Environmental Impact Assessment: gathering experiences from wave energy test centres in Europe (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ocean & Coastal Management, 2014
Available online xxx a b s t r a c t Plans for Marine Renewable Energy Installations (MREI) are developing worldwide, yet many questions still remain about the impacts such developments may have on marine ecosystems and on coastal and oceanographic processes. This uncertainty, combined with a lengthy and complex Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) phase prior to consent, has slowed the growth of the marine renewables sector. Information on completed and ongoing EIAs at MREI sites across Europe was summarised and compared amongst sites and with completed, comprehensive EIAs for Horns Rev offshore wind farm and the SeaGen tidal turbine site at Strangford Lough. This allowed for the identification of commonalities and differences in monitoring activities, and of data gaps in the wave energy EIA process. Studies on the socio-economic impacts of MREIs were lacking, as were monitoring of fish, fish habitats, electromagnetic fields and their impacts on marine wildlife. Even amongst sites monitoring similar topics, methodologies varied greatly. Science cannot inform the management of marine renewables whilst there are inconsistencies in baseline and impact monitoring, as this study has documented. A streamlined EIA process and collaborations between researchers and developers are required to move the industry forward.
Assessing wave energy effects on biodiversity:the Wave Hub experience
Marine renewable energy installations harnessing energy from wind, wave and tidal resources are likely to become a large part of the future energy mix worldwide. The potential to gather energy from waves has recently seen increasing interest, with pilot developments in several nations. Although technology to harness wave energy lags behind that of wind and tidal generation, it has the potential to contribute significantly to energy production. As wave energy technology matures and becomes more widespread, it is likely to result in further transformation of our coastal seas. Such changes are accompanied by uncertainty regarding their impacts on biodiversity. To date, impacts have not been assessed, as wave energy converters have yet to be fully developed. Therefore, there is a pressing need to build a framework of understanding regarding the potential impacts of these technologies, underpinned by methodologies that are transferable and scalable across sites to facilitate formal meta-analysis. We first review the potential positive and negative effects of wave energy generation, and then, with specific reference to our work at the Wave Hub (a wave energy test site in southwest England, UK), we set out the methodological approaches needed to assess possible effects of wave energy on biodiversity. We highlight the need for national and international research clusters to accelerate the implementation of wave energy, within a coherent understanding of potential effects-both positive and negative.
An economical shore-based method for quantitative measurement of littoral wave action or ‘exposure’ is presented. The ‘Terobuoy’ consists of a robust design that utilises a sacrificial material to deduce measurements of wave energy and direction over a sustained period. Further, the methodology can cheaply provide simultaneous measurements of wave action over integrated time periods in any number of locations. The method may not only provide a way of assessing the possible ecological and physiological effects that wave energy converter arrays could have on shoreline species but also give an impartial quantifying method for environmental impact assessments and environmental monitoring This would reduce uncertainties and financial outlay for stakeholders and investors in marine renewable energy technologies. Initial results from installations in Orkney indicate that it can provide both a measurement of accumulated energy and direction, for a given period, due to hydrodynamic forces on the shoreline. Research linked to this work could, for the first time, allow a direct quantitative measurement of littoral wave action that can be understood in terms of habitat and biotope classification systems, such as the European Nature Information System (EUNIS), the database for NATURA2000 protected areas.
Assessing and managing the cumulative impacts of human activities on the environment remains a major challenge to sustainable development. This challenge is highlighted by the worldwide expansion of marine renewable energy developments (MREDs) in areas already subject to multiple activities and climate change. Cumulative effects assessments in theory provide decision makers with adequate information about how the environment will respond to the incremental effects of licensed activities and are a legal requirement in many nations. In practise, however, such assessments are beset by uncertainties resulting in substantial delays during the licensing process that reduce MRED investor confidence and limit progress towards meeting climate change targets. In light of these targets and ambitions to manage the marine environment sustainably, reducing the uncertainty surrounding MRED effects and cumulative effects assessment are timely and vital. This review investigates the origins and evolution of cumulative effects assessment to identify why the multitude of approaches and pertinent research have emerged, and discusses key considerations and challenges relevant to assessing the cumulative effects of MREDs and other activities on ecosystems. The review recommends a shift away from the current reliance on disparate environmental impact assessments and limited strategic environmental assessments, and a move towards establishing a common system of coordinated data and research relative to ecologically meaningful areas, focussed on the needs of decision makers tasked with protecting and conserving marine ecosystems and services.
Ocean & Coastal Management, 2017
Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are a key legislative requirement used to ensure sustainable development. A notable example of the enabling legislation is the European Union Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (2011/92/EU). In the 25 years since its implementation it has been revised, most recently in 2014, with amendments to accommodate policy, legal and technical changes. The 2014 amendment to the EIA Directive is reviewed here in the marine context with areas identified where the Directive and its implementation may still be deficient. This arises from the experience of the authors of reviewing EIAs, and our recommendations are mainly that standardised guidance and approaches should be applied for comparability. These recommendations have general relevance to all EIA practitioners, not just marine, and to environmental assessments within and beyond the EU.
Biodiversity offsets for offshore wind farm projects: The current situation in Europe
2014
The European Union's energy policy aims to increase the proportion of energy derived from renewable sources in Europe. Marine renewable energy, offshore wind energy especially, contributes to the renewable energy mix. Offshore wind farms appear to be clean, and are supported by governments and NGOs as a way to reduce the use of conventional energy resources and thus decrease greenhouse gas emissions. However, developing infrastructure in marine areas can impact marine ecosystems. European directives ask offshore wind farm developers to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) including a mitigation hierarchy, i.e. envisaging measures that would avoid, reduce, and if possible offset significant adverse effects on ecosystems and human activities. This paper reviews EIA reports from seven European countries and is focused on impacts on the open water marine environment. According to the reports, measures have been taken for avoiding and reducing impacts, so there should be no significant negative residual impacts and hence no need of offsets. But the mitigation hierarchy for ecological impacts seems to have been incompletely implemented, because it is unlikely that there are no significant residual impacts. The paper proposes some technical and ecological explanations, followed by some governance and social explanations, for the absence of biodiversity offsets.
Resolving issues with environmental impact assessment of marine renewable energy installations
Frontiers in Marine Science, 2014
Growing concerns about climate change and energy security have fuelled a rapid increase in 36 the development of marine renewable energy installations (MREIs). The potential ecological 37 consequences of increased use of these devices emphasises the need for high quality 38 environmental impact assessment (EIA). We demonstrate that these processes are hampered 39 severely, primarily because ambiguities in the legislation and lack of clear implementation 40 guidance are such that they do not ensure robust assessment of the significance of impacts 41 and cumulative effects. We highlight why the regulatory framework leads to conceptual 42 ambiguities and propose changes which, for the most part, do not require major adjustments 43 to standard practice. We emphasise the importance of determining the degree of confidence 44 in impacts to permit the likelihood as well as magnitude of impacts to be quantified and 45 propose ways in which assessment of population-level impacts could be incorporated into the 46 EIA process. Overall, however, we argue that, instead of trying to ascertain which particular 47 developments are responsible for tipping an already heavily degraded marine environment 48 into an undesirable state, emphasis should be placed on better strategic assessment. 49 50
Environmental Impact Assessment in the marine environment: A comparison of legal frameworks
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a well-established practice in most developed countries, even though its application to projects in the marine environment is at a much earlier stage of development. We use the Por-tuguese example to address marine EIA legislation since its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is currently the third largest in the European Union and its EIA legislation does not require various offshore activities with potentially negative environmental impacts to undergo EIA before being licensed. This paper aims to determine whether three types of projects implemented within Portuguese maritime zones – artificial reefs using sunken ships, hydrocarbon prospecting and wave-energy generation – would benefit from application of an appropriately designed EIA. We have conducted a structured review of EIA legal provisions from seven other countries, and considered whether a full EIA was required for each project type. Consequently, 12 Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) have been compared to identify patterns of (dis)similarity across countries and project types. Additionally , we identified key descriptors and predicted impacts for each project type referred to in their EIS. The main conclusion is that ultimately all three projects would benefit from mandatory EIA in Portugal. This paper is relevant for countries with large maritime areas and underdeveloped marine EIA legislation, helping improve international policy-making relating to these three types of marine projects.