Deliverable - RS 1c WP 1 · Deliverable - RS 1c WP 1 1.5. Burdens from Oil Transportation Phase of Oil by Pipeline and by Tanker Route Due date of deliverable: August 31, 2007

1

Project no: 502687NEEDS

New Energy Externalities Developments for Sustainability

INTEGRATED PROJECTPriority 6.1: Sustainable Energy Systems and, more specifically,

Sub-priority 6.1.3.2.5: Socio-economic tools and concepts for energy strategy.

Deliverable - RS 1c WP 1

1.5. Burdens from Oil Transportation Phase of Oil by Pipeline and by Tanker

Route

Due date of deliverable: August 31, 2007Actual submission date: October 4, 2007

Start date of project: 1 September 2004 Duration: 48 months

Organisation name for this deliverable: FEEM, NTUA

Project co-funded by the European Commission within the Sixth FrameworkProgramme(2002-2006)

Dissemination LevelPU Public

PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the CommissionServices)

RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including theCommission Services)

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including theCommission Services)

2

Abstract

This report looks at the relevant burdens for oil transportation to Europe. For maritime

transportation, the report focuses on the situation at the hotspots along the tanker routes selected by

RS1c for the assessment of probabilistic externalities in marine oil transportation to Europe,

covering the available information about the economic sectors likely to be affected by oil spills, and

information about coastal protected areas in the vicinity of the hotspots As to pipelines, our main

focus was the northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline, that runs from Russia to Germany trough

Belarus and Poland. We take this pipeline as representative of onshore oil transport infrastructures

to Europe.

3

Table of contentsAbstract ............................................................................................................................................2Table of contents..............................................................................................................................3List of tables.....................................................................................................................................3List of figures ...................................................................................................................................31. Introduction..............................................................................................................................52. Oil pipelines .............................................................................................................................6

2.1. Contamination of soil and water ...........................................................................................62.2. Burdens along the Druzhba pipeline. ..................................................................................11

3. Burdens related to tanker oil transportation...........................................................................143.1 Route Ras Tanura- Rotterdam-Primorsk..............................................................................143.2. Route Novorossisk-Augusta ...............................................................................................29

4. Concluding Remarks..............................................................................................................35Appendix I: Land Use pipeline: Druzhba pipeline (Russia-Europe, Northern Branch) ................36ANNEX: Case study on burdens in the Aegean ............................................................................43

List of tablesTable 1 Distribution of spillages by hole size ....................................................................................8Table 2 Land use results long the northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline ...................................12Table 3 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Ras Tanura region....................17Table 4 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Suez region ..............................18Table 5 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Strait of Sicily. .................19Table 6 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Gibraltar Strait .................20Table 7 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in Galicia............................................21Table 8 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in Bretagne.........................................22Table 9 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Dover Strait......................24Table 10 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Rotterdam region ...................25Table 11 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Oresund Strait ................25Table 12 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Primorsk region .....................27Table 13 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Mongstad region. ...................27Table 14 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Novorossisk region. ...............30Table 15 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Bosphorus. .....................32Table 16 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Aegean. ..................................33Table 17 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around Augusta................................34

List of figuresFigure 1 Size of contaminated area and average spill volume.............................................................7Figure 2. 35-year average gross spillage volume per event by cause ..................................................9Figure 3 The route of the northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline. .................................................12Figure 4 Hotspots along the Ras Tanura- Rotterdam-Primorsk route. ..............................................15Figure 5 Protected and sensitive areas around Ras Tanura. Source: Google Earth© .........................16Figure 6 Protected and sensitive areas around Suez. Source: Google Earth©....................................17Figure 7 Protected and sensitive areas around the Sicily Straits. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA

Environmental Information Service...........................................................................................19Figure 8 Protected and sensitive areas around the Spanish Finisterre. Source: UNEP-

WCMC/IPIECA Environmental Information Service ...............................................................21

4

Figure 9 Protected and sensitive areas around the French Finistére. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECAEnvironmental Information Service...........................................................................................22

Figure 10 Detail of protected areas around the French Finistére. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECAEnvironmental Information Service...........................................................................................22

Figure 11 Protected and sensitive areas around the Dover Straits. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECAEnvironmental Information Service...........................................................................................23

Figure 12 Protected and sensitive areas around Rotterdam. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECAEnvironmental Information Service...........................................................................................24

Figure 13 Sensitive areas around Primorsk. Source: COWI..............................................................26Figure 14 Protected areas around Mongstad. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA Environmental

Information Service....................................................................................................................28Figure 15 Hotspots along the Novorossisk-Augusta route. ...............................................................29Figure 16 Protected and sensitive areas around Novorossiysk. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA

Environmental Information Service...........................................................................................30Figure 17 Protected and sensitive areas around the Bosphorus. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA

Environmental Information Service...........................................................................................32Figure 18 Protected and sensitive areas in the Aegean. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA

Environmental Information Service...........................................................................................33Figure 19 Protected and sensitive areas around Augusta. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA

Environmental Information Service...........................................................................................34

5

Burdens from Oil Transportation Phase of Oil by Pipeline and by Tanker Route

1. Introduction

The aim of this report is to collect the relevant available information related to the burdens of the oil

production chain, focusing on the oil transportation phase1.

In particular this report will look at burdens at the hotspots along the tanker routes selected for the

assessment of probabilistic externalities in marine oil transportation to Europe. This will include the

available information about the economic sectors likely to be affected by oil spills, and were

possible, information about coastal protected areas in the vicinity of the hotspots. A detailed case

study on the burdens in the Aegean Sea by NTUA is included as Annex I2.

As to pipelines, our main focus was the northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline, that runs from

Russia to Germany trough Belarus and Poland. We take this pipeline as representative of onshore

oil transport infrastructures to Europe. Our main focus here was to look at the burdens of leakages

from the pipeline on soil trough the analysis of the land use in the territories crossed by the

pipelines. We developed a simple methodology for land use assessment; however we could not find

specific data on oil spills from this pipeline. An accident however has been reported in July 2006

(Global Insight, 2006) for the southern branch of the pipeline. The rest of this report is organised as

follows. Section 2 looks at burdens from oil transportation by tanker route. Section 3 looks at

onshore oil transportation by pipeline. Section 4 concludes.

1 Burdens of the extraction phase are less complex and are dealt jointly with their impacts in Deliverable 1.6b2 This Annex followed the methodology originally formulated for the benefit transfer of environmental burdens troughspecific weightings. This methodology has been adopted in the rest of the project because, in a later stage ofadvancement of the research activity, proved not compatible with the benefit transfer methodology for environmentaldamages actually applicable to our analysis.

6

2. Oil pipelines

This section looks at the burdens related to the operation of oil pipelines.

Oil pipelines are made from steel or plastic tubes with inner diameter from 30 to 120 cm. Where

possible, they are built above the surface. However, in more developed, urban, environmentally

sensitive or potentially dangerous areas they are buried underground at a typical depth of about 1.3 -

1.6 metres (about 3 feet). The oil is kept in motion by a system of pump stations built along the

pipeline and usually flows at speed of about 1 to 6 m/s. Multi-product pipelines are used to

transport two or more different products in sequence in the same pipeline. Usually in multi-product

pipelines there is no physical separation between the different products. As the viscosity of oil and

oil products and hence the flow speed is influenced by temperature, pipelines can be operated at low

(cold pipelines) or high (hot pipelines) temperature.

There are four main kind of burdens for oil pipeline externalities:

soil: pollution of soil and from leakages of oil in the area surrounding the pipeline

water: pollution of soil and from leakages of oil in the area surrounding the pipeline

air: emissions of the volatile fraction of the hydrocarbons transported in case of leakage, and

emission of exhaust gasses from the pumping stations

accidental burdens: fire and explosions from accidental rupture of a pipeline and subsequent

ignition of the leaking flammable hydrocarbons.

In this section we will focus on the first two burdens. Accidental burdens will be dealt with in

deliverable 1.7b.

2.1. Contamination of soil and water

A crucial information to determine the impact in terms of oil pollution is the size of contaminated

land. For European pipelines, CONCAWE (2007) has performed an in-depth analysis based on the

information on 436 spillages recorded since 1983. area data is available for 232 (53%) of these

spillages This information is summarised in Figure 1.

7

Figure 1 Size of contaminated area and average spill volume

“The current CONCAWE performance questionnaire, in use with minor changes since 1983, requests reporting of the

area of ground (m2) affected by the spillage. Before that date, area data were reported infrequently. If we exclude the

one spillage that affected more than 100000 m2, and for which the gross spillage was relatively modest, there is a direct

relationship between spill size and area affected. Bigger spillage volumes affect larger areas.

