Category: Artificial Reefs in Qatar

Introduction & Argument

Having briefly analyzed Qatar’s artificial reef initiative from various environmental and theoretical angles, in this final post I will focus on what I consider to be its most critical aspect, its connection to transitions. With the growing frequency of climatic disasters and rising climate worries, the concept of transition—its structure, underlying values, and what characterizes one in general—has become particularly crucial in the field of environmental humanities. Not only is a transition necessary to economically shift away from oil and energy reliance, but it is equally required to break down the intricate social link between the freedoms offered by oil and the desire to continue relying on this type of energy. As a result, the concept of “transition” is not only critical to the goals of environmental humanities, but also to the general survival and prosperity of current and future generations because of its connection to climate change mitigation. Although not immediately clear, the artificial coral reefs project involves a transition: a physical transition in the form of relocating natural reefs and planting artificial coral reefs, but also a social transition that may invoke larger concern for ecology and biodiversity within Qatar, and the Gulf region. With this in mind, the focus for the final post is to explore the relationship between capitalism and the form that transition takes. Essentially, using the case study of Qatar’s artificial reef initiative, I argue that the involvement of capitalism, particularly through oil and energy firms, modifies the aim, form, and moral implications of a transition, making it less likely to survive or endure in the long run.

Energy dependence, Capitalist Aims, and Transition

In After-Oil, PRG discusses the notion of “impasse”, a point in time where we are stuck or unable to induce change. In addressing the root causes of the transition impasse, they argue that oil dependence, the capitalist economic system, and climate change are all key contributors to the current transition deadlock (Petrocultures Research Group 29). On the one hand, this is because capitalism’s growth-oriented and accelerationist nature is incompatible with a shift to decreased energy use (Petrocultures Research Group 35). On the other hand, our current freedoms provided by the capitalist regime are difficult to comprehend in a life beyond capitalist means (Petrocultures Research Group 35). Hence, all of this points to the idea that capitalism is at the root of the energy impasse that we are currently in. Highly relevant to the notion of impasses is the idea of a “transition without loss.” This transition narrative is frequently offered by energy firms, governments, and technology corporations, and it denotes a shift towards decarbonizing the present economy without sacrificing existing freedoms, or even resulting in an improvement in quality of life (Petrocultures Research Group 32). But how does this fit in with Qatar’s artificial reef initiative?

As noted in the second blog post, Qatargas’ involvement as one of the three partners is claimed to be in mitigation for another project they are currently holding, namely the “North Field Sustainability Project”. Since the North Field Sustainability Project aims to sustain current LNG production and increase LNG output in the near future, it effectively encourages a continued reliance on energy (in the form of natural gas) for the foreseeable future. As a result, we can definitively conclude that the artificial coral reef project is part of an energy transition toward greater reliance on natural gas. In this way, the involvement of capitalist energy companies modifies the goals of the transition; initially, the project might seem to invoke a larger concern for biodiversity, but now, it is understood to favor an increased reliance on non-sustainable energy forms, pushing us further into the current impasse. Similarly, capitalism does not only change the aims of a transition, but it also alters the form in a significant way.

The actions of Qatargas suggest a sense of contradiction. The motivations for both projects (artificial reefs and North Field Sustainability) are complex and legitimate. The artificial reef initiative genuinely seeks to improve biodiversity, demonstrating ecological concern. The North Field Sustainability Project aims to boost LNG production, which would certainly contribute to further environmental harm and so lacks ecological concern. This points to the artificial reef initiative becoming a fantasy of “transition without loss,” attempting to balance the competing objectives of high-energy modernism and environmental health. Hence, the type of transition has changed. Ultimately, Qatargas’ presence changes the major values at stake, from genuinely addressing biodiversity loss to a fiction of increasing energy reliance while maintaining or improving ecology. So, not only do the purposes of transition change but also the form of transition unavoidably alters with the participation of capitalist energy interests. However, the changes that capitalism brings about in the characteristics of transition are not restricted to form and goal; they also affect moral values, which inevitably undermines the transition’s long-term stability.

