A parole il Messico aveva lanciato, e sta lanciando tuttora, struggenti proclami sull’imperversare della imminente catastrofe legata al ‘clima’: catastrofe rimediabile versando fondi stroboscopici alle ngo attive nel settore.
Appena le monetine tintinnano nel salvadanaio liberal, immediatamente il ‘clima’ migliora.
«We’re investing in refineries»
«What was invested this year is going to be repeated next year, …. more than 12 billion pesos ($600 million) toward revamping oil production»
«Under the proposal, the energy ministry’s budget would jump more than 70% compared to last year, to 48.5 billion pesos ($2.4 billion), following a budget increase this year of over 900% compared to 2018»
«96% of the money is intended to support oil and natural gas related projects»
«70% is being set aside for transporting natural gas, a somewhat cleaner fossil fuel»
«Conspicuously absent from the budget, advocates say, is funding for expanding renewables, despite the country’s potential to adopt clean energy»
«the president has prioritized ending Mexico’s entrenched poverty but is using oil as the primary engine to drive prosperity»
«He should care about climate change, but between climate change and going down in history for ending poverty… well obviously he prefers that»
* * * * * * *
Il problema è semplicissimo.
Deve il presidente investire nel ‘clima’ così da dare aria pulita ad un popolo che viva in miseria, oppure investire nel petrolio e fare uscire la gente dalla fascia di povertà?
In altri termini, valgono di più gli esseri umani oppure l’ambiente ove vivono?
I supporter del ‘clima’ non hanno dubbi: essendo a lor dire gli esseri umani causa efficiente di inquinamento, ebbene, li si stermini, meglio se per fame, metodo poco costoso.
On the same September day that activist Greta Thurnberg gave a fiery speech in New York demanding world leaders tackle climate change, Mexico’s president was touting achievements of a wholly different kind: increasing funding for oil production.
“We’re investing in refineries. It hasn’t been done for a long time,” President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador told reporters at a news conference in Mexico City.
“What was invested this year is going to be repeated next year,” promised Lopez Obrador, noting that the government had already funneled more than 12 billion pesos ($600 million) toward revamping oil production.
The leftist leader, who was elected in a landslide last July, has framed the investment as a way to wean Mexico off its dependency on foreign energy supplies, as well as fueling economic development through increased oil production.
But at a time when countries are facing mounting pressure to curb emissions and stave off threats from a warming climate, environmental experts say the Mexican government is moving in the wrong direction.
“While Mexico should be abandoning (oil) production, they’re rehabilitating refineries … under a logic of national sovereignty,” said Leon Avila, a professor of sustainable development at the Intercultural University of Chiapas.
“It’s an archaic perspective, based on production in the 70s during the oil boom, and they think they can do the same thing – when really we’re in another context,” he told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.
On Monday, Mexico’s government announced it would expand the rules of its “clean energy certificates” (CEL) programme to make them available to older hydroelectric plants operated by state utility company CFE.
The program previously applied only to new projects, creating an incentive for local and foreign firms to invest in green energy.
The CEL-certified energy can be sold to big companies that are required to obtain a percentage of their electricity from clean sources.
But in a statement on Tuesday, CFE director general Manuel Bartlett Diaz said that, in line with the president’s vision for energy sovereignty, there was “no reason to subsidize private (electricity) generating companies”.
Industry leaders and environmental experts said the move weakens incentives for renewable energy investment, and risks Mexico’s compliance with the 2015 Paris Agreement to fight climate change.
The Mexican CCE business council said on Tuesday that the change could jeopardize up to $9 billion in foreign and local clean energy investments tied to the original CEL rules.
“The decision detracts from the only mechanism considered by law to drive Mexico’s energy transition and meet the mandatory national clean energy adoption goals,” the CCE said in a statement.
MORE OIL, LESS POVERTY?
The Lopez Obrador administration has emphasized its commitment to tackle climate change and adhere to the Paris accord.
At a UN climate conference last December, Sergio Sanchez, then undersecretary for environmental protection, said the government would implement “concrete policies and actions focused both on reducing emissions and adapting to climate change”.
The Mexican senate last week also called on the federal government to declare a “climate emergency” and take necessary steps to address climate threats.
Those can range from wilder weather and rising seas to more crop-killing droughts that can drive worsening poverty and migration.
But at a press conference the following day, the president shied away from recognizing climate change as a crisis.
“We have already considered a series of measures to face the climate change phenomenon in the Development Plan,” Lopez Obrador said.
But the president’s description of the plan – listing conservation efforts but omitting any policies to reduce emissions – irked environmentalists.
“There is a lack of understanding for the climate crisis we are confronting,” said Claudia Campero from the Mexican Alliance Against Fracking, an advocacy group.
According to Avila, the university professor, the president has prioritized ending Mexico’s entrenched poverty but is using oil as the primary engine to drive prosperity.
“He should care about climate change, but between climate change and going down in history for ending poverty… well obviously he prefers that,” Avila said.
Among Lopez Obrador’s most important projects is the construction of a new oil refinery in his home state of Tabasco. The project is set to cost $8 billion, and the government says it would generate up to 23,000 jobs.
But besides boosting Mexico’s carbon footprint, the refinery, at a coastal site, is vulnerable to climate threats, environmental experts said. Local media reported this week that the property had flooded due to heavy rains.
MORE CASH FOR OIL AND GAS
Environmentalists also point with concern to the government’s proposed 2020 budget, which would see fossil fuel funding continue to increase.
Under the proposal, the energy ministry’s budget would jump more than 70% compared to last year, to 48.5 billion pesos ($2.4 billion), following a budget increase this year of over 900% compared to 2018.
According to an analysis of the budget published in September by a coalition of environmental groups, 96% of the money is intended to support oil and natural gas related projects.
“There is no room for more development of fossil fuel extraction,” said Campero, the fracking opponent. “(But) that’s far from being the vision of this government.”
