Yeah similar thing was said for Macedonia, some big wind farm; i don't really expect anything out of these type of announcments.

Правительство Сербии одобрило сделку с "Газпромом"

http://www.newsru.com/finance/22jan2008/serbia.html

Правительство Сербии 22 января одобрило предложенный Россией проект соглашения о сотрудничестве в нефтегазовой области.

Россия предложила Сербии 1 млрд евро за пакет, в который входят 51% государственной нефтяной компании NIS, 50% сербского участка газопровода "Южный поток" и доля в подземном хранилище природного газа "Банатский Двор".

Газопровод "Южный поток", о строительстве которого летом 2007 года договорились "Газпром" и итальянская Eni, должен пройти по дну Черного моря и обеспечить поставки российского газа в Италию и ряд других европейских стран.

Принадлежащие NIS заводы остро нуждаются в модернизации, поэтому власти Сербии решили провести приватизацию государственной монополии. В начале октября глава российской газовой монополии Алексей Миллер договорился с президентом Сербии Борисом Тадичем и премьер-министром страны Воиславом Коштуницей об участии "Газпрома" в приватизации NIS, включении Сербии в проект "Южный поток" и строительство на территории балканского государства подземных хранилищ газа.

В декабре Россия и Сербия подписали соглашение о сотрудничестве по всем трем проектам, однако приступить к их совместной реализации они смогут только после соответствующего разрешения и правительства, и парламента Сербии.

"Газпром" готов заплатить сербской стороне 1 млрд евро за контрольный пакет в NIS, а также за доли в газопроводе и подземном газохранилище "Банатский Двор", которые только предстоит построить. 500 млн евро предполагается выплатить наличными, а вторая половина суммы будет инвестирована в NIS.

In short:

The Serbian government has agreed on a oil and gas cooperation accord proposed by Russia. According to the agreement, Russia offered 1 billion euros for a package including 51% of NIS oil company, 50% of Serbian part of South Stream gas pipeline and a share of Banatskij Dvor gas storage facility which is yet to be built. Half of the amount will be paid in cash, the rest will be invested into modenrisation of NIS.

so it now looks certain that South Stream will go through Serbia

^^ "Well done" Moscow ... once most advanced, open minded, closest to West part of EE is nowadays least interested in the European project and its democratic values ... bloody hell, I'm I dreaming, or what?!

no nebunul, you are not dreaming. Why did it happen? Maybe the West and EU gave Serbia a cold shoulder?

^^ "Well done" Moscow ... once most advanced, open minded, closest to West part of EE is nowadays least interested in the European project and its democratic values ... bloody hell, I'm I dreaming, or what?!

Serbia is right to do that IMO. The West has been Serbia's enemy since the fall of communism, while Russia has been its ally. What do you expect them to do: embrace the enemy, like for example Voronin does today with the new plan to federalize Moldova?

This was obvious. I never expected this pipe line to go thru Romania.

Well Serbia had to do that .... Don't believe they wish to become the biggest black hole on the map of Europe.

I am happy , because now one of the shoulders of the pipe will go all the way through our territory - from Varna to Vidin probably - more killometers - more transit fees ;)

Now I am curious to know the exact route of the second shoulder that will go to Greece. Wish it goes from Varna to Petrich :lol:

Well Serbia had to do that .... Don't believe they wish to become the biggest black hole on the map of Europe.

I am happy , because now one of the shoulders of the pipe will go all the way through our territory - from Varna to Vidin probably - more killometers - more transit fees ;)

Now I am curious to know the exact route of the second shoulder that will go to Greece. Wish it goes from Varna to Petrich :lol:

What sum do these fees amount to? This is quite unclear to me.

What sum do these fees amount to? This is quite unclear to me.

^^ To tell you the truth don't know for certain. ... Heard some numbers like 300 mil. euro per year profit for Bulgaria, but who will gather those money , in which pocket exactly they're gonna sink I have no idea.

Serbia is right to do that IMO. The West has been Serbia's enemy since the fall of communism, while Russia has been its ally. What do you expect them to do: embrace the enemy, like for example Voronin does today with the new plan to federalize Moldova?

What enemy ?!?!?

Disagree ... even though I am against Kosovo’s independence, Serbia committed a genocide that the West had to stop ... let’s remember facts ... ultra nationalism and a brainless leader denied Serbia a great European future...

What enemy ?!?!?

Disagree ... even though I am against Kosovo’s independence, Serbia committed a genocide that the West had to stop ... let’s remember facts ... ultra nationalism and a brainless leader denied Serbia a great European future...

True, but the fact remains that the West bombed Belgrade. :ohno: People cannot forget that. And now the West supports parts of Serbia getting independence. I can understand their feelings. I think they are pretty natural.

in Belgrade they did not renovete the bombed buldings. I think this is stupid. This way the serbian youth will grow to see their bombed buildings. This way they will only perpetuate hate. It is sad. Although serbians are my preferd balanic nation sometimes they can be stuborn and ultrnationalist.
The thing is that I honestly do not understand their war. Or how an educated developed nation (the most developed in the balkans) could kill each other like in the dark ages. So I can not honestly say I can depend on their feelings. The problem is that not even they know what they want. And I understand their frustration but not the roots of their frustration.

^^ Common , 1/3 of Sofia's center was bombed by the West in ww2 ... Then we suffered 45 years under the commie east rule. Does this mean that we're not gonna trade with both of them ? :nuts:

^^ To tell you the truth don't know for certain. ... Heard some numbers like 300 mil. euro per year profit for Bulgaria, but who will gather those money , in which pocket exactly they're gonna sink I have no idea.

I thought that it will be only 35mil per year:ohno:
Let`s hope that I`m wrong...

I thought that it will be only 35mil per year:ohno:
Let`s hope that I`m wrong...

^^ 35 mil./year is the avarage income from the Burgas-Alexandropolis oil pipe ;)

The SS is the most profitable of all the contracts signed last week.
SS is the cherry on the top of the cake ;)

^^ Common , 1/3 of Sofia's center was bombed by the West in ww2 ... Then we suffered 45 years under the commie east rule. Does this mean that we're not gonna trade with both of them ? :nuts:

The same goes for Bucharest and other Romanian cities in the IIWW: bombed by the Americans and British, then bombed by the Germans and finally occupied by the Soviets. And now doing business with everybody, but basically strategically allied with the West.

I was not speaking about trading, but about strategic affiliation. Russia is building the pipe through Serbia because it knows that Serbia is its ally rather than being EU's or other. And one cannot expect Serbia to be nice to the EU and even approve its accession requirements once the EU asks Serbia to give up parts of its territory, irrespective of what's happened there.

in Belgrade they did not renovete the bombed buldings. I think this is stupid. This way the serbian youth will grow to see their bombed buildings. This way they will only perpetuate hate. It is sad. Although serbians are my preferd balanic nation sometimes they can be stuborn and ultrnationalist.
The thing is that I honestly do not understand their war. Or how an educated developed nation (the most developed in the balkans) could kill each other like in the dark ages. So I can not honestly say I can depend on their feelings. The problem is that not even they know what they want. And I understand their frustration but not the roots of their frustration.

How many buildings have NOT been renovated in Bucharest since the collapse of communism, without Romania going through a war?? I guess you know the country needs a lot of money to do that, which money are not available after the war and international isolation.

I think he means that the ones in Belgrade were not renovated ... on purpose

I think he means that the ones in Belgrade were not renovated ... on purpose

I got that, but I guess it's just a speculation.

Only army headquarters are not renovated cause it's not clear what to do with it. It has status of culture monument so there is no posibility to destroy it. On the other side, it is really heavy damaged and, I supose, there is no money to renovate it.

^^ Right ... so really, they were not left damaged on purpose ...

ATHENS, Jan 23 (Reuters) - Greek construction company Metka (MTKr.AT: Quote, Profile, Research) and its joint venture partner General Electric (GE.N: Quote, Profile, Research) made the lowest bid to build a power station in Romania, the Greek company said on Wednesday.

"The GE-Metka joint venture was named the preferred bidder to build the station," Metka said in an Athens bourse filing. "Negotiations to reach a final agreement will begin tomorrow and are expected to last three weeks."

The 50-50 joint venture was among bidders that also included Siemens (SIEGn.DE: Quote, Profile, Research), Alstom (ALSO.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) and Mitsubishi (6503.T: Quote, Profile, Research) to build an 850 MW plant for Austrian OMV's (OMVV.VI: Quote, Profile, Research) Petrom unit near the Romanian oil town of Ploesti.

No further details can be given while negotiations are under way, Metka said.

24 January 2008 London _ The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development has extended its programme of providing credit facilities for energy efficiency projects to include Romania for the first time.

The London-based Bank, known as the EBRD, is giving loans to three Romanian commerical banks, which will then make credits available to private firms to boost better use of energy.

The three loan agreements, signed on Thursday, amount to €20 million for the Banca Comerciala Romana, BCR, €10 million for the CEC Bank and €5 million for the Banca Transilvania, BT.

Jean-Marc Peterschmitt, EBRD Director for Bank Relationships, said that this facility would further increase investments in energy efficiency.

“We are delighted that BCR, CEC and BT continue to be our strategic partners by joining the EBRD and the EU in promoting energy efficiency initiatives in Romania,” he added.

The loans are part of the EU/EBRD Energy Efficiency Facility, with a total amount of €100 million being made available in credits to banks to lend for energy efficiency projects in Bulgaria and Romania.

About €80 million is being earmarked for Romania, and the rest will go to Bulgarian projects.

On Wednesday, the EBRD committed €15 million to Bulgaria’s UniCredit Bulbank within the framework of that programme.

A further €24 million in EU grants will be available to boost technical assistance required for improved energy efficiency in the two Balkan countries.

Promoting energy efficiency among Romanian companies is designed to ensure that Romania meets its obligations as an EU member and contribute to mitigating the likely impact of climate change.

In spite of the economic reforms of recent years, wasteful use of energy remains a key problem in Romanian industry.

According to the International Energy Agency, the energy intensity of the Romanian economy is 4.1 times as high as the average of the EU countries; in other words the same amount of production output requires 4.1 times as much in energy costs in Romania as elsewhere in the EU (excluding the two most recent members, Bulgaria and Romania itself).

Even when using purchasing power parity – another way of measuring how much a currency is worth – Romanian energy costs are 1.44 times higher than the EU average.

Terry McCallion, the EBRD’s Senior Banker for Energy Efficiency projects, told Balkan Insight that the loans to Romanian banks were the latest in a series of similar credit facilities which were pioneered in Bulgaria with initial funds worth €200 million.

Bulgaria was the first recipient of the loan facility because of its specific problems, following the closure over the years of four obsolete nuclear reactors, deemed unsafe by the European Commission.

Since then Georgia, Slovakia and Ukraine have also become beneficiaries of similar arrangements, and they are now being joined by Romania, sharing the new credit facility with Bulgaria.

McCallion said the EBRD was now examining other potential markets, including in the western Balkans, for energy efficiency credits, but added that no decisions had been reached as to which countries would be the next in line to qualify for loans.

a nice map of european gas pipelines by Economist

http://www.economist.com/images/20080126/CEU939.gif

^^ Look at France!!!! Nil :nuts:

btw, I watched this morning on the TV a little wider material about SS and Nabucco...

It appears that Nabucco had major obsticles made by Turkey's will to buy the gas from Iran, Turkmenistan etc. and then sell it ... To act like the real producer. Iran and the other countries refused that and that's why Nabucco is still on hold.

Other major obsticle is that If Iran is not included in the deliverers , the other countries don't have the potential to supply 30 bln. m3 per year.

The last enormous obsticle is that Iran isn't secure source. I mean - look at USA - they are plannig to go in war with Iran , but in the same time try to built a gas pipe that depends on that country :nuts:

And the final conclusion is that even if Nabucco gets built - it will manage to supply no more than 30% of Europe's needs for gas ... Or said in another way - Russia's monopol will remain , no matter what.

Building the Belene nuclear plant not an easy task
http://www.neurope.eu/view_news.php?id=81637

The construction of the second Bulgarian nuclear power plant Belene is starting to look more like a hurdle race. The paradox is that despite the efforts of all parties concerned, even the start of the enterprise is still suspended, although Bulgaria urgently needs new power facilities which can replace the four closed reactors at the Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant, which had a total power of 1,760 megawatts. “The construction of the second nuclear power plant will not start by the end of 2008. The reason for that is that the National Electric Company (NEC), which is the investor of the project, cannot find a bank to finance the construction in spite of the guaranteed rate of return,” Klasa Daily News reported on January 2. The daily refers to anonymous “informed sources”, according to which NEC has been looking for a bank creditor since January, 2007. This creditor must guarantee a cheap loan of about 3.2 billion Euro. It is reminded in the publication that the total value of Belene Nuclear Power Plant is 3.997 billion Euro, 250 million of which were ensured by NEC by means of a syndicated loan from Paribas BNP. According to Klasa it was not clear yet where the needed billions would come from. The powerful western banks which are inclined to negotiate want a high interest rate, which will considerably raise the value of the new nuclear power plant. Thus, the price of electricity coming from Belene could reach over six Euro cents, compared to the promised 3.8–four Euro cents per kilowatt hour. In fact, as New Europe already informed, as early as in the summer of 2007 NEC launched a procedure for a choice of bank or a bank consortium to structure and organise the financing of the Belene plant. A requirement was also set that the candidate banks must have experience in the structuring of big energy projects in nuclear power engineering and must have been the organising banks along at least three significant projects in Europe in the last three years, where project financing was applied , as well as have an A credit rating. It was expected that after September 24, 2007 NEC would start direct negotiations with the candidates, meeting the criteria. At the time it was believed that the 250 million Euro from Paribas BNP would be enough for the first stage of preparation and the start of construction of the plant. Furthermore, the granting of a state guarantee had been approved in the budget for 2008, so that NEC could receive a loan of 600 million Euro from EURATOM and the European Investment Bank for the construction of the new nuclear power plant. Currently, however, the word is about postponing the construction for financial reasons. After the approval of the project on the part of the European Commission, it is logical to expect that most banks would be interested in financing the project, strategic for Bulgaria. There are also other “domestic” problems, however. The competition for a strategic partner of NEC in Belene has been delayed as well. This partner should have been fixed by the end of November 2007. Lyubomir Velkov, Chief Executive Director of NEC, announced that improved offers for 49 percent of the future nuclear power plant would be expected from the five short-listed candidates at the end of June 2008. The short-listed candidates are: German EON and RWE, Belgian Electrabel, Italian Enel and the Czech CEZ. These offers must also include suggestions for financing the remaining 49 percent of the project. There is also another alternative for the financing of Belene, which seems more probable in the context of what has been said so far. In December 2006, AtomStroyExport and Russia offered NEC a budget guaranteed credit of 3.8 billion Euro. It is possible for the terms, related to it, to be arranged as early as January 2008 during the formal visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Bulgaria.

Has ^^ it been agreed?

^^ Yes.
http://international.ibox.bg/news/id_480208051

^^ Any conditions - like to be built by GaZprom or another Russian company?

No, Gazprom has nothing to do with nuclear energy. The construction works will be done by a consortium of companies - Russian, French and German.

http://www.belene-npp.com/index.php?lang=2&pid=8

On 18 January 2008, in the presence of the President of the Republic of Bulgaria Georgi Parvanov and the President of Russia Vladimir Putin the EPC Contract for design, construction and commissioning of units 1 & 2 of Belene NPP was signed by Natsionalna Elektricheska Kompania (NEK EAD) and Atomstroyexport (Atomstroyexport JSC).
The main foreign subcontractor of the Russian company is a consortium composed of AREVA NP (France) and Siemens (Germany).
Atomstroyexport has been selected following a competition procedure under the Public Procurement Act based on predefined criteria such as: competitive price, construction terms and compliance with European and world’s requirements to safety and reliability of operation of nuclear power plants.
The Contract was signed by Lubomir Velkov, Chief Executive Director of NEK and Mardik Papazyan, Executive Director of NEK, and for the Russian side, by Sergey Shmatko, President of Atomstroyexport.
The contract price amounts to EUR 3 997 260 000.
The total capacity of the two nuclear units of Belene is 2000 MW.
The EPC contract sets forth all details related to the construction of the power plant and defines the conditions for the successful completion of the project.

Allianz Ready to Invest in 'South Stream'

Pension and insurance funds are ready to fund the big infrastructure projects in Bulgaria.

This is claimed in a declaration of “Allianz Bulgaria” to prime minister Stanishev, informed yesterday the chairman of the group Dimitar Zhelev, cited by “Trud” newspaper.

Currently, the funds accumulate an enormous financial resources. The forecasts for this year are the assets of the pension funds to reach 1.6 bln EUR.

This is money of the Bulgarian citizens, which could be invested in our economy instead of abroad, pointed out Zhelev.

The suggestion is the pension companies to be allowed to invest 15% of their assets in projects approved by the government.

Among such projects are “South stream” and “Nabucco” gas pipelines, Bourgas-Alexandroupolis oil pipeline and NPP “Belene”, which will provide maximum profitability at a minimal risk.



^^ I have a pension and insurance account with those guys ... I hope they don't fuck up something :lol:

Austrian Hydro Plants for Albania

25 January 2008 Tirana _ Austrian utility company EVN AG announced on Friday that it had won a tender to construct three hydro-electric power plants in southern Albania at an estimated cost of €612 million.


EVN was declared the winner of an international tender to build the three power plants on the Devoll river with a total output of approximately 400 megawatts.

The planned project is the first concrete result of the agreement signed by the government of Lower Austria, the Republic of Albania and EVN in early 2007.

The company sees the development of the Devoll plants as a first step towards increased urilisation of Albania’s large hydroelectric power potential.

Over the past two years Albania has been hit by an acute energy crisis, with regular power cuts throughout the country, including the capital Tirana.

Almost all of Albania's domestically-produced electricity is generated by hydro-power plants, which can be badly affected by drought, and even when rain is plentiful, the obsolete distribution grid causes major problems.

International organizations that monitor the Albanian economy, including the IMF and the World Bank, have expressed concern that the energy crisis could have an adverse effect on the country’s robust economic growth, which has been averaging close to 6% per annum in recent years.

