Authors

Podcast

Categories

Carbonomics

Older Archives

How dependent is Europe on Russian gas?

November 18th, 2008 by Pierre Noël, University of Cambridge

Conventional wisdom has it that Russia dominates Europe’s natural gas market, and that European imports of Russian gas are growing and can only continue to grow. This supposedly places the EU in a dangerous state of dependency and compromises its strategic position towards Russia. All sides of the debate over Europe’s Russia policy share these premises, including those “realists” who argue that dependency on Russian gas makes it irresponsible for the EU to pursue policies that antagonise Moscow. But the conventional wisdom is wrong: Europe’s gas supply is not dominated by Russia, or, for that matter, by any other exporter.

Since 1980, and particularly since 1995, Europe has considerably diversified its sources of gas imports. Today, for the EU as a whole, gas supply diversity is not a pressing problem.

As the figure below shows, over the past 40 years, natural gas consumption has grown steadily in Europe, and much faster than primary energy consumption. (Gas now accounts for around a quarter of energy use in Europe.) Since the mid-1970s, imports have covered all this growth. In 2007, Europe imported 300 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas, accounting for 60% of consumption.

20081117_01_gas_consumption

EU27 gas consumption, 1965-2007

Russia remains the largest exporter of gas to the EU, with total annual exports of 130 bcm today. But since the early 1980s, and particularly over the past decade, import growth from other countries has outpaced that from Russia. Since 1990, 80% of the growth in European gas imports has originated from countries other than Russia, especially Norway, Algeria, Nigeria and middle eastern countries. Accordingly, Russia’s share of EU gas imports has declined sharply, from 75% in 1990 to just over 40% today (see figure below). The share of EU gas consumption covered by Russian imports grew rapidly in the 1970s and 1980s, peaking at 30% in the early 1990s before stabilising at about 25%. Yet as a share of Europe’s primary energy consumption, gas imports from Russia have stabilised since 1990 at around 6.5% (see figure below).

20081117_02_dependence

EU27 dependence on Russian gas, 1990-2006

In other words, 93.5% of the energy consumed in Europe is covered by sources other than Russian gas – and natural gas, unlike oil, faces direct competition from other fuels and technologies.

Transport modes and routes for gas have also diversified. Until the early 2000s, most of Europe’s imports came via pipelines. But over the past decade, Europe has become a major customer in the rapidly growing market for liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is transported by sea. Since 2002, LNG from new suppliers such as Nigeria, Egypt, Trinidad or Qatar has accounted for most of the rise in EU gas imports. The share of LNG in EU gas imports has grown from 15% in 2000 to more than 20% in 2007. Even pipeline routes from Russia itself have diversified: the “Yamal-Europe” pipeline, which was opened in the 1990s, has reduced reliance on the Ukrainian corridor.

There may be no problem of European overdependence on Russian gas, but this is not to say that all is well on the supply front. Over the next 15-20 years, Gazprom faces serious supply challenges, and the international gas market is likely to experience considerable tightening. These issues, combined with declining indigenous production, mean that in the coming decades Europe could face a gas supply crunch, leading to stagnant or even declining consumption.

Despite controlling the world’s largest gas reserves, Gazprom will find it difficult to maintain its current supply levels. Production from the three “super-giant” west Siberian gas fields, which account for the bulk of Gazprom’s output, is now in steep decline. The company’s ability to maintain, let alone increase, production in the coming decades depends on the development of a new generation of fields on the Yamal Peninsula in northwest Siberia. Gazprom’s official line is that Yamal will come on stream in 2010. But independent analysts and most of the European gas industry think this is
highly unlikely. Some mention 2015 as a more realistic date for Yamal’s completion.

In fact, Gazprom’s production is already insufficient to meet all the company’s commitments. It depends on two other sources of gas – “independent” Russian producers and imports from Central Asia, especially Turkmenistan – to make up the shortfall. This “bridge” is supposed to supply Gazprom’s needs until the Yamal fields come online. But there is uncertainty over whether Gazprom will be able to source sufficient volumes from Turkmenistan, while independent Russian producers have little incentive to increase their production in the absence of access to Gazprom’s transmission network, which would enable them to reach consumers directly. Moreover, domestic gas consumption in Russia is growing, driven by economic expansion and a gas-intensive electricity mix. So there is at least a risk that Gazprom’s “bridge” to Yamal could collapse. Industry assessments vary from a tight but manageable supply situation to an impending crisis.

