American media: Russia will not help freezing Europe

November 29, 2021 31

With the onset of cold weather, Europe is increasingly feeling the energy crisis caused by a shortage of gas and rising prices for it. At the same time, according to the American resource Bloomberg, Europeans strongly doubt that Russia or Qatar will come to their aid.

So, on Monday, November 29, in the morning, the futures price for gas on the ICE exchange reached $ 1100 per thousand cubic meters. According to analysts, "blue fuel" may rise in price even more due to a further drop in temperature.

The situation can be especially serious in France, where severe frosts are expected in January and February. Rolling power outages are possible in the country. The situation is aggravated by the fact that France itself is an exporter of electricity for a number of countries in the region, and the lack of electricity could ricochet in Germany, Spain, Italy and the UK.

The energy crisis is developing against the backdrop of an unfavorable situation with the coronavirus pandemic, the incidence of which is on the rise again. Countries in the region are also concerned about the spread of a dangerous new strain, Omicron, sourced from South African countries.

Meanwhile, the main gas suppliers to Europe, Russia and Qatar, do not increase the volume of fuel transportation. Doha announced the production of gas at maximum capacity, while Moscow supplies gas in the volumes strictly stipulated in the contracts. After a decrease in gas exports in November, Russia increased supplies, but they still remain at a low level.

How much gas Russia will send to Europe in December remains an even bigger mystery

- Bloomberg notes, hinting that Russia is unlikely to help freezing Europe.

Our news channels

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

VK Zen Telegram

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Sofa division

+7

29 November 2021 17: 01

Open sp2 - buy cheap gas. They stepped on their own tail.
Bakht

+9

29 November 2021 17: 50

How much gas Russia will send to Europe in December remains an even bigger mystery

The fact of the matter is that there is no riddle. How much is required under the contract, so much will be delivered. If there are additional applications, then without the SP-2 it is possible to deliver through Poland. Europe is not applying for additional gas supplies. Under the GasPromov contract, the cost of gas is two times lower than on the exchange. Additional deliveries will be paid for according to stock quotes. And this cost does not suit Europe.
So the launch of SP-2 is not relevant at this stage.
Indeed, in all "analytical" articles, a key parameter is missing. How much real (non-futures) gas is traded on the exchange?
There are LNG terminals on the Atlantic coast of the United States. Shipping leverage to Europe is shorter than Southeast Asia. But gas carriers still do not go to Europe. Cause? There are no consumers in Europe. If you dig even deeper, it is not governments who buy gas in Europe, but large companies. That is, they are making profits, despite the fact that the Europeans are freezing.
The European Commission is preparing a lawsuit against Gazprom for $ 80 billion. And these people also want gas?

Little Johnny spies on his parents in the bedroom and speaks thoughtfully

- And these people forbid me to pick my nose!
1. sH, arK
  
  -1
  
  30 November 2021 01: 49
  
  What a lawsuit for 80 billion is complete stupidity ... What the idiots write on the social network has nothing to do with the lawsuit.
  The situation is very simple - Gazprom supplies gas at the lower contractual tolerance. The counterparties, of course, would like to increase supplies, but why does Gazprom need this? Going to sign a new contract for a new volume - and Gazprom is not interested in selling at a low price to counterparties in the EU, and these are very large companies, there is no desire to reduce the price, having a large discount in the contract price.
  Small customers cannot buy from Gazprom - it is not interested in one-time small deliveries. That's the whole problem ... I think that Gazprom has finally understood that it is better to supply less and get more for it than vice versa. Now, having exhibited dUrkaina for trading through the stock exchange, Gazprom ensures constant and significant demand, and the low volume of supplies to all sorts of Slovak and other small trash will not make it possible to make a cheap virtual reverse ...
  1. Bakht
    
    0
    
    30 November 2021 08: 25
    
    The Antimonopoly Office of the European Commission began collecting materials on the possible impact of the Russian company on the rise in gas prices in the EU, said European Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson.
    
