Accenture vähittäiskaupan Pre-studytoimialalla OpportunitiesSuomessa and challenges for sustainable farming of salmon in closed systems and offshore in Norway 1 Contents

Contents 2 Evaluation of barriers to and opportunities for more sustainable technology 31 Barriers 31 Preface Accenture 5 Regulations and public administration of the aquaculture industry 31 Access to funding for start-up technology companies 31 Preface WWF 7 Disagreement between stakeholders 32 Technological immaturity 32 Executive Summary 9 Concern that closed systems will harm Norway’s competitive advantage 32 Key Findings 9 Opportunities to overcome barriers 32 Opportunities in the industry 10 Government regulations 32 Financing 34 Introduction to Salmon Farming in Norway 12 Independent research within prioritised areas 37 Aquaculture in Norway 12 Influencing consumer behaviour 37 Regulations 13 Sustainability challenges for the Norwegian salmon farming industry 15 Closing remarks and the way forward 38 Parameters Descriptions 15 Technologies for aquaculture given Norwegian conditions 17 Sources 40

Overview and Assessment of New Salmon Farming Technologies 18 Appendix 42 Future salmon aquaculture production technology in Norway 18 List of acronyms 42 Map of Norwegian and global projects 19 List of interviews 42 Global projects 19 Table of international projects 44 Norwegian projects 19 Table of Norwegian projects 50 Experiences from potential salmon farming technologies 20 The environmental model – additional tables and assumptions 54 Recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) 20 Open containment systems with offshore net pens 20 Closed containment systems with coastal cages 20 Reflections and Accenture’s point of view 21

Model for assessing environmental impact 22 Purpose Description of the model 22 The parameters 22 Weighting of parameters 23 Ranking and comparing cases 24 Application of the model 26 Results 27 Discussion 27 Sensitivity analysis 28 Future State 1 28 Future State 2 28 Future States 1 and 2 28 Key takeaways 28 Next step for the Model 29

2 3 Preface Accenture

Norway is one of the leading nations in salmon aquaculture. Growth of the industry is a clear political target, but the industry experiences sustainability challenges. The Norwegian government has defined environmental sustainability within the aquaculture industry through five areas of focus: genetic impact and escapes; pollution and discharges; disease, including parasites; zoning; and feed resources.1

Attention from the Norwegian govern- knowledge in this area. This report consid- rectly involved in the work. The project was ment, increased costs, and negative media ers how new technologies can be part of carried out over a two-month period during coverage have all increased the focus on the solution to making the salmon farming the summer of 2013 as part of our summer sustainability in Norwegian aquaculture. industry more sustainable. The key issues in internship programme, and the conclusions Consequently, the authorities will not this report are to identify the current status are expected to contribute to the public award new licences for the production of of, the barriers to, and the opportunities for discussion about further development of salmon in seawater – which represent the sustainable farming of salmon in closed and the salmon aquaculture industry in Norway. key enabler of growth – before the industry offshore systems in Norway. has found a solution to the challenges of lice and escaped salmon. Most agree that The main purpose of this report is to assess Accenture the right choice of technical solutions for how the salmon farming industry can use fish farming would contribute to resolving new technology for closed and offshore sustainability issues, but stakeholders have systems as part of the solution to envi- competing views about which solutions ronmentally sustainable growth within the are best. There is therefore a need for a guidelines defined by the Norwegian gov- Ane Kristine Jacobsen knowledge-based political discussion. ernment.* The report is based on publically Norwegian Corporate Citizenship Lead available information and more than twenty The industry works on several parallel tracks interviews with industry stakeholders such to become more sustainable. New tech- as Marine Harvest, Lerøy, Norwegian Board nological solutions for closed systems and of Technology, Directorate of Fisheries, Sogn offshore technologies are considered to be and Fjordane County Council and more. By among the potential solutions for environ- industry stakeholders is meant producers, mental sustainable growth in Norwegian technology suppliers, authorities, NGOs, in- Frode Hvattum, Nordic Sustainability aquaculture. On a global basis, few commer- dustry organisations, consumers, scientists, Services Lead) cial facilities currently use closed technolo- and other interest groups. gies or offshore systems for farming salmon, and existing projects are mainly in the Accenture has written this report at the development stage. There is a need for more request of the World Wildlife Fund for pilot and research projects to obtain more Nature (WWF), but WWF has not been di-

* Although feed is an important parameter regarding sustainability of aquaculture, it is a production input factor for all technologies. Due to lack of data, 4 this report will not consider feed usage in different technologies; feed resources are therefore considered to beyond the scope of this report. 5 Preface WWF

The Norwegian farming of Atlantic salmon WWF’s goal is to obtain the best knowl- The role of WWF-Norway has been to accounts for more than 60 per cent of edge at all times, and we believe there is a initiate the project and provide guid- Norway´s total seafood exports. It is an need to gather more knowledge on closed ance on technical issues within farmed important industry that has grown rapidly production systems for the benefit of the salmon production. WWF Norway did not in recent years, but this growth has not environment. participate in the work on conducting the taken place without environmental im- interviews or interpreting the responses. pacts and challenges. Hence, WWF is grateful for the opportu- nity to work with Accenture on this topic. We look forward to presenting the report Many of these challenges are being ad- Together, we have agreed upon a project and the thorough work that Accenture dressed, but the environmental impacts and defined the following scope: has invested in it. from the aquaculture industry are far from resolved. • Describe different solutions, knowledge of, and experience with, existing closed WWF Norway Aquaculture production has led to prob- production systems, both national and lems regarding sea lice and interference international. with wild salmon through escapes and • Describe a model for environmental pollution from sea farms. In addition, accounting based on a set of environ- there are unknown consequences about mental parameters relevant to salmon its impact on other wild marine life. The farming and use this to set up an en- industry acknowledges many of these vironmental analysis for closed versus Nina Jensen issues, but there is disagreement about open systems. Secretary General their severity. Technology within the • Assess roles and actors in the value industry has developed rapidly in certain chain from an innovation perspective. areas while other areas have a long way • Identify opportunities and challenges/ to go. The safest solution is to change barriers to further development of the method of production from open-net closed aquaculture facilities, national cages to closed systems and thus improve and international. important parameters such as water qual- ity, emissions, pollution or to prevent sea lice and escapes.

6 7 Executive Summary

“If we are to run fish farms in the future, After oil and gas, the salmon farming industry is Norway’s second-largest export. Between 2003 and 2012 the total production volume in Norway more we must be environmentally sustainable.” than doubled, reaching 1.2 million tons.6 Norwegian authorities have stated that further development of the industry is a clear political goal. However, they will Geir-Magne Knutsen, fish farming manager, not allocate new licences for producing salmon in seawater before the industry Bremnes Seashore has found better solutions to the environmental challenges of escapes and salmon lice. Three new technologies have been pointed out as potential new solutions for the industry:

1. Recirculation aqua- 2. Open containment systems 3. Closed containment systems culture systems (RAS) with offshore net pens with coastal cages

“I believe in open net pen technology. I think it Key Findings Key findings are: escapes, lice, fish welfare, direct pol- Technological solutions for the saltwater will remain the main production technology for 1. Accenture believes that production lutants/chemical emissions and dis- production of salmon between 200 g and methods for salmon will be more charges of nutrient salts and organic 1 kg in recirculating aquaculture systems the next ten, twenty or perhaps thirty years.” diversified in the future. To resolve materials. The next step for the indus- (RAS) and closed coastal systems are still environmental challenges and op- try will be to explore the commercial under development and not yet commer- timise the total production volume, aspects of these technologies. cialised. Several pilot projects for these Harald Sveier, Technical Manager, technology will to a larger extent 3. In the short term, the greatest technologies have been established, the vary according to location and pro- potential for closed systems lies in results of which will be published within Lerøy Seafood Group ASA duction phase. New technologies and the smolt stage, the early stage of the next two years. These projects will combinations of technologies that saltwater production when the fish evaluate the economic viability of the both address environmental chal- grows from about 200 g to 1 kg. solutions. The focus for the industry should lenges and are profitable will persist. Keeping the fish in closed systems be to finalise existing projects as well as to 2. Closed systems have great potential for longer may optimise the total initiate more projects for extended smolt because they score relatively higher production process and reduce pro- production. The Norwegian authorities are on environmental parameters such as duction losses. best placed to initiate new projects.

8 9 Opportunities in the industry

To ensure a holistic assessment of 1. Adapt regulations to new technolo- and gain expertise through coop- the environmental impact of salmon gies – Government regulations are eration networks. In addition, the farming, Accenture developed a model important for moving development industry could form collaborative wherein eight parameters are measured: in a more sustainable direction. Rules communities to share knowledge and escapes, lice, fish welfare, environmen- governing the weight limit of smolt to jointly fund projects. tal effects, direct pollutants/chemical and fish density, for instance, must 3. Independent research within priori- emissions, discharges of nutrient salts be updated more frequently to keep tised areas – Independent research and organic materials, zoning, and input up with the development of new organisations should conduct studies factors in construction of system. Given technologies. Stricter regulations in on areas of expected environmental today’s environmental challenges, our exposed areas would give producers significance such as the effects of analysis shows that cases with closed an incentive to change production escaped salmon, salmon lice, and technologies have fewer environmen- technology. Additionally, a better fish welfare. Knowledge sharing is tal impacts than cases based on open coordinated public administration essential in order to unify the views technologies. Nonetheless, commercial would make it easier for industry of stakeholders and thus enable immaturity, regulations that are not players to navigate their way around the industry to focus its efforts on adapted to new technologies, limited the system and thus stimulate sus- resolving environmental challenges. access to funding, and disagreement tainable development. 4. Influence consumer behaviour between industry stakeholders repre- 2. Dedicated financing – A simpli- – To increase demand for sustain- sent barriers to the development of all fication of existing governmental ably produced salmon, the industry new technologies. To overcome these funding programmes in addition to could promote the use of govern- barriers, Accenture has identified four a dedicated fund for sustainable ment measures such as standards, specific opportunities for the industry to aquaculture similar to, for example, labelling, taxes or subsidies, and promote further development of envi- Enova, could strengthen develop- voluntary initiatives carried out by ronmentally sustainable technology: ment of the industry. Furthermore, other stakeholders, including product new technology start-up companies labels such as the Aquaculture could be supported by seed capital, Stewardship Council’s certification for instance through angel networks, scheme.

10 11 Introduction to Salmon Farming in Norway

Is the Norwegian salmon farming industry sustainable? Can the industry grow Regulations The law also states that operations must Salmon farming supply chain with current production technologies? What are the main environmental Salmon farming is regulated by approxi- be environmentally responsible and that Figure 112,13 shows the current supply mately sixty laws and regulations.8 fish farms must be located at sites ap- chain of farmed salmon. The total process challenges and how pressing are they? The aquaculture industry will continue to In addition, the operation of fish farms proved by local authorities. from fertilisation to harvest takes about be an important sector in the Norwegian economy, but producers, technology must comply with the Food Act, the Pol- two to three years and can be divided into lution Control Act, the Harbour Act, the For production in seawater, biomass six phases. Between steps three and four, suppliers, authorities, NGOs, industry organisations, consumers, and scientists Water Resources Act, and the Nature Di- licences are allocated according to the an additional phase which is not currently tend to disagree about how to make the industry more sustainable. versity Act. Location applications are ad- Aquaculture Act. Biomass licences are in use has been included: extended smolt. ministered by the county councils, which normally limited to a standing biomass in Extended smolt is an extension of cur- coordinate and pass the applications on to seawater of 780 tonnes per licence.10 This rent juvenile production whereby salmon the relevant authorities and counties.7 limit must be adhered to at all times. The above the current 250 g weight limit (e.g. same applies to the maximum allowable from 200 g and 1 kg) is kept on land. Aquaculture in Norway For freshwater production, the weight stocking density of 25 kg/m3. Produc- limit for smolt in onshore hatcheries is tion sites in seawater are required to be In 2012, the total world production of processes in 20124, while almost 20,000 Historically, the Norwegian salmon 250 grams. As of 2012, hatcheries may emptied and left fallow for at least two farmed Atlantic salmon was around 1.78 were employed in related processes such industry has been fragmented. During the apply for exemption from the weight months after each production cycle.11 million tons2, of which Norway produced as technology suppliers and distributors in past decade however, it has become more limit, allowing smolt up to 1,000 grams.9 over 1.2 million tons, reaching a first- 2011. 3 In the Soria Moria II Declaration, the consolidated. The number of producers hand value of nearly NOK 28.6 billion.4 government stated that Norway should be contributing to 80% of Norwegian salmon The Norwegian aquaculture industry, in the world’s leading seafood nation5. Never- production fell from almost 70% to 24% which salmon farming accounts for 95%,4 theless, with the current production method between 1997 and 2012. This trend is 3 7 represents 1% of Norway’s GDP and is the and more than a doubling of the total expected to continue in the future. Freshwater Saltwater country’s second-largest export industry production volume in Norway from 2003 to after oil and gas. In many local communi- 20126, the impact on the environment has ties along Norway’s coastline, the aqua- become an area of focus. The Norwegian culture industry is the largest employer; government requires further growth to take about 5,370 people were employed in core place within sustainable limits.

The farmed salmon The embryos hatch The fry is fed until The smolt are transferred The fish is The processing production cycle and emerge as they reach a weight to seawater for transported to the phase prepares the The Norwegian Atlantic Salmon Industry (2012 numbers)4 begins with the alevins. A yolk sac of about 60-100g. on-growing. This phase harvest station in a fish as products broodstock. When provides the alevins At this stage the usually lasts 15-24 well boat where the ready for retail and Production in tons 1,2 million the fish become with the nutrition fish go through months. At the end fish is anesthetized, food service. The sexually mature, until they are about a physiological of this period the fish bled and gutted. fish can be sold Production value NOK 28,6 billion female eggs are 25mm long and change that enables will have reached market whole or prepared mixed with male ready to feed. At them to live in weight of around 5,5 kg. as fillets, steaks and Direct employment 5 370 sperm (milt) to this stage the fish is seawater. The fish portions. produce fertilized called fry. is now referred to Employment in related processes 20 0004 eggs. as smolt

Table 1: Industry facts box Technology used: Technology used: Recirculation aquaculture systems (RAS) Open containment systems or Flow through systems with coastal net pens

Figure 1: Salmon farming supply chain

12 13 Sustainability challenges for the Norwegian salmon farming industry

The aquaculture industry has several the government’s strategy for an environ- In order to continue to grow, the industry challenges with regard to environmentally mentally sustainable fish farming industry.15 must overcome the environmental chal- sustainable development (see Table 2 for lenges it faces today. Although there is details). The Norwegian government has In a consultation paper submitted to the disagreement as to how important some defined “environmental sustainability” Food Safety Authority in 2009, the IMR of the challenges are, it is agreed that the within the aquaculture industry through recommended that the number of hosts loss and mortality rates of salmon are too five areas of focus: genetic impact and (salmon and trout) should not be increased high and that there is room for improve- escapes, pollution and discharges, dis- until the challenge regarding lice had ment. Reducing the number of escapes eases including parasites, zoning, and been resolved.16 Since 2009, conventional and the amount of lice would not only feed resources.1,* In 2012 the Institute of licences have not been allocated. However, have positive effects on the environment; Marine Research (IMR) conducted a risk the government will grant 45 “green bio- these are also economic parameters that assessment of the environmental effects mass licences” in 2013 in order to stimulate directly affect the bottom line. of Norwegian aquaculture and concluded the development and use of more environ- that infection pressure from salmon lice mentally friendly technology. These “green * Although feed is an important parameter regarding and genetic influences of escaped salmon biomass licences” will be allocated to pro- sustainability of aquaculture, it is a production input factor for all technologies. Due to lack of data, this are the most problematic risk factors for ducers who commit to use technology or report will not consider feed usage of different tech- the Norwegian fish farming industry.14 IMR operational methods that reduce the risk of nologies; feed resources are therefore considered to concluded that there was a medium or high escapes or that secure a certain level of lice be beyond the scope of this report. probability that the environmental impacts per fish and a certain number of delousing of the industry conflicted with the goals of treatments per production cycle.17

Parameters Descriptions

Escapes18 Escaped salmon can spawn with wild salmon and affect the survival rate and genetic integrity of wild salmon populations. Ac- cording to the IMR the number of escapes must be reduced to make fish production environmentally sustainable.

