[ad_1]
“Notice for seafarers 46/20: Germany. Baltic Sea. Waters around Rügen, VTG Adlergrund, 2 underwater pipelines under construction “.
Anyone who wanted to get an idea of the possibilities of the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline project in recent days depended on the dry statements from the Federal Waterways and Shipping Administration (WSV). Spokespersons for ministries involved in the dispute at the state and federal levels were just as taciturn as those of the Gazprom client. The political situation is particularly delicate at the moment.
With the new Sanctions Act (PEESCA), the US Congress has just expanded its threats of sanctions against European contractors for the Russian-German pipeline project. Now even insurers and other service providers must expect serious damage to their US operations if they participate in pipeline construction in the Baltic Sea.
East Committee: the importance of the pipeline has increased
The certifier Det Norske Veritas – Germanischer Lloyd (DNV GL) has therefore already stopped participating in the project. Since then it has been questionable where pipeline builders want to obtain a technical acceptance confirmation, which is required for the operating license. Insurers are also said to have dropped out.
The Eastern German Economic Committee expresses concern: “Purely European projects such as Nord Stream 2 must not be regulated by US bodies, but exclusively by the European countries involved and the EU. We are all the more opposed to the now planned expansion of possible sanction targets, for example to include certification companies and service providers. “
The importance of the pipeline for European energy supply, according to the trade association, “has further increased in recent months”.
There are currently many unanswered questions about the gigantic infrastructure project, which consists of transporting Russian natural gas directly to the landing point in Lubmin near Greifswald with construction costs of over eight billion euros.
“Political instrument of the Kremlin”
Political forces in the US are trying to make European gas purchases in Russia more difficult on all sides and completely independent of the Trump administration – on the one hand, to prevent their allies from becoming more dependent on Moscow, on the other, because they prefer to supply Europe itself with American shale gas.
Ukraine’s interests in remaining a transit country for Russian gas supplies are also important to Americans. The pipeline, a spokesman for the US embassy in Berlin told WELT, “is a political tool for the Kremlin to bypass Ukraine and divide Europe”.
Sharp threats of sanctions against German and European contractors for the project had already caused a diplomatic scandal in recent months. Brussels and Berlin banned Washington’s interference in European energy supply issues and declared threats of sanctions contrary to international law.
For a long time it was unclear whether the Russians would technically be able to carry out the project on their own after Swiss shipowner Allseas retired its secular ships in the spring under pressure from US sanctions threats.
Gazprom brought the Russian installer of the “Akademik Tscherski” gas pipeline from the Far East. But the special ship remained in the Baltic port of Sassnitz-Mukran on the island of Rügen on the quay for months, apparently to be adapted for the new task.
At least this secret has now been revealed by the notification to the administration of waterways and maritime routes: “Akademik Tscherski” is ready to sail.
Pipe laying by the end of the year
From Saturday December 5, until probably December 31, “a subsea pipeline laying of two parallel subsea pipelines will take place in the” Adlergrund “part of the exclusive economic zone in Germany, according to the WSV navigation news.
“A safety distance of at least 1.25 nautical miles from the pipelay vehicle held in position with multiple anchors must be maintained during the works.”
It is no longer so clear that “this pipeline will not take place,” as US government officials recently confidently asserted.
Another 16.5 kilometers of the pipeline is to be laid in German waters. During December, Nord Stream plans to cover 2.6 kilometers of this. From January, for reasons of bird protection, laying is prohibited until June.
A request for exemption for this period is currently still under consideration by the competent authorities, including the main Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (BSH).
If the BSH does not give its approval, Gazprom wants to leave the pipe sections in German waters for the time being and continue to build them in Denmark, in order to complete the remaining section in Germany after the interruption of the bird protection. In this case, completion of the pipeline is expected in the second half of 2021 at the earliest.
Environmentalists criticize building permits
Environmental protection organizations Nabu and DUH criticize the fact that the BSH authorized the works in December. According to the original 2018 approval, there should have been a break between September and May for bird protection reasons.
From the environmentalists’ point of view, the construction permit for December is questionable because the “Akademik Tscherski” – unlike the originally commissioned Allseas ship – must be anchored to the ground during the laying work. The further construction of the Nord Stream 2 is “associated with the severe destruction of the delicate natural area of the Baltic Sea,” said Sascha Müller-Kraenner, Federal Managing Director of DUH. “With its anchors, the” Akademik Tscherski “lifts sediments and destroys the seabed.”
The criticism of environmentalists is also or above all motivated by climate policy. “The construction of Nord Stream 2 contradicts the European and German climate goals”, says Constantin Zerger, Head of Energy and Climate Protection at DUH: “The pipeline would carry natural gas, which contains around 100 million tons of CO2 in the year. The DUH is asking the authorities to withdraw the building permit for December.
However, this is not predictable. The BSH points out that the possibility of further construction in December was already included in the 2018 permit. Significant nature conservation reasons do not hinder this process.
From an ornithological point of view, the resting times of migratory birds in January and February are more relevant. This was also confirmed by the specialized authority subordinate to the Federal Ministry of Environment at WELT’s request: “The Federal Nature Conservation Agency has no reservations that would question the approval of the further construction of Nord Stream 2. “
The BSH says it is simply not responsible for climate policy criticism of further gas imports. The responsible mining authority of Stralsund had verified and confirmed the energy needs of gas imports years ago. Supporters of the pipeline in Brussels also argue that any expansion of the energy infrastructure could be beneficial as European gas sources are slowly drying up.
The Nord Stream 2 can also carry hydrogen
The German Coal Exit Commission (WSB Commission), with the participation of Greenpeace and other environmentalists, had already determined that there was increased demand for natural gas power plants to offset Germany’s exit from coal and nuclear power.
On various occasions, the German and Russian sides have recently pointed out that the ultra-modern Nord Stream 2 is also designed to be capable of carrying large proportions of climate-neutral hydrogen.
Although there is official secrecy, the federal government is apparently trying behind the scenes to find a face-saving solution for the completion of the pipeline. A backdoor into the American PEESCA sanctions law could help, intentionally or not.
According to research by “Bild” in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the establishment of a “MV Climate Protection Foundation” is planned, which will in future manage the completion of the pipeline in German waters as a general undertaking under public law. The ministries involved currently do not comment on the report, but neither do they deny it.
All participating German companies should no longer work as contractors for the Russian project company Nord Stream 2, but formally as subcontractors of the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Foundation.
This could protect them from the direct consequences of US sanctions threats. Why the state foundation itself and its employees need not fear US sanctions: The new US sanctions law PEESCA expressly states that companies, but not governments, should be the target of sanctions.
Whether everyone involved can agree on this face-saving solution is currently still fully open.
.
[ad_2]
Source link
