the u.s. natural gas revolution: will europe be ready in time?

7/31/2019 The U.S. Natural Gas Revolution: Will Europe Be Ready in Time?

1/30

p a p e r s e r i e s

The U.S. NaTUral GaS revolUTioN

Will eUrope Be ready iN Time?

Paolo Natali

Compagnia di San Paolo Fellow


2/30

2012 Transatlantic Academy. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means

without permission in writing from the Transatlantic Academy. Please direct inquiries to:

Transatlantic Academy

1744 R Street, NW

Washington, DC 20009

T 1 202 745 3886

F 1 202 265 1662

E [email protected]

This publication can be downloaded for free at www.transatlanticacademy.org.

Transatlantic Academy Paper Series

The Transatlantic Academy Paper Series presents research on a variety of transatlantic topics by

staff, fellows, and partners of the Transatlantic Academy. The views expressed here are those of

the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Transatlantic Academy. Comments

from readers are welcome; reply to the mailing address above or by e-mail to [email protected].

About the Transatlantic Academy

The Transatlantic Academy was created in 2007 as a partnership between the German Marshall

Fund of the United States (GMF) and the ZEIT-Stiftung Ebelin und Gerd Bucerius. The Robert

Bosch Stiftung and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation joined as full partners beginning in

2008, and the Fritz Thyssen Foundation joined as a full partner in 2011. The Compagnia di San

Paolo joined in providing additional support in May 2009, as did the Joachim Herz Stiftung and the

Volkswagen Stifung in 2011. In addition, the Academy received startup funding from the Trans-

atlantic Program of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany through funds of the

European Recovery Program (ERP) of the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology.

About the Compagnia di San Paolo Fellowship

Chosen from among Italys most promising young academics and policy practitioners, Compagnia

di San Paolo Fellows are in residence at the Transatlantic Academy for up to three months.

During their fellowship, they interact with the Academys long-term fellows, conduct their own

research, write a short paper for the Transatlantic Academy Paper Series, and make presenta-

tions to audiences of analysts and government officials in the Washington area. The Compagnia

di San Paolo Fellowship is made possible by a grant from the Compagnia di San Paolo, Italy.

On the cover: A liquid natural gas tanker at port Mayumi Terao
http://-/?-mailto:TA%40gmfus.org?subject=mailto:TA%40gmfus.org?subject=http://-/?-


3/30

The U.S. Natural Gas Revolution:Will Europe Be Ready in Time?

Transatlantic Academy Paper Series

May 2012

Paolo Natali1

T w k T A fw f , T

B, S VD, P Aw-S. S k J C M f S Rb

M P f R D S, x g , f k g

g E. A fw f f f q ; w b

, w q b g bg fw .

Ex S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

T Nw Gb G G E P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Mk S F f P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

If G E G Nwk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

W P O f E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

P R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Bbg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3


4/30

The U.S. Natural Gas Revolution 1

Executive Summary

T g U S gg bg gf g gb

g k. A q g (LNG)

- b

b, w g LNG

b b x,

LNG gf fg

W E, g f f

f g

g. B f g f

g w

f E. W b g

k E qb bf f g gb

g k xg C w

LNG w f w

f g g b.

E g wk b

gf b -b g, f : wk f

b, , ff

k . C b b

, bf g LNG

gb k w

fb E

g T w f

gg gb g, f

g k E.

I z k

g w k ,

k b f , f E g

b -b xg f

g, F Pkg f f

bz f g k.


5/30


Introduction

The shale gas

revolution has

the potential

to terminate

the Wests

dependency on

energy supplies

produced in

remote regions

of the world.

S g b bzzw f g k

w b b g

b: g

f g g b gg f

f k. M

b, g

W g

g f w.

W U S w f f-

ff w g g, gb

k f Lqf N G (LNG) w

g g. W w b bf

g k g

w b x gb g

b. A f g, E f f

. Ig LNG b

w f (G

Tk bg x) g

g. B f

, q-

R g f k. Lkg

w w b g,

wg w g b g f .

