industryterm:energy supplies

  • Low prices cause redistribution of hash rate.
    https://hackernoon.com/low-prices-cause-redistribution-of-hash-rate-155959e1ee88?source=rss----

    Low Prices Can Cause Redistribution of The Hash RateThe vast portion of mining power is sourced from China.The recent slump in coin prices has led to concerns over the feasibility of mining operations. However, mining operations are still profitable in some parts of the world; the lower Bitcoin price is making way for diversification in the mining industry by enabling the growth of farms in countries with electricity prices that are lower than the energy costs in China.While a few Chinese mining facilities have been able to lock direct deals with power providers, thereby giving them access to discounted energy supplies, the average kWh rate in China stands at $0.08. Bitcoin’s current difficulty makes it difficult for most major miners, including those in China, to break-even on operating (...)

    #decentralization #hash-rate #cryptocurrency #blockchain #technology

  • Project Turkstream

    http://turkstream.info/project

    Intéressante page officile du Projet Russo-Turc " Turkstream

    TurkStream will start on the Russian coast near the town of Anapa and run over 900 km through the Black Sea to come ashore in the Thrace region of Turkey

    TurkStream will directly connect the large gas reserves in Russia to the Turkish gas transportation network, to provide reliable energy supplies for Turkey and south-east Europe.

  • Chilcot’s blind spot: Iraq War report buries oil evidence, fails to address motive | openDemocracy
    https://www.opendemocracy.net/david-whyte/chilcot-s-oil-blind-spot-in-iraq-war-report

    Most important of these is oil. Buried in deep in volume 9 of the 2.6 million-word report, Chilcot refers to government documents that explicitly state the oil objective, and outlining how Britain pursued that objective throughout the occupation. But he does not consider this evidence in his analysis or conclusions. Oil considerations do not even appear in the report’s 150-page summary.

    To many people around the world, it was obvious that oil was a central issue, as Iraq itself had nearly a tenth of the world’s oil reserves, and together with its neighbouring countries nearly two thirds. There was a clear public interest in understanding how that affected UK decisions. Chilcot failed to explore it.

    Section 10.3 of the report, in volume 9, records that senior government officials met secretly with BP and Shell on at several occasions (denied at the time) to discuss their commercial interests in obtaining contracts. Chilcot did not release the minutes, but we had obtained them under the Freedom of Information Act: they are posted here. In unusually expressive terms for a civil service write-up, one of the meeting’s minutes began, “Iraq is the big oil prospect. BP are desperate to get in there” (emphasis in original).

    Also in that section, Chilcot includes references to several pre-war documents identifying a British objective of using Iraqi oil to boost Britain’s own energy supplies. For example, a February 2002 Cabinet Office paper stated that the UK’s Iraq policy falls “within our objectives of preserving peace and stability in the Gulf and ensuring energy security”. A Foreign Office strategy paper in May 2003, which Chilcot didn’t include, was even more explicit: “The future shape of the Iraqi oil industry will affect oil markets, and the functioning of OPEC, in both of which we have a vital interest”.

  • Turkey agrees with Azerbaijan to accelerate gas project
    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-agrees-with-azerbaijan-to-accelerate-gas-project-.aspx?pag

    Turkey has agreed with Azerbaijan to accelerate the Trans-Anatolian Pipeline (TANAP), with an aim to have the gas project completed before the planned 2018, Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu said on Dec. 3, as quoted by Reuters.

    In a joint news conference with Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev in the capital Baku, Davutoğlu also said Turkey was willing to share details of its recent jet downing incident with Russia.

    This was the latest move by Turkey’s leaders, who are in an effort to diversify energy supplies as ties with its largest natural gas provider Russia have tumbled following the downing of a Russian warplane by Turkey.

    Earlier this week President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan visited Qatar to explore the possibility of buying more liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its Gulf Arab ally.

    Turkey’s gas grid BOTAŞ and Qatar’s national oil energy company inked a memorandum of understanding during Erdoğan’s visit on Dec. 2 which will pave the way for Turkey to import LNG in both a regular and long-term manner, according to Turkish officials.

