Europe’s climate alarmist policy fiasco leaves EU economy prisoner of foreign energy providers

Guest essay by Larry Hamlin

The excellent WattsUpWithThat? article presenting the energy challenges pitting U.S. and Russia’s global dominance in natural gas production thus setting the stage for international business export customer competition also exposes another global energy dilemma brought about by the ill-considered, ludicrous and scientifically unjustified climate alarmist policies of the EU.

clip_image002l

Europe’s dominating and impractical green energy policies combined with their anti-nuclear, anti-coal (even though coal continues to dominate electrical energy production because of renewable energy failures), anti-shale, etc. positions have resulted in the EU and its economy becoming a prisoner of and incredibly dependent upon foreign energy providers and unable to establish control of their own energy and economic destiny.

clip_image004

At the present time Germany, the economic driving engine of the EU, has become dependent on Russian supplied natural gas and this dependence is set to grow even more so in the future.

clip_image006

Germany is heavily lobbying for the building of a 10 billion euro second major natural gas pipeline, known as the Nord Stream 2, to significantly increase the amount of Russian natural gas that can be imported directly from Siberia.

Germany already receives about 40% of the gas it consumes from Russia and this figure will likely increase to over 50% by 2025.

clip_image008

Other EU countries have concerns about the new Russian/German pipeline because of the increased energy dependence upon Russia that such a pipeline would create for the EU.

Some EU countries are also concerned about the increased hub role that Germany would need to play in distributing natural gas to other EU nations because of the increased pipeline imports.

Additionally some segments of the route for the proposed pipeline lie outside the jurisdiction of the EU raising uncertain legal concerns.

clip_image010

The newly created sanctions the U.S. has assessed against Russia are also creating uncertainty for the EU regarding the building and use of the new proposed pipeline.

clip_image012

It is extraordinary that here in the U.S. there is so much hype from the mainstream media about alleged government ties to Russia at a time where America has established itself as a global energy giant and in complete control of its economic and energy future.

At the same time the EU has, because of its ridiculous climate alarmist folly, allowed its economic and energy future to become a prisoner of energy policy dictated by foreign governments – most prominently the Russian government.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
135 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pariah Dog
August 1, 2017 8:07 pm

The EU won’t be beholden to Russia. They require natural gas now, but it’s only to tide them over until they’re running on a stable mix of wind, solar, fusion and unicorn farts. At which time Nord Stream 2 will be shut off due to lack of demand.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Pariah Dog
August 1, 2017 8:31 pm

/sarc

Bryan A
Reply to  Pariah Dog
August 1, 2017 10:23 pm

I think the NordStream2 pipeline will likely remain active as they will be so TUNED to having the energy mix including Unicorn Farts that they will need to run a spar off the NordStream2 into the Hinterlands just to maintain the flatulence supply

Griff
Reply to  Pariah Dog
August 2, 2017 12:44 am

Yes.
Except for the fusion and unicorn bit.
The unicorns are all working on a replacement for Obamacare.

Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 2:57 am

LMAO! Good one Griff! Only a unicorn can replace a unicorn.

Bryan A
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 9:52 am

Or understand what another Unicorn wrote

Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 2:43 pm

Our website, Fusion 4 Freedom has become “The world’s most comprehensive Fusion Energy website for fusion & plasma science, research, project management, academic journal articles, videos, fusion politics, news, and advocacy.” Sorry but no unicorns. See at: http://fusion4freedom.com.

Old England
Reply to  Pariah Dog
August 2, 2017 7:07 am

And when a group of Jihadist terrorists blow up the pipeline … what then ?

Reply to  Old England
August 3, 2017 2:54 pm

We could supply Europe with LNG, delivered by ship – distributed via local pipelines.

Keith J
August 1, 2017 8:19 pm

Gas appliances are a durable good. Demand is set for at least ten years. Two scenarios exist for the EU and their fanciful weaning off hydrocarbon fossil fuel. Domestic legislation to prohibit gas appliances or to ban imports of natural gas. Either will cause a backlash with Gazprom which will then turn political. Russia needs the transfer payments.
Last world war was started because one nation restricted another’s access to petroleum. Another could easily start from restriction of a hydrocarbon market.

Reply to  Keith J
August 1, 2017 10:00 pm

Exactly so in the Pacific. On the Atlantic side it was caused by the belief that agricultural production was limited by the amount of land you owned.

decnine
Reply to  M Simon
August 2, 2017 1:03 am

‘On the Atlantic side…’
I’m British and I disagree. On the Atlantic side, A Hitler wanted:
1) to undo the territorial penalties inflicted on Germany at Versailles and
2) render Germany blockade proof by regaining agricultural land surrendered by Russia in 1917.
As for ‘So much for the idiotic theory of superior European intelligence.’ The principal architect of (1) was one W Wilson.

Reply to  M Simon
August 2, 2017 10:32 am

decnine
I think your 2) makes my point.

Reply to  Keith J
August 1, 2017 10:05 pm

So much for the idiotic theory of superior European intelligence.

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  pyeatte
August 2, 2017 1:31 am

Is that an American theory?