Ozg , , f

fw E g k

b bj f x ,

bg fw

. T bg g

zg f k

g. O ,

f b f w

bz f g k ,

f , wk

, g

b g

g. Hw, w fwk,

z f k j

, f w b , w f . T

T Y Nwk D P b

E f g

(ENTSO-G) x f

[ENTSO-G 9]. T z

f bg E

f. A E Ag f

C f Eg Rg (ACER)

b , 9 b T

Pkg f bz f E g

k. Mw, ENTSO-G

f wkg g fC A M Cg

Mg P. A f f

bz

kg, g w 4 D

f g ( b Rg

f w R-Uk g 6

9), w z

f g k E. O f ,

G Tg M b

, b C f E

Eg Rg, w g f g

fwk f w w E g k . F, g

f 6 T S O (TSO), b

w , wkg w

f b -b b

f

g f f N

E b -3.

T bkg f f

z E g k g

. T x wk k b F S f Rg w bkb

f G Tg M ,

b f g g

f k . T

g f


6/30

Transatlantic Academy4

[G Kf ]. T IEg Ag, f , f k f

z g g [IEA 8],

b gg b EU

C 7 q, w

g f bq g f

T Pkg [EU C 7]. I

CEER- M F [E

M EMI ]. M, q

f U S g g f-ff,

f LNG g bg b -, f x bg w,

f f

f f LNG

b E. Nb j Energy

Strategy Reviews j b

[B T ]. E ,

U.S. Cg R S

w LNG k w

b x g

[R ].


7/30


8/30


The relative

capacity of

member states

to attract natural

gas imports varies

widely across

the region.

The Decline of

Declinism in

Natural Gas, and

a Booming LNG

Sector

A,

f g,

f

b b

, b

fg

: g

f kg

g b

g

.

D

f x f

, w

b

f ff f, g

g f g

w

f w xg

b, b w

f g w

b f b. T

f f g , f x,

b x f b 7

3 b g , k

g

b f fg

z g w w

g fg f b

ww.

T , w, g

b. O f ,

E b w b

gf g f g f

, g

g. Mf f , E

U g, w b

, g f g

f f b. I

,

b . T b f g

f f E, b g , w

k gwg g .

T f b

g w

g. M W b

Regional Natural Gas Prices

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration 2012. Argos, Heren, Platts front month prices, 2012


9/30


Demand for gas

will increase

overall in Europe

but geographical

speaking it will

be driven by the

eastern side of

the continent.

bz , gbz, w f g

b f b (g g),

g wg f g

x g. M E

b , bg b

wb g x

b , w gg k f

g b f . T f

w g,

g, b ff

w b b k g

w b b g b, f g. T w w

CO-b f EU C Pkg,

.. b f

b 99 . H, g

f g , f g

w E, b gg

kg w b b f

.

Mw, k f g

k bg

g g , .. LNG k, xg gf g. I k

b E g k, b,

w f

w b gg g f

E g f

w E b

H Hb. T g b f

g U S g

f

w H Hb g b -q

E [P ]. T

q f b f g fw, U S

f bg g f

LNG g f x (

b w ,

b f ),

kg f

b f g LNG w

E [D ].


10/30


Europe Gearing Up for the LNG Impact

A f w g

, g fw

w xg f k

b f g

g f f b

, fb

. S b

f x f M E, Af,

f S U w E, U

S, N A, LNG f

g- b

gz . T , , f E LNG

f Q (4 ), Ag ( ),

Ng (8 ) [IGU ].

A , EU LNG ,

qg w gf

f f

bf f gb k. I , LNG

f E w 8.63 b, w q

g - f w LNG k (76

b w ) g -

x f E g k, w

46 b . T fg f E

q b f f E LNG

, 6 b.

A Tale of Pricing

T LNG g E

f g- w f

EU27 and Turkey.

Market Structures as Functions

of the Past2

World Gas Trade

Source: Congressional Cartography Program, 2010. Data from U.S. State Department and BP


11/30


fxb

k , w w b

f g- g g

b LNG. I, g f LNG

f fb , ..

f g E b

( I PSV) w LNG

w. T x w

E LNG

f . T q

f LNG b bk,

, w g

f, f k f

g

k, w g

g b

b f , w

b b . 3

T x f S j

- LNG k, w

k ff A B 998.

3 I I g wk, g f ,

g b g f ,

f g g. T g k

ff w , g

w b g bg k g

g.

I f fgg f

xg g- g ,

LNG k f f

w g- f x

b-b g , LNG

W f E w

M b b

f g, f

f LNG b

E b.

T w U S

w w f g-b

: g wg g b

U S g

gf gb

g k.

