equipment. The terrain will also be used for

the storage of the equipment before its erection and installation in the final position.

Τhe crane truck which will carry through the erection has to park so that its oblong axis is

aligned with the erection point of the WT. This even field must have small pitches (maxi-

mum permissible pitch 2%).

The center of the WT foundation is on the edge of the plateau. The levelling of the erec-

tion surface is mainly conducted through clearing of the land so that the ground is solid in

the wider area where the equipment will be placed, the transportation vehicles will move

and the crane machinery will operate. The estimated average depth of excavations on the

fields will not exceed 1,0 m.

Based on the beforementioned features and dimensions, it is estimated that the interven-



tion area will be approximately 2,5 acres for each wind turbine and the average volume of

the excavated material will be 2,500 m3 per WT. Τhe excavation material will be reused

almost totally in the form of earth fills for the arrangement of the necessary plateau.

The surface of the field will be laid with suitable material (3A or properly graded excava-

tion material), which will be compacted.

b) Foundation of Wind Turbines

The excavations for the foundations will be conducted having as center the installation

points of the WTs. The volume of the foundations will be approximately 350 m3. Τhe foun-

dations will be cylindrical in accordance with the geometry of the design below.

The diameter of the basis is approximately 15 m. The diameter of the neck is approxi-

mately 7,0 m and the foundation depth is 2,50 m. The final dimensions will be exactly de-

fined based on the foundation study.

All works will be executed with the help of mechanical means. The excavations for the

foundations will be executed in accordance with the respective specifications of the Minis-

try of Environment, Energy and Climate Change and compliance with all safety regula-

tions which are provided for by the relevant legislation.

The construction of the foundation of the WTs, includes concisely the following works:

Excavation of base.

Installation or earthing foundation.

Blinding concrete C12/15.

Construction of metal formwork.

Pad reinforcement installation and installation / alignment of the anchoring grid of

the wind turbine.

Installation of pipes for the M.V. cable run.



Pad concreting with concrete type C25/30.

Paint of upper surface of foundation.

Earth filling.

The necessary excavation for the foundation amounts to approximately 400 m3 per wind

turbine. The excavation is cylindrical of diameter 1 m bigger than the diameter of the

foundation basis. The excavation will be carried out with machinery. Τhe excavation mate-

rial is used partially for the earth fill of the foundation and partially for the arrangement of

the square.

The exact geometry of the foundation as well as the necessary reinforcement derive from

a study of static and dynamic loadings, and depend from the features of the WT tower, of

the wind activity in the area, the geological/geotechnical features of the soil and the seis-

mic activity of the installation area.

Special emphasis will be put to the restoration of the space into its initial natural state, so

that the visional disturbance caused by the excavations and the earth fillings will be miti-

gated. The full restoration of the space constitutes an essential objective so that the sole

perceivable intervention in nature is limited to a distance of ~10 m around the diameter of

the pillars anchorage and the internal road network the pavement of which will be execut-

ed with sorted excavation material minimizing thus the disturbance of the area.

c) Erection of wind turbines

The main erectable parts of a WT are:

Steel conical pillar consisting usually of 2-3 individual pieces.

Nacelle.

Rotor, which consists of the hub at which the three (3) blades area attached.

The transportation of the WT and of the accessory equipment (e.g. panelboards, connec-

tion and assembly material etc) will be done with suitable vehicles (platforms) as follows:

Bottom part of pillar.

Middle part of pillar.

Upper part of pillar.

Blades.

Nacelle, hub and boxes with accessory equipment.

All necessary preparations (arrangement of space, foundation construction, earthworks)

as well as the necessary preparation of the auxiliary material will have been carried out



previously in the installation site so that the erection can follow immediately after the

gradual arrival of the equipment to the site. The erection procedure consists of the

following phases:

Placement of the shell near the foundation.

Erection of the first part (base) of the pillar.

Preparation and erection of the second and then the third part of each pillar.

Lifting – connection of the nacelle.

Lifting – installation of the hub at the nacelle.

Lifting and connection of each blade with the hub. The two (2) types of lifting ma-

chinery which will be necessary for the proper and safe lifting of the equipment will

have lifting capacity of 800 t and 100 t respectively. The main lifting machinery with

lifting capacity 800 t can lift successfully all basic parts of the wind turbine, while

the secondary machinery with lifting capacity 100 t will perform all necessary auxil-

iary works.

Based on the general experience regarding equipage of similar size, the total erection

time, under normal weather conditions, should not exceed totally 3 days per wind turbine.

The assembly will be executed by a crew specialized in erections, consisting of four (4)

experienced technicians and two (2) assistants, excluding the operators of the lifting ma-

chinery.

d) Excavations for Low and Medium voltage cableline channels and weak current wires

within the wind farm.

For the electrical interconnection of the WT an underground network is constructed within

the WF through which the Medium Voltage cables (M.V.), the Low Voltage cables (L.V.)

(for the feeding of aviation lights etc), the telecommunication cables (optical fibres) and

the earthing network will pass.

The routing of the channels will take place, mainly, along the internal road network and so

that it does not cross the rain water pipelines. The cable channels follow usually the road

network; however in case the road makes a big detour, they follow the shortest route be-

tween the WTs. The channels are usually 1,0 m wide and 0,8 m. deep. The dimensions of

the channels and the order of the cables therein conform to the electrical regulations and

the technical specifications of PPC. The refilling of these channels will be executed as fol-

lows: Low resistivity soil will be spread on the base with a height of approximately 20 cm.

In the middle of this zone, a layer of sand will be spread to a height of approximately 30

cm in the middle of which the M.V. cables will be installed. The L.V. cables and the optical

fibres will be installed at a higher point.



In specific cases the placement of a special marker tape above the cables might be nec-

essary in order to avoid their destruction during a future excavation. Wherever the cable

channel route passes below roads of passage of heavy vehicles, additional provisions will

be taken for the enforcement of their mechanical resistance with the use of steel pipes or

plastic pipes made of heavy duty PVC. Furthermore, special attention will be paid to the

bendings of the cables during the route so that they comply with the specifications of the

manufacturer. The channels will be covered with suitable crushed material, possibly from

excavation products and they will not leave a visible trace, since they are expected to be

soon covered by the herbaceous vegetation of the area. The remaining excavation prod-

ucts can be used for the construction of the internal road network.

e) Control cabin (CC)

As aforementioned, a ground floor Control Cabin (CC) with a surface of approximately 72

m2 is going to be constructed in the installation field of the WF. Therefrom the control and

protection of the WF provisions will be conducted.

The CC will host the installation of the central electrical equipment for the connection of

the WF with the PPC network and the system of remote monitoring, control and safety.

Moreover it will have the necessary spaces for small repairs and storage of necessary

tools, consumables, spare parts etc as well as changing rooms and WC for the hygiene of

the staff which will attend periodically to the maintenance of the WF.

The building is properly designed in order to observe the regulations and the operational

requirements of the WF, while its external design follows the architecture of the buildings

in the wider area.

44..11..55 RRooaadd ccoonnsstt rruucctt iioonn wwoorrkkss

44..11..55..11 IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn

This study deals with the construction of a road network (internal and access), with a to-

tal length of 31,5 km, of the wind farms of the Group Damco Energy SA & Diethnis Con-

struction AΤΤΝE. The choice of alignments was based on the one hand on the existing

local, rural and forest road network for the definition of the entrances into the installation

polygon of the wind farm and on the other hand on the soil morphology, so that the road

follows the terrain with composite profile, as is shown in the attached typical profile, so

that heavy impacts in the ground are avoided. Finally the main alignments were planned

to be straight and parallel to the polygonal line that connects the wind turbines (WT) and

to pass as close as possible for the benefit of routes shortening and of the lineation of



the pipes of transmission of the generated electric power to the Control Cabin (CC).

Overhead photos were used to support the study as regards the choice of alignments, so

that there a passage through forested regions will be avoided, as well as digitalized dia-

grams scale 1:5000 of MGS for the measurements of long sections and cross sections

and then earth mass volumes.

The roads have been studied with a study speed of 20 km/h and in parallel they comply

with the terms of the Ministry of Rural Development and Food for the construction of forest

roads Category C; at the same time the specifications – technical requirements concern-

ing the safe circulation of the special vehicles for the transportation of the wind turbines

components and the pillars to their installation area, were taken into consideration during

the design.

The following geometrical features were selected and implemented in the whole network:

Width of road 5,00 m.

Maximum long fall 12%.

Minimum radius of curvature 25 m.

Minimum radius of curvature with manoeuvre 15 m and respective road widening.

Embankment slopes will be covered with topsoil coming from the clearing of the ground

before the excavations.

The opening of a draining ditch into the natural receivers as well as the construction of the

necessary sewers in their places is planned for the protection of roads from the rain water.

In the plan is also the levelling of the ground after the excavation with a gravel layer 0,20

m thick all along the road.

The construction of the road network requires approximately in total 230.000 m3 excava-

tions of rocky and semi-rocky surfaces which will be all disposed for the construction of

equivalent backfillings.

With the selection of the proper combinations of horizontal and vertical alignments an ab-

solute balance of earth mass was achieved at study so that in each wind farm all roads

(main and branches) are autonomous as regards earth mass.

As is also shown in the produced mass haul diagrams the minimization of earthmoving

was aimed and achieved so that the roads are constructed, in their biggest part, with

composite profile and transportation of excavation material for the construction of em-

bankments is almost nullified. An exception to the above are areas with very steep pitch-

es, where the road is constructed with section in full trench for obvious reasons of stability;

again the minimization of transfers was sought.



In case of failure of the earth mass balance during the construction because of the soil

condition, any remaining excavation material will either, if it is suitable, be crushed for the

production of gravel to meet the needs of road structure works, or deposited in the site of

the wind turbines or other suitable places at the discretion of the supervising engineer.

The required, based on premeasurements, total quantity of approximately 32.000 m3

rocky material suitable to be crushed for the needs of road structure (layers of sub-base

and base), will be saved from remaining suitable excavation material either from the roads

or the squares for assembly of the wind turbines.

44..11..55..22 DDeessccrriippttiioonn ooff aacccceessss ttoo eeaacchh wwiinndd ffaarrmm

"" PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

The connection of the wind farm with the local road Karystos-Platanistos is achieved with

the existing farm road which commences approximately 1 km before the settlement and

heads to the wind farm with an average gradient of 10%.

After 2,8 km it offers the possibility of access to WT 6 through the construction of a new

275 m long road.

Next, passing by WT 5 and after a route of 1,3 km, we meet a branch of the farm road,

which after 200 m reaches WT 2 and gives possibility of access to WT 3 and WT 4

through the construction of a new road 340 m long.

A new road 300 m long is constructed leading from WT 2 to the CC and WT 1.

Also, a new road 1 km long to WT 8 and a branch 350 m long to WT 7.

It derives from the above that the access to the wind farm requires the maintenance of the

existing 4,3 km long farm road network and the construction of new roads totally 2,25 km

long with excavations amounting approximately to 9. 600 m3.

"" PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

The connection of the wind farm with the farm road Karystos-Platanistos is achieved with

the existing farm road which commences approximately 3,5 km after the settlement and

heads to the wind farm with an average gradient of 11%.

After 1,3 km passing by WT 1, it offers the possibility of access to WT 2, WT 5 and WT 6,

through the construction of new road 2,4 km long and to WT 3 and WT 4 through the con-

struction of new 700 m long road.




existing 1,3 km long farm road network and the construction of new roads totally 3,1 km

long with excavations amounting approximately to 17.500 m3.

"" MMIILLIIAA"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

The connection of the wind farm with the local road Karystos-Prinias is achieved with the

existing main farm road which commences at the level of settlement Antia and reaches

the southern area of the wind farm after a 6,5 km long route with maximum gradient of

12% in its first part.

New roads are required only for access to WT 4 through the construction of a new 70 m

long road, a 430 m new main road to WT 7 and WT 8 and a 160 m long branch to WT 6.


existing approximately 10 km long farm road and the construction of totally 655 m long

new roads with excavations amounting approximately to 1.500 m3.

""ΚΚEERRAASSIIAA"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

The connection of the wind farm with the local road Karystos-Prinias is achieved also with

the existing main farm road which commences approximately 1,3 km after the settlement

Komito and reaches the area close to the wind farm after a 5,5 km long route with gradi-

ents up to 10%.

At this point starts the construction of a new 3.845 m long main road to WT 1 and WT 8

which passes consecutively by WT 12, WT 11, WT 10, WT 9, the CC and then by WT 8,

WT 7, WT 4, WT 3 and WT 2.

For access to WT 2, WT 5 and WT 6, the construction of branches 100, 321 and 165 m

long respectively is required.

From the above derives that the access to the wind farm requires the maintenance of the

existing approximately 5,5 km long farm road network and the construction of 4.435 m

long new roads with excavations amounting approximately to 30.000 m3.

"" SSPPIILLIIAA"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

The connection of the wind farm with the local road Karystos-Lepoyros is achieved with

the existing main road which commences approximately 3 km after Karystos and after an

approximately 12 km long route with mild gradients reaches the area close to the wind

farm. At this point starts the farm road which after approximately 3 km reaches the south-



ern part of the wind farm and is the departure point of the main roads to the wind farm

“SPILIA” and the wind farm “PLATANOS”.

From that point starts the construction of a 2.873 m long new main road to WT 1 which

passes consecutively by WT 9, the CC and then by WT 5, WT 4, WT 3 and WT 2.

Access to WT 5, WT 6 and WT 8, requires the construction of 83, 143 and 114 m long

branches respectively.

Access to WT 11, WT 12 and WT 13 is achieved through the main road of the wind farm

“PLATANOS” with the construction of 193, 155 and 539 m long branches, respectively.


existing approximately 3 km long farm road network and the construction of totally 4.273

m new roads with excavations amounting approximately to 25.300 m3.

"" PPLLAATTAANNOOSS"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

As aforementioned, from the departure point of the main road to the wind farm "SPILIA"

starts also the construction of a new main road to the wind farm “PLATANOS” totally

2.905 m long which reaches WT 1.

Access to WT 2, the CC and WT 3, WT 4, WT 5, WT 6, requires the construction of 44,

135, 80, 77, 249 and 471 m long branches respectively.

From the above derives that the access to the wind farm requires the construction of new

roads totally 3.961 m long with excavations amounting approximately to 31.600 m3.

““ AAΝΝAAΤΤOOLLII"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

The connection of the wind farm with the local road Karystos-Prinia is achieved with the

existing also main farm road which commences approximately 2,3 km after the settlement

Zacharia and heads to the southern part of the wind farms "AΝAΤOLI" and "ΚATHARA"

with gradients up to 10%.

Thus the construction of new main roads starts consecutively to:

- WT 7 675 m long.

- WT 6 755 m long with a 255 m long branch to WT 5.

- WT 2 1.566 m long passing by WT 3, with a 540 m long branch to WT 4 and a

288 m long branch to the CC.

For access to WT 1 the internal road network of the wind farm “KATHARA” is used.




existing farm road network approximately 2,5 km long in total and the construction of new


""ΚΚAATTHHAARRAA"" WWIINNDD FFAARRMM

At the end of the farm road which used to access the wind farm "AΝAΤOLI" starts the

construction of two new main roads to:

- WT 14 3.189 m long passing by WT 10, with a 891 m long branch to WT 9 and a

453 m long branch to WT 12 and WT 13.

- WT 1 1.414 m long passing by WT 4, WT 3 and WT 2, with a 2.340 m long branch

to the CC, WT 7, WT 8 (and WT 1 of the wind farm "AΝAΤOLI") and a 526 m long

branch to WT 6 and WT 5.

From the above it derives that the access to the wind farm requires the maintenance of

the existing farm road network approximately 3,5 km long and the construction of new


44..11..55..33 AAsssseessssmmeenntt ooff mmaassss hhaauull bbaallaannccee

A summary table of earth mass referring to the road construction works which will be exe-

cuted to serve the wind farms of the Group Damco Energy SA & Diethnis Construction

AΤΤΝE is presented below.

CUTTINGS EMBANKMENTS SUB-BASE BASE LENGTH

m3 m3 m2 m2 m PLATANISTOS_13_001 MAIN TO WT 8

4.633,85 4.634,32 5.276,71 4.974,08 994,82

PLATANISTOS_13_002 BRANCH 1 TO WT 7 1.906,02 1.907,20 1.765,03 1.663,90 346,29

PLATANISTOS_13_003 TO WT 6

571,84 572,06 1.459,65 1.375,27 275,05

PLATANISTOS_13_004 TO OE- WT1

2.209,60 2.209,58 1.575,93 1.482,40 296,48

PLATANISTOS_13_006 TO WT 3- WT4

261,30 261,36 1.816,01 1.867,41 337,48

TOTAL 9.582,61 9.584,52 11.893,33 11.363,06 2.250,12

PALIOPYRGOS_2_002 MAIN TO WT5- WT6

13.385,19 13.385,97 12.648,85 11.924,65 2.384,93

PALIOPYRGOS_6_002 BRANCH TO WT4- WT3-CC

4.169,89 4.169,97 3.626,52 3.416,13 706,91

TOTAL 17.555,08 17.555,94 16.275,37 15.340,78 3.091,84

KERASIA _01_001 MAIN TO WT1

25.435,05 25.435,17 20.399,72 19.224,05 3.844,80

KERASIA _02_001 BRANCH 1 TO WT2

901,92 901,75 489,09 462,47 104,15


2.772,01 2.771,95 1.626,61 1.532,05 321,07





1.004,96 1.004,72 807,44 762,84 165,25

TOTAL 30.113,94 30.113,59 23.322,86 21.981,41 4.435,27

SPILIA 14_001 MAIN TO WT1

15.885,87 15.885,75 15.258,84 14.366,10 2.873,22

SPILIA 14_002 BRANCH 1 TO WT5

542,99 543,50 384,31 365,58 83,20


906,06 906,75 943,17 895,70 193,30


517,75 517,98 916,14 863,46 172,69


5.240,28 5.239,03 2.796,02 2.635,95 539,22


1.622,63 1.621,45 772,89 730,02 155,15


203,26 203,66 687,12 648,59 142,67


404,62 402,49 603,86 568,61 113,72

TOTAL 25.323,46 25.320,61 22.362,35 21.074,01 4.273,17

PLATANOS 11_001 MAIN TO WT1

21.989,80 21.990,67 15.409,17 14.523,75 2.904,74

PLATANOS 11_000 BRANCH 1 TO CC

190,89 190,13 179,54 170,30 44,03

PLATANOS 11_002 BRANCH 2 TO WT2

944,72 945,21 663,20 563,24 134,80


247,17 248,13 361,91 345,12 80,01


580,08 579,18 337,78 309,27 77,29


2.477,06 2.477,02 1.227,08 1.160,64 249,16


5.174,26 5.175,55 2.434,91 2.296,55 471,05

TOTAL 31.603,98 31.605,89 20.613,59 19.368,87 3.961,08

ΚATHARA_01_001 MAIN 1 TO WT4- WT3- WT2- WT1

9.989,38 9.989,58 7.488,17 7.068,22 1.413,64

ΚATHARA_07_001 BRANCH 1 TO CC- WT7- WT8 & WT1*

15.401,25 15.401,27 12.336,72 11.632,36 2.340,17

ΚATHARA_05_002 BRANCH 2 TO WT6- WT5

3.894,71 3.895,59 2.748,39 2.595,98 526,10

ΚATHARA_2_01_001 MAIN 2 TO WT10- WT14

31.412,71 31.417,73 16.897,29 15.944,10 3.188,82

ΚATHARA_2_02_001 BRANCH 4 TO WT12- WT13

2.916,89 2.916,87 2.322,18 2.195,88 453,43

ΚATHARA_2_03_001 BRANCH 3 TO WT9

7.470,16 7.469,35 4.680,07 4.410,60 890,79

TOTAL 71.085,10 71.090,39 46.472,82 43.847,14 8.812,95

ΜILIA _03_001 MAIN 1 TO WT7- WT8

1.187,20 1.187,61 2.270,04 2.142,40 428,48

ΜILIA_05_001 TO WT4 44,61 45,01 354,57 334,16 66,83




ΜILIA_04_001 BRANCH 1 TO WT6

240,10 240,72 766,74 740,33 160,20

TOTAL 1.471,91 1.473,34 3.391,35 3.216,89 655,51

AΝAΤOLI_03_001 MAIN 1 TO WT2

17.386,97 17.386,20 8.601,04 8.121,91 1.565,85

AΝAΤOLI_02_001 BRANCH 1 TO CC

2.672,16 2.671,03 1.454,96 1.371,91 287,62

AΝAΤOLI_04_001 BRANCH 2 TO WT4

6.303,41 6.304,98 2.798,73 2.645,20 540,28

AΝAΤOLI_05_001 BRANCH 3 TO WT5

2.311,05 2.311,31 1.290,77 1.215,50 255,01


8.521,72 8.522,13 4.113,79 3.877,06 755,41


5.411,87 5.412,37 3.555,93 3.350,40 670,11

TOTAL 42.607,18 42.608,02 21.815,22 20.581,98 4.074,28

TOTAL SUM 229.343,26 229.352,30 166.146,89 156.774,14 31.554,22

Analytical tables of quantities are presented in the issues referring to road construction

studies which are attached to and accompany this Environmental Impact assessment

Study

44..11..66 CCoonnnneecctt iioonn wwii tthh eelleecctt rr iiccii ttyy ssyysstteemm

44..11..66..11 OOffffeerr ffoorr CCoonnnneeccttiioonn ttoo tthhee SSyysstteemm ((HHTTSSOO))

The connection terms of the sixteen (16) wind farms of the Groups Damco Energy SA &

Diethnis Construction AΤΤΝE and ΤERΝA Energeiaki AΒEΤE, of total capacity 325 MW,

were set forth with document no. 8920/29.12.2009 issued by HTSO SA (Subject: “Offer for

Connection with the System of sixteen (16) wind farms (WFs) with total capacity 325 MW

of the companies of the Group DAMCO ENERGY SA & DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION

AΤΤΝE and of the company ΤERΝA EΝERGEIAKI AΒEΤE in the municipality of Evia”).

A copy of the above document is attached to the chapter “Supporting documentation –

Approvals” of this Environmental Impact Assessment.

The following sections present concisely the data about the following: Medium

Voltage Network 20 kV or 33 kV (underground) , Step-up Substations 20/150 kV ,

High Voltage Network 150 kV (Overhead – Underground) , High Voltage Network 150

kV (Submarine) (Karystos – Rafina) , High Voltage Network 150 kV (Underground)

(Rafina – UVC of Pallini) . In spite of the fact that a detailed description of the con-

nection way with the electricity system as well as its impacts and countermeasures

are presented in ISSUE B – INTERCONNECTION NETWORK KARYSTOS-RAFINA, it

was deemed useful to present concise data in the following four sections for rea-



sons of completeness and continuity of this Environmental Impact Assessment.

44..11..66..22 MMeeddiiuumm VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 2200 kkVV oorr 3333 kkVV

The WTs of the wind farms of the Group Damco Energy SA and Diethnis Construction

AΤΤΝE will be manufactured by Enercon, type E-70/2,3MW, and will be generating elec-

tric power with 3-phase generators at 400 V and frequency of 50 Hz. Each wind turbine is

equipped with a local step-up transformer of 0,40/20 kV, 2500 kVA. Τhe cables will be led

to the Control Cabin of each Wind Farm, to the Medium Voltage Main Switchboard. Each

wind turbine is equipped with a step-up transformer of 1/20 kV, 3140 kVA, while on the

base of the pillar is installed a board for the protection of the step-up transformer against

errors of the Medium Voltage Network (MVN).

The WT of each station will we interconnected through an underground cable which will, in

its greater part, follow the alignment of the internal road network and which will end up in

the Control Cabin of the Wind Farm, in the Medium Voltage Main Switchboard.

The Medium Voltage Main Switchboard in the control cabin consists of entrance fields

(one for each branch), a measurements and protections field, a field which feeds the local

transformer 20/0,4 kV and one or more exit fields to the underground Medium Voltage

network which will connect the wind farm with the SS 20/150 kV. The accessory voltage of

the SS is assured with a transformer of 20/0,4 kV, 50 kVA from the yoke of 20 kV.

A network of earthings will provide protection to the wind farm. Every WT will be equipped

with foundation earthing through a strip of galvanized steel with appropriate supportings

and connection components, which will form a loop around the pad of the WT. The earth-

ing foundation will be enforced with its connection with the pad reinforcement of the WT

and with 4 earthing conductors type E.

The control building of the WF is also protected through foundation earthing. Additionally a

pipe Cu will be installed below the surface of each foundation as well as in the channel

bearing the underground MV cable. All of the abovementioned grounding systems will be

interconnected and connected also with the grounding grid in each local SS and the con-

trol building of the WF. The dimensions of the ground conductors and the grounding in

general will be such as to achieve a satisfactory ground resistance value.

Besides the cables and the ground conductor an optical fibre cable will be installed in the

channel of underground cables for the control of the WT which will be performed in a spe-

cial area of the Control Building of the Wind farm, which is the only building on the wind

farm.

The routes (channels) of the underground cables for the interconnection of each WT will

follow the alignment of the internal road network of the Wind Farm, and afterwards all



along the existing or the new road network up to SS 20/150 kV.

44..11..66..33 SStteepp--uupp SSuubbssttaattiioonnss 2200//115500 kkVV

Three (3) step-up substations 20/150kV will be constructed in the positions which are de-

picted in the topographical diagram as follows:

SSuubbssttaattiioonn 11 ““AAmmyyggddaalleeaa””

In the Substation 1 “Amygdalea” will be connected the wind power stations D1, D2, total

capacity 48,3 MW, through the underground medium voltage cables.

It will consist of two transformers at 40/50 MVA class 150/20 kV, connection Dyn1, with a

grounding potential either through resistance grounding system or directly and it will be

equipped with high voltage and medium voltage transformers. Every transformer will be

equipped with a power switch and a power-driven disconnector.

The HV busbars 150 kV will be single, common for both transformers. The 150 kV feeder

bay will consist of a power-driven disconnector, a power switch, a voltage and current

transformer for protection and measurements, disconnector and conductor.

The MV busbars 20 kV of each transformer are independent. However their connection

will be feasible through a power switch. Three, underground MV cables coming from four

wind farms are connected to each MV busbar through a power switch. Each gate is

equipped with a slide switch, a conductor and current transformers for protection. The re-

quired surface for the installation of this substation will be 8 acres.

SSuubbssttaattiioonn 22 ““AAnnttiiaass””

In the Substation 2 “Antias” will be connected the wind power station D7, total capacity

27,6 MW, through the underground medium voltage cables.

It will consist of four transformers, one at 20/25 MVA and three at 40/50 MVA, voltage

150/20 kV, connection Dyn1, with grounding potential either through resistance grounding

system or directly and they will be equipped with high voltage and medium voltage trans-

formers. Each transformer will be equipped with a power switch and two motor-driven

disconnectors.

The HV busbars 150 kV will be double with a busbar coupling switch. There are three line

gates 150 kV. Each gate will consist of two motor-driven disconnectors, a power switch,

voltage and current transformer for protection and measurements, disconnector and con-

ductor.

The MV busbars 20 kV of each transformer are independent. Their connection will be fea-



sible through a power switch. The MV underground lines coming from five wind power sta-

tions will be connected to the MV busbars. The gate will be equipped with a slide switch, a

conductor and a voltage and current transformer for protection.

The required surface for the installation of this substation will be 16 acres.

Substation 3 ““PPllaattaanniissttooss””

In the substation “Platanistos” will be connected the wind power stations D3, D4, D5, D6,

D8, total capacity 98,9 MW.

It will consist of four transformers, one at 20/25 MVA and three at 40/50 MVA, voltage

150/20 kV, connection Dyn1, with grounding potential either through resistance grounding

system or directly and they will be equipped with high voltage and medium voltage trans-

formers. Each transformer will be equipped with a power switch and two motor-driven

disconnectors.

The HV busbars 150 kV will be double, with a busbar coupling switch. There will be 4 line

gates 150 kV. Each gate will consist of two motor-driven disconnectors, a power switch, a

voltage and current disconnector for protection and measurements, a disconnector and a

conductor.

The MV busbars 20 kV of each transformer will be independent. Their connection will be

feasible through a power switch. The underground MV lines coming from seven wind

power stations will be connected with MV busbars through power switches. Each gate will

be equipped with a slide switch, a conductor and a current transformer for protection.

The required surface for the installation of this substation will be 19 acres.

44..11..66..44 HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 115500 kkVV ((OOvveerrhheeaadd -- UUnnddeerrggrroouunndd))

For the interconnection of the wind power stations with the Electric Power System the

construction of a new transmission line 150 kV is being planned. Herein is addressed the

overhead line which travels to the island of Evia. The line, approximately 22,658 km long,

commences from the first substation, “Amygdalea”, close to the homonymous municipal

region and ends up at the position Mpouros on the southmost edge of the island, and has

a north-south direction. The line will be overhead, except for a segment of approximately

700 m in its southmost edge, which will be underground.

√√ 11sstt NNEETTWWOORRKK SSUUBBSSEECCTTIIOONN –– TT..LL.. 115500 kkVV FFRROOMM SSSS 11 ““AAMMYYGGDDAALLEEAA”” UUPP TTOO SSSS 22

““AAΝΝΤΤIIAA””

The first subsection of the line is of a simple circuit with 24 optical fibres (18 single-mode

optical fibres G652 / 6 single-mode optical fibresG655). Subsequently this section has on-



ly one 3-phase circuit with overhead conductors for the transmission of electrical power.

The length of the line is 10 km with approximately 30 pillars. The line has the potential of

transmission of natural power 56 MW, thermal limit 138 MVA and in summer 117 MVA.

The line being a technical work comprises three essential elements:

- Τhe electric phase conductors, i.e. the overhead cables which are intended to transmit

electric power. The electric conductors are horizontally arranged and form a 3-phase

circuit. Each electric conductor is a naked, multi-core cable with twisted aluminum

wires on the outer layers and steel galvanized in the center (type ACSR = Aluminum

Cables Steel Reinforced), with outer diameter 25,883 mm and profile 322,26 mm2

(GROSBEAK).

- Τhe conductors of electrical protection which are intended to protect the line against

lightning. There are two conductors, arranged horizontally and symmetrically on both

sides of the line axis. The conductor of electrical protection is a naked, multi-core ca-

ble with twisted aluminum galvanized wires (galvanized wire rope) which bears inside

a conductor of 24 optical fibres (18 fibres G652/6 fibres G655) which will result in a

terminal equipment.

- Τhe agents on which are bound or attached through insulators the electric phase con-

ductors and the conductors of electrical protection. They are the well-known, steel,

galvanized lattice towers of high voltage line transmissions.

All types of towers are founded in the ground with four legs and have each a separate

concrete foundation. Several foundation types have been standardized (pads, concrete

piles etc) which are used depending on the strength and the composition of the ground).

The distance between two consecutive towers is on average 350 m. This distance may

vary and be adjusted accordingly depending on the arrangement and use of the land.

This specific route is defined by points Κ1- Κ9ΞΚ6* and Κ9ΞΚ6*- Κ1* in the topographical

diagram no. ΚA-Η∆-ΓYΤ/April 2010. The coordinates of the possible peaks of the polygo-

nal route of the High Voltage Transmission Line are depicted in the following table:

Table 2: Route coordinates of the 1 st Network subsection .

S/N Χ Y Κ1 549490.053 4219079.928 Κ2 548895.188 4219037.963 Κ3 547964.892 4218538.219 Κ4 547815.868 4218280.805 Κ5 547701.077 4217868.464 Κ6 547137.973 4216882.774 Κ7 546869.746 4216559.256 Κ8 546108.626 4215470.000

Κ9ΞΚ6* 546012.595 4214303.846 Κ5* 546037.593 4214304.164 Κ4* 546769.364 4214699.191 Κ3* 547204.699 4214837.096



Κ2* 547898.172 4214868.199 Κ1* 548793.157 4215000.000

√√ 22nndd NNEETTWWOORRKK SSUUBBSSEECCTTIIOONN –– TT..LL.. 115500 kkVV FFRROOMM SSSS 22 ““AAΝΝΤΤIIAASS”” UUPP TTOO SSSS 33

““PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS””

The second subsection of the line is of a double circuit, 3-phase, and will, bear 24 optical

fibres (18 single-mode optical fibres G652 / 6 single-mode optical fibres G655 in each cir-

cuit). Τhe length of the line is 5 km with approximately 20 pillars. The line has the potential

of transmission of natural power 2x64 MW, with thermal limit 2x202 MVA and in summer

2x169 MVA.

The line being a technical work comprises three essential elements:

1. Τhe electric phase conductors, i.e. the overhead cables which are intended to

transmit electric power. These conductors are vertically arranged on both sides of

the line axis, three per side and are attached to the same towers through chain in-

sulators made of porcelain or glass. Each group of three conductors on every side

forms a 3-phase circuit with one conductor per phase. Every electric conductor is a

naked, multi-core cable with twisted aluminum wires on the outer layers and steel

galvanized in the center (type ACSR = Aluminum Cables Steel Reinforced), with

outer diameter 25,883 mm and cross section 322,26 mm2 (GROSBEAK).

2. Τhe conductor of electrical protection which is intended to protect the line against

lightning. This conductor is installed on the line axis and is bound or attached di-

rectly to the towers, in position which is higher that the electric phase conductors

all along the line. The conductor of electrical protection is a naked, multi-core cable

with twisted aluminum galvanized wires (galvanized wire rope) which bears inside

a conductor of 24 optical fibres (18 fibres G652/6 fibres G655) which will result in a

terminal equipment.

3. Τhe agents on which are bound or attached through insulators the electric phase

conductors and the conductors of electrical protection. They are the well-known,

steel, galvanized lattice towers of high voltage line transmissions.

The distance between two consecutive towers is on average 350 m. This distance may

vary and be adjusted accordingly depending on the arrangement and use of the land.

The coordinates of the potential peaks of the polygonal route of the High Voltage Trans-

mission Line from SS 2 “Antia” to SS 3 “Platanistos” (defined by points Κ9ΞΚ6*- Κ14ΞΚ3*

and Κ14ΞΚ3*- Κ0** as they are depicted in the topographical diagram no. ΚA-Η∆-ΓYΤ/

April 2010), are presented in the following table:

Table 3: Route coordinates of the 2 nd Network subsection

S/N Χ Y Κ9ΞΚ6* 546012.595 4214303.846



S/N Χ Y Κ10 545903.462 4213675.052 Κ11 545475.000 4213263.133 Κ12 545175.000 4212714.691 Κ13 544801.797 4212278.295

Κ14ΞΚ3* 543105.000 4211461.434 Κ2** 543126.316 4211440.332 Κ1** 543379.968 4211193.433 Κ0** 543384.922 4211168.929

√√ 33rrdd NNEETTWWOORRKK SSUUBBSSEECCTTIIOONN –– TT..LL.. 115500 KKvv FFRROOMM SSSS 33 ““PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS”” UUPP TTOO TTHHEE UUNNDDEERR--

GGRROOUUNNDDIINNGG PPOOIINNTT

Finally, the third subsection of the line is of double circuit, 3-phase, and will bear inside 24

optical fibres (18 single mode optical fibres G652 / 6 single mode optical fibres G655 in

each circuit). Τhe length of the line is 7,6 km with approximately 36 pillars. The line has

the potential of transmission of natural power 2x64 MW, with thermal limit 2x202 MVA and

in summer 2x169 MVA.

The below table shows the coordinates of the possible peaks of the polygonal route the

High Voltage Transmission Line from SS 3 “Platanistos” to the coupling space where the

terminal station will be constructed (defined by points Κ14ΞΚ3*- Κ28 as depicted in the

topographical diagram no. ΚA-Η∆-ΓYΤ/April 2010). At this point the overhead high voltage

cable is converted to underground cable in the area of the terminal station.

Table 4: Route coordinates of the 3 rd Network subsection .

S/N Χ Y Κ14ΞΚ3* 543105.000 4211461.434 Κ15 542500.000 4210692.096 Κ16 5422290.636 4209903.290 Κ17 542481.607 4208790.954 Κ18 542431.390 4208181.568 Κ19 542541.490 4207284.168 Κ20 542701.176 4206900.000 Κ21 543436.127 4206200.067 Κ22 543573.992 4205785.646 Κ23 543841.487 4202507.911 Κ24 543731.874 420288.491 Κ25 543494.803 4201685.491 Κ26 543454.664 4201090.891 Κ27 543344.250 4200355.732 Κ28 543311.345 4200288.413

Regarding the underground final segment of the high voltage interconnection line

the following is applicable:

The last part of the High Voltage transmission line 150 kV, approximately 700 m long,

which is converted into an underground line, consists of six (6) underground, single core,

XLPE, 150 kV (170 kV max) cables, of total length approximately 6x200m, with aluminum



(Al) conductors with cross section 1200 mm2, as well as of two single-mode cables of op-

tical fibres each of which bearing 24 optical fibres (18 single-mode optical fibres G652 / 6

single mode optical fibres G655), of a total length of 2x200 m.

The six (6) single core, underground cables are divided in two groups of triangular layout.

The center horizontal distance between the two parallel circuits will be 800 mm.

Each of the two circuits of the overhead transmission line is connected only with one of

the two groups of underground single core cables respectively (Ug point), through the ap-

propriate protective equipment (lightning rods and disconnectors with grounding rods).

The underground single core cables will be ending up in single core outdoor termination

boxes, for single-core underground cables XLPE 150 kV at their one end (Ug point), while

at their other end they will be resulting in joints of three single core underground cables

through a three-core underground cable XLPE 150 kV (Uw point).

The above technical description may undergo some alterations for techno-economical

reasons, the result remaining, nevertheless, neutral.

All underground cables will be laid within a ditch, 1.600 mm deep, 1.400 wide and approx-

imately 200 m long, which is meticulously backfilled with suitable excavation material of

natural soil, fully restoring in this way the ground surface to its initial condition. The con-

struction will be executed in accordance with the applicable regulations and in compliance

with the applicable safety provisions (warning mesh, protective plates etc).

In an distance of approximately 700 m from the landing point in the location Mpouros the

terminal will be installed on a small surface 40 m x 40 m where the overhead conductors

will result into and will be connected with the underground part as follows.

Each phase of each circuit of the overhead transmission line 150 kV is connected with an

underground, single-core cable XLPE which is coated with sleeves for protection / insula-

tion made of drawn polyethylene with aluminum cross section 1.400 mm2.

44..11..66..55 HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 115500 kkVV ((SSuubbmmaarriinnee)) ((KKaarryyssttooss -- RRaaffiinnaa))

The submarine High Voltage Line 150 kV AC is approximately 45 km long and commenc-

es from the location Spilia-Mpouros which is in the southmost edge of Karystos gulf and

turns in the beginning to the south and then to the west-northwest approaching the coasts

of Attica in the south of the main port of Rafina where it ends at a landing point within the

port zone or a landing point a little further south.

For the construction of the submarine line 150 kV two three-core, shielded subsea cables

coated with multiple sleeves for protection/insulation made of drawn polyethylene (XLPE).



They are modern technology cables which consist of solid, stable materials and do not

contain liquid substances used in the past (oil-filled cables). The cross-section of every

cable is 630 mm2 copper and they will bear a conductor of 24 optical fibres (18 fibres

G652/6 fibres G655).

The installation of the submarine cables between Rafina (Prefecture of Attica) and Evia in

the location Spilia Mpouros of Karystos involves concisely the following works:

- Installation of the cables within a subsea ditch to a depth of 1,5 m in the sea bottom

and backfilling for the protection of the cable, after the placement, running from the

landing point of the coastline up to 20 m sea depth along the subsea route of the cable

for both landing sides, i.e. in Mpouros of Evia and in Rafina of Attica.

- Laying of submarine cables by a special cable ship. With the use of a special system

to lay submarine cables in the deep sea (jetting), the cable will be buried along its

length to a depth of 1 M below the bottom between the depth contours of 20 M in both

coasts.

44..11..66..66 HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk 115500 kkVV ((UUnnddeerrggrroouunndd)) ((RRaaffiinnaa –– UUHHVV CCeenntteerr ooff PPaalllliinnii))

√√ LLaannddiinngg ppooiinntt aatt tthhee eeaasstt ccooaasstt ooff AAttttiiccaa

Two alternative landing points have been chosen in Attica and specifically in the wider ar-

ea of Rafina. The first point is within the inland port of Rafina while the second point has

been chosen on the borders of the municipalities of Rafina and Artemida, and specifically

in the location Agios Nikolaos of the cape Velani.

Regardless of which one of these two alternative landing point locations is eventually cho-

sen, two underground sealed links (one for each cable) are constructed in a small dis-

tance from the foreshore, approximately 15-20 meters, serving the interconnection of the

subsea cables with the inland, underground cables. The route of the cables is marked with

a suitable standardized label along the foreshore zone and the backshore.

The selected point in the wider area of Rafina will be the endpoint of six (6) underground

single-core cables of 150 kV (170 kV max), XLPE with aluminum conductors (Al) of cross

section 1200 mm2, total length approximately 6x22 km, as well as optical fibre cables,

each one bearing 24 optical fibres (18 single-mode optical fibres G652 / 6 single-mode

optical fibres G655), of total length approximately 2x22km.

All cables will be laid within a ditch, 1.600 mm deep, 1.400 mm wide and approximately 22

km long.

The six (6) single-core underground cables are divided into two groups of triangular lay-

out. The center horizontal distance between the two parallel circuits will be 800 mm.



Except for the underground, single-core cables within the ditch will be also laid two fiber

optic cables, each of which will comprise 24 optical fibres (18 single-mode optical fibres

G652/6 single-mode optical fibres G655), of total length approximately 2x22 km.

At the side of the coastline of Rafina, underground single-core cables will end up to joints

which will be connecting them with the 3-phase submarine cables.

The selection of the two alternative locations was made after thorough examination of all

critical environmental and socio-economic conditions of the wider area of Rafina.

Finally, the selection of the final position of the landing point will be the result of a constant

communication and cooperation with local bodies and prominent persons of the area, as

well as with the competent environmental authorities to which this assessment will be

submitted.

The installation of the submarine cables in these two alternative landing points “Inland

Port Zone of Rafina” or “Agios Nikolaos – Cape Velani” comprises in total the following

works:

Excavation of a land ditch, approximately 1,5 m deep and 2 m wide, and its backfilling for

the protection of the cable after its placement, running from the coastline up to the joining

point with the underground cable in one of the two alternative landing points which will be

eventually chosen. The joining point with the underground network will be in a distance of

approximately 20 m from the coastline.

Finally it is noted here that as regards the route of the cables in the Inland Port Zone of

Rafina, the comments of the Ministry of Mercantile Marine and of the Organismos Limena

Rafinas were observed as depicted in document no. 8221.Τ12/10/07/17-09-2007 by Min-

istry of Mercantile Marine /Directorate of Port Infrastructures/Dep. b STUDIES AND PRO-

JECTS.

√√ MMaaiinn UUnnddeerrggrroouunndd HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee TTrraannssmmiissssiioonn LLiinnee bbeettwweeeenn RRaaffiinnaa aanndd UUHHVV CCeenntteerr ooff PPaalllliinnii

The transmission line 150 kV to Attica will be underground along its full length –

approximately 22 km– and will comprise two circuits. Each circuit consists of three single-

core cables XLPE coated with sleeves for protection/insulation made of drawn polyeth-

ylene with aluminum cross section 2.000 mm2, which are put in triangular layout, with a

distance of 80 cm between them, in a ditch 1,60 m deep and 1,40 m wide. Additionally

into the ditch will be laid for both circuits two fiber optic cables, each one comprising 24

optical fibres (18 single-mode optical fibres G652 / 6 single-mode optical fibres G655), of

total length approximately 2 x 22 km.

After the excavation of the ditch, a layer of fine sand 10 cm thick will be spread and then



follows the arrangement in triangular layout of the power cables for the two circuits. The

cables will be covered with fine sand screed in successively condensed 40 cm thick lay-

ers, above of which are placed 4 cm thick concrete slabs, for reasons of mechanic protec-

tion of the cables. Another layer of pit sand 15 cm thick, on which the fiber optic cables

are laid, which are covered by a layer of gravel STS 3A and 25 cm thick, which will be

compressed with a manual or light mechanic tool, and new concrete slabs are laid for pro-

tection. A layer of gravel STS 3A follows, 30 cm thick, which is sprinkled and compacted

with a mechanical vibrator; a plastic warning mesh is being placed. The remaining 35 cm

are back filled with gravel STS 3A which undergoes the same compaction, and finally

comes one layer of asphalt concrete 5 cm thick. Furthermore, on the bottom of any man-

holes for joints and before the first sand screed, a multi-core tinned earthing conductor will

be laid with cross section 50 mm2 which will end up as a sleeve inside the joint manhole.

While the sleeves of the submarine cables are grounded at their ends, the sleeves of the

high voltage underground cables are crossed and grounded at equal intervals. The fiber

optic cables accompany the power cables upon their connection with the fiber optic cables

of the submarine cables, and end up also to UHV Center of Pallini.

The common ditch will run in parallel with the following streets:

From the joints construction location the line heads through the inland port zone of Rafina

to the point where it meets Alexandrou Fleming street; it continues along this street for 2,7

km until its junction with Marathonas Avenue. Then it turns south-west following the

Marathona Avenue with direction to Pallini for 7,4 km until the point where Marathona Av.

meets Ploutarchou street. There it turns to the south following Ploutarchou street for 1,5

km and then to the west along the side street of Attiki Odos (2,6 km) Leontariou street (2,8

km) to end up to the SVC area, and be connected with the busbars of 150 kV in the Ultra-

high Voltage Center of Pallini.

The above alignment can be altered for better cooperation with the respective local au-

thorities, without change in the total length and with neutral environmental impact.

√√ PPrroovviissiioonnss aabboouutt RReeaaccttiivvee PPoowweerr ccoommppeennssaattiioonn

Due to the length of the submarine cables, a significant reactive power compensation will

be required. The following alternative ways were proposed for the reactive power com-

pensation pursuant to document no. ∆EΣΜΗE/8920/29.12.2009 “Offer for Connection to

the System of sixteen (16) wind farms (WFs) with total capacity 325 MW of the companies

of the Group DAMCO ENERGY SA & DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION AΤΤΝE and of the

company ΤERΝA EΝERGEIAKI AΒEΤE in the prefecture of Evia”.

1. Installation of compensation coils at the ends of the cable connections, i.e. the UHV

Center of Pallini and SS 3 “PLATANISTOS”. The total power of the compensation



coils will be equal approximately with 80% of the total reactive generation of the

submarine and the underground cables. In addition, a compensation device (SVC) of

low power might be needed in SS 1 “AMYGDALEA” or in SS 2 “AΝΤIA”. The power

and the quantity of the compensation coils will be defined during the execution of the

respective Connection Contracts when the type, the features and the excat length of

the submarine and underground cables, which are going to be used, will be known.

2. Installation of Static Var Compensators (SVCs) next to the UHV Center of Pallini.

The power of the compensation devices (SVCs) will be fully defined during the exe-

cution of the respective Connection Contracts when the type, the features and the

excat length of the submarine and underground cables, which are going to be used,

will be known.

3. In view of the above, the 2nd proposed solution was selected eventually, i.e. installa-

tion of Static Var Compensators (SVCs) next to the UHV Center of Pallini. In the field

area under question will be installed two (2), each with capacity of -120 MVAr, +20

MVAr (or two SVCs in combination with coils). This field with an area of approxi-

mately 6 acres is being sought close to the UHV of Pallini where the interconnection

network under study will end up.

The busbars 150 kV of each of the SVC, are connected through single core outdoor ter-

mination boxes of underground cables, with three arrivals of underground cables from

Rafina as well as three departures of underground single core cables which end up at the

UHV Center of Pallini. (150/400 kV).

Afterwards six (6) single core underground power cables depart from the SVC under study

and will end up to the triple 3-phase busbars 150 kV of the UHV Center of Pallini.

(150/400 kV), through single core outdoor termination boxes, of underground cables 150

kV. These underground cables are XLPE, single core, 150 kV (170 kV max), with alumi-

num (Al) conductors of cross section 1200 mm2.

All underground cables will be placed within a ditch 1.600 mm deep, 1.400 mm wide.

The six (6) single-core underground cables are divided into two groups of triangular lay-

out. The center horizontal distance between the two parallel circuits will be 800 mm.

Except for the underground, single-core cables within the ditch will be also laid two fiber

optic cables, each of which will comprise 24 optical fibres (18 single-mode optical fibres

G652/6 single-mode optical fibres G655).

√√ EExxppaannssiioonn ooff tthhee UUHHVV CCeenntteerr ooff PPaalllliinnii iinn tthhee PPPPCC ffiieelldd

According to the abovementioned the 2nd proposed solution of HTSO was preferred in-



volving the installation of Static Var Compensators (SVCs) next to the UHV Center of

Pallini. Six (6) single core underground power cables depart from the two SVC and will

end up to the triple 3-phase busbars 150 kV of the UHV Center of Pallini. (150/400 kV),

through single core outdoor termination boxes, of underground cables 150 kV. These un-

derground cables are XLPE, single core, 150 kV (170 kV max), with aluminum (Al) con-

ductors of cross section 1200 mm2.

The performance of the connection of 6 single core underground power cables with the

triple 3-phase busbars 150 kV of the UHV Center of Pallini (150/400 kV), requires its ex-

pansion. In the expansion area grow some trees which will have to be removed. The ex-

pansion involves the addition of two gates for the connection of the electric conductors

which arrive in Pallini at the side of the 150 kV of the UHV Center as well the connection

of all necessary switchgear and electromechanical equipment.

This particular intervention will take place in the west side of the UHV Center of Pallini

close to its existing fence which separates it from the neighbouring residences.

44..22 DDeessccrr iipptt iioonn ooff tthhee ccoonnssttrruucctt iioonn pphhaassee ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

The infrastructure works and the construction works for the installation of the wind farms

(WF) under study are the following:

Construction of internal road network – localized improvements of the access road

network.

Landscaping of the surroundings of the WT for the assembly and the erection of

the wind turbines.

Foundation of the WT.

Erection of the wind turbines.

Construction of cable channels.

Construction of one concrete control cabin (CC) per wind farm, each with surface

approximately of 72 m2

Construction of medium voltage networks.

Installation of three Step-up Substations.

Construction of High Voltage Networks (overhead line approximately 25 km from

the substations up to the location Mpouros, submarine line up to the port of Rafina,

underground line from Rafina up to the UHV Center of Pallini).

44..33 DDeessccrr iipptt iioonn ooff tthhee ooppeerraatt iioonn pphhaassee ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

The wind farms will be operating as independent generators of electric power and will be



interconnected with the system of PPC to which the total production will be exclusively

disposed pursuant to the applicable legislation.

According to the principal, the essence and the obligations provided by L 2773/99, the

companies of generation and exploitation of the specific WFs are aiming at:

The protection of the natural environment against the impacts of the Electric Power

Activities.

The fulfilment of the country’s energy needs.

The secure supply and the regular provision of electric power supply services of

high quality.

The protection of the people from potential dangers arising from energy activities

and the compliance with health and safety regulations by all people occupied

therein.

The proposed WFs are expected to contribute to the electrification and environmental re-

lief of Attica, a region which is particularly environmentally overburdened due to the large

concentration of population, as well as to the partial coverage of the country’s energy

needs. The generated energy is infused into the central part of the national electric system

and contributes, thus, to the treatment of the commonly known imbalance between North

and South, which characterizes the country’s electric system, and to the reduction of the

transmission losses.

Additionally with the optimum exploitation of the available wind energy, it will contribute to

the accomplishment of the environmental targets and the international obligations of the

country, but also to the compliance with the principle of sustainable development.

The WT are arranged at a proper distance between them so that effects of aerodynamic

shadow and high wind turbulence are avoided and their energy efficiency is optimized

while their wear and tear is being reduced and the life of the installation is being increased

Engineers and technicians will be working in the wind power stations for the monitoring

and everyday maintenance of the stations and the networks. All necessary spaces for

staff services (office, WC) are in the control cabins. Additionally scheduled or emergency

maintenance visits will be requested from specialized crews.

A system of central supervisory control and telemonitoring, consisting of a computer and

the appropriate devices and communication lines will be installed in the wind power sta-

tions. The system will be recording all data relevant with the operation of the wind farm

and will allow its remote operation and control.



44..44 IIrrrreegguullaarr aanndd ddaannggeerroouuss ssii ttuuaatt iioonnss

aa)) GGeenneerraall

The project is not related to emission of chemical substances or radiation. Moreover there

is no explosion risk because the operation of a WF does not require the usage of inflam-

mable or explosive materials. The operation of a wind farm is particularly safe since it is

pure electrical and does not require inflammable fuels nor active acids or other caustic

substances. Furthermore there is no accident risk due to contact with warm surfaces of

the installation as the wind turbines operate in environment temperature.

bb)) CCoonnssttrruuccttiioonn aanndd ooppeerraattiioonn pphhaasseess

During the construction phase, the installation of the wind turbines will be executed, pref-

erably, at time periods with favorable weather conditions in order to avoid difficulties dur-

ing the installation. The transportation and installation of the pillars will start after comple-

tion and inspection of all necessary technical works (road construction, foundation bases

etc) and so that no hazardous situations arise.

During the operation phase, the wind turbines and all other equipment which will be used

are not related with the possibility of outbreak of irregular and hazardous situations. More-

over the maintenance and monitoring of the installed wind turbines during the operation

phase of the project will be frequent and with ultimate goal the normal operation and the

avoidance of any accidents.



55 AALLTTEERRNNAATTIIVVEE SSOOLLUUTTIIOONNSS

55..11 ZZeerroo ssoolluutt iioonn

In the framework of preparation of this Environmental Impact Assessment the option of

“zero solution” was also examined alternatively, in the sense of the continuation of the ex-

isting situation without the construction and operation of the proposed project. This sce-

nario is mentioned in the international bibliography as a “do-nothing case” or “zero solu-

tion” and is examined in the framework of environmental licencing of works / activities.

More specifically:

Considering the “zero solution” the scenario of the continuation of the environmental situa-

tion as it is up to date is being adopted. It is evident that regarding the project under study

a solution of this kind (zero) is equal with the loss of generated energy from renewa-

ble/friendly energy sources (see wind energy potential and it is opposed to the adopted

direction of the country (and the EU) in the energy sector; even more nowadays since the

country has committed itself with the Directive 2009/28/EC (EEL 140/2009) to abide by

the following:

a) 20% share of energy from RES in the gross final consumption of energy.

b) 40% at least share of electricity from RES in the gross final consumption of electricity.

c) 20% at least share of energy from RES in the final consumption of energy for heating

and cooling.

d) 10% at least share of energy from RES in the final consumption of energy for trans-

ports.

Hence, in view of the above it becomes clear that a continuation of today’s situation, as

incorporated by a zero solution, is extremely harmful for the country (in terms of develop-

ment and economy), for the energy sector (in terms of non-generation of electric power

from RES), for the natural sources (in terms of non-exploitation of renewable energy

sources like the wind), but also for the environment (in terms of growth of the global envi-

ronmental problems such as the greenhouse effect and the climate change and in terms

of failure to reduce production of the polluting lignite-fired units of PPC and the conse-

quent maintenance of the emissions of fly ash, gas residues and other contaminants at

today’s levels).

Besides the negative impact on the abovementioned factors, the adoption of the “zero so-lution” affects adversely the local society and the revenues of the inhabitants, since the execution of works related to RES contributes to the creation of jobs and income. Espe-cially nowadays, considering the current economic situation of the country, the construc-tion and operation of such projects can contribute (cumulatively with all RES projects) to responding to a significant part of the national deficit.

Upon further review of the zero solution, i.e. the cancellation of the project in the light of



“goods weighting” we point out that weighting any negative environmental impacts of the project against the economic and energy benefits, which naturally favours overwhelmingly the latter ones, is in principle not correct. More correct is weighing the most important pos-itive environmental impacts from the implementation of the project (elimination or reduc-tion of the production of PPC polluting units, contribution to the reduction of pollutants causing the greenhouse effect etc) against the low and largely temporary and reversible negative environmental impacts deriving from the construction and the operation of the project. Weighting the above two environmental indexes results clearly in favour of the installation of the project. If to this weighting the other benefits from the installation (eco-nomic, energy etc) are added, then the zero solution results in being totally unfavourable and thus rejectable.

Based on the criteria, which were analysed above, at this point it is mentioned that the op-tion of “zero solution” is being rejected and the effort is orientated towards the licencing of the proposed project and the utilization of its multiple benefits at glob-al/community/national level. However it is quite difficult, even not realistic, to consider that projects of similar nature may be executed without any negative impact in the fields which are examined in this Environmental Impact Assessment. Nevertheless options which can prevent, limit and generally confront any negative impacts, can be chosen.

For this reason, especially in this Environmental Impact Assessment, the following was taken into consideration and evaluated:

The general and special directions of the spatial planning policy, deriving from ap-proved spatial and town plannings or other land use plans.

The environmental sensitivity of the wider area of installation of the project. The characteristics of any important environmental impacts, like their size, their

complexity, their intensity and extent, their duration, their frequency and their re-versibility.

The benefits for national economy, national security, public health and public inter-est.

The positive impacts to the natural and human environment at national/community/ global level, thus in an area wider than the one directly affected by the project.

55..22 AAll tteerrnnaatt iivvee ssoolluutt iioonnss ((ccoonncceerrnniinngg wwiinndd ffaarrmmss && wwiinndd ttuurrbbiinneess))

This section analyses the alternative scenarios/options which were examined and exclud-ed from the environmental licencing procedure. The main reason which led to the rejection of those alternative solutions was that their planning did not fully or partially comply with the criteria initially set by the consultants assigned to the preparation of this assessment. Those criteria pertained to the following:

- Location of the wind farm fields in areas where no priority habitats or other important habitats are located.

- Minimization of the impacts on the species of avifauna. - Minimization of the impacts on other species of fauna. - Location of the fields as far as possible from natural spaces/niches of the species of

avifauna. - Design of the wind farms and installation of the wind turbines outside Zone A which

was proposed in the Special Environmental Assessment.

In view of the above it is stated that after the re-planning and evaluation, and thereupon

the issuance of the positive opinion on the Preliminary Environmental Assessment &

Evaluation (Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works/General

Directorate for Environment/Special Environmental Service, Ref. 110580/15.12.2008),



these scenarios led to the final proposed solution, which is presented in this Environmen-

tal Impact Assessment and for which the final environmental licencing and approval of en-

vironmental terms is requested.

Details are laid out below. Specifically:

I. ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 1 – WIND FARM POLYGONS & WIND TURBINE POSI-

TIONS (INITIAL PLANNING)

The initial planning (alternative solution) for the Group DAMCO ENERGY S.A. &

DIETHNIS CONSTRUCTION included eight (8) wind farms , with ten (10) fields and

ninety (90) wind turbines which would generate a total power of 180 MW . Τhese wind

farms would be the following:

“Kathara” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 12 wind turbines, with

total capacity 24 MW.

“Anatoli” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 11 wind turbines, with


“Spilia” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 14 wind turbines, with


“Milia” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 9 wind turbines, with total

capacity 18 MW.

“Platanistos” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 13 wind turbines,

with total capacity 26 MW.

“Paliopyrgos” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 6 wind turbines,

with total capacity 12 MW.

“Kerasia” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 14 wind turbines, with


“Platanos” WF: The initial planning in this wind farm included 11 wind turbines, of


Eight (8) fields of the above wind farms were located within the border of the protected

area with code GR2420001 “Oros Ochi, Kampos Karystou, Potami, Akrotirio Kafirefs,

Paraktia thalassia zoni” while two (2) outside of it (south side of WF “Platanistos” and WF

“Paliopyrgos”).

The main reasons which resulted to the rejection of the above planning and to the need of

a re-planning are specified below for each wind farm. It is noted that the re-planning re-

ferred to a part of the abovementioned wind farms and not to their entirety. The Wind

Farms which were submitted to re-planning were those which would be improved as per



the above criteria. The rest remained the same. However, all of them are presented and

analysed below.

Specifically:

“Kathara” WF

No changes were required in the wind farm, neither in the field location nor in the ar-

rangement of the wind turbines.

“Anatoli” WF


rangement of the wind turbines

“Spilia” WF

In this wind farm the initial planning concerned a field with 14 wind turbines, the arrange-

ment of which involved 5 wind turbines in the north-west side and 9 wind turbines in the

south-east side. However, taking in consideration the fact that the 2 eastmost wind tur-

bines were located on the borders of Zone A of the SEA but also since they were located

in an area which presented non typical elements of the habitat type 6220, those two wind

turbines were relocated with densification of the wind turbines (WTs) to the north-west

side. It is also clarified that the distances between the WTs have become the minimum

allowable and consequently a potential further densification is not possible since the wake

effect between the WTs would result in a significant burdening of their fatigue load. Addi-

tionally, this option is considerably favourable for the avifauna of the area.

“Milia” WF

In this wind farm the initial planning concerned a field with 9 wind turbines, the arrange-

ment of which involved 3 wind turbines in the west side of the field and 6 wind turbines in

its east side. However, taking in consideration the fact that 4 wind turbines were located

on the borders of Zone A of the SEA but also since they were located in an area which

presented non typical elements of the habitat type 6220, those wind turbines were relo-

cated within the Wind Farm. One of them was relocated outside Zone A of the SEA and

the remaining 3 were relocated on the border of Zone A creating a wide gap between

them and the other wind turbines. Additionally, this option is considerably favourable for

the avifauna of the area.

“Platanistos” WF


rangement of the wind turbines



“Paliopyrgos” WF

No changes were required in this wind farm, neither in the field location nor in the ar-

rangement of the wind turbines so that there would be improvement as regards the initially

set criteria. However it is noted that during the re-planning of the wind farm a densification

of the wind turbines which was carried out, increased the wind turbines from 6 (in the al-

ternative solution) to 8 (in the proposed solution), for economic-technical reasons; i.e. so

that the economic stability of the project would not be deranged because of the cutbacks

in the other wind farms which constitute the total project and considering that the addition

of 2 WTs in the particular area is environmentally neutral.

“Kerasia” WF

In this wind farm the initial planning concerned a field with 14 wind turbines. However

considering that the first WT of the wind farm (from west to east) was located on the bor-

ders of Zone A which was proposed in the Special Environmental Assessment, and that

the WTs 6-10 (from west to east) were located at high altitude on the peaks of the moun-

tain Kerasia, where increased activity of birds of prey has been observed, those wind tur-

bines were removed. Upon re-planning of the Wind Farm, the arrangement of the wind

turbines involved 6 WTs on the west side of the field and 6 WTs on its east side.

“Platanos” WF

This wind farm included two (2) fields with eleven (11) wind turbines, five (5) of which

were planned to be located in the northern field and six (6) in the southern. However con-

sidering that the northern field is located in an area where the impacts on birds of the area

might be significant and additionally the northern field was located very close to Zone A of

the Special Environmental Assessment, this field was removed. During the re-planning of

the Wind Farm the northern field was totally rejected and the southern was submitted to

re-planning bringing about the installation of 7 WTs.

A view of the abovementioned alternative solution is presented in the image below.



II. ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 2 – WIND FARM POLYGONS & WIND TURBINE POSI-TIONS (*This solution was the PROPOSED SOLUTION in the framework of the EN-VIRONMENTAL IMPACT PRE-ASSESSMENT. It is here examined as an alternative, since this solution was preferred -after cutbacks of WTs- by the Special Environ-mental Service of the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change)

The solution, which was initially proposed for approval according to the Procedure of Pre-

liminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project, and which is now re-

viewed as an alternative solution, included eight (8) wind farms , with ten (10) fields and

ninety four (94) wind turbines which would generate a total power of 188 MW . Τhose

wind farms were the following:

“Kathara” WF: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Preliminary

Environmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project for this wind farm included

18 wind turbines, with total capacity 36 MW.

“Anatoli” WF: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Preliminary



”Spilia” WF: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Preliminary En-

vironmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project for this wind farm included 14

wind turbines, with total capacity 28 MW.

“Milia” WF: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Preliminary En-

vironmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project for this wind farm included 9

wind turbines, with total capacity 18 MW.

“Platanistos” WF: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Prelimi-

nary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project for this wind farm in-

cluded 13 wind turbines, with total capacity 26 MW.

“Paliopyrgos” WF: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Prelimi-

nary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project for this wind farm in-

cluded 10 wind turbines, with total capacity 20 MW.

“Kerasia” WF: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Preliminary



WF “Platanos”: The planning which was proposed in the Procedure of Preliminary



A view of the abovementioned alternative solution is presented in the image below.



The main reasons which led to the rejection of the above planning and to the need of a re-

design, are related with the “positions-opinions” of the Advisory Services (eg. Department

of Management of Natural Environment of the Natural Tourism Organization etc) during

the Procedure of Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation of this project. In

view of this it should be noted that the above solution –after the cutbacks made in the

number of wind turbines- received a positive opinion (Ministry for the Environment, Physi-

cal Planning and Public Works / General Directorate for Environment / Special Environ-

mental Service, Ref. 110580 / 15.12.2008).



II. ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 3 – WIND FARM POLYGONS & WIND TURBINE POSI-TIONS (*This solution was the approved solution in the framework of the PRELIMI-NARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION (see document of Special Environmental Service, Ref. 110580 / 15.12.2008 and the certified map for land use 8.A), which was examined in this EIA, and upon specific alterations the PROPOSED SOLUTION was created which is laid out in this issue)

The solution, which was initially proposed for approval according to the Procedure of Pre-

liminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation of the project, and which is now re-

viewed as an alternative solution, included eight (8) wind farms , with ten (10) fields and

seventy nine (79) wind turbines which would generate a total power of 158 MW . Τhese

wind farms were the following:

“Kathara” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact

Preassessment of the project included 14 wind turbines with total capacity 28 MW.

“Anatoli” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact


”Spilia” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact


“Milia” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact


“Platanistos” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact


“Paliopyrgos” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact


“Kerasia” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact


“Platanos” WF: The licenced / approved solution in the Environmental Impact


A view of the abovementioned alternative solution is presented in the certified map

of land use 8.A of the Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation which is

attached to this EIA in the chapter “Supporting documents - Approvals”



It is important to mention here that upon specific alterations which were performed in the above alternative solution , and refer to the following:

- increase of capacity of the wind turbine type which will be used, from 2 MW to 2,3 MW.

This wind turbine of ENERCON has the exact same dimensions as the initially reviewed of

2MW, but due to its design based on the latest developments of technology, it has capaci-

ty increased approximately by 15%. This way the achieved environmental balance is posi-

tive, because more electricity is generated with WTs of the exactly same external fea-

tures. It should be added here that the required opinions of the Regulatory Authority for

Energy (RAE) were issued regarding the amendment of validity of the Generation Licenc-

es of the proposed Wind Power Stations for Electricity Generation.

- increase of the number of wind turbines in the WF “Paliopyrgos” from 6 which were ap-

proved in the Environmental Impact Pre-assessment of the project to 8, without change of

the installation field, resulting in the increase of capacity from 12 MW to 18,4 MW without

any additional environmental burdening. In this framework the respective positive opinion

by the Regulatory Authority for Energy (RAE) about the amendment of Generation Li-

cence (no ∆6 / Φ17.1391 / οικ.19515 / 02.10.2006 Generation Licence) of the above wind

farm was issued, and

- decrease in the number of wind turbines, from 13 to 8, so that the carrying capacity in

the wind farm “Platanistos”, would not be exceeded according to the decision of RAE

without change of the installation field and resulting in the decrease of capacity.

the PROPOSED SOLUTION was suggested in the framework of this Environmental Impact Assessment. This solution is presented in the maps and designs which accom-

pany this EIA.

The proposed solution of this EIA does not create any issues as regards the licenced so-

lution of the Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation and more specifically

the differences between them, since:

- The change of capacity of the WT without change of the WTs positions and without

change of the technical features does not raise any issue – specially of environmental or

spatial planning nature. Furthermore this change is accompanied by the required opinions

of the Regulatory Authority for Energy (RAE) about the amendment of Generation Licenc-

es of the proposed Wind Power Stations for Electricity Generation.

- The decrease in the number of wind turbines in the WF “Platanistos” does not raise any

issue of environmental or spatial planning nature. Furthermore it should be mentioned that

this decrease complies with the guidelines of the Special Land Use Plan for the RES and

specifically the provisions concerning the maximum allowable density of WTs in Local Au-

thorities.

- The increase of the number of wind turbines in the WF “Paliopyrgos” from 6 which were

approved in the Environmental Impact Pre-assessment of the project to 8, without change



of the installation field does not raise any issue of environmental or spatial planning na-

ture. Furthermore this alteration of capacity received the required positive opinion of the

Regulatory Authority for Energy (RAE) about the amendment of the respective Generation

Licence.

Consequently, the proposed solution which is presented in this EIA and which has very

few differences from the approved one of the Environmental Impact Pre-assessment does

not raise any special issue of environmental or/and spatial planning nature. The impacts

on the environment (natural / human) were examined in the framework of this EIA and are

considered acceptable, the spatial planning compatibility was fully examined in ISSUE C

(REVIEW OF TERMS/LIMITATIONS OF THE SPECIAL FRAMEWORK FOR SPATIAL

PLANNING & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY

SOURCES).

55..33 AAll tteerrnnaatt iivvee ssoolluutt iioonnss ((ffoorr tthhee rrooaadd nneettwwoorrkk ccoonnssttrruucctt iioonn ffoorr aacccceessss aanndd iinntteerrnnaall rrooaadd nneettwwoorrkk ccoonnssttrruucctt iioonn))

The alternative solutions for the road construction works for access and internal road net-

works were directly connected with the alternative solutions regarding the location of the

wind farms and the wind turbines. Hence, every alternative solution of the latter which was

reviewed and rejected led also to the rejection of the construction works of access and

internal road networks.

In any case the final access and internal road networks which are presented in the pro-

posed for licencing solution of this EIA have advantages compared to the plan of access

and internal road networks which was stipulated in the alternative solutions. Consequently

the proposed solution is environmentally and in terms of spatial planning preferable from

the road construction plan which was planned for all alternative scenarios which were ex-

amined and rejected.

It is worth to mention that the length of the road network which was designed for the

needs of the solution which was proposed in the Environmental Impact Pre-assessment

(already examined as an alternative which was rejected) was approximately 43,5 km,

while the length of the road network in the proposed solution, in the framework of this EIA,

is approximately 31,5 km. The reduction of the road network by approximately 12 km is an

important environmental benefit due to the minimization of interventions in the natu-

ral environment of the area.

55..44 AAll tteerrnnaatt iivvee ssoolluutt iioonnss ((ffoorr tthhee mmeeddiiuumm vvooll ttaaggee nneettwwoorrkk 2200 kkVV oorr 3333 kkVV))

Like in the issue of the access and internal road networks, the medium voltage network

was directly connected with the alternative solutions regarding the location of the wind



farms and wind turbines, but also with the plans of the road networks (internal and ac-

cess). Hence, every alternative solution of the latter which was reviewed and rejected led

also to the rejection of the alignment of the medium voltage network.

In any case the final alignment of the medium voltage network which is presented in the

solution of this EIA which is being proposed for licencing has advantages compared to the

plan of the alignment of the medium voltage network which was designed in the alterna-

tive solutions. Consequently the proposed solution is environmentally preferable than the

medium voltage network plan which was designed for all alternative scenarios which were

examined and rejected.:

In the Environmental Impact Pre-assessment of the project the planned medium voltage

network was underground within the fields and followed mainly the alignment of the inter-

nal road network. Outside of the fields the same network was overground except for spe-

cific reservation concerning the wind frams of the north-east part of the area, i.e. WF

“Kathara”, “Anatoli” and “Kerasia”.

In the EIA of the project, and specifically in the proposed solution which is being present-

ed, the medium voltage network is designed as underground in and out of the wind farm

fields. Consequently it is obvious why the alternative solution of the Environmental Impact

Pre-assessment “underground within the WF fields – overground outside of the WF fields”

is being dismissed. The proposed solution has significant environmental benefits not

for the protection of species of wild avifauna but also for the minimization of im-

pacts on the landscape (e.g. less cables and less pillars in the landscape).

55..55 AAll tteerrnnaatt iivvee ssoolluutt iioonnss ((ffoorr tthhee SStteepp--uupp SSuubbssttaatt iioonnss 2200//115500 kkVV))

An alternative solution which was examined for the positions of the step-up substations

20/150 kV is the solution which was presented in the Environmental Impact Pre-

assessment of the project. The solution was rejected and preferred was the solution which

is presented in this EIA. The reasons for choosing this solution are related to the owner-

ship of the land where the three substations will be installed as well as to their distance

from the closest settlements. Specifically, the SS 2 “Antia” is on a property (rural) and the

SS 1 “Amygdalea” and 3 “Platanistos” are located in public forested areas, however of low

forest interest (ecosystems with low xerophytic sub-shrubs and meadows).

A view of the proposed and alternative solution for the installation positions of the step-up

substations is presented in the image below.



55..66 AAll tteerrnnaatt iivvee ssoolluutt iioonnss ((ffoorr tthhee hhiigghh vvooll ttaaggee nneettwwoorrkk 115500 kkVV))

For the interconnection of the proposed wind farms with the National Electricity Transmis-

sion System the construction of a new transmission line is being planned, which will con-

sist of three parts:

1. High Voltage Network 150 kV (Overhead - Underground). The line, approximately

22,658 km long, commences from the first substation “SS 1 Amygdalea”, close to the ho-

monymous municipal region, and ends up to the location Mpouros on the southmost edge

of the island, with a north-south direction. The line will be overhead except for one seg-

ment of approximately 700 m in its southest edge which will be underground.

2. High Voltage Network 150 kV (Submarine) (Karystos - Rafina). This line is in total

approximately 45 km long and will connect the first part of the line from the side of Evia at

a landing point on the rocky side of the location “Mpouros” with a landing point in Rafina,



of Attica.

3. High Voltage Network 150 kV (Underground) (Rafina – UHV Center of Pallini). The

high voltage transmission line between Rafina and the UHV Center of Pallini will be un-

derground during all its length – approximately 22 km – and will consist of two circuits.

In view of the above the alternative solutions which were reviewed refer to the follow-

ing:

For the first part, i.e. the overhead high voltage network 150 kV in Evia, three alternative

line routes were initially planned. Two of them were rejected, because they passed

through areas which have been qualified as Zone A in the Special Environmental As-

sessment.

For the first part the landing point was provided for and approved by the Preliminary Envi-

ronmental Assessment & Evaluation to be located in the remarkable sandy coast of the

area, in the eastmost edge of the bay of Karystos. However, after the residents’ protests,

as extensively described also in ISSUE B (INTERCONNECTION NETWORK ΚARYSTOS

– RAFINA) and specifically in Section 3.3.2 (Assessment and evaluation of the environ-

mental impacts of the landing point on the island of Evia), the relocation of the landing

point further east, on the rocky side east of cape Mpouros was decided. This solution, alt-

hough being considerably more expensive, because the High Voltage cable will have to

be buried in a rocky and not sandy ground, was nevertheless chosen as the optimum op-

tion responding also to the desire of the local community. Details are depicted in the im-

age below. Additionally three alternative solutions are being considered for the exact

alignment of the segment of the line in the area close to the cove of the landing point. The

main criterion upon which the selection of those three alternative scenarios was carried

out regarded the treatment of potential technical difficulties or property issues that might

arise.

Moreover, for the first part three alternatives solutions for terminals near the landing sta-

tion in the foreshore of Mpouros were considered. Details are depicted in the image be-

low.



For the parts of the High Voltage Network 150 kV “Karystos – Rafina” and “Rafina – UHV

Center of Pallini” the proposed solution is one. Nonetheless in Attica and more specifically

in the wider area of Rafina, two alternative landing points have been selected. Τhe first

point is located in the inland port of Rafina, while the second point is located on the bor-

ders of the municipalities of Rafina and Artemida, and more specifically in the location

Agios Nikolaos on the cape Velani.

The choice of the two alternative locations was made upon thorough examination of all

critical environmental and socio-economic conditions of the wider area of Rafina. The se-

lection of the final position of the landing point will be the result of constant communication

and cooperation with local bodies and prominent people, as well as with the competent

environmental authorities to which this EIA will be submitted.

Regarding the route of the cables in the inland port of Rafina observed were the com-

ments of the Ministry of Mercantile Marine and of the Organismos Limena Rafinas as in-

cluded in document no. 8221.Τ12/10/07/17-09-2007 by Ministry of Mercantile Marine

/Directorate of Port Infrastructures/Dep. b STUDIES AND PROJECTS.

Finally it is noted here that in the Environmental Impact Preassessment of the project the

landing of the submarine cable on the coast of Lavrio (near the PPC station) was consid-

ered and rejected, due to incapability of power absorption because of its commitment to

OΡΜIΣΚOΣ ΠΡOΣAIΓIAΛΩΣΗΣ



the future interconnection of Cyclades pursuant to the Transmission System Development

Plan.



66 CCOONNDDIITTIIOONN OOFF TTHHEE EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTT

66..11 SSttuuddyy aarreeaa

In this section the area under study is being defined, so that the final assessment of the

environmental impacts of the construction and the operation of the main project and the

accompanying supporting infrastructure on the natural and human environment of the

works area is feasible. For the determination of the surface of the area under study the

following was taken into consideration: a) the type and the size of the project in relation

with its zone of influence, and b) the environmental sensitivity of the area. Considering,

thus, that the main project and the accompanying supporting infrastructure are located to

a great extent within the borders of the protected areas of the Ecological Network Natura

2000, as study area is defined:

a. The area with code GR2420001 “Oros Ochi, Kampos Karystou, Potami, Akrotirio

Kafirefs, Paraktia thalassia zoni”, the borders of which are depicted in the following image.

b. The area with code GR2420012 “Oros Ochi, paraktia zoni kai nisides”, the borders of

which are depicted in the following image.

c. Part of the Municipalities of Marmari (municipal regions of Ag. Dimitrios, Kallianos) and

Karystos (municipal regions of Grampia, Kalyvia, Myloi, Aetos, Platanistos), as well as of

the Community of Kafireas (community regions of Amygdalea and Komito) which are lo-

cated within the borders of the protected area with code GR2420001 and in a distance of

at least 2 km from the wind farms under study. Τhe borders of the Municipalities of

Marmari and Karystos, and of the Community of Kafireas are shown in the image below.

Figure 1: View of the study area



66..22 AAbbiioott iicc ffeeaattuurreess

66..22..11 CCll iimmaattee aanndd bbiiooccll iimmaatt iicc ffeeaattuurreess

Eleven (11) Weather Stations and nine (9) Rain Gauge Stations operate in Evia, distribut-

ed on the island according to the body which has installed them:

- Five Weather Stations of the Hellenic National Meteorological Service (HNMS) in

Chalkida, in Aidipsos, in Oreous, in Kymi and in Karystos measuring precipitation,

temperature, relative humidity and wind speed in Beaufort for the period 1974 - 1978.

The station in Kymi also has barometric pressure measurements for the same time pe-

riod.

- The Weather Station of the Forest Research Institute in Agriovouno, which besides the

above measurements also has evaporimeter measurements (time period 1961-1980).

- The Weather Station of PPC in Aliveri providing precipitation, relative humidity and

temperature data (time period 1977-1990).

- The Weather Stations of the National Observatory of Athens in Steni and in Zarakes

providing temperature, humidity, precipitation days, wind speed and direction data.

- The Weather Station in the Municipality of Styra and of the National Observatory of

Athens with temperature, humidity, precipitation days wind speed and direction meas-

urements.

- The Weather Station of Istiaia, which is property of Mr. Schretsanitis Kostas, which

provides temperature, humidity, precipitation days, wind speed and direction data.

- Τhree Rain Gauge Stations of the Ministry for Environment, energy and Climate

Change in Istiaia, Kato Steni and Almyropotamos (time period 1960 - 1990).

- Six Rain Gauge Stations of the Ministry of Agricultural Development & Food in

Zermpisia of Distos, Kato Magoula, Milies, Kastaniotissa, Simia and Makrykappa with

recent and not constant measurements (except for the station of Zermpisia).

Processing of data from the Weather Station in Karystos regarding the climate situation in

the area under study showed the following.

aa)) PPrreecciippiittaattiioonn iinn tthhee wwiiddeerr aarreeaa

Precipitations result directly from the topographical features of the island and the winds

which blow from the area of NE Aegean Sea. The highest precipitation amount is ob-

served in the NE region of the island and the lowest in the W region along the Evripos

Strait.

In the southern area which includes also the wider area of the Dimosari gorge, many small

catchment areas are formed. Pursuant to the Guide to Hydrometeorological Practices of

the World Meteorological Organization, the alignment of isohyetal contour lines is not pos-



sible. According to the observations of the Weather Station in Karystos the annual precipi-

tation amount ranges between 600 and 700 mm. The average monthly and annual pre-

cipitation measurements of the same Weather Station are depicted in the table below.

Specifically:

Table 5: Average monthly and annual precipitation measurements (in mm) by the Weather

Station in Karystos.

Month W.S of Karystos January 134.30 February 123.10 Μarch 107.30 April 48.20 May 11.70 June 7.40 July 3.90

August 1.70 September 10.10

October 62.20 November 101.90 December 146.00

Total 757.80

bb)) AAnnaallyyssiiss ooff mmeetteeoorroollooggiiccaall ffaaccttoorrss iinn tthhee aarreeaa uunnddeerr ssttuuddyy

The closest Weather Station (WS) to the project under study (approx. 2,5 km), from which

we can draw data about the climate conditions prevailing in the wider study area, belongs

to the Hellenic National Meteorological Service (HNMS) and is situated in Karystos, at an

altitude of 10 m. It provides measurements for precipitation, air temperature, relative hu-

midity and nebulosity. More representative, due to its geographical position and distance

from the study area, is the WS of Karystos according to the measurements of which the

average precipitation (according to fifteen years’ measurements) reaches 758 mm, while

the respective temperature amounts to 17.96 °C. On Mount Ochi with a peak altitude of

1.398 m considerably more precipitation is expected because the mountain acts as a bar-

rier to the northern and north-eastern saturated winds of the Aegean Sea, which become

rain as soon as they hit it.

Table 6: Average monthly and average annual temperatures .

Month W.S. of Karystos January 10.6 February 10.5 Μarch 12.3 April 15.5 Μay 19.8 June 24.2 July 26.8

August 26.3 September 23.6

October 19.1 Νovember 14.8



Month W.S. of Karystos December 12.0

Average annual temperature 17.96

Considering that there is no weather station on the peak of Ochi, an extension of the exist-

ing meteorological data of Karystos is necessary for the extraction of approximate conclu-

sions regarding the basins that are created around the peak. This means that although for

the plain of Karystos up to an altitude of 100 m we accept as such the meteorological data

of its station, as regards the basins around Ochi with average altitude 200, 400 and 600 m

empirical rules were applied for the calculations. A short description thereof follows:

• Change of precipitation in relation to altitude : Τhe annual average precipitation in a

catchment area increases depending on the altitude of the catchment area up to a limit

where the maximum precipitation is observed and then decreases. This key altitude is

met lower in their surroundings. For our country the increase of the average precipita-

tion every 100 m is:

West Crete 125 mm

West Thessaly 112 mm

Thrace 95 mm

Sterea Ellada (Evia) 65 mm

Macedonia 55 mm

Peloponnisos 50 mm

East Thrace 55 mm

• Change of precipitation due to distance from the sea : When the factors are similar

(eg. altitudes, wind exposures etc) it has been found that in the direction of the route of

the usual storm winds, the more the distance from the sea grows, the biggest is the

decrease of precipitation.

• Change of the precipitation due to rain shadow: A mountain range with an axis which

is vertical to the main direction of the winds, causes a decrease in the precipitation (to

the opposite side of the movement direction of the air) to much lower values than the

respective altitude would justify.

In the catchment areas of the wider study area with average altitude 200, 400 and 600 m,

the average precipitation is expected to be:

758 mm + (200/100) * 65 mm = 888 mm

758 mm + (400/100) * 65 mm = 1.018 mm

758 mm + (600/100) * 65 mm = 1.148 mm, respectively

Considering also that the air temperature decreases with the altitude increase by 0,5 °C to

1,0 oC/100 m, the following derives for the three altitudes accordingly:



18o C - (0,5*200/100/1,50) oC = 17,4 oC

18o C - (0,5*400/100/1,50) oC = 16,7 oC

18o C - (0,5*600/100/1,50) oC = 16,0 oC

Full meteorological data of the weather station in Karystos are depicted in the table below.

Specifically:

Table 7: Meteorological data from the weather station of Karystos (Table 1/2).

Month W.S. of Karystos Temperature AV.CLOUD Evapotranspiration

MEAN AV.MAX AV.MIN ABS MAΧ

ABS MIN

TOTAL ΜAΧ 24H

January 10.6 13.9 7.7 21.0 -3.0 4.2 134.30 85.0 February 10.5 13.7 7.6 21.5 -3.0 4.8 123.10 70.0 Μarch 12.8 15.7 8.8 23.0 -0.5 4.0 107.30 90.0 April 15.5 19.2 11.6 26.0 4.0 3.2 48.20 92.0 Μay 19.8 23.6 15.4 30.0 9.0 2.4 11.70 16.0 June 24.2 28.0 19.6 36.0 12.0 1.2 7.40 34.0 July 26.8 30.5 22.3 38.5 9.0 0.8 3.90 25.0 August 26.3 30.1 22.0 37.5 16.0 0.9 1.70 6.0 September 23.6 27.7 19.6 35.0 12.6 1.4 10.10 38.0 October 19.1 23.0 15.6 30.5 9.0 2.8 62.20 110.0 Νovember 14.8 18.1 11.9 26.0 3.4 4.0 101.90 92.0 December 12.0 15.2 8.2 22.4 1.0 4.1 146.00 62.0

Table 8: Meteorological data from the weather station of Karystos (Table 2/2).

Month W.S. of Karystos CLOUDINESS PREC RAIN SNOW FOG WIND 0-1.5 1.6-6.4 6.5-8.0 GE 6B GE 8B

January 5.5 19.5 6.0 10.6 10.4 0.2 0.0 5.6 1.0 February 3.5 16.4 8.3 12.1 11.3 0.9 0.0 5.9 0.6 Μarch 6.5 19.4 6.1 9.2 8..6 1.0 0.1 3.6 0.5 April 10.1 15.8 4.1 6.4 6.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.1 Μay 14.1 15.1 1.8 3.3 3.3 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.1 June 21.1 8.7 0.1 1.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.4 July 24.4 6.5 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.5 August 23.8 7.1 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.2 September 19.7 0.0 0.4 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.1 3.4 0.2 October 12.0 14.7 3.4 6.1 6.1 0.0 0.0 4.5 0.4 Νovember 5.8 18.9 5.3 8.8 8.8 0.0 0.0 4.3 0.4 December 6.2 18.2 6.6 10.9 10.9 0.1 0.0 4.6 0.6

cc)) PPlluuvviiootthheerrmmiicc iinnddeexx QQ22 ooff EEmmbbeerrggeerr –– BBiioocclliimmaattiicc ddiiaaggrraamm ((CClliimmaattooggrraamm)) EEmmbbeerrggeerr--

SSaauuvvaaggee

The method Emberger-Sauvage is one of the most commonly used in the Mediterranean

area for the classification of the bioclimate. With this method bioclimatic zones corre-

sponding to the bioclimatic succession can be defined based on the temperature and pre-

cipitation change either by altitude or by latitude. The altitudinal change of the above cli-

mate characteristics is expressed through the altitudinal succession of the vegetation or



the vegetation zones.

For each weather station, the pluviothermic quotient Q2 is calculated according to the

Emberger formula:

where: Q2 = pluviothermic quotient,

P = annual precipitation in mm,

Μ = average highest temperature of the hottest month, and

m = average lowest temperature of the coldest month.

Table 9: Pluviothermic quotient of Weather Station in Karystos .

Weather Station Pluviothermic quotient Q2

P (mm) M (oΚ) m (o

Κ) M+m/2 M-m Q2

ΚARYSTOS 757,8 299,5 283,7 291,6 15,8 164,48

Figure 2: Climatogram Emberger-Sauvage for the weather station in Karystos.



The area is depicted in the Emberger-Sauvage climatogram according to the value of Q2

and of m in the weather station of Karystos. Karystos is belongs to the subhumid biocli-

matic zone with warm winter.

dd)) PPlluuvviiootthheerrmmiicc ddiiaaggrraamm ooff BBaaggnnoouullss && GGaauusssseenn

Upon observation of the chart below we note that that the arid or xerothermic period for

Karystos lasts from mid April until mid September.

Figure 3: Pluviothermic diagram for the weather station in Karystos.

66..22..22 MMoorrpphhoollooggiiccaall aanndd llaannddssccaappee cchhaarraacctteerr iisstt iiccss

66..22..22..11 IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn

Despite the fact that the evaluation and management of the landscape in protected areas

is extremely important at global level, in Greece there is still ignorance or big confusion as

regards this issue.

Pursuant to the European Landscape Convention of the Council Of Europe, as landscape

is defined a heterogeneous area whose character is the result of the action and interaction

of natural and/or human factors (Neveh and Lieberman 1984, Council of Europe, 2000,

Turner et. al. 2001).

According to Forman and Gordon (1986) as “landscape” is defined a heterogeneous land

area composed of a cluster of interacting ecosystems that is repeated in similar form through-

out. The above definition differs from the definition of the ecosystem in that it focuses in

groups of ecosystems and their interactions. Nevertheless the definition of the landscape

may be different depending on the study or the managerial approach.

Useful are also the definitions which contain the subjective dimension of the character of a

land, such as the following definition: “landscape is a sum of the characteristic features

Οµβροθερµικό Διάγραµµα

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Ι Φ Μ Α Μ Ι Ι Α Σ Ο Ν Δ

Μήνες

Θερ

µοκρ

ασία (

0C)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Ύψος

Βρο

χής

(mm)



which differentiate a specific area of the earth surface from other areas, as visible in an

optical field (Chatzistathis and Ispikoudis, 1995)”. Here the human factor defines the scale

– the optical field – and marks out a characteristic area as a landscape unit.

In Greek legislation the concept of the landscape is described in L.1650/1986 “About the

protection of the environment”, where the legislative formulation of landscape was formu-

lated as “every dynamic sum of biotic and abiotic factors and features of the environment

which individually or interacting in a specific area compose a visual experience.” It is worth

to mention here that Greece recently ratified the European Landscape Convention with L.

3827/2010 (Govt Gazette 30/A/25.02.2010). Pursuant to this Law the following definitions

apply:

““LLaannddssccaappee”” means an area as perceived by people whose character is the result of

the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors.

““LLaannddssccaappee pprrootteeccttiioonn”” means actions to conserve and maintain the significant or

characteristic features of a landscape, justified by its heritage value derived from its

natural configuration and/or from human activity.

""LLaannddssccaappee mmaannaaggeemmeenntt" means action, from a perspective of sustainable develop-

ment, to ensure the regular upkeep of a landscape, so as to guide and harmonise

changes which are brought about by social, economic and environmental processes;

The landscape is the most important unit for the management and conservation of the en-

vironment. It requires appropriate planning and actions for its protection, i.e. actions for

the expansion of the significant features and their forms as well as restoration of those

which have been degraded. It is also pointed out that the landscape is one of the levels of

the evaluation, monitoring and protection of the biodiversity. An hierarchical classification

has been now established distinguishing four levels of biodiversity: 1) genetic biodiversity,

2) species biodiversity, 3) ecosystems – habitats biodiversity and last 4) landscapes biodi-

versity.

The conservation evaluation of the landscape is a serious issue. The evaluation of con-

servation of the landscapes is mainly based on concepts which were elaborated in the

Red List or the Red Book about Threatened Landscapes suggested by Naveh and

Lieberman (1984) for the specification of areas of special cultural and ecological interest,

which are threatened by contemporary human pressures and are degraded or risk to be

degraded.

66..22..22..22 EEvvaalluuaattiioonn ooff tthhee llaannddssccaappee iinn tthhee ssttuuddyy aarreeaa

Four landscape sections with special features are recognized in the landscape of the

study area. These are the following:



The rocky, high peaks of Ochi (Profitis Ilias, Giouda, Neraida, Tsigathia, Mpoumplia),

characteristic rocky formations of amphibolite and serpentine visually prevail in all

southern Evia.

The forested northern side of Ochi which is extended from the gorge of Agios Dimitrios

to the cape of Kafireas, corrugated by deep gorges and covered with thick forests of

evergreen trees and bushes.

The naked eastern and southern sides of Ochi which are covered with low vegetation

of brushwood or maquis and are carved by small gorges.

The once cultivated plain of Karystos, nowadays pasture land with natural fences of

broad leaved trees and bushes.

Inside the above landscapes several landscape features, which might be of small surface

but significant aesthetic and ecological value, stand out:

Beds of streams and torrents, along with clusters of hygrophilous vegetation.

Rock formations, which are important for chasmophytes and birds of prey.

Steep coasts, which offer shelter to numerous sea animals and seabirds.

Individual clusters of trees/bushes.

The small wetland in the plain of Karystos.

Landscape parts which are visually independent and have great aesthetic value

(Dimosari gorge, Kastanologgos, Agios Dimitrios gorge, Rouklia valley, area of

Kastelo Rosso, Archampolis valley, mountains of Cavo d’oro, the ridge which connects

the peak Kerasia with the cape of Kafireas).

The following criteria were taken into consideration for the evaluation of the landscape in

the chapter of the in principio environmental assessment. Specifically:

- The aaeesstthheettiicc vvaalluuee of a landscape is related to the variety of natural terrain. The

presence of surface water and of benchmarks (characteristic peaks, capes, clusters of

forests etc) at various distances from the visitor give to a landscape bigger aesthetic

value. The rock formations and the water surfaces (except of the sea which is included

under the item “coasts”) make a landscape more attractive to visitors.

- The eeccoollooggiiccaall vvaalluuee of a landscape is connected to the species of flora and fauna,

which conventionally is represented by the vegetation diversity (it was not deemed

necessary to give more emphasis to threatened or protected species).

- The ccuullttuurraall vvaalluuee is represented by the existence of monuments from various time

periods (ancient times, Byzantine – post-Byzantine times, contemporary times). In-

cluded are only monuments recognizable to visitors and easy to visit (ancient



Drakospito – Kolones – Elliniko, post-Byzantine Kastelo Rosso, contemporary build-

ings – watermills – paved paths).

- The eeccoonnoommiicc vvaalluuee is related to the accessibility (for visitors but also for the transpor-

tation of materials for the improvement of infrastructures) but also the existence of at-

tractions for different visitors groups. Beaches and paths represent different kinds of

visitors groups, while “view sites with shadow and food” represent infrastructures in

settlements and key-positions of the area (with the exception of Karystos, the area

does not provide to visitors accommodation facilities).

- The vvuullnneerraabbiilliittyy is related with the protection status (part of the area has been sug-

gested to be included in the Community Network Natura 2000) and with the disturb-

ance due the existing or planned human activities.

The environmental impact assessment regarding the landscape and the landscape char-

acteristics of the area is being carried out (see chapter of environmental impact assess-

ment) upon having taken into consideration all the above.

66..22..22..33 EEvvaalluuaattiioonn ooff tthhee llaannddssccaappee ooff tthhee ssttuuddyy aarreeaa aaccccoorrddiinngg ttoo tthhee SSppeecciiaall

FFrraammeewwoorrkk ffoorr SSppaattiiaall PPllaannnniinngg aanndd SSuussttaaiinnaabbllee DDeevveellooppmmeenntt ffoorr RReenneewwaabbllee

EEnneerrggyy SSoouurrcceess

For the impact assessment on the landscape of the wind farms to be licenced, the visual

intervention from the sites of special interest as defined in the Joint Ministerial Decision of

the Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development for Renewable

Energy Sources.

The performed control is presented in detail in ISSUE C (REVIEW OF

TERMS/LIMITATIONS OF THE SPECIAL FRAMEWORK FOR SPATIAL PLANNING

AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES) which

accompanies this EIA, where a compatibility control was carried out of the investment with

the terms/limitations of the Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable De-

velopment for Renewable Energy Sources. According to the results of the review

which was performed in the framework of Annex IV of the Joint Ministerial Decision

of the Special Land Use Plan for the RES no impacts of the proposed investment

are observed on the landscape and on the existing landscape characteristics . Nev-

ertheless the following is mentioned here:

Regarding the examination of the criteria for the integration of the proposed wind farm in-

stallation in the landscape, applied are the rules concerning landscape as defined in An-

nex IV of the Joint Ministerial Decision 49828 (Govt. Gazette 2464/Β/03.12.2008). Hence,

upon examination of the Sites of Special Interest which are mentioned in this Annex, the

following derives:



1. Μonuments registered in the List of World Heritage and other important

monuments, archaeological sites and historic places of par. 5, subpar. bb) of

article 50 of L.3028/02 do not exist in a distance of 6 km from the proposed instal-

lation positions of the wind turbines.

2. Zones of absolute protection (Zones A) of other archaeological sites do not

exist in a distance of 6 km from the proposed installation positions of the wind tur-

bines.

3. Core zones of National Parks, Monuments of Nature, Aesthetic Forests of

par. 3. and 4. of article 19 of L.1650/86 do not exist in a distance of 0,8 km from

the proposed installation positions of the wind turbines.

4. Traditional villages do not exist in a distance of 6 km from the proposed installa-

tion positions of the wind turbines.

5. Statutory or configured touristic areas, tourist accommodations of medium

or large size, special tourist infrastructures and tourist ports do not exist in a

distance of 2 km from the proposed installation positions of the wind turbines.

Consequently, the criterion of integration of the wind farm installation in the landscape is

only examined from the Site of Special Interest “Borders of cities or villages”. Hence, and

keeping also in mind that the closest settlements are not considered as touristic or re-

markable, the radius of the zones (in km) within the Wind Capacity Priority Areas is A=0.5,

Β=1, C=2. This leads to the following calculations:

√ On the surface EΖONE A the location of wind turbines is not allowed.

√ On the surface EΖONE B the location of ~9 wind turbines is allowed.

√ On the surface EΖONE C the location of ~66 wind turbines is allowed.

The abovementioned densities conform to the rules regarding the settlements which are

located in a distance of at least 2 km from the proposed wind farms. However it should be

mentioned that in distance of 500 µ. from the village Schizali [Zone A (see above)] is lo-

cated the WT 7 of the WF ANATOLI (i.e. WT 7 is located exactly on the border of Zone A).

The above calculations lead to the conclusion that:

- The existing planning and the position of the WT does not exceed in any case the al-

lowed density per zone.

- The 2nd criterion does not need to be reviewed since terms about the density as stipu-

lated by the 1st criterion are fulfilled.

66..22..33 GGeeoollooggyy,, tteeccttoonniicc aanndd ssooii ll cchhaarraacctteerr iisstt iiccss

In the study area the following type of soil has been recognized according to the soil clas-



sification system of FAO - UNESCO:

EEuurrii--LLiitthhiicc LLeeppttoossooll:: shallow soil over hard rock or sandy material Leptosols contain

sandy or highly calcareous material. They are usually found in mountain areas as well

as in areas where the soil has eroded up to the point that the hard rock comes to the

surface. Due to the limited soil growth, Leptosols do not show any particular structure.

The coverage percentage of this soil type in Europe reaches 9 %.

Evia is characterized by an intense terrain, multifarious, steep cliffs and a limited drainage

network. In the southest part of Evia prevail amphibolites and amphibolite, sericite or chlo-

rite with lenticular structures of marble. Up north from the schists are extended cipollin

formations. Moreover, we meet local marble formations or crystallic limestones in a con-

siderable surface. Finally, in locations of the coastal zone of Evia we meet youngest allu-

vial deposits and colluvium in a small area (IΓΜE, 1967 & IΓΜE, 1978).

Between the islands of Evia and Andros, on the western half part of the strait, is a fault

with NNE-SSW direction (IΓΜE, 1989). According to the bathymetric chart (Y.Y. 1989),

and the respective bathymetric sketches (Papatheodorou a.o., 1995):

a) steep pitch is observed along the coasts of the island of Evia, which ranges between 5-

8%,

b) the shelf break is situated to a depth of approximately 150 m,

c) the area forms two basins along the axis of the strait, which are separated by a subma-

rine ridge with E-W direction and average depth 250 m, and

d) the northest basin has a maximum depth of 540 m while the southest approx. 400 m.

Τhe soil of the area (even the soil which is found in depths deeper than the surface) con-

sists of sand in percentages which range between 24 -56%. A considerable percentage of

the sand is constituted by fragments of shells and sceletic elements of sea foraminifera

gastropods, pteropods etc, mainly in the area of the continental shelf of Evia. In deeper

areas the sludge and the clay are found increased to a percentage which ranges between

35-41%. Two sediment types prevail: sandy clay-sludge in the deeper areas (north-south

basin and submarine ridge) and clay-sludge sand in the other deep or shallow areas. The

most important minerals are: quartz, plagioclase, chlorite, mica, kaolinite, calcite, arago-

nite and K-feldspar (found not so frequently).

The tectonic blueschist cover in Evia consists of two series, the one below Styra and the

other over Ochi (Karikatsos 1991). The tectonic section of Styra (more than 1 km thick) is

a series of medium-thickness marbles and cipolins with intercalations of mica schists

which at times (gradually) become quartzites. Tectonically they lay below the section of

Ochi and above the metaflysch or the marbles of the indigenous section of

Almyropotamos. The tectonic section of Ochi ( > 1km thick) consists of muscovite,



epidote, chlorite, glaucophane and quartz schists with intercalations of marbles,

metabasites, metarhyolite-metagranite and intercalations of quartzites (Shaked et al.

2000). The tensile diaclases have a general NW-SE direction and are found in numerous

rocks of the Ochi section, like gneiss, amphibolites, quartz, meta-pegmatites, marbles,

chlorite schists etc. Diaclases which are found in gneiss (metarhyolite-metagranite) and

metabasites which are connected with the Permian-Triassic magmatism are particularly

mineral rich (Katzir et al. 2000, Pe-Piper & Piper 2002).

As regards the mineral composition of the area, quartz is not found in high percentages

and ranges between 5-16%, with the exception of a specimen in the SE coast of Evia

(33%). Τhe low percentage and the low range of quartz rates is not related with the ba-

thymetry of the area nor with the grading change. Most possible cause is the quartz poor

material offer from the rocks of the coastal areas.

Plagioclases are found in a small percentage 3-18% and relatively high concentration in

the sandier sediments of the west part along the coasts of Evia. The most important feed-

ing source with plagioclases are considered the amphibolites. Notable is the total absence

of K- feldspar in the area due to their reduced presence in the rocks of the area but also

due to their fast erosion. Mica are found in high percentages in the whole area (20-50%).

Kaolinite is found in increased percentages 7-29 % in the central and west part of the

strait, in deeper areas where fine separates (sludge and clay) prevail. The degradation of

mica, amphibolites and feldspathic rocks of Evia is deemed to be feeding the area with

kaolinite rich material.

The existence of chlorite in the area is scarce. The erosion of chlorite schists in the

coastal zone of Evia feeds, probably, the area with clastic material enriched with chlorite.

Calcite, unlike quartz and plagioclase, is found in higher percentages, 4-20 %, in the strait

of Kafireas. Additionally notable is a geographical differentiation, presenting higher per-

centages in the east part (because it id fed with cipolin from Andros).

Aragonite is found in very small concentrations in the majority of specimen. According to

studies regarding grain size and mineralogical parameters but based also on the hydrody-

namic status of the area, the allocation of grain size types and of minerals is defined by

the quality of the terrigenous material available in the area in combination with the direc-

tion and speed of the periodical currents. Τhe sediments which cover the area up to the

shelf break are residual, the shell fractures in combination with high percentage of coarse

grained material, small thickness of sediments and the intense circulation of sea massifs

confirm this opinion. On the contrary sediments in deeper areas have derived from the

transfer and deposit of terrigenous material or material of coastal erosion in these areas.

In the area of the continental shelf where currents are stronger the minerals of sludge or



clay phase show a decrease while relatively fine grain sized separates are increased in

deeper areas.

The presence of these middle grained-fine grained sediments (sandy sludge clay), with

high content in mica, kaolinite, plagioclase etc in deeper areas (>400m), indicates strong

currents even in the deeper basins and fast transfer of the material to these areas. Fur-

thermore the horizontal allocation of the minerals in the surface sediments, is directly con-

nected with the mineralogical composition of the stones, on both sides of the strait, which

erode and feed the area, but also with the prevailing strong periodical currents.

√√ CCaappee ooff KKaaffiirreeaass ((AAkkrroottiirriioo KKaaffiirreeaass))

The cape of Kafireas (Cavo ‘d oro) is characterized by longitudinal hill ranges with suc-

cessive peaks and slopes up to 45°. From the lowest peak close to the sea until Ochi we

find the peaks “Asprolofos” (approximately +300m), Vios (approximately +400m), Anatoli

(approximately +980 m), 6km from the sea and with NE-SW direction. The transverse

slopes into this direction 1000-1500m long from the axis of the aforementioned ridge till

the sea level.

Τhis rough and mountainous terrain is the result of tectonic activity, with fault lines mainly

NW-SE and N-S, which also form the small currents of the area. The hanging wall of the

faults (pursuant to literature data) is the NE or N.

In terms of lithology the cape area (considered as a wider zone) consists of schists and

amphibolites of the series of Kerasia, which constitutes the higher stratigraphic section of

south Evia. Τhe subjected system (cipolin marbles and schists) is found in the higher

peaks (from Profotis Ilias and upstream). This happens because of the anticlinical struc-

ture with an anticlinical axis NW-SE and peak appearance on the west of Anatoli (Mytikas

of Ochi). Hence the cape is practically one wing of the anticline with NE immersion.

The schist rocks which are found in the area are easily degraded and the failure to create

an extended soil mantle of clay material is attributed to the exposure of the rocks to strong

winds and frequent rainfalls which are observed in this edge of Evia. The leaching is fast

and the sea, which is characterized by strong currents in the north as much as in the east

(passage of Kafireas) becomes the final receptor.

The marble layers, arranged by zones, being formations which are more persistent to ero-

sion, arise in the schist environment like rocky outcrops. Where the marbles are ade-

quately extended, carstic erosion occurs in many forms.

√√ PPllaaiinn ooff KKaarryyssttooss ((KKaammppooss KKaarryyssttoouu))

The study area in the plain of Karystos is characterized by a mild, almost even, morpho-



logical terrain of the alluvial deposits which have been accumulated on the plain. The soil

composition contains clay, as the product of degradation of the surrounding schist hills. In

the past the material was abstracted for brick-making.

The layers of sand and pebbles are spread in the clay massif of the deposits and form ad-

ditionally the ground water table with their multiple formation. The soils are rich in calcite

clay, kaolinite, mica and sandy at some places due to quartz accumulation.

The currents and the main stream of Rigia form several meanders in the low zone. In the

past this low region near the sea was covered by swamps which were drained. The thick-

ness of the clay layers in the area of interest is expected to be more than 10 m.

√√ DDiimmoossaarrii ggoorrggee ((FFaarraaggggii DDiimmoossaarrii))

Τhe gorge has been created in the lowest geological section of the island of Evia, i.e. in

the marble and cipolin schist system. Along the route of the main branch and the second-

ary branches one can find successive alternations of schist and cipolin-marbre layers. Τhe

gorge was created from tectonic activity. Its length running from the watershed till 3km af-

ter its output is the axis of the anticline. This means that its fragmentation took place on

the peak of the tectonic structure, it easily eroded and the gorgevalley was created. The

marbles, due to their bigger corrosion resistance than schists, project and form narrows

and waterfalls on the bed. The direction of the anticline is NE-SW. Τhe remaining part till

the output has fault origin (this is the reason why it turns to N instead of NE).

The majority of the individual streams which flow into the main stream correspond to fault

lines. Their directions range from NW-SE to E-W being 1-3 km long.

In the highest drainage basin (south-south west edge) an extend zone of land slides is

being observed in schists of the west side. It has a surface of approximately 1km2. It is

attributed to the pre-folding of schists and to a big fault with NE-SW direction and 6 km

length (from the settlement Kalyvia till the peak Tsifkathia). The land-slide occurs where

this “ends”, intersected by a cluster of other faults with various directions.

The cipolin marbles are found in layers 50-200 m thick and have suffered karstic erosion.

This is the reason of presence of numerous small sources in the drainage basin and in the

gorge bed which offer a continuous supply.

Despite the steep slopes, the schists keep an adequate part of the disintegrated mantle

resulting in the thick vegetation – forest cover of the area, with the exception naturally of

the mountainous zone on the higher parts.

Τhe slopes of the gorge in many parts are not close to the vertical line, while in other parts

range between 45ο - 70ο, the altitudinal differences from the bed till the slope crest reach



200 m, especially in the area of the settlement Lenosaioi and upstream.

66..33 NNaattuurraall EEnnvvii rroonnmmeenntt

66..33..11 GGeenneerraall ddaattaa

The present section provides summarized data for the study area. These data present the

natural and human environment in the works area. Τhe available data (urban areas, forest

surfaces, pastures etc) were obtained from the Ministry of Rural Development & Food and

the National Statistical Service of Greece. Specifically:

The borders of the study area, as stipulated in the relevant section, include the protected

area of the Ecological Network Natura 2000 with code GR2420001 “Oros Ochi, Kampos

Karystou, Potami, Akrotirio Kafirefs, Paraktia thalassia zoni”, parts of the Municipalities of

of Marmari (municipal districts of Giannitsi, Ag. Dimitrios, Kallianos, Melissonas,

Paradeisio, Katsaroni) and Karystos (municipal districts of Grampia, Kalyvia, Myloi, Aetos,

Platanistos), and the Community of Kafireas. Specifically:

√√ AAbboouutt tthhee MMuunniicciippaalliittyy ooff KKaarryyssttooss

Τhe MMuunniicciippaall DDiissttrriicctt ooff AAeettooss has semi-mountainous terrain. Out of totally 28.100 acres,

3.200 acres are cultivated land, while 24.600 acres are private pastures. According to the

data of the last national census of land use by the ELSTAT, areas which are covered by

forests or water do not exist. Last, 400 acres are covered by settlement areas (including

roads, squares etc).

Τhe MMuunniicciippaall DDiissttrriicctt ooff GGrraammppiiaa has mountainous terrain. Out of totally 15.200 acres,

700 acres are cultivated land and 13.900 acres are private pastures. The forested areas

cover 400 acres, while there are no surfaces covered by water. Last, 200 acres are cov-

ered by settlement areas (including roads, squares etc).

Τhe MMuunniicciippaall DDiissttrriicctt ooff KKaallyyvviiaa hhaass sseemmii--mmoouunnttaaiinnoouuss tteerrrraaiinn. Out of totally 19.800 acres

3.700 acres are cultivated land and 15.800 acres are private pastures. Forested areas or

surfaces covered by water do not exist in this municipal district. The settlements, including

roads, squares etc) cover an area of 400 acres.

Τhe MMuunniicciippaall DDiissttrriicctt ooff MMyyllooii has mountainous terrain. Out of totally 7.700 acres only

400 acres are cultivated land, while 6.900 acres are covered by settlements. 100 acres

are covered by forested areas. There are no surfaces covered with water while the set-

tlements cover just a surface of 300 acres.

Τhe MMuunniicciippaall DDiissttrriicctt ooff PPllaattaanniissttooss has mountainous terrain. Out of totally 61.800 acres

4.400 acres are cultivated land while 52.700 acres are pastures, out of which 4.000 acres

are community pastures and 48.700 acres are private pastures. Forested areas cover



3.900 acres out of the total surface. Last, 800 acres are covered by settlements, including

roads, squares etc.

√√ AAbboouutt tthhee MMuunniicciippaalliittyy ooff MMaarrmmaarrii

Τhe MMuunniicciippaall DDiissttrriicctt ooff AAgg.. DDiimmiittrriiooss has mountainous terrain. Out of totally 25.300 acres

1.100 acres are cultivated land while 22.800 acres are private pastures. Forested areas

cover 1.100 acres out of the total surface. There are no surfaces covered with water. Last,

300 acres are covered by settlements, including roads, squares etc.

Τhe MMuunniicciippaall DDiissttrriicctt ooff KKaalllliiaannooss has mountainous terrain. Out of totally 45.600 acres,

2.800 acres are cultivated land, while 39.000 acres are covered by private pastures. Ac-

cording to the data of the last national cencus of land use (1991) by ELSTAT, surfaces

covered with forests are 3.100 acres, while surfaces covered with water are 100 acres out

of the total surface of this municipal district. Last, 200 acres are covered by settlements,

including roads, squares etc.

√√ AAbboouutt tthhee CCoommmmuunniittyy ooff KKaaffiirreeaass

The Community District of Amygdalea has mountainous terrain. Out of 30.100 acres,

3.200 acres are cultivated land while 22.800 acres are pastures (private). The forested

areas cover 3.500 acres out of the total surface. There are surfaces covered with water.

Last, the settlements (including roads, squares etc) cover 600 acres.

The Community District of Komito has mountainous terrain. Out of 47.700 acres 2.500

acres are cultivated land while 43.400 acres are pastures (private). The forested areas

cover 1.200 acres out of the total surface. Last, the settlements (including roads, squares

etc) cover 600 acres.



√√ SSuummmmaarriizzeedd eevvaalluuaattiioonn ooff tthhee aabboovvee ddaattaa ((llaanndd uussee aaccccoorrddiinngg ttoo EELLSSTTAATT))

Municipality Terrain Main land use, accord-ing to ELSTAT

Main human economic a c-tivity, as indicated by the land use interpretation

MUNICIPALITY OF KARYSTOS MD of Aetos Η Pastures Livestock MD of Grampia O Pastures Livestock MD of Kalyvia Η Pastures Livestock MD of Myloi O Pastures Livestock MD of Platanistos O Pastures Livestock MUNICIPALITY OF MARMARI MD of Ag. Dimitrios O Pastures Livestock MD of Kallianos O Pastures Livestock COMMUNITY OF KAFIREAS CD of Amygdalea O Pastures Livestock CD of Komito O Pastures Livestock

√ Statutory protected areas in the study area

The installation area of the proposed wind farms is included in the Ecological Network

2000 and is characterized as a Site of Community Importance (SCI) pursuant to the Di-

rective 92/43/EEC and the Decision 2010/45/EE (GR2420001, Oros Ochi, Kampos

Karystou, Potami, Akrotirio Kafirefs, Paraktia thalassia zoni) and as a Special Protection

Area for Avifauna (SPA) pursuant to the Directives 79/409/EEC and 2009/147/EC

(GR2420012, Oros Ochi, paraktia zoni kai nisides).

The majority of the planned wind farms (except for WF PALIOPYRGOS and the southern

part of WF PLATANISTOS) is located within the borders of the above Site of Community

Importance (SCI). Furthermore, all planned wind farms are located within the borders of

the above Special Protection Area for Avifauna (SPA)

66..33..22 SSppeecciiaall aarreeaass

In the present section are recorded areas which fall into one of the following categories:

- Statutory protected areas pursuant to articles 18 and 19 of L.1650/86 “About the pro-

tection of the environment” (Absolute Protection Areas of Nature, Protected Areas of

Nature, National Parks, Protected Natural formations, Protected Landscapes and ele-

ments of landscape, Ecodevelopment areas).

- National Woodland Parks.

- Sites of Community Importance of the Network Natura 2000 (SCI - Directive

92/43/EEC and Decision 2010/45/EE) and Special Protection Area for Avifauna (SPA -

Directives 79/409/EEC and 2009/147/EC).

- Ramsar areas.

Specifically:



√√ SSttaattuuttoorryy pprrootteecctteedd aarreeaass qquuaalliiffiieedd ppuurrdduuaanntt ttoo LL11665500//8866

There are no statutory (Absolute Protection Areas of Nature, Protected Areas of Nature,

National Parks, Protected Natural formations, Protected Landscapes and elements of

landscape, Ecodevelopment areas) protected areas pursuant to L.1650/86 “About the pro-

tection of the environment”.

Nevertheless a Special Environmental Assessment has been prepared for the installation

area of the wind farms [*see Special Environmental Assessment of the Dimosari gorge

area and the wider area (Oros Ochi, Kampos Karystou, Akrotirio Kafirefs)]. The Special

Environmental Assessment is in the phase of evaluation – however the data which are

presented in the issue of EIA were taken seriously into consideration by the consultants

herein.

According to the Draft Presidential Decree which is suggested in the above Special Envi-

ronmental Assessment, the area is divided in three zones as follows:

-- ZZoonnee AA:: PPrrootteecctteedd AArreeaass ooff NNaattuurree,, with the following sub-zones: A1: Dimosari

gorge (Faraggi Dimosari), A2: Peaks of Mount Ochi (Periochi Korfon Ochis), A3:

Kastanologgos area (Periochi Kastanologgou), A4: Archampolis area (Periochi

Archampolis).

-- ΖΖoonnee ΒΒ:: SSppeecciiaall RReegguullaattiioonnss AArreeaass, with the following subzones: Β1: Greater area

of Dimosari gorge (Evriteri periochi Faraggiou Dimosari), Β2: Greater area of

Kastanologgos and valley of Komito (Evriteri periochi Kastanologgou kai koilada

Komitou), Β3: Area of Rouklia (Periochi Rouklion), Β4: Valley and Potami of

Platanistos (Koilada kai Potami Platanistou), Β5: Southern feet of Ochi (Notioi

Propodes tis Ochis), Β6: Agios Dimitrios gorge (Faraggi tou Agiou Dimitriou), Β7:

Area of Archampolis (Periochi Archampolis), Β8: Cape Kafireas (Akrotirio Kafirefs),

Β9: Anemopyles of Cavo d’oro, Β10: Wetland of “Kampos Karystou” plain

(Ygrotopos of Kampos Karystou).

- ΖΖoonnee CC:: MMiilldd ggrroowwtthh aarreeaass.

None of the finally proposed to be licenced wind farms is located in Zone A: Pro-tected Areas of Nature.

Last, it is worth mentioning that recently (October, 2009) the Directorate for Environment

of the Prefecture of Evia invited tenders for a study under the title “Update – Supplemen-

tation of the Special Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the protection of the area of the

Dimosari gorge and the wider area (Oros Ochi – Kampos Karystou – Kafireas)”. Today

(July 2010, 2010) this study remains in the phase of evaluation of submitted tech-

nical/economical offers. It is mentioned that now its reintegration in the National Strategic

Reference Framework (NSRF, 2007 - 2013) for financing is being suggested.



√√ NNaattiioonnaall WWooooddllaanndd PPaarrkkss

There is no area qualified as a National Woodland Park in the study area.

√√ AArreeaass ooff tthhee EEccoollooggiiccaall NNeettwwoorrkk NNaattuurraa 22000000:: SSiitteess ooff CCoommmmuunniittyy IImmppoorrttaannccee ((DDiirreeccttiivvee

9922//4433//EECC)) && SSppeecciiaall PPrrootteeccttiioonn AArreeaass ffoorr AAvviiffaauunnaa ((DDiirreeccttiivvee 7799//440099//EEEECC))

Sites of Community Importance

The Community Directive 92/43/EEC for the conservation of natural habitats, wild fauna

and flora provided for the creation of a European Network for Special Areas of Conserva-

tion, SAC, with the name Natura 2000. Pursuant to this Directive protected areas which

fulfil specific criteria are qualified as proposed Sites of Community Importance (pSCI). The

Directive 92/43/EEC has been transposed in the national legislation by the Joint Ministrial

Decision no. 33318/3028/1998 (Govt. Gazette 1289/Β/1998).

The installation area of the project, upon fulfilling the criteria of the Directive 92/43/EC,

has been included (SCI, Site of Community Importance, GR2420001, “Oros Ochi,

Kampos Karystou, Potami, Akrotirio Kafirefs, Paraktia thalassia zoni”) in the Ecological

Network Natura 2000. The area includes the Mount Ochi and the surrounding area, as

well as the cape of Kafireas and covers 15.948,13 hectars. Τhe latest borders of the area

do not include the plain of Karystos.

According to the database of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change the

following references are made for the study area:

• The area with code GR2420001 has a total surface of 15.948,13 ha, out of which

13.825,43 ha are land area and 2.122,7 ha are water area.

• For the management of the area responsible is the Forest Service of Aliveri (Kymi)

/Forest Department of Aliveri (Kymi).

• The main pressures noted in the area refer to the following: a) The plain of

Karystos (Kampos Karystou): Degradation of water receiver due to waste disposal

and illegal hunting, b) The Mount Ochi (Oros Ochi) and the surrounding area:

clearing of vegetation, grazing, road construction, quarries.

• The site was chosen to be included in the network Natura 2000 due to its specific

special natural features. The ecological significance and importance of the area is

deducted by the following elements (according to the standardized data form of

Network 2000):

o The diversity of habitat types which are found in the area in combination

with fauna and flora communities.



o Τhe large number of birds of prey which have been mentioned as well as

other birds which pass through the area.

o Τhe rich herpetofauna.

o Τhe water ecosystems of posidonia (Posidonia oceanica) and of the reefs

which are in a very good condition.

o Τhe rare, endemic and protected species of flora and fauna of the area.

Special Protection Areas for Avifauna

The Community Directive 79/409/EEC for the conservation of wild birds, aims for the

member-states to take measures in order to protect the populations of wild species of avi-

fauna, as well as their habitats. Areas which fulfill the criteria of this Directive are qualified

as Protection Areas, (SPA).

Special Protection Areas were included in the network Natura 200 automatically pursuant

to the Directive of habitats. The Directive 79/409/EC was harmonized with the greek legis-

lation by the Joint Ministerial Decisions 414985/29.11.85 (Govt. Gazette 757/Β/18.12.85),

366599/16.12.96 (Govt. Gazette 1188/Β/31.12.96), 294283/23.12.97 (Govt. Gazette 68 /

Β / 04.02.98) (Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works, 2005).

The installation area of the works was recently (March, 2010) characterized as a Special

Protection Area for Avifauna (SPA) according to the Directives 79/409/EEC and

2009/147/EC (SPA, Special Protection Area for Avifauna, GR2420012, Oros Ochi,

Paraktia zoni kai nisides).

All of the planned wind farms are located within the borders of the above Special Protec-

tion Area for Avifauna.

√√ RRaammssaarr aarreeaass

There is no Wetland of International Importance (Ramsar area) in the installation area of

the works.

66..33..33 OOtthheerr aarreeaass

This section records areas which fall in a category of the below:

- Monuments of Nature.

- Aesthetic forests.

- Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty (Statutory).

- Wildlife Refuges.

- Important Bird Areas (IBA).



Summarized data referring to the features which establish its environmental importance

are set forth for each area falling in one of the above categories. Specifically:

√√ ΜΜoonnuummeennttss ooff NNaattuurree

These include individual forests or clusters of trees with special botanical, ecological, aes-

thetical, history or cultural value. In the same category fall also surfaces of significant eco-

logical, paleontological, geomorphological or other interest. Their establishment was car-

ried out pursuant to the forest code. The majority of these monuments cover only few

square meters.

In the wider study area and in a particularly large distance (>30 km) is situated the the

Monument of Nature ““OOlliivvee ttrreeeess ooff AAllmmyyrrooppoottaammooss,, EEvviiaa””.. The qualification refers to

three old olive trees, with significant morphological features and remarkable aesthetic

presence next to an old church in a village near the sea. Τhis Monument is found in the

village Almyropotamos of Karystia. It was established with decision no. 202305/3584/1977

(Govt. Gazette 590/ΤΒ/1977) (Source: Ministry of Rural Development & Food, Directorate

of Aesthetic Forests, Woodland Parks & Hunting, Department of Forest Environment, Na-

tional Woodland Parks & Forest Recreation).

Due to the large distance no issue is raised concerning the control of the statutory

possibility of the project implementation as regards the protection measures ap-

plied to the Monuments of Nature. Thus there is no issue regarding impacts of the pro-

posed project on the abovementioned Monument of Nature.

The distance of the project site from the Olive Trees of Almyropotamos is depicted on the

map below.



√√ AAeesstthheettiicc FFoorreessttss

Aesthetic Forests have been established pursuant to the forest legislation (Law Decree

996/1971, Govt. Gazette 192 A’) and include forest landscapes of particular aesthetic and

ecological interest, aiming not only to the protection of nature but also to offer a chance to

the public to know and enjoy the natural environment with various recreational activities.

The measures which are taken and implemented for the protection, organization and im-

provement of the above areas are similar to those which are applicable to the peripheral

zones of National Woodland Parks, which as aforementioned are zones of limited protec-

tion (see Law Decree 996/1971, article 6, par. 3-4).

In the area of Evia is situated the Aesthetic Forest of Steni, with a total surface of 674 ha.

It was established with a Presidential Decree (Govt. Gazette 108/Τ∆/ 24.02.1977)

(Source: Ministry of Rural Development & Food, Directorate of Aesthetic Forests, Wood-

land Parks & Hunting, Department of Forest Environment, National Woodland Parks &

Forest Recreation).

This forest lays very close to the village Steni of Evia, on the southern slope of the moun-

tain Dirfys. This mountainous area is characterized by a variety of slopes, from small to

steep ones. Τhe bedrock consists of clay and crystallic schists with individual formations

of calcites of the Permian, the Upper Triassic and the Jurassic period. Remarkable is the

existence of numerous sources, small streamlets and gorges which cross the forested ar-

ea. Τhe prevailing tree species are Pinus halepensis, Castanea sativa, Abies cephalonica

(at higher altitudes) Quercus sp., and Platanus orientalis. Τhe other half of the area which



is at a higher altitude and includes the peak Delfi, consists mainly of steep schist scree

(Source: Official webpage of the Ministry Of Environment, Energy & Climate Change).

It is clarified that the Aesthetic Forest of Steni in Evia is in a quite long distance from the

project site (~ 70 km). Consequently no issue is raised concerning the control of the statu-

tory possibility of the project implementation as regards the protection measures applied

to Aesthetic Forests. Thus there is no issue regarding impacts of the proposed project on

the abovementioned Aesthetic Forest.



√√ LLaannddssccaappeess ooff SSppeecciiaall NNaattuurraall BBeeaauuttyy ((ssttaattuuttoorryy))

There are no statutory Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty (see L.5351/32 and L.

1469/50) in proximity with the installation area of the proposed project.

Nonetheless, according to a study of the National Technical University of Athens (*this

study does not have any statutory status), in the area of the Prefecture of Evia several

Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty have been recorded. Τhese landscapes are

presented in the following table.

Name of Landscap es Code Alrotirio Kafireas (Cape of Kafireas - Cavo d’oro) AT2011001 Dimosari and Kastanologgos on Ochi, Evia AT2011105 Valley of Rouklia, Karystia AT2011002 Islet of Sarakino, Skyros AT5011061 Islet of Stroggili, Evia AT2011042 Islets of Monolia and Lichades, Evia AT2011050 Mountaineous settlemets in the area of Kymi AT2011005 Bay of Kalogria, Atsitsa and Neighbouring Pine Forest AT2011032 Currents of Mourteri and Maniotiko in the area of Kymi AT2011004 Hora town, capital of Skyros AT5011062

Τhe Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty (study of NTUA) are areas which stand out

with their aesthetic value and stay natural, at a remarkable level, although they are

frequenty built (Source: National Technical University). Τheir size has been defined with

human measures and does not exceed one day hiking capability, apart from specific ex-



ceptions. They often include traditional settlements, archaeological or historical sites.

The criteria for selection and evaluation of the Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty (ac-

cording to the study of NTUA) are related with natural and ecological features, such as the

terrain, the vegetation and flora, the existence of fauna, waters, meteorological conditions,

panoramic view with human features such the existence of monuments, the historic refer-

ences, the traditional character, land use. The possibilities to use a Landscape of Special

Natural Beauty (according to the study of NTUA) for recreation and education, the exist-

ence of paths etc influence positively the choice. As criteria can also be considered ele-

ments like the timelessness, the feeling of escape or isolation, the creation of emotions,

the contact with nature, the possibility to understand natural processes etc The develop-

ment of a methodology for the establishment of criteria was based on bibliographic re-

search, the experience of the collaborators of the program and the help of special scien-

tists.

Out of the Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty which are mentioned in the table above,

the following are located in the study area:

Landscape of Special Natural Beauty (AΤ2011001) “Akrotirio Kafireas (Cavo

d’oro)”.

Landscape of Special Natural Beauty (AΤ2011105) “Dimosari and Kastanologgos

on Ochi, Evia”

Landscape of Special Natural Beauty (AΤ2011002) “Valley of Rouklia, Karystia”.

General elements of the three Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty (according to the

study of NTUA) which are located in the study area are presented below. Specifically:

LLaannddssccaappee ooff

SSppeecciiaall NNaattuurraall BBeeaauuttyy “Akrotirio Kafireas (Cavo d’

Oro)”

LLaannddssccaappee ooff SSppee--cciiaall NNaattuurraall BBeeaauuttyy

“Dimosari and Kastanologgos on

Ochi, Evia”

LLaannddssccaappee ooff SSppee--cciiaall NNaattuurraall BBeeaauuttyy “Valley of Rouklia,

Karystia”.

Code: AΤ2011001 AΤ2011105 AΤ2011002 Date of first record: 15.09.1997 02.06.1997 09.10.1997

Main character: Habitat, Natural landscape Natural landscape Natural landscape

Municipality/Community: Amygdalea Κallianos, Ag. Dimitrios and others Rouklia

Land area (in ha): 2.839 5.827 1.760 Maximum altitude (in m): 966 1.399 641



LLaannddssccaappee ooff SSppeecciiaall NNaattuurraall

BBeeaauuttyy “Akrotirio Kafireas (Cavo d’

Oro)”

LLaannddssccaappee ooff SSppee--cciiaall NNaattuurraall BBeeaauuttyy

“Dimosari and Kastanologgos on

Ochi, Evia”

LLaannddssccaappee ooff SSppee--cciiaall NNaattuurraall BBeeaauuttyy “Valley of Rouklia,

Karystia”.

Description of area:

Wild cape hit by the winds of the Aege-an Sea. The slopes fall steeply to the sea from a height of approx. 1.000 m. The northern side is mostly covered by ferns and olive groves, among which grow many plane trees. One can also see wild olive trees, Kermes oaks, Holm oaks.

It is mainly the north side of Mount Ochi which includes: the whole basin of the Dimosari gorge of the community Kallianos which starts from the high-est peaks of Ochi and reaches to the sea, the lowest part of the basin of stream Porfyra with the settlement of Ag. Dimitrios, Kastanologgos and the southern side of Ochi peak.

