For the VOTE OF THE MAJORITY OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF KAVALA

Jul 18, 2025 | news

For the VOTE OF THE MAJORITY OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF KAVALA

“WORDS OF NARRATIVES… AN UNEXPLAINED ORACLE – AN IRRESPONSIBLE ATTITUDE”

Those who attended the informative meeting of the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Kavala on 07/07 regarding the storage of CO2 in Kavala Bay could hardly believe that the result would be the adoption of a hermaphroditic resolution by the majority faction of Mayor Mouriadis. Because while the vast majority of the councilors of the Municipality’s administration were clearly and without asterisks against the project, as well as the major and minor opposition, the Mayor proposed instead of a resolution a resolution in which, while it is negatively positioned against the implementation of the “dirty” project, at the same time it turns a blind eye to the Energean begging for some guarantees – conditions from the state. Something like “stepping into two boats”, although the consequences of such an attitude are known to all. These guarantees are a pretext, possibly the “fig leaf” of the municipality, to hide its timidity to meet the social majority and join its voice with the omnipresent NO, or else to back the salvation of a faltering company by giving it the kiss of life with the implementation of the project.

GUARANTEE 1.

“…whether CO2capture and storage can be a key strategy for climate policy given that it allows large quantities of fossil fuels to continue to be burned…”

No guarantee can be given that reconciles this contradiction as eloquently described in the wording of the resolution. It is clear that there is an attempt by powerful transatlantic and European centres to greenwash pollution through a huge business with no real impact on climate change. They say ‘burn it and bury it’ – there is money, the people pay!

The Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change ( IPCC) even notes “…the ability of CCS to deliver substantial emission reductions over the next decade is extremely low, and its costs would be extremely high…”

The ambitious Northern CCS project in the North Sea is in danger of losing its customers and stopping since no one seems willing to bear the enormous cost of the installation, which has been revised from 2.1 billion to 3.3 billion. The case of Prinos is particularly revealing. Global emissions CO2 per year amount to 40 billion tonnes and the study estimates that around 2 million tonnes will be buried in the Prinos. The contribution of the Prinos to the reduction of carbon in the atmosphere is therefore 0.005%. That means that for every 100 kilograms CO2 emitted into the atmosphere just 5 grams (!!!!) of it will be buried in the Prino. It’s outrageous, it’s a rape of logic. The Prinos, with zero contribution to climate change, will cost over 1 billion euros, taxpayers’ money to warm the pockets of their ‘chosen’, know-nothing, know-nothing CCS and undersized Energean, it will exempt polluting industry from heavy fines and we will find ourselves in the arms of a nightmare that will abuse the environment and threaten our safety and our continuity in the place where we were born FOREVER! This is a fraud, a big graft of the “aristocrats” from the “fat cow” of the NSRF, another scandal of the many that we are witnessing lately and that expose our country internationally.

GUARANTEE 2..

“…To take all necessary measures to protect human life and the environment, close to an urban centre and an island with a high development of tourism and the primary sector…”

Energean itself in its own P.E.P. “guarantees”:

“The project under study, due to its nature, is associated with potential risks and emergency conditions throughout its life cycle, which require thorough identification and risk assessment (Risk Assessment)……

Even the assessment of CCS at Sleipner, 250 km off the coast of Norway, and not just 5 km in the “lake” of the Gulf of Kavala, says:

“Ensuring the safe maintenance of storage involves a high level of proactive regulatory oversight, activities for which governments are not adequately equipped.”

“Each project site has unique geology, so field operators need to expect the unexpected, make detailed plans, update plans and prepare for contingencies.”

So don’t look for guarantees that can’t guarantee anything beyond the obvious. That we are destined to be guinea pigs in an unknown field of risks that we cannot manage, forced against our will into a peculiar game of Russian roulette with no end in sight. Get rid of fear and avoidance of responsibility with vague appeals for guarantees. Listen to the crystal clear, no fine print unanimous decision of the Municipality of Thassos that defends the sustainable, developmental course of the region with a high level of ” brand name” of our tourist product.

The EU Directive 31/2009, which was incorporated into the national legal framework, requires to ensure that the impact on the man-made and natural environment of the storage area will be zero as the storage will be eternal. As well as that countries are not obliged to accept the storage of pollutants on their territory. Germany, for example, does not give permits for storage on land and in its seas. I guess our eager government is ardently seeking the title of ‘European dumbass’ since it is going too far. The “patriotism” of subservience that pervades it, leads it to the point of claiming “laurels” from its global unhistorical firsts, since “PRINCE”:

  • It is the only case in the world of CO2 storage in such close proximity to tourist, densely populated areas.
  • It is the only area protected from Natura as in our case where a storage facility is planned. Nowhere else in the world has a similar project been carried out in areas protected by the international treaties NATURA 2000 or RAMSAR.

