Environmentalists Fight Proposed Moscow-Petersburg Fast Train

By Maria Kosolapova & Image by the St. Petersburg Press

On February 27, a large crowd of journalists and onlookers gathered by the entrance to the Russian Federation Supreme Court. The occasion was the filing of the first-ever Russian citizens' suit, which challenged the legality of two government resolutions to construct and finance a super train between Moscow and St. Petersburg. Approximately 350 citizens from different Russian regions have signed on to the case as plaintiffs; over 30 different NGOs, political parties and academic institutions have also joined the case, including Tamara Zlotnikova, Chairman of the State Duma Ecology Committee. The attempt to prevent this ecologically and economically devastating project has become truly national.

The idea of building a high speed train in Russia has been floating around for the past 30 years. However, the first concrete step was taken on September 13, 1991, when a presidential edict officially gave government approval to a super train project. The proposed railway could cut travel time between St. Petersburg and Moscow from eight hours to 2.5, but cause severe damage to the fragile watershed located between the two cities.

The project's organizer, the Russian joint-stock company High Speed Railways (VSM), has planned a route that cuts through the wild forests and swamps of Valdaiski national park, the watershed for the Volga, Dniepr and West Dvina rivers and an important source of drinking water for the entire region. A large part of the planned route, which has a projected width of 10 meters, would cross marshes with a peat layer four to seven meters deep. To construct a stable road bed, VSM will either have to remove much of the peat or create a elaborate trestle system with piles over ten meters long. Constructing the line will entail moving some 100 million cubic meters of earth. As local soil is unfit for the roadbed, VSM proposes to import soil from Karelia, even though Karelian soil is known to have a higher radioactive content. An earthen embankment will be built and edged with a two to four-meter concrete fence in areas where a sound barrier is needed and a net fence in the remaining places. Crossings will be constructed only every four to five kilometers and in some areas every 11 kilometers, disrupting many existing human and animal thoroughfares. Finally, 5,000 hectares of forest will have to be cut down.

Alternatives to the super train do exist. The Ministry of Communications has stated that the existing rail line can be rebuilt to accommodate speeds up to 200 kph by the year 2000. The cost of modernizing the current line would be around 800 million dollars, which the Ministry has already found in its budget, compared to the seven billion dollars needed for the super train. If reconstructed, this line could cut travel time from Moscow to St. Petersburg to four hours and ten minutes.

VSM has stated that the project will pay for itself in seven years, but the numbers do not add up. According to data from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the line would have to carry about 40 million passengers per year to be profitable. The existing rail line between Moscow and St. Petersburg carries only 2.5 million passengers per year and operates at 70 percent capacity. Moreover, tickets for the super train would be prohibitively expensive for ordinary passengers, making it unlikely to attract additional travelers. While VSM asserts that it will not use government money, it has already received a 10 million dollar credit from the government.

Lobbying for the super train project is happening at the highest government levels. Among those who have sent letters of support for the project are Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, former St. Petersburg Mayor Anatoly Sob-chak and the governors of all four oblasts that the train would pass through. Prime Minister Chernomyrdin has also endorsed the line, and the former Minister of Communications is the CEO of VSM. The Minister of Communications who supported the renovation of the existing line has been removed from his position.

Although they are facing tough resistance, opponents of the train say the law is on their side, most importantly, a federal law on protected national territories. The project is also being challenged for failure to meet the requirements of a 1995 law mandating environmental impact assessments for such projects. However, after submitting the case to the Supreme Court and waiting the required three days for a Court response, the plaintiffs heard nothing. The case was not registered until three weeks after the legal waiting period. Activists prepared to celebrate, but on March 20th it was announced on the radio that the Supreme Court would not consider the case. No reasons for this were given. Despite these setbacks, activists have not given up the fight. They plan to take the case to the Constitutional Court if necessary.

Maria Kosolapova works at the Wildlife Protection Center in Moscow. Translated by Rachel Griffiths.

Wildlife Protection Center, PO Box 449, Valday, Moscow 119270, Russia; phone: (095) 482-1888; e-mail: biodivers@glas.apc.org