Military Review

The past, present and future of Russia's energy strategy

The past, present and future of Russia's energy strategyRussia's future ability to remain a global energy supplier and strengthen its energy sector is increasingly raising questions for the Kremlin. After a decade of reliable energy exports and revenues, Russia reduces natural gas prices for Europe, while revenue forecasts for its energy giant Gazprom have been declining since this year.

Russia has the world's largest proven natural gas reserves and is constantly competing with Saudi Arabia as the largest oil producer. The country supplies a third of European oil and natural gas demand and begins to export more for the hungry energy markets of East Asia. The energy sector is much larger than commercial assets for Moscow; it has been one of the pillars of stabilization in Russia and an increase in its power for more than a century. The Kremlin regards energy security as a key issue for Russia's national security, especially given the recent changes in the global and domestic trends that cast doubt on the power of the energy sector.

Throughout the Russian storiesThe country's energy sector was periodically strengthened and weakened. The management of this cycle has been at the center of Russian domestic and foreign policy since tsarist times. This historical burden is now on the regime of Vladimir Putin.

The imperatives of Russia and the energy factor

Russia is by its nature a vulnerable country surrounded by other great powers and without easily protected borders. In addition, Russia is a massive, mostly inhospitable territory, populated by various ethnic groups that are historically at odds with the centralized power of Moscow. This leaves Russia with a clear set of imperatives for strengthening the country and establishing it as a regional power. First, Russia must consolidate its societies under one power. Secondly, it must expand its power through its closest neighbors to create a buffer against other powers (the creation of the Soviet Union is a vivid example of this imperative in action). Finally, it must use its natural resources to achieve a balance with great powers beyond its periphery.

Russia uses various tools throughout history to achieve these imperatives, from agricultural exports to purely military conquests and intimidation. Since the end of the 1800s, Russia has added energy to the list of vital products that could be used to achieve its main strategic goals. By 1950, the Russian energy sector has become one of the main pillars of economic and political power.

Revenues from oil and natural gas exports show how the energy sector gave the Kremlin strength to unite the country. Energy export revenues for the Russian Empire flowed into the state treasury at the end of the 1800-s, where oil export revenues accounted for 7 percent of export earnings. These revenues rose to 14 percent at the end of 1920's in the early stages of the Soviet Union, and by 1950 accounted for half of Soviet export earnings. Currently, energy revenues account for half of the state budget. This capital inflow has been and continues to play an important role in the construction of Russia's military-industrial base, which is necessary to maintain its status as a regional - if not global - force. However, since the Russian government became dependent on energy, revenues also became too vulnerable.

In addition to export earnings, the energy sector has also contributed to the creation of a stable domestic industry. Domestic energy consumption in Russia is very high due to the very cold weather during most of the year, but, despite the inefficiency in the energy sector and energy production costs, the country's internal reserves allowed Moscow to provide its citizens and the industry in which they operate, low energy prices.

The energy sector also contributes to Russia's ability to expand its influence on its closest neighbors. Moscow's use of energy as a lever of pressure on buffer states differs from country to country: from managing regional energy production (as was previously done in the Azerbaijani and Kazakh oil fields) to subsidizing cheap energy supplies to countries and controlling energy transport infrastructure. Russia used similar strategies to form relations outside the former Soviet Union. For example, Russia is one of two major European energy suppliers and the only European supplier with large reserves of oil and natural gas with historically low prices. Russia's physical connection with Europe and the possibility of undermining any competition formed the basis for Moscow’s many relations with Europe.

Evolution of Russia's energy strategies

The usefulness of energy as a means for Russia to achieve the three main imperatives has changed over time, because Russia was forced to change its strategy depending on changes in national or international circumstances. Moscow’s strength lies in its flexibility in managing the energy sector.

The importance of Russian energy was realized at the end of 1800, when the monarchy saw great potential for the Russian empire, if it could develop this sector on a large scale. However, the empire had neither the technology nor the capital to lay the foundations of the domestic energy industry. As a solution, the monarchy lifted restrictions on foreign investment, inviting European and American firms to develop the Baku and Volga oil deposits. This led to a short period of warm relations between the Russian Empire and many Western partners, in particular, the United Kingdom, France and the United States. All parties soon realized that the only way to make the Russian oil business profitable, despite the high costs associated with the harsh climate and vast geography of the country, is to turn Russia into the largest producer. At the turn of the century, the Russian empire produced 31 a percentage of world oil exports.