The valley lays on the East of Mount Ochi, starting from the set-tlement of Rouklia. The area has forests and clusters of old chestnut trees, over 300 years old, long lived yews and rare herbaceous plants like Paeonia mascula spp. hellenica.

Vulnerability:

Not under severe threat.

In the wider area exist quarries of schist (slabs of Karystos).

Not under severe threat.

The above Landscapes of Special Natural Beauty are depicted in the following image.



√√ WWiillddlliiffee SShheelltteerrss

In the wider study area as a Wildlife Shelter has been qualified the area Krypti –

Lykoremma in the municipality of Karystos. Hunting of all animals is prohibited for indefi-

nite time in an area of 17.000 acres pursuant to Decision no. 171190 / 2530 / 3.6.1980 /

YπΓε / Γ∆∆&∆Π / ∆νση E΄ / ΤµII. The wider area has also a second Wildlife Shelter [Porto

Lafia – Kapsala (Styra)] in the location Trikorfo.

It is also pointed out that the proposed projects are outside the borders of the

aforementioned Wildlife Shelters. A view of the Shelters is depicted in the image below.

√√ IImmppoorrttaanntt BBoorrdd AArreeaass ((IIBBAA))

According to the BirdLife International “Important Bird Areas in Europe - Priority sites for

conservation”, Vol. 2: Southern Europe, (edited by: M.F.Heath & M.I. Evans), the following

Important Bird Areas (IBA) are found in the area of Evia:

Table 10: Important Bird Areas in the Prefecture of Evia.

Name of IBA Administrative region Coordinates Altitude Size of

area Identific ation

criteria Megalo and Mikro Livari la-goons Istieas (No 109)

Sterea Ellada

39°00’N 23°08’E

0-3 µ. 1.008

hectars B1i, C3

Kandili mountain (No 110)

Sterea Ellada

38°41’N 23°28’E

0-1.246 m 5.700

hectars Β3, C6



Name of IBA Administrative region Coordinates Altitude Size of

area Identific ation

criteria Mount Ochi and surrounding ar-ea (No 113)

Sterea Ellada

38°03’N 24°27’E 0-1.398 m 18.000

hectars A4ii, B1ii, B2, B3,

C2, C3, C6

Dirfi, Xirovouni, Skotini, Mavrovouni, Alokteri and Ortari mountains and the vicinity of Kimi (No 111)

Sterea Ellada

38°38’N 23°45’E

0-1.743 m 45.000 hectars

Β3, C6

Lake Distos (No 112)

Sterea Ellada

38°21’N 24°08’E

16-590 m. 2.600

hectars A3, B2, C2, C6

MEMO Category Criteria A3: Biome-restricted spe-cies confined to one bi-ome.

The site is known or thought to hold a significant assemblage of the species whose breeding distributions are largely or wholly confined to one biome

A4: Congregations (ii) The site is known or thought to hold, on a regular basis, 1% of the global population of a congregatory seabird or terrestrial species.

Β1: Congregations

(i) The site is known or thought to hold 1% of a flyway or other distinct population of a waterbird species. (ii) The site is known or thought to hold 1% of a distinct population of a seabird species.

Β2: Species with an un-favourable conservation status in Europe

The site is one of the ‘n’ most important in the country for a species with an unfavourable conservation status in Europe (SPEC 2, 3) and for which the site-protection approach is thought to be appropriate.

Β3: Species with an un-favourable conservation status in Europe

The site is one of the ‘n’ most important in the country for a species with a favourable conservation status in Europe but concentrated in Europe (SPEC 4) and for which the site-protection approach is thought to be appropriate.

C2: Concentrations of a species threatened at the European Union level

The site is known to regularly hold at least 1% of a flyway population or of the EU population of a species threatened at the EU level (listed on Annex I and referred to in Article 4.1 of the EC Birds Directive).

C3: Congregations of mi-gratory species not threatened at the EU lev-el

The site is known to regularly hold at least 1% of a flyway population of a migratory species not considered threatened at the EU level (as re-ferred to in Article 4.2 of the EC Birds Directive) (not listed on Annex I).

C6: Species threatened at the European Union level

The site is one of the five most important in the European region (NUTS region) in question for a species or subspecies considered threatened in the European Union (i.e. listed in Annex I of the EC Birds Directive).

Due to relevance with the study area the IBA “Mount Ochi and surrounding area (No 113)”

is further analyzed. The presented data was obtained by BirdLife International “Important

Bird Areas in Europe - Priority sites for conservation”, Vol. 2: Southern Europe, (edited by:

M.F.Heath & M.I. Evans). Specifically:



Mount Ochi and surrounding area (N o 113)

Decsription of the area

A coastal mountain dominated by grazed scrub with numerous springs and streams. Live-

stock and farming are the main activities.

Habitats : Forest and forested area (21%, broadleaved deciduous woodland, alluvial/very

wet forests, broadleaved evergreen woodland), Shrubland (55%, scrub, sclerophyllous

scrub/garrigue/maquis), Grassland (5%, steppes, dry calcareous grassland, humid grass-

lands), Wetland (5%, rivers/streams, water fringe vegetation, fens/transition mires,

springs), Sea/marine area (5%, sea inlets, coastal features), Rocky areas (6%, sea cliffs/

rocky shores, scree and boulders, rock stacks /islets, inland cliffs), Artificial Landscapes

(13%, arable land, perennial crops, orchards, groves).

Land use : Agriculture (75%), Fisheries / Aquaculture (10%), Forestry (10%), Τourism /

Recreation (5%).

Birds

The site is particularly important for passage migrant species of global conservation inter-est that do not meet Important Bird Area (IBA) criteria: Audouin’s Gull (Larus audouinii) (non breeding species).

Species Season Year Population (min)

Population (max)

Accuracy of

population size

Criteria

Yelkouan Shearwater (Puffinus yelkouan)

Ν (non breeding)

1996 - 900

A (reliable) A4ii, B1ii, C3

Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo)

R (resident) 1989 5 -

C (little accuracy)

B2, C6

Western Rock Nuthatch (Sitta neumayer)

R (resident) 1996 200 - -

B3

Cretzschmar’s Bunting (Emberiza caesia)

B (breeding) 1996 150 - -

B3, C2, C6

Protection Status

None on national level.

None on international level.

Conservation issues

Threats : Abandonment/reduction of land management, Agricultural intensifica-



tion/expansion, deforestation (commercial), extraction industry, Filling-in of wetlands, For-

est grazing, Industrialization/Urbanization, Infrastructures, Intensified forest management,

Recreation/Tourism, Unsustainable exploitation.

The extension of the road network and the future tourism development constitute serious

threats to the area. Other threats derive from the mining activities on the west and the

north side of the ara, the abandonment of the area, overgrazing, the use of poisonous

baits and the planned construction of wind farms in the area.

66..33..44 LLooccaatt iioonn ooff tthhee pprrooppoosseedd wwiinndd ffaarrmmss iinn rreelleevvaannccee ttoo tthhee ssttaattuuttoorryy pprrootteecctteedd

aarreeaass iinn oorr cclloossee ttoo tthhee ssttuuddyy aarreeaa

In the following table an aggregate evaluation of the proposed project in relation with the

“Special areas” and “Other areas” which were described in the previous sections, is being

carried out.



NAME OF WF LOCATION ACCORDING TO PROPOSED ZONING OF THE EIA NAT.

PARKS

AREAS OF THE NETWORK NATURA 2000 RAMSAR

AREAS ΖONE A ΖONE Β ΖONE C SCI SPA

A1 A2 A3 A4 Β1 Β2 Β3 Β4 Β5 Β6 Β7 Β8 Β9 Β10 C

AAΝΝAAΤΤOOLLII - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tot

al n

umbe

r /C

C

- - - Within Total

number/CC

Within Total number

/CC -

ΚΚAATTHHAARRAA - - - - 3 - - - - - 8/CC - 3 - - - Within

Total number /CC

Within Total number

/CC -

ΚΚEERRAASSIIAA - - - - 5 7/CC - - - - - - - - - - Within

Total number /CC

Within Total number

/CC -

MMIILLIIAA - - - - -

Tot

al n

umbe

r /C

C

- - - - - - - - - - Within

Total number /CC

Within Total number

/CC -

SSPPIILLIIAA - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tot

al n

umbe

r/C

C

- Within

Total number /CC

Within Total number

/CC -

PPLLAATTAANNOOSS - - - - 3 - - - - - - - - - 3/CC - Within

Total number /CC

Within Total number

/CC -

PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Within

Total number Within

Total number -

II.. SSPPEECCIIAALL NNAATTUURRAALL AARREEAASS



NAME OF WF LOCATION ACCORDING TO PROPOSED ZONING OF THE EIA NAT.

PARKS

AREAS OF THE NETWORK NATURA 2000 RAMSAR

AREAS ΖONE A ΖONE Β ΖONE C SCI SPA

A1 A2 A3 A4 Β1 Β2 Β3 Β4 Β5 Β6 Β7 Β8 Β9 Β10 C /CC /CC

PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tot

al n

umbe

r/C

C

-

Within north side

Total number of WT of north

side/CC

Within north side

Total number of WT of south

side

Within Total number/CC

-

LEGEND

WF: Wind Farm - WT: Wind Turbine - CC: Control Cabin.

SEA: Special Environmental Assessment.

* Number (eg 4): The specific number of wind turbines which are located on the proposed zone.

* Number/CC (eg 8/CC): The specific number of wind turbines and the control cabin which are located in the proposed zone.

* Τotal number/CC: Τhe total number of wind turbines, and the control cabin of the proposed WFs which are located in the proposed zone.

Within

Total number/CC

Outside

Total number/CC

: Within limits of the Site of Community Importance (SCI, Directive 92/43/EC) / Τhe total number of wind turbines and the control cabin are

located within the limits of the Site of Community Importance (SCI, Directive 92/43/EC).

: Outside limits of Site of Community Importance (SCI, Directive 92/43/EC) / Τhe total number of the wind turbines and the control cabin are located outside

the limits of the Site of Community Importance (SCI, Directive 92/43/EC).

II.. SSPPEECCIIAALL NNAATTUURRAALL AARREEAASS



LEGEND

WF: Wind Farm - WT: Wind Turbines - CC: Control Cabin - LSNB: Landscape of Special Natural Beauty (from study of NTUA).

* Total number/CC: Τhe total number of the wind turbines and the control cabin of the proposed WFs which are located within the LSNB (from study of NTUA).

* Number out of Number/CC: The number of wind turbines out of the total number of wind turbines of the proposed WFs and the control cabin which are located within the LSNB (from study of NTUA).

* Number out of Number: The number of wind turbines out of the total number of wind turbines of the proposed WFs which are located within the LSNB

(from study of NTUA) or within the limits of an Important Area for Birds (IBA). The control cabin is out of the limits of the LSNB (from study of NTUA) or the Important Area for Birds (IBA).

Within

Total number/CC

NAME OF WF ΜONUMENTS OF NATURE

AESTHETIC FORESTS

LANDSCAPES OF SPECIAL NATURAL

BEAUTY (STATUTORY)

LANDSCAPES OF SPECIAL NATURAL BEAUTY -LSNB -(FROM STUDY OF NTUA) IMPORTANT ARE-

AS FOR BIRDS (IBA)

WILDLIFE SHELTERS

AΤ2011001 AΤ2011105 AΤ2011002

AAΝΝAAΤΤOOLLII - - - TToottaall nnuummbbeerr //CC

- - Within

TToottaall nnuummbbeerr /CC -

ΚΚAATTHHAARRAA - - - 88 oouutt ooff 1144//CC

- - Within


ΚΚEERRAASSIIAA - - - - 55 oouutt ooff 1122 - Within


ΜΜIILLIIAA - - - - - - Within


SSPPIILLIIAA - - - - TToottaall nnuummbbeerr //CC

- 1111 oouutt ooff 1133 -

PPLLAATTAANNOOSS - - - - TToottaall nnuummbbeerr //CC

- Within


PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS - - - - - - Within


PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS - - - - - - Outside


: Within the limits of the Important Area for Birds / Τhe total number of the wind turbines, and the control cabin are located

within the limits of the Important Area for Birds.

IIII.. OOTTHHEERR NNAATTUURRAALL AARREEAASS



66..33..55 FFlloorraa -- VVeeggeettaatt iioonn -- HHaabbii ttaattss

66..33..55..11 IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn -- MMeetthhooddoollooggyy

This report on the flora and the habitat types in the sites of proposed installation of the

wind farms, is based on the existing bibliographical sources and on the field study which

was carried out in spring and summer 2009 (3 and 5 days accordingly) for the mapping of

the actual vegetation and corresponding the habitat types, in a scale of 1:5.000. The

methodology approach included:

- Sampling of vegetation (flora composition) in representative positions of each wind

farm and in every habitat type and, where accessible, in every installation field of wind

turbines,

- Survey of the existing ecological conditions of development of each habitat, photo-

graphic documentation of every habitat type

This field survey refers to the wind farms which are partially or totally within the borders of the Site of Community Importance.

A bigger scale (use of GIS backgrounds 1:5.000 at mapping and display on maps at 1:10.000) against mapping scale 1:50.000 (at which the data about ecosystems types ar-ea available in the Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works), was deemed necessary because it depicts with bigger accuracy the spatial distribution pattern of habitat types in relatively small surfaces (always in relation with the surface which is covered by the Site of Community Importance) of the proposed wind farm instal-lation. Maps with scale 1:50.000 depict only with relative accuracy the borders of the habi-tat types, especially ofr types which are inherently of small scale and are found in small surfaces of the studied field.

This was confirmed at the in situ field study during May and July 2009 and regarded es-pecially the mapping border (spatial arrangement) of habitat types which are found in small areas and are being altered with other habitat types.

For the collection of data about the flora which is found in the proposed installation posi-tions of wind turbines, with emphasis on the observation and survey of endemic species (Greek endemic species, endemic species of Evia), but also of the species mentioned in the Directive 92/43/EEC:

- the representatives locations of each wind farm were visited, flora data and construc-tion data (dominant, characteristic species, density of vegetation) were collected in all representative habitat types which compose the vegetation mosaic,

- the presence of endemic species was associated with specific habitat types, taking in consideration the existing bibliography.



66..33..55..22 HHaabbiittaatt ttyyppeess iinn tthhee SSiittee ooff CCoommmmuunniittyy IImmppoorrttaannccee OOrrooss OOcchhii –– KKaammppooss

KKaarryyssttoouu –– AAkkrroottiirriioo KKaaffiirreeffss

In the following paragraphs are presented the habitat types in the SCI as they have been

recorded since 1998. The two main studies which have been prepared in the area are the

Special Environmental Assessment (SEA1998) and the report “Identification and descrip-

tion of the habitat types in sites of interest for the conservation of nature” (widely known as

“Mapping of Habitat Types”) (1999-2001). Between those two surveys there are differ-

ences which undergo constant interpretation. Moreover, pursuant to later scientific data,

there have been alterations in the Mapping of Habitat Types which are set forth and also

interpreted. Last, the survey and evaluation of habitat types in this study are performed

based on: a) the SEA, b) the recording of the “Mapping of Habitat Types”, c) the contem-

porary and updated scientific data (eg 3ο Mediterranean Biogeographical Convention) and

d) the field study in the framework of this study.

√ Habitat types according to the SEA (1998)

According to the data included in the Special Environmental Assessment of the area in the

Dimosari gorge and the wider area (Oros Ochi – Kampos Karystou – Akrotirio Kafirefs)

(1998), the vegetation of the area is characterized by big diversity in natural habitat types

of Annex I of the Directive 92/43/EEC.

According to the SEA (1998), as shown in the table below (Table 11), the vegetation con-

sists of 22 habitat types and vegetation mosaics of two or more habitats in the form of is-

lets and one (1) Greek habitat type: 72A0, with the indication h=hellenic) which corre-

spond to more than 22 syntaxa (associations, sub-associations or communities) integrat-

ed in the individual vegetation sections and zones.

√ Habitat types according to the Mapping of Habitat Types (1999-2001)

According to the survey which was performed in the framework of the “Identification and

description of the habitat types in sites of interest for the conservation of nature” (widely

known as “Mapping of Habitat Types”) (1999-2001) 17 habitat types were mapped in the

area (Table 11).

Table 11: Habitat Types in the SCI GR2420001 according to SEA (1998) and Mapping of Habitat Types (1999-2001).

Code of Habitat Type Name of Habitat Type (D i-rective 92/43/EE)

Ecological Description of Hab i-tat Type Name

SEA MAPPING 1020 Cultivations Cultivations 1050 Settlements Settlements

1110 Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time

Seagrass with Cymodocea nodosa

*1120 Posidonia beds (Posidonion oceanicae) Seagrass (Posidonia beds)

1210 Annual vegetation of drift lines Ammonitrophilous vegetation





SEA MAPPING

1240 1240 Vegetated sea cliffs of the Medi-terranean coasts with endemic Limonium spp.

Chasmophytic vegetation in steep calcareous rocks

1410 Mediterranean salt meadows (Juncetalia maritimi)

Vegetation of wet meadows with Juncus spp.

2110 2110 Embryonic shifting dunes Ammophila vegetation on embry-onic dunes

3150 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition

Aquatic vegetation with rooted or not on the bottom plants or float-ing flowers or leaves

*3170 Mediterranean temporary ponds Vegetation of spring seasonal ponds

3260

Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion

Aquatic vegetation with floating flowers or leaves

3290

Rivers of the Mediterranean with Intermittently flowing Mediterra-nean rivers of the Paspalo- Agrostidion

Riverain nitrophilous vegetation of streams and currents

4090 4090 Endemic oro-Mediterranean heaths with gorse

“Steppelike” rocky grasslands with thorny bushes in mountaineous and oro Mediter-ranean height

5340 Garrigues of the eastern Mediter-ranean

Thorny (shrubs with Crataegus laciniata, shrubs with Erica arborea)

5420 5420 Sarcopoterium spinosum phryganas

Vegetation of phrygana with Eri-ca manipuliflora, E. arborea, Genista acanthoclada, Sarcopoterium spinosum, Eu-phorbia acanthothamnos and Centaurea spinosa

*6220 Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea

Meadows with the look of pseudosteppe and dominant var-ious species of grasses and therophytes

6310 Dehesas with evergreen Quercus spp. (high shrubs and forests with Quercus coccifera)

Degraded shrub vegetation with Quercus coccifera and three clusters with Quercus coccifera

72A0h 72A0h Reedbeds Wetland vegetation with wild reed (Phragmites australis)

8210 8217 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation

Rocky halophytic vegetation on steep cliffs

92C0 92C0 Platanus orientalis and Liquid-ambar orientalis woods (Platanion orientalis)

Riparian vegetation with east plane-tree

92D0 92D0 Southern riparian galleries and thickets (Nerio-Tamaricetea and Securinegion tinctoriae)

Riparian forests-galleries and tickets with oleander (Nerio-Tamaricetea)

9260 9260 Castanea sativa woods Forest vegetation with chestnut tree

924A Thermophilous oak-forest of E. Meditarranen and the Balcans

Forest vegetation with oak

9320 9320 Olea and Ceratonia forests Sparce formations with wild olive trees and locust trees





SEA MAPPING

9340 9340 Quercus ilex and Quercus rotundifolia forests Forest clusters of Quercus Ilex

9380 Forests of Ilex aquifolium Sparce clusters with holly 934A Quercus coccifera Greek forests Greek Briar woods

*9580 9580 Mediterranean Taxus baccata woods

Sparce clusters with yew

√ Differences between the two surveys – later update of data

Below follows the analysis of the current, actual distribution pattern of habitat types in the

study area and the justification of the occurring differences according to the youngest sci-

entific data in the surveys of the SEA (1998) and the Mapping (1999-2001):

a) change of the code for a habitat type and its alteration from a habitat type of the Di-

rective 92/43/EEC, to a Greek habitat type (the habitat type 6310 of the Directive was re-

placed by the Greek habitat type 934A).

The change took place in the framework of the work “Mapping of Habitat Types” (1999-

2001), based on the fact that specific habitat types like the habitat 6310 of Annex I of the

Directive 92/43/EEC are not found in Greece according also to the results of the II Medi-

terranean Biogeographical Seminar (1999). Habitat 6310 includes grazed forests of a

specific type which are found only in the Iberian peninsula. Therefore and in order to cover

the scrubby and low forest formations which are found in our area and elsewhere in Greek

section of the European Ecological Netwok Natura 2000, its replacement by the Greek

habitat type 934A (Quercus coccifera Greek forests) was decided (by the project teams of

1999-2001 in cooperation with the Greek Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning

and Public Works).

b) the habitat types *9580 and 9380 do not really occur on Mount Ochi , according to

our recent visit on the peaks of Profitis Ilias and Giouda. They are open rocky surfaces

with grasslands and thorny orbicular low shrubs and few individual and very scarce plants

of Taxus baccata and Ilex aquifolium. The visit took place with the scientific reservation of

the European Union Services regarding the habitat type *9580 (Mediterranean forests with

Taxus baccata) which is at the same time priority habitat type, as regards its existence in

Greece (Mediterranean Biogeographical Seminar III, Evaluation results 2004). Conse-

quently a proposal to the Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public

Works has been submitted for the replacement of habitats *9580 and 9380 by 4090 in

both cases of areas in Greece where it seemed as existing (GR2420001, GR1110004),

the first one of which is this SCI, where the study area belongs to.

c) regarding habitat *6220, which is a priority habitat according to Annex I of the Di-

rective 92/43/EEC, the following must be mentioned:



• The habitat is not described in the Standard Data Form of the SCI GR2420001.

• It is mentioned and mapped in mixture with the habitat types 5420 and 4090 not

only in the Special Environmental Assessment (SEA) but also in the mapping

schedule (1999-2001), i.e. it was never mapped as a separate vegetation unit-

habitat type. It is finally not included in the database with the habitat types for the

areas of the network Natura 2000 at European Level (results III of the Mediterra-

nean Biogeographical Seminar), according to the database with the habitat types

and species as delivered by Greece.

• The reasons why it is not mapped as a separate vegetation unit are the following:

- its presence was not documented on the basis of vegetation specimens

which are collected following a specific methodology which is widely ac-

cepted at European level

- it formed only small patches within other vegetation units-habitat types

which occupied very large surfaces in this area of the network Natura 2000

(5420: 39,7%, 4090: 6,8% of the total surface of the area (15.948 ha)

d) Finally, it should be taken into consideration that the borders of the study area were

different in both surveys. In the SEA (1998) the study area was bigger and covered also

sea areas while in the work of the Mapping of the Habitat Types (1999-2001) the study

area was smaller and was limited to land areas.

66..33..55..33 HHaabbiittaatt ttyyppeess iinn tthhee iinnssttaallllaattiioonn aarreeaass ooff tthhee wwiinndd ffaarrmmss

According to the field study which was carried out in the study area in order to depict the

current and actual situation of the vegetation and the respective habitat type, 8 habitat

types, pure or mosaics of two or three types (Table 12). The survey and mapping refers to

the direct project area (installation fields of WFs) and was executed at a scale of 1:5.000.

This scale is deemed to be more suitable to depict the actual distribution pattern of the

vegetation for works and activities which occupy a relatively small surface.

Table 12 : Habitat types in the proposed wind farms installation area.

Code Name Ecological description of name

4090 Endemic oro-Mediterranean heaths with gorse

Non typical “steppelike” rocky grasslands with thorny bushes in mountaineous and oro Mediter-ranean heights (domination of Genista acanthoclada with species of Daphno-Festucetalia and Thero-Brachypodietea)

5150 h Waste land with fern (Pteridium aquilinum) (pteriades)

Extensive, often close, plant communities with Pteridium aquilinum (fern). In the study area, es-pecially in the zone of oak and Quercus coccifera (500-900 m.).

5420 Sarcopoterium spinosum phryganas

Vegetation of phrygana with Erica manipuliflora, Genista acanthoclada, Sarcopoterium spinosum, Euphorbia acanthothamnos

5340h Garrigues of the Eastern Medi-terranean

Thorny (shrubs with Crataegus laciniata, shrubs with Erica arborea)



Code Name Ecological description of name

8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation

Chasmophytic vegetation on steep rocky for-mations in inside locations at an altitude >800 µ.

92C0 Platanus orientalis woods Riparian vegetation with Platanus orientalis 934Ah Greek briar woods Shrubs and low woodland with Quercus coccifera 9340 Quercus ilex forests Forest clusters of Quercus Ilex

In the area of interest, are found 5 habitat types of the Directive 92/43/EEC and 3 Greek

habitat types: 5150, 5340, 934A (with the indication h=hellenic).

The mapping of each wind farm includes not only the pure habitat types but also the mo-

saics of vegetation (habitat types) especially for cases where the chloristic composition

changes every dozen metres and vegetation/habitat types alternate so that an alternation

or transition from one habitat to the other which is impossible to be spatially depicted (due

to the fact that it is not abrupt but gradual whereby chloristic elements and structures from

various habitat types are mixed).

The following table records the mapping units of vegetation and habitat types per wind

farm which is located within the Site of Community Importance (area of network Natura

2000), in accordance with the Maps of Habitat types of each wind farm,

Table 13 : Habitat types per Wind Farm within the Site of Community Importance.

Wind Farm Habitat types D1 5150, 5340, 5420, 92C0, 9340 and mosaics of these habitat types D2 5340, 5420, 934A, D3 5420, 5340, 8210, 92C0, 9340 and mosaics of these habitat types D4 5150, 5420, 8210, 92C0 D5 5150, 5340, 5420, 92C0, 9340, D7 4090, 5150, 5340, 5420, 92C0 D8 4090, 5420, 5340, 9340

Next follows Table 14 with the habitat types and their distribution in the individual Wind

Farms of the study area.

Table 14: Distribution of habitat types per Wind Farm within the SCI.

Habitat types Distribution in the wind farms Directive 92/43/EEC (Annex I) 4090 D7, D8 5420 D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D7, D8 8210 D3, D4 92C0 D1, D3, D5, D7 9340 D1, D3, D5, D8 Greek (not included in Annex I of the Directive 92/43/EEC) 5150 D1, D4, D5, D7 5340 D1, D2, D3, D5, D7, D8 934A D2

A reduction of the habitats in the installation area of the WFs is observed compared to the

SCI, which is explained on the one hand due to the considerably smaller of the installation

polygons of the WFs in relation with the total surface of the SCI and on the other hand due

to the ecological requirements of each habitat. In the total area of the SCI are found



coastal and halophytic habitat types (1110, 1120, 1410), coastal and inland dunes (2110),

freshwater habitats (3150, 3170, 3260, 3290), habitats of high and low peatlands and fens

(72A0), which are limited to coastal and wetland areas of low altitude and thus are not

found in the mountainous areas under examination.

Regarding the priority habitat *6220 , according to the surveys of the study team in the

area a point presence of chloristic elements of this type is observed in specific locations.

They are species which participate in the clearings (open areas which are not cov-

ered with bushy or semi-bushy vegetation) of other habitat types (5420, 4090) . This

means that it is not a typical vegetable composition and structure of the habitat, as docu-

mented on the basis of the presence of a small number of differential species of the

phytosociological community to which it belongs. Consequently the spatial representation

of this habitat type, which in this case does not constitute a different structure (compared

to 5420 and 4090) is not possible, as we are based only on few species which are differ-

ential species of Thero-Brachypodietea (*6220).

66..33..55..44 FFlloorraa eelleemmeennttss iinn tthhee ssttuuddyy aarreeaa

The field survey showed that in the study area is not found any phytical taxon (species or

subspecies) included in Annexes II and IV of the Directive 92/43/EEC. However one can

find endemics as well as other species which are included either in the IUCN red list or in

the Red Data Book of Greece (Phitos et al., 1995).

The geographical location of the area, its geological composition and its complex paleo-

geography contributed to the isolation of certain species and the creation of new. The

presence in the Dimosari gorge and the wider area of 11 endemic taxa of Evia (five out of

which are local endemics of the area: Armeria johnsenii, Campanula celsii subsp.

carystea, Inula subfloccosa, Limonium runemarkii, Stachys euboica), and 28 endemix

taxa with broader expansion the Greek region, qualify the area as an important center of

endemism in the country. Below are presented some of the endemic taxa of the area

which are of interest or under pressure from human activities:

Stachys euboica

It is a particularly rare species, known from the rocky formations of Cavo d’oro, while a

small population was found in the area of Agios Dimitrios. The intense mining activities as

well as the alignment of new roads threaten the populations of this rare and endemic plant

species.

Inula subfloccosa

Τhis local endemic species grows in steep rocky areas with high altitudes on the Moun

Ochi. Important areas for this species are the rocky formations of Stefania Lalas as well

as other slopes on the northern foot of Mount Ochi. The intense mining activities in the



wider area may threaten the populations of this rare species.

Armeria johnsenii

Particularly rare local endemic species which is found only in the cape of Kafirefs and in

specific other locations on the coastline of Cavo d’oro (eg. river, Schizali beach). The total

population of this species counts only a few dozens. Its presence in the littoral zone

makes it vulnerable to potential human interventions. The construction of a new road in

1997 on the cape of Kafireas destructed certain plant species and threatens the biggest

known population of the species.

Cerastium runemarkii

Rare endemic species of the Aegean. Only two populations on Naxos island and on the

peak of Mount Ochi are known currently. The populations of these species are under

pressure due to intense overgrazing of the sheep in the surroundings of Mount Ochi.

Paeonia mascula subsp. hellenica

Until recently this taxon was considered as a Greek endemic, but a small population was

also found on the western coast of Turkey. The biggest known population of the species is

found in Mount Ochi, above the village of Rouklia. The road which was constructed in the

area the recent years divided the population in two while several individuals were re-

moved.

Two plant taxa (Taxus baccata, Ilex aquifolium) could be added to the endemic, threat-

ened, rare and protected species which, despite not constituting forested formations which

would allow the identification of the habitat types 9580 and 9380 respectively, are record-

ed in the area. In the study area only a few individuals are found on the preak of Mount

Ochi which are residual elements of older geological periods.

The total number of endemic and other plant species which are qualified as Important for

the study area, based on their integration and protection in National Lists (P.D. 67/81), as

well as in Risk Categories (Rare: R, Threatened: V, I: species "Endangered”, "Rare" or

"Threatened" for which there are not enough classification information) pursuant to Euro-

pean and International Lists (WCMC, UNEP, IUCN, Directive 92/43/EEC) amounts to 28

taxa (Table 15).

16 out these aforementioned endemic species on the Mount Ochi, in the Dimosari gorge

and the cape of Kafireas, are protected pursuant to Presidential Decree 67/81. As regards

their integration on protection categories according to international lists 16 are included in

one of the Red List categories as stipulated by the IUCN and are included in the afore-

mentioned Lists. Detailed results about the number of taxa for each Risk Category are

presented in the table below:



- 11 taxa belong to the Rare (R),

- 1 taxon is qualified as Threatened (Τ)

- 2 taxa belong to the locally rare species,

- 1 taxon belongs to the species of Indeterminate risk category (I)

- 1 taxon probably belongs to a risk category but the its population status is un-

known.

Table 15 : Endemic plant taxa of the study area and their protection status (P.D. 67/81, IUCN/WCMC and UNEP)

A/A Plant taxon P.D. 67/81 IUCN /WCMC UNEP

1 Cirsium heldreichii subsp. euboicum * - - 2 Inula subfloccosa * R/R R 3 Leontodon graecus * - - 4 Brassica cretica subsp. aegea - / (localy rare) - 5 Thlaspi bulbosum R/R R 6 Cerastium runemarkii * T/I I 7 Silene pentelica * R/R R 8 Ebenus sibthorpii * R/R R 9 Vicia pinetorum * ? - 10 Hypericum delphicum * R R 11 Sideritis euboea * - - 12 Stachys euboica * R R 13 Paeonia mascula subsp. hellenica -/(locally rare) I 14 Armeria johnsenii - - 15 Goniolimon sartorii * R R 16 Limonium palmare - - 17 Limonium runemarkii - - 18 Ranunculus subhomophylus * R R 19 Asperula lutea subsp. euboea 3 * ? - 20 Asperula rigidula - - 21 Verbascum delphicum * R R 22 Viola euboea - - 23 Crocus sieberi subsp. atticus - - 24 Fritillaria ehrhartii - - 25 Orchis boryi * - - 26 Sesleria vaginalis * - - 27 Hesperis laciniata subsp. secundiflora - R - 28 Aristolochia microstoma - R -

R = Rare, T= Threatened, V= Threatened or Vulnerable

66..33..66 SSppeecciieess ooff FFaauunnaa

Hereinafter follows a description of the study area based on the existing bibliographic

sources as well as the data collected by the study team during the field visits.

3 The report of the species from the gorge of Agios Dimitrios in S. Evia was not confirmed (according to Trigka

2003) and its existence is only documented in Mount Dirfy.



66..33..66..11 GGeenneerraall

The majority of the publications in the international bibliography regarding the impacts of

WFs on fauna refers only to birds and the recent years to bats (National Research Council

2007). In the guide of the European Union (Draft guidelines on Wind energy development

and EU Nature conservation requirements 2008) which is under publication and refers to

the relation between the development of wing energy with the Community protection re-

quirements, no mention is made to other species of fauna (except for birds, bats as

well as marine mammals and fish for offshore WFs). While studying small mammals in

WF location areas (with measurements before and after the construction and operation)

de Lucas et al. (2005) do not mention impacts on their populations.

Any impacts on the fauna (except for avifauna) refer to the construction phase of the WFs

(loss of habitat and disturbance during the construction of the installation fields and the

access roads) except for bats for which any impacts refer mainly to the operation phase.

66..33..66..22 PPrreesseennccee

A fundamental and important source regarding the fauna of the wider area and the works

area is the Special Environmental Assessment on the Dimosari gorge and the wider area

(Dimopoulos et al. 1998) which a covers to a great extent the study area. For a more

complete presentation of vertebrate fauna, the data of the SEA were combined with the

following bibliographic sources:

- Amphibians and Reptiles: Gasc et al. (1997), Arnold & Burton (2002), Dimitropoulos &

Ioannidis (2002), Valakos et al. (2008).

- Mammals: Mitchell-Jones et al. (1999).

Furthermore, during the field studies in the study area during the period 2006-2009, an

evaluation of the habitats in association with the species of fauna that they might support,

was also carried out.

Below we refer to and evaluate the species of fauna which, based on their ecology, may

be observed in the wider study area of the project and specifically in its terrestrial part.

Hence we will not refer further to species mentioned in the bibliography regarding

the wider study area but live and are observed only in the marine area (Turtle Caretta

caretta, Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus), or in freshwater systems and

habitats directly related with them (Europen Otter Lutra lutra, Balkan Terrapin

Mauremys rivulata and European pond turtle Emys orbicularis, Water snake Natrix natrix

and Dice snake Natrix tessellata, and amphibian species: Fire salamander Salamandra

salamandra, Yellow-Bellied Toad Bombina variegata, Common toad Bufo bufo, Green

toad Pseudepidalea viridis, Tree frog Hyla arborea and Marsh frog Pelophylax

ridibundus).



Table 16: Species of land mammals in the area of SE Evia (Dimopoulos et al. 1998, Greek names

by Mitchell-Jones et al. 1999).

S/N English name Scientific name Pr. 92/43/EEC IUCN RΒ Insectivora

1. Eastern European Hedgehog

Erinaceus concolor + LC NE

2. Mediterranean Mole Talpa caeca + LC DD Chiroptera

3. Common Pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus + IV LC DD 4. Kuhl's Pipistrelle P. kuhlii/nathusii + IV LC LC 5. Savi's Pipistrelle Hypsugo savii + IV LC LC 6. Long-tailed Bat Tadarida teniotis + IV LC LC 7. Myotis spp. 8. Plecotus spp.

9. Greater horseshoe bat

R. ferrumequinum + II/IV LC LC

Lagomorph a 10. European Hare Lepus europaeus + LC NE

Rodents 11. Edible Dormouse Glis glis + LC NE 12. Pitymys thomasi Pitymys thomasi + LC NE

13. Broad-toothed field Mouse

Apodemus mystacinus + LC NE

14. Wood mouse Apodemus sylvaticus + LC NE

15. Yellow-necked Mouse

Apodemus flavicollis + LC NE

16. House Rat Rattus rattus = NE 17. Brown rat Rattus norvegicus = NE 18. House Mouse Mus domesticus = NE

Carnivorans 19. Red Fox Vulpes vulpes + LC NE 20. Least Weasel Mustela nivalis + LC NE 21. Stone Marten Martes foina + LC NE

Table 17: Species of land reptiles in the area of SE Evia (Dimopoulos et al. 1998, Greek names

by Valakos et al. 2008).

A/a English name Scientific name Pr. 92/43 IUCN RB2009 Turtles

1. Hermann's tortoise Eurotestudo hermanni + II-IV LR/NT VU 2. Marginated Tortoise Testudo marginata + II-IV LC LC

Lizards 3. Kotschy's Gecko Cyrtopodion kotschyi = IV LC LC

4. Mediterranean House Gecko

Hemidactylus turcicus = LC LC

5. European Legless Lizard

Pseudopus apodus + IV LC LC

6. Snake-eyed skink Ablepharus kitaibelii + IV LC LC 7. Ocellated Skink Chalcides ocellatus + IV NT LC 8. Slow worm Anguis fragilis + LC 9. Three-lined lizard Lacerta trilineata + IV LC LC 10. Green lizard Lacerta viridis + IV LC LC 11. Erhard's wall lizard Podarcis erhardii + IV LC LC 12. Common wall lizard Podarcis muralis + IV LC LC

Snakes 13. European blind Typhlops vermicularis + LC



A/a English name Scientific name Pr. 92/43 IUCN RB2009 snake

14. Javelin sand boa Eryx jaculus + IV LC 15. Caspian whip snake Dolichophis caspius + IV LC LC 16. Balkan whip snake Hierophis gemonensis + LC LC 17. Dahl's Whip Snake Platyceps najadum + IV LC LC 18. Leopard snake Zamenis situlus + II/IV LC LC 19. Four-lined snake Elaphe quatuorlineata + II/V NT LC 20. Montpellier snake Malpolon monspessulanus + LC LC 21. European Cat Snake Telescopus fallax + IV LC LC 22. Nose-horned viper Vipera ammodytes + IV LC LC

MEMO of TABLES Presence: (+) Potential presence in the locations of the WFs or accompanying supporting infrastructure (=) simple presence in the wider area, according to their ecology (e.g. Valakos et al. 2008, IUCN 2009). 92/43: Directive 92/43/EEC for the conservation of the natural habitats and the wild fauna and flora - Annexes - (II) Species which requires the designation of special areas of conservation, (IV) Species in need of strict protection, (V) Species the exploitation of which can be regulated with management measures, (*) Priority species. IUCN: Red list of threatened species - (CR) Critically Endangered species, (EN) Endangered species, (VU) Vulnerable species, (NT) Near Threatened (LR/nt) Lower Risk/near threatened, (LR/lc) Lowest Risk/least concern, (LC) Least Concern, (DD) Data Deficient species (IUCN 2001, 2007, 2009). R.Β. 2009: Τhe Red Data Book of the Threatened Animals of Greece, Legakis, A. & P. Maragkou (ed.). 2009. Hellenic Zoological Society. (EX) Extinct species, (EW) Extinct in the wild, (RE) Locally extinct, (CR) Critically Endangered, (EN) Endangered, (VU) Vulnerable, (NT) Near Threatened (LC) Least Concern, (DD) Data Deficient, (NE) Not evaluated.

In the wider study area there have been observed 22 species of reptiles and 19 species of

mammals (and 2 species of chiroptera). The table above refers also to the species that

might be observed in the installation positions of the WT or in sites were the attached

works will be located based on the ecology of the species (eg. Valakos et al. 2008, IUCN

2009) and the habitats in the study area (see also chapter with analysis of habitat in the

installation positions). We will mention summarily that in the installation positions of the

WTs (WTs and accompanying supporting infrastructure, study area) are mainly found

opens spaces with low or none vegetation, and secondarily in specific spots clusters with

plane-trees, quercus ilex or higher bushes.

Most of the 22 species of reptiles of the wider area are common in the mainland of

Greece. As far as turtles are concerned the presence of two terrestrial species in the area

is interesting. This is attributed to the diversity of habitats and the relatively high altitudinal

width. At higher levels is observed the species Testudo marginata (Marginated Tortoise).

While both species (Eurotestudo hermanni and Testudo marginata) seem to prefer areas

with bushes, Testudo marginata is also found in more rocky areas. Summarily, potential

presence in the installation sites of the WFs or the location sites of the attached works

may occur for both aforementioned terrestrial species of turtles.

Eight species of lizards have been recorded in the wider study area, while the presence

of two more species, which are mentioned in bibliography from Evia (Anguis fragilis and

Chalcides ocellatus) is probable but not confirmed. Most species prefer areas with thin

vegetation and clearings, but they avoid the exposed ridges . Τhe species Hemidactylus

turcicus (Mediterranean House Gecko ) is almost always found in human buildings. Τhe



most common species in the area are Podarcis erhardii (Erhard's wall lizard) and

Ablepharus kitaibelii (Snake-eyed skink) which is found even in areas with low vegetation

(phrygana, low-degraded maquis). The presence of the species Lacerta trilineata (Three-

lined lizard) is related with the presence of shrubs to which it usually resorts to. At higher

altitudes its place takes the species Lacerta viridis (Green lizard). At even higher altitudes

and specially in the surroundings of Kastanologgos the Podarcis muralis (Common wall

lizard) is abundant. Τhe species Pseudopus apodus is also quite common and can be

even found in cultivated areas. Summarily, thus, the majority of the wider area may be al-

so found in the study area (WTs and locations of accompanying supporting infrastructure).

There are confirmed observations of eights species of snakes in the wider study area.

Older bibliographic records from Evia mention 2 more species (Hierophis gemonensis and

Telescopus fallax). Very few are the observations of the species Typhlops vermicularis

(European blind snake, due to its cryptic habits). Τhe two species of the genera Elaphe

and Zamenis are common in the area, especially in areas with low altitude. Τhe species

Zamenis situlus (Leopard snake) has been observed at altitudes up to 660m in the valley

of Rouklia, while the species Elaphe quatuorlineata (Four-lined snake) is found in areas up

to 950m high in Kastanologgos. Τhe species Eryx jaculus has been observed three times

but only in the plain of Karystos. The same area (plain of Karystos, area of Lala) offers the

most observations of the species Dolichophis caspius which prefers open and dry areas,

like cultivations, pastures and areas with thin maquis. Τhe species Platyceps najadum is

very common even in rocky areas, although usually it is found in habitats with thick vege-

tation. Τhe species Malpolon monspessulanus is very common in cultivated areas, as well

as in rocky areas until Cavo d’oro. Last, the Nose-horned viper (Vipera ammodytes) seems

to be a common and widespread species in areas with altitude up to 1000µ. Summarily,

thus, all of the species of the wider area may be observed also in the study area (WTs

and locations of the accompanying supporting infrastructure).

In the wider mountainous study area 19 species of mammals (and 2 genera of chiroptera)

are found.

From the insectivora , quite common in the area is the hedgedog. In certain locations of

the study area, the characteristic hills made by the moles have been observed. Although

the species has not been yet identified it probably is the Talpa caeca. Both species might

be observed also in the study area. (installation area of WTs and locations of accompany-

ing supporting infrastructure)).

The presence of four at least genera of chiroptera (based on older observations in the

area) is important since almost all species are included in International Conventions. One

or more species of the genus Rhinolophus prefer the cave of Agia Triada as well as other

small caves in the area of the same valley. Individuals which belong to genus Plecotus

have been observed in a house in the village Lalas and in warehouses of the mine in



“Platanogasos” near the village Kallianos.

It derives from the field studies about chiroptera which were carried out in the study ar-

ea in the framework of this assessment (Νovember 2008, with linear routes at the hours of

maximum activity of bats, use of bat-detector and analysis of the sound recordings with a

special software package), it seems that most of the bats resort to the numerous ravines,

gullies and gorges in order to hunt considering the abundance of insects in these areas

and the existence of water during the whole year in many of them. Recorded were 5 spe-

cies: Pipistrellus pipistrellus, P. kuhlii/nathusii, Hypsugo savii, Tadarida teniotis, R.

ferrumequinum, Plecotus spp.

The European Hare (Lepus europaeus) is found in relatively small numbers in the study

area. It prefers open spaces which offer more food possibilities, but uses also areas which

are covered with maquis mainly as shelters.

As regards rodents , the species Glis glis (Edible Dormouse) is mainly found in areas with

trees and mostly at altitudes more than 400µ. It is particularly abundant in Kastanologgos.

Out of three species of the genus Apodemus, Apodemus mystacinus is usually found in

open rocky areas, Apodemus flavicollis in areas at higher levels with relatively rich vegeta-

tion bushy or forested and Apodemus sylvaticus is widely spread in all habitat types, even

in areas with low vegetation and small percentage of ground coverage. Τhe above spe-

cies may be also observed in the study area (installation area of WT and locations of ac-

companying supporting infrastructure).

As regards anthropophilic species , Rattus norvegicus (Brown rat) has been observed

only in the region of Karystos and in the plain of Garystos contrary to Rattus rattus (House

Rat) which is found in most areas with human presence. Τhe species Mus musculus

(House mouse) is also found near human residences but has also been found far from

them, usually in areas with some kind of human activity. Τhese species are not expected

to be observed in the study area (installation area of WT and locations of accompanying

supporting infrastructure).

Three species of carnivorous mammals have been observed in the area. The Red Fox

(Vulpes vulpes) is found in relatively big populations in the area while weasels and mar-

tens are common and widely spread. Summarily, the 3 carnivorous mammals may be ob-

served in the study area (installation locations of WT and locations of accompanying sup-

porting infrastructure).

66..33..66..33 RRaarriittyy aanndd PPrrootteeccttiioonn

We focus mainly on the special protection status of the species in the European Union



(Directive 92/43/EEC) for the conservation of natural habitats as well as of wild fauna and

flora), i.e. the species of Annexes II (species which require the designation of special are-

as of conservation) and IV (species in need of strict protection). As far as the threat status

is concerned, we focus on the IUCN lists about threatened species at a global level (2009)

and the Red Book of Threatened Animals of Greece (Legakis & Μaragkou 2009) for spe-

cies at national level.

As far as serpents are concerned, and specifically turtles : Both species are included in

Annexes II and IV of the Directive 92/43/EEC. The Mediterranean turtle is referred to as a

species of Low risk which might soon be qualified as threatened (LR/nt, IUCN 2009) and

as Vulnerable species in the Red Book (2009).

Regarding lizards: The majority of the species in the wider study area (with the exception

of the Kotschy's Gecko and the Mediterranean House Gecko) may be observed also in

the study area (installation positions and locations of accompanying supporting infrastruc-

ture). Furthermore, most species are included in Annex IV of the Directive 92/43/EEC (8

out of 10 species). All species are referred to as being out on danger by the IUCN except

for the Ocellated Skink (Chalcides ocellatus) which referred to as Threatened in the near

future. No species is considered threatened at national level (Legakis & Μaragkou 2009).

Summarily, 7 out of 8 species which may be observed in the study area are included in

Annex IV of the Directive 92/43/EEC while 1 of them (Ocellated Skink) is deemed to be

threatened in the near future (IUCN 2009).

Regarding snakes : All of the species of the wider study area may be observed also in the

study area. Moreover, most of the species are included in II or/and IV of the Directive

92/43/EEC (7 out of 10 species), and only one species (Four-lined snake) is deemed to be

threatened in the near future (IUCN 2009).

As regards mammals and specifically the insectivora : both species of the wider area (the

Eastern European Hedgehog and the Mediterranean Mole) might be observed in the study

area, but are not included in the Annexes of the Directive 92/43/EEC and are considered

to be out of danger at global level (IUCN 2009) while the Mediterranean Mole is referred

to as insufficiently known in the Red Book (Legakis & Μaragkou 2009).

As regards chiroptera : All 5 species which were observed during the field surveys are

included in the Annexes of the Directive 92/43/EEC. Τhese species are considered to be

out of danger at a global level (IUCN 2009). In the Red Book (Legakis & Μaragkou 2009)

all 5 species are referred to as of Low Concern (LC) except for the Common Pipistrelle

(DD, Defficient Data).

Out of 8 species of rodents of the wider area, 5 might be observed in the study area while

none is protected by the Directive 92/43/EEC. Additionally, all species are considered to

be out of danger at global (IUCN) and national level. (Red Book).



Regarding carnivora : all 3 species of the wider area, might be observed in the installation

site and the locations of the accompanying supporting infrastructure. No species is includ-

ed in the Annex of the Directive 92/43/EEC and they are not threatened on a global and

national level (IUCN, Legakis & Μaragkou 2009).

66..33..77 AAvvii ffaauunnaa ooff tthhee aarreeaa

66..33..77..11 AAiimm ooff tthhee SSttuuddyy

In this study (Volume E - Special Ornithological Assessment) data recordings of avifauna,

which were collected in the study area as well as in the wider area during extensive orni-

thological field research between 2006 and 2010 (the data collected under the Preliminary

Environmental Impact Assessment is incorporated), are presented, analyzed and evaluat-

ed in this study in conjunction with existing literature data. The aim of the study is to as-

sess the potential impacts of the project on the avifauna of the region based on the con-

temporary field data and existing bibliographical data.

66..33..77..22 SSttuuddyy AArreeaa

This study concerns the potential impacts of the eight (8) wind farms on local bird popula-

tions; however, due to the birds’ mobility and capacity of flight, it is appropriate to examine

the situation in the wider region of the wind farms.

Thus, we consider the wider study area (in which existing bird populations may be associ-

ated with the wind farm installation area) to be the entire area consisting of the Special

Protection Area GR2420012 - Mount Ochi, coastline and islets (see Map 1 Annex II).

Respectively, we consider the study area (in which bird populations exist that are directly

associated with the installation area of wind farms, taking into account the wind farms of

the 2 groups) to be the area defined by the union of polygons centered on wind turbines

with a 2km radius length (in this range the movements of birds are recorded in the field

maps). In the study area, accompanying projects (SNH 2005) are included.

66..33..77..33 PPrrootteeccttiioonn ssttaattuuss ooff tthhee aarreeaa

Recently (March 2010), the study area was included in the Natura 2000 network as a

Special Protection Area (GR2420012 - Mount Ochi, coastal zone and islets ,

79/409/EEC Council Directive of 2 April 1979 "on the conservation of wild birds" EE L

103/25.4.1979). The region has an area of 33.385 ha (altitude 0-1.386m) and includes

Mount Ochi with the coastal areas of Kafireas River and Potamos as well as the rocky is-

let of Mandilou. The significance of the SPA is that it maintains important populations of

birds of prey species (such as Bonelli's Eagles and Short-toed Eagles) and a significant

population of (Eurasian) Eagle Owls. Also, the area is important for nesting passerine

species of European Community Importance (Woodlark, Tawny Pipit, Cretzschmar’s Bunt-



ing) and important species which nest on the rocky Mandilou islet (Eleonora’s Falcon,

Audouin’s Gull). The total number of the wind farms which are the subject of this study are

inside the SPA.

66..33..77..44 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy ooff rreeccoorrddiinnggss

To assess any possible impacts of wind farms on avifauna, it is necessary to record the

local bird population, which should be central:

• identify species using the airspace within a vertical elevation up to 250m from the

base of the wind turbine and in the terrestrial area of the wind farm site up to a

2km radius from the base of the wind turbine, and

• observe the behaviour of species in relation to the cumulative and synergistic ef-

fects which may exist from existing and future land use changes.

The area which is covered by the methodology for this study mainly concerns the

space designated "Study Area" in Chapter 3 (i.e. the area within a 2km radius of the de-

velopment points). In this study, we focus mainly on the time periods of breeding

and migration. Less weight was given to the winter observations because the period

of overwintering is especially important for areas with wetlands which accumulate large

populations of waterfowl to overwinter.

For avifauna recording, a combination of methods was used, “Vantage Point Counts” (VP,

“Observation from Vantage Points”: based on the region and the species, some locations

are selected where flight observations are made from a distance), “Point Counts” (“Point

Counts”: landscape points are selected from which observations are made from close

proximity), and “Playback Calls” (“Play recordings of nocturnal raptors’ territorial calls at

the right time of day and year and listen for a response”). These methods are classified as

the most important in the specifications of the SNH (Scottish National Heritage) and the

instructions of the Hellenic Ornithological Society (HOS) (Estimation of the Impact from

the Construction and Operation of Wind farms on the Avifauna, January 2009).

Moreover at regular intervals during the spring, points in the vicinity of the study area that

were potentially suitable locations for nesting (e.g. rocky outcrops, etc.) were investigated.

Cases in which there was evidence of nesting (presence of birds in the nest, "recent nest

droppings beneath or around the nest”) were recorded in the protocols and field maps

(Fuller & Mosher 1981, Hardey et al. 2009).

In summary , the selected methodology adequately covers the needs of recording, focus-

ing on the effects of wind farm location on the species of the wider area. With the Vantage

Point (VP) method, the movements and flights of large size breeding species as well as

the large migratory birds flying over the study area are mainly recorded, while the Point

Counts (PC) method reflects the composition of the avifauna at specific points (mainly



breeding passerines and species which have stopped over during migration). In line with

the effects discussed in the previous chapter, the Vantage Point Counts (VP) method fo-

cuses on possible effects due to collisions and the creation of obstacles to the movement

of birds (barrier effect), while the Point Counts (PC) method focuses on the disturbance

effects and displacement (European Commission 2008).

The VP selection at each wind farm and the recording of the necessary data are ac-

complished in accordance with specific protocols under conditions set by the interna-

tional bibliography. As a result, points with a wide field view are selected, and from the-

se points the horizon is scanned slowly and repeatedly for birds of prey in flight, with

particular emphasis on the position of the wind farm (and a band of approximately 2km

around it). The points are chosen in such a way (location, distance, number of points) so

that the wind turbine development positions are at least visually covered, while the dis-

tance from the field which they cover should not exceed 2km.

A total of 12 basic VPs were designated and sporadically distributed in the study area

where bird counts were recorded by the Vantage Point method in the area under con-

sideration for wind farms, while 1-2 additional points were regularly checked to locate

potential Bonelli's Eagle nests. In every position, birds which passed through proposed

wind farm development sites or close to the sites were counted.

The date which was taken and recorded in protocols in accordance with the VP method

concern the general characteristics of the species (the species, the number of individuals

etc.), information related to their flying behaviour (flight altitude, flight behaviour & direc-

tion) and information on the time of bird presence within the proximity zones. The move-

ments of recorded species are reflected in maps to scale, 1:25.000 or 1:35.000, for the

area of interest.

With a point of reference being the polygon of each wind farm installation, three proximi-

ty zones which relate to the project were defined.

Zone A covers a distance of 250 meters from each side of the project’s development

boundary line as well as a height of 250 meters above the project. These limits are de-

rived from the bibliography and empirical knowledge of the project’s “direct influence” on

the avifauna. It is postulated that birds within this area could be negatively affected by

the project because the potential for disturbance and collision are increased.

Zone B covers a distance between 250 and 1.000 meters from each side and 250 me-

ters in height. This area is the zone of wider influence (often described as the buffer

zone in the bibliography). Once again, the rationale is that there is a gradation. Here the

birds will be less affected than in Zone A.

Zone C is a wider area from 1.000 to 2.000 meters . This zone is included when we re-



fer to large size birds or raptors which have large territories and could be affected by the

project.



Fig- ure

4: The

hier-

archical succession of three virtual "proximity zones" that were used in counting (VP Counts). Zone

A includes the area of "direct influence" of the project on the avifauna

As for the point counts (PC), they are done concurrently with the Vantage Point Count.

The counts obtained with the PC method are made per observation point of birds within

and beyond an estimated 50m radius. Specifically, the species, number, sex and age are

recorded.

For the completion of field work, visits to the proposed wind farm areas were performed by

expert ornithologists for the period from April 2006 to May 2010 (see Appendix). The ob-

servers moved by car along the roads that are adjacent to the wind farms, making stops at

selected vantage points and using binoculars 10x50 and a telescope 20-60x65 for observ-

ing birds.



Table 18: The Vantage Points selected to cover the 8 wind farms

Id Vantage Point

Hours Days

Total Spring Autumn Total Spring Autumn

12 26.6 23.6 3.0 22 18 4

13 23.4 21.9 1.5 19 16 3

14 26.3 24.3 2.0 19 15 4

18 24.0 22.5 1.5 17 14 3

19 24.1 23.1 1.0 18 16 2

20 21.3 20.3 1.0 15 13 2

23 20.9 19.9 1.0 17 15 2

24 21.0 20.5 0.5 13 12 1

25 26.3 24.3 2.0 20 16 4

30 24.3 22.3 2.0 20 16 4

32 23.3 21.8 1.5 20 17 3

34 31.5 27.5 4.0 13 10 3



66..33..77..55 EEvvaalluuaattiioonn ooff iimmppaacctt aasssseessssmmeenntt

To assess the potential impacts of the proposed wind farms on important bird species, the

framework method described by Percival (2007) was used for similar assessments/studies

in the framework of Environmental Impact Studies.

Essentially, based on the specific context for each important species at each wind farm,

the significance of each type of impact is evaluated in accordance with the following steps:

- Collection of primary data on the avifauna in the proposed installation area (field

work)

- Determination of the ecological vulnerability of these species (based on their

protection status)

- Estimation of the magnitude of the potential impacts on these populations (to

what extent the local population will be affected)

- Assessment of the risk (probability of occurrence) of impact (risk of collisions,

habitat loss, disturbance), based on the bibliography

- Overall assessment of the significance of the impacts based on the ecological

vulnerability, the magnitude of the impacts and the risks of occurrence

- Conclusions about the impacts based on the overall assessment

The assessment method is discussed in detail at the Special Ornithological Assessment.

66..33..77..66 RReessuullttss

The wider area can be characterized as a mountainous peninsula, the avifaunal composi-

tion of which is subject to the pressures of island bio-geography (e.g. the geographical

barrier of the sea, the relationship between the species and area habitats, isolation from

population sources, etc.). Thus, the southern tip of Evia combines ornithological elements

of continental Greece as well as characteristic elements of the community composition of

Aegean Sea islands.

According to the bibliography (Tables 9-11), of the 210 species recorded in the wider

study area, 64 species are included in Annex I of 79/409/EEC Birds Directive. One hun-

dred thirty of the species can also potentially occur in the project development areas

based on their ecology. Of these 130, only 31 are included in Annex I of the Birds Di-

rective. During the period 2006-2010, 85 bird species were recorded in the study area ,

out of which 23 are included in Annex I (79/409/EEC Directive).



Table 19: Data summary of the wider regional avifauna in the study area and specific categories of bird species.

Species Category Number of

Species

Total of recorded species in the wider study area (bibliographically) 210

Annex I of 79/409/EEC Directive protected species in the wider study area 64

Total of recorded species in the wider study area with potential presence in the wind farm zone 130

Annex I of 79/409/EEC Directive protected species with potential presence in the wind farm zone

31

Total of species recorded in the study area during the period 2006-2010 85

Annex I of 79/409/EEC Directive protected species recorded in the study area during the period 2006-2010

23

Table 20: The avian species of the wider area based on bibliographical review (Kanellis et al. 1969, Zogaris 1985, Corine Biotopes 1987, Special Environmental Assessment 1998, Hellenic Ornithological Society 1989, Gaetlich 1992, Zogaris 1999) which were not ob-served during the field observations (2006-2010) in the study area (English names from Mullarney & Svensson 2007).

Scientific name English name Presence

Status SPEC KB 2009 79/409

Potential presence

in the wind farm zone

Observation in the wider

area

Acrocephalus melanopogon

Moustached Warbler ΜΧ VU I

Acrocephalus schoenobaenus

Sedge Warbler Μ 4 NE

Acrocephalus scirpaceus

(European) Reed Warbler Μ 4 NE

Alauda arvensis (Common) Skylark ΜΧ 3 NT II2 +

Alcedo atthis (Common) Kingfisher ΜΧ 3 DD I

Alectoris chukar Chukar Partridge EA 3 NE II2 +

Alectoris graeca Rock Partridge EA 2 VU +

Anas acuta (Northern) Pintail ΜΧ 3 NE II1/III2

Anas clypeata (Northern) Shoveler ΜΧ 3 NE II1/III2

Anas crecca (Common) Teal ΜΧ NE II1/III2

Anas penelope (Eurasian) Wigeon ΜΧ NE II1/III2

Anas platyrhynchos

Mallard ΜΧ NE

Anas querquedula

Garganey Μ VU II1

Anthus cervinus Red-throated Pipit Μ NE

Anthus Meadow Pipit ΜΧ 4 NE +





Potential presence



area

pratensis

Anthus spinoletta

Water Pipit ΜΧ NE +

Anthus trivialis Tree Pipit Μ NE +

Aquila chrysaetos

Golden Eagle Π; 3 EN I +

Ardea cinerea Grey Heron ΜΧ NE

Ardea purpurea Purple Heron Μ 3 EΝ I

Ardeola ralloides

Squacco Heron Μ 3 VU I

Arenaria interpres

(Ruddy) Turnstone Μ NE

Asio otus Long-eared Owl Χ(A) NE +

Aythya ferina (Common) Pochard ΜΧ 2 LC 111

/II12

Aythya nyroca Ferruginous Duck Μ 1 VU I

Buteo rufinus Long-legged Buzzard ΜΧ (A) 3 VU I +

Calandrella brachydactyla

(Greater) Short-toed Lark Μ 3 NE I +

Calidris alba Sanderling Μ NE

Calidris alpina Dunlin Μ 3 NE

Calidris ferruginea

Curlew Sandpiper Μ NE

Calidris minuta Little Stint Μ NE

Calidris temminckii

Temminck’s Stint Μ NE

Calonectris diomedea

Cory’s Shearwater Π 2 LC I

Carduelis spinus

(Eurasian) Siskin ΜΧ 4 NE

Cercotrichas galactotes

Rufous Bush Robin A 3 NE

Charadrius alexandrinus

Kentish Plover Μ 3 LC I

Charadrius dubius

Little Ringed Plover ΜΦ NE

Charadrius hiaticula

(Common) Ringed Plover Μ 4 NE

Chlidonias hybridus

Whiskered Tern Μ 3 EN I

Chlidonias leucopterus

White-winged Tern Μ NE

Chlidonias niger Black Tern Μ 3 EN I





Potential presence



area

Ciconia ciconia White Stork Π 2 VU I +

Cinclus cinclus (White-throated) Dipper EA NE

Cisticola juncidis

Zitting Cisticola EA NE

Coccothraustes coccothraustes

Hawfinch Χ NE

Columba palumbus

(Common) Wood Pigeon ΜΧ 4 NE +

Coracias garrulus

(European) Roller Μ 2 VU I +

Corvus monedula

(Western) Jackdaw Μ 4 NE II2 +

Coturnix coturnix

(Common) Quail Μ (A) 3 NE II2 +

Cygnus olor Mute Swan Χ 4 LC

Egretta garzetta Little Egret Μ LC I

Emberiza cia Rock Bunting ΜΧ (A) 3 NE +

Emberiza hortulana

Ortolan Bunting Μ 2 LC I +

Emberiza schoeniclus

(Common) Reed Bunting

Χ NE +

Eremophila alpestris

Horned Lark (Shore Lark) Γ; NE +

Ficedula albicollis

Collared Flycatcher Μ 4 NE I +

Ficedula hypoleuca

(European) Pied Flycatcher Μ 4 NE +

Fringilla montifringilla

Brambling Χ NE +

Fulica atra (Eurasian) Coot Μ NE II1/III2

Gallinago gallinago

(Common) Snipe ΜΧ 3 NE II1/III2

Gallinula chloropus

(Common) Moorhen Μ EA NE

Glareola pratincola

Collared Pratincole Μ 3 VU

Gyps fulvus (Eurasian) Griffon Vulture ΜΧ VU +

Hieraaetus pennatus

Booted Eagle Μ 3 EN +

Himantopus himantopus

Black-winged Stilt Μ LC

Hippolais icterina

Icterine Warbler Μ 4 NE +





Potential presence



area

Hydrobates pelagicus

(European) Storm Petrel Γ 4 DD I

Ixobrychus minutus

Little Bittern Μ(A) 3 LC I

Jynx torquilla (Eurasian) Wryneck Μ 3 NE +

Larus fuscus Lesser Black-backed Gull Π 4 NE

Larus melanocephalus

Mediterranean Gull ΜΧ 4 EN I

Larus minutus Little Gull ΜΧ 3 NE I

Larus ridibundus

Black-headed Gull ΜΧ 4 NE +

Limosa limosa Black-tailed Godwit Μ 2 NE

Lymnocryptes minimus

Jack Snipe Μ 3 NE II1/III2

Milvus migrans Black Kite Μ 3 CR I +

Monticola saxatilis

(Rufous-tailed) Rock Thrush ΜA 3 NE +

Motacilla cinerea

Grey Wagtail ΜEA NE +

Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail Μ (A) NE +

Numenius arquata

(Eurasian) Curlew Μ 2 LC

Nycticorax nycticorax

(Black-crowned) Night Heron Μ 3 NT I

Otus scops (Eurasian) Scops Owl A 2 NE +

Parus ater Coal Tit ΜΧ NE

Passer hispaniolensis

Spanish Sparrow ΜA NE +

Pelecanus onocrotalus

White Pelican Γ 3 VU

Phalacrocorax pygmeus

Pygmy Cormorant Γ 1 LC

Philomachus pugnax

Ruff Μ 2 NE

Phoenicurus phoenicurus

(Common) Redstart Μ 2 NE +

Plegadis falcinellus

Glossy Ibis Μ 3 CR I

Pluvialis apricaria

(European) Golden Plover Μ 4 NE I/II2/III2

Pluvialis squatarola

Grey Plover Μ NE

Podiceps Great Crested ΜΧ NE





Potential presence



area

cristatus Grebe

Podiceps grisegena

Red-necked Grebe Χ NE

Podiceps nigricollis

Black-necked Grebe ΜΧ NE

Porzana parva Little Crake Μ 4 DD I

Porzana porzana

Spotted Crake Μ 4 DD I

Porzana pusilla Baillon’s Crake Μ 3 NE I

Rallus aquaticus

Water Rail ΜΧ (E)(A) NE

Regulus ignicapillus

Firecrest ΜΧ 4 NE

Remiz pendulinus

(Eurasian) Penduline Tit ΜΧA NE

Scolopax rusticola

(Eurasian) Woodcock ΜΧ 3 NE II1/III2

Serinus serinus (European) Serin EA 4 NE

Sterna albifrons Little Tern Μ 3 NT I

Sterna hirundo Common Tern Μ LC I

Sterna nilotica Gull-billed Tern Μ 3 VU I

Sterna sandvicensis

Sandwich Tern ΠΧ 2 VU I

Streptopelia decaocto

(Eurasian) Collared Dove EA NE +

Streptopelia turtur

(European) Turtle Dove ΜA 3 NE +

Sturnus roseus Rose-colored Starling Π NE

Sylvia borin Garden Warbler Μ 4 NE +

Sylvia communis

(Common) Whitethroat ΜA 4 NE +

Sylvia crassirostris

Eastern Orphean Warbler Μ 3 NE +

Sylvia curruca Lesser Whitethroat Μ NE +

Tringa erythropus

Spotted Redshank Μ 3 NE

Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper Μ 3 LC I

Tringa nebularia (Common) Greenshank Μ NE

Tringa ochropus Green Sandpiper Μ NE

Tringa stagnatilis

Marsh Sandpiper Μ NE

Tringa totanus (Common) Μ 2 NE





Potential presence



area

Redshank

Turdus iliacus Redwing ΜΧ 4w NE 112 +

Turdus philomelos

Song Thrush ΜΧ 4 NE 112 +

Turdus pilaris Fieldfare ΜΧ 4w NE II2 +

Turdus viscivorus

Mistle Thrush ΜΧ 4 NE 112 +

Vanellus vanellus

(Northern) Lapwing ΜΧ 2 VU 112

Tachybaptus ruficollis

Little Grebe ΜΧA NE

TABLE LEGEND

Presence Status: Appearance status of the species in the wider area: (E) resident breeding species in the area (resident population); (A) Breeding visitor; ((A)) Possibly breeding; (Μ) Passing visitor (appears in the area for relatively short periods) during migration, is a regular visitor; (Χ) winter visitor; (Π) Non-breeding visitor (found periodically or irregularly, not a regular migratory species); (Γ) presence status unknown.