In recent weeks, two Italian companies announced plans for the construction of major wind farms and other renewable energy projects in Albania. Read more: http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/7470/

23 ian 2008 20:15 The Money Channel
Source: NewsIn

Romania’s gas operator Transgaz and the Hungarian-based MOL yesterday clinched a deal for the completion of the gas pipeline connecting Arad and Szeged, according to the general manager of Transgaz, Ioan Rusu.
The official said construction works should start around the middle of the year. Negotiations concerning the gas pipeline were dropped four years ago.

Rusu noted this pipeline will increase the safety in transporting gas to Romania. The pipeline should be completed by the end of 2009.

This is 61.7 kilometers long and has a diameter of 700 mm. Some 36.7 kilometers were already constructed. Transgaz schedules 587.26 million lei worth of investments this year.

Prime Minister: "Bulgaria Should Become Regional Centre for Transit and Distribution of Resources"

"Bulgaria should seek to capitalize on its geographical location and become a regional centre for transit and distribution of resources which come from various sources and are directed to EU member states," Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev said in Parliament on Friday.

"The transit of various routes via Bulgaria strengthens our sovereignty and our national security because both the producing countries and the consumer countries have an interest in Bulgaria's stability and successful development. It is wrong to assume that the building of the pipelines Nabucco, South Stream or any other via Bulgaria makes the country more dependent. Far from that, we are becoming a real factor on Europe's energy map," Stanishev said.

The Prime Minister said Bulgarian-Russian relations should not be viewed from an ideological perspective, based on the opposition between russophiles and russophobes. "We need to be bulgarophiles, to defend our interests before all our partners and get rid of our inferiority complex and the assumption that nothing depends on Bulgaria. We have nothing to worry about of what was accomplished during President Putin's visit," he said.

"As a member state of the EU and NATO, Bulgaria has clear foreign policy priorities. We have an important role to play as a stabilizing factor in the Balkans. This, however, does not mean that we should not develop our relations with other partners, such as Russia, India or China," the Prime Minister said.

According to him, all agreements signed during President Putin's recent visit to Bulgaria are in accordance with European priorities and European legislation. This has been written down
in the agreement on the South Stream gas pipeline, which provides for a possibility to respond to any changes in European energy norms.

Bulgaria and Russia did not sign a protocol on the supply of nuclear fuel because the Russian side did not agree on a provision which Bulgaria wanted to include, pertaining to this country's commitments to the EU, Stanishev said.

The Bourgas-Alexandroupolis oil pipeline will be built according to the highest European environmental standards, he said.

"It is hard to understand the lamentations of former ministers who were directly concerned with the closure of Units 3 and 4 of the Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant. Due to their decisions, we are now wondering how to ensure the energy balance and how to secure electricity exports," Stanishev said.

He noted that the future Belene nuclear power plant will ensure considerable independence from Russian energy supplies and will produce clean energy.

The three energy agreements signed during President Putin's visit constitute an important step forward in achieving energy security and in placing Bulgaria on Europe's energy map, the Prime Minister said. These three agreements will generate 5,500 million euro in direct investments in the Bulgarian economy.

The agreements are to be ratified by Parliament. The legislators can either approve or reject them, Stanishev noted.

The sides agreed on setting up an expert group to verify the list of Bulgarian archives in Moscow, the access to these archives and their possible return to Bulgaria.

The issue about Russia's debt to Bulgaria was also raised, and President Putin promised to work for a prompt settlement, Stanishev said. According to him, the debt amounts to 38 million US dollars.

During President Putin's visit to Bulgaria, Bulgarian companies were invited to share in the construction of facilities in Sochi, Russia, where Winter Olympics are to be held, Stanishev said.

Main target countries for export are Greece and Serbia. The average price for electricity produced in Romania stands at EUR 60 per MWh, while in the region the price for electricity is EUR 90 per MWh. Main source of exported electricity was the new reactor in Cernavoda and the fossil based electricity plants.



www.adevarul.ro
Luni,28 Ianuarie 2008

România şi-a dublat exportul de electricitate


Cererea mare de energie din regiune a fost determinată de sistarea exporturilor de către Bulgaria.

Consumul mai ridicat din această iarnă şi interzicerea exporturilor de către Bulgaria au pus pe jar furnizorii de electricitate. Vânzările la export de energie s-au dublat faţă de iarna anului trecut. Câştigurile sunt pe măsură, dat fiind că în România preţurile de pe bursa locală de energie sunt în medie cu o treime mai mici faţă de cele din Balcani.

Intrarea în funcţiune a reactorului 2 de la Cernavodă, care a suplimentat producţia internă de energie cu 8-9%, nu face faţă cererii tot mai ridicate de electricitate pe plan intern, dar, mai ales, la nivel regional.

Deşi aportul de energie ieftină adus de Nuclearelectrica, operatorul centralei de la Cernavodă, ar fi trebuit să scoată din piaţă producătorii scumpi, în speţă termocentralele pe gaz şi păcură, o parte a acestora produc în continuare. Explicaţia: bulgarii au interzis exporturile de electricitate, într-o perioadă în care consumul la nivel regional este mai ridicat din cauza temperaturilor scăzute.

Energie pe rutele Serbia şi Bulgaria

Potrivit informaţiilor primite de la Dispeceratul Energetic Naţional (DEN), responsabil cu siguranţa sistemului, România exportă în aceste zile la capacitate maximă. Astfel, dacă noaptea ies din sistem 500-600 MW, capacitatea contractată la export în timpul zilei este de 800 MW, în medie. Aceasta înseamnă că vârfurile depăşesc uneori 1.000 MW, adică aproximativ a noua parte din capacitatea de producţie pusă în funcţiune.
Comparativ, în luna ianuarie a anului trecut, România exporta în medie 400 MW, putere medie orară, însă aceasta a fost valoarea cea mai mică din ultimii ani. Niveluri similare la export, de 700-800 MW, au fost înregistrate în 2006.

Oficialul DEN a spus că cele mai mari cantităţi se duc înspre Bulgaria, pe care doar o tranzitează înspre Serbia şi Grecia. Cealaltă destinaţie este Serbia. „Cererea este mare la extern, pe fondul opririi exporturilor din Bulgaria. Şi polonezii au anunţat că nu o să mai exporte, din cauza unei iminente greve a minerilor, dar deocamdată nu se ştie când", a declarat, pentru „Adevărul", directorul general al DEN, Octavian Lohan.

Potrivit datelor de pe site-ul Operatorului Pieţei de Energie, compania care a contractat în ianuarie cea mai mare capacitate la export pe relaţia cu Bulgaria este EFT România, fiind urmată de EGL Gas&Power, Atel România, E.ON Sales&Trading (Germania) şi Statkraft (Norvegia). Pe linia cu Serbia, cea mai mare capacitate a fost contractată de Atel România, fiind urmată de EFT România, Grivco, CEZ Trade, E.ON Sales&Trading, Gen-I şi EGL Gas&Power. Unul dintre marii exportatori este şi Energy Holding.

Volume-record vândute pe bursa de electricitate

Încă de la începutul anului, cu puţin timp înainte ca Bulgaria să anunţe că sistează exporturile pentru a-şi acoperi necesarul intern, preţurile la bursa românească de electricitate (pe piaţa pentru ziua următoare) nu au mai coborât sub 200 de lei, decât cu una-două excepţii, valorile uzuale fiind de peste 210-220 lei/MWh. De altfel, volumele valorice tranzacţionate în această lună au înregistrat maxime istorice.

Comparativ, preţul mediu pe PZU în luna decembrie a fost de 130 lei/MWh, potrivit datelor de pe site-ul OPCOM. Un preţ de 60 de euro/MWh este totuşi redus în comparaţie cu preţurile practicate în regiune. Potrivit surselor din piaţă, energia în Balcani se vinde cu 90 euro/MWh sau chiar mai mult.

Reprezentanţii unuia dintre cei mai importanţi traderi de electricitate de pe piaţa locală, EFT România, au explicat evoluţia accentuată a preţurilor de pe PZU, în luna ianuarie. "Situaţia energetică dificilă din Bulgaria şi Grecia, din această perioadă, precum şi reducerea producţiei termoenergetice au condus în luna ianuarie 2008 la o creştere accentuată a preţurilor pe PZU", a declarat, pentru "Adevărul", Aurelia Mocanu, director al Departamentului de Trading Energie din cadrul companiei.

Potrivit acesteia, intrarea în funcţiune a reactorului 2 de la Cernavodă de 700 MW a condus la scăderea preţurilor pe piaţa românească de electricitate, mai ales în luna decembrie, şi la un plus de stabilitate în alimentarea cu energie electrică a zonei sud-est europene. În plus, energia ieftină de la reactorul 2 a făcut posibilă menţinerea preţurilor electricităţii la consumatorii captivi (în speţă casnici), prin înlocuirea altor cantităţi de energie, mult mai scumpe, produse de către termocentrale.

Bulgaria a oprit exporturile până în aprilie

Bulgaria a interzis exporturile de energie pentru a veni în întâmpinarea cererii interne. "Temperaturile scăzute au dus la creşterea cererii de energie cu 20% faţă de aceeaşi perioadă a anului trecut, iar exporturile trebuie să fie oprite", a declarat şeful companiei naţionale NEC, Lyubomir Velkov, citat de NewsIn. Restricţiile vor fi aplicate până la data de 31 martie.

Bulgaria a exportat aproximativ 300-400 MW, mai ales statelor vecine precum Grecia, Serbia şi Macedonia, înainte de aplicarea acestor restricţii, a adăugat responsabilul bulgar. Odată principalul exportator de energie din Balcani, Bulgaria a fost forţată să îşi reducă drastic exporturile în străinătate în cursul anului trecut, după închiderea a două reactoare de la Kozlodui, de 400 MW fiecare, drept condiţie a aderării la Uniunea Europeană. Anul trecut, Bulgaria a mai închis un reactor de 210 MW de la centrala sa din Bobov Dol, conform acordurilor de mediu semnate cu UE.

Business Standard
29 ianuarie 2008


Belgian energy giant Electrabel, part of the Suez group, has a budget of "billions of euros" to invest in the production of energy in Romania, according to a statement for Business Standard by the company's local representative, Sorin Patrascoiu.

Patrascoiu said that Electrabel Romania was established to develop electricity projects and energy trading. Electrabel is looking into nuclear, thermal, wind and hydroelectric energy. "We are only interested in large projects with hundreds of megawatts," Patrascoiu added.

Electrabel wants to deliver the first megawatt produced in a new power plant. The company plans to build an 800 megawatt electric coal power plant in Constanta, worth €1-1.2 billion.

The company is one of the candidates to build reactors 3 and 4 of the Cernavoda nuclear energy plant. The company also wants to build thermal power plants in partnership with Termoelectrica.

"We are investigating all possibilities to become an energy producer," Patrascoiu said. He added that Electrabel is in presently in direct competition with Gaz de France, which is present on the domestic market, and which is due to merge with Suez globally. "There is no business coordination between Gaz de France and Electrabel. We are independent until the two companies merge," Patrascoiu said.

Coca-Cola opens two electrical power plants in Romania :nuts::lol:
Business Standard
29 ianuarie 2008

Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company (CCHBC), the second-largest worldwide bottling company of Coca-Cola, has signed a contract with ContourGlobal, a US-based energy infrastructure company to build 15 electrical power plants, two of which in Romania, writes Thomson Financial.

Each unit will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent, said Coca-Cola representatives. Any surplus electricity will be delivered to the national network. The company did not want to discuss financial details.

ContourGlobal develops infrastructure projects in the USA, Brazil, Columbia, Ukraine, Togo and Nigeria.

CCHBC posted €435 million profit in the first nine months of 2007. In Romania, the company owns factories in Bucharest, Ploiesti, Iasi, Timisoara, Oradea and Vatra Dornei, although it has announced it will close its factory in Bucharest and transfer production to Ploiesti.

Greek company to invest 500 million euro in wind energy plant

The Greek company Marivent Ltd. will invest 500 million euro in a wind-energy park near the town of Pernik.

The park's energy capacity would be 800 MWh, Greek embassy to Finland said in a media statement.

Marivent announced that it had already signed a contract for the construction with local authorities.

The new plant will sell energy to the Bulgarian National Electric Company (NEC) for 20 years.

Marivent would complete the project in less than 30 months, the bulletin said. The company itself and EU funds would provide money for the project, according to investor.bg said. Marivent expected 4.5 billion euro in revenues over the next 20 years.

The project was considered one of the biggest in the sector in the EU.

Russia and Serbia have reached an agreement that will guarantee Gazprom an easy time in that country. It will buy into the state Naftna Industrija Srbije (NIS) cheaply and thus have an advantage in access to the Serbian portion of the coming South Stream Gas Pipeline, which Gazprom is implementing with Italian partner Eni. Gazprom has also received Austria's support, and half of one of Europe's largest gas markets with it. Now all Gazprom needs is Hungary.
An interstate agreement on cooperation in gas and oil was signed on Friday during the visit of Serbian President Boris Tadic and Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica to Russia. The agreement will be in force for 30 years, at which time it will be automatically renewed for five years unless one side breaks it off. Russian President Vladimir Putin reported that, in addition to that agreement, an agreement was signed on the purchase by Gazprom of 51 percent (4,158,040 shares) in NIS by the end of the year for €400 million.

Under the interstate agreement, a gas pipeline with a capacity of no less than 10 billion cu. m. per year will be built across Serbia and an underground gas reservoir will be built. They will become part of the South Stream system. NIS, which produces 1 million tons of oil and refines 7 million tons per year, will be modernized. Gazprom will invest €500 million in NIS by 2012. Gazprom will have control of 78 percent of the Serbian retail market for petroleum products after the deal is completed. Russian business as a whole will control over 90 percent of that market, since LUKOIL is already the second largest presence there. NIS was estimated to be worth €1.9 billion at the end of last year.

Also on Friday, Gazprom signed an agreement with the Austrian OMV for the transfer of 50 percent of the Central Europe Gas Hub, a subsidiary of OMV Gas International. U.S. officials are reported by Reuters to have expressed their dismay at the recent deals at a meeting between U.S. and Serbian officials in Belgrade, saying that the move increases Europe's dependence on Russia for gas. The U.S. expressed its preference for the Nabucco pipeline, which will run through Austria, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary and will be completed in 2011, that is, two years ahead of South Stream.

Gazprom has been unable to come to an agreement with the Hungarian MOL, which is eseential for the South Stream project. analysts say that Hungary will now be able to “name any price” for its cooperation.

Under the interstate agreement, a gas pipeline with a capacity of no less than 10 billion cu. m. per year will be built across Serbia and an underground gas reservoir will be built. They will become part of the South Stream system. NIS, which produces 1 million tons of oil and refines 7 million tons per year, will be modernized. Gazprom will invest €500 million in NIS by 2012. Gazprom will have control of 78 percent of the Serbian retail market for petroleum products after the deal is completed. Russian business as a whole will control over 90 percent of that market, since LUKOIL is already the second largest presence there. NIS was estimated to be worth €1.9 billion at the end of last year.

.

I do not envy the Serbian petroleum market with its 'over 90%' Russian control. Romania has already 5 petroleum distributors from 4 countries which allow only little competition. What then when a country is controlled up to 100% by state owned companies from another country? That's called 100% dependency.

Russian dependency is the best.

I do not envy the Serbian petroleum market with its 'over 90%' Russian control. Romania has already 5 petroleum distributors from 4 countries which allow only little competition. What then when a country is controlled up to 100% by state owned companies from another country? That's called 100% dependency.

What does it matter ? The gas comes anyway from russia.

He means it's better to have separate supplies/suppliers ...

let's see how it goes with the Hungarians now. Hungary is in general a pragmatic country, Malev is Russian-owned already, so I would expect them to come to an agreement. Though there will be a lot of pressure from Washington and Brussels put on Budapest no doubt.

Budapest has agreed to accommodate some gas deposits already (initially planned for/in Romania:)) ... so the answer will be ... YES :nuts:

What does it matter ? The gas comes anyway from russia.

Yes, but I was talking about the oil market, which the article says that Russia controls up to 90%. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter where the company comes from, but as long as the control is in the hands of very few companies, plus from the same country, the chances for a price cartel are extremely high.

^^This is quite a trend lately among the oil companies owning refineries...I mean to have their own power plant.


Autor: Ziarul Financiar
Data: 29-01-2008


Petrotel-Ploiesti refinery, controlled by Russian petroleum group Lukoil, intends to contract a 150 million-euro loan from its majority shareholder Lukoil Europe Holdings, registered in Holland, with the sum to be used as working capital. The proposition will be analysed by the company's Board of Directors on March 6, according to Mediafax press agency.

The company could, on the same day, change its financial auditors and opt for professional services provider KPMG. The group also announced it would make an additional investment into building a thermal power station on the platform of the Petrotel refinery, bringing total investments to over 100 million dollars (68 million euros), from the original sum of up to 85 million dollars (57.8 million euros).

According to company representatives, the increased investment is a result of fluctuations on the forex market, and the higher demand from China and India for technology and equipment for thermoelectric power stations, countries that are making huge investments in this field. The power station is scheduled to launch operations in 2009.

The refinery will use the energy produced, whilst any excess power will be distributed throughout the national grid.

He means it's better to have separate supplies/suppliers ...

Yeah, but I think we were already dependant on Russian gas, the only difference is that we won't have to pay Hungary for transit.

We will have to pay them than :) ... and still connect to south stream ... if ever needed ....

We will have to pay them than :) ... and still connect to south stream ... if ever needed ....

If Nabucco gets back on track, we'll never need to connect to another pipe. The national resources will still make up 50% of our national needs 30 years from now on. I also think electricity will become more and more of an alternative to gas-based energy, so...

Business Standard
31 ianuarie 2008


One of the top three players on the domestic LPG market, Butan Gas, intends to become a producer of electricity, following an initial investment of up to €15 million, according to a declaration in an interview for Business Standard by the company’s General Manager, Florin Preda.

“We are interested in eolian plants and have settled on two locations already. It is possible that we will initially opt for 10-12 MW, with an investment of €12-14 million,” said Preda. He added that it has not yet been decided whether the energy operator will be managed by Butan Gas or a new specialized company of the group. “This is a pilot project, and if it works out well, we will be able to continue with other investments. At present we are engaged in discussion to acquire or lease land with eolians,” said Preda.

Albania approves €1bn deals to modernize power plant, build hydroelectric stations

The Associated Press

TIRANA, Albania: Albania's government on Wednesday approved deals worth €1 billion (US$1.47 billion) to modernize a power station and build three new hydroelectric plants to help ease the country's chronic power-supply problems.