As the importance of the energy sector of the Russian Empire grew, it became clear that internal stability in Russia had a strong influence on it. The Bolsheviks used the energy sector in their attempts to overthrow the monarchy in the early 1900s. The oil-producing regions were one of the main centers in which the Bolsheviks operated, because energy was one of the few industries with organized workers. In addition, the Bolsheviks used the network of railways on which oil was transported, to spread propaganda throughout the country and abroad. In the 1904 year, when the Russian Empire dealt with the uprising in St. Petersburg, the Bolsheviks set fire to the Baku oil fields. This led to a two-thirds reduction in oil exports from Russia, which made Moscow and foreign markets pay attention to the link between vulnerability to oil exports and internal stability (the authors made a mistake in the date and decision-making center, because in tsarist Russia the capital was Petersburg - translator's note).

Modern energy strategies began to take shape after World War II. The Soviet Union was one of two global hegemones towering over divided Europe, and Moscow saw no obstacles to achieving dominance in the global energy sector. Between 1950 and 1960, Soviet oil production doubled, making the Soviet Union the second largest oil producer in the world and a major supplier for both Eastern and Western Europe. Revenues from oil exports began to account for almost half of Soviet export revenues.

Since the Soviet Union carried out massive oil production, and the Soviet system maintained low labor costs, Russia was able to sell its oil at prices almost 50 percent lower than oil from the Middle East. Oil subsidies to the Soviet bloc, and then to the countries of Western Europe, helped Moscow to undermine the Western regimes and strengthen its position on its own periphery - this strategy in the CIA called the Soviet economic offensive. For the Soviets, the issue was not to make money (although the money was paid), rather it was the formation of a sphere of influence and undermining in the West. This strategy was still costly, since Moscow did not receive as much income as it could, and inefficient oil production quickly depleted the fields.

In 1970, oil prices rose due to a series of crises, mainly in the Middle East. At the same time, Russia already felt the tension from supporting the massive Soviet Union. The regime of the Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev had a choice: to use high world prices as a reason for price increases in Eastern Europe and for the benefit of the Soviet economy, or to continue subsidizing the Eastern bloc so that he was obliged to Moscow, and not to push him to look for other sources of energy . It was a choice between two imperatives: Soviet national stability and retention of the buffer zone. In the end, Moscow decided to protect its own interests and in the year 1975 raised the price of oil for its customers, ensuring further growth based on global market prices. By 1976, oil prices in the Eastern bloc were almost twice as high, although they remained lower than world prices. However, the rather high price made some countries of the block take loans.

Soviet attention to maintaining high revenues from energy sales continued until the middle of the 1980s, when these revenues accounted for almost the entire monetary inflow of the Soviet Union. But the Soviets came under a double blow in the middle of the 1980s, when oil prices collapsed and the West declared an embargo on Soviet oil, which led Saudi Arabia to oil markets. In addition, the Soviet Union is extremely lagging behind the West in the field of technology, in particular, in the energy and agriculture. In response to this, starting in 1985, the Soviet Union began to move closer to an energy market economy, raising prices for the Eastern Bloc and demanding hard currency to pay and allowing foreign companies to reenter the energy sector.

But Russian shifts in strategy were not deep and timely enough to prevent the collapse of the Soviet Union. Within ten years after the fall of the Soviet bloc, the Russian power industry fell into disrepair. The liberalization of energy, which began under Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980-s, came in a terrible state under Boris Yeltsin in the 1990 year. As a result, production fell by half, and the energy sector of Russia was divided between foreign groups and the new class of Russian oltigarks.

The situation has changed under the leadership of Vladimir Putin in 2000 year. One of the first items on Putin’s agenda to stabilize the situation in the country was to consolidate the energy sector under state control. This meant a radical return from liberal politics two decades earlier. The government actually nationalized most of the energy sector under the roof of three state giants: Gazprom, Rosneft and Transneft. The Kremlin has become more aggressive in negotiating supply contracts with the former Soviet republics and Europe, forcing them to take large volumes at extremely high prices, because these customers did not have alternative sources of energy. The Kremlin has also begun to cut off energy supplies to some markets, blaming troublesome transit countries, such as Ukraine, in order to form other political negotiations.

Although Moscow’s energy strategy has become rather aggressive, it has helped Russia become stronger and more stable. Energy revenues increased due to high world prices for oil and natural gas, which Europe paid. Russia received surplus funds for transfer to its political, social, economic and military spheres. Energy policy also helped Russia to strengthen its influence in its former suburbs and forced Europe to retreat from containing Russia's recovery. Of course, the financial crisis that swept Europe and Russia in 2008, reminded Russia of its largest energy customers, when oil prices fell and demand began to decline.

Problems of maintaining energy in Russia

Russia's main problem is its vulnerability to energy price fluctuations. Considering that half of Russia's budget consists of energy revenues (of which 80 percent from oil sales and 20 percent from natural gas), the government can suffer greatly if energy prices fall. The Kremlin has already reduced budget planning, based on oil prices to $ 93 per barrel, not $ 119 - although even at that price, the government is playing a game of chance. Stratfor is not engaged in business forecasting of oil prices, just historical models show that major international crises and fluctuations in the global consumption and production model have repeatedly had a sufficient effect on oil prices and on Moscow's income, destabilizing the situation in the country.

Revenues from gas exports are also currently under question. Because of the alternative supplies of natural gas supplied to Russia's largest consumer, Europe, the Kremlin has been forced to reduce prices in recent months. This year, Gazprom plans to provide 4,7 billion dollars to European consumers - approximately 10 percent of Gazprom's net revenue - as a concession due to lower prices.

In its current configuration, Russia's energy sector is under attack. Consolidating the industry mainly under two large state-owned enterprises had many advantages for the Kremlin, but after ten years of consolidation, shortcomings have accumulated. With small options in the field of natural gas in Russia, the giant company Gazprom is lagging behind in technology and is considered unfriendly to foreign investment. The oil giant of Russia, Rosneft, recently began to develop into a larger monopoly like Gazprom, which could lead to its falling into a similar trap. With future energy projects in Russia requiring more advanced technologies (due to location and environment) and more capital, and Gazprom and Rosneft need modernization and foreign investment.

Corruption is also a major factor, since, according to various estimates, from 20 to 40, percent of Gazprom’s revenue is lost or associated with inefficient operations. Rosneft has similar problems. This loss would not affect the sustainability of Moscow’s previous high energy income, but sustainability will not be in the future if energy prices fall or support and expansion of the energy sector becomes more expensive. The Kremlin probes Gazprom, although with the culture of corruption that runs through Russian history, the Kremlin can do little to eliminate violations at this firm.

In addition, Europe’s dependence on Russian energy is decreasing. The lack of natural gas was felt throughout Europe during the Russian-Ukrainian crises 2006 and 2009, which was a reminder of how vulnerable European countries were due to their dependence on natural gas exports from Russia. Both unilaterally and within the European Union, European countries began developing strategies that would allow them to mitigate not only Europe’s vulnerability to disputes between Moscow and intermediaries in transit, but also a general dependence on energy from Russia.

Accelerated development of new and updated liquefied natural gas plants is one such effort. This will give some countries - Lithuania and Poland, first of all - the possibility of importing natural gas from suppliers around the world, bypassing Russia's traditional leverage related to geographic proximity. This is especially important in light of the accelerated development of unconventional methods of natural gas production in the world, in particular, shale reserves in the United States. The development of the pipeline project, which will bring non-Russian Caspian natural gas to the European market, is another attempt - although less successful today - to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian gas.

In addition, a set of pan-European policies, including the Third Energy Package, began to give EU member states political and legal tools to mitigate Gazprom’s dominance in its natural gas supply chains. This common framework will also allow European countries to come up with a more united front for changing certain types of business activity, in their opinion, monopolistic. Here is an example of the EU Commission to investigate the pricing strategy of Gazprom in Central Europe. This, combined with EU funding for connecting the gas supply networks of the EU member states to Central Europe, has created difficulties for Russia to use natural gas prices as a foreign policy tool. This is a major change in the business that Moscow has been doing with the region over the past ten years, when it rewarded closer ties with Russia to low gas prices (like in Belarus) and raised prices for those who challenged it (the Baltic countries).

Finally, Russia faces a simple but serious possibility that the escalation of the financial and political crisis in Europe will continue to reduce energy consumption on the continent, or at least eliminate any possibility of consumption growth in the next decade.

Russia's next action

Putin’s administration is well aware of the challenges facing Russia's energy sector. Russia's attempts in the past decade to depend on energy exports, focusing on the development of industry, have not been particularly successful, and the country's retention is linked to the fate of its energy sector. Russia's strategy to use its energy exports as a tool of foreign policy and as a revenue generator is sometimes contradictory: to use energy in foreign policy, Moscow must be able to lower or raise prices and threaten to cut off supplies, which is anathema to the income-generating industry.

Global and regional circumstances have changed so much that Moscow was forced to designate a priority for one of the two vectors of applying its energy industry - and she definitely decided to keep herself able to earn income. The Kremlin has begun the development of a set of policies intended to adjust the country to the changes that will come in the next two decades.

First, Russia is reconsidering relations with key transit countries, which traditionally allowed energy to be exported to Europe. The construction of the Ust-Luga oil terminal on the Baltic Sea coast will allow Russia to largely bypass the pipeline system of Belarus and deliver oil and oil products directly to consumers. In addition, the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea - and, ultimately, its twin South Stream through the Black Sea - will allow Russian natural gas to be sent around the Ukrainian and Belarusian transit systems, if necessary. These two pipelines will primarily provide for the supply of natural gas to the main European consumer markets in Germany and Italy, with which Russia seeks to maintain a long-term strategic partnership.

To provide supplies to its main European consumers, the bypass system will provide Moscow with vital energy income. This strategy of future flexibility in energy exports will also gradually reduce the leverage of Minsk and Kiev, which may resist Moscow’s attempts to unite them as vassal buffer states — Moscow still intends to pursue one of its few foreign policy goals through an energy strategy.

