Why Did France Just Save Nord Stream 2?
Dave Keating Contributor
Energy
-
A ceremony marking the start of Nord Stream pipeline construction in 2010 (Dmitry Lovetsky, ASSOCIATED PRESS)
What a difference a day makes.
Yesterday, things were looking bleak for Russia’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project. After months of insisting it didn’t want to get involved in the pipeline dispute, a French foreign ministry spokeswoman suddenly announced the country will support a European Commission proposal to make construction more difficult.
Then, just as suddenly, France changed its mind today at a meeting of energy ministers in Brussels – saying it had reached a “compromise” with Germany.
The proposed pipeline, which would bring gas from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea, is being fiercely opposed by an unlikely coalition of environmentalists and right-wing governments in the United States and Eastern Europe. Their view, just about the only thing they agree on, is that the new pipeline will lock Europe into long-term dependence on Russian gas. This is problematic both for efforts to fight climate change and for European energy security.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel is desperate to get the pipeline built because she needs to replace the nuclear and coal power she has committed to phase out in the coming years. But at a NATO summit in Brussels last July, US President Donald Trump fiercely criticised Merkel’s decision to approve the pipeline, saying it will make Germany “totally dependent” on Russia. The Trump administration would prefer Germany import liquified natural gas from America instead.
Stops and starts
After plenty of pressure from Washington, a critical mass of EU countries was able to block the EU’s mandate to approve the pipeline. In response, Germany and Russia said they didn’t need EU approval for the pipeline – only national approval from the four EU countries it’s passing through (Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany).
Acknowledging that the rules were unclear, the European Commission put forward a proposal that would indisputably make such pipelines coming to and from non-EU countries fall under EU jurisdiction for approval. Germany has been lobbying countries not to accept this proposal, because it could allow Brussels to kill the pipeline project, on which construction has already begun..
But the German and French ministers reached a compromise this morning which would keep the aspects of the proposal which increase EU oversight of such projects, but would not give the EU the ability to kill them.
According to EU sources, while the compromise might make construction of the pipeline more complicated, it will not prevent its construction.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The EU’s E flank is already heavily dependent on Russian Gas (Baltics, Finland), as is Ukraine, of course.
Apart from Russian Gas, there is Kazakh Gas, Iranian Gas or American LNG. You take your pick. Either that or you burn coal. Or go back on the commitment to phase out nuclear power.
The Greens and other would-be planet-savers need to decide which it is. More solar & wind ‘farms’ will not cut it.
Here is another pipeline fight, special interest groups in the US paying for pipeline resistance in Canada.
https://business.financialpost.com/tag/vivian-krause
The fun part is when Russia decides to ‘turn off the tap ‘ when it suits them for political reasons.
Merkel better hope it is not on her watch .
Sure… And when was the last time this occurred? Notwithstanding that when the US decides to stop shipping LNG for political reasons… that’s all fine right? The US has never been known to invade, meddle, pressure…
Sorry, it is nothing to do with some ‘left wing ‘love-in, or anti-USA sentament it just business for the Russias and if you don’t think that can shut the line down for ‘maintenance ‘ when its most needed you are kidding no one but yourself.
knr, you seem to have forgotten the initial US response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The Jimmy Carter administration said it would cut off grain exports to the Soviets. The American farmers ‘suggested’ that was not helpful to them. Instead the US boycotted the Moscow Olympics.
The two sides in a trading relationship have mutual interests and dependencies and are unlikely to make rash decisions. You can’t hurt the other without hurting yourself. Is this not the rationale of the Founding Fathers who espoused ‘Trade with everyone, entangling alliances with no one’?
You assume that individuals have the same influence on the government in Russia compared to the US.
they can sell the gas anytime, to anyone
If its ‘freezing ‘ in Germany and with coal and nuclear gone and renewable being ‘off-line’ only one side has all the aces
Very interesting Trump’s comment on Afghanistan – he said Russia was right to go after the terrorists. And Iraq was the biggest mistake the US ever made. Anyway toops are leaving Syria right now, and Afghanistan soon (after 17 years and $900 billion).
Ukraine did that, a valve too far. Hence NordStream 2.
Exactly… And at the worse of winter after maidan, Russia did not turn the tap off despite clear EU involvement…
Best read on the subject here: http://www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9781526131096/
Germany needs gas and Russia needs hard currency
Ukraine shot itself accidentally in the wallet, unfortunately it was nearly empty anyway so projectile didn’t stop there, Doneck, Crimea, Azov sea, one wonders what’s next.
or maybe Russians didn’t like Ukraine’s habit of helping themselves with a little bit extra
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/4077110/Ukraine-accused-of-stealing-gas-bound-for-Europe.html
ergo: if you live next door to a sleeping giant don’t nick his stuff
That loose projectile is still ricocheting – Donelly of Integrity Initiative urged Kiev to bomb the new Kerch Stait bridge, of course safely from a cellar in Temple Street.
Looks like a new British Drone, maybe on autopilot….
Private Pike’s ability to turn insanity to lunacy earlier today was hilarious, even tv news reader barely managed to control himself.
These are early fruits of the Aachen Franco-German Treaty.
Mr. Putin said it loud and clear:
-How will you heat your homes, with firewood ? Even that has to come from Siberia.
https://youtu.be/xDQDyt0B-1E
So far for Energiewende (change of energy), the German suicidal energy starvation electoral opportunism.
Energy transition.
The WBGU German Advisory Council on Global Change from then Merkel’s “science” advisor Dr. Schellnhuber CBE.
Incredible the same madness turns up in AOC’s GND- parts of which since pulled from the internet.
Looks like the Dems have been Germanized, Green is the new Brown.
The old Brown is the new Green, in fact.
News Magazine FOCUS Reveals German Green Movement’s Very Brown Roots
More proof that of the EU’s 27 member nations, only two (Germany and France) matter.
Read your history please. Way back post the 2 ns WW, France had a fear that Germany, a country where unlike easy going France, the people actually work, would again take over Europe. Of course they forgot all about their own Napolian and his day.
So France wanted to create a economic union, so it would not be possible for any European country to go to war, without wreaking its economy. This far simpler version was what the UK joined up to.
But then the buracrats gradually took over, and Brussels became the headquarters of a political union of Europe, which the UK now wants to get out of.
I can see nothing wrong with this deal, it appears to be a win/win one. If the likes of Mercal wish to go back to the 18th century, so be it, but the rest of the people of Germany like their present reasonably high standard of living.
The only query is, how long will Russia have enough Natural gas ?
MJE
Infinitly longer than USA will last.
So much for your credibility.
Germany is dependent on imported fuel. Therefore, the government tries to create as many different transport routes. There is the South route, a pipeline that runs through the Ukraine. But sometimes Ukraine does not pay its withdrawn quantities. Then Russia will block this pipeline. and also Germany will not get any oil! Mostly in winter. That’s why Russia and Germany are building the new pipeline. In addition, there are also terminals for seagoing ships which can unload their gas or oil there toget gas or oil to Germany or Europe. A lot of oil comes from the Arab States, but these are not always safe partners. There is no dependency on a single pipeline. Of course, the US government is trying to prevent the pipeline because it prefers to sell its own oil or gas.
I hope you understand that the German government sets other priorities in this matter than the US government.
Or it could produce its own power through means that work !
Isn’t it fantastic how clariry of insights increses with distance! The further away you are and the less you know the clearer you see the solution. Or is this a sickness that is more commen in US and UK?
BjornD
Why do you object to the notion that Germany shouldn’t be abandoning methods of producing power that work?
If Germany is so dependent on foreign sources that it has to enter a devil’s bargain with Russia, should it really be killing nuclear and coal plants?
It is quite good if you have a reserve. Why should Germany produce shale gas as long as cheap gas is available from elsewhere? Fracking is worthwhile only when gas is expensive. Then Germany and other countries will also think about such options. Remember we need fuel also in 100 years.
In a globalized world, it makes sense to think about what you make yourself and what you buy from the outside. For example, There are cheap good products from China. We import. For this we export high quality expensive products. Why should we, for example, produce cheap sweaters in Germany if they are twice as expensive? That just does not make sense. And that’s why we do not impose high tariffs on Chinese products and have established a customs union with Japan.
By which they simply mean that Russian gas is the cheapest option?
Nobody is really “locked” into anything. Russia isn’t forcing Western Europe into buying the cheapest available option (though Russia might be said to be locked into long-term dependence on Western European hard currency). If they wish, France and Germany remain free to buy energy from more expensive sources, but maybe they are running out of the stomach for it.
>If they wish, France and Germany remain free to buy energy from more expensive sources<
Yes, but why should they?