Experienced fisherman Branko Vujičić searches in vain for prawns and gambores on the bottom of the Adriatic. They have disappeared, he says, and he attributes this to the drilling of the seabed in search of oil.
"They lie at the very bottom. Probably the drilling causes some kind of vibration that drives the fish away. The prawns were completely lost, we couldn't catch two kilos, but we were catching a hundred, their price had dropped to three euros. They disappeared not only in Ulcinj and Bar, but more widely. I wander from border to border, and there are no prawns. They and sardines are food for all other fish,'' says Vujičić in an interview with the Center for Investigative Journalism of Montenegro (CIN-CG) and Monitor.
On March 25, giant metal drills, Topaz Driller, drilled the seabed, 20 kilometers from the coast, between Ulcinj and Bar in search of oil. The investor, the Italian-Russian consortium Eni-Novatek will search for black gold up to a depth of 6.500 meters. It will be known whether there is oil in the Montenegrin seabed, allegedly, at the beginning of September.
The journey to the bowels of the earth continues despite warnings from environmentalists that it is a risky undertaking and a violation of the Paris Agreement, and announcements that when the tourists leave, they will organize protests. Fishermen's complaints that because of drilling the sea is no longer as generous as before are also in vain. But that's why the work is going on with the blessing of the current government, which in this case continued where the previous one left off.
Fish not even for fuel
In a statement to CIN-CG/Monitor, the Ministry of Capital Investments said that, according to the information they have, "the ongoing oil and gas explorations have not affected maritime traffic and the work of the Port Authority in any way. Traffic is moving normally and the situation is completely regular.''
"They forbid us to approach within a few kilometers of that platform. And our sea is small, if I leave Ulcinj by trawler in the morning, I'll be in Croatia in the afternoon,'' says Vujičić, who is also the president of the Association of Professional Fishermen of Budva Sv. Nicholas.
Dragoljub Bajković, president of the Association of Professional Fishermen of Bar, believes that fish from the seabed, including prawns, started to disappear with the first seismic surveys that preceded the current drilling.
"A few years ago, seismic research was carried out during which the real pressure at the bottom was 3.000 bars. Then the fish from the bottom was killed, or migrated to the other side where there were no such tests - towards Albania and Boka,'' he says.
Bajković is convinced that even the current drilling has serious consequences for fishermen.
"It affects the people of Ulcinj, Barane, all the way to Čanj. People go from morning to night, stay 10-12 hours, and bring a minimum of fish to cover the fuel. I fish for bluefish and I went out to sea 29 times from December to July - 10 times I threw my nets, and 19 times I returned, because the fish won't. Some vibrations exist underwater from drilling. The fish is like a wild one, it is not calm, it runs away. Something is completely messed up. And a lot of us live by scrubbing."
Before the start of drilling, a meeting was held with representatives of the fishermen's association at the Ministry of Capital Investments.
"The fishermen told them that they are not looking forward to that research, but if the state has decided to go that way, we have to accept it," says Milun Anđić, president of the Montenegrin Seine Fishermen's Association, special boats from which surface net fishing is mostly carried out.
At the fishermen's request to form an equalization fund that will help the development of fisheries, the Ministry told them that it will come to life as soon as oil exploitation begins.
Everything is fine with the government
"We underlined that environmental protection is very important and received assurances that they have fourfold systems. They explained to us that the depth at which oil is extracted is 110 meters and that it is accessible to divers, devices, valves, so that everything can be immediately closed in case of leakage. They gave guarantees that the ships specially intended for leakage are already ready in Italian ports, and that they could be there in 10-15 hours and buy oil if called,'' says Andjić.
He assesses that the fishermen had no choice and that they tacitly accepted the assurances that fishing and the oil industry can work together.
According to Andjić, the previous researches on the fish stock and quantity of fish were done arbitrarily and in an invalid manner. Because of this, the fishermen sent a protest to the institutions: "That research was carried out by ships that do not have the ability to do it. No fishing boats were taken. All this was financed by investors.''
