"Both the Espoo and national EIA reports are very voluminous and contain much material, however, several presumed impacts have been insufficiently analysed nor is there enough evidence and justifications on minor impacts," Harry Liiv, Deputy Secretary General on Environmental Management of the Ministry of the Environment, explained Estonia's position. For example, the analysis of the transboundary impact in the Espoo EIA report and the Finnish national EIA report is superficial and very short – the transboundary impact on Estonia has only been dealt with on a total of 1.5 pages in the main document of the Espoo report.
The fact that Russia refused to submit its national EIA report also proved to be a major problem, because the country has not ratified the Espoo Convention and is, therefore, not obliged to act accordingly.
In addition, Estonia pointed to the small number of studies (e.g. with respect to munitions of war and sludge) and to the fact that not all studies have been conducted yet. The EIA report does not sufficiently discuss the risks connected to mines, there is also a lack of clarity in the report in determining the number of mines. Neither does the Nord Stream EIA report shed light on whether the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline requires establishment of a limited management zone in the Estonian exclusive economic zone for the time of construction works. For example, the EIA report had shortcomings in discussing the impact on human health (possible impact of toxic substances, which have been discharged due to the release of sludge to the aqueous layer, on fish fauna and, therefore, possibly reaching human food) and cultural heritage. The report neither shows what kind of catch limitations are intended to be implemented in connection with the construction and later use of the pipeline and where, nor does it indicate which compensatory mechanisms are intended to be used for fishers in connection with decreased fishing possibilities in case of establishment of catch limitations.
In addition, Estonia referred in its position to several shortcomings and problems in the EIA report in connection with the impact, accidents and risks in the construction and exploitation phase of the gas pipeline, environmental monitoring and impacts involving the Natura 2000 areas.
As a country influenced by the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Estonia had a possibility to examine the Nord Stream environmental impact assessment report and to submit its proposals and objections to it. During the public display, the Ministry of the Environment received 17 letters about the EIA in question and a total of 62 pages were used to submit comments and express opinions.
Nord Stream AG intends to build a pipeline in the Baltic Sea to carry natural gas from Russia to Germany. The plan is to build two gas pipelines running at the bottom of the Baltic Sea over a distance of 1220 km from Vyborg (Russia) to Lubmin (Germany). The construction works should begin in 2010. The first gas pipeline should open in 2011, the other one in 2012. 55 billion cubic metres of gas a year can be transported through the pipeline. The estimated life of the Nord Stream gas pipeline is 50 years.
Additional information: (8/06/2009) |
