Russia 100414 Basic Political Developments


Reuters: Gazprom looking at Israel natgas mkt –report



Yüklə 336,5 Kb.
səhifə22/22
tarix09.08.2018
ölçüsü336,5 Kb.
#62090
1   ...   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22

Reuters: Gazprom looking at Israel natgas mkt –report


http://in.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idINLDE63C1VQ20100413
Tue Apr 13, 2010 9:27pm IST

JERUSALEM, April 13 (Reuters) - Russia's Gazprom (GAZP.MM) may join the exploration race for a new natural gas windfall off the coast of Israel, Israeli media reported on Tuesday.

Financial daily Globes on its Web site reported Gazprom, together with Israel's Modiin Energy (MDINp.TA), the IDB Group (IDBH.TA) and Israel Land Development (ILDC.TA), was considering vying for a new tender for exploratory offshore drilling.

Officials at both Israel's Infrastructure Ministry and Modiin Energy declined to comment on the report. Gazprom was not available for immediate reaction.

U.S. group Noble Energy (NBL.N) has been the major international player in the Israeli natural gas market, leading an exploration group at a number of deep-sea sites.

The group shook the local energy market last year when it announced the reserves of its Tamar site, located 90 km off the Mediterranean port of Haifa, were estimated at 7.3 trillion cubic feet (tcf) (207 billion cubic meters), enough to supply Israel with natural gas for about 20 years.

Since the Tamar discovery, Noble has been investigating further explorations.

Globes also reported a Gazprom representative met with Israel's petroleum commissioner to discuss the possibility of joining the exploration process.

A source in the energy industry confirmed the meeting took place, but stressed no decision had been made. The source also said Gazprom would likely only play the role of "operator" in any future deal.

(Writing by Ari Rabinovitch; Editing by Steven Scheer and Keiron Henderson)


Moscow Times: Gazprom Exec Receives Orthodox Honor


http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/gazprom-exec-receives-orthodox-honor/403856.html
14 April 2010

The Moscow Times

The head of a regional Gazprom subsidiary received an award from the Russian Orthodox Church for its help in restoring a regional church, the gas giant said Tuesday in a statement.

Alexei Zavgorodnev, chief executive of Gazprom Transgaz Stavropol, was awarded the Order of the Blessed St. Daniel of Moscow.

The award was signed by Patriarch Kirill and awarded by Archbishop Feofan, who thanked Zavgorodnev, saying: "Every person has his path to the church, but there is a broader path, leading to faith, love, the fatherland, family and to our dear ones. Gas men know this path. It is the path of morality, purity and good."

Gazprom Transgaz Stavropol has aided in the restoration of several churches in the North Caucasus region.

This isn't the first time Gazprom has exhibited close ties with the church. Last month, the church wrote a letter to Gazprom chairman Viktor Zubkov asking for the gas monopoly to lower the price it charges Ukrainian chemical companies because of "the substantial help given by the Ukrainian chemical industry to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the Moscow Patriarchate." So far no deal has been reached on lowered gas prices.
13.04.2010

Oil and Gas Eurasia: Gazprom Taps Thomas Paine for a “Common Sense” Approach to the Shale Gas Challenge


http://www.oilandgaseurasia.com/news/p/3/press/95/

By Pat Davis Szymczak

I’m writing this month from Houston where I’m attending IHS CERAWeek. To say this event is “high level” is an understatement. There are more energy company CEOs and senior government officials per square meter here than you’ll find at any other event anywhere else in the world.

   I’m so impressed that I got up at 5 a.m. one day to be sure I’d not be caught in traffic while driving across town to hear Gazprom’s Deputy Chairman Alexander Medvedev deliver the morning keynote. But at a 7:30 a.m. breakfast session on “Chinese Gas Demand” I learned that Medvedev had cancelled because Russia’s prime minister had requested his presence in India.

   Of course, no one believed the India story and throughout the day I noticed a bit of snickering whenever someone uttered the “R” word. Soon though the press in Moscow reported what was really happening “under the carpet”: Gazprom was incensed that ENI CEO Paolo Scaroni had (in his dinner speech the night before Medvedev’s planned appearance) suggested that the competing Nabucco and South Stream pipelines be partially merged. Here in Texas, we’d call that “an ambush.” Had Medvedev showed up the next morning, his message would not have been heard. The audience would have one question in mind … “Would Gazprom support Nabucco?”

What Was Alexander Medvedev Supposed to Say?


Why would Scaroni deliberately try to embarrass Medvedev? ENI is the technology advisor and main commercial partner to the Gazprom-led South Stream. Both pipelines would deliver gas to Europe and both are political. South Stream keeps Gazprom in control while Nabucco seeks to diversify supply so as to lessen European dependence on Russian gas. South Stream could be twice as expensive as Nabucco, which in turn, may face difficulty securing supply to fill the pipe.
Gazprom would not debate such a thing in a forum as public as IHS CERAWeek. I must say though that I was amused to read the text of Medvedev’s speech which was later posted for download at “CERAWeek Online” together with a White Paper on Gazprom’s industry view. I’m not joking, Gazprom’s U.S. speechwriter opened Medvedev’s keynote by quoting Thomas Paine!

