A global meta-analysis of ecological effects from offshore marine artificial structures

Abstract

Marine artificial structures (MAS), including oil and gas installations (O&G) and offshore wind farms (OWFs), have a finite operational period. Selecting the most suitable decommissioning options when reaching end-of-life remains a challenge, in part because their effects are still largely undetermined. Whether decommissioned structures could act (sensu ‘function’) as artificial reefs (ARs) and provide desired ecological benefits is of particular interest. Here we use a meta-analysis approach of 531 effect sizes from 109 articles to assess the ecological effects of MAS, comparing O&G and OWFs to shipwrecks and ARs, with a view to inform their decommissioning. This synthesis demonstrates that while MAS can bring ecological benefits, important idiosyncrasies exist, with differences emerging between MAS types, habitat types, taxa and ecological metrics. Notably, we find limited conclusive evidence that O&G and OWFs would provide significant ecological benefits if decommissioned as ARs. We conclude that decommissioning options aimed at repurposing MAS into ARs may not provide the intended benefits.

Urbanisation on the coastline of the most populous and developed state of Brazil: the extent of coastal hardening and occupations in low-elevation zones

“…In the future, expanding mappings of AS and identifying drivers of coastal hardening in Brazil will provide a more thorough comprehension of its impacts and how to manage them. Finally, we highlight that some common and often abundant AS such as artificial reefs, shipwrecks, submarine cables and pipelines, vessel hulls, and offshore platforms (Bugnot et al 2021;Lemasson et al 2024) were not mapped in our research due to methodological approach and study scope. The extent of AS in SP coast is, therefore, even larger.…”