The current MMO draft marine plan for selected English waters in the North

Sea [111] designates ‘areas of potential’ for CO2 storage, in which marine licence applicants: should demonstrate in order of preference: (a) that they will not, wherever possible, prevent carbon dioxide storage An equivalent policy is notably absent from the Consultation Draft of Scotland׳s National Marine Plan, which sets out clear objectives to develop CO2 storage, but does not identify in detail how this objectives is to be reconciled with clear objectives to develop a wide range of other marine activities (e.g. marine renewable energy) [108]. It does however contemplate the preservation of spatial opportunity for CCTS projects by requiring that ‘Consideration Trichostatin A datasheet should be given to the development of marine utility corridors which will allow [CCTS] to capitalise on current infrastructure

in the North Sea including shared use of spatial corridors and pipelines.’ [108]. The UK׳s approach to planning and regulation of offshore CO2 storage (and its interaction with other marine activities) is illustrative of three key points that may be of particular interest selleck kinase inhibitor to other countries and jurisdictions: First, how a diverse array of coordination measures can be used to promote coherence within a complex and CYTH4 sectorally fragmented regulatory framework. As highlighted in Section 4 above, coherence can be promoted hierarchically (e.g. legal requirements to act consistently with certain policy instruments); or non-hierarchically (e.g. operational coordination arrangements; careful scope delineation of sector-specific permitting requirements).

A distinctive feature of the UK׳s approach is the cross-sectoral planning activity undertaken by the Crown Estate Commissioners, acting their capacity as a public but non-governmental owner of a broad portfolio of offshore property interests. As far as the author is aware, the Commissioners׳ cross-sectoral marine management and planning functions, exercised at arms length from government,8 do not have an equivalent in any other country or jurisdiction. Second, coherent cross-sectoral planning and regulation of marine activities can be promoted with limited centralisation of regulatory frameworks and associated government agencies. As noted in Section 4 above, decentralisation may yield beneficial outcomes provided coherence is maintained, including: inclusive decision-making, improved institutional memory, diversification of risk, and systemic resilience. Finally, a coherent planning framework may be necessary but not sufficient to deliver on high-level policy objectives to deploy offshore CO2 storage.