There's a number of issues here:

- one is the talk in the West about Gazprom's inability in the medium term (say, to 2015 or 2020) to bring gas on stream when needed (hint: let our boys in bog oil do it): that's bunk

- another is the issue of long term availability of gas, between the possible peak of their production and their increasing domestic demand: that's a real issue, which requires that we work on our side on demand

- another one you raise is that of pipeline capacity: on this I disagree with you: there are enough pipelines to carry over all the gas we're willing (or we need) to buy from Russia, and they are actualyl building those that will be needed in the next 10-15 years (with Nordpipe). The pipeline network is in good condition, it's the only thing where Gazprom never stopped investing during the 90s

As to the EU being Russia's largest customer, and having "rights" to see changes in Gazprom, I have to say: "huh?". Why? We have a right to see contractual obligations fulfilled. We have a right to try to negociate better terms, but currently, the balance of power is not really on our side, especially not with all the bluster around.

re Engdahl.geopolitics

Perhaps the following scenario will help explain events and predict others.

These are core facts of the Petrogame that drive events:

Consider: A desert chieftan in the 1930's discovers that his territory has tons and tons of gold laying in countless veins just 100 meters under the sand. Almost unbelievably easy to access it merely with big shovels. As such desirable treasure is impossible to exploit secretly, what would be the single, over-riding consideration dominating his thoughts...from the moment he verified the fact of that gold?

Clearly his next-tentflap neighbors will be at once dazzled and obsessed with plans to make him the main course for their dinner .
As the lucky chieftan, he has certainty that he must obtain an overwhelming military force to squash the appetite of neighbors, before their plans mature and overwhelm him. All his attention goes to securing both the new wealth and his ownership of it.

Here lay apparent contradictions. Until late 1970's, Saudi Arabia had no real military forces at all ! No Army...No Navy...No Air Force...Only police and internal security forces. That defies sensibility because the chieftan in the late 1930s, and surely by 1941, had Standard Oil engineers verify the data demonstrating that huge pools of oil were in fact there. Knock a pipe into the sand, screw on a valve, make lots of new friends. Does not even need a pump.

It is impossible that there was no huge, military force immediately established to protect those deposits. But there was none...or was there?

There had to be, but it was hiddden. A powerful partner was there. There was a quid-pro-quo created where each partner held exquisitely equal leverage. If either party renegged, the other could cause disaster. The key to workability was the equal leverage which ensures durability of the arrangement.

The Oil Powers [dominated first by Standard and soon RoyalDutchShell and later BP ] were able to guarantee that the now RoyalChieftanFamily stayed on the Royal Throne, in exchange [1] for the Chieftan depositing his oil revenue monie$ into the Oil Power's banks; and equally strategically, [2] the Oil Powers led by Standard would retain overriding control of wholesale and retail distribution policy to extent of who would/would not receive the ultimate use of the petro products [oil and gas] and at what terms.

What was the OilPowers' guarantee? The US Military was [somehow under the control of The Standard] to be made available to guarantee continuity of the Royal Throne as long as the Throne deposits the bulk of their revenue$ in OilPowers, banks and does not withdraw said deposits; and obeys any production/distribution/marketing directions. Oil became denominated in US Dollars. As for the Throne's leverage, just their mere hint that $ deposits would be withheld or withdrawn would undermine credibility of banking systems. As the magnitude of flowing oil rose, the partners next agreed the USDollar would be the exclusive trade-currency. Each party had equal and credible leverage to enforce its position.
That is what happened in Saudi Arabia.

"Oil Powers" identities change over time, but are essentially Anglo-American. "Oil Powers" are not companies; they are individuals with similar goals who use oil/gas as a tool to enable strategy.

Petro-oleum = Rock Oil. Until 1859, it was thought to exist only as slow seepage from inside rock, in non-commercial quantities. By 1859 petroleum was discovered to exist in underground pools. This was quickly recognized by some as the ultimate source of Heat/Light/Power [HLP], in terms of cost, quality and efficiency.

Silliman at Yale University had done the first major chemical analysis of crude oil within months of its being found to exist in commercial quantities. Note the first use for petroleum, in commercial quantities, was lamp-oil for light [nearly white, non-smoking, portable and cheap] and the demand was worldwide, overwhelming even from Asia. Demand for light was later followed by demand as lubricant. Still later as fuel for steam production [e.g. ships]; later still as source fuel for combustion [gasoline] engines, space heating and electrical generation.

Wherever oil was made available, it could easily dominate as the source of HLP demand. Thus he who controlled its distribution could control whoever needed it...or whatever nation needed it. You want Heat? You want Light? You want Power? Either be compliant or be coldly in darkness and powerless.

A super tool to compel cooperation from any ruler. Or to find another who will. Control the ruler or create the new ruler, and let the ruler control the population. Best to select a Royal Family, as that means a predictable line of succession. The plan is old, but the plan has had many successes.

