April 5, 2021 — As offshore aquaculture becomes a more viable enterprise globally, a variety of regulatory approaches have emerged that reflect conflicting perspectives of the sector as either an economic opportunity or an environmental threat.
The governments of Canada and Denmark have both taken aggressive actions to curtail offshore aquaculture, with Denmark banning any new projects as of December 2020 and Canada adopting increasingly restrictive policies on net-pen aquaculture.
February 13, 2020 — On 5 February, food processing equipment manufacturing company Marel hosted the 19th edition of its Salmon ShowHow, an event that brought 295 guests from 145 companies around the world to Progress Point in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Product demonstrations, guest speaker presentations, and seminars were featured throughout the 2020 Salmon ShowHow, which aimed to help global salmon processors of all types to “integrate smarter processing methods and technologies with their existing processes,” Marel said in a press release.
June 19, 2019 — A two-day conference of scientific experts from Russia, the United States, Canada, Denmark, Norway, South Korea, China, Sweden, Japan, and the European Union in the Russian city of Arkhangelsk resulted in an agreement to conduct more research on Arctic fisheries.
The April meeting was the first after an agreement between the 10 countries was signed in October of last year. The legally binding accord prohibits all commercial fishing in the Central Arctic until the nations additional surveys of stocks, their sizes, and how the region’s ecosystems operate. The agreement also included a draft of a joint research plan, with details to be discussed later this year and with implemented stalled until all the participating states ratify the agreement.
There is almost no data on high Arctic stocks, as nearly all the Arctic countries have only surveyed their own 200-mile exclusive economic zones. The only known study of the high seas was conducted by scientists from the Stockholm University. Its results presented at the conference brought some surprise and made it clear that more extensive research is needed, according to Vasily Sokolov, deputy head of the Russia’s Federal Agency for Fisheries.
“The Arctic Ocean was supposed to contain no great marine biological resources to be of interest for commercial fisheries. But it turned out that stocks of Arctic cod seem to be there, which means that fishing there may be commercially attractive,” Sokolov said. “The density of stocks increases toward the polar cap.”
January 8, 2019 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Most Europeans prefer buying fish and seafood frozen but consumers in Mediterranean countries such as Greece and Spain prefer fresh, according to a 28,000-strong European Commission survey.
The EU is one of the world’s largest markets for fish and seafood.
While per capita spending on fishery and aquaculture products is one-third of that of Japan, the world leader, it is more than three times as much as in the United States.
A recently published study commissioned by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, therefore aimed to shed light on what Europeans look for in fish and seafood, where they buy it and which information they would like to see on-pack.
The survey questioned almost 28,000 individuals from each member state in face-to-face interviews that were conducted at home in their native language.
“It aims at improving understanding of the EU internal market for fishery and aquaculture products to allow operators to be more competitive and to support new strategies that can stimulate growth, strengthen economic activities in the internal market and lead to job creation,” the report said.
Overall, seven in ten respondents (70%) eat fishery or aquaculture products at home ‘at least once a month’.
Unsurprisingly, the biggest consumers of fish and seafood products are from countries with a tradition of fishing and eating fish. Spain led the way, with 92% of respondents saying they eat fish at least once a month, followed by Portugal and Sweden (both 87%), Estonia (85%), Finland (84%) and Denmark and Greece with 83%.
As with the previous 2016 survey , Hungary stood out for having the lowest proportion, with just over one quarter (28%) of individuals eating fish at home at least once a month. However, price may be a deterring factor for consumers in the land-locked country: 90% of Hungarians said they would buy or eat more fishery and aquaculture products if the prices were not so high.
Supermarkets are the preferred purchase point
Over three-quarters of these respondents (77%) buy fishery or aquaculture products at the grocery store, supermarket or hypermarket. However, a majority of Italians (64%), Greeks (65%) and Maltese respondents (74%) were more likely to buy fish or seafood directly from a fishmonger, a fishmonger’s stall in a market hall, or at a specialist store.
Almost no country seemed to favour online shopping for fish products with one exception: Denmark, with 6%.
