Bayer AG's CO pipeline
The CO pipeline of Bayer AG is a pipeline for the transport of carbon monoxide , which at the company's Dormagen is a by-product, location Krefeld - Uerdingen , where it is needed for the production of plastics and other chemical products.
The justification for the approval of the construction of the pipeline is based in particular on the alleged orientation towards the common good , which also justifies expropriations of the owners concerned. Opponents of the pipeline point in particular to the toxicity of escaping carbon monoxide. An expert opinion commissioned by the State Environment Ministry also came to the conclusion in 2014 that the pipeline was uneconomical for the operator.
The developer of the project is Covestro (formerly Bayer MaterialScience ). The pipeline was completed at the end of 2009, but is not yet operational due to lawsuits against the project.
Route
The two plants, which are connected by the approximately 67 km long pipeline, are located on the left bank of the Rhine . However, the route runs almost exclusively rechtsrheinisch: south and east of Monheim am Rhein , north of Langenfeld the A 3 aptly, this almost to Duisburg following, then transversely to Krefeld-Uerdingen. If laid on the left bank of the Rhine, the pipeline would be significantly shorter; Bayer justified the route along the existing infrastructure (rail, motorway and existing cable bundles) with synergy effects. The gas trading company Wingas is laying a natural gas pipeline on around half of the route.
Current situation
Construction of the pipeline was completed in December 2009; In 2010 and 2011 there were improvements. Since February 2014, the commissioning of the CO pipeline has been negotiated before the Higher Administrative Court in Münster . The court had doubts about the constitutionality of the licensing procedure on several points : In the pipeline law passed by the state in 2006, the purpose of the expropriation was too vague, the administration not only had to examine the purposes of the expropriations, but also the chances of success in achieving the purposes, and finally the overall balance is not a matter for the administration, but for the legislature. On August 28, 2014, the OVG turned to the Federal Constitutional Court with a corresponding judge's submission , which rejected it. In the reasoning published on January 13, 2017, the BVerfG contradicted the OVG's view on all points.
criticism
Opponents of this construction project, which partly affects densely populated areas, particularly criticize the risk of poisoning , since the odorless and toxic carbon monoxide is only slightly lighter than air. Compared to similar lines, for example in the Netherlands , the safety measures are inadequate, so that in the worst case of a break, thousands of human lives are at risk. In 2010, the head of the Ratingen fire brigade complained that Bayer's propagation simulations did not represent the worst possible case . Bayer, on the other hand, refers to the control measures with which the pressure is monitored and carbon monoxide can also be detected in the smallest quantities along the route. Another measure to check for leaks is the comparison of the mass balance (amount fed in and amount withdrawn) and checking the pressure wave profile in the pipe. In addition, there are regular controls of the management.
Legal dispute
The construction was made possible by a law that partially includes the expropriation of property. This law was unanimously approved by all parliamentary groups in the North Rhine-Westphalian state parliament. After the administrative court in Düsseldorf initially rejected all urgent applications against the project, the urgent applications were approved by the higher administrative court in Münster and the commissioning was prohibited for the time being. The expropriations in favor of Bayer Material Science were also stopped for the time being. On May 26, 2009, the administrative court in Düsseldorf rejected another urgent application by Bayer Material Science AG for early commissioning, as the security level of the pipeline had been further deteriorated since the decision of the higher administrative court in Münster due to the change notices of the Düsseldorf district government in March 2009.
The first prominent model plaintiff in these proceedings was the Monheim farmer Heinz-Josef Muhr, who died in 2015 .
On May 25, 2011, the Düsseldorf Administrative Court ruled that the approval of the carbon monoxide pipeline between Dormagen and Krefeld was illegal because the earthquake safety of the project had not been adequately checked.
Situation after the change of government in NRW
In the state elections in North Rhine-Westphalia in 2010 on May 9, 2010, the black-yellow coalition that had been in power since 2005 was voted out of office and replaced by a red-green coalition . The lawyer Anne Lütkes (Greens) became the incumbent district president in the administrative district of Düsseldorf on August 18, 2010 . Lütkes said on November 30, 2010 that she had opted for a plan change procedure with public participation because of the numerous deviations from the original approval . You value a legally comprehensive and clean examination. The plan deviations are "substantial". Only through the participation of the public could “a correct plan approval procedure be guaranteed”. In the CO line, route deviations of more than one meter were found at 90 to 100 points. The safety mats that are supposed to protect the line from damage are not wide enough everywhere. There are also deviations in the type of steel used and in the material of the casing pipes. The plan change procedure should be initiated in spring 2011.
