How neighboring governments respond to the Riigikogu's decision Tuesday will determine whether these pipes in Kotka, Finland, intended to be used for Nord Stream, end up pumping gas through the Baltic Sea or not.
TALLINN — The construction of Nord Stream may hit a speed bump after the Estonian parliament agreed Tuesday that the gas pipeline’s environmental impact has not been adequately assessed.
The Riigikogu said in a statement that the Environmental Impact Assessment mandated by the Espoo Convention, an international agreement forcing companies to carry our environmental research before building, had not been carried out in full and therefore can’t be used.
“The Riigikogu considers it vital that the competent authorities of the countries bordering the Baltic Sea seriously consider all the environmental risks of the project, taking into account the most comprehensive scientific data available and not basing their decision solely on the deficient information provided by the developer,” the statement reads urging parliaments in the region to supervise the entire process for the sake of the and could Baltic Sea environment.
Nord Stream is calling the parliament’s decision a political choice, not environmental concern.
“We have to differentiate between environmental things and political concerns.” Jens Müller, Nord Stream spokesman told Baltic Reports Tuesday. “We have tried to investigate through Estonian waters, but they rejected our application.”
Nord Stream says they have involved all nine Baltic Sea countries in the assessment, which it calls “a benchmark” in environmental assessments. “The Baltic Sea has never seen such a comprehensive and complete survey,” Müller added.
Estonian approval not needed
The pipeline does not need the approval of the Estonians as it will run through only Finnish and Swedish waters in the northeast section of the Baltic sea.
The Nord Stream project, led by Russia’s gas state-owned Gazprom, sparked environmental criticism in some countries worried that the construction work could cause damage to sea life, stir up poisonous material on the seabed or disturb unexploded ordnance left from World War II. Rostekhnadzor, Russia’s federal agency for ecological, technical and atomic safety, said in October that the route was safe. The company’s offshore section is budgeted at €7.4 billion.
Though the pipeline will not go through Estonian waters, Nord Stream claimed in a press release that they are open to dialogue with interested parties.
Estonian Green Group Chairman Valdur Lahtvee said in local media that he saw the manner in which the Russia and Germany, which was then led by former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, signed an agreement on the approval of pipeline was similar to the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact when the two countries carved up Eastern Europe in 1939.
Schröder is now the chairman of the shareholders’ committee of the Nord Stream company.
The Estonian government would prefer the gas to be transported over land to avoid any chance of environmental problems, but noted that Russia intended to bypass any fees that intermediary countries would levy.
Since the pipeline does not pass through the exclusive economic zone of Estonia, the Estonian state’s direct approval is not needed. Permission for construction is required from Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany. The Danish ministry of energy has already given approval. It’s unclear how the other governments will react to the Estonian assessment that Nord Stream is not following Espoo Convention dictates.
Nord Stream is a Swiss-registered company. It is 51 percent owned by Gazprom, 20 percent by German companies Wintershall and E.ON Ruhrgas each and 9 percent owned by Dutch company Gasunie.
