Lomborg : german politicians are fooling themselves about the efficacy of renewables

 Another scathing account of Dane Björn Lomborg with Germany's energy policy. In an article for germany newspaper WELT he works out that Germany's measures to reduce CO2 are mostly ill-considered, useless, expensive and moreover strain emerging economies:

In a rational world, climate policy would be about finding the most cost-effective policy for the very real problem of global warming. But in the real world, many climate policy measures seem to be more about making us feel morally superior than using scarce resources effectively to have a noticeable impact.

Every spring, the lighting at the Brandenburg Gate, as well as on millions of buildings around the world - including the Eiffel Tower, the Sydney Opera House and the Empire State Building - is switched off for an hour under the campaign name "Earth Hour". The idea behind it is to jointly set an example for climate protection. But if you get people to turn off the lights for an hour, it doesn't have a noticeable effect on the climate. And if people light a few candles instead, that actually increases the net emissions.

Mediterranean: when exploration of gas fields hurtles with hegemonic ambitions

 The projected EastMed pipeline which is scheduled for construction start in 2023 is jeopardised by expansionist aspirations of Turkey. Israel has ordered four stealth capable corvettes at a german shipyard. The first one has just been delivered. Some observers draw parallels to arm races in the wake of WW1 writes german newspaper WELT:

Israel's security is German reasons of state - Angela Merkel's confession to the Knesset is probably the most frequently quoted sentence by a German head of government in Israel. Now Germany's responsibility for the Jewish state is to become visible: On November 11, the Kiel-built warship “INS Magen” (Hebrew for protective shield) will be handed over to the Israeli Navy.

It is the first of four Sa’ar 6-class corvettes that the Israeli government has ordered from ThyssenKrupp. According to the Ministry of Defense, the federal government is financing around a third of the project with 115 million euros.

Nuclear phase-out: Germany's constitutional court reprimands Parliament for poor compensation regulation

   The hasty decision of nuclear phase-out after the Fukushima nuclear incident reguires a financial compensation for the plant operators. However the bills passed so far are so poorly drafted that they could not become effective. The german constitutional court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) severely blamed lawmakers for their faulty work, writes german newspaper WELT:

The financial compensation for certain power plant operators due to the accelerated nuclear phase-out after the reactor disaster in Fukushima has to be completely reorganized again. The 2018 amendment to the law was inadequate and also never came into force due to formal deficiencies, the Federal Constitutional Court decided after a lawsuit by the energy company Vattenfall. The legislature is “still obliged to implement new regulations as soon as possible”, as the highest German court in Karlsruhe announced on Thursday. (Az. 1 BvR 1550/19)

Because of the reactor accident in Fukushima, Japan, the federal government withdrew an extension of the service life of the 17 German nuclear power plants that had been decided just a few months earlier. By the end of 2022 at the latest, all reactors must be taken off the grid on fixed dates. Then the end of nuclear power.

In 2016, following lawsuits from Eon, RWE and Vattenfall, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled that the amendment to the law that sealed this turnaround was essentially compatible with the Basic Law. The energy companies are entitled to adequate compensation for investments that have become pointless and forfeited production rights.

Vattenfall, among others, benefits from this. Due to the fixed shutdown dates set in 2011, the Swedish group no longer had the opportunity to internally produce electricity volumes originally allocated to its two German power plants, Krümmel and Brunsbüttel. For this, the group should be able to demand a compensation payment in the millions in 2023. According to the Federal Environment Ministry, the exact amount will only then be able to be determined.

However, the legal regulations for this are in parts "unreasonable", as stated in the Karlsruhe decision. In addition, the entry into force was made dependent on the approval of the EU Commission. However, this was never formally issued.

Because of the nuclear phase-out, Vattenfall is also pending a lawsuit at the World Bank's International Court of Arbitration (ICSID) in Washington. This involves claims of several billion euros due to the permanent shutdown of Krümmel and Brunsbüttel.

Germany: Uniper stops construction of FSRU Wilhelmshaven

Concerns about a sufficient workload of the planned FSRU confirmed by the paucity of prospective clients willing to book capacities le to the decision to put the project on hold, meanwhile the building works to complete the Nord Stream 2 pipeline have been resumed, writes german newspaper WELT:

Politicians are often sales geniuses, and this is particularly true of the incumbent US President: Donald Trump once advertised American natural gas on the world market as "Freedom Gas". The fuel extracted with the controversial "fracking" method should help to free the countries of the world from the dependence on Russian oil and gas monopolists.

The oil and gas business has always been highly politicized and is still at the center of geostrategic planning by the great powers. It was probably not due to purely economic considerations that Germany started building three liquefied gas ports on the North Sea coast a few years ago.

Frozen liquid gas, also known as LNG, delivered by tanker was intended to limit the market power of the main European supplier, Russia, in natural gas. The EU Commission also considered this to be sensible.

