CORRECTION: At 2:57, we say that TurkStream was originally commissioned as Blue Stream. This isn't quite correct: TurkStream is actually a replacement for Blue Stream 2, first suggested up by Putin in 2009. Blue Stream was the first Russia-Turkey gas pipeline, which began pumping gas in 2005. Blue Stream 2, which would have run parallel to Blue Stream, was proposed by Putin in 2009, but it never took off. Blue Stream 2 was replaced by South Stream, which was in turn replaced by TurkStream after it was cancelled by the Russian government in 2014.
BTW South Stream was cancelled because it wouldn't comply with EU open access regulation. Makes you wonder how TurkStream extension, dubbed Balkan Stream, passed the same regulation when Gazprom booked all capacity 10 years in advance, without providing access to third parties.
Western hypocrisy.!!!! western imperialism, you just want all the mines and oil pipelines to be yours, right and the ex-mining countries remain poor. die you western impalism
One of the main problems with the Trans-Saharian pipeline is the relations between Spain, Morocco and Algeria, especially in regards to the Western Sahara issue. A video on the matter would be helpful.
France is the only country that at least partially figured it out, with nuclear. When I was a kid my dad always told me what a huge mistake it was that Italy was closing its nuclear plants down. You were right dad.
I suppose back then we were all dealing with a rational soviet government, and there was optimism when the curtain came down. We now have a Russia run by gangsters, bordering on fascist
What the EU uses natural gas for might make an interesting video. I.e. percentage of domestic, industrial and power generation and which countries could be using greener alternatives.
Renewables are far too unreliable in their output to be used by big economies, at best renewables are 'gas savers' if and when they do decide to produce any power. Gas turbines are the only things agile enough to keep up with renewables and renewables need 100% backup. Too much gas is used to back up renewables when it can be used at 95% efficiency in domestic condensing boilers - and that is why gas is so much in demand, to back up the shortfalls from over-hyped renewables.
No government on earth really cares about the .04 per cent of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere. Me neither. It's ridiculous. CO2 is a natural, clean gas that is vital for all life and is not doing anybody any harm on earth. Nor has any government really and truly ever even tried to replace fossil fuels for environmental reasons. The whole climate scam has never been anything but a smoke screen to conceal what is, in fact, a worldwide scramble to secure remaining oil and gas reserves for the various competing power groups. That was the real reason behind Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan again, Iraq, again, Libya, Yemen, Syria, etc etc. It's all about oil and gas. Nobody's trying to do without it. They're all trying to do with it. That struggle is winding down now. The west has lost, and spent itself into ruin doing so. They're grasping at straws hoping that the Ukrainians (who couldn't even keep their country running during the best of times) are going to miraculously defeat Russia for them, and for free at that. But they're finding out that there ain't no free lunch. That phony war is costing them more than a real one would. But by now, the die is cast. They can't go back and change strategy, they've already wagered everything they have on a losing hand. They can't even beat the cards they can see, and there are plenty more cards they can't see. Does anybody even really believe that the US military would launch a major offensive against Russia on the orders of Joe Biden, or that Europe would follow suit? The US used NATO and the CIA to create the present war in order to prevent NorthStream 2 from coming on line. It wasn't to help Ukraine or protect Europe. It was to sacrifice Ukraine and severely impact Europe in an effort to keep Europe and Russia from getting too friendly with each other. But they didn't realize just how costly that strategy would turn out to be. The US is going to lose Europe entirely over it.
Interesting oil and gas history lesson. I had no idea the relationship went back that far. Given the loss of European colonies after WWII that makes sense.
It all comes down to money and time You'd be surprised how fast political issues between nations evaporate when money is on the line. Countries that don't like each other will get along really fast when there is money to be made The bigger problem is the building of any pipeline will take a lot of time. So unless their is a pipeline already in place it is already to late to help Europe with the coming winter
I doubt it will take a lot of time when the entire EU economy is in danger. Those pipelines will be made a continental priority once the reservoirs run out
@@6042833 Probably longer than a couple years. It will take them 5 - 10 years. Just the pipeline could take a few years, and a few more to actually get all the resources like equipment and special workers all in the right places and then to start extracting the oil. Not considering the politics and business deals needed to be made for all of these things to happen.
It is so frustrating how stupid Europe has been. Ever since Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, they should have had a plan for deteriorating relations with Russia.
nope, the threat was ignored on purpose. Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania were warning of exactly this, not only that, both Lithuania and Poland build LNG terminals to be diversify and prepare. All the warnings were dismissed by bribed western EU politicians as "some weird alarmism". Merkel was red in the face repeating that nordstream is definitely not political project, when all of eastern EU said it was.
Also. Greece apparently has huge gas reserves around its seas with some of the biggest reserves south of Crete. Which would be bigger than what Norway or Slochteren from Netherlands has. But unfortunately Greece was too late in accessing this. It was about to 7 years ago, but the continously stronger push for green energy was the reason why not just Greece but Europe had less incentive to exploit this resource. But in the end when the world news revolves around how Europe is building new routes for gas, I always have to laugh, because likely Greece would be one of the biggest sources just under the noses of Europe that would by now have helped Europe immensely.
Oh the irony Greece will be in crippling debt for decades, and Germany has long had an oil/gas deficit. Greece didn't exploit it's oil resources because of climate change, while Germany increased its reliance on oil and coal because of nuclear scares.
A lot of this deposit is offshore and close close to turkey. With a few key island claimed by them. Well, you know both countries are not very much on good terms and exploiting this deposit would have been more tensions between the two.
@@Drunken_Master It's potential is huge. Egypt and Cyprus alone have already found multiple immense gas pockets. But the tectonic plates of Europe, Asia, Africa and a 4th one are all in Greece and it's seas and the expectation is that all acorss the Ionian and seas south of Crete, will have huge to immense reserves. And this is just gas exploration.
@@ZTanMURReneRs I think you meant to say renewables by themselves are cheaper than fossil fuels. But renewables are intermittent energy sources. They require battery storage, which is very expensive.
I often wonder if this will push the EU to reduce its use of gas and oil, and replace it with electricity. Full electrification is really the only way to do long term energy security.
And produce electricity from what? The main reason why the EU uses so much gas and oil in the first place is that we use them to produce electricity. Gas was the EU's answer for greener energy for the next 2 decades, while we transitioned to renewable sources.
Use your brains dude, it is the reason we are in this crisis because electricity was being produced by russian fossil fuels. Fossil fuel is still the king in providing electricity, renewables are but a tiny fraction in providing energy.
@@davidgreen5994 Nuclear, Hydroelectric, wind, solar, geothermal. It's not like all of these are brand new technology. The EU and the rest of the world has known since at least the '70s that fossil fuels were limited and highly problematic. Yet they were cheaper and easier to implement so they didn't do the research and infrastructure upgrades that would have allowed them to create more EU based energy production. Likewise national pushes to increase energy efficiency would have gone a long way. I mean the passive house building standards European cousin has existed longer than its North American brother.
This is a noble idea, but much of Europe is not suitable for solar (cloudy, hazy) and wind is very location specific. For instance, Germany spent about $2 trillion Euros on solar and it has and it hasn't even come close to living up to its potential purported by the Greens, mainly because it is cloudy in Germany. Hydro and geothermal have likely been implemented where it is feasible. Green-tech is are not good primary sources of power since the sun doesn't shine at night and it isn't always windy, so green-tech is generally supplemental power and not base load. As shown by France, nuclear is certainly an option for base load, but the Greens object and the last I heard is that Germany shut down its last nuclear power plant this year (when they are facing an energy shortage!). The bottom line is that green-tech is in many areas not 'green' (e.g. it effectively emits more CO2 considering resource extraction, resource processing/transport, manufacturing, and installation than it saves in power generation CO2 offsets) and in more areas is not economically feasible (e.g. it costs more to install than the value of the electricity it produces). All this said, some areas of Europe are great for green-tech. Wind is wonderful along much of the coasts, and solar is great in sunny areas of southern Europe.
Trans Adriatic Pipeline from Azerbaijan to Italy is already in place, will bring 12m this winter up from 8m this year, will bring 20m in a few years at full capacity. Also yesterday Europe approved some 6 billions for hydrogen developments, backed up by other 11 billions from the private sector. Part of the idea is to have renewables in Africa when they are more effective and than pipe hydrogen to Europe converting part of Italians gas pipes, building new ones in Spain.
It could be interesting to dig deeper into the relationship between Algeria and Spain/EU since it has deteriorated so much recently making it harder for this pipeline to work
I think the African countries should develop their own industrial base instead of sending their resources to Europe. They'll only be cheated and abused again.
You showed the volumes of each pipeline individually, but it would have been nice to see a graph with all of them together. For example, show two circles. The first showing the current sources of EU gas imports, and the second just showing the additional capacity added by the new pipelines.
Importing natural gas from Norway would probably be the best solution for the time being. Norway is friendly and stable so most of the issues that prevented pipeline construction wouldn’t be present. It would likely only be a stopgap measure though since Norway only has about 1% of the world’s proven reserves.
Also importing gas from algeria is also a good idea because this country already supplies spain portugal and italy and its islands, and it is relatively safe and stable.
Also the trans-caspian pipeline would involve a significant portion of our gas imports going through Turkey, Azerbajian and dangerously close to Iran. Personally, I believe that’s worth mentioning.
The relations of Europe with all of those countries is not bad, Iran just has a real big problem with the US, most of Europe was against Trump when he pulled out of the nuclear deal, Europe tried to uphold it but the US pulled secondary sanctions, Europe issued its directive to protect its companies from sanctions but most dont want long litigations.
@@Solid_Snake99 All three of them are different, one should look into their respective political structures and understand their motives. China is mostly reliable just very protective of their interests and does so in agressive ways, Russia policy is determined by hate, it has no racional basis, just some profecy of Russian domination and right in Eastern Europe, this makes them very dangerous. Iran is an Islamic Republic but Supreme leader Khomenei is long death and current leader was open to dialogue, Iran is not a true democracy, but of the 3 there is some room and some democratic institutions in Iran, that is why the Nuclear deal was signed, radicals in Iran were against but people of Iran elected a government that supported further opening, I believe their commitment was genuine, Israel however wanted a weak Iran and use every influence it has to torpedo the deal, and succeded. The deal allowed foreign observers to monitor Iran nuclear facilities, Iran was willing to not go for Nuclear weapons because frankly they dont need them, Iran can defend its territory, if one look at the Iran-Irak war it was one of the most brutal conflicts anywhere in the world in the XX century, and that is a lot to say given the century. Even the US does not risk going to Iran, because geography has massivly defensible features, Iran capital was never taken with military force, in the oldest country in the world.
@@Solid_Snake99 loool How about stop acting like a American and putting your own interest forward instead. Then, these countries wouldn't be hostile to you.
This guy lives in la la land.. the pipe lines he says europe can get it's gas from don't exist... they would take decades to upgrade/construct ... winter in europe is only a few months away... whichever way you look at it, the EU is screwed.
