Scientists make surprising discovery in waters below offshore wind farms: 'We're trying to understand'
New research indicates that offshore wind farms may be a suitable habitat for ocean wildlife, according to a study published by Phys.org.
Seawater samples collected by scientists from Wageningen University & Research near four wind farms in the Dutch North Sea showed signs of multiple shark and ray species: thornback rays, basking sharks, spotted rays, starry smooth-hounds, and blonde rays.
A contributing factor to the abundance of fauna at wind farms may be the local ban on trawling. These are in place because trawling would damage undersea cables connected to the wind farms. The ban has the added benefit of leaving sea floor ecosystems undisturbed and ripe for natural predation.
Researchers were particularly excited by being able to gauge animal populations solely through DNA traces found in the water. This eliminated the need to spot live specimens or engage in more invasive tracking.
As a part of a larger project, the group is continuing to study the effects of undersea power cables on wildlife and whether their electromagnetic fields affect animal navigation skills.
Wind power is a key energy source for a more sustainable future. It can help displace reliance on coal and gas power, which produce significant atmospheric pollution.
That pollution can heat and acidify oceans, causing damage to ecosystems, and can accelerate the melting of polar ice caps, which raises sea levels. The extra heat in the atmosphere also exacerbates destructive weather patterns.
Being able to support biodiversity alongside green energy is a great bonus.
A major project in the U.S. aims to similarly protect animal habitat and provide space for large-scale wind power. However, the researchers were highly tentative about whether their work proved anything conclusive about wildlife at wind farms.
"We're trying to understand whether these animals are actually using the wind farms as habitat, or whether they're being displaced by them," said lead author Annemiek Hermans.
Should we be harnessing the ocean to power our homes?
Absolutely
Leave it be
It depends
I'm not sure
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Study links kissing to depression and anxiety
It's no kiss of death, but a new study out of Iran suggests that depression and anxiety might also be transmissible through kissing. In the same way that such close contact can transmit infections like the common cold, mononucleaosis and herpes, so too can depression and anxiety be transmitted. The study says the depression and anxiety can trigger the release of the stress hormone cortisol, which can disrupt the delicate balance of bacteria in the mouth. Research found that as many as 80 million bacteria are transferred in just one 10-second kiss. The new study found that when one spouse had poor mental health and trouble sleeping, the healthy partner suffered similar symptoms after just six months. Bacteria were to blame. 'Specifically, in couples where one partner had (depression/anxiety), the oral microbiota of the healthy spouse mirrored that of the affected partner,' the researchers wrote in the Exploratory Research and Hypothesis in Medicine journal, per the New York Post. The research team followed 268 newlywed Iranian couples. One set of honeymooners reported struggling with depression, anxiety and sleep issues while their spouses were healthy at the start of the study. Participants filled in surveys about their mental health and gave saliva samples for cortisol measurement and oral bacteria swabs for DNA analysis. Researchers found that the healthy spouses, particularly women, had significant increases in depression, anxiety and sleep problems after six months. These symptoms weren't as intense as their partners'. Bacteria types including Clostridia, Veillonella, Bacillus and Lachnospiraceae were relatively abundant in the samples. Some species of these bacteria may be harmful to health. Leaked medical report states controversial Olympic boxer has 'male' chromosomes Study explores ties between BMI at young age, colorectal cancer The researchers said there were several limitations to the study, including not taking into account underlying health issues and dietary factors that might influence oral bacteria. They suggested exploring whether bacteria play a role in other mental and brain-related conditions. Studies have identified other ways couples can be in sync, including heart rates, sleep patterns and even their stress and reproductive hormones. For more health news and content around diseases, conditions, wellness, healthy living, drugs, treatments and more, head to – a member of the Postmedia Network.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Real risk Rachel Reeves's spending review will be about the departments that have lost out
"It's a big deal for this government," says Simon Case. "It's the clearest indication yet of what they plan to do between now and the general election, a translation of their manifesto. "This is where you should expect the chancellor to say, on behalf of the government: 'This is what we're about'." As the former cabinet secretary, Mr Case was the man in charge of the civil service during the last spending review, in 2021. On Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will unveil the Labour government's priorities for the next three years. But it's unclear whether it will provide all that much of an answer about what it's really about. Unlike the Autumn budget, when the chancellor announced her plans on where to tax and borrow to fund overall levels of spending, the spending review will set out exactly how that money is divided up between the different government departments. Since the start of the process in December those departments have been bidding for their share of the cash - setting out their proposed budgets in a negotiation which looks set to continue right up to the wire. This review is being conducted in an usual level of detail, with every single line of spending assessed, according to the chancellor, on whether it represents value for money and meets the government's priorities. Budget proposals have been scrutinised by so called "challenge panels" of independent experts. It's clear that health and defence will be winners in this process given pre-existing commitments to prioritise the NHS - with a boost of up to £30bn expected - and to increase defence spending. On Sunday morning, the government press release trumpeted an impressive-sounding "£86bn boost" to research