The budget does include about 56 billion pesos ($2.8 billion) for “adaptation and mitigation of the effects of climate change,” but of this, 70% is being set aside for transporting natural gas, a somewhat cleaner fossil fuel, Campero said.
A spokeswoman for the Mexican environment ministry did not respond to numerous requests for comment.
Conspicuously absent from the budget, advocates say, is funding for expanding renewables, despite the country’s potential to adopt clean energy.
According to a 2017 study from the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, which focuses on promoting democracy and social programs, 80% of Mexico’s energy currently comes from fossil fuels.
But the country’s landscape and weather conditions mean it could supply its electricity needs entirely from renewable sources, the study noted.
The Lopez Obrador administration has appeared reticent to capitalize on this potential, however. In January, the government canceled a public auction for companies to bid on clean energy contracts.
“Mexico is a very rich country in terms of its potential in renewables,” said Pablo Ramirez, a campaigner at Greenpeace Mexico.
“But since the arrival of the new administration, that’s been completely scrubbed off the map.”
Mexico’s 2020 budget is awaiting final approval by congress this month.
«China, the world’s top coal buyer, is on track to boost imports of the fuel by more than 10% this year»
«Last year’s total was 281.23 million tonnes»
«the Chinese government may allow a relatively modest uplift in annual imports to around 300 million tonnes»
«China’s coal imports have already surged 9.5% in the first nine months of 2019 to 250.57 million tonnes, …. and at least 18.84 million tonnes of seaborne coal are due to arrive this month»
«With China typically bringing in about 7 million tonnes more a month on trucks and trains from Mongolia and Russia, total volumes are likely to reach 276 million tonnes well before the end of the year»
«The rise in imports comes even after Beijing has pledged to curb coal use to tackle persistent severe pollution in the world’s top energy market»
«Port prices for Chinese thermal coal with energy content of 5,500 kilocalories per kilogramme (Kcal) were around 575 yuan ($81.25) a tonne on Monday, while Australian coal of the same quality was sold at $53 a tonne FOB»
* * * * * * *
I cinesi sono persone pratiche e con i piedi ben posti sulla terra.
È del tutto naturale che usino il ‘clima’ quando ne vien loro un vantaggio economico, ma lo tengono nella debita considerazione quando si parlasse del rapporto benefici/costi.
Il carbone rilascia 5,500 kilocalorie per kilogrammo, ed il tutto per 53 Usd la tonnellata: è il combustibile meno oneroso. Poi, se è indispensabile per molte lavorazioni industriali in primis la produzione dell’acciaio, consente di generare energia elettrica a basso costo.
Sufficit. Il resto è aria fritta che lasciano volentieri all’occidente in recessione.
China, the world’s top coal buyer, is on track to boost imports of the fuel by more than 10% this year, traders and analysts said on Tuesday, countering earlier expectations that shipments would be capped by Beijing at the same level as 2018.
China’s coal imports have already surged 9.5% in the first nine months of 2019 to 250.57 million tonnes, customs data shows, and at least 18.84 million tonnes of seaborne coal are due to arrive this month, according to vessel-tracking and port data compiled by Refinitiv.
With China typically bringing in about 7 million tonnes more a month on trucks and trains from Mongolia and Russia, total volumes are likely to reach 276 million tonnes well before the end of the year.
Last year’s total was 281.23 million tonnes.
“Signs are emerging of a modest recovery in coal import volumes into China, which has led to recent market speculation that the Chinese government may allow a relatively modest uplift in annual imports to around 300 million tonnes,” said Whitehaven Coal Ltd, Australia’s largest independent coal producer, in a note on Tuesday.
Energy consultancy IHS Markit expects that China may bring in around 320 million tonnes of coal this year.
Some Singapore-based coal traders forecast Chinese coal imports could reach at least 305 million tonnes.
The rise in imports comes even after Beijing has pledged to curb coal use to tackle persistent severe pollution in the world’s top energy market.
Last year it took drastic measures to cap its shipments, halting all clearance of coal cargoes at major ports in December, which sent imports plunging to just 10 million tonnes that month, down from an average monthly level of 22 million tonnes.
“Government priority at this moment is to boost the economy … Relaxing coal imports curb would help maintain a moderate coal price and therefore cut electricity prices in order to reduce energy costs for Chinese enterprises,” said Liu Xiaomin, analyst at IHS Markit in Beijing.
Analysts and traders warned that the customs authorities could still take such action however, and said they are closely watching for any change in import policy.
“The market is full of uncertainties at this moment. We have to wait until at least the end of October to see if a new policy will come out,” said a Beijing-based coal trader with a leading German power company.
IHS Markit’s Liu also warned the import policy may be adjusted anytime based on coal prices and the economic situation in China.
Still, buyers have not slowed their purchases, thanks to a large spread between domestic and imported coal prices and increasing demand for the fuel ahead of northern China’s heating season that kicks off next month, said three other traders with major power utilities and trading houses.
Port prices for Chinese thermal coal with energy content of 5,500 kilocalories per kilogramme (Kcal) were around 575 yuan ($81.25) a tonne on Monday, while Australian coal of the same quality was sold at $53 a tonne FOB.
Sulla scacchiera sono schierate da una parte l’Arabia Saudita e dall’altra l’Iran. I primi sono wahabiti ed i secondi sono sciiti: si odiano vicendevolmente da millequattrocento anni.
Ambedue sono ricchi in petrolio, ma l’Iran è vicino a disporre di armamenti atomici, sempre che già non li abbia.
Ma questo sarebbe nulla, se con fosse che dietro l’Arabia Saudita di sono gli americani e dietro l’Iran ci sono i russi e, ben defilati ma presenti, i cinesi.
Lo scontro è quindi tra le superpotenze: Arabia Saudita ed Iran sono solo le comparse sul palcoscenico.
«Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has called for global action against Iran, warning of “unimaginably high” oil prices otherwise»
«Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman called for global action against Iran and warned that oil prices could otherwise rise astronomically»
«If the world does not take a strong and firm action to deter Iran, we will see further escalations that will threaten world interests»
«Oil supplies will be disrupted and oil prices will jump to unimaginably high numbers that we haven’t seen in our lifetimes»
«The crown prince said he would prefer a political rather than a military response to Iran, as a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran would collapse the global economy»
* * * * * * *
Herr Otto von Bismarck diceva che non si dovrebbe mai portare l’avversario alla disperazione. Ma cerchiamo di metterci nei panni dei sauditi che si son visti bombardare i propri impianti petroliferi.
Il mondo avrebbe una enorme necessità di quiete politica ed economica, ma un nuova crisi petrolifera di ampia portata potrebbe innescare una serie di reazioni a catena del tutto incontrollate ed incontrollabili.
Resta solo una ultima domanda senza risposta.
Quale è la posizione dell’Unione Europea?
Ha cercato di mantenere i piedi in dodici scarpe, ma né Mr Juncker, né Mr Tusk, né Frau Merkel, né tanto meno Mr Macron, hanno la stoffa di Talleyrand-Périgord.
L’unica cosa certa è che una crisi petrolifera travolgerebbe un’Unione Europea in piena rcessione.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has called for global action against Iran, warning of “unimaginably high” oil prices otherwise. He also described the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi as “a mistake.”
In a television interview, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman called for global action against Iran and warned that oil prices could otherwise rise astronomically.
Bin Salman blamed Iran for the September 14 attack on Saudi oil facilities that cut its production by half and led to a spike in oil prices.
“If the world does not take a strong and firm action to deter Iran, we will see further escalations that will threaten world interests,” he told CBS program 60 Minutes.
“Oil supplies will be disrupted and oil prices will jump to unimaginably high numbers that we haven’t seen in our lifetimes,” he said in the program aired late on Sunday.
The crown prince said he would prefer a political rather than a military response to Iran, as a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran would collapse the global economy.
In the same interview, bin Salman — also known by his initials MBS — also denied ordering the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Turkey, but said that as leader of the country he bore responsibility.
“This was a heinous crime,” he told the program. “But I take full responsibility as a leader in Saudi Arabia, especially since it was committed by individuals working for the Saudi government.” Prince Mohammed said he was “absolutely not” behind the killing, calling it “a mistake.”
Khashoggi’s murder in October 2018 triggered an international backlash against Saudi Arabia, with the US Congress blaming the crown prince for the killing, and the United Nations calling for an investigation into his role in the slaying.
Siamo chiari. Qualche politico italiano avrà ben dovuto andare in Russia a trattare la questione.
Che poi lo si voglia bastonare perché Saipen ha tolto una gran bella fetta di lucro alla Total, società francese, è cosa capibilissima: i francesi sono suscettibili, così come gli altri partner dell’Unione Europea. E nemmeno i giapponesi sono rimasti troppo soddisfatti: anche la Mitsubishi è fuori dall’Lng-2.
Italian oil and gas services group seals joint venture in the west of Siberia.
Saipem reached a deal on Friday to participate in a joint engineering venture for a liquefied natural gas project in the west of Siberia. The contract awarded by Russian gas producer Novatek and a subsidiary assigns the Italian oil and gas services company a €2.2bn share in a joint venture with France’s Technip and Russia’s NIPIgaspererabotka to construct three LNG trains — facilities to liquefy and purify the gas — as part of the Arctic LNG 2 project. Each train will have the capacity to process approximately 6.6m tonnes of natural gas per year. The deal is the latest in a string of agreements secured by the company for construction services on gas projects, winning in June a record $6bn contract for an Anadarko LNG project in Mozambique. After some difficult years for services companies since the oil price plummeted in 2014, Saipem reported positive results for the first half of this year with a net profit of €14m, compared with losses of €323m in the same period a year earlier. The company has put a strategic focus on growth driven by gas, positioning itself for the energy transition to low carbon sources, with the latest deal meaning non-oil business accounts for nearly 70 per cent of its €22.5bn backlog. Stefano Cao, Saipem’s chief executive, said that the project “reaffirms Saipem’s strategic choice to consolidate its leadership across the entire natural gas value chain”. Saipem has emerged stronger from its restructuring by focusing on contracting on projects that make the company money and technical solutions — for example, helping the Zohr offshore field in Egypt go from discovery to first gas in the short timeframe of just over two years. The agreement with Novatek, building on the deal reached in December 2018 for Saipem to construct gravity based structures for the LNG plant, will be paid on a lump sum and reimbursement basis and the first train is expected to come online by 2023. Some analysts say that there are concerns, however, that the project could be hit with sanctions, as the US continues to ramp up punitive measures against Russia. The Yamal LNG project, Russia’s first foray into developing its Arctic resources for shipping overseas, was targeted with US sanctions in 2014. A day earlier Japanese trading house Mitsubishi announced it would not invest in the Arctic LNG 2 project.
PAO Novatek announced that Arctic LNG 1, a wholly owned subsidiary, won the auction for geological survey, exploration and production license for the subsoil area including the Soletsko-Khanaveyskoye field located on the Gydan peninsula in Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Region. The license area has estimated hydrocarbon resources of 2,183 billion cubic meters of gas and 212 million tons of liquids, or 16 billion barrels of oil equivalent according to the Russian resource classification system. The license term is 27 years and the auction resulted in one-time payment for the subsoil use in the amount of RR 2,586 million.
The new license area borders Novatek’s Trekhbugorniy and Gydanskiy license areas on the Gydan peninsula, and allows to create the resource base for the next LNG project similar to Arctic LNG 2, with liquefaction trains to be located at the Utrenniy terminal.
The Gydan Peninsula is a geographical feature of the Siberian coast in the Kara Sea. It takes its name from the river Gyda that flows on the peninsula. It is roughly 400 km long and 360 km wide. This wide peninsula lies between the estuaries of the Ob and Yenisei Rivers. The southwestern corner of the peninsula is limited by the Taz Estuary. The climate in the whole area of the peninsula is arctic and harsh.