The most popular format was frozen. A total of 68% of all respondents who buy fish and seafood purchase frozen products either from time to time or often, with Portugal, Austria and Sweden the top countries for frozen fish purchases. Greece, Spain and Portugal, on the other hand, came out top for fresh fish and seafood products.
Mediterranean countries such as Greece, Cyprus and Croatia preferred to buy whole products.
Respondents were more likely to express a preference for wild products (35%) over farmed products (9%), but nearly as many said that they did not have a preference (32%).
“The most commonly mentioned reasons to buy or eat fishery and aquaculture products are because they are healthy (74%) and because they taste good (59%),” the report said.
Label information
“More than half mention the product’s appearance (59%) and the cost of the product (52%) as important aspects when buying fishery and aquaculture products. The third most frequently mentioned aspect is the origin of the product, with more than four in ten respondents (41%) considering this important. More than a fifth (23%) of respondents consider the brand or quality labels (e.g. PGI, PDO) and how easy and quick it is to prepare as important. Finally, the environmental, social or ethical impact is least mentioned as important (17%).
After date of catch and production, the second piece of information consumers would most like to see on-pack was environmental information, which nearly four in ten (39%) thought should be on labels.
This story was originally published by SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.
December 19, 2018 — Research undertaken by the NGO Oceana shows Denmark, France and the UK would ultimately register the highest increases in catch volume if EU ministers follow scientific advice when they meet to set the new 2019 quotas on Dec. 18.
The EU could increase the volume of fish landings from the North-Eastern Atlantic and the North Sea by 56%, up to more than 5 million metric tons, according to a study by Oceana.
The organization found that the recovery would take less than ten years, and that Denmark, France, the UK, Netherlands and Spain would benefit the most if scientific advice was followed. Ministers are under pressure in the approach to 2020, whereby under the common fisheries policy, all total allowable catches must be set sustainably.
Lasse Gustavsson, executive director of Oceana Europe, implored EU ministers to think of the longer-term benefits over short-term gains.
October 12, 2018 — It’s easy to miss the truly historic nature of the moment.
Last week, nine countries—the U.S., Canada, Russia, Norway, Greenland/Denmark, China, Japan, Iceland, South Korea, and the European Union (which includes 28 member states)—signed a treaty to hold off on commercial fishing in the high seas of the Arctic Ocean for at least 16 years while scientists study the potential impacts on wildlife in the far north. It was an extraordinary act of conservation—the rare case where major governments around the world proceeded with caution before racing into a new frontier to haul up sea life with boats and nets. They set aside 1.1 million square miles of ocean, an area larger than the Mediterranean Sea.
But to really grasp the significance of this milestone, consider why such a step was even possible, and what that says about our world today. For more than 100,000 years the central Arctic Ocean has been so thoroughly covered in ice that the very idea of fishing would have seemed ludicrous.
That remained true as recently as 20 years ago. But as human fossil-fuel emissions warmed the globe, the top of the world has melted faster than almost everywhere else. Now, in some years, up to 40 percent of the central Arctic Ocean—the area outside each surrounding nation’s 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone—is open water in summer. That hasn’t yet been enough to make fishing attractive. But it is enough that boats may be lured in soon.
So, for perhaps the first time in human history, the nations of the world set aside and protected fishing habitat that, for the moment, does not even yet exist. The foresight is certainly something to applaud. But it’s hard to escape the fact that the international accord is a tacit acknowledgment—including by the United States, which is moving to back out of the Paris climate accords—that we are headed, quite literally, into uncharted waters.
“The Arctic is in a transient state—it’s not stable,” Rafe Pomerance, a former State Department official who once worked on Arctic issues and now chairs a network of Arctic scientists from nongovernmental organizations and serves on the polar research board of the National Academy of Sciences, said last year.
September 24, 2018 — What could be the first offshore wind farm in federal waters took a major step forward last month when Dominion Energy applied to the Virginia State Corporation Commission for approval to build two 6 MW wind turbines and the project’s grid infrastructure.
Called the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Project (CVOW), it would located about 27 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach on 2,135 acres of federal waters leased by the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy. The two 6 MW turbines will sit in about 80 feet of water and generate wind energy for customers starting in December 2020.
Denmark’s Ørsted has been hired by Dominion Energy to build CVOW. Just this past Sept. 6, Ørsted opened the Walney Extension, the world’s largest offshore wind farm with 87 wind turbines generating potentially 659 MW of power in the Irish Sea.
A demonstration project, CVOW would be the second offshore wind farm in the U.S., following the Block Island Wind Farm in Rhode Island, which began operating in 2015. More importantly perhaps is that CVOW will be the first offshore wind farm to go through the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) approval process.
Read the full story at Marine Log
May 7, 2018 — Fans of renewable energy anticipate a bonanza blowing off the coast of California.
But a map released by the U.S. Navy puts large swaths of the state off limits to future offshore wind farms — including all of San Diego and Los Angeles, extending up to the Central Coast.
The military does not have the final say in the matter, as federal and state officials — as well as wind energy companies and at least one member of Congress — are working with the U.S. Department of Defense to develop a more flexible plan.
But the back-and-forth adds an extra layer of complexity to the nascent industry on the West Coast, where geographic features make it harder to construct wind farms in the Pacific than those on the East Coast.
“There’s a lot at stake here” for California to meet its ambitious clean energy goals, said Robert Collier, a policy analyst at the Green Energy Program at the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education. “California is going to need a lot more renewable energy from all sources. Offshore wind is not the only potential solution, but it is part of a multi-pronged strategy.”
Why offshore wind must float on the West Coast
The sight of wind turbines anchored into the ground, their blades turning like giant pinwheels, has become more common in recent years.
But it’s rare to see a wind farm looming over open water — at least in the United States. European companies with projects in places like Denmark and Scotland have taken the early lead in offshore wind energy.
Read the full story at the San Diego Union-Tribune
December 1, 2017 — MOSCOW — Relations between Russia and the United States are in a deep freeze, but they share a looming common problem north of their Arctic coastlines — the prospect that commercial trawling fleets might overfish the thawing Arctic Ocean.
Out on the sea, the polar ice cap has been melting so quickly as global temperatures rise that once improbable ideas for commercial activities, including fishing near the North Pole, are becoming realistic.
While Russia, the United States and three other countries with Arctic coastline control the exclusive economic zones near their shores, overfishing in the international waters at the central Arctic Ocean could collapse fish stocks.
Whatever their disagreements elsewhere, the countries have a shared interest in protecting the high Arctic from such unregulated fishing, which could affect coastal stocks as well, conservationists say.
Read the full story at the New York Times
December 29, 2016 — Studies of fish oil and health are like studies about coffee — there’s plenty of contradictory information out there.
With that in mind, here’s the latest turn: A Danish study finds that women who took fish oil supplements during pregnancy reduced the risk of asthma in their children.
“I would say that the finding that the effect was there was maybe not the surprise, because there have been indications,” says the study’s lead researcher, Dr. Hans Bisgaard, of the University of Copenhagen. “But the magnitude was very surprising to us.”
Bisgaard is a pediatrician and runs a privately funded research enterprise called the Copenhagen Prospective Studies on Asthma in Childhood. He is not the first person to study whether fish oil supplements during pregnancy can affect asthma, but his study was large and carefully designed.
Researchers gave 2.4 grams of either fish oil capsules or olive oil capsules to more than 700 pregnant women during the third trimester of pregnancy. (Nobody knew which capsules contained the fish oil.)
They then monitored the health of the children for at least five years. And it turns out that 17 percent of the children in the fish oil group had developed persistent wheezing or asthma by the age of 5, compared with 24 percent of children in the group that got olive oil. That’s about a 30 percent reduction in cases of asthma or wheezing. (Because the Danish study included “persistent wheezing,” it’s not possible to compare these rates with asthma rates in the U.S.)
Bisgaard and his colleagues report their findings in Thursday’s New England Journal of Medicine. He says by far the biggest benefit seemed to be among babies born to women who initially had low blood levels of the lipids found in fish oil.