SPEC: European Species of Conservation Interest: (SPEC1) European species of global conservation interest, (SPEC2) species population is concentrated in Europe and is under unfavorable conservation status in Europe, (SPEC3) species population is not concentrated in Europe and is under unfavorable conservation status in Europe, (Non-SPECE) species population is concentrated in Europe and is under favorable conservation status in Europe, (Non-SPEC) species population is not concentrated in Europe and is under favorable conservation status in Europe (BirdLife International 2004).

Κ.Β. 2009: The Red Book of Threatened Species in Greece. Legakis, A. & P. Maragou (eds.). 2009. Hellenic Zoological Society. (EX) Extinct species, (EW) Species extinct in their natural environment, (RE) Locally extinct, (CR) Critically endangered, (EN) Endangered, (VU) Vulnerable, (NT) Almost threatened, (LC) Least Concern, (DD) Poorly known, (NE) Not assessed.

79/409: Species included in the 79/409/EEC Directive for the Birds.

Possible presence: assessment of the species in the zone <100m altitude from the ground in the development

locations, based on their ecology (e.g. Handrinos & Akriotis 1997).

Table 21: Bird species observed during field recordings (2006-2010) (English names from Mullarney & Svensson 2007).

Scientific Name English Name Presence


Potential presence in

the wndfarm

zone


area

Accipiter brevipes

Levant Sparrowhawk Μ 2 NE I + +

Accipiter nisus (Eurasian) Sparrowhawk ΜΧEA NE + +

Acrocephalus arundinaceus

Great Reed Warbler Μ NE +

Actitis hypoleucos

Common Sandpiper ΜΧ 3 NE +

Anthus campestris

Tawny Pipit ΜA 3 LC I + +

Apus apus (Common) Swift ΜA NE + +






the wndfarm

zone


area

Apus melba Alpine Swift ΜA NE + +

Apus pallidus Pallid Swift ΜA NE + +

Athene noctua Little Owl EA 3 NE + +

Bubo bubo (Eurasian) Eagle Owl EA 3 LC I + +

Buteo buteo Common Buzzard ΜΧEA NE + +

Caprimulgus europaeus

(European) Nightjar ΜA 2 LC I + +

Carduelis cannabina

(Common) Linnet ΜΧEA 2 NE + +

Carduelis carduelis

(European) Goldfinch ΜΧEA NE + +

Carduelis chloris

(European) Greenfinch ΜΧEA 4 NE + +

Cettia cetti Cetti’s Warbler EA NE + +

Circaetus gallicus

Short-toed Eagle ΜA 3 NT I + +

Circus aeruginosus

Marsh Harrier Μ VU I + +

Circus cyaneus

Hen Harrier Μ 3 NE I + +

Circus macrourus

Pallid Harrier Μ 1 DD I + +

Circus pygargus

Montagu’s Harrier Μ 4 CR I + +

Columba livia Rock Dove EA NE II1 + +

Corvus corax (Common) Raven EA NE + +

Corvus corone Hooded Crow EA NE II2 + +

Cuculus canorus

(Common) Cuckoo Μ NE + +

Delichon urbica

(Common) House Martin ΜA 3 NE + +

Emberiza caesia

Cretzschmar’s Bunting ΜA 4 LC I + +

Emberiza calandra

Corn Bunting EA 2 NE + +

Emberiza cirlus

Cirl Bunting EA 4 NE + +

Emberiza melanocephala

Black-headed Bunting ΜA 2 NE + +

Erithacus rubecula

(European) Robin ΜΧEA 4 NE + +

Falco eleonorae

Eleonora’s Falcon ΜΠ(A) 2 LC I + +

Falco Lesser Kestrel Μ; 1 VU I + +






the wndfarm

zone


area

naumanni

Falco peregrinus

Peregrine Falcon EA LC I + +

Falco subbuteo

(Eurasian) Hobby Μ NE + +

Falco tinnunculus

(Common) Kestrel E 3 NE + +

Falco vespertinus

Red-footed Falcon Μ 3 DD I + +

Fringilla coelebs

(Common) Chaffinch ΜΧEA 4 NE + +

Galerida cristata

Crested Lark E 3 NE + +

Garrulus glandarius

(Eurasian) Jay EA NE + +

Hieraaetus fasciatus

Bonelli’s Eagle EA 3 VU I + +

Hippolais pallida

Olivaceous Warbler ΜA 3 NE + +

Hirundo daurica

Red-rumped Swallow ΜA ΝE + +

Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow ΜA 3 NE + +

Lanius collurio Red-backed Shrike Μ 3 NE I + +

Lanius minor Lesser Grey Shrike Μ 2 NT I + +

Lanius senator Woodchat Shrike ΜA 2 NE + +

Larus audouinii Audouin’s Gull Π 1 VU I +

Larus michahelis

Yellow-legged Gull EA 4 NE II2 + +

Lullula arborea Woodlark E 2 LC I + +

Luscinia megarhynchos

(Common) Nightingale ΜEΣ 4 NE + +

Merops apiaster

(European) Bee-eater Μ 3 NE + +

Monticola solitarius

Blue Rock Thrush EA 3 NE + +

Motacilla alba White/Pied Wagtail ΜΧ (A) NE + +

Muscicapa striata

Spotted Flycatcher ΜA 3 NE + +

Oenanthe hispanica

Black-eared Wheatear ΜA 2 NE + +

Oenanthe oenanthe

Northern Wheatear ΜA 3 NE + +

Oriolus oriolus (Eurasian) Golden Oriole

Μ NE + +






the wndfarm

zone


area

Pandion haliaetus

Osprey MX 3 LC I + +

Parus caeruleus

Blue Tit EA 4 ΝE + +

Parus lugubris Sombre Tit EA 4 ΝE +

Parus major Great Tit EA NE + +

Passer domesticus

House Sparrow EA 3 NE + +

Pernis apivorus

(European) Honey Buzzard

Μ(A) 4 LC I + +

Phalacrocorax aristotelis

(European) Shag Π(A) 4 NT I +

Phoenicurus ochruros

Black Redstart ΜΧEA NE + +

Phylloscopus collybita

Chiffchaff Μ NE + +

Phylloscopus sibilatrix

Wood Warbler Μ 2 NE + +

Phylloscopus trochilus

Willow Warbler ΜΧ NE + +

Pica pica (Common) Magpie Π (A) NE II2 + +

Prunella modularis

Dunnock ΜΧ 4 NE + +

Ptyonoprogne rupestris

(Eurasian) Crag Martin ΜA NE + +

Puffinus yelkouan

Mediterranean Shearwater Π 4 NT I +

Riparia riparia Sand Martin Μ 3 NE + +

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat Μ 4 NE + +

Saxicola torquata

(Common) Stonechat EA NE + +

Sitta neumayer (Western) Rock Nuthatch EA 4 NE + +

Strix aluco Tawny Owl EA 4 NE II2 + +

Sturnus vulgaris

(Common) Starling ΜΧ 3 NE II2 + +

Sylvia atricapilla

Blackcap ΧΜA 4 NE + +

Sylvia cantillans

Subalpine Warbler ΜA 4 NE + +

Sylvia melanocephala

Sardinian Warbler EA 4 NE + +

Troglodytes troglodytes

(Winter) Wren EA NE + +






the wndfarm

zone


area

Turdus merula (Common) Blackbird ΜΧA 4 NE II2 + +

Upupa epops (Eurasian) Hoopoe Μ (A) 3 NE + +

TABLE LEGEND

Presence Status: Appearance status of the species in the wider area: (E) resident breeding species in the area (resident population); (A) Breeding visitor; ((A)) Possibly breeding; (Μ) Passing visitor (appears in the area for relatively short periods) during migration, is a regular visitor; (Χ) winter visitor; (Π) Non-breeding visitor (found periodically or irregularly, not a regular migratory species); (Γ) presence status unknown.

SPEC: European Species of Conservation Interest: (SPEC1) European species of global conservation concern, (SPEC2) species population is concentrated in Europe and is under unfavorable conservation status in Europe, (SPEC3) species population is not concentrated in Europe and is under unfavorable conservation status in Europe, (Non-SPECE) species population is concentrated in Europe and is under favorable conservation status in Europe, (Non-SPEC) species population is not concentrated in Europe and is under favorable conservation status in Europe (BirdLife International 2004).

Κ.Β. 2009: The Red Book of Threatened Species in Greece. Legakis, A. & P. Maragou (eds.). 2009. Hellenic Zoological Society. (EX) Extinct species, (EW) Species extinct in their natural environment, (RE) Locally extinct, (CR) Critically endangered, (EN) Endangered, (VU) Vulnerable, (NT) Almost threatened, (LC) Least Concern, (DD) Poorly known, (NE) Not assessed.

79/409: Species included in the 79/409/EEC Directive for the Birds.

Possible presence: assessment of the species in the zone <100m altitude from the ground in the develop-ment locations, based on their ecology (e.g. Handrinos & Akriotis 1997).

From all the above species, the selection of the important avifauna species is performed

by isolating the species which are included in Annex I of the 79/409/EEC Directive and/or

which are considered as critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable or near threatened

in the Red Book (categories CR, EN, VU, NT, Legakis & Maragou 2009) or which are

known to appear in significant numbers at the regional level (>1% of the national popula-

tion) AND which which may appear in the wind farm zones based on their ecology (SNH

2005).

The species that meet the above criteria and additionally were recorded at the study area

(2006-2010) are as follows (species in which assessment is focused):

From the raptor species: Short-toed Eagle ( Circaetus gallicus ), Marsh Harrier ( Cir-

cus aeruginosus ), Hen Harrier ( Circus cyaneus ), Pallid Harrier ( Circus macrourus ),

Montagu’s Harrier ( Circus pygargus ), Eleonora’s Falcon ( Falco eleonorae ), Lesser

Kestrel ( Falco naumanni ), Peregrine Falcon ( Falco peregrinus ), Red-footed Falcon

(Falco vespertinus ), Osprey ( Pandion haliaetus ), Bonelli’s Eagle ( Hieraaetus

fasciatus ), (European) Honey Buzzard ( Pernis apivorus ) and Levant Sparrowhawk

(Accipiter brevipes ).

Also: the (Eurasian) Eagle Owl ( Bubo bubo ) and (European) Nightjar ( Caprimulgus

europaeus ) from the nocturnal species; and Cretzschmar’s Bunting ( Emberiza

caesia ), Tawny Pipit ( Anthus campestris ), Red-backed Shrike ( Lanius collurio ),



Lesser Grey Shrike ( Lanius minor ) and Woodlark ( Lullula arborea ) from the passer-

ines.

The following is summarized data on the presence and ecology of important species (see

also Annex I of the Special Ornithological Assessment for the distribution of each species

per wind farm). Population data is from BirdLife International (2004) while any possible

vulnerability to impacts from wind farms based on the international bibliography (Euro-

pean Commission 2010) is also mentioned. It should be noted at this point that any refer-

ence to any vulnerability to impacts from wind farms is based only on the international

bibliography in order to ascertain whether any recorded, potential or negligible risks exist

for each relevant species (which may be related to recorded incidents or associated with

characteristics of their ecology). Chapter 9 of the Special Ornithological Assessment re-

fers to any consequences which are ALSO based on the analysis of records/observations.

Short-toed Eagle ( Circaetus gallicus )

The Short-toed Eagle arrives in the area from Africa usually during the middle of March

and departs from the area usually in October. It is a prevalent species, possibly with a

stable population. In the study area, the existence of 3-4 pairs has been recorded (3 ac-

cording to SPA data). The nests are difficult to locate and usually the species builds a

new nest every year. In the spring of 1991, a chick was found to have fallen from a nest

in a wild bushy area with wild olive trees in the area of Antion (250m altitude). In 2006, it

appears that three pairs nested in characteristic locations in the area, such as the wider

Valley area of Komito, the Dimosari-Stefides-Laka Boukoura area and the Cavo d’oro

mountains. The observation points in 2008, 2009 and 2010 confirm the aforementioned

information. The species nests in trees. The Greek population is comprised of 300-350

pairs while the species is potentially vulnerable to wind farm effects (potential risks and

impacts must be considered in the evaluation, European Commission 2010).

Marsh Harrier ( Circus aeruginosus )

The Marsh Harrier is one of the most common migratory raptor species during the

spring and autumn migration. It is observed throughout the study area from the peaks of

Ochi to the shores of Kafireas. Although its most important habitat is the wetland of the

Karystos plain, it frequently occurs in areas far from flat or wet locations during migra-

tion. It is certain that relatively large numbers of Marsh Harriers pass through the region,

especially in the north part during the spring migration. The SPA data (standard data

forms) states that at least 100 individuals use the area as a stop-over during migration



During the spring migration, individuals have been observed many times along an axis

from east to west (i.e. from Kafireas to Agios Dimitrios) often passing low over the

mountain tops of Cavo d’oro. During the period of 2006-2009, they were observed in the

area of Kafireas and Platanistos, while in 2010 they were recorded in additional loca-

tions (Komito, Aidoni, Amygdalea, etc.). The evidence to date from the bibliography indi-

cates that the species is at medium, low or negligible risk of impact from wind farms.

Hen Harrier ( Circus cyaneus )

The Hen Harrier is relatively common. It migrates in spring and in autumn. It is possible

that some individuals cross the area in winter as well. During the period 2006-2010, it

was observed in the area of Kafireas and in the valley of Komito while the species is po-

tentially sensitive to impacts from wind farms. The SPA data (standard data forms) indi-

cates that at least 10 individuals use the area as a stop-over during migration.

Pallid Harrier ( Circus macrourus )

The Pallid Harrier is probably rare in the area. First reported in the area in spring of

2006, the species usually passes alone or in very small flocks (2-4 individuals). In 2006,

it was observed in Milia. The species is potentially vulnerable to the impacts from wind

farms. In the SPA data (standard data forms), it is reported that at least 10 individuals

use the area as a stop-over during migration.

Montagu’s Harrier ( Circus pygargus )

This species is probably rare in the area. It was observed a few times mainly in the area

of Platanistos but also in the areas of Komito and Milia (2010). The species is potentially

vulnerable to the impacts from wind farms. In the SPA data (standard data forms), it is

reported that at least 10 individuals use the area as a stop-over during migration.

Eleonora’s Falcon ( Falco eleonorae )

The nesting of Eleonora’s Falcons on the Mandila Islet (just outside the borders of the

Natura 2000 site) has been confirmed, but it is also possible that it reproduces on

Megalonisos of Petalia (the species has been observed in the area during the reproduc-

tion period). When the species arrives in the area in spring, it feeds on large insects in

the northern parts (more individuals are observed in the southern mountain base of Ochi

as well as near land cultivated with cereal crops in the Cavo d’oro area, often between

Komito and Amygdalea). From April until June, it is frequently found in flocks which are

sometimes large. The largest concentration recorded in the area indicated 50 individuals

over the village of Lala, Kalyvia (at the end of the 1980s). During the period of 2006-

2010, Eleonora’s Falcons were recorded in many scattered locations within the study

area. The Greek population consists of 4.500 pairs while the species is vulnerable to

impacts from wind farms (barrier effect).

Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni )



The Lesser Kestrel is a relatively rare migrant which was observed in 2006, 2009 and

2010 during spring migration in the area of Komito. Usually, it is found sporadically in

small flocks. In the SPA data (standard data forms), it is reported that at least 40 indi-

viduals use the area as a stop-over during migration.

Peregrine Falcon ( Falco peregrinus )

It is estimated that at least 4 pairs nest in the Natura 2000 area, possibly in the wider

Agios Dimitrios area and along the Cavo d’oro coast as well as outside the study area

(another two pairs were recorded in the Paximada Cape and north of Marmari during the

1990s). During the period of 2006-2010, it was observed primarily in the area of Kafireas

but also in Kerasia. The Greek population consists of approximately 200-500 pairs while

the species is vulnerable to impacts from wind farms.

Red-footed Falcon (Falco vespertinus )

This is a migrant species that is relatively common in spring (especially in highlands and

coastal plains), appearing in small flocks (3-15 individuals). Its appearance is much

more rare in autumn. During the period of 2006-2009, it was observed west of

Platanistos outside the wind farm zones (>2km distance), while in 2010 some individuals

were observed north of Amygdalea and in Andia. According to the bibliography, there

are impacts associated with the species (barrier effect). In the SPA data (standard data

forms), it is reported that at least 30 individuals use the area as a stop-over during mi-

gration.

Osprey ( Pandion haliaetus )

The Osprey no longer nests in Greece; however, it passes through during migration. Its

populations in Europe are stable. There was only one species observation in April 2009

in the area north of Aidoni. It usually flies at a low altitude over mountain tops where

strong thermals exist. In the SPA data (standard data forms), it is reported that at least 2

individuals use the area as a stop-over during migration.

Bonelli’s Eagle ( Hieraaetus fasciatus )

Bonelli’s Eagle is a rare and endangered species with a fixed local population. In 1989

in one of the known nesting positions (in the Cavo d’oro area), there was a very suc-

cessful reproduction with two fledglings that left the nest. The study helped to clarify the

species’ status in the Ochi area. Two active breeding sites were found (active nests in

2006, 2008), while there is possibly another pair within the wider study area (3 pairs are

mentioned in the SPA data). The pairs of this species are found in the north, northwest

and northeast part of the Ochi area.

It is estimated that the Greek population is comprised of 85 to 105 pairs according to

BirdLife International 2004, while Greece is estimated to have 100-140 pairs according

to the Red Book 2009. Although very agile, the species is potentially sensitive to the ef-

fects of wind farms as well as to the alterations of natural areas in which it feeds and



reproduces (disturbance, collision) (Langston and Pullan, 2004).

(European) Honey Buzzard ( Pernis apivorus )

This is a common species in the mountainous woodlands of northern Greece (1.000-2.000

pairs reproduce in Greece). It forages on the ground, and it usually flies at an altitude of a

few dozen meters. It was observed in 2008 and 2010 passing through the areas of

Kafireas and Komito. In the SPA data (standard data forms), it is reported that at least 10

individuals use the area as a stop-over during migration.

Levant Sparrowhawk ( Accipiter brevipes )

The Levant Sparrowhawk passes through the area during migration. It was observed a

few times in the area of Kafireas and west of Andia. In the SPA data (standard data

forms), it is reported that at least 40 individuals use the area as a stop-over during migra-

tion

(Eurasian) Eagle Owl ( Bubo bubo )

According to older data which is presented in Map 7, it is reported that 13 pairs existed

in the area within the SPA limits, and of these 13 pairs, 7 pairs were reported to have

existed inside the study area. At least 5 pairs are mentioned in the Important Bird Areas

of Greece data (Heath & Evans 2000) and 13 pairs are identified according to the SPA

data – throughout its territory.

The species has been documented in the international bibliography as being vulnerable

to collisions with overhead cables. (Fabrizio, et al. 2006). It is noted that the entire pro-

ject’s medium voltage cable network with a total length of over 100km and part of the

high voltage network will be underground. The Greek population of the species is esti-

mated to be 200-500 pairs (Birdlife International 2004).

The species was recorded at two location points in 2006 (Aeropetres and Limniaria),

and during the 2010 recordings, it was documented at two location points (Limniaria and

the Karkalas stream, see Map 7 Annex II).

(European) Nightjar ( Caprimulgus europaeus )

The (European) Nightjar is relatively common in a very large part of the area except at

the very high parts of the mountain. It should surpass the number of 40 pairs at the

southern base and eastern base of Ochi (according to the SPA data), while the Greek

population numbers between 10.000-30.000 pairs. The species is potentially sensitive to

wind farm impacts.

Cretzschmar’s Bunting (Emberiza caesia)

The Cretzschmar’s Bunting is a species which exists primarily in the southern and

southeast sides of Ochi, in brushwood areas from sea level to the mountain tops of Ochi

(up to 1.200 meters). The species was recorded in almost the entire study area. The ar-

ea population surpasses 140 pairs (based on the SPA data). The species is potentially



sensitive to wind farm impacts while the Greek population is estimated to be between

5.000-20.000 pairs.

Tawny Pipit (Anthus campestris)

This is a relatively common passerine in the mountainous and semi-mountainous parts of

the area. It is a more specialized species than the Woodlark. At least 100 pairs nest in the

study area (5.000-20.000 pairs in Greece). It is usually found at an elevation of over 300m

but it has been found at sea level during the reproduction season (in the area of Paximada

Cape and the hills of Cape Kafireas). It prefers open brushwood, mountainous meadows

with low grasses (such as mountain steppes) and also the periphery of heather areas. It is

very often found near plateaus and ridges. The species is potentially sensitive to wind

farm impacts.

Red-backed Shrike (Lanius collurio )

This species was not found to nest in Ochi. It is common and found in large numbers

during the autumn migration, and it is potentially sensitive to wind farm impacts.

Lesser Grey Shrike ( Lanius minor )

The Lesser Grey Shrike was only observed in the area of Platanistos-Aidoni while pass-

ing. The species is potentially sensitive to wind farm impacts.

Woodlark (Lullula arborea )

The Woodlark is a more common species among the protected species of Annex I

(79/409/EEC Directive), and it was recorded on many occasions. It is possible that the

entire population in the area exceeds 200 pairs according to the SPA data. It is usually

found at elevations exceeding 250m up to the mountain tops often near rock formations.

The Greek population is estimated at 5.000-20.000 pairs, while the species is potentially

vulnerable to wind farm impacts.

66..44 HHuummaann eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt

66..44..11 PPhhyyssiiccaall PPllaannnniinngg –– LLaanndd UUssee

66..44..11..11 RReeggiioonnaall FFrraammeewwoorrkk ffoorr SSppaattiiaall && SSuussttaaiinnaabbllee DDeevveellooppmmeenntt

The development framework of the Framework of Regional Planning & Sustainable De-

velopment suggests the organized spatial development of the Wind Energy Potential in

Southern Evia, which will also address issues of landscape protection in touristic and resi-

dential areas, requiring at the same time the preparation of a special relevant study (Deci-

sion no. 26298 (Govt. Gazette 1469/09.10.2003) “Approval of Framework of Regional

Planning & Sustainable Development in Sterea Ellada”). The Framework of Regional

Planning & Sustainable Development mentions, amongst others, the following:



The high wind energy potential of Southern Evia in combination with the installations in

Aliveri (part of the National Energy System), constitute an important perspective for the

region especially in relation with the general possibilities of Renewable Energy Sources.

Besides the hydrodynamic and geothermic potential, the wind energy potential is one of

the highest in Greece, so that it can play a significant role in the energy supply in the area.

The table below presents the advantages, the opportunities and the deficiencies of the

Prefecture of Evia in general related with the energy sector and its development:

Advantages Opportunities Deficiencies - Wind Energy Field of Evia in combination with the energy expertise and tradition of Aliveri. - Existence of large po-tential in Renewable En-ergy Sources

- Promotion of renewable energy sources - Possibilities of co-generation of energy in big energy intensive industries.

- Lack of interregional net-working beyond the axis Ath-ens-Thessaloniki (isolation of Evia). - Deficient exploitation of the important potentialities of the ports.

Suggestions of the Framework of Regional Planning & Sustainable Development

Τhe selected pattern of spatial development of the Framework of Regional Planning &

Sustainable Development in the region of Sterea Ellada intervenes in the contemporary

trends in favour of a development in the coming 15 years which will gradually result in an

increased regional autonomy and external competitiveness. At the same time it promotes

the intrusiveness in the management of environmental values and eminently in the land

use.

The long-term development objective of the Framework of Regional Planning & Sustaina-

ble Development is the utilization of the positive response of the region to the exercise of

national and EU policies in the sectors of energy, natural heritage, environmental im-

provement and prevention, as specified at national and regional level.

- According to its development framework, the secondary sector has to be dynamic.

The activation of the Wind Energy Field of southern Evia must constitute a signifi-

cant new sector of productive specialization and expansion of the activation to oth-

er renewable energy sources, besides the continuation of energy production in

Aliveri. An Energy Center is promoted in Evia (Chalkida, Aliveri) which will activate

and coordinate the important investments in the energy sector.

- The area of Karystos is being proposed to be developed as an urban center of

larger capacity, in combination with the protected by NATURA area of Ochi.

- The organized spatial development of the Wind Energy Potential of southern Evia

is being proposed which will also address issues regarding the protection of land-

scapes in touristic and residential areas, requiring at the same time the preparation

of a special relevant study.



- Areas with environmental sensitivity which include the big landscape systems

which are not protected while their conservation is deemed to be necessary have

been found in the Region of Sterea Ellada. For this reason a special survey on the

landscapes of the Evian Coast on the side of the Aegean Sea is being proposed.

It is suggested that the management proposals regarding areas of the network NATURA

are grouped according to the main uses which characterize them. The study area belongs

to the NATURA area “Oros Ochi, Kampos Karystou, Potami, Akrotirio Kafirefs” which falls

according to the Framework of Regional Planning & Sustainable Development into the

category “Residential development pressure area”. The principles ruling the management

of land use in cases where the protection of the NATURA area and of a specific land use

have to co-exist, can be the following:

- (a) examination of the possibility of the biggest possible limitation of the use in rela-

tion with all socio-economic impacts resulting therefrom, and not any impacts on

the natural environment,

- (b) designation of protection zones in the protection area so that zones of absolute

protection (more limited) are distinguished from those where specific uses are al-

lowed,

- (c) adoption of specific ways of production procedure for the necessary land use

(eg industry), so that minimal or no adverse impacts are created,

- (d) reduction of pollution created by the agricultural activity and enhancement of

organic farming.

As regards the οrganization of energy infrastructures, the objectives of sustainable devel-

opment are:

- the reduction of energy dependence of certain areas with potential of development

of renewable energy sources through installation zones and ways which do not ob-

struct the objectives of this framework as regards issues of natural and cultural

sources,

- the energy saving at all levels and in all sectors,

- the improvement of energy efficiency,

- the enhancement of the energy status of the region.

As regards the management of special rural sites and more specifically of the coastal site,

this includes:

- Τhe coasts of northern Evia on the side of the Aegean Sea, areas with a special

nature which require protection.



- Τhe islands of southern Evia. The exploitation of the wind energy potential of the

area is a positive source. The required survey of serious issues regarding land-

scape protection has to be a priority issue for the implementation programme of

the Special Framework of the Coastal Area.

- Τhe areas within NATURA with special environmental value.

66..44..11..22 SSppeecciiaall FFrraammeewwoorrkk ffoorr SSppaattiiaall PPllaannnniinngg && SSuussttaaiinnaabbllee DDeevveellooppmmeenntt ffoorr

RReenneewwaabbllee EEnneerrggyy SSoouurrcceess

This Environmental Impact Assessment examines the terms and constraints set with the

Joint Ministerial Decision 4499882288 ((GGoovvtt.. GGaazzeettttee 22446644//ΒΒ//0033..1122..22000088)) ““AApppprroovvaall ooff SSppeecciiaall

FFrraammeewwoorrkk ooff SSppaattiiaall PPllaannnniinngg && SSuussttaaiinnaabbllee DDeevveellooppmmeenntt ffoorr tthhee RReenneewwaabbllee EEnneerrggyy

SSoouurrcceess aanndd tthhee ssttrraatteeggiicc ssttuuddyy ooff iittss eennvviirroonnmmeennttaall iimmppaaccttss””.. TThhee examination of the cri-

teria set for the location of wind energy installations is performed in the framework of the

environmental licencing of the eight (8) wind farms of the company Damco Energy &

Diethnis Construction AΤΤΝE.

The following were examined:

Review of the project under study in relation with excluded areas and incompatibility

zones (article 6 of the Special Framework for Spatial Planning & Sustainable Devel-

opment for RES).

Review of the project under study in relation with the maximum allowed density of

wind farm installations at the level of first grade local authorities.

Review of the project under study in relation with the distances of the wind farm instal-

lations from neighbouring land use and technical infrastructure networks (Annex II of

the Special Framework for Spatial Planning & Sustainable Development for RES).

Review of the project under study in relation with the criteria of integration of the wind

farm installations in the landscape (Annex IV Special Framework for Spatial Planning

& Sustainable Development for RES).

Τhe results of the review are set forth in ISSUE C [REVIEW OF TERMS/LIMITATIONS

OF THE SPECIAL FRAMEWORK FOR SPATIAL PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DE-

VELOPMENT FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES] which accompanies this Envi-

ronmental Impact Assessment. Τhis issue presents in parallel a new and more detailed

study –based on the previous one– which was competently submitted and where all spe-

cial terms and limitations of the SPECIAL FRAMEWORK FOR SPATIAL PLANNING AND

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES are examined

and approved pursuant to the Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation deci-

sion no. 110580 of the Special Environmental Service which was issued on 15/12/2008. It

is herein briefly mentioned that the proposed project fulfils as a whole all the condi-



tions (terms / limitations) which are set by the Special Framework of Spatial Plan-

ning & Sustainable Energy for Renewable Energy Sources .

Nevertheless the following is briefly mentioned:

The investment under study fulfils all the terms and limitations set by the SPECIAL

FRAMEWORK FOR SPATIAL PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES regarding the maximum allowed density of

wind farms at the level of first grade local authorities where they will be installed.



FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES regarding the excluded areas and incompat-

ibility zones.



FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES regarding the observation of the minimum

distances between the wind farm installations and any neighbouring land use and

technical infrastructure networks.



FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES regarding the rules of integration of the wind

farm installations in the landscape.

66..44..11..33 LLaanndd uussee ((EELLSSTTAATT DDaattaa))

All possible and updated sources were utilized in order to record the land use. Below are

presented the land use in the study area as depicted from the data of the last national

census about land use . However in order to achieve the complete display of land use,

additionally the land use near the wind farm fields are analyzed with the help of the Geo-

graphic Information System (GIS, ArcView 3.2a), (see next section). More specifically:

Data about land use (source: ELSTAT) in the Municipalities of Karystos, Marmari and the

Community of Kafireas are presented in the tables below. Specifically:



Table 22: Land use in the municipality of Karystos (areas in thousands of acres).

Municipality/ Community

Ter

rain

form

P

:Pla

in,

S: S

emi-m

ount

aino

us,

M: M

ount

aino

us

Tot

al a

rea

Cul

tivat

ed a

reas

Pastures

Sur

face

s co

vere

d w

ith

fore

sts

Sur

face

s co

vere

d w

ith w

ater

Oth

er s

urfa

ces

cove

red

by

the

settl

emen

ts (

road

s,

squa

rese

tc

com

mun

ity o

r m

unic

ipal

priv

ate

M. of KARYSTOS P 34.3 8.6 0.0 24.2 0.0 0.0 1.5 C. of AEΤOS S 28.1 3.2 0.0 24.6 0.0 0.0 0.4 C. of GRAMPIAS M 15.2 0.7 0.0 13.9 0.4 0.0 0.2 C. of ΚALYVIA S 19.8 3.7 0.0 15.8 0.0 0.0 0.4 C. of ΜYLOI M 7.7 0.4 0.0 6.9 0.1 0.0 0.3 C. of PLATANISTOS

M 61.8 4.4 4.0 48.7 3.9 0.0 0.8

Table 23: Land use in the Municipality of Marmari (areas in thousands of acres).


Ter

rain

form

P

:Pla

in,

S: S

emi-m

ount

aino

us

M: M

ount

aino

us

Tot

al a

rea

Cul

tivat

ed a

reas

Pastures

Sur

face

s co

vere

d w

ith

fore

sts

Sur

face

s co

vere

d w

ith

wat

er

Oth

er s

urfa

ces

cove

red

by th

e se

ttlem

ents

(r

oads

, squ

ares

etc

com

mun

ity o

r m

unic

ipal

priv

ate

C. of ΜARMARI S 45.0 6.7 2.0 28.6 7.3 0.1 0.4 C. of AG. DIMITRIOS M 25.3 1.1 0.0 22.8 1.1 0.0 0.3 C. of GIANNITSI M 21.9 1.8 0.0 18.0 1.9 0.0 0.2 C. of KATSARONI S 10.2 3.6 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 C. of ΜELLISONAS M 12.7 0.6 0.0 11.3 0.5 0.0 0.3 C. of PARADEISIO M 20.9 5.7 0.0 13.5 0.4 0.2 0.7



Table 24: Land use in the Community of Kafireas ( areas in thousands of acres).


Ter

rain

form

P

: Pla

in,

S: S

emi-m

ount

aino

us

M: M

ount

aino

us

Tot

al a

rea

Cul

tivat

ed a

reas

Pastures

Sur

face

s co

vere

d w

ith

fore

sts

Sur

face

s co

vere

d w

ith

wat

er

Oth

er s

urfa

ces

cov-

ered

by

the

settl

e-m

ents

(ro

ads,

sq

uare

s et

c.)

com

mun

ity o

r m

unic

ipal

priv

ate

C. of AΜYGDALEA

M 30.1 3.2 0.0 22.8 3.5 0.0 0.6

C. of ΚOΜIΤOS M 47.7 2.5 0.0 43.4 1.2 0.0 0.6

66..44..11..44 LLaanndd uussee ((DDaattaa ooff EEuurrooppeeaann PPrrooggrraammmmee CCoorriinnee LLaanndd CCoovveerr--22000000))

For the depiction of the land use with the help of the software programme GIS ArcView

3.2a the following steps were taken: 1) Georeference of basemaps (scale:1:50.000) of the

Hellenic Military Geographical Service, 2) Addition of the “polygons” of land use (from the

programme Corine Land Cover (2000) – Programme of the European Environmental

Agency), 3) Empirical interpretation of the data.

As regards the project per se and specifically for the proposed solution which is presented

in this EIA, land use are as follows:

DD11 ““KKAATTHHAARRAA”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm

- 311: Broad-leaved forest.

- 313: Mixed forest.

- 321: Natural pastures.

- 323: Sclerophyllous vegetation.

- 324: Transitional woodland-shrub.

-- 333: Sparsely vegetated areas.

DD22 ““AANNAATTOOLLII”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm

- 312: Coniferous forest.






-- 333: Sparsely vegetated areas

DD33 ””SSPPIILLIIAA”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm





DD44 ““MMIILLIIAA”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm




-- 324: Transitional woodland-shrub.

DD55 WWiinndd ffaarrmm””PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS””


-- 323: Sclerophyllous vegetation

DD66 ““PPAALLIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm

- 243: Land principally occupied by agriculture with significant areas of natural vege-tation

-- 323: Sclerophyllous vegetation.

DD77 ““KKEERRAASSIIAA”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm




DD88 ““PPLLAATTAANNOOSS”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm




HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk

- 243: Land principally occupied by agriculture with significant areas of natural vege-tation.








IInntteerrccoonnnneeccttiioonn NNeettwwoorrkk

- 133: Construction sites.

- 231: Grasslands.

- 242: Complex cultivation patterns.








AAcccceessss rrooaadd ccoonnssttrruuccttiioonn aanndd iinntteerrnnaall rrooaadd ccoonnssttrruuccttiioonn






- 333: Sparsely vegetated areas.

66..44..22 BBuuii ll tt eennvviirroonnmmeenntt

The direct project area does not include elements of built environment. The wind turbines

positions regards mainly ridges of mountainous surfaces. However there are settlements

in the wider area of the works. As regards the Approved Urban Plans they have not been

found . Therefore no further mention is made referring to possible conditions and limita-

tions of buildings, any other more specific limitations etc. It is pointed out that the con-

struction and operation of the project will not modify in any way elements of the

built environment.

66..44..33 HHiissttoorr iicc aanndd ccuull ttuurraall eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt

In the wider study area are the ancient quarries of Karystian marble, the dragon houses

("Drakospita”) of Ochi, the mines and caves of Kafireas, the settlement and sanctuary of

Archampoli and the sanctuary of Geraistios Poseidon.

Below is presented a table which includes the qualified archaeological sites and historic

monuments which are found in the study area as well as their statutory framework which



rules their protection status. Specifically:

Table 25: Locations of archaeological sites.

S/N Location Μonument Time period Protection status

1 Agios Georgios of Karystos

Shells and tools Foundations of Church

Early Helladic Byzantine

CL 5351/32

2 Agia Eirini (Mpouros)

Findings Middle Helladic – Byzantine

CL 5351/32

3 Agios Ioannis (Lykorrema)

Shells Neolithic CL 5351/32

5 Agia Triada Cave –

Shells Neolithic CL 5351/32

6 Aetos Quarries Roman CL 5351/32

7 Cape Rozos (Paksimada)

Pottery Wall

Neolithic CL 5351/32

8 Akrotiri (Mpouros) Camp Furnace

Settlement Classical Classical Roman– Byzantine

CL 5351/32

9 Alamaneika Furnace

Farmhouse Tomb

Roman CL 5351/32

10 Archampoli Walled settlement Sanctuary

Geometric CL 5351/32

11 Vigla Findings Neolithic CL 5351/32

12 Κazari Findings Neolithic Govt Gazette 621/Β/22-

8-72

13

Κastri – ancientGeraistos

Findings Settlement Sanctuary of Geraistios Posei-don

Neolithic Archaic – Roman– Hellenistic – Roman

Govt Gazette 621/Β/22-8-72: estates inherit. by V. Papageorgiou or Papamastrigianni. Protection area 500 m.

15 Kafireas (Cavo d’oro)

Slags – galleries Caves Agios Grigorios

Prehistoric Geometric Classical

CL 5351/32

16

Kampos Agios Theodoros To Pigadi tou Pasa Agios Georgios Agios Georgios Mountain

Settlement Grape mill Settlement Farmhouse Sanctuary -furnace

Byzantine - Early Helladic Roman- Byzantine Archaic-Roman

CL 5351/32

17

Katsaroni Patitiri Agios Isidoros

Shells tools Shells, tools Buildings Old grape mill Shells, tools

Early Helladic Prehistoric Prehistoric

CL 5351/32

18 Κatsouli Findings

Shaft Farmhouse

Neolithic Classical- Byzantine

Govt Gazette 275/Β/20-3-80

20 Κarampampa Two buildings

Castle Sanctuary

Classical CL 5351/32

23 Κilosi Cave with shells

and human bones Neolithic CL 5351/32

24 Κokkinokastro Findings Classical CL 5351/32




25 Κounoupi- Agios Athanasios

Two Farmhouses Oratory

Byzantine CL 5351/32

26 Κylindri Quarries Roman CL 5351/32 27 Lala-Panagia Farmhouse Roman CL 5351/32

28

Livadaki Askoulithi

Sanctuary Walls Carvings Castle Farmhouses

Classical CL 5351/32

29

Μiloi Νtrouvalo Agios Nikolaos Fideleia

Buildings Findings Walls Smelter Oratory of Ag. Nikolaos Walls

Μiddle Helladic Classical


30 Μpouros Obsidian Shells, Neolithic CL 5351/32 31 Νikasi Tomb Classical CL 5351/32

32 Islet of Karystos (Agia Pelagia)

Shells Neolithic Early Helladic

CL 5351/32

33

Mount Ochi (Community of Platanistos)

“Dragon House” Church of Profitis Ilias

Geometric Govt Gazette 175/26-3-66 Govt Gazette 126/Β/11-2-72

34 Cape of Agia Pelagia

Findings Castle

Early Helladic Μiddle Ages


35

Paksimada Agia Paraskevi Stavros-Paliopithara Glifada Saravanou Μnima

Farmhouse Settlement Buildings- Shells Buildings-pottery Farmhouse Camp-Quarry Settlement

Hellenistic Neolithic Neolithic Classical Classical Classical-Venetian

Govt Gazette 275/Β/20-3-80 CL 5351/32 Govt Gazette 275/Β/20-3-80

36

Plakari hill Palaistra

Settlement Building relics Findings

Neolithic Early Helladic Geometric Archaic Neolithic Modern

Govt Gazette 275 /B/20-3-80


37

Platanistos Elliniko

Two castles Church of Konstantinos - Eleni

Classical

CL 5351/32

38 Platanistos Potami

Settlement Prehistoric CL 5351/32

39 Rigia Settlement Farmhouse

Geometric Classical-Roman

CL 5351/32

40

Rouklia Vrachos Kousoukou

Cave “Drakospito”

Neolithic Geometric

Govt Gazette 175/26-3-66

41 Skouasi (Aktaion) Settlement CL 5351/32




43 Filagra Settlement

walled Classical Μiddle Ages

CL 5351/32

44 Chartzani Castle Μiddle Ages CL 5351/32

45

ΚARYSTOS Palaiochora (Estate of Mariori Mousikou) Ksanemo Κokkaloi Agios Nikolaos Agios Nikolaos Drimonia Agios Ioannis Κotsika road Mpourtzi Limanaki (Skouries) Town hall

Various building relics of the old town Archaelogical site Cemetary Retaining wall Wall Mosaic Church Settlement Μοnastery Cemetery Farmhouse Findings Mausoleum Findings – architectonic parts Κamini Neoclassical

Hellenistic Classical Roman Byzantine Roman Hellenistic Byzantine Μiddle Helladic Modern (?) Greco-Roman Classical Roman Various times Modern

Govt Gazette 130/13-4-62 CL 5351/32 Govt Gazette 275/Β/20-3-80 CL 5351/32 Govt Gazette 555/Β/15-6-79

46 Agia Sofia of Grampia

Church Mosque CL 5351/32

47 Agios Dimitrios Church of Agios

Dimitrios Byzantine CL 5351/32

48 Agios Georgios of Aetos

Church Byzantine Govt Gazette 126/Β/11-2-72

49

Kalyvia Church of Taksiarches Bridges Water mill Primary school

Byzantine Modern Νeoclassical

Govt Gazette 175/26-3-66 CL 5351/32

50 Barka Rema Stone Bridge Modern CL 5351/32 51 Platanistos Bridge Watermill Modern CL 5351/32 52 Platanistos Bridge Modern CL 5351/32

53 Lenosaioi of Kalliano

Church of Dormition

Byzantine CL 5351/32

55 Κouki Well Ottoman Rule CL 5351/32 57 Karystos Mpourzti Μiddle Ages CL 5351/32

58 Zacharia Watermill

Church of Ypapanti

Modern CL 5351/32



It is worth mentioning here that in the framework of the procedure of the Preliminary Envi-

ronmental Assessment & Evaluation no comments were made by the competent

ephorates of antiquities (those which submitted their opinions) about the historic/cultural

elements of the project area. Specifically the Ephorate of Contemporary and Modern

Monuments of Attica mentions: ““……iinn tthhee ppaarrttiiccuullaarr llooccaattiioonnss wwhhiicchh aarree pprrooppoosseedd ffoorr eennvvii--

rroonnmmeennttaall lliicceenncciinngg ffoorr tthhee iinnssttaallllaattiioonn aanndd ooppeerraattiioonn ooff WWiinndd FFaarrmmss iinn ssoouutthh--eeaasstteerrnn EEvviiaa

aanndd wwhhiicchh aarree ddeeppiicctteedd iinn tthhee mmaappss tthhaatt yyoouu ssuubbmmiitttteedd ttoo uuss tthheerree aarree nnoo mmoonnuummeennttss bbee--

lloonnggiinngg ttoo tthhee jjuurriissddiiccttiioonn ooff oouurr eepphhoorraattee””, while the Department of Archaelogical Sites,

Monuments and Archaeognostic Research of the Ministry of Culture mentions: ““NNoonneetthhee--

lleessss ssiinnccee tthhee iinnssttaallllaattiioonn ooff eeiigghhtt wwiinndd ffaarrmmss ffoorr eelleeccttrriicc ppoowweerr ggeenneerraattiioonn iinn llooccaattiioonnss ooff

tthhee MMuunniicciippaalliittiieess ooff MMaarrmmaarrii,, KKaarryyssttooss aanndd tthhee CCoommmmuunniittyy ooff KKaaffiirreeaass ooff tthhee PPrreeffeeccttuurree

ooff EEvviiaa,, aanndd ooff tthhee iinntteerrccoonnnneeccttiinngg ttrraannssmmiissssiioonn lliinnee 115500 kkVV ooff tthhee WWiinndd FFaarrmmss wwiitthh tthhee

UUHHVV CCeenntteerr iinn PPaalllliinnii ooff tthhee PPrreeff.. ooff AAttttiiccaa,, ddooeess nnoott hhaarrmm tthhee aaffoorreemmeennttiioonneedd aannttiiqquuiittiieess

aanndd ccoonnssiiddeerriinngg tthhaatt aallll ooff tthhee uunnddeerrggrroouunndd lliinneess wwiitthhiinn tthhee PPrreeff.. OOff AAttttiiccaa wwiillll bbee ccoonn--

ssttrruucctteedd aalloonngg tthhee eexxiissttiinngg ppaavveedd rrooaaddss,, wwee aapppprroovvee ooff tthhee EEnnvviirroonnmmeennttaall IImmppaacctt PPrree--

aasssseessssmmeenntt ……””..

Finally, due to the special cultural significance a sperate mention is made below to ancient

quarries of Karystos and the Dragon Houses of Ochi. Specifically:

√√ AAnncciieenntt qquuaarrrriieess ooff KKaarryyssttooss MMaarrbbllee

The Karystian marble or Evian marble or Karystia lithos, i.e. the rock that was extracted

from the area of Karystos but also from other areas in southern Evia, was quite known in

the ancient years and is mainly represented by a variation of cipolin (Cipollino).

The intensive extraction of the Karystian Marble must have been carried out mostly at

Caesar’s time (60-44 B.C.) until the end of the reign of the emperor Antoninus Pius (161

A.D.).

The Karystian Marble was used in ancient times mainly for the construction of pillars. The

quarrying activity during Roman times in the area of southern Evia was so intensive that in

Marmari existed the temple for the cult of Apollo Marmarinos, which must have been the

protector of quarrier men and technicians of marble. The use of Karystian marble was

very intensive during the years of the emperor Andrianos and mainly during the four years

132-135 A.D. During the Byzantine period it was used to a much smaller extent than in the

Roman period.

Τhe ancient quarries which are saved until today are extended in a zone which commenc-

es from the north of Karystos, in the location Kylindroi, until Styra, in the location Kryo Ne-

ro. The ancient quarries were mostly dug in groups and each group was a separate quar-

rying center. There are four different areas of quarries, each of which belonged to one of

the three ancient cities: Karystos, Marmari and Styra. The fourth area was probably sub-



ject to Styra.

Table 26: Ancient quarries of Ochi and Styra.

Settlement Location Protection status ΚARYSTOS Κylindroi CL 5351/32

Μyloi (Chalikia) CL 5351/32 Aetos (Κοlones) CL 5351/32 Μpouros CL 5351/32

ΜARMARI Ompores CL 5351/32 Βatisi CL 5351/32 Aleksi CL 5351/32 Κalogeri CL 5351/32

Stoupaioi Κionia CL 5351/32 Κaratza CL 5351/32

STYRA Paliokalyveza CL 5351/32 Ag. Nikolaos: W. & E. slope CL 5351/32 Κliosi (Armenon) CL 5351/32

AΝIMPORIO Pyrgari CL 5351/32

√√ ΤΤhhee DDrraaggoonn HHoouusseess ooff OOcchhii

In the area of Karystos, in southern Evia, one can find until today certain buildings which

draw the attention of many visitors and scientists. They are the famous “Drakospita” in

Styra and on Mount Ochi.

The term "drakospito", meaning "dragon house", is found in many regions of the Mediter-

ranean and the Balkans and refers to buildings with large dimensions which are found in

remote, inaccessible places. They are built with huge boulders and give the impression

that they were constructed by beings of supernatural size exciting, thus, people’s imagina-

tion.

Within the study area are situated the “Drakospita” of Ochi. They are found in a mountain-

ous and inaccessible area, on locations without any strategic meaning, so that they in-

spect the surrounding area. Some of them are built so close to the rock that they have no

view of the whole area around. They, usually, occupy a large surface and some measure

5x10 m. They are dry stone walls, i.e. constructions made of local stones without mortar

with thick walls consisting of one or two rows of stone in width. Τheir shape is curved or

rectangular. The lower row of stones project and support the roof, which is built with the

technique of corbelling: the stones of the roof penetrate in each other on the interior and

form a structure which reminds of a trough turned upside down. In the end remains an ob-

long opening with length approximately 5,50 m. and width 0,50-0,60 m, which was initially

covered with horizontal slabs many of which have nowadays fallen in the interior of the

buildings.

Τhese buildings have one single entrance and a trapezoid opening above the lintel, to re-

lieve the pillars from the overlaying weight. Τhe floor is stone paved. It is possible that

several “Drakospita” had also a second floor.



The finding of ancient remains and inscriptions on the inside and outside space of these

constructions, the old age of their architectural type and the type of masonry reinforces

the opinion that they area ancient constructions. The oldest evidence is an archaic inscrip-

tion written with the Chalkidian alphabet carved onto a shell which was found in an ancient

layer outside a “Drakospita”. Numerous skyphoi (vessels with two handles) made locally,

which were excavated by Moutsopoulos, are dated to the late 4th and early 3rd century BC.

Attic-style vessels, such as vials and skyphoi, a bronze ear tag, glass beads, fragments of

bronze vessels, findings dated to the early 5th and the 4th century, refer to the time when

S. Evia had close relations with Athens. Hence, the findings support the view that the con-

struction of the “Drakospita” has to be estimated between the 6th and 4th century BC and

their usage lasted until the early Christian period..

The usage of the “Drakospita” has not been ascertained yet. Judging from the findings,it

cannot be argued that they were temples, places of worship. Nevertheless the kind of

worship, the exact date of their establishment and who built them have not yet been de-

termined.

Τhe “Drakospita” are found:

- On the summit of Ochi, on a small plateau (south of the altitude at 1398 m), where

the big “Drakospito” of Ochi is found

- In the village Rouklia, on the location "Vrachos tou Koutsoukou", where the small

“Drakospito” of Ochi is found, half demolished

- In Styra: three “Drakospita” are situated in the same location, two similar with the big

“Drakospito” of Ochi and the third one with a square facade.

The archaeological sites in the study area are shown on the maps which accompany this

Environmental Impact Assessment.

66..44..44 SSoocciioo--eeccoonnoommiicc eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt

66..44..44..11 AAddmmiinniissttrraattiivvee jjuurriissddiiccttiioonn

The study area and the wider area are administratively subject to the Region of Sterea

Ellada based in Lamia. Along with Skyros, Karystia is the most remote section from the

center of the Region. At prefectural level it belongs to the Prefecture of Evia seated in

Chalkida.

For the study area the following applies:

- Region: Sterea Ellada (seat: Lamia)

- Prefecture: Evia (seat: Chalkida)

- Municipalities/Communities: M. of Karystos, M. of Marmari, C. of Kafireas.



66..44..44..22 DDeemmooggrraapphhyy ooff ssttuuddyy aarreeaa

In order to analyse the demography of the study area the data of the last (2001) and the

penultimate (1991) national census executed by the Hellenic Statistical Authority

(ELSTAT) were utilized. Data were also obtained from the database of the ELSTAT

“ATHENS: Results of census”. Specifically:

The interprefectural inequities regarding economic activities and technical infrastructure

lead to the concentration of populations in certain residential centres and especially

Chalkida. Nonetheless the prefecture has a semi-urban character with many small semi-

urban and rural residential centers.

At prefectural level, as shown by the table below, the evolution of the population seems

positive.

Table 27: Evolution of population in the prefecture of Evia (ELSTAT, 1991-2001).

Permane nt Actual Prefecture / Region 2001 1991 2001 1991 Prefecture of Evia 207.305 202.131 215.136 208.408 Region of Sterea Ellada 505.480 537.984 578.876 605.329

(Source: ELSTAT, 1991-2001)

As regards the demography of the study area the following data apply. Specifically:

Table 28: Evolution of population in the Municipality of Karystos (ELSTAT, 1991-2001).

Permanent Actual 2001 1991 2001 1991 MUNICIPALITY OF KARYSTOS 6.854 6.770 7.144 7.016

MD of Karystos 4.942 4.674 5.011 4.663 Karystos 4.902 4.674 4.960 4.663 Zarmpoutaika 38 0 49 0 Sfiridoupoli 2 0 2 0 MD of Aetos 437 492 518 522 Aetos 331 409 377 426 Akrotiri 8 0 15 0 Μetochio 79 72 82 72 Μpouros 19 11 44 24 MD of Grampia 293 235 352 421 Grampia 180 147 204 269 Μekounida 92 83 115 135 Rouklia 21 5 33 17 MD of Kalyvia 697 775 716 768 Κalyvia 697 775 716 768 MD.of Myloi 150 168 166 168 Μyloi 150 168 166 168 MD.of Platanistos 335 426 381 474 Platanistos 153 225 165 237



Permanent Actual 2001 1991 2001 1991 Agioi 7 0 14 0 Elaion 35 35 35 35 Epanochorio 29 45 35 45 Κastri 29 25 39 44 Μandilos (islet) 0 0 0 0 Pidoulaika 25 28 27 30 Potamion 57 68 66 83


According to the abobe table it is evident that the permanent as well as the actual popula-

tion is increasing in the municipality of Karystos. This is mainly attributed to the large pop-

ulation growth, permanent and actual, in the municipal district of Karystos. On the contra-

ry, the remaining municipal districts of the municipality have the opposite evolution as re-

gards the permanent and actual population. Main cause seems to be the abandonment of

the small municipal districts by the population and its transfer to bigger centers for the

search of job opportunities.

Below is presented, like in table above, the evolution of the population according to the

last two censuses in the Municipality of Marmari. Specifically

Table 29: Evolution of population in the Municipality of Marmari (ELSTAT, 1991-2001).

Permanent Actual 2001 1991 2001 1991 MUNICIPALITY OF MARMARI 2.895 2.750 3.152 2.846 MD of Marmari 1.247 1.026 1.367 1.116 Marmari 963 935 1.006 996 Agia Marina 15 6 44 12 Agios Konstantinos 65 0 75 0 Diastavrosi 44 18 47 25 Κokkinis 5 0 14 0 Κrya Vrysi 17 0 21 0 Lykorema 20 11 28 13 Μegalonisos Petalion (islet) 0 0 0 0 Panagia 50 0 51 0 Paralia Figia 47 31 60 44 Τragonisio (islet) 0 1 0 1 Figia 21 20 21 21 Chersonisio (islet) 0 4 0 4 MD of Agios Dimitrios 298 293 301 292 Agios Dimitrios 298 293 301 292 MD of Aktaio 85 107 86 107 Aktaion 77 91 78 90 Ekali 8 16 8 17 MD of Giannitsio 223 221 274 235 Giannitsio 72 75 100 75 Κato Giannitsi 53 35 53 45 Pothion 98 111 121 115 MD of Κallianos 327 344 357 331



Permanent Actual 2001 1991 2001 1991 Κalliano 178 203 204 194 Agathon 59 65 60 65 Vrachos 9 13 9 13 Κallergon 38 15 42 15 Lenosaioi 27 22 27 22 Soteira 16 26 15 22 MD of. Katsaroniou 155 169 151 169 Κatsaronion 124 169 120 169 Choni 31 0 31 0 MD of Μelissonas 20 35 36 37 Μelisson 20 35 36 37 MD of Paradeisio 224 227 253 232 Paradeision 119 131 144 130 Aleksis 55 62 55 68 Chania 50 34 54 34 MD of.Stouppaioi 316 328 327 327 Stouppaioi 152 161 151 156 Varelaioi 32 20 32 21 Vatision 52 84 53 86 Κalogeri 26 0 27 0 Rizovounion 54 63 64 64


From the analysis of the above table derives an increase of the permanent and the actual

population in the area of the municipality of Marmari. Τhe biggest percentage of the in-

crease seems to be attributable to the big increase which is observed in the population of

the municipal district of Marmari. Like in the case of the municipal district of Karystos, the

increase is here also seems to be due to the mobility of the population to bigger centers.

Regarding the Community of Kafireas the evolution of the population is depicted through

the data of the table below. Specifically:

Table 30: Evolution of population in the Community of Κafireas (ELSTAT, 1991-2001).

Permanent Actual 2001 1991 2001 1991 COMMUNITY OF KAFIREAS 1.013 709 1.003 667

CD of Amygdalea 558 379 552 357 Amygdalea 183 158 179 142 Drymonario 33 22 32 21 Ζacharia 48 25 48 24 Thymion 82 64 81 64 Kapsourion 57 22 57 19 Prinia 80 43 80 43 Schizali 75 45 75 44 CD of Κοmito 455 330 451 310 Κomito 143 122 142 104 Antias 172 132 170 130 Evaggelismos 140 76 139 76




The permanent and actual population in the community of Kafireas shows an increase like

the municipalities of Marmari and Karystos. This increase in to its biggest part attributed to

the big increase of population in the two Community Districts – Κοmito and Amygdalea.

66..44..44..33 SSoocciiaall cchhaarraacctteerriissttiiccss ooff tthhee ppooppuullaattiioonn

In this unit the education level of the residents of the study area is being analyzed. Τhe

data which are presented were obtained by the database of ELSTAT: “ATHENS: Results

of census”. Specifically:

Table 31: Education level in the Municipality of Karystos (Pref. of Evia).

Education level 11999911 AAccttuuaall ppooppuullaatt iioonn

22000011 AAccttuuaall ppooppuullaatt iioonn

Total Male Female Total Male Female Post graduate diploma holders (doctor-ate or master's degree) 5 4 1 13 9 4

University degree holders 184 104 80 283 150 133 Received a third-level technical-vocational institution degree 48 29 19 126 68 58

Graduates of Higher Schools 36 29 7 196 111 85 Secondary level education 942 469 473 1.418 695 723 Completed the third stage of 6-year secondary education 769 424 345 941 549 392

Completed primary education 2.849 1.424 1.425 2.443 1.232 1.211 Not completed primary school but have writing and reading skills 745 325 420 710 300 410

Illiterate (no writing and reading skills) 598 241 357 243 89 154


Table 32: Education level in the Municipality of Μarmari (Pref. of Evia).





Graduates of Higher Schools 9 7 2 55 37 18 Secondary level education 203 123 80 420 231 189 Completed the third stage of 6-year secondary education 227 147 80 366 224 142

Completed primary education 1.280 695 585 1.402 745 657 Not completed primary school but have writing and reading skills 466 238 228 345 182 163

Illiterate (no writing and reading skills) 315 96 219 179 64 115




Table 33: Educational level in the Community of Κafireas (Pref. of Evia).





Graduates of Higher Schools 0 0 0 3 3 0 Secondary level education 5 3 2 61 31 30 Completed the third stage of 6-year secondary education 5 4 1 24 16 8

Completed primary education 394 225 169 526 293 233 Not completed primary school but have writing and reading skills 88 45 43 173 103 70

Illiterate (no writing and reading knowledge) 95 25 70 136 28 108


From the data of the above tables derives that, as regards the whole study area, the edu-

cational level of the majority of people reaches completed primary education. The per-

centage of illiterate people (not having writing and reading skills) and the percentage of

people who have not completed primary school but have writing and reading skills, is also

quite high.

The percentage of people who have reached the higher levels of education (graduates of

third level institution degrees and of universities, holders of postgraduate doctorate and

master’s degrees) is very low. Remarkable is the situation in the Community of Kafireas

where very few people (only 19 persons) are holders of a university degree, third-level

technical-vocational institution degree or postgraduate doctorate and master’s degree.

66..44..44..44 PPrroodduuccttiivvee sseeccttoorrss

√√ PPrriimmaarryy sseeccttoorr

Employment in the primary sector has significantly decreased. The primary sector has

played in the previous decades (and will continue to play in the future) an important role in

the growth procedure.

The selection of an integrated development pattern and the implementation of programs

for the local development necessitate the exploitation of the local advantages of the spa-

tial units of the prefecture in individual branches of the primary sector i.e. agriculture, live-

stock, fishery, forestry and apiculture. These activities and their parallel connection with

the processing of their products are essential on the one hand for the promotion of a bal-

anced development and on the other hand for the completion of the production network.



Furthermore, the wider area is covered by registered private forest plots with small sur-

faces (30 - 100 acres) which are being exploited by their owners for the extraction of fire-

wood, the quantity of which is designated on Logging Charts. There are also coal furnaces

which produce charcoal in small, as estimated, quantities (100 - 300 tons/year).

Mining exploitations, usually on the surface, are scattered in the wider study area where

the famous Karystian slabs are being extracted. In spite of the fact that the area is not a

statutory mining zone and the majority of interventions is being carried out without an an

assessment of the environmental impacts and the restoration of the landscape, the exploi-

tation keeps on considering the fact that it provides employment to the workforce in the

region.

√√ SSeeccoonnddaarryy sseeccttoorr

The study of the industry specialization results to the following:

- There is a strong turn to branches processing products of the primary sector, food,

timber, non metallic minerals.

- The main orientation of Evia is related with the branch of non metallic minerals.

This is directly connected with the occurrence of structural regression which affects

strongly the prefecture and is accompanied by economic, sectoral and social prob-

lems.

Τhe main problems of the secondary sector are:

- The direct dependence of many activities from the region of the capital city.

- The declining trends of certain medium technology industry sectors (non metallic

minerals, products made of plastic – rubber etc).

-- The technological downgrading of traditional industrial sectors (clothing - footwear,

metal products).

√√ ΤΤeerrttiiaarryy sseeccttoorr

As regards the tertiary sector, Evia is characterized by a very dynamic trend as it presents

a considerable increase of participation in the tertiary sector during the recent years.

The prefecture of Evia has a touristic development potential which is attributed to:

- The existence of archaeological sites.

- Its natural beauty.

- Its central position in the Greek Region and its neighbourhood with the region of

Attica.



Subsequently the study of the existing situation and the necessity of the promotion of tour-

ism require:

- Design of touristic zones.

- Enhancement of the infrastructure of the non-touristically developed areas.

- Modern – dynamic marketing and management.

- Training and specialization of the personnel.

- Development of special forms of tourism.

The promotion of the integrated development of the region requires a balanced touristic

development and subsequently the intensification of the efforts for the reinforcement of

the sector.

The available data of the Hellenic Statistical Authority (ELSTAT) show that in the study

area the majority of the residents is occupied with economic activities of the secondary but

also primary sector, which has played in the previous decades (and will continue to play in

the future) an important role in the growth procedure. We also observe that a considerable

percentage of the residents is occupied with the tertiary sector (eg. hotels and restau-

rants), with the exception of the Community of Kafireas which abstains from this activity.

The occupation of the residents with the supply services of electric power, natural gas and

water shows the lowest values.

