12 Oct 2022 - RU: Russian Energy Week International Forum plenary session
I would like to welcome all the participants and guests of Russian Energy Week, a respected and recognised platform for dialogue on key global energy topics.
Such direct and transparent communication is essential now, when the global economy in general, the fuel and energy sector are in the middle of, let me be direct, an acute crisis due to unstable price dynamics of energy resources, an imbalance in supply and demand, and the overtly subversive actions of individual market participants, who are guided solely by their own geopolitical ambitions, resort to outright discrimination in the market, and if that does not work, they simply destroy the infrastructure of their competitors.
[MRT: Indirectly stated - the one state which did it imposed sanctions and has geopolitical ambitions. This profile suits Uk - it is a gas producer and tries to implement so called "Global Britain" strategy.]
In this case, I am of course talking about the sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines. There is no doubt that this is an act of international terrorism, the purpose of which is to undermine the energy security of the entire continent.
The logic is cynical: to destroy and block cheap energy sources, hence depriving millions of people, industrial consumers of gas, heat, electricity and other resources and forcing them to buy all this at much higher prices. Forcing.
The attack on the Nord Streams has set an extremely dangerous precedent, which shows that any critical piece of transport, energy or communications infrastructure is under threat, regardless of its location, management or whether it lies on the seabed or on land.
It was proven by, well, it may not be the right place to talk about this, as Russian Energy Week is not directly related. However, I must say that it was proven by the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge committed by Ukrainian intelligence. I have already said that the Kiev regime has long resorted to terrorist methods, organising political assassinations, ethnic purges and crackdowns on civilians. They upload results on the internet, and then realise it was a mistake and immediately delete them. But the content stays online. They do not stop at nuclear terrorism either, specifically the shelling of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, terrorist attacks near the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant in Russia and, of course, sabotage attempts against TurkStream.
[MRT: See another post here: About The forgotten attack on Turk Stream and about UK Tackling Russian income from hydrocarbons]
I would like to repeat that there is solid documented evidence. These crimes were plotted and ordered by the end beneficiaries seeking instability and conflicts.
And who stands behind the sabotage against the Nord Streams? Clearly, those who want to completely sever ties between Russia and the European Union, to fully undermine and crush Europe’s political agency, weaken its industrial potential and seize the market. And, of course, those who – I want to stress it – have the technical capacity to organise such explosions and in fact have committed similar sabotage in the past and were caught red-handed but evaded punishment.
The beneficiaries are well known.
[MRT: See another post here: Mission accomplished - UK - from Energy Importer to Energy Exporter]
I believe no specific details are necessary since the remaining gas systems will acquire greater geopolitical significance. They stretch across Poland (Yamal‒Europe), and Ukraine, the two pipelines that Russia once built with its own money. And, of course, the United States, which will now be able to supply energy resources at high rates.
[MRT: The USA is beneficiary but does not seem to be the perpetrator]
As they say, in decent companies, this is “highly likely.” Everything is clear. It is obvious who stands behind this and who stands to gain.
Now it is possible to impose large volumes of LNG from the United States on European countries, LNG which is obviously less competitive than Russian pipeline gas. After all, the price of American LNG is much higher, and this was common knowledge before. Now the difference is even greater and there are additional risks. The risks lie in high instability – any supplies may float away to other countries. Incidentally, we watched this happen quite recently, when American tankers carrying LNG to Europe turned around halfway and changed their destinations because LNG sellers were offered a higher price elsewhere. They ignored the interests of their European customers.
I would like to recall who helped Europe at that time and sent additional gas supplies to the European market. It was Russia. However, the leaders of these countries prefer not to recall this. Moreover, they deem it possible to reproach us for being “unreliable.” Do we deny supplies to them? We are ready to ship and we are providing them with all the quantities, as agreed under our contracts. We are supplying them with all the contractual amounts. But if someone does not want to take our product, what do we have to do with this? That is your decision.
I have noted many times that the Nord Stream lacks any political background. It is a strictly commercial project, in which Russian and European companies take part on equal terms. Hence, Russia and our partners in EU countries should resolve the future of Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2.
It is certainly possible to repair the damaged gas pipelines that run under the Baltic Sea. But this will make sense only if their further use is economically feasible and the safety of their routes can be ensured – this is the fundamental prerequisite.
If we come to an agreement with the Europeans to supply gas through the surviving branch – and one branch of Nord Stream 2, apparently, has survived… Unfortunately, we are not allowed to help inspect this branch, but the pipeline is holding pressure. It might be damaged, but we do not know this, because as I have said, we are not allowed to inspect it, but there is pressure, which means, apparently, that it is in working order. Its capacity is 27.5 billion cubic metres per year, which is about 8 percent of Europe’s gas imports.
Russia is ready to begin deliveries. The ball is in the EU's court. If they want to, they can just turn on the tap and that is that. I repeat that we are not restricting anyone or anything, and are ready to supply additional volumes in the autumn and winter period.
We have spoken more than once, including at the Russian Energy Week platform, about the causes and nature of the crisis that is unfolding in the European market, including their excessive enthusiasm over renewable energy sources to the detriment of hydrocarbons. Of course, alternative types of energy should be explored – solar, wind, tidal and hydrogen energy. We need to explore them all, but we need to take into account the current volume of consumption, the growth rates of the global economy, the demand for energy resources and the level of technological development. But jumping the gun, for political reasons, especially populist domestic policies – come on, who does that? But this is what they did – and here is the result. The same holds true for the curtailment of nuclear energy, as well as the rejection of long-term contracts in the gas sector and the shift to exchange quotations.
Incidentally, according to expert estimates, this year alone, the spot gas pricing mechanics have caused Europe more than 300 billion euros in losses – about 2 percent of the Eurozone's GDP. This could have been avoided if they stuck to long-term oil-linked contracts. You are all professionals and must understand what I am saying: the price difference between the spot market and long-term contracts is three- or four-fold.
And who did it? Was it Russia? They did it themselves. In fact, they imposed this trading system on us. They have essentially forced Gazprom to shift, in part, to a link to the spot market, and now they are groaning. Well, it is their own fault.
It is clear how this problem of high rates will be solved. We have seen the same strategy being used with other commodity groups. They simply print more money. In the past year alone, the money supply in the EU has increased by around one trillion euros. The problem is what Europe is going to do with this money. Europe will, just like with other goods, including food, grab them and gas from the global market. As a result, other countries, especially developing countries, will have to overpay for these energy resources.
The resources that come to the European market are sold literally triple the price, as I have said, and this feeds inflation. It has already reached 10 percent in the euro zone. It is hitting ordinary Europeans as their electricity and gas bills have more than tripled over the past year. The European population is stocking up on wood for winter, like in the Middle Ages.
What does Russia have to do with it? They are constantly trying to blame others for their own mistakes, in this case Russia. I want to stress again that it is their own fault. It is not even a result of certain actions during the special military operation in Ukraine and Donbass. Absolutely not.
It is the result of years and years of bad energy policy. Years and years...
...As I mentioned earlier, Russia invariably fulfills its obligations in stark contrast to Western countries, which cynically refused to honour signed finance and technology, as well as equipment supply and maintenance contracts.
I am here to say one thing: Russia will not act contrary to common sense or underwrite someone else’s prosperity. We are not going to supply energy to the countries that introduce price caps. I want to tell those who prefer con jobs and shameless blackmail to business partnerships and market mechanisms – we have been living in this political paradigm for decades now – you should know that we will not do anything that disadvantages us.
We strongly believe that stability, balanced energy markets and a secure future for all nations can only be ensured through joint efforts in an open and honest dialogue based on the principles of joint responsibility and consideration for each other's national interests.
This is the kind of dialogue we have established with our partners under the OPEC+ agreement, as I have just mentioned.
No comments:
Post a Comment