I'm Australian and as committed to consumerism as any European. We don't have an energy shortage but periodically we do have water shortages, during these time we willingly accept that gardens cannot be watered, cars washed, shorter showers etc. I am certain that faced with a gas shortage Europeans will be prepared to turn their thermostats down by a few degrees and to wear an extra layer of clothing. If some industries are forced to reduce output, Europe is rich enough to ensure that poverty does not result.
Amen to that. I turned down my thermostat in March, prepping for next winter. People should wear proper clothes, like in the old days. 90% polyester might be cheap to buy, but useless for warmth.
Yeah I'd set the thermostat back to 26 just let the ukranians shell their people in the east 8 more years while holding back their pensions, unfunding their schools, forbidding their mother language. Sure, I'm like you.
I am sorry, but this comment and the answer by people talking about "lowering the thermostats" are incredibly asinine. Without gas the whole European industrial complex goes to hell. It's already happening. You guys have ZERO idea where the abundance you grew up in comes from, and the incredible amount of complex factors that are necessary to sustain it. Without energy there is no civilization. But sure, go on parroting the BS spewed by suicidal European politicians, feel free to feel good about supporting the "current thing". By the way, have you ever paid an electric bill, or are your parents still doing it? If you are in Europe, try asking them how it's going. We'll meet again when winter comes.
Regardless of what happens to Ukraine, why the hell would anyone sign another gas supply contract with a vendor who arbitrarily broke the last contract with them, solely in order to "punish them" or "assert dominance"? Price is not the only factor in making purchasing decisions. Reliable and logical long-term trade partners are critical. Russia is still drinking their own Kool-Aid. Historical example: "King Cotton" didn't work out as planned, either.
It wasnt Russia that broke it thou. I remember guys like you ecouraging western countries to do that. Now you cry when it backfired. The west tried to use it as a weapon against Russia, but our leaders are incompetent not to mention the populace.
@@attilamarics4808 What are you even talking about? Russia did indeed break the contract by suddenly demanding payment in rubles instead of dollars / euros as written in the original contracts. And then also by failing to supply the agreed amount of product during the period specified. It's black and white, no doubt whatsoever. So their former customers are sourcing the product elsewhere now of course. "Weapon against Russia?" Are you drunk comrade?
@@Darrylx444 They said that the EU countries can pay in euros, in a russian bank that changes it to rubels and then pay it out. Thats a very big difference. EU countries rejected every solution. You dont know what you are talking about.
@@Darrylx444 So the EU didnt try to use the sanctions against Russia? So the firts month of the conflict didnt happen, when ALL the western media and leaders said the sanctions will make Russia collapse. You are lying.
@@desj2584 IT was still the EU that broke the deals. Russia let the EU pay in anything they want if they exchange it in the bank into rubels before paying. It was on every youtube page every news site for months. You guys are forgetting inconvenient things pretty fast. Let me guess you think Ukraine is winning on the battlefield....
The fact that Russia would potentially destroy their European market to save their campaign in Ukraine sniffs of desperation. Even if they somehow pull it off *this winter*, this is the sort of thing that would really make leaders in western Europe think seriously about alternatives. For a block already determined to switch to renewables, this is the sort of kick in the pants that could really speed that transition up. The whole thing feels like a self-goal on the Russian side.
I can't believe Ukraine is that important that they would risk there main clientele. I don't get it. Europe will not go back to his cheap gas. . If he quit now he could probably save some of his gas sales
Europe is accelerating plans for alternative sources, From what I recall, Germany is on a crash programme to build a LNG terminal, investment in renewables is increasing, coal plants are being examined to see if they can be put back online and deals are being made with other nations for gas and oil. Russia has more than likely F**ked itself.
Well the reason why you can't believe it is that you don't understand the geography of the region. Ukraine falling basically creates a foothold for the West to invade Russia and break it up into pieces. That is an existential threat worth far more than whatever revenues could be generated by European energy markets
Came here to say the same. I'd even argue that the analogy is even more apt than immediately apparent. A very defining feature of Western culture and morality is our (comparatively unique, in terms of prominence) high valuation of human life and freedom (and in particular to this matter, freedom of self-determination): We _really_ don't like seeing a demagogue's murder-in-progress of a free country, _in particular_ not when it happens in our own proverbial back yard; not only because it threatens us indirectly, but because, I think, we've been really quite happy with the relatively peaceful state of affairs that has reigned in Europe since the end of WW2 (the Cold War and the Balkan Wars notwithstanding). In other words, in this "car crash" the injured persons (Ukraine) takes precedence over, and warrants better and more expensive treatment than, the 'car' (the gas), since it is, when it comes down to it, essentially a replaceable commodity. One that may suck hard to have battered or lost, but ultimately less important.
@@radiosification European Languages are pretty much all from the same family :) Well, except the two Finno-Ugric ones. They are a family of their own.
@@christopherg2347 There's Latin, Germanic, Slavic, and Finno-Ugric (Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, etc.). Four different families. I think the only outlier is Basque.
@@Thor.Jorgensen Actually, the Latin and Germanic languages (at least) also share the same roots; Indo-European, which, as the name implies, stems from ancient migratory tribes from the area that is modern (northwestern?) India.
@@mnxs Do you own a map? Take a good look at it and try to make sense of it. Where do you think these Indo-Europeans must have lived if they are also described as "Caucasian" and "Indo-European" simultaneously. Is the Caucasus located close to India? No, this is not how it all went down. Humanity migrated from Africa up through Egypt. The original Europeans migrated across the Caucasus and then west and into Europe. They did not take a detour to lush and fertile India before deciding they wanted to wander across the barren grass steppes of Eastern Europe. But none of this has anything to do with language. Germanic and Latin languages are separate families. As are Uralic, Celtic, and Slavic languages. They are however all European in origin.
Oh they love those exaggerations. They have their own shit shows where they constantly talk about things like this, feeding average (and below average) russian citizens.
Mr. Nielsen, you are really one of the best, if not the best, analyst that I have seen or heard. You are the real professional.. Would love to see your future projections for Belarus for medium/long term. Lithuanian viewer here.
I have a small income and I have cut back buying some things. Though hearing about maybe putting on an extra sweater this winter, reminds me of my childhood and the oil crises in the 1970's (which wasn't that hard at all). I long made my mind up. I felt somehow glad to be able doing this if it could be of any help to the people of Ukraine. For all the suffering during this war Ukraine has certainly come to fame and we will never forget the spirit of this people. Wish that I had hair to get the Ukrainian Cossack hairstyle, because the Russians use that hairstyle as a bad word for Ukrainians (Khokohl). Looked pretty good on Björn in "The Vikings".
I discovered Anders Puck Nielsen yesterday, I've already watched 3 videos and I really liked it, structured thinking and of course. Thanks from Portugal and keep up the good work. I recommend.
Yes. Well argued. Although I would add the "root cause" of the gas crisis is believing, mistakenly, tragically, that Russia is a reliable source of cheap energy. It is not, and never will be no matter who sits in the Kremlin. This was an error Europe (and especially Germany) made once. I hope they are wise enough not to make the same mistake ever - ever- again.
They should have realized that when Putin cancelled all the production sharing agreements except one and nationalized those projects on the excuse of environmental concerns. Anybody who has been to Russia knows that Russian companies are the worst for environmental concerns and typical Russian standards for oil and gas projects is to build the project however you want and then write up how it was built based on the Russian standards. But Europe has realized the old saying 'fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.' But I believe that Europe ( especially Germany) has tried so hard to integrate Russia into Europe as a partner but every time Russia screws them.
@@tom4115 I'm British and I can tell you the Germans only make the same mistake twice! (I'm really ashamed of myself but I couldn't resist this old joke given the perfect setup!)
Russia has been a trustworthy supplier of oil and gas for Germany even in the hights of the cold war. So seeing them as a good source was nothing based on not learning from the past. Additionally you have to consider that the alternative basically were islamic states in the middle east. There's no excuse to have not sped up with renewable energy and infrastructure for renewable energy. But using gas instead of oil and coal was not that bad idea in the beginning. Not re-evaluating after 2014 was a problem.
At the same time, here in Europe we need to accept that the days of cheap, reliable energy are over. Putin’s strategy just drives home the point that never again can Russia been seen as a reliable supplier, even if its gas is cheap.
Remember WW2 when it was the Allies against Germany, Italy and Japan? 2 atom bombs were dropped on Japan, Germany was split in 2. And Russia and China were on our side. It didn't take long for Russia to be the enemy, Japan and Western Germany to be essential allies, and for China to be a war enemy in Korea, Vietnam etc. There are people that say the longer term view is to have Russia on our side against China. Because China will be a huge threat to Russia soon. States very quickly get back to business after a war is over. I hope Ukraine gets all it's land back and that there is lasting peace for strategic areas.