The Energy Ministry said the Greek-based consortium Atermon SA, Roder & Blackwell Consulting will invest €100 million (US$147 million) in a power station at Fier, 100 kilometers (62 miles) south of the capital, Tirana, increasing output from 159 megawatts to 200 megawatts, and enabling the station to comply with European Union emission standards.

Authorities also granted a concession to the Austrian power utility EVN AG to spend €900 million (US$1.32 billion) on building three hydroelectric plants in six years on the Devolli River, 200 kilometers (124 miles) southeast of Tirana, with a combined output of 319 megawatts.

Albania has faced frequent power cuts. Low rainfall has hurt hydroelectric production, and the country also faces problems caused by an outdated distribution system and uncollected consumer bills.

Austria EVN's Albania power deal worth 900 mln euro

TIRANA, Jan 30 (Reuters) - A tender won by Austrian utility EVN (EVNV.VI: Quote, Profile, Research) to build three hydroelectric power stations in Albania will require an investment of some 900 million euros ($1.3 billion), the country's Energy Ministry said on Wednesday.

"The commission declared the Austrian company EVN the winner of the tender to award a build-operate-transfer concession to exploit the whole potential of the Devoll river valley," a statement said.

EVN announced the deal last week but without mentioning the price. It said the power stations on the Devoll would have a capacity of 400 megawatts and generate around 1,000 gigawatt hours annually. (Reporting by Benet Koleka, editing by Anthony Barker)

^^ IMO It is bad to be a puppet of ONLY one of the major players .... nothing good comes out of such situation. :ohno: If Albania is wise they should use their geostrategical situation the best way they can.

^^
I still have doubts on this one ... US Army is building bases in Bulgaria/Romania to protect their interests ... not Russia's ... so if you play in-between "major players" there is a 100% chance you will upset at least one ... if not two as in this particular case. So the question is: who's best/worst :nuts: to upset?

Anyway, I agree that on short term Bulgaria has made a good move. But long term, this was a bad choice IMO ... time will tell :)


Never ... just makes me think that a real bond between EE countries is a utopia ... and Russia exploits our fucked up (by them with our own help) systems very easily in their own interest ... beside Romania's kind of isolated in EE/SE ... all neighbours bow to Moscow ... so we've got only one clear option ... USA :cheers:


Found thid article I agree with ...

Romania and a united European energy policy
Mircea Marian criticises the new Russian participation in energy companies in Serbia and Bulgaria, as well as the decision to build the South Stream gas pipeline. "The Nabucco Pipeline, conceived as a competitor to the South Stream project, could not only provide cheaper gas to Western Europe, but also be a possibility to avoid the kind of blackmail that Russia has practiced in recent years. ... It's hard to say if Nabucco ultimately would win over South Stream, or vice versa. But what is clear is that both the USA and the EU are clinging to Nabucco as an alternative to the Russian monopoly. ... And Romania should not try to dance at two weddings: on one hand, being part of NATO and the EU, and on the other hand tolerating Moscow's games in the illusory hope of getting a bargain on Russian gas. Countries like Romania, Poland or the Baltic states have learned from history: If you crack open the door for Russia, it's hard to throw them out again."
http://europe.courrierinternational.com/eurotopics/article.asp?langue=uk&publication=30/01/2008&cat=ECONOMY&pi=0

German Company RWE to Become 6th Shareholder in Nabucco Gas Pipeline – Minister
http://capital.trend.az/?show=news&newsid=1124104&catid=500&subcatid=382&lang=EN

Azerbaijan, Baku, 31 January / TrendCapital corr. A. Badalova / On 5 February, in Vienna, German company RWE will become the 6th shareholder in the project to construct the Nabucco gas pipeline, the Energy Intelligence Group quoted the Turkish Energy & Natural Resources Minister Hilmi Guler.
According to Guler, RWE joining the project will precipitate its implementation. The union was postponed due to administrative problems which occurred in the Representation of the Turkish Botas in Nabucco.
The pipeline which costs $6.6bln will transport the Caspian Sea’s gas to the EU countries via Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania. The shareholders of the project who each hold equal shares, are Turkish Botas, Austrian OMV, Hungarian MOL, Romanian Transgaz and Bulgarian Bulgargaz.


Implementation of Caspian Gas Pipeline Project to be Launched This Year
01.02.08 15:54

Kazakhstan, Astana, 1 February / Тrend corr. K. Konirova / Practical implementation of the Caspian Gas Pipeline project will be launched in 2008, the President of KazMunayGaz joint-stock company Uzakbay Karablin said to journalists in Astana.
“Practical implementation of the Caspian Gas Pipeline project will begin in the second half of this year,” Karablin said.
In December, 2007, three countries’ governments signed an agreement on cooperation in construction of the gas pipeline.

^^ Reuters - Austria confirms RWE is 6th partner for Nabucco. Turkey's Energy Minister Hilmi Guler told Reuters on Wednesday RWE would become the sixth partner and sign the deal on Feb 5.
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssEnergyNews/idUSL0176271820080201

EU persists with Nabucco
www.bbj.hu

The planned South Stream natural gas pipeline will not endanger realizing the EU’s rival Nabucco project, said Andris Piebalgs, EU energy commissioner in Brussels. Piebalgs stressed that the Nabucco endeavor is backed by a strong consortium (of Hungarian MOL, Austrian OMV, Romanian Transgaz, Turkish Botas, Bulgarian Bulgargaz, and shortly German RWE), which will be able to continue its work regardless of the South Stream. Pielbags reiterated Brussels’ commitment to the Nabucco investment, after South Stream gained new momentum, when Serbia agreed to join its construction last week.

seems like the EU is not giving up yet, but I somehow doubt Nabucco will go ahead now. Time will tell.

seems like the EU is not giving up yet, but I somehow doubt Nabucco will go ahead now. Time will tell.

^^ Go Nabucco! I wouldn't mind if we have another pipe crossing our territory and generating additional income :)

RWE Joins the Nabucco Partners

The Austrian minister of economy Martin Bartenstein confirmed today that German utility company RWE would become the sixth partner in the Nabucco gas pipeline project.

After a meeting with his German counterpart Michael Glosm, Bartenstein informed that "on Tuesday next week we will sign the contract - RWE Germany is getting on board".

The 5 bln EUR project, designed to pump gas from the Caspian via Turkey and the Balkans to Austria through 3,300 km of pipelines, is of crucial importance to the European Union's plans to reduce the dependency on Russian gas.

The consortium is equally owned by oil and gas companies in the transit countries -- Austria's OMV, Hungary's MOL MOLB.BU, Turkey's Botas, Bulgaria's Bulgargaz and Romania's Transgaz.

Bulgaria is undermining the Nabucco project by joining Russia’s South Stream, official says

NewsIn
Vineri, 01 Februarie 2008

Bulgaria and Serbia’s participation to Russia’s South Stream gas pipeline project is a move that will weaken the plans for constructing the Nabucco project, the head of European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Jacek Saryusz-Wolski told NewsIn.

Saryusz-Wolski, who proposed that EU’s High Representative for Energy Policy position be created, believes the two Russian projects, North Stream and South Stream, resemble “two claws” around Europe.

North Stream would connect Russia and Germany, through the Baltic Sea. South Stream should traverse the Black Sea, Bulgaria, Greece and Southern Italy. Nabucco would transport gas from the Caspian Sea region and the Middle East to Europe. The project's goal is to diversify the European Union's power supply sources to cut dependency to Russia.

Saryusz-Wolski noted in the race between South Stream and Nabucco, the winner will be the project for which construction works will start first, as this will make the other one useless.

The EP official voiced disappointment over Bulgaria’s move of joining the South Stream project, instead of rallying to EU’s energy policy. Saryusz-Wolski also criticized Russia for establishing the price of gas depending on its relations with the country importing it.


Bulgaria, Serbia and Italy joined the South Stream project.

The official said there is no external energy policy coordinated by EU at the moment and its members are currently buying gas from Russia or Gazprom. Yet, the legal basis for a common energy policy is part of the new EU treaty, which was not ratified.

Saryusz-Wolski emphasized the fact that many EU members are clinching deals with Russia regarding gas projects and such a policy comes against EU’s entire energy strategy.

The EP official explained EU’s Nabucco is still in the project phase yet if there is enough political will and investments, the project could begin.

Saryusz-Wolski said the Romanian MEPs are supportive of the Nabucco project, especially as all EU members could benefit from a common EU power strategy.

He explained that 50 percent of the shares in Baumgarten, the terminal where Nabucco would end, belong to Gazprom which is part of Russia’s policy of strengthening its position against Europe.

Saryusz-Wolski noted a country like Bulgaria, which imports needed oil and gas from Russia, mulls it has no other option than to join the South Stream project. Another explanation would be that Bulgaria believes it can negotiate in more profitable terms with Russia than with the other EU members.

Saryusz-Wolski concluded all the EU members must make steps towards a single energy policy, no matter how difficult it will be.


Source: NewsIn

^^Bulgaria is doing exactly what it should be doing! The more pipelines (or other 'bridging' infrastructure projects) transversing its territory the better. Indeed, the country is using its strategic location to become what is for all intents and purposes a "middle-man"... Bulgaria is currently positioning itself in such a way as to be able to extract maximal benefit from its diversified relationships with the EU, the USA and Russia. We play the unified European market for obvious reasons, while increasing military ties with the USA. At the same time we play the "energy" game with the Russians, simply because they are a leading global source of oil and gas... Like it or not, this makes us an increasingly important nation-state! The more diversified in our foreign policy and the more invested the global powers are in our territory, especially as viewed from a strategic perspective, the greater the impetus for said powers to respect/stimulate the country's economic/political/social stability in order to preserve their expensive investments. Contrary to popular and simplified views, Bulgaria's sovereignty is actually maximized by way of what I call multilateral leveraging. Further still, we are leveraging our limited territory, geographic location, human ressources and cultural ties in hedged fashion. Confused?

Think of Bulgaria as an NYSE specialist, without the NYSE of course... If you're still confused, ask New Bulgaria and he'll explain to you what I mean. The middle-man is usually the one who has maximal benefit from the multifaceted relationships that dominate our globalizing/trade oriented world. :cheers:

Yeah, but they are right - actually SS is more important to us than Nabucco. We prefer Russian pipes to those coming from Turkey. That's the reason the same pipe will be well accepted in Greece and Serbia too.

And the article is not right in another aspect - not the first pipe will be the "winner" but the one that provides the cheaper gas. And I highly doubt that Nabucco will provide cheaper gas than SS.

^^Bulgaria is doing exactly what it should be doing! The more pipelines (or other 'bridging' infrastructure projects) transversing its territory the better. Indeed, the country is using its strategic location to become what is for all intents and purposes a "middle-man"... Bulgaria is currently positioning itself in such a way as to be able to extract maximal benefit from its diversified relationships with the EU, the USA and Russia. We play the unified European market for obvious reasons, while increasing military ties with the USA. At the same time we play the "energy" game with the Russians, simply because they are a leading global source of oil and gas... Like it or not, this makes us an increasingly important nation-state! The more diversified in our foreign policy and the more invested the global powers are in our territory, especially as viewed from a strategic perspective, the greater the impetus for said powers to respect/stimulate the country's economic/political/social stability in order to preserve their expensive investments. Contrary to popular and simplified views, Bulgaria's sovereignty is actually maximized by way of what I call multilateral leveraging. Further still, we are leveraging our limited territory, geographic location, human ressources and cultural ties in hedged fashion.

I agree to all above. And I think Romania'd have done the same, had the Russians wanted to bring the pipe onto our soil as well.


Confused?

Nope, just posted an article I haven't written, but thought it was interesting.


Think of Bulgaria as an NYSE specialist, without the NYSE of course... If you're still confused, ask New Bulgaria and he'll explain to you what I mean. The middle-man is usually the one who has maximal benefit from the multifaceted relationships that dominate our globalizing/trade oriented world. :cheers:

I think you are right on this one too. I think Bulgaria has the opportunity to benefit from different interests, and thus diversify its resources (or put the eggs in different bags, as economists say). I am more worried for Serbia's energy policy for example, which has put all eggs in Russian bags.:cheers:

First outcome of Sarkozy's visit to Bucharest, today. :cheers:



Gaz de France to join Nabucco project
de V.O. HotNews.ro
Luni, 4 februarie 2008, 17:42 English | Regional Europe


French energy group Gaz de France is to be associated to the Nabucco energy project with the strong support of Romania, Romanian President Traian Basescu said following talks with French counterpart Nicolas Sarkozy in Bucharest on Monday.

The two heads of state held bilateral talks during the several-hour official visit paid by the French president to Romania today. Sarkozy's visit also included talks with Romanian PM Calin Popescu Tariceanu.

Canadian 'Bruce Power' Interested in NPP Kozloduy's Blocks 3 & 4

The Canadian company 'Bruce Power' has expressed interest in taking on concession NPP 'Kozloduy's blocks 3 and 4, informed BNR.

The information was confirmed by the executive director of the enterprise Ivan Genov.

The Canadians will arrive in Bulgaria on Wednesday for further talks.

According to Genov, the Canadian company wants to take on concession not only blocks 3 and 4 but also the working blocks 5 and 6.

Sarkozy's visit to BUcharest: Romania to build a second nuclear power plant with French technology

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sarkozy : rallier la Roumanie à ses priorités européennes

Le Figaro
Alain Barluet, envoyé spécial en Roumanie
05/02/2008 | Mise à jour : 06:56 | Commentaires 16 .

Le chef de l'État était lundi à Bucarest pour y nouer un «partenariat stratégique» avant la présidence française de l'UE, qui commence le 1er juillet prochain.

«L'Europe a besoin de la Roumanie» : en passant par la Lorraine, Nicolas Sarkozy a effectué une visite de quelques heures dans un pays sur lequel la France compte s'appuyer durant la présidence française de l'Union européenne, au second trimestre de l'année. L'objectif était de rallier la Roumanie (septième pays de l'UE en termes de population, avec 22 millions d'habitants) aux priorités françaises pour l'Union (énergie et climat, immigration, agriculture, sécurité).

Nicolas Sarkozy les a exposées aux parlementaires roumains réunis dans le mirobolant Palais du peuple, édifié naguère par le dictateur communiste Ceausescu. «Prenez toute votre place dans l'Union européenne, la France est une amie qui ne vous trahira jamais», a déclaré le chef de l'État, applaudi avec enthousiasme par les parlementaires.

Dans la foulée, ceux-ci ont entériné le traité de Lisbonne, tandis qu'au même moment, à Versailles, le Congrès votait la révision de la constitution préalable à la ratification du traité «simplifié». Un cadeau de bienvenue salué lundi par Nicolas Sarkozy comme «un symbole remarquable de la proximité entre la Roumanie et la France».


Achat d'une centrale nucléaire

En gage d'amitié, le chef de l'État a signé lundi avec son homologue, Traian Basescu, un «partenariat stratégique», premier du genre à être conclu avec un pays d'Europe centrale. Ce document cadre vise à intensifier les relations dans plusieurs domaines et doit être suivi d'une feuille de route, débouchant possiblement sur des contrats.

Ainsi, dans le nucléaire, le «choix de collaboration majeur» qui sera engagé avec Bucarest pourrait ainsi être suivi de l'achat d'une centrale, la deuxième du pays, la Roumanie ayant indiqué sa préférence pour la technologie européenne. Autre volet : l'immigration. Paris s'inquiète des dérives criminelles liées à l'arrivée des Roms. Oui, à la libre circulation des travailleurs roumains, a dit en substance Nicolas Sarkozy, mais il faut lutter plus efficacement contre le travail illégal et l'immigration clandestine.

Quelque peu froissée par la brièveté de la visite présidentielle, la Roumanie francophone et francophile a néanmoins déroulé le tapis rouge pour «le mari de Carla Bruni», comme titrait lundi un quotidien roumain. À défaut de l'ex-mannequin, on a pu apercevoir son père, Maurizio Remmert, invité surprise dans la délégation accompagnant le chef de l'État.

À Bucarest, celui-ci a fait vibrer une corde sensible en rappelant qu'il était «fils d'un Européen de l'Est», pour bien appuyer le fait qu'il misait, lui, sur une région que son prédécesseur, Jacques Chirac, avait donné l'impression de peu considérer. Sarkozy s'est déjà rendu en Pologne, en Hongrie, en République tchèque et en Bulgarie. En revanche, ni Angela Merkel ni Tony Blair, en son temps, n'ont daigné faire le voyage de Bucarest.

Ces relations recèlent aussi des points d'achoppement. L'indépendance du Kosovo, qualifié d'«inéluctable» par Nicolas Sarkozy, a une nouvelle fois été rejetée lundi par Traian Basescu. Par ailleurs, la «corruption à haut niveau», dénoncée par la Commission européenne dans son rapport d'étape sur la Roumanie publié lundi, constitue un sérieux handicap pour le développement des relations économiques.

:nuts:

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/1004/ffvz5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

TheMoneyChannel
Miercuri, 06 Februarie 2008

The government can ask Gaz de France for a collaboration concerning Romania’s part in the Nabucco project, said the country’s Foreign Affairs Minister Adrian Cioroianu; the official admitted tackling the subject during his visit in France, in mid January this year.

Cioroianu noted it is in Romania’s interest for Gaz de France, the owner of Europe's largest natural-gas network, to be involved in an ambitious and expensive project such as Nabucco. President Traian Basescu yesterday said Gaz de France will be involved in the Nabucco project.

His statement came after talking with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who yesterday visited Romania. The Nabucco project refers to the construction of a 3,300 kilometers long pipeline which will transport gas from the Middle East and Asia to EU countries.

The pipeline will traverse several southeastern European countries. Turkey, Bulgaria, Hungary, Austria and Romania associated towards the construction of the pipeline, in a move to cut dependency from Russia’s gas.

People close to the Romanian president told the daily Cotidianul it was Sarkozy who asked Basescu’s support for France’s involvement in the Nabucco project.

Prime Minister Calin Popescu Tariceanu told Cotidianul the involvement of Gaz de France in the mentioned project was negotiated by Romania and France’s heads of foreign affairs.

Romania’s Economy and Finance Minister Varujan Vosganian said the involvement of the owner of Europe's largest natural-gas network in the project will be debated in Vienna.

Austria’s capital will host the signing of the agreement through which RWE, Germany's second-largest utility, will take part in the Nabucco project.

