Report - UNDP Russia

Report - UNDP Russia Report - UNDP Russia

12.07.2015 Views

per year (50-60). In 2001, there were 42,000instances of leaks from field pipelines, resultingin spillage of at least 65000 m 3 of oil and stratawater [Russian Oil, 2003, № 1; № 2] 10 . Accordingto Neva-Ladoga Water Authority, there were atleast 35 oil spills each year in the city ofSt.Petersburg and Leningrad Region due toshipping accidents in 1999–2003 [Barenboim,2005] 11 . Six major oil spills amounting to 42,290tonnes of crude oil (and, on one case,combustion of the spillage) were officiallyregistered in 1993–2001 on pipelines in IrkutskRegion operated by Transneft (the nationalpipeline monopoly) between Krasnoyarsk andIrkutsk and Omsk and Irkutsk (reported in letterNo. 4-9-758, dated August 23, 2002, from theIrkutsk Regional Branch of the Ministry of NaturalResources of the Russian Federation) [cited in‘Green World’, 2006]) 12 .Impact of oil spillages from pipelines areessentially disregarded in accounting of disturbedland. This seems to be because most spillagesoccur in ‘undeveloped’ areas – areas, which havenot been put to any (or to minimal) use in theeconomy. Local impact of spillages are ofteneliminated (though not completely) by springfloods within a year or a few years without thepipeline owner or emergency or environmentalservices taking any action. The fact that nearlyevery spillage of oil or oil products entailscontamination of water bodies is not taken intoaccount by official statistics on adverseenvironmental impacts, because suchcontamination does not come under any of thestatistical headings: ‘atmospheric pollutantemissions’, ‘waste water discharge’, ‘wasteformation’, ‘land disturbance’, ‘radiationcontamination’, ‘electromagnetic radiation’, ‘noise’,and ‘vibration’. The hydro-ecological sub-systemof environmental monitoring shows that oilcontamination of water bodies ranks fourth byvolume among types of water pollution (aftersuspended solids, phosphorus, and ironcompounds). Discharges of oil products andeffluent from oil operations were 5600, 6600,3700, 4600 and 3100 tonnes in respective yearfrom 2003 until 2007, and oil industry pollution isthe main type of pollution in many of Russia’srivers lakes and (particularly) reservoirs) 13 . Thesources of pollution in specific cases (andtherefore the responsible parties) are rarelyidentified, mainly because there is no nationalsystem for monitoring chief sources of oilpollution and no information on the shares ofdifferent economic sectors in pollution of waterbodies. However, the figures adduced above leaveno doubt that the share of oil production andpipeline transport in pollution is very high. Minorleakage from underwater pipelines (due to thehigh rate of wear, which is typical of most Russiantrunk pipelines) makes a steady contribution towater contamination. One example is anunderwater pipeline across the Sura River, whichflows into the Cheboksary Reservoir, where a leakwas detected by accident in the course ofprospecting work [Barenboim, 2005] 14 . But sharesof the processing industry and the transportationsector (mainly water and road transport) inpollution of water bodies are also large.To conclude, therefore, official data on oilspills and related environmental damage to soil,terrestrial ecosystems, ecotones and waterbodies are lacking or are highly inadequate , butthere is no doubt that such damage is very large.7.6. Impact of the fuel & energysector on the environment:pressure on ecosystemsThe outcome of economic impacts onecosystems depends on both the degree and10Oil of Russia, 2003, No.1, pp.104-107; Oil of Russia, 2003, No.2, pp.84-88.11G.M.Barenboym, Tha Main Scientific and Practical Results of GTsVM Operation and their Development Perspectives, M, 2006, 34 p.;12Quote: “Green World”, 2006, No.2 (471), p.13.13For example, the average annual oil product content in the Okhinka River (Sakhalin) in 2000 was 368 times higher than the official limitand the maximum recorded concentration was 640 times above the limit The Russia National Environmental Report, 2000, M., The NationalCenter for Environmental Programs (Gosecocenter), M, The National Center for Environmental Programs (Gosecocenter).14Quote: G.M.Barenboym, Works.128 National Human Development Report in the Russian Federation 2009

