Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:09 am

    Well privatisation does not mean the Government has to sell the entire
    stake to private investors but it can part sell and diversify its equity
    , for eg if the government owns 100 % in Power Trans mission and
    Distribution , it can sell 49 percent stake to private players and keep
    the 51 % as majority holders or do it vice or verse.

    Most of the time that merely results in foreign interests owning large portions of your most profitable companies for a reduced return.

    Sell off non strategic non infrastructural assets of course, but market forces have proved to be unreliable because the focus is making a profit and most of that profit heads overseas.

    In practical terms privatisation means selling off assets for a short term gain... and considering the price of oil at the moment that is not really necessary.

    That would help government raise money and improve its performance in
    such organisation by bringing in competition , sure people would be
    fired because they could be over staffed or not working to its full
    potential.

    So the government gains a small amount of short term revenue at the cost of an increase in unemployment.
    Why not just reduce the number of jobs themselves and make remaining workers work harder or smarter?

    If you replace government with the head of the family does it make sense to sell off assets that are generating income just because times are tough?

    It is time to prioritise and reduce spending where it is being wasted, not time to sell assets that are generating funds or are considered in the national interest.

    Here in NZ the government sold the railways... including rails and all. Recently they bought them back at an enormous loss because the (foreign) company that bought them that was going to fix everything didn't and rail as a transport option pretty much killed itself here.

    There is no guarantee that privatisation improves things.... it is a gamble... and why gamble when you don't have to?

    I can tell you from my experience in India privitisation has done
    wonders , I remember a time when all banks were government owned and
    depositing money in a bank or withdrawing it would be half a day job
    with long queues and poor work ethics.

    The banks in Russia are pretty rubbish, the government has little business in banking... except perhaps one national bank for those Russians that don't want all the profits from their business to go overseas.

    Here in NZ 90% of banks are Australian owned with only a few Kiwi owned banks. They screw us and we ask for more.

    these days you could get a phone within a day and get connected. thanks to privatisation that made the change.

    And is privatisation really the only solution or could reforms result in similar changes?
    Personally I don't like the idea of foreigners controlling such things... the only criteria is that they are prepared to pay what the asset is being sold for.
    Do you think such people care about their customers other than as a revenue source?

    Russia too would have its own experience with its drive , as long as its
    done via competitive bidding process and fair play .Russia and Russian
    people in general in the long run would gain more from it and loose
    less.

    Hahahahahaha.... you believe such things are fair? Really?

    I always believed Government should do pump in money where it should
    like infrastructure , education , health care and some strategic sectors
    for the rest they can be completely privately owned by many players or
    jointly owned by government and private players.

    I am beginning to think they should put some of the money into gold and silver reserves and spend the rest where it is needed the most... certainly health and education and infrastructure, but also into electronics and alternative energy.

    It should also set up a LNG plant because EU rules will eventually demand that the Russian companies can't sell oil and gas and also own the pipelines they are delivered through.

    This means that the Russian companies will have to sign contracts for delivery of energy yet not have control of the pipelines that deliver it, so the potential for problems with changing costs of using pipes and of course potential for lack of maintainence leading to problems makes delivering it in gas form might become untenable and they will have to deliver it as a liquid for a higher price by ship.
    All because Europe is afraid of a monopoly the Russians and Soviets have had for decades yet have never once used it as political leverage.

    Let me just say that I think it is rather criminal that a short distance from where I live in a place called McRaes Flat an Australian mineral company is extracting billions of dollars of gold every year from the ground.
    The New Zealand government earns some tax and a few people get jobs, but the vast majority of the wealth goes to Australia.

    Don't tell me life is fair.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:07 pm

    Russian Oil A Strategic Alternative Amid Middle-East Turmoil

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:37 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Most of the time that merely results in foreign interests owning large portions of your most profitable companies for a reduced return.

    Sell off non strategic non infrastructural assets of course, but market forces have proved to be unreliable because the focus is making a profit and most of that profit heads overseas.

    In practical terms privatisation means selling off assets for a short term gain... and considering the price of oil at the moment that is not really necessary.

    Well Privatisation is good in some sectors because it induces competition , why do you think India managed to grow its economy so rapidly , how do you think China did , due to reforms and privatisation.