   “I am here to challenge your thinking and your perceptions,” quoting from the opening graphs. “One of your founding fathers and noted political philosophers, Thomas Paine, is widely known for his phrase: ‘These are the times that try men’s souls.’ Well apparently, as we have all learned over the past 18 months, times have not changed as much as we would like to think since 1776.”

When the Best Government is No Government
Since most Oil&Gas Eurasia readers are Russian, let me try to explain why this sounds so funny to an American who has lived in Russia. Thomas Paine was a pamphleteer and an intellectual revolutionary who heavily influenced the French and the American Revolutions. Every American school kid knows Paine as the author of the pamphlet “Common Sense,” written in 1776 – the year my ancestors told England’s King George III what he could do with his taxes. Yes, he is a “Founding Father” and to a man, America’s Founding Fathers were all fiercely independent landowning capitalists who thought that the best government was “no government.”

   The bit of history that Paine represents – “The Enlightenment” – is the very bit of history that all my Russian friends tell me that “Russia missed” and that’s why we Americans and Russians can’t understand each other. Then, the real howler (yes, this is a direct quote!) “To quote your President Reagan: ‘Let’s trust but verify.’” What?! The late U.S. President Ronald Reagan said this, but in the context of U.S.–Soviet nuclear disarmament. This is the same Cold Warrior Reagan who labeled the U.S.S.R. “The Evil Empire” and implored, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall!”

   Where did Gazprom’s PR advisor in the U.S. get this (student intern?) speechwriter? I’m tempted to say that if I were Russian I’d be offended, but honestly, I have to say that, as an American who does business in Russia, I’m offended too. It seems that Americans and Russians can’t communicate important stuff to each other because the kitsch stereotypes keep getting in the way.

A Call for Market-Driven Competition


Medvedev did though have a serious message to communicate. Quoting his text: “Energy is not a weapon but a resource, and governments must not script regulations and ‘policies of the month’ that create volatile investment parameters … and people in this room cannot preach the need for opportunity to invest in Russia’s resource base while simultaneously working with governments around the world trying to restrict [Gazprom’s] participation in pipeline and energy projects. Let’s decide whether this industry is going to be a politically driven one or a market driven one. I am for the latter, unless you are afraid to compete with us.”
Gazprom is feared because it is a state-owned producer with title to the world’s largest natural gas reserves. So if world powers had traded natural gas in 1776, King George III would have been in control, and Thomas Paine, together with America’s Founding Fathers, would not have had a chance.

   In the “18 months” that Medvedev’s writers suggest have “tried men’s souls” the U.S. has gone from a market ready to consume LNG from Gazprom’s Shtokman field, to a market that now sees no need for further LNG imports (Russian or otherwise.) In the last 18 months, shale gas has become the craze. And several presentations at IHS CERAWeek suggested that the U.S. may become a net exporter of natural gas, even of LNG. Had Medvedev delivered his keynote, he would have disagreed: “The development of shale gas is real but the price at which sustained shale production is feasible over the long-term will enable LNG to compete in the U.S. market. This is the basis of Gazprom’s strategic commitment to Russian LNG as a head-to-head competitor in North America with shale gas producers and other gas suppliers.”

   If Medvedev is right, that is good news for Shtokman. But even if his speechwriter got the LNG angle wrong, Gazprom has options. Gazprom is knocking on doors in Washington DC to obtain rights to develop U.S. gas reserves; it is trading gas out of offices in Houston and in London. And as for shale, the fact is, Russia has the most shale gas in the world if you add up estimated deposits in West Siberia and European Russia near the Arctic Circle. In Moscow in March, the Duma discussed recommendations that the government explore commercial development of Russian shale gas. With apologies to Thomas Paine and King George, I think that makes a whole lot of “Common Sense”!

Bellona: Comment: Gazprom’s secret society, or who will profit from Shtokman backroom dealings?


http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/shtokman_hearing_process
MURMANSK – Another round of public hearings took place recently in the village of Teriberka, a settlement on the Kola Peninsula in Russia’s far north, to discuss the Shtokman gas field development project. This should not have raised anyone’s brows except for the fact that local environmentalists, who have long been on the Shtokman case to ensure the project’s ecological safety, only learned of the hearing after the fact. Bellona’s contributor Alexei Pavlov looks into the mystery. Alexey Pavlov, 13/04-2010 - Translated by Maria Kaminskaya

Shtokman, deemed to be one of the largest explored natural gas fields in the world, is a shelf deposit in the Russian sector of the Barents Sea, some 600 kilometres from Russia’s Murmansk, a large regional centre on the Kola Peninsula. Around 23.7 million cubic metres of gas is slated to be produced at the site during each of the envisioned three phases of Shtokman development.