Source: NewsIn

TheMoneyChannel
Marti, 05 Februarie 2008


Russia's Gazprom, the world's largest natural-gas producer, voiced interest in building new natural gas deposits in Romania; so far the giant met several local companies for consultations, according to data from Gazprom.

Gazprom deems Romania plays an important role in transiting the Russian gas to Balkan countries. The volume of the gas transit through Romania increased last year with almost 2 billion cubic meters against 2006, company officials mentioned.

“Construction of underground gas storage facilities on the territory of Romania is an important element of the Russian-Romanian cooperation in the gas sphere. It could allow to provide consumers with reliable gas supply during winter period and with more effective utilization of gas-transporting capacities,” company officials said.

Following discussions between the Romanian state-owned gas company Romgaz and Gazprom at the beginning of March last year, regarding the gas deposit which was supposed to be build in Neamt County, Romgaz proposed Gazprom to found a joint-venture to finance the feasibility study. Gazprom rejected the idea.

Costs for the feasibility study exceed 2 million U.S. dollars and will be covered by Romgaz, development manager Gheorghe Radu said in November last year. The study is slated to end in mid 2008 after which discussions regarding the collaboration with Gazprom will be resumed.


Source: NewsIn

^^Bulgaria is doing exactly what it should be doing! The more pipelines (or other 'bridging' infrastructure projects) transversing its territory the better. Indeed, the country is using its strategic location to become what is for all intents and purposes a "middle-man"... Bulgaria is currently positioning itself in such a way as to be able to extract maximal benefit from its diversified relationships with the EU, the USA and Russia. We play the unified European market for obvious reasons, while increasing military ties with the USA. At the same time we play the "energy" game with the Russians, simply because they are a leading global source of oil and gas... Like it or not, this makes us an increasingly important nation-state! The more diversified in our foreign policy and the more invested the global powers are in our territory, especially as viewed from a strategic perspective, the greater the impetus for said powers to respect/stimulate the country's economic/political/social stability in order to preserve their expensive investments. Contrary to popular and simplified views, Bulgaria's sovereignty is actually maximized by way of what I call multilateral leveraging. Further still, we are leveraging our limited territory, geographic location, human ressources and cultural ties in hedged fashion. Confused?

Think of Bulgaria as an NYSE specialist, without the NYSE of course... If you're still confused, ask New Bulgaria and he'll explain to you what I mean. The middle-man is usually the one who has maximal benefit from the multifaceted relationships that dominate our globalizing/trade oriented world. :cheers:

^^ Very well said! :okay:

Just to add that Bulgaria doesn't have any natural energy resources (we don't have Ploesti like Romania) so the only thing we can get benefits from is our geostrategical position ;)

another delay for Nabucco :ohno:

Nabucco Delays Gas Pipeline Completion by One Year (Update1)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aNc7Lxf3DJJM

By Jonathan Tirone and Thom Rose

Feb. 5 (Bloomberg) -- Nabucco, a pipeline venture to ship natural gas from the Caspian region to Europe, delayed the start of exports by a year as it organizes financing and materials for the 5 billion euro ($7.3 billion) project.

The pipeline won't start operating until 2013, rather than 2012, Nabucco said today in a press release distributed in Vienna. The delay was confirmed by Nabucco spokesman Christian Dolezal. It's the second time the project, which had originally been expected to start in 2011, has been postponed.

The delay will prolong Europe's reliance on Russian natural gas. In a bid to secure financing and customers to buy the gas, Nabucco's partners today added RWE AG, Germany's second-largest utility, as a sixth partner.

``This will significantly strengthen the project,'' OMV AG Chief Executive Officer Wolfgang Ruttenstorfer said. ``Shareholders stay open to a seventh partner, subject to unanimous agreement of the consortium.''

Essen-based RWE already manages more than 100,000 kilometers (62,000 miles) of gas pipelines and has more than 10 million gas customers in Germany, the Czech Republic, the U.K., Hungary and the Netherlands. Other companies involved in Nabucco are Turkish state pipeline company Botas, Bulgaria's Bulgargaz AD, Romania's Transgas and Hungarian oil company Mol Nyrt.

Central Asia

The group may choose Azerbaijan's state oil company Socar as an additional partner to secure gas supplies from Central Asia, Austrian Economy Minister Martin Bartenstein said in November.

Gaz de France SA, owner of Europe's largest natural-gas network, will join the Nabucco pipeline project, Romanian President Traian Basescu said yesterday, according to an adviser to French President Nicolas Sarkozy who was traveling with him.

The Nabucco pipeline would rival a gas link planned by Russia's OAO Gazprom, which wants to ship more of the fuel to western Europe. The company aims to build routes under the Black Sea and Baltic Sea to reach customers in Europe, where gas demand is expected to double by 2030.

Bartenstein said he would have preferred Nabucco to stick with its original 2012 operating deadline.

``I think we should stick to the year 2012 when we see the first gas being pumped,'' Bartenstein said. ``We know that Nabucco is one of the top four energy projects picked by the EU energy commission.''

The 27-member EU, which relies on Russia for a quarter of its gas supplies, supports the construction of new pipelines to bring fuel from the Caspian and Central Asia.

Will concentrate on nuclear in the meanwhile :nuts: And so, by 2013, will be even less dependent on Russia's gas ...

just read in Russian media, that this latest delay means that Nabucco is increasingly unlikely to ever be built. After last year it became clear that Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan will be filling the Russian pipeline network with their gas, the EU approached Iran as a source of gas. However the poor political relations between Iran and the major EU countries hinder that. Moreover, Russia is lobbying for Iran to construct another pipeline through Pakistan to India so Nabucco will be left dry again :D

Poland plans wind power plants at sea


WARSAW - Poland plans to build 300 wind-driven power plants on the Baltic Sea in a project described as the most spectacular of its kind, Polish Radio said Monday.

Blazej Toranski, a spokesman for BOT Gornictwo and Energetyka, said building a wind-powered plant at sea is more expensive but at the same time such plants are very efficient.

Toranski said a power plant at sea produces three times more electricity than a land-based, wind-powered plant because sea winds are stronger.

The Polish Maritime Economy Ministry has voiced its support for the idea, but Baltic Sea sailors and fishermen wondered how the electromagnetic field would affect the sea’s natural habitat.

just read in Russian media, that this latest delay means that Nabucco is increasingly unlikely to ever be built. After last year it became clear that Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan will be filling the Russian pipeline network with their gas, the EU approached Iran as a source of gas. However the poor political relations between Iran and the major EU countries hinder that. Moreover, Russia is lobbying for Iran to construct another pipeline through Pakistan to India so Nabucco will be left dry again :D

I would not laugh about it :ohno: ... as this situation may lead to EU/USA attack on Iran sooner than everyone expects. I do not really like this idea, but if you really think that whole civilised world will give in to Russian dementia (energy monopoly/ blackmail ) artificially fuelled by/with Arab hyper-pride and anti-West feelings, you are wrong !!

if the US want to get even more bogged down in Iran then they are now in Iraq and Afghanistan, let them play. But sure, the West will not give in that easy. So far Russia is ahead though.

If by "civilized world" you mean the West :D

I would not laugh about it :ohno: ... as this situation may lead to EU/USA attack on Iran sooner than everyone expects. I do not really like this idea, but if you really think that whole civilised world will give in to Russian dementia (energy monopoly/ blackmail ) artificially fuelled by/with Arab hyper-pride and anti-West feelings, you are wrong !!

EU and Russia have already started a protracted war on energy resources (it's more like a race similar to US-USSR arms race, than a war per se). Russia has its obvious advantages which gives her an easy step ahead. Europe's probable future energy containment by Russia will lead to, as it has always happened in wars, to innovation and revolutionary changes in people's habits. Specifically, I think Europe may be forced into using on a large scale (similarly to France's maybe) alternative sources of energy like nuclear, wind or solar, in order to minimize its dependency on Russia.

Not a bad outcome if you ask me. :cheers:

Here are some socially responsible companies :nuts:

Business Standard
07 februarie 2008


Romgaz and Petrom, the two largest natural gas producers, will allocate some RON 200 million (€57 mln) to the social gas fund.

Minister of Economy and Finance, Varujan Vosganian, explained that the social gas fund is for persons with low income to help them make their natural gas payments.

“Petrom will give €30 million and the rest will come from Romgaz,” said Vosganian. He added that the total amount for the coming years remains unknown. Petrom and Romgaz representatives declined to comment on this statement.

According to Ministry of Economy and Finance officials, the social gas fund will become operational in February-March, once the state institution signs an agreement with Petrom and Romgaz.

The government decided recently to increase funds to help persons with low incomes pay their gas bills. Gas prices rose 8.5 percent since 1 February due to a rise in price of imported natural gas.

Petrom and Romgaz are the largest gas producers in Romania. Both companies have an annual production of some 6 billion cubic meters each, which covers some two thirds of national consumption. The remainder comes from Gazprom Russia

Ridiculous socialist decision from a "liberal" party.

Ridiculous socialist decision from a "liberal" party.

Most likely the 'fund' is actually a loan to those low-paid citizens, complete with interest rates. Subtle, but a typical liberal tactic.

Russia is right now subsidising the price of gas for domestic consumers. It is raising prices gradually, but it will still be a while (5-10 years) before the prices reach world market levels.

I would not laugh about it :ohno: ... as this situation may lead to EU/USA attack on Iran sooner than everyone expects. I do not really like this idea, but if you really think that whole civilised world will give in to Russian dementia (energy monopoly/ blackmail ) artificially fuelled by/with Arab hyper-pride and anti-West feelings, you are wrong !!

This is a list of the countries by proven reserves of natural gas. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_natural_gas_production)According to it Russia has nearly 1/3 of the world`s reserves and ofcourse is on 1st place whereas Iran is 2nd and its reserves are 50% of the Russian ones(at rough estimates).However the production of Russia is 7-8 times bigger than the Iranian which means that Iran has a great potential which currently can`t be used due to the political isolation of the country and the lack of investments in the energy sector.Just for comparison, the Canadian reserves are 30 times lower than the Russian but Canada produces only 3-4 times less gas than Russia.This data easily leads to the conclusion that Iran would be able to cover all needs of the EU in the next 2-3 decades if the country had the necessary infrastructure to develop its large fields.However this would make Iran one of the richest countries in the not so distant future and considering the constantly growing population, the Islamic culture and their unhidden desire to have nuclear weapon, this scenario is too unacceptable for USA.So, the EU, supported by USA, will become dependant either on Russia, either on Iran unless there is another "peacekeeping operation" like in Iraq.In this case everyone will be happy except of Russia and Iran ofcourse:)The EU will solve all its problems connected with the import of natural gas, Iran will be prevented from producing a nuclear bomb and the the Russian influence will be decreased.

unless of course that "peacekeeping operation" results in a civil war, a failed state and total collapse of gas production in Iran. In that case everyone will be sad except for Russia :D

if the US want to get even more bogged down in Iran then they are now in Iraq and Afghanistan, let them play. But sure, the West will not give in that easy. So far Russia is ahead though.

If by "civilized world" you mean the West :D

By "cutting" off “civilised world’s” alternative energy suppliers (other than Russia’s) what would you expect, a birthday cake?! War - as last resource of course - would be not only legitimate but ultimately, THE only choice. Real alternative energy sources (hydro, Aeolian, nuclear) are 20-25 years away

Anyway, Nabucco (or other similar) will go ahead 100% (war in unlikely and more expensive) and so I am not too worried :) …

I still don't get what "civilised world" is. Russia is lobbying Iran on behalf of India so it gets gas instead of the EU. Do you mean India is less civilised than the EU?

@Yury

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c48769fe-d4fc-11dc-9af1-0000779fd2ac.html

What about Khodorkovsky and YUKOS I forgot about him but It was in today's FT.
Wat's going to happen is the sentece given or is it still in trial?

Khodorkovsky has been long sentenced and is in prison colony near Chinese border. There is a trial of one of his associates ongoing. Yukos as a company also seized to exist a few years ago.

I still don't get what "civilised world" is. Russia is lobbying Iran on behalf of India so it gets gas instead of the EU. Do you mean India is less civilised than the EU?

^^ Allow me to "translate" please: Russia is lobbying to cut off any other potential suppliers to EU and keep its current monopoly - than use it as a political tool (blackmail) to regain its lost influence throughout EEurope (and not only) - and it seems it’s advancing rapidly (just took a small blow in Serbia :nuts:). I do not deny Russia’s "right" to play such card, but I would find difficult to believe that EU/USA will just watch and swallow it. So we’ve got two outcomes deriving from this dispute: Nabucco or war on Iran (region). So when war on Iran will start, I hope Russia will take its share of blame … so would be fair

Anyway, I thought that Russia would be smarter and allow some alternative (EU/Russia joint-venture even) just to make Europeans feel “safer” and under no monopoly threat… and so diminish potential food for war-thoughts that could easily be exploited by any future Bush-Blair-like couple … time will tell …

Do you mean India is less civilised than the EU?
Sorry to interrupt, but... are you kidding me?:crazy: You actually consider India to be just as civilized as EU countries?!:ohno:

lol, EU wants be less dependent on Russia, Russia wants it to be more dependent. That's energy politics. But I don't see Russia considering to attack alternative suppliers of the EU to strengthen its position. Instead it is using diplomatic means.

So if some "civilised" Western leader can not play fairly and has to attack Iran to beat Russia, then don't blame Russia for that. That's some twisted logic you have there :nuts:

Sorry to interrupt, but... are you kidding me?:crazy: You actually consider India to be just as civilized as EU countries?!:ohno:

civilised in terms of what? They surely deserve access to energy just as much as the EU does

I'm not talking about access to energy here. I'm talking about considering India as civilized as EU. Civilized means civilized... c'mon, I'm not gonna go into a thousand details now... it's very simple... you look at India, you don't say it's civilized like Germany or France or Austria. It's a developing country, that's another thing... it's on it's way to becoming developed and civilized. I'm not talking about civilized as in lack of anarchy and presence of a civilization identity.

Nuff said.

So we’ve got two outcomes deriving from this dispute: Nabucco or war on Iran (region). So when war on Iran will start, I hope Russia will take its share of blame … so would be fair

Who will start a war with Iran, Obama or Hillary? :hilarious. Seriously, if they do it, Russia will monopolize world energy and it will become richer...The maximum that the Americans can do is some ''surgical'' bombings which will strengthen anti-americanism even more. Now as for the USA/EU alliance against Iran (militarily) or Russia (economically), it's just a dream.

lol, EU wants be less dependent on Russia, Russia wants it to be more dependent. That's energy politics. But I don't see Russia considering to attack alternative suppliers of the EU to strengthen its position. Instead it is using diplomatic means.

So if some "civilised" Western leader can not play fairly and has to attack Iran to beat Russia, then don't blame Russia for that. That's some twisted logic you have there :nuts:

Yury, I am over 18, you know?! :nuts: ... Russians are the only ones that think Russia uses diplomatic means :lol: ... BTW in civilised world, blackmail is not a diplomatic mean: nuts: (you might not know it so I feel obliged to mention it)
You expect Europe to get down on its knees just because Russia wants to?! Europe wants to do business with Moscow - 50/50 - but is not good enough for Russia. It wants to have overall control; but Europe/USA would not allow this, simply because an undemocratic society (be it socialism versus liberalism) can not defeat a democratic one. You lost the war against West once, you will lose it again. And if a war is needed (I doubt it - BTW it needs to sides to start one :nuts: – so do not play the innocent) a war will be … time will tell :)

I'm not talking about access to energy here. I'm talking about considering India as civilized as EU. Civilized means civilized... c'mon, I'm not gonna go into a thousand details now... it's very simple... you look at India, you don't say it's civilized like Germany or France or Austria. It's a developing country, that's another thing... it's on it's way to becoming developed and civilized. I'm not talking about civilized as in lack of anarchy and presence of a civilization identity.

Nuff said.

Friend of mine just come back from India and sent me this ... he mentioned this is a main street ...

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/5648/131md4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

the West never blackmails anyone, sure :D So far Russia has been using much more diplomatic means, that's quite obvious. It is not talking about bombing anyone if the pipelines go the wrong way, unlike you.

As for the picture, I remember someone posted some pics from Romania which were not that much different. So what? If you use economic development as a measure of "civilisation" then somebody in Western Europe could just as well say that Romania is not civilised either.

You might be in the EU now, but don't get too cocky nebunul. Overconfidence can be painful ;)

As for the picture, I remember someone posted some pics from Romania which were not that much different. So what? If you use economic development as a measure of "civilisation" then somebody in Western Europe could just as well say that Romania is not civilised either.
Man, you know what "civilized" means in this context, but I get it... you just want you arguments to add up. I have no problem with that; you should.:ohno:

Regarding Romania and it's civilization degree... I can assure you it's not as civilized as I'd like it to be. I face it's lack of civilization head-on even in Bucharest. Fortunately we are not as uncivilized as the Indians. You should know I'm not the one to defend my country just because it is my country. When I see shit, I admit it and even talk about it, I don't try to hide it.

On the other hand... would you consider Russia to be civilized enough? You don't even have to answer me... just be honest with yourself. Remember we're all (still) in the same shit. Some of us have their head above the shit, some of us have only their noses above it while others are completely submerged in it... at the end of the day we are all in the same shit though. Having a too good opinion about our countries is not gonna help them in any way.

the West never blackmails anyone, sure :D So far Russia has been using much more diplomatic means, that's quite obvious. It is not talking about bombing anyone if the pipelines go the wrong way, unlike you.


Again, just for your "diamat" backgound, turning off supplies is not really diplomatic is it?! It all started form that point, remember?!


As for the picture, I remember someone posted some pics from Romania which were not that much different. So what? If you use economic development as a measure of "civilisation" then somebody in Western Europe could just as well say that Romania is not civilised either.

You might be in the EU now, but don't get too cocky nebunul. Overconfidence can be painful ;)

Yury, I think I told you to fuck off once and I would not like to do it again as I am a "cocky" EU citizen now :) ... BTW being considered by western world more civilised than Russia is good enough for me ...

@Cosmin: I know we are in the same shit. Ukraine being even worse off than either Romania or Russia. I am against the use of the term "civilized" at all
but it was nebunul who asserted that Russia is somehow trying to cut civilized world from the alternative sources of energy, so Iran will have to be bombed because of that :nuts:

Again, just for your "diamat" backgound, turning off supplies is not really diplomatic is it?! It all started form that point, remember?!

this argument never ends. If you deny Russia a right to review the prices of the gas it supplies to its customers and to cut those supplies when the customer refuses to pay, then there is nothing I can say.