This relationship is, however, to some extent fortuitous. There are two ways in which small spillage volumes can affect

larger areas of ground. Fine sprays directed upwards can be spread around by winds. This factor tends to be more

prevalent in the smaller area ranges. Other smaller spillages can be spread over larger areas by the influence of

groundwater or surface water flows. This is the main mechanism by which relatively small spillages can affect very

large areas. Conversely, comparatively large spillages, particularly those that occur over extended periods of time and in

the lower quadrants of the pipeline circumference, can have their main effect underground with relatively little impact

on the surface. Porous ground and hot arid conditions can also lead to the surface consequences being limited”.

From Figure 1 one can infer that the average area affected by a spillage is slightly larger than 1.1

hectare3. The size of the spillage is determined by the characteristics, mainly the diameter, of the

hole. In the CONCAWE report, the following relationships have been observed.

3 This figure is computed as the weighted average of the median value of each area class in Figure 1 where the weightsare the percentages shown in the same figure.

8

Table 1 Distribution of spillages by hole size 4

The spill size can help linking the area affected with the cause, as the CONCAWE database reports

the spill size by accident cause. The 35-year average spill sizes by causes are illustrated in the figure

below. Mechanical failures, natural causes and third party activity seem to be likely to cause the

largest spill. This is reasonable, as corrosion causes very small holes to start with, which can be

easily detected and repaired before they can cause sizeable damages. Natural events and third party

accidents are more likely to cause sudden ruptures of the pipelines, and mechanical failures are

mostly related with the failure of pipeline valves, flanges and other fittings and the pump stations,

which are likely to release high quantity of oil when faulty.

4 The following arbitrary definitions have been adopted for classifying hole size:• Pinhole = less than 2 mm x 2 mm,• Fissure = 2 to 75 mm long x 10% max wide,• Hole = 2 to 75 mm long x 10% min wide,• Split = 75 to 1000 mm long x 10% max wide,• Rupture = >75 mm long x 10% min wide.

9

Figure 2. 35-year average gross spillage volume per event by cause

As to water contamination, the spillage reports record the incidents where oil pollution of the

water table and underground aquifers and surface watercourses has had consequences for the

abstraction of potable water. Some 14 spillages, representing 3.2% of the total, have had some

effect. It is believed that all of these effects have been temporary. For the last five years, impacts on

other types of water have been reported. In the years 2001 to 2005, of the 57 reported spillages, 10

have affected surface water, 8 have affected ground water but only 2 have impacted potable water

supplies.”

Moreover the accidental oil and gas spills and blowouts on the onshore main pipelines can pose

danger to the coastal marine ecosystems. This can happen when onshore pipeline accidents take

place near big rivers or in locations of their crossing. Any pollution of river waters eventually

affects the sea zone near the river mouth. Such a situation happened at the end of 1994 in the Usinsk

area, Russia. An onshore pipeline rupture led to the spill of more than 100000 tons of oil with the

danger of heavy pollution of the basin of Pechora River5.

It is difficult to find more precise information regarding the burdens of oil transportation for non

European pipelines. However, for the case of Russian pipelines, something can be inferred from the

spillages recorded in the Midhas database. This database contains more than 1400 records of oil and

5 The potential hazard of such situations can be even higher for particular projects in environmentally sensitive areas,such as oil and gas development on Sakhalin. The main pipelines are supposed to be laid along the entire eastern coastof the island, right across the main spawning rivers where reproduction of the unique populations of Sakhalin salmontakes place.

10

oil products spillages, of which 63 pertain to Russian pipelines. These 63 spillages resulted on

average in 2771,7 tons of oil leaked, which contaminated on average, 4.25 hectares of land. In 19

cases (30%) the oil contaminated water bodies. In three cases however the extremely low

temperatures of Russian winter resulted in rivers freezing, and hence in a very limited

contamination of their waters.

11

2.2. Burdens along the Druzhba pipeline.

In order to assess the potential pollution on the land crossed by a pipeline, we evaluated the land

use along the Druzhba6 pipeline.

The Druzhba pipeline is the world's longest oil pipeline, carrying oil for some 2500 miles from

southeast Russia to points in Ukraine, Hungary, Poland, and Germany. Today it is the largest

principal artery for the transportation of Russian (and Kazakh) oil across Europe. The Russian oil

company Transneft is the pipeline's operator.

The pipeline begins in Samara in southeastern Russia, where it collects oil from western Siberia, the

Urals, and the Caspian Sea. It runs to Mozyr in southern Belarus, where it splits into a northern and

southern branch. The latter branch runs south into Ukraine, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and

Hungary. The northern branch crosses the remainder of Belarus to reach Poland and Germany.

There have recently been proposals to extend this branch to the German North Sea port of

Wilhelmshaven, which would reduce oil tanker traffic in the Baltic Sea and make it easier to

transport Russian oil to the United States. TheMažeikių refineryin Lithuania and Ventspils oil

terminal in Latvia are connected to the main pipeline by the branch pipeline from Bryansk Oblast..

The Druzhba pipeline currently has a capacity of 1.2 to 1.4 million barrels per day. Work is

currently underway to increase this in the section between Belarus and Poland. We focus on the

northern branch.

.

Figure 3 illustrates the pipeline’s northern branch route.

6 The name "Druzhba" means "friendship", alluding to the fact that the pipeline was intended to supply oil to theenergy-hungry western regions of the Soviet Union, to its "fraternal socialist allies" in the former Soviet bloc, and towestern Europe.

12

Figure 3 The route of the northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline.

In order to analyse the land use along this pipeline, we divided the non-EU section of the route into

shorter segments. For each segment we assessed how many kilometres of the pipeline run across

areas of the following categories:

Urban Forests Agricultural water (rivers, sea, lakes, …)

The practical recognition of these land uses was performed following the route on the high

resolution maps of Google Earth©. The results are collected in the following table. The length of the

northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline was calculated through Google Earth©, and thus it is an

approximation of the real length, which could not be retrieved from the literature (in literature there

is only the total length of the whole Druzhba pipeline: around 2500 miles or 4000 km).

Landuse code land use km % total

length

1 urban 266 10%

2 forests 716 27%3 agricultural 1.695 63%

4 water (rivers, sea, lakes, …) 18 1%

Total* 2.695

Table 2 Land use results long the northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline

The details of this analysis are reported in Appendix I.

Notwithstanding the limitations of this procedure, Table 2 highlights that the vast majority (89%) of

the land crossed by the pipeline is devoted to uses in which the quality of soil is crucial, and there is

even a tiny portion (1%) in which surface waters are at risk. Assuming that the average are affected

13

could be the same along this pipeline as in Europe, Table 2 could imply that, on average, about

7900 hectares of forest land and 18700 hectares of agricultural land are at risk of oil contamination

along this pipeline. However, assuming that the average land contamination levels relevant are

those inferred from the Midhas database for the Russian pipelines, the forest land at risk would rise

to 14366 hectares and agricultural land at risk would rise to 34008 hectares. The accident occurred

in the Bryansk region of western Russia near the border with Ukraine and Belarus on 29 July 2006

along the Southern branch of the pipeline caused 3200 tonnes to be spilled, contaminating an area

of about 1035 hectares.

14

3. Burdens related to tanker oil transportation

This section collects the information relative to the burdens at the hotspots along the maritime

routes selected for the probabilistic externalities assessment. For each route we examine the

exposition of the area around the hotspot in terms of environmental value of the cost, proxied by the

presence of protected areas. This information is recovered either from Google Earth© or from the

UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA Environmental Information Service, or other local sources.

3.1 Route Ras Tanura- Rotterdam-Primorsk

Rotterdam is the main European port for oil and oil products. The routes from Persian Gulf and the

Baltic Sea to Rotterdam go trough a number of sensitive areas. The following ones have been

selected as hot spots for this route:

Ras Tanura–Rotterdam: Ras Tanura, Suez Canal, Sicily Strait, Gibraltar Strait, Spanish Finistere,

French Finistére, Dover Strait, Rotterdam.

Primorsk–Rotterdam: Primorsk, Strait of Oresund,. The map in Figure 4 illustrates the route and

identifies the hotspot, in terms of their location, the administrative territorial units relevant and their

area, and resident population. A secondary branch of this route collects the Norwegian oil

15

production at Mongstad and brings it directly to Rotterdam.

Figure 4 Hotspots along the Ras Tanura- Rotterdam-Primorsk route.

16

Ras tanura (Saudi Arabia)

Ras Tanura is a city in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia located on a peninsula extending into

the Persian Gulf. Geograpically, the Ras Tanura complex is located a distance south of the modern

industrial port city of Jubail and north across Tarut Bay from the old port city of Dammam. Tarut

Bay is an historically important fisheries nursery ground for hundreds, perhaps thousands of years.

Tarut Island and the adjacent oasis of Qatif were important agricultural communities well before oil

was discovered in the Eastern Province. They continue to provide the local markets with fresh fish

and produce throughout the year.

Figure 5 Protected and sensitive areas around Ras Tanura. Source: Google Earth©

Around Manifa, Tarut Bay and Dawhat Zaium in the Gulf of Bahrain are ecologically sensitive

mangrove areas, which support a myriad of marine species and provide valuable spawning and

nursery grounds for several fish species of commercial value.

The Gulf of Bahrain, particularly around Tarut Bay, Dawhat Zaium and Dawhat Salwah has some

of the best seagrass beds. These support a population of some 2500-3000 Dugong or sea cows, a

species threatened with extinction throughout much of its range, together with sea turtles, shellfish,

shrimps and commercial fish species7. The economic burdens are specified in Table 3 below. The

table, as the analogous ones that follow, displays the economic characteristics of the smallest

administrative unit, around the hotspot, for which data are available (e.g. the province).

7 http://www.unep-wcmc.org/latenews/Gulf_war1991/Gulf.pdf

17

Eastern Province(Ras Tanura)

GDP (2005) M€ (WB) 33.872,65

GDP per capita (€) (2005) 1.465,80

Population (2004) (Wikipedia/World Bank) 3.360.157

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2005) M€ (FAO) 237,11

GDP relative to Tourist Sector*(2005) M€ 2.709,81

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2005) (WTTC) 94.577

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2005) 3.093

Region's area (sq km) 710.000

Table 3 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Ras Tanura region

Suez Canal (Egypt)

The Suez Canal is a large artificial canal in Egypt, west of the Sinai Peninsula. It is 163 km long

and 300 wide at its narrowest point, and runs between Port Said on the Mediterranean Sea, and Suez

on the Red Sea. The canal allows two-way water transportation, most importantly between Europe

and Asia without circumnavigation of Africa.

Figure 6 Protected and sensitive areas around Suez. Source: Google Earth©

The St. Katherine Area in the Sinai peninsule was declared a Nature Protectorate (Reserve) by

Prime Ministerial Decree in 1988 under the provisions of Law No 102/1983. It achieved its present

18

area of 4300 km2 by Decree in 1994. It was designated because of its rich endemic flora and

abundant wildlife, its fertile agricultural area, with a large Bedouin population, and its importance

to three major world religions. The economic burdens8 are specified in the table below.

Egypt Regionsaround the Suez

Canal

Port SaidGovernorate Suez Ismaila

GDP (2004) M€ 25217,14 3215,17 2190,23 2519,38

Population (2004) (Egypt HumanDevelopment database) 1816200 521500 469300 825400

GDP per capita (€) (2004) (Egypt Human Development database) 13884,56 6165,24 4667,01 3052,31

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ 26,57

GDP relative to Tourist Sector*(2004) M€ 294,92

Region's area (sq km) 22322,80 1344,96 17840 4482,80

Table 4 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Suez region

Strait of Sicily (Italy)

The Strait of Sicily is the strait between Sicily and Tunisia. It is about 160 km wide and divides the

Tyrrhenian Sea and the western Mediterranean Sea from the eastern Mediterranean. Deep currents

in the strait flow from east to west, and the current nearer the surface travels in the opposite

direction.

8 http://whc.unesco.org/archive/advisory_body_evaluation/954.pdf

19

Figure 7 Protected and sensitive areas around the Sicily Straits. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA EnvironmentalInformation Service

The economic burdens are specified in the table below.

Sicily Nabeul Governorate

GDP (2004) M€ (Eurostat/UN) 77050,50 1397,43

Population (2004) (Eurostat) 5013081 694.000

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ (INE/WTTC) 389,40 14,67

GDP relative to Tourist Sector(2004/2005) M€ (INE) 1902,02 97,34

GDP relative to Tourist Sector(2005/2003) M€ 2083,15 206,36

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2004/2003) (INE/WTTC) 47900 30698

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2004) (INE) 15900 4244

Region's area (sq km) (Wikipedia) 25710 2788

Table 5 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Strait of Sicily.

Strait of Gibraltar

The Strait of Gibraltar is the strait that connects the Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea and

separates Spain from Morocco. There 13 km of ocean separating Europe from Africa at the strait's

narrowest point. The strait depth ranges between 300 and 900 meters.

Although only 15 km wide at its narrowest point, it is crucial for one of the three major north-south

corridors for migrating birds (e.g. raptors, storks) in Europe. Gibraltar Bay acts as the only

important foraging area for these transient seabirds in the strait.

20

The Nature Protection Ordinance (1991) protects all cetaceans and turtles in the territorial waters of

Gibraltar (UK). Fishing with nets and seabed raking within this three mile zone are also forbidden.

There is, moreover, complete legal protection for birds. A large area of the upper rock of Gibraltar,

which is a staging post for hundreds of thousands of migrating birds, has been designated as a

nature reserve. The law in Spain, however, is different. Although some species of birds are

protected, and there are plans for some protected areas as designated Natura 2000 sites along the

Spanish shore of the Straits, there is not the blanket protection afforded by law in Gibraltar.

Regarding offshore waters in the Strait there does not seem to be any regulations (Cortes, 1999).


Andalusia Tangier-Tétouan

GDP (2004/2003) M€ (IMF/UN) 115347,90 2421,65

GDP per capita (€) 15271,84 980,28

Population (2005) 7552978 2470372

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004/2003) M€ 245,01 60,54

GDP relative to Tourist Sector(2005/2003) M€ (/UN) 10782,44 360,83

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2004/2003) 30534 87619Number of workers in Fishery sector (2004/2002)(CIHEAM/INFOPECHE) 6900 29727


Table 6 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Gibraltar Strait

Cape Finisterre (Spain)

Cape Finisterre is a rock-bound peninsula in the uttermost west of Galicia, Spain. The shoreline

between Cape Finisterre and La Coruña, known as the Coast of Death because of its many

shipwrecks, is home to one of Europe’s largest populations of black-legged kittiwakes, as well as

other seabirds such as cormorants and gannets.

21

Figure 8 Protected and sensitive areas around the Spanish Finisterre. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECAEnvironmental Information Service


Galicia (Spain)

GDP (2004) M€ (Eurostat) 42868,60

GDP per capita (€) 15841,32

Population (2004) (Eurostat) 2706126

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ (INE) 811,93

GDP relative to Tourist Sector*(2004) M€ (INE) 2377,52

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2004) (INE) 58300

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2004) (INE) 30100

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2003)/kmq 1,02

Region's area (sq km) 29574

Table 7 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in Galicia

French Finistere (France)

Finistere is located at the western point of France. In 1992, the isles of Bannec, Balanec and

Trielen, in the Molene Archipelago were officially declared to be a natural reserve. This was the

result of several years of scientific research and local and institutional cooperation, and sealed the

archipelago’s fate as an environmental haven9. The establishment of this reserve is part of a national

policy for the establishment of protected areas.

9 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001245/124596eo.pdf

22

Figure 9 Protected and sensitive areas around the French Finistére. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECAEnvironmental Information Service

Figure 10 Detail of protected areas around the French Finistére. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA EnvironmentalInformation Service

The economic burdens are specified in the table below

Bretagne (France)

GDP (2004) M€ (Eurostat) 71136,20

GDP per capita (€) 23548,13


Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ (Istat) 612

GDP relative to Tourist Sector*(2004) M€ (Istat) 1634

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2004) (Eurostat) 33900Number of workers in Fishery sector (2004) (Eurostat) 7000Region's area (sq km) 27208

Table 8 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in Bretagne

23

Dover Strait

The Dover Strait, also called Pas de Calais Strait, is a sea strait of about 30 km wide separating the

North Sea from the English Channel and the Atlantic Ocean.

Most maritime traffic between the Atlantic Ocean and the North and Baltic Seas passes through the

Strait of Dover, rather than taking the longer and more dangerous route around the north of

Scotland. The Strait is one of the busiest international seaways in the world, regularly used by over

400 commercial vessels daily. This has made safety a critical issue, with HM Coastguard

maintaining a 24-hour watch over the strait and enforcing a strict regime of shipping lanes.

It is used by a wide variety of migratory animals including many species of fish and birds. A small

number of migrating cetaceans pass through the area, though most move along the west of the

British Isles (following the Gulf Stream). The importance of the pathway is determined by the

shallow and narrow characteristics of the channel, its geographical location and configuration.

It is also an important shipping channel.

Species using the corridor under water migration Fish (e.g. the horse mackerel) are the most

important migratory animals using or passing through the Dover Strait although some scientists

think that common dolphins, bottlenose dolphins and long-finned pilot whales also migrate using

this corridor. It is also an important passage for many migratory (water-)bird species. In 1994,

70000 individuals were counted representing 253 species.