Teriberka, on the shore of the Barents Sea in the northernmost part of the Kola Peninsula, is slated to become home to a liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant, and plans have also been made to build a local pipeline between Teriberka and Volkhov, near Murmansk, to supply gas to Murmansk and surrounding municipalities. However, a large part of the natural gas produced at Shtokman will be transported across the Baltic Sea via the Nord Stream main pipeline, a controversial project under development, which will connect Russia and the European Union for gas deliveries into Western Europe.
 
The first phase of the field development project is to be implemented by Shtokman Development AG, which is a joint Russian-French-Norwegian venture established two years ago. Russia’s gas giant Gazprom with its 51 percent shares is the company’s main shareholder.

The hearing of March 14th was initiated by a company called Piter Gaz, a contractor working for Gazprom’s daughter company Gazprom Dobycha Shelf (Gazprom Production Shelf). Piter Gaz is charged with carrying out Phases Two and Three of the Shtokman project. And none of the environmentalists who have been working closely with Shtokman developers to make sure the project follows all environmental protection guidelines had been invited.

As it later became known, presented at the public hearing were two documents: “Programme for a comprehensive marine engineering study for the construction of sites of development of the Shtokman gas condensate field (Phases 2 and 3), project documentation stage” and “Environmental impact assessment of works to be carried out as part of the Programme for a comprehensive marine engineering study at Phases 2 and 3 of the Shtokman project.”

Regional media reported several days after the hearing that a number of research vessels would be used in the marine engineering study, which is a fundamental step as the Shtokman project progresses to the stages of designing and erecting the offshore production complex, laying the underwater gas pipeline, and building the shore-based infrastructure. The speakers underscored, according to local reports, that everything will be done according to requirements set by the Russian environmental legislation currently in force. All works are to be completed in the summer months of 2010 and 2011.


 
There is no doubt that the hearing went through without a hitch and Gazprom’s representatives got all the go-aheads they needed. Those villagers who had come to the hearing were likely only interested in seeing that Shtokman development does not impact local fishing, their main means of sustenance. No risks beyond Shtokman’s possible impact on fishery were included in the agenda – all because the hearing proceeded with no chance for opposing views to be heard and no access given to participants to any independent assessments of how construction of field development sites might affect the environment. How did this happen?

Easy. No information on the upcoming hearing appeared in the press except one tiny newspaper called The Kolskoye Slovo (Kola Word). The newspaper is published in a small municipality called Kola and enjoys a circulation small enough to never reach Murmansk, where regional environmental organisations are mostly based. It stands to reason that the hearing organisers may have been well acquainted with these facts and would hardly have any objections to the public having very limited access to the news.

Upon receiving information from Piter Gaz, Kolskoye Slovo reported on February 5th that a decision had been made to hold a public hearing. If not quite following the spirit of relevant federal legislation, Piter Gaz acted well within its requirements, which mandate that such an announcement must be run no later than 30 days prior to the hearing.

But as for Teriberka administration, however, who were also required to run an announcement of their own, stating the date of the upcoming hearing, their actions clearly violated the municipal “Regulation on the procedure for organising and conducting public hearings.” The regulation states that the date of a public hearing must be announced by local authorities no later than 15 days before the hearing is convened. The date – March 14 – was only published in The “Kolskoye Slovo” in an issue that hit the stands two days before the hearing.

Likewise, no information about the hearing appeared on the website of the municipality of Teriberka – something that had never happened before. Also, prior to this hearing, Shtokman’s environmental impact assessment materials were always made available for the public in the building housing the Kola district administration.

This was convenient: Teriberka is quite a ways away and having copies of the environmental impact assessment available here meant a much easier access to the information for all organisations keeping abreast with Shtokman developments. This time, no such courtesy was extended environmentalists or the public.

As a result, none of the ecological organisations operating in Murmansk Region were present at the hearing. The media had not been invited, either. This is an unusual turn of events, as Shtokman Development AG has long cooperated with Severnaya Koalitsiya (Northern Coalition), a group uniting five environmental non-for-profit organisations: Bellona-Murmansk, a WWF branch operating in the Barents region, Murmansk’s Priroda i Molodyozh (Nature and Youth), the Kola Centre for the Protection of Wildlife, and the Kola Ecological Centre Gaea. So what would compel Gazprom’s daughter companies behind the latest hearing to break the well-established rapport?

Is it maybe that Phases 2 and 3 of the Shtokman project are planned to proceed without the participation of western partners? Will the project stop being an international one? This would effectively give project developers an exemption from meeting international banks’ stipulations mandating the project’s transparency and an obligatory placement of all project documentation for public review.



“Such disregard for issues of public participation, both on the part of project developers and the local administration, is outrageous. There was a clear violation of the legally established procedure for informing the public of the hearing’s date,” said Bellona-Murmansk’s energy projects coordinator Nina Lesikhina. “This is absolutely unacceptable, given that a project as dangerous as Shtokman is being carried out.”
Yüklə 336,5 Kb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   ...   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə