War is pretty much about resources and geo-economic warfare is going on around the globe.

80% of all energy consumed is fossil – this needs to change. While 40% of the electricity of Germany has become “independent” and “properly democratized” (in the hands of many small producers) and thus taken away from the big four power companies in Germany – the monopolists.

The heating and transport sector is still pretty much dependent on fossil fuels from abroad – be it Saudi Arabia or Russia.

Those 80% is the reason there is war in the Ukraine and why Germany is now again using it’s brown coal resources to create electricity – which is completely nuts climate and health wise.

So the question right now is not – is there enough energy – the question is – how may sell?

This is called competition and in such a competition is BigOil from USA and Saudi Arabia and BigGas from Russia.

Because selling those resources to other countries means you can go shopping for the latest weapons with foreign money in foreign markets.

Saudi Arabia does it all the time – sell oil to USA buy weapons from USA. Sounds like a win-let-live situation.

“Members of the European Commission on Friday decided to change a key regulation proposed by the German federal agency for gas, telecom and transport, the Bundesnetzagentur, to allow Gazprom more rights for gas transport.

Friday’s decision concerned the Opal gas pipeline in Germany, which receives the fuel from the Nord Stream 1 Baltic Sea pipeline and transports it to users in Germany and the Czech republic. Until now, Gazprom was allowed to use only 50 percent of the pipeline’s capacity to prevent the company from dominating the supply infrastructure.

Because of this, a large part of the pipeline’s capacity remained unused, causing Gazprom to request the Bundesnetzagentur to change its rules. The German agency agreed to change them subject to the European Commission’s permission. The Commission agreed in principle, but said that Gazprom’s competitors would get priority access of up to 20 percent of the pipeline’s capacity.

The Commission hoped that the change would help in getting guarantees from Moscow that it would keep sending gas to Ukraine after its current contract expired in 2019.”

src: http://www.dw.com/en/eu-allows-gazprom-more-access-to-opal-gas-pipeline-through-germany/a-36192680

Szydlo and Szymanski at the EU summit on Friday (Photo: consilium.europa.eu)

“Poland has so far taken the lead in trying to block Nord Stream II.”

Criticism in eastern Europe The Ukrainian Predicament – Dependency on Russian Gas

Opening up the Opal pipeline for Russia also meant Gazprom could move ahead with its 9.9-billion-euro ($10.8 billion) plan to double the capacity of its Nord Stream pipeline under the Baltic Sea.

However, many East European countries, including Poland, have criticized the project, saying it would sideline Ukraine, which serves as a transit route for gas supplies to Europe.

Ukraine’s state energy company said it could lose up to $425 million (386 million euros) a year in transit fees.

Polish state-run gas company PGNiG  (turnover (2010) 21.300.000.000 Polnischer Zloty / 5.044.943.127 Euro) also threatened ahead of Friday’s decision that it would sue the Commission, because opening up the Opal pipeline would endanger its supplies.

Poland has also consistently urged for lesser European dependence on Russian gas supplies, especially considering the ongoing crisis in Ukraine and Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014.

src: https://euobserver.com/foreign/135608