    This accord will help Turkey’s LNG imports from Qatar gain a long-term perspective, the officials said, as reported by Anadolu Agency.

    In the meantime, Russian gas supplies to Turkey are flowing normally, despite the row between the two countries, a source in Russian gas giant Gazprom told Reuters on Dec. 3.

    #Turquie #Russie #Energie #Qatar #Azerbaidjan

  • Russia may be raising the stakes on Turkey after it shot down a Russian air force jet - Business Insider
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/russia-may-be-raising-the-stakes-on-turkey-after-it-shot-down-a-

    Dans cet article sur #turkish_stream (toujours pas de décision), les « incompréhensions » (au minimum) des pays d’Europe centrale sur la politique gazière de la CE (on rappellera que la non réalisation de #south_stream est une conséquence de la participation de Gazprom au projet, le même Gazprom étant associé à #north_stream II apparemment, sans que cela pose de problème)

    In September, a group of European companies signed an agreement with Gazprom to expand its Nord Stream pipeline so that it can deliver increased volumes directly from Russia to Germany, also without pumping them through Ukraine.

    Gazprom and Royal Dutch Shell form the new consortium for the project, which is called Nord Stream II and aims to double the route’s annual capacity to about 100 billion cubic meters of gas.

    The new pipelines are due to start transporting gas by the end of 2019, according to the consortium.

    The plan has met opposition from the U.S. government and some eastern European countries, which say it allows the Kremlin to squeeze Ukraine out from its role as a transit country.

    The pro-Western government in Kiev, in power since street protests overthrew a Moscow-friendly president last year, earns significant revenues from transit fees.

    Ten EU countries have written a letter to the European Commission saying that Nord Stream II runs counter to the bloc’s interests.

    Polish Minister for Maritime Affairs Marek Grobarczyk told Reuters last week the project would harm energy security by deepening dependence on Russian gas.

    There is a broad agreement within EU countries ... that building Nord Stream II stands against the idea of diversification and the idea of the internal market and would lead to an increase of energy supplies from one direction and one supplier,” Grobarczyk said.

    Hungary, a country which backed the aborted South Stream project, has accused the EU of exercising double standards over which pipeline routes it supports and which it opposes.

    They complained about South Stream because it would have bypassed Ukraine. Does Nord Stream II traverse Ukraine?”, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said on Nov. 20. “Interestingly, South Stream was problematic, while Nord Stream is not.

  • Forget Ukraine. It’s Business As Usual Between Europe and Russia
    http://www.newsweek.com/forget-ukraine-its-business-usual-between-europe-and-russia-369730

    It was just like the old days before the European Union imposed sanctions on Russia in 2014. At the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok Gazprom clinched three major deals with some of Europe’s biggest energy companies.

    One of the most important was the revival of a lucrative asset swap between the Russian energy giant and Wintershall, the energy division of BASF, a German chemical company. BASF had abandoned that swap arrangement in December 2014 because of the geopolitical consequences of Russia’s invasion of eastern Ukraine and its annexation of Crimea.

    The asset swap and other deals signed in Vladivostok show how German as well as Austrian energy companies are loath to quit Russia. They also show how Gazprom wants to tie Europe’s lucrative gas market more closely to Russia. In 2013, Russia supplied the EU’s 28 countries with 30 percent of their gas needs.

    But more importantly, the deals confirm how Russia is determined to end Ukraine’s role as the major transit route for Russian gas to Europe. Half of the Russian gas imported by Europe crosses Ukraine.

    Under the terms of the deal between BASF and Gazprom, BASF’s subsidiary Wintershall will obtain a stake of 25 percent plus one share in the Urengoy natural gas fields in Siberia. Both firms will develop the fields.

    In return, Wintershall will transfer to Gazprom its jointly owned gas storage and trading business in Germany as well as a stake in its business in Austria. Through the asset swap, Gazprom will also receive a 50 percent stake in Wintershall’s exploration and production of oil and gas in the North Sea. These activities amounted to sales of over $13.4 billion in 2014, according to BASF.

    The second deal agreed to in Vladivostok involves Gazprom and a European consortium building a second Nord Stream pipeline under the Baltic Sea. This will enable Russia to send more of its gas directly to Germany, bypassing Ukraine.

    The consortium consists of BASF, German energy company E.ON, French electricity company Engie, Austrian oil and gas firm OMV and Royal Dutch Shell. Gazprom will own a 51 percent share of a new company called New European Pipeline AG, which will develop the project. The other partners will have a 10 percent stake, except for Engie, which will own 9 percent.

    The fact that the global energy majors participate in the project bespeaks its significance for securing reliable gas supply to European consumers,” stated Alexey Miller, chairman of the Gazprom Management Committee.

    Tell that to Poland and the Baltic states—and Ukraine. They had criticized the first Nord Stream pipeline, which was agreed to under the then German chancellor Gerhard Schröder in 2005. At the time, Warsaw argued that the deal increased Europe’s dependence on Russian energy.

    Since then, however, Europe has been diversifying its energy supplies, spurred by the 2009 Ukraine gas crisis, which disrupted supplies to Europe because of a dispute between Russia and Ukraine over energy prices.

    Also, through its Third Energy Package, the European Commission is introducing more competition in the energy sector by breaking the hold any one company can have over the production, distribution and trading of gas. That is one of the main reasons why in December 2014 Russia pulled out of the South Stream project, which was to transport gas across the Black Sea to Southeastern Europe. Under the terms of the commission package, Russia would have had to open up the gas pipeline to competition.

    The third deal reached in Vladivostok involves OMV’s participation in the Urengoy oil and gas fields. When the deal is concluded, OMV will acquire a 24.8 percent stake in the project in exchange for Gazprom obtaining some of the assets of OMV.

    • Sans trop de surprise, le projet de #North_Stream_2 ne plait pas à l’Ukraine…

      Ukraine PM calls second Russia-Germany pipeline ’anti-European’ - Yahoo News
      http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-pm-calls-second-russia-germany-pipeline-anti-173441635.html

      Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk on Thursday criticised as “anti-Ukrainian and anti-European” a deal between Russia’s energy giant Gazprom and several Western firms to build a second gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea.

      In June, Gazprom agreed with Anglo-Dutch Shell, Germany’s E.ON and Austria’s OMV to build the new gas pipeline — dubbed Nord Stream-2 — to Germany, bypassing conflict-torn Ukraine and also EU neighbour Poland.

      When the first Nord Stream was built, it brought the European Union no additional energy independence,” Yatsenyuk said after talks with Slovak counterpart Robert Fico in Bratislava.

      The construction of Nord Stream-2 is affecting the security of the continuous gas supply of the EU’s southeastern countries. It is a monopolisation of gas supply routes to the EU,” he told reporters.

      This project is anti-Ukrainian and anti-European.

  • EU, US promote alternative projects, following South Stream failure | EurActiv
    http://www.euractiv.com/sections/energy/eu-us-promote-alternative-projects-following-south-stream-failure-310569

    The cancellation of the South Stream pipeline project will not make the European Union more vulnerable to shortages caused by Russia cutting off gas to the Ukraine, senior EU and US officials said yesterday (3 December).

    Diplomats met in Brussels for the EU-US Energy Council, held two days after Russian President Vladimir Putin ditched the plan to pipe natural gas through the Black Sea to Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Slovenia and Austria.

    The meeting was attended by the EU’s foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini and US Secretary of State John Kerry. The latest Council was a show of unity against Russia’s use of energy supplies as a political tool.

    Speaking afterwards, senior EU and US officials said the pipeline would have reinforced the dominance of Russian gas at a time when diversification of suppliers and routes were needed.

    A senior EU official said, “South Stream did not represent diversification, it’s an alternative route that’s all. It bypasses Ukraine but it is the same gas.

    Malgré le pluriel, le seul projet alternatif déclenche l’enthousiasme états-unien…

    Alternative projects
    Projects in the Baltic region, such as the “Freedom” floating liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in Lithuania, a new gas interconnection agreement between Finland and Estonia, and LNG terminals in Helsinki and Tallinn, were a model that should be copied in south eastern Europe, the official said.

    LNG is not transported by pipes, making it a possible alternative to natural gas supplies and LNG producers as an alternative supplier to Russia.

    L’UE assume et règlera les détails sordides hors de la vue des É.-U.

    We have been very clear in our EU energy sector strategy regarding South Stream. This project should be suspended, that was our position, and also revisited, in the light of energy security,” a senior EU official said.

    Countries such as Bulgaria and Serbia have demanded compensation, but officials said that was an internal EU matter and not discussed with the Americans.

    (…)

    Earlier this week the International Energy Agency said in a review of EU energy policy that Europe would remain dependent on Russian gas for the “foreseeable future”.
    (…)
    Another senior EU official said, “Europe will be dependent on Russian gas, if you want to use that term, as long as it is cheaper than anywhere else.

    That’s fine. The important thing is to make sure that is no longer the case or the day there is reason that gas doesn’t arrive, you can get your supply somewhere else.

  • Europe Has Several Possible Replacements For Russian Gas But All Are Risky, Expensive And Will Take Years To Develop
    http://www.ibtimes.com/europe-has-several-possible-replacements-russian-gas-all-are-risky-expensiv

    Vladimir Putin’s rapid annexation of Crimea has sparked a new urgency in the European Union to find energy supplies outside Russian state-owned gas giant Gazprom, but weaning the EU from Russian gas will be slow and difficult.

    The U.S. Congressional Research Service (CRS) concluded as much six months ago, when it published an extensive report on Western Europe’s energy security. That report discussed a handful of alternatives to Russia’s Gazprom, including North African gas, Central Asian gas and U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports, concluding that although the options are many, completely replacing Russian gas will be difficult if not impossible, and each option faces significant challenges.

    Little did the report’s authors know how prophetic their words were when they wrote last August, “The 28 member-state European Union (EU) has been a growing natural gas consumer and importer for decades. As Europe’s natural gas production has declined in recent years, its dependence on imported natural gas has increased. This has left it more dependent as a whole on its primary supplier, Russia, which has shown some inclination to use its resources for political ends.”

    In 2012, Gazprom accounted for 34 percent of the European Union’s natural gas imports, CRS found. Norway accounts for another 35 percent of natural gas imports, making it the lead supplier to the EU, and Algeria is the third-largest supplier to the 28 member countries, which import 64 percent of their natural gas supply.

    Little has changed since the CRS report, a senior analyst for the U.S. government said Thursday. He believes Europe’s best option to decrease dependency on Russia is within its own borders — to increase interconnectivity of existing pipelines, increase gas storage and increase transparency that would allow companies to calculate costs of transport between countries.

    In North Africa, new political leadership and vast reserves mean some countries like Algeria, Libya and Egypt have the potential to become some of the largest European suppliers. The three countries together could provide about 44 percent of what Russia does today, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

    But problems with infrastructure and political instability are getting in the way.

    Algeria is the second-largest exporter on the continent and could possibly have more gas in shale resources than in its current reserves.

    “Algeria could become a more significant gas producer and exporter. However, a difficult business environment may continue to limit its potential,” the CRS report reads.

    In 2011, a consortium led by the Algerian state-owned Sonatrach opened the Medgaz natural gas pipeline that runs to Spain. But Spain’s pipelines have little connectivity to the rest of Europe, “like an island,” the senior U.S. official said. The state-owned Sonatrach continues to hold a majority stake in all energy projects and Algerian investment and export laws seem to change every year.

    Algeria’s regional neighbor Egypt has seen domestic for natural gas increase more than 57 percent since 2005, but production is limited, in part because of hard-to-reach reserves. While potentially a rich new source of supply for Europe, attacks from Bedouin and terrorist groups in the Sinai Peninsula have halted Egyptian exports much closer to home in Israel and Jordan. According to CRS, Egypt will need to make the tough political decisions to cut fuel subsidies and encourage western investment before it can tackle an ambitious export plan.

    In Libya, natural gas production dropped 90 percent during the 2011 civil war. The industry has recovered to a degree but civil unrest, protests and strikes still hamper production. Still, Libya holds the fourth-largest amount of natural gas reserves in Africa, and new leadership could help facilitate further exports.

