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.

Likely effects of construction of Scroby Sands offshore wind farm on a mixed population of harbour Phoca vitulina and grey Halichoerus grypus seals.

Scroby Sands offshore wind farm was built close to a haul-out and breeding site for harbour seal, a species of conservation concern. An aerial survey programme conducted during a five-year period spanning wind farm construction, revealed a significant post-construction decline in haul-out counts. Multivariate model selection suggested that the decline was not related to the environmental factors considered, nor did it mirror wider population trends. Although cause and effect could not be unequivocally established, the theoretical basis of hearing in pinnipeds and previous studies suggested that extreme noise (to 257 dB re 1 µ Pa(pp) @ 1m) generated by pile-driving of turbine bases led to displacement of seals. A lack of full recovery of harbour seal during the study was also linked to their sensitivity to vessel activity and/or rapid colonisation of competing grey seal. Any impact of offshore wind farm development upon pinnipeds would be much reduced without pile-driving.

Effects of the construction of Scroby Sands offshore wind farm on the prey base of Little tern Sternula albifrons at its most important UK colony.

Despite widespread interest in the impacts of wind farms upon birds, few researchers have examined the potential for indirect or trophic (predator-prey) effects. Using surface trawls, we monitored prey abundance before and after construction of a 30 turbine offshore wind farm sited close to an internationally important colony of Little terns. Observations confirmed that young-of-the-year clupeids dominated chick diet, which trawl samples suggested were mainly herring. Multivariate modelling indicated a significant reduction in herring abundance from 2004 onwards that could not be explained by environmental factors. Intensely noisy monopile installation during the winter spawning period was suggested to be responsible. Reduced prey abundance corresponded with a significant decline in Little tern foraging success. Unprecedented egg abandonment and lack of chick hatching tentatively suggested a colony-scale response in some years. We urge a precautionary approach to the timing and duration of pile-driving activity supported with long-term targeted monitoring of sensitive receptors.