How Gazprom outplayed itself with Nord Stream 2


On the eve, before Nord Stream 2, a certain shadow of hope dawned that the project would still be implemented. The unfriendly European Commission recognized the impossibility of introducing new sanctions against him because of the "Navalny case", and German Chancellor Merkel said that the differences with Washington over the unfinished gas pipeline were not so great. Trilateral negotiations are planned, as a result of which a compromise may well be found. It's just not a fact that we will really like their results.


To understand, it is necessary to take into account that Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream were created as alternative routes for gas supplies to Europe bypassing hostile Ukraine. At the same time, the goal was to eliminate Moscow's dependence on Kiev once and for all. And we must understand that no new gas was supposed to be pumped through the new two pipelines, this is the same "blue fuel" that previously went through the dilapidated Ukrainian GTS. Unfortunately, this simple Gazprom plan has almost completely failed.

First, discriminatory measures were applied against Nord Stream 2 under the Third Energy Package, which left it half empty. Then, because of the US sanctions, the construction was abandoned by a Swiss contractor, and after his example other Danish and Norwegian companies followed. Gazprom has not yet succeeded in completing the construction of the subsea pipeline on its own due to new restrictive measures by the United States. The domestic monopolist is at a dead end. But in Berlin they are talking about some new negotiations with Washington. What could be their essence?

For an adequate assessment of the situation, it should be borne in mind that Europe, in general, and Germany, in particular, need Russian gas. The only question is how much and on what terms. The EU no longer wants to become a victim of the "gas wars" between Russia and Ukraine, as it was before. Over the past decade, a developed gas transportation infrastructure has been built between the EU countries, and numerous LNG terminals have appeared on the coast. Liquefied gas is subject to serious price fluctuations, but the very possibility of obtaining it gives Brussels an alternative to fuel from Gazprom and a guarantee that in an emergency the Old World will not freeze in winter. This is called diversification.

Go ahead. The Kremlin obviously set itself the goal of getting rid of gas transit through Ukraine once and for all. But the problem is that the Europeans don't want this at all. First, they need to keep the huge Ukrainian UGS facilities in a functional state, which are an effective damper for the EU's energy supply in cold winters. In principle, no one in Brussels and Berlin is going to refuse them. Secondly, the Europeans need someone to regularly throw money at Independence Square to "keep the pants on." Russia represented by Gazprom is an ideal candidate for this.

And what do we get in the end in this situation. Earlier, Chancellor Merkel set conditions for maintaining certain volumes of transit through Ukraine. A year ago, Alexey Miller's team of "effective managers" signed an extremely unprofitable transit agreement with Naftogaz for a period of 5 years. Their only excuse for this could be that it was done the very last time. Alas, these are likely to be false hopes. A likely outcome of the "trilateral compromise" is permission to complete and commission Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream. In return, Gazprom undertakes to maintain substantial transit volumes through Independent. And this is a double-edged sword. It seems that bypass routes will be launched, but Ukraine will remain in business. Note that its GTS is worn out and needs major overhaul. Who will pay for it? Guess it at once. Transit tariffs are already high, but then Kiev will simply lay in them funds for the repair and modernization of the dilapidated pipeline and the maintenance of UGS facilities. And you have to pay.

It turns out that instead of getting rid of the "transit stranglehold" on the part of Ukraine, Gazprom received a surplus gas transportation infrastructure in the form of two new pipelines and one old one, which will need to be endlessly repaired, given the corruption realities of Nezalezhnaya. At the same time, simply stamping their feet and refusing to supply gas to the EU at all, blackmailing Brussels and Berlin by the fact that they will freeze in winter, will not work. Recall that, if absolutely necessary, they will interrupt with the help of LNG, for which American suppliers will thank the Kremlin, and the domestic monopolist will lose its main export market in the European Union.

