Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 1 of 11 REVIEW ARTICLE A review of subsurface geosystems and de-risking offshore construction in the Danish North Sea Lasse Tésik Prins*1 , Katrine Juul Andresen1,3 , Matthew Owen2 , Paul C. Knutz1 1Department of Land and Marine Geology, Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Aarhus, Denmark; 2Global Maritime, London, UK; 3Department of Geoscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark Abstract The renewable energy transition has increased the demand for offshore construction in the Danish North Sea energy sector. This development underpins the need for further investigation of poten- tial geological hazards and associated risks to avoid accidents involving people, the environment or infrastructure. A scientific approach to de-risking requires an understanding of the seabed and the buried geosystems. Understanding geosystems is the first step in the de-risking process of offshore construction. In this study, we review three key geosystem elements in the Danish North Sea, repre- sented by (1) shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology, (2) glacial tectonics and salt movement and (3) subsurface fluid migration. We summarise the current state of knowledge of these geosystem elements and identify multiple risks associated with each geosystem in the region. Such investiga- tions are critical for understanding the geotechnical behaviour of the subsurface and identifying and de-risking of potential geohazards during the construction of future energy developments in the Danish North Sea region. *Correspondence: lkp@geus.dk Received: 19 Feb 2024 Revised: 29 Nov 2024 Accepted: 18 Feb 2025 Published: 14 Apr 2025 Keywords: buried tunnel valleys, engineering geology, glacial tectonics, marine geology, late quaternary Abbreviations: CPT: Cone penetration test DNS: Danish North Sea EEZ: Exclusive Economic Zone GEUS: Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland LGM: Last Glacial Maximum PGM: preliminary ground model GEUS Bulletin (eISSN: 2597-2154) is an open access, peer-reviewed journal published by the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS). This article is distributed under a CC-BY 4.0 licence, permitting free redistribution, and reproduction for any purpose, even commercial, provided proper citation of the original work. Author(s) retain copyright. Edited by: Margaret Dolan (Geological Survey of Norway), Kaskela Anu (Geological Survey of Finland) Reviewed by: Daniel Hepp (NIhK, Germany), Mark Coughlan (iCRAG, Ireland), Nicola Dakin (British Geological Survey, UK) Funding: See page 8 Competing interests: See page 9 Additional files: See page 9 1. Introduction The Danish North Sea (DNS) is an important asset that provides a suite of important functions and services to Danish and international societies. These include not only fisheries and cargo transportation but also important geo- system services such as oil and gas production, CO2 storage and offshore renewable energy. In addition to these services, the DNS contains important habitats for a variety of birds, fish and marine mammals (Danish Maritime Authority 2023). The renewable energy transition will impose increased offshore construc- tion pressure, including windfarms, cable routes and energy islands to the DNS. This places a demand on marine spatial planning, not just for the DNS but the entire North Sea region, which includes the German, British, Dutch, Belgian and Norwegian Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs; Cotterill et al. 2017a; Fleischer et al. 2022; Petrie et al. 2022; Danish Maritime Authority 2023). The risks associated with these large-scale offshore construction projects are potentially immense, in terms of both geotechnical issues, health and safety and environmental risks, including construction failure, underwater noise, suspended sediments, pollution and changes to marine habitats (Le et  al. 2014; Degraer et al. 2020; Mooney et al. 2020). Adding to the complexity of the energy transition is the uncertainty concerning the rentability of offshore wind projects. Sound economic models are going to be crucial for reaching a 6 GW output from offshore wind energy to meet a Danish reduction target of 70% compared to 1991 (Møllgaard et al. 2024). https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2824-8345 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8029-3234 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7119-4656 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5188-4254 mailto:lkp@geus.dk https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ast Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 2 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG To facilitate marine planning of the DNS in the energy transition era that builds on safe and sustain- able approaches, a comprehensive understanding of the underlying marine geosystems is required. Due to hydrocarbon prospecting and extraction over the last five decades (Adegbamigbe et al. 2022), there is already significant knowledge on the deep geology. A similar knowledge base for the shallow geosystems, i.e. the upper 500 m below the seafloor, is only just starting to emerge. A geosystem is closely related to the term geosys- tem services. This has been defined as either ‘the direct result of the planet’s geodiversity’ or as providing ‘bene- fits specifically resulting from the subsurface’ (Frisk et al. 2022). In terms of de-risking offshore construction, we have adopted a more specific definition. Thus, geosys- tems in this context constitute geological features that influence offshore construction. Through reviewing pub- lished literature, this paper describes how knowledge of near-surface geology in the offshore environment of the DNS can help to de-risk the offshore construction pro- cess. We focus on three key geosystem elements rep- resented by shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology, glacial tectonics and salt migration and subsurface fluid migration (Table 1). 1.1. Geological background The North Sea is an epicontinental sea, bordered by the UK to the west, Norway and Denmark to the east and Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium to the south (Fig. 1). The North Sea Basin was initiated as a rift system in the early Triassic, which terminated in the Paleocene (Ziegler 1992). Up to 3000 m of Cenozoic sediments have accumulated in the basin ( Cameron et  al. 1987; Huuse & Clausen 2001; Gołedowski et  al. 2012; Ottesen et  al. 2014). The thickness of the sed- iments representing the Quaternary period (last 2.6  million years) may be up to 800 m in the central North Sea (Nielsen et  al. 2008; Ottesen et  al. 2014; Phillips et  al. 2017). These sediments are typically heterogenous and have been deposited, reworked and deformed largely as a result of glacial processes asso- ciated with the cyclic expansion and decay of large ice sheets in north-west Europe (Knudsen & Sejrup 1993; Hughes et al. 2016; Rea et al. 2018; Batchelor et al. 2019; Kirkham et  al. 2022). During the Elsterian (c. 500–400 Kyr BP) and Saalian (c. 380–130 Kyr BP) glacial periods, the entire DNS was covered by ice (Van der Vegt et al. 2012), which locally resulted in erosion into older Palaeogene or Cretaceous deposits. Prominent rem- nants of these glaciations are expressed as buried tun- nel valleys (Huuse & Lykke-Andersen 2000; Benvenuti et al. 2018; Prins et al. 2020) or as glaciotectonic com- plexes ( Andersen et al. 2005; Winsemann et al. 2020). Conversely, the more recent Weichselian glaciation (c. 117–11.5 Kyr BP) covered only the northern and west- ern parts of the DNS (Fig. 2D; Hughes et al. 2016). The Last Glacial Maximum (LGM; 22–18 Kyr BP) represents a phase of major expansion of the Fen- noscandian Ice Sheet inducing large variations in geo- morphology and sediment distribution across the region. Areas close to the Weichselian ice margin are often marked by an increase in geological complex- ity, which may involve interlayering of till, meltwater sediments and proglacial lake infill deposits (Fig. 2C). These features may be preserved within buried valleys and other paleo-landscape depressions such as those formed by glaciotectonic deformation (Moreau & Huuse 2014; Prins & Andresen 2019). During and after the LGM, widespread marsh depos- its formed in a boreal semi-submerged landscape of the German North Sea (Coughlan et al. 2018). A similar land- scape evolution has also been suggested for the south- western part of the DNS based on shallow seismic and acoustic data (Prins & Andresen 2019; Andresen et  al. 2022) although paleo-environmental constraints on landscape development around the last low-stand are sparse. Following the last deglaciation, from about 11,000 years BP, most of the DNS was presumably above sea level, forming a low relief landscape with lakes and bogs commonly infilling topographic depressions (Coughlan et  al. 2018). As the post-glacial landscape became inundated by rising sea-levels, multiple chan- nels were formed in connection with riverine drainage systems (e.g. Elbe Paleo-valley), which gradually trans- formed into estuaries (Hepp et  al. 2017, 2019; Prins & Andresen 2019; Andresen et al. 2022). Continuation of the Holocene transgression meant that by about Table 1 Summary of geosystems and their associated risks and methods of identification. Geosystem Associated risks Risk-reducing investigations Shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology Unpredicted lateral variations in soil behaviour. Improved regional stratigraphic models. Glacial tectonics and salt movement Unpredicted lithology, potential fluid migration, variation in geotechnical properties. Mapping past ice movements and their influence on the sediments; describing overburden above salt structures. Fluid migration Potential blowouts, changes in soil cohesion/ strength. Understanding shallow fluid migration paths and mechanisms; mapping shallow gas. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 3 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG 9.3 Kyr BP, the DNS was subject to full marine condi- tions and influenced by strong tidal currents that ini- tiated the deposition of large sand banks, presently known as Little Fisher Bank and the Jylland Bank (Leth 1996; Fig. 3). These features, like many other shallow areas of the DNS, remain hydrographically dynamic with mobile sand units forming the modern seabed (Anthony & Leth 2002; Nørgaard-Pedersen & Rödel 2021). Our knowledge of North Sea geosystems that iden- tifies the foundation zone for offshore constructions is rooted in the complex Quaternary strata, involving mul- tiple phases of deposition, erosion and glacial loading and unloading. Although several studies on the Qua- ternary stratigraphy in the North Sea have emerged in recent years (Le Bot et  al. 2005; Rijsdijk et  al. 2005; Cotterill et al. 2017b; Coughlan et al. 2018; Prins & Andre- sen 2019; Petrie et al. 2022), the Quaternary succession of the DNS remains poorly constrained, both in terms of chronostratigraphy, lithological variation and geotech- nical properties. Closing this knowledge-gap requires densely spaced and high-resolution data coverage aimed at mapping the shallow geosystems and would provide information that can de-risk offshore services now and in the future. 1.2. De-risking in a geosystem context Risk, in the context of a geosystem, can be regarded as an assessment of the probability and consequence resulting in a negative impact produced by a specific geosystem element (Copping et al. 2020). This could be the likelihood and consequence of a ship grounding in areas with varying water depths, or the likelihood and consequence of a punch-through failure for a jack-up rig, installed on an undiscovered buried valley. A buried tunnel valley poses no risk to a ship passing over it, but if it results in a subsurface failure below a jack-up rig, the consequences can potentially be fatal (Bienen et al. 2015). Consequences may also be financial, for exam- ple, as recently experienced in the Neart na Gaoithe off- shore windfarm in the UK Sector, where the likelihood of wind turbine generator foundation installation failing due to rockhead variability had not been foreseen and had a financial consequence of hundreds of millions of Euros (Watts et al. 2021). Such examples illustrate that 6100000 55° 2’ 12’’ 55°56’ 6’’ 56° 49’ 59’’ 4° 5’ 32’’ 5° 43’ 28’’ 7° 21’ 39’’ –50 m –50 m –50 m –50 m –50 m 4° 5’ 32’’ 5° 43’ 28’’ 7° 21’ 39’’ 55 °5 6’ 6 ’’ Energy island renewable energy development O�shore renewable energy development O�shore installations Mean elevation (m) –10 –55 –30 NO EEZ UK EEZ DK EEZ DE EEZ NL EEZ Fig. 1 Map overview of the Danish North Sea (DNS) and some of the offshore activities in the area (Danish Maritime Authority 2023). Base map pro- jection: ETRS89 UTM zone 32N. Background map: EMODnet Bathymetry. EEZ: Exclusive Economic Zone. No: Norway. DK: Denmark. DE: Germany. NL: Netherlands. UK: United Kingdom. Red lines indicate EEZs. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 4 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG risk is closely related to the interaction between humans and geosystems. Understanding geosystems is the first step in the de-risking process of offshore construction. This typ- ically involves a desktop study, which describes the potential risks at a specific location, based on existing data and knowledge from the literature (e.g. Owen et al. 2020). Desktop studies highlight areas that require fur- ther investigation and help to inform potential risks associated with the area of interest. During the initial phases of site investigation, the first step is to generate a representative preliminary ground model (PGM) for the investigation area, which is typically based on any existing geophysical, geological and geotechnical data. The PGMs will then subsequently be developed further to form a fully integrated ground model based on addi- tional site investigations and the collection of site-spe- cific data (Cook et al. 2014). The PGM will also aid in the survey design to optimise ship time and thus reduce costs. Further advantages from having a high level of 2000 m 100 m 200 m 50 m North Sea N orw egian Channel DB LB Bergen Norway 55ºN 0ºN S N S Multiple Water Remobilised sediments Fluvial sediments Deposits of Baltic Ice Lake Shallow channel in�ll Outwash phase II Outwash phase I Lacustrine deposits Subglacial till and pre-Quaternary deposits 1 km 10 ms Peak Trough 1 km 10 ms 40 80 120 (m s) 40 80 120 (m s) 53 52 BH/51 50 49 48 47 46 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 ? Onlap & downlapThrustsDecollement surface 100 200 300 400 tw t ( m s) 100 200 300 400 tw t ( m s) SW SW NE NE Hill Hole 500 m 500 m Seismic re�ector (0.78 Ma) Brunhes/Matuyama Seabed multiple Gas front ’Chimney’ stratigraphy visible beneath pockmark due to venting of gas or �uid 2 m deep depression visible on bathymetry and innomar data Bathymetry data Innomar DataA B C D Fig. 2 Overview of different categories of geosystems reported in previous publications. A: Subsurface fluid migration: flow features represented on Innomar sub-bottom profiler data and Multibeam echosounder data as pockmarks and trapped gas (modified from Owen et al. 2021). B: Glacial tectonics and salt movement: shown by a seismic profile and model representation of a glaciotectonic complex (modified from Bendixen et al. 2017). TWT: two-way travel time. C: Shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology: here visualised on various geophysical data from the Baltic Sea (modified from Bellwald et al. 2023). D: Extent of a proposed glacial lake (orange polygon) during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), which has potentially deposited problematic soft clays over a large area (Green shaded areas indicate DB (Dogger Bank) and LB (Ling Bank); modified from Hjelstuen et al. 2018). https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 5 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG understanding of the geosystems include reducing the risk of project delays due to unforeseen ground con- ditions. These are extremely costly and not only delay the project itself but also reduce the chance of meeting political goals such as reducing carbon emissions. 2. Geosystem elements and their potential risks This paper focuses on the potential risks associated with the following three geosystem elements in the DNS (Fig. 2): 1. shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology (Fig. 2C and 2D). 