Amber madness

The Baltic states and Poles are asking the European Commission for money for gas research

The economic ministers of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland are asking the European Commission to support the idea of ​​changing the route of the Nord Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Germany so that it does not go along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, but on land. The heads of the Lithuanian and Estonian economic departments, Vitas Navickas and Juhan Parts, announced this in Vilnius and Tallinn. “We must try to prove that this option is preferable from the point of view of environmental protection and safety,” Navickas said. “Our question is when this letter (from the ministers to Brussels - Ed. ) will be ready for the European Commission to study the feasibility of the Amber project as an alternative to the Nordstream project,” Mr. Parts noted.

Poland and the former Baltic republics of the Soviet Union, which remained aloof from the implementation of the new gas transport route, are trying in every possible way to disrupt the implementation of Nord Stream. This time they have gone so far as to ask the European Commission (which also represents the interests of Germany, which is participating in the project with two leading energy concerns) to finance research into an alternative gas pipeline. Moreover, a gas pipeline called “Yantar” was at one time considered by Gazprom, but was removed from the agenda due to complete economic futility associated with the need to lay the pipe through private property. Mr. Navickas was forced to admit this yesterday, who noted that ten years ago Russia invited the Baltic countries and Poland to join the project of laying a gas pipeline by land, but the proposal remained unrealized.

Nevertheless, both he and his Estonian colleague never tire of talking about the environmental risks of the underwater pipe. At the same time, neither Lithuania nor Estonia have done any serious research in this area, unlike the Nord Stream company, which is completing large-scale work to study the impact of the project on the environment. “My colleagues and I discussed that first of all, the European Union needs an analysis of alternatives. Both their feasibility and payback, as well as the assessment of many other factors,” Parts said.

The Nord Stream company, which is constructing the Nord Stream, reminded Vremya Novostey that the European Commission has long assigned the underwater gas pipeline project from Russia to Germany the status of TEN-E (trans-European energy networks). According to a representative of the operator company, the many thousands of kilometers of underwater gas pipelines already existing in the world indicate that offshore solutions are an internationally recognized alternative to transporting gas overland. “Detailed studies show that Nord Stream has environmental, technological and economic advantages compared to an onshore gas pipeline,” says our interlocutor. He also emphasized that Nord Stream can transport 25% of the gas needed to meet additional demand in Europe in 2015. “In this regard, we respect the interest of some countries in additional gas supplies from Russia or Norway as viable new projects, but not as an alternative to Nord Stream,” added the Nord Stream representative.

Alexey GRIVACHS