Mixed reaction to new pipeline route

SHELL E&P Ireland's publication of a modified onshore pipeline route for the Corrib gas project in north Mayo has drawn a mixed reaction from Erris community interests.

An Bord Pleanála has also denied that it has completed consultations with the Corrib gas developers on "pre-planning" aspects of the proposed amended route.

"Consultations are ongoing and the board has no comment on those consultations," the planning appeals board said in a statement.

Three Government Ministers will have to give various approvals for the amended route, and it may also be the subject of another oral hearing. The amended route is 9.2km long and runs for 40 per cent of the original high-pressure pipeline track. As with the original route, the landfall is at Glengad, and it crosses Sruwaddaccon Bay into Rossport, where it continues in a northeasterly direction, and then southeasterly through commonage shared by over 60 landowners.

It cuts into the Glenamoy bog complex, a special area of conservation (SAC), before crossing Sruwaddaccon Bay for a second time and travelling south to the refinery at Bellanaboy.

RPS - which was hired by Shell to identify the modified route on foot of a recommendation of Government mediator Peter Cassells - says the new route is "twice as far from occupied housing" as the original route.

An option to run straight down Sruwaddaccon Bay, also an SAC, was abandoned, mainly on environmental grounds, it says.

RPS adds that, following statutory consultation, applications and an environmental impact statement will be submitted to An Bord Pleanála under the Strategic Infrastructure Act. Consents will also be sought from Minister for Energy Eamon Ryan under the Gas Act, and from Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries Mary Coughlan under foreshore legislation.

Permission may also be required from Minister for the Environment John Gormley for the SAC dimensions to the route at Glengad and Glenamoy. This will be a matter for An Bord Pleanála to decide, RPS group director PJ Rudden told The Irish Times.

Compulsory acquisition orders are also to be issued by the developers for access to all land involved, even though such orders had been issued before for the original route, Mr Rudden said.

The original route had not been subject to planning, and consents were signed by former marine minister Frank Fahey before the 2002 general election.

Shell E&P Ireland's managing director Andy Pyle said that this announcement showed that "we have made every reasonable effort to address the concerns expressed by local people". The Bellanaboy gas terminal was now 30 per cent complete, he said.

Shell to Sea in Mayo said that the modified route "exposes not just the people of Rossport, but the people of the entire parish of Kilcommon to unprecedented and unacceptable risk".

"We do not give our consent to this and will resist it through every legal, political and campaigning means open to us, even though this could lead to more years of unnecessary conflict," its spokesman John Monaghan said.

"This conflict can be resolved if there is a genuine willingness on the part of Shell and Statoil to reach agreement and secure real consent," Mr Monaghan said. "The tragedy is that there has always been a better way. What we need is resolution and agreement, not the forced imposition on an unwilling community of an unwanted and unsafe project." The Pro Gas Mayo group said it welcomed the announcement, and said it should "allay fears which householders in the Rossport area had".

The Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Statoil plans heightens concern