CC Reader
Reply to  pyeatte
August 2, 2017 1:33 pm

Google “World Rankings of countries by their IQ”. Now examine the migration policy of the EU and the nationality of the people moving into the EU?

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Keith J
August 1, 2017 10:34 pm

People love to point at start dates in support of their agenda. Just look how the claim of “the hottest year ever recorded” goes back only to the 1850s.
Same with wars, I suppose. Sure enough, according to some, the war in the Pacific started not with Pearl Harbor, but when the Japanese would no longer chafe under the harsh US restriction of oil access…
but some remember those restrictions being imposed in order to thwart the expansion of a cruel empire.
Start dates… “oh, but ‘the pause’ doesn’t work if you expand to a longer time frame.” Right.
You can pick your facts, but you can’t alter the larger truth.

Keith J
Reply to  Alan Robertson
August 2, 2017 12:13 am

Ok, the pacific had been a wreck since the Opium trade..opium wars weakened China to where Russia and Japan became dominate. They sparred and Teddy Roosevelt broke up that spat..this set the Korean peninsula up for domination by Japan.
After Japan got spanked hard by fission, China got communist and extended its sphere over Korea. We still are dealing with that oversight.
Cease fires don’t end wars. The Cold War never ended. Russia wants to be great again.

1saveenergy
Reply to  Alan Robertson
August 2, 2017 1:46 am

Hey Keith! hold on a minute old bean,
the opium wars (1839 ~1860) was a tool used by the British under Lord Palmerston (to keep us ‘Great’); we British had realised that because there was so much opium produced on the east side of India smuggling opium to China made economic sense.
In just one attack in June 1840, between 20,000 and 25,000 Chinese were killed by the might of the navy in the name of free trade & drug smuggling.
Read more – http://www.encyclopedia.com/history/asia-and-africa/south-asian-history/opium-wars

Griff
Reply to  Keith J
August 2, 2017 12:45 am

Well, I believe Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands have all banned gas appliances for new homes…

Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 1:14 am

My son is building a house in Germany now. They use gas for heating. Induction heating for cooking is probably cheaper then gas and safer.

ron
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 4:07 am

As coal and lignite produce the majority of their power supply.

Griff
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 5:08 am

ron, 35% of their electricity this year was from renewables..
There’s a small list of coal plant scheduled for closure.
Henry, I’ll check that… there are certainly a couple of states who’ve restricted gas heating… I may have misremembered.
I’m guessing, btw, his house has better insulation than the UK or USA…

2hotel9
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 11:51 am

And your lies just keep coming. Are they supplied to you free? Or do you just make them up as you go? Guess it could be a little from column A and a little B.

Patrick B
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 9:43 am

Griff – 35%? “this year” – can you provide a cite? Everything I find says 30% in 2016 – and that includes counting 8% which is biomass.https://1-stromvergleich.com/strom-report/renewable-energy-germany/

Reply to  Keith J
August 2, 2017 2:37 am

Well they can always send Army Group South to seize the oil reserves of the Caucasus. Didn’t work out too well last time but you never know …

Roy Jones
Reply to  cephus0
August 2, 2017 2:48 pm

Don’t joke about it. If the Ukraine joins the EU the new NATO front line will be only 400km from Stalingrad (Volgograd). With a clear road that’s less than 6 hours driving time. Does Tesla make eco-friendly tanks?

Reply to  cephus0
August 3, 2017 3:04 pm

I wonder if the road signs are still there. Best do it in the winter while the muddy roads are frozen…

TA
Reply to  Keith J
August 2, 2017 5:18 am

“Two scenarios exist for the EU and their fanciful weaning off hydrocarbon fossil fuel.”
“fanciful”. That’s an good descripton.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Keith J
August 2, 2017 5:49 am

Most wars have started due to natural resources in some form or fashion. The current situation seems to defy most strategic policies where nations don’t willingly make themselves dependent on other nations. It makes them susceptible to blackmail.

MarkW
Reply to  Keith J
August 2, 2017 6:30 am

I love it when people try to declare that a complex problem has only one real cause, and it’s that cause is quite naturally, their peculiar hobby horse.
The war in the Pacific was already well involved by the time the US decided to stop selling oil to Japan.
Notice how Keith neatly ignores Japan’s territorial aggression and the invading of it’s neighbors. It’s all down to the US behaving badly.

Andrew Cooke
Reply to  MarkW
August 2, 2017 9:06 am

Yes, the “Americans are stupid and their country is horrible and the cause of everything wrong in the world today” mantra gets truly old and boring.
Lord knows, we have more problems than I can count and our country is embarrassingly far from perfect, but then, the same could be said about most every country in the world.
Ah well.