Is there a single reason that obliges you to accept the denial of our national rights and the violation of international treaties to save the environment? Do not delude yourself if you are suggesting … development. Sustainable development contracts with life, not with ‘graveyards’.

WARRANTY 3

“…To provide significant offsetting benefits to the local community in terms of percentage of revenue, jobs, environmental footprint projects…”

NO gentlemen. Our lives, our productive footprint, our environment are not financial commodities. They are not Dioxide to play on the stock market. They are priceless universal values and have no place in any scale. There is no price to pay for the loss of human life or the natural and animal environment. These trade-offs you are asking for are the ‘back door’ you are leaving unguarded for looters ‘investors’ to come through and ravage our already struggling region. Seal it now, tomorrow will be too late. They don’t give “even the devil …incense”, they have only one god, profit. Our lives and the environment are “collateral damage” to them. Yesterday the Karvali, today the Prinos, tomorrow the Gold of Thrace. It is not enough that they have given us the negative rank of the poorest European Region (of the many rewards!), they also tried to uproot us from our homes.

κ. Mayor of the Municipality of Kavala

κ. Councillors (21) of the majority party

Take back the unacceptable resolution. Stand up to your historic responsibility, meet with your citizens’ movements, justify their confidence in you yesterday and tomorrow, so that we can stand united in defence of our inalienable right to live. in a safe and clean environment in the place we were born and love. Say a big NO to “dirty investment”. Otherwise you will forever be held accountable to your conscience and to history because with your vote you helped to light the green light to the looming crime.

Remember that: “IN THIS SEA THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A DARK HORSE”

THASOS 15/07/25 COORDINATING COMMITTEE OF THASOS ANTI CO2OPERATORS

CONTACT: thassosagainstCO2@gmail.com

Suddenly 1.2 billion missing

Jul 15, 2025 | news

Suddenly 1.2 billion is missing.

Accounts without the hotelier lead to disaster!

 

The Northern Lights CCS project in the North Sea is considered “still” promising for CO₂ storage projects in many European countries. But in practice , questions arise about the financing, technical capacity and transport of the project.
How does a 1.2 billion hole suddenly appear? Here are the jumps…
Northern Lights is a consortium with the participation of the Norwegian state and is largely financed by public funds. The Norwegian government has promised to cover 80% of the costs. Of course at no cost because Norway with Equinor in the lead is the strategic initiator of the CCS technology from which it hopes to make a lot of money. Equinor (derived from Statoil ASA) with ISIN NO0010096985 and 67% owned by the Norwegian state. Now the question is whether Northern Lights’ customers will take on the remaining costs themselves which have risen to $3.3 billion. So we have a funding gap of about 1.2 billion.
Norwegian district heating producer Hafslund Celsio left already in 2023 due to rising costs – and despite the support of the Norwegian state – as an initial first customer, but plans to come back after 2029 if conditions change.
According to consultancy firm Wood Mackenzie, transport and storage alone cost an average of $145 per tonne – to this are added the costs of binding... but the most tragic thing is that there is no future reduction in costs due to economies of scale in this technology, which is what is happening with PV and PV.
As can be seen in practice, the estimates of the neutral consultancies are becoming reality. CCS is turning into a cow that will be milked by a few artisans, while society has to shoulder the many economic and environmental burdens….

The full article here…

https://www.focus.de/

 

The “Cover Your Arse” policy of Kavala City Council on CO2

Jul 13, 2025 | news

The decision of the Kavala Municipal Council on the storage of CO2 that took place on 07/07/2025 is a YES for the project with a failed in my opinion communication effort to paint this YES into NO. In essence it is a positive position for the project as the results recorded on the card below show:

In the Kavala Morning newspaper we read that the decision of the Municipal Council is negative unless the Greek government provides guarantees:

“

  1. on whether carbon capture and storage can be effective for the climate, since it allows industry to continue to burn large quantities of fossil fuels,
  2. to take all necessary measures to protect human life and the environment, close to an urban centre and an island with a high development of tourism and the primary sector,
  3. to provide significant offsetting benefits to the local community in terms of percentage of revenue, jobs, environmental footprint projects
  4. for more information on the results.
    “

Let’s analyse these conditions/guarantees in order.

