Nederland wil regels voor
energiewinning Noordpoolgebied
Nederland pleit voor bindende
internationale regels om milieuschade te voorkomen bij de winning van energie in
het Noordpoolgebied. Dat verklaarde de demissionaire minister van Economische
Zaken, Landbouw en Innovatie, Maxime Verhagen op 27 augustus 2012 in een
toespraak tijdens de internationale energieconferentie ONS 2012 in Stavanger, Noorwegen.
De vraag naar energie blijft
groeien. Het grootste deel van de energievoorraden bevindt zich binnen de
grenzen van de landen die aan de Noordpool grenzen. Daarom is winning van olie-
en gas in het Noordpoolgebied volgens Nederland alleen een kwestie van tijd.
'Niet of we energiewinning
moeten toestaan, maar hoe we dat op een verantwoorde manier kunnen doen, dat is
de uitdaging waar we voor staan', hield minister Verhagen een gehoor van
regeringsleiders, ministers, de top van de olie- en gasindustrie en analisten
voor.
De ONS-conferentie trekt
50.000 bezoekers uit meer dan 90 landen. Het belangrijkste thema zijn dit jaar
de geopolitieke uitdagingen van energiewinning.
Zijn oproep is
tegenstrijdig met zijn antwoorden op de Kamervragen van de
Partij voor de Dieren. Daarin verschuilt Verhagen zich achter de regering van de
Verenigde Staten, die toestemming aan Shell heeft gegeven om voor de kust van
Alaska het jachtgebied van de Inuit te boren. Eerder heeft Verhagen, als
minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, de enige ambtenaar die deels belast was met het
Nederlandse beleid ten aanzien van het Noordpoolgebied, op dit ministerie
wegbezuinigd.
Verhagen is niet aanwezig bij
de vergaderingen van de door hem aangehaalde Arctic Council of van de
Barents
Euro-Arctic Council want daar valt er voor de koopman in schaapskleren niets
– te koste van mens en milieu - te verdienen.
'Thinking slow in our energy policy'
“The
exploitation of the Arctic reserves is a matter of time, and most of these
reserves are located within the borders of the Arctic countries. But we still
need to minimise the risks of exploitation and foster good governance. Speaking
of which, the Dutch government considers those parts of the Arctic outside the
jurisdiction of the Arctic nations as Global Public Goods, an area that needs
protection for the sake of future generations. We also believe that Arctic allow
us to see whether global climate change policies have any
affect.
The Netherlands
has been active in the European sector of the Arctic ever since the epic journey
of captain Willem Barentsz over four hundred years ago. He searched for the
Northeast and Northwest passages to Asia but instead ‘found’ Bear Island,
Spitsbergen and a harsh winter at Novaya Zemlya in 1596-1597.
We learned that
the Arctic is to be approached with respect.
To safeguard the
Arctic today, we need to implement existing treaties. At the same time, we need
to be aware of the gaps -- gaps in the subjects and in the geographical area
covered by the existing treaties. That is why we favour additional binding
international rules based on the precautionary principle, to provide better
protection of the Arctic and its fish reserves. We think the Arctic Council is
the best forum for this.
In a paper prepared for this
session, risk management firm DNV and the Fridtjof Nansen Institute said that -
and I quote - “ large
areas towards the North Pole remain challenges in terms of regulatory frameworks
for search, rescue, evacuation, environmental clean-up, and liability for oil
spill damages.”
I agree with
this. We have to be realistic and avoid being overconfident with regard to
industry self-regulation. Considering the disparity of commercial and
geo-political interests, I am convinced we need new international
regulations.
We also need
technology and innovation policies that can handle the physical challenges of
the Arctic. The Netherlands is doing its part. Since 1984 we have been
conducting polar research and the Dutch government is supporting a proposal of
the Project Delta Group for an innovative approach to the exploitation of gas in
Yamal, Russia.
The truth is
that right now we cannot foresee all consequences of Arctic exploitation. Many
questions still need to be answered, such as:
-
Should we allow unlimited exploitation of gas and oil in such fragile environment?
-
Do we know enough about the impact of a major oil spill on freezing or frozen water?
-
Are there effective methods of containing and cleaning up an oil spill in the Arctic, with its long periods of darkness and extreme temperatures?
These questions
warrant a broad dialogue and slow thinking. In fact, we have a duty to develop
golden rules for the Arctic to bolster social acceptance, and use innovations
and new technologies for eventual production activities in this fragile part of
our planet.
...I started my
talk by saying that our brain has two ways of thinking: a fast and a slow one.
In my opinion, companies and governments need slow thinking to ensure a
sustainable energy future. This is especially true of the
Arctic.
So thank you for
your time. I wish you a lot of slow thinking.
www.rijksoverheid.nl 2012 08 27 (2012.09.11)
www.rijksoverheid.nl 2012 08 27 (2012.09.11)