In addition, Moscow has adapted its energy strategy with European consumers amid growing diversification and liberalization of efforts. Gazprom began to expand the system of discounts on previously reserved natural gas for strategic partners such as Germany or Italy. The Kremlin knows that its only hope of preserving natural gas revenues in the face of a potential global shale gas boom is to block its customers with a competitive price and long-term contracts. Moscow will continue to show that it can offer European consumers guaranteed large volumes at low cost, which manufacturers and suppliers of liquefied natural gas can rarely afford.

Finally, Russia is paying considerable attention to the development of ties with the growing energy markets of East Asia, so diversification of the export portfolio should continue to increase in the European market. One of the common aspects for all of Russia's strategy over the next decade is the high capital required for their implementation; The Eastern Siberia-Pacific pipeline costs almost $ 15 billion. Despite the consequences of the financial crisis in 2009, Russia still has huge capital reserves for these large-scale projects, but these funds are not endless.

The Kremlin seems keenly aware of the problems that Russia will face in the next two decades, as the next energy cycle comes to an end. Unlike Brezhnev and Gorbachev, Putin was able to conduct an effective policy and strategy for change in the Russian energy sector. While Russia's dependence on high oil prices continues to trouble Moscow, Putin has so far been able to actively respond to other external changes in energy consumption and production - especially those that affect the European natural gas market. However, the long-term sustainability of the Russian model remains in question.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Geisenberg
    Geisenberg 21 February 2013 16: 10
    There was such a character in the English history of the "soft sword" King John, who did not win a single war started. It just comes to memory. It is necessary now to build a non-coal-oil-gas energy sector. And then they have discounts in Europe, they show a finger in response ...
    1. rolik
      rolik 21 February 2013 16: 47
      Quote: Geisenberg
      And then they get discounts in Europe, they show a finger in response ...

      And we give them not only discounts. Now Russia is expanding into Europe. we buy up enterprises, banks, factories from an old woman. We enter (though they are very resisting) into their power systems. So. that in the near future they will stick this finger in one place. when you wake up in the morning, and 60% of production and other things will already belong to Russia. This is the correct expansion, a "probable enemy" and in fact it is, at the right time you need to grab the Adam's apple so as not to flutter.
      1. S_mirnov
        S_mirnov 21 February 2013 18: 01
        “Now there is an expansion of Russia to Europe.” - the purchase of real estate abroad by domestic oligarchs is not an expansion of Russia. This is a capital flight and should not be confused!
        "at the right moment we need to grab the Adam's apple so as not to flutter" - they seem to be holding us by the Adam's apple, it is worth artificially lowering the purchase prices for oil for several months and our economy will collapse, famine will really begin in the country, let's go dig our homesteads.
        Looking at the rise in prices on the domestic market for diesel fuel (already more expensive than the 92nd, and this is the destruction of agriculture, an increase in freight rates and, accordingly, negative for industry), it seems that morons or traitors rule the country!
        So make your choice!
        1. Komodo
          Komodo 21 February 2013 23: 27
          morons or traitors

          Yes, all of them "fuck ...... yut", and Tajiks and Dagi.
          Not to mention the amers and the Europeans,
          those are world class swindlers.
          "an initiative fool, worse than an enemy"
          So it turns out that traitors are also ...
        2. Egen
          Egen 22 February 2013 06: 57
          et yes, I can’t understand with my formations why our gasoline, which is produced and produced 200 km from us, is more expensive than in America, where it’s imported half a ball, and besides, the dollar and oil have fallen compared to at least 2009 :)))
      2. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 21 February 2013 18: 47
        I agree the good idea is to put a yeropu on a needle with our oil. Only Europe does not agree. Deja is not Europe, but the USA, which puppeteers in it.
  2. figvamforever
    figvamforever 21 February 2013 16: 11
    With all the clever words about strategies, gas prices abroad are falling, but for us they are rising.
    And at the same time, Gazprom spares no money to finance football. FC Zenit was bought by him in July 2006 for $ 36,25 million. Since then, according to analysts, investments in the club have grown to $ 150 million, taking into account the costs of buying players and investments in the club's infrastructure (in August 2011, Zenit bought from Moscow Dynamo Portuguese player Danny for a record euro30 million). Gazprom has an agreement with Schalke-04 that within five years Gazprom will pay it euro100-125 million.

