Greenpeace accuses OMV of ignoring risks posed by naval mines to Neptun Deep project

The environmental impact assessment (EIA) drafted by OMV’s Romanian subsidiary OMV Petrom and Romgaz for their Neptun Deep offshore gas project in the Black Sea fails to address the risk posed by the naval mines, Greenpeace claimed in a report released on June 18.

The report was issued the day after the Constanta regional office of Romania’s environmental authority APM, cleared the EIA for the Neptun Deep project, the largest natural gas project in the Romanian Black Sea and Romania’s first deepwater offshore project. According to OMV Petrom, investments of up to €4bn are estimated for the development phase of the project. 

Following approval of the EIA, the building permit and approval from the responsible offshore supervisory authority, ACROPO, are still pending, according to Offshore Energy.

Greenpeace intends to file a lawsuit if the EIA is finally approved, according to Offshore Energy. Marc Dengler, climate and energy expert at Greenpeace Austria, told Offshore Energy that developing the field is “outright irresponsibility”. 

“OMV is planning the EU’s largest gas extraction project in the Black Sea, close to where the fighting continues to rage. The Black Sea is both a scene of Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine and a key area for Russian interests. Disruptions and accidents could occur if the Neptun Deep field is developed in the vicinity of active hostilities,” the Greenpeace report said.

The environmental NGO argued that mines pose a “significant threat” to the project. “These deadly weapons, containing up to 160 kg of explosives, are designed to cripple ships. Nearly 100 naval mines have been neutralised since the war began, an average of one a week,” it added. 

The report also pointed to the hike in insurance premiums for ships in the Black Sea since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

However, in a response given to Adevarul, OMV Petrom said that the company, in line with its prudential risk management policy, is insuring all its operations. It also pointed out that the company already has operations in Romania’s offshore region.

Furthermore, Carlyle-controlled BSOG developed and launched last year a similar (yet smaller-sized) offshore project in Romania’s Black Sea, in shallow water but still 120 km offshore. No sea mine incidents were reported, although the perimeter is located closer to Ukraine compared to Neptun Deep.

The risks posed by the sea mines represent the third line of criticism launched by Greenpeace against the Neptun Deep project, in addition to the impact on the endangered species and the very fact of a natural gas project going against the decarbonisation policy. 

It is also the weakest: sea mines were in the headlines during the first stage of the war in Ukraine but (if they were ever seen as more than a means to protect ports) they were replaced by more efficient drones in the military strategy of both combatants. 

There is no evidence that the Black Sea is littered with sea mines and the few accidents reported do not support the idea of an imminent risk other than in the vicinity of Ukraine’s shores.

The incidents reported by Greenpeace include a swimmer plunging in the sea in an area marked by Ukraine’s authorities as mined for protection against Russian ships and an Estonian vessel apparently pushed by Russian military vessels into the line of fixed mines placed by Ukraine to protect its shore. 

While moored mines may still be anchored to protect Ukraine’s ports with a certain risk of being taken by storms and turned into floating mines, the use of (illegal) floating mines was not reported and in general, the number of such devices spotted over the past two years is very limited. 100 have been reported in the whole of the Black Sea, out of which six were spotted by Romanian authorities.

Greenpeace’s report correctly identifies the high insurance premiums charged by insurance agencies for the ships crossing the Black Sea – but this has very little if anything to do with the sea mines: the premiums surged in the autumn of 2023 after Russia pulled out of the grain corridor agreement and declared all grain ships a “justified target” for its attacks. In the subsequent months, the ports of Ukraine were under attack – however, not from sea mines, but from flying drones.