Yury, I think I told you to fuck off once and I would not like to do it again as I am a "cocky" EU citizen now :) ... BTW being considered by western world more civilised than Russia is good enough for me ...

all right, be proud ;)

I don't recall you ever telling me to fuck off, but if you did, that is surely a measure of your "civilization". What am I compared to that? :lol:

this argument never ends. If you deny Russia a right to review the prices of the gas it supplies to its customers and to cut those supplies when the customer refuses to pay, then there is nothing I can say.


I do not, do not get me wrong. But I'd deny Russia's right to interfere in Europe's efforts to acquire new suppliers – it’s just against free market economy rules that Russia - proudly and loudly - seem to be shouting out as being part of …

Going back to decent polemics, why would Europe spend billions to get Nabucco built if Russia is such a reliable and democratic supplier? That is my point !

Rusia’s “smart” move – turning off supplies - was a big mistake from Moscow’s side and it was the trigger that started all these anti-Russia/Russia-free energy policy (that EU will pursue with whatever the cost) and the need of natural resources diversification …

in a free market every supplier would always seek to block or take over its competitors so that the customers will have no other choice but to buy from this sole supplier. Unless some anti-monopoly commision interferes that obviously does not exist in the global energy marketplace.

So yes, Russia will try to strengthen EU's dependency on it, it will also seek to diversify its consumer base by sending more energy to the East. EU has a full right to oppose this, but without resorting to mafia tactics - bombing, "peacekeeping missions" etc. I think that's quite clear.

As for Russia turning off gas supplies. Maybe it was not a smart move, maybe it was a trigger for the EU's policy of energy diversification. But then it was also a trigger to Russia being viewed as an "energy superpower" and an important player in the world affairs. There are always positive and negative sides of every event.

As long as Russia exports gas, not revolutionaries and KGB agents (like years ago :) ), I don't think that it's a problem :D

in a free market every supplier would always seek to block or take over its competitors so that the customers will have no other choice but to buy from this sole supplier. Unless some anti-monopoly commision interferes that obviously does not exist in the global energy marketplace.



In "civilised" :nuts: world every country has one ... Russia can not have one as everything is Ex-KGB/GaZprom/State monopoly. That's why may be hard for you to understand real free market and economy ...

I was talking about the global energy marketplace, not Russia. So you can cut on your standard set of Russia-related stereotypes, unless that is the only thing you know about this country :)

BTW I don't see how Microsoft's monopoly over desktop OS'es or Chinese monopoly over junk toys (for example) can be any better than Russian monopoly over gas..

We used to say that we should declare war on the US the they will put us in a marshal plan. Basicly the US is atacking countrys for oil but at least it has a moral advantage. Opressing women and people of diffrent beliefs is not normal , fredom of speach and thought are natural rights all people should be born with them.
Probably russians and asian are people that have never benn used with freedom of thought so for them human wrights are not such a big issue. On the other hand you don't see the US and the EU intervening in aftican conflicts.
It is an oil war but with an excuse of morality. When Russia cuts gas it has no moral support it never has excuses for what it does.
So before becoming a major palyer Russia should at least find the moral reason for it's actions because in the end we are humans and we should be moral in our actions.

BTW I don't see how Microsoft's monopoly over desktop OS'es or Chinese monopoly over junk toys (for example) can be any better than Russian monopoly over gas..
Hehe Good point. Especially M$ is a pain in the ass. Linus Torvalds can save us of course...

Russia can not have one as everything is Ex-KGB/GaZprom/State monopoly.
They also do good-americanized-movies lately (Dnevnoy dozor and Nochnoy dozor).

Only in "civilised" world :nuts::lol: ... http://itvibe.com/news/2417/

in a free market every supplier would always seek to block or take over its competitors so that the customers will have no other choice but to buy from this sole supplier. Unless some anti-monopoly commision interferes that obviously does not exist in the global energy marketplace.

So yes, Russia will try to strengthen EU's dependency on it, it will also seek to diversify its consumer base by sending more energy to the East. EU has a full right to oppose this, but without resorting to mafia tactics - bombing, "peacekeeping missions" etc. I think that's quite clear.

As for Russia turning off gas supplies. Maybe it was not a smart move, maybe it was a trigger for the EU's policy of energy diversification. But then it was also a trigger to Russia being viewed as an "energy superpower" and an important player in the world affairs. There are always positive and negative sides of every event.



Shit, this discussion is so interesting (and it's not about energy but about politics, OK politics of energy, but it's more politics than energy). :)

Yury, BTW, Russia is trying now to create a unipolar energy world like USA found itself in a unipolar world at the end of comunism. Funny thing is that the unipolar world of the 90s ended, but the unipolar energy world is just emerging. And another funny thing is that Russia was criticizing the unipolar world of the begining of the 90s as one of the biggest catastrophes of the 20th century, while Russia is creating now a unipolar energy world. Funny how life is, indeed.:cheers:

hehe, nebunul ran out of arguments so he keeps repeating "civilized world" as if it was a magic spell :lol:

Basicly the US is atacking countrys for oil but at least it has a moral advantage. Opressing women and people of diffrent beliefs is not normal , fredom of speach and thought are natural rights all people should be born with them.
Probably russians and asian are people that have never benn used with freedom of thought so for them human wrights are not such a big issue. On the other hand you don't see the US and the EU intervening in aftican conflicts.

Are you serious? I have no idea about the status of human rights in Russia but the problem is that many of the countries who criticize them have a long history of denying basic human rights to-or even destroying- other nations. Several days ago the public TV had a documentary about Russia nowadays and they finalized it with the phrase "when someone criticizes Russia as undemocratic must also think that 80% of the Russians support their government, otherwise the criticizers can be considered from the Russian citizens as supporters of their misery (Yeltsin era)".
After all a multipolar world can be positive for everyone...

Are you serious? I have no idea about the status of human rights in Russia but the problem is that many of the countries who criticize them have a long history of denying basic human rights to-or even destroying- other nations. Several days ago the public TV had a documentary about Russia nowadays and they finalized it with the phrase "when someone criticizes Russia as undemocratic must also think that 80% of the Russians support their government, otherwise the criticizers can be considered from the Russian citizens as supporters of their misery (Yeltsin era)".
After all a multipolar world can be positive for everyone...


Human wrights in russia Ha you make me laugh. Is the press free there? Of course it is not africa but still. Plus I was refering of mentalities, people there are not used to be free they want a leader a saveyour to lead them. But as history history taught us power should be in the hands of many. One person can go crazy. All backward countryes have one leader one shining star. First of all it is not normal for 80% of the population to want the same thing. Ask any sociologist and I am sure he will confirm this.
Last post on this topic. Let's get back to energy


But we are not talking about energy any more.

^^
Of course not! :D


old news

Putin's party United Russia wins over 99% of vote in Chechnya

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=668_1196711776&c=1


:lol:That's life

^^ :ohno:


Last post on this topic. Let's get back to energy


But we are not talking about energy any more.

hehe, nebunul ran out of arguments so he keeps repeating "civilized world" as if it was a magic spell :lol:

I just gave you one. Can't stand it?! :nuts:

"Microsoft were found to have violated the European Union treaty's competition rules by abusing it's near monopoly (95% of the worlds PC's) in the PC operating system sector. A record breaking fine of nearly five hundred million euros was imposed on Microsoft, and they also have to make the following changes to remedy the situation!

^^ No point to mention Russia's 100% monopoly :dj:...

Russia's 100% monopoly on what? :nuts:

And I repeat again: unless some anti-monopoly commision interferes that obviously does not exist in the global energy marketplace. Which word here you don't understand? I am not talking about the Russiam domestic market. It has nothing to do with you. I say there is no such regulatory body on the global scale. Got it now, fruitcake? :poke:

Russia's 100% monopoly on what? :nuts:

And I repeat again: unless some anti-monopoly commision interferes that obviously does not exist in the global energy marketplace. Which word here you don't understand? I am not talking about the Russiam domestic market. It has nothing to do with you. I say there is no such regulatory body on the global scale. Got it now, fruitcake? :poke:

:nuts: Cheers!

what a fruitful discussion we have here :lol:

^^ :cheers: Somehow I can not hate you ... Russians ... but I've got a problem with your system/leaders :nuts:

happy to hear that :D

:D

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/7739/zzzhb3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

^^ yep, at least it has better prospects than Nabucco :yes:

Oh my, all these warmongering Romanians talking on behalf of EU, blackmailing with wars and stuff ... amusing thread :okay: :D

So before becoming a major palyer Russia should at least find the moral reason for it's actions because in the end we are humans and we should be moral in our actions.
Ukraine did not pay for gas, thats called stealing. Stealing is immoral action so we had every moral reason to punish them.

FYI Nebunul,

Russia has a very powerful anti-monopoly agency which actively interferes on all levels of our economy ;) Like most other countries, we have some natural monopolies which get special treatment,but the federal anti-monopoly service regularly dictates terms and interferes even with the largest of these monsters e.g. Gazprom. Some of these big monopolies that Im talking about are being successfully reformed and the markets - liberalized. The best example (surprisingly for you :)) is in our energy sector. RAO UES, which is an electricity generation and trading holding that has roots from the Soviet Union is being very successfully reorganized and sold off in pieces to various investors. This is bringing in billions of investments and effectively liberalizing the industry.

You see, stereotypes aside, Russia is just a normal country ;)

Russia is not quite a normal country, but we here kinda love it anyway :)

I guess some people are nostalgic about things like that:

qLcc19mt4eA

People are always nostalgic for the times when they were young ;)

Surprised?

Ayee...I was so young back then that I don't remember much about it :)

@bgrs: most things that are shown in the video can still be found in Russia, even the anthem melody stayed the same, only words changed. Moreover, this year for the first time since the collapse of the USSR, there will be tanks, missiles and other vehicles rolling down the Red Square on May 9th. Should be an amazing and nostalgic sight indeed. I was too young to remember the last such Victory parade so I am very much looking forward to that :cheers:

When I was a kid, I used to love watching the victory parade on TV :D

Errr....I'm very far away from being a militarist, so Russian military equipment usually gives me creeps..

I don't like the political situation in Russia too, I don't like all those authoritarian bullshit around Putin, all that extreme nationalism that IMO is disgusting (I can't even imagine why nowadays there are more nazi skinheads in Russia than in the rest of the world...you guys fought against Hitler, don't you remember?)

I don't like that anti-jewish bullshit coming from Russia, really, it sounds irrational (I'm not a jew). Didn't you have a jewish autonomous province?

But nevertheless I like Russia. Russians are slavs and use cyrillic. And they are cool guys too. I like Russia as a nation and people's mentality. But I hate your politicians. Especially Putin, he is an authoritarian militarist and is no better than that monkey G. Bush. Sorry to tell you that.

Russia is not quite a normal country, but we here kinda love it anyway :)

I guess some people are nostalgic about things like that:



^^ About this .... Naaa i don't think so :ohno:

But about this :

Erd8IlOY8pc

^^ What can i say. This is one of my all time favourite movies.
Mikhalkov kicks arse !!! :applause: :bow:

all that extreme nationalism that IMO is disgusting (I can't even imagine why nowadays there are more nazi skinheads in Russia than in the rest of the world...you guys fought against Hitler, don't you remember?)
So you heard/read this somewhere and now its a fact? Evidence plz, or at least a credible link, otherwise - BS :yes:


I don't like that anti-jewish bullshit coming from Russia, really, it sounds irrational (I'm not a jew). Didn't you have a jewish autonomous province?
We still do ;) I have not noticed any anti-semitism in Russia, really


But nevertheless I like Russia. Russians are slavs and use cyrillic. And they are cool guys too. I like Russia as a nation and people's mentality. But I hate your politicians. Especially Putin, he is an authoritarian militarist and is no better than that monkey G. Bush. Sorry to tell you that.
Likewise, I am quite a fan of Bulgaria. You language is very similar to Russian, nice climate, great people. Politicians come and go (even the all mighty Putin :D), so dont worry too much about him :)

So you heard/read this somewhere and now its a fact? Evidence plz, or at least a credible link, otherwise - BS

google search: nazi skinheads Russia

google search: nazi skinheads Russia
That doesnt prove anything and you know it, I guess I will accept the withdrawal of your statement

Btw bgrs, I am not in denial - I know we have some skinhead and some are very dangerous. That is why I want to see them locked up soon and I am sure society will supports this. However, you quoted some sort of pathetic tabloid "estimate" which does not reflect reality, lets not create myths

@bgrs:

Racism and skinheads is indeed a problem of the modern Russian society, however I would not relate it to the state-sponsored nationalism/patriotism (depending on how you look at it). Putin always stresses the inclusion of all Russian ethnic groups (some 150 of them) in the United Russia project :D I do agree that more must be done by the authorities to tackle the skinhead problem.

On the other hand, antisemitism is not so much of an issue these days. Most ethnically-related violence is directed against immigrants from other Soviet republics, especially in Central Asia and the Caucasus, but not the jews.


@Turnovec:

Сибирский цирюльник? Yep, it was a good one :yes:

OK, you can have it, but that won't change the fact that this is among the things Russia is well-known about here. It depends on the viewpoint though, some people here really admire you for that.

BTW, you really have some hardcore fans here, like those that made that video:

http://vbox7.com/play:36d69464

Russia does have image problems. It is obvious and Russia needs to work on that.

But I would also expect more and more people in EE to get more interested in and positive towards Russia. On the one hand, it would be due to the EUphoria of the new members receding as they realize that the euro-atlantic structures are also not paradise on Earth. On the other, Russia's growing economic and political importance in the region will contribute to that as well. And then of course Bulgaria would be in the lead of this process, since historically there have been very few nations having as much goodwill towards Russia as Bulgarians do :cheers:

Moreover, this year for the first time since the collapse of the USSR, there will be tanks, missiles and other vehicles rolling down the Red Square on May 9th.
Oh yeah. On the news they said that there will be more than 150 different fighting vehicles, including tanks and Topol-M nuclear intercontinential ballistic missiles + squadrons of figher jets flying over Red Square.:drool:
I cannot wait till the first proper 9th may parade in modern Russia.
It was so cool before:

http://de.fishki.net/picsw/012008/16/parad/tn.jpg

:drool:

Hm... I don't think that EU has anything to do with our attitude towards Russia. It's about reforming many systems from the old (ex-Warsaw-pact) period into a more adequate ones.

NATO is a different thing...but yes, if you ask me, as a Bulgarian, I'm glad we chose that path...Russian sattelites generally suck badly.

Anyway, I don't think Russia and EU should be antagonists anyway, I think that they both could cooperate very successfully...anyway, that's the last thing USA would like to see :)

Some day everything will be OK just like in the old times :lol: ...you know, we like it the eurocentrist way :)

@Gamma:

3 more months to wait. They will show off the new military uniform too. It is being introduced in Russian army from this year.

The parade will be in the new uniforms? nice, in that case I am hoping to see all of the new uniforms from field and parade :)

I already imagine a shitstorm in western press. :)

^^ Why, are you gonna show some nukes? :lol:

Hm... I don't think that EU has anything to do with our attitude towards Russia. It's about reforming many systems from the old (ex-Warsaw-pact) period into a more adequate ones.

NATO is a different thing...but yes, if you ask me, as a Bulgarian, I'm glad we chose that path...Russian sattelites generally suck badly.

Anyway, I don't think Russia and EU should be antagonists anyway, I think that they both could cooperate very successfully...anyway, that's the last thing USA would like to see :)

Some day everything will be OK just like in the old times :lol: ...you know, we like it the eurocentrist way :)

Russia pressing EU more and more on the energy front pushes even more the EU towards US. That is, the more Russia tries to contain EU energetically, the more it antagonizes the EU and makes stronger its relationship with NATO. Otherwise, should Russia (as it currently aims at and partially accomplished) succeed in braking apart EU along energy faultlines, it brakes both the EU rationale and the NATO rationale. Quite a challenging goal but also dangerous because it assumes that countries like GB, France or Germany (and US indirectly) will, in the end, give in entirely to Russia's energy containment strategy and assume a fragmented and disunified block, while they are actually members of a military and economic block which is supposed to hold them together. To conclude, such countries either become complacent and assume the braking up of the military and economic block at some critical moment or act critically to prevent that. That's Russia's bet in the near future. :cheers:

there will be ICBMs, though presumably without nuclear warheads. But for Russia, it is not necessary to show nukes in order to provoke shitstorm in Western press. A much lesser show of imaginary "imperial ambitions" would be enough :lol:

seriously guys, while I like EU in general and even think Russia might join it one day (of course not having a full membership but some associated status, without handing over any political powers to Brussels), this NATO thing is really messed up, being an extension of American power on our continent. Hope you'll quit that organisation eventually :)

^^ You take into account the gas deliveries only. But as a matter of fact, Russia needs the EU badly too - should it be Siemens trains, should it be tourism, should it be IKEA stores, whatever.

UK is not a good example of an EU member you know - they still have their currency and all those political disputes.

The problem with Russian gas is not the energy supplies themselves - the real problem is the political bonds that may emerge as a result of this. USA is inevitably going more and more distanced from EU nowadays. What they don't wanna see is close cooperation between EU and Russia. You see, Russia made some arrangements with Germany about those gas pipes and as a result, USA is rellocating military personnel from Germany to EE countries, the same applies to that anti-rocket defence system.

I don't think Russia is pushing the EU towards more US-oriented policy. It's the USA and their stupid oil speculations, terrorist paranoia and Iraqi adventure that fucked up everything.

seriously guys, while I like EU in general and even think Russia might join it one day (of course not having a full membership but some associated status, without handing over any political powers to Brussels), this NATO thing is really messed up, being an extension of American power on our continent. Hope you'll quit that organisation eventually :)

For Christ's sake, no! :)

ah come on, you have nothing to be afraid of. Down with NATO! :D

OK, we'll do it. But just after the USA splits into 52 autonomous countries and your Russian federation does the same :) We don't like your imperialistic policy hehe :) Fair deal? :)

^^ You take into account the gas deliveries only. But as a matter of fact, Russia needs the EU badly too - should it be Siemens trains, should it be tourism, should it be IKEA stores, whatever.

UK is not a good example of an EU member you know - they still have their currency and all those political disputes.