Figure 11 Protected and sensitive areas around the Dover Straits. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECAEnvironmental Information Service

24


Nord-Pas-de-Calais South East England

GDP (2004) M€ (EUROSTAT) 84818,90 253935,30

GDP per capita (€) 21058,86 31368,39

Population (2004) (Eurostat) 4027706 8095261

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ (Eurostat) 186 33,40

GDP relative to Tourist Sector(2004) M€ (Eurostat) 1465 6675,10

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2004) 35500 192568,81

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2004) (EUROSTAT) 2100 1280


Table 9 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Dover Strait

Rotterdam (Netherlands)

The Rotterdam port is a major European oil trading hub and home to several oil refineries,

including Europe's biggest. The port of Rotterdam is the largest in Europe and was the world's

busiest port from 1962 to 2004, when it was overtaken by Shanghai.

The port's main activities are petrochemical industries and general cargo handling and

transshipment. The harbour functions as an important transit point for bulk materials and between

the European continent and overseas.

Rotterdam is situated on the banks of the river Nieuwe Maas one of the channels in the delta formed

by the Rhine and Meuse rivers. The major rivers of the Netherlands are of international ecological

importance, e.g. for migrating waterfowl and as breeding areas for fish.

Figure 12 Protected and sensitive areas around Rotterdam. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA EnvironmentalInformation Service


25

Zuid-Holland(Rotterdam)

GDP (2004) M€ (Eurostat) 106241,40

GDP per capita (€) (2004) (UN) 30777,28



GDP relative to Tourist Sector*(2004) M€ 1470

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (hotels and restaurants) (2004) (Eurostat) 34200

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2000) (FAO) 3418,39


Table 10 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Rotterdam region

Strait of Oresund

Oresund is the strait that separates the Danish island Zealand from the south Swedish province

Scania. Its width is just 4 km at the narrowest point (between Helsingør, on Zealand, Denmark, and

Helsingborg, Sweden). Oresund is one of the three Danish Straits that connect the Baltic Sea to the

Atlantic Ocean (via Kattegat, Skagerrak, and the North Sea), and is one of the busiest waterways in

the world. The economic burdens are specified in the table below.

Sjaelland &Copenhagen

Regions(Denmark)

Scania(Sweden)

Copenhagen(Denmark)

Sjaelland(Denmark)

GDP (2004) M€ (EUROSTAT) 51105,98 36313,04 36266,62 16610,82

GDP per capita (€) (2004)(Statistics Denmark)

26949 31320,63 33429 20469

Population (2004) 1896396 1159397 1084885 811511

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ (Eurostat) 51,30 6,92 21,95

GDP relative to TouristSector(2004) M€ (Eurostat)

837,70 469,34 358,47

Number of workers inTourist Sector (2004) 31269,08 15423,03 13380,75

Number of workers inFishery sector (2004)(EUROSTAT)

1405,35 232,51 601,38

Region's area (sq km)(Wikipedia) 7273 11027 7273

Table 11 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Oresund Strait

26

Primorsk (Russia)

In 2005 Russia exported almost 300 million tonnes (Mt) of oil and oil products via the ports of

Russian Federation (RF) and it's neighbouring countries. More than one third of the oil was

transported trough the Gulf of Finland and the Baltic Sea. The most important oil terminal in Gulf

of Finland is Primorsk, located 120 km northwest of St. Petersbusrg, and has been in operation

since december 2001. The oil is originated from the Siberian oilfields. In most cases the destination

of the oil shipments through the Gulf of Finland is Western Europe.

Primorsk is located in environmentally-sensitive waters that are ice-bound for some six months a

year.

The parameters characterising the environment in the Baltic were mapped and their sensitivity to oil

spills were ranked. The parameters included coastal types, birds, fish, plankton, benthic fauna and

protected areas10.

Figure 13 Sensitive areas around Primorsk. Source: COWI

Primorsk is located near sensitive areas in the Baltic Sea. The economic burdens are specified in the

table below.

10 http://www.cowi.com/NR/rdonlyres/4B011BB2-82BE-4B77-B43B-CD5AB40E44FB/0/02331301006e.pdf

27

Leningrad Oblast(Primorsk)

GDP (2004) M€ (UN) 5052,48

GDP per capita (€) (2004) (UN) 3026,88

Population (2002) (UN) 1669205



Number of workers in Tourist Sector (hotels and restaurants) (2003) (ILO,LABORSTA) 14604,17

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2003) (ILO, LABORSTA) 2053,17


Table 12 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Primorsk region

Mongstad (Norway)

Mongstad is an industrial site located in the municipalities of Lindås and Austrheim in Hordaland,

Norway. The site features a oil refinery for Statoil and other oil companies, including Norsk Hydro.


Hordaland(Mongstad)

GDP (2001) M€ (Wikipedia, Eurostat) 14438,42

GDP per capita (€) (2001) (UN) 32950,75

Population (2006) (Wikipedia) 453574



Number of workers in Tourist Sector (hotels andrestaurants) (2004) (Eurostat) 6984,55

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2004) (Eurostat) 1449,08


Table 13 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Mongstad region.

There is a nature reserve around the Mongstad refinery

28

The probability for environmental damage from accidental oil spills in the North Sea is significant

higher in the vicinity of the oil terminals Sture, Mongstad, Kårstø and Sola compared to other parts

of the west coast of Norway. The probability for environmental damage from shuttle tanker oil

spills is found to be higher than from accidental discharges (offshore blowouts). A high number of

important and vulnerable natural resources are located in these areas where important seabird

breeding, summer areas and feeding/migration areas are present11.

Figure 14 Protected areas around Mongstad. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA Environmental InformationService

11 http://www.mrdb.no/Dokumenter/MRDB%20brochure%20English.pdf

29

3.2. Route Novorossisk-Augusta

The route from Novorossisk, to Augusta ha been selected because of its direct relevance for the

marine environment of Souithern Europe, as it crosses stretches of the Mediterranean Sea among

the richest of environmental and cultural features, and because it is the main route for Russian and

Central Asian oil to Europe . Morever it goes trough one of the most critical passages for oil tanker

navigation, the Bosphorus Straits.

The route includes the following hotspots: Novorossisk, Bosphorus, Aegean Sea (Northern

Southern and Crete), Augusta. The map in Figure 15 illustrates the route and identifies the hotspot,

in terms of their location, the administrative territorial units relevant and their area, and resident

population.

Figure 15 Hotspots along the Novorossisk-Augusta route.

30

Novorossisk (Russia)

Novorossiysk is the largest port in Southern Russia and its oil terminal at Sheskhranis is responsible

for over 50% of Russian crude oil exports by sea. There is a second terminal at Novorossiysk, the

Caspian Pipeline Consortium’s (CPC) new oil terminal at Yuzhniy Ozerejevka. Oil is

predominantly pumped to the terminal from the Tengiz oilfield in Western Kazakhstan and oil

fields in Azerbaijan. The CPC terminal is situated 5 km offshore in waters more than 50-metre deep

and is located west of the Sheskhranis oil terminal. The area around Novorossiysk is protected.

Figure 16 Protected and sensitive areas around Novorossiysk. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA EnvironmentalInformation Service


Kraj di Krasnodar*(Novorossisk)

GDP (2004) M€ (UN) 15513,41

GDP per capita (€) (2004) (UN) 3026,88

Population (2004) (UN) 5125221

Fishery Sector’sGDP (2004) M€ 108,59

Tourist Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ 46,54

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (hotels andrestaurants) (2003) (ILO, LABORSTA) 44841,48

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2003) (ILO,LABORSTA) 6304,16


Table 14 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Novorossisk region.

31

Bosphorus (Turkey)

By Turkish Straits is meant the passage from the Black Sea, through the Istanbul Strait (Bosphorus),

the Sea of Marmara, and the Canakkale Strait (Dardanelles) into the Aegean Sea. It is the only sea

route out of the Black Sea and as such the only sea route through which Russian and Caspian

exports can reach the Mediterranean. The Bosphorus passes through theheart of Istanbul, Turkey’s

largest city with a population of approximately 12 million. It is 31 km long and on average 0.8

nautical miles wide, though at its narrowest point it is only 660 metres wide. Depth varies from 35

to 12 metres and vessels passing through are required to make 12 course alterations, including one

turn of 45° at the narrowest point and another turn of 80°.

The Strait has very special ecological conditions in terms of both marine environment and terrestrial

environment since it connects two different seas, Mediterranean Sea and Black Sea, which have

different salinity, temperature etc. In addition, the Turkish Straits (Bosphorus and Canakkale) form

an "acclimatization zone" for transiting species, allowing those from the Mediterranean to adjust to

the different environmental conditions in the Black Sea, and vice versa.

The Dardanelles is another waterway similar to the Bosphorus. It is 70 km long though it is not as

narrow as the Bosphorus: its narrowest point is 1.5 km wide. The accident risk is therefore much

lower as, firstly, it does not pass through the centre of a large city (reduced consequences) and

secondly, the topology allows for a safer passage (reduced incident probability). As such, when

referring to the Turkish Straits, a number of factors refer mainly to the Bosphorus, however, where

appropriate, data for the Dardanelles have been included.

