The conversation around the Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD) at Hinkley Point C has drastically changed after the AFD Delivery Group released a report that answered and overcame the challenges facing EDF regarding the available technologies and maintenance of the system.
The AFD, which is government mandated, UK best practice, and would remove the need to install salt marshes, has been challenged by EDF on several grounds, including diver safety, noise, and the effects on marine mammals.
The AFD Delivery Group, which consists of experts from across the technology, project management, consultancy and environmental sectors, produced a technical report that delivers a plan for the AFD while meeting the concerns of EDF.
The AFD Delivery Group Report provides a viable path to delivering the AFD at Hinkley Point C. The path is one that is already set out, has been scrutinised by governments, and would require no purchasing, or flooding, of land. It is based on best practice technology and has been in the plans for Hinkley Point C since it was approved over a decade ago.
The next step is to bring all parties together to decide how it is installed. The alternative of continuing to delay, challenge and find ineffective alternatives is time that should now be spent on designing and installing the AFD.
Concerns Addressed
Safety Concerns.
Concern: because of the underwater environment at Hinkley Point C, the AFD would be difficult to install and maintain. Using divers to maintain the AFD poses a risk to life.
Response: The use of ROVs and other vessels eliminates the need for divers to maintain the system. In addition, the innovations in technology, project management and expertise have increased the time between maintenance cycles of the AFD, reducing the days per year needed from 72 to just 19 working days per year for on-site work.
AFD Viability
Concern: The AFD is a new technology.
Response: The AFD technology has been used on power plants for nearly 30 years and has been Environment Agency, and UK best practice for estuarine intakes for nearly 20 years. AFD systems have been installed around the world, and the AFD system at the Doel Nuclear Power Plant has been running since 1997. All the main components that are required at Hinkley Point C are already available and in use at other sites.
Effects on Marine Mammals
Concern: The AFD affects marine mammals
Response: The AFD does not affect marine mammals. The range of the AFD is limited to around the intakes, and uses frequencies that are different from the hearing range of marine mammals. In a study produced on the AFD which monitored seals, there was no effect on the seals at all.
No strong alternative to the AFD
EDF currently wishes to replace the AFD with a saltmarsh, but whereas the AFD would prevent 182 million fish being killed a year from entering the intakes at Hinkley Point C, a saltmarsh would increase the number of fish in the area, while failing to protect any from being drawn into the intakes.
. According to expert opinion from Associate Professor of Ecosystem Services at UWE Professor Mark Everard, University of West of England says “There can in my scientific view be no justification for removal of AFD. It makes absolutely no sense to permit very substantial damage to marine biodiversity and hope then that modest mitigation entailing a degree of recruitment only of species reliant on the saltmarsh can offset it. Cost reduction is cited by EDF as one element of its plan to remove the mandated AFD and would appear to be its principal consideration, but one that obviously overlooks the vital purpose of deflecting fish from the intake. Ideally, saltmarsh restoration should be implemented ADDITIONALLY to the AFD to mitigate the still substantial likely entrainment of multiple life stages of fish and invertebrates, even with deflection from the intake.”
