DEAR News Of The Area,

THERE is some local pushback on the development of offshore wind farms, some of which is genuinely based on environmental angst regarding the potential impact of these developments on the “pristine” offshore environment.

The environmental impact assessments (EIAs) will in theory address this situation.

But these environmental impact assessments/statements will have to be demonstrably independent and transparent to avoid being accused of bias or being influenced by the proponents.

This would render the EIAs and associated work unacceptable to sectors of the community, including those waiting to see how the environmental impact assessments will be undertaken.

Any doubt as to the independence of the impact assessments/statements will undermine the entire process and will no doubt be used by some to continue to drive more angst and division in the community.

Independence and transparency can be achieved by establishing a trust fund that the successful licensees subscribe to financially either equally or in proportionate amounts based on the size of their licence.

This will provide a single fund to support environmental assessment work pertaining to the development of wind farms in the licence area.

The Trust and associated entities will have to be clearly independent from the proponents and the Government with very clear Terms of Reference.

However, the Government will be required to put in place the necessary legislation and regulations to establish the trust and to ensure that proponents adhere to the proposed process.

To maximise credibility of the process an oversight body (committee) will need to be put in place to ensure that the Trust is fulfilling its obligations to deliver an independent and transparent EIA.

This committee may comprise academics from various universities and institutions and include private sector and independent/international expertise as required.

The entire structure and process will be funded by the Trust using the money held in trust for the proponents.

This process will help ensure a more broad-based ecosystem approach is taken to the required studies, for example, including a wider buffer zone around the individual licenced areas, and covering the areas between the individual leases generating a better understanding of the of the ecology and potential impacts across the entire lease area and not just the individual licenced areas with their minimal buffer zone.

This arrangement should be cheaper for the proponents and provide better environmental outcomes overall and a better basis for developing their work.

It will also build trust with the community for the proponents and the Government.

The data collected through these surveys will be owned by the Government and made publicly available for peer review and “blue sky” research by other institutions.

A time limit prior to releasing the data for further research may be appropriate but should not extend beyond two years.

This will allow further independent research to be undertaken in these areas potentially leading to any unrecognised long term impacts being identified by independent researchers.

The proponents may resist this proposed approach claiming the need for corporate confidentiality.

There may be some specific technical features of each proponent’s proposal which might require “commercial confidence”.

The Trust should be given the discretion to allow some limited studies and assessments to be conducted separately by individual licensees.

But the bulk of the required environmental assessment will be common to all technical proposals.

Finally, it should be noted that certain individuals in the community have already publicly stated that they will not necessarily accept or believe the science!

Presumably, this is a belief system that will require some other intervention.

Regards,
Iain WATT,
EcoNetwork Port Stephens.