CAMPAIGNERS opposed to the controversial Corrib gas pipeline and refinery at Bellanaboy have said that possible plans by Statoil to use the pipeline to transport gas from a field four times bigger than the Corrib field have reaffirmed fears that the site will be used for further development.
Statoil, who are one of the partners along with Shell in the Corrib gas project, have begun searching for gas in an adjacent area off the Mayo coast and they have confirmed that if any gas is found it is possible that Statoil could use the Corrib gas pipeline being built by Shell to transport it.
Statoil co-owns the exploration rights to the two areas it plans to explore with Shell, but unlike the Corrib gas project, Statoil are the senior partner and are solely responsible for the exploration work. The companies have held on to one of the two areas since 1994 and secured the rights to explore another area last year. The size of the two areas totals 1,970 square kilometres compared to 467 square kilometres for the area that produced the Corrib gas find.
The news of the gas exploration work and the possibility of using the Corrib gas pipeline came as little surprise to the opponents of the Corrib gas project who said they have constantly raised the issue of further development of the site. Dr Mark Garavan said there is a potential for more gas finds off the Mayo coast and the real reason for the development of the Bellanaboy site is for for further expansion.
“That news has come as no surprise, it has been one of the arguments we have been making for years. Bellanaboy as a development was never only about Corrib but it is clearly going to be about the development of further gas fields in the north east Atlantic. The reason Shell and the Corrib developers were so keen on a land base for a refinery site was for the expansion of a development of a future well and it accounts for the reason for a high pressure pipeline. We always argued that this was not just about Corrib, and what’s really the real issue here is the development of a site with the capacity for expansion,” said Mark Garavan.
A spokesperson for Shell to Sea, John Monaghan told The Mayo News that at all the planning stages they have always tried to highlight the issue of expansion at Bellanaboy, but this was refuted by the developers, who said it was a once-off. He said the news that Statoil would look to use the site is confirmation that the site will not just be about Corrib and will lead to the increase in the industrialisation of a rural area.
“This is confirms the statement of the Department of the Marine, Communications and Natural Resources who have been promoting new licences to explore in Atlantic waters and have advertised the Corrib infrastructure as potentially reducing the development costs of any other find. The developers were never pushed on the future expansion of the site and it seems our fears are coming true and are well-founded,” he said.
In light of the new exploration of the gas field, Independent TD, Dr Jerry Cowley called for the re-negotiation of the gas exploration deals to ensure that Ireland benefits from the new finds. He said that at present the Norwegian Government will be the beneficiaries of the Corrib gas find while Ireland will receive nothing from the riches of the gas coming ashore.
Efforts to contact a Shell representative on Monday failed.
Anton McNulty
Mayo News

The Corrib Gas Licence Saga Continues

Lorna Siggins , Western Correspondent with The Irish Times reports that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has denied claims that it was under political pressure to issue an early ruling on the licence application for the Corrib gas refinery in north Mayo.

The EPA was responding to criticism by the Shell to Sea campaign yesterday on the timing of its preliminary decision on a pollution prevention and control (IPPC) licence for the refinery being built at Bellanaboy.

The ruling has been welcomed by Shell E&P Ireland and its Corrib gas partners, Statoil and Marathon, and by the Pro-Gas Mayo group, comprising business interests in the area.

It is subject to a 28-day consultation period and may go to an oral hearing before a final licence is issued.

Shell to Sea said a decision was not expected before March 7th. However, the agency said this was the final date by which it must give a ruling.

As an independent body, it did not come under any influence in relation to the date of its decision, a spokeswoman said yesterday.

The licence deals with emissions and the environmental management of the facility. IPPC licences aim to prevent or reduce emissions to air, water and land, reduce waste and use energy/resources efficiently, according to the EPA.

Before a licence may be granted the agency must be satisfied that emissions do not cause adverse environmental impacts.

The EPA said that if approved, the proposed decision provided for the processing of 9.9 million cubic metres of natural gas a day which will be exported to the Bord Gáis Éireann distribution network.

The agency added that it was "satisfied that emissions from the refinery, when operated in accordance with the conditions of the proposed licence, will not adversely affect human health or the environment and will meet all relevant national and EU standards".

More than 85 conditions attached to the interim ruling refer to various aspects of the environmental management, operation, control and monitoring of the proposed refinery.

They include what the EPA describes as "strict controls" on emissions and a "high standard of treatment" of waste water which will be discharged from the terminal by a pipeline offshore.

The EPA said the discharge will be "outside" the Broadhaven Bay Special Area of Conservation.

The conditions, it said would be monitored by the Office of Environmental Enforcement, through "environmental audits, unannounced site visits and systematic checks on emissions".

An IPPC licence was applied for by the Corrib gas partners on December 8th, 2004, and the agency sought further information - specifically in relation to the environmental impact statement. This information was received on October 12th, 2006, and was available on its website for further submissions.

Submissions will be accepted during the 28-day consultation period, and an oral hearing may be requested by any person or group or by the applicant.