There are far more reasonable alternatives especially for heating, like restarting nuclear plants & geothermal. Countries like Germany who shutdown their nuclear plants out of fear after Fukushima and switched to Russian gas (way to go on that one Germany!) should already be in the planning for restarting those plants, hiring and training workers, etc. If nothing else this gives the option to shutdown the gas plants OR increasing generation capability to utilize electric heating for the winter. The UK and other nations that have shutdown plants should be doing the same. I also know for a fact that there are already "personal" geothermal wells in the UK and other European Nations. I am also aware of the issues that have been caused by poor research into them causing things like sinking/broken foundations, etc., BUT the fact those lessons have already been learned means the ability to properly drill wells has been improved. They can also be scaled up to provide for larger businesses, apartments, etc. They are "green" which should please people. They are local which means no major international political or building hang-ups. There are also already companies in place that have experience with creating them. It certainly won't be a solution for everyone, everywhere, but where it can be done and be supported with government subsidies, the reductions in gas requirements would be noticeable and benefit the entire continent. Transcontinental and intercontinental pipelines built to replace the Russian pipelines, much like Communism, sound great on paper, but the reality is it took from the 1970s to the 2020s to build the pipelines that are currently in place. Replacements would be decades out at best which means entire countries (or the world altogether at this rate) could be gone by then and will have little to no real world impact until the far future. Utilizing smaller scale, local, (and at least in people's minds) greener alternatives would be far more reasonable to show some impact on how things are currently. As in all necessities, the lack of significant diversification is the lesson no one ever seems to learn. Being wholly and only dependent on someone else, especially one with a questionable behavior and history, is asking for inevitable catastrophe. Hell, this makes ditching fire places decades ago look short sighted now.
@@TheMagicJIZZ I'm going to assume you watched the video, so you know they expressly discussed how long the pipelines that are currently in place took to complete and the huge issues (and even more they didn't talk about) with the replacements. You're talking about pipelines crossing multiple countries and multiple continents. They aren't going to throw it together in a few months and they need solutions for THIS winter, not a winter 10 years from now.
@@TheNuclearGeek Poland just connected to Norway in 4 months! Germany has a LNG terminal tanker coming in winter, There are existing pipelines, Lithuania and Latvia has LNG and pipelines which can be extended. It's not needed to just build brand new pipelines LNG terminals can be shared for a time
A little geopolitics about the East Med energy boom. The current status quo of East Med is that Israel exports it’s gas through existing pipelines to Egypt which then gets liquified at either of Egypt’s 2 LNG stations which then gets exported to Europe. In Q1 of 2022, Egypt’s gas exports went up 900% mainly thanks to the ZOR gas field coming online. Building a gas pipeline connecting East Med to Europe is currently to expensive and time consuming especially as the status quo is more than sufficient with only 1 of the 2 LNG stations in Egypt at full capacity. A project currently underway is connecting the Egyptian electric grid to the Greek grid through Cyprus using HVDC submarine wires allowing Egypt to export its surplus electricity directly. Especially as the Dabaa’ Nuclear Power Plant on the Mediterranean coast in Egypt comes online later this decade. Currently Egypt exports it’s excess electricity to Libya, Sudan, Jordan, Iraq and hopefully soon Lebanon while still running a surplus. Connecting the electrical grids will allow not just fossil fuel energy to get to Europe but excess Solar, Wind, Hydro and Nuclear power also to be exported to and used by Europeans. I am sure most of these issues will be brought up when leaders from around Europe and the World come to Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt next November to attend COP 27 (United Nations Climate Change Conference) where the issue of switching away from fossil fuels by all western nations will be discussed as an issue of national security and not only as an environmental issue. Hope everything works out for my fellow Europeans, especially during the winter 👍 Much love from Egypt ❤️
4:28 there is a fourth existing pipeline that could be potentially viable and upgraded "IF" the idiotic geopolitical instability created by Sarkozy and Obama could be solved, which goes from Lybia to Sicily. At the moment it is grossly underused due to problems with control of the Libyan gas fields, but Libya's natural reserves are at least as vast as those in Algeria and the infrastructures are already there. Vast Natural Gas reserves were also discovered in the Adriatic sea between Italy, Croatia and Albania: those were never exploited due to low prices of Russian gas, green nonsenses and inexcusable short sightness by the European governments, never able to devise a plan B due to costs and naivety.
there is another important offshore Pipeline from Nigeria to Morocco , yes it's longer and more expensive (passing 13 african nations) but it's safer and it will serve not only Europe but all West african countries from Nigeria to Morocco to Europe .. it's going to be the biggest project in the history of Africa (btw i posted a video on my channel explaining why Morocco is America's most important ally in Africa and that pipeline is one of the reasons)
It is kinda crazy sponsoring is still worth it for Brilliant. How many new people are there everyday that haven't been on any news or education channel in last year? I just play 'spot the segway' but the skips must be brutal on watch time.
@@BakerVS i know, short videos so you end up watching 1000 times the same video cut, but hey if you watch it so often just pay them for their work and bye bye ADs
You gas East Germany was connected to the Soviet Union. In 1963 the "Freundschaft" oil pipeline to Schwedt / East Germany was completed. Regarding the gas, it must be said that in 1926 it consisted not of natural gas but of coke oven gas. This resulted in the gas distribution networks in the Ruhr area and Saarland. In Berlin, gas was produced from coal, anthracite or coal dust. The production of smaller natural gas fields in Germany began. A large gas field was found near the Dutch city of Groningen, which also supplied gas to Germany. In the 1970s, West Germany produced pipes for Russia that were later paid for with Russian natural gas. Long-term supply contracts secured consumption. Natural gas displaced coal gas and other processes.
"Oh no! The country we sold our self reliance to in exchange for cheap energy were bad guys! Quick! find another politically unstable replacement!" These people would literally try run a pipeline through the increasingly violent north Africa than to even consider Nuclear Energy.
@@tomarmstrong1297 While I supprt Nuclear energy, it is not a 1 to 1 replacement for Gas. It can provide a baseline of electrical power but is much harder to use for Heat based industrial processes and heating for housing. It also cannot be used to stabilize short period fluctuations in the electricity grid.
@@davidescristofaros2241 That was why I mentioned storage. To store produced energy or electricity is crucial when the energy system gets a larger share of renewable energy. I'm sure that the specific amount of gas that is vital for industrial applications could be sourced from western Europe, eg the North sea. Furthermore, I'm not against the idea of commissioning more nuclear power in Europe, but that will take significantly longer time than deploying renewables.
So disheartening to see those pipe lines being build quite early and finished so late. That could've been a great point to think about: renewable energy instead, which would also take a while, but has so many other benefits. It could've created more benefits even: make it more economically viable and much earlier.
No kidding. If we'd put the same amount of money into greening our energy infrastructure as we do into maintaining our love affair with fossil fuels, we'd have transitioned completely by now.
@@GeoEstes Renewables are far too unreliable in their output to be used by big economies, and grid scale storage is eye-wateringly expensive ( and in the case of batteries highly dangerous ), at best renewables are 'gas savers' if and when they do decide to produce any power. Gas turbines are the only things agile enough to keep up with renewables and renewables need 100% backup. Too much gas is used to back up renewables when it can be used at 95% efficiency in domestic condensing boilers - and that is why gas is so much in demand, to back up the shortfalls from over-hyped renewables. Transitioning is something humans do when they think they were born in the wrong body, I doubt we will ever break our reliance on fossil fuels because they are so reliable and predictable, the only thing that can replace them in some areas is nuclear power, and fusion is hundreds of years away - if ever..
@@chrissmith2114 If you research in renewables, you also spec into the storage. There's plenty what you could do, especially if we had started that really on. And yes, research into nuclear (both fission and fusion) would fit in there too.
@@GeoEstes Ok, but that kind of talk is why so many people praise Germany for all the solar money they poured into the grid but that really doesn't work. Yes, I agree "all of the above" type approach would be better but so many people think only to push the renewables that do Not work in certain countries. Germany is a classic example of what not to do and what happens when politicians listen to people that hate everything about fossil fuels but push to use tech that doesn't work in Germnay and isn't mature anyways.
Natural gas isn't just used for energy. It's primarily used for industrial inputs. Plastics, synthetic fertilizers, many pharmaceutical products, many adhesives and many more products require products derived from natural gas to be produced.
@@kingart23 fusion is like mixing multiple particles together (usually hydrogen), this creates A LOT of energy, but it is still quite impossible to do with our current technology (only experiments have been successfully carried out). Fission on the other hand is the breaking of particles (usually thorium or uranium), this is what nuclearreactors do, it also creates a lot of energy, less than fusion and is also not an infinite process (as uranium runs out after hundreds of years) (therefore it is technically not a renewable source of enegy). This process is also very inefficient as a lot of energy is lost and nuclear reactors are very risky (e.g. fukushima, chernobyl)
@@mattia8327 fossil fuels kill millions each year, whilst fission has the lowest average death toll. humans naturally are more scared of high risk low probability events, but these irrational fears should not guide policy.
Some European experts have mentioned that a new pipeline between Israel and Turkey can significantly help Europe, but the two countries need to normalize and improve their relations. This pipeline would be much cheaper and faster than the mentioned East-Med pipeline because Turkey already has a pipeline system going into Europe.
@@giatiexwkanali2750 The current Turkish government is bad but the greek one is even worse. Turkey will very probably change its government to a secular democratic new government. On the other hand Greece is a sinking ship. Greek nationalist won’t admit but it is true
@@Dahiegezey wow, you call Greece a sinking ship , and Turkey as ok because it will "Probably" change in the future to become a democratic secular government. Turkey a regressive undemocratic unsecular state with a failing struggling hyper inflation economy with strong black market subeconomy with anti western and neo Ottoman outlook. In contrast Greece is a EU member of excellent standing with a Demoratic Free and Secular society, the economy is booming despite covid the Ukraine war etc. they have paid back the bailout loans before time and Europe and USA , is investing billions into the Greek economy etc. The Greek Human Development Index is higher than that of Turkeys (look it up), Greek people are free'r than Turkish people politically etc. and you call Greece a sinking ship. no my friend Turkey itself is a Sinking ship and as you say if it does not change its political landscape and mentality no Europen can trust a regressive Neo Ottoman undemocratic Islamic Oligarchy. Look in the mirror my friend Turkey has deep fundamental structural issues that need to be fixed , Greece is not your problem , your leaders are bluffing you with Greek stories to take your attention off the real issues inside Turkey , don't fall for it.
East Med pipeline first can go to Turkey and than to Europe. That is an easier and cheaper solution. It can't go through the sea because Turkey won't let a pipeline bypassing his country.
The Netherlands has one of the biggest gas fields in the world. The gas field in the province of Groningen is Number 9 I think. Also there are a lot of smaller gas fields in the Waddensea. Unfortunately the extracting of gas in Groningen causes earthquakes and extracting gas in the waddensea is hard because of the environmental issues.
given the latest discoveries by Egypt in their western part, and given the long relation between Italy and Lybia, I would also consider a pipeline from south italy to Lybia and Egypt through Malta. ENI has quite a good relation to all Lybian sides and is already quite involved in the operations in Lybia.
What a coincidence. Earlier today, I met an old man on the train. He had come to Sweden in 1943 and grew up here but was now living in Israel. And he mentioned the potential gas supply to Europe, and now you publish a video on the topic!
@@Salarat most of natural gas is used for heat and electricity, that's the biggest concern. Rubber, plastic, etc are produced from oil, not natural gas.
people in europ is so wasteful with their energy, one culture shock I had was that how many places here like shops keep lights on in night even if they are closed, no wonder they never had enough energy
Russia guaranteed the supply of gas no matter what…The world is watching and nobody will rely on Russia for the supply of its gas at least at a substantial level…!
Oh boy, China does, it has a major pipeline Power of Siberia, is constructing a new one as big, China buy a lot from Central Asia and most of China's in Central Asia is assured by Gazprom expertise. Other countries will soon be supplied by Russia. We wanted the divorce a long ago, it will happen and we all will live happy without each others. Live and let live. We have to purge the fascist in us.