And Bajković says that the investor and the Institute of Marine Biology should have determined the initial state of the fish stock during this year, which, he says, is not there.
"The Institute of Marine Biology did not conduct a study of the impact on fisheries. He monitored fishing activities before and after the earthquake, that is, analysis of the catch structure of small-scale coastal and large-scale commercial fisheries. We are not involved in the current activities related to the platform from the point of view of fisheries monitoring. It is possible that we will be involved after the completion of activities related to the platform, Dr. Aleksandar Joksimović, director of the Institute of Marine Biology, told CIN-CG/Monitor.
The prelude to the start of drilling was the protests of ecologists who pointed out the numerous ecological risks of this work, while the new government convinced them that there was no room for anxiety.
Prime Minister Zdravko Krivokapić stated that the concession contract was signed in 2016, a rare good decision by the previous government. He also assessed that the potential impact on the environment is negligible.
Environmental organizations and activists opposed the start of drilling, while the ruling URA demanded a referendum.
The Prime Minister silenced the noise by asserting that terminating the deal with Eni-Novatek would cost the state around one hundred million euros, and that the referendum would be technically unfeasible in the conditions of the corona crisis, with a cost of around two million euros.
The Minister of Capital Investments, Mladen Bojanić, claims that this is a good project. He repeatedly repeated that potential oil and gas reserves are measured in billions of euros!
Bojanić: Everything is at their expense
"The main feature of the contract with the Eni-Novatek consortium is that Montenegro did not invest a single cent in research, while the concessionaires bear all the costs," Draško Lončar from the Ministry of Capital Investments told Monitor/CINCG.
He also explains that Montenegro provided itself with guarantees, "on the mandatory work program", and that the concessionaires are unlimitedly and jointly liable to compensate the damage and lost profit to the state, as well as to third parties in the event of an incident, and most importantly, that the state provided the profit between 62 -68 percent.
Lončar explains that the mandatory work program committed to by the Eni-Novatek concessionaires includes: 3D seismic surveys, geological and geophysical studies and two wells of 6.500 and 1.500 meters.
In the event that the concessionaire does not fulfill the mandatory work program, according to Lončar's explanation, Montenegro could activate the guarantee of 84 million euros that it provided and possibly hire another company to continue the work.
Bojanović's Ministry points out that, if commercial hydrocarbon reserves are not found, the entire cost of exploration will be borne by the concessionaire, without any obligation of the state to participate in it.
"This is a business that is unprofitable, risky and harmful to the environment and the economy of Montenegro, primarily tourism and fishing," says Mustafa Canka, a journalist who has been writing about this topic for decades.
He points out that officials only talk about financial benefits and percentages, and they will not publicly say that "in the best case, in their most optimistic version, we can earn around 60 million euros annually. And only in a few years".
"Now, in order to find oil, more holes need to be drilled, then analyzed. In the best case scenario, exploitation would begin in three years. Until then, we will question everything, above all tourism, from which, when the season is good, we officially earn a little over a billion euros, and at least a third of the income remains in the gray zone,'' Canka told CIN-CG/Monitor.
A romantic saga about a turtle
He wonders where the calculation is, if we compare 1,3 billion with 60 million. He reminds that guests from the West are not enthusiastic about swimming with a view of oil platforms. He notes that the damage done to the flora and fauna in the sea will never be calculated, as well as that which will be suffered by the fishermen.
However, the Ministry of Ecology, Spatial Planning and Urbanism is not concerned about this project and its impact on the environment. In addition to the obligation to comply with domestic regulations governing the field of environmental protection, they state that the contract provides for two special compensation mechanisms for eventual damages. The first is the Guarantee of the final parent company of the concessionaire, which covers the payment of all contractual obligations in case of their non-performance, as well as all non-contractual obligations to third parties in case of direct damage or losses incurred in connection with these activities (including pollution or incidents). This guarantee, as the Ministry explains, means that concessionaires guarantee the value of the parent company, not the one registered in Montenegro, which is incomparably smaller.
