=
Transcript: Seaweed Farms Between Wind Turbines, and the NIMBY Trap
Speaker A: You’re listening to Environmentally Speaking, a weekly podcast diving into legal matters surrounding the environment, public utilities, energy, zoning, and permitting laws in Rhode Island and the surrounding areas. With your host, Marissa Desato.
Hello, everybody. Welcome back to Environmentally Speaking.
Hi, everyone. I’m Marissa Desautel, an environmental attorney in Rhode Island,
and I’m Clarice coming in with a hot take this time.
I know. I’m excited about this one.
All right, folks. I have basically asked Marissa. I said I have researched a topic, and when I say research, we’re saying that in air quotes. We’re saying that lightly. I’ve Googled a topic, and I just want to hear your hot takes, your thoughts on it. What are the first things that come to mind?
So, of course, Denmark. For wait
a minute, of course Denmark.
Yeah, of course Denmark would do this. So let’s okay. We’re setting the scene in Denmark, and I’m saying of course because in terms of renewable energy, Denmark has been on the front line over and over and over again. They’ve come up with a new use for the wind farms. So I know, I know. You’re talking about, but
I’m at at sea. The the wind farms at sea. Yeah. Okay.
Not your favorite, but you know me. You know I love a recycle. I love a thrift, a reuse. So they have taken the space in between each individual wind turbine in the sea, and they are setting up that area for seaweed farming. What do you think?
Oh, okay. So this is like aquaculture.
Yes, and is it is it being promoted by private industry or is it a a study? Is it more academic?
That I don’t know. I’m seeing that over and over again. They’re talking about. Oh, wait a minute. Here we go. I found the line that talks about it. Right now, it’s academic.
Ah, it’s bi. I had a feeling.
So scientists at a university, folks. I’m going to mess this up. Argus, A A R H U S, University.
Did you just sneeze?
It did, and you didn’t bless me. God bless you.
So I’m gonna go with Arhus. I could be way wrong. They’ve set up a project to see if the what’s now being deemed a sort of unusable area in the in between these wind turbines can now be used for seaweed farming. So going back to that aquaculture that we talked about a couple episodes ago.
Okay. What you just said just kind of set off alarm bells in my head.
Tell me, one
of the issues that the fishermen in Rhode Island and Virginia dealt with when looking at these wind farms and impacts to their livelihood was navigation and safety, and it was forced upon the fishermen that they would be able to still fish in the areas in between the turbines, and that one nautical mile would be enough room for the vessels to transit and and safely pass each other and and still fish, but what you’re saying is that Denmark admits that these areas are not suitable for fishing. So I’m curious if the spacing of the wind farms over there is different than what we’ve got here in the U.S.
That’s a good point. I don’t know about the spacing specifically. It doesn’t talk about distance between. I do know that there’s a common thread about the area in between the turbines isn’t for. It sounds like it’s not for traffic, like it’s not meant to be like a an established consistent route.
So I guess in my mind I’m thinking it’s not a water highway. So instead they’re thinking about putting up these just kind of. Seaweed farms, and it it looks like, from what I can see, it it kind of looks a little bit in my mind like the oyster farms, how they have the the lines going across the netting. It looks like they’re sort of like places for the seaweed to essentially latch onto. Yeah, so they’re using a space that’s no longer great for consistent travel, and they’re converting it to another use. Why it’s no longer for consistent travel, I don’t know. This particular article is silent on what’s made it fall out of favor, and instead is just really focusing on the the recycle aspect of it, so I will say this article is written that we’re looking at, and folks will put it in the show notes. It’s very much giving it sort of a positive promotional spin. So that could be, you know, of course, that could be coloring the info we’re getting.
It looks like the areas in between the turbines are still accessible to vessels. I’m not sure what is going on in Denmark with respect to traditional fishing activities, and if that those are still ongoing, but if this group is suggesting that seaweed and and kelp be grown in this space, there there has to be an issue with with vessel traffic already because
yeah you wouldn’t add more chaos to a limited.
I agree.
Navigation channel.
Yeah, I completely agree. It almost, in my mind, it had the same feeling and flavor of this route at at minimum is no longer desirable. So, how can we convert it?
Think, think about what you just said.
I know, crazy. It is. It is a. It’s a. It’s becoming a a highway, on in the on the ocean.
Yeah, I I’m I’m so happy you said that because immediately my mind went to this is like when they started putting in massive freeways, and you have like the life and death of Route 66, and now there is that push to revitalize that area of Americana. I’m like, is this the? Are the spaces between the turbines turning into those old routes where we’re trying to figure out something to do with it, and then on the flip, does something need to be done at all? What about you know we’re constantly talking about reforesting and rewilding of areas. Is this an area where instead of turning it into another ultimately commercial production area. It could resources and research be done to promote a rewilding. The turbines are already up. I know that is not something that we’re thrilled about in terms of what it’s done to the ecosystem in the habitats that were sort of bowled over to get there, but like, can a remedial measure be made, or does it have to come or shift into a production standpoint?