The problem with Russian gas is not the energy supplies themselves - the real problem is the political bonds that may emerge as a result of this. USA is inevitably going more and more distanced from EU nowadays. What they don't wanna see is close cooperation between EU and Russia. You see, Russia made some arrangements with Germany about those gas pipes and as a result, USA is rellocating military personnel from Germany to EE countries, the same applies to that anti-rocket defence system.

I don't think Russia is pushing the EU towards more US-oriented policy. It's the USA and their stupid oil speculations, terrorist paranoia and Iraqi adventure that fucked up everything.

The main issue with Russia's current energy policy in Europe, at least, is that it aims of cutting off any alternative gas supplies and establish its gas supplies as the only available ones in Europe. By doing so, Russia tells EU countries it can make or brake their economies and societies, because it can make them stop or run, as it turns off or on the gas pipe. Basically, Russia tells the EU countries it wants and aims at increasing their dependency on Russia's policies more than they'd be prepared to. The EU wants to be an independent block, but cannot do that as long as it notices it actually becomes more and more dependent on Russia. Therefore, the EU, while trying to be more convergent (see Lisbon treaty, attempt to approve a Constitution etc) it sees all this dreams of greatness since the 1950's crumble under Russia's energy push-over. The question is whether EU will accept al this history and strategic aims of 50 years crumble beneath the gas pipe. I see here more the danger that EU can brake-up than NATO. And that's bad for all of us, especially EE countries.

OK, we'll do it. But just after the USA splits into 52 autonomous countries and your Russian federation does the same :) We don't like your imperialistic policy hehe :) Fair deal? :)

but where is logic? If you wish the US to split up, I presume you don't like their imperialistic policy either. Then why joining NATO in the first place? You should have stayed neutral after the demise of Warsaw Pact ;)

^^ I think the problem is purely economic, not a political one. In other words, should the Russians try to raise the prices for their gas, we should be able to take on a suitable alternative.

Since the Americans' alternative is something like that:

M_wRfr9weCM

which is doubtfully a good one...I dunno.

Yes, there is a room for Russians' blackmailing the whole EU. But should they go too far, they would lose too much. I'd like to see India or China as their alternative markets, ha-ha-ha :)

Can you imagine the Russians trying to blackmail the Chinese in order to achieve some political advantages? I think those guys will kick their asses very very bad...

but where is logic? If you wish the US to split up, I presume you don't like their imperialistic policy either. Then why joining NATO in the first place? You should have stayed neutral after the demise of Warsaw Pact ;)

^^ It is purely economical. The same we did with South Stream ;) Neither USA , nor RUssia would want an unstable and unsecure Bulgaria when there are military bases of NATO and gas pipes going through its territory ... I hope you get what i mean ? ;)

yeah, you try to put your eggs in as many buskets as possible :yes:

But you could have also achieved that by building two pipelines - one Russian and one EU-backed. No need for NATO then ;)

Aham, diversification :) The alternative turned out to be not so successful. Anyway, you can afford to be a side in that game, we're too small and insignificant to be one. So there are two choices for us: to become someone's pawn or to balance between sides. It seems we're taking the second alternative. Don't be angry at us please.

Here's a relevant news:

Thursday, February 7, 2008 - 21:00

AFP News Briefs List

Gazprom threatens to cut gas to Ukraine next week

Send by e-mail Print Russian gas monopoly Gazprom said Thursday it could cut some of Ukraine's supplies from next Monday if Kiev did not resolve its gas debts by then, but stressed that deliveries to western Europe would not be affected.

"If by Monday the Ukrainian side does not resolve this situation, Gazprom will be forced to cut supplies of Russian gas to Ukraine," the company said in a statement, underlining the word "Russian."

This means that only supplies of Russian-produced natural gas will be affected, while those from Central Asian countries, which supply most of Ukraine's gas, will not, Gazprom spokesman Sergei Kupriyanov told AFP.

Russian gas is used to compensate for any shortfalls in Central Asian supplies to Ukraine. In January a quarter of total Ukrainian supplies were met by Russian-produced gas because of cold temperatures in Central Asia.

Ukraine owes Russia 1.5 billion dollars in back payments for its gas, Gazprom said.

Ukraine is a major transit route for Russian gas to the European Union and supplies were disrupted at the start of 2006 when Gazprom cut all of Ukraine's supplies in a row over prices.

However this time there is no such risk. "This will not impact on supplies to Gazprom's other customers in Europe," the Gazprom statement said.

The threat comes ahead of a trip by Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko to Moscow on Tuesday.

Relations between Ukraine and Russia are strained over Kiev's push to integrate with NATO and the European Union.

Following the 2006 crisis Russia made a priority of a planned giant new pipeline, dubbed Nord Stream, that will bypass Ukraine and eastern Europe by running under the Baltic Sea directly to Germany.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who was to visit Moscow on Friday, recently proposed an alternative pipeline running through Poland.

However, Kremlin foreign policy advisor Sergei Prikhodko on Thursday scotched that idea, saying that "from an economic point of view the project is very difficult and much more costly" than Nord Stream.

"It is not very profitable or acceptable," he was quoted as saying by RIA Novosti news agency.

Russia has regularly been accused of using Gazprom's control of a hefty slice of Europe's gas market for political ends, allegedly turning off the taps to punish governments in Moscow's communist-era stamping ground that fail to toe the Kremlin's line.



© 2007 AFP Natalia Kolesnikova
france24_en.wsx live_en.wsx

Ukraine owes Russia 1.5 billion dollars in back payments for its gas, Gazprom said.
No money - no gas. Pure capitalism.

^^ that Russian-Ukrainian mess never ends :ohno:

Aham, diversification :) The alternative turned out to be not so successful. Anyway, you can afford to be a side in that game, we're too small and insignificant to be one. So there are two choices for us: to become someone's pawn or to balance between sides. It seems we're taking the second alternative. Don't be angry at us please.

We? Angry? We like you guys :cheers:

Bulgaria is one of the more reasonable EE states when it comes to dealing with Russia. I wish all countries in the region were like you :)

^^ BTW the Turks are not at all content with all those negotiations we did with you :) Can you tell us why is that ahah :) I wonder how we ratified all those stuff with the Turkish minority party being a part in the leading coalition :) This became something like a little scandal here in Bulgaria :)

I wonder what any gas company would do if you stopped paying your gas bill?

^^ BTW the Turks are not at all content with all those negotiations we did with you :) Can you tell us why is that ahah :) I wonder how we ratified all those stuff with the Turkish minority party being a part in the leading coalition :) This became something like a little scandal here in Bulgaria :)

good question. Many strange things are happening recently. Maybe this (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=578557) can clarify some issues? :)

Nah, I don't think so :) They were among the biggest lobbist of our NATO membership :)

I already imagine a shitstorm in western press. :)
shitstorm?:lol:


I don't like the political situation in Russia too, I don't like all those authoritarian bullshit around Putin, all that extreme nationalism that IMO is disgusting (I can't even imagine why nowadays there are more nazi skinheads in Russia than in the rest of the world...you guys fought against Hitler, don't you remember?)
Exactly. Russian skinheads...really a shame for a nation who gave millions against Nazism. It may not be so critical issue for them now but nevertheless is a sign of historical disintegration.

The Romanian and Greek PMs signed yesterday a 5-year agreement whereby Romania will supply electricity to Greece in periods of high consumption.


Romania furnizeaza energie Greciei
08 februarie 2008
Premierul Calin Popescu Tariceanu si omologul sau grec, Kostas Karamanlis (foto), au discutat ieri, la Bucuresti, pe tema interconectarii retelelor energetice ale Romaniei si Greciei, cele doua parti semnand un acord de cooperare pentru o perioada de cinci ani, care poate fi prelungit, dupa cum a informat NewsIn. Astfel, Romania va furniza Greciei energie electrica in perioade de consum ridicat. Cei doi oficiali au convenit ca este necesar sa fie asigurate surse alternative de aprovizionare, pentru a reduce dependenta fata de un singur furnizor. (V.D.)

The Romanian and Greek PMs signed yesterday a 5-year agreement whereby Romania will supply electricity to Greece in periods of high consumption.


^^ Yep ... We already knew that. This is maybe the biggest mistake EU has made with Bulgaria. They showed double standart and forced us to close the not dangerous 3rd & 4th blocks of NPP Kozloduy(who saved the olimpics in Greece in 2004 btw) .... just to make sure that the Romanian-French-Canadian NPP will be able to export its electricity from 2007 or 2008 when completed .... :ohno: Now we lose aprox. 300 mil euro per year from elecricity export ... and those money will go into Romanian , French & Canadian pockets ....

Well done EU!

^^ Yep ... We already knew that. This is maybe the biggest mistake EU has made with Bulgaria. They showed double standart and forced us to close the not dangerous 3rd & 4th blocks of NPP Kozloduy(who saved the olimpics in Greece in 2004 btw) .... just to make sure that the Romanian-French-Canadian NPP will be able to export its electricity from 2007 or 2008 when completed .... :ohno: Now we lose aprox. 300 mil euro per year from elecricity export ... and those money will go into Romanian , French & Canadian pockets ....

Well done EU!


^^ Turnovec, you are simply wrong! I already explained you that. All the electricity exported comes from ROMANIAN COMPANIES (state owned; Romania is only now starting privatising electricity producers or entering consortiums for building up NPPs). Therefore, the only ones gaining from this are the Romanian companies. It has nothing to do with the French or the Canadians, for Christ's sake!

I really do not understand why EU asked Bulgaria to close some of its reactors at Kozloduy, but I can tell you it has nothing to do with Romania or its electricity. Iy's beyond any logic to believe that Romania could have convinced the EU to ask Bulgaria to close down the reactors at Kozloduy (during accession negotiations, when Romania itself was a black sheep) in order to benefit from the exports. It's just pure speculation and I think political propaganda and manipulation to serve certain interests. :cheers:

^^ Safety ... http://www.ebrd.com/country/sector/nuclear/overview/funds/kidsf.htm

More on - http://www.ebrd.com/country/sector/nuclear/index.htm

^^ Safety ... http://www.ebrd.com/country/sector/nuclear/overview/funds/kidsf.htm

More on - http://www.ebrd.com/country/sector/nuclear/index.htm

Yeah, I also believe that the EU was really worried about the safety of the Kozloduy plant and took advantage of Bulgaria's weak position vis-a-vis the EU and asked her to close them down. But again, this has nothing to do with Romania, and I am surprised to notice that there are speculations in BUlgaria about this, somehow creating a false sense of Romanian/French/Canadian etc plot to subvert Bulgaria's energy policy. I sense here some Bulgarian nationalistic parties spreading this rumour.

I really do not understand why EU asked Bulgaria to close some of its reactors at Kozloduy, but I can tell you it has nothing to do with Romania or its electricity.

^^ Le Clerk , I am not occusing Romania here. But it is more than obvious that there were economical interests of some big players involved here.... I already wrote a lot about the closing of 3rd & 4th reactors of Kozloduy, not gonna explain it again. Is it a coincidence that those facilities could have worked another 6-7 years more at least and we were forced to close them 1 year before the new ones in Romania started to produce electricity at full power ? I don't think so ... Those Romania - Greece contract from today is just the logical continuation of all those events. Nothing new under the sun :)

Anyway , congratulations to Romania! You are getting in the freed by us power market on the Balkans. :cheers:

^^ Le Clerk , I am not occusing Romania here. But it is more than obvious that there were economical interests of some big players involved here.... I already wrote a lot about the closing of 3rd & 4th reactors of Kozloduy, not gonna explain it again. Is it a coincidence that those facilities could have worked another 6-7 years more at least and we were forced to close them 1 year before the new ones in Romania started to produce electricity at full power ? I don't think so ... Those Romania - Greece contract from today is just the logical continuation of all those events. Nothing new under the sun :)

Anyway , congratulations to Romania! You are getting in the freed by us power market on the Balkans. :cheers:

Turnovec, I did not mean that you accused Romania. It is just that I am surprised of such speculations about some kind of EU plots to favour Romania against Bulgaria, and I can tell you that I can sniff them as being political driven, especiallly by nationalistic parties, as such speculations, on other issues, have also been made in Romania by nationalistic and populistic parties, trying to take advantage of the difficulties of Romania's accession to the EU.

In Romania, it is just 1 (ONE) reactor in addition to the old one that was inaugurated last year, but that's it. And the reactor was built with Canadian technology CANDU (as I already mentioned) but paid by the Romanian gov., and now it is all Romanian state-owned.

In addition to this, the mentioned 300 million EURO in exports are way too much I think.

I really hope that Bulgaria can rebuild sooner rather than later its NPP industry because I think there's enough demand to cover by both Bulgaria and Romania. :cheers:

Le Clerk, 300 mil was the avarage income we made each year from electricity export ... Since we closed the 3rd & 4th racotors of Kozloduy , the number dropped dramatically. This is official data, believe me. Even more , 1 month ago we stopped exporting electricity due to the high domestic demand and the lack of power...

Nationalistic parties are always ready to take advantage from any given opportunity. This is no exception. But this time all this i have been writing about Kozloduy is supported by very seriuos and respected people and specialists .... not only from Bulgaria... It is obvious that the question here is not about security. 30 reactors of the same type(and even older) are working in Europe in the moment and probably will continue to work in the coming decades. 9 of them(or 7 i am not quite sure) are on the territory of EU. Only 4 were closed so far .... 2 of them in Bulgaria .... what else could i add except the question WHY ?

Anyway, i believe there is a place under the sun for both of us. Electricity consumption is rising and will be rising with high tepms in teh comming years. So even if ro & bg built one new NPP each we'll still have enough wide market to export our electricity at. :cheers:

What i feel sorry is for the lost incomes for several years if 3rd & 4th blocks wouldn't have been closed... and i am a little mad at EU for the crumbs it gave us in exchange... a little more than 200 mil euro.

Le Clerk, 300 mil was the avarage income we made each year from electricity export ... Since we closed the 3rd & 4th racotors of Kozloduy , the number dropped dramatically. This is official data, believe me. Even more , 1 month ago we stopped exporting electricity due to the high domestic demand and the lack of power...

Nationalistic parties are always ready to take advantage from any given opportunity. This is no exception. But this time all this i have been writing about Kozloduy is supported by very seriuos and respected people and specialists .... not only from Bulgaria... It is obvious that the question here is not about security. 30 reactors of the same type(and even older) are working in Europe in the moment and probably will continue to work in the coming decades. 9 of them(or 7 i am not quite sure) are on the territory of EU. Only 4 were closed so far .... 2 of them in Bulgaria .... what else could i add except the question WHY ?

Anyway, i believe there is a place under the sun for both of us. Electricity consumption is rising and will be rising with high tepms in teh comming years. So even if ro & bg built one new NPP each we'll still have enough wide market to export our electricity at. :cheers:

What i feel sorry is for the lost incomes for several years if 3rd & 4th blocks wouldn't have been closed... and i am a little mad at EU for the crumbs it gave us in exchange... a little more than 200 mil euro.

The only thing I am worried is that there may be some nervousness in Bulgaria against Romania about the closure of the Kozloduy reactors, because it's really baseless. It'd be a false but effective manipulation mechanism to create some animosity against Romania, and not against the EU, as it should be the case. :cheers:

The only thing I am worried is that there may be some nervousness in Bulgaria against Romania about the closure of the Kozloduy reactors, because it's really baseless. It'd be a false but effective manipulation mechanism to create some animosity against Romania, and not against the EU, as it should be the case. :cheers:

^^ Don't worry about this . This theme is discussed here for a long time. Half of the guilt is in our own politicians who are doing nothig about it.

30 reactors of the same type(and even older) are working in Europe in the moment and probably will continue to work in the coming decades. 9 of them(or 7 i am not quite sure) are on the territory of EU. Only 4 were closed so far .... 2 of them in Bulgaria .... what else could i add except the question WHY ?


No offence guys, but I like to talk … numbers: nuts: there is only one ^^ VVER-440: V-230 type reactors in use in EU (Slovakia) which will close later this year. All others are newer versions that comply with EU safety standards (all countries have to adhere to - and this is what Bulgaria did). Germany has closed four of such units also ...

Turnovec ... I am myself the master of conspiracy theories and paranoia king, :nuts: but this particular case was simply about safety; and it (was) is the same for all 27 EU members. One thing I do not understand is why Bulgaria agreed to close it earlier than Slovakia?! Kozloduy 3&4 was built in 1980/82 as opposed to Slovakia's Bohunice 1&2 built in 1978/80. I may have ZA answer ...

^^ This theme is discussed here for a long time. Half of the guilt is in our own politicians who are doing nothig about it.

Turnovec ... I am myself the master of conspiracy theories and paranoia king, :nuts: but this particular case was simply about safety; and it (was) is the same for all 27 EU members. One thing I do not understand is why Bulgaria agreed to close it earlier than Slovakia?! Kozloduy 3&4 was built in 1980/82 as opposed to Slovakia's Bohunice 1&2 built in 1978/80. I may have ZA answer ...

Ок , if we are on facts here they come :

1. Lithuania received its ticket for the EU with the promise to close 2 reactors of NPP "Ignalina". Slovakia received euro visa by destening 2 reactors of NPP "Buhonice" .... Bulgaria was forced to close not 2 .... but 4 reactors in Kozloduy !!!

2. Bulgaria not only promised to switch off those 4 reactors , but alredy did this. To this moment Slovakia has switched off only 1 reactor, Lithuania also just 1 ...

3. Only Bulgaria was forced to sacrifice nuke power before its entrance in the EU. Lithiania and Slovakia first entered the EU in May 2004, and then started to think about switching off reactors.

4. The terms for closing the reactors are most cruel for Bulgaria. 1st and 2nd reactors of NPP Kozloduy were stopped on 31 Dec. 2002. Lithuania switched off its first reactor in late 2004, Slovakia postponed the switching off of the first reactor in 'Buhonice' for the end of 2006 .... when Kozloduy switched off another 2 blocks - 3rd & 4th ....

5. The second reactor in 'Buhonice' that used to be switched off will be working till the end of 2008 .... Block 2 in NPP "Ignalina" will be delivering electricity in Lithuania till the end of 2009 ...

6. the conclusion is that Bulgaria already lost 1760 MW of nuke power .... , Slovakia only 440 MW, Lithuania 1500MW ...

7. Bulgaria was put in the worst position regarding the financial compensations too ... from 1st january 2007, in Kozlduy are working only V and VI blocks .... In exchange of our nuke power suicide, and the losing of billions euro income ... we received only the funny sum of 210 mln. euro. While Lithuania will receive 865 mil. and Slovakia 375 miln.

NPP "Bohunice" - Slovakia
------------------------------------------------------
VVER 440 1980 - 2006 Closed on EU demand.
VVER 440 1981 - will be closed on EU demand in the end of 2008.
VVER 440 1985 - Operational
VVER 440 1985 - Operational
------------------------------------------------------

NPP "Kozloduy" - Bulgaria
------------------------------------------------------
VVER 440 1974-2002 Closed on EU demand.
VVER 440 1975-2002 Closed on EU demand.
VVER 440 1980-2006 Closed on EU demand.
VVER 440 1982-2006 Closed on EU demand.
VVER 1000 1988- Operational
VVER 1000 1993- Operational
------------------------------------------------------

NPP "Ignalina" - Lithuania
------------------------------------------------------
RBMK 1500 1983 - 2004 Closed on EU demand.
RBMK 1360 1987 - 2009 will be closed on EU demand in the end of 2009.
------------------------------------------------------


Here is the list (http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/nuc_reactors/china/vver.html) of all operational VVER type reactors in Europe and the rest of the world. In the EU there are still operational 6 in Czech Rep. , 4 in Hungary and 2 in Finland ... aside from those in Slovakia, Lithuania and Bulgaria that i already mentioned ....

Now tell me i am master of conspiracy theories and paranoia king :)

And sad but true .... ^^ ... Half of the guilt is in our own politicians who are doing nothig about it.

huh, and you said Russia treated you bad? :ohno:

huh, and you said Russia treated you bad? :ohno:

^^Yury, you are being so subversive :devil: taking advantage of every tiny bit of euro-conflict to highlight how good was/is Russia to its former allies :nocrook: just like Russia is doing now with the EU countries...trying to take advantage of their little pathetic disputes to gain one more foot in the EU. Russia says chess and wants to mate :crazy2::cheers:

No offence guys, but I like to talk … numbers: nuts: there is only one ^^ VVER-440: V-230 type reactors in use in EU (Slovakia) which will close later this year. All others are newer versions that comply with EU safety standards (all countries have to adhere to - and this is what Bulgaria did). Germany has closed four of such units also ...

Turnovec ... I am myself the master of conspiracy theories and paranoia king, :nuts: but this particular case was simply about safety; and it (was) is the same for all 27 EU members. One thing I do not understand is why Bulgaria agreed to close it earlier than Slovakia?! Kozloduy 3&4 was built in 1980/82 as opposed to Slovakia's Bohunice 1&2 built in 1978/80. I may have ZA answer ...

Please be carefull of what I wrote ...

me? where? :)

looks like not just nebunul is the master of conspiracy theories and paranoia king here :D

Please be carefull of what I wrote ...

^^ I am ... and i am posting data about those type of reactors + the fact that even older reactors as RBMK( the type involved in the Chernobyl accident.) will be operational in the EU till 2009 ... while ours are already closed.... :cheers:

I am not quite sure but i think that the VVERs in Dukovany Czech Rep. are of the same VVER 440 V-230 if not older type ... but were a little modernized and there isn't set date for their closing. In the same time the 3rd & 4th of Kozloduy were also modernized between 1996-99 i think costing us 400 mil. USD ... and EU didn't show any sign that closing will be demanded for them ... but suddenly after 1999 something changed dramatically.

^^ ^^
"There are currently 65 Soviet-designed nuclear plants in operation in the former Eastern Bloc countries, with others under construction. They include:

6 first-generation VVER-440/230 pressurised water reactors which have serious design deficiencies (4 in Russia, 1 in Slovakia, 1 in Armenia). Four such units in eastern Germany have been permanently shut down.

16 second-generation VVER-440/213 pressurised water reactors with some major design deficiencies which have been partly remedied. (4 in Czech Rep, 4in Hungary, 2 in Russia, 4 in Slovakia, 2 in Ukraine. Two more in Finland were greatly modified and are excluded from this tally.)

22 third -generation VVER-1000 pressurised water reactors with a full containment structure. Some have instrumentation and control system deficiencies, but they come closest to Western standards.

12 RBMK light water graphite reactors such as at Chernobyl, in operation in (and unique to) Russia (11), Ukraine (now closed) and Lithuania (1). The four oldest of these were commissioned in the 1970s at Kursk and Leningrad and are of most concern. A further Kursk unit is under construction.

4 small graphite-moderated BWR reactors in eastern Siberia, constructed in the 1970s. "
www.world-nuclear.org

and while you argue about nuclear plants, here is a story that we have been following for some time now :D

Gaz de France gave up Nabucco and turned towards South Stream
7 February 2008 | 17:12 | FOCUS News Agency

http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n133187

Paris. French company Gaz de France gave up the idea of participation in the European project Nabucco because of the position of Turkey which announced itself against cooperation with Paris. According to analyzers the reaction of Ankara was an answer to the position of France which was against the accession of Turkey in the EU and which acknowledges the genocide of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. Simultaneously the company expressed its interest in the Russian – Italian project of South Stream which is rival to Nabucco.

^^ Yuri , you might feel sorry to hear that , but i believe i am not arguing with my romanian friends right now, am I ? Le Clerk , nebunul ? :cheers:

Nebunul , i think we came to the same conclusion. So there are 1 VVER 440 V230 in Slovakia and 1 RBMK in Lithuania still not closed. :cheers:

and while you argue about nuclear plants, here is a story that we have been following for some time now :D

Gaz de France gave up Nabucco and turned towards South Stream
7 February 2008 | 17:12 | FOCUS News Agency





^^ Only nuclear is left now :lol:

^^ Yuri , you might feel sorry to hear that , but i believe i am not arguing with my romanian friends right now, am I ? Le Clerk , nebunul ? :cheers:

Arguing?!!? Hehehe ... just decent European Union citizens :lol: practicing Hegel's dialectic :nuts: :cheers:

@Turnovec:

so with whom are you arguing then? :)

@ nebubul:

don't forget to add "civilized" ;)

@Turnovec:

so with whom are you arguing then? :)

I think you want him to argue ... is in your head :weird: in your head :weird: .. wake up ... now !!! :nuts::lol:

^^ Yuri , you might feel sorry to hear that , but i believe i am not arguing with my romanian friends right now, am I ? Le Clerk , nebunul ? :cheers:

Nebunul , i think we came to the same conclusion. So there are 1 VVER 440 V230 in Slovakia and 1 RBMK in Lithuania still not closed. :cheers:

Upps, sorry for the delyed reply, NO CHANCE TO ARGUE WITH ME :bash::bash: !!! lol, just trying to convince you guys that this Kozloduy thing was not about Romania. No hard-feelings between Romanians and BUlgarians. We are neighbours and we should exchange borsh and oil, and not hard feelings. :lol:

@ nebubul:

don't forget to add "civilized" ;)

No need for it ... EU membership is enough :D

and while you argue about nuclear plants, here is a story that we have been following for some time now :D

Gaz de France gave up Nabucco and turned towards South Stream
7 February 2008 | 17:12 | FOCUS News Agency

http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n133187

Paris. French company Gaz de France gave up the idea of participation in the European project Nabucco because of the position of Turkey which announced itself against cooperation with Paris. According to analyzers the reaction of Ankara was an answer to the position of France which was against the accession of Turkey in the EU and which acknowledges the genocide of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. Simultaneously the company expressed its interest in the Russian – Italian project of South Stream which is rival to Nabucco.

Heh, Turkey made France turn to Russia. This is quite a piece of news! :ohno:

I am telling you guys, EU is going down the drain first, and NATO comes after, and then, total annihilation. Going out for an orgy before that happens. I want to die happy. :cucumber:

But before that, can I ask our Russian friends a favour. If they are to throw a nuke at Romania/Bucharest, can they hit right on the House of People? It's just a small favour we're asking from them....just like the death convict in the States can ask for a last favour. :banana:

Upps, sorry for the delyed reply, NO CHANCE TO ARGUE WITH ME :bash::bash: !!! lol, just trying to convince you guys that this Kozloduy thing was not about Romania. No hard-feelings between Romanians and BUlgarians. We are neighbours and we should exchange borsh and oil, and not hard feelings. :lol:

^^ Amen :cheers:

well, I just thought that when two sides disagree on a certain issue and try to prove that they are right, using supportive arguments - then it is called "arguing". But I might be wrong, there can be no arguments between Bulgaria and Romania these days! :D

Heh, Turkey made France turn to Russia. This is quite a piece of news! :ohno:

Well ... will do our share for Turkey :nuts: Nabucco will be built (as south stream :shifty:) under Black Sea :)

well, I just thought that when two sides disagree on a certain issue and try to prove that they are right, using supportive arguments - then it is called "arguing". But I might be wrong, there can be no arguments between Bulgaria and Romania these days! :D

^^
Arguing?!!? Hehehe ... just decent European Union citizens :lol: practicing Hegel's dialectic :nuts: :cheers:

You force :nuts: me to explain again :bash::lol:. You Russians are very cultured ... usually ... :nuts:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic

Heh, Turkey made France turn to Russia. This is quite a piece of news! :ohno:

geopolitics is complicated

I am telling you guys, EU is going down the drain first, and NATO comes after, and then, total annihilation. Going out for an orgy before that happens. I want to die happy. :cucumber:

that's a pessimistic scenario you have there, though I wouldn't mind NATO going down the drain :D

But before that, can I ask our Russian friends a favour. If they are to throw a nuke at Romania/Bucharest, can they hit right on the House of People? It's just a small favour we're asking from them....just like the death convict in the States can ask for a last favour. :banana:

Russia won't nuke you, don't worry. If a Russian missile ever falls within your borders, it would be conventional and will take out that American base you have ;)

Well ... will do our share for Turkey :nuts: Nabucco will be built (as south stream :shifty:) under Black Sea :)

^^ I think Bulgargaz is already in teh consortium for Nabucco :cheers:

You force :nuts: me to explain again :bash::lol:. You Russians are very cultured ... usually ... :nuts:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic

oh pardon me, great nebunul. Even though I live in the EU, I am not an EU citizen so you have to excuse my ignorance. "Dialectic", of course! I'll remember that word for the future :lol:

@Turnovec
The decision 3rd and 4th block to get closed was based much more on political than on technological arguments but definitely those who we should blame most are our politicians.If they have privatized the power station before 01.01.2007, it would countinue to work for sure.Just imagine how the EU commisioner responsible for the energetics is informing the owner of some energetic giant with bilions of euro incomes that he will have to close the power station, for which he had payed 1-2bilions of euro just a few months ago:lol:Sounds impossibly and very unlikely to happen, right;)
That`s why our politicians should accept the offer of the Canadian corporation and sell/give on concession the reactors as soon as possible becase with every single day the probability 3rd and 4th blocks to open again becomes smaller and smaller.After they are able to get the political decision from Brussels, I don`t see where is the problem.Furthermore, the new owner will be the one who will import nuclear fuel, will pay the big salaries of the physcians and ofcourse this will lead to additional revenues in the budget.

geopolitics is complicated



that's a pessimistic scenario you have there, though I wouldn't mind NATO going down the drain :D



Russia won't nuke you, don't worry. If a Russian missile ever falls within your borders, it would be conventional and will take out that American base you have ;)

No, but you can do it...so, it's just like a small favour...if you hit the american basis, just send another one over to our parliament, c'mon, don't be so cheap. We'll pay you back the cost for the second one double if that'll make you do it. :banana:

oh pardon me, great nebunul. Even though I live in the EU, I am not an EU citizen so you have to excuse my ignorance. "Dialectic", of course! I'll remember that word for the future :lol:

You gotta love these EURussians :lol: ... BTW There are loads living in London ...

No, but you can do it...so, it's just like a small favour...if you hit the american basis, just send another one over to our parliament, c'mon, don't be so cheap. We'll pay you back the cost for the second one double if that'll make you do it. :banana:

ok ok, as long as you a happy. Russia will also send you Putin as a bonus. He is leaving office next month and is already looking for a new job. Could become a good Romanian politician, what do you think? :D

You gotta love these EURussians :lol: ... BTW There are loads living in London ...

London? nah, dangerous place. Russians are so easily poisoned over there :ohno:

ok ok, as long as you a happy. Russia will also send you Putin as a bonus. He is leaving office next month and is already looking for a new job. Could become a good Romanian politician, what do you think? :D

Heh, you've got a very interesting imagination...so let's put it this way....we've got Basescu as President and I think Putin qualifies for head of the foreign affairs, interior ministry and defense. Yes, just imagine sending Putin to tell Voronin to shut the hell up from the Romanian side. :banana:, and then asking Putin make some order on our stadiums (AK47s may be allowed, so, that should do it), and finally send him to Irak to meet our boys and then teaching the Americans how to fix the civil war over there. :banana:

Any other ideas?

^^ One more thing: Putin should be also appointed minister of the economy. He should be able to pull alll the pipes on Romania's soil just in a few months. :banana:

^^ I thought Putin is already minister of ... everything :nuts:

that guy is truly versatile. I won't be surprised if he transforms Romania into a superpower in a matter of years ;)

that guy is truly versatile. I won't be surprised if he transforms Romania into a superpower in a matter of years ;)

EU will do this for/with us ... Cheers for you offer, anyway!:dj:

Yury, EU is just about to elect its president. What about an electoral campaign between Blair and Putin? Should be an interesting one... :lol:

that guy is truly versatile. I won't be surprised if he transforms Romania into a superpower in a matter of years ;)

He's a very efficient man...that's why Russians love him, allright. But a man like Putin needs a country like Russia....Romania is too small, maybe when he will retire and wants to do some gardening, he'll give it another thought. :nuts:

geopolitics is complicated



that's a pessimistic scenario you have there, though I wouldn't mind NATO going down the drain :D



Russia won't nuke you, don't worry. If a Russian missile ever falls within your borders, it would be conventional and will take out that American base you have ;)

Putin is a bit mad at Bulgaria and Romania:

Vladimir Putin: We will Arm Russia to Teeth
"A new arms race begins" he warns and wags a finger at the US bases in Bulgaria

Standart New:
http://www.standartnews.com/en/

"The start of a new arms race has been declared," President Vladimir Putin stated yesterday while outlining Russia's domestic and foreign policy strategy till 2020. Putin accused the US and NATO of having begun a military expansion towards the Russian borders. Putin said the US bases in Romania and Bulgaria were a proof to his words.

As I said, we're in Russia's target now. I still think that bombs will start falling at some point. What's the point building all these nice cities when they'll all be wiped out in a matter of seconds?! Shit, we humans are so stupid to have are little skirmishes instead of spending all that money on building empires on the Moon and Mars and even beyond. Imagine Russia, US, and EU having an alliance to conquer the space! That'd be an awesome topic to do an SSC for! :cheers:

Serbia's EFT Group - main energy supplier to the Southeast & "Central" Europe:okay:


Energy company ‘EFT’ made in last year a record high profit of 800 million Euros that company’s president Vuk Hamovic told Beta news agency.

That put ‘EFT’ to the position of leader in the trade with electric energy in the Southeast and Central Europe. ‘EFT’ is present in 18 countries and it effected 65 pct of business in the EU market.

‘We have more energy than most of the similar companies in the region and are among the leading participants in the Austrian energy stock. ‘EFT’ is the largest energy supplier to Greece, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Albania’, he pointed.

He claims that the monopoly of EPS in Serbia is being kept by wrong pricing policy and short-term political reasons that shall cost both the citizens and the State.

‘Not a single electric plant has been built in Serbia in recent 30 years and it is very likely that in spite of the pompous announcements, that is not going to happen in the next ten years either. Further to that the idea of improving of energy efficiency has not been in sight while the consumption of electric energy is being increased with every year’, Hamovic pointed out.



More about EFT Group:
http://www.eft-group.net/index.htm

@ Le Clerk:

Putin did not say that he would arm Russia to the teeth. He always stressed that there will be no great increases in military spendings and Russia's response to the threats will be much more cost-effective. And the US bases in your states are surely signs of NATO's (US) military infrustructure getting closer to Russia.

But I agree, all these resourcse spent on AMD shield and other military projects could have been spent on defence of Earth from asteroids for example, or maybe even Mars exploration and colonization :)

As I said, we're in Russia's target now. I still think that bombs will start falling at some point. What's the point building all these nice cities when they'll all be wiped out in a matter of seconds?! Shit, we humans are so stupid to have are little skirmishes instead of spending all that money on building empires on the Moon and Mars and even beyond. Imagine Russia, US, and EU having an alliance to conquer the space! That'd be an awesome topic to do an SSC for! :cheers:
Building skyscrapers on the Moon.:lol: Yeah, I agree this whole thing is stupid. In fact, as much as I admire Putin, I think his (well, Russia's) foreign policy and views on NATO are utter crap.:bash: I doubt that he would actually start a war... it's more a matter of flexing muscles at NATO and it is first and foremost a matter of spheres of influence, and we're right in the middle of this shit, as always.

Yury, planetary defense from asteroids and comets is indeed something that concerns me and I feel we're not doing enough to protect ourselves.:bash:

Putin is a bit mad at Bulgaria and Romania:

Vladimir Putin: We will Arm Russia to Teeth
"A new arms race begins" he warns and wags a finger at the US bases in Bulgaria

Standart New:
http://www.standartnews.com/en/

"The start of a new arms race has been declared," President Vladimir Putin stated yesterday while outlining Russia's domestic and foreign policy strategy till 2020. Putin accused the US and NATO of having begun a military expansion towards the Russian borders. Putin said the US bases in Romania and Bulgaria were a proof to his words.

As I said, we're in Russia's target now. I still think that bombs will start falling at some point. What's the point building all these nice cities when they'll all be wiped out in a matter of seconds?! Shit, we humans are so stupid to have are little skirmishes instead of spending all that money on building empires on the Moon and Mars and even beyond. Imagine Russia, US, and EU having an alliance to conquer the space! That'd be an awesome topic to do an SSC for! :cheers:

TOTALY AGREE! Imagine NASA budget 10 times bigger! Instead of that stupid waste in Iraq, those trillions of USD could have gone into space reasearch. After 40 years we are still not able to get back to the Moon.

The only thing that can truly save us are some nasty Aliens. That's the only way we could put an end to this stupid arms race.

No (more) comments ...


'A new phase in the arms race is unfolding' says Putin
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/europe/a-new-phase-in-the-arms-race-is-unfolding-says-putin-780183.html

Vladimir Putin has used one of the last major speeches of his presidency to deliver a defiant message to the West, accusing it of unleashing a new arms race that left Moscow no choice but to retaliate in kind. Less than a month before presidential elections that his hand-picked successor is almost certain to win, the speech removed any lingering doubts that Russian foreign policy might become less aggressive after Mr Putin steps down.


"It's clear that a new arms race is unfolding in the world," said Mr Putin, one that Russia did not start. And he vowed that Russia would respond to the threats by developing newer and more modern weapons that were as good as if not better than those possessed by Western countries. "We are being forced into retaliating ... Russia has and always will have the answers to these challenges," he said.

The speech in which he also condemned Nato expansion came as defence chiefs of the 26-nation alliance, increasingly alarmed by Russia's flexing of its military muscles, met in Vilnius, the Lithuanian capital, and urged Moscow to tone down its rhetoric.

Russian bomber patrols have recently been made over the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic oceans and approached close to the borders of Nato airspace. Two Russian Tupolev-95 aircraft strayed south from their routine patrol pattern off the Norwegian coast and headed towards Scotland last September.

In the most recent incident, two long-range "Blackjack" bombers flew to the Bay of Biscay off France and Spain to test-launch missiles. The Russians have also hinted they want to re-establish a naval presence in the Mediterranean, probably using Syrian ports. The strategy is designed to heighten the visibility of Russia's military might but the sabre-rattling has alarmed Western countries and fuelled talk of a new Cold War.

Mr Putin went into overdrive yesterday, painting Russia as the victim of Western aggression and expansion, and promised a Russian response. He said Western countries spent far more on defence than Russia, and also returned to a theme he has raised many times before – that of Nato enlargement towards Russian borders. "We pulled out of bases in Cuba and Vietnam," he said. "And what did we get? New American bases in Bulgaria and Romania."

He also complained about US plans to build elements of a missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic. "They try to persuade us that all these actions are not aimed against Russia," he said, "but they have no constructive answers to our well-founded concerns."

Russia has previously threatened to deploy nuclear missiles in its Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad if the US goes ahead with its plans. Russia's annual defence spending has quadrupled since Mr Putin came to power and the Kremlin has announced a £100bn programme to modernise ageing military hardware.

Symbolically ominous changes are under way too: Russia recently announced that vast parades in Red Square to showcase the nation's military strength are to be revived this year for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Mr Putin also accused unnamed foreign countries of cynically trying to gain unfair access to Russia's natural resources. "Many conflicts, foreign policy acts and diplomatic démarches smell of oil and gas," he said. "This is the context in which we understand the growing interest towards Russia." He said the sovereignty of certain countries had been completely destroyed under slogans of freedom and democracy.

The speech was broadcast live on Russian television. Mr Putin was addressing the State Council, an influential gathering of the country's elite, including Dmitry Medvedev, the man virtually guaranteed to be Russia's next president. Also present was the Chelsea owner, Roman Abramovich, Russia's richest man, attending in his capacity as governor of Russia's Chukotka region.

Mr Putin has consistently portrayed Western attempts to foster democracy in Russia as nefarious intentions. Last month, he told the security services to beware of foreign meddling in the upcoming presidential elections, and earlier this week the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe announced it would not monitor the election because of an unco-operative attitude from Russian officials.

Yesterday's bellicose remarks came at the end of a speech devoted to outlining achievements during his eight years in office and setting out a blueprint of Russia's development to 2020. He rattled off economic and social achievements over

the past eight years, boasting that Russians were now immeasurably better off than eight years ago, and laid out a development strategy to improve incomes, life expectancy, and quality of life for Russians by 2020.

Bizarrely, Mr Putin made no reference in his speech to the fact that the presidency will soon be changing hands, and spoke repeatedly of what "we" need to do.

Mr Medvedev, who is virtually certain to win the elections on 2 March, has asked Mr Putin to stay on as prime minister

that was a small part of Putin's address but the Western media made most of it :D

However, I think Russia should indeed establish a permanent navy presence in the Mediterranean. The current main base of Russian Black sea fleet in Ukraine is likely to be shut down in 2017 and it would be nice to move most of it to Syria.

And a Russian bomber enetered the Japonese air space today...the news is here: echo.msk.ru, but I cannot find it as it's in Russian. :bash: I took mandatory English and French lessons while in school during communism (Ceausescu was showing off his ass to the Russians I guess:lol:) but now I regret it. I could've done so much money in Bucharest being able to speak Russian. So much Russian businesses going on here...

Anyway, we're heading to WW3 as I said, so I am stockpiling bisquits, boose and women (and Viagra, the mess will hold on for some decades I believe :lol:).

yep, Japanese claim it stayed in their airspace for 3 minutes, but Russians are denying any such thing.

Viagra is a good move. WWIII will probably be a nuclear conflict so radiation might affect your abilities in respect to women. But I also suggest you take a Russian language textbook with you since you have not learned that language by now. When the world emerges after the war, you will be well prepared to speak the next language of international communication ;)

Who cares, thats what the Japanese get for all the illegal fishing in our waters :D

yep, Japanese claim it stayed in their airspace for 3 minutes, but Russians are denying any such thing.

Viagra is a good move. WWIII will probably be a nuclear conflict so radiation might affect your abilities in respect to women. But I also suggest you take a Russian language textbook with you since you have not learned that language by now. When the world emerges after the war, you will be well prepared to speak the next language of international communication ;)

That's a good idea....I surely hope to be saved by some Russian women from the rubbles. Thereafter, being considered an exotic figure in the Russian dominated world, I will benefit from a decent treatment from them. But, I have to reconsider the boose in such scenario, and bet on Vodka. Do not want to be a pathetic drinker and be left under the table by my Russian saviours. :lol:

Anyway, I am now outta here to a club tonight to take advantage of what's left of the world until WW3. Have a good night. :cheers:

Relax guys, wtf? Neither Russia nor NATO are dumb enough to start WWIII. As I said, it's just muscle flexing. Actually this is very interesting from the military perspective. Russia acts as a bullie now and it will be interesting to see how this develops. I think Russians are now (re)discovering the powers they have and are just playing with them... but sooner or later they'll understand they can't have all, so they'll temper their position. They just want influence and money. More specifically, they seek to maintain their influence and make more money. I really understand this game and a multipolar world with a few major players is a good thing.

I see no reason to overreact, since NATO, EU, USA and Japan are doing what they can to counter this... and I'm betting on stabilization on medium term and ease of the tensions. But I admit it really sounds fucked up at first to hear Putin speak bullshit like that.

come on Cosmin, we are just having fun here :D

How exactly is it bullshit!?
NATO's hostility towards Russia has been evident for a long time and ever increasingly since NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999.

If NATO had been more successful in that endeavour (a test/trial run), we might already be seeing an attack on Russia. But it took almost three months and ended in a stalemate . So just as in 1941, we delayed such an attack.

^^ That's a bullshit speculative theory.

And a Russian bomber enetered the Japonese air space today...the news is here: echo.msk.ru, but I cannot find it as it's in Russianol:).


The Japanese Defence Ministry claims that a Russian bomber has entered Japanese airspace. The incident allegedly took place the southern part of the Izu islands near Tokyo.

Twenty-four Japanese planes were scrambled to intercept the TU-95 bomber, which is alleged to have spent three minutes in Japanese airspace.

However, the Russian Air Force insists that strategic aircraft missions were carried out in accordance with international regulations.

http://www.russiatoday.ru/news/news/20715

How exactly is it bullshit!?
NATO's hostility towards Russia has been evident for a long time and ever increasingly since NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999.

If NATO had been more successful in that endeavour (a test/trial run), we might already be seeing an attack on Russia. But it took almost three months and ended in a stalemate . So just as in 1941, we delayed such an attack.
Get a grip! Serbia is not and was not Russian territory, so how can you talk about hostility towards Russia? Just because they didn't agree on bombing Serbia?

What NATO does is it attracts more and more states that used to fall under the sphere of influence of the former USSR. You now see a shift from one sphere of influence to another. Nothing abnormal, in fact, quite a natural thing to do and if done wisely quite beneficial for the countries involved... with the exception of Russia of course.

NATO membership is not forced on anyone. Member states are what they are (i.e. members) for a multitude of reasons and for their own interest. So how can you talk of aggression? Also, bare in mind that NATO's purpose is not that of countering Warsaw Pact and fighting against USSR anymore.

And speaking of actual military attacks on Russia is nothing short of gross bullshit!:bash:

Russian AF will never admit violating Japanese airspace simply because it knows what it's doing... they're not a bunch on drunk noobs flying bombers... if you know what I mean.:cheers:

I don't think NATO would have bombed Russia. Belarus would have been more likely. Lukashenko has already been called Europe's last dictator by the West, and we all know it is usually the first step to bombing a certain country. Fortunately, Belarus has a mutual defence agreement with Russia, so an attack on Belarus is also an attack on Russia. And according to Russian military doctrine, it can rataliate with nuclear weapons even in the case of conventional attack. Russia should have signed a similar accord with Serbia back in 1999, but Yeltsin had no balls then :(

and concerning NATO membership being voluntary, how many EE states actually held a referendum before entering the block?

You talk of NATO as of some supreme evil organization whilst hailing Russia as some kind of Mahatma Gandhi of countries.:lol:

How many EE states should have hold a referendum anyway? In each country the majority was for NATO membership... in some states a higher percentage, in others, a lower percentage, but the majority of the population was FOR membership. You reckon they would've changed their minds in the case of a referendum?

^^ very much doubt about that. For example I heard in Slovakia the majority was against (and is still), but the authorities joined anyway. Not sure about how it worked in other EE states, but I know the situation in Ukraine.

60% of the population is now against NATO membership, around 30% is for. And guess what? Yushenko is doing everything he can to join that NATO. He drags on the referendum in hope that people will change their mind, but they don't. There have been a large number of protests against NATO membership but the guy just does not get it. Maybe it takes a popular uprising in Ukraine for the Oranges to get a point, I don't know. But something has to be done about it, otherwise those politicians will drag Ukraine into NATO without any referendums, just as they did in most EE states. :bash:

Ok, so Slovakia joined against the majority's opinion... let's admit that (though I knew otherwise), and Ukraine might join in the same way, but you forget about the fact that still, in most of the countries that are now members of the block, the majority was pro NATO. So it was pretty much ok, since the majority would've obviously voted for joining in the case of a referendum. But we've gone off-topic again with NATO, WWIII and Japanese airspace.:lol:

Time to pour some gas on the fire…When Russia says it intends to flex its military muscle, is this the same muscle that wasn’t able to take care of some Chechen rebels? I think Putin is just talking out of his ass. I’m sure he knows Russia does not have the financial power to compete with the US and Europe. I can’t believe he would stage a military parade to show off Russia’s “military might”…how pathetic.

I’m sure he knows Russia does not have the financial power to compete with the US and Europe. I can’t believe he would stage a military parade to show off Russia’s “military might”…how pathetic.
Oh-oh!:shifty: You'll soon regret having said that... just wait for Russian forumers to read this.:lol:

Anyway, I agree with you to some extent.

Oh-oh!:shifty: You'll soon regret having said that... just wait for Russian forumers to read this.:lol:

Anyway, I agree with you to some extent.

Lets hope they don't stage a parade.

And I believe this: What is different from the WWII is that people have become more greedy nowadays. A war between Russia and US, China and US, or NATO and Russia is unthinkable. Since it's all about money, how do you expect the winning side get profit from a war? If Europe falls into ruins, who is going to buy Russia's oil and gas? If China gets obliterated, who are then going to buy Mercedes, BMW and google the net?

Fortunately for us, the World's today masters are not in search for epic glory (Napoleon, Alexander etc) but of money. And going nuclear isn't the right way to get them.

I am not takings anyone's side here, maybe because I know Russia to well to believe it is the supreme evil. They have oil and gas (among other stuff:)) which they consider rightfully theirs and are willing to do whatever they can to defend that. Just put in their shoes, you sit on oil, and everyone else is in short of that. Would you feel safe?

And I believe this: What is different from the WWII is that people have become more greedy nowadays. A war between Russia and US, China and US, or NATO and Russia is unthinkable. Since it's all about money, how do you expect the winning side get profit from a war? If Europe falls into ruins, who is going to buy Russia's oil and gas? If China gets obliterated, who are then going to buy Mercedes, BMW and google the net?

Fortunately for us, the World's today masters are not in search for epic glory (Napoleon, Alexander etc) but of money. And going nuclear isn't the right way to get them.

I am not takings anyone's side here, maybe because I know Russia to well to believe it is the supreme evil. They have oil and gas (among other stuff:)) which they consider rightfully theirs and are willing to do whatever they can to defend that. Just put in their shoes, you sit on oil, and everyone else is in short of that. Would you feel safe?


If you are a country like Iraq and have no way to defend yourself and are sitting on oil, then there is reason for concern...but Russia is not Iraq...it has a huge stoke pile of nukes and no country would think of attacking Russia. I think what Russia wants is respect...they want the US to treat it like an equal, not a rogue state...Of course the Americans won't do that and that's why Putin is talking crap...but he knows there is nothing he can do about it and the propaganda is aimed at his own people...to show that he's tough and that Russia is tough. But when the rubber meets the road, there is nothing Russia can do; just ask Serbia.

ok, is it Russia not having any muscle or is it Russia having a huge stockpile of weapons?

And by the way, Russia took better care of Chechen rebels than some other countries did of Taleban in Afghanistan. Not even mentioning Iraq :D

If you are a country like Iraq and have no way to defend yourself and are sitting on oil, then there is reason for concern...but Russia is not Iraq...it has a huge stoke pile of nukes and no country would think of attacking Russia. I think what Russia wants is respect...they want the US to treat it like an equal, not a rogue state...Of course the Americans won't do that and that's why Putin is talking crap...but he knows there is nothing he can do about it and the propaganda is aimed at his own people...to show that he's tough and that Russia is tough. But when the rubber meets the road, there is nothing Russia can do; just ask Serbia.

And that would be the second time for Serbia, right?

But what do you expect Russians to do if Kosovo goes independent? Bomb Prishtina? Russians got carried away by this whole Balkan story and could face a greater risk much closer to its borders, in Ukraine, where the local leadears are taking the bull by the horns! NATO membership.

Would be interesting to watch. Get your popcorn ready, and the helmet too, if bullets start flying:lol:

P.S. And that thing about Russia wanting respect is pure crap! Everyone wants respect. You think US has got respect? And what is respect anyway? Can you turn it into money? Well, you can certainly buy it. Russia wants the same thing as everybody else. A chunk of the World. And money too, for the elite. And good schools (most of them British) for their spolied rats.

ok, is it Russia not having any muscle or is it Russia having a huge stockpile of weapons?

And by the way, Russia took better care of Chechen rebels than some other countries did of Taleban in Afghanistan. Not even mentioning Iraq :D

I didn't say stockpile of weapons...I said stockpile of nukes...Russia does not have military might...just nukes.

well, in conventional terms Russian military is not as strong as the Soviet one. But it is still the strongest army in Europe at least and the military buget is on the rise.

As for Serbia, Russia's conduct of the matter in 1999 was a disgrace. But it's also true that Russia was very weak at that time. Next time NATO decides to bomb Serbia, Russia should enter a mutual defence treaty with it. We'll see if NATO has balls to attack Serbia then :D

But what do you expect Russians to do if Kosovo goes independent? Bomb Prishtina?
Bomb Georgia, thats pretty possible.

muscle, is this the same muscle that wasn’t able to take care of some Chechen rebels?
SUNDAY NEWS ON SSC:
Chechen rebellion was completely crushed many years ago. On last elections 99,9% of chechen population voted for Putin's party.

And that would be the second time for Serbia, right?

But what do you expect Russians to do if Kosovo goes independent? Bomb Prishtina? Russians got carried away by this whole Balkan story and could face a greater risk much closer to its borders, in Ukraine, where the local leadears are taking the bull by the horns! NATO membership.

Would be interesting to watch. Get your popcorn ready, and the helmet too, if bullets start flying:lol:


Not bomb...but if Russia had any sort of clout it would have stopped the US from bombing Serbia by diplomatic means...Of course to do that you need to have a military that is on par with the US, but Russia is so far behind the Americans aren't even paying attention anymore.

^^So having the ability to destroy the world a few times over with its nukes is not military might?:nuts: I think you are confusing tactical military might and strategic military might. They're different, but they're both military might nonetheless... In fact the latter is greater than the former if worse comes to worst!:cheers:

well, in conventional terms Russian military is not as strong as the Soviet one. But it is still the strongest army in Europe at least and the military buget is on the rise.

As for Serbia, Russia's conduct of the matter in 1999 was a disgrace. But it's also true that Russia was very weak at that time. Next time NATO decides to bomb Serbia, Russia should enter a mutual defence treaty with it. We'll see if NATO has balls to attack Serbia then :D


You have a stockpile of nukes, and I have pleinty of popcorn:lol:

Let's be serious Yury, although you're Russian, you are just a spectator as any of us here. I doubt you live in a 30 mln castle outside Moscow or part of the ruling family. If a War breaks loose, I doubt you will be anything else than "cannon meat" to defend Russia's rich.

Haven't we learn anything yet.

By the way, I saw this documentary about the Russian soldiers serving in Chechnya, doubled by images of how ordinary Russians spend their wekend in Moscow VIP clubs.

So let's not pretend that we, some forumers, can decide smth.

why pretend? In the scenario I described, NATO will not dare to attack Serbia and we all will have peace. Isn't that the best outcome? :cheers:

well, in conventional terms Russian military is not as strong as the Soviet one. But it is still the strongest army in Europe at least and the military buget is on the rise.

As for Serbia, Russia's conduct of the matter in 1999 was a disgrace. But it's also true that Russia was very weak at that time. Next time NATO decides to bomb Serbia, Russia should enter a mutual defence treaty with it. We'll see if NATO has balls to attack Serbia then :D


So the US can bomb one more time, but there won't be a third because by then Serbia will be like an appendix of Russia. I'm sure the Serbs will glad to hear that.

why pretend? In the scenario I described, NATO will not dare to attack Serbia and we all will have peace. Isn't that the best outcome? :cheers:

Yeah, and let the Serbs and Albanians extinct each other and involve Albania, Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia and Turkey along the way.:ohno:

What a strategic thinking!

Bombing Serbia was bad, but any other outcome might have been worse.