    You can have a russian partner and a private player working in tandem for privatisation , ofcourse companies works for profit no body wants to start a business or be in it to make losses , only the government might do so due to ineffeciency and guess what they end up spending more public money to take care of sick unit.

    So the government gains a small amount of short term revenue at the cost of an increase in unemployment.
    Why not just reduce the number of jobs themselves and make remaining workers work harder or smarter?


    Not all privatisation can result in trimming for work forces at least in India the government managed to sell part of the stake in companies to Indian private players and retained majority status , they did not cut any force they just made sure the exisiting people were better trained and worked effeciently ,in worst cases they stopped hiring.

    If you replace government with the head of the family does it make sense to sell off assets that are generating income just because times are tough?

    Its a tough choice but no private company would be interested in buying a loss making unit either no one wants to take such risk , so you end up part selling profit making unit along with some loss making one to provide incentive to companies who buy it.


    It is time to prioritise and reduce spending where it is being wasted, not time to sell assets that are generating funds or are considered in the national interest.

    Well government do have good plans but they end up not getting implemented , private players can implement the same plan very well , government all over the world are known to be ineffecient at doing some things , running business is something left best to private player or a mix stake holding between private and government.

    Here in NZ the government sold the railways... including rails and all. Recently they bought them back at an enormous loss because the (foreign) company that bought them that was going to fix everything didn't and rail as a transport option pretty much killed itself here.

    Seems like NZ government is not good at implementing things or just take bold decision and regret later , In India they are more conservative and tend to privatise partly , there are opposition too since we are a socalist democractic country

    Indian Railways are all government owned and in past few years running in profit , they privatised partly by selling off unused lands , privatised catering service and small stuff well it worked well but I think they can do much much better.

    I personally feel if they sell Indian Railway stake like 25 % to a major Indian Private player , Indian Railways would be far more efficient.

    There is no guarantee that privatisation improves things.... it is a gamble... and why gamble when you don't have to?

    Most of the times it would work , it would also help Russia develop its own big names in private industry , something they can then go out around the world and gain new grounds

    One of the private telecom players has tied with Russian giant Sistema SSA and provide telecom service under the brand MTS
    http://www.sistema.com/

    There are hardly any big name in Russian Private players and most are in Oil sector.

    And is privatisation really the only solution or could reforms result in similar changes?


    Atleast in Telecom and many sectors Privatisation has come as a great boon

    Personally I don't like the idea of foreigners controlling such things... the only criteria is that they are prepared to pay what the asset is being sold for.
    Do you think such people care about their customers other than as a revenue source?

    Well if you dont like foreigners then you can tell local private players tie up with them as majority players or let foreigner take some percentage less then 51 percent and let government keep majority.

    Hahahahahaha.... you believe such things are fair? Really?

    Yes in our experience an Open Tender with transparent bidding process help us generate more revenues , then discretionary based bidding like you must have heard of 2G scam in India where minister were given all the power to do a first come first serve and they ended in making big money for them self , underselling it and is rated as biggest scam in Independent India.

    Were as 3G was open bidding with the highest bidder getting the spectrum and it helped us generate more revenues , no other player complained of foul play

    So yes fair bidding is possible as long as the policy is fair and transparent to all players

    All because Europe is afraid of a monopoly the Russians and Soviets have had for decades yet have never once used it as political leverage.

    I would say Europe is just minimising the risk by diversifing the producer and supplier and are within their rights to do so.

    Let me just say that I think it is rather criminal that a short distance from where I live in a place called McRaes Flat an Australian mineral company is extracting billions of dollars of gold every year from the ground.
    The New Zealand government earns some tax and a few people get jobs, but the vast majority of the wealth goes to Australia.

    They should have simply let Australia company do the mining get the technology but keep the processing and gold in New zeland , no point in selling a gold mine if its sold at low cost , seems NZ has taken many bad decision.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:09 am

    Well Privatisation is good in some sectors because it induces
    competition , why do you think India managed to grow its economy so
    rapidly , how do you think China did , due to reforms and privatisation.

    Hahahaha... you really think that?

    First of all I would say that privatisation of some things makes a lot of sense... the Government has no business making toothpaste or baking bread.

    Controlling a countries power grid however is the business of the Government... and in modern times in many ways is a licence to print money because here in NZ it was taxpayers money that built the huge hydro electric dams that generate power with its main fuel a renewable resource called water.

    All they have to do is keep the dam maintained and it is a licence to print money. All the power lines are in place, they don't need to build anything substantial, they don't even need to compensate the people whose land is now under water in the lake they created cause that was all done when the government built the dams.

    It is like spending a small fortune on a person training them and teaching them and getting them to the point that they will be a very productive worker for 30-50 years and then selling them for one years wages.

    That one years wages is a nice short term cash injection that makes the books for this year look really good, but after two years whomever you sold them to is already making more than what they paid for him each year in earnings.

    Most politicians claim they need to be paid what they would be paid if they were in an equivalent business job to keep them happy... how about we make them work the same and also make the performance of their department decide their wage level.

    All the advantages of privatisation without selling to overseas interests.

    You can have a russian partner and a private player working in tandem
    for privatisation , ofcourse companies works for profit no body wants to
    start a business or be in it to make losses , only the government might
    do so due to ineffeciency and guess what they end up spending more
    public money to take care of sick unit.

    Selling food or furnature it makes sense to make a profit, but why would your focus be for profit in education or health?
    Efficiency is one thing, but service to the customer in private business is usually to justify the higher costs... it is the reason for first class service and costs and economy service and costs... such things certainly make sense in the private sector so that those that can and want to afford a better service can do so... it makes no sense in Health or Education. Unless you think there are people that deserve better treatment because of their political or economic or social situation.

    Not all privatisation can result in trimming for work forces at least in
    India the government managed to sell part of the stake in companies to
    Indian private players and retained majority status , they did not cut
    any force they just made sure the exisiting people were better trained
    and worked effeciently ,in worst cases they stopped hiring.

    Any why can a 51% government owned company perform better than a 100% government owned company?

    In both cases the Government has control. Why give away 49% of the dividends?

    Its a tough choice but no private company would be interested in buying a
    loss making unit either no one wants to take such risk , so you end up
    part selling profit making unit along with some loss making one to
    provide incentive to companies who buy it.

    Rubbish. Look at East Germany. When the wall fell there were more than a few huge old heavily staffed factories in the East that were not making profits at all. The Western companies moved in like wolves and bought these companies cheaply, fired most of the staff, pinched all the pension funds, sold off any material of value and then sold it on, or levelled the place fired everyone and sold the land.

    Well government do have good plans but they end up not getting
    implemented , private players can implement the same plan very well ,
    government all over the world are known to be ineffecient at doing some
    things , running business is something left best to private player or a
    mix stake holding between private and government.

    Efficiency is a gamble. It is minimising costs and trying to improve performance with the minimal outlay to increase profits. If you get it wrong you start losing key staff because they are over worked and under paid and are getting better offers elsewhere.

    I personally feel if they sell Indian Railway stake like 25 % to a major
    Indian Private player , Indian Railways would be far more efficient.

    Of course you think that... it is the western model. Big government = evil. Big business = nice and safe and efficient.

    Can I just say... without wanting to cause offense: Union Carbide India Limited.

    Private companies have no social responsibility to the people in the countries they operate in and if they can get away with something they will try.

    That is not to say the government is any better, but it is much easier in a democracy to hold them accountable.


    Well if you dont like foreigners then you can tell local private
    players tie up with them as majority players or let foreigner take some
    percentage less then 51 percent and let government keep majority.

    But why sell at all in the first place? If it is worth selling then it is worth keeping.

    So yes fair bidding is possible as long as the policy is fair and transparent to all players

    What you call fair is interesting.
    I am guessing the winner was the player that offered the most money for the bid.
    Is that a good way to determine who should adopt children?
    Well I guess if you don't care who controls your communications that I shouldn't.

    What I do have a problem with is most in NZ need access to a phone and that the ownership and use of those phones generates revenue... a few years ago we all benefited from that revenue... now it goes to Canada.


    I would say Europe is just minimising the risk by diversifing the producer and supplier and are within their rights to do so.

