|
Каспинфо март 2001 |
|
Название: Материалы на английском - III Главные Пункты: * Статья пресс-службы СоЭС в Бюллетене Экостан ньюс. <Футболки и рации вместо каспийской икры>, объясняющая, что, возможно, альтернативными проектами на Каспии общественность просто отвлекают от антиэкологической деятельности ТНК в регионе. * Тендер на строительство полуподводной платформы для добычи нефти и газа получили шведский Консорциум GVA и Иранская морская индустриальная компания (САДРА). Платформа сможет работать на глубине более 1 км. * В Казахстане началась закачка нефти в трубопроводную систему КТК. Потребуется 3 месяца, чтобы нефть пришла на побережье Черного моря (22.03.2001) Полный Текст Материалы на английском - III ECOSTAN NEWS ENVIRONMENTAL AND DEVELOPMENT NEWS FROM CENTRAL ASIA http://www.ecostan.org EDITED BY BELLA SEWALL (ENGLISH) AND ANDREI ZATOKA (RUSSIAN) Produced WITH FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF FINLAND PUBLISHED BY LAW AND ENVIRONMENT EURASIA PARTNERSHIP 99 Fulton St. #5-1, Boston, MA 02109 USA; (203) 562-4321; usleep@ecostan.org Seifullina 597, Suite 208; Almaty, KZ 480072; (3272) 696-445; kazleep@igc.almaty.kz Chilanzarskaya St. 80, Suite 215; Tashkent, UZ 700115; (99871) 173- 4773; leep@physic.uzsci.net Vol. 8/ Number 1 March 2001 In this issue: - Oil Companies Offer T-Shirts and Transistors in Place of Caspian Caviar OIL COMPANIES OFFER T-SHIRTS AND TRANSISTORS IN PLACE OF CASPIAN CAVIAR Anya Kochineva, Social Ecological Union "Ecosvodka," 6 February 2001 Representatives of NGOs from around the Caspian Basin - Azerbaijan, Iran, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkmenistan - gathered in Astrakhan, Russia at the end of January to participate in an Initiative for Social Action and Renewal in Eurasia (ISAR) - sponsored seminar, "Beyond Oil and Gas in the Caspian: The Role of NGOs in Finding Sustainable Solutions to Economic Development and Environmental Protection." Participants considered the feasibility of replacing the current economy based on intensive, uncontrolled exploitation of nonrenewable petroleum resources with an alternative economy based upon the renewable resources of the Caspian. Unregulated exploitation of nonrenewable resources is destroying this sensitive environment while barely giving any benefit to local inhabitants of the Caspian basin who will bear the long-term environmental consequences of current economic activities. Discussions centered around alternatives to oil and gas exploitation such as ecotourism, alternative energy, aquaculture, and organic agriculture. No proposals could have corresponded more ideally to ecological values. However, if one realistically assesses the political and economic situation of the Caspian, these wonderful ideas lose some of their luster. The interests and ambitions of many countries collide in the Caspian's turbulent depths. Each of the countries bordering the Caspian lays claim to a part of its rich deposits of oil and gas. The United States has also indicated that it views the Caspian as a zone of special interest. The sea's oil reserves, strategic location, rich biodiversity, and growing demand for transportation and export of energy resources- this all portends a highly tense struggle, which will become even more intense in the 21st century. There is every reason to believe that the passions surrounding the Caspian will calm only when the last drop of oil has been removed. By then little will remain of the rich biota of the sea or its fantastically diverse habitats. Many of the largest multinational corporations are working in the Caspian: Chevron, Shell, the OKIOC alliance and others infamous for violating international environmental standards, abusing the rights of local populations, and sponsoring "black PR" campaigns denying their responsibility for violations and misleading public opinion. Even now preparations are underway to begin to extract oil in the shallow areas of the Caspian shelf in Kazakhstan, and during the last year a new deposit was opened in the Northern Kashagan, which has been estimated to contain more than 10 billion tons of oil. It is impossible to sink wells in this fragile shelf zone without damaging the natural environment. It is this part of the sea and littoral zone that is richest in biodiversity: habitat to more than 300 species of birds, a multitude of sea mammals, and many commercially valuable species of fish. During the Soviet period this territory was a protected area, where commercial development was prohibited to preserve valuable wildlife. In recent years many influential international funds and organizations have arrived in the Caspian, which declare their interest in resolving the environmental problems of the region. The GEF and TACIS programs have launched the Caspian Environmental Program (CEP), with the grandiose goal of promoting "environmentally sustainable development and management of the Caspian environment, including living resources and water quality, so as to obtain the utmost long-term benefits for the human populations of the region, while protecting human health, ecological integrity and the region's sustainability for future generations." However, there has not been a single real accomplishment of this program except for a stream of conferences, hearings and symposiums. USAID has also invested a substantial sum in support of environmental projects in the Caspian region. Why does the United