Morality & Climate Action

To assess the morality of climate action, it is essential to examine Hourdequin’s principle of moral integrity. In “Climate, Collective Action, and Individual Ethical Obligations”, Hourdequin addresses the premise of moral integrity through the concept of harmonizing one’s political and personal values (Hourdequin 449). Here, she emphasizes that moral integrity necessitates the internalization and general coherence of ethical convictions; hence, for an individual to have moral integrity, their private commitments must be aligned with their political commitments (Hourdequin 449). Applying this to the involvement of Qatargas in the artificial reef initiative, we notice a clear conflict between individual and political values. If we suppose that Qatargas’ personal goals are targeted at increasing profits from LNG dependency (resulting in decreased ecological health) and their political values are intended at improving biodiversity (resulting in enhanced ecological health), then there is an obvious contradiction between personal and political commitments. Similarly, if we assume that Qatargas’ political values are aimed at increasing reliance on LNG due to it being a valuable source of profit for Qatar, and their personal values are aimed at improving biodiversity, there is still an inconsistency between personal and political values. Hence, by Hourdequin’s description, Qatargas’ actions lack moral integrity whichever way we look at them. Nonetheless, as previously mentioned, both initiatives (artificial coral reefs and the North Field Sustainability Project) have legitimate motivations, thus the question becomes: why does Qatargas’ lack of integrity matter, or how is this significant or relevant to the overall success of the transition?

In the same article, Hourdequin raises the notion of stable reform. Here, she contrasts coercive reform, which is superficial and unstable, with personal transformation, which leads to deep and stable reform (Hourdequin 454). She supports this with the idea that individual action arising out of personal transformation sends a message to others, effectively contributing to their personal transformation (Hourdequin 457). Hence, individual development serves as a foundation for further collective agreement and transformation. This points to a crucial moral dimension to the idea of transition or collective action. Even though Hourdequin focuses on coercion vs. personal development, her ideas about individual transformation may be extended to other crucial areas under the concept of transition.

Given we now know personal transformation and individual action arising out of personal transformation communicate to others, then individual action lacking moral integrity or a sound moral grounding is unlikely to communicate well or effectively to others. Therefore, the distinction is not only between coercive and personal transformations, but also between genuine (morally sound) and ingenuine (immoral or lacking integrity) transformations. And these contrasts effectively determine whether a transformation or a transition is likely to succeed or fail in the long term. So, the answer to the question of why Qatargas’ lack of moral integrity matters, is because it constitutes a critical deciding element in this initiative’s success or failure in establishing a social transition. When the actions of Qatargas, one of the partners in the initiative, are deemed immoral, it is unlikely to invoke personal transformations in others, meaning it is also unlikely to achieve the sort of changes necessary for long-term societal transformation in the form of increased ecological concern.

Conclusion

To conclude, the involvement of capitalist oil or energy companies inevitably changes several essential aspects of a transition. Through the case study of Qatargas’ involvement in the artificial reef initiative in Qatar, we can examine some of the elements that change. Since capitalist companies are growth- and profit-oriented, they are averse to a shift towards lower-energy use. Therefore, the aims of the artificial coral reef project change from being solely directed at protecting and preserving biodiversity to becoming part of an energy transition toward increased reliance on natural gas. Similarly, the form of the transition is also altered. Capitalist owners and companies spread the narrative that it is possible to achieve improved ecological health while increasing energy dependence. Qatargas is involved in an initiative that is aimed at improving ecological health but has simultaneously launched a project to increase LNG production and dependency on non-sustainable energy, implying that they participate in the fantasy of a “transition without loss.” Lastly, the changes in form and aim are accompanied by significant moral implications that directly undermine the transition’s long-term survival. The conflict of interests present in Qatargas’ actions demonstrates a lack of moral integrity, and since climate action is best led through personal transformations with a solid ethical basis, Qatargas’ actions are unlikely to communicate effectively enough to result in a genuine social transition toward a larger concern for biodiversity specifically, but also for non-human nature generally. All of this leads to the conclusion that the involvement of capitalism, via oil and energy, is detrimental to a transition’s form and aim, as well as its underlying moral values, inevitably threatening its long-term success in triggering change. So, is the artificial coral reef initiative in Qatar a transition for better or worse?

Works Cited:

Petrocultures Research Group. “After Oil.” Petrocultures Research Group, 2016.

Hourdequin, Marion. “Climate, Collective Action and Individual Ethical Obligations.” Environmental Values, vol. 19, no. 4, White Horse Press, Nov. 2010, pp. 443–64. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327110×531552.

After having examined a more ecological concern in the concept of scale and more moral concern in the concept of transitions, in this post I will focus on a more theoretical aspect of this initiative. As I have outlined previously in other posts, this project entails both the relocation of natural reefs and the planting or placement of artificial reefs in precise locations. In the words of the Ministry of Municipality, its activities over the past year have involved “the transfer and cultivation of 14,000 square meters of seaweed, and 11,595 units of natural coral hard, and 500 units of soft coral reefs, as well as the transfer and re-cultivation of more than 31,600 trees of mangroves in the coastal areas” (Ministry of Municipality). This raises important questions about what we consider nature, as well as the degree to which we are allowed to intervene with the “natural”.