    Bullshit. If the Russians paid for pipelines to be built and pay for them to be maintained why should they be forced to either sell them or sell their oil production assets?
    A quarry that produces gravel for road building is not allowed to own the trucks that deliver the gravel?
    Half of the problem is politics and considering the politics in Europe the result will be bad for Russia.

    They should have simply let Australia company do the mining get the
    technology but keep the processing and gold in New zeland , no point in
    selling a gold mine if its sold at low cost , seems NZ has taken many
    bad decision.

    Can't stop them buying land. They had the mining licence. What exactly was the New Zealand Government supposed to do? Welcome to the WTO...

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:47 am

    Austin wrote:

    Well Privatisation is good in some sectors because it induces competition , why do you think India managed to grow its economy so rapidly , how do you think China did , due to reforms and privatisation.

    China managed to grow rapidly by encouraging sweat shops.


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:58 am

    China managed to grow rapidly by encouraging sweat shops.

    Very good point.

    The way the US "used" China to get at the Soviet Union... who are we kidding... to get at Russia, you'd think there was no problem at all with communism in the first place.

    The real issue was that Russia was a potential rival to US dominance... which is ironic because as a communist state having to carry most of the other soviet republics and eastern europe and most of its client states around the world were generally poor as well... the end of communism and the breakup of the warsaw pact and the soviet union will likely be very good for Russia in the long term.

    Without communism it has not ideology to spread... it can just do business.

    I will repeat I have no problems in privatisation of some things, but in areas of Russian strategic interests like its mineral and energy wealth and infrastructure I think the government should retain some control.

    In areas where profits are good why share it with the private sector?

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:26 pm

    GarryB wrote:In areas where profits are good why share it with the private sector?

    The reasons why private sector is invited even when profits exists

    1 > New Project or Existing Projects needs vast amount of funding and even there could be potential risk involved for eg you may have an estimate of oil in some area but there is always uncertainity and you may want to involve a private player to risk share it , you may not have all the fund necessary to complete the project.

    2 > Technology , government may not have modern technology to do things which big private multinational may have , for eg the new BP-Rosneft deal to drill in the arctic where BP has the technology to obtain maximum oil/gas in deep arctic below the ice , something the Russian controlled companies dont.

    3 > Besides Technology and Financial Risk sharing , there is also an issue of market reach , brand value involved that comes into the picture that only big multinational can bring in.

    So in many ways privatization does help even if there could be government controlled companies thats running in profit. Hence government tends to part sell its share for the above mentioned reason and its happening in India in many strategic sectors including the profit making

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:02 pm

    Gazprom to produce 200 bln cu m of gas a year under new offshore program to 2030

    Gazprom will produce 200 billion cubic meters of gas and 10 million metric tons of oil in a new hydrocarbon development program for the Russian continental shelf to 2030 approved by the energy giant's board of directors, Gazprom said on Tuesday.

    The adjusted program adopted by the Gazprom management committee in early March, projects an increase in Gazprom's offshore deposit reserves by over 11 billion metric tons of fuel equivalent to 2030 and also excludes the energy giant's gas output under the Sakhalin-II oil and gas project off Russia's Pacific Coast.

    Total hydrocarbon reserves on Russia's continental shelf are estimated at about 100 billion metric tons of fuel equivalent, of which gas accounts for about 80 percent. The larger part of hydrocarbon reserves (over 80 percent) are concentrated in the Barents, Pechora, Kara and Okhotsk Seas. Offshore deposits in the Barents and Kara Seas abound in gas and gas condensate while the Pechora Sea largely contains oil and the Okhotsk Sea has oil and gas reserves.

    The company's plan for the Barents Sea includes development of the infrastructure of the giant Shtokman gas condensate deposit and its satellites. The firm also plans efforts to develop the Prirazlomnoye and Dolginskoye oil fields in the Pechora Sea.

    Operations in the Severo-Kamennomysskoye and Kamennomysskoye Sea fields offshore the Ob and Taz Bays will lay the foundation for developing a field cluster. The Sakhalin shelf will see comprehensive development of fields located within Gazprom's licensed areas (Sakhalin III project), the energy giant said.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:13 pm

    The crises boosting Russia's coffers


    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:50 am

    Russian Gas Beckons for Germany as Merkel Turns From Nuclear

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:06 am

    It is funny that Russia gets criticised for being so focused on Energy exports, and of course diversification is a good thing but the basic facts of life are that everyone needs energy and the more sophisticated your country is in many ways the more dependent it is on some form of energy source.