The only thing I miss in this video is a mention to the conflict between Algeria, Spain and Morroco that defenetly is going to affect the aviability of the Trans-saharan pipeline.
That Azerbaijan has not been able to increase production all these years after the pipeline was finished. That central Asia depends on Russian expertise and has its production tied to China, and is planing to sell also to Pakistan and India. That Algeria has no plans of increasing production. That the Norwegians and Quataris want contracts of at least 20 years, and a fixed price higher than the price the Russians offered years before the conflict.... That we don't need that much gas at all in 8 years, that whoever invests in infrastructure will loose slot of money.
They are already there Italy is in the European Grid Italy has grid with Greece and the TAP from Azerbaijan Italy has grid with Algeria already These have been functioning for a long, long time Add to this the Norwegian one We are already connected The best thing would be to have a direct connection to Saudi Arabia
Speaking from Italy, yes, something has been done. I hope that after the next elections we sill still side with Ukraine though. And that we will finally start to invest in Nuclear Power. It's no longer 1986, and it is high time that some of our politicians realize it already.
To use Saudi Arabian Gas, A pipeline from Israel has to be built Also from Saudis to Israel of course. But easiest option is to remove gas embargoes of Iran for a limited time. There is already a pipeline from Iran to Turkey. It may help Iran to become independent from Russian support.
Honestly, it sounds like the Italians have planned ahead, made some good decisions and will likely not be affected as much as other European countries.
@@yemliha4434 My God sure Iran have not pride, they just wait to help their enemy in time of need.Biden just call Iran for oil before few months and they answer with bunch of rockets to American embasy in Iraq.But GL with gas :)))
For the trans saharien pipeline the one passing from algeria to marocco then spain is closed due to geo political conflict (however there is a 2nd pipeline between algeria and italy under construction)
@@acanadianineurope814 that was before the Ukraine war...I think opinions may change in DC, especially with Erdoğan's previous blustering about Finland/Sweden joining NATO and his desire to attack the Kurds.
@@dmitrishufutinsky2251 Sorry Nuland was in Cyprus in may/June and said the program was not going ahead. DC doesnt care about anything except DC, and 10% for the big guy.
@@dmitrishufutinsky2251 Agree with you. Egypt allready talking to Greece to link power grids and on to Europe with electricity generated from gas and renewables. To note that Isreali gas is allready being pumped to Egypt and been converted to LG. The Saudi Government was In Greece a week ago talking about the same proposal, gas , electricity and renewable energy to Greece. Greece has also signed some energy deals with the UAE. I don't have the details on how exactly probably through Egypt, interesting non the less. notwith standing Greek deposits should they be confirmed. Greece also to note has a large maritime shipping capacity. With Greece now firmly in the camp of the USA , France, and an EU member of good standing, the Greek Isreali , Egypt and Saudi corridor seems like a good option long term. all these countries are strong Allies of the USA and Europe especially France. It does make sense to have a network of energy , gas , electricity including renewables and even petroleum running up from Saudi throug Egypt into Greece and into Europe connecting UAE and Isreali resources along the way.
Just Russia, or everyone else? Does nobody get to tell the Solomon Islands whether they can build Chinese ports, too? Or are we making an exception for all the "good" countries
@@LancesArmorStriking Well just Russia commits Genozide in Europe and brings war to its neighbors. So yes, just fricking Russia shouldn’t have a say in international affairs. Leave Ukraine, stop the crimes and Russia can be back on the international podium. Cheers
@@TheArneschwindt Lol you're admitting double standards then. You don't care about international laws, you just care about hating Russia. Also why should the US gave a say in anything, since it committed "GENOZIDE" (learn English lmao) in Afghanistan? This is my point. Everything the West is criticizing Russia of doing, it has also done. Any nobody has punished them for that. So why should Russia be punished??
I think they need to have multiple sources that they can rely on. Most definitely there need to be more LNG port facilities built so that if a pipeline source ever becomes unavailable they have a backup plan and can't be held hostage.
I cannot overstate how much I hate the fact we haven't figured this shit out decades ago, by diversifying providers and energy sources. Russia got us by the balls like a drug dealer holding back the coke once winter comes, and just like druggies, we're gonna give in eventually (or at least have massive calls to do so by a large percentage of the population). I know my fellow europeans, and we've grown pretty damn soft once our comforts and luxuries are in jeapoardy.
My country is not dependent on Russian gas (Romania) but I 100% agree that all of us europeans should share the national gas to pass these hard times together. Even if that means that the cost of living will increase. These are the tests we have to pass to prove our unity
True true. I am not energy expert but I pretty sure it is very difficult to find new natural gas supplies. Even in Australia we are concerned about our natural gas supplies and we are own of the largest exporters in the world.
The main problem, as said in the video, is the instability of the regions concerned: corruption, autocrats... who may have learnt from Russia about blackmailing Europe if it wants their gas - there are enough conflictual disputes in these countries to not guarantee a smooth supply + their still possible tights to Russia. Anyway, it will take time, if ever. Therefore this time should also be used to seriously develop the so called green energies (wind, sun...) - but of course the big oil lobby will not be so amused by this perspective. Yet, since necessity knows no law, solutions must be found, but preferably sustainable ones; therefore: the same error should not be repeated and a geografically and energetically diversified supply plan should be wisely thought and developed.
It's not the problem of oil lobby but cost and efficiency of this green energy. Such things like wind turbines or solar panels need rare resources to be constructed and currently we are not mining them enough for mass production. Plus it's still debatable on how productive those thing would be giving their dependence on good weather and taking massive chunks of land to construct. I still think the best way would be just abandon all these dreams of eco-friendly renewable resources and just focus on developing nuclear energy. Yes It does made some radioactive pollutions but with proper regulation of their containment it will not have negative effects on environment
Success of renewables mostly depends on storage capacity and also somewhat on ‚smarter‘ consumption. There are more storage solutions than lithium or other chemical battery’s that don’t require that much exotic materials, such as Hydrogen storage or pump dam lakes (or whatever they’re called in English).
Sadly, there's no oil/gas under Switzerland. Much of the World's land surface (at least certainly that within piped gas reach of Europe) is covered by non-democratic & outright autocratic regimes so it's not surprising that most of the biggest discoveries have been made in places where life & society is highly transactional in nature,adding an extra layer of nuance,balance & difficulty in relations with countries that have awkward regimes but have the power to keep the lights on in Europe. Europe is stymied by it's small size, not for the first time in it's history. One thing that has changed irreparably is that even if there's regime change in Moscow next week and a much different tone towards the West leads to a thawing of sanctions (and a positive conclusion for Ukraine in the war), Europe will never again allow itself to be so beholden to Russia for energy supplies, even if the taps get flowing once more, Putin has destroyed the energy relationship that has existed between Europe & Moscow for 70 years, a relationship that survived even most of the Cold War but could not survive beyond Putin's regime.
Some years ago, Ukraine tried to blackmail Europe with their gas pipeline from Russia. Any pipeline through Turkey would certainly lead to similar threats from bigmouth Erdogan. Though of course the various African countries will certainly also try to get more than agreed once such a pipeline is built.
Diversify and win. The EU also has leverage over Turkey. As long as we have a multi-stream system, all is well. They key is to not to put all of our eggs on one basket.
Ukraine had the pipline and used it as a bargain chip. Gernany by start using the nordstream 1 removed that bargain chip and the rest is history: invasion of crimea in 2014 and invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
how about the Dutch gas supply, we have one of the largest gas reserves. Which we stopped depleting because of people living near experienced earthquakes and deteriorating houses because of it. but we could start again to ease the gas shortage
The most important one that you don't cover already exists. It's the UK to Europe pipeline. We produce excess gas but don't really have storage. Europe requires gas and we are sending it.
It's not nearly enough to make up for the shortfall from Russia. Given that it is already in use it doesn't really fit the context of the video either.
Consider The Antarctic pipeline, Running undersea to Tierra del Fuego ,to Brazil ,across the Atlantic to West Africa , thence to Libya and Europe. What ! Fantasy ? what do you mean fantasy ? .
Can't we just ignore Russia's protests about the Caspian Pipeline? What are they gonna do about it? Furthermore it's not like Russia ever follows internazional law so there probably wouldn't be a problem convincing the citizens.
Russia has the largest fleet in the Caspian sea and is the only nation that can bring in more ships through the Volga-Don canal. You can't ignore them if they physically stop the construction of the pipeline.
Yeah like the others said I don't think Iran and Russia will allow that to happen plus I doubt Erdogan would want to piss them off to save the EU. Especially since many European countries support PKK rebels and prevented Turkey joining the EU. Plus those landlocked Ex-Soviet countries will not want to piss off Putin and China. Basically there is zero percent chance of that happening.
It's not like any of the nations over there are politically stable or democratic. Kazakhstan, Turkey, Azerbaijan, all politically unstable like Russia. Azerbaijan even has a huge war going on with Armenia for decades and that's why they made the pipeline take a turn and go upwards through Georgia instead of Armenia.
@@healththenopulence5106 majority of the demand for gas is for transport and heating . If those can be mitigated Europe would still have enough supply for industry
No you can't. The old designs would never get an operating license, and the new designs like the EPR takes 15-20 years from planning to production and the energy costs are significantly higher than even current electricity prices from imported natural gas.
You see ONLY one side of the equation ,the demand from Europe....for Russia oil and gas is over 40% in total revenues, being Europe the first customer ..an easy customer....for Russia the alternative is to liquify gas, not easy at all...they don't have the facilities nor the ships available ...pipeline to China is even worse they have to go through Mongolia....Russia is also suffering...and it will be a long suffering...for Europe this winter will be hard...but reserves in European countries are up (80%) the next winter they will arrange to buy from somebody else
Sounds to me like individual Europeans should take matters into their own hands. If you own a building (your own home, a business, or a rental building), put a little bit of solar on it to reduce your reliance on the power grid. If you’re able, put a lot of solar on it and pair it with energy storage. Being a net energy importer is a terrible thing for any country, and if the politicians and power companies can’t figure it out for you, then individuals will have to figure it out for themselves.
@Bessie Hillum I'm not sure of the relevance of buying a new smartphone. Do you mean that people cannot or will not afford solar because they have other spending priorities? If so, I'm sure you're correct. Though solar will pay for itself over time, so it's mostly an up-front cost, and a long-term savings.
so i just did some off the cuff calculations and based on industry estimates of a world useage of 132290211000000 cubic feet a year and estimated reserves of 7257000000000 cubic feet in the ground, the world only has 18.2 years of gas left and thats assuming no loss or accidents, 100% extraction etc if a pipline takes 15 years to build, this is utterly pointless, we need massive investment in renewables and to increase there durability in extreme climate conditions. were debating angels on a pinhead while our energy systems fail.
1:13 Honest it was not regional instability, but these region gain control of their own national assets from being stolen by colonize powers, and frankly the deal were to sell these assets for USD, which created what's so-called petrol dollar.
@@moritz3168 Nuclear is our only reliable method to slow climate change, ask anyone with a physics degree what energy source we should be investing in and most will say Nuclear.
One extreme idea I had was to create a pipeline which goes from New England to Northern Quėbec through Baffin Island. It would then pass through Greenland, Iceland, and maybe the Faroe Islands to connect with the existing pipelines in the North Sea. This would probably be even more expensive than the Trans-Saharan Pipeline as a lot of infrastructure would have to be made. I'm thinking that shipping gas across the Atlantic to Europe would be a lot cheaper than what I would call the North Atlantic Pipeline.
Pipelines do not replace gas. Gas or alternative energy replaces gas. Each pipeline has certain capacity limit to know if the gas actually reaches Europe or just taken by the intermediate countries. EU should remove trading natural gas inside EU to keep prices in check. Everyone knows piped natural gas contracts are fixed price and long term. So far Russia, Algeria and Azerbaijan are supplying at agreement prices, but consumers are charged high according to market price. Who is taking the profit here is a well known fact. Politicians should learn the business of gas pricing instead of making a joke of themselves in asking people to reduce heating.
This is not true: Russia is charging high prices for what little it's currently delivering, so much that it's revenue barely fell if at all compared to 2019
You're talking nonsense. Reduced supply inflated the prices. It's basic market forces... Also Russia is the one that set up the biggest Oil and Gas Cartel in the world (OPEC). Also I already decided not to heat my home at all next winter as soon as the invasion of Ukraine began. Winters here aren't that unbearable. I'll just wear a couple extra layers of clothes.
@@Leptospirosi They are charging for LNG shipments to japan as well as on crude oil that is giving better revenues. Piped gas is different and is priced according to long term contracts. Read contract that are available on open with any of energy company in Europe importing piped gas from Russia or Algeria. That's the main reason Algeria against Spain reselling their gas at higher price in European gas market. Do some research and read contract documents they submit to relevant stock exchanges.
For the Caspian Sea, the agreement has been changed, so it is not all countries that has to approve a pipeline but only the those whose territory is passes. If the Trans Caspian Pipeline is combined with the White Stream from Georgia to Romania over the Black Sea, it passes around Turkey. Something many would be able to see the value of today, with Erdogan in ower. From Romania, a new pipeline is required to connect it to the Friendship pipeline in Ukraine in north through the western plains of Romania. From there is on to Germany. In the south, it can supply the South Stream to Italy, so in effect reaching the two main users of Russian gas. Armenia and Iran can be coupled to this pipeline as well as Iran has a lot of gas. That will diversify the reliance away from Azerbaijan. It will also provide a new entry reality in Armenia. This entirely avoids Turkey and Cyprus, so it diversify the delivery routes to EU and does it to the core areas, Italy and Germany.
@@umutneo White Stream does not pass Turkish territory as far as I understand or? That is why Iran can connect the the pipeline through an expansion of the one through Georgia and Armenia. That would entirely avoid Azerbaijan for the Iranian/Armenian part.
Storytime with TLDR : today : the history of european oil & gas exploitation. Some « small corrections » if I may : - Most of euro-colonies take their independance during the 60's and 70's, not right after the WWII... - The oil consummed in Europe mostly comes from the middle east, and still is, oil nationalization in euro-colonies has been mostly negociated, there have been very few « instability » on that market before the oil crisis. - The oil crisis came in 1978 and was started by a political move from OPEP related to the israelo-arab conflict. - For strategic reasons, imports from USSR were always limited in the west, it's the contrary for eastern europe (including germany), which are connected and dependant of the russian infrastructure since the cold war. - Norway, UK or the Netherlands have huge local gas reserve, feeding most of western europe during the cold war and nowadays, diversifying our imports (with Russia but not only) was also a way to preserve those strategic ressources. - We don't need « to be saved » from the absence of russian gas, we need to be saved from the propaganda of a very nasty bunch of people. That's it for the biggest lies and wrong narratives of this one, it's a full one : one that try to reshape and confuze big chunks of history. TLDR is not an info-channel and what they do is discusting.
It looked like he was making this stuff up as he went along. Unfortunately for TLDR "News" there are some people over 70 that know European/world history of the twentieth century. We learnt it in school, and I'm in Australia not downtown Antwerp.
Continental Europe has a lot of oil it’s just not has densely located. However there are potential new oil fields in the far north of Norway and between Iceland and Greenland that could surpass all of them and now the ice sheets are melting it just needs a drive to allow regulation to be lifted.
So, a pipeline through Cyprus would help end self reliance from a crazy dictator who has invaded a sovereign country, but a crazy dictator who has invaded a sovereign country says no, because the pipeline affects the country they invaded. Who says Americans don't do irony
There is a pipeline from Iran to Turkey that could be connected quite easily with other pipelines going to europe, though europe would have to lift sanctions on iranian gas.
I notice from a Eurostat report that Germany and Italy have increased their exports to Russia by 18% since May 2022. Good to see some realism but disappointing that the EU has threatened Turkiye with sanctions if they export non-sanctioned goods to Russia Luckily "Western Values" preclude double standards.
I have a feeling that sometimes you are mixing up Europe and the EU. So I remain unsure if you are correctly presenting the statistics. Overall, I do know more now than I did before this video. :)
It'll be a happy day when the EU can buy Russian gas without worrying about blackmail. Once Russia is down to about 20% of EU supply they won't have the capacity to blackmail the continent.
WTF u speak USA is one blackmail world for decades with sanctions.If they not use sanctions for weapon, now EU can have allot of alternatives of Russian gas/oil.
@@suportbghelp4938 Sanctions aren't blackmail it's more like a ransom. But it's pretty easy to avoid getting sanctioned. Avoid terrorism and nuke development and you're pretty much free and clear. America can never be as good at using the economy to push around good size economies as Russian in the US the wealthy and corporations have too much power to allow long term economic damage to occur for political reasons. In Russia, if Putin wants it done, it's done.
CORRECTION: At 2:57, we say that TurkStream was originally commissioned as Blue Stream. This isn't quite correct: TurkStream is actually a replacement for Blue Stream 2, first suggested up by Putin in 2009. Blue Stream was the first Russia-Turkey gas pipeline, which began pumping gas in 2005. Blue Stream 2, which would have run parallel to Blue Stream, was proposed by Putin in 2009, but it never took off. Blue Stream 2 was replaced by South Stream, which was in turn replaced by TurkStream after it was cancelled by the Russian government in 2014.
BTW South Stream was cancelled because it wouldn't comply with EU open access regulation. Makes you wonder how TurkStream extension, dubbed Balkan Stream, passed the same regulation when Gazprom booked all capacity 10 years in advance, without providing access to third parties.
Western hypocrisy.!!!! western imperialism, you just want all the mines and oil pipelines to be yours, right and the ex-mining countries remain poor. die you western impalism
So let's recap. Russia has Nord Stream 2, China has Silk Road, America has the Metaverse... Hmm. I wonder what my country would get. 🤷
@@theinquisitor7191 meta verse is not GOVERNMENT created! Stop it 😂
Another mistake. The Nabucco pipeline would have ended in Baumgarten, Austria not Hungary.
One of the main problems with the Trans-Saharian pipeline is the relations between Spain, Morocco and Algeria, especially in regards to the Western Sahara issue. A video on the matter would be helpful.
Issue can be easily solved by EU by getting Spain to drop it's claims on sahara
@@baird5682 Spain has no claims in the Sahara. Historically they've supported the self-determination right of the Western Sahara.
Or by getting the gas coming through Portugal...
@@_MrMoney what Sahara? You mean some territory in Africa? 😆 🤣
Hilarious. Spain have some historic connection to it?
Spanish territory in Africa is also an issue right
5 stages of grief..Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Pay in Rubles.
France is the only country that at least partially figured it out, with nuclear. When I was a kid my dad always told me what a huge mistake it was that Italy was closing its nuclear plants down. You were right dad.
Also did mamy other countries like Spain or Portugal by not buying Russian gas.
Having french speaking african countries in her pocket also helps
I suppose back then we were all dealing with a rational soviet government, and there was optimism when the curtain came down. We now have a Russia run by gangsters, bordering on fascist
I'm french, and I love nuclear, but we can do it because we can get Uranium through our bloody colonial past and our influence on francophone Africa.
Except Italy is getting its energy from Algeria, Azerbaijan etc so they actually made some good decisions there.
What the EU uses natural gas for might make an interesting video. I.e. percentage of domestic, industrial and power generation and which countries could be using greener alternatives.
Just remember to include industrial proccesses that are NOT energy production.
Renewables are far too unreliable in their output to be used by big economies, at best renewables are 'gas savers' if and when they do decide to produce any power. Gas turbines are the only things agile enough to keep up with renewables and renewables need 100% backup. Too much gas is used to back up renewables when it can be used at 95% efficiency in domestic condensing boilers - and that is why gas is so much in demand, to back up the shortfalls from over-hyped renewables.
@@chrissmith2114 bot
@@chrissmith2114 well this whole situation will surely accelerate the adoption of your so called over-hyped renewables.
No government on earth really cares about the .04 per cent of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere. Me neither. It's ridiculous. CO2 is a natural, clean gas that is vital for all life and is not doing anybody any harm on earth. Nor has any government really and truly ever even tried to replace fossil fuels for environmental reasons.
The whole climate scam has never been anything but a smoke screen to conceal what is, in fact, a worldwide scramble to secure remaining oil and gas reserves for the various competing power groups. That was the real reason behind Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan again, Iraq, again, Libya, Yemen, Syria, etc etc. It's all about oil and gas. Nobody's trying to do without it. They're all trying to do with it.
That struggle is winding down now. The west has lost, and spent itself into ruin doing so. They're grasping at straws hoping that the Ukrainians (who couldn't even keep their country running during the best of times) are going to miraculously defeat Russia for them, and for free at that. But they're finding out that there ain't no free lunch. That phony war is costing them more than a real one would.
But by now, the die is cast. They can't go back and change strategy, they've already wagered everything they have on a losing hand. They can't even beat the cards they can see, and there are plenty more cards they can't see.
Does anybody even really believe that the US military would launch a major offensive against Russia on the orders of Joe Biden, or that Europe would follow suit?
The US used NATO and the CIA to create the present war in order to prevent NorthStream 2 from coming on line. It wasn't to help Ukraine or protect Europe. It was to sacrifice Ukraine and severely impact Europe in an effort to keep Europe and Russia from getting too friendly with each other. But they didn't realize just how costly that strategy would turn out to be. The US is going to lose Europe entirely over it.
Interesting oil and gas history lesson. I had no idea the relationship went back that far. Given the loss of European colonies after WWII that makes sense.
I found that informative as well
Please try to take on board that loss of colonies= loss of US UK looting.
@@kmadge9820 But I like the looting so I can get richer. It all balances out.
@@jackieboy1593 The scale of the coming crash willake no one richer.
@@kmadge9820 I'll just Dollar Cost Average on the way down
It all comes down to money and time
You'd be surprised how fast political issues between nations evaporate when money is on the line. Countries that don't like each other will get along really fast when there is money to be made
The bigger problem is the building of any pipeline will take a lot of time. So unless their is a pipeline already in place it is already to late to help Europe with the coming winter
I doubt it will take a lot of time when the entire EU economy is in danger. Those pipelines will be made a continental priority once the reservoirs run out
Ukraine proves that theory wrong. A fair bit of Orc gas goes through Ukraine.
@@AleXcsGaming Will take minimum couple years, and what you gonna do without gas for two years explain please.
@@6042833 Putin thinks EU has no alternative to his gas, but watch them. He has proven himself unreliable and thus to be avoided.
@@6042833 Probably longer than a couple years. It will take them 5 - 10 years. Just the pipeline could take a few years, and a few more to actually get all the resources like equipment and special workers all in the right places and then to start extracting the oil. Not considering the politics and business deals needed to be made for all of these things to happen.
It is so frustrating how stupid Europe has been. Ever since Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, they should have had a plan for deteriorating relations with Russia.
You mean German politicians were bribed by Russian mafia
nope, the threat was ignored on purpose. Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania were warning of exactly this, not only that, both Lithuania and Poland build LNG terminals to be diversify and prepare. All the warnings were dismissed by bribed western EU politicians as "some weird alarmism". Merkel was red in the face repeating that nordstream is definitely not political project, when all of eastern EU said it was.
That's easy to say with hindsight tho tbh they should have had a plan throughout the mid 2010s I think.
Or, maybe Europe should learn its place and play ball.
We’re all fools for thinking the Cold War was actually over in the first place.
Also. Greece apparently has huge gas reserves around its seas with some of the biggest reserves south of Crete. Which would be bigger than what Norway or Slochteren from Netherlands has. But unfortunately Greece was too late in accessing this. It was about to 7 years ago, but the continously stronger push for green energy was the reason why not just Greece but Europe had less incentive to exploit this resource.
But in the end when the world news revolves around how Europe is building new routes for gas, I always have to laugh, because likely Greece would be one of the biggest sources just under the noses of Europe that would by now have helped Europe immensely.
Oh the irony
Greece will be in crippling debt for decades, and Germany has long had an oil/gas deficit.
Greece didn't exploit it's oil resources because of climate change, while Germany increased its reliance on oil and coal because of nuclear scares.
Greece doesn't have huge gas reserves. It's a myth.
A lot of this deposit is offshore and close close to turkey. With a few key island claimed by them. Well, you know both countries are not very much on good terms and exploiting this deposit would have been more tensions between the two.
It has some potential reserves, bear in mind that only preliminary studies where conducted off the coast of Crete, not actual surveys.
@@Drunken_Master It's potential is huge. Egypt and Cyprus alone have already found multiple immense gas pockets. But the tectonic plates of Europe, Asia, Africa and a 4th one are all in Greece and it's seas and the expectation is that all acorss the Ionian and seas south of Crete, will have huge to immense reserves. And this is just gas exploration.
I chuckled at the idea of Russia objecting to something on the basis of ecological concerns.
Actually the US is the biggest polluter not Russia.
Same as Germany. Hypocrisy is international and universal.
Some guy: "Maybe they should just move away form fossil fuels that they don't have?"
Some guy gets thrown out window.
And which energy would that be?
@@revertrevertz5438 renewable energy. DUH
@@cgt3704 The renewable energy that's far more expensive than fossil fuels?
@@TomFranklinX it's not. Renewables beat fossil fuels by a lot.
@@ZTanMURReneRs I think you meant to say renewables by themselves are cheaper than fossil fuels. But renewables are intermittent energy sources. They require battery storage, which is very expensive.
I often wonder if this will push the EU to reduce its use of gas and oil, and replace it with electricity. Full electrification is really the only way to do long term energy security.
And produce electricity from what? The main reason why the EU uses so much gas and oil in the first place is that we use them to produce electricity. Gas was the EU's answer for greener energy for the next 2 decades, while we transitioned to renewable sources.
Use your brains dude, it is the reason we are in this crisis because electricity was being produced by russian fossil fuels. Fossil fuel is still the king in providing electricity, renewables are but a tiny fraction in providing energy.
@@davidgreen5994 Nuclear, Hydroelectric, wind, solar, geothermal. It's not like all of these are brand new technology. The EU and the rest of the world has known since at least the '70s that fossil fuels were limited and highly problematic. Yet they were cheaper and easier to implement so they didn't do the research and infrastructure upgrades that would have allowed them to create more EU based energy production. Likewise national pushes to increase energy efficiency would have gone a long way. I mean the passive house building standards European cousin has existed longer than its North American brother.
genius
This is a noble idea, but much of Europe is not suitable for solar (cloudy, hazy) and wind is very location specific. For instance, Germany spent about $2 trillion Euros on solar and it has and it hasn't even come close to living up to its potential purported by the Greens, mainly because it is cloudy in Germany. Hydro and geothermal have likely been implemented where it is feasible. Green-tech is are not good primary sources of power since the sun doesn't shine at night and it isn't always windy, so green-tech is generally supplemental power and not base load. As shown by France, nuclear is certainly an option for base load, but the Greens object and the last I heard is that Germany shut down its last nuclear power plant this year (when they are facing an energy shortage!). The bottom line is that green-tech is in many areas not 'green' (e.g. it effectively emits more CO2 considering resource extraction, resource processing/transport, manufacturing, and installation than it saves in power generation CO2 offsets) and in more areas is not economically feasible (e.g. it costs more to install than the value of the electricity it produces). All this said, some areas of Europe are great for green-tech. Wind is wonderful along much of the coasts, and solar is great in sunny areas of southern Europe.
Update: Marroco and Algeria are in a tense situation and the pipe in Marroco is not pumping any gas.
There is another pipeline that goes directly from Algeria to Spain and there is another one that goes to Italy that is not running at full capacity.
Trans Adriatic Pipeline from Azerbaijan to Italy is already in place, will bring 12m this winter up from 8m this year, will bring 20m in a few years at full capacity.
Also yesterday Europe approved some 6 billions for hydrogen developments, backed up by other 11 billions from the private sector. Part of the idea is to have renewables in Africa when they are more effective and than pipe hydrogen to Europe converting part of Italians gas pipes, building new ones in Spain.
Hydrogen is produced from gas and water. Good luck.
@@doofygilmore-Z lol
It could be interesting to dig deeper into the relationship between Algeria and Spain/EU since it has deteriorated so much recently making it harder for this pipeline to work
I think the African countries should develop their own industrial base instead of sending their resources to Europe. They'll only be cheated and abused again.
I mean when money is on the table. Does those political differences show up?
It funny how 90% of the relationship strains between them is due to a piece of desert land called western sahara
9:41 wtf.... i thought my PC was about to blue screen or something blew up....bruh that scared me.
You showed the volumes of each pipeline individually, but it would have been nice to see a graph with all of them together.
For example, show two circles. The first showing the current sources of EU gas imports, and the second just showing the additional capacity added by the new pipelines.
9:42 Goddammit guys. I was listening in the background and thought my PC was crashing. Never, ever play that sound again!
Importing natural gas from Norway would probably be the best solution for the time being. Norway is friendly and stable so most of the issues that prevented pipeline construction wouldn’t be present. It would likely only be a stopgap measure though since Norway only has about 1% of the world’s proven reserves.
Norway is already exporting as much natural gas as it can to Europe.. Norwegian prime minister said so to Olaf Solts a few days ago..
Also importing gas from algeria is also a good idea because this country already supplies spain portugal and italy and its islands, and it is relatively safe and stable.
Also the trans-caspian pipeline would involve a significant portion of our gas imports going through Turkey, Azerbajian and dangerously close to Iran. Personally, I believe that’s worth mentioning.
The relations of Europe with all of those countries is not bad, Iran just has a real big problem with the US, most of Europe was against Trump when he pulled out of the nuclear deal, Europe tried to uphold it but the US pulled secondary sanctions, Europe issued its directive to protect its companies from sanctions but most dont want long litigations.
@@Solid_Snake99 All three of them are different, one should look into their respective political structures and understand their motives. China is mostly reliable just very protective of their interests and does so in agressive ways, Russia policy is determined by hate, it has no racional basis, just some profecy of Russian domination and right in Eastern Europe, this makes them very dangerous. Iran is an Islamic Republic but Supreme leader Khomenei is long death and current leader was open to dialogue, Iran is not a true democracy, but of the 3 there is some room and some democratic institutions in Iran, that is why the Nuclear deal was signed, radicals in Iran were against but people of Iran elected a government that supported further opening, I believe their commitment was genuine, Israel however wanted a weak Iran and use every influence it has to torpedo the deal, and succeded. The deal allowed foreign observers to monitor Iran nuclear facilities, Iran was willing to not go for Nuclear weapons because frankly they dont need them, Iran can defend its territory, if one look at the Iran-Irak war it was one of the most brutal conflicts anywhere in the world in the XX century, and that is a lot to say given the century. Even the US does not risk going to Iran, because geography has massivly defensible features, Iran capital was never taken with military force, in the oldest country in the world.
@@Solid_Snake99 Yet, you have no problem taking energy from despicable regimes like the Saudis and the Qataris
@@Solid_Snake99 loool How about stop acting like a American and putting your own interest forward instead. Then, these countries wouldn't be hostile to you.
How can pipe go "Dangerously close" to Iran? Turkey and Azerbaijan don't have good relations with Iran lol.
This guy lives in la la land.. the pipe lines he says europe can get it's gas from don't exist... they would take decades to upgrade/construct ... winter in europe is only a few months away... whichever way you look at it, the EU is screwed.
At 9:41 you are using a similar sound to the emergency alerts, that is not good.
There are far more reasonable alternatives especially for heating, like restarting nuclear plants & geothermal. Countries like Germany who shutdown their nuclear plants out of fear after Fukushima and switched to Russian gas (way to go on that one Germany!) should already be in the planning for restarting those plants, hiring and training workers, etc. If nothing else this gives the option to shutdown the gas plants OR increasing generation capability to utilize electric heating for the winter. The UK and other nations that have shutdown plants should be doing the same.
I also know for a fact that there are already "personal" geothermal wells in the UK and other European Nations. I am also aware of the issues that have been caused by poor research into them causing things like sinking/broken foundations, etc., BUT the fact those lessons have already been learned means the ability to properly drill wells has been improved. They can also be scaled up to provide for larger businesses, apartments, etc. They are "green" which should please people. They are local which means no major international political or building hang-ups. There are also already companies in place that have experience with creating them. It certainly won't be a solution for everyone, everywhere, but where it can be done and be supported with government subsidies, the reductions in gas requirements would be noticeable and benefit the entire continent.
Transcontinental and intercontinental pipelines built to replace the Russian pipelines, much like Communism, sound great on paper, but the reality is it took from the 1970s to the 2020s to build the pipelines that are currently in place. Replacements would be decades out at best which means entire countries (or the world altogether at this rate) could be gone by then and will have little to no real world impact until the far future. Utilizing smaller scale, local, (and at least in people's minds) greener alternatives would be far more reasonable to show some impact on how things are currently.
As in all necessities, the lack of significant diversification is the lesson no one ever seems to learn. Being wholly and only dependent on someone else, especially one with a questionable behavior and history, is asking for inevitable catastrophe. Hell, this makes ditching fire places decades ago look short sighted now.
Let the German suffers from they incompetent
Pipelines don't take that long at all. It would take not decades!
@@TheMagicJIZZ I'm going to assume you watched the video, so you know they expressly discussed how long the pipelines that are currently in place took to complete and the huge issues (and even more they didn't talk about) with the replacements. You're talking about pipelines crossing multiple countries and multiple continents. They aren't going to throw it together in a few months and they need solutions for THIS winter, not a winter 10 years from now.
@@TheNuclearGeek Poland just connected to Norway in 4 months! Germany has a LNG terminal tanker coming in winter,
There are existing pipelines, Lithuania and Latvia has LNG and pipelines which can be extended. It's not needed to just build brand new pipelines
LNG terminals can be shared for a time
A little geopolitics about the East Med energy boom.
The current status quo of East Med is that Israel exports it’s gas through existing pipelines to Egypt which then gets liquified at either of Egypt’s 2 LNG stations which then gets exported to Europe. In Q1 of 2022, Egypt’s gas exports went up 900% mainly thanks to the ZOR gas field coming online. Building a gas pipeline connecting East Med to Europe is currently to expensive and time consuming especially as the status quo is more than sufficient with only 1 of the 2 LNG stations in Egypt at full capacity.