Τhe data which were described regarding the occupation of the population per sector of

economic activity, are depicted in detail in the table below as regards the study area (Mu-

nicipality of Karystos, Municipality of Marmari, Community of Kafireas). Specifically:

Table 34: Occupation per sector of economic activity.

Sector of economic activity per occupa-tion

2001 Actual population 2001 Permanent population

M. of Κarystos

M. of Μarmari

C. of Kafireas

M. of Κarystos

M. of Μarmari

C. of Κafireas

Total 2.554 1.224 456 2.416 1.104 458 Agriculture, livestock, hunting and forestry, fishing

347 551 337 349 546 339

Mines and quarries 71 42 - 70 42 - Manufacturing industries 191 49 8 170 29 8

Electricity, gas and water supply 29 4 - 27 6 -

Constructions 374 102 2 348 91 2 Wholesale and retail trade,repair of motor vehicles and motor cycles and personal and household goods

385 92 - 355 69 -

Hotels and restaurants 139 49 - 138 48 -



Sector of economic activity per occupa-tion

2001 Actual population 2001 Permanent population

M. of Κarystos

M. of Μarmari

C. of Kafireas

M. of Κarystos

M. of Μarmari

C. of Κafireas

Transport, storage and communication 183 53 58 203 43 58

Social and personal service activities 80 19 - 72 12 -

Public administration and defence. Com-pulsory social security

111 38 2 110 34 2

Education 115 11 - 94 8 - Health and social work 83 14 - 77 10 -

Other service activities 144 44 1 124 27 1

Young people, Not submittable in any sector

302 156 48 279 139 48

66..44..44..55 LLaanndd vvaalluueess

Due to missing bibliographical data about land values only some quality references can be

made. Depending on the development and the demand, the differentiation among land

values is large in the various zones of the study area.

The biggest values are found inside the town planning zone in Karystos and Marmari. The

second category comprises areas within settlements and in direct neighbourhood with

Karystos. The rest of the settlements follow with decreasing values depending on their

distance from Karystos and from the sea.

Very high values which might even exceed the second category refer to buildable plots

outside the town planning zone with good infrastructure in the wider area of Karystos and

Marmari. High prices are requested also for all buildable plots outside the town planning

zone in the peri-urban zone of Karystos and Marmari, especially when they also have a

nice view. Next come the rest of the coastal areas depending on their infrastructure and

the natural beauty of the area. The following categories refer to agricultural irrigated land,

simple agricultural land and finally pastures.

66..44..44..66 AAddmmiinniissttrraattiivvee aanndd ssoocciiaall iinnffrraassttrruuccttuurreess

The present unit refers to the important social infrastructures which are available in the

study area. The given data concerns health infrastructures, education infrastructures, cul-

tural infrastructures, services etc. Specifically:



Table 35: Administrative and social infrastructures in the Municipality of Karystos.

Municipality of Karystos Services Town Hall Education infrastructures

4th Office of Primary Education of Karystos, Τechnical Vocational Educational school of Karystos, 1st Unified Lyceum of Karystos, Gymnasium of Karystos, Τechnical Vocational Gymnasium of Karystos, (1) 2/seated primary schools of Karystos (2), 2/seated Primary school of Kalyvia, Kindergardens of Karystos (3), Kindergarden of Kalyvia, nursery classes of Karystos

Health infrastructures Veterinary station of Karystos, Karystos General Hospital – Health Center “Diokleio”,Karystos Health Center

Other services Karystos Library,Karystos Office of Agricultural Development, Karystos Forest police station, Karystos Customs, Karystos Port au-thority Karystos Port Funding, Karystos Town planning funding, Karystos District Civil Court, Karystos Tax Office, Karystos Port sta-tion, Karystos Police Department, Karystos Post Office, Social Secu-rity Institute, PPC, OΤE, Center of Adult Education, Agricultural Bank of Greece, National Bank of Greece, Iοnian Bank, Ecclesiastical Old People’s Home, Karystos Archaeological Museum - Cultural Center, Karystos Castle, Karystos Cinematographic Club

Table 36: Administrative and social infrastructures in the Municipality of Μarmari.

Municipality of Μarmari Services Town Hall Education infrastructures

1st Gymnasium of Marmari, Primary schools, Kindergardens

Health infrastructures Rural medical center of Marmari, Rural medical center of Kalliano Rural medical center of Paradeisio

Other services Cultural Center of the municipality of Marmari “Fylagra”, Develop-ment Corportion of the M. of Marmari, Marmari Town hall Marmari Citizens Service Center, Marmari Port Authority, Marmari Port station, Marmari Police station, Marmari Pharmacy, Marmari Post Office, Marmari Fire Brigade

66..44..55 ΤΤeecchhnniiccaall IInnff rraassttrruuccttuurreess

There are no projects of nationwide importance executed in the wider study area which

would have a decisive influence on its future development. However, there is a number of

projects at prefectural and local level (completed, under execution and scheduled) which

will bring about spatial and economic rearrangements to the area and will affect its devel-

opment.

The improvement of the central axis connecting the area with Aliveri, Chalkida and the

rest of the prefecture as well as the improvement of Karystos Port belong to projects at

prefectural level. Projects at local level include mainly road construction works (Agios

Dimitrios – Kallianos, Κarystos – Amygdalea, Karystos) and water supply projects (of

Karystos, Amygdalea, Kallianos, Kato Antia, Platanistos). Finally there are irrigation pro-

jects (Karystos, Platanistos) and environmental projects (Landfill Site) in Karystos.

These projects will contribute to a better access to the study area and will considerably

reduce the relative isolation mainly from the center of the prefecture (Chalkida), the center



of the region (Lamia) and the central national motorway PATHE. Τhe road construction

works and water supply projects will improve the basic technical infrastructures, mostly in

the small and isolated settlements of the study area and will bring them to a level which is

considered elementary for a permanent or periodic residence. Τhe rest of the projects will

improve the equipment of Karystos. Especially the road construction and water supply

projects are considered as necessary conditions for the development of special forms of

tourism and holiday in the isolated areas and mostly those of the cape of Kafireas. All of

the local projects will significantly improve the level of everyday services in the whole

study area and will contribute to its attractiveness.

In the '80s many small roads were constructed in the mountainous area, one of which was

a forest road opened in the Dimosari gorge.

Decision no. 3352/6.9.84 of the Pref. of Evia approved the opening of forest road c’ cate-

gory in the public forest of Kallianos of Karystos with a length of 7 + 481 km in the loca-

tions Mavrantoni – Dimosari – Ferthi.

The road connection of Amygdalea with Kallianos is achieved through the connection

Κomito – Stavros – Kallianos. The main road connection of Kallianos is made through

Agios Dimitrios.

All aforementioned settlements of the study area are served by the networks of PPC and

OTE. Due to the fact that the settlements are scattered in the area, there is a particular

difficulty in serving all residences with the infrastructure networks. The sewage of all set-

tlements is achieved with absorbent cesspools (SEA Dimosari).

Other technical infrastructures are displayed in the table below.

Table 37: Τechnical Infrastructures.

Municipality of Μarmari

Municipality of Karystos

Marmari Port Marmari Port Landfill Site of Karystos Waste Water Treatment Plant of Karystos Irrigation Networks (Κarystos, Platanistos)

66..44..66 AAnntthhrrooppooggeenniicc pprreessssuurreess oonn tthhee eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt

Livestock, fires and mining are the most important pressures exerted on the environment

in the study area. The need of areas for pasture leads stock breeders to the transfer of

their animals to the burnt areas which have been declared as areas for reforestation after

the fire. Moreover, the frequent occurrence of forest fires has dramatically burdened the

area. Mining is limited to specific areas and stays usually on the surface, but still burdens

the landscape and the ecosystem and constitutes in general a disturbance for the area.

Analytically:



√√ GGrraazziinngg -- OOvveerrggrraazziinngg

Despite the gradual abandonment of the small villages of Cavo d’oro and Ochi which is

being observed, the unrestrained exercise of livestock, continues to be an important local

burden to many of the areas.

The grazing pressure on the forests of the study area continues to be intense although the

grazing capacity of the forested vegetation is small compared to other plant communities.

Grazing influences directly the composition but also the structure of forested vegetation.

Furthermore, the animals which graze in the forest, trample the young seedlings, eat or

break the distal and side shoots of seedlings and saplings, damage the bark and the roots

of saplings and trees, cause the compression of the upper soil layers resulting into the in-

crease of the surface runoff, the interruption of the water economy of the soil and the soil

erosion.

Heavy or intensive grazing or overgrazing in the forests of the area leads to the disap-

pearance of regeneration, overaging of clusters, soil degradation and last to their gradual

disappearance. The regressive succession which takes place in the case of overgrazing,

transforms gradually forests into wooded pasture, into pastures and finally into barren land

surfaces which sometimes are not suitable even for grazing.

Goats cause the biggest damage to forests. Specifically, in the chestnut clusters on Mount

Ochi, despite the fact that adequate grass grows for their food, goats devour leaves and

shoots of young neophytes and saplings ruining completely the regeneration of clusters.

Sheep are not less harmful as they devour the endemic and rare flora of the study area

and cause localized heavy erosion.

√√ BBaacckkffiillll aanndd ddrraaiinnaaggee ooff ssmmaallll wweettllaannddss

The wetland on the plain of Karystos (Kampos Karystou) is being arbitrarily and systemat-

ically backfilled and only a few acres of wet meadows, seasonal ponds, reedbeds and

other remarkable habitat types are still remaining. The intense anthropogenic pressures

have as a result that several species of flora, a quite important isolated population of otter

as well as most rare and protected birds, amphibians and reptiles of the study area are

threatened with local extinction (eg. Iris pseudacorus). Similar pressures are being exert-

ed on the small wetland at the river of Platanistos.



√√ FFiirreess

Burning for the improvement of the nutritional value of the grassland plants is a way to im-

prove pastures and is an integral part of sheep grazing. The past two decades the fre-

quency of fires seems to have increased. Repeated fires destroy the tree vegetation in

certain quite important habitats like the chestnut forest, the Quercus ilex forests etc. In

addition intensive grazing which takes place immediately afterwards results into the de-

crease of many plant species and the alteration of the composition of the plant communi-

ties in the area.

√√ RRooaadd ccoonnssttrruuccttiioonn iinn nnaattuurraall aarreeaass

It is widely acceptable that road constructions are important works which meet important

needs of communication and transport. Nevertheless the construction of new roads is one

of the most important problems in the area of Ochi since it is being performed without any

control or programme. The construction of new roads is mostly aimed to facilitate the per-

formance of activities like: mining, “research” of resources for Karystian slabs, loggings,

husbandry, creation of allotments, touristic development, access to properties etc

These roads have technical problems due to lack of proper studies . Many roads are left

incomplete and cause heavy erosion, alteration of the landscape, destruction of rare flora,

disturbance to fauna and fragmentation of habitats. It is deemed that road constructions

are one of the most important environmental problems in the area of Ochi and the nega-

tive impacts that they can induce are the following: a) loss and transformation of habitats,

b) isolation of fauna and flora populations, c) direct killing of fauna, d) creation of artificial

habitats and artificial communication routes, e) emission of substances and thermal ener-

gy from vehicles f) expansion of modern activities in sensitive areas of nature.

√√ SSooiill eerroossiioonn

Soil erosion is a severe problem which directly and indirectly influences the natural eco-

systems of the area and the capability of their restoration. In the mountainous area of Ochi

prevail weathering rocks (like quartz schists). Due to the intense terrain and the long de-

forestation the risk of occurrence of serious erosion effects exists. The intensive grazing

and the non meticulous road constructions on inclined slopes have caused heavy erosion

in many locations of the mountain.



√√ NNoonn--ppooiinntt ppoolllluuttiioonn ffrroomm aaggrriiccuullttuurraall ccrrooppss

The use of fertilizers and pesticides (parasiticides) is not always rational, so that large

quantities of those chemicals end up in draining trenches and other parts of the wetland in

the plain of Karystos. The impacts of pesticides have not been studied in the plain of

Karystos but the agronomists of the area claim that the burdening of crops is not signifi-

cantly big. Due to the small surface of the plots, the local climate (regular winds which

sanitize the wineyard from pest), as well as the gradual abandonment of the grain cultiva-

tions in the area of the plain, no special burden from pesticides is being recorded. The

abandonment of crops is even more extended on the semi-mountainous areas and they

are not found any more at altitudes more than 500 m on Ochi.

√√ PPooiinntt ppoolllluuttiioonn ffoorrmmss

Poit pollution from areas with unrestrained waste disposal: The most important and bur-

dening place with unrestrained waste disposal of those found in the study area, is situated

in the artificial lake of Douvala in the plain of Karystos, resulting in the uncontrolled back-

filling of the lake. This lake area communicates with the ground water table and thus the

possibility of pollution of the underground waters of the plain exists. In addition, the crea-

tion of an uncontrolled waste disposal site in one of the most important habitats of the avi-

fauna of the area, degrades the ecological value of the plain of Karystos.

The regular disposal of waste water into the official waste disposal site of Karystos on the

location of Agioi Theodoroi causes also destruction to the environment. Urban waste

(mostly untreated sewage) ends up since the mid ‘80s into the stream of Rigia through

draining trenches. Τhe most evident result is the bleariness of the waters of Rigia and the

increase of eutrophication in certain parts of the stream during the summer months. An-

other source of pollution is the regular disposal of urban waste into the ravines of the area.

Concentrations of urban waste have been observed in the ravine of Lala, Myloi,

Platanistos, Komito and other ravines of the area.

Processing units of the primary sector products: In the study area operate two oil mills

which seem to be throwing their waste into the stream of Lala during the whole autumn

and the early winter. These burden the water ecosystem and are a source of aesthetic

pollution.

Waste from livestock activities: On the bank of the stream of Lala on the plain of Karystos

(near the location Pigadi tou Pasa) operates a slaughterhouse which seems to be loading

the bottom part of the river with waste.



√√ CClleeaarraanncceess

Τhe particular problem is mostly observed in the plain of Karystos where habitats with

very limited area are found. Τhe problem of the clearances is especially intense also on

stream banks where the natural vegetation is being cleared for the creation of works, plots

or the expansion of farmlands.

The reinstatement of the forested riparian vegetation on crops which have been aban-

doned the past 30 years raises an important issue for the area. In many locations plane-

tree forests and oak forests are the result of the regeneration of natural vegetation in old

crops (eg. valley of Platanistos, Stefides In Kallianos, “Plane-tree forest” in Kallianos,

Lenosaioi in Kallianos, Valley of Lala in Kalyvia etc).

√√ LLooggggiinngg

Logging is being carried out for the acquirement of charcoal and firewood for trade. During

the last decades the logging activities have degraded areas with quercus ilex. Logging

activities have been observed in old oak trees in Rouklia, on the south feet of Ochi (in the

surrounding of the villages Lala and Grampia) and in Agios Dimitrios. Logging of plane-

trees on roadside locations have also been carried out in the valley of Rouklia while doz-

ens of plane-trees were cut in the summer of 1997 in the “Plane-tree forest” of Kallianos.

Cut chestnut trees were also found on roadside locations in the valley of Rouklia. Illegal

logging seemes to be increasing in the area. The loss of those old trees has impacts on

the fauna especially in an area where seminatural brushes prevail and forest clusters are

rare.

√√ BBuuiillddiinngg

Controlling and planning the building outside the borders of the settlements are important

issues which do not only refer to the protection of the natural but also the cultural envi-

ronment, the attractivity of the area as a tourist pole and also the quality of life of the resi-

dents.

The area on the south feet of Ochi in the villages of “Gourna of Karystos” develops quickly

and the urban sprawl causes the aesthetic degradation of the landscape. Cottages close

to ravines cause the densification of the road network and severe disturbance to the fauna

and flora, and additionally pollution of the water networks. Behind the beaches of Potami,

Kallianos and Skinodavlia former farmlands and pastures are sold as plots. Moreover, in

the plain of Karystos the extended backfilling, the development of the road network and

the rest infrastuctures lead to the change of the area’s character.

Below are presented particularly sensitive areas for which special regulations are required

but also motives have to be given for their rational development:



a. Τhe villages of the "Gourna of Karystos" (Kalyvia, Grampias, Myloi)

Sensitive areas as regards building are the following:

- Τhe upper part of the valley of Myloi in the valley “Platanitses” where the Ancient

Quarries (including the location “Kylindroi”), ravines, rocky formations, habitats of

threatened birds of prey etc.) are located.

- The gully of Agia Triada where the homonymous cave, other smaller caves, the ra-

vine and the riparian forest (former community of Kalyvia) are located.

- The valley of Lala where a riparian forest, residues of oak-tree forests, two ravines

with constant flow, small seasonal waterfalls, many small springs and two gorges

(community of Kalyvia) are located.

- Τhe castle of Karystos and its surrounding area as well as the valley “Platy” with

the Medieval aqueduct. This area is a remarkable “Historic Landscape” (former

community if Grampia and Myloi), with important natural flower gardens where en-

demic and local rare plants grow.

b. Valley of Platanistos (Platanistos, Epanochori, Pidoulaika, Elionas)

Sensitive areas as far as building is regarded are the following:

- The Panochori Gorge which is characterized by an impressive gorge with a ripari-

an forest where many endemic plant species, rare birds of prey, historic monu-

ments (bridges, drinking fountains, cobbled pavements) etc are found.

- Potami Beach. The area is characterized by a variety of natural habitats, one of

which is a priority habitat and is found in the small wetland which concentrates rare

and threatened birds. This area is of great ecological and tourist interest and the

random building of tourist and resort buildings has already started.

c. Area of Kallianos

The Kallianos beach and the Dimosari estuary (community of Kallianos) which partially

lays within the protected area of nature, belong to sensitive areas as regards building.

d. Area of Agios Dimitrios Gorge

Skinodavlia beach and former settlement of Skinodavlia in the gorge of Agios Dimitrios.

An abandoned settlement is found here, while recently some houses began to be inhabit-

ed and at least one new house has been built inside the gorge. The area is of great aes-

thetic, ecological and touristic value.

√√ MMiinniinngg

Only three locations with intense and dense concentration of quarries are located in the



study areas causing the degradation of the natural environment. These areas are the

following:

- Wider area of Dimosari gorge.

- Stefani / Plakota (Mount Ochi).

-- Agios Dimitrios Gorge.

√√ WWaatteerr ssuuppppllyy pprroojjeeccttss

In the early ’90s the project for the water supply of Karystos from the springs of Dimosari

was completed having heavy environmental impacts during its construction phase (cutting

of dozens of old plane-trees, backfillings, road construction, erosion, disturbance), but al-

so during its operation phase (reduction of the river supply during the summer months

etc).

√√ UUssaaggee ooff ppooiissoonneedd bbaaiittss

Poisoned baits which aim to the decrease of the fox populations have been used in the

area of Ochi in the recent past. Threatened species of birds of prey such as the griffon

vulture and the golden eagle are vulnerable to this illegal action.

√√ UUssee ooff ppeessttiicciiddeess

Pesticides are an important source of environmental pollution. Τhe biggest parts in the

area of Ochi are not intensively cultivated and the use of pesticides is limited compared to

other areas.

√√ HHuunnttiinngg

Hunting does not cause severe burdening within the biggest part of the protected area.

Nevertheless hunting represents a serious threat to species of avifauna and fauna and to

habitats in the locations mentioned below.

- Lowland area of the Plain of Karystos (Kampos Karystou).

- Protected area of nature (Zone A) Dimosari Gorge – Kastanologgos – Peaks of

Ochi.

- Archampoli Gorge.

-- Prohibition of hunting of the rock partridge in an extended area around Ochi.

√√ PPooaacchhiinngg

Poaching exerts extreme pressure to the natural environment because it acts selectively

with disproportional destructive impacts compared to legal hunting. There are indications

that poaching is usual in the area as various protected species of avifauna, even otters,



have been found shot on the plain of Karystos. Furthermore killings of rare birds of prey

and wading birds have occurred.

√√ TToouurriissmm ddeevveellooppmmeenntt

The tourism development of natural habitats and the disturbance – degradation of the im-

portant shelters of fauna and of the locations where remarkable species of flora are con-

centrated by the traffic, the recreation and the stay of a big number of tourists in sensitive

parts of the area are expected to be the results deriving from the increase of the tourist

traffic in the future.

Several coastal areas, such as the gorge of Archampoli, are very sensitive. At the same

time certain mountainous habitats are particularly sensitive to intense human interven-

tions, specially because of their small surface (eg. the collection of wild flowers in such

bog numbers that specific plant populations of Ochi have decreased dramatically).

Other human activities which are exercised in the study area and which burden the natural

environment are the pollution from solid waste, the intensive use of pesticides and the de-

velopment of tourism activities.

66..44..77 AAttmmoosspphheerriicc EEnnvvii rroonnmmeenntt

There are no statutory limits regarding the quality of the atmospheric environment in the

study area. However according to an initial Assessment of the quality condition of the at-

mosphere in the study area, the atmospheric environment is in a quite good condition.

The study area does not concentrate intense industrial areas or areas where considerably

important interventions can be made.

On the other hand it is important to point out that in the study area several anthropogenic

economic activities (eg. quarries) are being carried out or other anthropogenic pressures

are being exerted which occasionally burden the atmospheric environment. Some of them

are the uncontrolled waste disposal (waste disposal sites), the excessive use of pesticides

or even the fires which break out at times. These nuisances are related with the emission

of unpleasant odours or even the emission of large quantities of carbon dioxide.

In any case it has to be pointed out that the project under study and its operation will con-

tribute decisively to the improvement of the quality features of the atmosphere not only at

local level but also in a national and global scale.



66..44..88 AAccoouusstt iicc eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt,, vviibbrraatt iioonnss,, rraaddiiaatt iioonn

In this unit the acoustic environment, the vibrations and the radiation in the direct zone of

the projects is being assessed. The assessment of the levels of noise, vibrations and ra-

diations refers to the existing situation as well as to the situation which will be created dur-

ing the construction and the operation of the project. Specifically:

As regards the existing situation it is mentioned that in the project area there are no activi-

ties related with the emission of noise and vibrations. The only activities which are per-

formed in the direct area of the projects and which have been mentioned also in other

sections are grazing and hunting, i.e. activities which are not related with the subject dealt

with in this section (noise, vibrations, radiation).

Regarding the construction and operation of the project the following has to be mentioned:

NNooiissee: During the construction phase of the project the existing noise level might be in-

creased due to the noise of machinery. The increase will be low, similar to the increase

which is observed at small-scale technical works of specific duration. In order to deal with

any impacts, the noise emission limits will be observed as they have been established and

are applicable.

During the operation phase of the project the created noise will regard only the operation

of the wind turbines. More details about the noise levels are presented in the noise con-

tours study which accompanies this Environmental Impact Assessment (see Annex II of

the present EIA). Nonetheless, further below are presented data and specific references.

Specifically:

Pursuant to the executed calculations and the noise contour studies regarding the pro-

posed wind farms there does not seem to arise any important problem or problem worth

mentioning for the anthropogenic environment and the residents. The 45 dΒ noise contour

does not include any settlement or presence of residents which could be influenced by the

produced noise. Health problems of the residents or other disturbances are not to be ex-

pected in any way. In any case the project under study conforms to the noise emission

limits. Τhe noise levels for each settlement are depicted in the following table.

Settlement Noise level (db)

SCHIZALI 37.16

PRINIA 30.91

AΜYGDALEA 33.58

ΖACHARIA 37.10

THYMION 34.88

ΚAPSOURION 35.85

EVAGGELISMOS 28.82

ΚOΜIΤOΝ 33.00




AΝΤIAS 30.94

EPANOCHORION 36.69

PLATANISTOS 31.45

ROUKLIA 32.88

AGIOS DIMITRIOS 35.43

ΜASTROGIANNAIOI 30.64

In the framework of the above it should be mentioned at this point that the WT type which

is planned to be used, serves also this direction, i.e. the minimization of noise levels.

Hence the decrease of noise produced at the increase of distance in one of the technical

features of the WT in question.

VViibbrraattiioonnss: During the construction phase of the works (main project and accompanying

supporting infrastructure) all vibration emission limits will be observed as they have been

established and are applicable. The operation of the project is not related with the emis-

sion of vibrations.

RRaaddiiaattiioonn: The concern about the emission of radiation usually refers on the one hand to

problems which are created by the wind turbines because of their position related with al-

ready existing television or radio stations or even army installations and on the other hand

to potential electromagnetic emissions by the same. Τhis problem was more intense with

the first generation wind turbines which were equipped with metallic blades. Τhe blades of

the modern wind turbines are constructed with exclusively synthetic materials which have

minimal share in the transmission of electromagnetic radiation.

Regarding the compatibility and the interferences to telecommunications it should be men-

tioned that in many European countries the towers of the wind turbines are already being

used for the installation of antennas for the facilitation of communication services. Regard-

ing the emission of radiation from the wind turbine itself it must be mentioned that subsys-

tems which might emit radiation are the electric generator and the transformer. Τhe elec-

tromagnetic field of the electric generator is particularly weak and is limited to a very small

distance. Additionally many of the transformers are surrounded by security fencing or en-

closed in a metallic shed. The fence is placed is such a distance that the level of electro-

magnetic radiation is negligible.

Regarding the impacts to the environment of electromagnetic radiation from the transmis-

sion lines, data were obtained from the study of the Medical College of Wisconsin un-

der the title: “Electromagnetic fields and human health” . The translation to the Greek

language was done by the Committee on Hygiene and Safety at Work/Transmission/PPC.

It is worth mentioning here that the impact assessment which is carried out focuses mainly

on the impacts of the produced electromagnetic radiation on human health. Until now

there is no convincing evidence proving that the exposure to electric and magnetic fields



cause health problems to animals. In addition to the above there is no evidence establish-

ing negative results in animal reproduction or growth, especially mammals, attributable to

the exposure to electric and magnetic fields. There is convincing evidence regarding be-

havioural reactions to electric and magnetic fields which are considerably higher than

those which are met in the residential environment; however negative results regarding

neural behaviour have not been revealed.

The study of the Medical College of Wisconsin was presented in the form of questions and

answers on the connection between power lines, electrical occupations and cancer. It in-

cludes discussion on the biophysics of interactions, summaries of the laboratory and hu-

man studies, information on standards and a bibliography.

The basic results of the study are summarized as follows:

- Many researches have not presented any relation between residence near transmis-

sion lines and onsets of dangerous diseases.

- All –except for one– researches about transmission lines and either child diseases or

other adult diseases, failed to show relative correlations.

- Even the studies which show a relevant relation between adult diseases and transmis-

sion lines do not provide any consistent instructions as regards the exposure distance

or level that should be related with the increased occurrence of adult diseases.

- Statements of higher officers in Sweden and Denmark do not announce any that any

regulation about the line fields was decided nor was any order about the removal of

lines from special uses buildings, like schools, issued. Nonetheless the Swedish gov-

ernment announced in 1996 a “precautionary principle” L14 where the following is

mentioned: "The Research results, which are currently available, do not justify and

there is no data to justify any limits or other obligatory limits on electric and magnetic

fields of low frequency..." and "The national authorities recommend the following pre-

ventive principle: If measures, which generally reduce the exposure, can be taken with

rational expenses and rational results from all other point of views, efforts should be

made to reduce the fields which deviate radically from the one which could be consid-

ered as normal in the respective environment. As regards new electrical installations

and buildings, efforts should be made even from the planning phase so that they are

designed and placed in a way that the exposure is limited... ".

- Undergrounding the power lines can basically reduce the strength of the magnetic

fields. The reduction of the magnetic fields occurs because underground cables use

as insulation rubber, plastic or oil despite the air; this allows the installation of the ca-

bles very closely and a bigger neutralization of phases. The reduction of the magnetic

fields of underground cables is not attributable to the protective mantle and reaches

the highest value at a distance from the line.

- Undergrounding of high voltage lines is costly; the repair of underground cables in



case of damages (which are quite frequent!) is also very difficult, time-consuming and

costly.

In the framework of all abovementioned data but also of the public controversy on elec-

tromagnetic radiation and its impacts on human health, the precautionary measures which

were taken during the planning phase of the project regarding the electricity transmission

network should be mentioned. These are the following:

a) undergrounding of the medium voltage network,

b) location of the 20/150 kV step-up substations to positions considerably remote from

settlements and residents,

c) alignment of the high voltage network in areas considerably remote from settlements

and residents,

d) alignment of the high voltage network in areas where no special sensitive uses and

buildings of sensitive uses (eg schools, hospitals, old peoples homes) are situated.

66..44..99 SSuurr ffaaccee wwaatteerr aanndd ggrroouunnddwwaatteerr

In the wider study area the status of the ground and surface waters, besides deriving from

weather conditions, is also the result of the geological construction, the tectonic structure

and the vegetation. Almost the whole surface, with the exception of the backfilling in the

plain of Karystos, is occupied by mica schists alternating with cipolin marbles. Τhese mar-

bles are slightly karstified only on the surface and cannot be considered as extended free

aquifers.

The hydrolithological classification of these rocks is presented in the table below. Accord-

ing to this classification we can point out that due to the nature of the rocks, the surface

runoff prevails against the percolation.

Table 38: Hydrolithological classification of rocks.

HYDROGEOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION LITHOLOGY "Continuous" Fault gouge rocks, porous or even fractured

(sand, sandstone, gravel deposits, conglom-erates)

"Discontinuous" Carbonate rocks, crushed and karstified. Crystallic crushed rocks (granites, migmatites, gneisses). Volcanic and similar rocks.

Middle permeability Sandclay rocks, molasse, morainoc for-mations, silts, calcareous mud, some con-glomerates, marlstones.

Impermeable Argillaceous rocks, calcareous clay. Schists, crystallic schists, flysch, some consolidated volcanic rocks.

Regarding hydrogeological conditions which result to small spring outlets, these can be



classified in two types depending on the hydrolithological and geotectonic features in the

wider area of the Dimosari river and the Kafireas cape:

a) Descending seepage springs with weathered mantle and underground drainage

water which follow courses defined by tectonic or morphological synclines and

b) Ascending fracture springs which form fronts along the faults.

Regarding other hydrological and hydrogeological features of the study area the following

applies:

√√ HHyyddrroollooggyy ooff tthhee ppllaaiinn ooff KKaarryyssttooss aarreeaa ((KKaammppooss KKaarryyssttoouu aarreeaa))

The plain of Karystos has a basin with a surface of approximately 22 km2, which is charac-

terized on the one hand by very mild morphological gradients and on the other hand by

the presence exclusively of schists or other rocks of similar composition. This results in

the creation of an extended and thick alluvial mantle at the slopes and deposits with clay

composition on the flat.

In the area of the Rigia stream mouth laid a marshy area which nowadays is dried out in

its biggest part. The phreatic horizon is high and underground aquifers are not expected in

the area except probably for certain waterway zones of faults or local aquifers on sandy –

brittle horizons of the schists.

Due to the quite small morphological pitch the torrents of the area do not flood. According

to the hydrological study of the Ministry of Agriculture which had been carried out in 1992

for the reservoir of Karystos, a surface run-off from torrents amounting to 1.500.000 m3

which correspond to approximately 1/3 of the surface of the plain’s catchment basin is

presumable. For the remaining 2/3 of the surface a similar or less run-off is estimated due

to the particularly smooth terrain.

The phreatic horizon on the upstream of the coastal zone maintain a good quality of water

while salinizations occur in the coastal zone due to over-exploitation. Τhe spring waters

have the quality influenced by the composition of the hydrolithologic formations and some

are used for water supply.

√√ HHyyddrroollooggyy ooff tthhee ccaappee ooff KKaaffiirreeaass aarreeaa

The cape has a mountainous terrain with torrents of small length which transverse purely

schist areas. The drainage of rainwater is quick so that percolation never takes place. Any

spring discharges drain the surface weathered mantle of the schists.

√√ HHyyddrrooggeeoollooggyy ooff tthhee ccaappee ooff KKaaffiirreeaass aarreeaa

Due to the prevalence of schist horizons the hydrogeological conditions are expressed



only through small seasonal seepage springs of the weathered mantle with the healthy

schist. Due to the zonal distribution and the occurrences of small thickness the marbles

create springs of the above type on the lower spots of the contact with the schists.

The water potential in this area is not expected to be remarkable. A cultivation of small

springs for recreation locations is considered advisable. The most suitable springs will oc-

cur upon a systematic recording of the spring discharges and their capabilities (hydrogeo-

logical study).

√√ HHyyddrrooggeeoollooggyy ooff tthhee ppllaaiinn ooff KKaarryyssttooss aarreeaa

Only the phreatic horizon is developed in the plain, and this even only in the places with

sandy layers. Clay areas are sterile in ground waters.

The wetlands of the plain are fed by surface and ground waters. The biggest part of the

run-off is channelled to the sea.

√√ HHyyddrrooggeeoollooggyy ooff tthhee DDiimmoossaarrii ggoorrggee aarreeaa

There are numerous spring outlets in many locations of the catchment basin of the gorge.

Their functioning mechanism is the same almost in all of them and they appear at the

point where cipolin marbles meet schist layers. Cipolin marbles, when they have a large

surface expansion, evolve into (as permeable formations due to fissures) large karstic aq-

uifer systems. Many springs have run-off during the whole year, on the high slopes as well

as within the gorge.

The development of certain springs requires the recording of all which occur in the particu-

lar areas, and the study of their capacity, the surface of their feeding zone (necessary also

for the protection against contamination) as well as their chemism. Τhe latter is enforced

because of the mineralization of the area by mixed sulphide and copper ores which prob-

ably affect the water quality.

66..55 EEvvoolluutt iioonn ttrreennddss ooff tthhee eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt −− ZZeerroo ssoolluutt iioonn

The wider area of the project undergoes tourism development which is mostly related with

visitors from the neighbouring area of Attica. The number of visitors in the coastal zone is

expected to increase in the future with the following results:

o Increase of construction-building,

o Increase of the traffic load,

o Decrease of livestock and of semi-mountainous cultivations,

o Increase of fire protection.

The construction of the project is expected to accelerate tourism development because:



It will improve and develop the existing forest road network,

It will construct an information center (future plan) for the renewable energy

sources,

It will supply the municipalities with compensatory benefits which can be allocated

to the improvement of tourism and other infrastructures.

Without the construction of the project, the evolution of the environment during the next 20

years is estimated based on the presumption that:

o Without the project, tourism development will be slower,

o Without the project, access to the area will be more difficult,

o Without the project, grazing and fires will stay at current levels.

Subsequently, the development of the natural environment will have the following charac-

teristics:

- The brushes will keep their current shape, as influenced by grazing, with limited

growth of bushes and many small clearings.

- Habitats will continue to display intense image of mosaics as a result of frequent

(but usually small) fires.

- The populations of preys (migratory birds, hare) will remain relatively abundant as

the area is a passage of migratory birds and has relatively few forest roads.

- The populations of birds of prey are maintained at satisfactory levels, because they

are not confronted with loss of living space neither due the projects nor to the in-

tensity of hunting (along the new roads).



Features of environment Evolutionary trends WITHOUT the pr oject

Habitats: frequency of fires It remains high due to intense human presence (shepherds, hunters) and low protection level (due to limited construc-tion)

Habitats: size of fires It remains small because frequent fires prevent the concen-tration of dead organic matter on the ground and create burnt zones which function as natural fire belts.

Habitats: intensity of grazing It is not influenced as no alternative employment opportuni-ties are created for stock breeders.

Habitats: forest layers It remains stable, because frequent fires prevent the evolu-tion to multi-floor clusters

Habitats: mosaics It remains high, because frequent fires create always new clearings in tall vegetation

Habitats: continuity It remains high, because the road network of the project is not constructed

Flora: diversity of species It is not influenced, because the project has only local im-pact to habitats

Fauna: birds of prey They remain relatively abundant because the available for-age space is not reduced and the number of hunters does not increase

Fauna: migratory birds They remain at the same levels because they are not con-fronted with obstacles during their movement

Fauna: preys They remain relatively abundant because the road network for the project is not constructed and the access of hunters is not improved.



77 EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL IIMMPPAACCTT AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT && EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN

This chapter deals with the assessment and evaluation of the projects’s environmental

impacts during its construction phase as well as during its operation phase. Detailed

presentation follows in the following sections.

The impact assessment refers to the main project as well as to its accompanying, support-

ing infrastructure. In addition to the assessment regarding the construction and operation

phases, the assessment will also regard the cumulative impacts of all the wind farms un-

der study as well as of all the wind farms under study and the other wind farms of the

same technology which exist or will be constructed in the area. Τhe wind farms of other

investors which are taken into consideration are presented in section 3.6 “Association of

the project with other projects or activities”.

It is crucial to mention at this point that because of the size and the national im-

portance of the interconnection works [Medium Voltage Network 20 kV or 33 kV

(underground) , Step-up Substations 20/150 kV , High Voltage Network 150 kV (Over-

head - Underground) , High Voltage Network 150 kV (Submarine) ( Κarystos - Rafina) ,

High Voltage Network 150 kV (Underground) (Rafina – UHV Center of Pallini) ] with

the electric power system, the assessment and evaluation of the impacts of their

construction and operation is performed not only in the following sections but also

extensively in ISSUE B ((IINNTTEERRCCOONNNNEECCTTIIOONN NNEETTWWOORRKK KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS -- RRAAFFIINNAA))..


77..11..11 CCll iimmaattee aanndd bbiiooccll iimmaatt iicc ffeeaattuurreess

AA.. CCoonnssttrruuccttiioonn && ooppeerraattiioonn pphhaassee

The climate and bioclimatic conditions which prevail in the study area and the wider area

differ and depend on the geomorphology and the terrain. The climate condition is different

for the lowland and highland areas where the installation fields of the wind turbines are

located.

As regards the project (main and accompanying supporting infrastructure) and the relation

it might have with the climate and bioclimatic features of the area, it has to be mentioned

that impacts during its construction phase are in no case expected . The installation

of the wind turbines, the construction, wherever necessary, of new roads, the improve-

ment of the existing road network and the connection with the electricity network are not

expected to alter parameters like temperature, rain-fall, hail-storm, snow-fall or humidity in

any way.

Likewise no significant or worth mentioning impacts are observed in the climate or



bioclimate of the study area in any of the two phases under study (construction and opera-

tion).

ΒΒ.. SSyynneerrggiissttiicc eeffffeeccttss

Thereafter follows the examination of the cumulative impacts on the climate and the

bioclimate in the study area only of the total number of the wind farms under study and

secondarily of the total number of the wind farms under study and other similar projects

which are installed or will be installed in the area. Specifically:

The construction and operation of the wind farms under study (overall project) are not ex-

pected to create any worth mentioning impacts on the climate and the bioclimate of the

area. If it was assumed that the size of the project was smaller eg. 7 wind farms, it is as-

sessed that the effects on the climate and the bioclimatic features of the study area would

not be significantly lower compared with those of the project for which environmental li-

cencing is being applied for. Nonetheless the impacts of a project with fewer wind farms

would clearly be smaller as regards the levels of the produced dust and particulates,

something, however, which does not influence the climate and bioclimatic features of an

area. Considering that these are occasional and not permanent the project to be licenced

could not be compared with a hypothetical scenario regarding a smaller project.

As regards the cumulative impacts of the project under study in relation with other wind

farms in the area the following should be mentioned: in the study area and the wider area

several wind farms have been located in the south, south-east and west of the study area.

Some of the wind farms are found in big distance from the study area and from the wind

farms under study and therefore any assessment of the cumulative impacts would be im-

proper. It is also pointed out that the located wind farms are in a different stage of the li-

cencing procedure.

In the framework of the above and upon evaluation of the cumulative impacts issues re-

garding the climate and bioclimatic parameters of the study area and the wider area do

not arise. Significant cumulative impacts on the climate and the bioclimate of the area are

not noted. Parameters like temperature, rain-fall, hail-storm etc are not in any way ex-

pected to be influenced by the total number of the projects (proposed WFs and WFs of

other investors). Therefore no further reference is made.



77..11..22 MMoorrpphhoollooggiiccaall aanndd llaannddssccaappee ffeeaattuurreess

AA.. CCoonnssttrruuccttiioonn pphhaassee

√√ AAss ttoo tthhee mmoorrpphhoollooggyy

During the construction phase of the project (main progect and accompanying supporting

infrastructure) and the execution of the necessary technical works there are no alterations

expected about the existing morphological features of the sydy area or/and the wider ar-

ea. Impacts, significant or worth mentioning, on the morphology and the morphological

features are not expected.

√√ AAss ttoo tthhee llaannddssccaappee

As regards the landscape it should be mentioned that the foundation of the wind turbines

of the wind farm under study, the improvement/construction of a road network and also

the connection of the project with the the electricity network will require the execution of

technical works for a specific time period (construction phase).

Considering the nature of these construction works it is estimated that that there will be

point (eg. installation positions of the wind turbines), but also linear (eg. zone for construc-

tion of access and internal road network, electric power network etc) local interventions in

the existing landscape features of the area. These interventions are unavoidable some-

thing which is usual at every technical work which is constructed in an area and they are

mainly related with the excavations, the clearing of vegetation, wherever it is deemed

necessary, the temporary disposal of aggregate materials, the presence of machinery etc

Taking, thus, in consideration the above it becomes clear that during the construction

phase a small-scale impact on the landscape is anticipated, which, however, will range

within acceptable limits. This visual temporary effect mostly during the construction phase

of the project does not cause any significant or irreversible impacts. Clearings or defor-

estation of vegetation will be carried out locally mainly for the access roads construction.

In any case it is deemed useful in this phase that specific protection measures are taken

(see in detail chapter “Observation and treatment of environmental impacts”), which will

minimize, according to the Assessment of the consultants herein, any impacts on the pro-

ject site and on the construction zones of the works (eg. road construction, electric power

connection network etc).



ΒΒ.. OOppeerraattiioonn pphhaassee


The operation of the proposed wind farms is not related with impacts on the morphological

features of the study area and the wider area.


During the operation phase of the project under study the impacts are different from those

which occurred during the construction phase and are directly related with the installation

of the wind turbines and the visual contact with specific parts of theirs, like the tower and

the blades. Furthermore, it should be mentioned that in this case issues regarding the

landscape aesthetics occur, a matter about which many and various opinions have been

expressed occasionally. Nowadays while some express their concerns about the impact

of the wind turbines on the landscape, there are others who consider them as being ele-

gant and aesthetic human constructions, the sight of which symbolizes the evolution of

technology towards a better, less polluted planet. Even the comparison between a petro-

leum or lignite power station and a wind farm would in any case end in favour of the latter

since it prevails also from an aesthetic point of view.

Although a commonly accepted scientific method does not exist (*except the one which is

designated in the Special Framework of Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development

for RES, which was applied to all wind farms under study so that the terms/limitations set

are fulfilled) for the evaluation of visual impacts deriving from the installation of wind farms

in an area, effort is being made below for the assessment of any impacts of the proposed

wind farms on the landscape with the evaluation and use of objective criteria [eg. pres-

ence of residences on or near the project site, evaluation of any much-frequented plac-

es/locations in the installation site of the project, visual contact from selected locations

(eg. locations where traffic of visitors is observed, see beaches of Platanistos / Amygdalea

/ Kallianos / Dimitrios, Dimosari gorge etc), etc.]. Hence, the set criteria which in view of

the consultants are satisfactory and assure the full and complete approach regarding the

impacts on the landscape, result to the following:

Τhe intense terrain of the area reduces drastically the visual field of many wind

farms locations.

The sparse arrangement of the WT in the majority of the wind farms under study

contributes significantly to the decrease of any visual impacts. Moreover the small

size of some has the same result.

In the locations of the proposed wind farms there have not been found any resi-

dences and hence human presence who could come in touch with the project un-

der study from a very close position.



In the locations of the proposed wind farms there have not been found much-

frequented places like squares, parks etc or other areas attracting the pres-

ence/concentration of residents/visitors, a fact which minimizes any chances of

visual contact with this project from a very close position.

In the locations of the proposed wind farms there have not been found any historic

or/and cultural elements which lead to traffic and hence to visual contact.

As regards the beaches of the area, which are situated in good distance from the

project under study it is mentioned that the visual impact from these locations is

not expected to be significant. Certain WTs might be visible without this meaning

an aesthetic alteration. The traffic in these locations is not expected to be be con-

siderably affected nor are changes in the number of visitors expected.

In conclusion, the project under study:

• will smoothly comply with the visual absorption capacity limits of the landscape,

thus the existing visual character and the integrity of the existing quality of the view

will be maintained,

• does not obstruct view locations in its immediate zone of influence during its oper-

ation

• is not related with occurrences of alteration of the existing aesthetics during its op-

eration,

• does not insult the residents aesthetics due to its distance from inhabited areas,

• will not influence the traffic in archaeological sites / monuments and beaches of

the wider area due to its distance from the aforementioned cultural elements,

• it is not available for visual contact from close distance locations due to limited

neighbouring land use.

Finally, as regards the evaluation of the project under study in relation with Annex IV “Cri-

teria for the integration of wind farm installations in the landscape” of the Special Frame-

work for Renewable Energy Sources, no issue arises. The terms and the limitations set

in the Special Land Planning for landscapes are fulfilled by the proposed planning

of the project . Details are presented in ISSUE C (REVIEW OF TERMS/LIMITATIONS

OF THE SPECIAL FRAMEWORK FOR SPATIAL PLANNING & SUSTAINABLE DEVEL-

OPMENT FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES) which accompanies this Environ-

mental Impact Assessment. Summarily however the following can be mentioned:

In order to control whether the proposed wind farm installation complies with the criteria

set for its integration in the landscape, the rules about landscape which are stipulated in

Annex IV of the Joint Ministerial Decision 49828 (Govt Gazette 2464/Β/03.12.2008) are

applied. Upon examination of the Sites of Special Interest which are mentioned in this An-



nex the following the following applies:

Monuments registered in the World Heritage List and other important monuments, ar-

chaeological sites and historic places of par. 5 subpar. bb) of article 50 L.3028/02 are not

found in a distance of 6 km from the proposed installation positions of the wind turbines.

Absolute Protection Zones (Zones A) of other archaeological sites are not found in a dis-

tance of 6 km from the proposed installation positions of the wind turbines.

Cores of National Woodland Parks, Monuments of Nature, Aesthetic Forests of par. 3 and

4 of article L. 1650/86 are not found in a distance of 0,8 km from the proposed installation

positions of the wind turbines.

Traditional settlements are not found in a distance of 6 km from the proposed installation

positions of the wind turbines.

Statutory or configured touristic areas, medium and large tourism accommodation facili-

ties, special tourism infrastructures and touristic ports are not found in a distance of 2 km

from the proposed installation positions of the wind turbines.

Hence, the criterion of integration of the proposed wind farms in the landscape is exam-

ined from the Site of Special Interest “City or settlement borders”. Therefore and consider-

ing that the closest settlements are not qualified as touristic or notable, the radiuses of the

zones (in km) within the Wind Capacity Priority Areas are A=0.5, Β=1, C=2. Subsequently

the results are the following:

√ On surface EΖONE A the location of wind turbines is not allowed.

√ On surface EΖONE Β the location of ~9 wind turbines is allowed.

√ On surface EΖONE Γ the location of ~66 wind turbines is allowed.

The abovementioned densities conform with the rules regarding the villages which are lo-

cated in a distance of at least 2 km from the proposed wind farms. However it should be

mentioned that in a distance of 500 m from the settlement of Schizali [Ζone A (see

above)] is located WT 7 of the WF ANATOLI (i.e. WT 7 is exactly on the borders of Zone

A).

Consequently the following derives from all the above calculations:

The existing planning and the positions of the WTs does not in any way exceed the al-

lowed density per zone.

The 2nd criterion does not need to be reviewed since the terms about density as stipulated

by the 1st criterion are fulfilled.



CC.. SSyynneerrggiissttiicc eeffffeeccttss


There are no cumulative impacts on the morphological features and elements of the study

area.


During the construction phase any small cumulative effect is estimated to occur only in

case the time period of execution of the technical works for the construction of the pro-

posed wind farms coincides with construction time of the wind farms of other investors as

located in the area and described in section 3.6 “Association of the project with other pro-

jects and activities ”.

Even if this is the case, any cumulative impacts will stay within acceptable limits since

they will be timed (construction phase) and spatially localized (works construction sites). It

is clarified that any measures against the impacts, stipulated by the licencing authority and

the consulting services during the environmental licencing of the projects (proposed wind

farms and wind farms of other investors) will contribute even more to the minimization of

the cumulative impacts on the landscape.

As regards the operation phase, the conclusive evaluation leads to following results:

South-eastern Evia has been qualified as a Wind Capacity Priority Area due to its high

wind energy potential and it has concentrated a considerable number of wind farms or ap-

plications for the installation of wind farms. The number of the wind farms which have

been installed have evidently altered the landscape of the area, without this entailing nec-

essarily the alteration of the landscape features. The addition of the proposed wind farms

and hence of the projects’s wind turbines will not burden the already differentiated land-

scape of the study area since the Group of Companies has taken into consideration all the

criteria and the opinions of the competent authorities regarding the morphological features

if the wider study area.

It should certainly be mentioned at this point that if the terms and limitations stipulated by

the Special Framework for Spatial Planning & Sustainable Development for RES (* the

proposed investment is compatible with the criteria of landscapes which are stipulated by

the Joint Ministerial Decision of the Special Framework for Spatial Planning & Sustainable

Development for RES) are taken into consideration (* this applies to the proposed project

and all other wind farms), the cumulative effect of all wind farms (proposed and rest of

wind farms) will remain at the minimum possible level.

77..11..33 GGeeoollooggiiccaall ,, tteeccttoonniicc aanndd ssooii ll ffeeaattuurreess

The project under study will need the configuration works of wind turbines’ assembly and



installation sites. Τhe specific installation fields of the wind turbines will be flat, smooth

surfaces with small pitch. Additionally the construction and operation of the wind farms

under study will require road construction works (mostly improvement of the existing road

network and construction of new road parts), as well as works for the connection with

electric power network. Therefore for the assessment and evaluation of the environmental

impacts on the soil, geological and tectonic features all works which have to be executed

in the area were taken into consideration (foundation of wind turbines, construction works

for access and internal roads, works for connection with the electric power network) for

the implementation of the investment. Specifically:


Small alterations may be visible during the construction phase since certain parts of the

soil will be excavated but soon they will be reversible in their biggest part. The localized, in

most cases necessary, clearing of the vegetation is not expected to create erosion of the

soil as it will be quickly reparable. Moreover, the necessary technical works are not ex-

pected to cause geological or tectonic changes.

Supplementary to the above it is pointed out that during the construction phase of the pro-

ject and the execution of the necessary works care will be taken that all necessary inter-

ventions are reduced to the minimum possible level. Especially regarding the road con-

struction works it should be mentioned that the choice of alignments was based on the

one hand in their part on the existing, rural, farm and forest road network for the designa-

tion of the entrances to the wind farm installation polygon and on the other hand on the

soil morphology in order to avoid large interventions in the soil.

As regards the mass haul balance it is important to be mentioned that upon selection of

the proper combinations of horizontal and vertical alignment section the absolute earth

mass balance was achieved at study level so that in all wind farms, all roads (main access

and internal roads) are autonomous as regards earth masses.

As is also shown in the produced mass haul diagrams the minimization of earthmoving

was aimed and achieved so that the roads are constructed, in their biggest part, with

composite profile and transportation of excavation material for the construction of em-

bankments is almost mitigated. An exception to the above are areas with very steep gra-

dients, where the road is constructed with section in full trench for obvious reasons of sta-

bility; again the minimization of transfers was aimed for.

In case of failure of the earth mass balance during the construction because of the soil

condition, any remaining excavation material will either, if suitable, be crushed for the pro-

duction of gravel to meet the needs of road structure works, or deposited in the site of the

wind turbines or other suitable places at the discretion of the supervising engineer.



Finally, the required, based on the premeasurements, total quantity of approximately

32.000 m3 rocky material suitable to be crushed for the needs of road pavement (layers of

sub-base and base), will be saved from remaining suitable excavation material either from

the roads or the wind turbines assembly fields and will be used after process with mobile

crushing plants.


During the operation phase of the project there are not expected any worth mentioning

impacts on the soil and subsoil, the geological rock arrangement and the topography of

the area, nor on the existing tectonic features. The operation of the project does not hide

any hazards for the soil, the tectonic or the geology of the study area and the wider area.


Any small cumulative effect –mostly on soil features– is estimated to occur only in case

the time period of execution of the technical works for the construction of the proposed

wind farms coincides with construction time of the wind farms of other inves-

tors/companies. Even if this is the case, any cumulative impacts on the soil will stay within

acceptable limits since they will be timed (construction phase) and spatially localized

(works construction sites). The cumulative impact on soil features from all proposed wind

farms will be small and within the acceptable limits. However important issues are not ex-

pected to occur.

It is clarified that the measures addressing the impacts, which will be stipulated by the li-

cencing authority and the consulting services during the environmental licencing of the

projects regarding all wind farms will contribute even more to the minimization of the cu-

mulative impacts.


77..22..11 FFlloorraa,, vveeggeettaatt iioonn,, hhaabbii ttaattss

√√ HHaabbiittaattss -- VVeeggeettaattiioonn

As regards the habitats of the area it can be mentioned that the impact of the project is not

significant according to the existing bibliographic references, the performed survey in the

framework of this Environmental Impact Assessment and the subsequent processing of

the data which derived therefrom. The only impact of the works on habitats is noted gen-

erally in the loss of area due to clearings for the project construction needs. There do not

arise, thus, any other impacts which might occur at projects of another type (alteration of

abiotic environment, alteration of ecosystemic structure and dynamic, alteration of

ecosystemic functions, etc).



The impacts are limited to the construction phase of the project and according to the cal-

culations (see section about the impact assessment based on art. 6 of the Directive

92/43/EEC) the loss of area is not significant. The loss of area as regards SCI ranges

from very low levels of 0% for certain types to a reduction of 0,88% and 0,49% for the

types 4090 (Endemic oro-Mediterranean heaths with gorse) and 5420 (Sarcopoterium spinosum phryganas) respectively, which are the habitats with the biggest losses as re-

gards SCI. The rest of the habitats in the area have smaller to zero losses.

It should be mentioned, furthermore, that the losses in forest habitats of the area are neg-

ligible and are the following

- 92C0: Platanus orientalis and Liquidambar orientalis (Platanion orientalis) forests.

Loss 2,24 ha / 0,09% of the habitat area in the SCI.

- 934A: Quercus coccifera forests. Loss 0,17 ha / 0,01% of the habitat area in the SCI.

- 9340: Quercus ilex and Quercus rotundifolia forests. Loss 1,83 ha / 0,28% of the habi-

tat area in the SCI.

The aforementioned losses do not constitute an important impact on the forest vegetation.

Hence they do not require special compensating measures.

Upon completion of the construction of the project and during its operation phase no fur-

ther impacts are expected. According to the total loss of area which was calculated for all

wind farms, there will be no synergistic effects.

As regards habitat *6220 which is qualified as a priority habitat pursuant to the Directive

92/43/EEC, as established by the programme of the “Mapping of Habitat types” of the

Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works (already Ministry of En-

vironment, Energy and Climate Change), as well as by the field survey of the present EIA

and as described in section 6.3.5 “Flora-Fauna-Habitats”, it is not found in the study area.

Consequently impacts thereon will not be dealt with.

According to the above it is assessed that in general the impact of the project on the

habitats of the area is not considered significant .

√√ FFlloorraa

The impacts of the project on the flora of the area occur during the construction phase and

refer to the necessary localized clearings for the installation of the project (main project,

accompanying supporting infrastructure).

Below follows in table-form the assessment of the impact level of the project on important

species of flora which were recorded in the installation sites of the proposed Wind Farms.

The table was based on: a) the existing bibliographic data, b) the executed extensive field



study.

The assessment of the impact level is based on the one hand on the population status of

the various species in the study area and on the other hand on their wider distribution in

Greece. In general they are species with big populations and relatively wide distribution in

land of Greece.

The assessment categories of the impact level which are used and depicted for each spe-

cies in relation with the installation of each wind farm in the study area are the following:

a) no impact (-), b) small impact (+) and c) medium impact (++), d) significant impact

(+++).

Table 39: Impact probability of the proposed project.

Wind Farm Interesting plant species Impact probability

D1

Cirsium hypopsilum Leontodon graecus

Cerastium candidissimum Thlaspi bulbosum Euphorbia deflexa Ebenus sibthorpii

Centaurea raphanina subsp. mixta Crepis hellenica subsp. hellenica

Silene pentelica Fritillaria ehrhartii

Orchis boryi

+ - + + +

++ + - + + +

D2 Viola euboea

Scorzonera crocifolia Crocus sieberi subsp. atticus

+ + +

D3

Viola euboea Scorzonera crocifolia

Crocus sieberi subsp. atticus Centaurea raphanina subsp. mixta Crepis hellenica subsp. hellenica

Leontodon graecus Cerastium candidissimum

Asperula rigidula Stachys euboica

+ + - - - - - + +

D4


Scorzonera crocifolia Crocus sieberi subsp. atticus

- - - +

D5 Centaurea raphanina subsp. mixta Crepis hellenica subsp. hellenica

- -

D6 Centaurea raphanina subsp. mixta Crepis hellenica subsp. hellenica

- -

D7

Leontodon graecus Cerastium candidissimum

Vicia pinetorum Sideritis euboea Asperula rigidula Stachys euboica


Orchis boryi

- - + + + + - - +



Wind Farm Interesting plant species Impact probability

D8 Scorzonera crocifolia

Crocus sieberi subsp. atticus + +

The next table shows the number of species and the respective impact level per wind

farm.

Table 40: Number of flora species with different impact levels per Wind Farm.

Wind Farm Number of

species without impact

Number of species with small impact

Number of species with

medium impact

Number of species with

significant im-pact

D1 2 8 1 - D2 - 3 - - D3 5 4 - - D4 3 1 - - D5 2 - - - D6 2 - - - D7 6 5 - - D8 2 2 - -

It derives from the above that for the majority of species zero or small impact is ex-

pected, while significant impacts are not expected for any species .

The medium impact which is mentioned for Ebenus sibthorpii refers to its rarity and to its

limited geographical distribution (endemic of south-eastern Greece). Nevertheless, the

species is mainly related with the habitat type 4090, which was not recorded on the field of

D1. Consequently the planned interventions may affect individuals of the species in D1

Wind Farm; despite this the total population in the SCI is not expected to face any further

problems.

There are no further impacts expected upon completion of the construction of the project

and during its operation phase.

Finally, based on the existing data there are no synergistic impacts on the flora in the

intervention locations of the project under study.

77..22..22 FFaauunnaa

In the analyzing chapter we focused on the species which may be observed in the Wind

Farm installations sites based on their ecology and their potential presence in the area of

southern Evia.

Regarding, thus, some of the important species of fauna of the area (qualified species of

the specific SCI) which are found only in the sea (eg. Μediterranean monk seal Monachus

monachus, Turtle Caretta caretta) or in freshwater systems and habitats directly related to

those (eg. European Otter Lutra lutra, Balkan Terrapin Mauremys rivulata and European

pond turtle Emys orbicularis) it is estimated that they will not suffer from the particular lo-



cation because they are not observed in the study area. Τhe same applies also for other

species of the study area (besides the qualified species of the SCI) like the Water snake

Natrix natrix and Dice snake Natrix tessellata, the Fire salamander Salamandra

salamandra, Common toad Bufo bufo, Tree frog Hyla arborea etc.

Beyond these, the majority of mammals and reptiles of the study area might (or can based

on their ecology) be observed also in the works area. Hence, regarding the probable im-

pacts on those during the construction and the operation phase:

During the construction phase of the project there have been planned interventions on

the soil mainly for the construction of new access roads and the foundation of wind tur-

bines.

Subsequently we do not expect significant impacts during the construction phase for the 2

most important species of the area (qualified species of SCI) which may be observed in

the works area based on their ecology (Hermann’s tortoise Eurotestudo hermanni and

Four-lined snake Elaphe quatuorlineata) since the loss of their habitats due to the project

construction (fields and roads) as a percentage of the total area in the borders of the par-

ticular Site of Community Importance is very small (smaller than 1%) .

Τhe same applies for the rest of the mammals and reptiles which might be observed in the

works area. The clearance of the vegetation is not expected, thus, to cause significant im-

pacts on any species of fauna. Moreover, the impacts that might be caused from the dis-

turbance due to increased human presence in the area from the new roads which are

constructed and which offer access to a bigger number of visitors.

As regards the operation phase of the project: impacts are not expected on any species

of fauna due to the disturbance (caused by the operation) since no similar results are re-

ferred to in the international bibliography (eg. European Commission 2010, de Lucas et al.

2005). As regards the impacts of collisions and generally killings of bats during the opera-

tion phase, very small impacts are expected since most bats seem to “resort” for hunting

to the numerous ravines, gullies and gorges considering the abundance of insects in such

areas and the maintenance of the water during the whole year in many of them.

Consequently, the operation of the project is not hazardous for the species of fauna

in the study area.

Cumulative impacts of the project under study with the existing wind farms on the species

of fauna are not found.

77..22..33 AAvvii ffaauunnaa

The impacts from collisions refer to the operation phase of the project, impacts from dis-



turbances/barriers refer to the construction and operation phase while impacts from the

loss of habitats refer only to the construction phase. The analysis of the censuses and the

impacts on the important bird species of the area are laid out in detail in chapter 9 of the

Issue of the Special Ornithological Assessment. In this issue are presented the analysis

and evaluation based on the extended field censuses during the period 2006-2010. More

specifically, the censuses included 63 days of field censuses during which totally 411 cen-

sus hours were completed. The particular hours refer to censuses from the selected view

locations while additional field hours were covered for the census of nocturnal species.

A summary of the particular evaluation is presented below.

The high peaks around the summit of Ochi and the area near Kafireas seem to be quite

remarkable for important bird species of the area while the presence of important species

is less intense in the southern and the eastern parts of the proposed project.

In Table 41, the significance of the impacts per species and WF is depicted. As expected,

since the project is not located next to a wetland system (where probably big concentra-

tions in relatively small spaces would be found), the significance of the impacts is low

or very low for the majority of species in the area . The ecology, the density and the

frequency of censuses of the most species (Passeriformes and passing birds of prey)

support the above conclusion. Species considerably sensitive to the impacts of WFs

were not observed (eg. Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos, Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus or

species of the genus Milvus spp.).

Additionally, a review of the international bibliography shows that the majority of birds

movements takes place outside the “risk zone”, while birds perceive and avoid ener-

getically the WTs. Moreover the mortality from collisions with WTs is relatively low, not

only as an absolute value but also in relation with other anthropogenic mortality sources.

Any disturbance and displacement, up to date, has been better documented in aquatic

species at wintering or stop-overs during migration, while impacts from barrier effects refer

to large WFs (dozens of kilometres long) which cause important deviations in the flyways

of the birds, something which is not the case in the project under study .

This means, (considering that the probability of significant impacts is in general very low),

that the environmental assessment and evaluation should focus on these cases where

this probability is important to be reviewed:

1. as regards rare or threatened species with small populations , especially birds of

prey which are more sensitive due to their biology (k strategy: few offspring are pro-

duced, low mortality, long life expectancy). In these cases even a small additional

mortality can be crucial. Hence, while for other species (eg Passeriformes) the loss

of a couple has practically negligible impacts on the local population, for birds of

prey (and especially for species with small populations) the same loss might be cru-



cial for the local population (especially if these individuals are reproductively ma-

ture). Τhe above (bigger sensitivity because of biology) is the case for 3 species in

this study: the Bonelli's Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus), the Short-toed Snake Eagle

(Circaetus gallicus) and the Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) (see also below). For

all 3 species the significance of impacts (based on the analysis in some cases from

collisions or disturbances was considered medium .

2. when this probability increases either due to the high density of the involved

bird populations (eg. Wetlands or very important migratory passages), or due to

the big size of the project (eg. WFs which cover large surfaces like in Altamont).

Τhe above do not apply in the project under study (medium or small size since the

WT are spread in “groups”, Canadian Wildlife Service 2006). Migration in the area

(according to censuses during the period 2006-2010) was quite important as regards

the number of species but less important as regards numbers (according to the fre-

quency of censuses). Additionally, the species which migrate at night generally fly in

bigger hights than those developed in WFs.

The construction of the new road network, is not expected to have several impacts, while

it is positive that the interconnection of the WTs with the medium voltage network is

planned as an underground construction. Furthermore WFs can be qualified as medium or

small sized (Canadian Wildlife Service 2006, since the WTs and the WFs are scattered in

a large surface) and the significant decrease of the number of WTs (according to the Pre-

liminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation) compared to the initial planning (by 20

WTs for both groups of companies) and the fact the medium voltage network will be con-

structed as an underground network, “extenuates” to a great extent any impacts of the

project especially on WFs where increased activity of important species is found (D1-D2-

D7).

This decrease (and the following spacing) was big for D1 WF and D2 WF (Kathara-

Anatoli, decrease by 8 WTs), which is very important since in this area frequent flights of

the most important species (the Bonelli's Eagle, the Short-toed Snake Eagle) are ob-

served. It is worth mentioning that the cutbacks on WTs, contribute to a great extent to the

decrease of the impacts on the avifauna since they were removed from crucial for the avi-

fauna (birds of prey) locations on the ridges. This way the probability of collision is signifi-

cantly reduced for important species which use the ridges, and at the same time a re-

markable reduction of the impacts of disturbance and habitat loss (for species which may

nest in the close area) is observed.