Though a number of pipeline projects bypassing the Straits have been constructed or are

beingplanned1, their high transport costs per barrel mean that oil transport by tanker through the

Bosphorus is still by far the preferred transport route for exporters. At present roughly 1.7 million

barrels of oil per day (bpd) is moved through the Bosphorus. Predicted increases in Russian and

Caspian exports mean that by 2010 another 2-3 million bpd could be added. The International

Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that the Straits have a maximum capacity of 1.8 million bpd. The

Straits are classed as international waters and as such Turkey has an obligation under the Montreux

Convention of 1936 to permit free transport for merchant traffic. At that time there were only

approximately 17 vessel transits per day, weighing on average 13 tonnes and mostly carrying grain.

Today there are over 130 vessel transits a day of which roughly 15% are oil tankers, often as big as

150’000 tonnes –the maximum size for the Turkish Straits. In addition to this 1.5 million people

32

commute from one side of the Bosphorus to the other each day, which makes it one of the busiest

waterways in the world.

Despite Russian opposition, Turkey unilaterally implemented certain traffic regulations in the

Straits following an accident in 1994, with the aim of enhancing the navigational and environmental

safety and security in the Straits which at that time already had a dense level of traffic. In 1998

Turkey introduced further regulations governing vessel flow through the Straits including a five-

fold increase in passage tariffs to help pay for ship safety measures. Both the regulations in 1994

and 1998 were supported by the United Nations International Maritime Organisation (IMO). Turkey

has also recently completed installation of a new vessel tracking System (VTS) which should help

further reduce the risk of accidents.

Figure 17 Protected and sensitive areas around the Bosphorus. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA EnvironmentalInformation Service


Istambul KocaeliGDP (2005) M€ (IMF) 63483,62 7642,35

GDP per capita (€) 886,60 106,73

Population (2005) 10018735 1206085

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ 145,42 17,51

Tourist Sector’s GDP (2005) M€ 2029,70 244,34

Number of workers in Tourist Sector(2004) 100028,85 12041,77

Number of workers in Fishery sector(2004) (CIHEAM) 9066,06 1091,40


Table 15 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around the Bosphorus.

33

Aegean Sea (Greece)

The Aegean Sea is located between the coasts of Greece and Turkey and the islands of Crete and

Rhodes. It covers an area of 210 square kilometres and contains over two thousand islands of

varying sizes, most of which belong to Greece. The Aegean is also filled with submerged rocks and

island populations that depend on fishing and tourism for their livelihood. It has been named as a

key area of the Mediterranean in need of protection by the World Wildlife Fund.

This area of the Mediterranean has a massive amount of tanker traffic, as it is here that tankers

travelling from the Black Sea and the Suez canal converge, increasing the likelihood of a collision.

Figure 18 Protected and sensitive areas in the Aegean. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA EnvironmentalInformation Service


Northern Aegean Southern Aegean Crete

GDP (2004) M€ 297.93 4875 8803.1

GDP per capita (€) 14462.63 16142.17 14647.41

Population (2004) 206000 302000 601000

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ 77 185 36

GDP relative to Tourist Sector(2004) M€ 91 910 1.155

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2003) 5478 17839 26.792

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2003) 2239 3586 1.161

Region's area (sq km) 3836 5286 8.336

Table 16 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors in the Aegean.

34

Augusta (Italy)

The port of Augusta in Sicily is the third largest in Italy after Trieste and Genoa in terms of oil

imports. It can handle tankers of up to 385000 dwt and serves the ISAB refinery, Italy’s second

largest. The port is situated in the Marina di Melilli between Siracusa and Augusta. The area is one

often frequented by tourists most of the year, and there is a nature reserve on the coast just south of

the port. In 2003, 31 million tonnes of oil were imported through Augusta.

Figure 19 Protected and sensitive areas around Augusta. Source: UNEP-WCMC/IPIECA EnvironmentalInformation Service


Augusta (Sicily)

GDP (2004)M€ 77050.5

GDP per capita (€) (Eurostat, 2003) 15707,70

Population (2004) (Sicily) 5013081

Fishery Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ (Istat) 389,40

Tourist Sector’s GDP (2004) M€ (Istat) 2083,15

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2003) 47900

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2003) (Istat) 15900

Coasts’ length (km) (Sicilyweb) 1000

Number of workers in Tourist Sector (2003)/kmq 1,86

Number of workers in Fishery sector (2003)/kmq 0,62


Table 17 Economic features of the fishery and tourist sectors around Augusta.

35

4. Concluding Remarks

Importing oil to Europe can expose to the risk of contamination the land and the water crossed

along the route, jeopardizing ecosystems and economic activities dependent from the quality of

land, water bodies and coasts. This deliverable has collected the available information about the

relevant burdens for oil import to Europe. For pipelines, it has focused on the northern branch

Druzhba pipeline. The analysis has highlighted that about 90% of the route covered by the pipeline

crosses sensitive areas, such as agricultural land, forests and water bodies. Given the average size of

contaminated areas by oil spills in Russia, this implies that up to 50000 hectares may be at risk of

oil contamination.

For maritime oil transportation, we have reviewed the main burdens along three major import routes

to Europe: from the Persian Gulf to Rotterdam, from the Baltic Sea to Rotterdam, and from the

Black sea to Italy. The emerging picture is one of substantial vulnerability, with many protected

areas close to hotspots along the route, and relevant economic activities likely to be adversely

affected by the consequences of oil spill accidents. The information gathered about these burdens

has been directly used for the evaluation of probabilistic externalities in Tasks 1.7and 1.8.

36

Appendix I: Land Use pipeline: Druzhba pipeline (Russia-Europe,Northern Branch)

land use1 Urban2 Forests3 Agricultural4 water (rivers, sea, lakes, …)

Pipeline’s segments Length(Km)

km Land use (1/2/3)

33 215 1Samara - Syzran

Russia 9865 320 191 310 27 1

Syzran - KuznetzRussia 128

27 316 226 318 2

Kuznetz - TamalaRussia 232

145 3268 313 2Tamala - Voronezh

Russia 2887 119 1

215 355 233 384 2

Voronezh - StarodubRussia 441

35 33 147 3Starodub - Zlynka

Russia 7222 21 110 235 335 230 340 2

Zlynka - MozyrRussia - Belarus 171

20 1

Mozyr - Stolin 169 7 1

37

15 330 216 396 2

Belarus

5 32 16 36 24 310 1

Stolin - confine BelarusSud (51°51' N - 26°24'

E)Belarus

31

3 210 220 310 26 32 25 312 219 16 23 3

confine Belarus Sud -Drogichin (confine

Belarus Sud (52°01'N-25°11'E))Belarus

99

6 28 315 214 39 247 3

Drogichin (confineBelarus Sud) - Brest

Belarus101

8 16 129 35 25 32 257 3

Brest - SiedliceBelarus - Poland 107

3 18 1

5 32 13 32 22 32 21 3

Siedlice - WarszawaPoland

90

2 2

38

2 33 22 31 123 33 28 311 12 28 113 11 21 11 21 31 2

0,5 36 26 37 23 31 22 419 31 117 34 2

Warszawa - PlockPoland 92,5

8 12 1

2 415 34 238 31 417 31 43 31 19 31 12 22 3

Plock - PoznanPoland 179,5

1 2

39

0,5 41 31 49 31 41 32 46 31 118 31 13 35 21 116 36 12 21 45 18 15 31 19 37 29 3

0,5 15 31 18 32 22 3

0,5 41 14 22 3

0,5 47 32 11 39 22 37 3

Poznan - GorzowPoland

119,5

23 2

40

3 12 19 37 24 38 22 33 21 32 23 39 24 34 22 33 12 33 2

Gorzow - Confine WPoland (53°01' N -

14°16' E)Poland

73

5 33 22 11 31 16 31 14 3

0,5 17 31 16 21 11 4

0,5 12 2

0,5 17 3

0,5 12 3

0,5 12 23 3

0,5 10,5 42 2

Confine W Poland(53°01' N - 14°16' E) -

RostockPoland - Germany

188

1 3

41

1 11 22 31 12 420 31 12 33 22 42 25 3

0,5 110 30,5 13 32 23 31 21 32 13 32 27 32 21 32 212 30,5 113 30,5 15 2

0,5 12 22 35 11 3

0,5 10,5 31 22 34 1

42

Total land use distribution along the Druzhba pipeline Northern Branch:

*the length of the Druzhba Pipeline Northern Branch was calculated through Google Earth, and so it is anapproximation of the real length, which it was impossible to find in literature (in literature there is only the total lengthof the whole Druzhba Pipeline: around 2500 miles or 4000 km)

43

ANNEX: Case study on burdens in the Aegean

1. Introduction

Most oil movements globally are at present implemented by tanker. Europe is amajor oil consumer and imports oil from a number of routes, such as from theArabian-Persian Gulf (through Suez, Sumed and Cape of Good Hope), fromRussia (maritime across the Black sea and the Baltic sea, Druzhba pipeline acrosseastern Europe), from North Africa, West Africa, Syria across the Mediterranean,from the North Sea, etc.