    It seems that by sponsoring football, the gas monopolist thus wants to sweeten the pill to consumers from ever-increasing gas prices.
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 21 February 2013 16: 16
      Quote: figvamforever
      It seems like sponsoring football,

      Especially German.
    2. S_mirnov
      S_mirnov 21 February 2013 18: 59
      nichrna itself "national treasure"
    3. Egen
      Egen 22 February 2013 06: 59
      Quote: figvamforever
      It looks like sponsoring football

      Why do you so naively think that Gazprom wants something and does it :) It's a state-owned company :) They said they give money for football - they give, they said for the Olympics and elections - they give :) But the state sets prices for gas, and for individual regions, if anyone doesn’t know ... So turn around here :(
      1. Allegedly
        Allegedly 22 February 2013 07: 07
        Quote: Egen
        Why do you think so naively that Gazprom wants something and does it :) This is a state-owned company :)

        Yeah, right now ...

        1. Egen
          Egen 22 February 2013 07: 44
          Quote: JACOB
          Yeah, right now ...

          Comrade from Germany, if you do not work in Gazprom, then do not speak :)
          And the shareholders - this is the state :))
  3. opkozak
    opkozak 21 February 2013 16: 15
    Who will win?
  4. ziqzaq
    ziqzaq 21 February 2013 16: 18
    Putin administration is knowledgeable about problems
    who wrote the article? As it is not clear, everything seems to be in some kind of negative light, but there are problems, but this is not the main thing. The article is titled "The past, present and future of Russia's energy strategy" - but forecasts for the future do not take into account liquefied gas at all, while the president clearly outlined priorities in this area. Something that the little article is somehow muddy and leaves a negative, but does not give a conclusion for reflection: minus.
    1. ziqzaq
      ziqzaq 21 February 2013 16: 24
      And for what minus that? I expressed my thoughts. An analytical article should correctly pose questions in the minds of readers who, in the process of searching for answers, will finally find the truth ........
      1. ziqzaq
        ziqzaq 21 February 2013 16: 30
        I repeat who put the minus? Look who the author is, redheads again .....
        A.a.a.a.a. ......... Wolves shameful ..
        1. ziqzaq
          ziqzaq 21 February 2013 16: 34
          "Our proud Varyag does not surrender to the enemy
          Nobody wants mercy ...... "
      2. Egen
        Egen 22 February 2013 07: 04
        moreover, the "analytical article" should show on the fingers what is what :)
    2. djon3volta
      djon3volta 21 February 2013 17: 24
      Quote: ziqzaq
      Something the article is somehow muddy and leaves a negative

      here read it, I think it will be more positive here, at the same time and external enemies in person.
      The Russian giant is strategically playing its cards

      The 2006 Paris Summit between Russian Putin, French President Chirac and German Chancellor Merkel emphasized Russia's rebirth as one of the world's major powers. New Russia is gaining influence through a series of strategic steps related to its geopolitical energy reserves - primarily oil and natural gas. She does this by skillfully using Washington's strategic mistakes and major political blunders. New Russia also realizes that if it acts hesitantly, it will soon be surrounded and trampled by its military rival, the United States, against which few remedies remain. The battle, about which little is said, is the battle with the highest stakes in today's world politics. Iran and Syria are viewed by Washington strategists simply as a stepping stone to the great Russian Endgame.
      After the devastating US-sponsored “color revolutions” in Georgia and then Ukraine, Russia began playing its strategic energy cards very carefully, starting with nuclear reactors in Iran and military supplies to Venezuela and other Latin American countries and ending with strategic market cooperation with Algeria on natural gas deals.
      Khodorkovsky was arrested just four weeks before the important elections to the Russian Duma (lower house of parliament), in which Khodorkovsky managed to buy a majority vote using his enormous wealth. Control of the Duma was Khodorkovsky’s first step in his plans to run for president next year. A victory in the Duma would allow him to change the electoral law in his favor, as well as change the controversial law "The Law on the Subsoil" prepared in the Duma. This law would not allow Yukos and other private companies to control raw materials underground, or to create private pipelines independent of Russian state ones.

      the rest is here.
      1. S_mirnov
        S_mirnov 21 February 2013 19: 02
        Our oligarchic kagal sells national gas and oil, the foreign matter is getting fatter on it, and even trying to rob its own citizens
        And the peak of this kagala is GDP. That’s the whole strategy, in short.
        1. Garrin
          Garrin 21 February 2013 19: 12
          Quote: S_mirnov
          Our oligarchic kagal sells national gas and oil, the foreign matter is getting fatter on it, and even trying to rob its own citizens

          And the peak of this kagala is GDP. That’s the whole strategy, in short.

          Everything is correct, although disgusting.
        2. djon3volta
          djon3volta 21 February 2013 19: 51
          Quote: S_mirnov
          Our oligarchic kagal sells national gas and oil.