A project currently underway is connecting the Egyptian electric grid to the Greek grid through Cyprus using HVDC submarine wires allowing Egypt to export its surplus electricity directly.
Especially as the Dabaa’ Nuclear Power Plant on the Mediterranean coast in Egypt comes online later this decade. Currently Egypt exports it’s excess electricity to Libya, Sudan, Jordan, Iraq and hopefully soon Lebanon while still running a surplus.
Connecting the electrical grids will allow not just fossil fuel energy to get to Europe but excess Solar, Wind, Hydro and Nuclear power also to be exported to and used by Europeans.
I am sure most of these issues will be brought up when leaders from around Europe and the World come to Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt next November to attend COP 27 (United Nations Climate Change Conference) where the issue of switching away from fossil fuels by all western nations will be discussed as an issue of national security and not only as an environmental issue.
Hope everything works out for my fellow Europeans, especially during the winter 👍
Much love from Egypt ❤️
4:28 there is a fourth existing pipeline that could be potentially viable and upgraded "IF" the idiotic geopolitical instability created by Sarkozy and Obama could be solved, which goes from Lybia to Sicily.
At the moment it is grossly underused due to problems with control of the Libyan gas fields, but Libya's natural reserves are at least as vast as those in Algeria and the infrastructures are already there.
Vast Natural Gas reserves were also discovered in the Adriatic sea between Italy, Croatia and Albania: those were never exploited due to low prices of Russian gas, green nonsenses and inexcusable short sightness by the European governments, never able to devise a plan B due to costs and naivety.
EU countries support opposing sides in Libya, good luck with that
yeah let's make Libya an EU colony so we can just steal all the gas.....
Well, well, well, if it isn’t the consequences of my own actions.
there is another important offshore Pipeline from Nigeria to Morocco , yes it's longer and more expensive (passing 13 african nations) but it's safer and it will serve not only Europe but all West african countries from Nigeria to Morocco to Europe .. it's going to be the biggest project in the history of Africa (btw i posted a video on my channel explaining why Morocco is America's most important ally in Africa and that pipeline is one of the reasons)
i think it will be the longest gas pipeline in the world
@@ausbin6102 yes with more than 4300 miles or 7000 Km
@@atlanticstate9602 that is insane 😯
@@ausbin6102 yeah it's a huge project .. maybe the biggest in the history of the continent
@@atlanticstate9602 i don't think it's the biggest
It is kinda crazy sponsoring is still worth it for Brilliant. How many new people are there everyday that haven't been on any news or education channel in last year?
I just play 'spot the segway' but the skips must be brutal on watch time.
These segways are indeed becoming VERY annoying.
@@BakerVS i know, short videos so you end up watching 1000 times the same video cut, but hey if you watch it so often just pay them for their work and bye bye ADs
Also France blocked the construction of a gas pipeline from Spain to the rest of Europe passing through its territory.
You gas East Germany was connected to the Soviet Union. In 1963 the "Freundschaft" oil pipeline to Schwedt / East Germany was completed.
Regarding the gas, it must be said that in 1926 it consisted not of natural gas but of coke oven gas. This resulted in the gas distribution networks in the Ruhr area and Saarland. In Berlin, gas was produced from coal, anthracite or coal dust.
The production of smaller natural gas fields in Germany began.
A large gas field was found near the Dutch city of Groningen, which also supplied gas to Germany.
In the 1970s, West Germany produced pipes for Russia that were later paid for with Russian natural gas.
Long-term supply contracts secured consumption.
Natural gas displaced coal gas and other processes.
"Oh no! The country we sold our self reliance to in exchange for cheap energy were bad guys! Quick! find another politically unstable replacement!"
These people would literally try run a pipeline through the increasingly violent north Africa than to even consider Nuclear Energy.
@@phl2785 Go back to Putin with a Big Begging Bowl.
@@phl2785 I literally just said Nuclear, big Pete.
@@phl2785 Nuclear energy was mentioned as the alternative. Keep holding that big L.
@@tomarmstrong1297 Ah Tom, I didn't see the second paragraph in your post. My bad
@@tomarmstrong1297 While I supprt Nuclear energy, it is not a 1 to 1 replacement for Gas. It can provide a baseline of electrical power but is much harder to use for Heat based industrial processes and heating for housing. It also cannot be used to stabilize short period fluctuations in the electricity grid.
Why not invest the equivalent sums and time in the construction and deployment of renewable energy sources and energy storage instead?
Because big fossil fuel company won't earn anything from that
because gas isn't only used to generate electricity, but in chemical processes.
@@davidescristofaros2241 That was why I mentioned storage. To store produced energy or electricity is crucial when the energy system gets a larger share of renewable energy.
I'm sure that the specific amount of gas that is vital for industrial applications could be sourced from western Europe, eg the North sea.
Furthermore, I'm not against the idea of commissioning more nuclear power in Europe, but that will take significantly longer time than deploying renewables.
Until we figure out how to effectively store renewable energy we won't be able to go 100% renewable.
The free market is not convinced.
Sorry, deal with precarious oil dependency and inhospitable changes to the climate ,🤷🏽♂️🤷🏽♂️
So disheartening to see those pipe lines being build quite early and finished so late. That could've been a great point to think about: renewable energy instead, which would also take a while, but has so many other benefits. It could've created more benefits even: make it more economically viable and much earlier.
No kidding. If we'd put the same amount of money into greening our energy infrastructure as we do into maintaining our love affair with fossil fuels, we'd have transitioned completely by now.
@@GeoEstes Renewables are far too unreliable in their output to be used by big economies, and grid scale storage is eye-wateringly expensive ( and in the case of batteries highly dangerous ), at best renewables are 'gas savers' if and when they do decide to produce any power. Gas turbines are the only things agile enough to keep up with renewables and renewables need 100% backup. Too much gas is used to back up renewables when it can be used at 95% efficiency in domestic condensing boilers - and that is why gas is so much in demand, to back up the shortfalls from over-hyped renewables. Transitioning is something humans do when they think they were born in the wrong body, I doubt we will ever break our reliance on fossil fuels because they are so reliable and predictable, the only thing that can replace them in some areas is nuclear power, and fusion is hundreds of years away - if ever..
@@chrissmith2114 I was referring to geothermal and nuclear, along with renewables.
@@chrissmith2114 If you research in renewables, you also spec into the storage. There's plenty what you could do, especially if we had started that really on. And yes, research into nuclear (both fission and fusion) would fit in there too.
@@GeoEstes Ok, but that kind of talk is why so many people praise Germany for all the solar money they poured into the grid but that really doesn't work. Yes, I agree "all of the above" type approach would be better but so many people think only to push the renewables that do Not work in certain countries. Germany is a classic example of what not to do and what happens when politicians listen to people that hate everything about fossil fuels but push to use tech that doesn't work in Germnay and isn't mature anyways.
The best pipeline is a pipeline to renewable energy.
Interesting, tu which energy do you think may work.
If renweable energy was so good and cheap we would have had it already..
@@lamchunting856 ever heard of lobbying..?
@@calin6327 lol not so simple.
Natural gas isn't just used for energy. It's primarily used for industrial inputs. Plastics, synthetic fertilizers, many pharmaceutical products, many adhesives and many more products require products derived from natural gas to be produced.
Any or all of these pipelines would take years and years to build and cost a lot. May as well build fusion reactors or go fully green.
what fusion reactors? and fully green do you mean nuclear energy?
Lol fusion will take decades. Thorium reactors and geothermal energy are more realistic
@@kingart23 fusion is like mixing multiple particles together (usually hydrogen), this creates A LOT of energy, but it is still quite impossible to do with our current technology (only experiments have been successfully carried out).
Fission on the other hand is the breaking of particles (usually thorium or uranium), this is what nuclearreactors do, it also creates a lot of energy, less than fusion and is also not an infinite process (as uranium runs out after hundreds of years) (therefore it is technically not a renewable source of enegy). This process is also very inefficient as a lot of energy is lost and nuclear reactors are very risky (e.g. fukushima, chernobyl)
@@mattia8327 fossil fuels kill millions each year, whilst fission has the lowest average death toll. humans naturally are more scared of high risk low probability events, but these irrational fears should not guide policy.
Noone born before 2000 will see the first commercial fusion power plant become net synchronised.
Some European experts have mentioned that a new pipeline between Israel and Turkey can significantly help Europe, but the two countries need to normalize and improve their relations. This pipeline would be much cheaper and faster than the mentioned East-Med pipeline because Turkey already has a pipeline system going into Europe.
Getting dependent on the current Turkish government is a very bad idea. Erdogan is already getting more concessions than decency allows.
@@idraote typical greek nationalist
@@Dahiegezey He’s not wrong, and how do you even know he’s Greek
@@giatiexwkanali2750 The current Turkish government is bad but the greek one is even worse. Turkey will very probably change its government to a secular democratic new government. On the other hand Greece is a sinking ship. Greek nationalist won’t admit but it is true
@@Dahiegezey wow, you call Greece a sinking ship , and Turkey as ok because it will "Probably" change in the future to become a democratic secular government. Turkey a regressive undemocratic unsecular state with a failing struggling hyper inflation economy with strong black market subeconomy with anti western and neo Ottoman outlook. In contrast Greece is a EU member of excellent standing with a Demoratic Free and Secular society, the economy is booming despite covid the Ukraine war etc. they have paid back the bailout loans before time and Europe and USA , is investing billions into the Greek economy etc. The Greek Human Development Index is higher than that of Turkeys (look it up), Greek people are free'r than Turkish people politically etc. and you call Greece a sinking ship. no my friend Turkey itself is a Sinking ship and as you say if it does not change its political landscape and mentality no Europen can trust a regressive Neo Ottoman undemocratic Islamic Oligarchy. Look in the mirror my friend Turkey has deep fundamental structural issues that need to be fixed , Greece is not your problem , your leaders are bluffing you with Greek stories to take your attention off the real issues inside Turkey , don't fall for it.
East Med pipeline first can go to Turkey and than to Europe. That is an easier and cheaper solution. It can't go through the sea because Turkey won't let a pipeline bypassing his country.
The Netherlands has one of the biggest gas fields in the world. The gas field in the province of Groningen is Number 9 I think. Also there are a lot of smaller gas fields in the Waddensea. Unfortunately the extracting of gas in Groningen causes earthquakes and extracting gas in the waddensea is hard because of the environmental issues.
jij en ik weten ook dat als het echt moet er gewoon gas uit groningen gaat komen.
@@mitch8072 Zeker!
given the latest discoveries by Egypt in their western part, and given the long relation between Italy and Lybia, I would also consider a pipeline from south italy to Lybia and Egypt through Malta. ENI has quite a good relation to all Lybian sides and is already quite involved in the operations in Lybia.
There is already a pipeline between Italy and Libya.
Just get rid of the sanctions. Easier and cheaper. Why USA is exempted?
Facts 😅
What a coincidence. Earlier today, I met an old man on the train. He had come to Sweden in 1943 and grew up here but was now living in Israel. And he mentioned the potential gas supply to Europe, and now you publish a video on the topic!
izrael is not the option
Build more nuclear reactors and invest in solar, wave, wind, water power
@@Salarat right
Nuclear reactor isn't built in short time it takes years
@@ShubhamMishrabro that I know. I’m thinking about the future
@@oliviamoore3426 but europe has to think about now
@@Salarat most of natural gas is used for heat and electricity, that's the biggest concern. Rubber, plastic, etc are produced from oil, not natural gas.
