Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

owais.usmani wrote:https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/nord-stream-2-eu-heading-towards-legal-arbitration/

Nord Stream 2, EU drifting towards legal arbitration

The EU never had a case. It can't claim that Gazprom being a Russian monopoly (extraction and not transport, BTW) violates EU rules.
Gazprom's pipes are a method to purchase gas by EU entities for a low price from an offshore seller. Attempting to elevate
the pipelines into an internal EU issues is absurd. The Bruxelles EU-tard bureaucrats are essentially insisting that only LNG
can be purchased from offshore entities. But what about the on-shore re-gasification facilities? Are they a violation of EU's
internal rules? What utter rubbish politically motivated posturing.

The problem for Gazprom is that none of the EU based arbitration courts are objective. The worst one is in Holland, which brazenly
acts as some re-trial kangaroo court. The Swedish one is also stationed in a hostile anti-Russian state. Gazprom should demand
pure 3rd party arbitration based in South Asia or the Orient.

Russia’s Novatek Hits Major Milestones In Arctic LNG Plans

Russian gas producer Novatek closed on Monday the sale of stakes in its Arctic LNG 2 project, just days after Russia’s government approved the construction of a liquefied natural gas (LNG) transshipment terminal that would help Novatek boost LNG exports from its operating and future LNG projects.

Novatek, the largest Russian producer and exporter of LNG, announced today the closure of the stake sales to two Chinese companies and a Japanese consortium.

In April, Novatek signed agreements with two Chinese companies, under which the Asian firms will become shareholders in the Arctic LNG project with 10 percent each. In June, Novatek signed a deal to sell another 10 percent in the project to a consortium of Mitsui & Co and Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC).

Earlier this year, France’s Total, a partner of Novatek in the producing Yamal LNG project, signed a deal to buy a direct 10-percent interest in Arctic LNG 2. The project’s final investment decision (FDI) is expected to be made in the second half of 2019, with plans to start up the first liquefaction train in 2023, according to the French oil and gas major.

Commenting on today’s closure of stake sales, Novatek’s Chairman of the Management Board, Leonid Mikhelson, said on Monday:

“We now have formed the structure of the Project’s participants by successfully closing the sale of interests in Arctic LNG 2.”

“The target level of NOVATEK’s participation has been reached, allowing us to make the final investment decision and optimally use the Company's cash flow to finance our new projects,” Mikhelson added.

Today’s closing of stake sales comes days after Russia approved the construction of Novatek’s transshipment terminal in the region of Murmansk, with construction license expected next year and actual construction taking place between 2020 and 2023.

Novatek plans LNG transshipment terminals in Murmansk and Kamchatka to reduce expenditures on LNG projects, including the Yamal LNG and the Arctic LNG 2 projects.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Russias-Novatek-Hits-Major-Milestones-In-Arctic-LNG-Plans.html#

https://news.yahoo.com/putin-gives-russian-citizenship-novateks-143836539.html

Putin gives Russian citizenship to Novatek's finance chief, a U.S. national

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-oil-kremlin/putin-orders-review-of-rosneft-oilfield-tax-break-request-idUSKCN1UH239?rpc=401&

Putin orders review of Rosneft oilfield tax break request

Lukoil to sign documents on acquisition of 5% in UAE project

The term of the concession is 40 years

ASTRAKHAN, July 23. /TASS/. Lukoil plans to acquire a 5% stake in the offshore gas project Ghasha in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) that is currently held by UAE’s ADNOC (Abu Dhabi National Oil Company), Chief Executive Officer of the Russian oil production giant Vagit Alekperov told reporters on Tuesday.

"I hope we will sign [the document] on entry by 5% in September-October," Alekperov said, adding that this will most probably take place in October. "The active final part of negotiations is underway," he noted.

"We will buy from ADNOC," the top manager noted.

It was reported earlier that Lukoil considers the option of entering the Ghasha offshore gas concession in the UAE. The term of the concession is 40 years and it comprises Hail, Ghasha, Dalma and other offshore fields in the Al Dhafra area.

Italy's Eni (25%), Germany's Wintershall (10%), and Austria's OMV (5%) are parties to the concession.

https://tass.com/economy/1069994

owais.usmani wrote:https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/nord-stream-2-eu-heading-towards-legal-arbitration/

Nord Stream 2, EU drifting towards legal arbitration

And it starts:

https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/nord-stream-2-takes-unusual-legal-step-against-the-commission/

Nord Stream 2 takes unusual legal step against the Commission

https://www.ft.com/content/4c25b29e-aa48-11e9-b6ee-3cdf3174eb89

Danish delay threatens Nord Stream 2 progress

Russia could miss the deadline to begin pumping gas to Europe through the controversial Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, unless Denmark approves construction in its waters in the next few weeks.

Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped... whether from Russia or the US or anywhere else.

If Germany wants to let the little countries in the EU screw up this deal they need to be very clear it was not Russians that are costing them money...

Ironically in terms of trade... it would actually benefit Russia if the EU had to pay more for their energy as it would make Russian products more competitive in other markets...

GarryB wrote:Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped... whether from Russia or the US or anywhere else.

If Germany wants to let the little countries in the EU screw up this deal they need to be very clear it was not Russians that are costing them money...

Ironically in terms of trade... it would actually benefit Russia if the EU had to pay more for their energy as it would make Russian products more competitive in other markets...

Eh Russia never got Norway's permission to build that pipe in their waters to start with. So if a country decides to violate Russia's waters with its own building project that would be okay?.

That's kind American of Russia!. Doing what you want then telling the other country play ball or else.

Guess they decided to take a note of the US playbook.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

GarryB wrote:Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped... whether from Russia or the US or anywhere else.

If Germany wants to let the little countries in the EU screw up this deal they need to be very clear it was not Russians that are costing them money...

Ironically in terms of trade... it would actually benefit Russia if the EU had to pay more for their energy as it would make Russian products more competitive in other markets...

Eh Russia never got Norway's permission to build that pipe in their waters to start with. So if a country decides to violate Russia's waters with its own building project that would be okay?.

That's kind American of Russia!. Doing what you want then telling the other country play ball or else.

Guess they decided to take a note of the US playbook.

What pipe in Norway's waters?

Ukrainians are begging Russians for a transit contract renewal.

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/naftogaz-waiting-for-response-from-gazprom.html

Naftogaz waiting for response from Gazprom

NJSC Naftogaz Ukrainy expects from Gazprom a formal response to the 10-year transit contract proposed by the European Commission with an annual volume of 60 billion cubic meters, Yuriy Vitrenko, the executive director of Naftogaz Ukrainy, has said.

“They say that Gazprom wants a contract for transit not for 10 years, as proposed by the European Commission, but only half a year or a year, until it completes Nord Stream 2. It would be appreciated for Gazprom to respond officially to the EC proposal. If Gazprom does not accept this offer, let it offer its own option. And preferably with all the detail,” he wrote on his Facebook page.

“For example, whether Gazprom is ready to unlock in practice the possibility for other companies to transit gas from the territory of the Russian Federation. We will carefully consider it. The Ukrainian side has repeatedly stressed that we are interested in continuing the transit, therefore we are taking a constructive position,” added Vitrenko.

The executive director of the NJSC drew attention to the fact that if information about Gazprom’s readiness to enter into a contract for just a year and a half is true, this proves the Russian side’s intention to completely abandon Ukrainian transit after the completion of the Nord Stream 2 project.

Naftogaz confirms on its official Facebook page that the Russian side has not yet officially announced the version of the “short” contract.

owais.usmani wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

GarryB wrote:Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped... whether from Russia or the US or anywhere else.

If Germany wants to let the little countries in the EU screw up this deal they need to be very clear it was not Russians that are costing them money...

Ironically in terms of trade... it would actually benefit Russia if the EU had to pay more for their energy as it would make Russian products more competitive in other markets...

Eh Russia never got Norway's permission to build that pipe in their waters to start with. So if a country decides to violate Russia's waters with its own building project that would be okay?.

That's kind American of Russia!. Doing what you want then telling the other country play ball or else.

Guess they decided to take a note of the US playbook.

What pipe in Norway's waters?

I am sorry made a mix-up, I meant to say Denmark.

I am saying threating Denmark into green lighting is a pure American move, which people like Garry whine about all the time.

But don't seem to have a problem if Russia does, i just find the one way standard funny.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

owais.usmani wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

GarryB wrote:Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped... whether from Russia or the US or anywhere else.

If Germany wants to let the little countries in the EU screw up this deal they need to be very clear it was not Russians that are costing them money...

Ironically in terms of trade... it would actually benefit Russia if the EU had to pay more for their energy as it would make Russian products more competitive in other markets...

Eh Russia never got Norway's permission to build that pipe in their waters to start with. So if a country decides to violate Russia's waters with its own building project that would be okay?.

That's kind American of Russia!. Doing what you want then telling the other country play ball or else.

Guess they decided to take a note of the US playbook.

What pipe in Norway's waters?

I am sorry made a mix-up, I meant to say Denmark.

I am saying threating Denmark into green lighting is a pure American move, which people like Garry whine about all the time.

But don't seem to have a problem if Russia does, i just find the one way standard funny.

Russia is threatening Denmark? You not smoking weed are you?

Nord Stream AG initially filed application for laying the nord stream 2 along the first nord stream, which would have taken the pipeline through Denmark territorial waters. After it became apparent that Denmark is in no mood of allowing that, that application was withdrawn and subsequent requests were filed which takes the nord stream 2 through Denmark EEZ which is actually international waters.

Can you read....I was responding to Garry who was saying quote

"Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped".

That is threating, did I say Russia was actively threating Denmark no, I said doing that would be a threat. Which is a common tactic we use in the US they whine about all the time.

Also no there is no official documents saying Nord Stream 2 will pass-throughs Denmark EZZ. None that I have see anyways, you can post if you have such information.

GarryB wrote:Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped... whether from Russia or the US or anywhere else.

If Germany wants to let the little countries in the EU screw up this deal they need to be very clear it was not Russians that are costing them money...

Ironically in terms of trade... it would actually benefit Russia if the EU had to pay more for their energy as it would make Russian products more competitive in other markets...

Russia needs to threaten to upgrade its EEZ into an agreement-only transit zone. No shipping without permission in this zone.

Let's see the "freedom of navigation" knights respond to that.

owais.usmani wrote:Ukrainians are begging Russians for a transit contract renewal.

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/naftogaz-waiting-for-response-from-gazprom.html

Naftogaz waiting for response from Gazprom

NJSC Naftogaz Ukrainy expects from Gazprom a formal response to the 10-year transit contract proposed by the European Commission with an annual volume of 60 billion cubic meters, Yuriy Vitrenko, the executive director of Naftogaz Ukrainy, has said.

“They say that Gazprom wants a contract for transit not for 10 years, as proposed by the European Commission, but only half a year or a year, until it completes Nord Stream 2. It would be appreciated for Gazprom to respond officially to the EC proposal. If Gazprom does not accept this offer, let it offer its own option. And preferably with all the detail,” he wrote on his Facebook page.

“For example, whether Gazprom is ready to unlock in practice the possibility for other companies to transit gas from the territory of the Russian Federation. We will carefully consider it. The Ukrainian side has repeatedly stressed that we are interested in continuing the transit, therefore we are taking a constructive position,” added Vitrenko.

The executive director of the NJSC drew attention to the fact that if information about Gazprom’s readiness to enter into a contract for just a year and a half is true, this proves the Russian side’s intention to completely abandon Ukrainian transit after the completion of the Nord Stream 2 project.

Naftogaz confirms on its official Facebook page that the Russian side has not yet officially announced the version of the “short” contract.

The EU is full of anti-Russian sh*t. Delinquent payers and thieves like the Banderastanis cannot be expected to get 10 year contracts.
They can at best hope for 6 month probationary contracts. That is the norm in the business world. The Bruxelles EU-tard bureaucrats
are living in their own fantasy land.

Eh Russia never got Norway's permission to build that pipe in their waters to start with. So if a country decides to violate Russia's waters with its own building project that would be okay?.

It is going through their EEZ, not their territorial waters, and not even their mainland... they have an island near the path of the pipes.

Russia is not threatening to build it anyway, they have rerouted it in a direction where they don't need Denmarks permission to build the pipeline.

If they were acting like the US they would have declared the current regime in Denmark to be a dictatorship and bomb them and declared the opposition leader leader of Denmark and have a bit of regime change... and of course seize their foreign assets of course to pay for everything.

"Russia needs to make clear that if Nord Stream II does not go ahead that the EU will be paying a lot more for liquified gas being shipped".

That is threating, did I say Russia was actively threating Denmark no, I said doing that would be a threat. Which is a common tactic we use in the US they whine about all the time.

Russia has built pipelines to transport gas to the EU, the Soviets built the first ones, but some of the pipelines going through the Ukraine have not been maintained and gas gets blocked or even stolen, so now they are spending their own money and money of their partners to build alternative routes to ensure the EU gets the gas it needs to meet its energy needs for the next few decades... Denmark is trying to stop the process. Russia has no threatened to invade, there have been no claims of regime change or sanctions against Denmark... except from the US of course... they have no other reason to block the programme.