B w w U.S. g LNG,

w w

, w k

H Hb, w b b w,

g ww . T,g w g kwg

LNG w g w k w

gf gf g,

k f f g w

LNG E : xg

Imports in Europe per Exporting Country 2010 Share of LNG World Imports 2010

Source: GIIGNL, The LNG Industry 2010 [Europe includes EU27 + Turkey]


12/30


6 b, b w x w

3 b (g b b),

w w 5 b (w

4 b g)

LNG b

b, g 7 b (

f w w b b b, g

).

Regasification Capacity becomes Paramount,

but its Location Too

Hg LNG gf f

b g f g-

g E ; b

LNG ff f

, g g b gb gg

f

b w . Of

xg 6

, Swj P,

f w b bkg f

E U w f

b g

R f q- f g

. I , fg gf

K L w b

4. T

b W E.

I b ,

g E b

g . T g x f

g EU, R, g b

b f b -x f EU

g , 34 f . Hw,

k f w R

g f

g. M, f g f R

f

f f g.

Dg g

b w f g

b k, b f f

Pricing of LNG from Qatar by Destination

Source: Waterborne LNG netback calculations 2011 (elaborated by Daniel Fineren)

Of the 20 existin

terminals and

the 6 that are

already under

construction, onl

one would direct

serve one of the

member states

that are currently

depending on

Russian imports

for the quasi-

totality of their

gas supply.


13/30


g- g g f

, x

f R .

Alternatives to Russian Gas

T R

g g wk w E.

Ag g fw S I

4 f , w

LNG terminals 2011-2020 by Volume ( bcm) Same by Price ( billion)

Source: GLE investment database and their internal assessment

LNG Terminals in Europe

Source: GLE map 2012


14/30


Nwg g fw U.K. Bx,

W EU f

, g 3 f [EU

Mk Ob ]. T -b

f b g g f

S C , f C

b. B , fb

bg EU g

k f

f S Dz f Az f

C S, w

b/. T f b b k bg ff

k b 3 b fwg

f R b f Nw.

A g w k

bg ff - EU b

R Bg,

f b

,

g

bg

f I

x

PSV

A b Bg,

w

k

f Bk

g.

G

b,

LNG

w b

w f E, f

w

g f R gb. T

bf f LNG b

f g, x f G 76

f w g f R ff

: g g

f J 9, R gf

w b ff

g R , g

Gk [N ].

European Natural Gas Market and Major Import Sources

Source: BP, Statistical Review of World Energy, 2008

During the gas

supply disruption

of January 2009

the Revithoussa

regasification

terminal alone

was able to

entirely offset th

missing Russian

volumes.


15/30


Physical vs. Regulatory Progress

M b

f E g

wk g E

g k, g

f g g. Mk

ff b bf, b

w b f g f

g g f g

. A w b g

, g w w , k

b g

f b f I E D E

Tg S. S f

f f

fw.

Rfg f w

bg bf b b, b q

b k w

b b g

w bf b g:

bz f g k. T

f z f fw f f. A g w

g zg fw g wk

g b f f

f bg w .

P f b

jf k w b

b . S

wk g b,

b w g

bg f .

I, ff g ,

kg f g k.

A bw EU U.S. x

bj qk w g

f f U S

g wg f

g f 5 g 4-5 E g w

k.4 W 5 bg

ww f w

w b f, 4-5 f

w g f jf

w b g .

T f g g

z fw [Jb P 7;

B ]. I , b

f f W E LNG .

T b

f bg k. B b wf

b k, k g ,

, b f

E ffg f

f g .

I w, w

b jf g,

b jf k ff g,

ff w x f

f z w

g . C wk b g, -k

g f

f, w x w

E U w N-

5 9 Rg g

G S f S D. B g

, f k

w E g k w

4 T f q WgAg C f C (WACC), f b f

g , , ff . I ,

RPI-X g f

ff.

5 N- f q f b

f f g wk f g f

f b b.

Infrastructure and Governance

in the European Gas Network3

There is more

room for

optimization

of flows than

there is in the

improvement of

infrastructure.


16/30


bf f kg gb g k.

The Case for Improving Market Governance

Lbz, f , g

f f , b

b W

f W W II. Bf

bz w f U.K. g

98, w wk-b

f f g, g q-b

g, b g g -w

, w g b b w

E. T g

ff w g, ff

k g . B

b w

wk.