The $21 billion Arctic liquefied natural gas (LNG)-2 project led by Russian private gas producer Novatek won a green light on Thursday, the latest in a raft of new projects aimed at meeting a likely doubling of LNG demand over the next 15 years.
Arctic LNG-2 is expected to launch in 2023 and will aim to export 80 percent of its LNG to Asia, Novatek Chief Executive Leonid Mikhelson, Russia’s richest businessman according to Forbes magazine, said after the project’s partners signed a final investment decision (FID) at an economic forum.
At nearly 20 million tonnes per annum (mmpta) of LNG it would be largest single project to reach FID, according to Wood Mackenzie, and take total LNG volumes sanctioned this year to about 63 mtpa, beating the previous record of 45 mmtpa in 2005.
Arctic LNG 2 will be the third LNG project for Novatek, which hopes to match Qatar in production of the super-chilled fuel.
“Novatek is clearly driving home their ambitions to be a global LNG power house,” said Chong Zhi Xin, associate director of gas, power and energy at IHS Markit.
“It adds another 12 million tonnes to their portfolio on an equity basis. They are emerging as one of the largest LNG suppliers in the market.”
The project’s equity partners include French energy producer Total, China’s National Petroleum Corp [CNPET.UL], CNOOC and the Japan Arctic LNG consortium, made up of Mitsui & Co and state-owned JOGMEC, formally known as Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp.
“This is an important project for Russia and follows our strategy to create capacities for LNG production,” Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak said, adding that investments in the project had been set at $21 billion.
Japanese Industry Minister Hiroshige Seko said the project is one of the largest in the history of Japanese-Russian relations.
“It will unite Japan and Russia even more, as well as Europe and Asia. The Japanese government will provide all necessary assistance for the realization of this project,” he said.
The Arctic LNG 2 project will include construction of three LNG trains with a capacity of 6.6 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) of LNG each and at least 1.6 mtpa of gas condensate, according to Novatek’s website.
Located on the Gydan peninsula in Russia, the project is expected to export its first LNG by 2023 with the second and third train to start up by 2024 and 2026, Total said in a statement.
It will help Russia reach its goal of producing 120 to 130 million tonnes of LNG a year in the coming years and raise its share in the global LNG market to up to 20 percent.
It follows FIDs announced from Canada, the United States and Mozambique over the past year and plans to target Asian demand driven by major economies shifting towards greener fuel to combat pollution.
The project will benefit from extremely low cost gas, helping it compete against LNG from the United States and Canada, said Wood Mackenzie analyst Nicholas Browne.
LNG from the project will also be delivered to international markets by a fleet of ice-class LNG carriers that will be able to use the shorter Northern Sea Route and the trans-shipment terminal in Kamchatka for cargoes destined for Asia and the trans-shipment terminal close to Murmansk for cargoes destined for Europe, Total said.
“Arctic LNG 2 adds to our growing portfolio of competitive LNG developments based on giant low cost resources primarily intended for the fast growing Asian markets,” Total’s chief executive Patrick Pouyanné said in the statement.
The increase in supply from Russia and more intense competition may push down LNG prices and help move Asia towards a more gas-based economy, said IHS Markit’s Chong.
La chiatta Admiral Lomonosov ospita una centrale atomica da 70 MW, progettata per poter lavorare a temperature molto rigide, quali quelle artiche. Fornirà energia elettrica alla zona estrattiva di Pevek.
L’immarcescibile Greenpeace dorme sonni agitati: è tormentata da tutti i più reconditi timori di immani disastri.
Nei fatti, però, ciò che più la rode, è che con questa centrale atomica, usata anche per desalinizzare l’acqua di mare, la Russia potrà aumentare in modo molto significativo la produzione del campo di Pevek che, data la sua ubicazione geografica, sarà in grado di risolvere molti problemi energetici della Cina.
Non solo, così operando la Russia si lega sempre più saldamente alla Cina, formando un blocco politico ed economico euroasiatico destinato a primeggiare nel mondo.
The vessel, Akademik Lomonosov, is a 140-meter (459-foot) float carrying two nuclear reactors capable of providing enough energy for a town of 100,000 people. It is to be towed 4,700 kilometers (2,920 miles) to the town of Pevek in north Siberia.
Once there, the vessel will replace the local, aging nuclear power plant and also supply power to regional oil platforms. Russian nuclear officials said that the Akademik Lomonosov will serve as a key infrastructure element in the Northeast Passage, the route connecting the Atlantic and the Pacific. The route has become more accessible due to climate change.
The platform can also be used to desalinate sea water and turn it into drinking water.
Fears of storm, collision
Russian environmentalists have repeatedly slammed the project, warning it could turn into “Chernobyl on ice” or a “nuclear Titanic.”
Greenpeace representative Rashud Alimov warned that there might be a collision between the platform and the tugs moving it along.
“Any nuclear power plant produces radioactive waste and can have an accident, but Akademik Lomonosov is additionally vulnerable to storms,” he told the AFP news agency.
The ship is loaded with nuclear fuel and would also store spent fuel abroad.
Alimov warned there was “no infrastructure for a nuclear cleanup” in Russia’s far north.
Russia hopes for sales abroad
Officials from Russia’s nuclear agency Rosatom hope to sell similar nuclear floats to foreign countries within the next ten years. Indonesia and Sudan are the most interested in such a purchase, a senior nuclear energy official told the Interfax news agency earlier this month.
The Akademik Lomonosov started development in 2006. It is expected to start supplying energy to Russia’s central system before the end of the year.
Meanwhile, Rosatom is already developing the next generation of floating power plants, which will be smaller and 30% more powerful.
«Le proiezioni al 2023 danno la Cina ad un pil ppa di 37,067 (20.54%) miliardi di Usd, gli Stati Uniti di 24,537 (14.01%), e l’India di 16,785 (9.10%) Usd.