#1

But can we start from the working assumption that the Greek government will influence the US “Drill Baby Drill policy”, i.e. mine, burn and bury all the fossil fuels you can? What will be the climate effectiveness of the 3 million tons of CO2 we bury per year in Prino compared to the approximately 40 billion tons of CO2 we produce on the planet? To bury what we produce we would need around 20,000 facilities like the one in Prinos on the planet, whereas today we don’t even have 50 in operation, around 6 in Europe. All this position only helps is to support the actions of the oil industry lobby – the International Association of Oil & Gas Producers Europe (IOGP Europe) – to get its positions on further funding for Carbon Contracts for Difference and the establishment of a CCS Bank to manage these contracts.

So this is the first ball that the City Council throws at the podium. No Greek Government can give any guarantee here, it cannot de facto do so.

 

#2

This working hypothesis is also a bit comical. The proximity of the reservoirs is for our region in combination with the high seismicity the most strategic factor, 𝙨𝙝𝙤𝙬 𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙧, 𝞽𝞸 𝞳𝞴𝞮𝞲𝞭ί 𝞹𝞸𝞾 𝞹𝞺έ𝞹𝞮𝞲 𝞶𝞪 𝞼𝞽𝞪𝞵𝞪𝞽ή𝞼𝞮𝞲 𝞽𝞸 𝙨𝙝𝙤𝙬, the key to saying no. Is it a coincidence that even the originators of the technology, the Norwegians who also have huge economic benefits from CCS, are building similar facilities 150+ km from their shores? The monitoring (monitoring) and observatories that need to be set up are high tech that does not exist today. They need, robots, satellites, sensors, and eventually huge computer centers to record ,analyze and evaluate the data. Assuming the investment is made, do you think that this kind of infrastructure and jobs will exist/be created in Tempe country? What is the point of demanding something from someone who cannot guarantee it?

So this is the second ball that the City Council throws at the podium. No Greek government can give this guarantee for the safety of a facility in an earthquake-prone area and 3 miles from the coast… Let’s get serious! The decision is political!

#3

Here the councillors are jumping into a large and dangerous field in the so-called “Violation of the Precautionary Principle”. This principle is not compensated. In this age of technology and development, big projects promise progress. But behind the promises, there are risks that are neither calculated nor addressed. Society is being asked to say ‘yes or no’ – without knowing the real price. This is not just a technical failure, but above all a moral failure.

When risks are uncertain but potentially catastrophic, avoiding them is a moral obligation. Waste, geological repositories, irreversible environmental impacts – all of these are “dumped” on people who are not yet born. Is this fair? When the few benefit and the many are at risk. The economic elites take the profits while the citizens bear the burden. This is called inequality, not progress. As Max Weber used to say, ‘It is not enough to have good intentions; you have to take responsibility for the consequences’. When the consequences are unknown or uncontrollable, responsibility becomes a risk on human lives.

But above all it is also a question of morality and respect. When for reasons of individual utility people and nature are used as a means to economic ends, respect is lost. We in Thassos will not become the field of “collateral damage”. We are a society with a voice and dignity. Out of respect and moral responsibility, out of the right to knowledge and participation as well as out of our unwavering obedience to the precautionary principle we refuse any kind of compensatory measures. We do not want to build our future on injustice and uncertainty.

#4

the only argument that I consider absolutely correct.

 

Conclusions

The behavior of the 21 councillors who voted YES was a classic example of what we call “Cover Your Arse” politics or CYA politics. This decision will be remembered for generations. It is “I’m a little pregnant politics”. The 21 took steps to protect themselves in case of trouble or failure and to absolve themselves of any liability.

What are the messages they sent us?

  • “I warned” or “I reported it.”
  • Avoidance of liability: It is preferred that decisions are delayed, delegated or shared among many, so that no one can be held responsible. In other words, in simple Greek, we throw the ball into the stands and turn the page. Not like this!
  • False transparency: pretending that all procedures are transparent and understandable, when the real purpose is to avoid liability.
  • It’s a culture based on fear. They left in the air, the Mayor of Thassos, the Municipal Council of Thassos and all the residents of Thassos and many from Kavala. Voters will not forget this in future elections.
  • In my opinion, this policy lacks morality because it undermines trust, cooperation and a sense of responsibility. Instead of honest communication and collective responsibility, it creates a climate of fear, opacity and a mentality of self-protection.