In this context, securing Europe’s future oil needs will become of increasing geopolitical and strategic importance given the predicted global increase in oildemand and the increasing density of the maritime traffic in the waters around theEU and in the enclosed Black Sea. Moreover, the concern over the threat ofmaritime accidents and the ensuing significant environmental damage caused bythe resulting oil spills is increased, based on a number of major tanker spillsoccurred from 1967 to the present day.

Each oil route has a number of special features, which make it of singularimportance and interest. Such features are the oil traffic density, the number ofports and more specific characteristics, such as the existence of scattered islandsand other insular features situated at short distances from international shippingroutes. In this context, the identification of “critical passages”–hot spots, is ofsignificant importance.

This is one of the main aims of the “WP1: Assessment of externalities concerning the extraction and transport of oil” of the NEEDS project. It will give decision makers in both the public and private sectors the information necessary regardingthe burdens and impacts linked with extraction and transport of oil (both bymaritime and by pipeline). This working document includes information regardingthe crude oil and petroleum products transport routes of the European area with aview to the main routes used by ocean tankers and their related characteristics. Inaddition, great emphasis has been laid on the Aegean Sea transport route and therelevant hot spots. In addition, a first attempt for evaluating the oil spill impact inthese areas in terms of some qualitative criteria has been elaborated.

The report, apart from the introduction consists of three section dedicated to thedescription of oil routes characteristics around the EU, as follows:

Section 2 is devoted to the description of the main sea oil routes, the valuationof tankers in use and the European strategic pipeline routes.

Section 3 shapes the picture regarding the oil tanker spills internationally andthe ship-incidents related to oil pollution in the Mediterranean Sea.

Section 4, which is the core of this working document, is devoted to theassessment of burdens in the Aegean, where the spill’s impact in an area is evaluated based on six qualitative criteria.

Finally, the Appendix provides a brief outlook of the main crude oil and oilproduct supply sources of Southern and Northern Europe.

44

45

2 Burdens Assessment in the Aegean Sea

2.1 Methodological Notes

The methodology to be followed for the assessment of burdens in the Aegeantransport route is a 4-step methodology, as illustrated in the following Figure 4.1.

Figure 2.1: Steps of the Methodology

For each route /pipeline under scrutiny, the relevant ecological burdens have to beidentified. This will need some selection among the possible burdens. Each stretchof sea, coast or land along the oil transport route will in principle be negativelyaffected, but it is more efficient to focus on hot spots (e.g. protected areas, coastalcities). For each selected burden, the following factors have to be taken underconsideration:

Area of impact;

Probability of stress occurrence;

Severity of impact;

Data uncertainty;

Intrinsic value of receptors, e.g. fishes, birds, humans.

For the evaluation of each selected burden, scores on a scale of “1-5”will be givenfor each one of the abovementioned factors and will be multiplied together toobtain a total score.

In this context, the procedure that was followed for the specific part of the maritimetransport route of the Aegean Sea is described in the following paragraphs.

2.2 Examined Maritime Transport Route

Description of the specific maritimetransport route

Identification of hot spots and the kindof ecological injuries

Description of factors that affecteach burden

Evaluation of each burden accordingto the value of each factor

Step 2: EcologicalBurdens

Step 1: MaritimeTransport Route

Step 3: Factors AffectingBurdens

Step 4: SignificanceEvaluation

Description of the specific maritimetransport route

Identification of hot spots and the kindof ecological injuries

Description of factors that affecteach burden

Evaluation of each burden accordingto the value of each factor

Step 2: EcologicalBurdens

Step 1: MaritimeTransport Route

Step 3: Factors AffectingBurdens

Step 4: SignificanceEvaluation

46

2.2.1 Novorossiysk to Augusta

The route from the Russian Black Sea deep water port in Novorossiysk, throughthe Turkish Straits (comprising the Bosphorus, the Marmara Sea and theDardanelles), through the Aegean Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean as far asthe Italian port of Augusta in Sicily, is of a great importance, due to the fact that itis used to transport black sea crude oil. The supply of Russian oil becoming ofincreasing importance as oil importers try to diversify the supply chain so as not torely too heavily on Middle Eastern oil.

Until recently, almost all of the oil exported to Southern and Western Europe andbeyond from the Caspian and Ural oil fields was transported via tanker from portsin the Black Sea, through the Turkish Straits, into the Mediterranean and on to thefinal destination (predominantly the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Germany andSpain). However, the risk of a major accident causing disruption to the route, aswell as environmental and socio-economic damage, means that a comprehensivestudy of the area is necessary to facilitate future investment decisions.

The route from Novorossiysk to Augusta can also be used to transport black seacrude oil to U.S. Gulf and NW Europe. As black sea crude oil quantities areexpected to increase in the next years, the most economically efficient solution isbeen examined. Indicatively:

The freight cost to transport crude oil from Novorossiysk through the TurkishStraits to US Gulf is estimated to be 21,3€/MT, in 2010.

On the other hand, the transportation of crude oil from Novorossiysk to US Gulfthrough Burgas - Alexandroupolis Pipeline (BAP), a short pipeline (~300 km),which runs through flat terrain of two EU countries (Bulgaria and Greece), isestimated to have a freight cost of 15,2€/MT, in 2010.

In addition, the freight cost from Novorossiysk to NW Europe (Rotterdam), in thetwo cases is 15,7€/MT and 11,9 €/MT (2010), respectively.

Finally, the freight cost from Novorossiysk to Augusta is:

11,3 €/MT with total delays in the Turkish Straits and 9,3 €/MT with BAP respectively.

10,0€/MT with reduced delays in the Turkish Straits.

10,1€/MT through a combination of BAP and Turkish Straits.

The freight cost to transport crude oil from Novorossiysk to Augusta via alternativeroutes is illustrated in figure 2.2.

Along the examined maritime transport route the Aegean Sea was chosen to beexamined in terms of the likelihood of an accident happening in that particular siteand the environmental and socioeconomic consequences that such an accidentwould entail.

47

9,3

11,3

10 10,1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

BAP Straits with totaldelays

Straits withreduced delays

Combined Straigtsand BAP

Figure 2.2: Transport cost comparison (€/ΜΤ) between Turkish Straits and BAP,from Novorossiysk (old port) to Augusta.

Source: Panos E. Cavoulacos, CERA Eurasia Transportation Summit 2005.

2.2.2 Agean Sea

The Aegean Sea is a part of the Mediterranean Sea, located between the Greekpeninsula and Asia. It is connected to the Marmara Sea and Black Sea by theDardanelles and Bosporus.

The islands constitute the main trait of the Greek nature and a basic element ofGreek culture. In the Greek space 6.000 islands are scattered in the Aegean andIonian sea, from which only the 227 are inhabited. However, only 78 islands haveabove 100 residents. The Greek archipelago, with 7.500 kilometers of islandshoreline - in the total Greek shoreline of 15.000 kilometers - makes Greece anideal destination for marine and summer tourism.

The Aegean islands can be simply divided into three groups:

The North Aegean sea;

The South Aegean sea;

Crete.

The Northern Aegean sea is found in north-eastern utmost Greece and South-eastern border of European Union and includes 3 prefectures, the PrefectureLesvos (17 Municipalities and 1 community), the Prefecture Chios (10Municipalities) and the Prefecture Samos (8 Municipalities). The region consists of9 islands. The islands that belong in the region are scattered in the north-easterndepartment of the Aegean Archipelago, most of them are found closely to thecoasts of Asia, and constitute the Eastern border of European Union with Turkey.The capital of Northern Aegean Region is Mitilini. In the area of Northern Aegean,the Sporades island complex is included.

The Southern Aegean region is found in south-eastern part of Greece and theEuropean Union and includes 2 prefectures, the Prefecture Dodekanisou (25

48

Municipalities and 2 communities) and the Prefecture Cyclades (20 Municipalitiesand 11 communities).The region is constituted of 79 islands (48 lived and 31uninhabited) and crowd of rocky islands. The islands that belong in the region arescattered in the southern department of the Aegean Archipelago and most of themare found in relatively big distance from the Ermoupoli (Island Syros) that is thecapital of the region.