In Denmark, it is not unusual to have almost free electricity, due to wind turbines, and we're building a crap ton of them. so electricity will become cheaper.
All that will happen is that countries will decarbonize faster to regain energy independence. Denmark took decisive action on that front after the oil crisis in the 70s, Denmark is not facing any issues today. Germany is learning bitter lessons that swapping one fossil fuel (coal) for another (gas) doesn’t help. Germany will accelerate renewable energy as a result. Russia could have had 20 more years of big money from Europe. That opportunity has now been squandered.
The Scandinavian Nations are known to be somewhat sanctimonious on these issues Denmark has vast on shore and offshore wind resources, Germany does not. Norway has oil and gas which it uses to subsidies its vast hydro and wind as well as Tesla cars. Sweden has vast wind and hydro resources. Wind and hydro work well together with the hydro being turned up with the wind proves insufficient for a time. Most European nations are not so blessed.
@@williamzk9083 all European countries can make good use of Wind and Solar (the latter doesn’t work so well for Sweden, Denmark and Norway). All countries can use biomass, use clean ways to burn waste and most importantly use the well working European electricity grid to balance local power generation fluctuations. It is ludicrous to rely on energy imports from despots and dictators - for military reasons alone we need to curb fossil fuels.
@@Viggo_Frb Yes but biomass is relatively small contribution. Wind is not as available to Germany and Eastern Europe as it is to the Scandinavian countries who usually have hydro to act as a "battery". Germany is very densely populated, due to the land losses after WW2. Sweden, Denmark and Norway are simply lucky because they have wind and hydro is more plentiful supply.
@@williamzk9083 Germany was asleep at the wheel: they pretty much stopped any new wind projects (especially in Bavaria) and at the same time opposed north/south electricity lines. Germany has of course massive off-shore wind capacity which is not used at all. Lastly, they have more than 1000 solar farms who they don’t let contribute to the net due to some German bureaucracy. TL;DR: They could do so much more and will likely do that to curb gas.
@@Viggo_Frb It doesn't matter how much renewables they add, Germany is not windy or sunny enough for it to be sufficient, especially as there is no way to store the energy they get on that one sunny week in summer and that one windy day in winter, Same for much of Eastern Europe.
These days I suffer from colder and shorter showers. I also switched from cooking meat to eating fresh fruit and veggies and I also walk to shops rather than drive my car. I work from home. I also do fasting for up to 5 days (there is little point doing more). I recycle and try not to waste electricity. My "suffering" is not only making me wealthier and healthier but is also helping Europe with being less dependent on Russian gas, and it is also helping the planet. Also my "suffering" is nothing compared to real ordeals of innocent Ukrainian civilians.
Really excellent summary. I know this stuff of course and to a certain degree it's "obvious", but you've done a great job of flowcharting through the noise:-) Subscribed!!
Its good to come back to this after the winter and see.... you were basically spot on. Europe sought solutions other than Russia very effectively, and endured hardship where it couldn't, and over all it was basically a non-issue.
Straight forward logical thinking as always. I love your honesty when you say at the start that there is no need to watch the video, however it was well worth finishing. I still think the key question is whether Russia's leaders will continue to fear full mobilisation more than clearly losing the war. I would be interested to hear your updated thoughts on this in the near future.
I don't understand why, but it looks like the Russian strategy is playing for time. As soon as Russia drafts all the Babushka's little Ivans, the support for the war doesn't just drop, but it sets up a drop in support over time that is basically linear. I think the Russian strategy is to basically endure the current stalemate, hope the Ukrainians don't get enough western support to actually drive the Russians out, and hope the US and Europe get distracted by something else. Then when the west has forgotten Ukraine in 2 years Russia does their mass draft and push. At that point they will attack a million strong trained force and 3-5 million armed partisans If Russia drafted every Russian male between 18 and 28 they would get 7 million men (Russia is not the Russian empire or USSR, it has about 2/5ths the US population and a low birthrate skewing most of their population towards retirees). Sending 7 million armed with what Russia is able to provide into that Ukraine, even with no western support, is like grabbing a buzzsaw by the blade to stop it. But a draft sooner won't really be better, the Ukrainians won't be as well trained but a Russian draft would probably double US aid. For Russia the choice is between bad, and worse...
The problem with full mobilization for Russia is that they simply do not have the logistics capability to use significantly more troops than they already have in Ukraine. Further, remember the scenes when the Russians sent drafted soldiers on the way to Kyiv? The troops refused to follow orders and in some cases even put nails trough the gasoline tanks of their vehicles in order to not being sent forwards. Now they can mobilize and get an enourmeous force of extremely low morale and poorly trained troops that they are simply unable to supply. Why should they do that?
.. ..than clearly losing the war..' dead right, Brit Intel has told us Russia has massive casualties, out of ammo, troops deserting, hungry, tired and demoralized, senior officers killed and the new ones useless.. while the glorious Azovs/nato/mercs. (2 Brit mercs executed by firing squad this week).. march on to victory BACKWARDS on all fronts.
@@thomashjensen1556 Another problem is of political and propaganda nature. The Russian government spent years demobilizing the public to keep their interest in politics low. This now hinders them in mobilizing for war. Newly fueled patriotism can also turn against the leader. (Thanks to Vlad Vexler for pointing out the importance of keeping the public desinterested)
Jeg liker virkelig godt dine analyser, Hr. Nielsen. Det er så mange som står og gaper og taler over seg om disse tingene ... så det er en lise å høre gjennomtenkte argumenter iblant :-) Hilsen en norsk snekker.
I admit, that is good explanation. On the long run-not delivering gas has some additional bad traits for Russians. 1. Some % of energy alternatives will be fount=too much energy post war=even cheaper gas. 2. Industry in EU will collapse therefore decrease gas dependant consumption=there will be smaller market for gas after war=even lower prices. 3. How Russia will economically and militarily rebuild? There will be no or significantly smaller export market for their products=oil and gas is their export product. 4. Yes-US is paying with weapons; EU is paying with economic degradation and Ukrainians are paying with lives-but burden is shared.
The biggest mistake made by Russia was they continued with gas supplies even after the war started. That meant two things: 1. they actually NEED to sell that gas, that is a big signal for Europe that if they cut themselves from Russian gas Russia will lose (and that might be seen as the reason why countries like Poland cut themselves off as soon as they could because they prepared themselves for that situation) 2. Europe got a half a year of time to work on a solution while they were free to support Ukraine in any way they saw fit. Thanks to that EU countries made sure that those with a big exposure to Russian gas can last at least until the winter is over. Not mentioning that for example France or UK care not that much about Russian gas, the only countries where this strategy could work are Germany, Italy and Czechia and as far as Czechia is concerned, the impact should not be big, we should have enough gas for maybe half a year now, whatever happens we gonna hold out at least to march. But Russians are really good at spreading FUD, as a cryptobro might say. But since they gave us half a year of time for free they blundered their whole strategy.
That last line is interesting. Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) was used to describe Microsoft's practices in the 90s and early 2000s regarding competitors and open source products. As mentioned in the video, they're two different problems. Had Russia cut off gas supplies immediately, everyone would know it was about the war. Yes, it's a sham pretext, but it is the nugget of truth that makes the whole lie work. In the short term it might have stopped some support, but even then Poland and the US would have still gone all out. Everyone would have also still tried to cut away from gas ASAP as an unreliable supplier is more risky than no supplier at all.
That’s partially incorrect. Russia is claiming technical problems with the gas pipeline to avoid being at fault under the contract. Secondly, the Russia-owned company managing Germany gas storage reduced it to a minimum before the war source: bloomberg Germany Has Three Months to Save Itself From a Winter Gas Crisis. Germany delayed support to Ukraine, and have accepted to ignore anything Putin does to the gas supply. Putin planned to use gas as a weapon well before the war started, and the gas weapon failed. Looser is authoritarianism: those states cannot be relied upon. For example, will China suddenly refuse to manufacture iPhones?
I think it's even more unlikely then you portray here. Europe is not a monoblock, I understand that you're talking here largely about western Europe and primarily Germany. But there is also Poland which is already done with russian gas, all of the Baltics, and many other eastern european nations. All of them would have to be VERY heavily pressured by the collective west to stop supporting Ukraine. And considering Poland alone sends tanks by the hundreds it's not small support.