Corrib protesters bruised

Liam McNally in The Irish Times writes of how three people sought hospital treatment following scuffles between gardaí and protesters outside Shell's Corrib gas site in north Mayo yesterday.
Between 50 and 60 protesters from the Shell to Sea campaign gathered at Bellanaboy bridge when workers at the Shell site were being driven past to the refinery site's entrance gates.
A Garda spokesman said scuffles broke out after a garda was attacked and pulled among the protesters. Other gardaí went to his assistance and were assaulted. He said some had their uniforms torn in the incident.
The spokesman denied batons had been used by gardaí and rejected claims that some gardaí were not wearing mandatory identity numbers on their shoulders. He said a Garda sergeant was pushed into the path of a slow-moving bus carrying Shell workers. He was not seriously injured and remained on duty.
Three protesters - all local men - were injured in the scuffle. One was driven to Mayo General Hospital in Castlebar, some 45 miles away. Another man received three stitches to an injury on his face, while a third man, with a suspected broken nose, also attended the hospital later for an X-ray.
An American television crew filming in north Mayo yesterday captured the incidents on camera. Gardaí are investigating the confrontation.
PJ Moran from the Shell to Sea campaign denied that protesters started the trouble.
"A Garda sergeant recognised one of the men in the group and ordered another garda to pull out the man. That is how it all started. That is when the scuffles broke out. We categorically deny that Shell to Sea initiated the incident."
Mr Moran also rejected the Garda claim that no baton was used. "One man was injured by a baton today. He was struck on the back of the head and a family member drove him to hospital for treatment. Several people asked to speak to the commanding officer today but no garda came forward."

Corrib gas - what's going on?

Dr Mark Garavan, a lecturer at GMIT in Castlebar, the spokesperson for the Shell to Sea group wrote this article for the Western People.

The time has come for the people of Mayo to ask themselves what is going on with the Corrib Gas project, writes Dr Mark Garavan.
FOR OVER six years the real issues regarding the Corrib gas project have been consistently obscured or deliberately ignored. The most recent obstacle being raised to prevent the issues being finally addressed is fatigue. We are told that the Corrib conflict has become boring, is repetitive and that it is time for everyone to move on. It is as if the unfortunate participants in this sorry saga are there to provide a spectacle of entertainment and that if there are no new plot twists they should pack up and go home.
But what precisely does this mean? Those who must live beside Shell and Statoil’s proposed project have no choice about where they live. Contrary to the carefully contrived public relations spin the issues that have given rise to the Corrib gas conflict remain. Despite the last dreadful six years, the project proposed in 2000 remains substantially the same project being proposed in 2007. There is still a processing plant at Bellanaboy and still a production pipeline routed close to people’s homes in the village of Rossport. The only significant changes that have occurred are that the original pipeline route might be tweaked; that excavated peat is being dumped out-side Bangor rather than Bellanaboy; and that gas will be released raw into the atmosphere at Bellanaboy rather than being flared.
The core problem with the Corrib gas project remains the decision to locate the processing plant nine kilo-meters inland. Why is this being opposed? Let me outline a number of brief reasons.
First, the plant is being constructed on a bog. To build it 500,000 tonnes of wet Atlantic peat must be removed. This is an extraordinarily risky procedure, one never before attempted on this scale. The risk of peat run-off, aluminium build-up, increase in peat instability in a wide area and general water contamination is high. This is a serious matter given that Carrowmore Lake, the source of most of the drinking water for Erris, is just two miles away from the site.
Second, gas processing involves a number of hazardous activities. In the event of a fire or explosion, the area is poorly served by necessary support infrastructure such as medical facilities, fire fighting capacity and accessible roads. Yet the plant is being proposed for a populated area with a number of houses some hundreds of yards from it. In addition, the inland location of the plant necessitates the routing of a production pipeline also through populated areas which brings in its wake additional risks.
Third, the processing gives rise to a number of chemical by-products. Discharges will occur to both air and water. There will be a high-pressure flare stack some 40 metres high, two low pressure chimneys and the developer will ‘cold vent’ methane to the air. All of this will degrade the environmental quality of the area and give rise to ongoing local anxiety about health.
Fourth, the insertion of this huge plant into an entirely rural and nonindustrialised area will change the character of the area and transform it from a location of intimacy and familiarity to one that would be alien to many of its inhabitants. The physical building itself will cover twenty-two acres of ground and will operate 24/7 with attendant noise and lighting.
Finally, it is clear that Shell’s determination to secure the Bellanaboy site is driven by their expectation of developing further gas wells in the future. This was acknowledged by them at the An Bord Pleanála oral hearing. The 400 acres available at Bellanaboy permits them to build additional processing capacity in the future.
These issues are not invented or contrived. They are genuine concerns whether you agree with the detail or not. What therefore should those who hold these concerns do? Stay quiet? Remain indifferent? Avert their eyes? Instead, from the outset those who have campaigned under the umbrella of Shell to Sea have approached this conflict in a positive manner. We have proposed that the gas can be processed offshore and that this would effectively resolve the difficulties. What is so radical and unreasonable as that? Not only have we from the outset defined clearly what the problem is we have equally detailed a viable solution.
Surely the time has come for the people of Mayo to ask themselves what is really going on with this project. Who is really benefiting? What are the much-lauded benefits that justify this project being forced through?
Is it security of supply? No, because Bord Gas makes it quite clear that most Irish gas comes from the North Sea and that there is no medium term threat to the continuity of those supplies. Is it lower cost? No, the price of gas is determined by global market forces and Corrib will be purchased at full market price. Are there significant financial benefits to the State? Again no. No royalties are being extracted, no equity share taken, no windfall tax levied.
All exploration and development costs can be written off against tax at 100% from year one. Thus very little financial benefit will arise. Might there be jobs from the project? Minimal, other than in the short-term construction of the plant. Once the plant is operational only fifty jobs will be needed. The companies are not obliged to employ Irish work-ers on their exploration rigs nor do they have to source their supplies from Ireland. Is it gas for Mayo? No, gas is already going to be provided to a number of towns prior to the possible development of the Corrib well. The development of Corrib and whether Mayo should receive gas or not are two separate matters.
The real beneficiaries are Norway (because of Statoil’s involvement), Scotland (where the bulk of the industry’s supplies are sourced) and the shareholders of Shell and Marathon. Any other presentation of the reality is self-serving. It is clear that for the New Year we need to pause, take stock and agree a proper development that meets with local consent and delivers real national and local benefits. Why should the people of Mayo not deserve and receive the best?