T g f k bz

EU bk

99 b fw

ff g xg wk

q f f k f bg g

f f w

f k

, , b

wk. T b bj

, b kwg

k b

g q k,

b f . A b

, b w g

EU , w f

N-, -- f;6 b f k b f

6 T -- q b

q g b f-ff f

b f w, g

k, .

k wk f ff g bb g

z f xg fw.

I f, f w E

g wk f ff.

A ff g wk b f

w w : f

b f g- bkg b

ff g k

f ; f ff ,

ff bw x

f k b

(g w g)

f . I b

f k

f f . F f , f

g b bk g

w b

g,

b. T g b

b, f U-I-O-L-I

fx . T

, f -fxb, b , w

ff b

g. S,

f -

b f z z, b

g g f

w gg. A

E , wk w

k gf g

, w -b k

w f gf g

, w N bg ffxb G. B

x: b fw F, S,

I w f b x

[L M ].

The amount of

capacity that

remains unused

at cross-border

points varies

from zone to

zone, but on

average remains

higher than the

actual security

of supply needs

would suggest.


17/30


I b g g f Ag

Lb ( b x w

g f ),

f g G

T f

x w g

PSV b.

T F S x x

b

bw b

Pg, g f S gfxb F b PEG k

LNG . (T xg

-b L fw

b f 3 w 5

, w -b

B 5 b, b

L - z).

F fxb

g . B F g

k. Af x

, Nb F g

w f, w

x g g

k, w w f fw wk

g b bg b f fw. Bg

x w S, w

g, q w

w b b g

w. A

g, .. f fw g

f fw, b

b b bw PEG N

Bg G. B F w

b f fxb G

f N, w w

w b b f b f

f g .

I w, z f , g

g f g wk

xg fxb,

b g g k f f

b . T b-g f

b f bz f E g

k b b, b

g w

bf f gb g g b g. B b

b .

The harmonizati

of rules appears

to be something

that the gas

market left to

itself is not able

to provide.


18/30


Cross-Border Gas Shipping Today

If g g -b E

g k b g

g,

f b fw , b g

f E E g

g , f bf f

EU w. A g

bg w f g g -b

b f gf

q, f ,

f E,

bf , w wk

f, g, LNG .

A , -b g f g

b w EU

k f g

g b f g

b f T S O (TSO),

b b

g . I g

g ,

k f ff TSO w ,

x x w

g

g ff w

wk, k

g . I,

f , ,

f E q

z, b w b

q z. F

wg g f

D b TTF A b CEGH Bg, g x

b Bx .

O f , g w q

b f -f ,

g q, g g,

f g f fz E . T k

f g

. F w g

g g f

f . Ib

b w bg

z ( g w

f bg b) -

f (k-b bg w

TSO g f bg)

w f f,

b k fg. M, x f k

k w

b fb f : TSO

w (g,

, f) b

w ff. O , k

b g, gg

bk : b w

bk g f g-

f f

- b , w

k f .

T q f f LNG

fw k, f x, S g

b k ff b gf

, b f Sk,

R, Bg bf f

. F , g g

f S R Bg

b wk, R

f

EU. N R Bg f . T

b g LNG. U C

b, g f Ib

(M Eg)

Mk

What Policy Options for Europe?

4

Cross-border

shipping of natu

gas is a relatively

cumbersome

activity within

the EUs territory

due to the lack

of regulatory

coordination

among member

states and the

presence of a

large number

of Transmission

System Operator

(TSOs).


19/30


Box 1: From TTF to CEGH

Imagine that a company has bought, or is otherwise going to hold, a certain volume of gas for

a period of time, starting the following month (i.e. a front month contract), at the TTF hub in

the Netherlands. This company believes the price differential with the Austrian hub CEGH at

Baumgarten will increase, and therefore intends to sell this volume there. Leaving aside for

simplicity any license requirement, in order to simply ship the gas across the continent, the

company will need to complete the following:

Acquire exit capacity from the Dutch TSO GasTransportServices at one of the five exit points

toward Germany (Bocholtz, Zevenaar, Winterswijk, Vlieghuis, Bunde).

Match it with entry capacity into Germany from the appropriate TSO (Open Grid Europe,

Thyssengas, ENI GT DE depending on entry point).

Move it further inside Germany with other TSOs as necessary.

continued on page 21


20/30


f Bg Tk. T Gk

R

Sk b.