These ex-USSR states know on a deep, personal level about the brutality that the neo-fascist state of Russia is capable of. The FSB/KGB leadership of Russia needs to be completely purged and the liberals of Russia need to come to power for there to ever be a chance for Europe to have a peaceful relationship with that country again. BIG thank you to the Polish and Baltic peoples
@@taan1424 You not supposed to know about it. No, they use LNG ports to buy gas 7x the price, and they they don't even need the Covid recovery fund to empower the russian liberals to take over Moscow. OMG.
Once again great video from Nielsen but I think that you missed two important points. 1) Russia is dependant on revenue from gas and artifiacial gas shortgage can impact gas prices and increas gas revenue so it is more advantageous for Russia than complete stop of gas trade. 2) There is a poor group of people in Europe who cannot look ahead further than a week in the future. They can be source of political unrest. PS: Never forget that Russia has many folds smaller population and economy than EU, USA and Britain combined. Russia cannot win as long as there is will in the west to support Ukraine independance.
@@attilamarics4808 countries whose military (without aid from others) could defeat Russia in a conventional war: US (obviously) China (ditto) UK France Germany now Italy Poland Canada Brazil Israel Japan South Korea Australia (but not NZ, sorry Kiwis) did I miss any?
@@aaronbaker2186 So you pit what exactly against 7000 nukes? Nobody can defeat Russia without total annihilation of themselves. I do hope you try it, we won't.
@@coderentity2079 you are right, in a nuclear war the other nation would be destroyed. But it would probably involve the US or China destroying every man, woman, and child in every major Russian city with nukes too. Remember, after a nuclear war the superpowers will be Brazil and Australia.
@@aaronbaker2186 So your thinking if Russia nukes Kiev, then the US will nuke Moscow, and that's the end of it? The Russians will pack up their other 6999 nukes in the Taiga and say sorry, we didn't mean to do that! FYI Reagen said they woudn't retaliate with nukes if West Europe got attacked back then. Why risk annhiliation? My question: what changed?
Thanks for this very clear and very convincing explanation. Europe can no longer trust Russia for its gas, that an irreversible fact (at least as long poutine is in charge). Because who is the next state on the Russia list ?
China is a customer. Pretty big one. Russia's problem is that they don't have the infrastructure to deliver hydrocarbons to China, or to Asia in general. No pipelines.
@@yurinator4411 By the time EU can cut itself from Russian gas, they can build those pipelines, and the real war can begin without the interdependence on each other. US goal achieved.
@@coderentity2079 Not likely, there are 1000s of miles of pipeline required to reach from where the gas is produced, to China. Not only would it take many years to build, but every inch of the pipelines would be vulnerable to sabotage.
@@yurinator4411 Building new nuclear reactors also takes tens of years, it's a race. Every reactor and every floating LPG ship and terminal also vulnerable to sabotage, so not a real problem to retaliate.
Russia supplied roughly 50% of gas to Germany, the rest comes (mainly) from the North Sea (Norway and Netherlands). Large part of gas supplied by Russia can be supplied from the USA, North Africa and the Middle East as LNG. We are talking about at most 25% reduction in amount of gas available to Germany.
LNG terminals take years and billions of dollars to build and the gas itself become more expensive and less efficient. Sure europe can deal with that in a long run, but the next few years without "just" a quarter of the gas suppled will be hard.
@@taan1424 Not true, floating LNG terminals take just a few months to build. Germany has ordered 5 of them and the first will be operational before the year end, the others coming online start of next year. They are also greatly increasing the capacity of the existing LNG terminals in neighbouring Netherlands, which can supply the German market. This means Germany will be completely independent of Russian gas by Spring of next year, it certainly won’t take years. Even if LNG is slightly more expensive (not a given, see record low gas prices in Britain this summer due to the oversupply of LNG), national security and security of supply is more important.
Good to hear from you again. Local question. How does the war in Ukraine affect the capability of the Russian Baltic Fleet and the 336th Naval Infantry BDE in Baltysk ? - Assuming somewhat low manpower in the BTG’s before the war - and adding looses in Ukraine - they may be seriously degraded for quite a while ?
Edit I was thinking Black fleet, sorry. Thanks r&g for point it out to me. What Baltic fleet? I am being a little bit facetious but it is unable to do the primary job of a Navy, control the waterways. Russia can't use it to support amphibious operations, it is too risky to use it for supply. The best it can offer is a low rate of fire, really expensive, indirect fire platform. Even that will probably rely mostly on the submarines. The real reason Russia agreed to the grain shipments was that the only way to maintain the blockade was submarines sinking civilian ships, and India needs that grain as much as they need Russian oil, so Russia would have weakened themselves trying to keep the blockade up.
You got it sorted :-). The Baltic Fleet is - on paper - quite well armed with a large number of VLS equipped missile corvettes. The big question is how many of the tubes are loaded.. With Kalibr missiles they could strike the UK from the Eastern Baltic, they can definitely do a lot of damage - but I doubt they have the capacity to grab land. The 336 Naval Infantry Brigade is said to have sustained losses in the Mariopul area - hoped Anders had more info. Two of the Baltic 3 Ropucha LST’s are in the Baltic too, wonder if they will get back any time soon. Perhaps Poland/Germany should tease Russia, asking them to return Köningsberg home. Russians are said to have a lot of humor :-)
The world is changed, times are hard and will be harder, Europeans must struggle again not to disappear and by considering that the alternatives are...Russia, China and other..countries..yes I think that with all our defects, Europe is not so bad. It's time to resist, be optimistic and creative.
Sure.. Europeans must struggle for the cia/Mi5 controlled coke-head who was told told to dismember Russia for mad Murikan hegemony. Worry not, Brit Intel has told that Russia has massive casualties, out of ammo, troops deserting, hungry, tired and demoralized, senior officers killed and the new ones useless.. while the glorious Azovs/nato/mercs. (2 Brit mercs executed by firing squad this week).. march on to victory BACKWARDS on all fronts.
America and Canada are happy to sell you our gas and oil, and we share similar values so your consciences would even be clear, not that that was ever a problem for you with Russian sources though
Video is certainly worth watching for me. It makes explaining the gas crisis to others a lot easier because of the excellent car crash analogy. Thank you
Considering that Ukraine was perfectly capable of resisting Russia at the start of the war when Russia was at it's strongest and Ukraine had barely received any western supplies they could probably resist the now much reduced Russian army with their now fairly big arsenal of western weapons even if supplies stopped.
To be fair the first few weeks of the war were rushed, chaotic and quite frankly rather stupid on russias side. Im not here to sing praise for russia, but their combat capabilities (in terms of strategy) definetly are more advanced than at the start. But i dont think that that will tip the war in russias favour.
Uhm, at the start, Ukraine had stocks of Russian-calibre ammuntion, such as 152 mm artillery shells. One of the major problems Ukraine has is that Russian sent terrorists to destroy ammunition stocks throughout eastern Europe in a 2014-2021 terrorism campaign where Russian terrorists struck in Moldova and Bulgaria. So now most of their (Soviet) artillery is running out shells. The western artillery Ukraine has is advanced and better than what Russia has, but lower in numbers and uses the 155 mm. To my knowledge it's not possible to re-bore a 152 mm barrel into a 155 mm and fire NATO standard shells with it. This transition from Russian gear to NATO gear is still ongoing for Ukraine and greatly complicates their logistics situation.
Unfortunately, I do think that Ukraine is absolutely depending on help from the west (arms & money). However, as pointed put, it is very unlikely that western support will suddenly stop
I do not think that this is the case, mainly because: 1. material gets deteriorated. It has to be repaired and re-munitionized. Both currently requires western technology or supplies 2. russia still has an aweful lot of man and material available - especially in regards to artillery (which they can use again fully once UKR runs out of HIMAR missiles or launch tubes which need to be switched regularly) 3. freezing the current frontlike is an economic defeat for UKR: Ukraine heavily relies on its seaports for exports. Surviving the economic impact only is possible with western help. So yeah, unfortunately, I do think it is essential that we do not stop supporting Ukraine. Fortunately, I do not think support will stop.
Right up to the last 60 year old lady, sent to the front after 2 weeks training, to the constant Russian artillery grind. Great thinking.. lucky not your granny. eh?
I generally agree with this analysis, and enjoy Ander's clear way of thinking. The idea that "russia has disqualified itself" however is temporary - I remember OPEC's gas war against the US. We were all relieved when they re-opened their petro markets, and there were few repercussions. Only a few saber-rattlers wanted to have nothing more to do with them, ever. Perhaps the difference was that many US companies were invested in the region. What do you think Anders?