No mention of Norway, the third largest exporter of Natural gas in the world.
For the love of God get rid of the buzzer sound during Brillant Ad. It's the worst with earphones...
people in europ is so wasteful with their energy, one culture shock I had was that how many places here like shops keep lights on in night even if they are closed, no wonder they never had enough energy
Russia guaranteed the supply of gas no matter what…The world is watching and nobody will rely on Russia for the supply of its gas at least at a substantial level…!
Oh boy, China does, it has a major pipeline Power of Siberia, is constructing a new one as big, China buy a lot from Central Asia and most of China's in Central Asia is assured by Gazprom expertise. Other countries will soon be supplied by Russia. We wanted the divorce a long ago, it will happen and we all will live happy without each others. Live and let live. We have to purge the fascist in us.
The only thing I miss in this video is a mention to the conflict between Algeria, Spain and Morroco that defenetly is going to affect the aviability of the Trans-saharan pipeline.
That Azerbaijan has not been able to increase production all these years after the pipeline was finished. That central Asia depends on Russian expertise and has its production tied to China, and is planing to sell also to Pakistan and India. That Algeria has no plans of increasing production. That the Norwegians and Quataris want contracts of at least 20 years, and a fixed price higher than the price the Russians offered years before the conflict.... That we don't need that much gas at all in 8 years, that whoever invests in infrastructure will loose slot of money.
They are already there
Italy is in the European Grid
Italy has grid with Greece and the TAP from Azerbaijan
Italy has grid with Algeria already
These have been functioning for a long, long time
Add to this the Norwegian one
We are already connected
The best thing would be to have a direct connection to Saudi Arabia
Speaking from Italy, yes, something has been done. I hope that after the next elections we sill still side with Ukraine though. And that we will finally start to invest in Nuclear Power. It's no longer 1986, and it is high time that some of our politicians realize it already.
To use Saudi Arabian Gas, A pipeline from Israel has to be built Also from Saudis to Israel of course. But easiest option is to remove gas embargoes of Iran for a limited time. There is already a pipeline from Iran to Turkey. It may help Iran to become independent from Russian support.
Honestly, it sounds like the Italians have planned ahead, made some good decisions and will likely not be affected as much as other European countries.
@@yemliha4434 My God sure Iran have not pride, they just wait to help their enemy in time of need.Biden just call Iran for oil before few months and they answer with bunch of rockets to American embasy in Iraq.But GL with gas :)))
@@yemliha4434 Iran is on the verge of creating a nuke. You really want to help them with getting one?
For the trans saharien pipeline the one passing from algeria to marocco then spain is closed due to geo political conflict (however there is a 2nd pipeline between algeria and italy under construction)
To me east med seems the most realistic, as well as the most reliable.
USA already said no no no.
@@acanadianineurope814 that was before the Ukraine war...I think opinions may change in DC, especially with Erdoğan's previous blustering about Finland/Sweden joining NATO and his desire to attack the Kurds.
@@dmitrishufutinsky2251 Sorry Nuland was in Cyprus in may/June and said the program was not going ahead. DC doesnt care about anything except DC, and 10% for the big guy.
@@dmitrishufutinsky2251 Agree with you. Egypt allready talking to Greece to link power grids and on to Europe with electricity generated from gas and renewables. To note that Isreali gas is allready being pumped to Egypt and been converted to LG. The Saudi Government was In Greece a week ago talking about the same proposal, gas , electricity and renewable energy to Greece. Greece has also signed some energy deals with the UAE. I don't have the details on how exactly probably through Egypt, interesting non the less. notwith standing Greek deposits should they be confirmed. Greece also to note has a large maritime shipping capacity. With Greece now firmly in the camp of the USA , France, and an EU member of good standing, the Greek Isreali , Egypt and Saudi corridor seems like a good option long term. all these countries are strong Allies of the USA and Europe especially France. It does make sense to have a network of energy , gas , electricity including renewables and even petroleum running up from Saudi throug Egypt into Greece and into Europe connecting UAE and Isreali resources along the way.
Trans saharan pipeline too
Norway have a lot of gas but political environment parties refuse
Algeria 🇩🇿 too has a LOT of gas more than Norway 🇳🇴
@@malikaabizar8318 yes they might have on the tap, but Norway have hus\ge oil and gas reserves in North sea , hard to mesure indeed
Can we just decide that Russia doesn’t get to say no to things internationally? They’ll always block things that weaken them, obviously.
Just Russia, or everyone else? Does nobody get to tell the Solomon Islands whether they can build Chinese ports, too? Or are we making an exception for all the "good" countries
You're wrong, the United States is blocking everything.
@@LancesArmorStriking Well just Russia commits Genozide in Europe and brings war to its neighbors. So yes, just fricking Russia shouldn’t have a say in international affairs. Leave Ukraine, stop the crimes and Russia can be back on the international podium.
Cheers
@@TheArneschwindt
Lol you're admitting double standards then. You don't care about international laws, you just care about hating Russia.
Also why should the US gave a say in anything, since it committed "GENOZIDE" (learn English lmao) in Afghanistan?
This is my point. Everything the West is criticizing Russia of doing, it has also done. Any nobody has punished them for that.
So why should Russia be punished??
Pretty much everybody else
The only way out is to compromise, if none going to compromise we will be in stone age right now
I think they need to have multiple sources that they can rely on. Most definitely there need to be more LNG port facilities built so that if a pipeline source ever becomes unavailable they have a backup plan and can't be held hostage.
I cannot overstate how much I hate the fact we haven't figured this shit out decades ago, by diversifying providers and energy sources. Russia got us by the balls like a drug dealer holding back the coke once winter comes, and just like druggies, we're gonna give in eventually (or at least have massive calls to do so by a large percentage of the population). I know my fellow europeans, and we've grown pretty damn soft once our comforts and luxuries are in jeapoardy.
I'll trust you don't actually view "druggies", people regardless, with such disdain.
My country is not dependent on Russian gas (Romania) but I 100% agree that all of us europeans should share the national gas to pass these hard times together. Even if that means that the cost of living will increase. These are the tests we have to pass to prove our unity
True true. I am not energy expert but I pretty sure it is very difficult to find new natural gas supplies. Even in Australia we are concerned about our natural gas supplies and we are own of the largest exporters in the world.
@@emazio4122 Why Romans people wish to be big Europeans so hard.Your EU equality in salaries is not enough in term of unity?
I hope people in the West realize their real enemies. The politicians.
Please stop using the sound of my computer breaking in your ads. It's really unpleasant.
The main problem, as said in the video, is the instability of the regions concerned: corruption, autocrats... who may have learnt from Russia about blackmailing Europe if it wants their gas - there are enough conflictual disputes in these countries to not guarantee a smooth supply + their still possible tights to Russia. Anyway, it will take time, if ever. Therefore this time should also be used to seriously develop the so called green energies (wind, sun...) - but of course the big oil lobby will not be so amused by this perspective. Yet, since necessity knows no law, solutions must be found, but preferably sustainable ones; therefore: the same error should not be repeated and a geografically and energetically diversified supply plan should be wisely thought and developed.
It's not the problem of oil lobby but cost and efficiency of this green energy. Such things like wind turbines or solar panels need rare resources to be constructed and currently we are not mining them enough for mass production. Plus it's still debatable on how productive those thing would be giving their dependence on good weather and taking massive chunks of land to construct. I still think the best way would be just abandon all these dreams of eco-friendly renewable resources and just focus on developing nuclear energy. Yes It does made some radioactive pollutions but with proper regulation of their containment it will not have negative effects on environment
Success of renewables mostly depends on storage capacity and also somewhat on ‚smarter‘ consumption. There are more storage solutions than lithium or other chemical battery’s that don’t require that much exotic materials, such as Hydrogen storage or pump dam lakes (or whatever they’re called in English).
And Europe has shown time and again they are open to the idea of being blackmail. Being Stockholm is in their territory and all.
@@yudistiraliem135 Lol
Sadly, there's no oil/gas under Switzerland. Much of the World's land surface (at least certainly that within piped gas reach of Europe) is covered by non-democratic & outright autocratic regimes so it's not surprising that most of the biggest discoveries have been made in places where life & society is highly transactional in nature,adding an extra layer of nuance,balance & difficulty in relations with countries that have awkward regimes but have the power to keep the lights on in Europe.
Europe is stymied by it's small size, not for the first time in it's history.
One thing that has changed irreparably is that even if there's regime change in Moscow next week and a much different tone towards the West leads to a thawing of sanctions (and a positive conclusion for Ukraine in the war), Europe will never again allow itself to be so beholden to Russia for energy supplies, even if the taps get flowing once more, Putin has destroyed the energy relationship that has existed between Europe & Moscow for 70 years, a relationship that survived even most of the Cold War but could not survive beyond Putin's regime.
The thing is that Americans want to keep making money by selling their expensive gas to Europe ..
Some years ago, Ukraine tried to blackmail Europe with their gas pipeline from Russia. Any pipeline through Turkey would certainly lead to similar threats from bigmouth Erdogan. Though of course the various African countries will certainly also try to get more than agreed once such a pipeline is built.
Diversify and win. The EU also has leverage over Turkey. As long as we have a multi-stream system, all is well. They key is to not to put all of our eggs on one basket.
Basically oil breeds blackmailers?
I presume then, that as usual it'll all boil down to who Germany and the loathsome EU surmise will be their most undemanding sugar-daddy?
Ukraine had the pipline and used it as a bargain chip. Gernany by start using the nordstream 1 removed that bargain chip and the rest is history: invasion of crimea in 2014 and invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
@@mikatu If Ukraine hadn't tried to blackmail Germany, Northstream 2 wouldn't have been planned and built.
Relying on the middle east for gas sounds like a god damn death wish for Europe.
how about the Dutch gas supply, we have one of the largest gas reserves. Which we stopped depleting because of people living near experienced earthquakes and deteriorating houses because of it. but we could start again to ease the gas shortage
Sounds pretty authoritarian to me
They are reconsidering that option at present - preservation of the community/buildings needs to be resolved first.
This is total magical thinking.
6:42. Aka the typical bullies who think that the whole world belongs to them. Thanks Biden for caving.
Thank you for sharing.
The most important one that you don't cover already exists. It's the UK to Europe pipeline. We produce excess gas but don't really have storage. Europe requires gas and we are sending it.
It's not nearly enough to make up for the shortfall from Russia. Given that it is already in use it doesn't really fit the context of the video either.
Consider The Antarctic pipeline, Running undersea to Tierra del Fuego ,to Brazil ,across the Atlantic to West Africa , thence to Libya and Europe. What ! Fantasy ? what do you mean fantasy ? .
Can't we just ignore Russia's protests about the Caspian Pipeline? What are they gonna do about it? Furthermore it's not like Russia ever follows internazional law so there probably wouldn't be a problem convincing the citizens.
Russia has the largest fleet in the Caspian sea and is the only nation that can bring in more ships through the Volga-Don canal. You can't ignore them if they physically stop the construction of the pipeline.
@@Salarat ok, China is bigger problem, thanks for explaining
@@sanzhsn thanks for explaining
Yeah like the others said I don't think Iran and Russia will allow that to happen plus I doubt Erdogan would want to piss them off to save the EU. Especially since many European countries support PKK rebels and prevented Turkey joining the EU. Plus those landlocked Ex-Soviet countries will not want to piss off Putin and China. Basically there is zero percent chance of that happening.
