EU's strange energy policy

By Rhod Mackenzie

When the historians and economists in the future look back at the history of the EU and particularly the European Commission and the decisons they made in the years in the run up to 2022 particularly their all out move to cut the use of fossil fuels and focus on renewable energy before all the relevant technology to make it viable existed and then to completely stop the purchase of Russia fossil fuels particularly gas.
It was said by the European commision that they wanted to reduce their dependence on Russia pipeline gas but that was an interesting statement as Russian pipeline gas made up only around 35% of its gas supplies with other sources such as Algeria and Norway also providing gas supplies plus LNG shipments from various parts of the world.

The major advantage of Russian pipeline gas was its reliability,of supply and its ability for the volume to be increased in times of shortages, all Gazprom had to do was increase what it sent. It was also cost efficient with the price of gas fixed with long term contracts which benefited both parties and were not subject to the wild price flucuations of the Spot market. Plus Gazporm and Russia had been a very reliable supplier going back to the days of the Soviet Union.
The building of Nord Stream and then Nord Stream 2 in partnership between Gazprom and 5 European energy suppliers ensured that new efficient supply routes were available to replace the old pipelines and were more environmenty friendly.

Obviously the situation changed in 2014 when the US organised a coup in Ukraine to take the Crimea from Russia and surround it. It was then that the US started to state that Europe was dependent on Russian gas while Russia was its enemy and the US had bases in Europe to defend it from Russian aggression and it should cease buying Russian gas because Russia was its enemy and looking to invade it.
That was when the US decided that the Nord Stream pipelines had to go, they were a way for Europe to backslide and have second thoughts about abandoning Russian gas. So they carried out the biggest industrial sabotage in history and still claim they don't know who did it.
Of course nothing could be further from the truth, the US has bases in Europe not to defend Europe to make sure that it is close enough to Russia to cause a problem.

Lets not forget that in 1990 , the Soviets agreed to German unification and withdrew all their military and bases from not only East Germany but from all of Eastern Europe and the Baltic States ( the Baltics remember were part of the Soviet Union)

Did the US pack up their bases in Germany which they have had since 1945? No they reinforced them and then through the 90's and 2000's expanded the so called NATO wchich is just a puppet of the US with bases into more and more countries up to the border of Russia.
Now they were telling the countries of the European Union that this reliable energy supplier since the days of the Soviet Inion was about to attack them and they should stop trading with one of their largest partners. Of course if they decided to stop buying cheap Russian pipeline gas then the US would be able to sell them 'Freedom Molecules' of its LNG at around three times the price and they would have to build expensive regasification terminals to accomadate the tankers supplying the gas and also compete with the Asian market when prices were high.

So the EU went along with this senario and all it caused were huge increases in prices for gas, the knock on effects of which turned out to be high energy costs, a massive increase in the prices of food, and industries not being able to compete in world markets as their products were not price competative.. This has also caused inflation,a drop in living standards,civil unrest and an increase in unemployement.
Also the US is also not a reliable supplier as if and when the price of gas is higher in Asia it has a tendency to send cargoes their rather than Euope because it makes more money. So the US managed to get the EC to give the supplies of a major and reliable partner on the promise of a so called ally that actually wants to destroy it economically and prevent it becoming a competitor.
Russia has obviously seen through all of these charades and undertands the game being played by the US but the EC led by the failed politicians and under the instructions of the globalists think that they are pursuing a path for eco nirvana and not economic extinction.
Russia did not actually make that much money from pipeline gas, most of it was sold on long term contracts and the majority of the time the price difference of pipeling gas and LNG was huge. The major problem for the EU is once you stop having the supply of cheap and reliable pipeline gas you are then t the mercy of the Spot Market and the speculators, this means the price of gas can be where ever those who control it want it to be.
If you cannot turn up the tap of pipeline gas then you are subjected to the dreaded market of supply and demand and this is what the EU faces.
Every time there is a cold snap or a major even like an accident in Norway prices rocket demand increases and supplies become difficult to source.
Does Russia care? well it still sells around 40 billion cubic metres of gas via pipelines through the Ukraine transit system and the Turkish Stream pipeline which is around 60% less than it used to supply but the price of gas is better, plus its still selling LNG so despite what the EC says its has not got rid of Russian gas.

So the US has succeeded in destroying the economic capabilities of the EU and convinced it that it is for their own good and the benefit of mankind. Its hard not to laugh.. .