Keith J
Reply to  MarkW
August 2, 2017 11:11 am

I didn’t intend to express that opinion. War has natural cause, to force a cease fire prematurely quells bloodshed but not motive, much like a playground fight broken up by a teacher often carries on after hours at the bus stop. The USSR still exists in the mind of Vladimir Putin..Vladimir literally means leader of world peace. Isn’t it ironic, don’t you think?

barrybrill
August 1, 2017 8:30 pm

The countries of Western Europe import over 80% of their primary energy (hydrocarbons) and will eternally be at the mercy of decisions taken in other countries.This goes to the heart of the two profound obligations of their elected representatives – national security and economic autonomy.
Aware of this dependency, it has become an article of faith amongst EU politicians of every stripe that they must lead the world to a new utopia which is not dependent on fossil fuels. They see this as an existential imperative and cost is barely relevant.
At Kyoto in 1997, the EU negotiated a deal with USA (Al Gore) that the base year for calculating emissions would be 1990 – in return, the EU would allow trading of emission permits. As EU emissions had plummeted during 1991-94, this deal gave the Europeans a competitive advantage over the rest of the world in any rules-based transition to a “low-carbon global economy”.
We should not blame the Europeans for the asinine Paris Agreement –they were merely acting rationally to “Make Europe Great Again”. The less-developed countries all acted rationally to gain access to the Green Climate Fund. US and Russia have belatedly seen the light. What is wholly inexplicable is the acquiescence of other developed countries in a fantasy that is essentially a European scam.

RobR
Reply to  barrybrill
August 1, 2017 11:53 pm

Well Said Barry.

Kleinefeldmaus
Reply to  barrybrill
August 2, 2017 12:47 am

Agreed Barry – but when will they wake up? you know as well as anyone that the Europeans are not the only ones literally cutting their own throats over their fixation with cutting co2 emissions. Your own country included. Witness the recent statments regarding emissiions from the farming industry.comment image?w=640

David A
Reply to  Kleinefeldmaus
August 2, 2017 4:10 am

Barry says;
” Aware of this dependency, it has become an article of faith amongst EU politicians of every stripe that they must lead the world to a new utopia which is not dependent on fossil fuels.”
I am not certain how this can be called rational. You cannot change natural law. In fact, via making domestic energy supply expensive, you only precipitate the very crisis you wanted your policy to avoid, greater dependence on less expensive foreign sources.
Of course these same geniuses simultaneously bring in millions of immigrants, uneducated immigrants indoctrinated with a radical world view that despises your values and, as a matter of faith, believe they should rule over you.
I find their thought process anything but rational. I find their policy extremely irrational and likely to cause global war.

TA
Reply to  barrybrill
August 2, 2017 5:28 am

“Aware of this dependency, it has become an article of faith amongst EU politicians of every stripe that they must lead the world to a new utopia which is not dependent on fossil fuels. They see this as an existential imperative and cost is barely relevant.”
That’s an interesting perspective, barrybrill.
Looking at things that way could cause them to go to extremes like denying reality and thinking they can totally power their economies with windmills and solar panels.

barrybrill
Reply to  TA
August 2, 2017 5:47 pm

DavidA: If the EU can achieve a worldwide ban on fossil fuels, all countries will have to compete on the basis of industries powered by renewables. Europe’s current disadvantage will be cancelled out. Global cost of living will be an order of magnitude more expensive, but Europe can afford it – and will shuck off its ever-present risk of being devastated when Russia cuts the pipe.

2hotel9
Reply to  barrybrill
August 2, 2017 6:04 pm

Exactly how is EU going to force this on everyone globally? They failed miserably with their 1000 Year Reich, you really think they got the power to do it today?

tomwys1
August 1, 2017 8:34 pm

& the German people are still being told that they are “saving the planet.”

Keith J
Reply to  tomwys1
August 1, 2017 8:51 pm

Schnitzel won’t cook right over unicorn flatulence. I’ve tried 😉

markl
August 1, 2017 8:37 pm

Eu meet reality. How long will it take before EU members realize they are in a non negotiable position with a necessity provider that has been promoted as undesirable?

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  markl
August 2, 2017 1:34 am

EU has met reality before. Some years ago, they demanded a co2 tax on all air transport to and from the union. They soon backed down.

Reply to  Henning Nielsen
August 2, 2017 7:40 am

Are winds blowing across the border into the EU also to be taxed for their CO2 content?

Tom Halla
August 1, 2017 8:56 pm

This situation should get very nasty, rather fast, as Putin seems to be impatient.

Keith J
Reply to  Tom Halla
August 1, 2017 8:59 pm

His wealth lies mostly in Gazprom. This is like hitting Amazon with antitrust legislation. There will be blood.

Mark
August 1, 2017 9:05 pm

Imagine pursuing a policy that makes you more dependent upon someone you’d rather not cosy up to, when a perfectly viable (in fact more viable) alternative is available.
Imagine hopping into bed with a gorilla that doesn’t even like you, when the sexiest person you know is playing come-hither.
Great choice!

August 1, 2017 9:56 pm

Europe has a backup plan. Gas from Israel.
http://classicalvalues.com/2017/06/its-a-gas/

August 1, 2017 10:08 pm

Australia is fast joining UK and Germany with an energy crisis and for that country it is all the more remarkable given it has some of the largest per capita reserves of coal, natural gas and uranium and given that it is a leading exporter of all these.