A f Sk, g fw f

Bg b , b bf

g Bg, LNG

S w g

b Bx . T x f w

- fwk,

b f Sk LNG

g g S. T x f 9

g w

g b f g R

b bg G b

NCG g g Cz Rb.

T b

z k f S, f

g w b w

f q b NCG. B w g

g f , f, ff

f LNG S q NCG E

b, gg b

k g

f J 9.

continued from page 20

Use exit capacity at either Oberkappel (Open Grid Europe or GRTGaz Deutschland) or Burghausen

(Bayemets or Gascade).

Buy entry capacity from the corresponding Austrian TSO (BOG for Oberkappel, or Gas Connect

Austria for Burghausen).

The capacities acquired need to match in terms of volumes and timing, and in order for the shipping

to be guaranteed, all of them need to be firm capacities. Any failure to obtain firm capacity in a

segment of the route, with the consequent need to use at least interruptible capacity, will expose

the entire route to risk of being disrupted.

Imagine that, for example, the entry points from Germany are congested, and neither BOG nor GasConnect Austria have firm capacity available for the specified time framework. In addition, this time

the owner of the volumes is particularly unlucky, and it looks like no such capacity is available on

the secondary market either. BOG offers interruptible at Oberkappel. The possibilities are:

Sell the volume at the German NCG, provide the Austrian counterpart with gas sourced locally at

CEGH, strike two decent deals but forget about making a profit on the price differential. After all,

this is exactly the reason why there is a price differential.

Buy interruptible capacity at the Austrian entry point, be lucky, and still be able to fully exploit the

price differential.

Buy interruptible capacity at the Austrian entry point, be unlucky, and get interrupted for some

days during the contract. During those days, sell the German volumes at NCG day ahead and

provide the Austrian counterpart with local volumes sourced at CEGH day ahead, making a loss in

the process.


21/30


Box 2: LNG from Spain to Slovakia

In order to ship gas landed at the Bilbao LNG terminal, a shipper would first of all need to enter

and exit the Spanish system operated by the TSO Enagas.

The gas must then pass through the three PEG balancing zones in France (TIGF operated by the

eponymous TSO, then South and North operated by GRTGaz) to reach the German exit point at

Medelsheim.

After the border crossing, the gas would be in Germany and in the pipes operated by either

GRTGaz Deustschland or Open Gas Europe.

At this point, the long process already described in Box 1 needs to be completed in order to

reach Austrias eastern border at Baumgarten. As the Slovakian TSO Eustream now has physical

bi-directional capacity at the Baumgarten entry point, the gas can then be shipped into Slovakia by

booking the corresponding capacity.

More likely, however, the gas would be shipped through the Czech Republic (Waidhaus or Deustch

Neudorf entry and Lanhot exit) via the TSO Net4Gas.

This physical shipping of gas from Spain to Slovakia is not what would happen even in a more

virtually interconnected system, as there will always be different liquidity levels at different points in

the network, and most likely this would lead to cheaper opportunities physically closer to the point

of demand. In this case, unless the severity of the disruption drains out spot availability at hubs,

continued on page 23


22/30


Mkg b g b

f fw

bw : f g b g z g,

w w , b ,

wb fw f g g f

R k . A g LNG

S g A w w

g b AOC f g Bg.

Of , fw f

g g

E f R -. T

f w w kg

g g w. B

ff ff fxb

E E k, b

b ff b g

b .

The Needed Change and its Drivers

Ig , g

w b

, w b

f g E

w w b f

f -b , k w b Bx

g f LNG S

Sk.

B -b x f

k bg

continued from page 22the spot price at NCG is likely to remain lower

than that of landing a spot LNG cargo in Spain

and shipping it in the byzantine way described

above. But with more virtual interconnection,

the costs of the two operations would

influence each other, mitigating spot price

spikes and therefore ultimately providing

physical volumes at lower prices.

f . I TSO bg z b, fwg

z w k

:

C

b f bkg

b . I f b

b,

g g b

.

Cg g b

gz w bk

f -b g

f g , w

b f g, w b k

bg g

w k

k .

Rg q w g,

TSO, g,

b z w

, , b

Box 3: Moving Gas Virtually from Italy to

Bulgaria through an Optimization Strategy

Customer A in Bulgaria wants 1 mcm/d.