In the longer term, US and African LNG production will expand and largely replace Russian gas dependence. It will be more expensive for us, but more secure. One question I have never seen anyone answer is what is happening to Russian Oil and oil product exports from Europe. Russia exports around 5 to 6 million bbls of Oil and oil related products to Europe daily (around 50 tov60 % of Russian production). Of this around 40 to 50 %b is export from Europe and used on the global market. Whilst European demand for Russian oil is slowly being reduced and eliminated (outside Hingary) are we still permitting Russian oil to trasnsit out of Europe ? TW Russian oil expors will decline anyway come the autumn as they only have 1 all year round port. The rest are iced up from late Autumn to Spring.
Excellent video, I see the gas crisis being talked up a lot. Thanks for the clear break-down of the logical steps as to why Russian assumptions are weak
I turned my gas heating off when Russia invaded. If I have to choose between supporting a genocidal megalomaniac by buying his gas or wearing extra clothing, I will do the latter. It hardly seems like a great sacrifice.
...supporting a genocidal megalomaniac.. did you really expect R to not respond to 8 years of shelling, 15K murdered and.. preparation for full invasion of Donbas and Crimea, as later confirmed by captured nato officers, hiding behind 600 civvies, in their HQ in Azovstel. BBC twisted you some?
My house is now 18 c by choice normally 22 c. Put on a sweater and forget about it. Just like gasoline the real problem is the price. We drive half as much now also. Whatever! F* Russia. Never let a bully win or you will pay for it the rest of your life!
Russia's supposed checkmate is something that can be defeated with wearing winter clothes, import source substitution, nuclear energy and coal gasification. It's equally pathetic how Russia think it's such a master plan, and how people panics at the prospect of Russian gas cutoff.
Interesting analogy with the car accident. Do you think that if the war in Ukraine ended soon, the Europeans would go back to trading with Russia since they would no longer need to throw the Ukrainians under the bus to do so? In other words, do you think the European mistrust of Russia is now a permanent feeling?
No. The russians are a much better country to do business with than Ukraine. Europeans make a lot of money doing business with Russia. I can't understand why but nobody seems to say ukrainien economy is going to go broke and Russia will have a 16% récession ! At least the ukrainiens seem to be getting their grain out of the country
Germany is spending billions building 5 floating LNG terminals, all to be ready by spring next year and they have signed multi year contracts with US, Saudi, etc. to supply those LNG terminals. In other words most of Europe is quickly turning it’s back on Russia and yes it will be permanent. Even if the war stopped tomorrow, they will never again trust Russia. There will likely be some ongoing trade, Hungary jumps to mind, but going forward it will be a fraction of the current trade.
Europe has already decided to phase out Russian energy. It's just a matter of time. At worse Europe get one winter with questionable supply. But that's only a part of Europe. Northern Europe doesn't rely on gas for heating so they most likely will get through the winter with minor electricity price bumps.
The Polish absolute unadulterated hatred towards Russia knows no bounds. And I applaud that from the bottom of my heart. Poland and The Baltics have voiced their concerns about Russia many times, and we were absolute fools for not listening to the people who have that much first hand experience.
The further east you go in europe, the more significant the gas shortage impact will be. Germany will get by and probably restart its Nuclear power generation at least for a few more years. Even if Germany and French (due to nuclear maintenance driven issues) energy shortages did change EU policy, I dont think any of the US, UK, Sweden, Poland would stop supporting Ukraine to the maximum extent possible. The UK whilst not dependent on Russian gas imports, is dependent on European gas storage (although this may reduce by the Autumn somewhat). IF the EU doesnt permit return of UK puchased gas from European storage (a rerun of the early Astra-Zeneca Vaccine dispute) then the UK may have more problems. I think that has more ability to damage European relations than anything Russia can do. The general view in the UK politically is that Germany, France and Italy havent really stepped up to support Kyiv enough and have done so with too much regret, much too slowly. As for recession, much of thew west is going to have a recession come 2023/4 anyway. Even if the ECB didnt react, the US Centeral Bank interest rate rises to totally eliminate inflation has already plased the UK economy into recession and this will get worse. ECB and most other cntral banks are following the same plan, and global interest rate rises are just going to make things more difficult. The double or tripling of energy costs in Europe is just the iceling on the cake which makes things much worse. Unlike previous energy cuts, working from home is much more widespread than ever before, which means that City office heating and electricity costs can be reduced to keep other economic sectors going. In many ways, it will be a return to my childhood in the 70s when we dressed warmly at home in winter and switched of heating and electricity in rooms we didnt use. We have got used to a life of ease, but we are adaptable. I think the much more significant crisi coming out of The Russia/Ukraine war is food shortages and food price cost inflation . Given the 7 to 8 billion population of the earth, the reduction of loss of agriculture from one small country of 44 million people short not cause this level of global proiblem. In addiiton, fertiliser costs are now very high and 2023 harvests will be substanially reduced in quantity and quality as a result. European Govts are still pushing reduction in agricultral output (which is really really stupid given the current situation; its stupid anyway given growing global population) and there is no support to offset higher operating costs for European farmers. They have a cash flow problem as although higher food prices in 2022 onwards generates more income, it isnt enough to pay for upfront fertilisers.
I'm Australian and as committed to consumerism as any European. We don't have an energy shortage but periodically we do have water shortages, during these time we willingly accept that gardens cannot be watered, cars washed, shorter showers etc. I am certain that faced with a gas shortage Europeans will be prepared to turn their thermostats down by a few degrees and to wear an extra layer of clothing.
If some industries are forced to reduce output, Europe is rich enough to ensure that poverty does not result.
Amen to that.
I turned down my thermostat in March, prepping for next winter.
People should wear proper clothes, like in the old days. 90% polyester might be cheap to buy, but useless for warmth.
Ya, enough heat to ensure pipes don’t freeze is the absolute minimum. Every degree higher is just about comfort for healthy people.
Yeah I'd set the thermostat back to 26 just let the ukranians shell their people in the east 8 more years while holding back their pensions, unfunding their schools, forbidding their mother language. Sure, I'm like you.
Russia forgot how Britain literally had major towns and homes bombed regularly during WW2 and they just dealt with it
I am sorry, but this comment and the answer by people talking about "lowering the thermostats" are incredibly asinine. Without gas the whole European industrial complex goes to hell. It's already happening. You guys have ZERO idea where the abundance you grew up in comes from, and the incredible amount of complex factors that are necessary to sustain it. Without energy there is no civilization. But sure, go on parroting the BS spewed by suicidal European politicians, feel free to feel good about supporting the "current thing". By the way, have you ever paid an electric bill, or are your parents still doing it? If you are in Europe, try asking them how it's going. We'll meet again when winter comes.
Regardless of what happens to Ukraine, why the hell would anyone sign another gas supply contract with a vendor who arbitrarily broke the last contract with them, solely in order to "punish them" or "assert dominance"? Price is not the only factor in making purchasing decisions. Reliable and logical long-term trade partners are critical.
Russia is still drinking their own Kool-Aid. Historical example: "King Cotton" didn't work out as planned, either.
It wasnt Russia that broke it thou. I remember guys like you ecouraging western countries to do that. Now you cry when it backfired. The west tried to use it as a weapon against Russia, but our leaders are incompetent not to mention the populace.
@@attilamarics4808 What are you even talking about? Russia did indeed break the contract by suddenly demanding payment in rubles instead of dollars / euros as written in the original contracts. And then also by failing to supply the agreed amount of product during the period specified. It's black and white, no doubt whatsoever.
So their former customers are sourcing the product elsewhere now of course.
"Weapon against Russia?" Are you drunk comrade?
@@Darrylx444 They said that the EU countries can pay in euros, in a russian bank that changes it to rubels and then pay it out. Thats a very big difference. EU countries rejected every solution. You dont know what you are talking about.
@@Darrylx444 So the EU didnt try to use the sanctions against Russia? So the firts month of the conflict didnt happen, when ALL the western media and leaders said the sanctions will make Russia collapse.
You are lying.
@@desj2584 IT was still the EU that broke the deals. Russia let the EU pay in anything they want if they exchange it in the bank into rubels before paying. It was on every youtube page every news site for months. You guys are forgetting inconvenient things pretty fast.
Let me guess you think Ukraine is winning on the battlefield....
The fact that Russia would potentially destroy their European market to save their campaign in Ukraine sniffs of desperation. Even if they somehow pull it off *this winter*, this is the sort of thing that would really make leaders in western Europe think seriously about alternatives. For a block already determined to switch to renewables, this is the sort of kick in the pants that could really speed that transition up. The whole thing feels like a self-goal on the Russian side.