    As far as I understand, the statement of the European Commissioner on energy is "complete nonsense." The usual solution in such cases is 10% of the company's turnover.
    Your logical constructions are incomprehensible to me. Small deliveries on the exchange are really not interesting to GazProm, but the situation looks different. Europe does NOT buy expensive gas, but closes production. That is, the demand for gas is falling due to the high price. Due to the fall in demand, Gazprom's share in the European market increased from 33% to 40%.
    Selling "less but more" is very good for economists. Good intentions, divorced from the production of idealists in the offices. You ask operators how to maintain wellhead pressure and what the consequences might be. And what does it mean to plug the well, and then reactivate it. This is not a gas burner in the kitchen to stop mining by turning a knob. And then it is also easy to build it up. These are billions of dollars in investment. And they are planned for decades. With exchange trading and short-term decisions, no one will risk the development of new deposits.
    1. sH, arK
      
      +1
      
      1 December 2021 20: 27
      
      Do not write nonsense. You don't need to "choke" anything. The debit, on average, for wells changes without the slightest problem by 30-40%, it all depends on the well and the geology. On large, as a rule - less, on small - more. But with exports of 200 billion and production of 500 billion - what are the problems to cut exports by 20-30 billion m3? You don't even need to reduce anything artificially, shake it up, just increase processing ... It's not about a planning horizon - a year, but about several!
      1. Bakht
        
        +1
        
        1 December 2021 22: 31
        
        Again "nonsense" ...
        Well, what can you do if everyone is a connoisseur.
        Of course, the flow rate of the wells is regulated. Both oil and gas. That is, it is necessary to reduce production by 10%. After all, gas is supplied to Europe not from all of Russia, but only from Yamal.
        Gas wells are much more difficult to tune than oil wells. The gas flow rate is ten times higher than the oil rate. Oil is an incompressible liquid. Gas - no. The volume of gas on the surface increases tens and hundreds of times. Let's say the pressure at the wellhead is 1 atmosphere, in the reservoir at a depth of 1 km - 250 atmospheres. How much gas will be extracted from the reservoir to the surface? Plus geology. At a high flow rate, wells clogging occurs. Repairs cost millions. Underground well repair is one of the most difficult operations.
        The institutes have a specialty in "exploitation of oil and gas wells". This is learned. Then they work for several years to gain experience. There is a risk of blocking the well (this is still good). It will be worse if the deposit is ruined.
        I am not an operator. But I spent a lot of time with them. With the strongest specialists. It's not as easy as it sounds.
        Yes, if the planning horizon is several years, then this is easier to do. But the problem is that Europe is not planning for such a period. They didn't want gas last year. They want more in this. Who can say how much gas the EU wants in six months?
        
        So. The planning horizon is a maximum of a year.
        A change in the oil production regime threatens to deplete the field. Unfortunately, I have seen such deposits. After graduation he worked in Turkmenistan in Nebit-Dag. He was very friendly with the chief engineer of the NGDU. The paper will not tolerate what he said about his predecessors.
        During the war, the best field in Azerbaijan, Balakhanskoye, was flooded.
        Unfortunately, I believe that the largest field in the Caspian - ACG is now being flooded. There are no data, but the flow rate shows that the extraction is carried out in a predatory way.
        
        So you are right. Gas production can be increased and decreased. It is possible. The consequences will be disentangled by others.
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        2 December 2021 11: 42
        
        Debit - regulated, yes, in limited quantities, but regulated. But without consequences. The consequences are the result of stupidity or over-regulation. But most importantly, it concerns the planning horizon - that's what we're talking about! Temporary workers from Gazprem are not ready to think about anything at all! What do they care about the EU? You supply 150bn under contracts, and another 20-30bn by spot, and that's it! Who prevents them from regulating the market? With 40% of the market? Now they have started, but what was in the way before? Creeps about American shale LNG? Did they not know before about the cost of production, liquefaction, delivery? Truth? I just really wanted right now, myself and the grass not to grow! It was this position of Gazprom that brought us to the 3rd energy package! It is clear that the EU thought that Gazprom would be bent ... Not a problem ... They miscalculated, of course ... but it was possible not to bring it up?
        
        And as far as I understand, ACG is doing exactly the opposite - uncontrolled production, too high a debit, which is extremely dangerous not for the well, but for the field. Of course, all sorts of proppants and hydraulic fracturing allow it to be increased, but these "drugs" cannot be used thoughtlessly ...
        
        Bakht
        
        0
        
        2 December 2021 12: 45
        
        Not consistent. The third energy package has a completely different rationale. Gazprom has nothing to do with it. Just Gazprom is planning for a decade. The third energy package for a momentary conjunction.
        So I disagree with you on any point.
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        2 December 2021 13: 35
        
        You are confusing God's gift with scrambled eggs, cause and effect! The third energy package is an attempt to change the policy of Gazprom, and it arose out of the feeling that it can be done! And it turned out, in fact, in the past years! Yes, one can try to explain this by the fact that Gazprom dumped in order to prevent shale LNG from entering Europe. But this is a poor explanation.
        
        Bakht
        
        0
        
        2 December 2021 14: 28
        
        You are wrong. Gazprom worked strictly according to European rules. The gentlemen just decided to change the rules. And sat in a puddle. Gazprom still operates according to European rules
      2. Bakht
        
        +1
        
        1 December 2021 22: 39
        
        Here is a small link for changing the flow rate of wells.
        https://www.neftemagnat.ru/enc/92
        
        The practical productivity of a well is precisely the industrial productivity. It lasts a long time and does not harm either the well or the formation. With such productivity, the reservoir and the well are working quietly. To obtain practical productivity, it is necessary to produce gas with a certain back pressure. For each formation, there is an “optimal working pressure” in the wellbore against the formation.
        
        This is science. And do not write about 30-40% adjustment of wells. I will not define your post as "nonsense". If you are a specialist, then this is one thing. If you just take information from the Internet, then this is completely different.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        1 December 2021 23: 10
        
        This is Gazprom's standard manual for the exploitation of gas fields. Normative document
        
        5.12 Technological regime of gas field operation at peak loads is established on the basis of technological modes of well operation, subject to the following conditions:
        - the average well production rate increases by more than 20% of the average values for the current quarter for a period not exceeding 12 days during this quarter with well operation factor equal to 1
        
        5.13 The mode of unplanned reduction of gas sampling levels is a mode introduced for a limited period with a decrease in gas demand.
        The mode corresponds to the minimum permissible technological mode of operation of the field with deviation from the design daily production no more than 20%.
        
        So I can repeat. Of course, it is possible to reduce and increase the flow rate of gas wells. No more than 20% and for a very limited period. Gas fields are operated on a continuous basis and are monitored almost daily. It is not possible to increase or decrease gas production at a click from Brussels. Therefore, a long-term contract for 20-25 years is required. And there is absolutely no reason for GasProm to run to the stock exchange with prices of 1000 or 2000 dollars per thousand cubic meters. These prices are played only by speculators with futures non-deliverable contracts. That is, with paper gas.
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        2 December 2021 13: 43
        
        Yes, so we came to the conclusion that it is possible to regulate the debit simply by reducing it instantly. But it's not about instant action! It is enough to restrict the commissioning of new wells, not to intensify production, but simply to start pumping into UGS facilities - there are 70 billion of them in Russia, and the injection of 20-30 billion per month will already lead to a problem in the market. Even just switching part of the thermal power plant to gas - sometimes, it is better to burn it off at home than to break the market! Long-term deliveries - only under the lower tolerance! What's in the way? With a 40% market share - it's stupid not to use it! Otherwise, why is she?
        
        And what is the problem with getting away from the Groningen contracts? If the share is 40%? We can easily manipulate the market if a huge volume is exactly bought on the market! A deficit arises already when there is a shortage of 3-5%, so what prevented us from using it in previous periods? Stupidity or corruption? Something tells me that it's not stupidity ...
        
        Bakht
        
        -1
        
        2 December 2021 14: 29
        
        You misunderstood. You cannot instantly change the debit.
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        4 December 2021 15: 58
        
        Well, you can, for example, by washering, but, yes, within modest limits ... But you need to change the flow rate within 5%, no more! It is possible and reasonable not to limit anything at all in production, the question is not a few days or even months! Restricting production means stopping drilling and putting into operation new wells! Restricting exports is not necessarily limiting production, it is also an increase in our own consumption, this is also pumping into our own UGS facilities - this is not always a long process, we need to "pump" the market in our interests ...
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        4 December 2021 17: 50
        
        5% is not 30-40%.
        Nobody says that there is no need to drill or explore. We are talking about Europe's desire to get more gas now.
        And the opinion of many on this site is that Gazprom does not know how to plan.
        You always have to set boundary conditions and read the news. And then the picture may become clearer.
        First. GazProm operates in accordance with European laws and complies with the decisions of the European Commission on Energy and the Stockholm Arbitration.
        Second. Nobody reduced production in Yamal. GasProm is pumping at full capacity. There were many press reports about this.
        Third. No one in Europe has ordered additional volumes of gas. In any case, A. Merkel stated that she was not aware of cases when Gazprom did not fulfill additional requests.
        A consequence of these conditions. GasProm pumps in the same volume without changing the technological process. The excess gas is pumped into its own storage facilities throughout the country. Since November, excess gas has been pumped into their storage facilities in Europe. This is Gazprom's own gas, for which no one pays it. On the contrary, Gazprom is also spent on gas transit and storage.
        There is simply no economic sense to increase transit to Europe. Nobody ordered it and nobody will pay for it. Miller and Putin have repeatedly stated that without gas purchase contracts there can be no gas transit contract. Which is very logical. Where and to whom to download?
        Europe is not ready to pay the exchange price to GazProm. At the same time, Europe pays the exchange price to Norway. This is not only politics, but also economics. The pipelines from Norway are shorter. And while Norway is coping with these volumes. Perhaps in winter Europe will want gas from Russia. Then transit will be increased.
        So, due to geography, Norway is currently the beneficiary of high gas prices. Gazprom is planning for a long period. And high gas prices are unprofitable in the long term. The market is shrinking. Even now, due to the shrinking market, Gazprom's share has increased to 40%. By what means?
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        5 December 2021 11: 15
        
        You are absolutely right ... Everything is happening NOW! Gazprom supplies the minimum required volume under all contracts. The question is not NOW, but the fact that such an obvious practice has never been carried out before! Gazprom was driving gas according to the upper tolerance of the contracts, and then, after that (!!!) it also climbed onto the spot, knocking out the stool from under itself! What was it? What for?
        
        I repeat, the questions are not about Gazprom's current policy! And to the last one!
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        5 December 2021 12: 11
        
        GazProm has NEVER climbed the spot. You have incorrect information.
        It is another matter that German companies were selling gas on the spot, which bought gas from Gazprom for $ 200-300 and sold for $ 1000.
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        5 December 2021 12: 16
        
        This is now the case. And before that, in excess of the tolerance, the GP was driving gas for what? What would it be leaked on the spot, breaking the price, but giving kickbacks ?! Yes, it was not the SE itself as a trader who traded on the stock exchange ... But in fact, he participated, breaking the market for himself (in the same place, in the contracts, in the majority, there is now a link to the spot! For a long time, and already ...)
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        5 December 2021 12: 22
        
        Above tolerance, GazProm delivered gas on demand. And they were paid. Last year the spot price was $ 50. And under the contract (Groningen) - $ 130. There is a difference?
        GazProm was NOT ACTUALLY involved. And he is not going to participate in spot trading. The contract included a clause on the inadmissibility of the resale of gas. Stockholm canceled this provision last year. So, we can only talk about Gazprom's participation in spot sales since last year. But again, there was no direct involvement.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        4 December 2021 17: 51
        
        Yes, also in addition. Avoiding the Groningen contract is absolutely unprofitable, because it fundamentally does not allow forecasting for a long period.
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        5 December 2021 11: 21
        
        I disagree. At all! Gazprom, as the owner of the main resource, as an operator with 40% of the huge market share, cannot plan ?! Yes, of course, the market is a constant job, yes, and the risk too! I speak like a person who changed bank deposits to exchange accounts! ;))
        
        Yes, you need to manage the market, since you have a 40% share on it! Yes, you have to WORK! But yes, it was easier to cut kickbacks;)) Hunchback also liked to smile on the cover of magazines, and not think about the country!
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        5 December 2021 12: 16
        
        GazProm is up and running. A year ago, Gazprom's share was 33%. Now 40%.
        I have always been amazed by people who, not having complete information, draw global conclusions. I do not pretend to be omniscient, since contracts are classified information. But so far it is clear that Gazprom has increased its share in the European gas market from 33 to 40%. Does this indicate poor management or vice versa?
        GazProm has increased its revenue this year. Does this also indicate poor planning?
        
        Can you say exactly how much gas Europe will need in 6 months? The market cannot be managed. After the abandonment of Groningen, the market is run by speculators. Long-term planning becomes unrealistic. Hence the desire of Gazprom to get away from momentary hesitations.
        
        Exchange accounts are great. What will you do if the exchange crashes? Do you think you can jump off in time?
Bakht

+1

30 November 2021 08: 45

Stabilization of the gas market in Europe is possible. But for this it is necessary to perform certain actions that liberal economists cannot perform by virtue of the principle. This is a rejection of the EU gas directive, and the abolition of futures trading on energy (oil and gas). I mean specifically "non-deliverable futures". This will remove speculators from the market. And the conclusion of long-term contracts so that mining companies can plan their expenses and income.
1. sH, arK
  
  +1
  
  5 December 2021 11: 25
  
  Again you are RIGHT! Damn it! Since we are being forced, let's use it! We, as the owners of the resource, which, in fact, has nowhere else to just take and replace, MUST USE THIS! Who is stopping us from "shaking" the market? Moreover, some of the major contractors will actively help us in this!
  
  It is necessary to "stagger" wisely, of course! What was in the way before ?!
  1. Bakht
    
    +2
    
    5 December 2021 12: 19
    
    The lack of contracts prevents the market from shaking. If there is no buyer for your product, how can you manage the market. Let's say you brought a ton of potatoes to the market. And they don't buy it. Can you influence the market?
    Again. There are no contracts for the purchase of additional gas. The share of Gazprom increased only due to the fact that Europe REDUCE gas purchases. Why are their gas storage facilities empty? And they do not plan to pump additional gas there. The price is too high. That is why super-high gas prices are UNFAVORABLE for GasProm.
    1. sH, arK
      
      +1
      
      5 December 2021 12: 42
      
      How not? TOLERANCE is specified in the contracts! Within the framework of the contract, by mutual agreement or additional agreement, you can deliver the minimum volume or more, and significantly! And by managing this, you also rock the market. Now - only the contractual minimum, according to which the "take or pay" condition works. And before that ?!
      
      Are high prices not profitable for Gazprom? Yes, you can come up with an excuse and explanation ... for everything ... But what prevents you from doing a discount to the market? And not 70-80% to the price ?! And most importantly, do they sit at Gazprom at all? Who will replace 200 billion m3 of gas for Europe? How? Or are we going to talk about common human values?
      
      Now, Gazprom will receive an increase in contract prices, with a lag of 3-6-9 months. through the accounting of spot prices. There now, more than 80% of the contracts are like that. True, this is the number of contracts, not the volume of delivery for them ... And with the volumes, how? I think that the Groningen model is 100% there;)) andIliya is wrong? Yes, the market will shrink, so what?
      
      Yes, Europe is already going to give up gas! Well, from the atom! And the hydroelectric power station is also not amber now with them;)) But there it is clear, simple idiocy, even a really sick child is used;)) But to be serious about such a market - well, it's stupid! They have already "given up" the coal, now at $ 300 per ton!
      
      Gazprom should not think and live only for the moment, how much it will receive here and now, this is the psychology of a thief, Gazprom is a state company, and should think not only about momentary small gains, but global and long-term solutions. And gas is a limited resource, it cannot be grown or produced, which means that no market dumping can be used for a long time! The cost of gas is not just "the cost of production + VAT + transportation", it is a finite resource and we must remember this!
      1. Bakht
        
        +2
        
        5 December 2021 12: 59
        
        Additional options are specified in the contract. That is, there is a window. But it is needed only at the request of the consumer. There is an application - there will be a change in volume WITHIN the LIMITS specified in the contract.
        
        High prices are unprofitable due to the decrease in the volume of supplies. And, consequently, profit is lost. That is, you propose to extract more "final resource" and supply it to Europe in order to reduce the profit of the state-owned company?
        The Groningen model died after the Stockholm decisions. There are now mainly pegged to the spot. And the take-or-pay principle also died. Stockholm canceled this provision. But for some reason he kept the "download or pay" position. Therefore, it is currently unprofitable for GazProm to increase supplies to Europe. I have said many times that Stockholm arbitration will come back to haunt Europe. If you think that Gazprom has bad managers, then in any case, they are two heads taller than Europeans.
        
        I see from your statements that you are a supporter of momentary decisions, without long-term planning. Again. Abandoning Groningen destroys long-term planning entirely. Therefore, increasing supplies to Europe doesn't make a lot of sense. And I think it is a mistake to pump gas into UGS facilities in Europe. But Gazprom now has a surplus of gas and has nowhere to go. So it is being pumped into Europe. May be needed in winter. But there are no psychics either in Gazprom or here on the website. Nobody knows what the winter season will be. Consumption is projected to remain high until the summer of 2022. But this is assumed. And no one knows what else the European Energy Commission will throw out.
        
        At present, Gazprom is keeping up with the volume of supplies. On request. Plus a small amount of surplus in their stores. What is the problem? SP-1 operates at 100% capacity. Turkish and all other streams operate at 100% capacity. Transit through Ukraine within the limits of the contract. Transit through Poland is unclaimed. Everything is in accordance with EU legislation and decisions of the European Commission.
        Why rape yourself to reduce the price of gas in Europe?
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        5 December 2021 13: 31
        
        1) Right now, there is no increase in volume on requests. Only the minimum guaranteed volume is supplied! It is especially stupid (but there were probably non-contractual nuances, such as a rollback!) To supply additional volumes under all sorts of small contracts such as Slovak, Czech, and other interesting consumers ... Durkaina bought gas on the spot for 60-70% through Switzerland, who sold it? And how did you get that gas? Not interested?!
        
        2) I wrote specifically about a decrease in supplies to the EU, not an increase and dumping! How did you decide that the opposite is true ?!
        
        3) There is a decrease in supplies now, precisely within the framework of the lower tolerance, and this is CORRECT! The question is, why only now?
        
        4) The "take or pay" conditions were changed only in the contract with Durkaina, and "download or pay" were introduced, more precisely, they were clearly formulated and introduced after the fact, and recovered, but yes, this is a precedent ... And how can it end if there are disputes with Germany or Austria - God knows! But not good for Gazprom, for sure ...
        
        5) The Stockholm Arbitration has shown the "fairness" of European "justice". Next in line is the British court on the debts of the DUrkains, while they are postponing everything to infinity for any reason ... Exit? Well, at least it's time to move to Switzerland from Sweden. And better - to Moscow! If you don't want to - go look ...
        
        6) UGS facilities in the EU are just the right thing to fill! First, it is insurance against possible transit problems. Secondly, a short leverage, to enter the exchange through the seal ... You will have to exit. But the exchange has a plus - we don’t want to, we don’t sell! There is no obligation if there is no exchange contract, you just have to know how to use it. What's the problem? To transfer free volumes to the production of LNG or fertilizers?
        Yes, you need to have power for one thing, that for another!
        
        And you don't need psychics, you just need to have brains and work! As they do everywhere and always! And in Gazprom they began to deal with this only now ... It's too late ... It's a pity!
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        5 December 2021 17: 57
        
        I don't want to repeat myself.
        You are not right. There is no point in repeating the arguments once again. Just always pay attention to the time.
        And the main thing. Take-or-pay has been removed for all contracts. Not only for Ukraine. And earlier it was impossible to resell gas. This principle was also canceled after Stockholm. Although in relation to Ukraine, this principle has always been violated.
        I don't really like managers. Especially the middle management. But in this case, decisions are made at the highest level. Menagers have nothing to do with it. Decisions on transit and volumes are made at the Miller level (in agreement with Putin). It is unlikely that you or I are smarter than these people. And we hardly have more information than they do.
        So your claims about Gazprom's stupidity are ABSOLUTELY groundless.
        
        sH, arK
        
        +1
        
        6 December 2021 01: 08
        
        Stupidity in this case is a conditional concept, rather it is a cover for the concept of theft and corruption. I just used a softer definition. We know perfectly well what and how much and how much are earning now, for example, Wintershall DEA or WinGas;)) And that these companies are 49% owned by ... Gazprom? And it is they who now have the lion's share in the spot volume of the exchange? ;))) And what, 49% of their profits are subject to Russian taxes? ;))
        
        And I'm not sure that the "take or pay" principle is abolished in all contracts - yes, in Polish, Czech, Lithuanian and Ukrainian - yes, they are abolished ... But not in all. Not everyone went to court. And this condition still works for some Dutch and Norwegian contracts, which are already 30 years old ... They cannot be canceled without going to court. Although, of course, they will be canceled in court, but after all, not all contracts imply Swedish jurisdiction, but only Gazprom's ... Gazprom generally has a problem with lawyers, and not only with Swedish freaks, but also with the price formula, for example, on the Blue Stream .. Supposedly there was an error ... arithmetic (!!!) and we drove gas for $ 80 Botas, when it went to Germany for $ 230 ... But we do not know for sure, no one reports publicly, but there is no smoke without fire !