Customer B in Italy has 2 mcm/d available

in Bulgaria delivered from Russia, and 1

mcm/d of LNG delivered to Italy.

Customer A buys 1 mcm/d Russian gas

in Bulgaria from customer B, which serves

additional customer C in Italy with 1 mcm/d

LNG instead of using the physical Russian

flow in exit from Bulgaria onto CEGH and then

PSV, which is now only 1 mcm/d.

The process reduces the westbound flow

rather than reversing it.

What would be

needed in the

first place is the

creation of cross

border capacity

products.


23/30


f g f

TSO g

g. Rg

b b g/x , g

f g E b,

w f k

f f bg .

L b

b f w, b ,

b g

f . O b

q q f f f

b b b f b

w b ( x f I PSV). Ow

b w k b f

/x g ff

.

A b ,

b f

E k

b. T EU g f g k E

gf w

z f , g

TSO g b w .

A f g

f b f b w

f. A ,

f Bg b

5 R g,

w x f P (48 ), w

f g ggb, R, w g

f (g R g

f gf 7 f

).

Dependency on Russian Natural Gas Exports

Sources. EU27 countries: Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the proposal for a Regulation repealing EU Directive 2004/67/EC

on the security of gas supply, July 16, 2007. Non-EU27 countries: U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2012


24/30


F, g f f U.S. g gb LNG k,

f x w

f E, wk w

z, g

-b g. Kg

gf f b -

f- bff fg, b ff

w 5

jfb g. I

, g x x

U.S. g w b ,

f -k LNG x, w b

LNG , g

k f U.S. k. I

w, g- b w g

f

LNG g w , fg

k, b f

w b f gf

f E. W E g

b gf x

f f:

S, I, G

bk f

f b ;

g kg

b

g w-b f f

g;

w k k

w f b

EU E Tg S. T

b w b f

g, k g

f w.

F, g g E b,

w z f fw w ,

f g. P g wb w

g f f g g

, g

g f g

w g .

The Opposing Factors

Igg wk ff k

f f k. T b w

E g wk b

f g g kg

gb k. T w k fwk f g

g E wk k g

w b bf

f g b gb k. A

f gb g fw kg

g w, k,

w fw w w

b f .

O f g f z

:

, w b b bw f b ,

w b E k f g

gg j fg

f q. O g

w b , b g f

f zg:

Rg g w

g w g

w k g

f , g ,

f. I , f , w

LNG w w k bf f

.

T g b x EU

E-w k g

An historical shif

in global gas flow

is taking place

right now, and as

in every market,

second comers

will have fewer

opportunities.


25/30


b. T kg k fg, f

b f fg

, wg f ff

bw E b,

g bg

f g

f x

g k f .

What Direction?

Mk ff b bg b b

k . A b , f g b f

. T w

, g w

f g wk,

f E g

k g f f

kg , f

. P f b

w g f

, w f g

bg f g b

wk b

f f .

B g f g fwk

b bz kg EU

(998, 3, 9), w f

b TSO

g g f

g g

, g g

, b

k ff f g

w w b f b f TSO -k f , g

f k f z j

k f z. F x, g

f g

wk f TSO

. If f f bw b f ,

-b w b f w k

f g w f ff

.

A x f g b, w

wg w g

k g, b

b g b g

g bz E k.

I w b b

b bg f TSO b f

TSO g . M, E

fg b

g f f w

gg z b. T

f b f gf

, f f -w b

w b- E

. A j k

g b wg

w fg k, w f

, f b.G f b

g ( w f -b

z g) w

( w g

), k

g- bf f z

k E . T

g , w

f f

EU-w g k, b f

.

E ff E b,

w w f

g k f,

w b g

f , b

g . A k b

The monopoly

power that is still

held at many

levels hinders

the spontaneous

development of

the European

gas market into

a competitive

playing field.


26/30


q, g- g

g bk b ,

g bw g-

w w g g f b b

w b ff b ff,

jzg bf f -kg

f g f .

R g w b

- g- , k

b w w z

w g -b g

k g bf bg b. T

f gb g k w

g- LNG zgw, b

w . T f

x k g f

g kg E

.

Pressure from Abroad

under a Transatlantic Perspective

I b fg , LNG

f -x f EU f g, , E LNG

- f gb k. S

g f

f E g k w

b b -g f . T

g f q gb g k

gb , bf

E w b b , w b b

g.

