Nabucco gas pipeline

The Nabucco pipeline project is based on the idea to bring Caspian or Middle Eastern gas through Turkey to the EU. Its planned route is 3300 kilometres long with an estimated construction cost of almost EUR 8 billion.

Quick facts:
  • planned final capacity is 31 billion cubic metres of gas
  • half of the estimated costs (EUR 7.9 billion) could be financed by international financial institutions
  • in September 2010, the European Investment Bank (EIB), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the International Financial Coorporation (IFC), the World Bank's private lending arm, initiated their appraisal procedures

Among the main promoters of the project are the European Commission (EC) and several EU member states. The main justifications for Nabucco are its role in ensuring energy security and fighting climate change.

Yet there remain serious doubts over whether the Nabucco pipeline can help to solve any of these problems. Moreover, it will bring limited public benefits and comes with serious social and environmental concerns.

Bankwatch believes that Nabucco should not receive public support, either financial or political.

Four important reasons for not providing public funds for this project.

    1. Do not contradict the EU's policy of human rights' promotion

    For many years the Nabucco project has faced problems when it comes to guaranteeing sufficient gas supplies. The only country offering enough gas is Turkmenistan, one of the most authoritarian regimes in the world (in a recent Freedom House survey, Turkmenistan received the same score as North Korea).

    more details

    See also our position paper Our energy security, Turkmens' misery (pdf).

    OurEnergySecuritycover

    If the political dialogue with Turkmenistan is to bring any results for changing this corrupt and undemocratic regime, a clear signal has to be given now. Negotiations over the supply of Turkmenistan's gas to Europe should be preceded by the formulation of measurable benchmarks to show the transition of Turkmenistan towards becoming a more democratic state. These demands should be made public. Only when they are met, should the EU move to initiate business negotiations over gas supply.


    2. Do not support fossil fuels addiction

    Public financial and political support for fossil fuels investments undermines EU climate policy targets. If we commit to Nabucco now, Europe will be using it for importing gas in at least 50 years' time. We believe that public financial and political support should be exclusively focused on energy efficiency and renewables.

    more details


    3. Bet on energy efficiency to bring real energy security

    Real energy security and independence can be achieved by increased energy efficiency. Central and eastern Europe wastes a lot more energy than western Europe, and this is clearly detrimental for the region's economies. We can, though, achieve the goal of energy security by rationalising our energy use, for example: insulating houses, lowering losses in transmission of energy and heat, increasing the efficiency of existing power generation units, and better integration of EU energy market.

    more details


    4. Invest in technologies benefiting local people

    Unlike big fossil fuels investments, concentration on energy efficiency will not only contribute to energy security and emission reductions, but also can reap numerous ancillary benefits (“double dividend”) for social cohesion and economic development such as reducing energy bills for households and providing new employment and business opportunities, especially in the sector of small and medium enterprises.

    more details


Nabucco is receiving significant public support even though:

  • It may ultimately benefit the governments of the most authoritarian regimes in the world at the expense of citizens.
  • No assessment of an alternative way to deliver energy security, through increasing energy efficiency for example, has been conducted.
  • It may involve Europe in long-term cooperation with unstable regimes that do not always stick to contractual commitments on gas deliveries.
  • No political risk assessment for the whole project has been made public.
  • No climate assessment of the project as a whole has been done.

 

For more information contact Piotr Trzaskowski, Bankwatch's Energy & climate coordinator or Laszlo Fazekas, the Bankwatcher in National Society of Conservationists (MTVSZ) / Friends of the Earth Hungary.


Share:



Publications

Bankwatch Mail

May 14, 2012

Following the EBRD's controvesial adoption in 2010 of a 'calibrated strategic approach' to guide its activities in the totalitarian state of Turkmenistan, annual discussions between the bank and civil society organisations have been taking place, with the most recent last month.

Study

February 16, 2012

How can fossil fuels and uranium be kept in the ground and agrofuels off the land in ways that do not inflict suffering upon millions? Mainstream policy responses to these issues are largely framed in terms of "energy security". Yet far from making energy supplies more secure, such policies are triggering a cascade of new insecurities for millions of people.

Briefing

May 15, 2011

The democratic revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East have not quite spread it to the authoritarian regimes of Central Asia. Nevertheless nervous reactions among leaders in these countries have proven another weakness of the proposed Nabucco pipeline project, in that the stable gas supplies promised by the project under the capacious term "energy security" are much less "secure" than previously expected.

Advocacy letter

January 20, 2011

The International Finance Corporation (IFC) is considering financing the Nabucco gas pipeline project. Should the IFC decide to finance the project, it risks repeating the serious economic, environmental, social and human rights mistakes associated with the Baku Tbilisi Ceyhan (BTC) and Chad-Cameroon pipeline projects and involving the World Bank Group in another highly problematic, politicized and economically and environmentally unsustainable project.

Study

September 10, 2010

This paper examines the less obvious aspects of the Nabucco gas pipeline project - its possible impact on Turkmenistan, a country notorious for its grave human rights situation and the dictatorial tendencies of its political leaders. It also discusses how, with a lack of public oversight over gas revenues in Turkmenistan, the construction of Nabucco may lead to the strengthening of one of the most brutal regimes currently in existence.

Briefing

May 10, 2010

Although the Nabucco gas pipeline is still nothing more than an idea on the drawing board it has attracted unprecedented political support and managed to swallow millions of euros of EU taxpayer's money without an assessment of its effect on transit and gas supplying countries. CEE Bankwatch network urges the EBRD to properly assess all impacts it may have on societies and the environment and to consider financing alternative ways to ensure energy security, namely by energy efficiency measures.

Official document

April 9, 2010

The letter from Heidi Hautala, Chairwoman of the European Parliament's Subcommittee on Human Rights, puts forward a request to Commissioner for Energy Guenther Oettinger to include a meeting with human rights activists and raise the human rights situation in discussions with authorities during his visit in Turkmenistan.

Policy comments

March 1, 2010

In contrast to the EBRD's previous Turkmenistan Country Strategy (TCS) from 2006 the new draft sees progress in the political and economic spheres since the beginning of President Berdymukhamedovs rule. The information we have received from activists inside the country presents a very different picture.

Official document

February 23, 2010

Explanation by the Council of the European Union on reasons for partial disclosure of the reports on the EU-Turkmenistan human rights dialogues in 2008 and 2009.