Figure 2.2: Aegean Sea

The relevant data concerning the Aegean islands’ complex include fishermen, species, tourism, recreational activities, etc. Crucial data regarding the Aegeanregion are indicatively presented in the following Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Aegean Data

Northern Aegean Southern Aegean Crete

GDP 3.183 M€ 4.838 M€ 9.035 M€

GDP per capita 15.685€ 15.971€ 15.038€

Fishery Sector’s GDP 74 M€ 178 M€ 35 M€

GDP relative to Tourist Sector 88 M€ 878 M€ 1.114 M€

Number of workers in Tourist Sector 5.478 17.839 26.792

Number of workers in Fishery sector 2.239 3.586 1.161

Coasts’ length(km) 1.357 2.964 1.046

The pollution that is caused by the petroleum products from the ship charge and

N o rth A e g e a nN o rth A e g e a n

S o u th A e g e a nS o u th A e g e a n

C re teC re te

N o rth A e g e a nN o rth A e g e a n

S o u th A e g e a nS o u th A e g e a n

C re teC re te

49

discharge in the land reaches the quantity of oil from marine accidents. Accordingto the European Environment Agency, from the 42.000 tons of oil that reach eachyear the waters of Mediterranean, the 20.000 tons emanate from the losses of theregion‘s 60 refineries. Nevertheless, these are only quantities that are recorded, since based on the estimates of the World Fund for the Nature, only the 30% oflosses are traced by the authorities.

In Greece, the danger of a serious accident exists in the areas around therefineries of oil, in the big commercial harbours and in marine regions withincreased ship traffic. In particular, more than 100 millions tons of petroleumproducts are transported annually via the Greek seas, due to the nodal geographicplace of the country. Therefore, the danger of a serious accident is quitesignificant, since Greece has the privilege to offer some of the most beautiful andinteresting marine and coastal ecosystems in Europe and to give shelter to someof the most threatening marine species in the planet (as the Mediterranean monkseal “Monachous-Monachous” and the marine turtle “Kareta-Kareta”).

In Greece, there have been developed 12 stations for confronting the pollutionfrom petroleum products. These stations have the possibility to interfere either withboats or dispersive chemicals.

In the Aegean, sailing is quite developed, fact that also incorporates increasedrisks for pollution, originating from refuses and waste, in the case of course theseare rejected in the sea. Characteristic is the fact that the Mediterranean althoughrepresents the 0,7% of the total water surface, it also exhibits the 17% of the totalpetroleum pollution of the seas. In the Aegean, the hydrocarbons’ concentration is approximately 0,5% mg/m2. Every year it is estimated that approximately 24.000ships pass through the “Dardanelia narrows”. These ships contribute significantly to the pollution of the sea in the area. The total capacity of these ships is 227million tons, from which the 16 million tons contain crude oil. The number of theGreek fishing boats in the Aegean is 1.550. The passengers’ transport from passenger ships is realized from 85 ships and 70 flying dolphins. Twelve tankersload petroleum and refined petroleum products from the Greek refineries.

2.3 Identification of Ecological BurdensBased on the literature search for relevant site-specific information, a number ofsignificant oil spills have been implemented in the Greek territory, as illustrated inthe following Table 2.2.

It has to be interlined the fact that difficulties exist regarding the oil spills recording.The lack of a specific authority that is delegated and able to collect and recorddata from marine accidents and oil spills seems to be the major problem.

Indicatively, some oil spills in the Greek territory are the following:

Oil leaked from the Greek tanker Iliad killed wildlife and destroyed fish farms inthe bay of Pylos. A three-mile-long (4.8 km) oil slick was caused when thetanker ran aground off the island of Spaktiria on October 9 1993.

Greek authorities raced against time to prevent an environmental disaster,following a fuel oil spill from a sunken cargo ship off a popular stretch of touristbeaches northeast of Athens. Miles of coastline was threatened by the spill,which came from the Cambodian-registered cement carrier Eurobulker X. The

50

35,264 deadweight ton (dwt12) vessel broke in half a week earlier, while loadingcement at Lefkandi port, central Greece. It was the second spill inside a week,following a smaller spill from a grounded freighter off the island of Kythira(September 200).

A complete list of oil spills in the Greek territory is depicted in the following Table2.2, by year, amount and ship.

Table 2.2: List of Accidents

Year Ship name LocationAmount

(tons of oil spilled)

1972 Trader Aegean Sea 37.000

1979 Messiniaki Frontis Kaloi Limenes Crete 12.000

1980 Irenes Serenade Pylos 100.000

1987 Rabigh Bay III Aspropyrgos 500-1.000

1988 Jupiter & Adige (collision) Piraeus 500-1.000

1992 Geori Chernomorya Central Aegean Sea 8.000

1993 Iliad Pylos 800

1994 La Guardia Elefsina Bay 400-800

1996 Kriti SeaAghioi Theodoroi

Korinthia300-500

2000 Eurobulker X Lefkanti Evoia 300

Based on these accidents’ impacts, the following ecological injuries can be identified:

Marine organisms: The components of crude oil and its products contain avariety of unions that are toxic for a wide spectrum of marine organisms. Theeggs and the larvae of fishes are more sensitive in the pollution. The oil causesdisturbances in the physiology and in the behaviour of organisms andabnormalities in the growth of fishes, leading finally to their premature death. Inaddition, the oil can involve changes in the constitution marine flora. In this wayhowever it reverses the balances of entire trophic chain.

Coasts: The repercussions of oil spills in the ecosystems of rocky coasts areparticularly serious. In all the accidents there exists a disturbance of ecosystemand the reversibility to the previous situation does not become possible for a lotof years. On the other hand, the oil cannot be detached easily by the sandycoasts. In addition, when it is in liquid form, then it is absorbed in bigger depth,and its decomposition becomes very difficult.

Seabirds: Because of the oil spills, each year hundreds thousands seabirdsare dying. A lot of birds of which the plumage is moistened cannot float inwater and finally drown.

Marine turtles: The marine turtles are particularly agile in water; however theirneed to come out to the surface in order to breathe (or even to sleep) makes

12Deadweight Ton - "dwt" - A unit of a vessel's capacity for cargo, fuel oil, stores and crew, measured in metric tons of 1000 kilograms.

A vessel's dwt or total deadweight is the total weight the vessel can carry when loaded to a particular load line.

51

them particularly frail in cases of extensive oil spills. The pollution of coasts,where the turtles have their eggs, has a significant impact to their reproduction.

Monk seals: Few years before, the available data for the repercussions of oilspills in monk seals were very little and generally the perception that thesemarine mammals avoid the oil spills prevailed. This picture was altered afterthe accident of "Exxon Valdez" in Alaska, where hundreds of monk sealsbecame victims of the oil spill.

Human health: Even if the direct repercussions of oil in the trophic chains areconsidered often small scale, long-lasting repercussions in the humanorganisms are not excluded as well as phenomena of cancer-causinghydrocarbons’ accumulation from the consumption of marine organisms.

Specific hot spots on the Aegean sea are the following:

Samothrace: The island is oval-shaped with an area of almost 180Km2; itscoastline is 32 km. There are 12 small, rural settlements on the island. Theinhabitants make a living by agriculture, stockbreeding, fishing and lumbering.In latter years the island has begun to develop its tourism. The island is uponthe migrant routes of many birds moving from the warmer climates to thecooler ones of Northern Europe in spring, and back again in autumn. Birdstraversing the sky come from far off places and rest in the island beforecontinuing their long trip north. The island’s coastal areas constitute important resting and feeding stations during the migration of a large number of birdspecies. The island constitutes cliffs, which are the kingdom of seagulls, wildpigeons, eleonora’s falcons, peregrines and wild goats. One of Greece’sandEurope’s rarest mammals, the Monk Seal (“Monachus monachus”) finds refugein the sea caves of this area. There are 700-1000 individuals in all of theMediterranean, most of which make their habitat in the Aegean.

Sporades island complex: In this island complex is situated a marine park,which is considered a protected area. In this context:

Ship transit upper the 500 tones is forbidden;

Ships can only pass 3 mile north to the marine park, through the channelbetween Skopelos Island and Alonnisos Island, which therefore can beconsidered as a critical passage.

The Alonissos National Marine Park is the first to open in Greece and thelargest in Europe and the Mediterranean, which hosts 250 Mediterraneanmonk seals “monachus monachus”, a species that is extinct from the westernMediterranean and other rare species of flora and fauna, such as the agrielia(wild olive tree), thamnokiparisso (low growing cypress tree), Poseidon’s seaweed, the Giouros wild goat, mavropetritis hawk and aigoglaros (a type ofseagull). The Marine Park is located in an area of 2,200 sq km, north ofAlonissos and includes the uninhabited islands and islets of Peristera, DioAdelfoi, Kira Panagia, Pappous, Skantoura, Gioura, Psathoura and Piperi. Theimportance of the area is great and in 1992 was officially recognized as theNational Marine Park and is inspected by the Coastal Guard Authorities.

Cyclades island complex: Cyclades are a part of the vast number of islandswhich constitute the Greek archipelago in the Aegean Sea. The Cycladescomprise about 220 islands. It is considered one of the finest vacationdestinations worldwide, with rich species of flora and fauna.

Pylos cove: This cove is a significant biotope (Gialova lagoon, Sfactiria coast)and a place with extensive fish-farming facilities. Charge and discharge of oil isforbidden, only bunkering is permitted out of the cove.