Another mechanism is the Mandatory Comprehensive Insurance Policy for the Oil and Gas Industry, which covers the complete operations carried out by the operator Eni, including all their subcontractors.
"Montenegro has ensured that in the event of any damage to the environment, it has the possibility of reimbursing costs, including damage to third parties. In the specific case, this means, for example, that compensation for eventual damages would also be paid to fishermen,'' say the department that also deals with ecology.
The Ministry of Capital Investments also claims that "from a large number of ecologists" they have a positive attitude about the project, as well as about all the studies done on the protection and preservation of the environment.
"The concessionaire's commitment to the environment should be emphasized. As an example, we state that during seismic surveys, a turtle appeared in front of the ship and operations were suspended until it moved to a safe distance. The price of the cost of waiting or stand by rate was about 150 thousand dollars. With this, we emphasize that the concessionaires have high standards when it comes to environmental protection,'' said the Ministry.
Practiced, if it leaks
Zenepa Lika, an environmental activist from Ulcinj, is not convinced by these standards, who claims for Monitor/CIN CG that this venture is risky. She explains that he is relying on an environmental impact assessment study done by the developer.
"The Nature Protection Agency sent the document back several times for revision. Which means that ENI did not respect our legislation. As far as I am aware, there is no plan for emergency situations in the event of an oil spill, models and projections for rehabilitation,'' Lika claims.
The Environmental Protection Agency confirmed that the Elaboration of the Environmental Impact Assessment, carried out by Eni Montenegro and prepared by Italian experts, was not done in accordance with the rules. In October 2019, they say, the Agency requested certain changes and additions from the project holder. The innovative Elaborate was approved by the Agency in December of that year.
The Ministry of Capital Investments claims that in the event of an emergency, there are plans:
"There is a response plan for the concessionaire, a response plan for the Montenegrin institutions responsible for this project, as well as a response plan in cooperation with the concessionaire. Also, in June, the PLATFORM 21 exercise was held, in which the Maritime Safety Administration, the police, the army, the harbor master's office, the hydrocarbons administration took part, with the topic of response in the event of an oil spill in the Adriatic Sea. Of course, in addition to these plans, there are others for responding to all anticipated incident situations.''
From this department, they also claim that inspection supervision is constant and will continue to be so throughout the entire project.
"The Hydrocarbons Inspector, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, based on the results of the CETI analyses, are vigilantly monitoring and controlling this project, both at the plant itself and in the logistics base. For now, the process is completely safe and secure for both the environment and personnel, as well as for the approved project itself.''
At the beginning of April, the Ulcinj parliament unanimously adopted conclusions expressing great skepticism towards seabed drilling.
"The municipality invites the Government to participate in a transparent and cooperative manner in the review of decisions related to the exploration and exploitation of oil at sea, taking into account the views of citizens of coastal municipalities, ecological and economic aspects of demographic data," the adopted conclusions state.
Lika says that from the very beginning of this, as she says, non-transparent and undesirable project, the former, and unfortunately the current government, violated the constitutional right of the citizens of coastal cities and beyond, because they were not informed in a timely, sufficient and understandable manner.
"I would like to mention that, for example, the people of Ulcinj were taken aback when they found out that oil would be explored 'again' in our sea. They were also denied participation in the public hearing that was organized in the Bar. On the same day, a public hearing was held in Ulcinj on the plan for the special purpose of the coastal area. So, the first research blocks are planned on the coast of Ulcinj, and citizens are prevented from giving their opinion", says Lika.
As an additional argument, the Ministry of Ecology points out that the oil and gas industry is not unknown in the countries with which we share the Adriatic Sea:
"Until now, around 1500 wells have been drilled in the Adriatic for both research and oil and gas production."