States support these projects? We would venture to guess that it is not out of love for nature or concern for the local people. They have certain concrete interests in this territory. First and foremost, they want to ensure that civil society interferes as little as possible in the activities of the multinational oil companies. To ensure this they find it necessary to distract environmental groups to other activities: for some, scientific research, and others, participation in a never-ending stream of discussions and hearings. For this reason above all others they are happy to supply money. An effective project proposed by a Kazakh (or certainly a Turkmen) group that might actually get in the way of oil exploration and production in the shelf will never receive any funding. For the government and transport corporations and funds it is advantageous to create and support an illusion that they are striving to open a dialogue with NGOs and local citizens, taking into account their suggestions and observations, an illusion that they support "civil society participation in decision making" and "the development of civil society." A representative of the Shell Oil Company took part in the NGO meeting, advisor on Caspian Affairs Richard Dion. He listened for two days to presentations about the work that the Caspian NGOs are doing to promote aquaculture, ecotourism, the development of alternative energy, and how they are lobbying for stronger environmental legislation and working with government agencies to improve implementation of existing laws. On the evening of the second day Mr. Dion spoke at a round table about Shell's programs in the West supporting projects connected with alternative energy and forest conservation. Mr. Dion explained that Shell has an environmental and social policy that they observe strictly wherever they work. Then the conversation turned to possible areas of cooperation between Shell and the NGOs of the Caspian states. Mr. Dion had the following suggestion: "After a deposit has been exhausted, the oil towers remain, which severely effect the landscape. NGOs can take care of the dismantling of these towersя. Shell will provide you with work clothes for this purpose and instruments." When this suggestion failed to win applause, Mr. Dion was ready with another. "There is another possibility. You could create 'green patrols' that will keep watch in parks and alert authorities to all violations of the law. Shell will give you t-shirts, baseball caps, and transistor radiosя." Apparently, in the countries of the former Soviet Union, Shell and the other multinationals are striving to create an appearance of cooperation with NGOs in contrast to the reputation they have garnered for their troubling activities in places such as Nigeria, where this very company, Shell, collaborated shamelessly with government forces that shot straight into the midst of peaceful demonstrations against gross violations of human rights and senseless destruction of unique natural resources. Now multinational corporations and funds will encourage in every way possible the development of alternative projects in the Caspian, providing monetary support as it is required. Why quarrel with the public, if it is possible to simply buy them off? Their message is practical: "Do as you like, play as many alternative games as you like, only meanwhile do not touch us, do not try to stop us from pumping our oil." What can be done in such a situation, what can realistically counterbalance the powerful financial structures of the multinationals and the PR industry propping them up? First and most important is access to reliable information. The people of the Caspian basis should understand the true interests of the governments and the companies. They should know how these companies that are proclaiming themselves the champions of nature have behaved in other developing countries and they should understand that all these NGO- friendly policies are no more than the most conventional of public relations ploys. The more people oppose the efforts of the multinationals to greenwash themselves and their activities, and do not fear to express their views, the more difficult it will be for these companies to destroy the rich natural resources of the Caspian. The oilmen will not stay to eke out a living on the land that their corporations occupy today; when the oil reserves are exhausted, their executives will return home, leaving our countries to deal with the damage they leave in their wake. But as long as oil interests can rely on the System or powerful friends who we can only hope will not allow them to utterly destroy this region, the situation in the Caspian will not change. [Ecostan News thanks the author and the Socio-Ecological Union for their kind permission to translate and reprint this story, which originally appeared in the February6, 2001 issue of the Socio-Ecological Union's weekly Ecosvodka journal. The original article in Russian is available at http://www.seu.ru/svodka/175.htm.] *** INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR CASPIAN STUDIES(IICS) ------------------------------------------------- EURASIA is the official newsletter of IICS http://www.caspianstudies.com news@caspianstudies.com To subscribe send a blank e-mail to: eurasia-subscribe@topica.com ================================================ SWEDISH-LED GROUP TO BUILD CASPIAN RIG Middle East Economic Digest