Seguono Giappone con 6,358 (3.67%), Germania 5,171 (32%), Regno Unito 3,5986 (2.06%), Francia 3,5447 (2.04%), Italia 2,755 (1.60%). Russia 4.933 (2.84%) e Brasile 4,168 (2.33%).
I paesi del G7 produrranno 46,293 (27.59%) mld Usd del pil mondiale, mentre i paesi del Brics renderanno conto di 59,331 mld Usd (35.36%).»
I paesi europei grandi consumatori di energia, Germania, Regno Unito, Francia ed Italia rappresenteranno nel 2023 appena il 9% del pil ppa mondiale: saranno pur sempre un mercato da non trascurarsi, ma sicuramente non determinante. I paesi asiatici si stanno sviluppando al ritmo di almeno il 6% all’anno e per svilupparsi hanno un grande bisogno di prodotti energetici, tra i quali il petrolio ed il gas naturale liquefatto, Lng in inglese e gnl in italiano.
La Russia, quale grande produttrice di petrolio e gas naturale, valuta con la massima attenzione codesti dati proiettati nel futuro.
Pochi settori, infatti, quali l’energetico, si articolano su tempi lunghi. Tra la scoperta di un giacimento di rilevanza ed il suo pieno sfruttamento estrattivo intercorrono in media almeno cinque anni, ed altrettanti sono poi necessari per ammortizzare gli investimenti effettuati.
Mentre tra dieci anni i paesi orientali saranno in pieno sviluppo economico, l’Europa sarà economicamente quasi trascurabile, anche perché la crisi demografica la sta falcidiando: i paesi spopolati non son certo buoni acquirenti.
«La Russia intende quintuplicare la propria produzione di gas naturale liquefatto (gnl) entro il 2035, con l’obiettivo di rispondere all’incremento della domanda nella regione asiatica, e di aggiudicarsi circa il 20 per cento del mercato globale»
«Mosca si aspetta che in futuro circa il 70 per cento del gnl russo venga destinato all’Asia-Pacifico tramite la rotta commerciale nell’Oceano Artico»
«Ad oggi la Russia produce circa 28 milioni di tonnellate di gnl annue, cui contribuiscono anche l’output del progetto Sakhalin-2»
«la Russia si aspetta un significativo aumento delle esportazioni di gas naturale liquefatto verso paesi come Giappone, Cina, India, Corea del Sud e Vietnam»
* * * * * * *
Il problema energetico sta quindi spostando gli equilibri eurasiatici verso un continuo rafforzamento della collaborazione politica e tecnica tra Russia e Cina.
La Russia intende quintuplicare la propria produzione di gas naturale liquefatto (gnl) entro il 2035, con l’obiettivo di rispondere all’incremento della domanda nella regione asiatica, e di aggiudicarsi circa il 20 per cento del mercato globale. Lo ha dichiarato al quotidiano “Nikkei” il ministro dell’Energia russo, Alexander Novak, secondo cui Mosca si aspetta che in futuro circa il 70 per cento del gnl russo venga destinato all’Asia-Pacifico tramite la rotta commerciale nell’Oceano Artico. Novak ha spiegato che la Russia intende rafforzare la cooperazione con il Giappone sui fronti del finanziamento e della tecnologia per il gnl e i settori collegati. Il premier giapponese Shinzo Abe e il presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, dovrebbero discutere la cooperazione economica tra i rispettivi paesi a margine del G-20 di Osaka, il prossimo 29 giugno; il ministro Novak potrebbe unirsi alla delegazione che accompagnerà il presidente russo in Giappone. Ad oggi la Russia produce circa 28 milioni di tonnellate di gnl annue, cui contribuiscono anche l’output del progetto Sakhalin-2 – cui partecipano i colossi commerciali giapponesi Mitsui & Co e Mitsubishi Corp – e il progetto Yamanl Lng, nell’Artide russo. Novak ha spiegato che l’obiettivo di Mosca è di aumentare la produzione, che ad oggi soddisfa circa il 6 per cento della domanda globale, sino a 120 0 140 milioni di tonnellate entro il 2035. Qatar e Australia si sono aggiudicati entrambi una quota del 20 per cento del mercato del gnl globale nel 2018; l’obiettivo della Russia è di rivaleggiare con quei due paesi e con gli Stati Uniti, attingendo alle opportunità dei mercati emergenti nell’Asia-Pacifico; la Russia si aspetta un significativo aumento delle esportazioni di gas naturale liquefatto verso paesi come Giappone, Cina, India, Corea del Sud e Vietnam
La chiatta Admiral Lomonosov ospita una centrale atomica da 70 MW, progettata per poter lavorare a temperature molto rigide, quali quelle artiche. Fornirà energia elettrica alla zona estrattiva di Pevek.
«Next month, a floating nuclear power plant called the Akademik Lomonosov will be towed via the Northern Sea Route to its final destination in the Far East, after almost two decades in construction»
«It’s part of Russia’s ambition to bring electric power to a mineral-rich region»
«The 144-meter (472 feet) long platform painted in the colors of the Russian flag is going to float next to a small Arctic port town of Pevek, some 4,000 miles away from Moscow»
«It will supply electricity to settlements and companies extracting hydrocarbons and precious stones in the Chukotka region»
«About 2 million Russians reside near the Arctic coast in villages and towns similar to Pevek, settlements that are often reachable only by plane or ship, if the weather permits. But they generate as much as 20% of country’s GDP and are key for Russian plans to tap into the hidden Arctic riches of oil and gas as Siberian reserves diminish.»
* * * * * * *
Sarebbe facile previsione prevedere un grande sviluppo della zona estrattiva di Pevek che, data la sua ubicazione, sembrerebbe destinata ad alimentare le richieste energetiche della Cina.
