Thursday, 28 May 2020
The European gas market is oversupplied, with demand down due to Covid-19. Storage facilities are filling up and Ukrainian companies are offering the country's huge storage capacity to European traders. With "virtual reverse flow" now in place, it's working well. An Oxford Energy Comment by my colleague Jack Sharples and me.
Tuesday, 10 March 2020
Gazprom and Naftogaz Ukrainy signed agreements at the end of last year covering the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine for the period 2020-24, with transit volumes of 65 bcm in 2020 and 40 bcm per year thereafter. In this Oxford Energy Insight, Jack Sharples and I analyse how the deal was reached, the terms of the deal, the likely transit flows via Ukraine during the period of the deal, and what that means for Gazprom and for Naftogaz. In a linked Insight, Implications of the Russia-Ukraine gas transit deal for alternative pipeline routes and the Ukrainian and European markets, by Simon Pirani, Jack Sharples, Katja Yafimava and Vitaly Yermakov, we look at the broader picture of Russian gas exports to Europe in the light of the deal.
Sunday, 9 February 2020
"Millions of school students, by striking to protest at government inaction on climate change, have brought popular rebellion back to the centre of international politics. The “Fridays for Future” strikes could turn out to be among the roots of deeper, wider, civil society movements to avert dangerous global warming." My article on the E-International Relations site.
Sunday, 2 February 2020
Decarbonising the economy will be impossible unless we transform our economic and social systems. This means looking to a world beyond capitalism. My article for OpenDemocracy. It is based on a talk I gave at the University of Durham's Centre for Culture and Ecology on 16 January 2020. Slide presentation from the talk here.
Monday, 27 January 2020
Monday, 30 December 2019
"Over the last decade, China has replaced Russia as the main export destination for Central Asian gas. Due to strong gas demand in China, in the early 2020s, the Central Asia-China pipeline corridor will be used close to its 55 Bcm/year capacity. An expansion to 85 Bcm/year is possible, by construction of Line D from Turkmenistan via Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to China, but this is unlikely to go ahead until it is seen as strategically necessary by China – that is, probably not before the late 2020s. Central Asian exports to Russia may continue to decline. Other routes – the proposed TAPI line to India, or westward exports to Europe via a Trans Caspian pipeline – are very unlikely to be opened up. As for supply, Turkmenistan has ample resources but it may take cooperation with Chinese and other foreign companies to develop them effectively. By contrast, both Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan have supply side constraints." - my paper, published by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies
Tuesday, 3 December 2019
The trilateral talks between the EU, Russia, and Ukraine on transit of Russian gas via Ukraine beyond the expiry of the existing transit contract, on 31 December 2019, have failed to yield a solution. With the deadline fast approaching, the sides remain far apart. This paper, written jointly with my colleagues Tatiana Mitrova and Jack Sharples, assesses the state of the negotiations, the likelihood of an interruption in transit via Ukraine in January 2020, and the potential impact.
Monday, 22 July 2019
Tuesday, 18 June 2019
Trilateral talks between the EU, Russia and Ukraine on gas transit through Ukraine after the expiry of the current transit contract on 1st January 2020 are on hold. Gazprom’s transit diversification projects, Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream, will not be operating at full capacity by that time and arrangements must be made. But there is little sign of progress in the talks to date and political factors, including changes in leadership in Ukraine and Europe, could prevent a deal being done. Companies and governments are assessing the risk of a supply interruption.
Tuesday, 21 May 2019
The Sea Change report, to which I contributed, shows that UK government policy of squeezing every last drop of oil out of the North Sea is incompatible with its claims to be dealing appropriately with the danger of climate change. The government lavishes subsidies on oil companies producing in the North Sea: the deal is currently so good that in two recent tax years the aggregate tax bill for North Sea producers was negative, i.e. rebates exceeded payments. The report also considers what a “just transition” away from oil production, that defends the interests of oil workers and the communities dependent on the industry, might look like.
"Trilateral talks between the EU, Russia and Ukraine on gas transit through Ukraine after 1 January 2020 are due to resume in late May. Gazprom’s transit diversification projects, Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream, will not be operating at full capacity by that time and arrangements must be made. But there is little sign of progress in the talks and political factors could prevent a deal being done. Should there be a supply interruption, it could have a lasting negative impact on the position of gas in Europe." - My comment published by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies