Brussels, 30/05/2008 (Agence Europe) - Adopting the own initiative report by Marcin Libicki (UEN, Poland) on the planned Nord Stream gas pipeline on Tuesday 27 May 2008 by 26 to 3 with one abstention, the European Parliament's petitions committee clearly shared the rapporteur's concern about the environmental impact of building such a pipeline under the Baltic Sea. The Nord Stream pipeline is one of the trans-European Energy Network (TEN-E) projects and would form a direct link between Russia and Germany. It is a “project of European interest that would help the meet the EU's future energy needs,” says the Libicki Report. However, should there be a proven risk of an environmental disaster in the Baltic Sea, the MEPs call on the Council, European Commission and member states to “use every legal means at their disposal to prevent the construction of the North European gas pipeline” on the scale proposed. The own initiative report responds to two petitions by Polish and Lithuanian environmental associations which fear that the planned pipelines could harm marine European Council-systems along the Polish and Lithuanian coastlines. It will be voted upon in plenary in July 2008.
The MEPs warn that the gas pipeline would be “especially vulnerable to potential damage” and “dozens of months of work in an area of up to 2m400 km2, requiring the use of a large number of vessels and other equipment, represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the number of habitats” and Nord Stream AG should be obliged to pay compensation for any environmental damage. The Libicki Report points out that “disturbing munitions dumped on the Baltic seabed after World War II could pose a threat to the Baltic marine environment, and to human life and health”.
The petitions committee calls for a “truly independent environmental impact assessment to be commissioned with the approval of all littoral states” along the Baltic. An environmental impact assessment commissioned by Nord Stream AG is still under way and will be submitted for approval to Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany, as the “parties of origin” set in the Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. The petitions committee urges Nord Stream AG to make the research data available to all coastal states. The MEPs underline that the Espoo Convention requires an analysis of alternatives and in this case of overland routes. It is possible to run such routes to the Russian border overland, solely through EU member states.
As the EU depends on a limited number of energy sources, suppliers and transport routes, “it is essential to support initiatives aimed at their diversification, both geographically and by developing sustainable alternatives,” says the report, which notes that the Nord Stream pipeline will be only one of a large number of infrastructure projects to meet growing demand for natural gas.
The MEPs also call on the European Commission to prevent Gazprom, which is the majority shareholder of Nord Stream AG, from “assuming a dominant role on the EU gas markets without guaranteeing reciprocal rights for EU companies to enter the Russian energy market”. The MEPs regret the EU's marginal role in this project, commenting that “greater EU involvement would reduce the uncertainty felt by many member states about the Nord Stream project.” They are against the “project being implemented on the promised scale without the consent of all the littoral states first being obtained”. Finally, the petitions committee believes that to address the environmental and geopolitical security aspects of such projects, the Commission should create “an appropriate post” under the authority of the high representative for foreign affairs and security policy and Commission vice president.' (O.L.)