          But what other countries that produce oil and gas do not sell it over a hill? They pump and store and store? wassat or are they selling it too? wassat
          1. S_mirnov
            S_mirnov 21 February 2013 20: 32
            And in many countries, oil exporters six months below zero temperatures? Selling energy is a crime. Do we need energy resources ourselves? However, there are fewer plants alive.
            And the big difference is where the profit from the sale of oil goes - to the development of industry or into the pockets of oligarchs.
            1. Egen
              Egen 22 February 2013 07: 07
              Quote: S_mirnov
              And the big difference is where the profit from the sale of oil goes - to the development of industry or into the pockets of oligarchs.

              well, actually Gazprom and Rosneft are state-owned companies ............
      2. Egen
        Egen 22 February 2013 07: 06
        Quote: djon3volta
        read it, I think it will be more positive here, along with external enemies

        ah, this is more interesting!
    3. Octavian avgust
      Octavian avgust 21 February 2013 20: 49
      The article is generally negative, if not harmful. Many agencies at the beginning of the zero predicted by 2010 the oil price of about $ 45! And where are these authors?
      Author Lauren Goodrich, Mark Lantemann
      The authors are clearly not Russian and Russian, and it is naive to believe that they will write something good about Russia! And we will do them the opposite of evil!
      The climate on the earth is getting colder and energy sources especially in Europe will grow!
      The shale revolution is a public relations action of the State Department. During gas production, all subsoil and the environment are spoiled! Plus is very expensive, from the usual!
      1. Egen
        Egen 22 February 2013 07: 08
        Quote: Octavian avgust
        The shale revolution is a public relations action of the State Department. During gas production, all subsoil and the environment are spoiled! Plus is very expensive, from the usual!

        Almost so, while nothing is clear, time will tell who is right with his strategy - the West with shale or we with the North :)
    4. Egen
      Egen 22 February 2013 07: 03
      agree, "minus". As I wrote below, the authors do not represent the realities of the Russian oil and gas industry at all, although the forecasts and conclusions are written correctly. But they were not invented by the authors, everyone has been talking about this for the last couple of years, from the top to the bottom! In general, a vinaigrette of all the garbage and other people's strategies.
      As for LNG, everything is true, but unfortunately, it requires huge investments and long years, not everything is so simple :(
  5. avt
    avt 21 February 2013 16: 19
    Quote: figvamforever
    With all the clever words about strategies, gas prices abroad are falling, but for us they are rising.

    Here, if not about football, there is a clear parallel with the fall in oil prices during the USSR. It is real how they broke the chain after the South Stream and Russia's active position in foreign policy. Immediately shale gas, alternative sources loomed with enhanced funding. It was necessary to deal with liquefied gas for a long time also in the eastern direction.
  6. figvamforever
    figvamforever 21 February 2013 16: 28
    Quote: avt
    It was necessary to deal with liquefied gas for a long time also in the eastern direction.

    I agree. The trumpet binds stiffly. And if the pipe is for their own money, then the consumer, risking nothing, can refuse from "pipeline gas". And liquefied gas gives freedom to the gas supplier. Who paid money in advance there and the boat will sail with gas. If you want to Japan, you want to go to China.
    1. Egen
      Egen 22 February 2013 07: 17
      Quote: figvamforever
      Trumpet tightly tied

      You guys are not quite talking about that. Gas is gas, oil shale, or north — the method and technology of its production. A pipe or LNG is a delivery method, logistics. Separate flies from cutlets. The LNG plant costs billions and has been under construction for years, and the terminals for premix and gas distribution from the consumer also. This is a huge expensive system. You think why Europe hasn’t filled up all of the LNG from the Middle East when the United States refused to take them. began to miss its coal and shale? Not everything is so simple and fast alas :(
      There is already a pipe; to it is the distribution system that has developed in the west. It is not so easy to decide to switch to other rails, and even where so many attendants are found - to Western countries.
      And no one bothers to build an LNG plant on Bovanenkovo ​​and export gas by tankers across the North, the thing is in the calculations, which is more profitable - maybe they could lay a pipe. Many agree, and I too :) that instead of developing towns and gas stations for small gas pipelines, it is probably more appropriate to use the LNG system. There are many conferences on this subject, many scientists (and not quite :)) deal with this issue. But there are so many system factors that whole institutions consider this, and you and I, if there are miners or geologists, will understand.
  7. avt
    avt 21 February 2013 16: 39
    Quote: figvamforever
    I agree. The trumpet binds stiffly. And if the pipe is for their own money, then the consumer, risking nothing, can refuse from "pipeline gas". And liquefied gas gives freedom to the gas supplier. Who paid money in advance there and the boat will sail with gas. If you want to Japan, you want to go to China.

