Skip to main content

Forbes Looks At Gazprom

For those of you who would like to get a good review on the rise of Russia's Gazprom, and how it's having an ever greater effect on world energy markets, a piece in the latest issue of Forbes is a good place to start:
"This is not a business where you can get away with bullying a counter-party," says John Hattenberger, Gazprom's point man in the U.S., from his one-man office in downtown Houston, set up in preparation for building more permanent Gazprom digs there.

It will be at least four years before Gazprom is fully prepared to enter the North American market. Expansion into China is a long way off, too. But as Gazprom gropes its way to fulfilling its global ambitions, it will be under the spotlight as never before. Putin has turned Gazprom into the nation's public persona--creating in the process the specter of a frightening and newly powerful Russia. This weekend at the G8 conference, the president, not [Gazprom CEO Alexi] Miller, is onstage for all the world to see. Will Russia--with its difficult and confounding history, its boom-and-bust cycles, its questionable commitment to rule of law and open markets--once again send investors stampeding for the exits?
For customers who don't want to deal with the risk of relying on Gazprom, new nuclear build ought to be an option -- just ask U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair. For some macro-level thoughts on Russia's long-term challenges, click here.

For more from our archives about Gazprom, click here.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

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...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...