Mock whale funeral at bank HQ

Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland

CEE Bankwatch, Friends of the Earth, Pacific Environment,
Sakhalin Environment Watch

Whale funeral and press conference, London, Friday 16 April 2004

Whale Funeral: 9-10 am with procession and a large skeleton of a
grey whale. EBRD Head Office, Bishopsgate

Photo Call outside EBRD at: 9.45am

Press Conference: 10am, opposite EBRD in Lower Hall,
Bishopsgate Institute, 230 Bishopsgate, London EC2M 4QH.

Campaigners will stage a mock whale funeral with a 20ft whale outside the head office of London's European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) on Friday 16th April at 9am to protest at the threat posed to the Western Pacific grey whale by plans to expand the oil and gas extraction in the region. The EBRD is being asked to fund the project.

Environmental campaigners from Russia, Japan and Sakhalin will join with Friends of the Earth and Bankwatch to highlight the dangers posed by the project, which is being led by Shell. The campaigners are calling on the oil giant to meet specific criteria for good practice before funding can be considered (A full list of criteria is below).

The project also threatens important fisheries in the area, and the livelihoods of the local fishing communities.

The mock funeral will be followed by a press briefing where speakers from the region will outline their concerns.

Contacts:

Greig Aitken, CEE Bankwatch Network, Mobile: 00420 605 216 705

Friends of the Earth Press Office 020 7566 1649

Nick Rau 020 7566 1714

Background briefing on the Sakhalin project:

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) is considering financing a massive expansion of the Sakhalin II oil and gas project at Sakhalin Island in the Russian Far East. The Sakhalin II project is led by Shell, and includes Mitsubishi and Mitsui. The project has attracted considerable criticism for environmental and financial reasons.

Project Background:
Sakhalin II is: The biggest integrated oil and gas project that includes the biggest liquid natural gas (LNG) processing plant ever built; The third largest Project Finance deal ever undertaken, and by far the first largest ever undertaken in the oil and gas sector; Plagued with two billion dollars in cost
overruns.

Environmental Problems:
The Sakhalin II project: Threatens the world's most critically endangered population of grey whales with extinction. The whales feeding ground is off the coast of Sakhalin and the project proposal includes building off-shore platforms adjacent to, and undersea pipelines trenched directly through this
area. Only 100-110 of these creatures remain, and recent studies have shown the whales are showing signs of malnourishment. This is thought to be the result of the impact of off-shore oil construction, waste discharges, noise and increased traffic in the area. Threatens at least 59 wild salmon-bearing streams (the Russian Far East has 1/3 of the world's remaining wild salmon
stocks) by trenching pipelines directly through stream beds and by burying pipelines underground in this highly seismic area; Threatens wildlife and endangered species through habitat destruction; Threatens the fisheries-rich Aniva Bay through the dumping of industrial wastes and run-off; Poses the potential of a catastrophic oil spill not unlike the Exxon Valdez.

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and other public lenders have informed Shell (via the project company, Sakhalin Energy) that it is not satisfied with the environmental documentation that the company had provided them and that the Sakhalin II Environmental Impact Assessment is not fit for purpose.

NGO Demands:
Russian and International Non-Governmental Organisations have issued a broad set of demands that Shell must meet before advancing the project. NGOs have urged EBRD not to finance the project until these minimal demands are met.

Western Grey Whales:
Only 100 Western Grey Whales remain, and less than 20 are females capable of bearing calves. Yet, Shell proposes offshore platforms adjacent to, and undersea pipelines directly through its primary feeding habitat. NGOs insist that all proposed off-shore facilities must be installed a sufficient distance
away from grey whale habitat to ensure no negative impacts. NGOs say EBRD should not support Sakhalin II until an independent panel of cetacean and related experts is established, and until the panel has thoroughly reviewed the Sakhalin II proposal and its revisions, and is convinced that the project poses no potential impacts to the Western Grey Whale.

Seismic Risks:
The Sakhalin II project is in an area of very high seismic risks, and earthquakes of 8.0 are not uncommon. Shell proposes to compound this risk by burying pipelines potentially resulting in earthquake-induced leaks that poison soils,
watersheds, and wildlife. NGOs demand that on-shore pipelines be built above ground in order to quickly detect and respond to leaks, as is done on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.

Wild Salmon Impacts:
Shell proposes to trench 800 kilometers of on-shore pipelines across over 1000 watercourses, including excavating across delicate river beds of wild-salmon bearing streams. Trenching pipelines through wild salmon spawning beds is to global best practices what blood-letting is to modern medicine. NGOs call on Shell to abandon the retrograde practice of trenching through wild salmon spawning river beds in favor of modern-day aerial stream crossings.

Fisheries Impact at Anvia Bay:
During construction of the proposed LNG terminal, one million cubic meters of construction dredging materials will be dumped into Aniva Bay and over 500,000 cubic meters of wastewater will annually enter the bay. This is in
spite of the fact that the fisheries-rich Aniva Bay currently has the highest fisheries protection designations and is a vital part of the regional fisheries economy. NGOs call on Shell to not dispose of wastes into Aniva Bay.

Oil Spill Risks:
Sakhalin II oil spill risks include potential leaks and ruptures from off-shore platforms, and from hundreds of kilometers of off-shore and on-shore pipelines. These could affect community drinking water, wildlife, and the rich fisheries in the area. There is also the risk of a potential accident associated with tanker traffic in the congested Aniva Bay as these tankers pass through the La Perouse Straights. This raises the potential for a catastrophic oil
spill not unlike that of the Exxon Valdez. In addition to protection measures for pipelines described above, NGOs call on Shell to assume full liability for any oil spill and that EBRD should guarantee this liability.

Two Billion in Cost Over-Runs:
News reports suggest that Sakhalin II is $2 billion over budget for a variety of reasons, including increased costs of off-shore platforms. There are
believed to be problems associated with pipeline routes, The London Times reported on April 2. Shell should have designed the project right in the first place by avoiding the whales altogether. Instead, Shell decided to run the extinction gauntlet, and is now paying the price. NGOs are concerned that Shells $2 billion cost overrun will cause the company to cut corners on environmental protection.

Russian NGO Lawsuit:
On March 1, 2004, a Moscow court agreed to review a lawsuit filed by Russian environmental NGOs. This lawsuit demands the discontinuance of Sakhalin II project activities that put at risk endangered species including the Western Grey Whale, Steller's sea eagle, and Sakhalin Taimen.

Greig Aitken
Media coordinator
CEE Bankwatch Network
Bratislavska 31
602 00 Brno
Czech Republic
Tel: +420-545 214 431, ext 19