ORESS 2.1 Tonn Nua: Provisional Auction Results Due Thursday – What You Need to Know
Dear Blue Horizon Supporters,
On Thursday, November 27th, the Government will announce the provisional results of the ORESS 2.1 Tonn Nua offshore wind auction; a decision that will shape the future of Ireland's offshore wind industry and determine which private developer gains control of a 900 MW wind farm, planned just 12 kilometres off the Waterford coast. Regardless of who wins, this announcement represents a deeply flawed process that prioritises speed over sustainability, corporate interests over community concerns, and short-term targets over long-term national benefit.
What's Being Decided?
The auction awards a single developer exclusive rights to build a 900 MW bottom-fixed offshore wind farm at Site A (Tonn Nua) within the South Coast Designated Maritime Area Plan. Major energy companies including Energia, Vårgrønn, ESB, EDF, Bord Gáis, SSE, RWE, Ørsted, and Mainstream Renewable Power are expected to compete for this contract. The winner receives a 20-year government support contract guaranteeing fixed electricity prices; a deal worth hundreds of millions of euros. In exchange, they'll contribute approximately €7 million annually (€140 million over 20 years) to counties Cork, Wexford and Waterford, provide performance security totaling €120 million, and must achieve commercial operation by January 2037. The Government has framed this as a competitive, transparent process where the lowest bidder wins. Blue Horizon fundamentally disputes this characterisation.
A Compromised Process from the Start
The problems with this auction run deep, beginning with how Site A was selected. When the draft South Coast DMAP was published in May 2024, the Government simultaneously released auction documents for Area A to the wind industry. This was before the statutory six-week public consultation had even begun. This was not a consultation in any meaningful sense. The auction was already in motion before a single public comment had been submitted.
The site selection itself raises serious questions. Ireland lacks a coherent national marine spatial plan backed by strategic environmental assessment, as required under EU law (Maritime Spatial Planning Directive 2014/89/EU). Instead, the Government has adopted a piecework strategy through DMAPs; selecting sites without comprehensive baseline studies of what's happening in our marine environment.
The Celtic Sea Ecological Sensitivity Analysis found all four South Coast DMAP zones to be highly sensitive marine areas, yet these same zones were nonetheless earmarked for development. Site A sits directly over critical cod and herring spawning grounds; vital ecosystems supporting both marine biodiversity and fishing livelihoods. These are not theoretical concerns: the DMAP areas recorded over 3,650 fishing days last year and support extensive demersal trawling by small vessels under 12 metres, the backbone of Ireland's inshore fleet. The fishing communities whose livelihoods depend on these waters have been side-lined.
An Uneven Playing Field
While we cannot predict Thursday's winner, the auction structure itself has created significant competitive advantages for certain developers. The timeline reveals how, prior to 2021, several companies submitted foreshore licence applications to investigate potential sites off the Waterford coast. When the Government paused these applications ahead of establishing the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority (MARA), some companies waited as instructed. One company, Energia, challenged the instruction to delay in the High Court and secured a fast-tracked foreshore licence approval, gaining years of exclusive access to collect geophysical, geotechnical, and environmental data from an area incorporating Site A (Tonn Nua).
This matters enormously because the auction requires bidders to submit detailed project information documents demonstrating detailed knowledge of seabed conditions, wind speeds, and marine biodiversity. Companies that spent years conducting comprehensive surveys gained obvious advantages over competitors relying on basic Government-supplied data collected in summer 2024. When Site A's boundaries were finalised by the Government in October 2024, these boundaries almost mirrored the areas surveyed by those wind development companies that gained early access to survey the sites involved. This remarkable coincidence raises questions about whether site selection was truly independent of commercial interests.
Environmental Damage Locked In
Beyond procedural concerns, the environmental consequences of siting turbine parks regardless of environmental concerns are severe. Provisional plans for creating one on Site A, for example, suggest depositing an estimated 165,000 cubic metres of rock (equivalent to 10,000 truckloads) to protect turbine foundations. Recent research indicates this will cause irreparable harm to fragile seabed ecosystems. The turbines themselves, positioned just 12 kilometres offshore, contrary to international best practice, will industrialise one of Ireland's most ecologically sensitive marine zones.
This destruction of the integrity of the Waterford coastline is only one project in a much bigger plan that forms the overall objective of the Irish Government’s intended partnership with the wind industry. Consider the broader context. In order to meet the Government's 2050 goal of 37 GW of offshore wind capacity, an estimated 2,460 turbines are required. These will be situated around Ireland's 1,360-kilometre coastline. That number of 2,460 equates to one 300-metre-high turbine tower every 550 metres, a number that will completely transform the existing seascape. While the Government does not plan to encircle Ireland with turbines in this way the amount of turbine parks planned for Ireland’s coastline means that turbine parks will create extensive and catastrophic ecological, environmental and visual impact all around the Irish coastline. Current planning applications on the east coast propose turbines just six kilometres offshore, far closer than international standards recommend. The advantage turbine parks close to shore is that they are less expensive and quicker to build.
Who Benefits?
Even if offshore wind development were proceeding responsibly, which Blue Horizon firmly believes is not the case with Tonn Nua, a fundamental question remains: who owns Ireland's energy future?
The Government is auctioning 20-year contracts to private developers. When Ireland achieves its goal of 100% renewable electricity, we will do so without owning the infrastructure that generates our power. Compare this to Norway's approach, where offshore wind resources are developed with significant state participation ensuring long-term national benefit. In 2023, Ireland’s first offshore energy auction (ORESS 1) awarded contracts at an average price of €86.05/MWh; celebrated by Government as among the lowest prices globally for an emerging offshore wind market. However, significant cost increases in the offshore wind sector since then mean we're expecting a strike price above €100/MWh on Thursday; approaching the current wholesale electricity price that's set by natural gas generation costs. And here's the critical point: wholesale prices represent only half of a consumer household bill. We anticipate little or no cost reductions as a result of installing this nearshore wind farm. Instead, we expect significant price increases due to necessary network upgrades and large business consumers such as data centres placing disproportionate demands on the grid.
Worse still, the contribution to climate change will be zero. Since 2017, all renewable energy sources added to the grid have been diverted to powering data centres, meaning there is no net contribution to reducing our fossil fuel demands. The renewable energy we generate isn't replacing coal or gas; it's enabling more data centres, one of which is being planned for Kilmeaden. This is not energy independence. It's selling off Ireland's natural resources to multinational corporations under the guise of climate action, with zero benefit to Irish households or the environment. The Government is preparing to monetise Ireland’s coastline and, by so doing, to destroy its ecology, biodiversity and visual integrity. This DMAP auction is a blatant attack on Irish seas, communities, and heritage. We have so much to lose and nothing to gain. The long-term winners will be the wind industry and big tech shareholders who have no appreciation or concern for what is destroyed to boost their investment returns.
What Happens Thursday and Afterwards?
When the winning bidder is announced on Thursday, that company must submit a Maritime Area Consent Application within five working days and a Planning Consent Application within six months. Remember, that winner will tout its commitment to community benefit, environmental responsibility, and renewable energy targets. The Government will celebrate meeting offshore wind goals ahead of schedule. What will not be acknowledged is that the process has been fundamentally compromised from the outset; characterised by inadequate environmental assessment, procedural shortcuts, potential competitive advantages for certain developers, and the systematic exclusion of community concerns. The fact that household electricity bills won't fall, that renewable energy will power data centres rather than replace fossil fuels, or that this process will destroy irreplaceable marine ecosystems for zero climate benefit will not be mentioned.
Environmental organisations calling for comprehensive strategic assessment have been ignored. Coastal residents opposing the industrialisation of the seascape have been dismissed as obstructionist. Thursday’s auction results will have consequences for generations. Irish coastlines, marine ecosystems, fishing heritage, and communities are at stake. We owe it to future generations to get this right and that means refusing to accept a flawed maritime planning process.
This is where the real work begins. Scrutinising the Maritime Area Consent application, of the winning wind developer, challenging the inadequate planning consent processes, demanding transparency around how site selection advantages were created, building public awareness of what will be lost in this rush to enrich developers and shareholders while exploding the myth that this process delivers nothing positive to Irish people or climate justice is a brief summary of some of the work ahead. This work will involve expert technical review and legal challenges, both of which require substantial resources. As this journey unfolds, we'll keep you informed on how you can help protect our marine heritage.
In solidarity,
Blue Horizon Team