TDs regret cancellation of Corrib gas protest

Members of the Oireachtas who support the Shell to Sea campaign yesterday expressed their regret that a protest planned for Friday could not go ahead and criticised the use of batons by gardaí during a recent demonstration at the site by the protest group.

Responding to the announcement that organisers had called off a protest at the site of the Corrib gas project on "health and safety grounds", the group of TDs and Senator David Norris called for continued support for the campaign.

At a press conference in Dublin, Green Party leader Trevor Sargent said the Government "really has to ask itself how have we come to this point".

He said he had attended some of the daily protests at the site in Bellanaboy, Co Mayo, and described the actions of gardaí during the last "day of protest", on November 10th, as a "real disgrace".

Gardaí used batons to disperse protesters who had come from across the State and one person was hospitalised.

Mr Norris said the gardaí had "engaged very clearly in brutality" and it was a "disgrace that the police force of a state be used against the Irish people, in the interests of a multinational corporation". "This is a watershed in civil rights. This was and would be a peaceful protest. It's a disgrace."

Chief Supt Tony McNamara of the Mayo Garda Division said following the incidents that he was "particularly disappointed and sad" about them. Two gardaí had sustained minor injuries - one was punched in the eye and another suffered a strained finger. He said the protesters were well organised and their numbers had been boosted by about 20 "non-natives".

Martin Ferris, TD and Sinn Féin spokesman on natural resources, said his party would continue to support the Shell to Sea campaign.

He reiterated his support for the campaign's call for an independent commission of inquiry into the dispute.

"We would call on the Government to recognise the potential of the commission of inquiry proposal and for the thousands of people out there who have supported this campaign from the beginning to keep up the pressure."

A spokesman for Shell to Sea said that suggestions by the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, and the Minister for Justice, Michael McDowell, that the campaign had been infiltrated by outside interests was "nonsensical".

"The safe exploitation of the Corrib gas field is a national issue as the gas is a national resource."