It's not like any of the nations over there are politically stable or democratic. Kazakhstan, Turkey, Azerbaijan, all politically unstable like Russia. Azerbaijan even has a huge war going on with Armenia for decades and that's why they made the pipeline take a turn and go upwards through Georgia instead of Armenia.
Are Norway not part of Europe.
Putler has increased the size and capability of NATO and made the planet greener at the same time. He should be nominated for some kind of prize.
He should be awarded the prize of king of Europe, because he's owning every single idiot that runs this continent.
There is already a trans Adriatic pipeline built, it goes from Azerbaijan Turkey Greece Albania and ends in Italy.
What about stop depending on oil, coal and gas ?
Ok, you pay
@@whitezombie10 yes that's the point
Just build more nuclear and renewables.
Metals can only be melt with gas… without gas bye bye industry
@@healththenopulence5106 majority of the demand for gas is for transport and heating . If those can be mitigated Europe would still have enough supply for industry
Fool
Like France which is importing electricity at the moment even if it has the largest nuclear electricity generation programme in Europe?
They should start running all three of these pipelines today not tomorrow but today immediately
Reject gas-guzzling cars. Embrace traditional horses for travel.
idk I kinda wanna go back to horses.
Portugal and Spain are already in talks to facilitate the outflow of the Iberian Peninsula
Based on how long it usually takes building these pipelines, in the same timeline you could just copy the French nuclear 1970's nuclear expansion.
And with modern, more-efficient plant designs.
No you can't. The old designs would never get an operating license, and the new designs like the EPR takes 15-20 years from planning to production and the energy costs are significantly higher than even current electricity prices from imported natural gas.
So... You need to build 3 brand new pipelines from scrap to replace already existing one?!
And that's a good idea?!
lol!
Wonder if the countries in the EU, especially industrial giant Germany, ever had this old saying" don't put all your eggs in the same basket".
They have one
Ha Ha. EU choose Russia/Soviet Union out of Options. Nuclear Energy should have been the choice but the Germans did not full trust nuclear energy.
You see ONLY one side of the equation ,the demand from Europe....for Russia oil and gas is over 40% in total revenues, being Europe the first customer ..an easy customer....for Russia the alternative is to liquify gas, not easy at all...they don't have the facilities nor the ships available ...pipeline to China is even worse they have to go through Mongolia....Russia is also suffering...and it will be a long suffering...for Europe this winter will be hard...but reserves in European countries are up (80%) the next winter they will arrange to buy from somebody else
Sounds to me like individual Europeans should take matters into their own hands. If you own a building (your own home, a business, or a rental building), put a little bit of solar on it to reduce your reliance on the power grid. If you’re able, put a lot of solar on it and pair it with energy storage. Being a net energy importer is a terrible thing for any country, and if the politicians and power companies can’t figure it out for you, then individuals will have to figure it out for themselves.
@Bessie Hillum I'm not sure of the relevance of buying a new smartphone. Do you mean that people cannot or will not afford solar because they have other spending priorities? If so, I'm sure you're correct. Though solar will pay for itself over time, so it's mostly an up-front cost, and a long-term savings.
save europe? before what? let europe pay for gas, start nord stream 2, and that's it
so i just did some off the cuff calculations and based on industry estimates of a world useage of 132290211000000 cubic feet a year and estimated reserves of 7257000000000 cubic feet in the ground, the world only has 18.2 years of gas left and thats assuming no loss or accidents, 100% extraction etc if a pipline takes 15 years to build, this is utterly pointless, we need massive investment in renewables and to increase there durability in extreme climate conditions. were debating angels on a pinhead while our energy systems fail.
That will not work .Never ever .
Absaolutely brilliant idea. Replace gas from one volatile region with another. Excellent advice, really.
1:13 Honest it was not regional instability, but these region gain control of their own national assets from being stolen by colonize powers, and frankly the deal were to sell these assets for USD, which created what's so-called petrol dollar.
Can we just build nuclear power stations instead
Nuclear bad!!! 🤬😭🤬
@@moritz3168 Nuclear is our only reliable method to slow climate change, ask anyone with a physics degree what energy source we should be investing in and most will say Nuclear.
@@StarmanYeti xD. Have you heard of sarcasm? And we should also invest more into fusion research.
no cuz u only want that cuz u believe in global warming which is proved fake
@@moritz3168 I thought you may have been sarcastic because of the emojis but I wasn't sure 😂
Excellent analysis , thank you
One extreme idea I had was to create a pipeline which goes from New England to Northern Quėbec through Baffin Island. It would then pass through Greenland, Iceland, and maybe the Faroe Islands to connect with the existing pipelines in the North Sea. This would probably be even more expensive than the Trans-Saharan Pipeline as a lot of infrastructure would have to be made. I'm thinking that shipping gas across the Atlantic to Europe would be a lot cheaper than what I would call the North Atlantic Pipeline.
Or a trans-Arctic pipeline from Alaska and Canada to Scandinavia.
Ya circle the wotld , GREAT IDEA - -
Should we not be looking for clean energy rather than focusing on gas!
Pipelines do not replace gas. Gas or alternative energy replaces gas. Each pipeline has certain capacity limit to know if the gas actually reaches Europe or just taken by the intermediate countries. EU should remove trading natural gas inside EU to keep prices in check. Everyone knows piped natural gas contracts are fixed price and long term. So far Russia, Algeria and Azerbaijan are supplying at agreement prices, but consumers are charged high according to market price. Who is taking the profit here is a well known fact. Politicians should learn the business of gas pricing instead of making a joke of themselves in asking people to reduce heating.
This is not true: Russia is charging high prices for what little it's currently delivering, so much that it's revenue barely fell if at all compared to 2019
You're talking nonsense. Reduced supply inflated the prices. It's basic market forces... Also Russia is the one that set up the biggest Oil and Gas Cartel in the world (OPEC). Also I already decided not to heat my home at all next winter as soon as the invasion of Ukraine began. Winters here aren't that unbearable. I'll just wear a couple extra layers of clothes.
@@NLTops Nonsense is mixing oil prices with gas prices. Piped gas is different from LNG and oil pricing.
@@Leptospirosi They are charging for LNG shipments to japan as well as on crude oil that is giving better revenues. Piped gas is different and is priced according to long term contracts. Read contract that are available on open with any of energy company in Europe importing piped gas from Russia or Algeria. That's the main reason Algeria against Spain reselling their gas at higher price in European gas market. Do some research and read contract documents they submit to relevant stock exchanges.
Even if those pipelines were built in record time, it wouldn't supply the 150 bcm of gas that Europe imports from Russia
For the Caspian Sea, the agreement has been changed, so it is not all countries that has to approve a pipeline but only the those whose territory is passes. If the Trans Caspian Pipeline is combined with the White Stream from Georgia to Romania over the Black Sea, it passes around Turkey. Something many would be able to see the value of today, with Erdogan in ower. From Romania, a new pipeline is required to connect it to the Friendship pipeline in Ukraine in north through the western plains of Romania. From there is on to Germany. In the south, it can supply the South Stream to Italy, so in effect reaching the two main users of Russian gas.
Armenia and Iran can be coupled to this pipeline as well as Iran has a lot of gas. That will diversify the reliance away from Azerbaijan. It will also provide a new entry reality in Armenia.
This entirely avoids Turkey and Cyprus, so it diversify the delivery routes to EU and does it to the core areas, Italy and Germany.
You cant evade Turkey on that route. You cant have iran and armenia to work with azerbaican. They are enemy.
@@umutneo White Stream does not pass Turkish territory as far as I understand or?
That is why Iran can connect the the pipeline through an expansion of the one through Georgia and Armenia. That would entirely avoid Azerbaijan for the Iranian/Armenian part.
@@Schroinx What makes you think that iran is a friend 🤣 even imagining that is expensive.
good luck with that xD bcs you need it so much!
What about north sea gas
Storytime with TLDR : today : the history of european oil & gas exploitation. Some « small corrections » if I may :
- Most of euro-colonies take their independance during the 60's and 70's, not right after the WWII...
- The oil consummed in Europe mostly comes from the middle east, and still is, oil nationalization in euro-colonies has been mostly negociated, there have been very few « instability » on that market before the oil crisis.
- The oil crisis came in 1978 and was started by a political move from OPEP related to the israelo-arab conflict.
- For strategic reasons, imports from USSR were always limited in the west, it's the contrary for eastern europe (including germany), which are connected and dependant of the russian infrastructure since the cold war.
- Norway, UK or the Netherlands have huge local gas reserve, feeding most of western europe during the cold war and nowadays, diversifying our imports (with Russia but not only) was also a way to preserve those strategic ressources.
- We don't need « to be saved » from the absence of russian gas, we need to be saved from the propaganda of a very nasty bunch of people.
That's it for the biggest lies and wrong narratives of this one, it's a full one : one that try to reshape and confuze big chunks of history.
TLDR is not an info-channel and what they do is discusting.
It looked like he was making this stuff up as he went along. Unfortunately for TLDR "News" there are some people over 70 that know European/world history of the twentieth century. We learnt it in school, and I'm in Australia not downtown Antwerp.
@@tonicjack9823 I disagree with everything you said
Continental Europe has a lot of oil it’s just not has densely located. However there are potential new oil fields in the far north of Norway and between Iceland and Greenland that could surpass all of them and now the ice sheets are melting it just needs a drive to allow regulation to be lifted.
So, a pipeline through Cyprus would help end self reliance from a crazy dictator who has invaded a sovereign country, but a crazy dictator who has invaded a sovereign country says no, because the pipeline affects the country they invaded. Who says Americans don't do irony
And what does the EU do about it? Nothing
@@cazwalt9013 starting nuclear again.LNG and coal
east med is scam and usa already told this shit. there is no way gre isr and egy could do this project without usa help even help of EU!!
the syrian war is about a pipe line too, russia did not want it, for geo-fuel reasons.
There is a pipeline from Iran to Turkey that could be connected quite easily with other pipelines going to europe, though europe would have to lift sanctions on iranian gas.
Looks like it could be a start of a good friendship.
I notice from a Eurostat report that Germany and Italy have increased their exports to Russia by 18% since May 2022.
Good to see some realism but disappointing that the EU has threatened Turkiye with sanctions if they export non-sanctioned goods to Russia
Luckily "Western Values" preclude double standards.
I have a feeling that sometimes you are mixing up Europe and the EU.
So I remain unsure if you are correctly presenting the statistics.
Overall, I do know more now than I did before this video. :)
why the baltic pipe is totally missing in this video?
It'll be a happy day when the EU can buy Russian gas without worrying about blackmail. Once Russia is down to about 20% of EU supply they won't have the capacity to blackmail the continent.
WTF u speak USA is one blackmail world for decades with sanctions.If they not use sanctions for weapon, now EU can have allot of alternatives of Russian gas/oil.
20% is still to much. It needs to be 0.
@@Suksass you're a psycopath. Why do you hate Europe?
@@suportbghelp4938 Sanctions aren't blackmail it's more like a ransom. But it's pretty easy to avoid getting sanctioned. Avoid terrorism and nuke development and you're pretty much free and clear.
America can never be as good at using the economy to push around good size economies as Russian in the US the wealthy and corporations have too much power to allow long term economic damage to occur for political reasons. In Russia, if Putin wants it done, it's done.
@@Suksass I don't think 20% will leave Russia with any leverage, but if they can make Russia even poorer then I'm all for it.