These are the prospects that emerge based on the results of the “multi-move” that started in 2014. It is possible to reverse the negative trend only by the most extraordinary methods.
13 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. mark1 Offline mark1
    mark1 6 February 2021 14: 42
    +1
    So it is necessary to determine the limit of expansion to Europe (and it is mainly determined by the throughput of streams) and calm down on this. What to do in addition to pumping raw materials, it is time to move to a new quality level - gas chemistry, internal gasification, transport gasification and many other interesting things. Exclude Ukraine from the transit scheme as much as possible.
  2. Bakht Offline Bakht
    Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 6 February 2021 14: 48
    +7
    And what will happen if GazProm still does not extend the transit agreement with Ukraine? Deliveries to Europe are secured, especially since there are LNG terminals in Europe.
    Would you like to hear a forecast for the development of the situation in the absence of a transit agreement?
  3. Dmitry S. Offline Dmitry S.
    Dmitry S. (Dmitry Sanin) 6 February 2021 14: 53
    -2
    Didn't lose in any way. One contract has at least 1- infinity of sub-clauses. Nobody knows how this fuss in the salted Baltic pit will continue. Pilaf will be eaten only by those who have clean hands. If you lose something on the resale, you are a shitty seller. Plov, it's not only rice, and rice isn't all from China. Lamb for pilaf - Dagestan. Personally. Very good. Very very. Ossetia is tougher. Krasnodar rice is very controversial, but it has its own in cooking.
    Much to my regret, a lane of beef in 180 days of dry fermentation ... I don't know anything. For me, a nation with poor cuisine is fu. And tasteless
  4. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 6 February 2021 18: 19
    -1
    Gos-Gazprom is a forge of oligarchs and officials.
    Therefore, he can outplay not himself, but everyone else.
    Profits for yourself, losses for others ..
    1. Polente the Wanderer 12 February 2021 18: 18
      0
      the rest of the citizens of Russia
  5. rotkiv04 Offline rotkiv04
    rotkiv04 (Victor) 6 February 2021 18: 33
    0
    maybe it was not worth pushing everything to Miller's effective managers, it is clear who made the decision on a 5-year contract with the outskirts
  6. bobba94 Offline bobba94
    bobba94 (Vladimir) 6 February 2021 21: 31
    +1
    This Nord Stream-2 will feed a lot of people well for four more years - officials, employees of gas companies, analysts, TV hosts of political shows, journalists, you cannot name them all. It's like a Loch Ness monster or a Yeti, only smaller.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 6 February 2021 22: 11
    +1
    06.02.2021g.
    The Russian vessel Fortuna has started laying pipes for Nord Stream 2 in Danish territorial waters. The pipeline operator Nord Stream 2 AG said the vessel resumed construction after successful sea trials.

    https://russian.rt.com/world/article/829654-fortuna-ukladka-trub-severnyi-potok-2
    No strings attached.
  9. Potapov Offline Potapov
    Potapov (Valery) 7 February 2021 09: 57
    +1
    Well, finally, there will be gas left for my Redkino ... Something is not clear, you are so bothering about the money of Gazprom and the convenience of Europe ... Maybe you are some kind of zalants ...
  10. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
    gorenina91 (Irina) 7 February 2021 12: 26
    -1
    - An interesting little article ...
    - But personally, I'm just tired of writing about empty-headed Gazprom ... - All my predictions that I personally posted on the site ... - to my great regret ... - came true (alas ... - personally, I'm not happy about that) ...
    - With regard to the current situation; then ... then ... then today Western Europe, Turkey, the Americans, China ... - everything, absolutely everyone rules Gazprom ... - as they please ...
    - Well, there would be no problem with the Ukrainian gas pipeline; then another would immediately arise ... -So what's the difference ... - since empty-headed Gazprom is a "slave", then they will be pushed around forever ...
    - Personally, I am generally amazed ... how it is, having all the "trump cards" in hand, Gazprom always remains an eternal loser ...: - they bluff with him ... - and Gazprom is easy; they tell him - and Gazprom obeys and follows the instructions ...; he is given conditions and he easily agrees ... -That's a disgrace ...
    - Today the Americans, with their LNG ... are bluffing in black ... and blackmailing Gazprom in black; that, they say, in which case they will overwhelm Europe with their LNG ...
    - Ha, where will they get this gas ??? - Shale mining ??? - Yes, then he will simply become "gold" at cost; and where will they get the required volumes of this shale gas ??? - They will run from point to point and collect this gas ... - in small batches ... - one cylinder here, and another cylinder there ... increasing the already huge production cost ... - And then ... - it is necessary still carry across the ocean (already "in the fraction" LNG) ... - charter ships from the Greeks ... - The whole "move" will take at least 4 weeks (count a month) ... - Well ... they brought it .. - and how much will this LNG cost ??? - Well, first the Americans will "cut the price"; and then the price of this LNG will only grow every time ... - Who will agree to such conditions in Europe ???
    - And what about Gazprom ??? - This slobber can only clap his ears ...
  11. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) 8 February 2021 10: 46
    0
    Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream were created as alternative routes for gas supplies to Europe bypassing hostile Ukraine. At the same time, the goal was to eliminate Moscow's dependence on Kiev once and for all. And we must understand that no new gas was supposed to be pumped through the new two pipelines, this is the same "blue fuel" that previously went through the dilapidated Ukrainian GTS. Unfortunately, this simple one Gazprom's plan has almost completely failed.

    Are you sure? Gas is supplied to the Balkans through Turkey, to Germany via SP-1, and apparently SP-2 will be completed.

    Gazprom has not yet succeeded in completing the construction of the subsea pipeline on its own due to new restrictive measures by the United States.

    As far as I remember, the pipe is being laid. What restrictive measures are we talking about?

    Over the past decade, a developed gas transportation infrastructure has been built between the EU countries, and numerous LNG terminals have appeared on the coast. Liquefied gas is subject to serious price fluctuations, but the very possibility of obtaining it gives Brussels an alternative to fuel from Gazprom and a guarantee that in an emergency the Old World will not freeze in winter.

    Practice shows that without a pipe, Europeans should take a closer look at the Ukrainian experience and start collecting dung. In the event of a cold snap, it is not possible to provide additional LNG supplies in the required volume. A gas carrier from the USA gets to an old woman in Europe in 2 weeks, and you also need to buy this gas, deliver it to the plant, and liquefy it. All this takes some time.

    Gazprom in January 2021 increased gas production by 6%, exports to non-CIS countries - by 45%

    https://neftegaz.ru/news/companies/662607-gazprom-v-yanvare-2021-g-uvelichil-dobychu-gaza-na-6-eksport-v-dalnee-zarubezhe-na-45/

    A likely outcome of the "trilateral compromise" is permission to complete and commission Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream. In return, Gazprom undertakes to maintain substantial transit volumes through Independent.

    What does tripartite mean? USA puts conditions on Germany. The measures of pressure on Russia have been exhausted, they have not brought any results. That is why Biden took on Merkel. Why should Gazprom take on any obligations? Does Germany have more leverage to influence Moscow?

    It turns out that instead of getting rid of the "transit stranglehold" on the part of Ukraine, Gazprom received redundant gas transportation infrastructure

    Poor Gazprom, he was thrown into a bush laughing As far as I remember, they fought against the totalitarian Mordorian gas, the goal was to rid Europe of its corrupting influence. And what do we see? winked Citizen Biden, it's a fiasco bro smile

    Gazprom received redundant gas transmission infrastructure in the form of two new pipelines and one old one, which it will be necessary to endlessly repair, given the corruption realities of the Independent.

    Previously, Gazprom was not seen in such altruism, where did you find signs of Miller's desire to repair the pipe for the Sumerians?
  12. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 8 February 2021 12: 21
    +3
    All this is nonsense. Refusal from SP-2 is a nail in the coffin of the EU economy, and Berlin will not agree to this, neither for the sake of Dill, nor the parliament of the Polish-Jewish clown Novalny and company, from Echo Matza.
  13. Polente the Wanderer 12 February 2021 18: 14
    +1
    What, in principle, prevented Gazprom from selling gas to its European partners on the border between Russia and Ukraine? Property in the form of a gas pipeline through Ukraine? Even if it was still not given back (the money of the Sberbank branch was forbidden to withdraw from Ukraine). Possibility to influence politics?
    The United States, as a state, does not own companies. But if necessary, it imposes bans on work with other countries and private companies obediently obey them. Why do we need state-owned companies? It may be better to take good taxes from them (and not subsidize them like now), but how will they make money let it be their problem.