Tantrum around Russian gas

Tantrum around Russian gas

Immediately, two significant events give precedents for a new panic in the commodity markets. First, yesterday there was a conversation between Putin and Erdogan, in which the construction of the Turkish Stream was touched upon. Discussion of this topic will continue at the energy congress in Istanbul, and the stream itself can kill all European ideas about creating competition for Gazprom in the bud of southern Europe.

But the “Turkish Stream” is not the most interesting. news for Europe. She is interrupted by a message about yesterday’s meeting of Miller with representatives of Shell, Uniper, Engie and Wintershall, who confirmed their intentions to contribute to the implementation of the Nord Stream-2 project.

About the project. The total capacity of the two threads of the Nord Stream 2 is 55 billion cubic meters. m of gas per year. Thus, the total design capacity of the SP and SP 2 is 110 billion cubic meters. m of gas per year. Expansion of the joint venture will cost 9,9 billion euros. The pipeline route runs along the bottom of the Baltic Sea from Portovaya Bay near Vyborg to the coast of Germany in the Greifswald region. The length is 1224 km.

Market skepticism about gas consumption in Europe crashed about the signing of environmental agreements in 2015. Up to this point, coal mining has grown, which, however, is the most dangerous energy source for the environment. But after the Paris Climate Agreement came into force, Euro-appetite for gas is only increasing. Gas supplies via the Nord Stream-1 gas pipeline have already increased from January 1 to October 3 by 13% to 32 billion cubic meters. m

According to IEA forecasts, gas demand in Europe will not fall at least until 2040. Prospects SP-2 are also determined by the slowdown in gas production in Western Europe. In the Netherlands, the peak of production was passed in 2007-2008, and after 15 in years, the country will become a net importer of blue fuel. The UK with 2005 consumes more natural gas than it can produce. In parallel with the decline in its own production volumes, London will gradually incapacitate the most polluting coal-fired CHP plants, which will provide an additional incentive for gas imports.

It is expected that by 2020, the UK's dependence on gas imports will reach 70-75%.

As for France, it did not manage to work out a consistent line regarding the replacement of capacities, which will be disabled by 2025 due to the decision to bring the share of nuclear energy in the country's energy balance to 50%. In this regard, Paris could also greatly benefit from an additional source of energy.

The position of Germany. Germany remains the main beneficiary of the second part of the north stream. The German Federal Anti-Monopoly Office approved the entry of European companies into the project’s equity capital. Thus, the process of legal registration of a joint venture that will build a gas pipeline was completed.
However, in order to sit on two chairs at once, Berlin requires the preservation of transit through Ukraine after the 2019 of the year (that's when the launch of the SP-2 is supposed).

However, by this time Germany itself, approximately by 60%, will depend precisely on Russian supplies, so it will not be necessary to choose.

In this regard, the statement of fact "Ukraine is everything" becomes real. Gazprom is regularly accused of irrational use of funds, of the high cost of the project, of its lack of load. However, the growing demand covers the minimum prices (which promise growth in the future - see the issue of wholesale contract prices), and the geopolitical instability and interest of Western Europe clearly indicate not in favor of Ukraine, which loses not only discounts, but also transit fees through its territory, which is about 2 billion dollars annually.

And one moment. Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder became the head of the governing council of Nord Stream 2.

Well, you understand ...

Now back to Turkey and the construction of another project - "Turkish Stream".

A year ago, experts argued and chose between these two projects. However, after a quarrel with Erdogan, the choice was dropped by itself. And now the Turkish president again does not mind, but Moscow seems to be a very good pros. However, the prospects for TP are not as bright as the joint venture.

According to the report of the national industry consultant in the field of fuel and energy Vygon Consulting, TP could be useful for Russia in the following aspects: reducing the risk of transit; "destruction" of competitors.

About the project. The budget of the Turkish stream should be 24 billion euros, which is a very unfavorable price for the balancing on the verge of losses of Gazprom.

The offshore section of the gas pipeline was planned to run along the bottom of the Black Sea from Anapa region to Turkey. The length of 1100 kilometers, the project was to consist of four lines. Capacity - 63 billion cubic meters of gas per year, of which 47 billion cubic meters of gas per year was planned to deliver to the border of Turkey and Greece. The length of the Turkish onshore gas pipeline should have been 180 km.
About the Turkish stream speak less and less, as this is the case of only two states and a lot of money. There is no war for payment for transit, however, they often forget that Europe also wants to have its own pipes: for this, it is trying to launch TANAP (Southern Gas Corridor - gas transportation project bypassing Russia), the agreement for which was signed on June 26 2012 Istanbul This is another attempt to reduce the monopoly of the Russian Federation. The idea is realized if not only Azerbaijan is connected to it (let us remember the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh - who will allow just having money for gas transit?), But also Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan. To connect Iraq, for example, it will be necessary to agree with the Kurds. And in the context of their war with the Turks, which has only become aggravated, it will not be very easy.

What's next?