In order to get a better understanding of the concept of “nature” and the strong significance such a phrase has on human culture, we may look at Clark’s The Anthropocene. In this article, Clark discusses several dilemmas of the current environmental epoch, which many refer to as the “Anthropocene.” What is nature, we may ask? As Clark explains, many traditional views of nature as ‘unaffected by human activity’ have become debatable (Clark 32). The phrase “natural” has value in and of itself, such as claiming that the components in a certain meal or drink are natural (Clark 32). Similarly, this notion may be found in far more complicated elements of life, such as stating that certain ways of life are more natural than others (32-33). Nature, viewed in this context, is a domain of undisputable facts (32). However, as notions of nature become more questionable, appeals to nature and the natural have also begun to lose credibility. This raises serious concerns for eco-criticism; a green critic can no longer claim to be protecting a natural state from human influence (36).

Looking back at the artificial reefs initiative in Qatar, doubts about nature or the natural raise more difficulties about the form and course of action that should be taken to address biodiversity loss. Grey areas around what exactly can be considered “nature”, in a way, raise questions about whether we should prioritize aspects of biodiversity based on how much “natural” value they hold. Do artificial reefs count as nature? Similarly, the lack of bounds to the idea of the “natural” raises questions about to what degree we can alter specific natures and preserve others. Is the relocation of natural reefs as a step in this initiative morally sound? Hence, it becomes clear how the notion of “nature” complicates this initiative’s core values. Through an examination of this initiative from Clark’s lens, a third alternative to the debate of altering vs preserving nature arises.

The case study of Qatar’s artificial reefs encompasses a new scope of altering to preserve nature. Are we allowed to alter nature if the ultimate aim is to preserve it? The Municipality of Environment and Climate Change has relocated natural reefs, seaweeds, and even mangroves, all of which constitute an alteration of nature. But since the aim is to protect nature and decrease biodiversity loss, does this change the moral stakes? Overall, this idea of altering to preserve would constitute new philosophical and moral dilemmas to the already existing doubts about the bounds of nature, as not only does it become a question of whether we are allowed to alter nature, but now it becomes a question of when are we allowed to do so, and what counts as an adequate reason for such a process?

Works Cited:

“The ‘Anthropocene’? Nature and Complexity.” The Value of Ecocriticism, by Timothy Clark, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2019, pp. 17–37.

“Qatar Marks International Day for Biological Biodiversity.” Ministry of Municipality, 22 May 2018, https://www.mme.gov.qa/cui/view.dox?id=702&contentID=5592&siteID=2.

After looking at how the joint initiative by Qatargas, the Municipality of Environment and climate change, and Qatar University is relevant to the concept of scale, in this blog I will focus on its relevance to the concept of transitions. The artificial coral reefs project involves a transition, a physical transition in the form of relocating natural reefs and planting artificial coral reefs, but also a social transition that may invoke larger concern for ecology and biodiversity within Qatar, and the Gulf region. Because of this element of change, the notion of transitions becomes crucial to examine, both to grasp what a transition means and some of the consequences that might result from these transformations. The book After-Oil delves deeply into the cultural and political changes required to support the transition away from fossil fuels. However, for the purposes of this study, I will concentrate on three important themes in this book: transitions, oil characteristics, and energy deepening.

Oil is more than just a physical resource; it shapes space, culture, habits, and even our beliefs and values (Petrocultures Research Group 16-17). Almost all of the ideals connected with contemporary life’s liberties are in some way tied to petroculture (Petrocultures Research Group 10). As a result, an energy transition is both social and historical in nature, which means a social framework is required for a shift that addresses basic human needs while also reflecting collective interests (14). Deeply entrenched within the characteristics of oil and capitalism is the concept of energy deepening.  This refers to the propensity of capitalist modernization to use natural forms of physical labor to optimize, control, and discard human labor (Petrocultures Research Group 24). A concern with energy deepening and the concept of transitions is that “Once oil’s role as a modulator of economic and thus social relations is brought to the centre of the project of transition, the stakes, content, and form of what is in transition alter dramatically” (Petrocultures Research Group 25). But how does this connect to Qatar’s artificial coral reef initiatives?