    Following up. Look at the joke in Bulgaria. The atomic was closed, with a stream of South over how many were roaming, Americans were appeased. And what is the bottom line? And how are Greece amers pressed so that they don’t sell the internal sales network to Gazprom? And that’s how the name of the customer of the Marlezon ballet of falling demand for gas develops.
  8. ronin
    ronin 21 February 2013 16: 43
    By the names of the authors, you can determine the customer of this article wink . Although the efficiency of Gazprom, Rosneft, and other large Russian oil companies is all right. Steal! They steal a lot. According to the most conservative estimates, it is possible to reduce the cost of both gas and oil by 20 percent.
  9. figvamforever
    figvamforever 21 February 2013 16: 50
    Quote: avt
    And so on a grain of concrete, the name of the customer of the Marlezon ballet of falling gas demand is taking shape.

    So this is no secret. This is the USA. They defend their interests, and we owe ours. angry
    1. Egen
      Egen 22 February 2013 07: 19
      Quote: figvamforever
      The name of the customer of the Marlezon ballet of falling demand for gas is emerging.

      not for gas. America has already stopped importing gas and promises to switch to its export in five years. But there is no oil.
  10. Radarik606
    Radarik606 21 February 2013 17: 10
    the article is superficial and selected from other sources in pieces, the problems of the Russian service are not taken into account, it is being finished and soon the entire oil and gas service will be foreign, and this is 35 mln d. by 2015, a decrease in production and oil recovery factor in the whole country, too low subsidies for exploration and many others, which in combination give a huge minus NG industry
  11. anchonsha
    anchonsha 21 February 2013 18: 08
    In general, the article is a plus, although in the section "Future" the authors did not indicate what needs to be done in the field of energy for a decent future for the country. And we should pay more attention to expand our production, its efficiency, to increase the processing of the same oil and sell it as a new product. But our oligarchs are in no hurry to invest in the technological re-equipment of production, and continue to pump out everything for wear and tear. This is where the problem lies. Would Putin have more health, fresh ideas and beat people like Dod (who managed not to understand that they stole more than a billion from the state)
  12. s23wesdggg
    s23wesdggg 21 February 2013 18: 58
    Imagine, it turns out that our authorities have complete information about each of us. And now she appeared on the Internet Very surprised and scared, my correspondence, addresses, phone numbers, even found my nude photo, I can not even imagine where. The good news is that the data can be deleted from the site, of course, I used it and I advise everyone not to hesitate
  13. jagdpanzer
    jagdpanzer 21 February 2013 19: 26
    Quote: s23wesdggg

    Imagine, it turns out that our authorities have complete information about each of us. And now she appeared on the Internet Very surprised and scared, my correspondence, addresses, phone numbers, even found my nude photo, I can not even imagine where. The good news is that the data can be deleted from the site, of course, I used it and I advise everyone not to hesitate
    Already here they spam stunned ..) I did not understand the article to be honest .. I just know that for a long time on energy we will not stretch it. the country is degrading without developing, only they steal and impudent more.
  14. suharev-52
    suharev-52 21 February 2013 20: 04
    I would not be in a hurry to rejoice that Gazprom is being introduced into Europe. All this top of the gas monopolist set their sights on the world oligarchy, which is not particularly attached to any state. And not interested in upholding someone's national interests. They already have supranational interests. Therefore, they intensively and spend the money received on anything but production. Who needs this production? Them? No! Sincerely.
    1. Egen
      Egen 22 February 2013 07: 21
      Quote: suharev-52
      All this top of the gas monopoly set its sights on the world oligarchy

      Dear, if you do not know who exactly from this "top", what are you talking about. Gazprom is a state company, what they say and do! I have explained below.
  15. homosum20
    homosum20 21 February 2013 21: 17
    Afftor resembles not even a drug addict, but a maniac blinded by his schiza. His schiz is Russia's energy dependence. When Russia beat the French - where was this addiction? When she beat the Entente - where was she? Hitler?
    "Russia is by nature a vulnerable country surrounded by other great powers and lacking easily defended borders. Moreover, Russia is a massive, largely inhospitable territory inhabited by various ethnic groups that have historically been at odds with Moscow's centralized power."
    Afftor considers this a criterion of weakness. In fact, this is a criterion for our self-sufficiency and independence not only from an external enemy, but also of our servants (servants of the people) from Moscow. They will have to deal with us. Not with Dima - the Compromiser, not with a bunch of politicians, with simple Russian men. An analysis of this threat is not in any intelligence of the world.
    1. Egen
      Egen 22 February 2013 06: 55
      "The giant company Gazprom lags behind in technology and is considered unfriendly to outside investment."
      Another lie. In some ways, yes, behind. And how did you want when all the science in the country was ... lost ?! But so far, foreigners have something to be surprised at, for example, the Nord Stream projects and the Unified gas transmission system have no equal.
      Foreign investments - why do they need Gazprom? This is a state-owned company, why does the state share profits? Vaughn Shell is spinning, everything wants to cling to itself - but you read at least open memoranda, their task is to pump money, grab a piece of the pie, and not bring any technology or money to the country. Bourgeois will not miss their! And what for do we need this ?!
      By the way, the company's attractiveness for investing is estimated by its stock price, which is based incl. on profit. Read the print. Again, the first course ...