Yeah. Well, it looks like the academia here is suggesting that the seaweed can be used To offset nutrient pollution, so
you’ve got nitrogen and phosphorus in water.
We know that that creates an algal bloom, which is not good. It chokes out oxygen, so that that’s interesting. It’s almost like a like a net benefit the the way that they’re putting this information out there.
Yeah, I immediately was thinking. I mean, I’m I’m happy to hear and learn about that piece of it, but immediately I was thinking, is this kelp and seaweed now being grown for sale. Is this something that’s going to like for food consumption, going into skincare? I don’t know if you’ve seen that’s the newest thing, skincare that contains different algae and seaweeds and and things like that. So you know, oh, that’s what do you do?
You just put seaweed on your face?
Well, apparently there’s products where they have ground up seaweed already in it.
That sounds awful. I don’t know. I don’t know, Nanny. Well, this looks like they’re yeah they’re talking about it. Selling it as a food crop, yeah.
Hmm. Okay.
So
I’m not a fan of sugar kelp, but someone must be if they’re thinking that this is a productive reuse of yeah the ocean.
So I guess you know my first reaction was I’m happy it’s being used for something, but then that was immediately followed with the idea of does it have to be used for something? Is rewilding not no longer an option?
Yeah, what does that say to the bigger picture? So I would love to hear, you know, is the university that’s creating these farms and now farming the sugar like, are they did they have that conversation? I come to you with questions.
I’ve got this other concept in my head rolling around. I’m like, do I share this or not? I just-it’s a-it’s a-it’s a kind of a circular thought here that occurs to me on a regular basis, being an environmental attorney, and the the irony of development progress versus what we’re seeing now with renewable energy and changing our oceans. Any time there is an environmental objection to something, to a project application, you get this pushback from members of the public and others that the objection is just because people have a not in my backyard attitude.
Oh, nimby, nimby. I’ve never heard anyone agree that progress, development, offshore wind is necessary while not arguing Nimbyism, the renewable energy sector, and anti-environment pro progress are aligned now, in in my experience, and once you start suggesting other types of development and commerce in that same area. I can just hear. I can hear the people saying, “Oh, this is you’re objecting to to seaweed harvesting and aquaculture because it’s NIMBY. And I’ve now gone down a rabbit hole where I’m wondering if that if that crossroads will ever be met with respect to renewable energy.
I don’t know. I think I think that brings up a great point, and I also think what’s really interesting is, and now I’m gonna kind of jump jump down the rabbit hole with you. Is I think the NIMBY voice is so loud it can only lead itself to energy, alternative energy efforts that are now in untouched spaces. Like if we were, and I talk, you know, it’s funny. I talked about this with my husband not too long ago. We were driving through a city, and it was so interesting. We were on the freeway, so it was sort of up high, and we could see a lot of distant rooftops. And he made the comment, and he was like, “Cell towers have no problem renting space for antennas, but for some odd reason, people are so opposed to the idea of solar panels being put up there or an energy company renting out those spaces. It’s vertical space. It’s already constructed. It’s already man-made, and at that point, it’s void of greenery to begin with. You’re on top of a concrete building, so it’s the nimby voice of like, not for us. We don’t want to see it. We don’t want to deal with it. That’s too much effort, which then pushes any sort of effort further and further out. So where are our solar farms across big untouched environments? They’re across deserts. They’re across. You know, we’ve seen it actually just in Turbin. They had an acre that was it was mowed down essentially, and there’s a wind farm or not a wind farm, a solar farm. We’re putting.
Wind turbines out in the ocean. Why? Because that inconveniences humans the least. We are unwilling to sit with any sort of slight discomfort for change that we’re going to push it further and further out. That’s my soapbox.
No, you’re right. And at what point is it the the phrase “nimbi” is not a is not a positive attribute. It’s always used in the negative, and I just wonder at what point everything is going to be in everyone’s backyard.
Yeah, and then it’s too late.
Yep, completely agree. the the
The not in my backyard concept is is I don’t know. It’s disrespectful of conservation efforts, and I I wish it didn’t exist. I deal with it all the time, and with offshore wind, and now with this seaweed project, that stuff will just start going forward, and the ocean will be industrialized, and then people are going to jump up and down and say, “Well, where are the conservationists? Why didn’t we do more to protect this area? But if you object right now, you’re nimby.
Yeah, yeah.
If you have questions about anything that I said, or you want to call and pontificate with me, my email address is marissa@desautelbrowning.com.
Oh, thank you so much, everybody.
Speaker A: Thank you for listening to this episode of Environmentally Speaking. If you’re in need of an environmental attorney, we are here to help. Call us at 401-477-0023, or visit our website at desuatellabrowning.com. That’s D E S A U T E L B R O W N I N G .com.