The importance of the impacts from the direct loss of habitats was evaluated in all cases

as low or very low because the loss of habitats for the sum of the species (due to the

construction of the fields and the new road network) does not cover a large area (com-

pared to the total area occupied by the habitats in the SCI) and a clearing of important surfaces and areas for the conservation of the populations of the species has not been



ascertained. Furthermore regarding the impacts of disturbance there were not found any

nests for the most important species (Bonelli's Eagle Hieraaetus fasciatus, Short-toed

Snake Eagle Circaetus gallicus and Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo bubo) within the displace-

ment radius (approximately 300-600m according to bibliography). As regards the impacts

from collisions, the census frequency of the species in the area is usually low and there-

fore the significance of the impacts was considered as low or medium.

In some cases the medium significance of impacts for 3 species occurs: The Eurasian

Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo), the Bonelli's Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus) and the Short-toed

Snake Eagle (Circaetus gallicus).

As regards the significance of the impacts on the Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) it

should be noted that:

• The area was included in the SPAs, with qualification species the Eurasian Eagle

Owl and according to older data 13 couples are mentioned for the specific SPA (7

couples within the study area – in the census zone of the 16 WFs of both groups of

companies).

• According to the censuses during the period 2006-2010, the species was found in

3 areas which are remote from each other and so it is deemed that there are 3

couples.

• The significance of the impacts was considered as medium for the WMs for which

a recent (2006-2010) report regarding the presence of the Eurasian Eagle Owl ex-

ists (D2 Anatoli, D3 Spilia, D5 Platanistos).

• Additionally, based on the above (SPA qualification type, census difficulties of spe-

cies) and on the principle of prevention, the significance of the impacts was con-

sidered as potentially medium also for the WFs for which an older report regarding

the presence of the Eurasian Eagle Owl (D1 Kathara, D4 Μilia, D7 Κerasia) exists.

As regards the Bonelli's Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus): the species is characterized by

high ecological sensitivity while the Greek population counts 85-105 couples (Birdlife In-

ternational 2004). It is mentioned that that 2-3 couples nest in the wider study area (2

nesting places were recorded). Τhe 2 couples were observed in a large distance from the

planned WFs. It was recorded that the 3rd couple nests north from the location Kathara-

Anatoli while the area where it moves coincides to a great extent with the part of the D1

WF and D2 WF, where the arrangement is sparse (after the reduction of the installed WTs

according to the Preliminary Environmental Assessment & Evaluation). For this reason the

significance of the impacts of collisions and disturbance/barrier is assessed as medium

for these 2 WFs.

As regards the Short-toed Snake Eagle (Circaetus gallicus): this species is characterized

by high ecological sensitivity while the Greek population counts 300-500 couples (Birdlife

International 2004). In the wider study area nest 3-4 couples. Τhe 2 couples were ob-

served in a medium frequency close to the planned D1-D2 WFs and D7 WF and therefore



the significance of the impacts (collisions and disturbance) was assessed as medium for

these 3 WFs.

Regarding these 3 species, it is assessed that the particular impacts are adequately ad-

dressed to with the proposed countermeasures which are mentioned in the next chapter.



Table 41: Summary of the significance of each examined impact on important species, for the examined WF

(VL: Very low, L: Low, Μ: Μedium, H: High).

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

itat

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

itat

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

itat

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

ita

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

itat

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

itat

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

itat

Dis

turb

/bar

rier

Col

lisio

n

Hab

itat

Accipiter brevipes L L VL L L VL L L VL

Anthus campestris VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL

Bubo bubo Μ Μ L Μ Μ L Μ Μ L Μ Μ L Μ Μ L Μ Μ L

Caprimulgus europaeus

L L VL L L VL

Circaetus gallicus Μ Μ VL Μ Μ VL L L VL L L VL L L VL L L VL Μ Μ VL L L VL

Circus aeruginosus L VL VL L VL VL L VL VL L VL VL L VL VL L VL VL

Circus cyaneus L L VL L L VL L L VL

Circus macrourus L L VL L L VL

Circus pygargus L L VL L L VL L L VL L L VL

Emberiza caesia L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L

Falco eleonorae L L VL L L VL L L VL L L VL L L VL L L VL L L VL L L VL

Falco naumanni L VL VL L VL VL

Falco peregrinus L L VL L L VL

Falco vespertinus L L VL L L VL L L VL

Hieraaetus fasciatus

Μ Μ VL Μ Μ VL L L VL

Lanius collurio VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL

Lanius minor VL VL VL

Lullula arborea VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL

Pandion haliaetus L L VL L L VL L L VL

Pernis apivorus L L VL L L VL



Finally as regards the synergistic effects the following applies:

Considered were the populations of the important birds in the wider study area while it

was deemed that any cumulative impacts may originate from the planned WFs which are

being examined in this study, the WFs in the wider study area with generation licence or

installation licence, as they are presented in Table 8 (of the issue of the Special Ornitho-

logical Assessment). In addition the accompanying supporting infrastructure of the WFs

under study (new road network and medium voltage network) were taken inot considera-

tion). The analysis of the synergistic effects is laid out in chapter 9.3 of the issue of the

Special Ornithological Assessment. The synergistic effects were assessed as low or very

low for the majority of species with the exception of the Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo),

the Bonelli's Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus) and the Short-toed Snake Eagle (Circaetus

gallicus) (synergistic impacts of medium significance attributable to collisions or disturb-

ance/barriers). It is assessed that the particular impacts are adequately addressed to by

the proposed countermeasures which are mentioned in the next chapter.

77..33 IImmppaacctt aasssseessssmmeenntt ppuurrssuuaanntt ttoo aarrtt iicc llee 66 ooff tthhee DDiirreecctt iivvee 9922//4433//EEEECC

77..33..11 IInntt rroodduucctt iioonn

This paragraph presents an analysis of the methodology which is required for the as-

sessment of impacts on projects or plans which are not directly connected with the man-

agement of a site which belongs to the network Natura 2000, pursuant to article 6 of the

Directive 92/43/EEC.

The Directive of Habitats 92/43/EEC supplementing the Directive of Birds 79/409/EEC

(codified with 2009/147/EC) are the two most important Directives which has been trans-

posed to the National Legislation and which refer to the protection of areas belonging to

the Network Natura 2000 and to the protection of the species and their habitats. According

to the aforementioned European Directives specific areas which are characterized by re-

markable natural features are designated for protection on the basis of specific criteria.

These areas are either Special Protection Areas [(SPA) –referring to birds] or suggested

Sites of Community Importance [(SCI) – referring to habitats], which upon completion of

their assessment by the European Committee will be designated by the Member-States

as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC).

The importance of interpretation of article 6 lays in the fact that it is the only part of the di-

rective which defines the relation of the conservation of nature with land use. Article 6 in-

cludes three basic group provisions. Paragraph 1 provides for the designation of the nec-

essary conservation measures (regulatory, administrative or contractual) and focuses on

proactive interventions. Paragraph 2 focuses on the precautionary principle and includes

provisions to avoid the degradation of habitats and the significant disturbance of the spe-



cies. Finally paragraphs 3 and 4 present several safeguarding measures which refer to

projects or plans which might affect significantly the areas of Natura 2000.

Definitions

“Natural habitat types of Community importance”: habitats which on the Euro-

pean territory of the member states of the Directive:

- are in danger of disappearance in their natural range or

- have a small natural range following their regression or by reason of their intrinsi-

cally restricted area or

- present outstanding examples of typical characteristics of one or more of the nine

following biogeographical regions: Alpine, Atlantic, Black Sea, Boreal, Continen-

tal, Macaronesian, Mediterranean, Pannonian and Steppic.

“Priority natural habitat types”: natural habitat types in danger of disappearance,

from the European territory of the member states of the Directive and for the conser-

vation of which the Community has particular responsibility in view of the proportion of

their natural range which falls within the territory referred to in Article 2; these priority

natural habitat types are indicated by an asterisk (*) in Annex I of the Directive

“Conservation status of a natural habitat”: means the sum of the influences act-

ing on a natural habitat and its typical species that may affect its long-term natural

distribution, structure and functions as well as the long-term survival of its typical spe-

cies within the European territory of the Member States of the Directive. The “conser-

vation status” of a natural habitat is considered “favourable” when:

- its natural range and areas it covers within that range are stable or increasing

and

- the specific structure and functions which are necessary for its long-term mainte-

nance exist and are likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future, and

- the conservation status of its typical species is considered favourable.

“Species of Community importance”: species which, within the European territory

of the member States of the Directive are:

- endangered, except those species whose natural range is marginal in that terri-

tory and which are not endangered or vulnerable in the western palearctic region;

or

- vulnerable, i.e. believed likely to move into the endangered category in the near

future if the causal factors continue operating; or



- rare, i.e. with small populations that are not at present endangered or vulnerable,

but are at risk. The species are located within restricted geographical areas or

are thinly scattered over a more extensive range; or

- endemic and requiring particular attention by reason of the specific nature of their

habitat and/or the potential impact of their exploitation on their habitat and/or the

potential impact of their exploitation on their conservation status.

Such species are listed or may be listed in Annex II and/or Annex IV or V;

“Priority species”: species referred to the first sub-case of the paragraph above for

the conservation of which the Community has particular responsibility in view of the

proportion of their natural range which falls within the territory referred to in Article 2;

these priority species are indicated by an asterisk (*) in Annex II;

“Conservation status of a species”: the sum of the influences acting on the spe-

cies concerned that may affect the long-term distribution and abundance of its popu-

lations within the European territory of the Member State of the Directive;

The conservation status will be taken as ‘favourable’ when

- population dynamics data on the species concerned indicate that it is maintaining

itself on a long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats, and

- the natural range of the species is neither being reduced nor is likely to be re-

duced for the foreseeable future, and

- there is, and will probably continue to be, a sufficiently large habitat to maintain

its populations on a long-term basis;

77..33..22 AAnnaallyyssiiss ooff aarr tt iiccllee 66 ooff tthhee DDiirreecctt iivvee

Paragraph 1 of article 6 mentions that “For special areas of conservation, Member States

shall establish the necessary conservation measures involving, if need be, appropriate

management plans specifically designed for the sites or integrated into other development

plans, and appropriate statutory, administrative or contractual measures which correspond

to the ecological requirements of the natural habitat types in Annex I and the species in

Annex II present on the sites”.

Paragraph 2 of article 6 mentions that “Member States shall take appropriate steps to

avoid, in the special areas of conservation, the deterioration of natural habitats and the

habitats of species as well as disturbance of the species for which the areas have been

designated, in so far as such disturbance could be significant in relation to the objectives

of this Directive”.



The disturbances of the species (in order to be significant) have impacts on the conserva-

tion status of the species. Any disturbance or/and degradation must be evaluated on the

basis of the conservation concept and keeping at all times in mind that according to article

3 par. 1 the network comprises regions and allows the conservation of the relevant natural

habitats and the habitat species at a satisfactory conservation status in the whole range of

their natural distribution.

Paragraph 3 of article 6 mentions: “Any plan or project not directly connected with or nec-

essary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either

individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate

assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site's conservation objectives. In

the light of the conclusions of the assessment of the implications for the site and subject to

the provisions of paragraph 4, the competent national authorities shall agree to the plan or

project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site

concerned and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general public.”

Paragraph 4 of article 6 mentions: “If, in spite of a negative assessment of the implica-

tions for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must never-

theless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those

of a social or economic nature, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures

necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. It shall inform

the Commission of the compensatory measures adopted.

Where the site concerned hosts a priority natural habitat type and/or a priority species, the

only considerations which may be raised are those relating to human health or public

safety, to beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment or, further to

an opinion from the Commission, to other imperative reasons of overriding public interest.”

Paragraphs 3 (and 4) of article 6 designate the conditions under which the implementation

of plans or projects may be allowed. The preliminary assessment of the implications of the

plan or project on the area, which is referred in paragraph 3 of article 6 helps the compe-

tent national authorities to reach conclusions regarding the planned incentives as to the

integrity of the particular area. If these conclusions are positive, in the sense that there is

a certainty at considerable level that this incentive will not influence the area, the compe-

tent authorities can give their consent for the plan or project.

If the conclusions are negative and only then, the precautionary principle must be imple-

mented and the procedure under paragraph 4 of article 6 must be followed.

77..33..33 GGeenneerraall ddii rreecctt iioonnss ffoorr tthhee ccoonnff iigguurraatt iioonn ooff mmeetthhooddoollooggyy

Upon summarizing the above and according to the interpretative guidance of the Directive

[Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 200 sites: Methodological



guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC

(2001) & Management of the areas of the Network Natura 2000: Provisions of article 6 of

the directive 92/43/EEC for habitats (2000)] the impact assessment must follow 4 stages.

- Stage 1 - Screening : Identifies the likely impacts upon a Natura 200 site of a project

or plan, either alone or in combination with other projects or plans, and considers

whether these impacts are likely to be significant;

- Stage 2 - Appropriate Assessment : Consideration of the impact on the integrity of

the Natura 2000 site of the project or plan, either alone or in combination with other

projects or plans, with respect to the site’s structure and function and its conservation

objectives. Additionally, where there are adverse impacts, an assessment of the po-

tential mitigation of those impacts;

- Stage 3 – Assessment of alternative solutions : examines alternative ways of

achieving the objectives of the project or plan that avoid adverse impacts on the in-

tegrity of the Natura 2000 site;

- Stage 4 – Assessment where no alternative solutions exist and where adverse impacts remain : assessment of compensatory measures where, in the light of an

assessment of imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI), it is deemed

that the project or plan should proceed (it is important to note that this guidance does

not deal with the assessment of imperative reasons of overriding public interest).

According to article 6 of the Directive 92/43/EEC, the assessment procedures of plans or

projects which might influence Natura 2000 sites (SCI) have to guarantee full review of all

elements which contribute to the integrity of the area and to the overall consistency of

the network , not only in the designation framework of the starting conditions but also dur-

ing identification stages of the potential impacts, the mitigation measures and impacts

which remain during the operation of the project.

The “integrity of an area” refers to its conservation objectives , according to article 6,

par. 3 of the Directive 92/43/EEC, the basis for the designation of which (the conservation

objectives) are all habitat types and habitat species which are included in Annexes I and II

respectively, while they can be designated through a management plan. It should also be

mentioned that the rest of habitat types and other important species of flora and fauna

(beyond the Annexes of the Directive 92/43/EEC) have to be recorded but these elements

do not play any role in the designation of the conservation objectives of SCI (a Natura

2000 site) (article 6, paragraph 3 of the Directive 92/43/EEC).

77..33..44 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy ccoonnff iigguurraatt iioonn ffoorr tthhee ssttuuddyy aarreeaa

For the qualification of the biological integrity and the impact assessment the best possi-

ble indicators have to be used. As evaluation indicator in the project under study, due to

its nature and extent of proposed interventions, is used the loss of area in the form of a



percentual loss. Since the particular choice is done for the proposed project (main project,

accompanying supporting infrastructure) there are no bibliographical indications that other

changes arise in the biotic and abiotic features of an area, like the structure and the dy-

namics of the habitats, the ecosystemic changes of the site, the restoration possibility of a

habitat in the SCI, the water quality, the soil quality etc.

For the quantitative impact assessment as regards the parameter of the area threshold

reference values are used. These values are defined upon a basic research for each

habitat type or species. The Directive 92/43/EEC, and its interpretative documents, do not

mention specific threshold values for each element or specific calculation methods of the-

se values. It is therefore deemed useful to compare the results of the calculation of this

study with the results of research studies of the international bibliography and to use as a

crucial limit the percentual reduction of 2% in the area of each habitat and the range of

each species under study.

It should be noted that in the explanatory guidance of the European Committee for the

Assessment of the Conservation Status, the component “Area” is used as a limit for the

change of the Conservation Status from “Favourable” to “Unfavourable” in a percentage of

10% at the level of a Member State. It is, thus, evident that proportionally for the SCI, the

limit set in this study gives excessively safe results.

A Special Environmental Assessment (1998) has been prepared for the study area; there-

fore as conservation objectives are considered the elements of the SCI that have to

be protected as they have been described in Annexes I (habitats) and II (species) of

the Standard Data Form and are included in the Special Environmental Assess-

ment. As updated data are considered the data of the Ministry for the Environment,

Physical Planning and Public Works (Study for “Mapping of habitat Types” which

was prepared after the completion of the Special Environmental Study preparation)

and the data which derived from the field survey in the framework of this Environ-


In the SCI GR2420001, which is a study area of this EIA, 9 habitat types are found (Annex

I of the 92/43/EEC and Greek types), no species of flora of Annex II and 8 species of

fauna of Annex II of the Directive 92/43/EEC. Hence the survey of this chapter refers only

to the habitat types and the fauna.

Τhe digital data of the spatial expansion of the habitat types, were entered in the mapping

software ArcMap 9.3 along with the mapping data of the project for the execution of the

quantitative calculation if the loss of area. The loss of area in the installation fields of the

Wind Farms was calculated on the basis of the mapping by the study group herein, while

the calculation of the loss outside the fields but within the SCI (accompanying supporting

infrastructure) was performed with the use of data from the Mapping of Habitat Types of



the Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works. The loss caused

eventually by the project is the sum of the loss from the construction of each wind turbine

and the loss from the new road construction works.

77..33..55 IImmppaacctt AAsssseessssmmeenntt

77..33..55..11 AAsssseessssmmeenntt ooff iinnddiiccaattoorr ffoorr lloossss ooff aarreeaa

According to the technical data of the project, the loss around each wind turbine will be a

square area of 50 m x 50 m, i.e. 2.500 sqm. For our assessment to be more safe it was

decided that the clearance area will be a circle with a radius of 35,36 m. around the instal-

lation position of the WTs. The circle with a radius of 35,36 m has a diameter of ~ 70 m

(equal with the diagonal of the square 50 m x 50 m). The calculated area leaves a margin

for potential small-scale accompanying works (stations etc). Eventually the loss of area in

this study will be approximately 4.000 sqm per WT (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Loss of area according to the technical specifications and the assessment model which was eventually used in this study.

Next and upon isolation of the cyclical areas which will be cleared, the area which will be

lost per WT was calculated.

Moreover the loss of area caused by the alignment of a new road network was calculated.

Based on the data, the roads to be constructed will be 5 m wide. For the quantitative cal-

culation of the losses of vegetation, the digital data were calculated with the addition of a

zone of 2,5 m on each side of the road (i.e. 10 m total width for calculation purposes)

which corresponds to the losses caused by clearings or which is not actually burdened (it

will not be cleared or it will be restored in the future), but it will be degraded during the

construction phase and therefore it is included in the total losses. Consequently the cal-

Actual clearing area

Area determined in this study

Windturbine coordinates



culated area is quite bigger than the actual area so that the safest possible results

are produced .

77..33..55..22 HHaabbiittaattss

The following table presents the losses of area of the habitat types on the borders of the

SCI GR2420001.

Table 42: Losses of habitat type areas from the planned project. (Areas in sqm, Mapping of Study Group).

DOMINANT TYPE PER UNIT WF

LOS

S F

RO

M

WT

(ha

)

LOS

S F

RO

M

RO

AD

C

ON

ST

R. (

ha)

TO

TA

L LO

SS

(h

a)

Area in the SCI (ha)

Per

cent

age

%

4090 4090 SCI 0,00 1,06 9,43 1.074,42 0,88

4090x5420 D7 3,55 1,44

D8 2,18 1,19

5150 5150x5420 D5 0,09 0,00 0,09 318,96 0,03

5340 5340 SCI 0,00 1,86 4,36 1.287,09 0,34

D4 0,12 0,03

5340x5150x5420 D1 0,90 0,87

5340x5420 D5 0,23 0,07

5340x9340 D8 0,00 0,00

D1 0,12 0,17

5340x9340x92C0 D5 0,00 0,00

5420 5420 SCI 0,00 3,54 30,79 6.238,19 0,49

D2 0,90 0,93

D3 0,64 0,10

D1 0,00 0,00

D4 2,24 0,35

D5 2,03 0,00

5420x5150 D7 1,10 0,93

D4 0,78 0,21

5420x5340 D2 1,68 0,86

D3 4,42 3,16

D8 0,17 0,20

D1 2,20 4,37

5420x5340x5150 D7 0,00 0,00

8210 8210 D3 0,00 0,00 negligible losses

8210x5420 D4 0,00 0,00

92C0 92C0 SCI 0,00 2,20 2,24 2.424,80 0,09

D7 0,04 0,00

D4 0,00 0,00

924A 924A SCI 0,00 0,13 0,13 42,59 0,31

9340 9340 SCI 0,00 0,90 1,83 646,35 0,28

D2 0,15 0,13



DOMINANT TYPE PER UNIT WF

LOS

S F

RO

M

WT

(ha

)

LOS

S F

RO

M

RO

AD

C

ON

ST

R. (

ha)

TO

TA

L LO

SS

(h

a)

Area in the SCI (ha)

Per

cent

age

%

D3 0,02 0,00

9340x5340 D1 0,10 0,00

D5 0,00 0,00

9340x5420 D4 0,00 0,04

9340x92C0 D3 0,01 0,25

D1 0,18 0,07

9340x934A D2 0,00 0,00

934A 934A SCI 0,00 0,17 0,17 1.274,25 0,01

Note: At the location of the loss of area (WF column), the reference SCI refers to losses of areas due to the construction of the project outside the Wind Farm fields, but within the Site of Community Importance.

Note: SCI = Site of Community Importance

As shown in the above table the loss at SCI level ranges from very low values of 0% for

certain types to a reduction amounting to 0,88% and 0,49% for the types 4090 and 5420

respectively, which are the habitats with the biggest losses as SCI level. The rest of the

habitats in the area have smaller to zero losses.

Taking into consideration the above, it is deemed that the indicator “Loss of area” which

is used in this study for the assessment of the impact on the SCI elements that have to be

protected, as well as the fact that the two habitat types with the biggest losses are 2 of the

most common habitat types in Greece, indicate a non important impact.

It is worth mentioning again that at the review of the indicator for the loss of area

the maximum loss values which arise from the construction of a project of a similar

scale with the proposed project were used, without however the examined ultimate

values to indicate the actual magnitude of the impacts from the construction of the

project which (impacts) are comparatively much smaller than the calculated im-

pacts. In consequence no further research of the habitats in the area is required

pursuant to article 6 of the Directive 92/43/EEC

77..33..55..33 FFlloorraa

Species of flora of the Annex II are not described in the study area. Nothing further is

mentioned about the flora.

77..33..55..44 FFaauunnaa

For the species of Fauna of the SCI which are to be protected and are included in Annex

II of the Directive 92/43/EEC used were the observation data of the study group, the data



from the standard data forms and their association with the habitats were because of the

lack of maps with analytical range and population information. Τheir habitats and the loss

of area thereof constitute an indicator for the preliminary assessment based on article 6 of

the Directive.

In the area are found 8 species of Annex II of the Directive 92/43/EEC. Τhese species are

the following:

Table 43: Species of fauna of Annex II in the SCI GR2420001.

Scientific name Population size Taxon Eurotestudo hermanni Hermann's tortoise R Emys orbicularis European Pond Turtle R Mauremys rivulata Balkan pond turtle R Elaphe quatuorlineata Four-lined snake R Lutra lutra European Otter M Monachus monachus Mediterranean Monk Seal M Lycaena dispar Large Copper (order Lycaenidae) I Lucanus cervus Stag beetle I

Taxon: (A) Amphibian (R) Reptile (M) Mammal (I) Invertebrate.

The conservation status of the above species for the particular area, according to the Natura

inventory sheets (Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works – March

2010), is mentioned as medium-degraded. Based on the sub-criteria for the evaluation

according to article 17 (methodology used for the evaluation in a biogeographical area

scale within the territory of a Member State), the conservation status is also evaluated as

non satisfactory at a scale of Site of Community Importance.

Despite all this, considering the habitats of the 6 out of 8 species of fauna of Annex II in

the SCI GR2420001 and in the same time the loss of habitats caused by the project con-

struction (the percentage of which is very small), we believe that the particular project

does not obstruct the achievement of the objective of a satisfactory conservation

status for the specific species (it does not affect significantly the populations or the

habitats or the conservation prospects) . The total number (eight) of the fauna species

of Annex II is being examined, although the habitats of 2 of them – European Monk Seal

(Monachus monachus) and the European Otter (Lutra lutra) – are not in any way affected

by the project. The following are the detailed results for the species of Annex II:

The Hermann's tortoise ( Eurotestudo hermanni ), is found in areas with low vegetation,

open forests, meadows but also cultivated surfaces. In southern Greece the species is found

according to bibliography almost exclusively on cultivated surfaces (Valakos et al. 2008). The

conservation status in the particular SCI is considered as medium or degraded according to

the standard data forms while according to the 6-year reports (2001-2006) where the con-

servation status of species which are covered by the Directive 92/43/EEC (article 17) is

evaluated, the conservation status of the species at national level (Mediterranean bio-

geographical area) was considered as non satisfactory - inadequate. As non satisfactory –



inadequate is assessed the conservation status of the species also in the study area, on the

basis of an assessment for this study. Τhe species is considered threatened in the near fu-

ture (IUCN 2009) and vulnerable (VU) in the Red Book (2009).Τhe planned WFs and the ac-

companying, supporting infrastructure will result to the loss of a small area of the habitats of

the particular species (compared with the total area of the SCI); consequently the project is

not expected to have any significant impact on the conservation status of the species in

the total area.

The Four-lined snake (Elaphe quatuorlineata ) is a quite common species in the area and

is found in dry, bushy, rocky areas as well as in mountain lopes, coastal meadows, pastures

and wet areas (Dimitropoulos & Ioannidis 2002). The conservation status in the particular

SCI is considered as medium while according to the 6-year reports where the conservation

status of species which are covered by the Directive 92/43/EEC (article 17) is evaluated, the

conservation status of the species at national level (Mediterranean biogeographical area)

was considered as unknown, while the species is considered as threatened in the near future

(IUCN 2009). As non satisfactory – inadequate is assessed the conservation status of the

species also in the study area, on the basis of an assessment for this study. The above in-

formation show that the species is found in a wide range of habitats, and almost the whole

Natura site offers suitable habitats for the species. Consequently the impacts from the

construction of the project cannot be significant for the conservation status of the species.

Regarding the 2 terrapin species: The Balkan pond turtle (Mauremys rivulata ) and the

European pond turtle (Emys orbicularis ) are generally found in wetlands. The Balkan

pond turtle is found in irrigation channels, lakes, ponds, lagoons, swamps, rivers, torrents

etc while the European pond turtle is found in wetlands with thick vegetation (river and

lake banks, swamps, marshes etc). In the wider study area the European Pond turtle has

been observed only in the plain of Karystos while the Balkan pond turtle also in the rivers

Platanistos and Dimosaris. The conservation status in the particular SCI is considered as

medium for both species while according to the 6-year reports where the conservation

status of species which are covered by the Directive 92/43/EEC (article 17) is evaluated, the

conservation status of the European pond turtle at national level (Mediterranean bio-

geographical area) was considered as non satisfactory – inadequate and of the Balkan pond

turtle as unknown. As non satisfactory – inadequate is assessed the conservation status of

the species also in the study area, on the basis of an assessment for this study. Furthermore

the European pond turtle is considered as threatened in the near future (IUCN 2009). The

project under study is not expected to affect the habitats of neither of the 2 species, conse-

quently the impacts will not be significant for their conservation status.

The Mediterranean Monk Seal (Monachus monachus ) is observed only in the sea,

therefore we do not expect any impacts from the location and the operation of the project

in any way.



As regards the European Otter ( Lutra lutra ), it is generally observed near the water, in

rivers, torrents with riparian vegetation etc. The only known population of the European

Otter today is found in the area of Karystos plain, without excluding any presence of it also

in other locations of the wider study area. Τhe species is mentioned as being threatened

in the near future by IUCN. As non satisfactory –inadequate is assessed the conservation

status of the species also in the study area, on the basis of an assessment for this study. Τhe

project under study is not expected to affect the habitats of the species, consequently the

impacts will not be significant for its conservations status.

Τhe species Stag Beetle Lucanus cervus (Stag beetle, Coleoptera, its presence is not

confirmed according to the SEA – Dimopoulos et al. 1998) is observed in holes in old

trees and dead trunks. It is included in Annex II of the Directive 92/43/EEC but also in An-

nex III of the Bern Convention while the conservation status in the particular SCI is char-

acterized as medium. According to the 6-year reports where the conservation status of

species which are covered by the Directive 92/43/EEC (article 17) is evaluated, the conser-

vation status of the species at national level (Mediterranean biogeographical area) was con-

sidered as unknown. As non satisfactory – inadequate is assessed the conservation status of

the species also in the study area, on the basis of an assessment for this study. The project

under study is not expected to affect the habitat of the species, consequently the impacts will

not be significant for its conservations status.

Τhe species Lycaena dispar (Lepidoptera) is considered as threatened in the near future

(IUCN 2009) and vulnerable (VU) in the Red Book while its populations are reduced with

the drainage of small freshwater wetlands. Even small-scale projects (roads, sand extrac-

tions, drainages) near permanent flow streams and freshwater marshes where the hydro-

philic plants Rumex spp. grow, can cause significant impacts on the species. It is included

in Annex II and IV of the Directive 92/43/EEC but also in Annex II of the Bern Convention

while the conservation status in the particular SCI is characterized as medium. According

to the 6-year reports where the conservation status of species which are covered by the Di-

rective 92/43/EEC (article 17) is evaluated, the conservation status of the species at national

level (Mediterranean biogeographical area) was considered as unknown. As non satisfactory

– inadequate is assessed the conservation status of the species also in the study area, on

the basis of an assessment for this study. Τhe project under study is not expected to affect

the habitat of the species, consequently the impacts will not be significant for its conserva-

tions status.

Consequently there are not any adverse impacts for the particular species expected

and thus no further research is required pursuant to article 6 of the Directive

92/43/EEC.



77..33..66 CCoonncclluussiioonnss –– AAddddrreessssiinngg ooff IImmppaaccttss

Summarizing we can say that the impacts of the project:

Are negligible at SCI level and at biogeographical level.

No significant impacts on the habitats of Annex I of the Community Directive 92/43/EEC nor on the Greek habitats are noted.

No adverse impacts on the species of fauna are noted.

The integrity of the SCI and the total coherence of the network Natura 2000 are not disturbed.

Consequently, it is assessed that the overall impacts of the project on the flora and

the habitat types of the area, as well as in the overall area are not significant/worth

mentioning.

Based on these results, it is assessed that no further research is required pursuant

to article 6 of the Directive 92/43/EEC .

77..44 AAnntthhrrooppooggeenniicc eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt

77..44..11 LLaanndd uussee


Based on the digital data of the land cover census included in Corine Land Cover (2000),

the main land use which are found in the project (main project and accompanying support-

ing infrastructure), and specifically the proposed solution which is presented in this EIA,

are those which have been analytically recorded in the land use map which accompanies

this EIA.

As it has already been mentioned, the total number of the works is located on mountain-

ous areas of south-eastern Evia. In these locations land use are limited, also because of

the soil condition which is not suitable for any utilization. As regards the road construction

works and the works for the connection with electric power, it should be mentioned that

these have been planned in a way that they occupy the smallest possible zone of the ex-

isting land use. Therefore, there are not any significant changes on the existing or planned

in the future land use expected.

Any localized impacts consist, mainly, in the alteration of land use in the foundation loca-

tions of the WTs, in the road construction and improvement zone and in the zone where

the connection with the electric power network will be carried out. These impacts, bal-

anced against the benefits, at local but also supralocal level (development and even more

environmental benefits), are within acceptable limits. There are no additional measures

required to be taken.




The operation of the project is not related with impacts or changes on land use. Therefore

no further analysis is necessary.


There does not seem to arise any issue regarding significant synergistic effects of the the

sum of the proposed wind farms. Τhe same applies for the accumulation of the proposed

wind farms with the wind farms of other investors/companies. Significant changes or

changes worth mentioning do not arise. The land use which are found in the wind farms

sites are widely found in the study area and the wider area.

77..44..22 BBuuii ll tt EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt


The direct zone of the works does not contain any built environment elements. The posi-

tions of the wind turbines are mostly located on mountainous surfaces. There are however

several small settlements situated in the wider area of the works. During this phase im-

pacts on the built environment of the area and specifically the neighbouring settlements

are not expected. Works will be executed at distance from the settlements and therefore

changes on them are not expected.

It is important to mention here that according to the performed control of the criteria set by

Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development for Renewable En-

ergy Sources (Issue C), the required distances form the settlement are being observed.

Additionally the requirement for a minimum noise level less than 45 db within the limits of

the above residential activities is ensured (see attached noise contour study).


The operation of the project is not related with any kind of impacts on the built environ-

ment of the study area. There are is no probability of degradation of the built environment

during this phase.


Next are examined the cumulative impacts on the built environment of the study area only

caused by the sum of the wind farms under study and secondarily by the sum of the wind

farms under study and the rest of the wind farms of the other investors/companies. Specif-

ically:

The construction and operation of the proposed wind farms is not expected to cause syn-

ergistic effects on the built environment. Significant impacts of cumulative noise are not

created. Regarding, furthermore, the cumulative impacts on the landscape no special is-



sues arise. As already mentioned in the relative section (Morphological and landscape

features) and considering the results of several controls which were performed, there are

no issues regarding the landscape which would have further impacts on the settlements of

the area.

Τhe above do not change even in the case that the planned wind farms of other inves-

tors/companies are counted in the cumulative impacts.

77..44..33 HHiissttoorr iicc aanndd ccuull ttuurraall eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt


Τhe project does not have adverse impacts on the cultural and historic environment be-

cause such elements do not exist within the direct works zone; nor is it expected to affect

the cultural and historic elements of the wider area. The works execution takes place in

locations and positions where visible historic/cultural elements are not found. Consequent-

ly impacts of the project on the cultural/historic environment of the study area will not be

discussed.

It is important to be mentioned here that according to the performed control of the criteria

set by the Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development for RES,

the required distances from areas and elements of cultural interest are being observed.

Details are presented in ISSUE C (REVIEW OF TERMS/LIMITATIONS OF THE SPECIAL

FRAMEWORK FOR SPATIAL PLANNING & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR RE-

NEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES)) which accompanies this Environmental Impact As-

sessment.


The operation of the proposed wind energy stations is not in any way related with impacts

on the cultural and historic environment of the area.


The cumulative impacts on the historic and cultural environment of the study area of all

the wind farms under study and secondarily all the wind farms under study and the other

planned wind farm stations will be reviewed thereafter. Specifically:

The construction and operation of the wind farms under study are not expected to create

impacts on the history and the culture of the area. Impacts of the technical works which

will be executed during the construction phase or of the project operation are not ex-

pected. It is clarified that visible historic/cultural elements are not found in field locations.

Cumulative impacts of the project under study with the planned wind farm stations of other

investors/companies do equally not arise. Nevertheless, the competent consultative au-



thorities (Ephorates of Antiquities) have to give the necessary directions for preventive

measures which will aim to the protection and conservation of the cultural and historic el-

ements of the wider area.

77..44..44 77..44..44 SSoocciioo--eeccoonnoommiicc eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt –– ΤΤeecchhnniiccaall iinnff rraasstt rruuccttuurree

AA.. CCoonnssttrruuccttiioonn && ooppeerraattiioonn pphhaassee

Population: A change of the human population of the area due to the presence or opera-

tion of the proposed wind farms is not expected. It is pointed out here that the construction

and the operation of the proposed wind farms will offer new jobs in the area and it will

support the local income. One or two technicians will probably be employed at the WFs

from time to time while 2-3 persons with various specialties will be occupied outside the

wind farms.

Productive sectors: Neither during the project construction phase nor during its opera-

tion phase are expected any impacts on the anthropogenic economic activities of the pri-

mary, the secondary and the tertiary sector. Τhe overall project will not cause any signifi-

cant or worth mentioning impacts on the productive sectors of the area.

Residence: The proposed wind farms will require only a small number of people for their

operation. The existing residential conditions are hence not affected.

Transports/traffic: The project does not cause any burdening of the transports or signifi-

cant changes in the vehicular traffic. It will cause a small increase of traffic in the area only

during the period of execution of the constructional works. During the operation phase, the

vehicular traffic will be minimal since the site will be visited only by one or two technicians.

Energy: The project generates and consumes energy. Therefore any use of significant

quantities of fuel or energy is excluded.

Public utility: The project does not require modifications to public utilities services except

for its connection with the electric power network. At this point it is worth mentioning that

the whole project is based on the solution of the interconnection problem given the fact

that the only existing High Voltage Line 150 kV of the PPC in the area (Line Aliveri-

Karystos) is saturated sine the early 2000’s, so that the rich wind energy potential of the

wider area of Kafireas remains unexploited. Therefore the total High Voltage transmission

line of 150 kV and with length approximately 90 km will constitute a pioneering work for

our country, and one of the most important for the interconnection of Wind Farms at inter-

national level.

As is understandable, the project will not cause the need for significant modifications to

services of public utilities sectors such as communication systems, water supply systems,



sewers or septic cesspools, rainwater sewage, solid waste and its disposal, but it will

moreover upgrade the existing electrical interconnection infrastructure between the island

of Evia with the mainland of Greece.

Human health: Human health is not any way affected by the project. It is pointed out that

during the construction phase all necessary regulations for the protection of the personnel

from work accidents will be observed.

Recreation: Τhe project will not cause any impacts on recreation since the Wind turbine

installation sites are not easily accessible but also because they do not have any remark-

able elements which would attract tourists and thus they are not used for recreational pur-

poses.

To the extent that the wind farms are related with the protection of the environment and

the nature, the contribution of the wind energy to the protection of nature and the eco-

development of the wider area can be highlighted. This can offer an attraction to visitors

who would like to be informed about the wind energy and the protection of nature through

information signs at various points.

Τechnical infrastructures: The existing technical infrastructures in the sectors of tele-

communication, water supply, sewerage-drainage and waste collection-disposal are not

expected to be affected from the construction and operation of the project.

ΒΒ.. SSyynneerrggiissttiicc eeffffeeccttss

The construction and operation of the proposed WFs is not expected to cause any ad-

verse impacts on the social and economic features of the area. Τhe same applies also in

the case where to the synergies are also counted the other planned wind farms.

On the other hand it is important to mention that positive synergistic effects on the socio-

economic environment are noted and summarized as follows:

- Significant positive results will occur for employment. The necessary construction

works will be based to a big extent on local personnel while a considerable direct

capital inflow will take place in the area.

- Immediate employment growth on a permanent basis will take place. Every wind

farm station employs at local level approximately 4 workers which mostly come

from the local labor market as in general they do not need to have specialties

which do not exist in the area.

Furthermore there will occur quantitatively bigger indirect results to the economy, through

the knock-on effects and the interbranch relations:

- the operation of RES projects results to the creation of demand due to needs for re-



pairs or/and alterations. The needs which are of constructional character (eg. build-

ings, roads etc) will be almost exclusively addressed by local undertakings and the

same will be the case for a part of the other technical needs (eg. Certain electrical re-

pairs, repairs concerning computers etc).

- The operation of RES projects create on an annual basis a flow of visitors for various

reasons (external maintenance works, supervisions, briefing etc). The visitors will de

facto boost local undertakings (accommodation, restaurants, recreation etc). Addition-

ally the flow of people will lead to the dissemination of information having as medium-

term result that the area becomes known to a broader circle which will offer additional

flows.

The local authorities of the RES projects location areas will also have direct reve-

nues from the operation of the wind energy stations, because of the collection of a

percentage of the revenues. It will be a very considerable amount of money which will

clearly contribute to the improvement of the local financial data and can be used for the

financing of projects and interventions which will enhance the growth and the competitive-

ness level of the area as well as the quality of life of the inhabitants. There will be, thus,

significant compensatory benefits from the utilization of the wind energy potential of the

area.

Henceforth, pursuant to article 7: “Special tax and incentive provisions for house-

hold consumers in areas near RES installations” of the recent law for the accelera-

tion of RES projects (L.3851/2010), direct benefits will also enjoy the household

consumers within the administrative borders of the municipal district in which the

RES stations are going to be installed. This articles mentions: “… An amount up to

1% on the, before the V.A.T. selling price of the electrical energy from RES is passed on

to the holders of a supply license who supply electrical energy to the household consum-

ers of the first degree local authorities in which the RES are installed, with the aim to cred-

it up to the whole of that amount the bills for electrical energy consumption of the house-

hold consumers. Beneficiaries for this credit, are by priority the household consumers

within the administrative borders of the municipal or community district in which the RES

stations are installed, and in turn the household consumers of the remaining municipal or

town districts. The credit is applied to the settlement invoice of every beneficiary, in pro-

portion to the energy he consumed, under the condition that in total the above amount is

not exceeded (…)”.

Finally, two very important elements which are positively assessed for the outcome of the

project and which do not occur only during its construction phase but refer also to its op-

eration phase are the following:

- It is deemed that the project will be accepted by the members of the local society. Alt-

hough this assessment is only an assumption, the nature of the project and the fact that



the project per se does not conflict with any anthropogenic or other economic activity

does not allow an assumption of non acceptability to be probable.

- It has to be pointed out that the contribution of the project is not limited only to local or

regional scale but that its benefits extend also to national level. Moreover projects of

similar nature which are implemented by our country doubtlessly contribute to the crea-

tion of a profile of a country which has special environmental and energy priorities.

77..44..55 AAttmmoosspphheerriicc eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt


The construction of the project is not in any way associated with impacts on the atmos-

pheric environment. Any impacts will be of small scale and will occur only during the con-

struction phase of the project and specifically at the technical works which will be execut-

ed:

Periodically there will be increase of dust and particulates during the construction phase of

the project, but it will not be high nor will it cause any problems to the residents of neigh-

bouring areas due to the winds blowing in the area and the distance of the project from

the existing settlements. Subsequently the impacts of the works on the qualitative features

of the atmospheric environment will be occasional and fully reversible.

Emissions of smoke, aerosol and toxic gases will not be created neither during the con-

struction phase nor during the operation phase of the proposed wind stations.


Τhe project under study does not create in any way emissions of air pollutants into the

atmosphere. On the contrary, the project will contribute to the reduction of emissions due

to the substitution of a part of the electric power which is generated with conventional en-

ergy forms (wind power which is a renewable energy source). Τhe project does not cause

changes to the overall climate of the area since it does not depend or affect other climate

features (temperature, humidity etc).


Τhe sum of the projects (wind farms under study and wind farms of other inves-

tors/companies) is not expected to have worth mentioning impacts on the qualitative fea-

tures of the atmosphere. Any impacts occur only during the construction phase of the

works and refer to technical works to be executed. In this case the impacts will be within

acceptable limits and are associated with the temporary emission of dust and particulates.

These impacts are timed and will be mitigated with appropriate measures. They will not

exist any more upon completion of the constructional works.



As regards the operation phase of the projects (wind farms under study and wind farms of

other investors/companies) any impacts will be positive. The operation of the all the pro-

jects (wind farms) and generally the generation of electric power from renewable energy

sources (wind power potential) contributes to the substitution of conventional fuel (eg.

coal, oil etc.) and addresses the global environmental problems such as the greenhouse

effect and hence the temperature increase of the planet.



Acoustic environment: During the construction phase of the project a small increase of the

noise level caused by the works to be executed is expected. This increase is observed in

zones where the necessary technical/constructional works will be executed (fields for the

erection of wind turbines, access and internal road construction works, connection with

the electric power network). Upon completion of the works the produced noise from the

worksites and movement of vehicles will stop.

Vibrations: Significant vibrations or vibrations worth mentioning are not expected in the

works area. Therefore no further mention is made.

Radiation: The construction of the project is not at all related with the emission of any ra-

diation.


Acoustic environment: According to the calculations carried out and the noise contour

study for the proposed wind farms a significant or worth mentioning problem for the hu-

man environment and the inhabitants does not seem to occur. The noise contour 45 dΒ

does not include any settlement or presence of residents which could be affected by the

produced noise. Problems to the health of the residents or other disturbances are not ex-

pected. In any case the project under study conforms to the noise emission limits.

Supplementary it is mentioned that even as regards other settlements which are located in

the wider area of the project location the noise levels are considerably lower than 45 db.

Specifically:


SCHIZALI 37.16

PRINIA 30.91

AΜYGDALEA 33.58

ΖACHARIA 37.10

THYMION 34.88

ΚAPSOURION 35.85




EVAGGELISMOS 28.82

ΚOΜIΤOΝ 33.00

AΝΤIAS 30.94

EPANOCHORION 36.69

PLATANISTOS 31.45

ROUKLIA 32.88

AGIOS DIMITRIOS 35.43

ΜASTROGIANNAIOI 30.64

In the framework of the above it is useful to be mentioned here that the WT type which is

to be used has been chosen with the objective of mitigation of noise levels. Among the

technical features, thus, of the WT in question is mentioned the reduction of the produced

noise with the increase of distance.

Vibrations: Emission of vibrations is not related with the operation of the project. Therefore

no further mention is made.

Radiation: An extensive analysis of the issue has been presented in section 6.4.8 Acous-

tic environment, vibrations, radiation. Nonetheless a summary follows:

Up to date there is public controversy about the electromagnetic radiation and its impacts

on human health. Nevertheless the preventive measures which were taken during the

planning phase of the project which refer to the electricity transmission network should be

mentioned. These are the following:

a) undergrounding of the medium voltage network,

b) location of the 20/150 kV step-up substations to positions considerably remote from

settlements and residents,

c) alignment of the high voltage network in areas considerably remote from settlements

and residents,

d) alignment of the high voltage network in areas where no special sensitive uses and

buildings of sensitive uses (eg. schools, hospitals, old peoples homes) are situated.

Specifically, as regards the impacts of the electrical and magnetic field on the environment

of the step-up substations, extensive reference is made in Issue B of this EIA as well as in

the attached study in Annex III thereof by Mr. D. Tsanakas and E. Mimos of the Depart-

ment of Electrical and Computer Engineering of The University of Patra with subject “Elec-

trical and magnetic field in the environment of outdoor type substations 150 kV/MT as en-

vironmental factors”. This study was prepared by the Laboratory of Generation, Transmis-

sion, Distribution and Utilization of Electrical Energy in November 2003, under the general

supervision of the Laboratory Director Mr. D. Tsanakas. This study proves the safety of

the adopted solutions as regards electromagnetic radiation.




Small cumulative impact – mainly at noise levels – is estimated to occur due to the overall

number of the proposed wind farms. This increase, which is attributable to the technical

works which are going to be executed, will be limited because of the generally linear-serial

way of the execution of the construction works. In any way the produced noise will be

timely defined and not permanent, while noise levels are not expected to be worth men-

tioning.

Synergistic effects do not occur as regards noise from the wind farms under study and

wind farms of the other investors/companies. Main reason is the distance between them.

Any synergy at noise levels would occur in the case that the construction works of the

wind farms coincided in term of time with the construction works of the proposed wind sta-

tions. This probability, however, is quite low considering that the wind farms (planned and

under construction) are in different licencing stages.

Synergistic impacts as regards vibrations and radiation are not expected and therefore no

further mention is made.

77..44..77 SSuurr ffaaccee wwaatteerr aanndd ggrroouunnddwwaatteerr


During the construction phase of the project there will not be any interventions on surface

or groundwater resources. Alterations in the qualitative and quantitative condition of sur-

face water or groundwater resources are not planned. The construction works that will be

executed for the needs of the project do not have anything to do with interventions in the

water resources of the area and the wider area. Especially regarding the road construction

works it should be mentioned that interventions in the surface water or groundwater re-

sources. At this point it is pointed out that during this phase particular attention will be paid

to the protection of surface water, eg. the temporary disposal of the material will not take

place in surface water resources; the materials will be left in places remote from any sur-

face water resources so that the possibility of them being swept away by rainfalls and de-

grade the quality of waters etc. is excluded.


Τhe project does not create any liquid waste. Τhe liquids which are necessary of the

maintenance of the wind turbines will be collected in barrels and will be transferred out-

side the wind farms by specialized personnel that will perform the maintenance.

The existence of wind turbines in an area does not hinder the free movement of water in

the area nor does it cause the reduction of its quantity since the operation (and the con-

struction) of the wind farms does not require any water (surface water or groundwater).

Moreover the terrain of the area is not being altered and the water flow is not being hin-



dered. In general, the operation of the proposed WFs is not expected to have any impacts

on surface water and groundwater.

Finally it is mentioned that due to the large distance the project is not expected to affect

the existing qualitative and quantitative condition of the coastal waters of the wider area.


Τhe project under study does not cause any cumulative impacts with other projects of sim-

ilar nature to the surface water and groundwater resources of the study area.

77..55 SSuummmmaarr iizzeedd pprreesseennttaatt iioonn ooff tthhee eennvvii rroonnmmeennttaall iimmppaaccttss iinn aa mmaattrr iixx

For the presentation of the impacts of the project under study on the natural, socio-economic and cultural environment of the study area in a matrix, research was carried out in the Greek and international bibliography, so that a full and scientific presentation of all information data would be possible. It is pointed out that the most and the most complete presentation examples of environmental impacts were found in the international bibliog-raphy, wherefrom also data for the design of the following charts – tables were obtained. Specifically:

A) Parameters of impacts assessment

Initially a table was drawn with all possible parameters which could be influenced by the project under study. For the selection of parameters the nature of the project under stdy, the character and nature of the study area, the existing statutory framework as well as bib-liographical data-information were taken into consideration. It is mentioned that the pa-rameters which are going to be examined refer to the natural, socio-economic and cultural environment.

Β) Categories of impacts

For the classification of the impacts into categories bibliographic research was carried out as well as research in official websites of the internet (eg. Europa, Environmental Protec-tion Agency (Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service), Environmental Protection Authority of Western Australia, etc). The data of the research confirmed the fact that in many cases-studies a five-point scale was used for the classification of the impacts of a project (Big - Medium - Small - Negligible - Beneficial). However taking into consideration that the five-point scale causes problems in certain cases and makes the impact assessment more difficult, since the limits between the categories “Small - Μedium” or “Negligible - Small” are indiscernible and particularly sensitive, the adoption of the classification of impacts which is mentioned in the Guide “Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumula-tive Impacts as well as Impact Interactions” which was issued by the European Committee for the impact assessment of public or/and private works was preferred. Hence for the project under study the scale: High – Μoderate – Low – Beneficial will be applied.

C) Phase of impact occurence

The impacts of a project occur mainly during two phases: a) the construction phase of the project during which all technical works are executed, and b) the operation phase of the



project, during which the project operates normally and works refer to its maintenance or potential repairs – replacements of equipment.

D) Matrix designing

Based on the presentation forms which are internationally used (simple matrices, polyvaricon matrices, scalar matrices, sophisticated network matrices) for the needs of the particular study a combination was chosen which was assessed to better display the im-pacts of the specific project.



A) Parameters of impact assessment of a project

HISTORIC & CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

Cultural elements of the area (traditional villages, archaeological sites, historic sites, monuments, monuments of significant importance, etc.)

Folklore of the area (customs, traditions, etc.)

History of the area

NA

TU

RA

L E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

CLIMATE

Rainfall Temperature Air Quality Wind Moisture Micro-climate

POSSIBLE IM-PACT OF THE

PROJECT

Natural areas (e.g. forests, grasslands, water harvesting, etc.) Anthropogenic land (e.g. settlements, agricultural crops, grasslands, aquacul-ture, etc.)

LAND USE

SO

CIO

-EC

ON

OM

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SOIL

Geology Geomorphology Tectonics Soil characteristics (productivity, biodiversity, organic matter, etc.) Special issues of soil (erosion, desertification, sealing, compaction, salinization)

Infrastructure (roads - railways, ports, air-ports, energy trans-mission, water and sanitation, etc.) settlements Industries, Commer-cial zones Sport and leisure facilities

BUILT ENVIRONMENT

WATER RESSOURCE

Surface water Groundwater Quality (heavy metals, oils, halo-genated compounds, eutrophica-tion, thermal pollution) and quantity of water

Population Productive sectors Income Residence Public utility Human Health Recreational activities Education and wel-fare

SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

PROJECT AREA

PR

OT

EC

TE

D A

RE

AS

Areas of Article 18 of L.1650/86 (OGG 160A) Areas of the Natura 2000 Network: Sites of Community Importance and Special Protection Areas for birds, National Parks, Ramsar Sites, Aesthetic Forests, Monuments, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Wildlife Sanctuar-ies

TO THE NATU-RAL, SOCIO-

ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL ENVI-

RONMENT

Economic activities in the primary, second-ary and tertiary sec-tors

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

FLORA VEGETATION

HABITAT

Flora and vegetation of the area Endemic, rare and endangered species habitats Priority Habitats of the 92/43/EC Directive

Landscape elements (line, shape, color) Optical vulnerability of the landscape Optical absorption Coverage of the horizon

LANDSCAPE AESTHETICS

FAUNA

Fauna (birds, mammals, fish fauna, reptiles, etc.) Endemic, endangered and rare species (e.g. Directive 79/409/EU, Red List of Threatened Species, etc.) Migration routes Foraging, nesting, breeding areas

NATURAL

DISASTERS

Floods Earthquakes Fires Erosion Landslides



Impact presentation in form of a matrix

Category Subcategory

Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase

Impact tracking point Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

CLIMATIC AND BIOCLIMATIC CHARACTERISTICS

Rainfall No - - - - - - - - - Temperature No - - - - - - - - - Wind No - - - - - - - - - Moisture No - - - - - - - - - Bioclimate No - - - - - - - - -

MORPHOLOGICAL AND TOPOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Morphology of soil

No - - - - - - - - No work capable of changing the morphology of the study area is carried.

Landscape characteristics

Yes - - - 1. On location of WT 2. On location of development of ancillary works (access roads, internal roads, connectivity, etc.)

Slight alteration of landscape characteristics is expected during the construction phase of the wind farm and the new road. This defect will be transient and within acceptable limits. Synergistic effects of low significance are to be expected if the construction of the sug-gested project coincides with other investors WF. Compliance with the proposed mitigation measures determined by the licensing au-thority and the advisory services will help minimize the impact.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase

Impact tracking point

Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

GEOLOGY, TEC-TONICS AND SOIL CHARACTERIS-TICS

Geology No - - - - - - - - - Tectonics No - - - - - - - - - Soil Characteris-tics (productivity, organic matter, biodiversity, etc.)

Yes - - - - 1. On location of

WT 2. On location of development of ancillary works (access roads, internal roads, connectivity, etc.)

The scale of the project and the planned interventions are not ex-pected to have significant impacts on the soil characteristics of the area. Upon completion of the works, changes on the ground are expected to return but not to affect the construction phase. Syner-gistic effects are expected only if the construction of the proposed project coincides with the construction of other investors’ works. Given the scale and the nature of the project, the synergistic ef-fects are limited to the construction phase and to the locations of the execution of the project. During the operation phase no impact of great significance is expected.

Significant in-crease in the volume of Earth-work

No - - - - - - - - Increase of the volume of Earthwork is not expected. In case of failure regarding the balance of Earthwork during the construction due to soil conditions, any excess excavations would be deposited in areas of the squares of the turbines or in appropriate places.

NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Flora, Vegetation, Habitats

Yes - - - - - 1. On location of WT 2. On location of development of ancillary works (access roads, internal roads, connectivity, etc.)

Point interventions are of a very small scale e.g. reduced to spaces required for building the foundations of wind turbines. Additional interventions in flora-vegetation are expected during the construc-tion of the ancillary works. Calculations show that the maximum extent of losses in habitat types 4090 and 5420 are of 0.88% and 0.49% respectively. This figure shows a low impact on the vegeta-tion. Species listed in Annex II of Directive 92/43/EU are not affect-ed and no significant impact on other important species is ex-pected.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase


Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Fauna Yes - - - - - 1. On location of WT 2. On location of development of ancillary works (access roads, internal roads, connectivity, etc.)

No major impacts or noteworthy impacts on fauna in the study ar-ea. Small disturbance may be observed during the construction phase of the project. However, by the end of the engineering works the species will return to their normal pace. The operation of the project is not expected to have an impact on the fauna. The spe-cies are expected to quickly adapt and continue their daily and seasonal rhythms. No synergistic effects are expected on fauna.

Avifauna Yes - - - - 1. On location of WT

The construction and operation of the project is expected to have effects on populations of bird species of the area, but they are es-timated to be of low significance. The detailed results of field ob-servations and their evaluation are presented in the Issue of the Special Ornithological Assessment which accompanies this EIA.

Natural resources No - - - - - - - - The construction and completion of the projects is not expected to have an impact on the region’s natural resources. The only natural resource exploited is the wind which is renewable.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase


Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

SURFACE WATERS AND GROUNDWATER

Qualitative and quantitative sta-tus of surface waters

No - - - - - - - - The project is not associated with impacts on surface waters. The project is not expected to prevent the movement of water or alter the existing flow. Any disposal of materials during the construction phase will be done in areas away from aqueous deposits.

Qualitative and quantitative sta-tus of groundwa-ter

No - - - - - - - - The project under study and the technical work performed for the construction is not expected to create impacts on groundwater in the area. Possible liquids used for maintenance of the turbines will be collected in special barrels and will be deposited in special are-as.

PROTECTED AREAS

Statutory protect-ed areas desig-nated under Arti-cles 18 and 19 of Law 1650/86

Yes - - - - Throughout the study area

A Special Environmental Study which established protection zones has been developed in the area. The impact of the project lies in the construction phase and to a small extent in the disturbance of the protected elements of the area. However the disturbance is restricted to the construction phase of the project and is temporary. Finally, it is important to mention that in ZONE A "PROTECTION AREAS OF NATURE" no wind turbines are situated. For all these reasons, the impact in the area is not considered to be important.

National parks No - - - - - - - - No national parks are identified in the area of works or the wider region.Therefore impact is not expected on them.

Sites of Commu-nity Importance Of The 2000 Natura Network (SCI – OGG 92/43/E.U.)


According to the analysis of this EIA no significant impacts are identified from the construction and operation of the project in the SCI GR2420001 and its protected elements. The integrity of SCI is not disturbed.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase


Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

Special Protec-tion Areas for birds (SPA - Di-rective 2009/147/EC)

No - - - - - - - - According to the research of this EIA no significant impacts are identified from the construction and operation of the project in the SPA GR2420012 and the fauna (birds) that exists

Ramsar Sites No - - - - - - - - There are no Ramsar sites in the study area. Effects are not identified.

PROTECTED AREAS

Natural Monuments

No - - - - - - - - There are no statutory natural monuments in proximity to the study area. The nearest is located ~ 30 km from the proposed project. No effects are identified.

Aesthetic forests No - - - - - - - - There are no statutory Aesthetic Forests in proximity to the study area The nearest is located ~ 70 km from the proposed project. No effects are identified.

Landscapes of Outstanding Nat-ural Beauty (stat-utory)

No - - - - - - - - There are no statutory Landscapes of Outstanding Natural Beauty (LONB) in proximity to the study area. In the region and at a great distance from the project there are three statutory LONB where no impact is expected.

Wildlife Sanctuaries

No - - - - - - - - In the region 2 WS are identified. The first (Crypti - Lykoremma of the W. Karystos area and K. Kalyvia - Katsaroni - Marmari) is lo-cated within the study area. However, the main work and the ancil-laries are located outside the WS. The second area of WS (posi-tion Trikorfo) is outside the study area. Therefore no impact is expected in any case.

Habitats Of Eu-ropean Union’s Corine Pro-gramme

No - - - - - - - - The 2 Corine program areas identified in the project area are not expected to be affected by the construction and operation of the main and ancillary works. Significant impacts are not identified for Mount Ochi and the surrounding area (AG0010225) - while the second - Campos Karystos (AG0030021) – is totally not affected.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase


Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

NATURAL DISASTERS

Floods No - - - - - - - - The project and its design (sparse arrangement of turbines, dis-tance between WF) is not going to create floods. As mentioned in the relevant section of the table (above), the project will not prevent any water flow neither in the construction phase nor the operation phase.

Earthquakes No - - - - - - - - The project is not associated with such natural disasters. Fires No - - - - - - - - The project is not associated with such natural disasters. In any

case all necessary fire protection measures will take place in order to prevent any abnormal conditions.

Erosion No - - - - - - - - The project and technical work for its construction is not associated with soil erosion phenomena.

Landslides No - - - - - - - - Landslides are not expected either during the construction phase or the operation phase of the main and ancillary works.

LAND USE Natural areas (e.g. forests, grasslands, water collection, natural pastures, etc.)


Any effects consist mainly of the change in land use in the location where the WT will be founded, the road construction zone and the connection zone with the electric energy network. The effects are spatially and temporally limited and are not expected to have a lasting impact on the region.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase


Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

Anthropogenic land (e.g. settle-ments, agricul-tural crops, aq-uaculture, etc.)


Anthropogenic areas, such as settlements, are not located in the immediate area of the project. However farming land is identified. In the wider area settlements are identified but no major changes are going to take place. None of the settlements in the study area are expected to be adversely affected by the project according to the research of criteria of the Special Land Use for RES In addition the demand for minimum noise level is assured (see Study of Noise Contours attached in Annex II of this EIA).

BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Infrastructure (e.g. roads - rail-ways, ports, air-ports, energy transmission network, water and sanitation network, etc.)

No - - - - - - - - The project is not associated with changes in the existing infra-structure of the study area and the wider region. It should be noted that the project does not cause change in transport or significant changes in traffic. It will cause an increase in traffic in the area dur-ing the construction phase only. During the operational phase the traffic will be minimal, as the site will be visited by one or two tech-nicians.

Industries, commercial zones

No - - - - - - - - No industrial and commercial zones were identified in the project area. In any case, the construction and operation of the project is not expected to have any impact on industrial and commercial zones in the region.

Sport and leisure facilities

No - - - - - - - - The project will not have negative impacts on recreation due to the fact that the places of installation of the WF are not easily accessi-ble and are not attractive for visiting since they are not used for recreation.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase


Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

HISTORIC AND CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

Cultural elements of the area (Archaeological sites, historic sites, declared monuments, ma-jor monuments, etc.)

No - - - - - - - - There are no cultural and historic elements in the study area there-fore any impacts from the construction and the operation of the main and ancillary works are not detected.

History and folk-lore of the area

No - - - - - - - - No changes or anticipated impacts expected on historic and folklor-ic elements of the study area.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

Population No - - - - - - - - Change or population movement due to the construction and oper-ation of the project is not expected in any case. Impact on the current population is not identified.

Income Yes - - - - Study Area, wider area.

The construction and operation of the project is expected to have a positive impact on the income of the residents of the local commu-nity. The creation of wind farms will provide new jobs for the region and support the local income. During the operational phase three persons will be employed for every WF

Residence No - - - - - - - - The project under study is not associated with effects on residen-cies.

Public utility No

- - - - - - - - The project does not require any changes in public utilities apart from its connection to the power network. Therefore it will not con-tribute to the need for significant changes in areas of common in-terest such as communication systems, waterworks, sewers or septic tanks, rainwater drainage, solid waste and disposal of it.

Human health No - - - - - - - - Human health is not affected by the project. In parallel, the opera-tional mode of the WF is not expected to expose people to danger. However, during the construction phase of the project all neces-sary safety regulations should be kept in order to protect the staff from accidents.




Impa

ct tr

acki

ng Impact category

Syn

ergi

stic

Effe

cts Impact

tracking phase


Comments

Hig

h

Med

ium

Low

Pos

itive

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

Ope

ratio

n P

hase

Recreational activities

No - - - - - - - - Negative effects are not expected on the recreational activities of the region. The hiking and walking trails as identified and mapped are not expected to be affected by the project.

Education and welfare

No - - - - - - - - No impacts identified in the educational and welfare sectors of the study area.

Economic activi-ties in the prima-ry, secondary and tertiary sec-tors

No - - - - - - - - No impacts identified in the productive sectors (primary, second-ary, tertiary) of the study area.

ACOUSTIC ENVIRONMENT VIBRATIONS, RADIATION

Acoustic environment

No - - - - - - - - No significant effects on the acoustic environment of the study area are expected. During the construction phase of the project there will be a slight increase in the noise levels, but all the required noise emission limits from technical work are going to be held. Based on the calculations performed and the study of Noise Con-tours for proposed wind farms, no significant problem or a problem worth mentioning for the human environment and the residents is identified. In the 45 DB Noise Contour, settlement or presence of residents who could be affected by the noise is not included. Health problems of residents or other disturbances on species are not expected in any case. In each case the project under study adheres the noise emission limits

Vibrations No - - - - - - - - Significant vibrations are not expected at the work site. Radiation No - - - - - - - - During the operation of the project emissions that could expose the

public to risk are not expected. During the construction phase, electromagnetic radiation is not emitted.

LEGEND

Category – Subcategory: Categories – Subcategories, for which the impact of the project assessment is made



Impact tracking: YES - NO

Impact category: HIGH – MEDIUM – LOW - POSITIVE. It is mentioned that when no impact is found, the dash symbol is used (-).

Cumulative effects: YES – NO. It is mentioned that when no cumulative effect is found, the dash symbol is used (-).

Impact tracking phase: CONSTRUCTION PHASE – OPERATION PHASE.

Impact tracking phase: It is mentioned in the point - area where the effects of the main project and the ancillaries are expected.

Commentary: There is a brief review of the effect. With this column the choice of effect (high, medium, low, positive, none) is presumed.

88 MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT AANNDD MMOONNIITTOORRIINNGG OOFF EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL IIMMPPAACCTT


88..11..11 CCll iimmaatt iicc aanndd bbiiooccll iimmaatt iicc cchhaarraacctteerr iisstt iiccss

AA.. CCoonnssttrruuccttiioonn PPhhaassee

- Compliance with fuel quality limits to be used by the machines, as defined in the

existing provisions.

- Frequent wetting of properties (e.g. road construction zone, building sites, wind tur-

bine building squares, etc.) to reduce the emitted dust and particulate matter coming

from the execution of the technical work.

ΒΒ.. OOppeerraattiioonn PPhhaassee

No additional protection measures on climate and bioclimatic characteristics of the

study area and the immediate area of the project required. The project (main and an-

cillary) does not cause significant changes in both the climate and bioclimate of the

area during the operation phase.

CC.. SSyynneerrggiissttiicc EEffffeeccttss

No corrective measures required. No significant cumulative impacts detected.

88..11..22 MMoorrpphhoollooggiiccaall aanndd llaannddssccaappee ffeeaattuurreess


Special attention to prevent deterioration phenomena observed in existing aesthetics.

To this end any point interventions in natural vegetation are proposed to be taken

seriously.

- Any possible significant vegetation damage should be limited to minimum, accord-

ing to the instructions of the competent forestry department. In the beginning of

course there is some local damage expected given that the bandwidth occupancy of

the project is limited to what is necessary for its construction.

- Remove idle and possible excavation rocky tracks.

ΒΒ.. OOppeerraattiioonnaall PPhhaassee

INSTALLATION & OPERATION OF 8 WIND FARMS WITH TOTAL CAPACITY 174, 8 MW, IN SOUTH-EASTERN EVIA


No additional protective measures proposed on morphological and topological char-

acteristics of the study area and the immediate area of the project. The project (main

and ancillary) at this stage does not cause significant changes in the morphology and

in existing landscape features.


Additional remedial measures not recommended.

88..11..33 GGeeoollooggiiccaall ,, tteeccttoonniicc aanndd ssooii ll cchhaarraacctteerr iisstt iiccss


- Interventions on the ground should occupy the smallest possible surface area.

Excavations must be limited to mandatory in order to construct the projects under

study (e.g. wind turbine construction, construction of access roads).

- For the temporary depositing of the excavated materials, areas of natural vegeta-

tion should be avoided whenever possible.

- To ensure the use of the excavated materials for the required embankments dur-

ing the construction of roads and squares of the WT, sufficient mobile stone pro-

cessing plant will be installed for processing the excavated materials and turn

them suitable for the embankments.

- At the end of the work stone processing plants and any bases will be removed

while any resulting waste will be deposited in legal disposal sites.

- In case of failure of Earthwork balance and redundancy, the appropriate local

agency should be consulted in order to determine the areas of deposition and the

way of disposal of the excavated material.

- Deep and extensive excavations should be avoided where possible and the width

of the access roads should be limited to the necessary extent. The internal roads

should be coated gravel. (3A).


No additional protective measures proposed during this phase.


Not recommended corrective measures. No significant cumulative impacts detected.




88..22..11 FFlloorraa,, vveeggeettaatt iioonn,, hhaabbii ttaatt


Small-scale environmental impacts mentioned in the previous section will not affect

the natural vegetation, flora and habitats, so it is not necessary to take special meas-

ures to address them.

Regarding the forest formations of the study area it is estimated that no specific or

other compensatory measures are required. As presented in the chapter concerning

the assessment of the impacts, losses of forest vegetation from the proposed project

involve the following forest habitats:

- 92C0: Forests of Platanus orientalis and Liquidambar orientalis (Platanion orien-

talis). Loss of 2,24 ha / 0,09% of the area of habitat in SCI).

- 934A: Greek holm forests. Loss of 0,17 ha / 0,01% of the area of habitat in SCI).

- 9340: Forests with Quercus ilex and Quercus rotundifolia. Loss of 1,83 ha / 0,28%

of the area of habitat in SCI).

The above losses have no significant impact on forest vegetation. No specific com-

pensation measures are therefore required.

Compliance with the conditions and restrictions that will be placed by the licensing

authority and advisory services to all projects is considered to preserve the flora /

vegetation and habitats found in the area.


Impacts on flora, vegetation and habitats are not found during the operational phase.

Compensatory measures are not proposed.




Corrective measures are not required. No significant cumulative impacts are identi-

fied in the study project compared to other projects of similar nature that exist in the

study area.

88..22..22 FFaauunnaa


No additional measures of protection are recommended during this phase. The sides

of the roads, in some spots, should be constructed with the minimum amount of bro-

ken stones needed and should also be normalized in order to ensure the circulation

of fauna (turtles, invertebrates, etc.).


No additional protective measures proposed during this phase.


No corrective measure required. No significant cumulative impacts identified in the

study project with other projects of similar nature that exist in the study area.

88..22..33 AAvvii ffuuaauunnaa

It is believed that through proper planning of work for the construction of the project

the impact on the species will be moderated significantly. Conducting surveillance

(monitoring) of the impacts during the operational phase of the project is necessary

for at least a year (for specific WFs). Based on the results of scientific monitoring,

e.g. if problems concerning wild birds are observed, the operation of the projects will

be adjusted accordingly.

For WFs D4, D6, D8 it is estimated that the overall impact on bird populations is of

low significance , therefore no corrective interventions or other measures are re-

quired.

For WFs D3, D4, D5, where the significance of the impact on the Eagle Owl was

evaluated as potentially moderate (D4, based on past records of the species in the

area), or moderate (D3 and D5, based on the surveys of 2006 and 2010), the imple-

mentation of systematic monitoring is not proposed because:

- WF D4 is located at a sufficient distance (> 1km) from the locations of the older

records concerning the species

- The recording of Eagle Owl in WF D3 took place at the boundaries of the zones B

and C (1km)



- In WF D5 sufficient mitigation has already occurred

For WFs D1, D2, D7 the implementation of systematic monitoring is proposed

during the operating phase for at least a year. Based on the results of the scientific

monitoring, e.g. in case of observed problems on the wild birds, the operation of the

wind farms will be adjusted accordingly. These WFs are either in close proximity

(<1km) with observation points of Eagle Owls (Bubo bubo, D1, D7), or are associated

with the fairly strong presence of Short-toed (Snake) Eagle (Circaetus gallicus)

(D1,D2,D7) and Bonelli’s Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus) (D1, D2) .

Regarding the cumulative effects (moderate for the above 3 species), it is estimated

that the impact would be mitigated significantly with the proposed measures (low

significance).

88..33 HHuummaann eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt

88..33..11 LLaanndd UUssee


Significant changes in land use are not detected by the construction of the proposed

project. The installation of wind turbines has mainly to do with locations in mountain-

ous areas of south Evia. At these locations the use of land is limited mainly due to

the condition of the soil which is not suitable for any use. Regarding the roadwork

mentioned, this is designed with the basic view to occupy the smallest area possible,

therefore no major changes are going to take place in the existing or future land use.

The impacts consist mainly of change of land use at the locations of construction of

the WT, the road construction zone and the connecting zone of the electric power

network. Compared to the benefits, these impacts are both at a local and ultra-local

level (developing and environmental) within acceptable limits.

Additional protection measures not required.


The operation of the project is not associated with changes in existing or planned

land use of the study area. Therefore, it seems not appropriate to take remedial

measures.


No remedial action is recommended, since there seems not to be an issue of syner-

gistic impacts on land use. In any case, all interventions should be kept to a minimum

level.



88..33..22 BBuuii ll tt EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt


No impact is expected on the built environment of the study area, therefore no reme-

dial measures are suggested. It is important to mention that according to the test cri-

teria of the Spatial Planning for the RES, the required distances from settlements etc.

are held. In addition the demand for required minimum noise level is preserved at the

boundaries of the above residential activities, e.g. less than 45 db.


The operation of the project is not associated with changes in the built environment

of the study area. Therefore, it seems not appropriate to take remedial measures.


No corrective measures recommended. No significant cumulative impacts identified

in the built environment of the study area.

88..33..33 HHiissttoorr iiccaall aanndd CCuull ttuurraall EEnnvvii rroonnmmeenntt


No remedial measures are recommended to protect the historic and cultural envi-

ronment of the region. At this stage, no impact is expected on the cultural elements

of interest.

Furthermore it is important to mention that according to the test criteria of the Spatial

Planning for RES, the required distances from places and items of cultural interest

are held.

It has to be noted that in the course of technical work, if any places or objects of his-

torical / cultural interest are revealed, the responsible departments should be warned.


The operation of the project is not associated with effects on the cultural environment

of the region. Therefore, it is not necessary to take protective measures.


No corrective measures required. Cumulative impacts on historic and cultural ele-

ments of the study area are not identified.

88..33..44 SSoocciioo--eeccoonnoommiicc eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt -- TTeecchhnniiccaall IInnff rraasstt rruuccttuurree




This phase of the project is not associated with significant effects or changes in so-

cial and / or economic environment of the area in the study. Changes in lifestyle, the

customs, and the historical tradition of the region are not expected. Need for new

housing is not expected, moreover there are no expected changes in the current

model of economic development in the region.

It should also be noted that the project under consideration does not come into con-

flict or contradicting with any current or planned projects and economic development

programs carried out or performed by public services or private sector.

Therefore, there is no need to take protective measures.


No significant impact on the socio-economic environment of the area. Changes in the

existing technical infrastructure are not expected at this phase.

On the contrary, the operation of the project involves the following:

- Employment increase in permanent basis.

- Demand because of the need for repairs and / or modifications of the stations.

The needs in construction (e.g., roads, etc.) will be covered almost entirely by lo-

cal businesses, and the same will happen for a part of the other technical needs

(e.g. some electrical repairs, the ones regarding the PCs etc.).

- An annual flow of visitors for different reasons will be created (exterior mainte-

nance, inspections, reporting etc). Guests will, in fact, support local businesses

(accommodation, food, recreation, etc.). It is important that this demand will not

focus on high season but will be distributed throughout the year. Moreover, the

flow of people results in advertising, with medium effect that the region will be-

come known to a wider circle, which will supply additional flows of visitors.

- Creation of fire safety infrastructure for the protection of the wider area of the pro-

ject. South Evia has been, indeed, tested repeatedly by intense forest fires. Main

reason for their wide spread is the late notification of the relevant services about

the start of the fire along with the inability to reach the fire by land (fire trucks,

land troops of firefighters). By installing the eight (8) under study wind farms in

conjunction with the other eight (8) of the same text project, property of TERNA

group, a system of forest roads is created which greatly increases the accessibil-

ity of the area to assist in the fire fighting extinguishing. That in conjunction with

the immediate information of the start of a fire from the security guards and the

workers in the wind farms greatly increases the immediate response, containment

and extinguishing of forest fires, with maximum benefit for the natural environ-

ment and the protected species and habitats in the wider area under study.




No recommended corrective measures. No significant cumulative impacts identified

in the socio-economic environment of the area in the study and the existing technical

infrastructure.

88..33..55 AAttmmoosspphheerriicc eennvvii rroonnmmeenntt


The project is not associated with serious impact on the atmospheric environment.

Any impact would be of small scale and located only in the construction phase of the

project, and specifically in the technical work to be performed. Specifically:

Increase in dust and suspended particles during the construction phase of the project

will occur, however by pouring water at the construction zones, which is suggested

as an environmental term above, it will not be too much and will not bring problems to

the people living in the surrounding areas.

It will not create smoke emissions of aerosols and toxic gases, either during the con-

struction phase or during the operational phase of the WFs.

Frequent wetting of all areas is suggested (e.g. road construction zones, worksites,

wind farm construction sites, etc) to reduce dust and suspended particles from the

ongoing technical work.

It is suggested to keep the existing limits, as set and applied for the proper condition

of the atmospheric quality.


The project under study does not emit pollutants in the atmosphere. On the contrary,

the project will contribute to the reduction of pollutant emissions by substituting the

production of electricity from conventional forms (with wind which is a mild form of

energy). The project does not cause change in the broader climate of the region

since it does not depend on or does not affect other climatic data (temperature, hu-

midity, etc.).

Therefore, protective measures are not required at this stage.


Corrective measures are not required. No Significant cumulative impact on the at-



mospheric environment of the region under study found. In any case, it could be stat-

ed that, any cumulative effects are positive, since the operation of all the wind parks

will contribute jointly to the improvement of the atmosphere and the reduction of

greenhouse gases.



While in the construction phase of the project a slight increase in the amount of noise

from the work to be done is expected. This increase is focused on the technical work

zones, which means that it is identified in place and time. By the time the project

ends the produced noise from the construction sites and the movement of vehicles

will stop. In any case, because the project installation area is uninhabited, this matter

is of low importance from an environmental point of view.

Significant levels of noise or radiation are not produced during this phase. Protective

measures proposed are as follows:

√ Acoustic environment

Keeping the existing provisions for noise emission limits.

√ Vibrations

Keeping the existing provisions for vibration emission limits

√ Radiation

Keeping the existing provisions on limits of exposure to electromagnetic radiation.

There is no need for other protective or preventive measures during this phase.


√ Acoustic environment

Based on the calculations performed and the study of noise contours for the pro-

posed WFs does not seem to indicate a major problem or a problem worth mention-

ing for the human environment and its inhabitants. The noise contour curve of 45 dB

does not include the presence of residents or settlements which could be affected by

the noise. Health problems of residents or other nuisance for species are not ex-

pected in any way. In any case the project under study appears to meet noise emis-

sion limits.

In addition, regarding the other settlements located in the greater area of the project

it is mentioned that the noise levels are far less than 45 db



Considering all of the above no additional measures are suggested.

√ Vibrations

This phase of the project does not involve vibration emissions. Therefore there are

no particular protective measures suggested.

√ Radiation

This phase of the project does not involve radiation emissions. Therefore there are

no particular protective measures suggested, besides those taken during the plan-

ning phase regarding the following:

a) undergrounding the medium voltage network,

b) installing the step up substations 20/150 kV in places considerably far from settle-

ments and residents,

c) plotting the overhead high voltage network in parts where possible, considerably

far from settlements and residents,

d) plotting the elevated high voltage network in parts where there are no delicate us-

es and buildings for delicate uses (e.g. schools, hospitals, homes for the elderly) and

in great distance from such places.


Not recommended taking corrective measures, since there are no major synergistic

effects identified.

88..33..77 SSuurr ffaaccee wwaatteerrss aanndd ggrroouunnddwwaatteerr


The foundation of the WT is not associated with interventions on the water resources

of the region. Regarding road construction and connection to the electricity network it

is indicated that any operations on surface and groundwater resources will not be

conducted. Therefore, no special protective measures suggested.




There is no hazard for water resources (surface and groundwater) in the area during

the operation of the project. Any fluids used for maintenance of the wind turbines it is

suggested to be collected in barrels and transported in special locations for further

processing.


It is not recommended to take corrective measures.

88..44 AAddddii tt iioonnaall ssppeeccii ff iicc pprrootteecctt iivvee mmeeaassuurreess

Specific protective measures proposed in addition to those enumerated in the pre-

ceding sections are as follows:

Potential risk for abnormal situations

To address potential risks of abnormal situations throughout the course of construc-

tion works it is suggested that the strictest safety standards should be met in order to

exclude any possibility of an accident. It is also proposed to take all measures for fire

protection in case of fire and to minimize the risk of spreading to adjacent areas.

Concerning dealing with the risk of potential oil or other chemicals leak, and in partic-

ular lubricants, the following are suggested in that order:

- Any equipment or vehicle washing in the immediate area of the project is prohib-

ited.

- Any disposal of non-biodegradable substances on the ground or in water receiv-

ers, must be prohibited.

- To deal with any accidents with leakage effects of non-biodegradable substances

and soil and water pollution the necessary measures to confine water contami-

nants, like sawdust, oil confiners, various special biodegradation substances etc.

should be taken.

- Throughout the construction of the project it is proposed the used oils from the

machines to be managed and disposed in special places. The storage and the

transfusion of fuels and oils should be conducted in a way that does not allow

leaks.



For the fields of public benefit

In the context of preventive and precautionary principles it is mentioned that in order

to handle potential downgrade and alteration by garbage, waste material, old ma-

chine parts etc there are the following suggestions:

- In the case of solid waste produced, a system for collecting and sorting should

exist.

- Waste should be transported to certified places for disposal. Temporary deposi-

tion at the main site of the project must be prohibited.

- Burning of any material including garbage should be prohibited at the site of the

project.

For public health

The following measures about public health are suggested:

- The rules for protection against accidents at work should apply for every type of

work to be conducted.

For aesthetics

- By the end of the project any aesthetic interventions must be restored, by gather-

ing and removing any remaining aggregate or other material.

- Any potential damage in vegetation should be contained to the minimum possible

and always in accordance with the suggestions of the relevant forestry depart-

ment. If local restoration is required this must be done solely with local speci-

mens. No other reformations or planting is suggested.

- In case the relevant forestry department finds that the landscape should be re-

stored, this will be conducted according to landscaping designs made after the

suggestions of the forestry departments and approved by them.



99 PPRROOPPOOSSEEDD EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL CCOONNDDIITTIIOONNSS

A) Concised description of the project – activity

11.. TTyyppee ooff aaccttiivviittyy aanndd ggeeooggrraapphhiicc llooccaattiioonn

The project involves the installation and operation of eight (8) wind farms (WF

"Kathara", WF “Anatoli”, WF “Spilia”, WF “Milia”, WF "Platanistos" WF "Paliopyrgos"

WF "Kerasia "WF" Platanos ") with a total installed capacity of 174,8 MW. Administra-

tively the project falls under the Municipalities of Karystos and Marmari, and the

Community of Kafireas.

In summary the project includes:

“Kathara” WF with 14 wind turbines, of 2,3 MW power each and 32,2 MW to-

tal power.

“Anatoli” WF with 7 wind turbines, of 2,3 MW power each and 16,1 MW total

power.

“Spilia” WF with 13 wind turbines of 2,3 MW power each and 28,9 MW total

power.

“Milia” WF with 8 wind turbines of 2,3 MW power each and 18,4 MW total

power.

“Platanistos” WF with 8 wind turbines of 2,3 MW power each and 18,4 MW to-

tal power.

“Paliopyrgos” WF with 8 wind turbines of 2,3 MW power each and 18,4 MW

total power.

“Kerasia” WF with 12 wind turbines of 2,3 MW power each and 27,6 MW total

power.

“Platanos” WF with 6 wind turbines of 2,3 MW power each ande 13,8 MW to-

tal power.

The project includes, among others, the following associated works:

Access roads and internal roads. The total road length is 31,5 km and is divided as

follows: for WF "Platanistos” 2,25 km, for WF "Paliopyrgos” 3,09 km, for W/ F

Kerasia 4,43 km, for WF "Spilia” 4,27 km, for W/ F "Platanos” 3,96 km, for W/ F

Kathara” 8,81 km, for W/ F “Milia” 655 m, for W/ F “Anatoli” 4,07 km. The roads

have been studied with a speed of 20 km / h and satisfy the requirements of the

Ministry of Rural Development and Food for the opening of C Class forest roads.

During the design the specifications - technical requirements for the safe movement



of vehicles transporting features of wind turbines and pillars to their instalment area

were taken into account. The road width is 5,00 m, the maximum longitudinal slope

is 12%, the minimum curvature radius is 25 m with corresponding road surface

widening.

Medium Voltage 20 kV or 33 kV (Underground) Network between control cabins

and the three step-up substations. The medium voltage network follows the existing

forest roads and new drilled roads as planned. The total route length of under-

ground cable on existing roads is estimated at about 99,7 km and the total length of

the route for the proposed new road is estimated at about 9,8 km. Additionally, the

same channel of the planned route is provided for the installation of optic fibers..

Control cabins within the installation area of any WF, of 72 m2. From this place the

control and protection of the WF layout is performed. The CC hosts the installation

of the central electrical connection equipment of the WF with the PPC network and

remote monitoring, control and security system. Additionally, it has the necessary

micro repair and storage spaces of the necessary tools, consumables, spare parts,

etc., and changing room and WC for hygiene reasons of the maintenance staff. The

building will be designed appropriately to meet the regulations and operational re-

quirements of the WF while the exterior design will follow the possible architecture

of buildings in the region.

Three step up substations 20/150 kV (S/S 1 "Amygdalea", S/S 2 "Antia" S/S 3

"Plataistos" In Substation 1 "Amygdalea" the wind farms “Kathara” and “Anatoli” will

be connected, in substation 2 "Antia” the wind farm “Kerasia” will be connected and

in substation 3 “Platanistos” the wind farms “Spilia”, “Milia”, “Platanistos”,

”Palaiopyrgos” and “Platanos” will be connected.

-High voltage 150 kV (Overhead - Underground). The line, length of about 22,658

km, starts from the first substation, S/S1 “Amygdalea” and ends at position

Mpouros at the southernmost tip of the island, with a north – south direction. The

line is overhead, apart from a section approximately 700 m at the southern end,

where it goes underground. This is the first part of the project of the new high volt-

age transmission line 150 kV.

- High voltage 150 kV (Underwater) (Karystos - Rafina). This line is the second part

of the overall project of new 150 kV transmission line which consists of three sub-

sections. The underwater link Evia - Attica is the second part of the high Voltage

line (H.V.L.) 150 kV which will be immersed in the seabed of the wider area of

Peralion Bay in South Evia. It has a total length of approximately 45 km and will

connect the first section of the line from the side of Evia (landing point in the rocky

side of the site "Mpouros") with the landing point in Attca, Rafina.



- High voltage 150 kV (Underground) (Rafina – Pallini Substation). The high voltage

transmission line between Rafina and Pallini substation (the third part of the new

transmission line) will be underground throughout its length, around 22 km, and will

consist of two circuits. The landing point will be on the east coast of Attica and spe-

cifically in the area of Rafina.

22.. MMaaiinn tteecchhnniiccaall ffeeaattuurreess ooff tthhee pprroojjeecctt

22..11 ““KKaatthhaarraa”” WWiinndd FFaarrmm

The “Kathara” wind farm is located to Kathara position (Municipality of Marmari,

Community of Kafirea) in the region of south Evia, as shown in the drawings and

maps of the Environmental Impact Study submitted to the Special Environmental

Service (SES) of Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change. This wind

farm consists of 14 wind turbines, power 2, 3 MW each, with a rotor diameter of 71 m

and pillar height 62,85 m. The total installed power in "Kathara" WF is 32, 2 MW.

The geographic coordinates (Hellenic Geodetic Reference System '87) that define

the installation area of wind turbines and wind turbine position are listed in the follow-

ing table (K= Polygon Vertex, A/Γ = WT, O.E. = CC):

V/N HGRS 87 (wind turbines installation field vertices)

Χ Y

K1 545.049 4.218.810

K2 545.310 4.218.668

K3 545.543 4.218.105

K4 545.686 4.217.979

K5 546.320 4.218.390

K6 546.563 4.218.735

K7 546.859 4.218.892

K8 546.961 4.218.660

K9 546.734 4.218.544

K10 546.577 4.218.321

K11 546.722 4.218.141

K12 546.856 4.217.898

K13 546.998 4.217.663

K14 547.189 4.217.546

K15 547.433 4.217.451

K16 547.701 4.217.235

K17 547.863 4.216.994




Χ Y

K18 548.013 4.216.814

K19 548.326 4.216.663

K20 548.217 4.216.438

K21 547.856 4.216.612

K22 547.662 4.216.844

K23 547.514 4.217.065

K24 547.307 4.217.232

K25 547.078 4.217.321

K26 546.815 4.217.482

K27 546.639 4.217.773

K28 546.513 4.218.001

K29 546.399 4.218.144

K30 545.662 4.217.673

K31 545.340 4.217.951

K32 545.110 4.218.489

K33 544.867 4.218.635

S/N HGRS 87 (wind turbines installation positions)

Χ Y

AΓ1 545.018 4.218.670

AΓ2 545.210 4.218.578

AΓ3 545.320 4.218.288

AΓ4 545.442 4.218.028

AΓ5 545.675 4.217.827

AΓ6 545.858 4.217.938

AΓ7 546.543 4.218.466

AΓ8 546.850 4.218.749

AΓ9 547.134 4.217.433

AΓ10 547.370 4.217.341

AΓ11 547.607 4.217.150

AΓ12 547.762 4.216.919

AΓ13 547.934 4.216.713

AΓ14 548.159 4.216.605

O.E. 546.544 4.218.184



22..22 ““AAnnaattoollii”” WWiinndd FFaarrmm

“Anatoli” wind farm is located in Anatoli position (C. Kafireas) in the region of south-

eastern Evia, as shown in the drawings and maps of the Environmental Impact Study

submitted to the Special Environmental Service (SES) of Ministry of Environment,

Energy and Climate Change. This WF consists of 7 turbines, power 2,3 MW each,

with a rotor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m. The total installed power in

"Anatoli" WF is 16,1 MW.

The geographic coordinates (HGRS 87) of the points that define the installation area

of wind turbines and wind turbine position are listed in the following table (K= Polygon

Vertex, A/Γ = WT, O.E. = CC):


Χ Y

K1 546.942 4.218.905

K2 547.192 4.218.955

K3 547.381 4.219.046

K4 548.020 4.219.176

K5 548.402 4.219.429

K6 548.642 4.219.481

K7 548.813 4.219.576

K8 549.089 4.219.853

K9 549.266 4.219.676

K10 548.965 4.219.374

K11 548.731 4.219.245

K12 548.504 4.219.195

K13 548.128 4.218.949

K14 547.466 4.218.809

K15 547.272 4.218.716

K16 546.988 4.218.659


Χ Y

AΓ1 547.024 4.218.793

AΓ2 548.074 4.219.063

AΓ3 548.266 4.219.183

AΓ4 548.453 4.219.312

AΓ5 548.687 4.219.363




Χ Y

AΓ6 548.889 4.219.475

AΓ7 549.045 4.219.632

O.E. 548.191 4.219.106

22..33 ““SSppiilliiaa”” wwiinndd ffaarrmm

“Spilia” wind farm is located in Anatoli position (M. Marmari, M. Karystos) in the re-

gion of southeastern Evia, as shown in the drawings and maps of the Environmental

Impact Study submitted to the Special Environmental Service (SES) of Ministry of

Environment, Energy and Climate Change. This WF consists of 13 turbines, power

2,3 MW each, with a rotor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m. The total in-

stalled power in "Milia" WF is 29,9 MW.





Χ Y

K1 537.722 4.216.656

Κ2 538.032 4.216.125

Κ3 538.424 4.215.679

Κ4 538.591 4.215.550

Κ5 538.878 4.215.477

Κ6 539.022 4.215.228

Κ7 539.584 4.214.840

Κ8 539.705 4.214.498

Κ9 539.654 4.214.082

Κ10 539.785 4.213.567

Κ11 540.164 4.213.205

Κ12 539.988 4.213.028

Κ13 539.565 4.213.428

Κ14 539.401 4.214.069

Κ15 539.449 4.214.470

Κ16 539.375 4.214.680

Κ17 538.834 4.215.054

Κ18 538.714 4.215.261




Χ Y

Κ19 538.479 4.215.321

Κ20 538.250 4.215.497

Κ21 537.826 4.215.981

Κ22 537.506 4.216.530


Χ Y

AΓ1 537.813 4.216.271

AΓ2 537.897 4.216.103

AΓ3 538.027 4.215.944

AΓ4 538.159 4.215.796

AΓ5 538.301 4.215.649

AΓ6 538.434 4.215.504

AΓ7 538.616 4.215.417

AΓ8 538.813 4.215.328

AΓ9 538.921 4.215.148

AΓ10 539.075 4.215.014

AΓ11 539.240 4.214.913

AΓ12 539.384 4.214.806

AΓ13 539.548 4.214.672

O.E. 538.679 4.215.381

22..44 ““MMiilliiaa”” wwiinndd ffaarrmm

“Milia” wind farm is located in Milia position (C. Kafirea) in the region of southeastern

Evia, as shown in the drawings and maps of the Environmental Impact Study submit-

ted to the Special Environmental Service (SES) of Ministry of Environment, Energy

and Climate Change. This WF consists of 8 turbines, power 2,3 MW each, with a ro-

tor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m. The total installed power in "Milia" WF

is 18,4 MW.







Χ Y

K1 542.475 4.212.645

K2 542.981 4.212.368

K3 543.053 4.212.261

K4 542.884 4.212.065

K5 542.812 4.212.173

K6 542.353 4.212.427

K7 543.173 4.212.075

K8 543.722 4.212.191

K9 544.267 4.212.438

K10 544.267 4.212.149

K11 543.776 4.211.912

K12 543.221 4.211.784


Χ Y

AΓ1 542.853 4.212.300

AΓ2 543.260 4.211.936

AΓ3 543.434 4.211.964

AΓ4 543.604 4.212.030

AΓ5 543.746 4.212.042

AΓ6 543.889 4.212.083

AΓ7 544.040 4.212.206

AΓ8 544.194 4.212.258

O.E. 543.416 4.211.892

22..55 ““PPllaattaanniissttooss”” WWiinndd ffaarrmm

“Platanistos” wind farm is located in Platanistos position (M. Karystos) in the region of

southeastern Evia, as shown in the drawings and maps of the Environmental Impact

Study submitted to the Special Environmental Service (SES) of Ministry of Environ-

ment, Energy and Climate Change. This WF consists of 8 turbines, power 2,3 MW

each, with a rotor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m. The total installed pow-

er in "Platanistos" WF is 18,4 MW.







Χ Y

K1 542.517 4.208.509

Κ2 542.841 4.208.486

Κ3 543.289 4.208.554

Κ4 543.542 4.208.459

Κ5 543.779 4.208.306

Κ6 544.119 4.208.153

Κ7 544.016 4.207.925

Κ8 543.659 4.208.086

Κ9 543.429 4.208.235

Κ10 543.256 4.208.299

Κ11 542.859 4.208.234

Κ12 542.499 4.208.260

Κ13 542.756 4.207.898

Κ14 543.372 4.207.621

Κ15 543.802 4.207.342

Κ16 544.165 4.207.245

Κ17 544.101 4.207.004

Κ18 543.708 4.207.108

Κ19 543.246 4.207.403

Κ20 542.653 4.207.670


Χ Y

AΓ1 542.633 4.208.376

AΓ2 542.850 4.208.360

AΓ3 543.060 4.208.405

AΓ4 543.273 4.208.427

AΓ5 543.485 4.208.347

AΓ6 543.719 4.208.196

AΓ7 542.819 4.207.732

AΓ8 543.078 4.207.614

O.E. 542.746 4.208.366

22..66 ““PPaallaaiiooppyyrrggooss”” wwiinndd ffaarrmm

“Palaiopyrgos” wind farm is located in Palaiopirgos position (M. Karystos, C. Kafirea)



in the region of southeastern Evia, as shown in the drawings and maps of the Envi-

ronmental Impact Study submitted to the Special Environmental Service (SES) of

Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change. This WF consists of 8 tur-

bines, power 2,3 MW each, with a rotor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m.

The total installed power in "Palaiopyrgos" WF is 18,4 MW.





Χ Y

K1 548.285 4.208.330

Κ2 548.820 4.208.152

Κ3 549.398 4.208.027

Κ4 549.617 4.208.154

Κ5 550.042 4.208.261

Κ6 550.395 4.208.234

Κ7 550.375 4.207.985

Κ8 550.053 4.208.010

Κ9 549.674 4.207.915

Κ10 549.449 4.207.758

Κ11 548.760 4.207.908

Κ12 548.209 4.208.092


Χ Y

AΓ1 548.366 4.208.173

AΓ2 548.790 4.208.030

AΓ3 549.213 4.207.942

AΓ4 549.424 4.207.893

AΓ5 549.625 4.208.036

AΓ6 549.832 4.208.099

AΓ7 550.075 4.208.132

AΓ8 550.260 4.208.119

O.E. 549.108 4.207.972



22..77 ““KKeerraassiiaa”” wwiinndd ffaarrmm

“Kerasia” wind farm is located in Kerasia position (M. Marmari, C. Kafirea) in the re-

gion of southeastern Evia, as shown in the drawings and maps of the Environmental

Impact Study submitted to the Special Environmental Service (SES) of Ministry of

Environment, Energy and Climate Change. This WF consists of 12 turbines, power

2,3 MW each, with a rotor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m. The total in-

stalled power in "Kerasia" WF is 27,6 MW.


of wind turbines and wind turbine positions are listed in the following table (K= Poly-

gon Vertex, A/Γ = WT, O.E. = CC):


Χ Y

K1 542.457 4.214.897

K2 542.781 4.214.974

K3 543.048 4.214.868

K4 543.298 4.214.863

K5 543.551 4.214.769

K6 544.088 4.214.706

K7 544.388 4.214.753

K8 544.631 4.214.466

K9 544.781 4.214.359

K10 545.847 4.213.963

K11 545.753 4.213.731

K12 544.666 4.214.134

K13 544.461 4.214.281

K14 544.288 4.214.484

K15 544.096 4.214.455

K16 543.490 4.214.525

K17 543.251 4.214.614

K18 542.998 4.214.619

K19 542.762 4.214.712

K20 542.515 4.214.654


Χ Y

AΓ1 542.952 4.214.775

AΓ2 543.186 4.214.744




Χ Y

AΓ3 543.356 4.214.699

AΓ4 543.507 4.214.636

AΓ5 543.685 4.214.603

AΓ6 544.768 4.214.242

AΓ7 544.931 4.214.175

AΓ8 545.093 4.214.105

AΓ9 545.261 4.214.060

AΓ10 545.424 4.213.985

AΓ11 545.595 4.213.941

AΓ12 545.770 4.213.899

O.E. 545.209 4.214.086

22..88 ““PPllaattaannooss”” wwiinndd ffaarrmm

“Platanos” wind farm is located in Platanos position (M. Marmari, ) in the region of

southeastern Evia, as shown in the drawings and maps of the Environmental Impact

Study submitted to the Special Environmental Service (SES) of Ministry of Environ-

ment, Energy and Climate Change. This WF consists of 6 turbines, power 2,3 MW

each, with a rotor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m. The total installed pow-

er in "Platanos" WF is 13,8 MW..





Χ Y

K1 538.827 4.216.509

Κ2 539.070 4.216.388

Κ3 539.308 4.216.082

Κ4 539.493 4.216.085

Κ5 539.931 4.215.906

Κ6 539.837 4.215.674

Κ7 539.446 4.215.834

Κ8 539.200 4.215.830

Κ9 538.902 4.216.192

Κ10 538.714 4.216.285




Χ Y

AΓ1 538.846 4.216.369

AΓ2 538.997 4.216.262

AΓ3 539.102 4.216.121

AΓ4 539.239 4.215.996

AΓ5 539.418 4.215.948

AΓ6 539.595 4.215.908

O.E. 539.019 4.216.210

The positions of the polygon vertices and the turbines of these eight (8) WF are pre-

sented in certified topographic …., ….., ….., …… and certified maps …., ….., …..,

accompanying the Environmental Impact Study of the project.

22..99 WWiinndd ttuurrbbiinnee ffeeaattuurreess

The project will consist of 76 wind turbines, power 2,3 MW each. The exploitation of

wind power will be achieved with a rotor diameter of 71 m and pillar height 62,85 m.

Other technical features are presented below:

Hub height: 64 m.

Blade Length: 32,8 m.

Weight: 153 tn.

Tip Diameter: 2,00 m.

Base diameter: 4,20 m.

Nominal Voltage: 400 Volt.

Nominal frequency: 50 Hz.

Power setting: Variable speed - blade angle setting.

Blade Number: 3.

Blade speed: 22 - 80 m/s.



Cut-in wind speed: 2,5 m/s approximately.

Cut-out wind speed: 28 – 34 m/s approximately.

22..1100 AAcccceessss rrooaaddss aanndd iinntteerrnnaall rrooaaddss

For access to the premises of WF and for the interconnection between the turbines the construction of roads (access roads and internal roads) total length of 31,5 km will be required. The work includes road improvements for specific parts for the ser-vice needs of the project.

The total road length is divided as follows: for WF “Platanistos” 2,25 km, for WF “Paliopyrgos” 3,09 km, for WF “Kerasia” 4,43 km, for WF “Spilia” 4,27 km, for WF “Platanos” 3,96 km, for WF “Kathara” 8,81 km, for WF “Milia” 655 m, for WF “Anatoli” 4,07 km.

The roads have been studied for speed of 20 km / h and satisfy the requirements of the Ministry of Rural Development and Food for the opening of C Class forest roads. During the design the specifications - technical requirements for the safe movement of vehicles transporting special features of wind turbines and pillars to the installation area have been taken into account

The geometric characteristics are as follows:

Road width 5,00 m.

Maximum longitudinal slope 12%.

Minimum radius of curvature 25 m.

Minimum radius of curvature at manoeuvre 15 m with corresponding road sur-

face widening.

There will be lining of the slopes of the embankment with topsoil that will come from

soil cleaning before excavation.

To protect the roads from the rain there will be trench digging to drain the natural re-cipients and construction of necessary culverts at these positions.

Also, smoothing down the trough resulting from the excavation with gravel layer in thickness 0,20 m along the road will be required.

For the construction of roads a total of nearly 230.000 m3 of rock excavation and semi rocky land will be required and all will be available for the construction of em-bankments in equal amounts.

The total quantity, based on pre measurement, approximately 32.000 m3, suitable for

crushing rock material required for the purpose of road building (base and subbase



layers), will be saved by appropriate excavated material excess, or roads or assem-

bly of wind turbines squares.

Illustration of access roads and internal roads shown on certified topographics ….,

….., ….., …… and certified maps …., ….., ….., accompanying the Environmental Im-

pact Assessment of the project.

2.11 Medium Voltage Network 20kV or 33kV (Underground)

Wind turbines in the wind farm will generate electricity using modern three-phase

generators at 400 V and a frequency of 50 Hz. In each turbine there will be local ste

up transformer 0,40 / 20 kV, 2500 kVA. The cables will be guided into Control Cabine

of each wind park in the General MV Panel. Each turbine will have M/ V Lift 1/20 kV,

3140 kVA, while in the base of the pillar a panel will be installed to protect the M/V lift

from errors of medium voltage network (MVN).

The turbines of each station are interconnected with an underground cable that will follow mostly the development of internal roads, and will lead in the Control Cabin of the Wind Farm, the General MV Panel.

The general MV Panel in the control cabin will consist of inputs (one for each sector), one measurement and protection field, one field that feeds the local T/S service 20/0, 4 kV and one or more output fields, to the underground medium voltage network which will connect the wind farm to the S / S 20/150 kV. The auxiliary voltage of the S / S is secured by M / V 20/0, 4 kV, 50 kVA from the busbars of 20 kV.

There will be a grounding network to protect the wind farm. In each wind turbine grounding will be installed from galvanized copper tape with suitable supports and fittings, which will form loops around the wind turbine pad. The foundation grounding will be strengthened with the connection with the armor wind turbine pad and with 4 type E grounding switches.

Foundation grounding will be installed and in the control cabin of the wind farm. A Cu conductor will be placed under the surface of each foundation as in the channel with the underground cable M/V. All the above grounding systems will be interconnected and linked with the grounding grid in each local S /S and control cabin of the wind farm. The size of the grounding conductors and the grounding generally will be such as to achieve a satisfactory ground resistance value.

In the channel of underground cables, apart from the wires and ground wire, optic fiber cable will be placed to control the turbines, which will happen in a separate room of the Control Cabin of the wind farm, which will be the only building of the wind farm.

The routes (channels) of the underground cables for interconnection of each wind



turbine will follow the route of the internal road network of the wind farm, and then

along the existing or new road network to the S/S 20/150 kV.

Illustration of the medium voltage network is presented in certified topographics ….,

….., ….., …… and certified maps …., ….., ….., accompanying the Environmental Im-

pact Assessment of the project.

22..1122 CCoonnttrrooll CCaabbiinnss

Within the installation area of each WF the construction of a ground floor Control

Cabin (CC) area of 72 m2 is provided. From the cabin, the WF control and the pro-

tection will be carried out.

The CC will host the installation of the central electrical connection equipment of the

WF with the PPC network and remote monitoring, control and security system. More-

over, it will have the necessary micro repairs spaces and storage of the necessary

tools, consumables, spare parts, etc., as well as changing room and WC for mainte-

nance staff.

The building must meet the regulations and operational requirements of WF, while

the exterior design will follow, at the possible, the architecture of buildings in the re-

gion.

Illustration of the Control Cabin installation points is presented in certified

topographics …., ….., ….., …… and certified maps …., ….., ….., accompanying the

Environmental Impact Assessment of the project.

22..1133 SStteepp uupp ssuubbssttaattiioonnss

Three (3) step up substations 20/150kV will be constructed in the positions illustrated

in the certified topographic maps …., ….., …… For the step up S/S 20/150kV apply

the following:

In Substation 1 “Amygdalea” the wind farms “Kathara” and “Anatoli” will be connect-ed, of total power 48,3 MW, through the underground medium voltage cables.

It consists of two power transformers 40/50 MVA voltage 150/20 kV, coupling Dyn1, with the possibility of grounding direct of through resistance and will be equipped with high-current transformers high and medium voltage. Each T/S will have power switch, and motor connector.

Busbars HV 150 kV will be simple, common to both transformers. The gate of the 150 kV line will consist of a motor circuit breaker, breaker, voltage and current trans-former for protection and measurements, disconnector and grounding switch. The busbars MV 20 kV of each transformer are independent. But their connection via



power switch will be possible. At each busbar MV the underground M/V cables from the four wind farms are connected, by three. Each gate has sliding switch, grounding switch and power transformer for protection.

The area required for the installation of the substation is 8 acres.

In Substation 2 "Antia" the wind farm “Kerasia”, total power 27,6 MW, will be con-nected through the underground medium voltage cables.

It consists of four transformers, one 20/25 MVA power and three 40/50 MVA power, all of voltage 150/20 kV, coupling Dyn1, with the grounding ability direct or through resistance and will be equipped with high-current transformers high and medium voltage. Each transformer will have power switch, and two motor disconnectors.

Busbars HV 150 kV will be dual coupling switch. There are three gate lines 150 kV. Each gate will consist of two motor disconnectors, circuit breakers, voltage and cur-rent transformers for protection and measurements, disconnector and grounding switch. The Busbars MV 20 kV of each transformer are independent. It will be possi-ble to connect them via the power switch. In MV busbars underground lines MV from five wind farms will be connected through breakers. Each gate will have slide switch, grounding switch and transformer for protection.

The area will required for installation of this substation is 16 acres..

To Substation 3 "Platanistos" the wind farms “Spilia”, “Milia”, “Platanistos” and “Platanos”, total power 98,9 MW, will be connected.

It consists of four transformers, one 20/25 MVA power and three 40/50 MVA power, everyone voltage 150/20 kV, coupling Dyn1, with the possibility of grounding direct or through resistance and will be equipped with and medium voltage current transform-ers. Each transformer will have a power switch, and two motor disconnectors.

Busbars HV 150 kV will be dual with coupling switch. There will be 4 gate lines 150 kV. Each gate will consist of two motor disconnectors, circuit breakers, voltage and current transformers for protection and measurements, disconnect and grounding switch. Busbars MV 20 kV of each transformer are independent. It will be possible to connect them via the power switch. In MV busbars the underground M/V line of sev-en wind farms will be connected through breakers. Each gate will have sliding switch, grounding switch and transformer for protection.

The area required for installation of this substation is 19 acres.

22..1144 HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk ((OOvveerrhheeaadd -- UUnnddeerrggrroouunndd))

For interconnection of wind farms with the power system of the country new trans-

mission line 150 kV will be built. The line, length of about 22,658 km, starts from the

first substation, "Amygdalea", near the eponymous municipal district, and ends at po-



sition Mpouros the southernmost tip of the island, and has a north – south direction.

The line will be overhead, except for a portion of about 700 m at the southern end,

where it goes underground. The line consists of three subsections, for which the fol-

lowing apply:

The first subsection of the line is single circuit and will have 24 optical fibers (18 sin-

gle mode fiber G652 / 6 single mode fiber G655). This section has only a three-phase

circuit conductors for aerial transport of electricity. The length of the line is 10 km with

about 30 pillars. The line has potential for physical power 56 MW, thermal limit of 138

MVA and summer 117 MVA.

The towers of all types are based on the ground with four legs and have independent

concrete foundation each. Different types of foundation have been standardized

which are used depending on the strength and composition of the soil. The distance

between two successive towers is on average 350 m. This distance can be varied

and adjusted depending on configuration and usage conditions of the soil.

The specific route is defined by the points illustrated in the table below and in the cor-

responding topographic map no. ……...

S/N/ Χ Y Κ1 549490.053 4219079.928 Κ2 548895.188 4219037.963 Κ3 547964.892 4218538.219 Κ4 547815.868 4218280.805 Κ5 547701.077 4217868.464 Κ6 547137.973 4216882.774 Κ7 546869.746 4216559.256 Κ8 546108.626 4215470.000

Κ9ΞΚ6* 546012.595 4214303.846 Κ5* 546037.593 4214304.164 Κ4* 546769.364 4214699.191 Κ3* 547204.699 4214837.096 Κ2* 547898.172 4214868.199 Κ1* 548793.157 4215000.000

The second sub-section of the line is three phased double circuit and will bear 24 op-

tic fiber (18 single mode fiber G652 / 6 single mode fiber G655 in each circuit). The

length of the line is 5 km with 20 pillars around. The line has a potential for physical

strength 2x64 MW, with thermal limit of 2x202 MVA and summer 2x169 MVA.

The distance between the two towers is on average 350 m. This distance can be var-

ied and adjusted depending the configuration and usage conditions of the soil.

This route is defined by the positions shown in the table below and the corresponding

certified topographic chart no……...



S/N/ Χ Y Κ9ΞΚ6* 546012.595 4214303.846 Κ10 545903.462 4213675.052 Κ11 545475.000 4213263.133 Κ12 545175.000 4212714.691 Κ13 544801.797 4212278.295

Κ14ΞΚ3* 543105.000 4211461.434 Κ2** 543126.316 4211440.332 Κ1** 543379.968 4211193.433 Κ0** 543384.922 4211168.929

The third sub-section of the line is three phased double circuit and will bear 24 optic

fiber (18 single mode fiber G652 / 6 single mode fiber G655 in each circuit). The

length of the line is 7,6 km with 36 pillars around. The line has a potential for physical

strength 2x64 MW, with thermal limit of 2x202 MVA and summer 2x169 MVA.

The distance between the two towers is on average 350 m. This distance can be var-

ied and adjusted depending on the configuration and usage conditions of the soil.

This route is defined by the positions shown in the table below and the corresponding

certified topographic chart no……...

S/N/ Χ Y Κ14ΞΚ3* 543105.000 4211461.434 Κ15 542500.000 4210692.096 Κ16 5422290.636 4209903.290 Κ17 542481.607 4208790.954 Κ18 542431.390 4208181.568 Κ19 542541.490 4207284.168 Κ20 542701.176 4206900.000 Κ21 543436.127 4206200.067 Κ22 543573.992 4205785.646 Κ23 543841.487 4202507.911 Κ24 543731.874 420288.491 Κ25 543494.803 4201685.491 Κ26 543454.664 4201090.891 Κ27 543344.250 4200355.732 Κ28 543311.345 4200288.413

For the underground end of the interconnection line H/V the following apply:

The last part of the high voltage transmission line 150 kV, approximately 700 m, goes

underground and will consist of six (6) underground, single core, XLPE, 150 kV (170

kV max) power cables with a total length of approximately 6x200 m, with aluminum

conductor (Al) section 1200 mm2, and two single-mode optic fiber cables, which

each carry 24 optical fibers (18 single mode fiber G652 / 6 single mode fiber G655),

total length 2x200 m. The six (6) single core, underground power cables are divided

into two groups in triangular layout. The axial horizontal distance between the two

parallel circuits is 800 mm.

All underground cables will be placed in the trench, depth 1.600 mm, width 1.400



mm, length of approximately 200 m to which careful backfilling with suitable natural

excavation soil will be implemented, fully restoring the surface to its original form.

The construction will be in accordance with applicable regulations and the use of

provided safety regulations (grid labeling, protection plates, etc).

In a small area of 40 m x 40 m and approximately 700 m from the landing point in the

Spilia Buros position the terminal will be installed where all overhead conductors will

lead and connect with the underground section.

22..1155 HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk115500 kkVV ((UUnnddeerrwwaatteerr)) ((KKaarryyssttooss –– RRaaffiinnaa))

The underwater high voltage line 150 kV AC will have a length of about 45 km and starts from the position Spilia Mpouros at the southernmost tip of the gulf of Karystos and directed initially to the south and then west - northwest approaching the coast of Attica, south Rafina main port where it ends at a landing point little further south.

For the construction of the 150 kV underwater line, two tri - polar armored underwater cables are used carrying successive mantles of protection/insulation of extruded pol-yethylene (XLPE). These modern technology cables consist wholly of solid, stable materials and do not contain volatile substances used in the past (oil cables). The cross section of each cable is 630 mm2 copper and will have 24 optic fiber cable (18 fibers G652 / 6 fibers G655).

The installation of underwater cables between Rafina in Attica and Evia in Spilia Buros Karystos includes the following tasks:

- Installation of cables in underwater trench 1,5 m depth in the seabed and backfilling to protect the cable, after the installation, from the scoastline to the landing point up to sea depth 20m along the underwater path of the cable in both landing points, that is in Mpouros Evia and in Rafina Attica.

- Immersion of underwater cables from special cable ship. The cable in its en-

tire length between the isobaths of 20M on both coasts will be buried at a depth of

1m below seabed using special underwater cable system buried deep with water jet-

ting (jetting).

Illustration of underwater high voltage line 150 kV (Karystos - Rafina) is presented in

certified topographics …., ….., ….., …… and certified maps …., ….., ….., accompa-

nying the Environmental Impact Assessment of the project.

22..1166 HHiigghh VVoollttaaggee NNeettwwoorrkk ((UUnnddeerrggrroouunndd)) ((RRaaffiinnaa –– PPaalliinnii SS//SS))

LLaannddiinngg ppooiinntt iinn eeaasstteerrnn AAtt tt iiccaa ccooaasstt

For the landing point in Attica two underground waterproof connectors (one for each



cable) are constructed for the interconnection of underwater cable to land under-

ground cables. Along the coastline and beach area the routing of cables with proper -

standard surface markers is indicated.

At this point six (6) single core underground power cables 150 kV (170 kV max),

XLPE with aluminum conductors (Al) section 1200 mm2, total length of about 6x22

km, and two optic fiber cables, which each carry 24 optical fibers (18 single mode

fiber G652 / 6 single mode fiber G655), total length about 2x22km will end.

All cables will be placed in the trench, depth 1.600 mm, width 1.400 mm and a length

of approximately 22 km.

The six (6) single core underground power cables are divided into two groups in tri-

angular layout. The axial horizontal distance between the two parallel circuits is 800

mm.

Apart from underground, single core cables, into the trench two optic fiber cables,

which each will bear 24 optical fibers (18 single mode fiber G652 / 6 single mode fi-

ber G655), a total length of about 2x22 km will be placed and.

On the side of the Rafina coastline, single core underground cables will end in links

that will connect them to tri polar underwater cables.

Overall, the installation of underwater cables will include the following tasks:

Land trench excavation, depth of about 1,5 m and width 2 m and backfilling to protect

the cable after installation, from the coastline to the connection point with the under-

ground cable at the landing point. The connection to the underground network point

is located approximately 20 m from the shoreline.

MMaaiinn uunnddeerrggrroouunndd HH//VV tt rraannssmmiissssiioonn ll iinnee bbeettwweeeenn RRaaff iinnaa aanndd PPaall ll iinnii SS//SS

The transmission line 150 kV in Attica will be underground throughout its length, ap-

proximately 22 km, and will consist of two circuits. Each circuit would consist of three

single core cables XLPE type bearing aluminum extruded polyethylene mantle for

protection/insulation, section 2.000 mm2, which will be placed in a triangular ar-

rangement, in 80 cm between them, in trench of depth 1,60 m and width of 1, 40 m.

Within the trench for both circuits two optic fiber cables are provided, which each car-

ry 24 fiber (18 single mode fiber G652 / 6 single mode fiber G655), a total length of

about 2 x 22 km.

After the excavation of the trench, a layer of fine coating sand 10 cm thick will be

placed and then the power cables of the circuits will be placed in triangular arrange-



ment. The wires are covered by fine coating sand in successive layers of total thick-

ness 40 cm, above which concrete plates, thickness 4 cm, are placed for mechanical

protection of cables.

A new layer of quarry sand, thickness 15 cm, follows on top of which the optical fiber

cables are placed, covered by gravel layer, Standard Technical Specifications (STS)

3A 25 cm thickness, which is compressed with hand mixer or light mechanical de-

vice, and concrete protection plates are once again placed. A gravel layer STS 3A 30

cm thickness layer follows, which is splashed and concentrated by hand mixer, and

then wire marking plastic mesh is placed. The remaining 35 cm of gravel will be

backfilled with gravel STS 3A, which will undergo the same concentration, and finally

a layer of 5 cm asphalt will be placed. Wherever there will be link wells, multi core

tinned grounding conductor, section 50 mm2, will be placed in their floor, before the

first layer of coating, which will end as pending inside the link well.

The mantles of underground high voltage cables are crossed and grounded in equal

spaces. Optic fiber cables are attached to the power cables after the cables after be-

ing connected with optic fiber underwater cables, and end as well in the Pallini sub-

station.

The trench will lead parallel and to the occupation end of the following routes:

From the link’s construction place the line will lead into the land area of Rafina port to

the point where the “Alexander Fleming” street lies, so will continue on this road in

2,7 km length and up to the junction with “Marathonos Avenue”. Then it turns south-

west along the “Marathonos Avenue” towards Pallini in 7,4 km length to the point

where “Marathonos Avenue” meets “Plutarchou street”. There it turns to the south

along “Plutarchou street” in 1,5 km length and then west along the adjoining “Attiki

Odos” (2,6 km) and “Leontariou road” (2,8 km) to reach the site of SVC, and connect

to the 150 kV busbars to the Pallini Ultra High Voltage Center.

22..1177 PPaalllliinnii SSuubbssttaattiioonn

The underground single core power cable will be extended to connect with the triple

three-phase busbars 150 kV of Pallini substation (150/400 kV). The trees that are in

the extended position will be removed during the construction phase.

The extension consists of adding two gates for connecting the electrical conductors

in the side of the Pallini 150 kV substation and the installation of all required switches

and measuring electromechanical equipment.

This specific intervention is to take place on the west side of Pallini substation near

the existing fence, which separates it from the neighboring houses.



Β) Specific emission limits of pollutant loads and concentrations in accord-

ance with the applicable provisions

1. For point broadcasts suspended solids (dust) from construction sites and facilities

of the project the limit of 100 mg/m3, as defined by Article 2 par.d of P.D. 1180-1181

(Gov 293/A/06.10.1981 "On regulating issues related with the establishment and op-

eration of the industry, all kinds of mechanical installations and warehouses and the

protection of the environment in general".

2. For liquid wastes apply the respective Prefectural decisions.

C) Specific noise and vibration limits in accordance with the applicable provi-

sions

1. For equipment noise emissions used by the project worksites apply the provisions

of the Common Ministerial Decision 37393/2028/2003 (Gov 1418/V/2003 "Measures

and conditions for noise emission in the environment by equipment for outdoor use".

2. For the maximum permitted worksite noise limits apply the provisions of P.D. Arti-

cle 3 1180/81 (Gov. 293/A/06.10.1981 " On regulating issues related with the estab-

lishment and operation of the industry, all kinds of mechanical installations and ware-

houses and the protection of the environment in general”.

D) Required construction projects and anti pollution measure or, in general,

addressing environment degradation

1. The following terms, which are obligatory, concern:

The developer,

The departments and agencies responsible for the construction and operation

of the project,

The head managers of the above departments and agencies, who must en-

sure and monitor their implementation and compliance, everyone who from

the position and duties are responsible for the design, approval, tendering,

assignment, monitoring, certification , receiving and other procedures relating

to the construction and operation of the project,

The contractor.

2. During construction and operation of the project, all necessary actions must be

made and all necessary measures must be taken to ensure:

Compliance with the environmental conditions,

The ability to address and restore unpleasant environmental situations due to



actions or omissions of the operator in violation of environmental conditions.

3. From appropriations for the construction and operation of the project, the required

expenditures for projects to protect and restore the environment must be firstly en-

sured.

4. For any activity or facility necessary for the construction and operation of the pro-

ject, all the required by the legislation permits and approvals must be administered ,

including the approval of the environmental conditions required for any additional pro-

jects or activities that are not taken under consideration in this decision.

5. Before beginning project construction the character of the area should be exam-

ined by the responsible Forest Service. For interventions in forestry land a decision of

the responsible service should be requested and issued, in accordance with the

terms, conditions and procedures provided by the forest legislation.

6. The developer of the project must provide written notice to the responsible

Ephorates of Antiquities fifteen (15) working days prior to commencement of work,

communicating and the timetable of the work, while chiseling works will be conducted

under the supervision of representatives of these Ephorates.

7. If during the construction project antiquities are detected the works will cease im-

mediately as provided by Article 8 of L.3028/2002 and rescue excavation will be con-

ducted as provided by Article 37 of the above law, from the results of which the direc-

tion of the project will depend on, after consultation with the responsible services of

the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. The cost for project supervision, and to conduct

any required rescue excavation, conservation, study and publication of the findings

will be entered in the budget of the project. If such expense exceeds 10% of the pro-

ject budget, a written consent of the developer, after a question from the responsible

department of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, on whether the operator wishes

the continuation or abandonment of the project’s section where antiquities were de-

tected.

8. The developer and contractor must ensure during the deployment phase of the

worksite and the project, the necessary scientific support for the implementation of

the terms of this study that require specialized knowledge in matters relating to the

types of habitats, species of flora / vegetation and fauna / avifauna through collabora-

tion with scientific staff with the necessary training. Any cost for such cooperation will

be borne on the project budget.

9. During construction of the project concern must be taken for the smallest possible

disruption of the natural environment of the project area, so that the adverse effects

of any visual impact, are the smallest possible.

10. The roads (access and internal) should follow, as possible, the terrain and, where



possible, avoid major interventions on the ground..

11. Avoid, where possible, deep and extensive excavations, the width of the access

roads should be limited to the extent necessary. Similarly, all necessary flood control

and erosion halting works must be performed, so that there is no fear of deterioration

of the landscape due to the project. The internal roads should be coated gravel (3A).

12. To protect the roads from rainwater a trench must be dug for draining to natural

recipients, and the necessary culverts at these positions must be constructed.

13. The maintenance of the road will be done by the contractor and operator of the

project every year and additionally whenever requested by the Forest Service.

14. The construction of control cabins should be limited to the necessary for this pur-

pose area. Where possible the construction of control cabins should be done in a

way and with materials that enable smooth integration into the environment and aes-

thetics of the area.

15.1 The medium voltage network should be underground and follow the roads (ac-

cess and internal). The high-voltage network, approximately 22,658 km in length, will

start from the first substation, "Amygdalea", near the eponymous municipal district,

and will end at position Mpouros the southernmost tip of the island, with a north –

south direction. The line will be overhead, except for a section of about 700 m at the

southern end, where it is underground. The final routing of the electricity transmission

network must be approved by the competent for this purpose service and manufac-

tured in accordance with the relevant instructions and specifications.

15.2 The underwater high voltage line 150 kV AC will have a length of approximately

45 km and will start from the position “Spilia Buros” located at the southern end of the

gulf of Karystos, directed initially to the south and then west - northwest approaching

the coast of Attica south of the main port of Rafina and ends to the landing point.

During the installation of underwater high voltage line 150 kV is proposed to use wa-

ter jetting technology in order to avoid interfering with the marine ecosystems of the

region such as the priority habitat “Posidonia meadows” (Posidonia oceanic), men-

tioned in Annex I of the Directive 92/43 / EEC. Otherwise the final routing of the elec-

tricity transmission network must be approved by the competent for this purpose ser-

vice and manufactured in accordance with the relevant instructions and specifica-

tions.

15.3 For the connection of underground single core power cables to the triple three-

phase busbars 150 kV of Pallini substations make the necessary expansion. For the

realization of this work there is a need to remove trees that exist in the extended po-

sition. The extension consists of adding two gates for connecting the electrical con-

ductors enclosed in Pallini in the side of the 150 kV substation and the installation of

all required switches and measuring electromechanical equipment. This intervention



is to take place on the west side of Pallini substation near the existing fence, which

separates it from the neighboring houses.

16. The step up substations 20/150 kV occupy the most essential for this purpose

area and, if possible, should be made of such materials to allow the smooth integra-

tion into the environment and aesthetics of the area. For the construction and opera-

tion of step up substations the recommendations and standards of the competent

service should be met.

17. Daytime and nighttime marking signs should be installed in accordance with the

instructions and recommendations of the Civil Aviation Authority and the National de-

fense general staff.

18. The routes for trucks transporting materials to and from the project, should be

designed so as to avoid passing through villages. Where this is not practicable, all

necessary measures to protect residents from any suspended particles (eg dust)

should be secured beforehand.

19. The disposal of materials related to the construction of the project (inactive, ex-

cess excavation, etc.) : a) within sections of the drainage network, with the exception

of temporary depositing materials at each worksite, and b) near archaeological sites

and in any case in a distance less than 500 m.

20. Required aggregates for the project should be ensured from the excavations to

be made in the construction phase or other legitimate sites. The excavated material

will be processed through mobile rock processing plants and will be used for the re-

quired embankments to minimize the required 3A backfill material and the required

disposal of excess excavation products.

21. Apart from the above ways of aggregates ensuring, if required any installation of

borrow pits, quarries or gravel collecting, the environmental permitting process

should be carried out before installation. Compliance with the provisions of the spe-

cific regulations is necessary.

22. In case of failure in the balance of Earthwork and need for disposal of surplus ex-

cavated material, it should be deposited at sites with gentle slopes that will not affect

the flow of surface waters will not be forested and will not affect the settlements in the

area. Deposition in legitimate existing sites is allowed. Debris and other aggregates

disposal, even temporary, in the drainage network of the area is prohibited.

23. To reduce dust emitted by work the following should be respected: a) the aggre-

gates facilities (the rock processing plants) that may be activated in the project

should have a dampening containment system of dust and all kinds aggregates

transporting tapes should be covered, b) the piles of excavated material and stored

aggregates as well as dirt roads used by vehicles should be wetted periodically, es-



pecially during the months when there is no precipitation (e.g. rain), c) the excava-

tion-construction work and material transport should be coordinated in such a way as

to reduce as far as possible the formation of dust and d) trucks transporting the ag-

gregates and the excavated material must be covered with a special cover..

24. To avoid effects of soil erosion and sediment transporting the earthworks during

periods of high rainfall should be avoided if possible,

25. The operator of the project should ensure the conservasion of cleanliness in

premises managed. Any kind of rubbish, waste material, old machinery and spare

parts, oil etc. must be collected and removed from the worksite and the disposal must

be in compliance with applicable health regulations. Any form of burning materials

(tires, oil, etc.) in the project area is prohibited.

26. Any washing machinery or vehicles in the immediate area of the works is prohib-

ited. In case of machinery and vehicle washing a pit for collection and sedimentation

of leaching water must be built, while regular cleaning must be made with disposal of

the waste in an approved area.

27. The management and disposal of used oil of the worksite must be performed in

accordance with the applicable regulations. The storage and transfusion of fuels and

oils must be carried out in a safe manner to prevent any leaks.

28. If vehicles and equipment maintenance work is necessary, including changing

their oil, in the construction area of the project, it must be performed exclusively in

space inside the worksite and on sealed floor.

29. To address potential accidents resulting in leakage of non-biodegradable liquid

pollutants, in each area of construction should exist the necessary materials for con-

tainment and diffusion such as sawdust, oil absorbents, etc.

30. Upon completion of any construction work remove any worksite facilities and all

kinds of surplus materials in responsibility of the contractor and those unusable them

to be transported to approved disposal sites.

31. Before beginning construction work logging table must be drafted and approved

by the Forest Service in order to estimate the number (volume) of timber to be har-

vested during the execution of projects.

32. Before beginning construction work, if requested by the competent Forest Ser-

vice, a study of vegetative restoration must be drafted and approved by the Forest

Service to restore the embankments, as requested by the services.

33. Any damage to forest vegetation within the project, and the area of occupancy for

the work should be reduced in the minimum required area. Any logging or eradication

of forest shrubs and trees, and the disposal of the timber, should be in accordance

with the relevant provisions of the forest law and the instructions of the competent



Forest Service.

34. Any plantings should take place under the required landscape design studies,

while in the case relating to forest land a technical study should be developed and

approved by the competent Forest Service.

35. The change of the work area use beyond the approved purpose is prohibited.

These intervention positions may be modified upon the recommendation of the com-

petent forestry service, if there are serious matters of natural environment protection.

36. All the necessary environment and forest vegetation protection measures (fire

prevention and suppression) should be taken, as well as for the employees or visitors

of the forest area. Where necessary tasteful warning signs should be placed..

37. The removed topsoil should be preserved so as to be used for restorations.

38. During construction and operation of the project all measures for fire protection

and to minimize the risk of transition in adjacent areas should be taken.

39. The average noise level of project worksites should be within the limits defined by

statutory provisons as applicable depending on the region of project implementation.

40. The machinery used in the worksites of the project should conform to noise levels

defined by existing provisions as applicable. Stay is not allowed in the construction

site and machine use without the EU certificate of noise is prohibited.