Lice19, 20 Salmon lice can reduce growth, affect reproduction and increase mortality rates amongst wild fish populations. The infection pressure on wild fish seems to have increased in recent years due to fish farming.21

Fish welfare* The welfare of fish is affected when they are held in captivity as opposed to their natural habitat. Although difficult to monitor directly, fish welfare is believed to be related to factors such as fish density, temperature, water quality, disease, etc. The IMR notes that the fish mortality rate in production systems is a rough indicator of fish welfare.22

Climate effects Transportation and operation of some system facilities lead to carbon emissions. Climate effects will become increasingly impor- tant if the industry starts using new technologies that require more energy than today’s open systems.

Direct pollutants / chemical Chemical emissions from delousing substances and medicines can be detrimental to the environment. The IMR states that there emissions is a need for more knowledge regarding chemical emissions through fish feces and waste feed.23

Discharges of nutrient salts The IMR concludes that the risk of regional eutrophication is low given today’s production level.24 However, it notes that the risk and organic materials may be higher in local areas. The risk may also increase if production increases.

Zoning There are certain challenges regarding the zoning of fish farms. The Area Committee that was appointed by the Norwegian government noted that fish farm operations may have negative consequences for other stakeholders such as fishermen and wild salmon interest groups.26

Input factors in construction Materials and energy consumed in production of the containment system lead to emissions of direct pollutants, chemical emis- of system sions and carbon emissions.

Table 2: Main environmental challenges for the Norwegian salmon farming industry * We assume that fish mortality is a result of fish welfare, and that poor fish welfare leads to higher death rates. We include viruses and diseases in fish welfare.

14 15 Technologies for aquaculture given Norwegian conditions

Different technologies are used for the net pens, and freshwater production in 1. Land-based: Recirculation aquacul- salmon’s freshwater and seawater phases. recirculating aquaculture systems are ture systems (RAS) The technologies for salmon farming can therefore beyond the scope of this report. 2. Sea-based: Open containment sys- be divided into six main categories, as il- Furthermore, the development of closed tems with offshore net pens lustrated in Figure 2. This report does not systems has mainly focused on coastal 3. Sea-based: Closed containment consider further development of already near-shore cages, so closed containment systems with coastal cages commercialised technologies, but instead systems with offshore cages are therefore focuses on new technology develop- considered to be beyond the scope of this ment. Land-based flow-through systems, report. This report considers the following open containment systems with coastal technologies:

Land-based Sea-based

Recirculating Open containment Closed containment aquaculture systems with offshore systems with systems (RAS) net pens coastal cages

• Water is pumped • Same as “Open containment • There is a physical barrier between the water through tanks on land systems with coastal net pens”, inside and around the cage. The Norwegian • Water is partially reused, but located further out to sea Board of Technology divides closed systems and the percentage of with higher flow rates and into four levels, where level 1 is the simplest Within scope recirculation varies significant wave amplitudes barrier for water only, while level 4 has strict separations for particles, virus, organic materials and more26 • Defined as coastal according to flow rate and significant wave amplitude*

Flow-through Open containment Closed containment systems systems with systems with coastal net pens offshore cages • Water is pumped through tanks on land • Seawater flows through the net pens • Same as “Closed containment systems with • No recycling of water • Located in proximity to the coastline or in fjords coastal cages”, but located further out to sea

Beyond scope with higher flow rates and significant wave amplitudes • Can be on or below the water surface, or a combination

Figure 2: Descriptions of salmon farming technologies

Today, land-based flow-through systems main trends in commercial cage technol- systems until it reaches a weight of 1 kg. or RAS are commercialised for the fresh- ogy: polyethylene-based pens and steel The fish is then transferred to open net water part of the production cycle, i.e. pens. Polyethylene pens represent the pens. Thus the time the fish spends in the hatcheries and fingerling production. technology most widely used in Norway.27 closed cages before being transferred to For the saltwater part of the production, The total cost of production is currently open net pens is extended. In Norway this from smolt to slaughtering, open coastal about NOK 23 per kg.28 phase has been considered as a possible systems are used. Open coastal systems means of introducing new technologies, consist of three main components: float- Extended smolt production entails keep- particularly for closed systems on land or ing collar, net, and mooring. There are two ing salmon from about 200 g in closed in the sea.29

16 17 Overview and Assessment of New Salmon Map of Norwegian and global projects 37 49 48 42 35 25 31 Farming Technologies 28 3432 30

26 38 37 49 41 48 27 42 33 35 40 Accenture has mapped projects, both in Norway and globally, 25 31 29 39 28 3432 for each of the three technologies considered in this report: 30 26 38 41 27 33 40 29 39 14 11 910 24 22 13 21 1 12 15 17 18 20 2 7 23 14 11 910 24 19 22 13 21 8 1 16 12 15 17 18 20 2 7 Recirculation aquaculture Open containment systems Closed containment sys- 23 19 8 systems (RAS) with offshore net pens tems with coastal cages 16

Future salmon aquaculture production technology in Norway Land-based recirculation aquaculture systems Open containment systems 3 3 5 with offshore net pens5 4 6 Thus far, the industry in Norway has been able to grow by increasing the number 4 6 of biomass licences and locations. Presently, however, the availability of locations Closed containment systems has become a limiting factor, and Norwegian authorities have placed restrictions Figure 3: Map of Norwegian and global projects for land-based recirculation aquaculture systems, open offshore systems and closed coastal systems* on the allocation of new biomass licences. Consequently, the most effective * Though not exhaustive, this map provides an overview of many of the projects in the area; from planning and full-scale pilots to commercialised farms. Further alternatives for achieving industry growth are by optimising existing technology details on each of the projects can be found in the appendix, chapters 9.3 and 9.4. or by developing new production technologies. Losses in the production process Global projects in Canada, the United States, Denmark, Norwegian projects due to escape, disease, sea lice, and mortality have direct economic impacts as RAS technology has a relatively global China, and Chile. In Norway, most projects are in the well as environmental impacts. Shorter production time in open net pens allows spread whereas, by contrast, only a lim- research and development phase.30 RAS ited number of projects for open offshore Accenture found no projects for open has been piloted for extended smolt for greater flexibility in the management of seawater biomass licences. Reducing systems and closed coastal systems were offshore systems, and the use of closed production and holding cages. Offshore production time in seawater could therefore further reduce the risk of losses and identified in the course of this study. coastal systems was found to be lim- cage technology is still immature, as there Despite a relatively wide geographic ited. The technology for closed coastal are technological challenges regarding increase the output volumes of existing locations. spread of RAS sites, production volumes systems was developed in Canada, where offshore environmental conditions. There are presently very low. Various small- several full production cycles have been have been several pilots for closed coastal scale operations exist, as well as sites tested. Agrimarine is amongst the largest systems, mainly focused on extended where RAS serves as one part of a larger producers, and Canadian producers are smolt production, an extension of current production chain. Nonetheless, commer- working towards spreading this technol- juvenile production whereby salmon is cial full-cycle RAS production has now ogy to other countries, including China kept on land above the current 250 g been established and is actively running and Norway. weight limit (between 200 g and 1 kg).

18 19 Experiences from potential Reflections and Accenture’s salmon farming technologies point of view

Recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) many stakeholders believe that the costs Closed containment systems In the future, technologies and combi- will probably vary according to location publish their results within the next two On a global scale, the development of RAS for full-cycle RAS are too high. However, with coastal cages nations of technologies that are more and production phase. years. In the long term, it is difficult to technologies is now mature, and there more projects should be initiated and Norway and Canada have been key actors resistant to resolving sustainability chal- conclude as to which technologies will be are several projects for full-cycle and financed in order to better understand the in several large-scale pilot projects for lenges will persist. Accenture believes that In the short term, the technologies for commercialised. Results from extended extended smolt production.* Canada and potential of RAS technologies for Norwe- closed coastal. Large-scale projects have future production methods for salmon will extended smolt production in RAS and smolt projects will probably give some China have commercial production facili- gian conditions in the long term. been undertaken by AgriMarine, Aquafarm be more diversified. To be able to resolve closed coastal systems are the most indication of the potential for full-cycle ties using full-cycle RAS production of Equipment, Optimized Postsmolt Produc- sustainability challenges and optimise mature. Several projects for these tech- production, while more projects for open salmon, but production volumes are very Open containment systems tion, Preline, Aquadom and AkvaDesign* total production volumes, the technology nologies have been established and will offshore net pens must yet be carried out. small due to large initial investments and with offshore net pens among others. These projects are in the high production costs. In Norway, RAS SINTEF34 conducted a mapping survey research and development stage and focus pilots have been built for extended smolt of existing salmon farming technolo- mainly on extended smolt production.** production and holding pens. Nonethe- gies, including offshore systems. It found Full-cycle production projects are mostly less, the technology has only been com- technology for open offshore systems to in the research and development stage. mercialised for certain species, such as be premature, with few full-scale pilots Based on results from these projects, it is halibut and turbot. for salmon and several proposals still in too early to tell whether these technolo- the planning phase. Furthermore, there gies will prove significantly better than Examples of ongoing projects include: are persisting challenges with existing current technologies if environmental and • The Aquafarm Equipment project by technologies. A pilot by Lerøy Hydrotech, economic aspects are taken into account. Marine Harvest in Skånevik, Eldøyene is a for example, was destroyed due to harsh pilot project for extended smolt that plans weather conditions offshore in 2011.35 AgriMarine has operated closed-system to start testing during the autumn 2013. Another challenge is the fact that sup- salmon farms since 2005. The estimated • The AquaOptima project in Kråkvag is pliers of offshore technologies receive energy usage for pumping and oxygen is a pilot project for full-cycle production. higher margins from the oil and gas 0.3-0.45 kWh/kg salmon, given a fish den- Although the project is still in the plan- industry. Accenture does not believe that sity of 75 kg/m3.36 AgriMarine contends that ning phase, the total cost for pumping offshore technologies will be applicable increased fish density is the key factor for and oxygen is estimated at NOK 1 per in the short term, due to technological making closed systems profitable.3 AquaDo- kilo salmon.31 challenges and few established projects. me’s prototype energy costs are about NOK • Bremnes Seashore is currently building New pilot projects must thus be initiated 1 per kilo salmon.37 AkvaDesign has not yet a land-based holding pen facility in to explore the true potential of offshore published its results, but states that the Øklandsvåg.32 The test operation is technologies. energy costs have thus far been higher than planned to start in the summer of 2014.33 affordable.38 The Aquafarm Equipment pro- ject launched a closed coastal system in July In the short term, RAS in Norway appears 2013 and plans to start testing in autumn to be more suitable for extended smolt 2013.39 The Optimized Postsmolt Production than for full-cycle production. Norway has project is ongoing, and the results have not a long coastline which favours sea-based yet been published.40 production. Large tanks on land would conflict with other interests and, although *See page 44 Table of international projects and the economic aspect is not considered, page 50 Table of Norwegian projects in appendix **Extended smolt: 200 g–1 kg; see page 13

Recirculation aquaculture Open containment systems Closed containment sys- systems (RAS) with offshore net pens tems with coastal cages

20 21 Model for assessing environmental impact

In this chapter we rank four cases in terms of the environmental impact Parameters* Description Scoring Criteria of a technology applied in a specific setting. We consider full-cycle production Risk of salmon escaping containment and consequently affect- Risk of escapes related to unforeseen incidences. Escapes in two of the three technologies within the scope of this report: RAS and closed ing wild salmon populations. Risk of escapes related to planned activities. Generation and spread of salmon lice affecting farmed and Contamination risk for fish inside the system. Lice containment systems with coastal cages. Open offshore net pens will not be wild salmon. Contamination risk for fish outside the system. Fish ulceration (sores) considered because the technology is immature and few full-scale pilots have Capture factors affecting fish welfare ultimately leading to Fish welfare** Non-observable fish welfare. salmon mortality. been built. We also consider a case for today’s open coastal net pens and one Viral diseases.*** Energy usage. for extended smolt production in a closed coastal system. Climate effects Indirect or direct emission of greenhouse gases. Carbon emissions. Energy-producing properties. Direct pollutants / chemical Direct pollutants emitted, primarily related to medication and Intentional pollutants and chemical emissions. emissions chemical lice treatments Unintentional pollutants and chemical emissions. Purpose Discharges of nutrient salts Organic substance emissions. Discharges of nutrient salts and organic materials. and organic materials Nutrients emissions. Sea space. Accenture developed a scoring model in additional parameters based on discus- the weighting factors, such as further Zoning Area claimed by the fish farming system. order to highlight the environmental im- sions with interview stakeholders. These research on the impact of parameters, Onshore space. pact of different salmon farming technol- additional parameters are included in environmental development, and tech- Input factors in construction Input factors required in the production of containments Materials consumed. ogies in a structured manner. The model order to highlight the overall environmen- nological development. To address these of system systems. Energy consumed. is based on a set of carefully selected tal impact. This is important because if dynamics, the model includes a sensitivity Table 4: Descriptions of parameters and scoring criteria parameters that cover the environmental one based an assessment on a restricted analysis of the weight factors we consider impact of a given technology applied set of parameters, the conclusion might most likely to be affected. Stakeholders * Although feed is an important parameter regarding sustainability of aquaculture, it is a production input factor for all technologies. Due to lack of data, this report does not consider feed usage of different technologies; feed resources are therefore considered to be beyond the scope of this report. See appendix, page 54 for details. in a given setting. The parameters are be biased. Accenture then weighted each will have different opinions regarding ** We assume that fish mortality is a result of fish welfare, and that poor fish welfare leads to higher death rates compared to good fish welfare based on four of the Norwegian govern- parameter to ensure that the total score the importance of each parameter in the ***Viral diseases affect the mortality rate and level of fish welfare of the fish in the farming system. In addition, the Institute of Marine Research states that despite ment’s five focus areas for environmental reflects the relative importance of the model, and Accenture wants this model to uncertainty regarding the risk of infection from farmed salmon to wild salmon populations, the risk is considered to be low. Our model therefore assumes that viral sustainability within aquaculture (feed parameters and, consequently, paints be used as a starting point to discuss the diseases mainly affect the fish in the production system, and that virus diseases affect fish welfare. resources are not considered; see page 5), a picture of the overall environmental overall environmental impact. The model which Accenture supplemented with impact. Several dynamics may affect does not consider economic factors.

