91av

A GIANT oil pipeline through the African jungle, which got the go-ahead last
week, could wreck the coastal ecology of Cameroon and put thousands of fishermen
out of work, claim British biologists. The economic value of the threatened
ecosystems dwarfs any likely oil revenues, they say.

The 1050-kilometre pipeline is designed to provide an oil export route to the
Atlantic for Chad, a landlocked country on the margins of the Sahara. Oil from
huge reserves found in Chad’s Doba oilfield will be piped to an offshore tanker
terminal at Kribi, Cameroon. Last week, despite strong opposition from
environmental groups, the World Bank approved loans worth $220 million
for the $3.7 billion scheme, which will be one of the world’s largest
infrastructure projects this decade. Oil companies said they would not go ahead
with the scheme without the bank’s approval.

The bank says the pipeline could double the revenues of Chad’s government
within 10 years, generating money for improved health care, education and
environmental protection in one of the world’s poorest countries. But a study by
Andrew Price and colleagues at the University of Warwick suggests that Chad’s
gain could be Cameroon’s loss.

The offshore terminal will be sandwiched between Cameroon’s only two nature
reserves, which contain mangroves and coral reefs that are extremely sensitive
to both oil spills and silt stirred up by construction work. This puts some 36
kilometres of coastline at “high risk” of being damaged, says Price.

The rich waters along this coastline also support 20 000 skilled fishermen
and feed over a million people, estimates Price. “The approximate value of
renewable resources . . . most at risk from construction and operational effects
of the pipeline is nearly $1.5 billion per annum,” he says.

This figure compares to the World Bank’s estimate of likely royalties to
Cameroon from the pipeline of around only $20 million a year. Price
believes this huge difference underlines the need to preserve the ecosystems
along Cameroon’s coast.

Despite the findings, the World Wide Fund for Nature, which funded the
investigation, has refused to join other green groups in opposing the pipeline.
“Our position has always been qualified approval for the pipeline,” Steve
Gartlan, WWF’s Cameroon programme officer, told 91av
from the capital Yaoundé this week.

The Price report raised “important concerns”, particularly about the risks
from oil spills. But it smacks of “colonialism” when environmental groups in
developed countries tell these countries what they should do with their natural
resources, Gartlan says. “That is up to them.”