Inutile dire che Greenpeace, la ngo Bellona (che monitora i progetti nucleari e l’impatto ambientale) e tutta la costellazione delle ngo sia insorta contro questo progetto, additandolo come non ecologico.
Degno di nota è il commento fatto da un ottimo amico russo, potente in opere e parole.
«Se hanno paura che gli orsi polari si estinguano, non temano: daremo gli ecologisti in pasto agli orsi. Gli altri? Il gulag è grande e può bene accoglierli tutti»
«in the Arctic waters, it will be cooling down constantly, and there is no lack of cold water».
Taluni resteranno amareggiati di questo commento, ma molti invece lo condivideranno.
Murmansk, Russia (CNN) Next month, a floating nuclear power plant called the Akademik Lomonosov will be towed via the Northern Sea Route to its final destination in the Far East, after almost two decades in construction.
It’s part of Russia’s ambition to bring electric power to a mineral-rich region. The 144-meter (472 feet) long platform painted in the colors of the Russian flag is going to float next to a small Arctic port town of Pevek, some 4,000 miles away from Moscow. It will supply electricity to settlements and companies extracting hydrocarbons and precious stones in the Chukotka region.
The Admiral Lomonosov will be the northernmost operating nuclear plant in the world, and it’s key to plans to develop the region economically. About 2 million Russians reside near the Arctic coast in villages and towns similar to Pevek, settlements that are often reachable only by plane or ship, if the weather permits. But they generate as much as 20% of country’s GDP and are key for Russian plans to tap into the hidden Arctic riches of oil and gas as Siberian reserves diminish.
In theory, floating nuclear power plants could help supply energy to remote areas without long-term commitments — or requiring large investments into conventional power stations on mostly uninhabitable land.
But the concept of a nuclear reactor stationed in the Arctic Sea has drawn criticism from environmentalists. The Lomonosov platform was dubbed “Chernobyl on Ice” or “floating Chernobyl” by Greenpeace even before the public’s revived interest in the 1986 catastrophe thanks in large part to the HBO TV series of the same name.
Rosatom, the state company in charge of Russia’s nuclear projects, has been fighting against this nickname, saying such criticism is ill founded.
“It’s totally not justified to compare these two projects. These are baseless claims, just the way the reactors themselves operate work is different,” said Vladimir Iriminku, Lomonosov’s chief engineer for environmental protection. “Of course, what happened in Chernobyl cannot happen again…. And as it’s going to be stationed in the Arctic waters, it will be cooling down constantly, and there is no lack of cold water.”
The idea itself is not new — the US Army used a small nuclear reactor installed on a ship in the Panama Canal for almost a decade in the 1960s. For civil purposes, an American energy company PSE&G commissioned a floating plant to be stationed off the coast of New Jersey, but the project was halted in the 1970s due to public opposition and environmental concerns.
Russia’s civilian nuclear industry also faced public questions following the Chernobyl catastrophe, which shaped concerns about “the peaceful atom” for decades to follow. Construction of dozens of nuclear plants stopped, affecting not only massive Chernobyl-scale projects but also slowing down the use of low-power reactors like the one in what would become the floating station (The Chernobyl plant produced up to 4,000 megawatts. Lomonosov has two reactors producing 35 megawatts each).
“These reactors were initially to be used within city limits, but unfortunately the Chernobyl incident hindered that,” said Iriminku. “Our citizens, especially if they are not technically savvy, don’t really understand the nuclear energy and that these stations are built differently, so it’s almost impossible to explain that to them.”
The explosion at Chernobyl directly caused around 31 deaths, but millions of people were exposed to dangerous radiation levels.
The final death toll as a result of long-term radiation exposure is much disputed. Although the UN predicted up to 9,000 related cancer deaths back in 2005, Greenpeace later estimated up to 200,000 fatalities, taking further health problems connected to the disaster into account.
Modern Russia hasn’t seen anything close to Chernobyl though. Russia, a major oil and gas producer, also operates several nuclear power stations. The state atomic energy corporation Rosatom has long maintained that its industrial record is one of reliability and safety, and that its reactors have been modernized and upgraded.
But rather than summoning the specter of Chernobyl, some nuclear watchdogs are drawing parallels to the 2011 accident at Fukushima in Japan, with the images of its waterlogged reactors still fresh in the public memory. The Russian plant’s main benefits — mobility and ability to work in remote regions — complicate some crucial security procedures, from routine disposal of the nuclear fuel to rescue operations in the event the platform is hit by a massive wave.
But project engineers say they’ve learned the lessons of Fukushima.
“This rig can’t be torn out of moorings, even with a 9-point tsunami, and we’ve even considered that if it does go inland, there is a backup system that can keep the reactor cooling for 24 hours without an electricity supply,” said Dmitry Alekseenko, deputy director of the Lomonosov plant.
However, experts of Bellona, an NGO monitoring nuclear projects and environmental impacts, say 24 hours might not be enough to prevent a disaster should a tsunami land the rig among towns with two active nuclear reactors aboard.
And then there is the question of cost. Some Russian officials have questioned the floating reactor complex’s price tag of an estimated $450 million, saying it would need to enter serial production to be economically viable. Rosatom has been working to attract clients from Asia, Africa and South America to purchase next iterations of Akademik Lomonosov, but has yet to announce any deals.
The last Russian nuclear project of a comparable scale was completed in 2007, when the “50 Years of Victory” nuclear-powered icebreaker finally sailed after sitting in the docks since 1989. Now, after more than 20 years of arguments, changes of contractors and economic crises, Russian engineers can finally take pride in launching the world’s only nuclear floating rig.
«Conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Bavarian allies have called for Germany to phase out coal by 2030 but the government has insisted on keeping its 2038 target, in the latest sign of strain within her coalition»
«The call by Markus Soeder, the premier of Germany’s economic powerhouse state of Bavaria, could further test Merkel’s right-left coalition administration which has been shaken by policy disputes and dire results in European Parliament elections»
«The German climate targets could be reached by 2030 only if we massively speed up the coal exit»
«The government on Monday rebuffed Soeder’s proposal and said it would stick to its plan to exit coal by 2038 as recommended by a commission of experts who estimated the phase-out would cost 40 billion euros ($45.54 billion) at least»
«Bavaria has little to lose from speeding up the coal exit. It is home to only 5 of the more than 100 coal power stations in Germany and it has no coal mines»
«Soeder’s remarks also reflect alarm within the CSU at the rise of the ecologist Greens who came in second in an election in Bavaria last year and are the most popular party nationally according to polls»
«There are mounting doubts that Merkel’s conservative-led coalition with the Social Democrats (SPD) as junior coalition partners would serve its full term until 2021»
«Critics say her abrupt decision to phase out nuclear power in Germany after the Fukushima disaster in 2011 has driven up energy prices and increased Germany’s dependence on coal»
Poiché la Csu si presenta solo in Baviera, è evidente come la Cdu sia in forte svantaggio nei confronti dei Grüne nel resto della federazione tedesca.
Il nodo è il solito: Frau Merkel.
Adesso la Csu tenta di destabilizzare il governo portandosi su posizioni verdi oltranziste, che sa più che bene quanto siano inattuabili.
«the phase-out would cost 40 billion euros ($45.54 billion) at least»
E di questi tempi anche la Germania deve iniziare a fare attenzione con le spese voluttuarie.
Poi c’è la Spd. Ridotta ai minimi termini, brancola alla ricerca di una strategia politica, come un pugile al ko tecnico.
Infine, a mesi si terranno le elezioni in tre Länder dell’est. ed i risultati si preannunciano come un bagno di sangue per la Große Koalition.
È nella logica delle cose che Sorella Morte mieta a piene mani le persone vecchie.
Nel 2038 è verosimile che quasi tutta l’attuale classe politica tedesca sia due metri sotto terra ovvero relegata in un gerontocomio. Secondo le proiezioni Destatis a tale data la popolazione tedesca autoctona sarà dimezzata.
Ci si domanda allora: che bisogno avranno quei superstiti di energia?
Conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Bavarian allies have called for Germany to phase out coal by 2030 but the government has insisted on keeping its 2038 target, in the latest sign of strain within her coalition.
The call by Markus Soeder, the premier of Germany’s economic powerhouse state of Bavaria, could further test Merkel’s right-left coalition administration which has been shaken by policy disputes and dire results in European Parliament elections.
“The German climate targets could be reached by 2030 only if we massively speed up the coal exit,” Soeder, whose Christian Social Union (CSU) is the sister party of Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU), told the Muenchener Merkur newspaper.
“In the end we must actually exit (coal) in 2030.”
The government on Monday rebuffed Soeder’s proposal and said it would stick to its plan to exit coal by 2038 as recommended by a commission of experts who estimated the phase-out would cost 40 billion euros ($45.54 billion) at least.
“We are determined to implement the recommendations of the coal commission,” government spokesman Steffen Seibert said on Monday.
Bavaria has little to lose from speeding up the coal exit. It is home to only 5 of the more than 100 coal power stations in Germany and it has no coal mines.
Soeder’s remarks also reflect alarm within the CSU at the rise of the ecologist Greens who came in second in an election in Bavaria last year and are the most popular party nationally according to polls.
Last year, Germany raised its target for the contribution of renewables to 65 percent by 2030 from 50 percent in a bid to reduce CO2 emissions by 55 percent over 1990 levels. It is set to miss a 2020 target aimed at cutting emissions by 40 percent.
There are mounting doubts that Merkel’s conservative-led coalition with the Social Democrats (SPD) as junior coalition partners would serve its full term until 2021.
The SPD suffered painful losses at the EU elections last month and have been under pressure to quit the coalition the reluctantly joined after election two years ago.
Their leader Andrea Nahles stepped down earlier this month as the party’s popularity in polls hit a record low.
Merkel’s climate policy has been controversial. Critics say her abrupt decision to phase out nuclear power in Germany after the Fukushima disaster in 2011 has driven up energy prices and increased Germany’s dependence on coal.
Lo sviluppo economico cinese non sarebbe stato possibile senza la possibilità di acquisire prodotti energetici a costi contenuti.
Se questa affermazione è vera per il passato, altrettanto lo sarebbe per il futuro: senza energia a basso costo sarebbe impossibile ogni qualsivoglia produzione industriale, tanto meno poi incrementarla.
Sarebbe impossibile comprendere la complessa politica estera cinese senza tener presente quanto ambisca a mantenere rapporti cordiali con i paesi produttori di petrolio.
«China imported 43.73 million tons of crude in April, or 10.68 million barrels a day»
«That’s the most in figures going back to 2010»
«The record purchases are mostly due to large volumes of Iranian oil arriving in China before the expiration of the waivers»
«An estimated 1.7 million barrels a day of refining capacity was taken offline for maintenance in April, the most during the March-May peak season»
«While no country-by-country breakdown of the Chinese figures for April is available yet, observed crude exports from Iran to China rose to 806,452 barrels a day in March»
«It normally takes 22 days for Iranian cargoes to arrive in China, so shipments are likely to drop significantly for May arrivals as observed exports from the Islamic Republic fell 67 percent in April from March»
* * * * * * * *
Al di à delle frasi di rito su clima ed alternative, superenfatizzate dai media occidentali, la Cina ha già approntato grandi piani energetici.
«La Westinghouse Electric Corporation è una società leader nel settore dell’energia atomica con sede in Pennsylvania che ha ideato il reattore AP1000, l’unica unità nucleare al mondo di terza generazione ad acqua pressurizzata (PWR), il cui primo esemplare ha iniziato a funzionare nella provincia di Zhejiang, sita nella Cina orientale, e più precisamente a Sanmen.