      "shale boom" - it is not yet clear how profitable it is :) Yes, there are a lot of shale underfoot, I don't want a storm. But still, each shale well costs from 0,5 to 1 million dollars, and gives only a little gas and only a year, at most 2. The strength of shale gas is in the number of wells. A gas well in the North, of course, costs an order of magnitude more expensive, but it produces hundreds of times more gas and for decades, but of course it is necessary to pull the string or build LNG as in Sakhalin. Therefore, in the end, it is not yet clear which is more effective :)
      "Russia's attempts to get away from dependence ... were not particularly successful ..." - that's alas, but it has nothing to do with the energy sector, why confuse flies with cutlets
  16. kukuruzo
    kukuruzo 21 February 2013 23: 55
    maybe the government will think ... and begin to develop other areas, what will be relevant in the future .. as time shows, hydrocarbons in the future will not be relevant
    1. huut
      huut 22 February 2013 02: 02
      Quote: kukuruzo
      as time shows, hydrocarbons in the future will not be relevant

      Time shows - on the contrary, they will be wildly popular. The Americans are even going to ruin their ecology for the sake of shale gas reserves. China may not have enough Middle Eastern or Russian reserves to feed oil and gas. While some countries are in decline, others are growing, which means they consume fuel.

      Well, if you mean the distant future, then I agree - in 50 we’ll live in fusion, plasma and magnetic fields in years)
  17. huut
    huut 22 February 2013 01: 54
    This historical burden now lies with the regime of Vladimir Putin.

    To Obama's regime from Putin's "regime" - minus and warm greetings!
  18. Egen
    Egen 22 February 2013 06: 36
    1) Hmm, and I recently read in an article on economic development since the time of Nicholas 2 that in Russia, only after the Germans broke into the Caucasus, they realized the importance of oil, and before that it was not given a special role, because inside the country and cars it was not enough. By the way, the first small gas pipeline was built in the 42nd, and gas came to Moscow from Saratov in the 46th (they began to build in the 44th)
    2) I also met in the Soviet Union and after the press that it was the Arabs, not the USSR, who dumped in the market
    3) The USSR has never lagged behind the West in the field of oil and gas technology! As in the military sphere and space. On the contrary, bourgeoisie came to us to study pipelines, substations and drilling operations, and we had all the mountain science! This is the opposite now :(

    "The situation changed under the leadership of Vladimir Putin in 2000" What BB, what are you writing about ?! On February 17.02 Gazprom was 20 years old, when there was no smell of anyone! All this was conceived and implemented by clever Chernomyrdin! Read at least his memoirs, or chat with those who worked with him, even Yeltsin came to everything ready, and now everyone is bawling to tear apart Gazprom and Rosneft! And you oversubscribe history, hanging merit on the current government, which made 0! Only taxes and income, write yourself, are pumped out of oil and gas, and who will invest - Miller his money ?!
    In general, the authors are completely far from the realities of our oil and gas industry, and not knowing whether to try to suck something in top-down is a hoax!

    "half of Russia's budget consists of energy revenues (of which 80 percent from oil sales and 20 percent from natural gas),"
    - where do these numbers come from? Almost half the way around! Read official sources at least!

    "according to various estimates, from 20 to 40 percent of Gazprom's revenue is lost or associated with ineffective activities"
    Well, that smells like criminal prosecution. Not even from Gazprom, but from the state as its owner. About the effectiveness of the activities, it is more than written in detail on the Gazprom website about the strategy on reducing costs adopted almost 2 years ago, there are reports. Any student will add 1 + 1. The authors at least looked at the site before writing. Then, from the list of structural divisions in the same site on the site, any student will conclude that there is strict control over each penny. Although, this is already 2 + 2, and the authors at school did not learn to see ... But, again, I could at least ask someone from the industry!
    About "getting lost" is a separate question. This can only be decided by the prosecutor's office :) Although, it has not yet been proven in the Moscow region :) If you do not know where the financial flows are going, then do not write libel. If I know about control, then about flows - no. And what do you want the state to print on every corner, how and where is 50% of the budget revenue going? :) I think there is no such transparency even in the United States and this issue relates to the security of the state :) After all, if everyone ... uh ... a spy :) knows what ways money comes to the state from overseas, it will be very easy to stop them :))

    "Natural gas shortages were felt throughout Europe during the Russian-Ukrainian crises of 2006 and 2009, which was a reminder of how vulnerable European countries are due to their dependence on natural gas exports from Russia" - read the press at least! Why then do you think Gazprom is building all kinds of gas pipelines such as northern, southern and Chinese streams, LNG on Sakhalin? As if they were built in just a month! Such strategies and plans have been adopted for a long time, only this construction is not a house for you to build, it is years and billions ...