As long as Gazprom relies on the Turkmen/independent supplier “gas bridge”, it is unlikely that exports to Europe, at least those under long-term contracts, will increase at all. Depending on how quickly Gazprom can get the Yamal fields on stream, there could be room for increased exports to Europe in the second part of the next decade, though any additional commitments are unlikely to be large. In 2006, major long-term contracts with European importers were renewed until 2030-3514; as west Siberian production declines, these contracts will be serviced increasingly from Yamal, limiting the volumes available for new contracts. Finally, Russia’s political willingness to expand exports to Europe beyond current levels remains unclear.

Pierre Noël

P.S. This post is an excerpt from my report for the European Council of Foreign Relations ‘Beyond Dependence: How to Deal with Russian Gas

Send this to a friend

6 Responses to “How dependent is Europe on Russian gas?”

  1. Hugh Sharman Says:

    Mr Noel’s paper only illustrates more clearly what a mess Europe’s energy policy is. He is right that Russia probabaly cannot increase gas exports without leaving domestic demand short and that would be politically disastrous for who ever is in the Kremlin. In fact, Russian exports are likely to fall. Among other matters, it lacks the capital to develop large new reservoirs and is in any case hardly motivated to develop these reservoirs in order to bring down the price of energy!

    But then who will fill the growing gap? Not Qatar. Not Norway, soon to be on a production plateau. Not Algeria. Not Iran which has dallied for decades with LNG export that has never been realised

    Let’s face it, it was always stupid to assign so much of our vital infrastructure to reliance gas which we, in the EU, no longer have. It was unbelieveably stupid to draw our own reserves down so rapidly at such low cost. Access across EU countries however “free” is not the same as commanding reserves which we do not have.

    Mr Noels paper illustrates how in the long run, Russia has us over a barrel of our own making!

    Th

  2. John Busby Says:

    Taking the figures from the BP Statisitical Review 2008 for Saudi oil and Russian gas I was able to show the coming problem of reducing production and rising domestic use.

    See “Oil and gas net exports” in the Real Resources Review

    http://www.sandersresearch.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1361&Itemid=105

    The two pllots show a Saudi oil production peak in 2005 and Russian gas peak in 2006/ The UK was once a net oil and gas importer, but has been able to source elsewhere. When the same scenario applies to Saudi Arabia and Russia, they have nowhere else to go!

    If Russia’s internal economy continues to grow and the Shtokman field is delayed, the extrapolated plots cross around 2015 when the valve to Europe will finally be closed.

  3. Justinas Says:

    I appreciate critical analysis conducted by Mr Noel. Arguments are precisely weighted and warranted by relevant data.

    At the same time I wonder what impact in Europe possible Russian-Chinese gas trade might have. Since signing PSA in 2006, development remains unclear. If built these pipelines would probably fasten resource depletion in Western Siberia.

    Noteworthy, I do believe analysts at EU Commission did a great job preparing Second Strategic Energy Review. Renewables (especially windmills), nuclear are still solutions worth pursuing. Not only due to Russian threats, but Climate change issue too. Shall we expect ECFR commentary on the Second EU Energy package?

  4. Ulf Hansen Says:

    Mr. Noel has focussed on a vital point of European energy securityand I wonder if not already signs are seen that Russian gas may be in short supply. Mr. Putin just a few days ago said that the planned Norstream gas pipeline through the Baltic Sea to Germany may not be built because the neighbouring countries i. e. Finland, Sweden, the Baltic States, Poland a.o. are putting too many environmental stumbling stones in the way. Alternatively, LNG may be a proposition.

    Are environmental concerns the only problems? Could it be that a pipeline would commit too large a gas volume over too long a period and that LNG offerrs a more flexible export route?

  5. James Rothfeld Says:

    Several points:
    Dependence on gas is regional. Germany is by far the most dependent on Russian gas, while Poland hardly uses any gas at all (relative to its overall energy consumption).
    Furthermore, energy dependence on Russia has to take into consideration oil as well. This includes oil not only from Russia itself, but also from those sources that transit directly through Russia. By this calculation, Russia currently supplies about a quarter of all EU oil and gas demand.
    By comparison, the Middle East – including North Africa – supplies less than 10% of all US oil and gas demand.
    Since 1984, the the EU27 energy deficit in oil and gas has been steadily increasing.
    EU gas and oil resources are rapidly declining, with few alternative sources within the EU and Norway left.
    A politically sound analysis should include Norwegian gas as domestic to the EU27. This will not change the ratio of Russian energy in the EU27 energy balance, but it changes the relative size of Russia vis-a-vis any other source of oil and gas.

  6. John Patrick Says:

    EU states have huge gas resources within their own borders in the form of coal bed methane (CBM) and stranded coal deposits at depth which are amenable to being gasified underground and extracted (UCG) using new environmenlally sound technologies successfully trialled in Australia. Local CBM and UCG are the only viable options capable of securing Europe’s gas supplies long term!

Leave a Reply