Qatargas is a major energy company in Qatar and one of the three partners in this project. According to a website article, this initiative, as well as the present coral management program in general, “has been established as mitigation for the North Field Production Sustainability (NFPS) Project” (Qatargas). The goal of the NFPS project is to build numerous developments that will not only help sustain current gas output, but also aims to increase Qatar’s LNG production capacity by 23 million tons per year (Rani). This emphasizes the concern of energy deepening, underlining how the involvement of oil radically changes the purpose and form of transition. On the surface, this project appears to contribute to enhanced ecological awareness, a shift to higher biodiversity, and a culture that values nonhuman life. However, given the involvement of Qatargas, we may deduce that this initiative is largely motivated by selfish aspirations to ensure the continuation of this energy regime. Looking at transitions and the actions of energy companies, we notice a sense of “specification of nature” that can be paralleled to eco-Marxism.

Similar to class distinction in Marxism, capitalists, and often society as a whole, select which natures to care for and which to exploit. Improvements to specific natures (coral reefs) are met by degradation in another (oil sites immediately, and other natures through climate change). In this sense, particular natures are preferred above others for ecological reasons or convenience of access. We also see this with veganism and vegetarianism, where animal health and well-being are prioritized over plants which are also part of nature. Here, we may also see this as a point of convergence with eco-Marxism, with this division of nature paralleling the class distinction. In a capitalist society, the rich bourgeoisie are given preference over the destitute proletariat. In this way, the specification of nature is analogous to the division of labor, where the protection of select natures and not others represents the protection and prosperity of specific classes and not others.

Works Cited:

After Oil. Petrocultures Research Group, 2016.

Rani, Archana. “Saipem Receives $350M Contract from Qatargas.” Offshore Technology, 14 Apr. 2021, https://www.offshore-technology.com/news/saipem-contract-qatargas/#:~:text=The%20North%20Field%20Production%20Sustainability%20Offshore%20Project%20aims%20to%20sustain,annum%20(Mtpa)%20to%20110Mtpa.

“Qatargas Completes Landmark Environmental Project to Protect Qatar’s Rich Marine Biodiversity.” Qatargas, 19 Oct. 2021, https://www.qatargas.com/english/MediaCenter/Pages/Press%20Releases/Qatargas-completes-landmark-environmental-project-to-protect-Qatar%E2%80%99s-rich-marine-biodiversity.aspx.

The joint initiative by Qatargas, Qatar’s Ministry of Municipality and Environment, and Qatar University to protect and preserve biodiversity through the planting of artificial coral reefs raises important questions of scale. The significance of scale towards environmental study is a topic that Tim Clark discusses in his essay “Derangements of scale”. A derangement of scale, also known as a crisis of scale, arises when we read or evaluate at multiple scales at the same time (Clark 17). One important consequence of this implosion of scale is that we may begin to associate simple actions with vast stakes (Clark 5). One example of the confusion caused by the crisis of scale is the misperception that a motorist purchasing a somewhat less damaging vehicle is suddenly “saving the planet” (Clark 4). Similarly, we often hear climate change urgency being evoked through statements such as “humanity is destroying itself.” This is extremely deceptive since it implies that mankind has control over the entire planet and is consciously choosing to self-harm (Clark 4). To better grasp Clark’s concept of scale, we must look at the three different scales of analysis for environmental studies.

In “Derangements of Scale”, Tim Clark devises three important scales of analysis. The first is the personal scale, which evaluates an agent’s close group and contacts (Clark 11). The second is the spatial scale, in which the influence or repercussions include a country’s culture and its citizens (Clark 11). Finally, the hypothetical scale may reflect the entire planet, its population, and possibly a period of 600 years (Clark 12). Applying this distinction of scale to the artificial coral reefs initiative in Qatar, we may infer what each scale may look like. For example, the personal scale might show how this campaign may benefit the individual agents (Qatargas, Qatar University, and the Ministry of Municipality and Environment) through increased media attention. Likewise, the spatial/national scale would represent the benefits to Qatar’s culture, which would simply be the enhancement or preservation of ocean biodiversity. Finally, and most critically, on the hypothetical/global scale, a possible benefit is that this project may enable or pave the way for new marine environment preservation strategies (Qatargas), whereas, a possible disadvantage is that it implies a sense of techno-optimism and selfishness in the attitude of the various actors toward global environmental crises. Hence, by viewing this case study via Tim Clark’s “Derangement of Scale” perspective, we might deduce a new implication, namely the “prioritization of scale”.