The International Energy Congress will be held in Istanbul from 9 to 13 October. According to the Minister of Energy Industry of Venezuela Eulohio del Pino, the ministers of Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Gabon, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, as well as the Minister of Energy of the Russian Federation Alexander Novak will take part in the meeting. And since the official OPEC summit with decisions to limit oil will take place only on November 30, Istanbul will become some kind of springboard for official and not very arrangements.

Most likely, the fate of the Turkish Stream will be decided during this period. I dare to suggest that it is in Turkey that the search for sponsors and partners in the TA will be conducted.

What Gazprom considers more promising for itself is only Miller knows. But it is unlikely that in the conditions of such strong economic uncertainty, the company will manage to invest in two projects at once. So there are two options: either the search for sponsors for the implementation of the southern branch of the pipeline, or the concentration on only one project. And in this case, the joint venture-2 is much more likely to be realized.

And you could play a nocturne
on the flute of gas pipes?
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    8 October 2016 07: 11
    If I were the president, I would refuse the Turkish stream.
    1. +4
      8 October 2016 07: 29
      Come on .. It's the State Corporation ... Although it seems to be OAO. They would deliver gas to anyone, just to pay .. Although the penguins.
      1. 0
        8 October 2016 08: 19
        See penguins gas. They do without him
      2. +2
        8 October 2016 09: 11
        Maybe state corruption? does it sound more true? laughing
    2. 0
      9 October 2016 17: 50
      Quote: Danil Larionov
      If I were the president

      "If I were a queen," says one girl, ... "
      A.S. Pushkin "The Tale of Tsar Saltan".
    3. +1
      9 October 2016 21: 12
      I would refuse refused.-even two times ??? feel
  2. +2
    8 October 2016 07: 43
    Why from
    Quote: Danil Larionov
    If I were the president, I would refuse the Turkish stream.
    What for? As far as I understand, there is no talk of a monopoly in the construction and operation of the entire gas pipeline, investors - gas-hungry countries, will be dumped on construction. It was in vain that Bulgaria was twitching, they didn’t profit from the exploitation of any money for transit, now they’ve cut down a penny even with investments and it’s not alone.
  3. +1
    8 October 2016 07: 54
    it seems that the Nord Stream 2 project falls into new sanctions because of Aleppo ... and then the Turkish stream remains current
  4. +3
    8 October 2016 08: 32
    "... which is an extremely unfavorable price for Gazprom balancing on the brink of losses ...."

    And these lads are at a loss! They sell out the public treasure almost for nothing. Right altruists ...
    1. +1
      8 October 2016 09: 18
      After reading the article, the first association is the buridan donkey! He, too, stood between two haystacks and wondered where to start. How drama ended remember? At the moment, I see no reason for cheer optimism. Nobody canceled the sanctions, Schroeder has long been associated with everything as an agent of Putin and therefore is not allowed to the real rule. You can meet endlessly, discuss and appoint each other as Gauleiter of industries. One can even analytically infer the dependence of unfriendly states on gas and oil. But how compel do these countries take gas, oil, products, etc. from you? If they have decided at the top, we will not take it in principle! For complacency, you can build at least five streams and they will rust for lack of demand ...
      1. +3
        8 October 2016 09: 35
        Love comes and goes, but you always want to eat. Cooking, basking, feeding industrial enterprises is very convenient with gas, and profitable. Pragmatics however.
      2. +7
        8 October 2016 10: 03
        Quote: Leader of the Redskins
        You can meet endlessly, discuss and appoint each other as Gauleiter of industries. One can even analytically infer the dependence of unfriendly states on gas and oil. But how to make these states take gas, oil, products, etc. from you? If they have decided at the top, we will not take it in principle! For complacency, you can build at least five streams and they will rust for lack of demand ...

