|
|
|||||
 Citizen
Outcries Drowned by the Yumaguzinsky Reservoir in
BashkiriaTaking the Future of Russia's Protected Areas in Their Own Hands: Zapovednik Directors Meet in Vladivostok Oil Production on Sakhalin: How long Before We See Another Valdez? A Brief Background on the Eurasian Snow Leopard Securing the Survival of Snow Leopards in Kyrgyzstan
|
|||||
|
How Long Before We See Another Valdez? Compiled
by Nikolai Maleshin with information provided by This past June foreign oil companies forming the joint consortium, Sakhalin Energy Ltd., celebrated the official commencement of oil drilling on the shelf off Sakhalin Island in the Russian Far East. Their festivities, however, were somewhat dampened by a protest organized by Greenpeace Russia and Sakhalin Environmental Watch. The groups' opposition is summarized by their slogan, "the first oil means the last fish." The Sea of Okhotsk is
one of Russia's most biologically diverse and productive
marine ecoregions. Economically, the Sea of Okhotsk is a
critical resource for Russia, supporting approximately 70
percent of the nation's marine products, including a high
percentage those intended for export such as crab and
echinoderms. From January to May 1999, the export of these
species generated $80 million for Russia. (The estimated
worth of illegally exported marine products is an astounding
$300 million). In comparison, Sakhalin's oil export revenues
during this same period reached a modest $50 million. While
the price of oil is continuing to drop, the price for marine
products rose 29.4 percent during the first half of 1999.
Oil development now poses a grave threats to the marine region and all of its valuable living resources. Alarming signs of things to come were seen this past spring when mass numbers of Pacific herring (Culpea pallasi) washed ashore in the Piltunsky Gulf , just 16 km inshore from the Molikpak oil drilling platform. The official explanation of the massive fish death was DDT poisoning. However, analyses conducted by two independent laboratories in different countries revealed no traces of DDT in the fish. The tests did identify the presence of oil in the fish, pointing to oil extraction activities as a culprit in the fish mortality. Other signs of risk associated with the development are evident in recent spills. During the night of September 27, 1999 approximately 0.5 tons of oil flowed into the sea when a sudden storm snapped the cables that held the gigantic oil tanker, Okha, alongside the drilling platform. The storm waves severed the pipeline running from the platform to the tanker, spilling crude oil into the sea in two large streaks ranging in diameter from 2.7 to 1.5 km. Such storms are not unusual in this region, and we can only expect similar events to occur. But can we expect Sakhalin to prevent future spills or clean up spills like the one that occurred in September? Typically, even in the most favorable weather conditions, no more than 15 percent of the surface oil from a spill can be skimmed from the water. In the rough waters of the Sea of Okhotsk, clean-up efforts will be doubly difficult. Fortunately, the wind swept the oil from this latest spill out to sea instead of toward the shoreline. The Exxon Valdez accident in Alaska served as a stark reminder to the world of an oil spill's disastrous effects of on marine ecosystems. Given these climatic conditions in this part of Russia, a catastrophic oil spill, such as the Exxon Valdez is an all too real possibility. One complicating
factor is the issue of compensation, in the unlucky event
that a large spill does occur. Local environmentalists fear
that if and when this disaster does occur, neither oil
companies nor tanker owners will take financial
responsibility to respond. Exxon was compelled to pay $7
billion in reimbursement for the damages. In comparison, the
Sakhalin Energy Ltd. would only be obliged to compensate for
a spill within the bounds of its initial capital, which is
$100 million. The consortium has been able to evade full
responsibility in the case of an accident by being
officially based in Bermuda, where it is under lax
governmental regulation. Political intrigue in Russia adds a new layer of complexity to the question of management of the oil operation. The companies within this consortium have been able to skirt environmental regulations in Russia by offering bonuses to the Federal and Sakhalin Committees on Environmental Protection. The local Sakhalin Marine Inspection-the one official agency that exposed violations of environmental legislation and opposed oil development-was abolished in the fall of 1998 by Russia's Environmental Minister Viktor Danilov-Danilyan. A major concern of local people is the lack of social benefit provided by the development. Although the companies promised jobs for the majority of the island's inhabitants, today only 80 local people have been given jobs, most of which are menial; at best they are construction positions. And, while the residents of Sakhalin have yet to feel the economic benefit of oil production, the Federal and Sakhalin governments have received and will continue to receive certain fees. However, according to a Profit Sharing Agreement that favors the oil companies, no profits will be shared with Russia for the first several decades of operation. Russia will begin to receive profits once the initial investment in development has been recouped. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
Home