Impact of large infrastructure facilities on sea-water landscapes based on the example of “Nord Stream 2”

Abstract

Subject. The article considers the influence of the “Nord Stream 2” pipeline on the ecosystem of the Baltic Sea. The ecosystem services of natural systems, in particular aquatic systems are expensive (according to some estimates, they exceed the global GDP). Their quality is rapidly deteriorating, especially in regions experiencing significant anthropogenic impacts. One of such regions is the Baltic Sea. The polluter-pays principle is becoming more popular in international relations. Evidence proving that the pipeline has no negative effect on the environment confirms the fact that there are no grounds for applying this principle to “Nord Stream 2”. Purpose. To show that “Nord Stream 2” does not pose any significant threat to the sea-water landscapes and does not cause any significant degradation of their ecosystem services. Methods. The study simulates the future state of aquatic ecosystems after the construction of the pipeline. It also analyses the structure of ecosystem services provided by the aquatic landscapes of the Baltic Sea based on available assessments of the ecosystem services of aquatic systems in other regions. Results. For most ecosystem services provided by the aquatic landscapes of the Baltic Sea, the impact of the pipeline is insignificant and/or appears exclusively along its route and at the points of its entry (Ust-Luga) and exit (Greifswald, Germany). In some cases, this has both a negative and a positive impact, for example, when it comes to the living conditions of certain species or as a recreational service. A significant degradation of ecosystem services provided by the aquatic systems of the Baltic Sea and, as a consequence, a significant decrease in their cost is not expected to happen due to the impact of the “Nord Stream 2” pipeline. Conclusions. The environmental conditions in the Baltic Sea arouse a lot of concern. Russia contributes to their deterioration, in particular, to the eutrophication of the sea. However, the “Nord Stream 2” pipeline has little to do with this. What is more, in some cases it has a positive direct or indirect impact on the sea-water landscapes.