        Yes, completeness to you sir to make you sad)))
        Today, Europe, of all gas consumed, 60 percent burns Russian gas. There is no alternative. It’s more expensive to take an American liquefied one, and its efficiency is low. Europeans cannot replace these 60% with anything else.
        They wanted to gouge Syria and stretch a pipe from Qatar to Europe through it, but it did not work out due to their chronic greed and stupidity, now this option is stuck for a long time. Meanwhile, the Russian Federation is pulling the Power of Siberia pipe to China under 30 billion cubic meters a year with the prospect of increasing it by another 30 billion. And Japan, South Korea and India want the pipe to reach them. They will swallow more gas than all of Europe. So Gazprom has an alternative - anyway ...
        1. +1
          8 October 2016 11: 16
          Wonderful! For almost half a year in Hamburg I have been "suffering" from gas problems. You know, both me and the local natives have a blue fuel burning in the kitchen. But! ... They continue to grow fat, do not freeze, drive good cars, and so on .. And I read OUR press and think - sanctions are in our favor, but we live, sorry, worse. And Europeans have neither gas nor oil - and the exact opposite? My logic is breaking. And when I read these "funeral" articles, I begin to guess that the nemchura will live even better, and my fellow countrymen ... That's full of me ...
      3. +2
        8 October 2016 11: 39
        The question is, whose will will prevail. If Russia keeps its promise to stop transit through Ukraine, then Europe will have no choice but to force Nord Stream 2, first allowing Gazprom to fill the first pipe 100%.
        Of course, the last thing to be measured for possible losses, but with the freezing of the Nord Stream and the termination of transit through the outskirts, the losses of the parties will not be comparable.
        Russia has lost profits in the presence of a huge need for gasification of its regions and the way to Asia.
        In Europe, it’s even difficult to list. Starting from the decline in production and ending with a significant increase in the cost of production.
        It remains to be hoped that our sworn "partners" will be able to understand that the GDP does not throw words to the wind and the termination of transit through the Ukrainians is not a bluff.
        1. +1
          8 October 2016 22: 31
          I think they’ll agree. because you need to understand - a gas field - like an uncorked bottle of champagne. She either needs to be drunk or she will be gone! Block transit? And where to put the excess?
          1. +1
            9 October 2016 21: 19
            Everything is much simpler:
            "When shutting down wells to be put into production in the future, their wellbore is filled with mud, which is sometimes treated with surfactants, and the upper part of the wellbore (up to 30 m) is filled with oil or diesel fuel. In case of prolonged downtime or conservation of gas wells to avoid When pressure arises at the wellhead, a cement bridge must be installed above the perforated zone. [1]
            During conservation, the wells are poured with a solution whose density should ensure the pressure of the liquid column 25-30% higher than the reservoir pressure. The upper part of the column is filled with non-freezing liquid, the layer of which should be 2–3 m in the southern regions, and in the northern regions should cover the entire depth of the permafrost layer. At fountain fittings, all valves must be closed and sealed, and their flywheels removed.
            When shutting down wells with reservoir pressure not exceeding hydrostatic pressure for up to one year, it is necessary to: shut off the well and fill it with flushing fluid (drilling mud, water) of such a density to create hydrostatic pressure 5-10% higher than the reservoir pressure; the flushing fluid must be treated with surfactants to maintain the permeability of the bottomhole formation; in the case of absorption, it is necessary to carry out work on filling the sand plug into the filter area; raise the tubing 50-60 m above the perforated interval. [3] "
    2. +3
      8 October 2016 10: 59
      for Gazprom, balancing on the verge of losses.
      But here "Rusnano" is fabulously rich, incredibly rich .. As for Gazprom, the time has come for the parasitism to end on the legacy of the USSR, and it is necessary to invest, hence the "losses".
  5. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      8 October 2016 10: 00
      Yes, too, juggling and lying. Even if the topic is raised that the gas supply line to the EU should not be only through the joint venture, this is not because it is necessary because of politics, but because it is logical from a technical point of view - reservation of supply routes. And of course, at the same time, no one will say much out loud that very redundant power is used on the lines for redundancy.
  6. 0
    8 October 2016 09: 57
    The very first picture, where the lines of the Turk stream are shown, is deliberately separate from the South Stream along the entire length of the lines - lies.
  7. +5
    8 October 2016 10: 25
    Bullshit from a 27-year-old blogger (professionally engaged in web design, programming, and now also vangovanie. One of his "predictions" was recently discussed at VO) who imagined himself to be either a world-scale analyst, or a new Wanga!
    About the project. The budget of the Turkish stream should be 24 billion euros, which is a very unfavorable price for the balancing on the verge of losses of Gazprom.
    Further, it remains only to view the available information on the network and twirl a finger at the temple - according to the results of work for 2015, the volume of Gazprom's profit increased fivefold compared to 2014 (source - http://www.rbc.ru/business/ 28/04/2016 / 572211e79a7
    9475df963440e). And if "Vanga" read somewhere that Gazprom has problems, then it used only the heading, they are and always have been - in relation to the profit from the sale of products on the domestic market. I didn’t even bother to look at the profit structure and the ratio of exports and domestic consumption.
  8. 0
    8 October 2016 10: 41
    Quote: Danil Larionov
    If I were the president, I would refuse the Turkish stream.

    And what is bad if
    the flow itself can kill all European ideas about creating competition for Gazprom in southern Europe at the root.

    Europe will immediately become much more accommodating.
  9. +2
    8 October 2016 11: 05
    (However, in order to sit on two chairs at once, Berlin requires the preservation of transit through Ukraine after 2019 (it is then that the launch of SP-2 is supposed).)

    Pipelines (through the former Ukraine) have exhausted their resources and require replacement and repair of pumping equipment. Therefore, it is necessary to stop the supply of gas through them for an indefinite period (most likely 10-15 years). During this time, much can change (the sultan, the donkey or the tax collector will die ...). So, Merkel and Hollande have no alternative how to sign an agreement and transfer their shares to the Bank of Russia.
  10. 0
    13 October 2016 06: 27
    will play! and spoons, and knives, and berets, and ... even empty sleeves, and blow gas. Compressors Price issue (relative to Other parts of the world)

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"