Western People (Ireland): Corrib Gas: the dashed hopes and the lowered expectations: "Last week Shell employees sought to enter on lands where they knew from previous experience (10/11 Jan ‘05 and 1 March) that they would not be welcome.": "...despite the presence of gardai access to the lands was denied. Shell will now go to the High Court to seek an injunction against the objectors." (ShellNews.net) 9 March 05
 

Wednesday, March 09, 2005
By Christy Loftus

The announcement that Enterprise Energy Ireland (later to be taken over by Shell) had struck “gold’ in 1996 with the discovery of an economically viable gas well in the Corrib field was hailed as the beginning of a new era in energy development in this country and welcomed as a boost to the Mayo economy.

The discovery was the first significant find offshore since the Kinsale Head field in 1971. Ireland's sole source of gas from Kinsale is in decline and imports are growing in importance.

Nowadays 82% of Ireland's needs are met by imports. It is anticipated that when the Corrib find comes on stream the dependency on imported gas will reduce (for a number of years) to about 50%.

The benefits of Corrib natural gas are seen as enhancing security of national energy supply; providing an alternative source to gas imports; generating substantial contributions to economy; providing a more environmentally friendly energy source than coal or oil; providing more efficient fuel for electricity generation and providing a cleaner, instant and convenient energy for customers.

In Mayo there was considerable initial euphoria at the prospect that gas would find its way to homes in major towns and that a clean, efficient energy source in the county would lead to hugely increased investment resulting in badly needed jobs.

Those hopes were raised even more with the news that Rolls Royce had applied for planning permission for a gas fired electricity generating station at Bellacorick.

Little enough of the hopes remain as the project was delayed by planning objections and turned down, after an appeal, by An Bord Pleanala. A revised application and an oral hearing later, the project got the blessing of the planners but still finds opposition among a group of vocal locals who believe the projected should be out at sea.

The objections continue but have now been reduced to fine details, relating in the main, to safety and the State failure to protect citizens. Much of the detail is difficult to comprehend for those who have not followed the story.

Among these issues are:

The Consents

Some of those who signed consents allowing Shell onto their lands for the purposes of laying the upstream pipeline from Glangad to Bellanaboy have now withdrawn that consent, it has been claimed by those opposing the pipeline. It is claimed that information, especially in relation to possible pipeline explosions, was withheld from people in the area by Shell representatives. The safety factor has been highlighted by Mr Vincent McGrath and Mr Brian Coyle both of whom are natives of the area.

At the weekend, Mr Micheál O’Sheighin weighed in with instances of pipeline failures that have caused more than five hundred and fifty deaths (500 in the USSR, 35 in Venezuela, 18 in the US) and untold pollution and damage to flora, fauna and fish life arising from the fires that occur following an explosion. He cites the following as examples of pipeline explosions that “could not happen: ”Bealton, Virginia, USA, 09/06/1974; Beaumont, Kentucky, USA, 27/04/1985; Burstall, Saskatchewan, Canada, 15/02/1994; Cartwright, Louisiana, USA, 09/08/1976; Cideville, Normandy, France, 28/07/1994; Edison, New Jersey, USA, 23/03/1994; Erlangen, Bavaria, Germany, 25/03/1984; Houston, Texas, USA, 09/09/1969; La Salle River Crossing, Manitoba, Canada, 15/04/1996; Lancaster, Kentucky, USA, 21/02/1986; Latchford, Ontario, Canada, 23/07/1994, Manassas and Locust Grove, Virginia, USA, 06/03/1980; Mounds View, Minnesota, USA, 08/07/1986; Palaceknowe, Moffat, Scotland, 22/12/1993; Natchitoches, Louisiana, USA, 04/03/1965; Pine Bluff, Arkansas, USA 01/10/1982 and Rapid City, Manitoba, Canada, 29/07/1995. “Those examples of well known and documented cases of pipeline explosions will be well known to Shell but they did not bother to bring them to the attention of the people of Rossport and Bellanaboy. “It is very important to us that people who are concerned know now that this is not and never was a NIMBY issue. “A small community are being forced to take the burden of the advantages accruing to Shell shareholders and their heirs in shareholding, with minimal common good. “We are exposed to the maximum risk for the most minimal return,” he said.

Work in progress

Mayo county council has undertaken large scale road re-development works to facilitate the removal of peat from the site at Bellanaboy to an area of cutaway bog at Shramore, near Bangor.

A number of former Bord na Móna workers are now employed in readying the Shramore site and ensuring that it is in a position to receive the fifty truckloads of peat a day that will be transported while the site is being cleared.

There are presently over one hundred people employed on the project. This will rise to six hundred people at the peak of construction. When the refinery is commissioned it will offer about fifty full time jobs which are expected to last for a minimum twenty years.... the lifetime of the present discovery. Much of the one hundred and fifty km of pipeline required to connect the gas to the national grid is already stored at various locations along the pipeline route. Next May, Bord Gáis Éireann expect to commence construction of the pipeline from Caughwell to Bellanaboy.

The recent brouhaha

Last week Shell employees sought to enter on lands where they knew from previous experience (10/11 Jan ‘05 and 1 March) that they would not be welcome. The “confrontation” was of the “swinging handbags” variety but despite the presence of gardai access to the lands was denied. Shell will now go to the High Court to seek an injunction against the objectors.

Shell claim that they have the consent of all but seven of the landowners. Those agreements come with commitments on compensation and proper restoration. The compensation includes a sum for “loss” while the pipe is being laid and the land restored.

The objectors accept the Shell figures that seven of thirty-five have withheld permission but argue that the seven own fifty per cent of the land that Shell require permission to enter on.
They argue that the confrontation was totally unnecessary. Shell knew the landowners and householders would not agree.

“They went onto Gerard (Monica) Mueller's land, then on to Philip McGraths, then to Gerard McGrath then on to McGarry's Gort a' Chreachaire,” according to O’Sheighin.
“Some of the people who signed early on have now pulled back. We have no problem with Shell doing what businesses do, but we do have a problem with the State failing to protect its citizens.”

The Shell position

The Shell position is simple. They have done everything they are required to do under planning laws and in relation to way leaves and consents. The authorisation process for the pipeline, including land access and compensation arrangements, is the same in principle as for Bord Gais pipelines which run in cities, towns and the countryside across Ireland.

Obtaining and implementing of Compulsory Acquisition Orders is the appropriate procedure set down for dealing with access to land where land-owners have not consented in respect of those landholdings.

The way-leave working area Shell require is a 40m wide strip to lay and bury the pipeline. The land will be fully reinstated afterwards to at least as good a condition as before the work.

They argue that in a short time it should not be possible to see where the work has taken place and the route will have land markers to indicate the presence of the pipeline buried beneath. The land will be returned to the landowner for normal agricultural use following installation of the pipeline and land reinstatement.
The onshore stretch of pipeline is 9kms long from the landfall at Glengad to the new gas terminal site at Bellananboy.

The justification for undertaking the project in the absence of full agreement is that the Corrib project will bring benefits to Ireland in terms of security and diversification of gas supply as well as local benefits in Mayo through local employment and provision of goods and services. Shell shareholders will also make some money.

The QRA (Quality Risk Assessment) has become an issue in recent times and there is confusion as to whether or not the QRA carried out on the project is an independent assessment.

Those who object to the project (on the basis that it should go ahead, but out at sea) are concerned because, as they see it, the government which should protect the people, won’t stand over the QRA.

There is the unusual situation that the Government won't publish or can't publish because it was commissioned and paid for by the developer.

This issue has been pursued by Dr Jerry Cowley, TD on behalf of the local residents and Dr Cowley is unimpressed by the performance of Minister Noel Dempsey who is unable or unwilling to provide the assurances that the people seek.

The Minister told Dr Cowley it would be inappropriate to release the QRA at present. The purpose of this assessment was to identify and assess all risks associated with the operation of the onshore section of the pipeline.

According to the Junior Minister, Pat the Cope Gallagher: “The assessment makes recommendations for risk reduction where appropriate and demonstrates that the residual risk associated with the operation of the onshore pipeline have been reduced to tolerable levels.

”It showed that even in the worst case of the pipeline being ruptured and the gas being ignited, the occupants of a building 70 metres away would be safe. The design of the pipeline means that the risk of such an event or any other type of gas escape is infinitesimally small.”

That response from the Minister does not sit well with Dr Cowley who argues that Shell and the government are treating the people of Erris with contempt. “I am demanding the full release of the QRA immediately. What is there to hide. An edited non-technical summary as suggested by Shell is an insult to the people of Erris,” he states.

http://www.westernpeople.com/news/story.asp?j=24035