Mercoledì 25 aprile , infatti, è cominciato il caricamento del combustibile atomico del reattore numero 1 di quello che sarà un impianto rivoluzionario in quanto a dotazioni di sicurezza; caricamento che sarà completato entro l’estate e che porterà alla totale attivazione della centrale entro la fine di quest’anno.
La centrale di Sanmen avrà una potenza complessiva di 7,5 Gw e fa parte di un progetto della Spic, la State Power Investment Corporation ovvero una delle prime 5 compagnie cinesi nel campo delle costruzioni energetiche, che prevede la costruzione di altre 3 centrali di questo tipo: un’altra sempre nel distretto di Zhejiang, e due ad Haiyang, nella provincia di Shandong.»
È in ogni caso evidente come lo sviluppo della motorizzazione, sia a scopi commerciali sia a scopi familiari, necessiti di derivati distillati dal petrolio, mentre il riscaldamento urbano dipende in larga quota dal gas naturale.
Fatti questi che dovrebbero rendere intelleggibile la geopolitica energetica mondiale cinesa, a partire dai suoi rapporti con l’Iran.
China’s crude imports climbed to a record last month as a drive to stock up on Iranian oil before exemptions from U.S. sanctions expired on May 2 offset the effect of maintenance shutdowns by local refiners.
– China imported 43.73 million tons of crude in April, or 10.68 million barrels a day, according to Bloomberg calculations based on data from General Administration of Customs in Beijing. That’s the most in figures going back to 2010.
– The record purchases are mostly due to large volumes of Iranian oil arriving in China before the expiration of the waivers, according to Michal Meidan, an analyst with London-based industry consultant Energy Aspects Ltd. An estimated 1.7 million barrels a day of refining capacity was taken offline for maintenance in April, the most during the March-May peak season.
– The start-up of a mega refinery at Dalian by Hengli Group also boosted imports, according to Li Li, an analyst at Shanghai-based commodities researcher ICIS-China.
– While no country-by-country breakdown of the Chinese figures for April is available yet, observed crude exports from Iran to China rose to 806,452 barrels a day in March, the highest in six months, according to tanker-tracking data compiled by Bloomberg.
– It normally takes 22 days for Iranian cargoes to arrive in China, so shipments are likely to drop significantly for May arrivals as observed exports from the Islamic Republic fell 67 percent in April from March.
Sempre che non siano in corso delle trattative riservate, cosa possibile quanto verosimile, l’Unione Europea sembrerebbe non aver ancora pensato a come comportarsi quando a fine 2019 scadranno gli accordi tra Russia ed Ukraina, in base ai quali il gas russo transita sul territorio ukraino per giungere ai consumatori europei.
Per quanto possa sembrare essere ragionevole che alla fine si arrivi ad un rinnovo dei permessi, ciò non è assolutamente detto che accada. A quanto sembrerebbe, il problema sarebbe sicuramente di prezzo del pedaggio, ma molto di più sarebbe politico.
L’Europa dipende mani e piedi dalle forniture russe di gas, sia per il riscaldamento ed uso domestico, sia per alimentare molte delle esistenti centrali elettriche.
Lascia quindi alquanto perplessi la notizia per cui l’Ungheria avrebbe preso l’iniziativa e contrattato direttamente le forniture con la Russia.
«Russia will supply gas to Hungary in 2020, regardless of agreements on gas transit between Moscow and Kiev»
«Today, the CEO of Gazprom and I have concluded an agreement that Gazprom will ensure gas supplies to Hungary, regardless of whether a transit agreement is concluded between Russia and Ukraine,” RBC quoted Hungarian Foreign and Trade Minister Péter Szijjártó»
«A situation might arise when Russia will no longer supply gas to the European continent via Ukraine»
«We have to prepare for this scenario, because we must always take into account the worst scenario when planning the security of the country’s energy supply»
* * * * * * *
Il problema è di non poco conto ed anche di ben difficile soluzione. Poi, magari, in colloqui riservati, le parti potrebbero anche dimostrasi una volta tanto ragionevoli.
Che tra Russia ed Ukraina non corra buon sangue non dovrebbe essere cosa ignota: l’Unione Europea parteggerebbe ufficialmente per l’Ukraina, ma nel contempo ha bisogno del gas russo per sopravvivere.
La Russia sta proseguendo i lavori per il Nord Stream 2 con grande risentimento americano, e nel contempo sta proseguendo i lavori sullo TurkStream, tra le urenti ambasce dell’Unione Europea. Ambedue le soluzioni bypassano l’Ukraina.
Un’occhiata sia pur superficiale al tracciato del TurkStream in avanzata fase di posa mette chiaramente in luce come il tracciato passi dalla Turkia alla Bulgaria e, quindi, attraverso la Serbia, arrivi direttamente in Ungheria.
Russia will supply gas to Hungary in 2020, regardless of agreements on gas transit between Moscow and Kiev, the RBC news website reported on Friday.
The transit agreement between Russia and Ukraine expires at the end of this year and a new agreement has not yet been negotiated.
“Today, the CEO of Gazprom and I have concluded an agreement that Gazprom will ensure gas supplies to Hungary, regardless of whether a transit agreement is concluded between Russia and Ukraine,” RBC quoted Hungarian Foreign and Trade Minister Péter Szijjártó as saying after negotiations with Gazprom head Alexei Miller.
“A situation might arise when Russia will no longer supply gas to the European continent via Ukraine. We have to prepare for this scenario, because we must always take into account the worst scenario when planning the security of the country’s energy supply,” RBC quoted Szijjártó as saying.
State-run Gazprom is building two pipelines — Nord Stream 2 and the European leg of TurkStream — in the face of opposition from the European Union and the United States.
Both will carry Russian gas to Europe, bypassing Ukraine. The Nord Stream 2 link under the Baltic Sea is jointly funded by Gazprom and five regional energy companies. The planned TurkStream leg from Turkey to the EU is set to receive financing from a 50-50 joint venture between Gazprom and its Turkish partner.