I can't believe Ukraine is that important that they would risk there main clientele. I don't get it. Europe will not go back to his cheap gas. . If he quit now he could probably save some of his gas sales
Russia is bankrupt if they do that. They don't have other distribution channels. So they sit on their gas and can't sell more.
Europe is accelerating plans for alternative sources, From what I recall, Germany is on a crash programme to build a LNG terminal, investment in renewables is increasing, coal plants are being examined to see if they can be put back online and deals are being made with other nations for gas and oil.
Russia has more than likely F**ked itself.
Well the reason why you can't believe it is that you don't understand the geography of the region. Ukraine falling basically creates a foothold for the West to invade Russia and break it up into pieces. That is an existential threat worth far more than whatever revenues could be generated by European energy markets
@@nicholas97223 🤣 The cope is strong in you!
Leaving a comment for the TH-cam algorithm. In times like these reflected commentary and analysis is difficult to come by.
An endorsement from THE CEO himself
I wonder if replies to algorithmic comments also influence the algorithm? Here's hoping.
Your analogy with the car accident is amazing, keep doing these great videos!
Came here to say the same. I'd even argue that the analogy is even more apt than immediately apparent. A very defining feature of Western culture and morality is our (comparatively unique, in terms of prominence) high valuation of human life and freedom (and in particular to this matter, freedom of self-determination): We _really_ don't like seeing a demagogue's murder-in-progress of a free country, _in particular_ not when it happens in our own proverbial back yard; not only because it threatens us indirectly, but because, I think, we've been really quite happy with the relatively peaceful state of affairs that has reigned in Europe since the end of WW2 (the Cold War and the Balkan Wars notwithstanding).
In other words, in this "car crash" the injured persons (Ukraine) takes precedence over, and warrants better and more expensive treatment than, the 'car' (the gas), since it is, when it comes down to it, essentially a replaceable commodity. One that may suck hard to have battered or lost, but ultimately less important.
Fantastisk analyse. Tak for den.
Wow, I can understand Danish!
@@radiosification European Languages are pretty much all from the same family :)
Well, except the two Finno-Ugric ones. They are a family of their own.
@@christopherg2347 There's Latin, Germanic, Slavic, and Finno-Ugric (Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, etc.).
Four different families.
I think the only outlier is Basque.
@@Thor.Jorgensen Actually, the Latin and Germanic languages (at least) also share the same roots; Indo-European, which, as the name implies, stems from ancient migratory tribes from the area that is modern (northwestern?) India.
@@mnxs Do you own a map? Take a good look at it and try to make sense of it. Where do you think these Indo-Europeans must have lived if they are also described as "Caucasian" and "Indo-European" simultaneously.
Is the Caucasus located close to India?
No, this is not how it all went down. Humanity migrated from Africa up through Egypt. The original Europeans migrated across the Caucasus and then west and into Europe. They did not take a detour to lush and fertile India before deciding they wanted to wander across the barren grass steppes of Eastern Europe.
But none of this has anything to do with language. Germanic and Latin languages are separate families. As are Uralic, Celtic, and Slavic languages. They are however all European in origin.
Brilliant. Are there any other commentators left who are as clear and intelligent - and as smartly dressed! - as Anders?! Respect!
Really appreciate your analysis!! Thank you for making these videos!!
My favourite piece of Russian propoganda was that the UK is resorting to cannibalism to cope with sanctions.
Who can believe that? Have you seen how UK citizens look? :) :)
Knowing British cuisine, that's one piece of Russian news that I instantly believed.
Oh they love those exaggerations. They have their own shit shows where they constantly talk about things like this, feeding average (and below average) russian citizens.
@@jamesmccaul2945 same here, I can confirm we are moments from eating our own children.
@@jamesmccaul2945 Haha. Bon appetit :)
One of the better examples of clear, critical and logical thinking that I’ve seen on the internet for some time.
Excellent analysis. Always worthwhile listening to a pro.
Finally someone gives a proper analysis.
News sites are utterly useless at this point.
Very good analysis. Thank you.
Another great analysis Anders, many thanks!
Another Master class in Logic. Thank you Anders.
Very good, multidimensional analysis. Respect.
Really Well done Anders- Well done analysis. Not to Short, not to Long👏🏼
Excellent analysis, thank you !
Thank you for covering Russian aggression against Ukraine.
Mr. Nielsen, you are really one of the best, if not the best, analyst that I have seen or heard. You are the real professional.. Would love to see your future projections for Belarus for medium/long term. Lithuanian viewer here.
You know, when you lay it out like that, the idea that weaponising gas will win the Russians this war does indeed sound like total bollocks.
Brilliant video, Anders. Great insights and comments on the topic.
Tak for endnu en god analyse af disse ting. :)
Commenting a 2nd time, for the algorithm. This is such a good video.
I have a small income and I have cut back buying some things. Though hearing about maybe putting on an extra sweater this winter, reminds me of my childhood and the oil crises in the 1970's (which wasn't that hard at all). I long made my mind up. I felt somehow glad to be able doing this if it could be of any help to the people of Ukraine. For all the suffering during this war Ukraine has certainly come to fame and we will never forget the spirit of this people. Wish that I had hair to get the Ukrainian Cossack hairstyle, because the Russians use that hairstyle as a bad word for Ukrainians (Khokohl). Looked pretty good on Björn in "The Vikings".
Well said, you took the words out of my mouth. 👍 Slava Ukraini.
superb analysis a+++
I discovered Anders Puck Nielsen yesterday, I've already watched 3 videos and I really liked it, structured thinking and of course. Thanks from Portugal and keep up the good work. I recommend.
Excellent analysis of this gaz issue related to the Ukranian war.
My compliments for this - i am listening to yr video on 14.9 and it is spot on
Yes. Well argued. Although I would add the "root cause" of the gas crisis is believing, mistakenly, tragically, that Russia is a reliable source of cheap energy. It is not, and never will be no matter who sits in the Kremlin. This was an error Europe (and especially Germany) made once. I hope they are wise enough not to make the same mistake ever - ever- again.
thats very charitable of you the germans have a long history of repeating mistakes.
They should have realized that when Putin cancelled all the production sharing agreements except one and nationalized those projects on the excuse of environmental concerns.
Anybody who has been to Russia knows that Russian companies are the worst for environmental concerns and typical Russian standards for oil and gas projects is to build the project however you want and then write up how it was built based on the Russian standards.
But Europe has realized the old saying 'fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.' But I believe that Europe ( especially Germany) has tried so hard to integrate Russia into Europe as a partner but every time Russia screws them.
@@tom4115 I'm British and I can tell you the Germans only make the same mistake twice!
(I'm really ashamed of myself but I couldn't resist this old joke given the perfect setup!)
Russia has been a trustworthy supplier of oil and gas for Germany even in the hights of the cold war. So seeing them as a good source was nothing based on not learning from the past. Additionally you have to consider that the alternative basically were islamic states in the middle east. There's no excuse to have not sped up with renewable energy and infrastructure for renewable energy. But using gas instead of oil and coal was not that bad idea in the beginning. Not re-evaluating after 2014 was a problem.
@@joachimfrank4134 The USSR might have been a reliable partner, but Russia under Putin is not.
As always, thorough analysis and excellent presented. 👌
very good explanation, thank you !
Superb analysis, 👍
Thank you so much for clearing this up. Great video, Anders! 👍
Great video, thank you!
Дякую з України)
At the same time, here in Europe we need to accept that the days of cheap, reliable energy are over. Putin’s strategy just drives home the point that never again can Russia been seen as a reliable supplier, even if its gas is cheap.
That won't means much when people are freezing to death in the winter.
Remember WW2 when it was the Allies against Germany, Italy and Japan? 2 atom bombs were dropped on Japan, Germany was split in 2. And Russia and China were on our side.
It didn't take long for Russia to be the enemy, Japan and Western Germany to be essential allies, and for China to be a war enemy in Korea, Vietnam etc.
There are people that say the longer term view is to have Russia on our side against China. Because China will be a huge threat to Russia soon.
States very quickly get back to business after a war is over.
I hope Ukraine gets all it's land back and that there is lasting peace for strategic areas.
@@huntergatherer7796 No one is going to freeze. False assumption.
Nuclear will produce cheap and reliable energy again. A new generation of SMR from NuScale and Rolls Royce will make it so.
In Denmark, it is not unusual to have almost free electricity, due to wind turbines, and we're building a crap ton of them. so electricity will become cheaper.
All that will happen is that countries will decarbonize faster to regain energy independence. Denmark took decisive action on that front after the oil crisis in the 70s, Denmark is not facing any issues today. Germany is learning bitter lessons that swapping one fossil fuel (coal) for another (gas) doesn’t help. Germany will accelerate renewable energy as a result. Russia could have had 20 more years of big money from Europe. That opportunity has now been squandered.