    “Libya may have the greatest potential to increase natural gas exports to Europe once a new regime is established and possibly a new state oil and natural gas company in a post-Qadhafi Libya,” the Congressional Research Service concluded.

    Central Asia sits on top of the largest reserves of natural gas in the world, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), but transporting that gas to Europe would require expensive and lengthy pipelines through multiple countries. Nonetheless, the EU has proposed what’s known as the Southern Strategy or Southern Corridor to transport natural gas from the Caspian region through Turkey.

    The initially planned Nabucco pipeline, which is no longer considered commercially viable, would have transported gas from Turkey to Austria.

    Now a smaller pipeline project has taken its place, known as the Trans-Anatolian natural gas pipeline (TANAP). This pipeline would carry gas through Turkey from Azerbaijan and connect to the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP), which flows from the Turkish border through Greece and Albania, ending in Italy. But delays in construction have forced the Central Asian countries to hunt for customers in the east. Construction on TANAP is expected to begin at the end of the year and be completed by 2018. Even so, European pipelines would then need to connect to Italy’s infrastructure, which would present its own problems.

    Perhaps the most touted option so far is to import LNG from the U.S, but the U.S. Energy Department has so far only approved seven applications out of more than 20, and only one has final approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The soonest any company will export LNG from the U.S. is 2015.

    LNG already represents about 25 percent of European natural gas imports, up from 15 percent in 2010, according to CRS. Algeria, Egypt and Qatar are the largest suppliers, and the U.K., Spain and France are the largest consumers. There are 22 LNG import terminals around Europe, with Poland, Lithuania and Estonia building new terminals that could distribute imported LNG around Northern and Eastern Europe.

    With U.S. LNG in the global gas market, prices would decline and eat into Russia’s profit. Some energy analysts, like David Goldwyn, a senior fellow for the Energy Security Initiative at the Brookings Institution, argue merely expediting the LNG permitting process would immediately erode Russia’s market power.

    President Obama was in Brussels Wednesday to discuss trade relations and the Ukraine crisis and he said a new trans-Atlantic trade agreement under negotiation would make it easier for his administration to approve LNG exports. He emphasized that it can’t happen overnight.

    #Gazprom
    #Russie
    #CRS U.S. ( Congressional Research Service )
    #Western-Europe’s-energy-security
    #EU ( European Union )

  • Stopping West African piracy is vital for Europe’s energy security

    http://theconversation.com/stopping-west-african-piracy-is-vital-for-europes-energy-security-2

    The Crimea crisis has focused our attention on the vexed question of Europe’s energy supplies. To a great extent Europe depends on Russia for its oil and gas, which gives Vladimir Putin disproportionate political leverage. One of the biggest possible alternative suppliers is the Gulf of Guinea, which is thought to have vast untapped reserves – but which is also a world epicentre of maritime crime.

    #piraterie-maritime

  • Russia sanctions: Why the U.S. and Europe are not quite in step - CNN.com
    http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/07/business/russia-sanctions-why-the-u-s-and-europe-are-not-quite-in-step/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

    How important is Russia’s economy?

    Russia is the eight biggest economy in the world, with GDP of more than $2 trillion. Its economy — which is heavily reliant on commodities, particularly oil and gas — is expected to grow only slightly in 2014 to around $2.4 trillion. Hopes it would be one of the decade’s powerhouse economies have faded, with its GDP growing just 1.3% last year compared to 2012, one of the sharpest slowdowns in the emerging markets.

    Russia boomed in the late 1990s and early 2000s as energy prices rose, then stumbled as demand for commodities contracted. But its energy supplies remain vitally important for the European Union, to which it supplies a third of its natural gas. Germany, the eurozone’s biggest economy, imports around 40% of its gas from Russia.

    But Russia’s relationship with the West has fractured over the Ukraine crisis, and it now risks being economically isolated by the U.S. and the European Union. Visa bans have been introduced, and harsher sanctions threatened.

    What is Russia’s economic relationship with the U.S?
    Obama: The world should support Ukraine
    Obama orders sanctions over Ukraine

    The economic relationship between Russia and the U.S. is unbalanced. Russia is the 20th largest trading partner for the U.S., with $27 billion worth of trade exported across the Atlantic. On the flip-side, the U.S. is Russia’s fifth largest partner, with just $11 billion worth of trade.
    Barroso: Ukrainian goal is convergence

    According to Russian Foundation chair David Clark, trade is a “relatively unimportant” component of relations. Energy links are also weakening as the U.S. looks to shale gas for its energy supplies and heads towards self-sufficiency.

    However, on Thursday the U.S. State Department imposed a visa ban on Russian and Ukrainian officials and individuals “responsible for, or complicit in threatening the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.” President Barack Obama also signed an Executive Order laying the groundwork to impose sanctions against individuals and entities responsible for the crisis.

    In a statement the White House said the move was a response to “Russia’s ongoing violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity — actions that constitute a threat to peace and security and a breach of international law.”

    Clark said the U.S. could get greater leverage over Russia from financial sanctions aimed at the country’s banking system and stability of the ruble. Measures targeted at named individuals, similar to those contained in the Magnitsky Act, could also be effective. “Russia’s angry response to the act shows that it works,” Clark said.

    Russia has threatened to retaliate against sanctions but, according to Clark, it “has a great deal to lose by escalating too far. Seizing western property would make Russia a no-go zone for foreign investors who Russia desperately needs to modernize its economy and maintain energy production.”

    s Europe going to do the same?

    The EU is Russia’s largest trading partner, and there are deep economic links between the two. Almost half of Russia’s exports — $292 billion worth — end up in EU countries. Russia, in turn, is the third biggest trading partner for the EU, with $169 billion in imports.

    The EU has stepped more cautiously than the U.S. on sanctions. On Thursday, the EU threatened to impose sanctions on Russia if the negotiations between Moscow and Kiev did not prove effective in dealing with the Ukraine crisis.

    European Council President Herman Van Rompuy said negotiations needed to start in the next few days and “produce results.” Without that, he said, the EU would look to additional measures such as travel bans, asset freezes, and cancellation of the EU and Russia summit.

    Earlier, a document leaked from British government suggested the UK was happy to impose sanctions — but only those that would not cause harm to the country’s financial sector.

    And while G8 members — excluding Russia — are threatening to abandon a Sochi summit planned for later this year, Germany has also pushed for more diplomacy.

    Clark believes Russia could retaliate against any European sanctions, saying it would probably try and “pick-off some of the countries that have been most forceful in advocating tough measures against it — especially Poland and the Baltic States.” However, “it probably wouldn’t retaliate against the EU as a whole or against Germany.”

    Meanwhile, the West has offered $16 billion in aid for Ukraine, helping the country prop up its ailing finances. Ukrainian leaders have said they will be $30 billion in the hole by the end of 2015. About half of that debt comes due in 2014.

    Why the different approaches?

    The eurozone has only just emerged from its own crisis, and would be wary of cutting ties with such a powerful economic partner. Its reliance on gas out of Russia would also feed caution. In contrast, the U.S. is weaning itself off Russia’s energy supplies and its trade relationship is much less intertwined.

    But Louise Cooper, of financial blog CooperCity, said the West risks looking weak if it doesn’t follow tough talk with action. The EU has so far “only come up with a threat of symbolic sanctions, even after Crimea has effectively been taken over by Russia with a new pro-Russian government,” she noted. Even the U.S. visa ban “will have no impact on either the Russian economy or the American one,” she said.

    Meanwhile Russia risks isolating itself, Clark said. “It can maintain de facto control over Crimea indefinitely, but it will come at a very considerable long-term cost to Europe’s willingness to consider Russia as anything other than a source of trouble and insecurity.”

    #Russie
    #Ukraine
    #Etats-Unis
    #Europe

  • East Med subsea cable to feed 2000MW to energy-hungry Europe
    http://www.financialmirror.com/research-details.php?rid=31260&rt=News

    The first phase of an EU-backed plan to lay the world’s longest subsea electricity cable could be completed by 2017, ending Europe’s reliance on Russian energy supplies, while allowing Israel to export power generated from its newly found offshore gasfields.