Danish author: The myths of renewable energies

 Danish author Björn Lomborg of think tank Copenhagen Consensus Center considers renewable energies an eyewash. Neither are they low in price nor do they contribute to halt the climate change. He develops some interesting arguments in german newspaper WELT:

Are Renewable Energies Competitive? We hear constantly that wind and solar energy are conquering the world. They are free and - we are told - cheaper than fossil fuels. But why is Germany spending 18 billion euros this year on subsidizing solar and wind energy? In the current discussion about renewable energy, a little is actually true and a lot is misleading.

Technically speaking, it's true that an extra kilowatt-hour of electricity generated by the cheapest and most effective new wind and solar systems is cheaper than fossil fuels. In Germany, according to the Fraunhofer Institute, these best-case technologies generate an average of one kilowatt hour of electricity for 5.2 cents for solar and 6.1 cents for wind energy. Compared to the average price of a new lignite power station that produces a kilowatt hour for 6.3 cents, it seems absolutely logical to build more and more wind and solar systems.

Nord Stream 2: Ukraine caucus wants to ensure sanctions

 RFERL writes:

Members of the Congressional Ukraine Caucus are concerned a U.S. bill to expand sanctions on a Russian natural-gas pipeline to Europe could be dropped from the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The bill, known as the Protecting Europe’s Energy Security Clarification Act (PEESCA), would widen the scope of sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline running under the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany to include any individual or entity providing insurance or welding services for the project.

PEESCA has been included in the NDAA defense spending bill passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate earlier this year with slight variations. The Senate bill would also sanction any company that provides testing or inspection services for the pipeline. Congress is currently reconciling differences between the Senate and House versions of the NDAA and could be finalized in the coming days.

Members of the Ukraine Caucus have written to congressional leaders to urge them to “include language” in the final version of the NDAA that clarifies the new sanctions, indicating they are concerned PEESCA could be taken out or watered down despite bipartisan support for the bill, according to a letter obtained by RFE/RL.

You can read the rest of the piece via the below link:

https://www.rferl.org/a/30916780.html

Poland: another blow against Nord Stream 2

The polish office for competition and consumer protection (UOKiK) has inflicted financial penalties of more than 6 bn EUR on Gazprom and other companies involved in the pipeline construction; polish government hopes that to end the controversed project, writes german newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ):

After the attempted murder of Kremlin critic Alexej Nawalny and a decision by its anti-monopoly authorities, Poland is hoping for an end to the controversial Baltic Sea pipeline Nord Stream 2. A construction freeze is apparently possible, said Poland's Foreign Minister Zbigniew Rau on Polish radio. Norbert Röttgen, Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Bundestag, had previously also called for an immediate construction stop.

Poland has long been campaigning for a complete shutdown of Nord Stream 2, the 93 percent completion of which is being financed by Russia's gas monopoly Gazprom, the German companies Wintershall and Uniper, the Austrian OMV, the French Engie and the British-Dutch Shell. After the assassination attempt on Navalny with a neurotoxin by the Novichok group, "a key moment has come when we should all say that it makes no sense to pursue a project like Nord Stream 2 with Russia," said Poland's Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki to the EU Summit last week for an end to the Baltic Sea pipeline.

In addition to the political rejection by Warsaw, there are now possible billions in fines for Gazprom and millions in fines for its western partners - and probably years of disputes before Warsaw and European courts. On October 6, Poland's anti-monopoly authority UOKiK imposed a fine of almost 6.48 billion euros on Gazprom for alleged violations of Poland's anti-monopoly laws. Engie is to pay 12.4 million euros, Uniper 6.67 million, Wintershall 6.87 million, Shell 6.74 million and OMV 19.6 million. Gazprom and several partners have already announced lawsuits against the decision - it can take years to reach a decision.

The background to the UOKiK decision is a request from Gazprom and the five western partners in 2015: At that time, the companies asked Poland's anti-monopoly authority for approval of a planned joint venture for Nord Stream 2, in which Gazprom will hold half and the five western companies each hold ten percent should hold. According to UOKiK, Gazprom and its partners have recognized Polish jurisdiction and EU law.

But in 2016 the then UOKiK boss announced concerns about the planned joint venture: Nord Stream 2 would reduce competition on the gas market and increase Europe's dependence on Russian natural gas. As a result, the Russian monopoly and its partners withdrew the application in Warsaw in August 2016 - and in 2017 only signed two contracts for the joint financing of Nord Stream 2. However, according to today's UOKiK boss Tomasz Chróstny, these contracts constitute a de facto joint venture without If it had only been a question of financing, Gazprom could have borrowed the billions required for the construction of Nord Stream 2 (total cost: estimated 9.5 billion euros) from banks or the Russian government. The penalties now imposed, each corresponding to a tenth of the annual turnover, are the maximum possible penalty under Polish law. In addition, the companies should terminate their agreements within 30 days.

Gazprom said the Warsaw decision "violates the principles of legality, proportionality and fair trial" and announced a lawsuit; Shell did the same. The Warsaw Anti-Monopoly Court is initially responsible. Should Gazprom and its partners lose there and in an appeal, they should go to the EU Court of Justice. Kremlin spokesman Dmitrij Peskow said of the Warsaw decision that Russian-Polish relations were "not flourishing" anyway. One could therefore not assume that anything would have a negative effect on them.