Prioritization of scale simply refers to the idea that actors working on issues of climate change frequently prioritize the benefits to the personal or national scale above potential global implications. This sense of prioritization of scale is relevant in both the cases of environmental slogans and the artificial coral reef initiative in Qatar. As we observed with the motorist, environmental slogans frequently tend toward the personal or, at most, the spatial scale, and their assertions are only applicable when studied on those dimensions. A motorist who purchases a less damaging vehicle is simply decreasing his carbon footprint, but his individual actions are completely insignificant to global climate change mitigation. Similarly, the artificial coral reef initiative is only beneficial on a personal and spatial level. On a personal level, one potential advantage is increased media attention for the partners involved, whilst on a spatial or national level, the initiatives are expected to aid in the mitigation of ocean biodiversity loss caused by rising temperatures. In both instances, there is little consideration or significance to the potential implications on a hypothetical or global scale. In this sense, there’s a prioritization of scale, with the closer, presumably easier, scales favored over the distant, considerably more complex ones, or in other words, the individual and domestic benefits are prioritized over potential global consequences.

Works Cited:

Clark, Timothy. “Derangements of scale.” Telemorphosis: Theory in the era of climate change 1 (2012): 148-166.

“Qatargas completes landmark environmental project to protect Qatar’s rich marine biodiversity” Qatargas, 19 Oct. 2021, https://www.qatargas.com/english/MediaCenter/Pages/Press%20Releases/Qatargas-completes-landmark-environmental-project-to-protect-Qatar%E2%80%99s-rich-marine-biodiversity.aspx

In an attempt to preserve and protect the country’s biodiversity, Qatar’s Ministry of Municipality and Environment, Qatargas, and Qatar University have launched a joint initiative to build artificial coral reef habitats. This project entails the relocation of coral reefs and the planting of artificial coral reefs in precise locations. In the words of the active head of environmental and regulatory affairs, “The programme aims at increasing spaces for marine habitats of the country, protecting coral reefs and support the scientific research of QU laboratory in growing artificial coral reefs” (Abdallah). In this case study, I look at Qatar’s efforts to preserve ocean biodiversity by creating artificial coral reefs, highlighting the methods, reasons, and consequences of such projects.

While the specific roles of each partner are not directly outlined, the project is divided into four distinct phases: the first is choosing a suitable location through environmental evaluation studies; the second is constructing an artificial coral reef and expertly deploying it in the water; the third is moving live coral reefs to the chosen location; the fourth is reporting on the project’s progress, the response of marine life to the locations, and the growth of coral reefs (Abdallah). One prominent implication of such a project is the question of whether it is permissible to alter nature. Does tampering with nature to preserve it change the moral stakes? The philosophical debate of preserving vs altering nature becomes critical in this case, where we may wonder if there is a third alternative of “altering to preserve” nature, as in Qatar’s case.

Another follow-up implication is that this project entails a form of invasion. The artificial coral reefs that will replace the natural reefs raise questions about what we perceive as “nature” or the “natural” by extending what we may consider as wilderness to non-natural localities. If what we consider as nature is simply nonhuman creations, then we may be in a predicament over whether or not manmade reefs count as “nature,” but if not, then what are the boundaries of “nature” or the “natural”? Similarly, an initiative of this form, and with such ambitions, implies an important sense of techno-optimism.

Faced with the dilemma of rapidly declining ocean biodiversity, damaged coral reefs, and a potential 30% decrease in fish catch potential (Doha News), the actors in this case, and mainly the Municipality of Environment and Climate Change, chose an approach that perhaps minimizes or excludes any economic losses for them. Rather than targeting the root of the problem by decreasing CO2 emissions and oil dependence, the agents involved opted for a more technologically reliant response. This is possibly indicative of the willingness, or lack thereof, of actors within the Gulf region, but also globally, to incur losses in the process of transition.

Finally, the participation of Qatargas is also a significant element of this project. The involvement of the Municipality of Environment and Climate Change is to a certain degree self-explanatory, the involvement of Qatar University is in support of the scientific research it has been conducting, but there’s no real obvious reason for the involvement of an energy company in this initiative. This raises the concern of oil or energy as a modulator of society and makes the role of Qatargas essential to examine, in order to get the complete image of the form and consequences of this initiative. Overall, through an examination of this project from an environmental humanities perspective, this case study aims to explore different aspects of this initiative through the scope of varying theories and themes discussed within environmental literature to gain a broader understanding of the potential benefits, but also some questions that arise morally, philosophically, and ecologically.

Works Cited

“While Artificial Reefs Generally Enhance Local Economies, they Can Have Both Positive and Negative Effects on Ecosystems.” Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, 13 June 2011, https://floridakeys.noaa.gov/artificialreefs/effects.html

Abdallah, Hala. “What’s Being Done to Protect Qatar’s Coral Reefs.” Doha News, 21 Nov. 2021, https://dohanews.co/whats-being-done-to-protect-qatars-coral-reefs/. 

Ritvo, Harriet. “Invasion/Invasive.” Environmental Humanities, vol. 9, no. 1, May 2017, pp. 171-174.