Web links
- Information from Bayer AG
- Opponent initiative in Duisburg
- Opponent initiative in Erkrath
- Opponent initiative in Hilden
- Map / aerial photo of the route
Individual evidence
- ↑ CO line between Dormagen and Krefeld-Uerdingen: secure supply within the network. Covestro , accessed February 13, 2017 .
- ↑ With so few beneficiaries, how justified is an orientation towards the common good that justifies expropriation? (No longer available online.) Düsseldorf district government , August 8, 2011, archived from the original on February 13, 2017 ; accessed on February 12, 2017 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Controversial CO pipeline uneconomical for Bayer. In: The world . February 20, 2014, accessed February 12, 2017 .
- ↑ Course of the CO pipeline. In: Bayer Pipeline Project. Bayer MaterialScience AG, accessed August 31, 2012 .
- ↑ Pressure test of the CO pipeline before successful completion. (PDF, 65KB) Bayer MaterialScience AG, December 16, 2009, accessed on August 31, 2012 .
- ↑ Florian Müller: Criticism of the Kraft cabinet. In: WAZ.de. WAZ New Media GmbH & Co. KG, March 20, 2012, accessed on August 31, 2012 .
- ↑ CO pipeline: court could overturn the legal basis. In: www.rp-online.de. RP Digital GmbH, February 19, 2014, accessed on April 28, 2014 .
- ↑ Martin Ahlers: OVG Münster considers the construction of the CO pipeline to be unconstitutional. In: WAZ. August 28, 2014. Retrieved August 28, 2014 .
- ↑ The Higher Administrative Court considers the Pipeline Act for the carbon monoxide (CO) pipeline of Bayer AG to be unconstitutional. Higher Administrative Court for the State of North Rhine-Westphalia , August 28, 2014, accessed on February 12, 2017 (press release).
- ↑ Inadmissible submission by a judge in connection with the construction of a carbon monoxide pipeline. Federal Constitutional Court , January 13, 2017, accessed on February 12, 2017 (decision 1 BvL 10/14 of December 21, 2016).
- ↑ Antje Höning: Federal Constitutional Court rejects CO pipeline lawsuit. In: RP Online . January 13, 2017. Retrieved February 12, 2017 .
- ^ Demands of the citizens' initiative against the CO pipeline in the south of Duisburg. (No longer available online.) Citizens' initiative COntra-Pipeline Duisburg-Süd, July 15, 2009, archived from the original on February 21, 2013 ; accessed on August 31, 2012 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Joachim Preuss: CO pipeline: fire brigade criticizes Bayer. In: RP Online . April 19, 2010, accessed February 12, 2017 .
- ↑ Monitoring the CO pipeline. In: Bayer Pipeline Project. Bayer MaterialScience AG, accessed August 31, 2012 .
- ↑ a b Düsseldorf Administrative Court again rejects urgent applications for the carbon monoxide pipeline. Administrative Court of Düsseldorf, May 26, 2009, archived from the original on January 6, 2013 ; Retrieved September 14, 2012 .
- ↑ Bayer MaterialScience regrets the decision of the Münster Higher Administrative Court. (PDF, 68KB) In: Bayer Pipeline Project. Bayer MaterialScience AG, December 18, 2007, accessed August 31, 2012 .
- ^ Commissioning of the Bayer carbon monoxide pipeline Dormagen-Krefeld / Uerdingen stopped for the time being. Higher Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia, December 18, 2007, archived from the original on July 14, 2014 ; Retrieved September 14, 2012 .
- ↑ Administrative court stops BAYER's CO pipeline. In: Coordination against BAYER dangers. May 25, 2011, accessed August 31, 2012 .
- ↑ Gerhard Voogt: Citizens' protest: District President wants citizens to participate in the CO pipeline. In: RP ONLINE. December 1, 2010, accessed August 31, 2012 .