The Scandinavian Nations are known to be somewhat sanctimonious on these issues Denmark has vast on shore and offshore wind resources, Germany does not. Norway has oil and gas which it uses to subsidies its vast hydro and wind as well as Tesla cars. Sweden has vast wind and hydro resources. Wind and hydro work well together with the hydro being turned up with the wind proves insufficient for a time. Most European nations are not so blessed.
@@williamzk9083 all European countries can make good use of Wind and Solar (the latter doesn’t work so well for Sweden, Denmark and Norway). All countries can use biomass, use clean ways to burn waste and most importantly use the well working European electricity grid to balance local power generation fluctuations. It is ludicrous to rely on energy imports from despots and dictators - for military reasons alone we need to curb fossil fuels.
@@Viggo_Frb Yes but biomass is relatively small contribution. Wind is not as available to Germany and Eastern Europe as it is to the Scandinavian countries who usually have hydro to act as a "battery". Germany is very densely populated, due to the land losses after WW2. Sweden, Denmark and Norway are simply lucky because they have wind and hydro is more plentiful supply.
@@williamzk9083 Germany was asleep at the wheel: they pretty much stopped any new wind projects (especially in Bavaria) and at the same time opposed north/south electricity lines. Germany has of course massive off-shore wind capacity which is not used at all. Lastly, they have more than 1000 solar farms who they don’t let contribute to the net due to some German bureaucracy. TL;DR: They could do so much more and will likely do that to curb gas.
@@Viggo_Frb It doesn't matter how much renewables they add, Germany is not windy or sunny enough for it to be sufficient, especially as there is no way to store the energy they get on that one sunny week in summer and that one windy day in winter, Same for much of Eastern Europe.
These days I suffer from colder and shorter showers. I also switched from cooking meat to eating fresh fruit and veggies and I also walk to shops rather than drive my car. I work from home. I also do fasting for up to 5 days (there is little point doing more). I recycle and try not to waste electricity. My "suffering" is not only making me wealthier and healthier but is also helping Europe with being less dependent on Russian gas, and it is also helping the planet. Also my "suffering" is nothing compared to real ordeals of innocent Ukrainian civilians.
Also your suffering is nothing to the ordeals of innocent people in LPR/DPR suffering for the last 8 years. You seem to forget that.
Wonderful coverage like always Anders
Really excellent summary. I know this stuff of course and to a certain degree it's "obvious", but you've done a great job of flowcharting through the noise:-) Subscribed!!
Thanks for the great analysis
Very informative video. Thanks
Nice videos! I love how you use formal logic to make your points clear, thanks!
Nice explanation. Thanks.
Very well broken down and explained. Good video.
You did a great job at explaining everything. Thank you for this video.
Its good to come back to this after the winter and see.... you were basically spot on. Europe sought solutions other than Russia very effectively, and endured hardship where it couldn't, and over all it was basically a non-issue.
Straight forward logical thinking as always. I love your honesty when you say at the start that there is no need to watch the video, however it was well worth finishing. I still think the key question is whether Russia's leaders will continue to fear full mobilisation more than clearly losing the war. I would be interested to hear your updated thoughts on this in the near future.
I don't understand why, but it looks like the Russian strategy is playing for time. As soon as Russia drafts all the Babushka's little Ivans, the support for the war doesn't just drop, but it sets up a drop in support over time that is basically linear.
I think the Russian strategy is to basically endure the current stalemate, hope the Ukrainians don't get enough western support to actually drive the Russians out, and hope the US and Europe get distracted by something else. Then when the west has forgotten Ukraine in 2 years Russia does their mass draft and push.
At that point they will attack a million strong trained force and 3-5 million armed partisans If Russia drafted every Russian male between 18 and 28 they would get 7 million men (Russia is not the Russian empire or USSR, it has about 2/5ths the US population and a low birthrate skewing most of their population towards retirees). Sending 7 million armed with what Russia is able to provide into that Ukraine, even with no western support, is like grabbing a buzzsaw by the blade to stop it.
But a draft sooner won't really be better, the Ukrainians won't be as well trained but a Russian draft would probably double US aid. For Russia the choice is between bad, and worse...
The problem with full mobilization for Russia is that they simply do not have the logistics capability to use significantly more troops than they already have in Ukraine. Further, remember the scenes when the Russians sent drafted soldiers on the way to Kyiv? The troops refused to follow orders and in some cases even put nails trough the gasoline tanks of their vehicles in order to not being sent forwards. Now they can mobilize and get an enourmeous force of extremely low morale and poorly trained troops that they are simply unable to supply. Why should they do that?
..
..than clearly losing the war..' dead right, Brit Intel has told us Russia has massive casualties, out of ammo, troops deserting, hungry, tired and demoralized, senior officers killed and the new ones useless.. while the glorious Azovs/nato/mercs. (2 Brit mercs executed by firing squad this week).. march on to victory BACKWARDS on all fronts.
@@thomashjensen1556 How exactly lost their capability since WW2?
@@thomashjensen1556 Another problem is of political and propaganda nature. The Russian government spent years demobilizing the public to keep their interest in politics low. This now hinders them in mobilizing for war. Newly fueled patriotism can also turn against the leader.
(Thanks to Vlad Vexler for pointing out the importance of keeping the public desinterested)
Thanks for presenting a listenable point of view.
Som altid knivskarp knastør analyse. 👍😁
Håller med.
Thanks for this excellent analysis, Anders!
Jeg liker virkelig godt dine analyser, Hr. Nielsen.
Det er så mange som står og gaper og taler over seg om disse tingene ...
så det er en lise å høre gjennomtenkte argumenter iblant :-)
Hilsen en norsk snekker.
Solid commentary. Thanks!
100% correct. For me the cost of war is in my pocket. A few extra pounds on my electricity bill is nothing compared to the suffering of others.
Refreshing, candid and persuasive. Thank you.
I admit, that is good explanation. On the long run-not delivering gas has some additional bad traits for Russians. 1. Some % of energy alternatives will be fount=too much energy post war=even cheaper gas. 2. Industry in EU will collapse therefore decrease gas dependant consumption=there will be smaller market for gas after war=even lower prices. 3. How Russia will economically and militarily rebuild? There will be no or significantly smaller export market for their products=oil and gas is their export product. 4. Yes-US is paying with weapons; EU is paying with economic degradation and Ukrainians are paying with lives-but burden is shared.
Clear and convincing. Thanks for your analysis.
The biggest mistake made by Russia was they continued with gas supplies even after the war started. That meant two things: 1. they actually NEED to sell that gas, that is a big signal for Europe that if they cut themselves from Russian gas Russia will lose (and that might be seen as the reason why countries like Poland cut themselves off as soon as they could because they prepared themselves for that situation) 2. Europe got a half a year of time to work on a solution while they were free to support Ukraine in any way they saw fit. Thanks to that EU countries made sure that those with a big exposure to Russian gas can last at least until the winter is over. Not mentioning that for example France or UK care not that much about Russian gas, the only countries where this strategy could work are Germany, Italy and Czechia and as far as Czechia is concerned, the impact should not be big, we should have enough gas for maybe half a year now, whatever happens we gonna hold out at least to march.
But Russians are really good at spreading FUD, as a cryptobro might say. But since they gave us half a year of time for free they blundered their whole strategy.
That last line is interesting. Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) was used to describe Microsoft's practices in the 90s and early 2000s regarding competitors and open source products.
As mentioned in the video, they're two different problems. Had Russia cut off gas supplies immediately, everyone would know it was about the war. Yes, it's a sham pretext, but it is the nugget of truth that makes the whole lie work. In the short term it might have stopped some support, but even then Poland and the US would have still gone all out. Everyone would have also still tried to cut away from gas ASAP as an unreliable supplier is more risky than no supplier at all.
Austria and Hunguary are also addictted to Russian gas.
@@arthurmoore9488 If You don't see the Fnord it can't eat You 😏
Well it sort of worked in Hungary, though even there the argument is mostly hot air because Orban was bought and paid for to begin with.
That’s partially incorrect. Russia is claiming technical problems with the gas pipeline to avoid being at fault under the contract. Secondly, the Russia-owned company managing Germany gas storage reduced it to a minimum before the war source: bloomberg Germany Has Three Months to Save Itself From a Winter Gas Crisis. Germany delayed support to Ukraine, and have accepted to ignore anything Putin does to the gas supply. Putin planned to use gas as a weapon well before the war started, and the gas weapon failed. Looser is authoritarianism: those states cannot be relied upon. For example, will China suddenly refuse to manufacture iPhones?
