 Our presentation comes closer to home, and the red arrow shows the second biggy style in the bestonia, Yuma, and our case study looks at planned offshore wind parks which is about 12 kilometers from the coast. As an introduction I would like to say that this case study and another one as well were carried out under the Inter-REQ project called Good Environmental Status through Regional Cooperation and Capacity Building. And we had a good team, Edelin Urbaldir Pirtalo, Alona Karlyusheva, Sulevnumman, Heiti Tukkonen, Valdur Lape, who have all been part of that project. And particularly in this case we are focusing on the conflicting area of conflicting use of marine area. And this is even in a bigger picture, the potentially conflicting EU policies. One is biodiversity conservation, which is aiming at halting the biodiversity loss. And another one is energy policy reducing carbon emissions. And of course good environmental status actually comes from even a third environmental policy or strategy which is then related to marine status. Here is Yuma Island and we are talking about four shallow areas. The Apollo is so to call most valuable because of its bottom habitats and a lot of birds, migrating birds who are overwintering because this area is also ice free during the winter time. There's a lot of food for birds. Around ten different types of birds have been identified and around seven of them are at Apollo Shoal. And Western Shoals as well important shallow areas. And when we talk about the bottom habitats then mainly reef, stony, which is not very common for the Baltic Sea and they are more on Western Shoals and Apollo Shoal has then sandy banks. And what were our research questions then? Is the value of using marine areas for wind energy production higher of the value than preserving the habitats and biodiversity of these marine ecosystems can provide? And when we talk about the wind parks then is society willing to pay extra for the wind park with minimal environmental impact? Because the cases show that with the design of the wind park, how the turbines are allocated, the distances, how they follow the relief of the bottom day and the material you use for the construction, it can have an impact that reduces the negative impact to the environment. And why is this renewable energy discussion so important? In Estonia more than 80% of our energy comes from oil, shale-based energy and we are aiming at renewable energy. Of course we are actually meeting already EU minimum requirements thus this is the question should we go for more. And then about the valuable sandy banks, the bottom reefs of the same the Western Shoals and for example Longdale, Tuck and other important migrating birds. We had a web-based survey around 700 respondents. The questionnaire was carried out both in Estonia and in Russia to cover the whole nation. And when we asked about their willingness to pay then already currently people are paying for renewable energy as one additional on their energy bill. And then it was asked whether they would be willing to. I can show you later on what kind of choice cards they had. But basically what people agree or disagree? What is the general opinion? People do favor EU targets for more renewable energy sources and that energy, your renewable energy should be supported. But when it comes to, but still I think it's important for you to understand that about one-third is also in opinion of that oil-shale potential as a priority should be used as well. And of course one can understand because the whole northeast region of Estonia where their oil-shale complex is located is depending their livelihoods on that industry. What is the general knowledge about marine habitats overall? And whether people have been in human? Do they know the place? Yes, people have been there but I think it was also important to understand that or see that prior to the survey people did not have too much information or the information was not as precise because you don't see under the water. They were presented the information that in Estonia about 27% of marine areas have already some sort of protection. But at the same time only one-third of marine area has been mapped that we know actually what is there. How to ask people how much they are willing to pay? We used a discrete choice experiment method, not a contingent valuation that would give us a certain sum for different scenarios but this discrete choice gave us opportunity to play all together with some 15 different scenarios. And then what we were asking status quo that nothing happens also the area is not protected some mining could carry on. Alternatives then whether we have ordinary wind parks or then more eco wind parks. And this was the choice card. People had all together 12 choice cards and the cost levels were 0, 2, 5, 10 and 20 euros per year for them to pay for those different choices. And what were the main results? The first preference is status quo. People would not like to pay actually if they are asked upfront. And it's understandable for Estonians this is the first year of open energy market. They have a lot of discussions that renewable energy bill cost on the bill though the oil shale price is not shown on the same bill. But when these concrete choices are presented then actually you can see quite interesting developments that there is a high willingness to pay for marine protected areas. And when they are on both shores then people are willing to pay up to 9 euro per person per year for those protected areas. And we have scenarios we can tell how much to only Apollo or on the western shore. There is no willingness to pay for planned wind park than ordinary wind parks. But there is a high willingness to pay for environmentally sound wind park and this is up to 80 euro per person per year. And the work is let's say I will answer to these two questions what we said at the beginning. Is the value to use the marine area for wind energy higher? This tells us no. But also in that context what we were asking and what kind of information we were given. This comes to another slide I will tell you. And is the society willing to pay extra for the wind park with minimal environmental impact? Yes they are. And what we would like to study further. This is a detailed analysis with existing data because there are so much more additional models and things we can look into. And then we definitely see that we would like to carry out new survey because with additional benefits to local communities. That they are part of the owners. There will be a foundation that will pay for local communities or energy cooperatives. That this is something which comes to the inclusiveness as well. And we expect that the willingness to pay for that will be different. Thank you.