The fact is that if they don't build Nord Stream II then the EU is in the shit because Russia is cutting off the pipes through the Ukraine whether there are alternative options or not... if there are not then the EU will need to build a lot more terminals to receive LNG from ships... the Russians can still deliver it cheaper than the US, but the EU will pay more for a more expensive and less reliable product.

Also no there is no official documents saying Nord Stream 2 will pass-throughs Denmark EZZ. None that I have see anyways, you can post if you have such information.

The pipes go past a Danish island in the Baltic sea.

The new plan will just put a kink in their design to take them out of territorial waters and into EEZ waters.

Personally I think it is a good idea anyway as it will probably reduce the necessary transit fee costs that could have been paid to Denmark but now wont be.

Bulgaria also pissed around with permission for south stream so the Russians decided to pump it to Turkey and they can sort it out... cost Bulgaria a good income... but I am sure their Washington masters have rewarded them.... NOT.

The EU is full of anti-Russian sh*t. Delinquent payers and thieves like the Banderastanis cannot be expected to get 10 year contracts.
They can at best hope for 6 month probationary contracts. That is the norm in the business world. The Bruxelles EU-tard bureaucrats
are living in their own fantasy land.

Actually shoplifters get escorted from the store and a trespass notice issued against them to never come back into the store again.

Ukraine should steal another Russian ship... I bet that will make them want to give them money to pump their gas through their pipes...

Denmark is violating international law:

1) It does not own the seabed in its EEZ. The EEZ only gives it rights to access minerals below the seabed
and biological products from the seabed surface.

2) The Nord Stream II pipe does not hinder any of the allowed activities in point (1). Instead of arguing
that the pipe is a hindrance to resource extraction (which is the only argument that Denmark can make),
it is dragging its heels pretending the EEZ is like territorial waters and it is right of Denmark to
refuse access.

3) Denmark has zero rights to refuse access to its EEZ since it is not territorial or possession waters and seabed.
Special resource access rights do not give the rights holder all sorts of additional rights such as property
and control rights. It cannot collect transit fees through its EEZ.

Russia should lay the pipe and see what Denmark does. Russia would not be violating international law. Any
hostile action by Denmark would be a brazen violation and amount to act of war and piracy.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Fastest-Growing-Energy-Producer-In-The-World.html

The Fastest Growing Energy Producer In The World

https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/supreme_court_dismisses_client_earth_objection_to_nord_stream_pipeline/10928038

Supreme Court dismisses Client Earth objection to Nord Stream pipeline

Trump has announced America's intention to "buy" Greenland from Denmark. The Danish leader is "shocked". What a moron. Did he expect that
by sucking Uncle Scumbag's schlong that Denmark would be riding the gravy train? That's not how minions are treated. Minions are routinely
kicked in the face and spat on. They should know their place and lick their master's boots with a smile.

America needs Greenland as foothold in the Arctic that Alaska can't give it. They are obsessed with control and think that the North-East passage
is the new Suez which, naturally, only America will control. With its one disintegrating ice breaker....

BTW, Russia has parked its floating LNG unloading plant in Rotterdam in anticipation of gas flow disruption from Banderastan. It really should
let the EU taste LNG for a couple of years by halting Nord Stream II and transit through Banderastan until the scumbags in Bruxelles can no
longer posture.

If I were Greenlander I would agree to USA takeover

Yes, Americans can be obnoxious but at least you'd would no longer be treated as wildlife attraction for tourists to gawk at while being on minimum income with no prospects of economic development all in the name of Denmark mandated environmentalism

Just a reminder map. The Danish island is the one north of the pipeline at the western end.

Denmark's smarmy attempt to upgrade the status of its EEZ into territorial waters which it can control can come back to bite NATO in the ass. Russia
can apply the same logic to its whole Arctic Sea EEZ. That will allow it to fully control shipping through the North East passage.

Greenland being better off under the yanquis is something that someone with no idea of US history would claim. While you
piss on Denmark's pro-environment policy, the yanquis will carpetbag the island into some waste dump. The marginal
Arctic climate and biosphere will not tolerate mid-latitude levels of abuse. And like with every other indigenous peoples
that the USA has conquered, they will be either genocided or turned into paupers. This applies to Hawaiians, North American
aboriginals and the Pacific Islanders.

The Arctic does not need yanqui toilet economics.