European Union environmental directives are “disproportionate” and “detrimental” to the growth of wave and tidal energy, according to the Renewable Energy Association’s marine advisor Dr Stephanie Merry.
Addressing the Environmental Audit Committee, Merry said the human resource, cost and time implications of managing environmental impact assessments and monitoring for small companies of fewer than 20 employees were overly burdensome.
Merry said the EU Birds and Habitats Directives should to be proportionate to the size of the project, adding it “would be very helpful” if the UK government or the EU itself paid for monitoring.
“Most of the EU environmental directives were brought in before the Renewable Energy Directive and there are conflicts that are erecting barriers to being able to achieve our 2020 targets,” she said.
“The environmental directives need to recognise the long-term impact of climate change on habitats and species. We’d like to see the positive impacts of marine projects included in the environmental impact assessments.”
Merry cited Marine Current Turbine’s project in Strangford Lough, which had environmental monitoring costs of £2m.
MCT was required to cease operation of its SeaGen turbine if a seal came within 200 metres and was only allowed to operate in daytime hours. The company was also required to charter helicopters with infrared cameras to monitor the seals at night, as well as strap GPS systems on seals’ heads to follow their tracks.
“This disincentivises investment and is disproportionate and detrimental to marine energy, particularly when a company may only have one small demonstration project,” added Merry.
The REA official also cited a 30MW marine project in the Isle of Wight, for which the cost of the environmental impact assessment was over £1m and ran to more than 21 volumes.
Merry was giving evidence to the EAC’s assessment of EU/UK environmental policy inquiry.
Image: MCT’s SeaGen tidal device at Strangford Lough (Siemens)
