From good to best practices in Australia’s offshore wind industry

There’s a huge amount of investment happening in offshore wind right now – both financially and scientifically.

If you work in marine science, it’s an exciting time. Offshore wind is one of the biggest opportunities we’ve had in decades to investigate and learn about marine ecosystems and species across a large region. 

To date, Australia has five Declared Areas for offshore wind, totaling close to 23,000 square kilometres. Bass Strait, Tasmania (which could represent a further 10K+ square kilometres) will likely be added to the list soon. While we might still be years away from building anything, the offshore wind industry is deep in environmental ‘learning mode’. Hundreds of marine studies are being planned, designed and rolled out. Together, these studies will create an ecological body of knowledge that we’ve never had access to before.

But how do we make sure this data serves its intended purpose­ ­− to ensure projects are designed and built with as little negative impact to marine systems and species as possible?

In marine science, consistency is key

One of the hurdles we face in marine science is a lack of consistency in how studies are designed and undertaken. This can make it difficult, if not impossible, to compare data collected from different locations and times, including addressing national-scale questions. I’ve spent many years of my career trying to address exactly this issue, leading the Field Manuals for Marine Sampling to Monitor Australian Waters, a National Environmental Science Program (NESP) project.

More than 228 contributors from across the marine science community came together to develop them. While ‘manuals’ sounds prescriptive and final, the project is more of an ongoing process. Now up to Version 3, these manuals are a continual journey towards standardisation of our sampling methods, with a goal that they become best practices (more on that below).

But how does all this relate to offshore wind?

Standardisation in data collection should be a key goal for the offshore wind sector. By collecting and presenting environmental data that is robust, consistent and easily comparable, the Australia’s offshore wind industry can:

• Support environmental regulators to be confident in a proponent’s conclusions about potential impact, and proposed mitigation measures for their project.

• Demonstrate to regulators and communities that studies adhere to best scientific practice.

• Support iterative, evidence-based decision-making about project design, construction and operations by allowing the industry to compare findings across geographic areas, and over time.

• Provide a reliable baseline for the planning of long-term monitoring programs before, during and after offshore wind development. 

Marine environmental studies take time. To be reliable, they need to be long enough to account for natural variation over time. For offshore wind and other marine industries, that’s the cost of doing business in Australia. However, standardisation of methodologies in the investigation phase provides an acceleration opportunity in the approvals phase that comes next. When proponents use standardised methods and draw consistent conclusions from the data in project approvals documents, regulators have the reliable source of evidence they need to make project approval decisions more quickly. 

Best practice, bias free

While I’ve spent a lot of my career pursuing it, I have mixed feelings about the term, ‘best practice’. It can be nebulous and overused. Of course, we want to advance our marine scientific practice as far as we can. But when it comes to marine sampling, ‘best practice’ doesn’t necessarily mean using the latest tech, or even doing surveys exactly the same way, every time. A true ‘best practice’ involves applying methods that are agreed upon, validated, well-documented, and importantly, widely adopted.

Variations in sampling method can lead to a significant variation in results. And this can introduce bias in what researchers, proponents, and regulators conclude about the presence, abundance or diversity of marine species present in an area, what impacts are likely to occur to them, and what mitigation measures are required to protect them. When it comes to project approvals – particularly for offshore wind when the approvals process itself is new – uncertainty is not a good thing. 

To enhance certainty even further for Australia’s offshore wind industry (and other marine uses) we need to ensure our practices fit the local context. We can learn a lot from markets like the UK where the industry is more established. However, our environmental conditions, concerns and species are different. We need to make sure our ‘best practices’ aren’t just best in name, but best for here.

Collaboration a panacea to duplication, and cumulative impact

One way that RPS is supporting Australian offshore wind proponents to apply a consistent approach to studies is through our Regional Marine Environmental Baseline Studies (RMEBS) Victoria Program.

Covering key parts of Victoria’s coastline and waters where offshore wind development is being considered, it’s a program that brings project proponents together to collaborate on the collection of regional-scale data on protected species populations, including the migratory marine mammals and birds, to directly meet their data needs.

While the developers who have signed up are commercial competitors, they know that by pooling resources on RMEBS they will get regional-scale baseline data to better understand where important habitats are in relation to their individual project sites. They'll also get it more cost effectively and quicker than if they’d gone it alone. And this in turn reduces risks to their projects. 

RMBES was conceived in recognition of the fact that marine studies themselves aren’t without impact. While Australia’s Declared Areas are large, numerous studies happening in close proximity or overlapping each other multiply those impacts. RMBES is a great example of industry taking a ‘lifecycle’ approach to marine ecological impact mitigation. Not only is this better for the marine environment, it provides a good signal to the community that the offshore wind industry is serious about scientific rigour, and environmental protection.