Great breakdown!
I think it's even more unlikely then you portray here. Europe is not a monoblock, I understand that you're talking here largely about western Europe and primarily Germany. But there is also Poland which is already done with russian gas, all of the Baltics, and many other eastern european nations. All of them would have to be VERY heavily pressured by the collective west to stop supporting Ukraine. And considering Poland alone sends tanks by the hundreds it's not small support.
These ex-USSR states know on a deep, personal level about the brutality that the neo-fascist state of Russia is capable of. The FSB/KGB leadership of Russia needs to be completely purged and the liberals of Russia need to come to power for there to ever be a chance for Europe to have a peaceful relationship with that country again. BIG thank you to the Polish and Baltic peoples
And then there is Orban and Hungary...
Nobody’s ever talking about Germany. It’s all just stupid fantasies!
Dont they just buy back the Russian gas from Germany?
@@taan1424 You not supposed to know about it. No, they use LNG ports to buy gas 7x the price, and they they don't even need the Covid recovery fund to empower the russian liberals to take over Moscow.
OMG.
Clear as always and I agree. Thanks!
Once again great video from Nielsen but I think that you missed two important points.
1) Russia is dependant on revenue from gas and artifiacial gas shortgage can impact gas prices and increas gas revenue so it is more advantageous for Russia than complete stop of gas trade.
2) There is a poor group of people in Europe who cannot look ahead further than a week in the future. They can be source of political unrest.
PS: Never forget that Russia has many folds smaller population and economy than EU, USA and Britain combined. Russia cannot win as long as there is will in the west to support Ukraine independance.
Yeah the west support Ukraine with the least ammount because they are so strong.
@@attilamarics4808 countries whose military (without aid from others) could defeat Russia in a conventional war:
US (obviously)
China (ditto)
UK
France
Germany now
Italy
Poland
Canada
Brazil
Israel
Japan
South Korea
Australia (but not NZ, sorry Kiwis)
did I miss any?
@@aaronbaker2186 So you pit what exactly against 7000 nukes?
Nobody can defeat Russia without total annihilation of themselves.
I do hope you try it, we won't.
@@coderentity2079 you are right, in a nuclear war the other nation would be destroyed. But it would probably involve the US or China destroying every man, woman, and child in every major Russian city with nukes too.
Remember, after a nuclear war the superpowers will be Brazil and Australia.
@@aaronbaker2186 So your thinking if Russia nukes Kiev, then the US will nuke Moscow, and that's the end of it? The Russians will pack up their other 6999 nukes in the Taiga and say sorry, we didn't mean to do that!
FYI Reagen said they woudn't retaliate with nukes if West Europe got attacked back then. Why risk annhiliation?
My question: what changed?
Very interesting video. I think i will watch it again.
Tak for endnu en god og forståelig analyse.
Rigtig gode pointer Anders
Thanks for this very clear and very convincing explanation. Europe can no longer trust Russia for its gas, that an irreversible fact (at least as long poutine is in charge). Because who is the next state on the Russia list ?
He is so good
Great video , love your content.
Interesting. Thank you.
The problem with gas as a weapon is that when Russia runs out of paying customers they will run out of money.
That pretty much sums it all up right there. You run your customers off you go broke.
China is a customer. Pretty big one. Russia's problem is that they don't have the infrastructure to deliver hydrocarbons to China, or to Asia in general. No pipelines.
@@yurinator4411 By the time EU can cut itself from Russian gas, they can build those pipelines, and the real war can begin without the interdependence on each other. US goal achieved.
@@coderentity2079 Not likely, there are 1000s of miles of pipeline required to reach from where the gas is produced, to China. Not only would it take many years to build, but every inch of the pipelines would be vulnerable to sabotage.
@@yurinator4411 Building new nuclear reactors also takes tens of years, it's a race.
Every reactor and every floating LPG ship and terminal also vulnerable to sabotage, so not a real problem to retaliate.
Brilliant analysis!
Comment for the algorithm!
Reply ditto.
@@andrewharrison8436 Furious reply, absolutely refuting you preposterous claims regarding said reply!
Good video even 2 years later. Was pretty on point in hindsight.
Russia supplied roughly 50% of gas to Germany, the rest comes (mainly) from the North Sea (Norway and Netherlands). Large part of gas supplied by Russia can be supplied from the USA, North Africa and the Middle East as LNG. We are talking about at most 25% reduction in amount of gas available to Germany.
It's also like, of all the countries in the world to pick on, why *Germany*? The russians really think the *germans* are soft???
LNG terminals take years and billions of dollars to build and the gas itself become more expensive and less efficient. Sure europe can deal with that in a long run, but the next few years without "just" a quarter of the gas suppled will be hard.
@@taan1424 Not true, floating LNG terminals take just a few months to build. Germany has ordered 5 of them and the first will be operational before the year end, the others coming online start of next year. They are also greatly increasing the capacity of the existing LNG terminals in neighbouring Netherlands, which can supply the German market.
This means Germany will be completely independent of Russian gas by Spring of next year, it certainly won’t take years.
Even if LNG is slightly more expensive (not a given, see record low gas prices in Britain this summer due to the oversupply of LNG), national security and security of supply is more important.
@@bk99911 That problem can be solved with 5 Kinzhals.
@@bk99911 but Asian countries are buying lot of LNG
Excellent analysis (and presentation)!
Fantastisk gode videoer
Good to hear from you again. Local question. How does the war in Ukraine affect the capability of the Russian Baltic Fleet and the 336th Naval Infantry BDE in Baltysk ? - Assuming somewhat low manpower in the BTG’s before the war - and adding looses in Ukraine - they may be seriously degraded for quite a while ?
Edit I was thinking Black fleet, sorry. Thanks r&g for point it out to me.
What Baltic fleet? I am being a little bit facetious but it is unable to do the primary job of a Navy, control the waterways. Russia can't use it to support amphibious operations, it is too risky to use it for supply. The best it can offer is a low rate of fire, really expensive, indirect fire platform. Even that will probably rely mostly on the submarines.
The real reason Russia agreed to the grain shipments was that the only way to maintain the blockade was submarines sinking civilian ships, and India needs that grain as much as they need Russian oil, so Russia would have weakened themselves trying to keep the blockade up.
@@aaronbaker2186 Baltic fleet. Kaliningrad.Not the Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol.
@@rg-cc5kg ack, you are right! Sorry.
You got it sorted :-). The Baltic Fleet is - on paper - quite well armed with a large number of VLS equipped missile corvettes. The big question is how many of the tubes are loaded.. With Kalibr missiles they could strike the UK from the Eastern Baltic, they can definitely do a lot of damage - but I doubt they have the capacity to grab land. The 336 Naval Infantry Brigade is said to have sustained losses in the Mariopul area - hoped Anders had more info. Two of the Baltic 3 Ropucha LST’s are in the Baltic too, wonder if they will get back any time soon.
Perhaps Poland/Germany should tease Russia, asking them to return Köningsberg home. Russians are said to have a lot of humor :-)
Fantastic video and spot on analysis. Thanks and keep up the good work! 👍
The world is changed, times are hard and will be harder, Europeans must struggle again not to disappear and by considering that the alternatives are...Russia, China and other..countries..yes I think that with all our defects, Europe is not so bad. It's time to resist, be optimistic and creative.
Russia is a has been country that looses more and more. The Chinese will turn them into their resources delivery boy.
Sure.. Europeans must struggle for the cia/Mi5 controlled coke-head who was told told to dismember Russia for mad Murikan hegemony. Worry not, Brit Intel has told that Russia has massive casualties, out of ammo, troops deserting, hungry, tired and demoralized, senior officers killed and the new ones useless.. while the glorious Azovs/nato/mercs. (2 Brit mercs executed by firing squad this week).. march on to victory BACKWARDS on all fronts.
America and Canada are happy to sell you our gas and oil, and we share similar values so your consciences would even be clear, not that that was ever a problem for you with Russian sources though
Video is certainly worth watching for me. It makes explaining the gas crisis to others a lot easier because of the excellent car crash analogy. Thank you
Considering that Ukraine was perfectly capable of resisting Russia at the start of the war when Russia was at it's strongest and Ukraine had barely received any western supplies they could probably resist the now much reduced Russian army with their now fairly big arsenal of western weapons even if supplies stopped.
To be fair the first few weeks of the war were rushed, chaotic and quite frankly rather stupid on russias side.
Im not here to sing praise for russia, but their combat capabilities (in terms of strategy) definetly are more advanced than at the start.
But i dont think that that will tip the war in russias favour.
