By Belinda Ng, Lotta Baalerud, and Louisa Hoy
As alumni of the World Ocean Day Youth Advisory Council, we are passionate about raising awareness of the ocean’s most pressing threats and actively working to protect it as young people. The three of us live in countries connected by the North Sea, a vast body of water with abundant biodiversity situated between Great Britain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, and France. In writing this blog, we want to critically explore some of the key developments occurring in the North Sea and highlight the significance of the preservation of ocean health for all its living beings for years to come.
Some of the key developments occurring in the North Sea include commercial fishing, oil and gas extraction, renewable energy generation, and shipping. The presence of these activities alongside proposed new ones, such as deep sea mining, raise questions about whether and how the North Sea can be viewed as a place for ‘resource extraction’ at the expense of marine biodiversity.
In this blog, we explore three key activities with potentially large implications for marine life: fishing, wind energy generation, and deep sea mining for critical minerals. We selected these topics because of our personal interest and prior experiences: Lotta wrote her Master’s thesis on the impact of offshore floating wind on North Sea fish communities; Louisa has a Master’s degree in marine biology and is passionate about how humans are impacting fish communities; Belinda has been working on the clean energy transition and critical minerals in her current role as a sustainability consultant. Currently, North Sea bordering countries are taking action to limit the negative impacts of these activities on marine biodiversity, but continued action and cross border cooperation is required to ensure that the North Sea ecosystems can continue to thrive and provide for generations to come.
The North Sea Cod Crisis
Fishing is more than just an industry for many North Sea communities – it’s a way of life. The Atlantic cod, a crucial species in the ecosystem, plays a vital role as both predator and prey, supporting fishing economies in the UK and EU (and beyond).
Unfortunately, cod populations are now facing serious decline, a situation many are calling the “cod crisis”[1]. Overfishing has become a major threat, with nearly 30% of fish populations in the North Sea being exploited beyond sustainable limits [2]. This not only threatens marine biodiversity but also poses serious risks to the livelihoods of fishing communities and regional food supply. As cod populations diminish, the consequences can extend beyond fisheries and affect entire marine ecosystems. Furthermore, coastal economies reliant on fishing may face economic hardship, while nations surrounding the North Sea could see reduced fish supplies and limited trade opportunities. After all, to have a productive ocean with robust fisheries, we need healthy populations of fish species and science-based fisheries that are effectively enforced. This involves fishing practices that are guided by rigorous research on population dynamics, ecosystem health, and sustainable catch limits [3].
However, not all fishing practices contribute equally to the decline. Large-scale commercial fishing, especially with methods like bottom trawling, can be particularly damaging to marine ecosystems. In contrast, small-scale artisanal fishing tends to use more selective, sustainable methods that help protect marine biodiversity and local livelihoods.
There is some good news; Sweden recently banned trawling in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), which can be considered a big victory for sustainable fishing [4]. Trawling, a method that involves pulling a fishing net through the water behind one or more boats, has long been criticised for damaging marine habitats, depleting fish stocks and causing the by-catch of unwanted species. Implementing trawling bans has long been a challenge for conservationists because, despite its damaging effects on marine habitats, trawling is economically valuable, politically sensitive, and deeply embedded in industrial fishing practices. This makes it difficult to secure the policy changes needed to protect vulnerable ecosystems. By protecting key breeding grounds, Sweden’s decision allows fish populations like cod to recover in areas where they are most vulnerable to overfishing. This ban promotes healthier ecosystems and offers a positive example for other nations. More nations need to follow Sweden’s lead and implement similar bans on trawling if we are to see a real recovery in fish stocks in the North Sea. This is crucial for ensuring the survival of marine life and securing the future of fishing communities for generations to come. Without broader global action, we risk irreversible damage to marine ecosystems and the collapse of fisheries that depend on them. The fishing industry’s future is shifting towards sustainability, with Sweden’s trawling ban leading the way. As demand for seafood grows, managing fish stocks responsibly is crucial, especially with the expanding pressures from offshore wind power and deep sea mining [5].
Offshore Wind: A New Era of Energy
The Paris Agreement´s central aim is to limit global warming to below 1.5 °C6. To reach this goal, global greenhouse gas emissions must decrease by 43% by 20306. A central part of reaching this level of emissions reduction involves de-carbonising global energy systems. A major player in the renewable energy sector is offshore wind power.
The North Sea currently hosts around 38 GW of offshore wind. To put that into context, that is enough capacity to power around 33 million homes per year, which is slightly more houses than in the entire United Kingdom. Over the next decade, offshore wind development is expected to accelerate in the North Sea. In April 2023, the leaders of nine North Sea-adjacent countries committed to achieving a total of 120 GW offshore wind capacity in the North Sea by 2030 and then to more than double this capacity to 300 GW by 2050 [7]. These goals represent a massive upscaling of current capacity and installations [8].
In comparison to oil and gas production, where there are constant risks of blowouts and leaks, offshore wind offers far less environmental risks. Furthermore, there are also some documented positive effects of wind turbines, including the ‘artificial reef effect’. The ‘artificial reef effect’ occurs when newly available artificial hard structures become colonised by microorganisms, plants, algae, and small animals, which in turn provide food resources to higher trophic species such as crustaceans and fish9. Increased food availability together with the sheltering opportunities around structures has been documented to lead to increased diversity and abundance of a number of marine species around wind turbines [10].
While offshore wind power is much preferred to oil and gas production from a carbon emissions reduction perspective, there are still some challenges related to the large expected growth of offshore wind installations in the North Sea. The North Sea is already a crowded part of the ocean in terms of developments, and the addition of significant renewable energy infrastructure will add to these existing pressures on the environment. Some concerns with regard to offshore wind installations include seabird collisions, noise pollution, electromagnetic interference, metal pollution, and changes in hydrographic conditions impacting primary productivity [8]. Many of these impacts on marine life are poorly understood, and there is also a need to better understand how the impacts of different types of wind turbines, namely fixed-bottom and floating, differ.
While more research is needed to understand the ecosystem-level and long term impacts of offshore wind farms and the wider implications of the planned upscaling of wind power production in the North Sea it is still clear that offshore wind offers a much better alternative to traditional oil and gas production. Yet, it will be important to continue research and carefully plan the placement and structures of offshore wind farms to minimise their negative impact and maximise their contribution to the green transition.
Deep Sea Mining:
Go or No Go?
Global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by transitioning to more low-carbon energy systems are requiring the rapid scale-up of responsibly sourced low-carbon technologies such as EV batteries, wind turbines and solar panels, of which critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt and graphite are currently essential components11. While terrestrial mining is already underway, the bottom of the North Sea has received controversial attention as a site for ‘deep sea mining’ to meet increased demand. ‘Deep sea mining’ refers specifically to mining of the deep seabed at depths of 2000 metres or greater, for the minerals found in rocks called polymetallic nodules [12].
However, deep sea mining is controversial because of its negative environmental impacts, ranging from light, noise, water pollution, sediment disturbance and habitat removal which cause “large scale, severe, and irreversible harm” [12]. Because of this, in 2023, 32 countries, including the UK, Sweden and Ireland called for a moratorium, pause or ban on commercial deep-sea mining [13]. Nonetheless, in January 2024, Norway became the first country in the world to approve commercial deep sea mining in its national waters; in June, the proposal for the first round of licences for seabed minerals was announced for public consultation14.
The decision has received considerable backlash from other governments and civil society. For example, WWF-Norway announced in May that it will be taking the Norwegian government to court over its failure to comply with the impact assessment requirements of the Seabed Minerals Act in its licensing process15. Norway’s decision is also a geopolitically controversial one, as the proposed mining area includes the Svalbard archipelago in the Arctic (Norwegian territory), which the EU and the UK have historically been allowed equal rights to commercial activities. As countries beyond those bordering the North Sea also start to submit mining licences (such as the one by the Pacific State of Naura) for deep sea mining, the International Seabed Authority (ISA), comprised of the EU and 168 member states, are working to finalise agreements about whether and how deep sea mining can occur. Ultimately, there are high stakes for deep sea mining in the North Sea, with inherent geopolitical sensitivity and environmental risks; only time will tell if the right decisions and practices have been made.
Given the trajectory of on-going developments and activities in the North Sea that pose risks to marine life, it is more important now than ever to get involved in climate action and marine protection. These issues are highly complex and interconnected with other emerging and current issues as well; they are also mirrored in other parts of the world.
Note: Belinda Ng, Lotta Baalerud, and Louisa Hoy are World Ocean Day Youth Advisory Council alumni and you can learn more here.
At World Ocean Day, we are working hard for a healthy ocean, to protect biodiversity, and create a stable climate. Through the 12 Months of Action campaigns we focus the world on stopping deep sea mining, promoting ratification of the High Seas Treaty, and many other issues and opportunities to help with solutions, nationally and globally. If you want to get involved with our work in the North Sea and beyond, sign up to our newsletter, and learn more and take direct action here!