Weighting of parameters regarding the importance of each of the • Salmon lice are present, and the intro- The parameters presented in the model parameters. As a consequence informa- duction of farmed fish will stimulate Description of the model are not of equal importance in terms of tion from different stakeholders and lice generation if the fish have unre- environmental impact. In order to ensure sources has been balanced.* stricted contact with the seawater The model is dynamic, as parameters, sized as current and potential environ- Table 4 provides a description of each that the total score reflects the rela- • Viral diseases may be present in the weights and cases can be customised to mental challenges in the industry. The pa- parameter. For instance, escapes can be tive importance of the parameters, the The weights are based on the assumption area, implying a risk of infection the model application. The model can eas- rameters deal not only with issues directly related to unforeseen incidents (weather, parameters are weighted high, medium or that production takes place along the Nor- • Energy usage implies indirect emissions ily be adjusted for more specific cases or affecting farmed salmon and wild salmon boat collisions, etc.) and to planned low. The weight factors in this report are wegian shore or in a Norwegian fjord. This of greenhouse gases for other requirements. populations, but also with effects related activities (smolt transfer, etc.). When Ac- primarily based on research and publica- implies the following general assumptions: to the local and global environment, such centure set the score for a given param- tions by the Institute of Marine Research. • Temperature, feed factor, growth, *It should be noted that for some parameters the The parameters as carbon emissions and zoning. Conse- eter, all subcriteria were balanced. However, information gathered through release date, fallowing period and other actual environmental impact is not thoroughly documented. The weight factors portray the relative The model is based on eight parameters quently, when assessing the impact of a interviews and publicly available sources external production factors are consid- importance of the parameters based on currently (see Table 4) which reflect the entirety of case, applying this model ensures that the have also been taken into account. The ered to be equal for all cases, so that available information, but the relative importance what industry stakeholders have empha- overall environmental impact is assessed. importance of the different parameters the production cycle is equal in all cases may change over time as more research is con- is a much debated topic, and different • The salmon farming system is in the ducted. stakeholders often have different views proximity of wild salmon populations

22 23 Table 5 shows the weights and explains their rationale.

Parameters Weight Rationale

Escaped salmon is one of the most problematic environmental factors in the industry.14 Because the evidence for es- Escape High caped salmon impacting wild salmon populations is not indisputable, the topic remains a contentious political issue. Lice are one of the most problematic environmental factors in the industry.14 “Infection pressure of salmon lice on Lice High wild salmon seems to have increased in areas of intensive salmon farming”.41 In addition to the direct health impact on farmed salmon and wild salmonids, lice infections involve chemical treatment and/or medication. Documentation of fish welfare is becoming increasingly important for consumers and authorities, and operating Fish welfare Medium regulations are becoming stricter. Poor fish welfare ultimately leads to higher mortality rates, but impacts outside the system are believed to be limited. Compared to pig and chicken, salmon farming has a relatively high energy and protein retention42. This may change in Climate effects Low the future due to development of more energy retention food sources and stricter emission regulations. Direct pollutants / chemical Medium Medication and chemical lice treatments may potentially affect local fauna and flora. Emissions Discharges of nutrient salts Only an issue for the local environment surrounding the production facility. Eutrophication on a regional level is Low and organic materials considered low given today’s production level. Even though limited, land is currently not a scarce resource along the Norwegian shore. Zoning is, however, politically Zoning Low sensitive, partly due to esthetical considerations. Input factors in construction The environmental impact related to the consumption of input factors in production of the containment systems is Low of system regarded to be low compared to other factors. Table 5: Weights and rationale

Ranking and comparing cases It is thus possible to compare different differently and that comparisons may Each case is ranked on a scale from 1 to cases within and across parameters and yield different results. 5 according to its environmental impact on an overall level. As discussed, the represented by a given parameter. For weight scale may need to be adjusted instance, a case with a relatively low over time due to findings of further Poor probability of escapes will score high on research on the impact of the respec- the escape parameter. tive parameters and to environmental Fair and technological developments. Since Good Based on the given weights and scores the total score of a case depends on the Very Good for the different parameters, the model weighting, this implies that the total Excellent calculates a total value for each case. score for each case would be affected

24 25 Application of the model Results The four cases are ranked in Table 7. The other relevant sources. Consequently the our best judgment when aggregating these In the following chapter the model is used tions – such as system specifications and *Offshore installations are excluded because tech- scores are based on information gathered ranking will reflect input from various per- inputs into scores, and we believe the com- to compare the environmental impact of locational factors – enable us to under- nological development is mainly at the research and through extensive interviews with stake- spectives such as technology companies, parison provides a good basis for further development stage, and there are still technological four different cases based on technologies take a holistic assessment. In addition to challenges with existing technologies; see page 20. holders throughout the fish farming value NGOs, industry organisations, academia discussion of the environmental impacts of outlined on page 17.* The technologies, case-specific assumptions, the common chain; see appendix page 42, reports, and and governmental agencies. We have used the respective cases. either individually or in combination, are assumptions discussed on page 23 are placed in cases where specific assump- applied to each of the four cases. Parameters Weight Open Closed Recirculating Extended Comments coastal coastal aquaculture smolt net pens cages systems Out of scope Cases with closed technologies score higher because the pens are impenetrable and more robust. RAS scores Escapes High 1 4 5 2 highest because it is located onshore, where salmon most likely cannot escape. 1. Today’s solution 2. Recirculation Open containment 3. Closed contain- 4. Extended smolt Cases with closed technologies score higher because – Open coastal net pens aquaculture systems systems with off- ment systems with water can be filtered and disinfected 43 in and out of the system and pumped from depths with fewer lice. (RAS) shore net pens coastal cages Lice High 1 4 5 2 RAS scores highest because the system is located onshore and only 10% of water comes from the sea (90% is recycled). Cases Despite higher fish density, cases with closed tech- nologies score slightly higher due to water tempera- Fish welfare Medium 3 4 4 3 Case 1: Description: Assumptions: ture and nutrition/oxygen level control. Fewer lice and Today’s solution This case is based on open coastal net pens • System is close to land diseases will positively affect fish welfare. – open coastal net pens where seawater flows through the net pens • Distance to seabed is in line with regulations Cases with open technologies score higher because without any form of water treatment. • Water, particles and parasites flow unhin- they use less energy. RAS scores lowest due to high dered through the net pens Climate effects Low 4 2 1 3 energy consumption related to water pumped up • Net pens are made of flexible polyethylene above sea level. Cases with closed technologies score higher score Direct pollutants / because medication/treatment has no unfiltered Medium 1 3 4 2 Case 2: Description: Assumptions: chemicals contact with seawater. Fewer lice reduces the need for Closed coastal cages This case is based on closed coastal cages • Walls are impenetrable treatment/medication. where there is a physical barrier between the • Water can only enter or exit through intake/ Discharges of Cases with closed technologies score higher because water inside and around the net pens. Both outlet nutrient salts and Low 1 4 5 2 waste mass can be collected. RAS scores highest closed systems with flexible and rigid walls are • Particles and parasites are filtered at water organic materials because 90% of the water is recycled. included in this case. intake/outlet • Water temperature determined by water Case 2 scores highest because new and remote areas pumped in Zoning Low 3 4 1 3 can be taken into use. RAS scores lowest score because it claims land along the coastline. Case 3: Recirculating Case 3 scores lowest because RAS systems require Description: Assumptions: Input factors in con- aquaculture systems (RAS) Low 4 2 1 3 relatively more input factors in production compared This case is based on RAS which are closed • Water is pumped from the shore struction of system containment systems placed on land that • Particles and parasites are filtered to the other cases filter, treat and recirculate the water used for • 90% of the water is recirculated and reused Weighted average 1,9 3,6 3,9 2,4 production • The system is placed near the shore (1-5)

Table 7: Results

Case 4: Description: Assumptions: Extended smol This case is based on a combination of closed • Smolt is transferred at 1kg from closed Discussion coastal cages and open coastal net pens in the to open containment Based on the weighted scores, it is evident Closed coastal cages can also be placed in It is important to note that the model sea. Smolt up to 1kg is produced in the closed • Same assumptions as for case 1 and 2 that cases based on closed technologies new areas where conditions are not suitable focuses exclusively on environmental impact system and then transferred to the open system have fewer environmental impacts than for today’s open net pens. The main disad- and does not take economic aspects into cases based on open technologies, given vantage for the cases with closed systems account. Accordingly, the RAS case is ranked today’s environmental challenges. Impen- is high energy consumption related to water best case solely from an environmental etrable walls prevent fish from escaping and pumping compared to the case with open perspective. An analysis that factors in eco- Table 6: Case descriptions and assumptions lice from entering and leaving the system, net pens. The need for space can also be a nomic aspects must be undertaken in order and closed walls make it possible to collect disadvantage if closed systems are placed to conclude which case is most feasible given waste mass such as feces and waste feed. on land. Norwegian fish farming conditions.

26 27 Sensitivity analysis eters climate effect, zoning, and input longer considered environmentally friendly Next step for the Model The total score is sensitive to the rela- factors in construction of system. The new but rather the worst of the four cases. Case tive weights associated with each of the weights result in a slightly higher score for 2, closed coastal pens, receives the highest parameters. As discussed, weighting is case 2 compared to the RAS case. This is score given the new weights. Several steps should be considered in order based on a synthesis of currently available because the RAS case scores low on the to further improve the model and expand its information. Future research and develop- climate effect, zoning and input factors in Key takeaways ment may lead to new knowledge which construction of system parameters while • It is difficult to determine which scope of application. may necessitate adjusting the weights. For the closed coastal cages in case 2 scores specific case would have the least example, in the analysis above, escapes relatively high. The relative ranking of environmental impact in the future. • Since several of the technologies are • One should consider granting independ- help applicants in documenting the en- are weighted as “high”. New research may cases 1 and 4 remains the same. However, given our future states based in the developmental phase, access ent third-party ownership of the model. vironmental impacts of the relevant fish indicate that the assumption of genetic di- on current environmental drivers, the to empirical data is limited. As tech- Such a party could develop the model, farming technologies in connection with lution of wild salmon is exaggerated, which Future State 2 case based on closed coastal pens nologies mature, one should seek to especially with regards to life cycle as- applying for “green biomass licences”. would justify an adjustment of the weight • Due to research and new knowledge performs well in all states. leverage empirical data across param- sessment. Furthermore, the party could Similarly, it may help local authorities factor. In order to address this uncertainty, within genetics and medical research • While the RAS case is best given eters to increase the robustness of the guide and monitor the use the model evaluate applications. we conducted a sensitivity analysis. and/or the use of sterile salmon, the today’s cases, it is actually the worst analysis. However, since the model is and ensure that different cases received escape parameter is weighted as low case from an environmental perspec- likely to be used to evaluate emerging an objective and robust score. It should be emphasized that if the model Based on current environmental drivers, instead of high. tive if both -future states 1 or 2 occur. technologies, one may still have to rely is to be acknowledged by industry stake- we identified a set of future states. These • Due to the introduction of new tech- • If both Future States 1 and 2 occur, the on qualitative assessments. In the future, application of the model holders, it must allow them to influence states highlight how the results would nologies or medicines, lice is no longer case with closed coastal cages receives • The model in this report focuses on the could be extended. Our interviews show its methodology and further development. differ if the relative importance of the considered an environmental challenge, the highest score. This implies that the operational part of the life cycle and on that several companies do not use a parameters changed. and the lice parameter is weighted as extended smolt case would be better the the consumption of input factors in con- particular framework for assessing the low or medium instead of high. longer the fish remained in the closed struction of the fish farming systems. environmental impact of salmon farm- Future State 1 coastal cages compared to open net pens. However, the environmental impact of ing technology. Some companies may • Due to increased awareness of global Table 9 shows the new total scores after • The results are highly sensitive to processes such as distribution, mainte- therefore find the model a useful tool warming and stricter regulation of changing the weights of the two parame- weights of the model. Future develop- nance and decommissioning could also when evaluating technologies or internal greenhouse gas emissions, the climate ters escapes and lice to low instead of high. ments will most likely alter the relative be assessed in order to increase the projects to which the model could be effect parameter is weighted as high This does not alter the relative ranking of ranking due to changing weights. Tech- comprehensiveness of the model. applied. Furthermore, the model could instead of low. the four cases, but we see that case 2 and nological development may also change • Due to political tension regard- the RAS case now are almost equally good. the parameter scores for the cases. ing coastal areas and public rights • In our base case the lice and escape concerning the shoreline, the zoning Future States 1 and 2 parameters are weighted as high, which parameter is weighted as high instead If both Future States 1 and 2 materialise, implies that the overall result is par- of low the relative ranking would change: ticularly sensitive to changes in scoring • Due to increased awareness regarding within these two parameters. One should sustainable consumption of resources, Table 10 shows the new scores given that consequently pay attention to techno- the input factors in construction of both Future State 1 and 2 occur. Cases 2 logical development going forward to system parameter is weighted as me- and 3 with closed systems perform poorly verify that the scoring remains correct. dium instead of low. compared the original weight factors, while the cases with open technologies perform Table 8 shows the new total scores after better. The new weight factors change changing the weights of the three param- the relative ranking, as the RAS case is no

Open Closed RAS Extended Open Closed RAS Extended Open Closed RAS Extended

New New New weighted weighted weighted average average average 2.3 3.4 3.1 2.5 2.2 3.4 3.4 2.5 2.7 3.2 2.6 2.7 (1-5) (1-5) (1-5) in future in future in future state 1 state 2 state 1 + 2 Change Change Change from +0.5 -0.2 -0.8 +0.2 from +0.3 -0.2 -0.5 +0.1 from +0.8 -0.4 -1.3 +0.3 original original original

Table 8: Future State 1 Table 9: Future State 2 Table 10: Future State 1 and 2 combined

28 29 Evaluation of barriers “For projects with new, innovative, to and opportunities for more environmentally friendly technologies, sustainable technology it is generally difficult to get the extra capital needed in addition to the financing To secure sustainable growth for the salmon farming industry, an important aspect of the efforts made is the development of more sustainable production methods. There is a need to from Innovation Norway. That is often conduct more research, further testing of new technologies, and documentation and sharing of the bottleneck for these projects.” results in order to achieve the long-term goal of fully commercialised solutions. The stakeholders that play a key role in this development are technology suppliers and producers supported by Bergny Irene Dahl, government authorities, research institutions, and investors. We identified some barriers to further development and opportunities to overcome them. Manager Environmental Technology Scheme, Innovation Norway Barriers Existing, proven production methods for amending regulations can take years. This development. Innovation requires large salmon farming have been incrementally leads to uncertainty around the profit- and risky investments in research and developed over the past forty years. When ability of new technologies and provides development. The aquaculture industry acquiring production assets, producers little incentive to shift from open pens. consists of many small producers with lit- tend to focus on economic viability. Envi- tle or no funds for research and develop- ronmental externalities are often viewed In addition, public administration of the ment, investment costs are often high, as an issue that must meet government aquaculture industry is fragmented, with and it can take a long time to get past regulations rather than as a factor that many different interests to consider. the first peak in the cost curve to achieve affects the longevity of the industry. Obtaining approval for new sites or for profitability and economies of scale. Accenture divided the main barriers to expanding existing ones can be long and further development within the industry demanding processes. The county councils The Norwegian support system for fund- into five categories. coordinate the reviewal process for new ing is extensive, from basic research to sites, but several other sectoral authori- support for commercialisation of new Regulations and public administration ties are involved in reviewing applications technology.44 Nevertheless, access to of the aquaculture industry for compliance with various guidelines capital beyond financing from such pro- As explained on page 13, current regu- and regulations in areas such as pollution, grammes is generally difficult to acquire. lations are adapted to the use of open animal health and welfare, harbours and The venture capital market in Norway systems. The laws for density, maximum fairways, biodiversity, and spatial plan- is small, and especially the early stage smolt weights and fallowing periods ning. A licence may only be granted if all investment segments are suffering.45 In in saltwater production are mentioned parties involved issue their approval. addition, public funding is spread over as barriers by several new technology many different programmes, so the sys- suppliers because these laws impact the Access to funding for start-up tem can be difficult to navigate and there economy directly. The authorities must technology companies is no responsible authority to coordinate ensure that updated laws are based on Access to financing for new technology the development and qualification of documented research, which means that projects is one of the major barriers to technology.44

30 31 Disagreement between stakeholders Technological immaturity vantages Norway holds. The use of closed Interviews conducted suggest that As many new technologies are in an early systems may enable other countries to “To get a better informed and stakeholders across the industry have phase of development, it is too early to produce salmon more cost-efficiently different, often opposing opinions as to draw any conclusions about long-term than Norway. Another concern is that the nuanced discussion of different what the main industry challenges are, environmental impact or economic sustain- use of closed systems, especially onshore, what the barriers to further develop- ability. In current projects, economic data may affect the brand of salmon produced ment are, and how these should be are often based on estimates, and many in Norwegian fjords and thereby reduce technologies, it is important to overcome. In areas where scientists projects have not yet published their results. the price premium producers can expect disagree, the stakeholders often use in the market. This attitude may impede develop a better knowledge base.” reports that support their view, for Concern that closed systems will harm development of new technologies. example, the degree to which lice and Norway’s competitive advantage Jon Fixdal, Senior Project Manager, escapes have a regulating effect on the Interviews conducted indicate that wild salmon population. Lack of consen- there is some concern in the Norwegian sus is a barrier in itself, as it prevents a aquaculture industry that development of Norwegian Board of Technology focus of efforts. closed systems may harm the natural ad-

Opportunities to overcome barriers “The producers are the main force in Accenture formulated four key enabling enforced and no dispensations be granted One of the areas the authorities should initiatives that can contribute to over- to certain producers because this may af- focus on is reviewing the maximum al- developing the technology further coming barriers and making the industry fect production for neighbouring producers. lowable stocking density to determine more sustainable. The four initiatives are: whether the limit should be increased for The aim for the “green biomass licences” is closed systems. The density regulation is a and in making it sustainable. However, Government regulations to encourage the use of new technologi- major economic restriction and can affect Government regulations are an important cal solutions or methods of operation the business case for many technologies. we see that the rate of technological driver of development of new technology. which contribute to reducing the envi- More knowledge about the relationship To stimulate development of closed and ronmental challenges of escapes and the between fish density and fish welfare development increases if we put offshore systems, it is crucial that regula- spread of lice.47 It is still too early to say – such as water flow, oxygen levels – is tions facilitate development so that, for whether the “green biomass licences” will necessary before new limits for closed example, hatcheries can apply for exemp- prove effective because the application systems can be set.48 pressure on the industry. ” tion from the 250 g weight limit, allowing deadline is October 1st 2013. Assessing the smolt up to 1,000 g.46 Regulations should success of the “green biomass licences” Closed systems both on land and in sea be updated at a faster pace to keep up will be important because they could play are highly relevant for extended smolt Elisabeth Aune, Senior Advisor, with changes in the industry. an important part in stimulating develop- production. As of 2012, it is possible to ment of more sustainable technology. apply for dispensation from the 250 g Sogn and Fjordane County Council There is little incentive for fish farmers with weight limit for smolt in hatcheries on well operated open coastal net pens to take There are many sectoral authorities land and to keep smolt up to 1 kg.11 the risk associated with the transition to involved in administrating the aquaculture The same regulations do not apply for closed systems. Stricter regulation of, for industry. There is need to review not extended smolt production in closed example, lice, escapes, and fallowing in par- only the regulatory framework but also coastal cages. The application process for ticularly exposed areas would force industry the administration of the aquaculture dispensation should be uncomplicated, players to move in a more sustainable industry. A more coordinated and uni- and it should be relatively easy to obtain direction and perhaps look at alternative fied public administration, such as better permission so as to stimulate more test- options to open coastal net pens. The risk is coordination of government supervisory ing of closed technologies in addition to that premature regulations could have the authorities, would make it easier for indus- producing more knowledge about fish undesired effect of inhibiting growth and try players to navigate the system and lead welfare in closed systems. development. Regardless of whether or not to shorter processing times. This would more stringent requirements are introduced, facilitate establishment of new sites and, it is critical that the current regulations be ultimately, stimulate development.

32 33 Financing coordination between them.44 The sup- funding programme aimed at support- One of the major barriers to further port system would be more manageable ing ideas for sustainable development development of new technologies is lack for applicants if there was a responsible within the aquaculture industry. Such of financing. While an extensive support party that had an overview and that a programme could be funded through system provides support for start-up could coordinate the different funding public-private cooperation. Enova is an companies, few schemes are directed programmes. This entity could inform example of a funding programme that has specifically at environmentally sustainable applicants where and how to apply for been successful in increasing environmen- technology in the aquaculture sector, and funding as well as coordinate the applica- tally sustainable projects within energy no governing body exists to coordinate tion process. A more navigable support consumption. Enova focuses on aiding the the funding processes across different system would perhaps encourage more restructuring of energy use, converting to programmes. The Norwegian Board of companies to apply. renewable energy sources, and provid- Technology suggests that the authori- ing financing as well as counselling and ties should review the support systems in In addition to a better overview of the expertise.49 terms of the number of players and the funding programmes, there is need for a

Enova Enova SF was established in 2001 as a public enterprise owned by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. Enova promotes more efficient energy consumption and increased production of “new” renewable energy. Enova has targeted programmes and support schemes in the areas where the greatest effect of saved, converted or generated clean energy can be documented. Enova wants to become the driving force in the comprehensive work to create an energy-efficient Norway. 49

Case 1: Enova

Many of the technologies for closed and can pitch their ideas. These meetings may value chain are also needed. There are few offshore systems are in the early stages of be instigated by, for example, industry arenas in the aquaculture industry where development and are consequently often organisations, governmental institutions networks for cooperation can be formed. in need of seed capital.* In addition to or angel networks. The establishment of Through forming collaborative communi- research grants and the founders them- such gatherings should be considered by ties, industry players could accomplish selves, angel investors represent a typical the Norwegian fish farming industry or- more than they would on their own by source of seed capital. An angel investor ganisations and governmental institutions sharing knowledge and experience and by is often a wealthy individual who provides in order to stimulate funding of salmon using commonly held resources to pursue seed capital in exchange for convertible farming technology start-ups. innovation projects. The overall purpose of debt or ownership equity. Angel investors a community would be to provide “ongo- are often found among a founder’s family *Seed capital is a relatively small long-term ing, trust-based environments where firms or friends and might invest for reasons investment aimed at growing companies in early can share technical and market knowledge stages and often carries high returns at the cost of that go beyond pure monetary returns. significant risk. without fear of exploitation and with the Contact with angel investors is often expectation of common gain.”50 In addi- established through referrals or attend- tion, they could provide an opportunity ance at symposiums. Groups of angels Access to financing is not enough to en- for joint funding of projects and research. are often brought together at meetings sure innovation; expertise and cooperation Such communities could collaborate with where companies seeking seed capital between players in different parts of the research institutions and authorities to ar-

34 35

1. Case 2: The Swan Eco-Label range innovation competitions for sustain- three key areas that lack knowledge about optimal growth, health, and welfare. Closed “Although we make efforts able solutions where the winners receive where research should be focused. systems have a number of advantages, funding from major industry players. This such as the potential to better control the to monitor our suppliers would provide opportunities for start-ups Effects of escaped salmon - There is salmon’s environment with respect to water to receive funding at the same time as the need for more research on the effect of temperature, oxygen levels, and water flow, industry players would strengthen their ef- escaped salmon from fish farms on wild but have other challenges to overcome.54 concerning environmental forts within research and development. The salmon stocks. The Institute of Marine More research is needed to determine,

Optimized Postsmolt Production (OPP) pro- Research has defined escaped salmon as for example, how oxygen, CO2, and higher issues and traceability, we ject is an example of an interdisciplinary a threat to the genetic integrity of the density levels affect the welfare of fish. collaboration where various industry play- wild salmon population. However, there rarely receive enquiries from ers, research institutions and the Research are relatively few empirical studies that Influencing consumer behaviour Council of Norway have come together to evaluate the genetic effects of escaped Consumer demand is a key driver for fund a project and to share expertise and salmon that cross into wild populations.52 sustainable production and development, our guests about those issues.” experience.51 There is a need to quantify cross-breeding as it will force the industry to change and its biological consequences. and also lead to changes in regulations; Independent research for example Safeway and Wholefoods in Silje Steien, within prioritised areas Salmon lice - It is widely agreed that lice USA want sustainably produced seafood.55 In order to increase knowledge, it is impor- has a negative effect on both farmed and Methods for promoting more sustainable Operations Manager, tant that independent research organisa- wild salmon and other salmonids such as consumption include government meas- tions are involved in research projects trout. However, there is still limited regional ures, voluntary initiatives by industry play- and are responsible for publishing results. data on salmon lice infections, uncertainty ers, and campaigns by NGOs. Government Alex Sushi Objective research results will contrib- as to what the maximum sustainable infec- actions to promote sustainable consump- ute to establishing a unified view of the tion pressure is, and to what degree lice tion include performance standards and environmental challenges among industry is a population-regulating factor for wild mandatory labelling, taxes or subsidies, and players. Furthermore, independent research salmon.53 In order to develop more precise public information campaigns.56 Producers organisations would publish results that values, more knowledge about the impact can help consumers make more sustain- could be shared across the industry. of a given infection pressure is needed. able choices through the use of voluntary labelling. Product labelling is most credible It is also important to focus research on Fish welfare - With respect to new tech- when it is verified by a third party, and in areas where the environmental impact is nologies, extensive research and testing the aquaculture industry the Aquaculture expected to be high and where there is a are necessary in order to assess both the Stewardship Council’s certification is one lack of objective data. With more objec- environmental and economic sustainability of several labels.57 A number of Norwegian tive information, it would be possible to of different technologies. There is inad- producers have shown an interest in be- establish a common knowledge platform equate knowledge about what the biologi- coming certified. An alternative to product and to identify where future efforts cal requirements should be for extended labelling is product differentiation through should be focused. We believe there are smolt in closed systems in order to achieve creating a sustainable product brand.

The Swan Eco-Label The Swan logo demonstrates that a product is a good environmental choice, so with the help of eco-labelling consumers can choose the most environmentally friendly products. When new and more sustainable technology is available, they are incorporated into the label’s requirements. An example is how dosage of laundry detergent has decreased since the 1980s and environmentally damaging substances like phosphate have been removed.58

Case 2: The Swan Eco-Label

36 37 Closing remarks and the way forward

Results from the model for environmental impact show that closed systems in general are the most environmentally sustainable technologies, regardless of assumptions for future development. From an environmental perspective, the industry should therefore seek to increase the use of these technologies.

Accenture identified four opportunities (discussed in chapter 3 and 6.1.1) are not not the technologies are environmentally for the industry to overcome the main adapted to extended smolt production and economically sustainable in the long barriers to development of new technolo- does, however, limit the potential of the run. Due to the fact that conditions for gies: government regulation, financing, technology. Projects for extended smolt seawater production are ideal in Norway, independent research within prioritised production in RAS and closed coastal sys- requirements for documented upsides are areas, and influencing the mind of the tems are currently being undertaken both particularly high. consumer. All four opportunities play in Norway and globally. The technological a role in stimulating the rollout of fish and economical results of these projects Accenture believes that viable closed farming projects based on sustainable are not finalised, and it is too early to full-cycle production will rely heavily on technologies. Accenture’s understanding draw definitive conclusions. However, em- insights generated from experimental is that the Norwegian authorities have pirical data from these projects will pro- projects and closed extended smolt pro- the greatest ability to influence these op- vide valuable insights into technological duction. We believe that profitable closed portunities. However initiatives should be and economical parameters for extended full-cycle production, both coastal and launched in collaboration with producers, smolt as well as contribute to knowledge land-based, is not likely to be realised un- industry organisations, and NGO’s. about full-cycle production. Accordingly, til the end of the decade. Viable offshore completing closed production cycles – production is believed to lie even further In the short term particularly for extended smolt produc- into the future. Accenture believes that the greatest tion – and extracting data and insights potential for new technology lies in closed are key objectives for the industry going In order to accelerate this timetable, the technologies applied at the extended forward. Results from the projects will focus for the industry and stakeholders smolt stage* of the production process: provide more knowledge about environ- should be to launch full-cycle closed pro- • Salmon are more vulnerable in the mental and economic impacts, and will duction projects and to leverage insights earlier stages of life and, since closed serve as important input for legislators. from these and comparable projects, technology reduces lice exposure and such as ones for closed extended smolt better controls water quality, it may *200 g–1 kg production. The Norwegian authorities result in lower mortality rates have a key role to play in facilitating • Shorter production time in open net In the long term initiation new projects, and this aspect pens results in more flexibility in oper- It is difficult to foresee how salmon farm- should be considered when the incoming ating seawater biomass licences ing technology will evolve and mature government carry out the new fishery and • Based on our model assumptions, allo- in the long run. A critical factor for the aquaculture strategy after the general cating a share of production to closed success of sustainable technologies is election in 2013. Furthermore, the gov- pens yields environmental benefits documentation of economic feasibility ernment must ensure that the interests of • Allocating the extended smolt stage in and environmental benefits. As argued small actors be taken into consideration closed pens involved less uncertainty above, knowledge about closed coastal in further development of the industry. related to new technologies compared systems and offshore net pens is lim- to full-cycle production ited, whereas knowledge about RAS is somewhat greater due to more projects The fact that current regulations related being undertaken. However, one cannot to density, biomass, and decontamination unequivocally conclude as to whether or

38 39 Sources

1. “Strategy for an environmental sustainable aquaculture industry”, 17. «Grøne kriterium for nye laksekonsesjoner» 32. «Storinvesteringar hos Bremnes Seashore», Bømlo Nytt, 05.11.2012 49. “Organizing Continuous Product Development and Commercialization: The The Norwegian ministry of fisheries and coastal affairs, 2009 Ministery of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs, 04.03.2013 http://www.bomlo-nytt.no/index.cfm?event=doLink&famID=318979&frontFa Collaborative Community of Firms Model”, Charles C. Snow, Øystein D. Fjeld- http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fkd/press-centre/Press-releases/2009/ http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fkd/pressesenter/pressemeldinger/2013/ mID=84484 stad, Christopher Lettl, and Raymond E. Miles, Journal of Product Innovation strategi-for-en-miljomessig-barekraftig-.html?id=552992 grone-kriterium-for-nye-laksekonsesjonar.html?id=715986 Management, 2011

33. Geir-Magne Knutsen, Manager, Bremnes Seashore 2. “Salmon Farming Industry Handbook 2013”, pg 8, Marine Harvest, 2013 18. “Oppdatering - Risikovurdering miljøvirkninger av norsk fiskeoppdrett 2011», 50. «Optimalisert Postsmoltproduksjon», The Food Research Institute http://marineharvest.com/PageFiles/1296/2013%20Salmon%20Handbook%20 pg 35, Institute of Marine Research, 2011 http://www.nofima.no/prosjekt/optimalisert-postsmoltproduksjon 27-04-13.pdf http://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2011/10/risikovurdering_akvakultur_oppdater- 34. «Kartlegging av ulike teknologiske løsninger for å møte de miljømessige ut- ing_300911.pdf/nb-no fordringene i havbruksnæringen», Aarhus et. al, 06.03.2011 Temaside - Rømt fisk og genetisk påvirkning, Institute of Marine Research, 51. «Risikovurdering av norsk fiskeoppdrett», pg 64, Institute of Marine Research 3. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 18, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April 2012 22.08.2012 http://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2013/01/risikovurdering_norsk_fiskeoppdrett_2012_ 35. «Mislykka forsøk med oppdrett til havs», NRK, 02.07.2012, http://www.nrk.no/ http://www.imr.no/temasider/akvakultur/romt_fisk_og_genetisk_pavirkning/nb-no web.pdf/nb-no video/mislykka_forsok_med_oppdrett_til_havs/7D744074661D799A/emne/ 4. “Statistikk for akvakultur - Laks, regnbueørret og ørret”, The Directorate of oppdrettsanlegg/ Fisheries, 06.06.13, http://www.fiskeridir.no/statistikk/akvakultur/statistikk- 19. “Temaside - Lakselus”, Institute of Marine Research, 14.05.2013 52. “Risk assessment – environmental impacts of Norwegian aquaculture” for-akvakultur/laks-regnbueoerret-og-oerret http://www.imr.no/temasider/parasitter/lus/lakselus/nb-no pg 42-45, Institute of Marine research, 2011 36. Geir Spiten, Akvatech http://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2011/08/risk_assessment_engelsk_versjon.pdf/en

5. «Politisk plattform for flertallsregjeringen», pg 23, The Norwegian Government, 20. «Temaside - Rømt fisk og genetisk påvirkning», Institute of Marine Research, 37. «Aquadome», Olav Grønolen, 03.01.2012 2009, http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/SMK/Vedlegg/2009/Ny_politisk_plat- 22.08.2012, http://www.imr.no/temasider/akvakultur/romt_fisk_og_genetisk_ 53. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 47-50, The Norwegian Board of Technology, www.tekna.no/ikbViewer/Content/839996/09%20Olav%20Gr%F8nolen%20 tform_2009-2013.pdf pavirkning/nb-no April 2012 AquaDome%20Presentasjon%203.1.12.pdf

6. “Salmon Farming Industry Handbook 2013”, pg 13, Marine Harvest, 2013, 21. “Lakselusinfeksjonen på vill laksefisk langs norskekysten i 2011”, pg 44, Insti- 54. “Greenpeace Seafood Sustainable Scorecard”, Greenpeace, 2013 38. «Fritt for lakselus i lukket anlegg», Dagens Næringsliv, 05.02.2013 http://marineharvest.com/PageFiles/1296/2013%20Salmon%20Handbook%20 tute of Marine Research, 2012, http://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2012/12/rapport_ www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/media-center/news-releases/Greenpeace-Sea- www.dn.no/forsiden/naringsliv/article2556257.ece 27-04-13.pdf lakselusinfeksjonen_pa_vill_laksefisk_langs_norskekysten_i_2012.pdf/nb-no food-Sustainability-Scorecard/

39. Aquafarm Equipment AS, 2013, www.aquafarm.no 7. “Salmon Farming Industry Handbook 2013”, pg 25, Marine Harvest, 2013, 22. «Ny risikovurdering av norsk oppdrettsnæring», Institute of Marine Research, 55. “Promoting Sustainable Consumption, Good practices in OECD countries”, http://marineharvest.com/PageFiles/1296/2013%20Salmon%20Handbook%20 18.01.2013 http://www.imr.no/nyhetsarkiv/2013/januar/ny_risikovurder- OECD, 2008, www.oecd.org/greengrowth/40317373.pdf 27-04-13.pdf ing_av_norsk_oppdrettsnering/nb-no 40. «Spennende ny horisont i semi-lukket postsmolt-produksjon», Kyst.no, 07.05.12 www.kyst.no/index.php?page_id=95&article_id=94783 56. Aquaculture Stewardship Council, 2013, www.asc-aqua.org 8. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 20, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April 2012 23. «Risikovurdering Norsk Fiskeoppdrett 2012», pg 97, Institute for Marine Research, 2012, http://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2013/01/risikovurdering_norsk_ 41. «Lakselus kan ha vært bestandsregulerende», Institute of Marine Research, 57. Svanemerket (2013) http://www.svanemerket.no fiskeoppdrett_2012_web.pdf/nb-no 9. «FOR 2008-06-17 nr 822: Forskrift om drift av akvakulturanlegg (akvakultur- 20.12.2012, http://www.imr.no/nyhetsarkiv/2012/desember/lakselus_kan_ha_ driftsforskriften)», §55, Norwegian Legislation vert_bestandsreduserende/nb-no 58. We assume that fish mortality is a result of fish welfare, and that low fish http://www.lovdata.no/for/sf/fi/xi-20080617-0822.html#55 24. «Risikovurdering Norsk Fiskeoppdrett 2012», pg 6, Institute of Marine Research, welfare leads to higher death rates compared to when fish welfare is high. 2012, http://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2013/01/risikovurdering_norsk_fiskeopp- 42. “Oppdrett av laks og ørret i lukkede anlegg - forprosjekt”, Sintef, p25 drett_2012_web.pdf/nb-no 10. «Meld. St. 22 (2012-2013) - Melding til Stortinget - Verdens fremste http://www.sintef.no/upload/Fiskeri_og_havbruk/Internasjonalt_ sjømatnasjon” , The Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs, 22.03.2013 RC3%A5dgivning/Lukkede_anlegg_forprosjekt_endelig_med%20endret%20 59. Viral diseases affect mortality and fish welfare for the fish in the farming tabell.pdf system. In addition, the Marine Research Institute states that even though http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fkd/dok/regpubl/stmeld/2012-2013/meld- 25. «Effektiv og bærekraftig arealbruk i havbruksnæringen», pg 14, Gullestad et al., there is uncertainty regarding the risk of infection from farmed salmon to wild st-22-20122013/11.html?id=718722 2011, http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FKD/Vedlegg/Rapporter/2011/Effek- salmon populations, the risk is considered to be low. Our model therefore as- tiv_og_baerekraftig_arealbruk_i_havbruksnaeringen.pdf 43. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 68, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April 2012 sumes that viral diseases mainly affect the fish in the production system, and 11. “FOR 2008-06-17 nr 822: Forskrift om drift av akvakulturanlegg (akvakultur- that virus diseases affects fish welfare. driftsforskriften)”, §40, Norwegian Legislation, 17.08.2008, 26. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 40, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April 2012 44. “Activity Report 2011, Private Equity Funds in Norway, Seed -Venture- Buy http://www.lovdata.no/for/sf/fi/xi-20080617-0822.html#40 Out”, Norwegian Venture Capital Association, 2012 http://www.norskventure.no/userfiles/Activity_report_2011_-__Private_Eq- 27. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 30, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April 2012 12. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 19, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April 2012 uity_Funds_in_Norway__Seed__Venture__Buy_Out.pdf

28. «Marine Harvest, Salmon Farming Industry Handbook 2013», p. 42, Marine 45. «FOR 2008-06-17 nr 822: Forskrift om drift av akvakulturanlegg (akvakultur- 13. “The Seafood Value Chain”, Marine Harvest, 2012 Harvest, 2013, http://marineharvest.com/PageFiles/1296/2013%20Salmon%20 driftsforskriften)», §55, Norwegian Legislation, http://www.lovdata.no/for/sf/fi/ http://marineharvest.com/en/Seafood-Value-Chain1/ Handbook%2027-04-13.pdf xi-20080617-0822.html#55

14. «Risikovurdering norsk fiskeoppdrett 2012», pg 5, Institute of Marine Research, 29. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 37-38, The Norwegian Board of Technology, 46. «Forskrift om tildeling av løyve til havbruk med matfisk av laks, aure og regn- 2013, http://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2013/01/risikovurdering_norsk_fiskeopp- April 2012 drett_2012_web.pdf/nb-no bogeaure i sjøvatn i 2013», Norwegian Authorities, 2013 http://www.regjeringen.no/nn/dep/fkd/Dokument/lover-og-reglar/Forskrift- 30. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 45, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April er/2013/forskrift-om-tildeling-av-loyve-til-havb.html?id=731666 15. “Lus og rømming ødelegger”, Institute of Marine Research, 12.01.2011 2012 http://www.imr.no/nyhetsarkiv/2011/januar/lus_og_romming_odelegger/nb-no 47. «Fremtidens Lakseoppdrett», pg 50, The Norwegian Board of Technology, April 2012 31. «Kombinert landbasert lakseoppdrett og algeproduksjon», Christian Uhlig, 16. «Bestilling av vurdering i forbindelse med tildeling av tillatelser til akvakultur 03.01.2011, http://www.tekna.no/ikbViewer/Content/839994/07%20Chris- 48. Enova, 2013, www.enova.no av laks, ørret og regnbueørret», Institute of Marine Research, 2009 tian%20Uhlig%20Tekna%203_januar.pdf 2 http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FKD/Vedlegg/Diverse/2009/MTB%20oekn- ing/200900464_D5_V1.pdf 40 41 Appendix

List of acronyms

FSA – Food Safety Authority GDP – Gross domestic product IMR - The Institute of Marine Research LCA – Life cycle assessment MASD – Maximum allowable salmon density NGO – Non-governmental organisation OPP – Optimized Post-smolt Production RAS – Recirculation aquaculture systems WWF - World Wildlife Fund for Nature

List of interviews

# Name Company

1 Elisabeth Aune Sogn and Fjordane County Council 2 Bjørn Bilberg Preline 3 Barry Costa-Pierce University of New England 4 Bergny Irene Dahl Innovation Norway Else Marie Djupevåg 5 Directorate of Fisheries and Henrik Hareide 6 Jon Fixdal Norwegian Board of Technology 7 Inger Fyllingen Norwegian Food Safety Authority 8 Piers Hart WWF UK 9 Inger Jakobsen Standards Norway 10 Bjørn Vegard Løvik Atlantic Sapphire 11 Geir Magne Knutsen Bremnes Seashore 12 Endre Korsøen Hordaland County Council 13 Anders Næss AkvaFuture 14 Tom N. Pedersen County Governor of Hordaland 15 Ole Fredrik Skulstad Green Marine 16 Rikard Slaski Scottish Aquaculture Research Forum 17 Geir Spiten Akvatech 18 Silje Steien Alex Sushi 19 Erik Sterud Norwegian Salmon Rivers 20 Harald Sveier Lerøy Seafood Group ASA 21 Ørjan Tveiten Marine Harvest 22 Bent Urup Kruger Kaldnes AS 23 Aina Valland Norwegian Seafood Federation 24 Soleig Willis Salmon Group

42 43 Table of international projects Main players Nature of Stages Documented results, energy Location Type involved operation of production usage and interesting notes

Table of international projects for: Land-based closed containment with recirculation aquaculture systems (RAS) 1. Land-based recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) 2. Open containment systems with offshore net pens 9. Langsand Laks • Land-based • Atlantic Sapphire AS Commercial Full-cycle: from egg • 1000T per year in its current phase; 3. Closed containment systems with coastal cages AS, Hvide Sande, RAS (former organic salmon to 4.5kg adult next phase to yield 3000T per year Denmark farmers) • Water consumption is 250l per kg • Polar Salmon AS (pro- of fish produced cessor) • No use of antibiotics • Aquapri AS • Low mortality Main players Nature of Stages Documented results, energy Location Type • Steensgaard Holding AS • No diseases or parasites involved operation of production usage and interesting notes • Sohn Invest ApS • Low power consumption: less than • Preben Kristensen 1.3kW per kg of fish produced Land-based closed containment with recirculation aquaculture systems (RAS) • Thue Holm • Stakeholders include 36. Atlantic Sapphire

1. ‘Namgis First • Land-based, • K’udas Limited Partner- Commercial From smolt to market • 3 cohorts per year. Fish harvested Nation’s Closed closed RAS ship (built and operates), size: 100g to 5-6 kg every 2 weeks. 10. Odense • Land-based • Billund Aquaculture Commercial Broodstock, hatchery, • Up to 1.3 million fish per year Containment ‘Namgis First Nation • Peak density will be 90 kg/m3, Produktions RAS (build) smolt • Bulit in 2000 Salmon Farm, • SOS Marine Conserva- producing 470 MT annually Højskol, Odense, Vancouver, Brit- tion Foundation (project • 98% of water is recirculated Denmark ish Columbia, partner), • This is the first module of five Canada • Tides Canada (project module farms being built on 11. Danish • Land-based • Billund Aquaculture Commercial • Target projection: 60T per cycle advisor) Northern Vancouver Island. The Salmon, Hirt- RAS (build) Biomar (feeds) • 95% water reuse combined productivity of all 5 shals, Denmark • AquaPri (processing and will be 2000-3000 MT/year). sales) • Slightly saline groundwater from • Denmark Technical Uni- wells is disinfected on entry and versity (management) heated to 10 - 15°C. • Orbicon (regulatory due • Capital cost $8 million diligence) • 2-stage disease screen • RK Plastics (bio-filter • Multiple energy conservation elements) measures • North Sea Science Park • Hjørring Municipality 2. Sustainable • Land-based Commercial Smolt to market size • Not yet built • Ministry of Food, Ag- Blue, Centre RAS (3.5 to 4kg) in 12 • Projected to produce 375 to 500T riculture and Fisheries’ Burlington, Nova months per year Green Development Scotia, Canada and Demonstration Programme

3. AquaGen • Land-based Billund Aquaculture (build) Commercial Spawning adult • Broodstock facility producing Chile S.A., RAS 180T of smolt per batch 12. Stiftung • Land-based • Billund Aquaculture Commercial Spawning adults, • Hatchery and Broodstock system Puerto Varas, Wasserlauf RAS (build) fry (5g) • 150,000 fish per year Chile NRW, Sankt Au- gustin, Germany

4. Salmon Chai- • Land-based Billund Aquaculture (build) Commercial Spawning adult, • Broodstock and smolt Production cas S.A, Puerto RAS smolt System. 120 million eyed eggs 13. NIRI Ireland, • Land-based Commercial Smolt, but has had • Sister operation of 44. NIRI Montt, Chile and 4 million smolt per year Cork, Ireland RAS production up to Ireland 2.8 kg in 2002

5. Salmones • Land-based Billund Aquaculture (build) Commercial Smolt to market size: • 8T per year 14. Fishfrom, • Land-based Fishfrom (operator) R&D Full-cycle • Not yet built Río Coihue S.A, RAS from 100g to 4.5kg Tayinloan, Scot- RAS • Target projection of 800,000T Maullín, Chile land, UK per year • Planned production start in 2014 6. NeoSalmon, • Land-based Salmon Rio Ciohue S.A; Commercial Full-cycle up to • Not yet built • Density of 50kg per m2 Los Lagos, Chile RAS Reciculatrionchilde Ltda market size (4.5kg) • No antibiotics to be used • Power from solar and hydro, even- • Mortality rate expected at 7% tually maybe factory’s own waste • Owned by 11. Salmones Río • Feeds will be from own supply of Coihue S.A specially farmed ragworm • Onsite water recycling 7. Gobi Desert, • Land-based • Billund Aqua Culture Commercial • 1000T per year • Currently already supplies the Fat China RAS (build) • To obtain water farmers have Duck restaurant • Chinese government drilled a 70 m deep well. Recy- • Plans to build 2 more in UK, in cling technology used in land- talks to build in 3 other countries based plants, make sure they use (New Zealand, USA, Romania) relatively little water. • Borders a Site of Special Scien- tific Interest

8. Yantai Salmon • Land-based • Shandong Oriental Commercial • 700T per year; projected to Farm, Shandong RAS Ocean Sci-Tech Co. increase to 1400T per year Province, China (owner and facilitator); • First Atlantic salmon harvested in AquaOptima (build); 2011 at 1.5 kg • Ocean Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Science

44 45 Main players Nature of Stages Documented results, energy Main players Nature of Stages Documented results, energy Location Type Location Type involved operation of production usage and interesting notes involved operation of production usage and interesting notes

Land-based closed containment with recirculation aquaculture systems (RAS) Sea-based closed containment systems with coastal cages

15. SweetSpring, • Land-based • Aquaseed (through Commercial Smolt to market • 100T per year 22. Middle Bay • Solid-walled • AgriMarine (build and R&D and • The Chinook salmon grown here Washington, RAS acquisistion of Domsea size: 60g to 3kg in 8 • 40L of new water used per kg of feed Demonstration floating tanks facilities provider) showcase have been shown to have a USA Farms) months • 100% system volume replace- Farm, Campbell • Middle Bay Sustainable particular resistance to sea lice • Gordon and Betty Moore ment each day River, Middle Aquaculture Institute compared with other species of Foundation • All organic wastes are removed Bay, Canada • Sustainable Develop- salmon mechanically in settling ponds ment Technology • The floating tank system really before the majority of the water Canada does nothing to stop disease and re-enters the system • Gordon and Betty Moore parasite interactions between • No antibiotics, pesticides or harsh Foundation wild and farmed fish. The tank chemicals used • David Suzuki Founda- is open to the ocean at the top • There has never been a major tion; Living Oceans and below. The risk still exists to disease outbreak Society; the Coast transmit pathogens between wild • Produce is purchased almost Sustainable Trust; the and farmed fish. exclusively by Overwaitea Food Georgia Strait Alliance • Farm production currently sus- Group, a company that owns pended at Middle Bay, pilot tank several grocery chains through dismantled due to storm damage, British Columbia and Alberta operations to be resumed TBA • SweetSpring salmon was the first farmed salmon to receive a ‘Best 23. Near the city • Stream fed • AgriMarine (build and Commercial Juveniles and small • 500 metric T per year, with plans Choice’ ranking by the Monterey Bay of Benxi, Liaon- closed con- facilities provider) fish (2.5kg) for increase Aquarium’s Seafood Watch program ing Province, tainment • Benxi City • Stream-fed closed containment • Won an award for environmental China system in Guanmenshan Reser- innovation from the Association voir: floating tanks outfitted with of Washington Businesses. low-pressure pumping systems • Essentially a joint venture with • Water levels at the firm’s Benxi 37. Teton Fisheries LLC reservoir base have proven inadequate, creating problems in 16. Atlantic • Land-based Main shareholder Alsco AS R&D Full-cycle • Target production of 16,000T summer when the temperature Sapphire, mid- RAS per year rises. Atlantic, USA • This project owns a stake in 23. • Low water levels contribute to Langsand Laks AS disease and health issues. Hence the firm has sourced new sites 17. Teton Fisher- • Land-based • Miller Hutterite Colony Commercial Full-cycle up to • 90% or more of well water is along the North Korean border, ies LLC, Choteau, RAS (founder, owner, facili- 2.5/3 kg filtered and reused though Buchanan declined to say Montana, USA tator) • Ranked ‘Super Green’ by Seafood how many new sites are under • SweetSpring Salmon Watch development. (joint venture) • No diseases since opening • China’s first and only closed con- • Essentially a joint venture with tainment Chinook or King salmon 15. SweetSpring from Canadian ova • Sister facility is 18. Hill Fisheries LLC 24. British • Floating • Agrimarine Commercial • Agrimarine Industries Inc is 18. Hill Fisheries • Land-based • East End Hutterite Commercial Full-cycle up to • Sister facility is 37. Teton Fisher- Columbia, closed Industries Inc installing 12,000 cubic meters LLC, Havre, RAS Colony 2.5/3 kg ies LLC Canada containment of floating closed containment Montana, USA tankage tankage at the West Coast Fish Culture Steelhead farm in British Columbia, Canada. 19. The Conser- • Land-based • Atlantic Salmon Federa- R&D Extended smolt to • 12-month outgrow trial • Two different tanks styles are be- vation Fund’s RAS tion (ASF) harvest size: 340g • Water recirculation (4800L/min) ; ing evaluated including the latest Freshwater • The Conservation Fund’s to 4-4.6kg within 99.8% reuse generation of 3000 cubic meter Institute, Shep- Freshwater Institute approximately 12 • 99% of fish wastes and phospho- floating closed containment tanks herdstown, West • Canada’s Department of months rus reclaimed for fertiliser which embody the lessons learned Virginia, USA Fisheries and Oceans • Total loss to mortality (3.9%), culls from both previous land based (5.6%), and jumpers (1.9%) ac- installations, the companies ex- counted for 11.4% of the population perience at its ocean test site and • No obligate pathogens, sea lice, its operational farm in China. or Kudoa were detected in the • This installation is planned to be fish or the system. phase one of a larger project to • No fish were vaccinated. No anti- prove and to continue to improve biotic, pesticide, or harsh organic the company’s technology on a chemotherapeutants were used. commercial scale at an active farm in North America. 20. BDV SAS, • Land-based Eco Farms AS Commercial Up to market size: • Not yet built – approved and Normandy, [undeter- 4-6kg awaiting construction France mined] • Technology provided by the Norwe- gian company Eco Farms AS, with both mechanical and the biological filter in the middle of the tank

21. NIRI Poland, Land-based • Sister operation of 30. NIRI Szczecin, Poland [undetermined] Ireland

46 47 Location Source Location Source

1. ‘Namgis First 1) «‘Namgis Closed Containment Salmon Farm», ‘Namgis website http://www.namgis.bc.ca/CCP/Pages/default.aspx ; 2) «‘Namgis Closed 15. SweetSpring, 1) «SweetSpring», SweetSpring website, http://sweetspringsalmon.com ; 2) «Overwaitea Food Group closing the loop on farmed salmon», Nation’s Closed Containment Salmon Farm General Project Backgrounder», ‘Namgis website, 16.04.2013, http://www.namgis.bc.ca/CCP/Documents/Pro- Washington, USA David Suzuki Foundation, 21.04.2010, http://www.davidsuzuki.org/media/news/2010/04/media-advisory-dsf-and-overwaitea-to- Containment ject%20Backgrounder%202013-04-17.pdf announce-sale-of-super-green-salmon ; 3) «Salmon farming may be a good idea after all», David Suzuki Foundation, 30.04.2010, http:// Salmon Farm, www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2010/04/salmon-farming-may-be-a-good-idea-after-all ; 4) «SweetSpring Salmon/Aqua- Vancouver, British Seed Corporation: Reconciling Sustainability with Profitability», Kimberly Irwin, http://www.seachoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/ Columbia, Canada SweetSpring-Salmon-Profile.pdf ; 5) «AquaSeed’s SweetSpringTM Salmon», Per Heggelund and Jim Terry, 26.09.2011, http://tidescanada. org/wp-content/uploads/files/salmon/workshop-sept-2011/Per_Heggelund_Jim_Terry_-_Aquaseeds_Sweetspring_Salmon.pdf 2. Sustain- 1) «Developments in Land-Based Closed-Containment System for Fish Production», Steven Summerfelt, 10.10.2012, http://0101.nccdn. able Blue, Centre net/1_5/022/0a8/2c2/01-Summerfelt_Developments.pdf ; 2) «The Sustainable Blue Project», Jeremy Lee, Sustainable Blue, 5.11.2012, 16. Atlantic 1) «Atlantic Sapphire Presentation», Thue Holm, 05.11.2012, http://tidescanada.org/wp-content/uploads/files/salmon/workshop- Burlington, Nova http://tidescanada.org/wp-content/uploads/files/salmon/workshop-nov-2012/D1_-_7_Jeremy_Lee_Sustainable_Blue.pdf ; 3) «The Sus- Sapphire, mid- sept-2011/Thue_Holm_-_Atlantic_Sapphire_Aquaculture_Innovation.pdf ; 2) «Atlantic Sapphire», Atlantic Sapphire website, http://www. Scotia, Canada tainable Blue», Sustainable Blue website, http://www.sustainableblue.com/ Atlantic, USA atlanticsapphire.com ; 3) «Atlantic Sapphire», Twitter, https://twitter.com/AtlSapphire

3. AquaGen Chile 1) «Reference List – July 2013», Billund Aquaculture (direct correspondence), 22.07.2013 ; 2) Correspondence with Marcelo Varela, Bil- 17. Teton Fisher- 1) «Developments in Land-Based Closed-Containment System for Fish Production», Steven Summerfelt, 10.10.2012, http://0101.nc- S.A., Puerto Varas, lund Aquaculture, 25.07.2013 ; 3) «AquaGen History», AquaGen website, http://aquagen.no/en/about-aquagen/history/ ies LLC, Choteau, cdn.net/1_5/022/0a8/2c2/01-Summerfelt_Developments.pdf ; 2) «High Plains Coho», John G. Nickum for Aquaculture North America, Chile Montana, USA 19.09.2011, http://www.aquaculturenorthamerica.com/2011/09/19/high-plains-coho

4. Salmon Chaicas 1) «Reference List – July 2013», Billund Aquaculture (direct correspondence), 22.07.2013 ; 2) Correspondence with Bjarne Hald Olsen, 18. Hill Fisheries 1) «Developments in Land-Based Closed-Containment System for Fish Production», Steven Summerfelt, 10.10.2012, http://0101.nc- S.A, Puerto Montt, Billund Aquaculture, 25.07.2013 LLC, Havre, Mon- cdn.net/1_5/022/0a8/2c2/01-Summerfelt_Developments.pdf ; 2) «High Plains Coho», John G. Nickum for Aquaculture North America, Chile tana, USA 19.09.2011, http://www.aquacare.com/wp-content/themes/aqua/images/ANAhighplainscoho.pdf

5. Salmones 1) «Reference List – July 2013», Billund Aquaculture (direct correspondence), 22.07.2013 ; 2) «Salmones Rio Coihue», Salmones Rio 19. The Conserva- 1) «Environmentally Sustainable Salmon Dinner A Success», PRWEB, 03.06.2013, http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/6/ Río Coihue S.A, Coihue website, http://www.salmonesriocoihue.cl/index.html (Partial translation via Google) tion Fund’s Fresh- prweb10790682.htm ; 2) «Landbased Aquaculture», Atlantic Salmon Federation, http://asf.ca/landbased-aquaculture_1.html ; 3) Maullín, Chile water Institute, «Towards a Sustainable Land-based Closed Containment Aquaculture System», Atlantic Salmon Federation, http://0101.nccdn. Shepherdstown, net/1_5/0b6/1a8/270/closed-containmentbackgrounder.pdf ; 3) «Freshwater Growout Trial of St John River Strain Atlantic Salmon in 6. NeoSalmon, Los 1) «Developments in Land-Based Closed-Containment System for Fish Production», Steven Summerfelt, 10.10.2012, http://0101.nccdn. West Virginia, a Commercial-scale, Land-based, Closed-containment System», Summerfelt et al, 2013, http://www.conservationfund.org/wp-content/ Lagos, Chile net/1_5/022/0a8/2c2/01-Summerfelt_Developments.pdf ; 2) «NeoSalmon», NeoSalmon website, http://www.neosalmon.com (Partial USA uploads/2013/03/FI-ASF_Final-Report_March-20131.pdf ; 4) «Progress Update on Two Atlantic Salmon Growout Trials in Freshwater translation via Google) Closed- Containment Systems at the Freshwater Institute», Steven Summerfelt, 26.09.2011, http://tidescanada.org/wp-content/uploads/ files/salmon/workshop-sept-2011/Steve_Summerfelt_-_Progress_Update_on_Two_Atlantic_Salmon_Growout_Trials_in_Freshwater_ Closed-Containment_Systems_at_FI.pdf 7. Gobi Desert, 1) «Land-based Salmon Production in China’s Gobi Desert», Lykkegaard AS, 03.06.2013, http://lykkegaard-as.com/News.aspx?Action=1& China NewsId=77&M=NewsV2&PID=43 ; 2) «Kina skal produsere laks i ørkenen», ‘Namgis website, 06.10.2012, http://www.namgis.bc.ca/CCP/ Documents/News%20items%20closed%20containment%20general/salmon%20in%20the%20sahara.pdf (Translation via Google) 20. BDV SAS, Nor- 1) «Salmon Aquaculture Solutions: Use of Closed Tank Technologies for Salmon Farming», David Suzuki Foundation, 2010, http://fair- mandy, France questions.typepad.com/files/dsf-8-salmon-aquaculture-solutions-ao3feb2010.pdf ; 2) «Developments in Land-Based Closed-Containment System for Fish Production», Steven Summerfelt, 10.10.2012, http://0101.nccdn.net/1_5/022/0a8/2c2/01-Summerfelt_Developments. 8. Yantai Salmon 1) «Developments in Land-Based Closed-Containment System for Fish Production», Steven Summerfelt, 10.10.2012, http://0101.nccdn. pdf ; 3) «Global Update», Steven Summerfelt, 15.05.2012, http://tidescanada.org/wp-content/uploads/files/salmon/workshop-may-2012/ Farm, Shandong net/1_5/022/0a8/2c2/01-Summerfelt_Developments.pdf ; 2) «China firm cultivating salmon for live sales», Mark Godfrey, 13.03.2013 D1-8_Global_Update_re_Closed-Containment_Production_of_Salmon.pdf Province, China http://www.seafoodsource.com/newsarticledetail.aspx?id=19923 21. NIRI Poland, 1) «Company Story», Niri website, http://niri.com/about-us/company-story 9. Langsand Laks 1) «Future Trends in Recirculation Technology for Sustainable Fish Production», Marcelo Varela, Billund Aquaculture, 06-09.11.2011, Szczecin, Poland AS, Hvide Sande, http://www.gaalliance.org/update/GOAL11/BILLUND.pdf ; 2) «Langsand Laks», Langsand Laks website, http://www.langsandlaks.dk ; 3) 22. Middle Bay 1) «Middle Bay - Canada», AgriMarine website, http://agrimarine.com/projects/canada-middlebay ; 2) «Agrimarine Middle Bay Closed Denmark «Langsand Laks AS», Alsco website, http://www.alsco.no/investments/langsand-laks-as Demonstration Farm, Containment Salmon Farm», Coastal Alliance for Aquaculture Reform, 05.2011, http://agrimarine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/ Campbell River, Mid- AgriMarine-CAAR-Support-Letter-May-2011.pdf ; 3) «RIP Agrimarine», Salmon Farm Science blog, 12.09.2012, http://salmonfarmscience. 10. Odense 1) «Reference List – July 2013», Billund Aquaculture (direct correspondence), 22.07.2013 dle Bay, Canada com/2012/09/12/rip-agrimarine ; 4) «Corporate Presentation Q2 2013», Agrimarine website, 2013, http://agrimarine.com/wp-content/up- Produktions loads/2013/06/FSH-Corp-Presentation-Q2-2013.pdf Højskol, Odense, 23. Near the city 1) «Benxi Farm - China», Agrimarine website, http://agrimarine.com/projects/china-benxi ; 2) «Agrimarine Expands Salmon Production in Denmark of Benxi, Liaoning China», The Fish Site News Desk, 25.07.2011, http://www.thefishsite.com/fishnews/15259/agrimarine-expands-salmon-production-in-china Province, China ; 3) «Agrimarine Salmon Targets China», Mark Godfrey for SeafoodSource, 03.01.2013, http://www.seafoodsource.com/newsarticledetail. 11. Danish 1) «Developments in Land-Based Closed-Containment System for Fish Production», Steven Summerfelt, 10.10.2012, http://0101.nccdn. aspx?id=18986 Salmon, Hirtshals, net/1_5/022/0a8/2c2/01-Summerfelt_Developments.pdf ; 2) «Salmon farming comes ashore», Line Reeh for DTU Aqua, 09.03.2011, 24. British Columbia, 1) Geir Spiten, Akvatech Denmark http://www.aqua.dtu.dk/english/News/2011/03/110309_salmon-breeding-comes-ashore Canada

12. Stiftung 1) «Reference List – July 2013», Billund Aquaculture (direct correspondence), 22.07.2013 Wasserlauf NRW, Sankt Augustin, Germany

13. NIRI Ireland, 1) «Company Story», Niri website, http://niri.com/about-us/company-story ; 2) «Niri Seafood Ireland Ltd – Onshore Salmon Farming Cork, Ireland Facility EIS», Scoping Document – Onshore Salmon Farming Facility EIA Bantry, 05.2012, http://bantryblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/ ccs_proposal_26april12.pdf

14. Fishfrom, 1) «Could Scottish salmon farming be transformed by moving to dry land?», Severin Carrell for The Guardian, 17.12.2012, http://www. Tayinloan, Scot- guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/dec/17/scottish-salmon-fishing ; 2) «FishFrom to lodge plans for world’s largest on-shore fish farm», land, UK FishUpdate.com, 16.01.2013, http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/18860 ; 3) «FishFrom Brochure», FishFrom website, 13.03.2013, http://www.fishfrom.com/index.php/fishfrom-documents/fishfrom/11-fishfrom-brochure/file

48 49 Table of Norwegian projects Main players Nature of Stages Documented results, energy Location Type involved operation of production usage and interesting notes Table of Norwegian projects for: 1. Land-based recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) Land-based closed containment with recirculation aquaculture systems (RAS) 2. Open containment systems with offshore net pens 3. Closed containment systems with coastal cages 33. Fjæra • Land-based • Marine Harvest Commercial Smolt • 7.5 million smolt per year RAS (Partly ap- • Department of environment has ap- proved) proved

Main players Nature of Stages Documented results, energy 34. Stong- • Land-based • Marine Harvest Commercial Smolt • 7.5 million smolt per year Location Type involved operation of production usage and interesting notes fjorden RAS (Seeking ap- • The community is criticizing the plans proval at the that will include severe changes to moment) the shoreline where the facility will Land-based closed containment with recirculation aquaculture systems (RAS) be located

25. Kråkvåg Land-based • GRØMI AS (Project owner) Commercial Full-cycle • Grømi is prepared to invest 50-60 Sea-based open containment systems with offshore net pens closed • AquaOptima AS (Not started) million NOK containment • SINTEF Fiskeri og Havbruk • Production target of 20 000 ton AS • Estimated 1 NOK per kg in energy 35. Kristian- • Offshore • Lerøy Hydrotech (develop- R&D Smolt to harvest • Cancelled in 2011 after a storm • APS Automasjon AS costs sund open con- ment) caused severe damage to it • ITT Flygt AS tainment • AquaCulture Engineer- ing AS 36. No loca- • Offshore, • Ocean globe R&D (con- • Den første prototypen var for svak. tion submersible cept stage) • The OceanGlobe project has now been 26. Askøy • Land-based • Marine Harvest Commercial Full-cycle • Planned location is a quarry that will net pen fully financed, and can therefore be RAS • NorStone AS (current (not started) be 20 meters below sea level moved on to full-scale testing. operator of the quarry) • The city council is resisting the • A 40,000 cubic metre facility will lowering of the ground level and the now be built and tested in one of the project is therefore on hold world’s toughest marine environments • If realized, it will be one of the largest land-based aquaculture facilities Sea-based closed containment systems with coastal cages

27. Øklandsvåg • Closed • Bremnes seashore Commercial Pre-harvest • The fish goes straight from well boat 37. Lamhol- • Sea-based • AkvaDesign AS (develop- R&D • Full-cycle • No lice registered land-based • Innovasjon Norge (financial (Testing will to land-based waiting containment men, Brøn- closed con- ment) finish autumn • Same growth as open containment waiting support) commence • Cold water pumped from 70-80 nøysund tainment. • Norsk Havbrukssenter 2013 • Lower mortality contain- in 2014, meters depth • Flexible (operation) • Large smolt • No escapes ment commercial • Increased hygiene control walls • Innovasjon Norge completed • 5-7kW per hour for 300 ton fish a in 2015) • Increased fish health year • 1.5 NOK per kg fish (power and oxygen) 28. Barstadvik • Land-based • Profunda AS (operation and Broodstock • Have previously produced cod and RAS owner) (from egg to 10- halibut in the same facility 38. Tørvikbygd • Sea-based • Preline (development) • R&D Extended smolt • The water is pumped from 25-30 • Utilizing • Lerøy (Main customer and 15 kg) closed con- • Lerøy Vest • Com- (850-1000 gram) meters depth high quality collaboration partner) tainment • Innovasjon Norge mercial • Lice only during loss of power groundwa- • Horizon- project is • Same energy cost apart from ad- ter 30 tal pipes com- ditional 0.1 NOK per fish for stream meters floating at menced creation below the the water • Feces transportation is still an issue bottom of surface. the sea 39. Dirdal • Half-sphere • EFAF AS (development) R&D Smolt (300-400 • No escapes 29. Kårstø • Land-based • Marine Harvest R&D (con- Extended smolt • Utilizes pre-heated water from nearby shaped • EWOS Innovation (opera- gram) to harvest • No lice RAS cept stage) (up to 500 gram) gas facility closed tion) during test • Same quality as wild salmon contain- • Energy costs: 1 NOK per kg fish 30. Florø • Land-based • Green Marine Commer- Extended smolt • 2% mortality ment made RAS • Ecofarm (supplier of tech- cial (Tests (up to 1 kg) • Estimated energy cost: 2,55 NOK with glass nology) have been per kg reinforced • Innovasjon Norge conducted, plastic awaiting (GRP) permissions) 40. Skånevik • Sea-based • Aquafarm Equipment R&D (Not Extended smolt • The world’s largest sea-based closed 31. Belsvik, • Land-based • Lerøy Midnor Commercial Smolt • Escape proof (Eldøyene) closed con- (development) started, containment Hemne RAS • No contact with external environment tainment • Marine Harvest (operation) • 65 million NOK is allocated to the • One of the • Expected to cost ~350 million NOK testing will system • HighComp (producer of commence project world’s larg- made with walls) est smolt GRP Autumn facilitites • Four pumps 2013) (11000m2) will ensure 32. Steinsvika • Land-based • Marine Harvest Commercial un- Smolt Expected to cost ~200 million NOK all the RAS der construction water is (finish 2014 or replaced 2015) every 70 minutes

50 51 Main players Nature of Stages Documented results, energy Location Source Location Type involved operation of production usage and interesting notes 25. Kråkvåg 1) http://www.tekna.no/ikbViewer/Content/839994/07%20Christian%20Uhlig%20Tekna%203_januar.pdf 2) Interview with Ole Fredrik Sea-based closed containment systems with coastal cages Skulstad

26. Askøy 1) http://marineharvest.com/no/Marine-Harvest-Norge/Media/Aktuelt/Vil-utforske-oppdrett-pa-Mjolkevikvarden/ ; 2) http://www.tv2.no/ 41. Bergen, Sea-based • Marine Harvest (project R&D Smolt to Extended • 25 million NOK is allocated to this nyheter/innenriks/flytter-oppdrettsanlegg-paa-land-3672703.html 3) Interview with Ørjan Tveiten Sunndalsøra closed con- owner) smolt (1kg) project over three years (optimized tainment • Lerøy SG • The aim is to prolong the time spent postsmolt • Grieg Seafood in closed containment to prevent 27. Øklandsvåg 1) http://www.bomlo-nytt.no/index.cfm?event=doLink&famID=318979&frontFamID=84484 2)Interview with Geir Magne Knutsen production) • Smøla Klekkeri diseases and escapes • Norsk Forskningsråd 28. Barstadvik 1) http://www.norskfisk.no/Pdf/nf513.pdf (Financing) • Agrimarine (Akvatech) 29. Kårstø 1) http://marineharvest.com/no/Marine-Harvest-Norge/Media/Aktuelt/Vurderer-lenger-periode-med-lukket-produksjon/ ; 2) Interview with Ørjan Tveiten 42. Trondheim Closed flexible • Norges Forskningsråd, R&D Closed flexible • Testing of external sea loads and cages (CFC) Havbruks-programmet cages (CFC) offers internal hydraulics on small scale 30. Florø 1) www.njff.no/portal/pls/portal/.../1/45123020.PPT • Flere partnere inkl. SINTEF a route for devel- prototypes Fiskeri og havbruk, NTNU, oping closed fish • 5 year project, 01.01.2012 - US Naval Academy, Uni- production sys- 31.12.2016 31. Belsvik, 1) http://blogg.smn.no/2013/06/et-av-verdens-storste-settefiskanlegg/ 2) Interview with Ørjan Tveiten versity of New Hampshire, tems (CFPS) that Hemne Aqualine, Botngaard, Smøla might be faster Settefisk og klekkeri, Osland than developing 32. Steinsvika 1) http://www.morenytt.no/nyheiter/article1201394.ece 2) Interview with Ørjan Tveiten fiskeoppdrett, Lingalaks new CFPS in rigid m.fl. material 33. Fjæra 1) http://www.marineharvest.com/en/Marine-Harvest-Norge/Media/Aktuelt/Miljoverndepartementet-sier-ja-til-anlegg-i-Etne/ 2) Inter- view with Ørjan Tveiten 43. No location Sea-based • Mood Harvest R&D (con- • Reasoning: Decommissioned floating closed cept stage) vessels have most of the prerequisites containment for an aquaculture facility 34. Stongfjorden 1) http://gustavskaar.blogspot.se/2013/03/stor-sak-i-stongfjorden.html 2) http://www.radgivende-biologer.no/uploads/Rapporter/1291. on decommis- • Currently developing a fish farm with pdf ; 2) Interview with Ørjan Tveiten sioned float- capacity of 10-15000 ton a year ing vessels • Seeking investors 35. Kristiansund 1)http://www.nrk.no/video/mislykka_forsok_med_oppdrett_til_havs/7D744074661D799A/emne/oppdrettsanlegg/

44. No location Sea-based • Coast Innovation R&D (con- • The concept includes several steel 36. No location closed • Svanøy Havbruk cept stage) containments located on the same (Måløy) containment platform system with • Two central pump stations provide 37. Lamholmen, 1) Interview with Anders Næss 2) www.akvafuture.com rigid steel water Brønnøysund walls 38. Tørvikbygd 1) Interview with Bjørn Billberg 2) http://www.preline.no/default.aspx 45. No location Sea-based • Dr Techn Olav Olsen R&D (con- Extended smolt • Robust material closed • Marine Harvest cept stage) (up to 1 kg) • Low maintenance demand containment • Stabile 39. Dirdal 1)http://www.tekna.no/ikbViewer/Content/839996/09%20Olav%20Gr%F8nolen%20AquaDome%20Presentasjon%203.1.12.pdf 2) http:// system • Chemical processes might reduce pH (Aquadome) www.smolaks.no/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/laks21.pdf Concrete walls on surface • Concluded that it would be too 40. Skånevik 1) http://www.sunnhordland.no/article/20130418/NYHENDE/130419798 2) http://www.sunnhordland.no/article/20130702/NY- expensive as of today (Eldøyene) HENDE/130709943

46. No location Sea-based • Ecomerden AS R&D (con- • Sparsely mentioned solution except 41. Bergen, 1) http://www.nofima.no/prosjekt/optimalisert-postsmoltproduksjon ; 2) http://www.forskningsradet.no/servlet/Satellite?c=Prosjekt&cid= closed cept stage) on homepage Sunndalsøra (op- 1253971359447&lang=no&pagename=ForskningsradetNorsk/Hovedsidemal containment timized postsmolt system with production) flexible walls 42. Trondheim 1)http://www.forskningsradet.no/servlet/Satellite?c=Prosjekt&cid=1253971359280&pagename=havbruk/ 47. No location Closed • Botngaard R&D (con- Extended smolt • Potentially shorten the time in open Hovedsidemal&p=1226994216935 2)http://www.nofima.no/filearchive/22_onsd_rosten.pdf sea-based • Aqualine cept stage) (800 gram) containment with 8-10 months containment • ITT Flygt • Water is pumped from 20-30 meters 43. No location 1) www.moodharvest.com system with • LiftUP depth both net and • Smøla Klekkeri & Settefisk flexible wall • NOFIMA 44. No location Rosten et al. (2011), Kartlegging av ulike teknologiske løsninger (plastic) • Patogen Analyse 45. No location Rosten et al. (2011), Kartlegging av ulike teknologiske løsninger 48. Middle- Sea-based • Akvatech has a contract Commercial Extended smolt • Last generation of 3000 cubic tanks Norway closed with Smølen • Expected delivery of the first tanks is 46. No location 1) http://www.ecomerden.no/site/ containment Handelskompani AS/Ute AS the spring and autumn 2014 tankage 47. No location 1) http://www.vitaminw.no/kunde/botngaard/FilVedlegg/Nyhetsbrev1.PDF

49. Bindal • Sea-based • AkvaDesign AS • Planned to set out 50 tons in closed 48. Middle- 1) Geir Spiten, Akvatech closed con- (development) tanks during the autumn 2013 Norway tainment • Bindalslaks AS • The project has a time frame of 3 years • Flexible walls 49. Bindal 1) http://www.akvadesign.com/event/doLink/famid/369513

52 53 The environmental model – additional tables and assumptions

Parameters Description Case assumptions: Escapes Related to unforeseen incidences: - System breakdown due to weather conditions - System breakdown due to boat traffic Scenario 1: Open Coastal Net Pens - assumptions - System breakdown due to humans • The fish is transferred to the system when it reaches 100g and stays until it reaches harvest weight Related to planned activities: • The system is close to the shore or in a fjord (not offshore) - Fish stocking operations increase the risk of escapes because there are more manual operations • Net pens are flexible polyethylene meshes - Fish harvesting operations increase the risk of escapes because there are more manual operations • Water, particles and parasites flow unhindered through the net pens Lice Contamination risk for fish inside the system: • Distance to seabed is in line with regulations (water circulation and oxygen levels are not issues) - Ability of system to prevent lice from entering the system - Ease of carrying out lice treatments/medication if lice is present in the system Scenario 2: Closed Coastal Cages - assumptions Contamination risk for fish outside the system: • The fish is transferred to the system when it reaches 100g and stays until it reaches harvest weight - Ability of system to prevent lice from exiting the system • The system is close to the shore or in a fjord (not offshore) Walls are made of impenetrable concrete Fish welfare60 Fish ulceration (Sores): • - Scrape/frictions against the nets/walls can cause ulceration • Water is pumped from 20-30 meters below the surface where there is less lice - Sores can be caused by cold water • Water can only enter or exit through intake/outlet Non-observable fish welfare: • Inlet and outlet water is filtered (fish, particles and parasites cannot enter or exit the system at normal operation) - Fish density in the farming system can affect fish welfare Water temperature is given by water pumped in - Water quality related factors such as water flow, water temperature and oxygen levels affect fish welfare • Viral diseases13 • There is no water recirculation - Fish density can affect the speed of infection • Regulations allow for a higher fish density compared to open systems and oxygen levels are managed to support the higher density - Stress and sores increases the likelihood of infection • Biological material and nutrients are collected and transported to land (but insufficient infrastructure to manage and/or leverage disposal) Climate effects Energy usage: - Water pumping requires energy - Water heating/cooling requires energy Scenario 3: RAS - assumptions Carbon emissions: • The fish is transferred to the system when it reaches 100g and stays until it reaches harvest weight - Operation of system facilities can lead to carbon emissions • The system is placed on land near the shore - Increased need for transportation by well boats, trucks etc. increases carbon emissions • Distance from shore and elevation from sea level affects energy required to pump water Energy producing properties: - Retained biogas can be used as feedstock in biomass power plants or used to generate other sources of energy • Water is pumped from 20-30 meters below the surface where there is less lice • Water temperature can be adjusted Direct pollutants / Intentional pollutants and chemical emissions • 90% of the water is recirculated and reused chemical emissions - Both orally and bath administered delousing substances and medicines can lead to chemical emissions and be poisonous for the • Non-recycled water is pumped from sea environment. • Inlet and outlet water is filtered (fish, particles and parasites cannot enter or exit the system at normal operation) Unintentional pollutants and chemical emissions - Chemical emissions can be caused by copper and other material decompositions from the system • Regulations allow for a higher fish density compared to open systems and oxygen levels can are managed to support - Chemical emissions can be caused by oxidation from the system the higher density - Boats and other equipment can cause fuel and oil emissions • Biological material and nutrients are collected and transported to land (but insufficient infrastructure to manage and/or leverage disposal) Discharges of nutrient Organic substance emissions: salts and organic - Feces, waste feed and filtered mass can be emitted from the system and affect marine life outside the system Scenario 4: Extended smolt - assumptions materials Nutrients emissions: - Phosphorus, nitrogen and other nutrients can be emitted from the system and affect marine life outside the system Phase 1: Closed system in the sea: • The fish is transferred to the system when it reaches 100g and stays until it reaches 1 kg Zoning Sea space • The system is close to the shore or in a fjord (not offshore) - Livestock volume positively affects zoning • In close proximity to the open net pens - Fish density positively affects zoning • Walls are made of impenetrable concrete - Anchoring systems affect the need for sea space - Different anchoring systems require different zoning • Water is pumped from 20-30 meters below the surface where there is less lice - Systems in the sea can cause conflicts of interest with regards to fishermen, boat traffic and other infrastructure in sea and near • Water can only enter or exit through intake/outlet the shoreline • Inlet and outlet water is filtered (fish, particles and parasites cannot enter or exit the system at normal operation) Onshore space • Water temperature is given by water pumped in - For land-based systems livestock volume positively affects zoning - For land-based systems fish density positively affects zoning • There is no water recirculation - Land-based systems can cause conflicts of interest if placed near established infrastructure • Regulations allow for a higher fish density compared to open systems and oxygen levels can are managed to support the higher density Input factors Materials consumed • Biological material and nutrients are collected and transported to land (but insufficient infrastructure to manage and/or leverage in construction - The amount and type of raw materials, semi manufactured goods and sub components required in production of the fish farming disposal) of system system affect resource scarcity and can have an environmental impact Energy consumed - The energy consumed in the production process of the fish farming system can have an indirect impact (electricity consumption) Phase 2: Open system in the sea: and/or direct impact (impact (Co2 emissions) on the environment • The fish is transferred to the system when it reaches 1 kg and stays until it reaches harvest weight • The system is close to the shore or in a fjord (not offshore) • Net pens are flexible polyethylene meshes Note: Feed is not a separate parameter in the model, however environmental externalities related to emitted organic material is covered through teter Discharges • Water, particles and parasites flow unhindered through the net pens of nutrient salts and organic materials, and emissions of medication added to the feed is covered through teter Direct Pollutants/Chemical Emission. Environmental • Distance to seabed is in line with regulations (water circulation and oxygen levels are not issues) externalities related to resource consumption in feed production and economical aspects of feed efficiency is considered out of scope.

54 55 Parameters Weight Open Closed RAS Extended smolt Parameters Weight Open Closed RAS Extended smolt

Escape HIgh 1 4 5 2 Direct Medium 1 3 4 2 pollutants / - Many escape incidences + Impenetrable walls and + The system is placed + Same as closed coastal in the past secured filtering systems onshore (no currents, system up top 1kg chemicals - High risk of lice means + Less risk of lice means + Less risk of lice means + Same as closed coastal - System relatively prevent escapes little or no risk related to (reduced time in open more use of drugs and less use of medication and less use of medication and system up top 1kg sensitive to weather + The problem of holes weather conditions and nets) delousing substances delousing substances delousing substances (reduced time in open conditions and wear on nets is boat traffic) - Same as open system - Copper used to + Feed containing + Feed containing nets) - High probability of net avoided - Still possible to have after 1kg impregnate the nets medication is collected medication is collected - Same as open system holes - Relative movement structural collapse or + Filtering can reduce + Filtering can reduce after 1kg of water inside the breakdown of water emission of delousing emission of delousing construction can toss fish filtering substances substances out of the system - Some substances can + Not in immediate (Sintef = S) escape through the contact with water - Possible escapes related to water pumping and filtering system, and the - Some substances can construction errors (S) filtering system can break escape through the down filtering system, and the Lice High 1 4 5 2 filtering system can break down - Open nets do not prevent + Water can be filtered and + Water can be filtered + Same as closed coastal lice from entering the disinfected in and out of and disinfected in and out system up top 1kg system the system of the system (reduced time in open Discharges Low 1 4 5 2 - The system uses surface + Water can be pumped + Water can be pumped nets) of nutrient water which contains from depths where there is from depths where there - Same as open system salts and - Open nets does not + Feces, waste feed and + Feces, waste feed and + Same as closed coastal relatively high amounts less lice is less lice after 1kg organic prevent organic and filtered mass can be filtered mass can be system up top 1kg of lice compared to water - Filtering system and water + Only inlet for lice is materials nutrients emissions collected which leads to collected which leads to (reduced time in open from deeper sea levels pumps can break down through the filtered water less nutrients and organic less nutrients and organic nets) - Reduced water flow intake which only counts emissions (if deposited emissions (if deposited - Same as open system (sintef) and increased for 10% of the water elsewhere) elsewhere) after 1kg density can increase consumption +/- Retained biomass can +/- Retained biomass can infection rates - Surface water containing be used to produce energy, be used to produce energy, lice can splash into the but as of today we lack the but as of today we lack the system necessary infrastructure necessary infrastructure + Not in immediate Fish welfare Medium 3 4 4 3 contact with sea water

- Relatively high mortality + Water flow and oxygen + Possible to control water + Same as closed coastal rates in early smolt stages levels can be controlled temperature, water flow system up top 1kg Zoning Low 3 4 1 3 - Possible scrape/frictions + Filtering water intake and oxygen levels (reduced time in open against the nets can prevent the intake of + Filtering water intake nets) - Claims sea acreage - Claims sea acreage - Claims land acreage - Claims sea acreage - Not possible to control viruses and recycling of water can - Same as open system + Can take new and - High conflicts of interest - The extra closed system water temperature + Regulations for water prevent the intake/reduce after 1kg remote areas into use on the Norwegian shore is assumed to be placed - Open nets do not prevent quality can possibly assure spread of viruses (areas where conditions - More space needed in close to the open net spread of viruses equally good water quality + Regulations for water are too poor to use open absolute terms (housing pens and will not claim as in open systems quality can possibly assure systems) around pens) an additional location. (tekn.råd) equally good water quality + Higher MASD can lead - Opportunity cost more The marginal impact is - Water from deeper sea as in open systems levels can affect growth (tekn.råd) to less space needed per relevant than in sea assumed to be small. patterns and growth rates - Water from deeper sea MAB (given same pen - More space needed in (tekn.råd) levels can affect growth depth) due to more shallow pens - Water from deeper sea pattern and growth rate (source?) levels can cause new (tekn.råd) diseases (tekn.råd) - Water from deeper sea Input Low 4 2 1 3 - Increased fish density levels can cause new factors in increases the risk that diseases (tekn.råd) construction infections will spread and - Increased fish density + The open containment - The coastal closed cages - RAS systems are the most + Part of the production of system might increase stress increases the risk that system is the least complex are based on a sturdier con- complex construction (in happens in open pens infections will spread construction and requires struction than open pens addition to onshore tanks - Part of the production is the least amount of mate- and the systems involve RAS requires housing, filter- done in closed coastal cages Climate Low 4 2 1 3 rials in production water pumping and filtering ing systems, recirculation effects + Relatively simple produc- components. Consequently systems, pumping facilities + No water pumping +/- Retained biomass can +/- Retained biomass can + Same as closed coastal tion process leads to mod- coastal closed cages con- etc.) and requires the most reduces energy be used to produce energy, be used to produce energy, system up top 1kg est energy consumption sume more materials and amount of materials and consumption but as of today we lack the but as of today we lack the (reduced time in open - Emissions related to necessary infrastructure necessary infrastructure nets) energy during production energy in production transportation - Energy consumption + Less transportation/ - Same as open system compared to open pens related to water pumping logistics after 1kg water, add oxygen, collect - Energy used to pump ∑ 1.9 3.6 3.9 2.4 waste and recycle the water, add oxygen, heat/cool waste water, recycle water, collect - Emissions related to waste and recycle the waste transportation - Extra energy consumption - Extra energy will be used needed for water pumping if the water is filtered since the system is above (tekn.råd) sea level - Extra energy will be used if the water is filtered (tekn. råd)

56 57 Accenture Accenture is a global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company, with approximately 266,000 people serving clients in more than 200 cities in 54 countries. Combining unparalleled experience, comprehensive capabilities across all industries and business functions, and extensive research on the world’s most successful companies, Accenture collaborates with clients to help them become high-performance businesses and governments. The company generated net revenues of US$27.9 billion for the fiscal year ended Aug. 31, 2012. www.accenture.com

Authors Ane Kristine Jacobsen – Norwegian Corporate Citizenship Lead Frode Hvattum – Nordic Sustainability Services Lead Christine Rynning-Tønnesen Per Martin Storvik Kaia Furnes Morten Westby Andreas Nordsjö Francesca Fernandez

Copyright © 20122013 Accenture All rights reserved.

Accenture, its Signature,logo, and and High Performance Delivered are trademarks of Accenture.