US NOAA Fisheries and UK SAHFOS CPR surveys: comparison of methods and data

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) Survey has sampled four routes: Boston–Nova Scotia (1961–present), New York toward Bermuda (1976–present), Narragansett Bay–Mount Hope Bay–Rhode Island Sound (1998–present) and eastward of Chesapeake Bay (1974–1980). NOAA involvement began in 1974 when it assumed responsibility for the existing Boston–Nova Scotia route from what is now the UK's Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science (SAHFOS). Training, equipment and computer software were provided by SAHFOS to ensure continuity for this and standard protocols for any new routes. Data for the first 14 years of this route were provided to NOAA by SAHFOS. Comparison of collection methods; sample processing; and sample identification, staging and counting techniques revealed near-consistency between NOAA and SAHFOS. One departure involved phytoplankton counting standards. This has since been addressed and the data corrected. Within- and between-survey taxonomic and life-stage names and their consistency through time were, and continue to be, an issue. For this, a cross-reference table has been generated that contains the SAHFOS taxonomic code, NOAA taxonomic code, NOAA life-stage code, National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) taxonomic code, Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) serial number and authority and consistent use/route. This table is available for review/use by other CPR surveys. Details of the NOAA and SAHFOS comparison and analytical techniques unique to NOAA are presented.

Energy systems and their impacts on marine ecosystem services

Global warming and its link to the burning of fossil fuels has prompted many governments around the world to set legally binding greenhouse gas reduction targets which are to be partially realised through a stronger reliance on renewable (e.g. wind) and other lower carbon (i.e. natural gas and nuclear) energy commodities. The marine environment will play a key role in hosting or supporting these new energy strategies. However, it is unclear how the construction, operation and eventual decommissioning of these energy systems, and their related infrastructure, will impact the marine environment, the ecosystem services (i.e. cultural, regulating, provisioning and supporting) and in turn the benefits it provides for human well-being. This uncertainty stems from a lack of research that has synthesised into a common currency the various effects of each energy sector on marine ecosystems and the benefits humans derive from it. To address this gap, the present study reviews existing ecosystem impact studies for offshore components of nuclear, offshore wind, offshore gas and offshore oil sectors and translates them into the common language of ecosystem service impacts that can be used to evaluate current policies. The results suggest that differences exist in the way in which energy systems impact ecosystem services, with the nuclear sector having a predominantly negative impact on cultural ecosystem services; oil and gas a predominately negative impact on cultural, provisioning, regulating and supporting ecosystem services; while wind has a mix of impacts on cultural, provisioning and supporting services and an absence of studies for regulating services. This study suggests that information is still missing with regard to the full impact of these energy sectors on specific types of benefits that humans derive from the marine environment and proposes possible areas of targeted research.