    When the Ukraine was stealing gas from european customers the Europeans blamed Russia and when Russia decided to invest billions creating alternative pipelines to prevent it from happening the Europeans jumped up and down about the monopoly Russia has with energy imports into Europe.

    The Europeans had the balls to demand Russia sell parts of its energy delivery infrastructure... which it built and maintained... now if a western company buys the pipes cheap and decides to make maximum profit by taking transit fees but not spending money on maintainence when the energy fails to get to the customer you can be sure the Europeans will blame the Russians for not delivering.

    Then the Europeans got all high and mighty and decided they would reduce their dependence on Russian energy exports (exports by the way that remained stable throughout the cold war) by looking at more nuclear power generation.

    Sounds like the problems in Japan have reminded them that there are worse things that being dependent on natural gas.

    The huge irony is that most rubbish dumps around the world generate enormous amounts of methane that simply escapes into the atmosphere.

    Personally I think the Russians should build a few oil refineries and produce their own fuel and stop exporting crude, and in gas they should develop and produce liquid natural gas and deliver it by super tanker... the profit margins on refined fuels like LNG and petrol are much higher than for the raw gas and crude oil.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:03 pm

    Gazprom to boost LNG supplies to India

    Russia’s state-run energy giant Gazprom is set to increase its liquefied natural gas (LNG) deliveries to India up to 7.5 million tonnes per year.

    The LNG will come from Gazprom`s plant on the Pacific island of Sakhalin.

    The sides are expected to sign a respective 25-year contract in the coming months.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:17 pm

    On the Money: Russia energized

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:33 pm

    China and Russia on the way to energy cooperation

    Russian Deputy Prime-Minister Igor Sechin said on Tuesday following the seventh round of the China-Russia energy negotiators’ meeting that Russia will finalize a 30-year deal with China by the 10th of June to supply a total of 68 billion cubic meters of gas annually. Commenting on this will be our guest Neal McKinnon, global macrostrategist at VTB Capital in London.

    As we know, Russia and China have enjoyed a close economic relationship since the middle of 2000s, so how would you describe the economic cooperation between these two countries at present?

    I think there is a significant degree of economic cooperation between China and Russia; both countries have been key leaders in terms of economic growth over the last year or two years, as far as the global economy is concerned, and both countries are key commodity producers and certainly in recent years there has been increase in cooperation in terms of joint ventures, trade relationships, and investment relationships between Russia and China.

    Russian Deputy Prime-Minister Igor Sechin who oversees energy issues in the government, says that Gasprom and Chinese national petroleum cooperation will soon prepare a commercial contract, adding that the deal span will be at least 30 years. But as we know so far the bodies have failed to reach a final agreement on gas prices, so what results can be expected?

    Certainly I think that it is very positive that there are these negotiations taking place. And certainly the issue with the natural gas prices is an important one, I think that the current discussions can make progress, there are also discussions under way in other countries as well, and certainly with the very large increase in oil prices that we have seen over the past year – that means that natural gas prices, which tend to follow the price of oil, are an important linkage. I am certain at the moment that there are countries’ meeting in Egypt, tomorrow one day meeting of the gas exporting countries and these discussions on the relationship between natural gas prices and oil prices are certainly high on the agenda, and it is likely that contract prices will probably rise by around 15% in the next 3 or 6 months. So the price of gas is going up and it is certainly an important consideration for any discussions between the leading gas producing companies.

    Russia and China may also reach an agreement by the end of 2011 to build a joint oil refinery and as China’s energy chief said the countries planned to extend cooperation in retail oil products sales, so how do you think this cooperation is going to develop?

    I think that certainly it is not surprising that there are these discussions. China is an important commodity demander globally, giving the move towards organization and modernization of the Chinese economy. China is certainly a big buyer of oil, it has been increasing its storage capacity because if the very large additions to the power network in China, so it makes commercial sense for Russia to have these discussions, for Russia is an important producer, and certainly I think it is very constructive, I would hope, that before too long we will see some progress that will be to the advantage of the Russian economy.

