|
Каспинфо декабрь 2003 |
|
Название: ОБЩЕСТВЕННОСТЬ И ТРУБОПРОВОДЫ (на англ. яз) Главные Пункты: * Осенний выпуск журнала Give & Take (ISAR-DC), 2003 г. * Общественность и трубопроводы: российский нефтяной бум, * Знают ли американские потребители, что сибирский тигр у них в бензобаке? (19.12.2003) Полный Текст ОБЩЕСТВЕННОСТЬ И ТРУБОПРОВОДЫ (на англ. яз) ОБЩЕСТВЕННОСТЬ И ТРУБОПРОВОДЫ (на англ. яз) *** Autumn 2003 Issue of Give & Take Pipelines and the Public: Ecologists and NGOs on Russia's Oil Boom http://www.isar.org/isar/archive/GT/GT18editorsnote.html Communities Demand a Say Russia's Oil, Russia's People by Alice Hengesbach Pipelines and the Public NGOs Insist on Public Monitoring, Independent Evaluation of Pipeline by Anton Semenov Political Pressure Pushes Oil Terminal in Unspoiled Khasanski Raion by Anton Semenov Coastal Community Survey Raises Questions about Pipeline Construction by Anton Semenov Seeking Information Disclosure, Primorye Ecologists Go to Court by Alexander Malishev Russian Activists Follow the Alaska Pipeline and Find Partners by Anton Semenov Lessons of Alaska: Partnering for Nature Protection by Ludmilla Fedorovskaya Lake Baikal: More Valuable Than Oil by Alice Hengesbach and Sergei Shapkhaev Sakhalin Activist Briefs Congressional Committee on Oil Threat to Marine Life by Alice Hengesbach Russia's Oil Boom and US Consumers How to Achieve Effective NGO Cooperation on Oil by John Deever Do US Consumers Know There's A Siberian Tiger in Their Tanks? by John Deever *** Russia's Oil, Russia's People by Alice Hengesbach Russia's government and industrial leaders see the country's amazing array of natural resources as the source of tremendous wealth for the country. Among the most prized of those resources is oil, reserves of which, based on current estimates, could make Russia the world's biggest exporter of oil. With this in mind, Russia's budget is largely based on the production and transportation of oil. Maximizing the earning potential of this "black gold" means developing an extensive network of pipelines serving customers domestically and abroad. A number of pipeline projects, in various stages of development, could make the export of Russian oil more efficient and profitable for government and industry. At the same time, communities and NGOs have concerns about the social and environmental costs of these pipelines. In recent years, activists and individual citizens have become more vocal and active in holding the Russian government and the oil industry accountable for their activities. The process of public monitoring and assessment is far from perfected, but it has emerged as a growing force for change in Russia and a catalyst for more responsible resource use. Caspian Region The Caspian Region holds global importance as a source of oil and gas. Recently, attention has focused on the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline planned to carry Caspian oil through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey (bypassing Russia). However, already in existence is a pipeline constructed and managed by the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC). The 1,580-km CPC pipeline runs from the Tengiz oil field in Kazakhstan, across southern Russia to the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. Completed in late 2001, it cost an estimated $2.6 billion. Expansion of the pipeline's capacity is already being planned. Public involvement in reviewing the CPC serves as a lesson for NGOs looking to influence other pipeline projects. Before construction, communities and NGOs faced many obstacles in accessing technical documentation, project reports, and a complete environmental assessment of the project. According to Russian law, every industrial project must undergo a federal environmental impact assessment (EIA). The CPC's official EIA -- completed and approved in 1998 -- was challenged in 1999 by Zelyeniye, a Novorossiysk NGO. Zelyeniye argued that while regional EIAs were completed, a full federal EIA was not. Zelyeniye's legal challenge failed, but the group's actions raised public concern about the project. Ultimately, CPC did respond to certain environmental concerns. It constructed river crossings using horizontal drilling technology, established a system to detect any disparity between the volume of oil being pumped and that being loaded into tankers. Also, it developed a basic emergency response and oil spill liquidation system in coordination with the Russian government -- an NGO demand. However, NGOs and community leaders have continued to push for increased accountability by the Consortium on how spills should be handled. Unfortunately, CPC has not followed through on its promises to work with communities and NGOs. The Consortium failed to send a representative to a recent seminar about oil spill response organized by local NGOs and the international NGO Crude Accountability. In response, local NGOs are planning a public campaign to demand more information from CPC. It seems that only public pressure will ensure public involvement. Sakhalin Like the development in the Caspian region, the development of oil resources on Sakhalin Island began in the mid-1990s. The Russian government signed production sharing agreements (PSAs) with a number of international oil companies. Sakhalin Energy Investment Company began development of one of those PSAs, known as Sakhalin-II, in 1998. According to company materials, the first phase of this project, the Vityaz Complex (consisting of the Molikpaq production platform and other offshore units) began successfully producing oil in 1999. The second phase of this extensive project is currently under review by several international financing institutions. It would include two pipelines (one gas, one oil) running the length of the