C w b g b f

fg , g wk gg gf x

f , gb LNG

b, , f ,

f g g. T w

w gg

The Future of the Global Gas Market

Source: BG Group 2011

The real risk is

that all these

obstacles

slow down the

harmonization

process in a

way that easing

cross-border

shipping takes

too long before

becoming visible


27/30


k b C b , b w f

g gb g k. A ,

I f gg j g f

g wk. I gg k

f f A LNG, b

f U.S.-x LNG. A g g

f LNG k, b

. I , b 55

f LNG k

C, I, J, K, Tw. A

bkg f , S C

w kg w g k w.

D U.S. g k w

b , f g g

f g

xg wg

. T LNG

U S g bw b/, g 5-8

f gb k. T

b g f LNG W

E, S, w 49.5 b

gf f w b 5

b z . Pg

w b b f E

f U S. A

b f x ,

g w ff w A g

g . C,

f g w E w f

U.S. . B E

f A , g

f - LNG w

g.

Developments in

the U.S. domestic

gas market will

also be pivotal, as

the former largest

gas importer

disappears from

the demand curve

and might soon

start exercising

its weight on the

supply curve.


28/30


I f E gz b b

gb g k q w

bg . E g

, b j

g .

A b w, EU

b g g bf

f . C-b g

b f b g

z f k ,

f TSO g w g q f

g . A E g

b g, b

f xg b g

b, f g f

q (

g f w, g g, )

z f ,

, wk q.

I b b f

LNG g w Ib

P Sk, P,

Policy Recommendations

5

Bg . O w w E k b b

g f LNG b k

f f f ff f

E .

T x f w

b g

g q f f

g, F Pkg f

bz f g k. T

f g bz k w

q g f TSO k E , w

z f g

g. C- bw TSO

gg b

b- . B

b kwg k f w

f f g b b

f , g

q. I g, EU k

q , w

k w k g .


29/30


A Sz, Aj (C N Eg) (), LNG in Spain: Key Figures and

Regulatory Framework, , F,

M 6, .

B, O. P. T (.) (), Eg

S M & N G Sg,

Eg Sg Rw, . /, M .

B, T, Safeguarding Optimal Investments

in Gas Infrastructure, T A,

, .

BP (), Energy Outlook 2030, Statistical Review.

D C f Eg S (),

Made in America: The Economic Impact of LNG

Exports from the United States.

ETSO EPEX (9), Development and

Implementation of a Coordinated Model

for Regional and Inter-Regional Congestion

Management.

EU Mk Ob f Eg (), Key

Figures, June 2011, E C DG

ENER.

Eg (), Natural Gas Demand and Supply

Long Term Outlook to 2030.

E C (7), Inquiry into

competition in gas and electricity markets, COM

(6) 85 f, J 7.

E C (), EU Energy and

Transport in Figures Statistical Pocketbook.

E C (), Energy Roadmap

2050, COM() 885/.

E M EMI (), From Regional

Markets to a Single European Market,

ERGEG M F

g, J 5, .

G, J-M Hk Kf (),Conclusions of Workshop Identifying Benefits

and Allocating Costs for Cross-Border Electricity

& Gas Infrastructure Projects,E

C DG ENER F S f

Rg.

I Eg Ag (8), Development

of competitive gas trading in continental Europe .

I G U (), World LNG Report

Jb, T. P, M. (7), I

g f b wk:L f x f B, Energy

Policy, 35 ().

KEMA (9), Study on Methodologies for Gas

Transmission Network Tariffs and Gas-Balancing

Fees in Europe, f E C,

DG TREN.

L, C Bz M (),

Convergence of Non-Discriminatory Tariff and

Congestion Management Systems in the European

Gas Sector, T B G.

Mff A (8), Review and analysis

of EU wholesale energy markets. Evaluation of

factors impacting on current and future market

liquidity and efficiency, b

DG TREN.

N, P (EPRG Cbg) (), European

Gas Supply Security, w

CERI S P P, M 9, .

P, www.., g

R, M (), Global Natural Gas: A

Growing Resource, Cg R

S, Db .

Bibliography

6
http://www.platts.com/http://www.platts.com/


30/30

1744 R StReet NW

WaShiNgtoN, DC 20009

t: 1 202 745 3886

F: 1 202 265 1662

e: [email protected]
http://-/?-http://-/?-

the u.s. natural gas revolution: will europe be ready in time?

Documents