South Stream pipeline: News

zino wrote:This and the ukrainian mess. The definitive proof that the strategic partnership between Russia and EU, started in the Schroeder era, is gone. From now the gas war will become the gas "nuclear" war. Very sad indeed. So much potential thrown away. And dangerous, for Russia's finances and for the european costumers.

GarryB wrote:The National government pulled the same crap here... if you ask me if a company spends the money creating infrastructure then they fricken own it and no government should be allowed to take it off them for any silly "competition" rules.

etaepsilonk wrote:The reason for that is EU 3rd energy package.

It states, that gas (or any energy source) production, transportation, and distribution cannot be owned by the same companies.

SOC wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:The reason for that is EU 3rd energy package.

It states, that gas (or any energy source) production, transportation, and distribution cannot be owned by the same companies.

Why does that matter to Russia, who's not an EU member?  Or is that part of the gas agreement meaning Russia is supposed to cooperate?

GarryB wrote:

Yes, it's possible that new company would be really bad at maintaining pipelines. But in this case, pipelines could be owned by state-run companies, with governmental supervision. That would kinda solve the problem you mentioned, wouldn't it?

Which state? Why should the states own the pipelines on their territory... isn't that communism? Or at least Socialism?

When the Cuban government took control of foreign owned assets in Cuba the US imposed sanctions... why should Russian energy companies sell their pipeline assets to the governments of the countries they pass through?

What do european governments know about maintaining pipelines?

What if the pipeline leads to an unfriendly country... it would be tempting to develop a fault in the line and have to close it down for 6 months... btw something the Soviets and Russians have never done to western european countries that paid their bills.

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

Yes, it's possible that new company would be really bad at maintaining pipelines. But in this case, pipelines could be owned by state-run companies, with governmental supervision. That would kinda solve the problem you mentioned, wouldn't it?

Which state? Why should the states own the pipelines on their territory... isn't that communism? Or at least Socialism?

When the Cuban government took control of foreign owned assets in Cuba the US imposed sanctions... why should Russian energy companies sell their pipeline assets to the governments of the countries they pass through?

What do european governments know about maintaining pipelines?

What if the pipeline leads to an unfriendly country... it would be tempting to develop a fault in the line and have to close it down for 6 months... btw something the Soviets and Russians have never done to western european countries that paid their bills.

You know, you (or Russia) may not like this law, but it's already in force in all EU countries. And laws must be obeyed. So, deal with it   

GarryB wrote:

You know, you (or Russia) may not like this law, but it's already in force in all EU countries. And laws must be obeyed. So, deal with it

Piping the gas is the cheapest option but the Russians can easily close down the pipelines and liquify the gas and sell it as LNG... which sells at a rather higher profit margin. The difference for Europe is that it is more expensive... of course once you start putting it on ships for delivery... the cost of delivering it to Europe is not that much different from delivering it to many parts of the world via ship so why send it to Europe when they could send it to Africa or Asia or lots of other places?

the pipes are used because it is a cheap and efficient way of delivering gas... that benefits Russia and also Europe.

If Europe wants to separate Russian companies from their assets in Europe there are plenty of alternatives that actually make more money for those Russian companies... the difference is that it just costs the European consumer more. Adding new pipe owners who might want to create more income and charge more for using the pipes once they fully own them do you think the Russian gas company will absorb the cost or do you think that extra cost will be reflected in the cost to the consumer?

Either way of course the Russian company will get the blame for the price increases... no one ever blames the stupid new rules that added all those middle men for no sensible reason.

Market forces only work when there is actually some real competition.  A myth.

zg18 wrote:

Because of that , it`s more of an attempt to show some teeth. Reality is , Russians have more cards while Europe should not use it`s most strongest card , a European market itself for dubious benefits. And also having 145 million nation as an enemy next door is not wise politics.

etaepsilonk wrote:
In this capitalist world, Russia has EVERY right to sell their products for whatever price they want (or don't sell at all), and their customers have just the same right to not buy their products, if they want.
But the trouble is, in some cases Gazprom (and actually, some other European gas companies, as well) monopolized gas pipeline systems of some countries, so they can charge whatever price they want, and the respectable country is FORCED to buy those gas. That's just plain wrong. And 3rd energy package is an attempt to rectify this injustice.

collegeboy16 wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:
In this capitalist world, Russia has EVERY right to sell their products for whatever price they want (or don't sell at all), and their customers have just the same right to not buy their products, if they want.
But the trouble is, in some cases Gazprom (and actually, some other European gas companies, as well) monopolized gas pipeline systems of some countries, so they can charge whatever price they want, and the respectable country is FORCED to buy those gas. That's just plain wrong. And 3rd energy package is an attempt to rectify this injustice.

what injustice... this is capitalism, you dont slash profits, you maximize them and it just so happens that monopoly gives the max profit.

etaepsilonk wrote:

collegeboy16 wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:
In this capitalist world, Russia has EVERY right to sell their products for whatever price they want (or don't sell at all), and their customers have just the same right to not buy their products, if they want.
But the trouble is, in some cases Gazprom (and actually, some other European gas companies, as well) monopolized gas pipeline systems of some countries, so they can charge whatever price they want, and the respectable country is FORCED to buy those gas. That's just plain wrong. And 3rd energy package is an attempt to rectify this injustice.

what injustice... this is capitalism, you dont slash profits, you maximize them and it just so happens that monopoly gives the max profit.

Dude, most countries left "pure" capitalism in 19th century    . And when poorer families become unable to pay their gas bills, believe me, there's something not right.

And besides, your perception about profits is wrong. A successful company will ALWAYS prefer increasing a quality of their product over increased profits.

etaepsilonk wrote:
And besides, your perception about profits is wrong. A successful company will ALWAYS prefer increasing a quality of their product over increased profits.