island, as well as two platforms and four underwater pipelines off the eastern coast of Sakhalin, and a terminal at Aniva Bay. Environmentalists are concerned about the long-term effect of oil drilling and transport on the population of the Western Grey Whale, as well as the potential for oil spills from land-based pipelines, which would cross numerous active faults and salmon spawning streams. The construction and development of the first phase of Sakhalin-II occurred with little public attention, but since then several different campaigns, led in large part by the NGO Sakhalin Environmental Watch (SEW), have created intense interest in the project. In 2002, SEW, in cooperation with the regional coalition "Living Seas," organized a public campaign focused on oil development on Sakhalin, raising public awareness not only on the island but throughout the Russian Far East. Earlier this year, SEW and 50 other Russian and international NGOs submitted a letter to Sakhalin Energy demanding safety improvements at Sakhalin-II. Sakhalin Energy responded by reasserting their claims that the project is environmentally safe. Unsatisfied by these assertions, SEW and other activists continue to push for environmental accountability for the project by lobbying international finance institutions, as well as the governments holding stakes in those institutions, including the US. Siberia and the Russian Far East Unlike the more finalized plans on Sakhalin Island, plans to bring Siberian oil to Asia and the Pacific are still in the planning phase. Building on previous experience, NGOs and communities have already started to make their voices heard. One pipeline option, recommended by the Russian government-owned Transneft, would run from Angarsk (in Siberia, west of Lake Baikal) to Primorye on Russia's Pacific coast. The pipeline would skirt Lake Baikal and end up 3,765 km later at a terminal on the Sea of Japan. Another option, offered by Yukos-Sibneft, would take a shorter southern route directly to China's hinterlands. Despite a year of debate, no conclusion has been reached as to which option -- if any -- makes the most political, economic and environmental sense. Communities along the proposed routes question the actual regional economic benefits of the pipeline. Concerns include the technical aspects of such a long pipeline over areas of seismic activity, permafrost, and animal migration. And legal questions surround the proposed pipeline's proximity to environmental treasures such as Tunka National Park, south of Lake Baikal. Not least of all, oil spills could ruin some of Russia's most pristine salmon spawning streams and the watershed of Lake Baikal, the deepest body of freshwater in the world. NGOs and community groups have played a significant role in this debate over the last two years. In Irkutsk Oblast, near the pipeline's source, the NGO Baikal Environmental Wave and the Buryat Regional Department on Lake Baikal, along with indigenous communities, have organized public awareness campaigns, held public hearings, and pursued legal action to protect Lake Baikal and Tunka National Park. ISAR-Far East, working with groups along the proposed pipeline route, has provided information and spread awareness about the project. The Vladivostok NGO Green Cross has sued Transneft and the regional Ministry of Natural Resources to get full access to information about the project. Murmansk Another way to bring Russia's oil to the US and Western Europe is via Murmansk on the Barents Sea. Tankers leaving from this deep, year-round port would take only nine days to reach the US, compared with the 32-day trip from the Middle East. As many as 80 million tons of crude a year from Western Siberia could be exported through Murmansk. In November 2002, LUKoil, YukosSibneft, and Tyumen Oil set out to plan a pipeline from Western Siberia to Murmansk. BP and others have also expressed support for either a pipeline or a series of offshore platforms in the Barents Sea. The Russian government is supportive, but no official assessment has begun. Even before concrete plans appeared, criticism emerged. Some industry and government figures view output estimates as unrealistic. Certainly the current relationship between the Russian government and oil companies like YukosSibneft casts doubt on privately funded projects like those proposed for Northern Russia. Environmentalists fear any oil development in the Barents Sea region, home to one of the world's largest puffin colonies, the largest known cold water reef, and large populations of seals, whales and polar bears. Any oil spill could destroy the ecosystem of a region already jeopardized by significant port traffic, not to mention a rusting scrapheap of decomissioned nuclear submarines. International environmental organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund have already expressed concerns about such oil development. Some local NGOs have joined in opposition as well. For many, the incentive to tap Russia's vast resources is great, but at what cost? Public monitoring and assessment can go a long way toward insuring that economic development does not lead to environmental degradation. The key to effective public monitoring is cooperation among Russian NGOs and local communities. The pipeline issue is inspiring such cooperation on a greater scale all over the country. Alice Hengesbach is ISAR's Russia program officer and new co-director. http://www.isar.org/isar/archive/GT/GT18alice.html *** Do US Consumers Know There's A Siberian Tiger in Their Tanks? by John Deever When Russian President Vladimir Putin made an official visit to the US in September, he made a very brief and little-noticed stop in New York City, where he ate a glazed doughnut from a "Kwik-Farm" convenience store. Why? To "celebrate the