Early on, Standard's Rockefeller and Royal Dutch' Dietermann and the English Crown understood all of this. [England's Shell and RoyalDutch merged about 1900.]*

It is critical to include the fact that the OIL-game was merged with the BANKING-game. * *

As with Saudi Arabia, the similar deals made with Kuwait and other ruling-family-type governments. He who partners with the family controls the oil/gas as long as that family stays on the throne.

The deals all involve Standard [American] and Royal DutchShell/BP [Anglo] et al, who have similar, effective, covert control over their respective governments' forces [military and/or other contributions to the required force] to guarantee longevity of the ruler's status and similar production/distribution/marketing rights from the ruler.

So explains the saga of Iran's Shah. Democraticly booted out in early 1950's, quickly reinstalled by Anglo-American force, then booted again 25 years later. No more Royal Line = end of deal = OilPowers attempt in ANY WAY to stop/ruin any oil production/marketing they cannot control.

So explains the saga of Saddam. Non-cooperating [e.g. not denominating exclusively in USD] and no Royal Line.

So explains the saga of Kuwait when Saddam briefly took over. Who reacted very forcefully to put the Sabah family back on the Royal Throne? You can bet the Saud family was watching nervously to see if, in fact, Standard et al would make good the guarantee; after all, the Saud clan held the same guarantee with the same partner. The Saud clan breathed easy when Kuwait's Sabah family was returned to their throne [followed by abrupt end of military operation].

So explains some of the Czar's troubles. The Czar would not relinquish control of Russian oil [e.g. Baku] which really crimped Rockefeller's [Standard] and Dietermann's [Royal Dutch/EnglishShell] world-monopoly dream, and not-so-oddly, WW I did not end in Russia until 1922/1923; then government that followed the Czar was not ruling-family type, thus no predictable line of succession.

WW 1 ? Have a look at the territory of the Ottoman Empire at that time. Then, locate the known oil resources within that perimeter, factor in England's Lawrence of Arabia and promise of self-government to their Arabian allies for expelling the Ottoman rulers. Then watch what happened when the the Ottoman armies were expelled.

WW 2 ? Surely Krupp, I. G. Farben et al in oil-less Germany knew well the prize of Baku/Caspian. There's an old bio of Dietermann who, in 1920's, was quoted in English newsmedia, claiming that the resources of Russia would be the "greatest commercial prize in history", and that "Baku is the finger that points East" as he promoted another war. But the world depression from 1930 delayed the acquisitive Dietermann's-and-others' plan to jointly invade Russia.

So explains the saga of Vietnam. Offshore, oil/gas deposits were surmised because the geography fit the oil industry's working model of Continental Shelf theory [just GOOGLE "vietnam + oil" to see who/what is happening post-1975] but, after the French left, there was no possibility to control a petroleum industry. And certainly no ruling family after failed attempt to create a Diem clan. The thought of oil being independently developed and marketed was indeed a threat.

So explains the saga of all non-ruling-family-type governments' attempts to develop and market their oil. In the case of Mexico, albeit without a ruling-famly, Marines were sent into Veracruz and the oligarchs coalesced to rule extended-family-style since then; and being right on US border facilitates control. Those oligarchs who did not agree were visited by unlucky events.

So explains the saga everywhere a ruling-family has oil that can be produced and potentially marketed.

So explains a lot of other observations from circa 1880 to present time.

So explains why the petrogame of "I hold you by your heat/light/power arteries" is getting interestinger and interestinger. And wilder.

So explains the addiction. Oil addiction was created by low-cost, high quality, efficient and readily available fuel supply. The addiction was/is maintained by intense suppression of alternative HLP sources [e.g. by legislation; denial of funding; misdirecting R&D], along with theOilPowers closely monitoring all aspects of their game.

The petrogame is the means to World Domination by a small group who coincidently share similar goals.

Only petroleum [as oil and gas] can be harnessed in a way that precludes unwanted-others from joining the group.

No other HLP resource can be globally monopolized; or exists in sufficient quantity. The others are merely technology based, and technology cannot be monopolized. [E.g.-- a nuclear club to monopolize enrichment/extraction is a work-in-progress, but has only short-term and spotty workability that can be bypassed. Also there are local monopolies, such as control of hydro-power, that are not scaleable to global scope. As for coal, technology has not resolved enormous pollution aspects, and coal has potential only to crimp or tweak the petrogame.]

The above is a minimal framework to make sense of many events, especially since late 1800's, that otherwise seem crazy-quilt.