52

Crete: Crete is the largest of the Greek islands and the fifth largest in theMediterranean Sea. It covers an area of 8,336 km² and a coastline 1046 kmlong. Crete is one of the most popular holiday destinations in Greece. In summore than two million tourists visited Crete last year. The endangeredloggerhead (“caretta-caretta”) sea turtle lay their eggs on a number of quietbeaches around the island. In regions of Crete (Rethymno, Hania) and thePeloponnese (Kyparissia and Lakonikos) 500-800 nests of the turtle “caretta-caretta”are laid annually. Crete is also a stopover each spring for birdsmigrating from Africa to Europe as well as in the autumn as they make thereturn flight.

2.4 Significance EvaluationIn order to evaluate the impacts of a possible oil spill in the Aegean Sea, the aimwas to identify the route under scrutiny and to prescribe the relevant ecologicalburdens focusing on hot spots. For each selected hot spot the ecological impactswas given a score, based on:

Area of impact: The area of impact is defined in terms of the distance from theoil route; the length of adjoining shorelines, the distance between theshorelines and inhabited areas, etc.

Probability of stress occurrence: The probability of stress occurrence mainlyconcerns the difficulties within the ship passage. The existence of many smallislands, scattered islands, submerged rocks and other insular features situatedat short distances from international shipping routes.

Severity of impact: The severity on environmental and economical impact ofthe region is related to the GDP, relative to the fishery sector, the GDP relativeto Tourist Sector, as well as on the number of protected areas.

Reversibility of impact: The reversibility of impact concerns the difficulty toencounter the environmental and economic damage caused by the potential oilspill. It is also related to the environmental and social regulation of oiloperations’ in sensitive areas, the social sensitization and the environmentalawareness.

Data uncertainty: It is related to the existence of related institutions andauthorised offices for the collection of relevant information and data.

Intrinsic value of receptors: The intrinsic value of receptors is close related tothe number of workers in Tourist Sector, number of workers in fishery sectorand the number of species in these regions.

As it can be seen on table 2.2, scores on a scale of 1-5 was given for each criteriaand multiplied together to obtain a total score for each hot spot, where, 1 = VeryLow, 2 = Low, 3 = Medium, 4 = High and 5 = Very High. These can be comparedto the risk scores in a partial and supplementary analysis of the benefits ofdifferent options.

The attempt of figuring out qualitatively how an oil spill will affect these areas wasachieved through an extensive literature review, relevant site-specific informationas well as through collection of personal experiences from the Greek sectoroperators.

In particular, a detailed explanation of how the values for each hot spot wereestimated are described in the following paragraphs:

Samothrace: It is considered medium graded in the criteria “Area of impact”,

53

because of the fact that is located in a relatively far distance from the specifictransportation path. The criterion “Probability of stress occurrence” should be scored very high due to the extremely narrow ship route at the maritime area ofSamothrace. The“Severity of impact” possesses a medium grade, as the most important impact concerns the animal kingdom and especially the protected“Monachus monachus”.The “Reversibility of impact” is scored very low, due to inefficient regulation and deficient technological know-how. On the other hand,“Data uncertainty” as well as “Intrinsic value of receptors” criteria is very high rated. There are no reports and data regarding oil spills in the region. Inaddition, residents are making a living by mainly fishing and the island has justbegun to develop its tourism.

Sporades island complex: It appears that this area is characterized from a lowcriterion of “Area of impact” and “Probability of stress occurrence”, because the complex is located in the wide area of the particular route from Novorossiysk toAugusta. The high score of the criteria “Severity of impact” is explained by the fact that the tourism is vital for the welfare of the area. Very low is the score ofthe criterion “Reversibility of impact”, as thelack of sufficient technologicalknow-how is a fact. “Data uncertainty” is scored high, because there are very few existing data regarding oil spills in the region. “Intrinsic value of receptors” seems to be graded very high due to the existing protected areas (AlonissosNational Marine Park) in the region as well as the big number of fishers andemployees in the tourist sector.

Cyclades island complex: The region is estimated to have a very high score inthe criteria “Area of impact” and “Probability of stress occurrence”. Cyclades complex possess many small islands and the examined maritime transportroute literally passes though this island complex. That is why Cyclades is asignificant area of impact and also has a high probability of stress occurrence.This area is assessed by a very high score in the criteria of “Severity of impact”, as it is very rich in flora and fauna and holds a large length ofshoreline. On the other hand, “Reversibility of impact” is scored very low, due to insufficient regulation and lack of sufficient technological know-how. Thecriteria “Data uncertainty” is scored high, due to the lack of data regarding oil spills in the region. Finally, the area seems to obtain a very high score in thecriteria “Intrinsic value of receptors”, as the region is a very important tourist destination and its economy depends greatly on fishing.

Peloponnese: The criterion “Area of impact” is considered to be scored medium, as this hot spot is located far from the examined route. Therefore,“Probability of stress occurrence” is assumed low due to the easy access in theregion. The criterion of “Severity of impact” is gradedwith a medium scorebecause the most important impact regards the protected “caretta-caretta”. Peloponnese is a region with a large share in the country’s GDP. Consequently, the area will recover quickly from an oil spill accident, so“Reversibility of impact” obtains a high score. High is also accounted the “Data uncertainty”, as very little information exists regarding oil spills in the area. An important number of people are occupied in the fishing sector, thus “Intrinsic value of receptors” is presumed to be graded high.

Pylos cove: It is defined as an area with a low criterion of “Area of impact”, because it is rather far from the specific route and also possesses a smalllength of coastline. For the same reasons as well as the fact that there are nodifficulties within the ship passage from the spot, “Probability of stress occurrence” has a very low score. “Severity of impact” is rated medium, as the cove is a biotope. “Reversibility of impact” is considered to be scored very low, due to the existing difficulties to encounter the environmental and economicdamage caused by the potential oil spill. “Data uncertainty”, like in almost all

54

the hot spots, is scored high with the lack of reports regarding oil spills toblame. Finally, the criterion “Intrinsic value of receptors” is appears that should be graded high, because of the consequences to the fishers.

Crete: It can be considered as having a large “Area of impact”. Crete is the biggest Greek island, has a coastline 1046 km long and is located in arelatively small distance from the route under examination, so that the abovecriteria has a very high score. “Probability of stress occurrence” is medium scored, because as the passage in that area is easy, it is not so likely an oilspill accident to occur. “Severity of impact” in case of an oil spill seems to be graded very high for the reason that the Tourist Sector play a significant role tothe island’s economy as well as for some endangered species, such as“caretta-caretta” and various kinds of birds. As Crete is a very large and rich island (GDP / capita = 15.038 €), a case of an oil spill it could be easily dealt with that is why the criterion “Reversibility of impact” presumed high graded.“Data uncertainty” is assumed to be scored high, due to the lack of data regarding oil spills in the region. Finally, the area is supposed to be graded witha very high “Intrinsic value of receptors”, due to the fact that the number of workers in Tourist Sector in the region is more than 25 thousand, which is veryhigh, as well as many residents on fishing for their livelihood.

The significance evaluation for each one of the above-mentioned hot-spots, aswell as their total values, by multiplying the values for each one of the criteria, isdepicted in the following Table 2.3.

Table 2.3: Significance Evaluation

Hot Spots Area ofImpact

Probability ofstress

occurrence

Severityof

impact

Reversibilityof impact

Datauncertainty

Intrinsicvalue of

receptorsTotal

Samothrace 3 5 3 1 5 5 1125

Sporades islandcomplex 2 2 4 1 4 5 320

Cyclades islandcomplex 5 5 5 1 4 5 2500

Peloponnese 3 2 3 4 4 4 1152

Pylos cove 2 1 3 1 4 4 96

Crete 5 3 5 4 4 5 6000

In general, it can be considered that:

The Aegean is populated by people that depend on fishing and tourism fortheir livelihood.

This is the reason why the intrinsic value of receptors is quite high for all thedefined hot spots.

The data uncertainty criterion is high considering that the region’s capacity regarding the oil spills is very small.

For the same reason, together with insufficient regulation and lack of sufficienttechnological know-how, the reversibility of impact in almost all hot spots islow.

Crete and Cyclades are considered to have a significant area of impact as theyare located in a very small distance from the route under scrutiny and posse agreat length of shoreline. Likewise these two areas are those to suffer from avery high severity of impact in case of an oil spill. Both of them depend ontourism and fishery sector, not to mention that some places of Crete are

55

considered natural protected area.

Finally, at the maritime area of Samothrace and Cyclades island complex it ismore likely an oil spill accident to occur due to the extremely narrow ship route.Therefore, the score of the probability of stress occurrence factor is very highin these cases. This is the reason why Crete is presumed to be the oneexperiencing the most serious impacts in case of oil spill.

56

Documents

Deliverable - RS 1c WP 1 · Deliverable - RS 1c WP 1 1.5. Burdens from Oil Transportation Phase of Oil by Pipeline and by Tanker Route Due date of deliverable: August 31, 2007