Towards answering the “so what” question in marine renewables environmental impact assessment

Marine renewable energy (MRE) projects are increasingly occupying the European North-Atlantic coasts and this is clearly observed in the North Sea. Given the expected impacts on the marine environment, each individual project is accompanied by a legally mandatory, environmental monitoring programme. These programmes are focused on the resultant effects on ecosystem component structure (e.g. species composition, numbers and densities) of single industrial projects. To date, there is a tendency to further narrow down to only a selection of ecosystem components (e.g. marine mammals and birds). While a wide knowledge-based understanding of structural impacts on (a selection of) ecosystem components exists, this evidence is largely lacking when undertaking impact assessments at the ecosystem functioning level (e.g. trophic interactions, dispersal and nutrient cycling). This critical knowledge gap compromises a scientifically-underpinned answer to the “so what” question of environmental impacts, i.e. whether the observed impacts are considered to be good or bad, or acceptable or unacceptable. The importance of ecosystem functioning is further acknowledged in the descriptors 4 and 6 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (EU MSFD) and is at the heart of a sustainable use and management of our marine resources. There hence is a fundamental need to focus on ecosystem functioning at the spatial scales at which marine ecosystems function when assessing MRE impacts. Here, we make a plea for an increased investment in a large (spatial) scale impact assessment of MRE projects focused on ecosystem functioning. This presentation will cover a selection of examples from North Sea MRE monitoring programmes, where the current knowledge has limited conclusions on the “so what” question. We will demonstrate how an ecosystem functioning-focused approach at an appropriate spatial scale could advance our current understanding, whilst assessing these issues. These examples will cover biogeochemical cycling, food webs and connectivity in a cumulative MRE impact assessment context. This presentation will highlight both the available knowledge base and further elaborate on the knowledge gaps. We will offer guidance on how these knowledge gaps could be further investigated, based on examples taken from the recently started projects FaCE-It, Functional biodiversity in a changing sedimentary environment: implications for biogeochemistry and food webs in a managerial setting (financed by the Belgian Science Policy) and UNDINE, Understanding the influence of man-made structures on the ecosystem functions of the North Sea (financed by Oil & Gas UK). This presentation will set the scene and offer further thinking on the current issues associated to MRE monitoring, particularly beyond the level of ecological structure and individual industrial projects. The overall message will aid advancing and strengthening a collaborative MRE monitoring, helping scientists, managers and regulators to answer the much needed “so what” question to support environmental assessments

Offshore decommissioning horizon scan : Research priorities to support decision-making activities for oil and gas infrastructure

Thousands of oil and gas structures have been installed in the world's oceans over the past 70 years to meet the population's reliance on hydrocarbons. Over the last decade, there has been increased concern over how to handle decommissioning of this infrastructure when it reaches the end of its operational life. Complete or partial removal may or may not present the best option when considering potential impacts on the environment, society, technical feasibility, economy, and future asset liability. Re-purposing of offshore structures may also be a valid legal option under international maritime law where robust evidence exists to support this option. Given the complex nature of decommissioning offshore infrastructure, a global horizon scan was undertaken, eliciting input from an interdisciplinary cohort of 35 global experts to develop the top ten priority research needs to further inform decommissioning decisions and advance our understanding of their potential impacts. The highest research priorities included: (1) an assessment of impacts of contaminants and their acceptable environmental limits to reduce potential for ecological harm; (2) defining risk and acceptability thresholds in policy/governance; (3) characterising liability issues of ongoing costs and responsibility; and (4) quantification of impacts to ecosystem services. The remaining top ten priorities included: (5) quantifying ecological connectivity; (6) assessing marine life productivity; (7) determining feasibility of infrastructure re-use; (8) identification of stakeholder views and values; (9) quantification of greenhouse gas emissions; and (10) developing a transdisciplinary decommissioning decision-making process. Addressing these priorities will help inform policy development and governance frameworks to provide industry and stakeholders with a clearer path forward for offshore decommissioning. The principles and framework developed in this paper are equally applicable for informing responsible decommissioning of offshore renewable energy infrastructure, in particular wind turbines, a field that is accelerating rapidly

Comparing the Cologne Sonderbund of 1912 and the Second Post-Impressionist Exhibition in London

The article examines the agendas of the International Art Exhibition of the West German Sonderbund held in Cologne in 1912 and the Second Post-Impressionist Exhibition organised in London the same year, by contrasting their historical contexts and comparing their theoretical backgrounds. While the shows varied slightly in approach, both sought to give a systematic overview of the latest trends in art, which was then marketed mainly by private dealers. They addressed similar issues, such as defining the inherited tradition and topical dilemmas about the autonomy of painting and its decorative potential. The paper will discuss the emphasis on the progressive timeline and international outlook on modern art they formulated. It will also revisit the role of these exhibitions in light of the currently expanding discussion of the mechanisms that shaped the canon of European modernism

Age and frailty are independently associated with increased COVID-19 mortality and increased care needs in survivors: results of an international multi-centre study

Introduction: Increased mortality has been demonstrated in older adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the effect of frailty has been unclear. Methods: This multi-centre cohort study involved patients aged 18 years and older hospitalised with COVID-19, using routinely collected data. We used Cox regression analysis to assess the impact of age, frailty and delirium on the risk of inpatient mortality, adjusting for sex, illness severity, inflammation and co-morbidities. We used ordinal logistic regression analysis to assess the impact of age, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and delirium on risk of increased care requirements on discharge, adjusting for the same variables. Results: Data from 5,711 patients from 55 hospitals in 12 countries were included (median age 74, interquartile range [IQR] 54–83; 55.2% male). The risk of death increased independently with increasing age (>80 versus 18–49: hazard ratio [HR] 3.57, confidence interval [CI] 2.54–5.02), frailty (CFS 8 versus 1–3: HR 3.03, CI 2.29–4.00) inflammation, renal disease, cardiovascular disease and cancer, but not delirium. Age, frailty (CFS 7 versus 1–3: odds ratio 7.00, CI 5.27–9.32), delirium, dementia and mental health diagnoses were all associated with increased risk of higher care needs on discharge. The likelihood of adverse outcomes increased across all grades of CFS from 4 to 9. Conclusion: Age and frailty are independently associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19. Risk of increased care needs was also increased in survivors of COVID-19 with frailty or older age.</p