2. glacial tectonics and salt movement (Fig. 2B) 3. subsurface fluid migration (Fig. 2A) 2.1. Shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology An understanding of the shallow stratigraphy (typically down to 200–500 m below seabed) is the basic frame- work for gaining information on the subsurface geo- technical properties. Knowing the lateral and vertical variation in lithology and mapping subsurface strati- graphic boundaries are essential for foundation design for large constructions such as wind turbine generators or artificial islands (Fig. 2C). In the inner Danish waters, a recent desktop study identified a thick succession of weakly consolidated gla- ciomarine clays (Jensen & Bennike 2022). This resulted in the windfarm project south of Hesselø to be paused and demanded new site investigations to assess the subsurface geological constraints in the area. In the DNS, numerous site surveys have been carried out in relation to offshore construction, but efforts to synthesise the results between sites have been sparse (Prins & Andresen 2021; Petrie et al. 2024). Integrating geotechnical data with robust stratigraphic models has the potential to reduce both risks and costs in relation to offshore construction (Velenturf et al. 2021; Petrie et al. 2024) and help avoid delaying large-scale offshore con- struction projects. Ice-dammed lakes typically form massive deposits of soft clay, which can pose a hazard for the develop- ment of offshore windfarms. A phase of ice-dammed lake development during the Last Glacial Maximum has been suggested for the DNS area (Hjelstuen et al. 2018; 55° 2’ 12’’ 55°56’ 6’’ 56° 49’ 59’’ 4° 5’ 32’’ 5° 43’ 28’’ 7° 21’ 39’’ 4° 5’ 32’’ 5° 43’ 28’’ 7° 21’ 39’’ 55 °5 6’ 6 ’’ Elbe Palaeo-valley outline Tunnel valleys (2D) Dogger Bank outline LGM ice extent Proposed glacial lake extent Buried valleys (3D) EEZ borders Salt structures Seabed sediments Mud and sandy mud Muddy sand Sand Gravel and coarse sand Till/diamicton Quaternary clay & silt Jyske Rev Lille Fiskerbanke Fig. 3 Overview of the different geosystems at various stratigraphic depths in the Danish North Sea (DNS). EEZ: Exclusive Economic Zone. LGM: Last Glacial Maximum. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 6 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG Fig.  2D). The geographical extent of this lake phase is bound by uncertainties although recent observations support a wider presence across the central and south- ern DNS (Andresen et al. 2022; Knutz et al. 2022). Fur- ther work is needed to constrain these clay-rich units in terms of lateral extent, thickness and geotechnical properties. Understanding the subsurface geology requires knowledge of the stratigraphic units, their distribution and their lithological variation. However, in order to generate a predictive subsurface model, the geologi- cal history and depositional environment need to be constrained, which require the geomorphology and sedimentological processes of the subsurface to be interpreted (Cotterill et al. 2017a). The shallow subsurface in the North Sea contains multiple different glacial geomorphologies, includ- ing prominent positive landforms such as eskers and moraine ridges (Dove et  al. 2017; Emery et  al. 2019; Mellett et  al. 2020) and paleo-coastline deposits, e.g. aggradational bars, which are well known in onshore Denmark. Buried negative landforms that are less expressive in the terrestrial terrain are commonly observed in the offshore seismic profiles as various forms of channels and troughs. These predominantly erosional features range from small troughs formed locally in a tidal paleo marsh setting (Coughlan et  al. 2018) to kilometre-scale buried valleys formed by flu- vial or subglacial processes. The Elbe Paleo-valley forms a major depressional feature of composite erosional channels that intersects the DNS in a SSE–NNW direc- tion (Lonergan et al. 2006; Stewart et al. 2013; Moreau & Huuse 2014; Ottesen et al. 2014; Cotterill et al. 2017b; Prins & Andresen 2019; Emery et al. 2020; Prins et al. 2020). Depending on their origin and subsequent geo- logical evolution, e.g. the character of sedimentary infill, buried valleys pose different risks for offshore con- struction, particularly deployment of jack-up rigs and design of appropriate wind turbine foundations. Peats have frequently been reported from within buried val- leys as well as the surrounding fluvial plains (Coughlan et al. 2018; Hepp et al. 2019), and these pose a risk for cable routings, as they increase the risk of overheating (Bellwald et al. 2024). By assembling and integrating all the available sub-surface information, geological models can be produced that describe spatial variations in buried geomorphology, litho-stratigraphy and depositional environments. Subsequently, geotechnical information can be added, or inferred, to generate a ground model that will be used for spatial site planning of offshore installations. An example is the Dogger Bank windfarm area, where intensive data collection and the integra- tion of geological and geotechnical data have been suggested to potentially reduce the need for drilling, thus lowering the cost of the site survey investigations (Cotterill et al. 2017a). 2.2. Glacial tectonics and salt movement The glaciation history of the DNS has led to variable glaciotectonic effects on the geosystems. Deformation in a subglacial or proglacial environment occurs when the weight of a moving ice sheet exerts a lateral stress component in the subsurface strata, causing failure or brittle deformation, which propagates through the ice-contact zone (Andersen et al. 2005). This results in thrusting and folding of the pre-existing strata, which may lead to stacking and repetition of the sedimentary sequences (Bennet & Glasser 2009) introducing geo- logical heterogeneity and unpredictability in the area (Fig. 2B). Glaciotectonic complexes are found throughout the North Sea providing evidence of ice-marginal processes during the last and previous glaciations (Andersen et al. 2005; Larsen & Andersen 2005; Bendixen et  al. 2017; Cotterill et al. 2017b; Pedersen & Boldreel 2017; Owen et  al. 2020). Some of the most well-studied glaciotec- tonic deformation structures are found on the island of Mors in Denmark, where diatomite and ash layers show extensive folding of Paleocene–Eocene deposits (Klint & Pedersen 1995). Glaciotectonic thrust complexes alter the existing stratigraphy through deformation with potentially dis- continuous sedimentary sequences as a result, such as allochthonous slabs of fine-grained material in a sandy matrix. This introduces increased heterogeneity and facies unpredictability in the area. A concrete example of glaciotectonically induced heterogeneity can be found in the Jammerbugt area, where the Upper Cretaceous chalk units have been deformed by glaciotectonic activ- ity, leaving a depression that was subsequently filled with Eemian Weichselian deposits (Pedersen & Boldreel 2017). Similar effects are seen in the British North Sea sector, where the rugged surface of thrust complexes has facilitated deposition of fine-grained material within lakes or ponds, some of which may contain organic-rich deposits, e.g. peat or gyttja (Cotterill et al. 2017a). For the final risk assessment, variability in lithology and struc- tural character induced by glacial tectonics need to be integrated into the geotechnical ground model (Velen- turf et al. 2021). Beyond the negative effects of glacial deformation and substratum complexities, ice loading may also be beneficial for offshore foundations as it enhances burial compaction and may lead to over-con- solidation expressed by high shear strength and sedi- ment stiffness (Le et al. 2014). Deformation of the near surface sediments can also occur as a result of salt movement (Rank-Friend https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 7 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG & Elders 2004). And there is evidence of Quaternary faulting related to these salt movements (Huuse et  al. 2001). The  most prominent influence these deep salt structures pose on offshore construction is through the faulting of the near-surface sediments as well as fluid migration through these faults. 2.3. Subsurface fluid migration Subsurface fluid migration is a naturally occurring pro- cess in sedimentary basins, principally driven by sedi- ment compaction, decomposition of organic matter and development of localised pressure gradients (Judd & Hovland 2009). Evidence of fluid migration within geosystems is seen as crater-like depressions, or pock- marks, on the seafloor (Lohrberg et al. 2020; Andresen et al. 2021) or in the form of gas chimneys, pipes and buried pockmarks on seismic data (Fig. 2A; Cartwright et al. 2007; Andresen et al. 2008; Andresen 2012; Moss et al. 2012). Sea- or lake-floor pockmarks on bathymetry data (Reusch et al. 2015; Lohrberg et al. 2020; Andresen et al. 2021) or pockmarks at the present day land surface (Bogoyavlensky et al. 2020) are documented from many sites globally – particularly sites located in hydrocar- bon-prone sedimentary basins such as the DNS, where enhanced fluid flow, commonly associated with salt-in- duced geological structures, is prevalent (Huuse et  al. 2010; Knutz 2010) or along permafrost or gas hydrate regions (Walter Anthony et al. 2012). Seafloor pockmarks may pose a risk to offshore instal- lations. If fluid expulsion is active, overpressurised pore fluids may yield low sediment stability or fluidisation of sediments below the crater or rim of the pockmark (Hovland et al. 2002; Chuvilin et al. 2020). In the Norwe- gian North Sea sector, seafloor pockmarks are a com- mon feature in offshore windfarm development areas, which needs to be assessed in terms of fluid migration activity and potential risks (Petrie et al. 2022). Locations of focused fluid seepage may also present issues due to marine habitat protection of bubble reefs. These bio- herms are formed by chemosynthetic organisms that use methane as an energy source whilst precipitating authigenic carbonate (Noble-James et al. 2020). Fluid escape and the presence of shallow gas may also occur without a prominent seafloor expression. Gas in the shallow subsurface is found across most of the DNS, where fine-grained sediments with organic content are present, or where geological conditions are amenable to vertical gas migration (Etiope 2009; Vielstädte et  al. 2015; Petersen & Smit 2023). In a de-risking context, it is important to understand the spatial distribution and geological context of subsurface gas accumulations as they can lead to gas blowouts or undermine founda- tions for offshore installations. Thus, understanding the gas migration pathway through geosystems, whether related to natural processes or induced by human activ- ities, such as oil and gas production (Hornafius et  al. 1999) or wind turbine foundation is crucial for reducing risk elements in offshore construction (Coughlan et al. 2021). 