Skip to main content

Russia Doubles Natural Gas Price for Georgia

In Russia, it's beginning to look a lot like Christmas. From the Daily Mail:
Fears that Russia is using energy supplies as a political weapon increased last night after Moscow forced Georgia to accept a doubling of gas prices.

The deal came within hours of a threat by Gazprom, Russia's statecontrolled energy giant, to cut off supplies to the former Soviet republic from January 1.

Georgia had called the price increase 'unacceptable' and 'politically motivated'.

Relations between the Kremlin and Georgia's pro-West leadership were already at their worst for a decade after a spy row in September.

The Georgia 'agreement' is another example of what alarmed EU officials see as the Kremlin's heavy-handed tactics in dealing with energy clients.

It came the day after Gazprom took control of a massive oil and gas project from Royal Dutch Shell, which had suffered a long campaign of bureaucratic harassment.
Don't forget, as Geoffrey Styles said earlier this week, Russia's long-term goal is to be able to exercise just this sort of market power over the U.S. Of course, if the U.S. builds more nuclear power plants and displaces natural gas-fired electrical production the same way it displaced oil-fired electric production in the 1970s, the nation won't be in the same bind that much of Europe will be in the near future.

Technorati tags: , , , , , ,

Comments

Rod Adams said…
As an unrepentant Cold Warrior, I have little trust in Russia's acceptance of the idea that the US is the world's sole remaining superpower.

Russia has a long history as a player in the world's power elite. Its leaders have used its natural resources and people power for at least two centuries to maintain their own lifestyles. They are excellent chess players and are as good at raw power plays as they are at subtle, long term moves.

I have no doubt at all that Russian leaders fully understand the importance of energy and the fact that nuclear power plants allow the owners a measure of independence from fuel supplier pressure that is not available for owners of fossil fuel burning generators.

I fully believe that some of the money that supports anti-nuclear pressure groups around the world comes from Russian oil and gas interests - aka the Russian government.
>>Of course, if the U.S. builds more nuclear power plants and displaces natural gas-fired electrical production the same way it displaced oil-fired electric production in the 1970s, the nation won't be in the same bind that much of Europe will be in the near future.

Nuclear power can all of a sudden displace load-following generators--especially with increased wind capacity requiring more gas backup?
KenG said…
Many of the recent, larger gas units are combined cycle plants that were built for baseload use. New nuclear units will have more capability to load follow than older units but the more logical approach would be to load follow with coal units.

As to the impact of wind, we'll have to cross that bridge when we get there, but wind is a long way from being a significant part of the mix.
Farkas said…
For the Russians to "exercise this sort of market power over the U.S." someone will have to build a pipeline (or LNG terminal) that connects Russian gas fields with the American gas infrastructure. The gas market is relatively large in North America and the Russians would have to be more than a marginal player to have the kind of influence they have over their European customers. New American NPPs will offset demand for new American gas-fired baseload generators; however, the U.S. having the largest economy in the world growing at 3%/year, it seems that all generators will be important in the task of meeting demand.

Popular posts from this blog

Knowing What You’ve Got Before It’s Gone in Nuclear Energy

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior director of policy analysis and strategic planning at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

Nuclear energy is by far the largest source of carbon prevention in the United States, but this is a rough time to be in the business of selling electricity due to cheap natural gas and a flood of subsidized renewable energy. Some nuclear plants have closed prematurely, and others likely will follow.
In recent weeks, Exelon and the Omaha Public Power District said that they might close the Clinton, Quad Cities and Fort Calhoun nuclear reactors. As Joni Mitchell’s famous song says, “Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone.”
More than 100 energy and policy experts will gather in a U.S. Senate meeting room on May 19 to talk about how to improve the viability of existing nuclear plants. The event will be webcast, and a link will be available here.
Unlike other energy sources, nuclear power plants get no specia…

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…