    Some experts believe that Beijing sees its giant neighbor to the west rather as a little more than a source of energy and other commodities to feed China’s rapidly growing economy, and the economic relationship between Russia and China is unlikely to change any time soon. Can you comment on it?

    I think that it is important to remember that both Russia and China are important economies on the world basis, they both enjoyed fairly significant economic growth and now they play an important role in the production of commodities particularly oil and gas. I think that going forward it makes sense to try to improve the trade relationship; I think both countries will benefit from that. I would hope that certainly over the next 12 months or so we will see important progress on all these discussions.

    Russian politicians declare from time to time that the country seeks to totally re-orientate its natural gas exports away from Europe towards China, but this doesn’t seem realistic at this point as Gasprom is bound by long-term commitments to western customers. What do you think of that?

    Certainly there is no doubt that western European countries like Germany, for example, are important customers for Gasprom and for Russian commodity and energy producers generally, it is highly unlikely that this relationship is going to change, Germany is an important economy, and certainly the strongest manufacturing economy in western Europe, so it makes sense for Russia to maintain its relationship in the same way that it makes sense for Germany to ensure that there is continuing supply. But China is clearly a growing economy, and a very important economy, and it also makes sense for Russian companies like Gasprom to look towards China in order to build commercial relationships. I don’t think that these are mutually exclusive considerations, I think it makes perfect business sense to try and expand business generally and look towards the new growing economies like China that will be profitable for Russian companies in the long-term.

    Can Russia consider Chinese companies as an alternative to BP as we know that the deal between BP and Rosneft collapsed earlier in May, and now Rosneft has to look for another partner?

    This is a very good question. It certainly is a possibility that Chinese partners could step into the breach; certainly there is no particular reason why it is a problem. It is always up to the two parties involved, but in principle my opinion is that there’s no particular reason to prevent such a relationship and partnership from taking place.

    Thank you very much for your commentary. Thank you for joining us!

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:05 pm

    GarryB wrote:Personally I think the Russians should build a few oil refineries and produce their own fuel and stop exporting crude, and in gas they should develop and produce liquid natural gas and deliver it by super tanker... the profit margins on refined fuels like LNG and petrol are much higher than for the raw gas and crude oil.

    I think thats not a bad idea to value add over raw materials ,but for countries that border russia and where demand is high and transporting gas/oil over pipeline is much cheaper then transporting it via ships then there is no harm in building pipelines.

    For countries where is not feseable like India they do deliver it via tankers etc.

    Value addition is a good idea they should build refineries and develop products.

    Stimulating Added Value in the Russian Oil and Gas Sector
    http://www.insor-russia.ru/en/_news/analytics/9058

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:13 am

    Certainly pipelines to places that appreciate it and don't whine makes sense, but for most of Europe I think Pipelines are not worth the effort taken to secure and maintain.

    Having a tanker fleet also means a global supply potential rather than the current system limited by permissions to lay pipe.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Mon Jun 06, 2011 3:32 pm

    Gazprom looks to expand, both east and west

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:13 pm

    New oil war in Asia: Saudi Arabia versus Russia

    Pervius
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 259
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2011-03-08

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Pervius on Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:20 pm

    Austin wrote:New oil war in Asia: Saudi Arabia versus Russia


    Saudi Arabia and Russia both want the same thing, top dollar per barrel of crude. Neither will slash prices.

    It would be in their interest to keep increasing prices...what would anyone else in the world do? Dump their oil cheaper?.....won't happen.


    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Mon May 21, 2012 7:56 pm

    Nord Stream takes shape: A big victory for Russia

    Russian President Medvedev inaugurated the construction of the controversial undersea natural gas pipeline system Nord Stream on 9 April 2010. The geo-political importance of Nord Stream cannot be overestimated. With the construction of the pipeline, Europe and Russia will be tied to each other even more closely. Russia will get a direct link with Western Europe without transit through Eastern Europe. Russia already meets a quarter of Europe’s energy needs. Nord Stream will increase European dependence on Russian natural gas further. Russia presently supplies about 140 billion cubic metre (bcm) of gas every year to Europe. Nord Stream will add up to 55 bcm per year to this capacity.