nature of the impact (atmospheric emissions,wastewater discharge, solid waste disposal, landdisturbance, etc.), as well as specific features ofthe ecosystems, which are affected (scale andquality of land reclamation is also important).Russia has enormous geography (17 million sq.km.) and encompasses a great variety of climatezones and an even greater variety of ecosystems.Hydrocarbon production is carried out all over thecountry as well as offshore, affecting terrestrialand marine ecosystems, but is located mainly innorthern areas: southern tundra, forest tundra,and taiga. Major increase of oil & gas productionis also to be expected in the near future on theoffshore continental shelf. Atmospheric emissionsby the fuel & energy sector are carried over vastdistances. It has been established that sulfurdioxide (SO 2 ) and nitrogen oxides (NO x ), whichare the primary causes of acid rain, can travel upto 4000 km from their source. Many lakes,including Lake Baikal, absorb more pollutantsfrom the air than from discharge water.Carrying of air pollutants over largedistances makes it difficult to estimate theirquantitative impact on ecosystems. Mixture ofpollutants from various sources (industries) in theatmosphere adds to the difficulties. So, our abilityto determine the share attributable to each typeof source is limited to relatively simple cases.Satisfactory results can be achieved in modelingof air pollution by one or two industrial sources,but accurate estimates for three sources are notyet possible.Methods of observation from a distanceallow identification of impact zones, whereecosystems are under pressure from a specificpollutant source, and fuel & energy enterprisesfigure frequently among such polluters. Mostsuch enterprises are located in undevelopedareas, in the ‘wilderness’, and this makes it mucheasier to identify facilities, which are havingmajor impact on their close surroundings. This isalso true for pollution of coastal areas and waterbodies by leaks from pipelines. High-resolutionsatellite images are available, but they costmoney and they need to be supplemented byintegrated ground-based observations, whichalso require significant investment, especially inremote areas. Analysis techniques for distancemonitoring data now exist, which can identify thesource of close impact and track the spread of oilpollution (‘spots’) in water bodies (seas, lakes,reservoirs, rivers, canals). Wide implementationof these techniques is hampered by shortage ofmonitoring information and of money to pay forits collection. The biggest obstacles to progress,however, is the absence of any authority in Russiacommitted to carrying out these tasks (theMinistry of Natural Resources and Ecology of theRussian Federation is principally focused onmaximizing natural resource extraction and noton preventing environmental damage oraddressing other environmental concerns).Meanwhile, for want of monitoring, assessmentand forecasts of fuel & energy impact onecosystems, and for want of estimates of theeconomic damage arising from these impacts,there is a risk that Russia’s biggest ‘bread-winning’sector could become the destroyer of Russia’snatural environment, and, consequently, thedestroyer of its economy.In order to maintain the current level ofoil production in Russia, it will be necessary toexpand the geography of production and todiscover and develop new oil deposits,particularly in eastern Siberia and offshore. Thesame is true for the gas industry. The coalindustry will open new mines adjacent to existingfacilities. If per unit indicators of environmentalimpact (emission, discharge and solid waste perunit of production or transportation of rawmaterials) remain at current levels, there will bemore pressure on ecosystems, which are alreadysuffering large impacts. Russia is currently aglobal environmental donor, since overall impactof Russia's economy on the environment is lessthan the useful yield of Russian ecosystems forsustaining the global ecological balance. Russianboreal forests and wetlands (where most of thecountry’s fuel & energy enterprises are located)are important carbon sinks. But Russia could losethis role if it allows the unfettered fuel & energyexpansion, which we have just described, tocontinue.129

per year (50-60). In 2001, there were 42,000instances of leaks from field pipelines, resultingin spillage of at least 65000 m 3 of oil and stratawater [<strong>Russia</strong>n Oil, 2003, № 1; № 2] 10 . Accordingto Neva-Ladoga Water Authority, there were atleast 35 oil spills each year in the city ofSt.Petersburg and Leningrad Region due toshipping accidents in 1999–2003 [Barenboim,2005] 11 . Six major oil spills amounting to 42,290tonnes of crude oil (and, on one case,combustion of the spillage) were officiallyregistered in 1993–2001 on pipelines in IrkutskRegion operated by Transneft (the nationalpipeline monopoly) between Krasnoyarsk andIrkutsk and Omsk and Irkutsk (reported in letterNo. 4-9-758, dated August 23, 2002, from theIrkutsk Regional Branch of the Ministry of NaturalResources of the <strong>Russia</strong>n Federation) [cited in‘Green World’, 2006]) 12 .Impact of oil spillages from pipelines areessentially disregarded in accounting of disturbedland. This seems to be because most spillagesoccur in ‘undeveloped’ areas – areas, which havenot been put to any (or to minimal) use in theeconomy. Local impact of spillages are ofteneliminated (though not completely) by springfloods within a year or a few years without thepipeline owner or emergency or environmentalservices taking any action. The fact that nearlyevery spillage of oil or oil products entailscontamination of water bodies is not taken intoaccount by official statistics on adverseenvironmental impacts, because suchcontamination does not come under any of thestatistical headings: ‘atmospheric pollutantemissions’, ‘waste water discharge’, ‘wasteformation’, ‘land disturbance’, ‘radiationcontamination’, ‘electromagnetic radiation’, ‘noise’,and ‘vibration’. The hydro-ecological sub-systemof environmental monitoring shows that oilcontamination of water bodies ranks fourth byvolume among types of water pollution (aftersuspended solids, phosphorus, and ironcompounds). Discharges of oil products andeffluent from oil operations were 5600, 6600,3700, 4600 and 3100 tonnes in respective yearfrom 2003 until 2007, and oil industry pollution isthe main type of pollution in many of <strong>Russia</strong>’srivers lakes and (particularly) reservoirs) 13 . Thesources of pollution in specific cases (andtherefore the responsible parties) are rarelyidentified, mainly because there is no nationalsystem for monitoring chief sources of oilpollution and no information on the shares ofdifferent economic sectors in pollution of waterbodies. However, the figures adduced above leaveno doubt that the share of oil production andpipeline transport in pollution is very high. Minorleakage from underwater pipelines (due to thehigh rate of wear, which is typical of most <strong>Russia</strong>ntrunk pipelines) makes a steady contribution towater contamination. One example is anunderwater pipeline across the Sura River, whichflows into the Cheboksary Reservoir, where a leakwas detected by accident in the course ofprospecting work [Barenboim, 2005] 14 . But sharesof the processing industry and the transportationsector (mainly water and road transport) inpollution of water bodies are also large.To conclude, therefore, official data on oilspills and related environmental damage to soil,terrestrial ecosystems, ecotones and waterbodies are lacking or are highly inadequate , butthere is no doubt that such damage is very large.7.6. Impact of the fuel & energysector on the environment:pressure on ecosystemsThe outcome of economic impacts onecosystems depends on both the degree and10Oil of <strong>Russia</strong>, 2003, No.1, pp.104-107; Oil of <strong>Russia</strong>, 2003, No.2, pp.84-88.11G.M.Barenboym, Tha Main Scientific and Practical Results of GTsVM Operation and their Development Perspectives, M, 2006, 34 p.;12Quote: “Green World”, 2006, No.2 (471), p.13.13For example, the average annual oil product content in the Okhinka River (Sakhalin) in 2000 was 368 times higher than the official limitand the maximum recorded concentration was 640 times above the limit The <strong>Russia</strong> National Environmental <strong>Report</strong>, 2000, M., The NationalCenter for Environmental Programs (Gosecocenter), M, The National Center for Environmental Programs (Gosecocenter).14Quote: G.M.Barenboym, Works.128 National Human Development <strong>Report</strong> in the <strong>Russia</strong>n Federation 2009

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!