The Baltic’s nuclear flavour

In view of the severe ice situation in the Gulf of Finland in winter navigation of 2010-11, Russia decided to secure itself by sending nuclear icebreakers to assist diesel-electric ones in the Baltic Sea. Meanwhile, operation of one nuclear icebreaker being equal to that of a diesel-powered open sea icebreaker costs 4-5 times more. In case of oil price fall, deployment of nuclear icebreakers will become economically impractical. Engaging of icebreakers from Finland is under consideration.

Oil accounting

Abnormally severe ice situation of 2010-11 in the Gulf of Finland when the lack powerful icebreakers resulted in suspended operation of a strategically important for Russian economy export oil pipeline to Primorsk port, inspired the Ministry of Transport to deploy nuclear icebreakers of Atomflot FSUE for operation in the Gulf of Finland. In view of this purpose some alterations were introduced into the legislation: multiple border crossings without going through extra formalities are allowed for icebreakers, settlements are made with Finland in respect of nuclear icebreakers’ stay in territorial waters, they are allowed to call on the ports of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.

However, deployment of icebreakers for the Baltic Sea is a least-evil solution caused by the deficiency of diesel-powered open sea icebreakers. As PortNews IAA learnt from Rosmorport FSUE, icebreakers “Rossiya” and “50 let Pobedy” carried out 23% of all pilotage in the Gulf of Finland in winter navigation of 2011-12. “Nuclear icebreakers are deployed for operation in the Gulf of Finland under the necessity of assisting diesel-electric ones after abnormally severe winter of 2010-11. Operation of one nuclear icebreaker is equal to that of a diesel-powered open sea icebreaker,” Rosmorport press secretary says.

As previously reported, the enterprise spent over RUR 300 mln for icebreaker charter last navigation. This winter icebreaker “Rossiya” is chartered by Rosmorport for 90 days. The vessel left Murmansk for the Gulf of Finland on the night of January 15/16. The voyage is to take about 7 days. Press center of Atomflot FSUE couldn’t say how much the freight costs having noted that the exact figures would be revealed upon the end of the navigation. As experts in deployment of icebreakers told PortNews IAA, estimated cost of one nuclear icebreaker deployed for operation in the Gulf of Finland is 4-5 times as high as operation of one diesel-electric icebreaker through the same period of time.

Besides, ecological risks are higher for nuclear icebreakers – any oil, water or other leakage may be radioactive. So any minor incident may entail severe consequences.

As it was earlier noted by Konstantin Stasyuk, deputy head of Rosmorrechflot (Federal Marine and River Transport Agency), nuclear icebreakers were built specially for operation in the Arctic, not in the Baltic conditions. According to him, the construction of new diesel icebreaker for Rosmorport will, most likely, make it possible to divert from winter deployment of a nuclear icebreaker in the Gulf of Finland.

Moreover, as PortNews IAA learnt from a source in the Ministry of Transport, they consider a possibility to conclude an agreement between the governments of Finland and Russia on cooperation and interaction in providing services of icebreaker assistance in the Baltic Sea. Such an agreement implying a possibility to engage Finnish diesel-electric icebreaker in the Gulf of Finland can be signed as early as this winter.

In this context, we note that the order for construction of four diesel-electric icebreakers was placed in 2012 with the enterprises of the United Shipbuilding Corporation OJSC. Diesel-electric icebreaker with the capacity of 25 МW is to be built by the Baltic Shipyard (St. Petersburg) by November 2015, while 16 МW icebreakers are to be delivered in May and October 2015.

Anyhow, the matter actually depends on oil prices as the key issue for Russian economy is the guarantee of uninterruptable oil export via the ports of the Gulf of Finland (Prim and Ust-Luga) the share of which in transshipment of oil in Russian ports is nearing 50%.

Therefore, as long as oil price is high (about $110 per barrel), deployment of icebreakers seems to be economically feasible despite all the costs. If oil price falls, oil export via the ports of the Gulf of Finland with the assistance of nuclear icebreaker may prove to be loss-making. Here we should also take into consideration the environmental law enforcement in the Baltic Sea which will also increase the net cost of oil export by maritime transport. The program for construction of icebreakers evidently serves to secure Russia against this situation as well.

Vitali Chernov, Nadezhda Malysheva