Uhm, at the start, Ukraine had stocks of Russian-calibre ammuntion, such as 152 mm artillery shells.
One of the major problems Ukraine has is that Russian sent terrorists to destroy ammunition stocks throughout eastern Europe in a 2014-2021 terrorism campaign where Russian terrorists struck in Moldova and Bulgaria.
So now most of their (Soviet) artillery is running out shells.
The western artillery Ukraine has is advanced and better than what Russia has, but lower in numbers and uses the 155 mm.
To my knowledge it's not possible to re-bore a 152 mm barrel into a 155 mm and fire NATO standard shells with it.
This transition from Russian gear to NATO gear is still ongoing for Ukraine and greatly complicates their logistics situation.
Unfortunately, I do think that Ukraine is absolutely depending on help from the west (arms & money). However, as pointed put, it is very unlikely that western support will suddenly stop
Ukraine has already depleted most of it's reserves of Soviet era armaments. That is why they have to switch to NATO standard weapons.
I do not think that this is the case, mainly because:
1. material gets deteriorated. It has to be repaired and re-munitionized. Both currently requires western technology or supplies
2. russia still has an aweful lot of man and material available - especially in regards to artillery (which they can use again fully once UKR runs out of HIMAR missiles or launch tubes which need to be switched regularly)
3. freezing the current frontlike is an economic defeat for UKR: Ukraine heavily relies on its seaports for exports. Surviving the economic impact only is possible with western help.
So yeah, unfortunately, I do think it is essential that we do not stop supporting Ukraine. Fortunately, I do not think support will stop.
Thank you sir, for a great video as always
I agree. There is zero chance the US will stop supporting Ukraine. 💛💙🤘
We already have manufacturing of weapons going on just for that war.
Unless Marjorie Taylor Greene or Gaetz manage to take over the Capitol ;)
Right up to the last 60 year old lady, sent to the front after 2 weeks training, to the constant Russian artillery grind. Great thinking.. lucky not your granny. eh?
@@TommyTCGT She probably would. My grandma was in the army in WW2. She was a real American. They don't make them like that anymore. 👊😎🤘🇺🇸🇺🇸
I generally agree with this analysis, and enjoy Ander's clear way of thinking. The idea that "russia has disqualified itself" however is temporary - I remember OPEC's gas war against the US. We were all relieved when they re-opened their petro markets, and there were few repercussions. Only a few saber-rattlers wanted to have nothing more to do with them, ever. Perhaps the difference was that many US companies were invested in the region. What do you think Anders?
In the longer term, US and African LNG production will expand and largely replace Russian gas dependence. It will be more expensive for us, but more secure.
One question I have never seen anyone answer is what is happening to Russian Oil and oil product exports from Europe. Russia exports around 5 to 6 million bbls of Oil and oil related products to Europe daily (around 50 tov60 % of Russian production). Of this around 40 to 50 %b is export from Europe and used on the global market.
Whilst European demand for Russian oil is slowly being reduced and eliminated (outside Hingary) are we still permitting Russian oil to trasnsit out of Europe ?
TW Russian oil expors will decline anyway come the autumn as they only have 1 all year round port. The rest are iced up from late Autumn to Spring.
Excellent video, I see the gas crisis being talked up a lot. Thanks for the clear break-down of the logical steps as to why Russian assumptions are weak
I turned my gas heating off when Russia invaded. If I have to choose between supporting a genocidal megalomaniac by buying his gas or wearing extra clothing, I will do the latter. It hardly seems like a great sacrifice.
...supporting a genocidal megalomaniac.. did you really expect R to not respond to 8 years of shelling, 15K murdered and.. preparation for full invasion of Donbas and Crimea, as later confirmed by captured nato officers, hiding behind 600 civvies, in their HQ in Azovstel. BBC twisted you some?
@@TommyTCGT Let me get this straight: you think Putin started this war in 2014 because the Ukrainians were shelling their own cities.
Appreciate your perspective on this.
My house is now 18 c by choice normally 22 c. Put on a sweater and forget about it. Just like gasoline the real problem is the price. We drive half as much now also. Whatever! F* Russia. Never let a bully win or you will pay for it the rest of your life!
what a great channel this is, keep it up. Can we have an update on how sanctions are affecting Russia as we go into autumn
Russia's supposed checkmate is something that can be defeated with wearing winter clothes, import source substitution, nuclear energy and coal gasification.
It's equally pathetic how Russia think it's such a master plan, and how people panics at the prospect of Russian gas cutoff.
Altid godt at høre din tolkning!
mvh Jensen
Interesting analogy with the car accident. Do you think that if the war in Ukraine ended soon, the Europeans would go back to trading with Russia since they would no longer need to throw the Ukrainians under the bus to do so? In other words, do you think the European mistrust of Russia is now a permanent feeling?
Yes, they would. Even right now, Greek traitors are using Greek ships to transport stolen Ukrainian grain and oil from the Russians.
I really hope so. Never deal with a bully
No. The russians are a much better country to do business with than Ukraine. Europeans make a lot of money doing business with Russia. I can't understand why but nobody seems to say ukrainien economy is going to go broke and Russia will have a 16% récession ! At least the ukrainiens seem to be getting their grain out of the country
Europe was converting to wind, solar, etc already. Switching heating from gas to heatpumps is trivial. There will be no going back to Russian energy.
Germany is spending billions building 5 floating LNG terminals, all to be ready by spring next year and they have signed multi year contracts with US, Saudi, etc. to supply those LNG terminals. In other words most of Europe is quickly turning it’s back on Russia and yes it will be permanent. Even if the war stopped tomorrow, they will never again trust Russia. There will likely be some ongoing trade, Hungary jumps to mind, but going forward it will be a fraction of the current trade.
Another great video. Thanks
Europe has already decided to phase out Russian energy. It's just a matter of time.
At worse Europe get one winter with questionable supply. But that's only a part of Europe. Northern Europe doesn't rely on gas for heating so they most likely will get through the winter with minor electricity price bumps.
Hi Anders - thanks for your insightful videos.
To send weapons to Ukraine, the US needs Poland for transit. But that's not an issue. Poland will not surrender to the Russian just because it's cold.
The Polish absolute unadulterated hatred towards Russia knows no bounds. And I applaud that from the bottom of my heart. Poland and The Baltics have voiced their concerns about Russia many times, and we were absolute fools for not listening to the people who have that much first hand experience.
In answer to the question - Hell YES!
Thank you for another thoughtful and insightful video. Russian trolls and propaganda are always a trip....
sadly some will freeze because every energy source got significantly more expensive (gas, electricity, wood).
The further east you go in europe, the more significant the gas shortage impact will be. Germany will get by and probably restart its Nuclear power generation at least for a few more years. Even if Germany and French (due to nuclear maintenance driven issues) energy shortages did change EU policy, I dont think any of the US, UK, Sweden, Poland would stop supporting Ukraine to the maximum extent possible.
The UK whilst not dependent on Russian gas imports, is dependent on European gas storage (although this may reduce by the Autumn somewhat). IF the EU doesnt permit return of UK puchased gas from European storage (a rerun of the early Astra-Zeneca Vaccine dispute) then the UK may have more problems. I think that has more ability to damage European relations than anything Russia can do. The general view in the UK politically is that Germany, France and Italy havent really stepped up to support Kyiv enough and have done so with too much regret, much too slowly.
As for recession, much of thew west is going to have a recession come 2023/4 anyway. Even if the ECB didnt react, the US Centeral Bank interest rate rises to totally eliminate inflation has already plased the UK economy into recession and this will get worse. ECB and most other cntral banks are following the same plan, and global interest rate rises are just going to make things more difficult. The double or tripling of energy costs in Europe is just the iceling on the cake which makes things much worse.
Unlike previous energy cuts, working from home is much more widespread than ever before, which means that City office heating and electricity costs can be reduced to keep other economic sectors going. In many ways, it will be a return to my childhood in the 70s when we dressed warmly at home in winter and switched of heating and electricity in rooms we didnt use. We have got used to a life of ease, but we are adaptable.
I think the much more significant crisi coming out of The Russia/Ukraine war is food shortages and food price cost inflation . Given the 7 to 8 billion population of the earth, the reduction of loss of agriculture from one small country of 44 million people short not cause this level of global proiblem. In addiiton, fertiliser costs are now very high and 2023 harvests will be substanially reduced in quantity and quality as a result. European Govts are still pushing reduction in agricultral output (which is really really stupid given the current situation; its stupid anyway given growing global population) and there is no support to offset higher operating costs for European farmers. They have a cash flow problem as although higher food prices in 2022 onwards generates more income, it isnt enough to pay for upfront fertilisers.