March 23, 2001 A consortium of Sweden's GVA Consultants and the local Iran Marine Industrial Company (Sadra) is to build a semi-submersible drilling rig for oil and gas exploration in the Caspian Sea in a contract valued at $226 million. The rig was tendered in late 2000, with the group competing against bidders from Singapore and Russia (MEED 20:10:00). International and local tenders for equipment supplies, including drilling equipment, will be issued in the next six months, a GVA official in Gothenberg said on 13 March. Some 50 per cent of machinery will be locally supplied. GVA has a stake of nearly 5 per cent, worth about $10 million, in the consortium, with Sadra, a subsidiary of the Industrial Development & Renovation Organisation (IDRO), holding the balance. The rig will be manufactured at Sadra's facility near the port of Neka built in the 1990s with the help of Finland's Rauma Repola. GVA is to act as consortium leader with responsibility for design and project management. The rig, to be built over 32 months, will be able to operate at depths of up to 1,000 metres. Financing is "through the normal NIOC (National Iranian Oil Company) methods", says GVA. The rig, owned by Sadra, is to be leased to local and foreign firms exploring in the Caspian. This is expected to be in Iranian waters, where the Royal Dutch/Shell Group and the UK's Lasmo (part of Italy's Eni as of 2001) are carrying out exploration work in several blocks (MEED 21:7:00). *** INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR CASPIAN STUDIES(IICS) ------------------------------------------------- EURASIA is the official newsletter of IICS http://www.caspianstudies.com news@caspianstudies.com To subscribe send a blank e-mail to: eurasia-subscribe@topica.com ====================================================== Moscow pushes ahead in Caspian oil pipeline battle By David Buchan in London and David Stern in Baku Financial Times March 25 2001 Moscow will strike a first blow on Monday in the battle for pipeline superiority in the Caspian region, as government and oil company officials gather in north-west Kazakhstan to inaugurate a 1,580km pipeline to Russia's Black Sea. The new pipeline will provide a much needed outlet for Kazakhstan's massive Tengiz onshore oilfield, with estimated recoverable reserves of 6bn-9bn barrels. So far production from Tengiz, operated by Chevron which has a 50 per cent stake in the field, has had to be exported by rail and existing pipelines through Russia and by barge across the Caspian to Baku. All the region's states are playing the pipeline game. Caspian states with oil reserves are trying to diversify export routes, while their less well-endowed neighbours are vying for the transit fees and energy security that would come from having pipelines cross their territory. On Monday the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, whose main shareholders are the Russian and Kazakh governments, will open the tap at Atyrau in Kazakhstan. Other members are Oman, Chevron Caspian Pipeline Consortium, Lukarco, Rosneft-Shell Caspian Ventures, Mobil Caspian Pipeline, Agip International, BG Overseas Holding, Kazakhstan Pipeline Ventures and Oryx Caspian Pipeline. It will take three months for the oil to fill the pipeline and reach the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk where the first tanker is due to load at the end of June. Kazakhstan's promising Kashagan offshore field as well as Tengiz are marking it out as the region's biggest oil producer. It is also increasingly seen as the key to the economic feasibility of the pipeline project to link Baku in Azerbaijan, to near Tiblisi in Georgia and on to Ceyhan on Turkey's Mediterranean coast. This project is being pushed by the US which wants to steer pipelines away from Iran, and by Turkey which wants to gain oil transit income without allowing more tankers through the environmentally sensitive Bosphorus. At a conference in London last week, Wref Digings, a vice-president of BP in charge of promoting the Baku-Tiblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline, dismissed claims that the pipeline's rationale was more political than commercial. He said the 4.5bn barrel proven reserves in the southern Caspian, where BP is heavily involved, were sufficient to justify the pipeline project, and he was now awaiting firm volume commitments from producers. But to try to clinch the BTC project's rationale, the US succeeded in getting Kazakhstan to sign a memorandum on March 1 opening up the possibility that it might send oil across the Caspian to enter the 1,740km BTC pipeline at Baku. However, in a further sign that the Kazakh government may still be sitting on the fence in a way that will not please Washington, Kairgeldy Kabyldin, vice-president of KazTransOil, the national pipeline company, said that his company was studying the feasibility of a route through Iran. "This would be the shortest and possibly the cheapest route," he told the London conference. Among the potential transit countries, Georgia stands to gain from the BTC pipeline to the Mediterranean and from development of its own Black Sea ports. Giorgi Chanturia, president of Georgia's state oil company, suggested one factor that may lie behind US support for the BTC project when he pointed out it would allow Israel to draw oil from Ceyhan in Turkey, the only Middle East government with which Israel has good relations. |