Wednesday

12th Aug 2020

Opinion

Gazprom: A wolf in green clothing

People like me love conspiracy theories. This is especially true with ones involving Russia. But since the end of last year, it seems that at least one of these theories is coming true.

On 29 November 2011, the Gazprom board of directors made the unusual statement that it was concerned that "the production of shale gas is associated with significant environmental risks, in particular the hazard of surface and underground water contamination with chemicals applied in the production process. This fact already caused the prohibition of shale gas development and production in France."

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Support quality EU news

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • Gazprom HQ in Moscow: Russia sits on one of largest shale gas reserves in the world (Photo: Gazprom.ru)

This was a confirmation of statements made by the company's chairman, Alexander Medvedev in 2010.

Why this board's statement is unusual is that it makes Gazprom the only gas company in the world that is officially against the development of shale gas. Russia sits on one of largest shale gas reserves in the world, with at least 688 different shale formations. Why would the Russian gas export monopoly oppose its only long term development interest?

The use of the environmental argument only adds to its oddness.

Gazprom currently is building a huge pipeline through the Russian old-growth wilderness to feed its Nord Stream pipeline - with much environmental damage along the way - and is seeking to build another under the Black Sea, South Stream.

Europe is currently served by natural gas from Siberia through pipelines that are thousands of kilometres long. Because of a lack of maintenance, these Russian pipelines leak significant amounts of gas each year into the environment.

This would seem to be more worrying for the global environment than shale gas development in the heavily-controlled EU. One would think the Russians would be more interested to first look to the considerable methane emissions from their gas pipeline system and its economic costs and environmental damage before thinking about us poor Europeans.

It looks clear to me that these arguments are not based on real concern for the European environment but instead are in the defence of their traditional gas markets in Europe and Asia, which shale gas threaten. It is politics and economics in 'green' sheep's clothing.

The use of the environment as a cover for other policy issues is not new. The Russians use to accuse Poland and other EU nations os using green propaganda to oppose the building of Nordstream, despite real concerns of damage to the Baltic Sea.

It would be wise of any organisation which opposites shale gas development to be careful when accepting help and funds from non-traditional sources.

The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.

As someone who wants an honest dialogue on shale gas, I am not somebody who believes in the hype of shale gas either being the saviour or the destroyer of Europe.

Every development has benefits and costs which must be balanced.

While I think the balance right now is in favour of the development of European shale gas, above all I believe in an open discourse based on facts and principles. Clearly, this is not the case for Gazprom, which only sees the grand political chessboard and its own short term self-interest.

It is a sad day when a conspiracy theory becomes fact. I guess that day has come.

The writer is a political advisor to Lena Kolarska-Bobinska, a Polish centre-right MEP in the European Parliament.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

EU backs budget support and 2030 target for renewables

The European Commission has said the EU must establish a binding 2030 target for renewable energy, pledging to include stimulus measures for the industry in its multi-annual budget proposals (post 2013) to be published later this month.

Column

Drums of war again, in Europe

Just a few weeks ago, as Europeans in several countries put their furious debates about masks and corona appsinto higher gear, Turkey and Greece almost came to blows in the Aegean Sea.

Schrems privacy ruling risks EU's ties to digital world

With more and more trade moving to the digital realm, Europe can ill-afford to cut itself off. Meanwhile, China continues to advance a vision for an internet that is fractured along national boundaries and controlled by governments.

Worrying rows over future EU chemicals policy

It is of utmost concern to the environmental health community that forces within the EU Commission are actively trying to push back against a European Green Deal that is supposed to put people's health at its core.

Letter

An open letter to the EPP on end of Hungary's press freedom

I hate to break it to you, but excuses have run out. You have to look at the images of sobbing journalists in Index's newsroom, and shoulder part of the blame. Your silence, your continued procrastination led to this.

Revealed: fossil-fuel lobbying behind EU hydrogen strategy

As with the German government – which presented its own hydrogen strategy last month – the European Commission and other EU institutions appear to be similarly intoxicated by the false promises of the gas industry.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. UNESDANext generation Europe should be green and circular
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNEW REPORT: Eight in ten people are concerned about climate change
  3. UNESDAHow reducing sugar and calories in soft drinks makes the healthier choice the easy choice
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersGreen energy to power Nordic start after Covid-19
  5. European Sustainable Energy WeekThis year’s EU Sustainable Energy Week (EUSEW) will be held digitally!
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic states are fighting to protect gender equality during corona crisis

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us