2.4. Combined risk elements Fluid migration within glaciotectonised areas is a case of combined risk elements that can influence the geo- technical properties within a geosystem. Fluid or gas migration may occur along thrust planes of the defor- mation complex, thus acting as a conduit for deeper flu- ids, which may reach the subsurface stratum and cause foundation conditions to deteriorate (Velenturf et  al. 2021). Similar fluid migration issues may be relevant near large salt structures (Fig. 3). 3. From geosystems to ground models This paper highlights the importance of understand- ing geosystem elements that carry potential hazards for future energy developments in the DNS. Improving this knowledge will reduce physical, environmental and financial risks associated with the expected increase in offshore construction activities. This risk reduction is essential for avoiding accidents, project delays or can- cellations for large offshore renewable projects that are a key component in meeting decarbonisation and net zero targets (Møllgaard et al. 2024). The geosystems risk analyses should be treated as an integrated approach, since interference with one system can pose new unknown risks in other systems. For instance, although the lithological succession may appear static, the strain and loading induced from site survey drilling and construction or piling may alter the physical properties in the subsurface by compaction and fluid expulsion. Mitigation of subsurface interac- tions occurring during the construction phase requires modelling of subsurface behaviour based on knowledge from the geological models and geosystem elements. Integrated models that compile all geophysical, geo- logical and geotechnical data are key for defining the interaction between geosystem services and the risk associated with a specific geosystem (Prins & Andresen 2021; Velenturf et  al. 2021; Bellwald et  al. 2023). The model presented by Prins & Andresen (2021) included scattered data points from the Central Graben area from 11 site surveys including seven cone penetration tests (CPTs), which are 1D geotechnical measurements of the strength of the sediments. The data spread high- lights the need for a better regional understanding of the subsurface geology. The development of offshore windfarm sites requires large amounts of geophysical, https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 8 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG geotechnical and geological data to ground truth the engineering properties of the subsurface. And as such, regional ground models can be improved, providing a better foundation for the de-risking process in future offshore construction projects. The improvements shown in the integrated ground models that are cur- rently being produced in relation to large-scale wind energy projects like the Ten Noorden van de Wadde- neilanden Wind Farm Zone in the Netherlands (see offshorewind.rvo.nl) have a huge potential for extrap- olation to wider areas. It also shows how a quantita- tive approach to integrating geological, geophysical and geotechnical data sets provides additional detailed information that also helps in the de-risking process (Karkov et al. 2022). In the Irish Sea, data collected for Ireland’s marine resource program were used to map geotechnical and geological constraints for offshore construction (Cough- lan et  al. 2020; Guinan et  al. 2020). A similar approach could be adopted in the DNS where offshore geolog- ical data made available from different industry and academic sources allow for qualitative interpretations and early-stage geological models to be established. By leveraging a general understanding of the soil proper- ties, implications for foundation type and design, and potential risks, these models provide a valuable service for decision-makers in marine spatial planning and the offshore energy industry (Coughlan et  al. 2020; Guinan et al. 2020). Data density has improved drastically in some areas of the DNS, particularly in association with a pro- posed energy island (Knutz et al. 2022), and as the renew- able energy transition progresses, a growing amount of geophysical and geotechnical data will become available. Much of these data will be available to the public through the marine raw material database ‘MARTA’ (GEUS 2024), which means that an increasingly larger proportion of the DNS can be described, for example, involving detailed ground models and stratigraphic schemes, which ulti- mately allows for a more robust risk analyses. 4. Conclusions For the DNS, three geosystems potentially containing hazards and forming risks to offshore construction have been identified (Table 1). These are: 1. Shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology: here, unknown variations in soil strength and lithological variations across the DNS pose a risk for offshore construction if it is not resolved through a better gen- eral understanding or through site survey investiga- tions. This includes mapping of geomorphological features, which can contribute to large local lithologi- cal variations within a stratigraphic unit (e.g. erosional valleys or coarse-grained coastal deposits) but which also helps highlight areas that require further investigation. 2. Glacial tectonics: including the postdepositional alteration of the subsurface resulting in unexpected lithological variations (e.g. chalk in a quaternary setting) and potential fluid migration paths, resulting in unexpected geotechnical properties. 3. Fluid migration: here, the presence of gas in the sedi- ment causes a variety of potential hazards like expul- sion to the water column, loss of sediment cohesion and strength and potential blowouts. This review of geosystems in the DNS shows that there are multiple risks associated with each geosystem. It highlights the need for a general understanding of these geosystems and provides information on good practice for understanding and mitigating these risks. Because the near-surface geology of the DNS is so diverse, there is a need for a broad geological model that can be con- tinuously improved upon. This model should inform the desktop studies and subsequent integrated ground models for offshore construction projects. As we have shown, most regional geosystems and their distribution are known; however, we still lack spe- cific knowledge on how the systems are interlinked, which exact geotechnical properties they have as well as the challenges they pose. As the renewable energy transition continues, more data will need to be gathered about these geosystems, and how to handle the risks associated with them. With increased use of oil and gas technology applied on shallow data, the resolution and accuracy will also gradually increase. To this end, some initiatives have already been established. These include a large-scale mapping project funded by the Danish Energy Agency, to screen Danish waters for areas that are unfit for windfarm construction and the NOARG project, funded by Geocenter Denmark (see https://www. geocenter.dk/projekter/2023-2/), which aims to map and improve our understanding of buried valleys in the DNS. Such projects will increase regional knowledge of the geosystems in the DNS and how they might pose a risk to future offshore construction. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the Danish Offshore Technology Cen- tre at DTU Denmark for funding the project SEEP – Building a seabed environmental baseline for platform abandonment. This study is a product of the work carried out in that study. We would also like to thank the three reviewers whose comments significantly improved the manuscript. Additional information Funding statement This study was funded by the Danish Offshore Technology Centre, DTU, Denmark. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ http://offshorewind.rvo.nl https://www.geocenter.dk/projekter/2023-2/ https://www.geocenter.dk/projekter/2023-2/ Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 9 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG Author contributions LTP: Conceptualisation, formal analysis, methodology, visualisation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing. KJA: Conceptu- alisation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing. MO: Conceptualisation, writing – original draft. PK: Conceptualisation, writing – review and editing. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Additional files None provided. References Adegbamigbe, T., Biswas, A., Blaney, J. & Jagtap, A. 2022: The North Sea – a long and proud history. https://jpt.spe.org/twa/the-north-sea-a-long- and-proud-history (accessed Feb 2025). Andersen, L.T., Hansen, D.L. & Huuse, M. 2005: Numerical modelling of thrust structures in unconsolidated sediments: implications for gla- ciotectonic deformation. Journal of Structural Geology 27, 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2005.01.005 Andresen, K.J. 2012: Fluid flow features in hydrocarbon plumb- ing systems: what do they tell us about the basin evolution? Marine Geology 332–334, 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. margeo.2012.07.006 Andresen, K.J., Dahlin, A., Kjeldsen, K.U., Røy, H., Bennike, O., Nør- gaard-Pedersen, N. & Seidenkrantz, M.S. 2021: The longevity of pockmarks – a case study from a shallow water body in northern Denmark. Marine Geology 434, 106440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. margeo.2021.106440 Andresen, K.J., Hepp, D.A., Keil, H. & Spiess, V. 2022: Seismic mor- phologies of submerged late glacial to Early Holocene landscapes at the eastern Dogger Bank, central North Sea Basin – impli- cations for geo-archaeological potential. Geological Society of London, Special Publications 525, 13–42. https://doi.org/10.1144/ sp525-2021-155 Andresen, K.J., Huuse, M. & Clausen, O.R. 2008: Morphology and distribution of Oligocene and Miocene pockmarks in the Danish North Sea – implications for bottom current activ- ity and fluid migration. Basin Research 20, 445–466. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2008.00362.x Anthony, D. & Leth, J.O. 2002: Large-scale bedforms, sediment distri- bution and sand mobility in the eastern North Sea off the Danish west coast. Marine Geology 182, 247–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0025-3227(01)00245-6 Batchelor, C.L., Margold, M., Krapp, M., Murton, D.K., Dalton, A.S., Gibbard, P.L., Stokes, C.R., Murton, J.B. & Manica, A. 2019: The con- figuration of Northern Hemisphere ice sheets through the Quater- nary. Nature Communications 10, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-019-11601-2 Bellwald, B. et  al. 2024: Geohazards and engineering challenges related to heterogeneous infill of tunnel calleys. In: Fifth EAGE Global Energy Transition Conference & Exhibition (GET 2024). Euro- pean Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, 1–5. https://doi. org/10.3997/2214-4609.202421069 Bellwald, B., Forsberg, C.F. & Vanneste, M. 2023: Multi-disciplinary char- acterization of sedimentary environments on glaciated margins: implications for engineering of offshore windfarm sites. NSG2023 1st Conference on Sub-surface Characterisation for Offshore Wind 2023, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202320040 Bendixen, C., Lamb, R.M., Huuse, M., Boldreel, L.O., Jensen, J.B. & Clau- sen, O.R. 2017: Evidence for a grounded ice sheet in the central North Sea during the early middle pleistocene donian glaciation. Journal of the Geological Society of London 175, 291–307. https://doi. org/10.1144/jgs2017-073 Bennet, M.R. & Glasser, N.F., 2009. Glacial geology – ice sheets  and landforms, Ch. 8.1 Direct glacial Sedimentation. 2nd ed., Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, West Sussex. Benvenuti, A., Šegvić, B. & Moscariello, A. 2018: Tunnel valley deposits from the southern North Sea – material provenance and depositional processes. Boreas 47, 625–642. https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12292 Bienen, B., Qiu, G. & Pucker, T. 2015: CPT correlation developed from numerical analysis to predict jack-up foundation penetration into sand overlying clay. Ocean Engineering 108, 216–226. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.08.009 Bogoyavlensky, V., Bogoyavlensky, I., Nikonov, R. & Kishankov, A. 2020: Complex of geophysical studies of the seyakha catastrophic gas blow- out crater on the Yamal peninsula, Russian Arctic. Geosciences 10, 215. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10060215 Cameron, T.D.J., Stoker, M.S. & Long, D. 1987: The history of Quaternary sedimentation in the UK sector of the North Sea Basin. Journal of the Geological Society 144, 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.144.1.0043 Cartwright, J., Huuse, M. & Aplin, A. 2007: Seal bypass systems. AAPG Bulletin 91, 1141–1166. https://doi.org/10.1306/04090705181 Chuvilin, E. et al. 2020: A gas-emission crater in the erkuta river valley, yamal peninsula: characteristics and potential formation model. Geo- sciences 10(5), 170. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10050170 Cook, M. et  al. 2014: Guidance notes for the planning and execution of geophysical and geotechnical ground investigations for offshore renewable energy developments. The Society for Underwater Tech- nology. ISBN: 0906940540. Pp. 1–48, London. Copping, A.E., Freeman, M.C., Gorton, A.M. & Hemery, L.G. 2020: Risk retirement – decreasing uncertainty and informing consenting pro- cesses for marine renewable energy development. Toxics 8, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse8030172 Cotterill, C., Phillips, E., James, L., Forsberg, C. & Tjelta, T.I. 2017a: How understanding past landscapes might inform present–day site investigations: a case study from Dogger Bank, southern cen- tral North Sea. Near Surface Geophysics 15, 403–414. https://doi. org/10.3997/1873-0604.2017032 Cotterill, C.J., Phillips, E., James, L., Forsberg, C.F., Tjelta, T.I., Carter, G. & Dove, D. 2017b: The evolution of the Dogger Bank, North Sea: a com- plex history of terrestrial, glacial and marine environmental change. Quaternary Science Reviews 171, 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. quascirev.2017.07.006 Coughlan, M., Fleischer, M., Wheeler, A.J., Hepp, D.A., Hebbeln, D. & Mörz, T. 2018: A revised stratigraphical framework for the Quaternary deposits of the German North Sea sector: a geological-geotechnical approach. Boreas 47, 80–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12253 Coughlan, M., Long, M. & Doherty, P. 2020: Geological and geotechnical constraints in the Irish Sea for offshore renewable energy. Journal of Maps 16, 420–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2020.1758811 Coughlan, M., Roy, S., O’Sullivan, C., Clements, A., O’Toole, R. & Plets, R. 2021: Geological settings and controls of fluid migration and associated seafloor seepage features in the north Irish Sea. Marine and Petroleum Geology 123, 104762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marpetgeo.2020.104762 Danish Maritime Authority 2023: Maritime spatial plan. https://www.dma. dk/growth-and-framework-conditions/maritime-spatial-plan (accessed Feb 2025). Degraer, S., Carey, D.A., Coolen, J.W., Hutchison, Z.L., Kerckhof, F., Rumes, B. & Vanaverbeke, J. 2020: Special issue on understanding the effects of offshore wind energy development on fisheries: off- shore wind farm artificial reefs affect ecosystem structure and func- tioning – a synthesis. Oceanography 33, 10. https://doi.org/10.5670/ oceanog.2020.405 Dove, D., Evans, D.J.A., Lee, J.R., Roberts, D.H., Tappin, D.R., Mellett, C.L., Long, D. & Callard, S.L. 2017: Phased occupation and retreat of the last British–Irish Ice Sheet in the southern North Sea; geo- morphic and seismostratigraphic evidence of a dynamic ice lobe. Quaternary Science Reviews 163, 114–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. quascirev.2017.03.006 Emery, A.R., Hodgson, D.M., Barlow, N.L.M., Carrivick, J.L., Cotterill, C.J. & Phillips, E. 2019: Left high and dry: deglaciation of Dogger Bank, North Sea, recorded in proglacial lake evolution. Frontiers in Earth Science 7, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00234 Emery, A.R., Hodgson, D.M., Barlow, N.L.M., Carrivick, J.L., Cotterill, C.J., Richardson, J.C., Ivanovic, R.F. & Mellett, C.L. 2020: Ice sheet and https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ https://jpt.spe.org/twa/the-north-sea-a-long-and-proud-history https://jpt.spe.org/twa/the-north-sea-a-long-and-proud-history https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2005.01.