Bitter experience from Albania
In ENI's Elaborate on the impact on the environment, it is specified that there are 1.440 wells in the Adriatic Sea (research, production and for other purposes), of which 1.350 were drilled by Eni SpA, and that no eruption was recorded at any of them.
"Neighboring Croatia has declared a moratorium on all new oil and gas exploration, even the 'oilmen' themselves from Croatia are against drilling in the Adriatic Sea. They believe that oil and clean sea simply do not work,'' says Lika.
She points out that Albania does not have offshore platforms, but exploitation is done on land. He warns that there are known pictures and videos from 2015, when a major accident occurred in the village of Marinza in the south of Albania, where, as he says, the entire settlement is flooded with oil and threatened, and the citizens are forced to evacuate, while the strategic investor from Canada, Bankers Petroleum, simply considered that he was not guilty of the incident.
Referring to the Albanian experience of oil exploration, Canka also says that "it says that we absolutely should not enter into this dangerous business".
"Since 1990, major global companies have been conducting research on the Albanian part of the Adriatic, but there are no concrete results. Only in a few cases was oil discovered, but it turned out to be an unprofitable exploitation,'' Canka points out, noting that even in that country during the 90s of the last century, sweet dreams were dreamed of "Albania floating on oil".
"After three decades, the illusions dissipated across the Adriatic and, unfortunately for us, reached the official Podgorica," says Canka.
Montenegro started drilling in the Adriatic despite the clear message from the European Union that fossil fuels are a thing of the past, and that the future is reserved for ecological and renewable energy.
The finance ministers of the European Union countries agreed in November 2019 that the financing of projects involving oil, gas and coal should be suspended. On that occasion, they called on the European Investment Bank, the World Bank and other financial institutions to stop granting loans for these purposes. It was the first time that high-ranking officials of European governments demanded an end to the financing of all fossil fuels, taking into account sustainable development and energy needs, as well as the energy security of partner countries.
Environmentalists remind that Montenegro is a signatory to the Paris Agreement, by which 200 countries committed to gradually abandon the use of fossil sources.
"With this project, we are violating the agreement and pushing the exploitation of fossil fuels, even though we know that this type of exploitation affects climate change and certainly the quality of our sea, no matter how much it is claimed that this is not the case," concludes Lika.
As part of the Green Deal for the Western Balkans, the EU has earmarked nine billion euros for innovative and green ideas and projects. Environmentalists believe that it would be better to use this chance for long-term environmental and financial benefits, rather than drilling the seabed.
The actions of ecologists against underwater drilling, as announced by the interlocutor CIN-CG/Monitor, will continue.
"We have not given up on our demands and are asking for the suspension of exploration and exploitation of oil and gas. We came out to meet the tourist season because we sympathize with the citizens and do not want to spread an even more negative image of our country,'' says Zenepa Lika.
It takes a little to do a lot of damage
If found in the sea, only eight grams of oil is enough to pollute a cubic meter of seawater. One cubic meter of released oil depletes oxygen from 400.000 cubic meters of the sea, claims the report of the State Audit Institution, which in April published the Audit of the Effectiveness of Management of Interventions in the Case of Sudden Pollution in the Adriatic Sea.
The audit established poor cooperation of national institutions, non-compliance with already outdated strategies, and that no coastal municipality has a plan and risk assessment in case of sudden sea pollution, as well as lack of adequate equipment to respond in case of large-scale pollution...
The DRI document also states the response of the Hydrocarbons Administration regarding the current investigative works:
"Before carrying out geophysical surveys by the concessionaire, fish catch measurements were made in the zone of the proposed activities, which was also carried out after the geophysical surveys were carried out by the concessionaire, in order to compare data on fish catch before and after the implementation of the activity. Also, since the fishing activities during the geophysical surveys were difficult, the concessionaires compensated the fishing associations for the time that the geophysical surveys lasted, in accordance with the measures from the study on environmental impact assessment."
Bonus video:
