In January this year DECC announced that the South West had been named the UK's first Marine Energy Park, creating a partnership between government and buisness to drive forward the development of marine renewable industries - offshore windfarms, wave hubs and tidal power schemes - from the Severn to the Isles of Scilly. The following was published last week in the Western Morning News and Western Daily Press and consdiers how we approach balancing the need for clean renewable energy with the need to protect some of the richest marine environments in the UK ...
Climate change is the biggest threat to human development and the natural world on which we all ultimately depend. A renewable energy revolution that gets damaging climate change under control is crucial.
And we know, if done correctly, “green energy” is not just the right thing for the environment, it could also be the right thing for the economy and jobs, especially down here in the south west where our seas are rich in wind, wave and tide. Wherever possible we should extract the maximum good from the opportunity. This means jobs, investment, research and innovation, and a good return to the communities that host this revolution and in a way that works for their interests.
However, the West County’s marine environment is also astonishingly rich in wildlife, from the maerl reefs near shore in Falmouth out to internationally important offshore seabird populations. We have a responsibility here. We protect it because it is morally the right thing to do. We protect it because people cherish it. And we protect it because the quality of our natural environment underpins our economy here in the West Country.
It is vital we don’t lose sight of this. But how do we host major green infrastructure projects and defend our precious natural assets?
The RSPB thinks it is possible, but we need to move quickly beyond stale economy versus environment arguments and start addressing the root issues that can lead to conflict.
Offshore, beyond the low tide mark, where windfarms and wave hubs are to be located what is needed by both developers and environmentalists is clarity. Everyone needs to know where the important wildlife areas are. And have a coherent network of marine protected areas declared on the basis of solid information.
We also need to ensure robust strategic planning in the marine environment so that damage can be avoided.
Let’s have a sensible dialogue that seeks to avoid conflict by locating development away from sensitive areas, or genuinely searches for ways to take the minimal impact option. If , damaging locations really cannot be avoided, we can consider whether the development is genuinely of overriding public interest and go on to identify the opportunity for serious habitat compensation.
The mechanisms are there to do all this; we just need government to get on with it.
Closer to shore our biggest estuary, the Severn can be the source of clean tidal power. And our ports can service the boom in wind and wave power. Here, in terms of wildlife, there is much more clarity. Through the UK’s implementation of the EU Habitats and Birds Directives we have a network of Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas to guide the protection of our wonderful coasts and estuaries.
The Directives are crucial. They have provided valuable protection for Europe’s most threatened habitats and species for over 30 years; they are arguably the two most important mechanisms for embedding the value of nature in decision-making.
The directives though are subject currently to much myth. To be clear, the vast majority of planning applications are unaffected by the them, and very few of those that are result in objections on the basis of Habitats Regulations issues.
The question of are they, “gold-plated”, comes round every now and again – is the UK doing more than is actually required by Europe. The answer in 2006 in the Davidson review was “no”. And likewise the RSPB has found no evidence of gold-plating; in fact, the RSPB would say transposition is incomplete – the lack of marine Special Protection Areas is evidence of this.
However this government has ordered another review. There is talk of slimming down, simplifying. The real question though is do they work - do they do job of protecting our very most important wildlife? When development is proposed on or near a protected nature area do they provide a clear framework for dealing with potential conflicts? The RSPB thinks they do, and mustn’t be sacrificed.
The current economic crisis means delivering economic growth and creating jobs is uppermost, but let’s not be lazy and slip into tired debates where the environment is positioned as a barrier to success.
Instead, in a part of the world that trades so heavily on its quality natural environment, that underpins our well-being and our economic performance, let’s take the growth option that factors in our precious natural environment. The RSPB believes the Habitats Directive, implemented properly, is a straightforward, well practiced way, to do this.
Is there room for improvement?. As with our oceans, there is sometimes lack of information to support decisions. In absence of good data, we must take a precautionary approach. This appears to be one of the issues on the Fal. We’d much rather work on the basis of evidence. And to do this we need to invest in and support agencies responsible for proper implementation of the directives.
And what opportunities do the Directives provide for business? As Neil Bentley, the deputy director general of the CBI said in December "Environmental regulation doesn't have to be a burden for business. Framed correctly, environmental goals can help our economic goals - help start new companies and generate new jobs and enrich us all."
Surely we can imagine a world beating marine renewable energy industry based on sound environmental sense? Can we release the huge power of the Severn and protect the estuary? Can we build windfarm arrays in the Bristol Channel without impact on seabird populations?
Through intelligence and engineering guile guided by a positive regulatory framework this has to be possible. And surely this is an advantage, something we can both trade on and be proud of. And fundamentally something that will help address the dark spectre of climate change.