41. For the produced electromagnetic radiation (e.g. step up substations, high-

voltage network) the statutory public exposure limits apply as they have been estab-

lished and apply in each case by the relevant provisions.

42. During the construction and operation of the project do not to hinder the smooth

communication between the residential areas.

43. Continuously ensure the requirement for minimum noise level limits for residential

activities less than 45 db

44. Apply the protection rules from accidents on the type of work to be performed.

45. If for any reason the contractor and the project manager stops the operation of

wind farms, he must remove the facilities and equipment used and the land is revert

to the management of the competent forest service. In addition the contractor and the

project manager must restore the area to its original condition.

E) 1. Area Environment - Sensitive data - Special Protected Areas

A large part of the wind farms installation area is included in the Natura 2000 ecolog-

ical network and is designated as a Site of Community Importance (SCI, Directive

92/43/EC and Decision 2010/45/EU, GR2420001, Mount Ochi, plain Karystos

Potami, Cape Kafireas and marine coastal zone) and a Special Protection Area for



birds (SPA, Directives 2009/147/EC and 79/409/EU, GR2420012, Mount Ochi,

coastal zone and islands).

To protect and preserve the biodiversity of the region the following must be met:

1. Establish controlled access bars on the roads that will be opened for the needs of

the project, to avoid disturbance from human presence and poaching of wild bird

species.

2. The sides of roads, in some points, should have the fewest broken stones and will

be normalized to ensure the movement of fauna (turtles, invertebrates, etc.).

3. For WF “Kathara”, “Anatoli” and “Kerasia” systematic surveillance (monitoring)

must be made during the operational phase for at least one year. Based on the re-

sults of scientific monitoring, e.g. if problems of avifauna species are encountered,

the operation of the wind farms will be adjusted accordingly. These WF are in close

proximity (<1km) with Eagle Owl observation points (Bubo bubo, “Kathara” and

“Kerasia”) or associated with fairly strong presence of Short-toed (Snake) Eagle

(Circaetus gallicus) (“Kathara”, “Anatoli” and “Kerasia”) and Bonelli’s Eagle

(Hieraaetus fasciatus) (“Kathara” and “Anatoli”).

E2. Measures and projects for the conservation of the above elements

Any adverse impact from the construction and operation of the project in (natural and

anthropogenic) elements of the region, are sufficiently addressed by the remedial

measures proposed to be made or obtained in section (D) of this study.

F) TIME PERIOD OF THE DECISION

The above mentioned environmental conditions are valid for 10 years, until …., pro-

vided that they met exactly. Before this date the responsible for the project must be

provided with a decision to renew or extend the validity of environmental conditions

of the project, in accordance with the applicable provisions.

G) Requirements for amending the Decision

1. For the improvement, amendment, expansion or modernization of key features of

the project, as described in the EIA under conditions and limitations of the present,

the compliance from the SSE of MEPPPW with the procedure provide in Article 13 of

the CMD11014/703/F104/2003 as applicable.

2. This decision may be amended if, during the construction or operation of the pro-

ject, derives that the protection provided by this environment is not sufficient. Moreo-

ver in view of the long time period of the project, this decision may be changed, if it

needed to be updated in the field of environmental sciences.



Η) Monitoring compliance with Environmental Conditions

This decision should always be in the worksite and the headquarters of the of the

construction and operation contractors, accompanied by the approved EIA, and must

be demonstrated in any competent, according to the relevant legislation.

I) Penalties for failure to implement the Environmental Terms

Failure to comply with the terms of this Decision or its excess during the project, re-

sulting in environmental degradation, involve, in addition to the penalties provide by

the provisions of relevant legislation, the enforcement of penalties provided from pro-

vision of Articles 28 and 29 of L.1650/86, and Article 30 of the same Law as amend-

ed by Article 4 of L.3010/2002.

J) Announcement of the Decision

The Prefectural Council of Southeastern Evia is obliged to publicize this decision at

the expense of the developer of the project, as described in Article 5 of the CMD

37111/2021/2003.

THE CONTRACTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

EVANGELOS PAPPAS

CONSULTANT Class.27 (ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES), Class C, AM 6691



1100 DDEESSCCRRIIPPTTIIOONN OOFF PPRROOBBLLEEMMSS EENNCCOOUUNNTTEERREEDD DDUURRIINNGG TTHHEE DDEEVVEELLOOPPMMEENNTT OOFF TTHHEE SSTTUUDDYY

This chapter describes problems encountered in the preparation of the Environmen-

tal Impact Study, and how they were addressed. Specifically:

This study was conducted according to the needs and timetable set from the begin-

ning by the General Manager and Member of the Study Group, Mr. Evangelos Pap-

pas, Biologist, MSc. Environmental Management, Scholar Class 27 (Environmental

Studies, Class III, RN: 6691).

Significant difficulties or other problems were not encountered in the preparation of

this study. Visits to the study area, field research, collecting information for further

analysis, writing of texts and the compilation of maps were made at the planned time-

table.



1111 MMAAPPSS –– TTOOPPOOGGRRAAPPHHIICCSS

In Section D (MAPS – TOPOGRAPHICS) of this Environmental Impact Study the fol-

lowing are attached in this order:

1111..11 MMaappss

NUMBER NAME SCALE 1 ORIENTATION MAP 1:75.000

2A ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS MAP 1:85.000 2Β ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS MAP 1:85.000 2Γ ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS MAP 1:85.000 3 GENERAL AREA MAP 1:50.000 4 GEOLOGICAL MAP 1:50.000

5A NATURAL HABITATS MAP according to habitat mapping project M.E.P.P.P.W. (now M.E.E.C.C)

1:30.000

5Β NATURAL HABITATS MAP according to field recordings 1:30.000 6A LAND USE MAP 1:25.000 6Β LAND USE MAP 1:25.000 7 IMPACT MAP 1:50.000 8 PHOTOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS MAP 1:40.000 9 CUMMULATIVE IMPACT MAP 1:50.000

1111..22 TTOOPPOOGGRRAAPPHHIICC MMAAPPSS

NUMBER NAME SCALE MAP 1 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D1 - KATHARA, D2 ANATOLI 1:5.000 MAP 2 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D4 - MILIA, D7 KERASIA 1:5.000 MAP 3 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D3 - SPILIA, D8 PLATANOS 1:5.000 MAP 4 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D5 - PLATANISTOS 1:5.000 MAP 5 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP: WF: D6 - PALIOPYRGOS 1:5.000



1122 DDOOCCUUMMEENNTTSS –– AAPPPPRROOVVAALLSS

The following are attached in order :

Document of Ministry of E.P.P.W. / General Directorate of Environment / Special

Environmental Service, D.N. 110580/15.12.2008 (Endorsement of the Prelimi-

nary Environmental Impact Assessment of the project ).

Copy of certified land use map (Map No.: 8.a) associated with D.N.

110580/15.12.2008 document of the Special Environment Service of M.E.P.P.W.

TSO Document (No./Da./TSO/8920/29.12.09) (Offer for System Connection of

16 wind parks).

Copies of Production Licenses of the wind farms under consideration:

- No. D6/F17.1162/ref.13262/16.6.2009 Production License of the company

"AIOLIKO PARKO KATHARA SA" for wind farm power 28 MW in place

Kathara.


"AIOLIKO PARKO ANATOLIS - PRINIS SA" for wind farm power 14 MW in

place Anatoli - Prinia.


"AIOLIKO PARKO SPILIA SA" for wind farm power 26 MW in place Spilia.


"MAIOLIKO PARKO MILIA SA" for wind farm power 16 MW in place Milia.


"AIOLIKO PARKO MITIKA SA" for wind farm power 16 MW in place

Platanistos.


"AIOLIKO PARKO PALAIOPYRGOS SA" for wind farm power 12 MW in place

Palaiopyrgos.


"AIOLIKO PARKO KERASIAS SA" for wind farm power 24 MW in place

Kerasia.


"AIOLIKO PARKO PLATANOS SA" for wind farm power 12 MW in place

Platanos



Endorsements of the Regulatory Authority for Energy (RAE) on the

amendment of the production license.

- Endorsement on the amendment of No. D6 / F17.1162 / ref.13262 / 16.6.2009

Production License electricity for wind farm power 28 MW in the “Kathara”

position Municipality of Marmari and Community of Kafireas, Evia

Prefecturate of the company AIOLIKA PARKA KATHARA SA.


Production License electricity for wind farm power 14 MW in the “Anatoli” po-

sition, Community of Kafireas, Evia Prefecturate of the company AIOLIKA

PARKA ANATAOLIS - PRINIAS SA.


Production License electricity for wind farm power 26 MW in the “Spilia” posi-

tion, Municipality of Marmari and Karystos, Evia Prefecturate of the company

AIOLIKA PARKA SPILIAS SA.


Production License electricity for wind farm power 16 MW in the “Milia” posi-

tion, Community of Kafireas, Evia Prefecturate of the company AIOLIKA

PARKA MILIAS SA.


Production License electricity for wind farm power 16 MW in the “Platanistos”

position, Municipality of Karystos, Evia Prefecturate of the company AIOLIKA

PARKA MYTIKAS SA.

- Endorsement on the amendment of No. D6 / F17.1391 / ref.19515 /

02.10.2006 Production License electricity for wind farm power 12 MW in the

“Paliopyrgos” position, Municipality of Karystos, Community of Kafireas, Evia

Prefecturate of the company AIOLIKA PARKA PALIOPYRGOS SA.


Production License electricity for wind farm power 24 MW in the “Kerasia” po-

sition, Municipality of Karystos, Community of Kafireas, Evia Prefecturate of

the company AIOLIKA PARKA KERASIAS SA.


Production License electricity for wind farm power 12 MW in the “Platanos”

position, Municipality of Marmari, Evia Prefecturate of the company AIOLIKA

PARKA PLATANOS SA.



1133 BBIIBBLLIIOOGGRRAAPPHHYY –– SSOOUURRCCEESS

1133..11 GGrreeeekk BBiibbll iiooggrraapphhyy

Decision no. ref. 104247/SES/MEPPPW (OGG 663/26.05.2006) "Preliminary Envi-

ronmental Assessment and Evaluation Process (PEAEP) and the Environmental

Conditions Approval (ECA) of Renewable Energy Sources (RES) in accordance

with Article 4 of Law 1650/1986 , as amended by Article 2 of N.3010/2002”.

Decision no. ref.104248/SES/MEPPW (OGG 663/26.05.2006) “Content, docu-

ments and other data of Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (PEIA),

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and related environmental studies, of Re-

newable Energy Sources (RES )“.

Decision No. 26298 (OGG 1469/09.10.2003) “Approval of Regional Framework for

Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development of Central Greece Region”.

EE (2000). Managing of Natura 2000 network areas. The provisions of Article 6 of

Directive 92/43/EEC on habitats. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the

European Communities.

Hellenic Ornithological Society (1989). Motion for Protection, Upgrading and Utili-

zation of Wetland in Campos Karistos as Natural Park. Unpublished Report to the

Municipality of Karystos. 39 pages and maps and charts. Athens.

Hellenic Ornithological Society (1994), "Important Bird Areas of Greece, an ac-

quaintance with important habitatas of Greece." Special Edition, Athens

National Statistical Service of Greece (NSSG), " Census elements year 2001."

National Statistical Service of Greece (NSSG), " Census elements year 1991."

National Statistical Service of Greece (NSSG) “Land use Census elements year

1991”

HTSO, 2004. Study of Transmission System Development, Athens 2004.

Dimopoulos P., et al., (SES) (1998). "Special Environmental Study of Dimosaris

canyon and greater region (Mount Ochi - plain Karystos - Cape Kafireas)" Prefec-

ture of Evia, Directorate of Physical Planning, Housing and Environment - Envi-

ronment Department (unpublished study.

Zogaris S., (1985). Otter observation in area of Karystos. Unpublished typed report

to the Greek Society for the Protection of Nature.



Common Ministerial Decision 49828 (OGG 2464/V/03.12.2008) "Approval of spatial

planning framework for sustainable development and renewable energy and stra-

tegic environmental assessment of this."

Common Ministerial Decision No. : 11014/703/F104 (OGG 332/20 - 03 - 2003)

"Preliminary Environmental Assessment Process and Evaluation (P.E.A.P.E.) and

Environmental Terms Approval (E.T.A.) in accordance with Article 4 of L.1650/86

(A 160) as amended by Article 2 of L.3010/2002 "Amendment of L.1650/86 with Di-

rectives 97/11/EC and 96 / 61/EC ... and other provisions "(A 91)".

Common Ministerial Decision No. : 15393/2332 (OGG 1022-1005 - 08 - 2002)

"Classification of public and private projects and activities into categories, accord-

ing to Article 3 of L.1650/86, as replaced by Article 1 of L.3010/2002."

L. 1650/86 (OGG160/16 - 10 - 1986) "For the protection of the environment."

L.3010/2002 (OGG 91/25 - 04 - 2002) "Harmonisation of L.1650/86 with Directives

97/11/EC and 96/61/EC, Delineation process and regulation issues on streams and

other provisions”.

Economou D. & Associates, 2006, "Spatial Wind Suitability Area Study in the

southern part of Evia", Athens.

Economou D. & Associates, 2005, "Spatial Planning Study for the siting of wind

farms zone in NE Laconia," study was conducted in collaboration with the Universi-

ty of Thessaly - Department of Urban and Regional Planning

Presidential Decree No. 35662 (OGG 587/D/25.09.1989) "Determination of resi-

dential zone control (RZC) segmentationn threshold and other conditions and re-

strictions on building outside the approved town planning and off settlement limits

before the year 1923, community Marmari (Evia L)."

Ministry of Development (2005). 3rd national report for the level of renwable energy

infiltration the year 2010, Athens.

1133..22 FFoorreeiiggnn LLaanngguuaaggee BBiibbll iiooggrraapphhyy

Bauer, W., Helversen, O.V., Hodge, M., and Martens, J. (1969). Aves. In Kanellis,

A. (ed) Catalogus Faunae Graeciae. Thessaloniki.

Bolos O., Masalles R.M., Vinot J.M. & J. Vigo (1996). "A survey on the vegetation

of Kephalonia". Phytocoenologia 26 (1): 81-123. Berlin – Stuttgart

Bourdakis. S. And S. Vareltzidou (2000). Greece. Pp 261-333 in M.F. Heath and

M.I. Evans, eds. Important Bird Areas in Europe: Priority sites for conservation. 2:



Southern Europe. Cambridge, UK: Birdlife International (Birdlife Conservation

Series No. 8).

Briggs, B. (1996). RSPB policy and experience. Birds and Wind Turbines: can they

coexist? Proceedings to a one day seminar. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Hun-

tingdon, Cambs.

Casement, M.B. (1966). Migration Across The Mediterranean Observed By Radar.

Ibis, 108: 461- 480

Clausager, I. and Nohr, H. (1995). Vindmollers indvirkning pa fugle – Status over

viden og perspektiver. Impact of wind turbines on birds – status of present

knowledge and perspectives. Denmark: Miljo-og Energiministeriet.

Colsen & Assc. (1995). Avian interaction with wind energy facilities: a summary.

Report for the American Wind Energy Association.

Davidson, C. 1998. Issues in measuring landscape fragmentation. Wildlife Society

Bulletin, 26:32-37.

DEFRA (2005). Nature Conservation Guidance on Offshore Windfarm Develop-

ment. Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK.

DH Ecological Consultancy (2000). Windy Standard wind farm, Dumfries and Gal-

loway. Breeding Bird Survey 2000.

English Nature (2003). Windfarms and birds. Birds network information note. UK

Gaetlich, M. (1992). Mission dans l’ile d’ Eubee, du 25 au 27 mars et les 21 et 22

avril 1989. In: Invetaire de la Faune de Grece. Milieux humides insulaires: Egee

occidentale et centrale. Condenses des rapportes de missions. Biol. Gallo-hellen.,

19 (2): 105 (189).

Hallmann, B.and Sfikas, G. (1987). "Corine Biotope Program: Unpublished Data".

Handrinos G. and Akriotis, T. (1997). Birds of Greece. Christopher Helm Ltd.

Langston, R.H.W. and Pullan, J.D. (2002). Windfarms and birds: An analysis of the

effects of windfams on birds and guidance on environmental assessment criteria

and site selection issues. Report written by Birdlife on behalf of the Bern Conven-

tion.

Leddy, K.L., Higgings, K.F. and Naugle, D.E. (1999). Effects of wind turbins on up-

land nesting birds in Conservation reserve program grasslands. Wilson Bull

111:100-104.



Loyd, A. (1996). Wind Farm design in the light of previous experience. Birds and

Wind Turbines: can they coexist? Proceedings to a one day seminar. Institute of

Terrestrial Ecology, Huntingdon, Cambs.

Meek, E.R., Ribbands, J.B., Christer, W.G., Davey, P.R. and Higginson, I (1993).

The effects of aero-generators on moorland bird populations in the Orkney Islands,

Scotland. Bird study 40: 140-143.

Moreau, R.E. (1972). The Palaearctic-African bird migration systems. London:

Academic Press.

Natural Environment Consultants (1995). Rigged Hill (Co. Londonderry) Wind Farm

Bird Monitoring. Report for Renewable Energy Systems Ltd.

NWCC (2005). Proceedings of Onshore wildlife interactions with wind Develop-

ments: Research Meeting V. National Wind Coordinating Committee – Wldlife

Workgroup. Washington DC, USA.

Orloff, S. and Flannery, A. (1996). A continued examination of avian mortality in the

Altamont Pass wind resource area. California Energy Commission, Sacramento.

Pedersen, M.B. & Poulsen, E. (1991). Impact of a 2 MW Wind Turbine on Birds.

Danish National Environment Research Institute.

Phitos, D., Strid, A., Snogerup, S. and Greuter, W. (1995). The Red Data Book of

Rare and Threatened Plants in Greece. WWF.

POWIND-V (2005). Proccedings of the Onshore Wildlife Interactions with Wind De-

velopments: Research Meeting V. Lansdowne, VA November 3-4, 2005. Prepared

for the Wildlife Subcommittee of the National Wind Coordinating Committee by

RESOLVE, Inc., Washington, DC, Susan Savitt Schwartz, ed.120pp.

RSPB (2002). Wind Energy and Birds: Results and requirements. RSPB Research

Report no. 2. UK.

Still, D., Little B. And Lawrence, S. (1996). The effect of wind turbines on the bird

population at Blyth Harbour, Northumberland. ETSU W/13/00394/REP.

Thomas, R. (1999). Renewable energy and environmental impacts in the UK: birds

and wind turbines. Unpubl. Mres Thesis, UCL. London

TNS Consumer (2003). Attitudes and Knowledge of Renewable Energy Amongst

the General Public. UK.

Tucker, G.M. and Evans, M.I. Eds. (1997). Habitats for Birds in Europe: A Conser-

vation Strategy for the Wider Environment. BirdLife International, Cambridge (UK).

(BirdLife Conservation Series No. 6).



Tucker, G.M. and Heath, M.F. (1994). Birds in Europe: their conservation status.

Cambridge, U.K.: Birdlife International (Birdlife International Series no. 3)

Tucker, V.A. (1996). Using a collition model to design safer wind turbine rotors for

birds. Jornal of Solar Energy Engineering. 118:233-262.

Watson, III, G.E. (1964). Ecology and Evolution of Passerine Birds in the Islands of

the Aegean Sea. Ph.D Thesis. Yale University.

Wilkerman, J.E. (1992). The impact of the Sep wind park near Oosterbierum (Fr.),

The Netherlands, on birds, 4: Disturbance. RIN Rep. 92/5. The Netherlands.

Winkelman, J.E. (1989). Birds and the wind park near Urk: collision victims and dis-

turbance of ducks, geese, and swans. RIN Rep. 89/15. Rijksinstituut voor

Natuurbeheer, Arnhem, The Netherlands. Dutch, English summary.

Winkelman, J.E. (1992). The impact of Sep wind park near Oosterbierum, The

Netherlands, on birds, 1: collision victims. DLO-instituut voor Bos- en

Natuurronderzoek. RIN-rapport 92/2.

Zogaris, S. (1995). Avifauna and Nature Conservation in Karystia, Southern Evia,

Greece. For completion of a course in Biological Sciences (Dr. D. Lank). Simon

Fraser University. Unpublished 121 pp.

Zogaris, S. (1996). "Birds and Habitat Conservation in Karystia, Southern Evia", in:

Minutes for the 7th International Convention of Zoological Geography and Ecology

of Greece and Neighbouring Regions, Greek Zoological Society and Department of

Biology, University of Athens.

1133..33 GGrreeeekk BBiibbll iiooggrraapphhyy ((uusseedd ffoorr tthhee pprreeppaarraattiioonn ooff tthhee SSppeecciiaall OOrrnnii tthhoollooggiiccaall AAsssseessssmmeenntt))

Enviroplan – Development & Construction Consultants, 2007, Strategic Environ-

mental Assessment of the Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable

Development for Renewable Energy, Ministry of Environment.

Hellenic Ornithological Society, February 2008, Impacts of wind farms on birds,

Opinion Text..

K. Mullarney, Svensson, L., Zetterstrom, D. & Grant, P.J., 2007, Birds of Greece,

Cyprus and Europe, Albert Bonniers Forlag, Hellenic Ornithological Society.

WWF Hellas, October 2008, Proposal for the proper siting of wind farms in Thrace,

Opinion Text, Dadia - Athens.



Asimakopoulos G., - 'EKOTECHNIKA', 2007, Special Framework for Spatial Plan-

ning and Sustainable Development for Renewable Energy (L.2742/1999) - Phase A

supportive study, Ministry of Environment.

Vlami B., 2000. “The District of Ochi-Karystos Marmari Kafireas” Ministry of Envi-

ronment, Prefecture of Evia Construction Company.

Dimalexis A., Mullin,S. V., Xirouchakis S. Grivas K., 2009, Evaluation of the Impact

on Avifaune by the Creation and Operation of Wind Farms, Hellenic Ornithological

Society.

Dimopoulos P., 1998, Special environmental study Dimosaris canyon and sur-

rounding area (Mount Ochi - Campos Karystos - Cape Kafireas). Final Phase,

Prefecture of Evia.

Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Development, General Energy Directorate, Direc-

torate of Renewable Energy Sources and Energy Saving, 2003, 2nd National Re-

port on the Field of Renewable Energy Infiltration in the year 2010 (Articles 3 and 6

of Directive 2001/77/EC)

Zogaris, S. 1985, "The Birds of Karystos Region ", Hellenic Ornithological Society

Bulletin 2: 9-13.

Zogaris S., Alivisatos C., Roussopoulos, J., Vlami, B., 1998, Ornithological survey

Koskina Area, Green Community, Evia in order to identify and evaluate the impact

of the installation of 16 wind turbines wind farm capacity of 10,56 MW, Unpublished

Work / Environmental Impact Study TERNA ENERGY SA / HOUSE LTD.

Karandinos M. (ed.), 1992, The Red Book of Threatened Vertebrates of Greece.

Hellenic Zoological Society - Hellenic Ornithological Society, p.356

Bourdakis, S., 2000, Wind Farms in Ochi, Oionos – Ochi Region 12:38-39..

Xirouchakis S., 2009, Monitoring of impact on avifauna from the operation of the

WF of Terna Energy in Perdikokoryfi position, MD A. Barbara, P. Irakleiou.

Museum of Natural History, Heraklion.

MEPPW, 2008, Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Develop-

ment for Renewable Energy (OGG B 2464, 03/12/2008).

Publications Office of the European Union, 2000, Management of Natura 2000

network sites, the provisions of Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC on habitats, Lux-

embourg.

Ministerial Decision ref 104247/SES/MEPPW "Procedure of Preliminary Environ-

mental Assessment and Evaluation (PEAE) and Environmental Conditions Approv-



al (ECA) of Renewable Energy Sources (RES), in accordance with Article 4 of

L.1650/1986, as amended by Article 2 of L.3010/2002 "( OGG B 663 05/26/2006).

1133..44 FFoorreeiiggnn llaanngguuaaggee bbiibbll iiooggrraapphhyy ((uusseedd ffoorr tthhee pprreeppaarraatt iioonn ooff tthhee SSppeecciiaall OOrrnnii tthhoollooggiiccaall AAsssseessssmmeenntt))

Alerstam, T., 1990, Bird Migration, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Allan, J., Bell, M., Brown, M., Budgey, R. & Walls, R., 2004, Measurement of Bird

Abundance and Movements Using Bird Detection Radar Central Science Laborato-

ry (CSL) Research reportm York, UK: CSL.

Allcorn, R., Eaton, M.A., Cranswick, P.A., Perrow, M., Hall, C., Smith, L., Reid,

J.B., Webb, A., Smith, K.W., Langston, R.H.W. & Ratcliffe, N., 2003, A Pilot Study

of Breeding Tern Foraging Ranges in NW England and East Anglia in Relation to

Potential Development Areas for Offshore Wind Farms, Wildfowl & Wetland Trust,

Slimbridge, UK.

Band, W., 2000, Estimating collision risks of birds with wind turbines. Scottish

Natural Heritage, Research Advisory Note, Battleby.

Band, W., Madders, M. & Whitfield, D.P., 2005, Developing field and analytical

methods to assess avian collision risk at wind farms, In De Lucas, M., Janss, G.

and Ferrer, M., eds., Birds and Wind Power.

Barrios, L. & Rodriguez, A., 2004, Behavioural and environmental correlates of

soaring-bird mortality at on-shore wind turbines, J. Appl. Ecol. 41: 72–81.

Brown, M.J., Linton, E. & Rees, E.C., 1992, Causes of mortality among wild swans

in Britain, Wildfowl 43: 70–79.

Blondel, J., Chessel, D. & Frochot B., 1998, Bird Species impoverishment, niche

expansion and density inflation in Mediterranean island habitats, Ecology, 69(6):

1899-1917.

Camphuysen, C.J., Fox, A.D., Leopold, M.F. & Petersen, I.K., 2004, Towards

Standardised Seabirds at Sea Census Techniques in Connection with Environmen-

tal Impact Assessments for Offshore Wind Farms in the UK: a Comparison of Ship

and Aerial Sampling Methods for Marine Birds, and their Applicability to Offshore

Wind Farm Assessments. Report commissioned by COWRIE, Texel, Royal Nether-

land Institute for Sea Research, Netherlands.

Canadian Wildlife Service. 2006. Wind turbines and birds – a guidance document

for Environmental Assessment. Environment Canada.



Chamberlain, D., Rehfisch, M.R., Fox, A.D., Desholm, M. & Anthony, S.J., 2006,

The effect of avoidance rates on bird mortality predictions made by wind turbine

collision risk models, In Wind, Fire and Water: Renewable Energy and Birds, Ibis

148 (Suppl. 1): 198–202.

Christensen, T.K., Hounisen, J.P., Clausager, I. & Petersen, I.K., 2004, Visual and

Radar Observations of Birds in Relation to Collision Risk at the Horns Rev. Off-

shore Wind Farm, Annual status report 2003, Report commissioned by Elsam En-

gineering A/S 2003, NERI Report. Rønde, National Environmental Research

Institute, Denmark.

Colson & Associates. 1995. Avian interaction with wind energy facilities: a sum-

mary. Prepared for the American Wind Energy Association, Washington D.C.

Cramp, S.(ed), 1987, The Birds of the Western Palearctic, Volumes I-VI, Oxford

University Press, England.

Cranswick, P.A., 2002, Surveillance of seaducks in the United Kingdom: a review

of methods and proposals for future activity, Wildfowl and Wetland Trust

Slimbridge, UK.

Desholm, M. & Kahlert, J. 2005. Avian collision risk at an offshore wind farm. Royal

Society Biol., Lett. 1: 296–298.

Desholm, M., 2003, Thermal Animal Detection Systems (TADS). Development of a

Method for Estimating Collision Frequency of Migrating Birds at Offshore Wind

Turbines, NERI Technical Report no. 440, National Environmental Research Insti-

tute, Ronde, Denmark.

Desholm, M., 2005, Preliminary Investigations of Bird-Turbine Collisions at Nysted

Offshore Wind Farm and Final Quality Control of Thermal Animal Detection System

(TADS), National Environmental Research Institute, Ronde, Denmark.

Desholm, M., Fox, A.D. & Beasley, P., 2005, Best practice. Guidance for the Use of

Remote Techniques for Observing Bird Behaviour in Relation to Offshore Wind

farms. A Preliminary Discussion Document Produced for COWRIE, Collaborative

Offshore Wind Research into the Environment COWRIE – REMOTE – 05 – 2004,

The Crown Estate, London.

Desholm, M., Fox, A.D., Beasley, P. & Kahlert, J., 2006, Remote techniques for

counting and estimating the number of bird-wind turbine collisions at sea: a review,

In Wind, Fire and Water: Renewable Energy and Birds. Ibis 148 (Suppl. 1): 76–89.

Dirksen, S., Spaans, A.L. & van der Winden, J., May 2000, Studies on Nocturnal

Flight Paths and Altitudes of Waterbirds in Relation to Wind Turbines: A Review of



Current Research in the Netherlands. In Proceedings of the National Avian-Wind

Power Planning Meeting III, Prepared for the National Wind Coordinating Commit-

tee. Ontario: LGL Ltd., San Diego, California.

Dirksen, S., van der Winden, J. & Spaans, A.L., 1998, Nocturnal collision risks of

birds with wind turbines in tidal and semi-offshore areas, In Ratto, C.F. & Solari, G.,

eds. Wind Energy and Landscape, Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Drewitt A.L., Langston R.H.W., 2006, Assessing the impacts of wind farms on

birds, Ibis, 148, 29–42.

Drewitt A.L., Langston R.H.W., 2008, Collision effects of wind-power generators

and other obstacles on birds. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1134:

233-266.

Edited, 2000, Communication from the Commission on the precautionary principle,

European Commission.

Edited, 2004, Birds During Construction and Operation of Nysted Offshore Wind

Farm at Rodsand. Annual status report 2003. Report Commissioned by Energi, E2

A/S, National Environmental Research Institute, Ronde, Denmark.

Edited, BMT Cordah Limited, 2003, Offshore Wind Energy Generation: Phase 1

proposals and environmental report for consideration by the Department of Trade

and Industry. Report no: Cordah/DTI.009.04.01.06/2003, BMT Cordah, Edinburgh,

UK.

Edited, DEFRA, 2005, Nature conservation Guidance on Offshore Wind farm De-

velopment: a Guidance Note for Developers Undertaking Offshore Wind farm De-

velopments. Prepared by Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Edited, 2004, Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources – Encouraging Electricity

in Europe, European Commission.

Edited, European Commission, 2008, Guidelines on Wind Energy Development,

and EU Nature Conservation Requirements. Draft 17 June 2008.

Edited, Heath, M. & Evans, M.I., 2000, Important Bird Areas in Europe: Priority

sites for conservation. Vol. 2: Southern Europe, BirdLife International (BirdLife

Conservation Series No. 8), Cambridge, UK.

Edited, Morris, P. & Therivel, R., 1995, Methods of Environmental Impact Assess-

ment. Taylor & Francis.



Edited, Langston, R.H.W. & Ratcliffe, N., 2003., A Pilot Study of Breeding Tern

Foraging Ranges in NW England and East Anglia in Relation to Potential Devel-

opment Areas for Offshore Wind Farms, Wildfowl & Wetland Trust, Slimbridge, UK

Edited, Scottish Natural Heritage, 2005, Methods to assess the impacts of pro-

posed onshore wind farms on bird communities, S.N.H., Edinburgh.

Edited, Lucas de, M., Janss, G.F.E., Ferrer, M., 2007, Birds and Wind Farms –

Risk Assessment and Mitigation, Servicios Informativos Ambientales/ Quercus,

Madrid.

English Nature, 2003, Windfarms and birds, Birds network information note, UK.

Erickson, W.P., Johnson, G.D., Strickland, M.D., Young, D.P., Jr Sernja, K.J. &

Good, R.E., 2001, Avian collisions with wind turbines: a summary of existing stud-

ies and comparisons to other sources of avian collision mortality in the United

States, Western EcoSystems Technology Inc., National Wind Coordinating Com-

mittee, Resource Document.

Evans, W.R., May 2000, Applications of Acoustic Bird Monitoring for the Wind

Power Industry. In Proceedings of the National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meet-

ing III, Prepared for the National Wind Coordinating Committee, Ontario: L.G.L.

Ltd., San Diego, California.

Everaert, J., Devos, K., & Kuijken, E., 2001, Windtrubines en vogels in Vlaaneren:

Voorlopige Onderzoeksresultaten En Buitenlandse Bevindingen [Wind Turbines

and Birds in Flanders (Belgium): Preliminary Study Results in a European Context],

Instituut Voor Natuurbehoud, Report R.2002.03, Brussels B.76pp., Institut voor

Natuurbehoud, Brussels, Belgium.

Fabrizio, S., L. Marchesi, P. Pedrini, M. Ferrer, and V. Penteriani, 2004, Electrocu-

tion alters the distribution and density of a top predator, the eagle owl Bubo bubo,

Journal of Applied Ecology, 41: 836-851

Fox, A.D., Desholm, M., Kahlert, J., Christensen, T.K. & Krag Petersen, I.B., 2006,

Information needs to support environmental impact assessments of the effects of

European marine offshore wind farms on birds, In Wind, Fire and Water: Renewa-

ble Energy and Birds, Ibis 148 (Suppl. 1): 129–144.

Fuller, M. & Mosher, J., 1981, Methods of detecting and counting raptors: a review,

Studies in Avian Biology 6: 235-248.

Gill, J., Tonwsley, P., Mudge, G. 1996. Review of the impacts of wind farms and

other aerial structures upon birds. Scottish Natural Heritage Review, No. 21.

Edinburgh.



Guillemette, M., Larsen, J.K. & Clausager, I., 1998, Impact Assessment of an Off-

Shore Wind Park on Sea Ducks, NERI, Technical Report no. 227.

Guillemette, M., Larsen, J.K. & Clausager, I., 1999, Assessing the Impact of the

Tuno Knob Wind Park on Sea Ducks: the Influence of Food Resources, NERI,

Technical Report no. 263, National Environmental, Research Institute, Ronde,

Denmark.

Handrinos, G. & Akriotis, T., 1997, Birds of Greece, Cromwell Press Ltd.,

Melksham, Great Britain.

Hardey, J., Crick, H., Wernham, C., Riley, H., Etheridge, B., Thompson, D., 2009,

Raptors: a field guide for surveys and monitoring, TSO, UK.

Henderson, I.G., Langston, R.H.W. & Clark, N.A., 1996, The response of common

terns Sterna hirundo to power lines: an assessment of risk in relation to breeding

commitment, age and wind speed, Biol. Conserv. 77: 185–192.

Hill, D., 1990, The Impact of Noise and Artificial Light on Waterfowl Behaviour: a

Review and Synthesis of Available Literature, BTO Research Report 61, British

Trust for Ornithology, Thetford, UK.

Howell, J.A. & DiDonato, J.E., 1991, Assessment of avian use and mortality related

to wind turbine operations: Altamont Pass, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties,

California, September 1988 Through August 1989, Final report prepared for

Kenentech Windpower.

Hunt, W.G., 2001, Continuing studies of golden eagles at Altamont Pass, Proceed-

ings of the National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting IV.

Hunt, W.G., Jackman, R.E., Hunt, T.L., Driscoll, D.E. & Culp, L., 1999, A Popula-

tion Study of Golden Eagles in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area: Population

Trend Analysis 1994 – 1997, Report to National Renewable Energy Laboratory,

Subcontract XAT-6-16459–01, University of California, Santa Cruz.

Huntley, B., Collingham, Y.C., Green, R.E., Hilton, G.M., Rahbeck, C. & Willis,

S.G., 2006, Potential impacts of climatic change upon geographical distribution of

birds, In Wind, Fire and Water: Renewable Energy and Birds. Ibis 148 (Suppl. 1):

8–28.

Huppop, O., Dierschke, J., Exo, K.-M., Fredrich, E. & Hill, R., 2006., Bird migration

studies and potential collision risk with offshore wind turbines, In Wind, Fire and

Water: Renewable Energy and Birds. Ibis 148 (Suppl. 1): 90–109.



Iberdrola Renewables. 2008. Avian and bat protection plan. October 2008.

(http://www.iberdrolarenewables.us/pdf/Signed_ABPP_10-28-08.pdf)

Johnson, G., Strickland, M., Erickson, W., Young, D. 2007. Use of data to develop

mitigation measures for wind power development impacts to birds, in: de Lucas,

M., G.F.E. Janss and M. Ferrer (editors). Birds and windfarms : Risk assessment

and mitigation. 2007. Quercus, Madrid. 275 pp.

Kahlert, J., Petersen, I.K., Fox, A.D., Desholm, M. & Clausager, I. 2004a. Investiga-

tions of Birds During Construction and Operation of Nysted Offshore Wind Farm at

Rodsand, Annual status report 2003, Report Commissioned by Energi. E2 A/S,

National Environmental Research Institute, Ronde, Denmark.

Kahlert, J., Petersen, I.K., Desholm, M. & Clausager, I., 2004b., Investigations of

migratory birds during operation of Nysted offshore wind farm at Rodsand: Prelimi-

nary Analysis of Data from Spring 2004, NERI, Note commissioned by Energi E2

A/S, National Environmental Research Institute, Ronde, Denmark.

Kaiser, M.J., Galanidi, M., Showler, D.A., Elliott, A.J., Caldow, R.W.G., Rees,

E.I.S., Stillman, R.A. & Sutherland, W.J., 2006, Distribution and behaviour of com-

mon scoter relative to prey resources and environmental parameters, In Wind, Fire

and Water: Renewable Energy and Birds, Ibis 148 (Suppl. 1): 110–128.

Karlsson, J., 1983, Faglar och vindkraft, Ekologihuset , Lund, Sweden.

Kerlinger, P. 2001. Avian issues and potential impacts associated with wind power

development of nearshore waters of Long island, New York. Prepared for Bruce

Bailey, AWS Scientific.

Ketzenberg, C., Exo, K.-M., Reichenbach, M. & Castor, M., 2002, Einfluss von

Windkraftanlagen auf brutende Wiesenvogel, Natur Landsch, 77: 144–153.

Komdeur, J., Bertelsen, J. & Cracknell, G., 1992, Manual for aeroplane and ship

surveys of waterfowl and seabirds. International Waterfowl and Wetlands Bureau

(IWRB) Special Publication no. 19., National Environmental Research Institute,

Ronde, Denmark.

Kruckenberg, H. & Jaene, J., 1999, Zum Einfluss eines Wind-parks auf die

Verteilung weidender Blaganse im Rheiderland (Landkreis Leer, Niedersachsen),

Natur Landsch. 74: 420–427.

Langston, R.H.W. & Pullan, J.D., 2003, Wind farms and birds: an analysis of the

effects of wind farms on birds, and guidance on environmental assessment criteria

and site selection issues, Report written by Birdlife International on behalf of the

Bern Convention, Council Europe Report T-PVS/Inf.



Langston, R.H.W. & Pullan, J.D., 2002, Windfarms and birds: An analysis of the

effects of windfams on birds and guidance on environmental assessment criteria

and site selection issues, Report written by Birdlife on behalf of the Bern Conven-

tion.

Larsen, J.K. & Madsen, J., 2000, Effects of wind turbines and other physical ele-

ments on field utilization by pink-footed geese (Anser brachyrhynchus): A land-

scape perspective, Landscape Ecol. 15: 755–764.

Leddy, K.L., Higgins, K.F. & Naugle, D.E., 1999, Effects of Wind Turbines on Up-

land Nesting Birds in Conservation Reserve Program Grasslands, Wilson Bull. 111:

100–104.

Larsen, J.K. & Clausen, P., 2002, Potential wind park impacts on whooper swans

in winter: the risk of collision, Waterbirds 25: 327–330.

Lucas, M., Janss, G., Ferrer, M. 2004. The effects of a wind farm on birds in a mi-

gration point: the Strait of Giblartar. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:395-407.

Mabee, T., Cooper, B., Plissner, J., & D. Young. 2006. Nocturnal bird migration

over an Appalachian ridge at a proposed wind power project. Wildlife Society

Bulletin 34: 682-690.

Madders, M. & Whitfield, P.D., 2006, Upland raptors and the assessment of wind

farm impacts, In Wind, Fire and Water: Renewable Energy and Birds, Ibis 148

(Suppl. 1): 43–56.

Marris, E. & D. Fairless. 2007. Wind farms’ deadly reputation hard to shift. Nature

447: 126.

Masden, E., Fox, A., Furness, R., Bullman, R. & D. Haydon., In press, Cumulative

impact assessment and bird/wind farm interactions: Developing a conceptual

framework, Environmental Impact Assessment Review.

McIsaac, H., 2001, Raptor acuity and wind turbine blade conspicuity, In Proceed-

ings of the National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting IV.

Moreau, R.E., 1972, The Palaearctic-African bird migration systems, Academic

Press London, UK.

National Academy of Sciences. 2007. Environmental impacts of wind-energy pro-

jects (Washington, DC: National Research Council).

Natural Environment Consultants, 1995, Rigged Hill (Co. Londonderry) Wind Farm

Bird Monitoring, Report for Renewable Energy Systems Ltd.



Nelson, H. & S. Curry. 1995. Assessing avian interactions with windplant develop-

ment and operation. Translations 60th North American Wildlife and Nature Re-

source Conferences. Pp. 266-277.

Orloff, S. & Flannery, A., 1992, Wind turbine effects on avian activity, habitat use

and mortality in Altamont Pass and Solano County Wind Resource Areas, 1989–

91, Energy Commission, California.

Osborn, R., Dieter, C., Higgins, K., Usgaard, R. 1998. Bird flight characteristics

near wind turbines in Minnesota. The American Midland Naturalist 139: 28-38.

Painter, A., Little, B. & Lawrence, S., 1999, Continuation of Bird Studies at Blyth

Harbour Wind Farm and the Implications for Offshore Wind Farms, Report by Bor-

der Wind Limited DTI, ETSU W/13/00485/00/00.

Pedersen, M.B. & Poulsen, E., 1991, Impact of a 90 m/2MW wind turbine on birds.

Avian responses to the implementation of the Tjaereborg wind turbine at the Dan-

ish Wadden Sea, Danske Vildtunderogelser Haefte 47, Danmarks

Miljoundersogelser, Ronde, Denmark.

Percival, S. 2001. Assessment of the effects of offshore wind farms on birds.

Report ETSU.

Percival, S.M., 2003, Birds and Wind Farms in Ireland: A review of Potential Issues

and Impact Assessment, Ecology Consulting.

Percival, S.M., 2007, Predicting the effects of windfsrms on birds in the UK: The

development of an objective assessment method. pp. 137-152, in: de Lucas, M.,

G.F.E. Janss and M. Ferrer (editors). Birds and windfarms : Risk assessment and

mitigation. 2007. Quercus, Madrid. 275 pp.

Perrow, M., Skeate, E.R., Lines, P. & Brown, D., 2006, Radio telemetry as a tool

for impact assessment of wind farms: the case of Little Terns Sterna albifrons at

Scroby Sands, Norfolk, UK. In Wind, Fire and Water: Renewable Energy and Birds.

Ibis 148 (Suppl. 1): 57–75.

Petersen, I.K., Clausager, I. & Christensen, T.J., 2004, Bird Numbers and Distribu-

tion on the Horns Rev. Offshore Wind Farm Area, Annual Status Report 2003, Re-

port commissioned by Elsam Engineering A/S 2003, National Environmental Re-

search Institute. Ronde, Denmark.

Pettersson, J., 2005, The Impact of Offshore Wind Farms on Bird Life in Southern

Kalmar Sound, Sweden, A final report based on studies 1999–2003, Report for the

Swedish Energy Agency, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.



Richardson, W.J., 2000, Bird Migration and Wind Turbines: Migration Timing, Flight

Behaviour, and Collision Risk. Proceedings of National Avian-Wind Power Planning

Meeting II, 132–140.

Ruiz, C., Schindler, S., Poirazidis, K. 2005. Impact of wind farms on birds in

Thrace, Greece. Technical report, 2005. WWF Greece, Athens.

Smallwood, K.S., Thelander, C., 2004, Developing Methods to Reduce Bird Mor-

tality in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, California Energy Commission.

Smallwood, K.S., Thelander, C.G., 2005. Bird mortality in the Altamont Pass Wind

Resource Area (Golden, Colorado: NREL/SR-500-36973, August, 2005).

Sovacool, B. 2009. Contextualizing avian mortality: a preliminary appraisal of bird

and bat fatalities from wind, fossil-fuel, and nuclear electricity. Energy Policy 37:

2241-2248.

Stewart, G.B., Coles, C.F. & Pullin, A.S., 2004, Effects of Wind Turbines on Bird

Abundance, Sytematic Review no. 4, Centre for Evidence-based Conservation,

Birmingham, UK.

Thelander, C.G., Smallwood, K.S. & Rugge, L., 2003, Bird Risk Behaviours and

Fatalities at the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, Report to the National Re-

newable Energy Laboratory, Colorado.

Troen, I. & Petersen, E.L., 1989, European Wind Atlas. Roskilde, Riso National La-

boratory, Snh, Denmark.

Watson, G.E., 1964, Ecology and Evolution of Passerine Birds in the Islands of the

Aegean Sea, Ph.D Thesis, Yale University, Michigan, USA.

West, A.D. & Caldow, R.W.G., 2006, The development and use of individuals-

based models to predict the effects of habitat loss and disturbance on waders and

waterfowl. In Wind, Fire and Water: Renewable Energy and Birds, Ibis 148 (Suppl.

1): 158–168.

Whitfield, D.P. & Madders, M. 2006. Flight height in the hen harrier Circus cyaneus

and its incorporation in wind turbine collision risk modelling. Natural Research

Information Note 2. Natural Research Ltd, Banchory, UK.

Winkelman, J.E., 1989, Birds and the wind park near Urk: bird collision victims and

disturbance of wintering ducks, geese and swans, RIN rapport 89/15, Arnhem:

Rijksintituut voor Natuurbeheer.



Winkelman, J.E., 1992a, The Impact of the Sep Wind Park Near Oosterbierum, the

Netherlands on Birds 1: Collision Victims. RIN rapport 92/2, Rijksintituut voor

Natuurbeheer, Arnhem.

Winkelman, J.E., 1992b, The impact of the Sep wind park near Oosterbierum, the

Netherlands on birds 2: nocturnal collision risks. RIN rapport 92/3, Rijksintituut voor


Winkelman, J.E., 1992c, The impact of the Sep wind park near Oosterbierum, the

Netherlands on birds 3: flight behaviour during daylight. RIN rapport 92/4,

Rijksintituut voor Natuurbeheer, Arnhem.

Winkelman, J.E.,1992d, The Impact of the Sep Wind Park Near Oosterbierum, the

Netherlands on Birds 4: Disturbance. RIN rapport 92/5, Rijksintituut voor


Winkelman, J.E., 1995, Bird/wind turbine investigations in Europe, In Proceedings

of the National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting 1994.

Young, D. & W. Erickson. 2006. Wildlife issue solutions: what have marine radars

taught us about avian risk assessment. Proceedings of the American Wind energy

association windpower 2006 conference and exhibition. Pittsburg, Pennsylvania,

June 4-7, 2006.

Zogaris, S., 1999, Breeding Birds as Indicators for Habitat Conservation in South-

ern Evvoia, Greece, Contributions to the Zoogeography and Ecology of the Eastern

Mediterranean Region Vol.1, pp. 171-177.

1133..55 DDaattaa ffrroomm ooff ff iicc iiaall wweebbssii tteess

Ministry of Development (www.ypan.gr).

Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change (www.minenv.gr).

European Union Portal (www.europa.eu).

Hellenic National Meteorological Service (HNMS) (www.hnms.gr).

National Statistical Service (NSS) (ATHINA database) (www.statistics.gr).

NATIONAL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY of Athens( FILOTIS database)

(http://www.itia.ntua.gr/filotis/).

Regulatory Authority for Energy (ΡAE) (www.rae.gr).

Center For Renewable Energy Sources (www.cres.gr).

Birdlife international (www.birdlife.org).



1144 PPHHOOTTOOGGRRAAPPHHIICC DDOOCCUUMMEENNTTAATTIIOONN

Photo 1: D1 – Kathara (southern section).

Photo 2: D1 – Kathara (different view).



Photo 3: D2 – Anatoli.

Photo 4: D2 – Anatoli (different view).



Photo 5: D3 – Spilia.

Photo 6: D3 – Spilia (different view).



Photo 7: D4 – Milia.

Photo 8: D4 – Milia (different view).



Photo 9: D5 – Platanistos (northern field).

Photo. 10: D5 – Platanistos (southern field).



Photo 11: D6 – Paliopyrgos.

Photo 12: D6 – Paliopyrgos (different view).



Photo 13: D7 – Kerasia (eastern section).

Photo 14: D7 – Kerasia (eastern section, different view).



Photo 15: D8 – Platanos.

Photo 16: D8 – Platanos (WF section).



Photo 17: Coast view in position Mpouros Karystos (east side).

Photo. 18: Coast view in position Mpouros Karystos (west side).



Photo. 19: Type of seabed excavating equipment by water jetting (jetting).



1155 AANNNNEEXXEESS

1155..11 AAnnnneexx II:: CCoooorrddiinnaatteess ooff ppoollyyggoonn wwiinndd ffaarrmmss aanndd wwiinndd ttuurrbbiinnee//ccoonnttrrooll ccaabbiinneess llooccaatt iioonnss

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD FFAARRMMSS PPOOLLYYGGOONN VVEERRTTIICCEESS PPOOWWEERR 1166,,11 MMWW,, IINN

AANNAATTOOLLII LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, KKAAFFIIRREEAASS CCOOMMMMUUNNIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 6.065 -14.602 546.942 4.218.905

K2 6.315 -14.553 547.192 4.218.955

K3 6.505 -14.464 547.381 4.219.046

K4 7.145 -14.336 548.020 4.219.176

K5 7.528 -14.086 548.402 4.219.429

K6 7.769 -14.034 548.642 4.219.481

K7 7.940 -13.941 548.813 4.219.576

K8 8.217 -13.665 549.089 4.219.853

K9 8.394 -13.843 549.266 4.219.676

K10 8.092 -14.143 548.965 4.219.374

K11 7.857 -14.271 548.731 4.219.245

K12 7.629 -14.320 548.504 4.219.195

K13 7.251 -14.564 548.128 4.218.949

K14 6.589 -14.701 547.466 4.218.809

K15 6.394 -14.793 547.272 4.218.716

K16 6.110 -14.848 546.988 4.218.659

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 1166,,11 MMWW,, IINN AANNAATTOOLLII LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,,

KKAAFFIIRREEAASS CCOOMMMMUUNNIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 6.147 -14.715 547.024 4.218.793

AΓ2 7.198 -14.450 548.074 4.219.063

AΓ3 7.391 -14.331 548.266 4.219.183

AΓ4 7.578 -14.203 548.453 4.219.312

AΓ5 7.813 -14.153 548.687 4.219.363

AΓ6 8.016 -14.042 548.889 4.219.475



S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ7 8.173 -13.886 549.045 4.219.632

O.E. 7.315 -14.408 548.191 4.219.106

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD FFAARRMMSS PPOOLLYYGGOONN VVEERRTTIICCEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 3322,,22 MMWW,, IINN

KKAATTHHAARRAA LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,, KKAAFFIIRREEAASS,, EEVVIIAA

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 4.171 -14.688 545.049 4.218.810

K2 4.431 -14.831 545.310 4.218.668

K3 4.662 -15.395 545.543 4.218.105

K4 4.804 -15.522 545.686 4.217.979

K5 5.440 -15.115 546.320 4.218.390

K6 5.685 -14.770 546.563 4.218.735

K7 5.982 -14.615 546.859 4.218.892

K8 6.083 -14.848 546.961 4.218.660

K9 5.855 -14.962 546.734 4.218.544

K10 5.697 -15.184 546.577 4.218.321

K11 5.841 -15.365 546.722 4.218.141

K12 5.974 -15.609 546.856 4.217.898

K13 6.114 -15.845 546.998 4.217.663

K14 6.306 -15.963 547.189 4.217.546

K15 6.549 -16.059 547.433 4.217.451

K16 6.816 -16.276 547.701 4.217.235

K17 6.976 -16.518 547.863 4.216.994

K18 7.126 -16.700 548.013 4.216.814

K19 7.438 -16.852 548.326 4.216.663

K20 7.328 -17.077 548.217 4.216.438

K21 6.968 -16.901 547.856 4.216.612

K22 6.775 -16.668 547.662 4.216.844

K23 6.628 -16.446 547.514 4.217.065

K24 6.421 -16.278 547.307 4.217.232

K25 6.193 -16.188 547.078 4.217.321

K26 5.931 -16.025 546.815 4.217.482



V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K27 5.757 -15.733 546.639 4.217.773

K28 5.632 -15.504 546.513 4.218.001

K29 5.519 -15.361 546.399 4.218.144

K30 4.778 -15.829 545.662 4.217.673

K31 4.457 -15.549 545.340 4.217.951

K32 4.231 -15.009 545.110 4.218.489

K33 3.988 -14.862 544.867 4.218.635

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 3322,,22 MMWW,, IINN KKAATTHHAARRAA LLOOCCAA--

TTIIOONN,, MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,,KKAAFFIIRREEAASS,,EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 4.140 -14.828 545.018 4.218.670

AΓ2 4.331 -14.920 545.210 4.218.578

AΓ3 4.439 -15.211 545.320 4.218.288

AΓ4 4.560 -15.472 545.442 4.218.028

AΓ5 4.792 -15.675 545.675 4.217.827

AΓ6 4.976 -15.565 545.858 4.217.938

AΓ7 5.664 -15.039 546.543 4.218.466

AΓ8 5.972 -14.758 546.850 4.218.749

AΓ9 6.249 -16.076 547.134 4.217.433

AΓ10 6.485 -16.169 547.370 4.217.341

AΓ11 6.722 -16.361 547.607 4.217.150

AΓ12 6.876 -16.593 547.762 4.216.919

AΓ13 7.047 -16.800 547.934 4.216.713

AΓ14 7.271 -16.909 548.159 4.216.605

O.E. 5.663 -15.322 546.544 4.218.184


KKEERRAASSIIAA LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,, KKAAFFIIRREEAASS,, EEVVII

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 1.559 -18.589 542.457 4.214.897

K2 1.883 -18.514 542.781 4.214.974



V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K3 2.150 -18.621 543.048 4.214.868

K4 2.400 -18.628 543.298 4.214.863

K5 2.652 -18.723 543.551 4.214.769

K6 3.190 -18.788 544.088 4.214.706

K7 3.489 -18.743 544.388 4.214.753

K8 3.731 -19.031 544.631 4.214.466

K9 3.881 -19.139 544.781 4.214.359

K10 4.945 -19.541 545.847 4.213.963

K11 4.850 -19.772 545.753 4.213.731

K12 3.765 -19.363 544.666 4.214.134

K13 3.560 -19.215 544.461 4.214.281

K14 3.388 -19.011 544.288 4.214.484

K15 3.196 -19.040 544.096 4.214.455

K16 2.590 -18.966 543.490 4.214.525

K17 2.351 -18.877 543.251 4.214.614

K18 2.098 -18.870 542.998 4.214.619

K19 1.863 -18.775 542.762 4.214.712

K20 1.615 -18.833 542.515 4.214.654

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 2277,,66 MMWW,, IINN KKEERRAASSIIAA LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,,

MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,,KKAAFFIIRREEAASS,,EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 2.053 -18.713 542.952 4.214.775

AΓ2 2.287 -18.745 543.186 4.214.744

AΓ3 2.457 -18.792 543.356 4.214.699

AΓ4 2.608 -18.856 543.507 4.214.636

AΓ5 2.785 -18.889 543.685 4.214.603

AΓ6 3.867 -19.256 544.768 4.214.242

AΓ7 4.030 -19.324 544.931 4.214.175

AΓ8 4.192 -19.394 545.093 4.214.105

AΓ9 4.359 -19.440 545.261 4.214.060

AΓ10 4.522 -19.516 545.424 4.213.985

AΓ11 4.693 -19.561 545.595 4.213.941

AΓ12 4.867 -19.604 545.770 4.213.899



S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

O.E. 4.308 -19.414 545.209 4.214.086


MMIILLIIAA LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, KKAAFFIIRREEAASS CCOOMMMMUUNNIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 1.565 -20.842 542.475 4.212.645

K2 2.070 -21.121 542.981 4.212.368

K3 2.142 -21.229 543.053 4.212.261

K4 1.971 -21.424 542.884 4.212.065

K5 1.899 -21.316 542.812 4.212.173

K6 1.443 -21.060 542.353 4.212.427

K7 2.261 -21.416 543.173 4.212.075

K8 2.811 -21.302 543.722 4.212.191

K9 3.357 -21.058 544.267 4.212.438

K10 3.355 -21.347 544.267 4.212.149

K11 2.863 -21.582 543.776 4.211.912

K12 2.308 -21.707 543.221 4.211.784

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 1188,,44 MMWW,, IINN MMIILLIIAA LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,,

KKAAFFIIRREEAASS CCOOMMMMUUNNIITTYY,,EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 1.941 -21.189 542.853 4.212.300

AΓ2 2.347 -21.556 543.260 4.211.936

AΓ3 2.522 -21.528 543.434 4.211.964

AΓ4 2.692 -21.463 543.604 4.212.030

AΓ5 2.834 -21.451 543.746 4.212.042

AΓ6 2.977 -21.412 543.889 4.212.083

AΓ7 3.128 -21.289 544.040 4.212.206

AΓ8 3.283 -21.238 544.194 4.212.258

O.E. 2.502 -21.600 543.416 4.211.892




PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 1.587 -24.979 542.517 4.208.509

Κ2 1.911 -25.004 542.841 4.208.486

Κ3 2.359 -24.938 543.289 4.208.554

Κ4 2.611 -25.035 543.542 4.208.459

Κ5 2.848 -25.189 543.779 4.208.306

Κ6 3.187 -25.344 544.119 4.208.153

Κ7 3.083 -25.571 544.016 4.207.925

Κ8 2.727 -25.409 543.659 4.208.086

Κ9 2.497 -25.259 543.429 4.208.235

Κ10 2.325 -25.193 543.256 4.208.299

Κ11 1.927 -25.256 542.859 4.208.234

Κ12 1.568 -25.229 542.499 4.208.260

Κ13 1.823 -25.592 542.756 4.207.898

Κ14 2.437 -25.872 543.372 4.207.621

Κ15 2.866 -26.154 543.802 4.207.342

Κ16 3.229 -26.252 544.165 4.207.245

Κ17 3.164 -26.493 544.101 4.207.004

Κ18 2.771 -26.387 543.708 4.207.108

Κ19 2.311 -26.090 543.246 4.207.403

Κ20 1.718 -25.820 542.653 4.207.670

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 1188,,44 MMWW,, IINN PPLLAATTAANNIISSTTOOSS LLOO--

CCAATTIIOONN,, KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,,EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 1.702 -25.113 542.633 4.208.376

AΓ2 1.919 -25.130 542.850 4.208.360

AΓ3 2.129 -25.087 543.060 4.208.405

AΓ4 2.342 -25.066 543.273 4.208.427

AΓ5 2.554 -25.147 543.485 4.208.347

AΓ6 2.788 -25.299 543.719 4.208.196

AΓ7 1.884 -25.758 542.819 4.207.732

AΓ8 2.143 -25.877 543.078 4.207.614



S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

O.E. 1.815 -25.123 542.746 4.208.366


PPAALLAAIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY && KKAAFFIIRREEAASS CCOOMMMMUU--

NNIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 7.356 -25.187 548.285 4.208.330

Κ2 7.890 -25.368 548.820 4.208.152

Κ3 8.468 -25.496 549.398 4.208.027

Κ4 8.687 -25.370 549.617 4.208.154

Κ5 9.113 -25.265 550.042 4.208.261

Κ6 9.465 -25.294 550.395 4.208.234

Κ7 9.444 -25.544 550.375 4.207.985

Κ8 9.123 -25.517 550.053 4.208.010

Κ9 8.743 -25.610 549.674 4.207.915

Κ10 8.517 -25.765 549.449 4.207.758

Κ11 7.828 -25.612 548.760 4.207.908

Κ12 7.278 -25.425 548.209 4.208.092

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 1188,,44 MMWW,, IINN PPAALLAAIIOOPPYYRRGGOOSS

LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY && KKAAFFIIRREEAASS CCOOMMMMUUNNIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 7.436 -25.345 548.366 4.208.173

AΓ2 7.859 -25.490 548.790 4.208.030

AΓ3 8.282 -25.580 549.213 4.207.942

AΓ4 8.492 -25.631 549.424 4.207.893

AΓ5 8.694 -25.488 549.625 4.208.036

AΓ6 8.902 -25.426 549.832 4.208.099

AΓ7 9.145 -25.394 550.075 4.208.132

AΓ8 9.330 -25.409 550.260 4.208.119

O.E. 8.177 -25.550 549.108 4.207.972




SSPPIILLIIAA LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY && KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,,

EEVVIIAA

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 -3.169 -16.806 537.722 4.216.656

Κ2 -2.862 -17.338 538.032 4.216.125

Κ3 -2.472 -17.787 538.424 4.215.679

Κ4 -2.306 -17.916 538.591 4.215.550

Κ5 -2.019 -17.991 538.878 4.215.477

Κ6 -1.876 -18.241 539.022 4.215.228

Κ7 -1.316 -18.632 539.584 4.214.840

Κ8 -1.197 -18.975 539.705 4.214.498

Κ9 -1.250 -19.391 539.654 4.214.082

Κ10 -1.121 -19.906 539.785 4.213.567

Κ11 -743 -20.270 540.164 4.213.205

Κ12 -921 -20.447 539.988 4.213.028

Κ13 -1.342 -20.044 539.565 4.213.428

Κ14 -1.503 -19.402 539.401 4.214.069

Κ15 -1.452 -19.001 539.449 4.214.470

Κ16 -1.525 -18.791 539.375 4.214.680

Κ17 -2.065 -18.414 538.834 4.215.054

Κ18 -2.184 -18.207 538.714 4.215.261

Κ19 -2.419 -18.145 538.479 4.215.321

Κ20 -2.647 -17.968 538.250 4.215.497

Κ21 -3.069 -17.482 537.826 4.215.981

Κ22 -3.386 -16.931 537.506 4.216.530

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 2299,,99 MMWW,, IINN SSPPIILLIIAA LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,,

MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY && KKAARRYYSSTTOOSS MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 -3.080 -17.192 537.813 4.216.271

AΓ2 -2.997 -17.360 537.897 4.216.103

AΓ3 -2.867 -17.520 538.027 4.215.944

AΓ4 -2.736 -17.668 538.159 4.215.796

AΓ5 -2.596 -17.816 538.301 4.215.649



AΓ6 -2.463 -17.962 538.434 4.215.504

AΓ7 -2.281 -18.050 538.616 4.215.417

AΓ8 -2.085 -18.140 538.813 4.215.328

AΓ9 -1.978 -18.320 538.921 4.215.148

AΓ10 -1.824 -18.455 539.075 4.215.014

AΓ11 -1.660 -18.557 539.240 4.214.913

AΓ12 -1.516 -18.665 539.384 4.214.806

AΓ13 -1.352 -18.799 539.548 4.214.672

O.E. -2.219 -18.086 538.679 4.215.381


PPLLAATTAANNOOSS LLOOCCAATTIIOONN,, MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA,,

V/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

K1 -2.065 -16.958 538.827 4.216.509

Κ2 -1.822 -17.081 539.070 4.216.388

Κ3 -1.585 -17.388 539.308 4.216.082

Κ4 -1.400 -17.386 539.493 4.216.085

Κ5 -963 -17.568 539.931 4.215.906

Κ6 -1.059 -17.798 539.837 4.215.674

Κ7 -1.449 -17.637 539.446 4.215.834

Κ8 -1.695 -17.640 539.200 4.215.830

Κ9 -1.992 -17.276 538.902 4.216.192

Κ10 -2.179 -17.181 538.714 4.216.285

CCOOOORRDDIINNAATTEESS OOFF WWIINNDD TTUURRBBIINNEESS,, PPOOWWEERR 1133,,88 MMWW,, IINN PPLLAATTAANNOOSS LLOOCCAA--

TTIIOONN,, MMAARRMMAARRII MMUUNNIICCIIPPAALLIITTYY,, EEVVIIAA

S/N ΗAΤΤ HGRS 87

Χ Y Χ Y

AΓ1 -2.046 -17.099 538.846 4.216.369

AΓ2 -1.896 -17.206 538.997 4.216.262

AΓ3 -1.792 -17.348 539.102 4.216.121

AΓ4 -1.655 -17.474 539.239 4.215.996

AΓ5 -1.477 -17.522 539.418 4.215.948

AΓ6 -1.299 -17.563 539.595 4.215.908

O.E. -1.874 -17.258 539.019 4.216.210



1155..22 AAnnnneexx IIII:: NNooiissee ccoonnttoouurrss ccuurrvveess ssttuuddyy



1155..33 AAnnnneexx IIIIII:: RRooaadd eeaarrtthhwwoorrkkss ddeettaaii lleedd ttaabblleess

ΑΙΟlika parka ΚΑtharas s.a. ΑΙΟlika parka ΑΝΑΤΟlis …...table 22: land use in the...

Documents