BoyfromTottenham
August 1, 2017 10:32 pm

berniel – yes we Aussies have a growing energy problem, but at least its OUR energy problem, potentially under our control. We have loads of energy coal, gas and uranium in the ground, we just have to wait till things get serious on the energy front (e.g. Musk’s giant battery doesn’t fix South Australia’s reliance on windmills), and then blast the (green, leftie, etc.) roadblocks out of the way to fix the problem. I think the UK and EU countries have a rather larger set of problems caused by shambolic energy policy plus totally muddled geopolitics with ruthless players like Russia, the USA and maybe Israel.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
August 1, 2017 10:44 pm

Ever the optimist BfT. I am not so hopeful.

Griff
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
August 2, 2017 12:46 am

And 23.9% of all Australian homes have solar panels…

climatereason
Editor
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 1:23 am

Griff
I understand the Australian solar panels are especially effective at night.
Mind you the solar arrays in the UK are at their most effective during our long dull winter months when the light levels are low and the wind turbines are then working flat out when the wind stops blowing, as high pressure settles over us.
tonyb

Kleinefeldmaus
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 1:24 am

Griff babe – the daft Ockers will need them too – run out if natural wind – after shutting down their coal plants – relying on the ‘hot air’ from Turnbull and co.
do I really need the sarc button?

AndyG55
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 5:00 am

ROFLMAO.
Anyone can us Google Earth to skim over Sydney suburbs, and see what a load of arrant BALONY that is.

2hotel9
Reply to  AndyG55
August 2, 2017 5:08 am

And griffie will respond by telling you that you can not believe anything you see on the internet! Wait for it, takes him a bit to type one handed.

Griff
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 5:12 am

climate… Australians use power also during the day. Very many of hem for aircon.
and domestic battery use in Australia is just taking off.
The number of days in the UK with high pressure and low wind are limited. It is not an impossible problem to solve. and wind last year generated more power than coal. In Q2 of 2017 coal was 1.8% of UK electricity.

2hotel9
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 11:49 am

You grab a lie and hang on for dear life. How pathetic.

climatereason
Editor
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 5:44 am

Griff
You said
‘The number of days in the UK with high pressure and low wind are limited.’
In the winter it often happens which is just when the light levels for solar are at their poorest. How do you reckon this can be solved? The only way is by far better battery technology which will need a breakthrough as batteries can not be built yet that will store say 3 or 4 days power.
I am not against renewables but we must not give them super powers.
tonyb

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 6:35 am

Take an energy source that is already twice as expensive as the alternatives, and double it’s cost again by adding batteries.
What’s not to love?

Andrew Cooke
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 9:18 am

You know Griff, I have been reading WUWT for a long time. Your posts on solar and wind are so predictable that I truly am beginning to wonder if you do this “information control” stuff for a living.

AndyG55
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 8:29 pm

“and domestic battery use in Australia is just taking off.”
roflmao..
Where does griff get these fantasies from. Quite HILARIOUS. !!

AndyG55
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 8:31 pm

“And 23.9% of all Australian homes have solar panels…”
maybe 2% – 5% in major cities.
Then maybe much higher in Adelaide (30-40% ?), where it will soon be the ONLY source of power for a significant amount of the time.

Bruiser
Reply to  Griff
August 3, 2017 3:04 am

Griff, as one of those 23%, I received a new “smart” meter, and the NSW government ceased subsidizing solar feed in tariffs in January. The feed in tariffs dropped to 6 cents per kWh. I am waiting to see how or if this feed-in tariff is applied to major solar projects and how many will survive at these rates.

Barry Sheridan
August 2, 2017 12:07 am

Doubtless the solution to any energy shortfall in Europe will be limits on its use. Rolling power cuts such as those experienced in Britain during the early 1970’s will become widespread and a part of normal life. Electorates have tolerated the policies that will lead to this situation, ultimately they are responsible though I expect they will disown that duty, western culture is not about shouldering any liability, it centres on blaming someone else.

Nuthead from the countryside
August 2, 2017 12:30 am

An important aspect is the FTM (follow the money) and the price aspect; gas price over time. In the upper left of the first figure there is a country called Norway. Its posterior is pretty full of gas (a range of unexploited gas fields along the coast and into the Barents sea. The gas pressure seems to be so high that it has blocked the top floor of politicians and together with a kind of greening brain disease lamed their strategic thinking and negotiation capability. Bottom line is, there is a neighbouring country not in the EU, but in NATO, and with extensive gas reserves, but with a demand for reliable long term contracts to justify and secure the extensive and comprehensive investments and possibly with a price a bit higher than Merkel is paying Putin at present. Have to add for the sake explantion that the Norwegian tax system means that this small state take a large risk by options for tax deductions for companies failing in hydrocarbon investments.

Griff
August 2, 2017 12:43 am

“even though coal continues to dominate electrical energy production because of renewable energy failures2
What failures?
There aren’t any, are there?
where’s the list?
Germany: 35% of electricity from renewables in first half 2017… no grid outages. New wind farm tenders without subsidies…

CheshireRed
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 1:20 am

‘No failures’? What?! The failure is the ability of their green energy transition to power Germany to the minimum standards required. Why are they building 20-odd brand new COAL power stations burning dirty, cheap lignite? Because they dumped nuclear but then discovered ‘renewables’ aren’t up to the job, that’s why. You know this Griff yet choose to ignore it.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Beijing
Reply to  CheshireRed
August 2, 2017 3:17 am

Lignite is a very clean burning fuel. Stop with the ‘dirty coal’ memes. Don’t blame the fuel for the faults of the combustor designer.

Griff
Reply to  CheshireRed
August 2, 2017 5:15 am

Cheshire, they are not building 20 new coal plants.
They (just about, see below) completed a programme of coal plants started in 2008 with the then intention of replacing nuclear plant. They will never build another new coal plant. They didn’t build 20. There is a list of 6.7GW of coal plant scheduled to close…
https://energytransition.org/2016/10/germanys-last-new-coal-plant/

Reply to  CheshireRed
August 2, 2017 5:17 am

Lignite and coal in general *can* be burnt cleanly; however, German lignite contains some 4% of sulphur if memory serves.
East Germany was entirely powered and heated by burning lignite dirtily, and the caustic smell was blanketing the entire country. Acid rain was a real thing while this was going on.

Reply to  CheshireRed
August 3, 2017 12:22 am

Yes the “acid rain” scare was primarily German mythology alongside the musicians of Bremen, the Lutzelfrau and the hundreds of thousands killed by deadly radiation from Chernobyl.

ron
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 4:18 am

“35% of electricity from renewables in first half 2017…”
Not even close Griff. Facts please?

Reg Nelson
Reply to  ron
August 2, 2017 8:16 am

Griff doesn’t seem to know the difference between production and consumption. Or he deliberately conflates the two.

AndyG55
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 5:16 am

Simple question that you can try to answer.
What percentage of nameplate can wind and solar maintain for 90% of the time.?
Actually, you would not be capable, so I’ll do it for you.
For Solar, the answer is obviously a BIG FAT ZERO. Can only supply around 405 of the time, at best.
For wind, in Germany 2016.. it was… 3.91%
And it was only able to supply 50% of nameplate for less than 5% of the time
Don’t you find that to be
REMARKABLY PATHETIC !! comment image
Even old Hazelwood coal fired power station, in the few weeks before being shut down, each of the 3 turbines were operating at above 90%, 24/7 ie CONTINUOUSLY !!!

AndyG55
Reply to  AndyG55
August 2, 2017 5:17 am

4th sentence 40% , not 405.

Griff
Reply to  AndyG55
August 2, 2017 5:19 am

Show solar and bio energy on the same graph…
Plus imported wind energy…

2hotel9
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 12:01 pm

Re-wording a lie does not change it.

Leo Smith
Reply to  AndyG55
August 2, 2017 6:46 am

yep show solar. percentage of time at max is zero. well over 50% of the time it produces zero
Average in UK is around 10% of nameplate – way worse than wind at 25% or so.
Bio is fine for capacity factor, its just stupid economics.

Bryan A
Reply to  AndyG55
August 2, 2017 10:00 am

One should consider BIO energy to be even less GREEN/RENEWABLE than Hydro. BIO still requires Burning Fuel which produces added atmospheric CO2

AndyG55
Reply to  AndyG55
August 2, 2017 2:06 pm

“Show solar and bio energy on the same graph…”
You want the graph.. You draw it, putz. !!

Phil
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 1:11 pm

Germany had some of the most expensive electricity in Europe, and probably the world. For a first world ndustrial nation, that’s a pretty big bloody failure…

Kleinefeldmaus
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 3:02 pm

Gripper Griff You are sooooo… erm funny?comment image?w=640

Griff
August 2, 2017 12:47 am

This is hardly news… Germany has been using Russian gas – as has much of E Europe – for what – 2 decades…?

Kleinefeldmaus
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 1:45 am

Griff you are daft – the article was about its reliance on it into the distant future.

moderately Cross of East Anglia
August 2, 2017 1:27 am

Griff
Eastern Europe used Russian gas because it was compelled to. There is far less enthusiasm for the Russia – Germany pipeline in Eastern European countries than you think as neither Russia nor German are wholly trusted for very good historical reasons. If Germany has a steady supply of Russian gas direct to its shores it will undoubtedly show even less restraint in throwing its weight about in the EU than ever in demanding ever daft green planet saving twaddle.
Meanwhile solar energy, which is perfectly fine as a minor energy entertainment, won’t keep people in Eastern Europe warm in the harsh winter months when there is very little sunlight and the days are somewhat short. Still no prospect of the constantly promised vast (battery) storage we keep being promised. Perhaps that’s why the Visgrad group of east European nations are keeping their own counsel on what’s going on and trusting their own judgement. With good reason looking at the EU successes in Greece, Italy and poor nets south of Berlin.

Griff
Reply to  moderately Cross of East Anglia
August 2, 2017 5:22 am

I don’t think there is any enthusiasm for Russian gas in Germany or any part of E Europe.
I’m merely pointing out that this (getting Russian gas) has been the case for along while, this is not new, or, sadly, very likely to change in the short term. and unrelated to the growth of renewables.
Wind energy will keep europeans warm in winter and solar will keep them cool in summer, no doubt.
The success or failure of the EU in e.g. Greece is quite a separate thing from the success of renewables. I note Germany is extending HVDC grid to connect its north and south.

Leo Smith
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 6:43 am

Wind energy will keep europeans warm in winter and solar will keep them cool in summer, no doubt.

I’d give £100 to know whether you actually believe any of the drivel you spout.

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 6:53 am

They’ll keep those warm in Europe who can pay their inflated electric bills due to renewables. Others will die.

2hotel9
Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 12:00 pm

Wind is a failure, solar is a failure, coal is being blocked, nuclear is being blocked and hydro is being blocked. That leaves gas. Either they drill and frac their own or they buy from Russia. Or import from America. You lying about wind and solar does not heat homes or generate electricity.

Reply to  Griff
August 2, 2017 12:15 pm

Reliable winter wind power can be harvested by building 10 km tall towers to tap the jet stream.
Reliable summer solar power just needs 15 km panels, above natural clouds and contrail stratus, plus the panels will provide shade. Or geostationary panels in space with microwave transmitters.
Is this genius or crackpot? You decide.

Henning Nielsen
August 2, 2017 1:44 am

Not quite convincing, this attempt to create some rerun of the cold war between the US and Russia over natural gas / LNG. Remember that Russia is dependent on having customers for their gas. Europe can, if they want, be largely self-sufficient if they develop their fracking resources, and build more nuclear power. Also remember that Norway supplies 23% of the natural gas consumed in the EU (Russia 31%, Algeria 8% Nehterlands 10%, UK 10%).
http://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/production-and-exports/exports-of-oil-and-gas/

Kleinefeldmaus
Reply to  Henning Nielsen
August 2, 2017 2:32 am

@ Henning Neilsen
All very well to develop their own fracking – but they are so convinced about the evils of co2 – it won’t go down with those stiff necked folk who are never wrong. So it might take a little while. But you are right to the extent that the greatest producer of gas in now the US and that does mean competition for Russia.. You can be sure that POTUS will pursue that line of thinking.

John W. Garrett
Reply to  Henning Nielsen
August 2, 2017 3:59 am

Gazprom has worked very hard to establish its credibility as a dependable and reliable natural gas supplier. The delivery interruptions that occurred in 2008 were entirely attributable to Ukrainian meddling and interference.
That’s EXACTLY why Nord Stream I was built— to avoid Ukraine.

Reply to  Henning Nielsen
August 2, 2017 7:51 am

Henning
Europe can, if they want … develop their fracking resources, and build more nuclear power.
That will happen on the day when MacDonalds opens a branch opposite the palace of Kim Yong Un in Pyong-Yang, North Korea.

Nigel Williams
August 2, 2017 2:10 am

A lot of people missing the biggest red flag here, Germany is the distribution hub, with current trends in the EU this to me is not insignificant as Germany begins to flex against an almost bankrupt France, bankrupted Italy, Greece & Portugal, the Eastern blocs are still poor and need the EU investments to grow economically. As a wealth creating and industrial strategy the pipeline should cross Ukraine, Poland, Germany and into Northern France, by doing it this way the whole of the EU states benefit from distribution hubs within their state and this could have tied in with greater infrastructural development creating more opportunity for states to regulate their own prices and levy against spikes and generate revenue by means of duty and subsidise low income families and pensioners with fuel credits on smart meters as they saw fit.
In my own sceptical manner this will be another tool in Germany’s quest for dominance over the EU as they will be able to set prices and control outbound distribution to Holland, Belgium, France and beyond from within their own house.

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  Nigel Williams
August 2, 2017 4:09 am

There already are pipelines running through Ukraine. The problem with that route is Ukraine, a politically unstable state with a failed economy. When it doesn’t pay its bills and gets cut off, or a crazy Ukrainian nationalist blows up a pipeline, all of Europe is affected.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia.
Reply to  Nigel Williams
August 2, 2017 5:03 am

Exactly right. Energy dominance and financial dominance of the EU. Western Europe mostly asleep.

Reply to  Nigel Williams
August 2, 2017 5:26 am

The more Germany attempts to dominate the EU, the greater the centrifugal forces will become. The UK will not be the last member to quit.

Bob boder
Reply to  Nigel Williams
August 2, 2017 9:25 am

Nigel
How to win a war after you lost!
Germany is the EU

nankerphelge
August 2, 2017 3:02 am

Germany in particular is tying itself in such a knot that they will cause the Gerexit They are in too deep. It can’t go on with such hypocrisy or a recognition that they were wrong. Don’t hold your breathe.

Bob boder
Reply to  nankerphelge
August 2, 2017 9:28 am

Not, Germany needs the Failed other economies to keep the Euro down. This is no different than how the Soviet Union sucked Eastern Europe dry to build its empire.