    The gas will be supplied via two parallel steel pipelines of 27.5 bcm/year capacity each. The length of this under sea pipeline is 1220 km. It will begin at Vyborg in Russia near St. Petersburg, cut across the Baltic Sea (maximum depth 210 metres) and reach Greifswald in Germany. It will cost about US $12 billion to build and will be ready to deliver gas by 2012. It will be the largest underwater gas pipeline system when built. The pipeline will pass through the territorial waters and/or economic zones of Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany. Several side pipelines will be built in different countries to connect with the main pipeline.

    The pipeline, discussions about which began in 1997, is an outcome of the strong commitment from former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroder and Vladmir Putin, the former President and current Prime Minister of Russia. Schroeder is presently the chairperson of the Shareholders’ Committee.

    The strongest objection for the pipeline has come from Poland. In 2006, the Polish defence minister compared the agreement between Russia and Germany with the 1939 Nazi-Soviet Pact. There have also been apprehensions that the pipeline may be misused by Russia for spying purposes. Russia has dismissed these allegations as unfounded. Countries like Ukraine, Poland and Belarus stand to lose US $1 billion per year in transit fees when the pipeline is constructed.

    Thirty per cent of the funding for the project will be provided from the equity holdings while the rest will be raised by various banks. Several European banks have joined the project to raise funds. Nord Stream is a truly pan-European project in which a large number of companies are joining hands. Russia’s Gazprom holds 51 per cent of shares in Nord Stream AG, Germany’s Wintershall and E.ON Ruhrgas hold 20 per cent each, and the Netherlands’ Gasunie holds 9 per cent. These companies have wide experience in building and operating natural gas pipeline projects around the world. Some other companies are expected to join the project. The equity holding pattern will change in future as more companies join the project. Already funding to the tune of US $4 billion has been raised from 22 banks.

    The project will supply Russian gas to Germany, France, Denmank, Belgium and the Netherlands. Eventually a pipeline may be built to connect the United Kingdom also. The pipeline will help Russia diversify its routes and Russia’s dependence upon Ukraine for supply of gas to Europe will reduce. The recipient countries will be freed from supply disruptions caused by Russian-Ukrainian spats in the last few years. This factor alone has compelled Germany to back the pipeline project.

    Nord Stream will get its gas supples from Yuzhno-Russkoye gas field which has an proven gas reserves of 700 bcm and estimated reserves of one trillion bcm. The fields in the Yamal peninsula, Ob-Taz bay and Shtokman gas fields will also be added. These are some of Russia’s largest gas fields.

    The project will change the nature of Russian-European relations. It is hoped that energy interdependence will forge better ties between the EU and Russia. Nord Stream is crucial for Europe’s energy security. Europe currently needs about 543 bcm of gas annually. This will go up to 629 bcm by 2025. Eighty one percent of this will have to be imported. Nord Stream will meet about 25 per cent of the projected growth in Europe’s gas imports. No wonder the project is listed as a priority project in EU’s Trans-Europe Energy Network (TEN - E).

    Despite the beginning of the construction of the pipeline environmental concerns remain. The Baltic Sea is considered to be one of the most polluted seas in the world. Chemical and conventional munitions were dumped into the Baltic Sea after the two world wars. Several surveys have been carried out in the past to map the sites where such munitions may be lying. The pipeline route seeks to avoid sensitive sites. The concern is that construction activities in the sea may stir up the toxic waste in the Baltic Sea. Russia has said that the environmental impact studies done for the Nord Stream show that the pipeline is safe. Finland would not allow any construction ships to anchor in its economic zone. The pipeline project has obtained safety and environmental clearances from the concerned countries and agencies but environmental NGOs like WWF have criticised the environmental impact clearances obtained as inadequate.

    Doubts have also been expressed about the economic viability of the project. Will it deliver Russian gas to European customers at an affordable price? Despite these apprehensions, Nord Stream should come as a great relief to energy starved Europe.

    Europe is looking for alternative non-Russian sources of energy supply as well. The Nabucco project is one such project aimed at delivering gas from Central Asia to Europe. Russia’s counter to Nabucco project is the South Stream project through the Black Sea into Southern Europe. It may be noted that together Nord Stream and South Stream gas pipelines will equal the gas pipeline capacity of the Russia-Ukraine-Europe system.

    Russia is no doubt an energy super power. The dependence of individual European countries on Russian gas varies from 21 per cent in the case of France and 43 per cent for Germany to 74 per cent for Austria, 79 per cent for Poland and 100 per cent in the case of Finland. This dependence is likely to continue in the foreseeable future. The Nord Stream Project will further strengthen Prime Minister Putin’s vision of positioning Russia as a major power in the world.

    Country
    Dependence on Russian Gas

    France
    21%
    Italy
    31%
    Germany
    43%
    Slovenia
    60%
    Austria
    73%
    Slovak Republic
    73%
    Czech Republic
    74%
    Poland
    79%
    Hungary
    81%
    Greece
    82%
    Finland
    100%
    Estonia
    100%
    Latvia
    100%
    Lithuania
    100%

    (Source www.energy.eu)

    Facts and route map


    * Vyborg, Russia – Greifswald, Germany
    * Approx. 1,220 km long – 2 parallel pipelines
    * 27.5 bcm annual capacity each
    * 55 bcm total capacity per year
    * 2011 – planned commissioning of first pipeline
    * 2012 – planned commissioning of second pipeline
    * 1,220 mm pipeline diameter
    * 220 bar design pressure
    * Planned investment: 7.4 billion Euro
    * Will meet about 25% of the growth in Europe’s gas import needs between 2005 and 2025.


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9443
    Points : 9935
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  George1 on Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:47 am

    LUKoil Buys Conoco Stake in Timan Pechora Joint Venture

    Russia’s largest privately owned oil firm LUKoil has acquired ConocoPhillips’ indirect 30 percent interest in NaryanMarNefteGaz (NMNG) operating in the Timan Pechora oil and gas province in northern Russia, the firm said on Wednesday.
    “The acquisition brings LUKoil’s total ownership interest in NMNG to 100 percent. Financial terms of the transaction were not disclosed,” LUKoil said in a statement.
    In view of the sale of ConocoPhillips’ 30 percent stake in NMNG as part of its divesture program for 2012, LUKOIL is aiming to strengthen and consolidate its positions in its key upstream Timan Pechora region, the statement said.
    ConocoPhillips said it expected to recognize an after-tax financial gain of about $400 million for the sale.
    "The sale of this non-core quality asset is an important component of our divestiture program for 2012,” said Don Wallette, executive vice president, Commercial, Business Development, and Corporate Planning.
    “We are pleased that LUKoil, the co-owner of NMNG, recognizes the value of this asset."
    The sale of NMNG is part of ConocoPhillips’ plan to increase value for shareholders through disciplined capital investment, improved returns on capital and growth in shareholder distributions.

    http://en.rian.ru/business/20120822/175367711.html

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:36 pm

    This is real big discovery for Russia as far as oil reserves go , as big as Saudi reserves with this discovery Shocked

    126 trillion barrels of oil equivalent biomass in Bazhenov Oil shale in Russia


    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:36 pm

    In the Oil game, Russia has the longest suit to play

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:32 am

    Would much rather see developments that result in technologies that allow cleaner use of fossil fuels and then the change to renewable energy sources... but as long as oil is cheap they are not getting the investment and focus they need to develop and mature.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6079
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Austin on Tue Sep 25, 2012 1:30 pm

    GarryB wrote:Would much rather see developments that result in technologies that allow cleaner use of fossil fuels and then the change to renewable energy sources... but as long as oil is cheap they are not getting the investment and focus they need to develop and mature.

    That being the case , Oil and Gas would still be in demand for the next 50-100 years that is beacause most of the big oil companies have deep pockets to fund politicians , bussiness lobies and governments and it is in their interest to not let alternate fuel take shape.

    So even though they continue to pay lip service with regards to green fuel it would still be a small percentage of fuel and fossil fuel will continue to dominate.

    For Russia it is good as it is a dominant player with new reserves

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 11:14 pm


      Current date/time is Wed Dec 07, 2016 11:14 pm