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2012.07.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2012.07.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2021.106440 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2021.106440 https://doi.org/10.1144/sp525-2021-155 https://doi.org/10.1144/sp525-2021-155 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2008.00362.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2008.00362.x https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(01)00245-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(01)00245-6 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11601-2 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11601-2 https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202421069 https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202421069 https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202320040 https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2017-073 https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2017-073 https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12292 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.08.009 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.08.009 https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10060215 https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.144.1.0043 https://doi.org/10.1306/04090705181 https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10050170 https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse8030172 https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2017032 https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2017032 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.07.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.07.006 https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12253 https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2020.1758811 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104762 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104762 https://www.dma.dk/growth-and-framework-conditions/maritime-spatial-plan https://www.dma.dk/growth-and-framework-conditions/maritime-spatial-plan https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2020.405 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2020.405 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.03.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.03.006 https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00234 Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 10 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG palaeoclimate controls on drainage network evolution: an example from Dogger Bank, North Sea. Earth Surface Dynamics 8, 869–891. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-8-869-2020 Etiope, G. 2009: Natural emissions of methane from geological seep- age in Europe. Atmospheric Environment 43, 1430–1443. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.03.014 Fleischer, M., Abegunrin, A., Hepp, D.A., Kreiter, S., Coughlan & M., Mörz, T. 2022: Stratigraphic and geotechnical characterization of regionally extensive and highly competent shallow sand units in the southern North Sea. Boreas 52, 78–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12595 Frisk, E.L. 2022: The geosystem services concept – what is it and can it support subsurface planning? Ecosystem Services 58, 101493. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101493 Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS) 2024: Marine raw material database. https://eng.geus.dk/products-services-facilities/data- and-maps/marine-raw-material-database-marta (accessed Feb 2025). Gołedowski, B., Nielsen, S.B. & Clausen, O.R. 2012: Patterns of Cenozoic sediment flux from western Scandinavia. Basin Research 24, 377–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2011.00530.x Guinan, J., McKeon, C., O’keeffe, E., Monteys, X., Sacchetti, F., Coughlan, M. & Aonghusa, C.N. 2020: Infomar data supports offshore energy development and marine spatial planning in the irish offshore via the emodnet geology portal. Quearterly Journal of Engineering Geol- ogy and Hydrogeology 54, qjegh2020-033. https://doi.org/10.1144/ qjegh2020-033 Hepp, D.A., Romero, O.E., Mörz, T., de Pol-Holz, R. & Hebbeln, D. 2019: How a river submerges into the sea: a geological record of chang- ing a fluvial to a marine paleoenvironment during early Holocene sea level rise. Journal of Quaternary Science 34, 581–592. https://doi. org/10.1002/jqs.3147 Hepp, D.A., Warnke, U., Hebbeln, D. & Mörz, T. 2017: Tributaries of the elbe palaeovalley: features of a hidden palaeolandscape in the Ger- man bight, North Sea. Coastal Research Library 20, 211–222. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53160-1_14 Hjelstuen, B.O., Sejrup, H.P., Valvik, E. & Becker, L.W.M. 2018: Evidence of an ice-dammed lake outburst in the North Sea during the last deglaciation. Marine Geology 402, 118–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. margeo.2017.11.021 Hornafius, J.S., Quigley, D. & Luyendyk, B.P. 1999: The world’s most spectacular marine hydrocarbon seeps (Coal Oil Point, Santa Bar- bara Channel, California): quantification of emissions. Journal of Geophysical Research Oceans 104, 20703–20711. https://doi. org/10.1029/1999JC900148 Hovland, M., Gardner, J.V. & Judd, A.G. 2002: The significance of pock- marks to understanding fluid flow processes and geohazards. Geoflu- ids 2, 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-8123.2002.00028.x Hughes, A.L.C., Gyllencreutz, R., Lohne, Ø.S., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 2016: The last Eurasian ice sheets – a chronological database and time-slice reconstruction, DATED-1. Boreas 45, 1–45. https://doi. org/10.1111/bor.12142 Huuse, M. & Clausen, O.R. 2001: Morphology and origin of major Ceno- zoic sequence boundaries in the Eastern North Sea Basin: top eocene, near-top oligocene and the mid-miocene unconformity. Basin Research 13, 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2117.2001.00123.x Huuse, M., Jackson, C.A.L., Van Rensbergen, P., Davies, R.J., Flemings, P.B. & Dixon, R.J. 2010: Subsurface sediment remobilization and fluid flow in sedimentary basins: an overview. Basin Research 22, 342–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2010.00488.x Huuse, M. & Lykke-Andersen, H. 2000: Overdeepened Quaternary val- leys in the eastern Danish North Sea: morphology and origin. Qua- ternary Science Reviews 19, 1233–1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0277-3791(99)00103-1 Huuse, M., Lykke-Andersen, H. & Michelsen, O. 2001: Cenozoic evolu- tion of the eastern Danish North Sea. Marine Geology 177, 243–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(01)00168-2 Jensen, J.B. & Bennike, O. 2022: Geological screening of Kattegat Area A and B. Geological seabed screening in relation to possible location of windfarm areas. Client Danish Energy Agency. GEUS, Copenhagen. Danmarks og Grønlands Geologiske Undersøgelse Rapport 2021(64). https://doi.org/10.22008/gpub/34624 Judd, A. & Hovland, M. 2009: Pockmarks, shallow gas, and seeps: an initial appraisal. In: Seabed fluid flow. The impact on geology, biol- ogy and the marine environment, 7–44. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511535918.004 Karkov, K.H. et  al. 2022: Case study: avo inversion and processing of ultra-high resolution seismic for a windfarm application. In: 83rd EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition. European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers 2022, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202210942 Kirkham, J.D. et al. 2022: Tunnel valley formation beneath deglaciating mid-latitude ice sheets: observations and modelling. Quaternary Science Reviews 323, 107680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev. 2022.107680 Klint, K.E.S. & Pedersen, S.A.S. 1995: The Hanklit glaciotectonic thrust fault complex, Mors, Denmark. Danmarks Geologiske Undersøgelse, Serie A 35, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.34194/seriea.v35.7055 Knudsen, K.L. & Sejrup, H.P. 1993: Pleistocene stratigraphy in the Dev- ils Hole Area, Central North Sea: foraminiferal and amino–acid evi- dence. Journal of Quaternary Science 8, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/ jqs.3390080102 Knutz, P.C. 2010: Channel structures formed by contour currents and fluid expulsion: significance for late neogene development of the cen- tral north sea basin. Petroleum Geology Conference Proceedings 7, 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1144/0070077 Knutz, P.C., Rasmussen, E.S., Laghari, S. & Prins, L.T. 2022: A desk study of the geological succession below a proposed energy island. Danish North Sea Report prepared for EnergiNet. Larsen, B. & Andersen, L.T. 2005: Late quaternary stratigraphy and morphogenesis in the Danish eastern North Sea and its relation to onshore geology. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 84, 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016774600023003 Le, T.M.H., Eiksund, G.R., Strøm, P.J. & Saue, M. 2014: Geological and geo- technical characterisation for offshore wind turbine foundations: a case study of the Sheringham Shoal wind farm. Engineering Geology 177, 40–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.05.005 Le Bot, S., Van Lancker, V., Deleu, S., De Batist, M., Henriet, J.P. & Haege- man, W. 2005: Geological characteristics and geotechnical properties of Eocene and Quaternary deposits on the Belgian continental shelf: syn- thesis in the context of offshore wind farming. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 84, 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0016774600023027 Leth, J.O. 1996: Late Quaternary geological development of the Jutland Bank and the initiation Jutland Current, NE North Sea. Geological Sur- vey of Norway Bulletin 430, 25–34. Lohrberg, A., Schmale, O., Ostrovsky, I., Niemann, H., Held, P. & Schneider von Deimling, J. 2020: Discovery and quantification of a widespread methane ebullition event in a coastal inlet (Baltic Sea) using a novel sonar strategy. Scientific Reports 10, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41598-020-60283-0 Lonergan, L., Maidment, S.C.R. & Collier, J.S. 2006: Pleistocene subglacial tunnel valleys in the central North Sea basin: 3-D morphology and evolution. Journal of Quaternary Science 21, 891–903. https://doi. org/10.1002/jqs.1015 Mellett, C.L., Phillips, E., Lee, J.R., Cotterill, C.J., Tjelta, T.I., James, L. & Duffy, C. 2020: Elsterian ice-sheet retreat in the southern North Sea: antecedent controls on large-scale glaciotectonics and subglacial bed conditions. Boreas 49, 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12410 Møllgaard, P., Halkier, B., Kristensen, N.B., Bye, B., Helselberg, P., Knud- sen, M.T., Münster, M., Richardson, K. & Thorsen, B.J. 2024: Status Outlook 2024. The Danish Council on Climate Change, Copenhagen. Mooney, T.A., Andersson, M. & Stanley, J. 2020: Acoustic impacts of offshore wind energy on fishery resources: an evolving source and varied effects across a wind farm’s lifetime. Oceanography 33, 82–95. https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2020.408 Moreau, J. & Huuse, M. 2014: Infill of tunnel valleys associated with land- ward-flowing ice sheets: the missing middle pleistocene record of the NW European rivers? Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 15, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GC005007 Moss, J.L., Cartwright, J. & Moore, R. 2012: Evidence for fluid migra- tion following pockmark formation: examples from the Nile Deep Sea Fan. Marine Geology 303–306, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. margeo.2012.01.010 https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-8-869-2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.03.014 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.03.014 https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12595 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101493 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101493 https://eng.geus.dk/products-services-facilities/data-and-maps/marine-raw-material-database-marta https://eng.geus.dk/products-services-facilities/data-and-maps/marine-raw-material-database-marta https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2011.00530.x https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2020-033 https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2020-033 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3147 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3147 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53160-1_14 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53160-1_14 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2017.11.021 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2017.11.021 https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900148 https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900148 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-8123.2002.00028.x https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12142 https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12142 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2117.2001.00123.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2010.00488.x https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00103-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00103-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(01)00168-2 https://doi.org/10.22008/gpub/34624 https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511535918.004 https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202210942 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2022.107680 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2022.107680 https://doi.org/10.34194/seriea.v35.7055 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3390080102 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3390080102 https://doi.org/10.1144/0070077 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016774600023003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.05.005 https://doi.org/10.1017/s0016774600023027 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60283-0 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60283-0 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.1015 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.1015 https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12410 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2020.408 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GC005007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2012.01.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2012.01.010 Prins et al. 2025: GEUS Bulletin 52. 8371. https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 11 of 11 GEUSBULLETIN.ORG Nielsen, T., Mathiesen, A. & Bryde-Auken, M. 2008: Base quaternary in the Danish parts of the North Sea and Skagerrak. Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 15, 37–40. https://doi.org/10.34194/ geusb.v15.5038 Noble-James, T., Judd, A., Diesing, M., Clare, D., Eggett, A., Silburn, B. & Duncan, G. 2020: Monitoring shallow methane-derived authigenic carbonate: insights from a UK Marine Protected Area. Aquatic Con- servation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 30, 959–976. https://doi. org/10.1002/aqc.3296 Nørgaard-Pedersen, N. & Rödel, L.G. 2021: Slutopmåling af auktionsom- råde 562-LD. Jyske Rev. Kortlægning og miljøvurdering for Thyborøn Nordsøral A/S. Danmarks og Grønlands Geologiske Undersøgelse Rapport 42, 59 pp. https://doi.org/10.22008/gpub/34602 Ottesen, D., Dowdeswell, J.A. & Bugge, T. 2014: Morphology, sedimentary infill and depositional environments of the Early Quaternary North Sea Basin (56°–62°N). Marine and Petroleum Geology 56, 123–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.04.007 Owen, M., Bodin, S., Andresen, K.J. & Al-hamdani, Z. 2021: Investigat- ing Pockmark Fields in the Danish Skagerrak. Danish Rnvironmental Agency Report 2190, pp 27. Owen, M., Knutz, P. & Prins, L.T. 2020: En geologisk screeningundersø- gelse af potentielle energiøområder i Dansk Nordsø. Rapport udført for Energistyrelsen. Danmarks og Grønlands Geologiske Undersø- gelse Rapport 24, 50 pp. https://doi.org/10.22008/gpub/34521 Pedersen, S.A.S. & Boldreel, L.O. 2017: Glaciotectonic deformations in the Jammerbugt and glaciodynamic development in the eastern North Sea. Journal of Quaternary Science 32, 183–195. https://doi. org/10.1002/jqs.2887 Petersen, H.I. & Smit, F.W.H. 2023: Application of mud gas data and leakage phenomena to evaluate seal integrity of potential CO2 storage sites: a study of chalk structures in the Danish Central Graben, North Sea. Jour- nal of Petroleum Geology 46, 47–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpg.12830 Petrie, H.E., Eide, C.H., Haflidason, H., Brendryen, J. & Watton, T. 2024: An integrated geological characterization of the Mid-Pleistocene to Holocene geology of the Sørlige Nordsjø II offshore wind site, south- ern North Sea. Boreas 53, 186–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12647 Petrie, H.E., Eide, C.H., Haflidason, H. & Watton, T. 2022: A conceptual geological model for offshore wind sites in former ice stream settings: the Utsira Nord site, North Sea. Journal of the Geological Society 179, jgs2021-163. https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2021-163 Phillips, E., Hodgson, D.M. & Emery, A.R. 2017: The quaternary geology of the North Sea basin. Journal of Quaternary Science 32, 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.2932 Prins, L.T. & Andresen, K.J. 2019: Buried late Quaternary channel sys- tems in the Danish North Sea – Genesis and geological evolution. Quaternary Science Reviews 223, 105943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. quascirev.2019.105943 Prins, L.T. & Andresen, K.J. 2021: A geotechnical stratigraphy for the shal- low subsurface in the Southern Central Graben, North Sea. Engineer- ing Geology 286, 106089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106089 Prins, L.T., Andresen, K.J., Clausen, O.R. & Piotrowski, J.A. 2020: Forma- tion and widening of a North Sea tunnel valley – the impact of slope processes on valley morphology. Geomorphology 368, 107347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107347 Rank-Friend, M. & Elders, C.F. 2004: The evolution and growth of Central Graben salt structures, Salt Dome Province, Danish North Sea. Geo- logical Society, London, Memoirs 29, 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1144/ GSL.MEM.2004.029.01.15 Rea, B.R. et al. 2018: Extensive marine-terminating ice sheets in Europe from 2.5 million years ago. Science Advances 4, eaar8327. https://doi. org/10.1126/sciadv.aar8327 Reusch, A. et  al. 2015: Giant lacustrine pockmarks with subaqueous groundwater discharge and subsurface sediment mobilization. Geo- physical Research Letters 42, 3465–3473. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015 GL064179 Rijsdijk, K.F., Passchier, S., Weerts, H.J.T., Laban, C., van Leeuwen, R.J.W. & Ebbing, J.H.J. 2005: Revised Upper Cenozoic stratigraphy of the Dutch sector of the North Sea Basin: towards an integrated lithostrati- graphic, seismostratigraphic and allostratigraphic approach. Nether- lands Journal of Geosciences 84, 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0016774600023015 Stewart, M.A., Lonergan, L. & Hampson, G. 2013: 3D seismic analysis of buried tunnel valleys in the central North Sea: morphology, cross-cut- ting generations and glacial history. Quaternary Science Reviews 72, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2013.03.016 Van der Vegt, P., Janszen, A. & Moscariello, A. 2012: Tunnel valleys: current knowledge and future perspectives. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 368, 75–97. https://doi.org/10.1144/ SP368.13 Velenturf, A.P.M., Emery, A.R., Hodgson, D.M., Barlow, N.L.M., Mohtaj Khorasani, A.M., Van Alstine, J., Peterson, E.L., Piazolo, S. & Thorp, M. 2021: Geoscience solutions for sustainable offshore wind devel- opment. Earth Science Systems and Society 1, 1–23. https://doi. org/10.3389/esss.2021.10042 Vielstädte, L., Karstens, J., Haeckel, M., Schmidt, M., Linke, P., Reimann, S., Liebetrau, V., McGinnis, D.F. & Wallmann, K. 2015: Quantification of methane emissions at abandoned gas wells in the Central North Sea. Marine and Petroleum Geology 68, 848–860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marpetgeo.2015.07.030 Walter Anthony, K.M., Anthony, P., Grosse, G. & Chanton, J. 2012: Geo- logic methane seeps along boundaries of Arctic permafrost thaw and melting glaciers. Nature Geoscience 5, 419–426. https://doi. org/10.1038/ngeo1480 Watts, R., Lee, A. & Snieckus, D. 2021: Saipem woe as ‘soil and founda- tions’ issues hit work on North Sea wind farm installation. UpStream. https://www.upstreamonline.com/energy-transition/saipem-woe-as- soil-and-foundations-issues-hit-work-on-north-sea-wind-farm-installa- tion/2-1-971065 (accessed Feb 2025). Winsemann, J., Koopmann, H., Tanner, D.C., Lutz, R., Lang, J., Brandes, C. & Gaedicke, C. 2020: Seismic interpretation and structural restoration of the Heligoland glaciotectonic thrust-fault complex: implications for multiple deformation during (pre-)Elsterian to Warthian ice advances into the southern North Sea Basin. Quaternary Science Reviews 227, 106068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.106068 Ziegler, P.A. 1992: North Sea rift system. In: Ziegler, P.A. (ed.): Geody- namics of rifting, volume I. Case history studies on rifts: Europe and Asia. Tectonophysics 208, 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/ b978-0-444-89912-5.50007-7 https://doi.org/10.34194/sj67gw16 http://www.geusbulletin.org/ https://doi.org/10.34194/geusb.v15.5038 https://doi.org/10.34194/geusb.v15.5038 https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.3296 https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.3296 https://doi.org/10.22008/gpub/34602 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.04.007 https://doi.org/10.22008/gpub/34521 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.2887 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.2887 https://doi.org/10.1111/jpg.12830 https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12647 https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2021-163 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.2932 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.105943 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.105943 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106089 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107347 https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.MEM.2004.029.01.15 https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.MEM.2004.029.01.15 https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aar8327 https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aar8327 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064179 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064179 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016774600023015 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016774600023015 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2013.03.016 https://doi.org/10.1144/SP368.13 https://doi.org/10.1144/SP368.13 https://doi.org/10.3389/esss.2021.10042 https://doi.org/10.3389/esss.2021.10042 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.07.030 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.07.030 https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1480 https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1480 https://www.upstreamonline.com/energy-transition/saipem-woe-as-soil-and-foundations-issues-hit-work-on-north-sea-wind-farm-installation/2-1-971065 https://www.upstreamonline.com/energy-transition/saipem-woe-as-soil-and-foundations-issues-hit-work-on-north-sea-wind-farm-installation/2-1-971065 https://www.upstreamonline.com/energy-transition/saipem-woe-as-soil-and-foundations-issues-hit-work-on-north-sea-wind-farm-installation/2-1-971065 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.106068 https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-89912-5.50007-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-89912-5.50007-7 A review of subsurface geosystems and de-risking offshore construction in the Danish North Sea 1. Introduction 1.1. Geological background 1.2. De-risking in a geosystem context 2. Geosystem elements and their potential risks 2.1. Shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology 2.2. Glacial tectonics and salt movement 2.3. Subsurface fluid migration 2.4. Combined risk elements 3. From geosystems to ground models 4. Conclusions Acknowledgements Additional information Funding statement Author contributions Competing interests Additional files References Figures Fig. 1 Map overview of the Danish North Sea (DNS) and some of the offshore activities in the area (Danish Maritime Authority 2023). Base map projection: ETRS89 UTM zone 32N. Background map: EMODnet Bathymetry. EEZ: Exclusive Economic Zone. No: Norway. DK: Denmark. DE: Germany. NL: Netherlands. UK: United Kingdom. Red lines indicate EEZs. Fig. 2 Overview of different categories of geosystems reported in previous publications. A: Subsurface fluid migration: flow features represented on Innomar sub-bottom profiler data and Multibeam echosounder data as pockmarks and trapped gas (modified from Owen et al. 2021). B: Glacial tectonics and salt movement: shown by a seismic profile and model representation of a glaciotectonic complex (modified from Bendixen et al. 2017). TWT: two-way travel time. C: Shallow stratigraphy and geomorphology: here visualised on various geophysical data from the Baltic Sea (modified from Bellwald et al. 2023). D: Extent of a proposed glacial lake (orange polygon) during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), which has potentially deposited problematic soft... Fig. 3 Overview of the different geosystems at various stratigraphic depths in the Danish North Sea (DNS). EEZ: Exclusive Economic Zone. LGM: Last Glacial Maximum. Table Table 1 Summary of geosystems and their associated risks and methods of identification.