grand opening" of a Russian oil giant's new service stations in New York City. Starting in September, the Russian company LUKoil began operating eight retail gas stations in New York City. Soon it will sell its gasoline to Americans at 1,279 locations in New York and 12 other mid-Atlantic US states. LUKoil bought the Getty chain, the last remaining piece of the Getty Oil Company. Former Getty stations in the US have begun to sport LUKoil logo. Depending on your point of view, the logo's letter "O" looks like either a droplet of oil, a teardrop, or an onion (luk is Russian for "onion"). Photo, right, of newly rebranded LUKoil gas station in Washington, DC. At the grand opening at Tenth Avenue and 24th Street in Manhattan, Putin stood side-by-side with LUKoil President Vagit Alekperov (a good and obedient oligarch, unlike recently jailed Yukos head Mikhail Khodorkovsky?) and US Senator Chuck Schumer. Clearly proud of his state's new economic ties with Russia, Schumer issued a proud press release about the September event that, curiously, emphasized reducing dependence on foreign oil. "More competiton and new sources are the best way to loosen OPEC's stranglehold on New York and America," Schumer said. Russia's entrance into the US gas station market meant a dose of "good old-fashioned American competition" for OPEC. Schumer's press release was downright gleeful: "OPEC and Saudi Arabia have held New Yorkers in the palms of their hands for too long, jacking up our gas prices at will. When President Bush says we have to cut our reliance on oil from the Middle East, I couldn't agree more -- but for most of us, we've had no choice until now. LUKoil's huge investment in New York gives us a choice -- an opportunity to cut our reliance on Middle East oil without having to drive our cars any less." That "huge" investment will bring $54 million in taxes into New York City -- an amount measuring a third of what the New York Yankees pay in salaries. Meanwhile, LUKoil will charge 1.3 times what it can charge for gas in Russia and still beat prices at other US gas stations. LUKoil expects to draw in $400 million in annual revenues from the stations, which, three years ago, cost it only $71 million to purchase -- that's about $55,000 per gas station. At the time, the price for the Getty stations was "negligible" for LUKoil, according to a report in the Russian newspaper Pravda. LUKoil's profit in 2000, topping $3.5 billion, had tripled from the year before. "Analysts questioned the economic reasons for the acquisition," Pravda reported, "saying the company most likely needed a safe place to put its extra cash." The historic purchase made LUKoil the first Russian company to buy a US company publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange. That speaks to the suddenness with which Russian industrial managers have caught up to their Westerm counterparts, at least in their ability to move dollars around the world. Twelve years ago, what is now LUKoil was a small cluster of oil-producing industries and a Volgograd refinery. In case New Yorkers are curious, the name LUKoil was a simplification of LangepasNeftegaz, UraiNeftegaz, and KogalymNeftegaz. Obviously, LUKoil is less of a mouthful. But never mind all that. Most US drivers, who are likely to pronounce the company name "Luck-oil," rather than "Luke-oil," may never guess at LUKoil's Russian pedigree. Furthermore, most probably won't care. After all, isn't increased US-Russian cooperation what the end of the Cold War was all about? Well, if you rank private oil companies by largest proven reserves, LUKoil is the world's second largest after ExxonMobil -- a brand US consumers are familiar with for many reasons, one being the tanker Valdez catastrophe in Alaska. LUKoil's reserves, however, are mostly in little-watched but also much-polluted Western Siberia. LUKoil is also hard at work pumping out the resources of Russia's arctic and subarctic regions such as the Komi Republic and the Yamal region, both predominantly indigenous-inhabited, yet lacking the kind of social support and tribal rights legislation present in, for example, Alaska. Finally, LUKoil has big plans to explore and drill in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Egypt, North Africa, and Colombia. Perhaps few New Yorkers realize or are concerned that the next tank of gasoline they pump into their cars might have originated under the soil of the former USSR. Yet by buying a Kwik-Farm doughnut, US consumers are handing over dollars to the company now helping transport oil from the huge Karachaganak deposit in Western Kazakhstan and pump natural gas from Russia's far north Yamal Nenets region. Buying LUKoil's Regular Unleaded means supporting giant refineries in Odessa, Ukraine and Ploesti, Romania, and countless other projects whose environmental and social effects they have virtually no way of knowing. LUKoil plans to fill about half its pumps with Russian oil and half from other sources. And for that matter, your local Shell, Exxon, or BP station may be selling gasoline bought from Russian suppliers or its own subsidiaries in Siberia or the Russian Far East. Corporate globalization of the economy is good at obscuring where products came from and what "external costs" were included in their creation. But LUKoil's ownership of US gas stations demonstrates that some of the biggest Russian-owned businesses today compete quite handily on the same playing field as the rest of the world. That's an amazing triumph for the advocates of the speedy privatization that has taken place since 1991. From an environmental perspective, it means that US consumers should have as much information as possible when they pull up at the pump. -- John Deever, Editor of Give & Take -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |