HIGEHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS
Faculty of Political Science
«PEREVOZNAY BAY: PROTECT NATURE OF
PRIMORSKY PROVINC
(2005-2007)»
from:
Burnatseva Roxana
Group №642
Moscow, 2010
Perevoznay Bay : Citizens ask to protect nature of Primorsky Provinc
Little bay in Pacific Ocean called Perevoznaya became famous in Russia when
Transneft decided to output pipeline The Siberia-Pacific there, to build terminal and
to pour oil in tankers.
First of all, in a few words, about the Siberia-Pacific Pipeline.
The Siberia-Pacific Pipeline goes by a few names, including VSTO ("Eastern
Siberia-Pacific Ocean"), Transneft, and Taishet - Perevoznaya. If built, it would be
about 2,565 miles (4,130 kilometers) long and cost more than USD $15 billion. More
than three times longer than the Alaska pipeline, it is surrounded by controversy. This
is one in a series of pipelines planned to export resources out of the fragile Baikal
region to East Asia. Previously, a BP gas pipeline was planned to go south of Lake
Baikal (from Kovykta) through the Tunka Valley - and its National Park - to China.
While this was still in development, a Yukos oil pipeline was planned to go the same
route, and was stopped by environmental activists. In 2002, a plan for another
pipeline, this one by Transneft and going north of Lake Baikal, failed to pass a state
environmental impact assessment because it was too close to the lake; Transneft
moved it further north, to a safer distance from the lake, but into a high seismic zone.
On New Year's Eve 2005, Russia's government made a new commitment to an oil
pipeline to Japan (rather than China). The Japanese Bank for International
Cooperation (JBIC) a Japanese export credit agency - has shown interest in backing
this pipeline. Now, Transneft claims that it will fund the project itself. Construction of
a rail station, possibly to be followed by an oil export terminal, began in the winter of
2004-2005 in pristine Perevoznaya Bay on the Sea of Japan.
So, an early stage of the project feasibility study identified two major
environmental concerns in the 4200 km route – the terminal location in Perevoznaya
Bay and the passage going in just 800 meters from the Baikal Lake shore in a
seismicity hazardous zone. After massive protest actions all over the country not only
by ecologists but by ordinary citizens the pipeline was moved from the lake 400 km
to the north and Transneft began construction in Central Siberia. But in case with
Baikal the fact that it is worldwide famous lake played an important role.
Perevoznaya bay, on the contrary, is not a famous place for majority.
But it took a long time for the company to decide on the terminal location. A
proposal to build the loading facility in Perevoznaya Bay was met by a strong
opposition from ecologists, Green Peace, WWF, and local Russian NGO was among
them. Coalition of ecological NGOs started a campaign to save Southern Primorie
ecosystems and called upon the company to switch the terminal from Perevoznaya to
an alternative location.
Perevoznaya Bay is an extremely open bay, and in the event of an oil spill, water
currents will carry oil over a wide area. In Perevoznaya, the high volume of tanker
traffic between the area's many islands during the windy storm season greatly
increases the probability of a major oil spill. The water near Perevoznaya is shallow,
and oil tankers traveling to and from Perevoznaya will have to navigate past a string
of small islands at the mouth of the Amur Bay to reach it. The Khasansky area, where
the Perevoznaya Bay is situated, is also a critical economic zone for recreation,
aquaculture, and fisheries. The local population is reliant on those economies and so
is strongly opposed to the construction of an oil terminal nearby, as evidenced in
recent public hearings. Oil spills in the Amur Bay would threaten to pollute:
• The most popular beaches and tourist resorts in Primorsky Krai, visited by
tens of thousands of tourists annually;
• The coasts of the city of Vladivostok, located directly opposite
Perevoznaya in the Amur Bay;
• Primorsky Krai's main commercial aquaculture farms and important fish
spawning grounds, on which local Russian fishermen are economically
dependent; and
• The Far East Marine Biosphere Reserve: the only protected marine area in
Russia and home to large populations of marine mammals and seabirds. The
Far Eastern Marine Reserve is home to vast amounts of marine biodiversity
and provides spawning grounds for species including sea cucumbers and
pollock that migrate throughout the Sea of Japan. Oil spilled en route to
Perevoznaya could potentially reach the Marine Reserve within a matter of
hours.
The Transneft pipeline, if routed to Perevoznaya, would run along or through two
protected land areas in southwest Primorsky Krai: Barsovy Wildlife Refuge and
Kedrovaya Pad Nature Preserve. Kedrovaya Pad is Russia’s oldest preserve and was
recently awarded the status of a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. Southwest Primorsky
Krai is one of Russia's richest regions in terms of biodiversity: it is home to thirty
percent of Russia's endangered "Red List" species, including the Amur tiger and the
Amur leopard, which has been recognized by the World Conservation Union (IUCN)
as critically endangered. With a remaining population of around thirty, the Amur
leopard is one of the rarest cats on earth. Negative impacts from an oil pipeline
connecting to a terminal in southwest Primorsky Krai through the leopard's only
habitat may well lead to its extinction.
There are viable alternatives to the current planned route which would mitigate a
number of the pipeline's dangers. These alternatives are superior to Perevoznaya both
economically and from an environmental perspective. WWF prepared and published
an analytical report based on scientific knowledge and respective experts’
conclusions. The report came with ten alternative locations for the terminal, while
Perevoznya Bay was named “the worst location possible”:
An alternative site for the pipeline terminal is Nakhodka Bay, an active industrial
port with existing oil terminals. Were the terminal to be located in Nakhodka Bay, no
protected areas would be threatened, and because Nakhodka Bay is more enclosed
than Perevoznaya, there would be significantly less danger of oil spills spreading via
ocean currents. Locating the pipeline terminal in the already-developed port of
Nakhodka would also be more cost-effective than building a new terminal in
Perevoznaya. An important benefit of locating the terminal in Nakhodka is improved
safety for oil transportation in the Sea of Japan. Nakhodka's port does not yet meet
best international standards for oil transportation safety. The people of Japan suffered
from this when the vessel
"Nakhodka" spilled oil near western Japan in 1997. A port with best international
safety practices would not have allowed such a decrepit ship to load and transport oil.
Nakhodka's port is an accident waiting to happen. The Transneft pipeline will create
significant investment for the Nakhodka port that would dramatically improve
shipping safety throughout the Sea of Japan.
Analysis

Strategy.
Protest activity was carried out in several directions. Through some
methods ecological organizations contacted with citizens, through the
others they wanted to reach authorities, and by the third ones they
connected with the representatives of Oil Company.
The quickest and easiest way for people to help ecologists was to join
them in pressuring the Russian government to change the Siberia Pacific
pipeline route by sending a letter to President Putin, by mail or by
ecological organization’s web sites. Besides taking direct action by sending
a letter, they could also «help by spreading the word about the threats faced
by the beautiful Amur leopard»1. Their asked people to send organizations
action alert to their friends and family. The main slogan of their strategy
1
Pasific Enviromental organization. http://www.pacificenvironment.org/
was: «The more international outcry we generate, the more likely the
Russian government will be to change the pipeline route»!
In process of cooperation with the state and Transneft' in August 2005
WWF and Transneft established a working group in order to make an
environmental assessment of terminal locations. Unfortunately, numerous
meetings with the company hasn’t resulted in any constructive solutions,
the position of sides remained unchanged. Because of this strong resistance
ecologist voiced their concerns to responsible ministries and the president
administration. Wey got their support and in September 2005 the minister
for natural resources Yury Trutnev stated that Perevoznay “doesn’t fit for
purpose and proposed Kozmino Bay. The minister position was caused by
technical unsuitability of Perevoznay. The bay it’s too shallow to
accommodate 300 thousands tones tankers and the region is extremely
ecologically sensitive, there are two state nature reserves - Kedrovay Pad
and only one in Russia marine reserve as well as the fact that the region is
a home to 15% of Russian endangered animal species (far eastern leopard
and Amur tiger among them). On the other hand, Kozmino Bay that served
as an airport for hydro airplanes, and later on as a base for metal recycling
is abandoned now and doesn’t have any serious ecological restrictions.

Discourse.
There are two contradictive points of view in this case: on the one hand,
the majority realizes how dangerous is this pipeline for ecology, but on the
other hand inhabitants of nearby territories have their reasons to support
the building. There isn’t economic activity on that territory, and new bay
could become a jobsite for many people. Besides, the region could expect
further financing from Transneft. Building of the pipeline is also very
important for geopolitical situation. The Siberia-Pacific Pipeline opened
the way to the Asian markets for Russia.

Who cares?
The most active work was carried by international and local organizations
and their participants: WWF, GreenPeace, ecological association «Bellona»,
fund «Feniks», and others. Cooperating with each other they organized
several actions of protest, were able to lobby support of some Russian
politicians, mobilized citizens, wrote special reports with the professional
ecological grade. Citizens, who sent thousands cards to President Putin,
took part in the action. Also took part NGO and citizens of Japan. They
asked Putin to protect nature of Primorsky Province: in June 2006 WWFJapan and two other Japanese NGOs sent a petition to President Putin
asking him to choose an alternative site for the Eastern Siberia - the Pacific
Ocean oil pipeline terminal. The NGOs also gathered signatures of Japanese
citizens who support this petition.
Moreover, Japaniese government
declared: «The Japanese government has the ability and responsibility to
ensure that the East Siberia-Pacific Ocean pipeline is built according to best
international environmental standards, does not cause unnecessary
environmental harm, and improves oil transportation safety in the Sea of
Japan. Since Japan will be a primary investor in the pipeline, we believe
that you should act now to make certain the project is compliant with best
practices. Japan will proceed with the pipeline project only with full
consideration of all possible environmental and sociological risks, the two
greatest environmental risks being the location of the pipeline terminal in
Perevoznaya Bay in Southwest Primorsky Krai. The pipeline route and
safety standards will translate into greater financial security for the
pipeline's financiers, who will include the Japanese government and
Japanese banks»2.
2
http://www.wwf.ru/ Japan ask Putin to protect nature of Primorsky Province

Eficiency/delivery.
12 March 2007 Kozmino Bay is approved to be the ESPO pipeline terminal
final site. This decision, announced by Rostekhnadzor, Russia’s federal
service for ecological, technical and atomic supervision, marks the end of a
two-year battle by Ecologists to have the oil terminal moved to Kozmino
Bay from the original option of Perevoznaya Bay on environmental
grounds.
The main reason of my choice of the topic is a rare example when different
factors were impacting on Russian government and were able to break the decision of
power. Russian NGO, Foreign NGO, Japanese, Russians together won in the battle
for the nature. It can be an example of the power of citizen’s position when it is
supported by many people. And even such transnational giant as Transneft doesn’t
always win. In conclusion I want to quote WWF-Russia’s conservation director Dr.
Evgeny Shvarts who welcomed the decision to relocate the terminal to Kozmino.
“We’re glad for the leopards of Kedrovaya Pad nature reserve, for the Far-Eastern
Marine Reserve, for the nature conservation movement and for our country, on the
whole,” he said. And I really believe that it’s not big, but real victory of our society
and citizens.
Used websites:
1. wwf.com World Wide Fund for Nature
2. greenpeace.com Green Peace
3.
http://www.pacificenvironment.org/
4. Newsru.com
Pasific Enviromental organization.