19 research outputs found
Potential use of offshore marine structures in rebuilding an overfished rockfish species, bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis)
Although bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis) was an economically important rockfish species along the west coast of North America, overfishing has reduced the stock to about 7.4% of its former unfished population. In 2003, using a manned research submersible, we conducted fish surveys around eight oil and gas platforms off southern California as part of an assessment of the potential value of these structures as fish habitat. From these surveys, we estimated that there was a minimum of 430,000 juvenile bocaccio at these eight structures. We determined this number to be about 20% of the average number of juvenile bocaccio that survive annually for the geographic range of the species. When these juveniles become adults, they will contribute about one percent (0.8%) of the additional amount of fish needed to rebuild the Pacific Coast population. By comparison, juvenile bocaccio recruitment to nearshore natural nursery grounds, as determined through regional scuba surveys, was low in the same year. This research demonstrates that a relatively small amount of artificial nursery habitat may be quite valuable in rebuilding an overfished species
Identical Response of Caged Rock Crabs (Genera Metacarcinus and Cancer) to Energized and Unenergized Undersea Power Cables in Southern California, USA
Energy generation facilities (i.e., wave and wind) are being sited in offshore marine waters. The electricity generated from these facilities is transmitted to shore through cables carrying alternating or direct current. This current produces an electromagnetic field (EMF) that is emitted from the cable. Concerns have been voiced regarding how marine organisms, in this instance crabs, respond to the EMF emitted by submarine power cables. Two submarine cables, one energized and the other unenergized, and separated by about 7 m, were used in the experiment. Crabs (Metacarcinus anthonyi (Rathbun, 1897) and Cancer productus (Randall, 1839)) were placed in plastic perforated boxes secured to the sea floor with one end in contact with one of the two cables. After one hour and 24 hours, scuba divers ascertained the position of the crabs within the boxes, these positions designated as either “near-half” or “far-half.” EMF readings were taken on the floor of each box at the edge closest to the cable and on the floor of that box furthest from the cable at one and 24 hours. Within the boxes, EMF levels were between 46.2–80.0 microteslas next to the cable an
The Organisms Living Around Energized Submarine Power Cables, Pipe, and Natural Sea Floor in the Inshore waters of Southern California
Between 1 February 2012 and 26 February 2014 using scuba, we surveyed the fishes, invertebrates, and macrophytes living on two energized submarine power cables, an adjacent pipe, and nearby natural habitat in southern California at bottom depths of 10–11 m and 13–14 m. Over the course of the study, average electromagnetic field (EMF) levels at the two cables (A and B) were statistically similar (Cable A = 73.0µT, Cable B = 91.4µT) and were much higher at these two cables than at either the pipe (average = 0.5µT) or sand (0µT). Overall, our study demonstrated that 1) the fish and invertebrate communities on cables, pipe, and natural habitat strongly overlapped and 2) there were differences between the shallower and deeper fish and invertebrate communities. We saw no evidence that fishes or invertebrates are either preferentially attracted to, or repelled by, the EMF emitted by the cables. Any differences in the fish or invertebrate densities between cables, pipe, and natural habitat taxa were most likely due to the differences in the physical characteristics of these habitats. As with the fishes and invertebrates, macrophytes did not appear to be responding to the EMF emitted by the cables. Rather, it is likely that differences in the plant communities were driven by site depth and habitat type
Haven or hell? : A perspective on the ecology of offshore oil and gas platforms
We acknowledge in-kind support from Net Zero Technology Centre and the University of Aberdeen through their partnership in the UK National Decommissioning Centre. Also E. Carr for graphical assistance.Peer reviewe
To what extent can decommissioning options for marine artificial structures move us toward environmental targets?
Switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy is key to international energy transition efforts and the move toward net zero. For many nations, this requires decommissioning of hundreds of oil and gas infrastructure in the marine environment. Current international, regional and national legislation largely dictates that structures must be completely removed at end-of-life although, increasingly, alternative decommissioning options are being promoted and implemented. Yet, a paucity of real-world case studies describing the impacts of decommissioning on the environment make decision-making with respect to which option(s) might be optimal for meeting international and regional strategic environmental targets challenging. To address this gap, we draw together international expertise and judgment from marine environmental scientists on marine artificial structures as an alternative source of evidence that explores how different decommissioning options might ameliorate pressures that drive environmental status toward (or away) from environmental objectives. Synthesis reveals that for 37 United Nations and Oslo-Paris Commissions (OSPAR) global and regional environmental targets, experts consider repurposing or abandoning individual structures, or abandoning multiple structures across a region, as the options that would most strongly contribute toward targets. This collective view suggests complete removal may not be best for the environment or society. However, different decommissioning options act in different ways and make variable contributions toward environmental targets, such that policy makers and managers would likely need to prioritise some targets over others considering political, social, economic, and ecological contexts. Current policy may not result in optimal outcomes for the environment or society
Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning
This work was supported by the UK Natural Environment Research Council and the INSITE programme [INSITE SYNTHESIS project, grant number NE/W009889/1].Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desirable and undesirable effects associated with MAS present a significant challenge for policy- and decision-makers in their justification to implement decommissioning options. Decisions may need to be decided on a case-by-case basis accounting for the trade-off in costs and benefits at a local level.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe
Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning
Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desirable and undesirable effects associated with MAS present a significant challenge for policy- and decision-makers in their justification to implement decommissioning options. Decisions may need to be decided on a case-by-case basis accounting for the trade-off in costs and benefits at a local level
Recommended from our members
Welcome to Oregon, Federal/BOEM Perspective
As the Chief of the Environmental Sciences Section of BOEM, the speaker welcomed participants and gave background on the topic from the federal perspective. She identified BOEM's need to share environmental research information as well as determine the largest data gaps to guide future research. From her perspective, the intent of the conference was threefold: 1) Showcase completed and ongoing research that addresses
environmental questions associated with wave and wind
energy development in the Pacific Northwest; 2) Synthesize new research and existing information and
distill it into products that agencies and resource
managers can use; 3) Identify study gaps of the technologies or potentially
affected systems that can be used for scientists, managers
and funders to focus future research efforts
Recommended from our members
Next Steps and Concluding Remarks: Federal and State Perspectives
The Chief of the Environmental Sciences Section of BOEM presented the federal perspective that focused on identifying and addressing data gaps. The manager of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's Marine Resource Program and the Marine Affairs Coordinator for the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development acknowledged the value or setting priorities on data and monitoring needs