and development (R&D), with the Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle sent out on the morning media round to celebrate as record levels of investment. We're told this increased spending on the life sciences, advanced manufacturing and defence will lead to jobs and growth across the country, with every £1 in investment set to lead to a £7 economic return. But the headline figure is misleading. . That £86bn has been calculated by adding together all R&D investment across government for the next three years, which will reach an annual figure of £22.5bn by 2029-30. The figure for this year was already set to be £20.4bn; so while it's a definite uplift, much of that money was already allocated. Read More: Peter Kyle also highlighted plans for "the most we've ever spent per pupil in our school system". I understand the schools budget is to be boosted by £4.5bn. Again, this is clearly an uplift - but over a three-year period, that equates to just £1.5bn a year (compared with an existing budget of £63.7bn). It also has to cover the cost of , and the promised uplift in teachers' pay. In any process of prioritisation there are losers as well as winners. We already know about planned cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions - but other unprotected departments like the Home Office and the Department of Communities and Local Government are braced for a real spending squeeze. We've heard dire warnings about austerity 2.0, and the impact that would have on the government's crime and policing priorities, its promises around housing and immigration, and on the budgets for cash-strapped local councils. The chancellor wants to make it clear to the markets she's sticking to her fiscal rules on balancing the books for day-to-day the decision to loosen the rules around borrowing to fund capital investment have given her greater room to manoeuvre in funding long-term infrastructure projects. That's why we've seen her travelling around the country this week to promote the £15.6bn she's spending on regional transport projects. The Treasury team clearly wants to focus on promoting the generosity of these kind of investments, and we'll hear more in the coming days. But there's a real risk the story of this spending review will be about the departments which have lost out - and the promises which could slip as a result.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Real risk Rachel Reeves's spending review will be about the departments that have lost out
"It's a big deal for this government," says Simon Case. "It's the clearest indication yet of what they plan to do between now and the general election, a translation of their manifesto. "This is where you should expect the chancellor to say, on behalf of the government: 'This is what we're about'." As the former cabinet secretary, Mr Case was the man in charge of the civil service during the last spending review, in 2021. On Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will unveil the Labour government's priorities for the next three years. But it's unclear whether it will provide all that much of an answer about what it's really about. Unlike the Autumn budget, when the chancellor announced her plans on where to tax and borrow to fund overall levels of spending, the spending review will set out exactly how that money is divided up between the different government departments. Since the start of the process in December those departments have been bidding for their share of the cash - setting out their proposed budgets in a negotiation which looks set to continue right up to the wire. This review is being conducted in an usual level of detail, with every single line of spending assessed, according to the chancellor, on whether it represents value for money and meets the government's priorities. Budget proposals have been scrutinised by so called "challenge panels" of independent experts. It's clear that health and defence will be winners in this process given pre-existing commitments to prioritise the NHS - with a boost of up to £30bn expected - and to increase defence spending. On Sunday morning, the government press release trumpeted an impressive-sounding "£86bn boost" to research and development (R&D), with the Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle sent out on the morning media round to celebrate as record levels of investment. We're told this increased spending on the life sciences, advanced manufacturing and defence will lead to jobs and growth across the country, with every £1 in investment set to lead to a £7 economic return. But the headline figure is misleading. . That £86bn has been calculated by adding together all R&D investment across government for the next three years, which will reach an annual figure of £22.5bn by 2029-30. The figure for this year was already set to be £20.4bn; so while it's a definite uplift, much of that money was already allocated. Read More: Peter Kyle also highlighted plans for "the most we've ever spent per pupil in our school system". I understand the schools budget is to be boosted by £4.5bn. Again, this is clearly an uplift - but over a three-year period, that equates to just £1.5bn a year (compared with an existing budget of £63.7bn). It also has to cover the cost of , and the promised uplift in teachers' pay. In any process of prioritisation there are losers as well as winners. We already know about planned cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions - but other unprotected departments like the Home Office and the Department of Communities and Local Government are braced for a real spending squeeze. We've heard dire warnings about austerity 2.0, and the impact that would have on the government's crime and policing priorities, its promises around housing and immigration, and on the budgets for cash-strapped local councils. The chancellor wants to make it clear to the markets she's sticking to her fiscal rules on balancing the books for day-to-day the decision to loosen the rules around borrowing to fund capital investment have given her greater room to manoeuvre in funding long-term infrastructure projects. That's why we've seen her travelling around the country this week to promote the £15.6bn she's spending on regional transport projects. The Treasury team clearly wants to focus on promoting the generosity of these kind of investments, and we'll hear more in the coming days. But there's a real risk the story of this spending review will be about the departments which have lost out - and the promises which could slip as a result.