* In late 1500's, the English Crown realized its very survival was as seafaring-traders/sea-controllers and began (1) building a global navy and (2)collecting data, in earnest, of all known, global resources, first compiled by England's Hakluyt team. [Just 1 example so the reader gets the urgency: On 2,500 mile voyages across open ocean, lack of potable water caused entire crews to die and their ships become derelict. Thus sources of potable water in mid-ocean and the route for longboats to get safely ashore on the "unknown" islands, became vital secrets to be learned.] That viewpoint and project primed many subsequent adventures from gold-buccaneering, fleet-building and wiping-out the Spanish Armada on up to The East India Company and into more modern, more covert tactics. Long-range planning always evolving by trial and error and very covert. The small island-nation of England learned well its limitations as its Empire collapsed. Surely by the 20th Century, survival depended on correctly analysing its failure to control that Empire. The island-nation needed a giant proxy-nation to front for its Empire rebuild. Whoever might it be?

** By 1890, it was apparent that Big Oil, primarily Standard's combine, had the cash volumes and cash flows to actually rival and threaten the banking game. In late 1890s, Rockefeller and JP Morgan teamed to buy Carnegie's steel behemoth and form the US Steel combine. The cash price was about $490 Million, in 1890-era dollars ! The peculiar nature of the petrogame's grip on HLP offerred real assets versus the paper of banking, breaking the banker's peculiar clout that depended on being allowed to monopolize paper money. Further, while paper money dealt with sovereign currencies on a nation-by-nation basis, oil was a global tool.

Read my post and read the article at the link and then it will be clear.

I agree with most of what you write.

BUT, the most important goal of the EU is to stabilize Europe and to prevent wars breaking out. It stabilizes the continent that was embroiled in wars for centuries. This is the main point of having the EU - to give nations a place to discuss their differences instead of going to war. And this works. If it were not for the EU, the break-up of Yugoslavia could have lead to a larger war including many countries in the region. Many-many countries have minorities in other countries in Europe and this is a possible source of conflict.

Also at the current time, the EU is divided over many issues and there is no hope yet to make a more centralized federal government (like the USA). But this could change with time. It is utmost of importance for the USA to prevent a more centralized European state. They use the UK and other means of 'divide and conquer' strategy to slow down the integration of Europe. Why? Because Europe then could become a major international player (which currently it is not).

As for the Euro, it is considered by many a safer currency than the dollar. The US prints the dollar limitlessly and this causes its value to fall - an eventual collapse of the dollar is also possible. European nations do not have very high debts and trade deficits, even though the Euro is not backed by gold reserves either (which is a weakness).

I really don't think you have any idea what the EU is about. Stop reading the UK press to have information on the EU, seriously.

The EU has no REAL POWER to enforce anything.

I'm not sure I understand what issues you are talking about here. Are you saying the EU is unable to enforce regulations within member states? Could you give some examples where that is the case?

The last four words are very accurate, "have began to panic". But it is not the gas situation alone that is causing this panic. The gas issue simply makes visible the full magnitude of Europe's complete lack of power in the world, and the EU's "black hole" of real enforcable policy.

Complete lack of power? It's certainly true that the EU nations lack the ability to project military power around the globe US style, but then again, Europe pretty much gave up on the whole empire idea in the second half of the last century, so there is really no need for that kind of military power. You also seem to overlook the small issue of economic power. Or are you saying that the EU has no economic power?

Only the Americans are still completely bought into the cult of European superiority. Compounded by America's own almost blinding self hatred, and the utter disgust and disdain we hold for our Administration, we have been easy suckers for the Uber Euro scam, and many Americans who invested in Europe simply to spite our own nation stand to be wiped out when the reality of the world situation hits.

For a scam currency it seems to be surprisingly popular in the world, even or especially outside the US, following your logic I suppose those countries must have their share of unpatriotic suckers who buy it just to spite their respective governments.

What should the Americans do vis a vie the Europeans? Simple. Deal honestly, directly, straightforwardly with the individual European nations in matters of open and cooperative trade and mutual education and assistance, and pretend for all practical effects that the "EU" does not exist. Because facts on the ground are, it really doesn't.

Whoa, now the EU doesn't even exist? Care to elaborate what these fact on the ground are?

Hi Writerman,

Thanks and I'm a little confused by what you say here. You believe
"Personally, I believe they are being uduly alarmist in relation to how close we are to the peak and how rapidly the decline in production will subsequently be..."
And at the same time "In my opinion the guys from the Soil Association are drastically underestimating the "challange" posed by Peak Oil..."
Can you explain further?

In any case, I'm wondering...when you say "...maybe oil production will fall by 75% in only fifteen years! If this was to happen, I think one could reasonably assume that civilization as we know it would collapse, the timescale is just way too short for us to adapt in time."

1) What timescale do you think is needed in order to avoid collapse?
2) What lesser percentages would result in a different scenario?
For example, take a 50% fall in 20 years...what scenario? Do you see what I mean? 75% in only 15 years = collapse,
65% in only 20 years = ?
And so forth...

3) How would one come up with a realistic assessment?

Hope that You are right (I'm a software eng. from Russia).
My biggest gripe with lawmakers here - not enough laws against smoking.