Skip to main content

Putin Follows Through On Gas Cutoff Threat

By Eric McErlain
Here's a situation in Europe worth keeping an eye on:
Russia took Europe to the brink of a winter energy crisis yesterday when it carried out a Cold War-style threat and halted gas deliveries to Ukraine, the main conduit for exports to the West.

With a quarter of its gas supplied by Russia, Europe is facing serious disruption and price rises for as long as the dispute rumbles on.

Moscow turned off the tap at 10 a.m. after Ukraine refused to sign a new contract with the Russian state monopoly Gazprom quadrupling prices...

If Ukraine's reserves run out, it could be tempted to siphon off gas intended for other countries. It claims the right to do so in lieu of transit fees.

The cut-off coincided with Russia assuming the rotating presidency of the G8 leading industrialised nations.

In Britain, millions of families started paying higher fuel prices yesterday.

Scottish and Southern Energy raised prices by 13.6 per cent, adding approximately £50 to the average annual bill, while electricity charges will go up by 12 per cent, or about £30 a year.

Npower puts its rises into effect today, adding 14.5 per cent for gas and 13.6 per cent for electricity.
This might be a good time to point out that as local natural gas supplies in Europe and North America are drawn down, three of the leading international sources of natural gas are Russia, Algeria and Iran.

For more, check out the New York Times. To follow the conversation in the Blogosphere, click here.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
Apologies for the offtopic comment, but a question has come up at the nuclear power article at the Wikipedia that the readers of this blog may be able to help me with.

Have any of you come across an individual named Terry Oldberg, who claims that there are statistical flaws in the NRC's risk assessment methods? A paper by Oldberg is published here. If so, is his work well known in the nuclear safety community?

I can't find any evidence that his work has been cited anywhere, but nuclear safety is well outside my field of expertise.

Hope somebody with the requisite expertise can help, and sorry again for the offtopic posting.
January 3, 2006 at 4:17 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
23 comments
Read more

Wednesday Update

By
From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more