Nic Harvard
August 2, 2017 3:51 am

Very nicely researched sir.
The new LNG export terminals being built in the US (noticed three new, up from one) will mitigate this for the EU.
However, to understand motivation and the size of the prize, rather follow the money trail.
Consider this quote:
“By David Randall | NEW YORK
(Reuters) – Environmentally conscious investors are using their pocketbooks to protest President Donald Trump’s plans to slash environmental regulations, fueling a rally in funds that only invest in companies that meet progressive criteria for sustainability.
From the start of November to the end of January, investors poured $1.8 billion into actively managed equities funds in the “socially responsible” category, according to Lipper data. In the same period, there was a net outflow of $133 billion from funds that do not have environmental or social mandates. ”
So that’s a shift of almost 7 billion directly into surveyed funds, and over half a trillion OUT of “non-ethical ” funds surveyed.
And by ethical, these days we don’t mean strip mining, seal-clubbing, or genocidal practices to secure mineral concessions
We mean “carbon” (carbon being the new black)
Considering this survey is very limited geographically and does not cover multiple different negotiable financial instruments, we are talking figures within and order of magnitude of tens or hundreds of trillions globally
That’s a heck of a lot of reasons to ignore proper science or even surrender your countries energy security…
After all, the Russians *might* not blackmail or coerce you, but if everyone sees the wiz of oz’s fackery… you or your backers WILL lose a vast amount.

John W. Garrett
August 2, 2017 3:53 am

You, too, can be an owner of 17% of the world’s proved natural gas reserves (as well as supplier of 40% of Germany’s natural gas). As a bonus, you get all of Russia’s natural gas pipeline system and Nord Stream I.
Gazprom ADRs currently yield 6.81%, are priced at less than half of audited (IFRS) book value while the entire enterprise has a market capitalization of roughly $44 billion (USD).

I Came I Saw I Left
August 2, 2017 3:54 am

Makes sense for Germany to want to cut out and become the middleman and also eliminate the risk of having its NG supply impacted because of the political instability in Ukraine and Ukraine’s non-payment of its gas bills.

David A
Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
August 2, 2017 4:24 am

…it only makes sense if they ignore the option of developing greater energy independence and domestic jobs.

David A
Reply to  David A
August 2, 2017 4:27 am

@ I Came I saw… Especially true considering the Ukraine alternative is being sanctioned by you supposedly for wanting to take over the Ukraine.

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  David A
August 2, 2017 5:03 am

Germany is ignoring that option, so what’s your point? It’s actually in all of Europe’s interest to not have to depend on Ukrainian instability. Just basic good sense.

alfredmelbourne
August 2, 2017 4:30 am

The whole idea that the USA is energy-independent is nonsense. Please check your facts.
Whether Trump and all the others likes it or not, Europe needs Russia for its supplies of dependable and cheap energy.
“U.S. Natural Gas Imports & Exports 2016”
https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/importsexports/annual/ – US imports and exports are in balance
“The United States produces a large share of the petroleum it consumes, but it still relies on imports to help meet demand”
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_imports – US imports 25% of its oil

2hotel9
August 2, 2017 4:57 am

Time for an olde fashioned energy war!

John W. Garrett
August 2, 2017 5:01 am

Putin suggests Germans replace nuclear with firewood
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=28907
___________
01 December 2010
Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin has told German businessmen that they may have to rely on Russian firewood for heating if they do not want to construct new nuclear power plants or bring in Russian gas supplies. At a business conference organized in Berlin by the German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, Putin recognised that “the German public does not like the nuclear power industry for some reason.” He continued: “But I cannot understand what fuel you will take for heating. You do not want gas, you do not develop the nuclear power industry, so you will heat with firewood?” Putin then noted, “You will have to go to Siberia to buy the firewood there,” as Europeans “do not even have firewood.”

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  John W. Garrett
August 2, 2017 5:29 am

That’s essentially what the Brits are doing. Replacing coal with imported wood chips and calling it renewable.

Leo Smith
Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
August 2, 2017 6:42 am

Only on one independent power station.
Because running coal has been made impossible

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
August 2, 2017 6:55 am

So Great Britain consumes 1/3 of all wood pellet imports in the world and it’s only for one plant?

Griff
Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
August 2, 2017 7:14 am

yes. its a nonsense and isn’t renewable.
should be shut down!

Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
August 2, 2017 7:45 am

ICISIL, actually only part of one plant. Drax converted unit 1, and IIRC got more hundreds of billions of subidies to convert units 2 and 3. Unit 4 is still running on coal mined locally.

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
August 2, 2017 9:23 am

yes. its a nonsense and isn’t renewable. should be shut down!

Well it really should be shutdown if CO2 reduction is the actual goal, considering the facts that enormous amounts of CO2 are produced during harvesting, manufacturing and (mainly) shipping wood pellets to GB from all over the world, and that an important carbon sink is removed from the equation that won’t be fully replaced for a decade or more.

ghalfrunt
August 2, 2017 5:17 am

Why worry about europe…it is a gonner RoyW. Spencer, Ph. D. says:
June 2, 2017 at 8:43 AM
I don’t care if we are a laughingstock to a bunch of countries whose claim to fame is artists and musicians who died hundreds of years ago. Some of us laugh at you, too. Your countries are slowly dying, culturally and economically.
Good luck.

Leo Smith
August 2, 2017 6:41 am

Gazprom probably owns Greenpeace the way the KGB owned the CND

August 2, 2017 7:45 am

The H1tlerite foaming-at-the-mouth (literally in the case of CNN talking heads) genocidal Russophobic racist hatred that has seized the American left wing media and political establishment is not going to lead anywhere good. If McCain could do everyone a favour and just drop dead finally, that might help some rationality to return.

Bob boder
Reply to  ptolemy2
August 2, 2017 9:31 am

I can’t stand Mcain but stop with the drop dead stuff that is unacceptable.

Reply to  Bob boder
August 2, 2017 11:02 am

There are a number of reports that the kind of cancer McCain has can be cured by cannabis. McCain is against cannabis. Just deserts.

2hotel9
Reply to  Bob boder
August 2, 2017 12:20 pm

I would be fine with McCrap being locked in a secure medical facility where his Alzheimers could be stopped from doing further damage to America.

Reply to  Bob boder
August 2, 2017 2:49 pm

I’m sorry for the extreme language, but this is an existential threat to democracy, just like the Na3is.
They can’t and won’t accept that the American people voted for Donald Trump.
Instead they spin the tale that a few deplorable red-necks with the help of an army of Russian hackers stole the election.
This is a totalitarian power-grab. It means war.

Bob boder
Reply to  Bob boder
August 3, 2017 4:46 am

Ptolemy
Agreed

Resourceguy
August 2, 2017 8:36 am

Meanwhile the EU is trying to kill diesel engines while Germany attempts to save it after cheating the world.

Steve Zell
August 2, 2017 8:41 am

The dependence of most of Europe on Russian natural gas presents a great opportunity for the United States, if we are smart enough to take advantage of it. With advances in fracking, particularly in the Marcellus Shale area of Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio, the United States produces more natural gas than it consumes.
The EU has always been hesitant to impose sanctions on Russia when it has been aggressive (invading Georgia, Crimea, and eastern Ukraine) because the EU fears that Russia will cut off the supply of natural gas. The United States can help the EU overcome that fear by building many LNG export terminals along our east coast, which can supply the EU with the gas they need if Russia cuts off the supply. This would have the double benefit of helping our European allies in need, and would also provide thousands of high-paying jobs in the eastern United States.
Former President Obama was too attached to the anti-carbon lobby to allow development of LNG export terminals, but is President Trump willing to reverse this trend, which could create jobs and gain him votes in critical states like North Carolina, Virginia, and possibly Maryland?

Sheri
August 2, 2017 10:00 am

Kind of ironic. Denmark switched to “renewables” in response to the oil embargo. Now, it appears dependence on foreign energy sources can’t be avoided with those energy from weather towers and panels. They’ve had over 40 years to make this work and still, it’s a FAIL. People never learn, do they?

Resourceguy
August 2, 2017 10:30 am

How do you go about repairing a pipeline at the bottom of the Baltic? just wondered. I guess you call in the specialists from countries most concerned about the damage, as in the case of emergency canopies over the Chernobyl reactor.

Resourceguy
August 2, 2017 10:32 am

Well, it does make more sense than clear cutting US forests and shipping wood pellets to the UK. But then making sense has never been part of the green economic and political equations.

August 2, 2017 5:39 pm

Pipelines of any sort, to use John Robb’s term (GlobalGuerillas.typepad.com) are a systempunkt – an inevitably insecure part of an overall infrastructure. And so, as such, they are vulnerable to a very wide range of threats, ranging from the state that controls the overall flow, to that from the numerous malcontents all along the route.
Not the happiest position for the EU in general, or for Germany in particular, to be in…..
Look on the bright side, though. There’s all that coal and lignite…..currently (sorry) supplying around half of total electricity output, and essential for synchronous baseload and frequency stability (http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/france-germany-turn-coal/). South Australia’s travails, in this context, are relevant: like Germany, it’s the crash-test-dummy for a large intermittents generation percentage, but without the needed extent of interconnects which supply frequency stabilisation and black-start capabilities (http://joannenova.com.au/2017/08/sa-solves-blackouts-crisis-partly-by-closing-holden-factory/).
Plus there are the German cross-border interconnects which can act as a sink or a source. But Germany had not consulted sufficiently with its power-connected neighbours about these flows, and dumping or drawing power affects those countries’ grids, often at short notice and in un-negotiated ways. So the other countries have effectively started to shield themselves from unwanted flows, and this generates (sorry) a call for an ‘EU-wide Energiewende’ (https://energytransition.org/2017/02/why-germany-needs-a-european-energiewende/). The political probability of this occurring is, as can be imagined, fairly much a textbook definition of zero/zip/nada/nyet…..

Bimbo
August 3, 2017 11:40 am

Another bashing article from the “MAGA” ideolgy.
How much the external dependency rose with Renewables in the EU in the last 20 years? The answer is funny,
That explains why the USA is decaying. The mix between ideology and science. And bashing the EU.

%d bloggers like this: