1 / 10

Ecological Risk Analysis of MHK Arrays: Potential Impacts and Mitigation

This study aims to categorize and evaluate the potential ecological impacts of MHK (Marine and Hydrokinetic) arrays, including single deployments and large-scale commercial developments. The goal is to aid developers in meeting regulatory requirements, identify high-risk impacts requiring mitigation, and reduce uncertainty through data investigation. The study utilizes the EPA Risk Assessment Framework, incorporates field and laboratory studies from partner labs, and proposes new endpoints for further evaluation.

wsolis
Download Presentation

Ecological Risk Analysis of MHK Arrays: Potential Impacts and Mitigation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Water Power Peer Review Risk Analysis of the Potential Ecological Impacts of MHK Arrays M. Grippo and I. Hlohowskyj Argonne National Lab mgrippo@anl.gov November 2011 MHK MA\Categorizing and Evaluating the Effects of Stressors

  2. Purpose, Objectives, & Integration Ecological impacts are a major concern in the regulatory review of MHK projects and uncertainty about biological impacts will slow the pace of field deployments. Ecological risk analysis of MHK deployments • Single deployment • Array of devices • Cumulative Impacts - The incremental increases in impacts from a single MHK device to large-scale commercial developments - Interaction of the MHK device with existing impacts from other anthropogenic stressors

  3. Purpose, Objectives, & Integration Objectives: • Aid developers in meeting NEPA requirements by addressing concerns of regulatory and management agencies • Identify the highest risk impacts that will likely require mitigation • Identify data gaps that need to be investigated to reduce uncertainty Integration: • Incorporate the results of field and laboratory studies conducted by partner labs into our risk analysis • Suggest new endpoints for other labs to evaluate experimentally

  4. Technical Approach Widely accepted EPA Risk Assessment Framework: problem formulation, analysis, and risk characterization • Problem formulation-Conceptual models (CM) • Identifies MHK stressor-receptor relationships -Stakeholder communication, data gaps, prediction -Readily modified as new data become available Address Risk: -MHK Operations: Collision, noise, EMF; habitat alteration -MHK Structure: Habitat alteration; reef effect -Population and Ecosystem level risks

  5. Plan, Schedule, & Budget Schedule • Initiation date: 9/1/2009 • Planned completion date: 9/30/2012 • FY10 Milestones: Report documenting the preliminary CMs and their application to benthic habitat alteration at proposed development sites • FY11 Milestones: Report documenting revised CMs and the summary of recent environmental research on MHK deployments • FY12 Milestones: Risk analysis and CMs incorporating the most recent studies of the ecological effects of MHK deployments (9/20/2012). Budget: • Approximately 61% of the total project funding has been spent to date

  6. Accomplishments and Results FY10 1. Developed CMs of risks associated with a single device and MHK arrays based on existing literature 2. Developed framework for cumulative impact analysis 3. Applied CMs to benthic ecosystems at four locations considered for MHK deployment

  7. Accomplishments and Results FY11 1. Submitted CMs for review to multiple resource agencies 2. Revised CM report incorporating agency comments 3. Currently in the Analysis Phase -Evaluating MHK monitoring studies currently available -Working with USACE on using individual based models quantify exposure probabilities

  8. Accomplishments and Results Habitat mediated impact routes from MHK arrays Higher order interactions more difficult to address CM shows POTENTIAL EFFECTS

  9. Challenges to Date • Lack of data to inform the risk analysis held up 2011 work • Few MHK deployments • Inconclusive results from available monitoring studies • Resources and potential impacts vary by technology and project location • Challenging to evaluate cumulative impacts • Cumulative impacts analysis requires understanding of MHK device impacts Working with developers to design monitoring plans that will effectively address high priority ecological risks

  10. Next Steps FY12 1. Continue analysis phase of risk assessment -Incorporate new studies and data generated by partner labs 2. Characterization of Exposure -Contact with ecological receptors based on species life history -Empirical or mechanistic models of animal movement to quantitatively evaluate exposure risk 3. Revise CMs based on new data Milestones and Deliverables Risk analysis report and conceptual models (CM) integrating most current risk information on MHK devices Future Work Ongoing incorporation of new data into CM Development of targeted individual based models

More Related