Russia's claims to Arctic energy

[Capn_Birdseye]

Should we fear Russia's aggressive push to claim more energy reserves in the Artic? Putin doesn't seem to care about the US or world opinion, his main objective seems to be to bolster Russia's strength as a provider of energy to the world and thereby hold leverage over states.
He's already blackmailed Western oil companies in to giving up their equity stakes in Russian energy companies for a pittance, he's blackmailed eastern European states by cutting off their energy supplies that come from Russia, he's been eyeing up British Gas as a possible purchase, and now he's after the Artic sources!
Putin obviously has a new strategy, what Russia couldn't achieve through military means its now trying to achieve through energy control.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=464921&in_page_id=1811

[Eugenious]

Should we fear Russia's aggressive push to claim more energy reserves in the Artic? Putin doesn't seem to care about the US or world opinion, his main objective seems to be to bolster Russia's strength as a provider of energy to the world and thereby hold leverage over states.
He's already blackmailed Western oil companies in to giving up their equity stakes in Russian energy companies for a pittance, he's blackmailed eastern European states by cutting off their energy supplies that come from Russia, he's been eyeing up British Gas as a possible purchase, and now he's after the Artic sources!
Putin obviously has a new strategy, what Russia couldn't achieve through military means its now trying to achieve through energy control.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=464921&in_page_id=1811

Russia doesn't have the resources to utilize the reserves in the Arctic. They can boast about that's it's Russian and all that but they will need western companies and their technology to make any use of it.

That's why Putin took over Sakhalin 2 and Kovykta because western companies already invested billions and built the infrastructure to extract the resources.

Putin knows Russia cant go at it alone, he's just bluffing in order to bolster his position at home and among his elite.

[Capn_Birdseye]

Russia doesn't have the resources to utilize the reserves in the artic.

Putin knows Russia cant go at it alone, he's just bluffing in order to bolster his position at home and among his elite.
Your complacency astounds me, you seem to believe that Russia, a country that put the first man into space doesn't have the technical know-how to exploit oil & gas reserves!! Wake up my friend to the real world, the third paragraph in the link makes interesting reading.

http://www.cisoilgas.com/pastissue/article.asp?art=268908&issue=182

[Eugenious]

Your complacency astounds me, you seem to believe that Russia, a country that put the first man into space doesn't have the technical know-how to exploit oil & gas reserves!! Wake up my friend to the real world, the third paragraph in the link makes interesting reading.

http://www.cisoilgas.com/pastissue/article.asp?art=268908&issue=182

You wake up, Russia's oil and gas industry in the soviet era was losing money. from inefficiency and only when it was privatized by the oligarchs in the 90's that it started to be profitable and competitive. Yeltsin signed psa's with western oil companies so Russia could extract oil from Sakhalin and other huge deposits which it couldnt do on its own. If you think you can gain western know how and experience to extract oil miles deep you are kidding.

The western oil companies pioneered and perfected the technology to extract oil efficiently and Russia still lacks this now. The state champions in the face of Gazprom and Rosneft are horrible in terms of competitivness and technology. While they have alot of money now they are crude thiefdoms and are personal piggy banks of Putin's croneys from Saint Petersburg. Russia stands at the crossroads right now if it does not dramatically increase its oil and gas productions it's output will fall and domestic market will be forced to raise prices and this will create a huge problem for Putin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kovykta

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_policy_of_Russia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakhalin-I
Field Development
Sakhalin 1’s fields the Chayvo, Arkutun-Dagi and the Odoptu had been discovered some 20 years before by the Soviets at the time of the Production Sharing agreement in 1996. However these fields had never been properly assessed and a reevaluation of the commercial viability had to be carried. To do this, factors such as the reservoir quality, producibility and well locations had to be found. 3–d seismic is the most common way to determine much of this however shallow gas reservoirs interfered with the seismic signals and blurred the images somewhat.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakhalin-II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_industry_of_Russia
In communist days, exploration techniques were often wasteful as engineers simply drilled as many wells as possible to satisfy Moscow's quota demands, regardless of the productivity of each one.

[WebErr]

Capn_Birdseye
Where is Artic?
Is it Arctic? :D

Your complacency astounds me, you seem to believe that Russia, a country that put the first man into space doesn't have the technical know-how to exploit oil & gas reserves!! Wake up my friend to the real world, the third paragraph in the link makes interesting reading.
I agree with you. :)

Eugenious
You believe in only that you want to be. ;)
Try to understand.
Start to see what realy happens in the world.
Or you risk to live whole your life with wide shut eyes!

[Punzie]

Where is Artic?
Is it Arctic? :D

You are correct.:)
I will change the spelling on the thread title.

[Capn_Birdseye]

Thanks punzie, I have trouble with my "c's". What a stupid unt I am. ;)

[Eugenious]

Eugenious
You believe in only that you want to be. ;)
Try to understand.
Start to see what realy happens in the world.
Or you risk to live whole your life with wide shut eyes!

Here's WebErr look at what Putin's former chief economic minister thinks of your reality :)


Russia Will Not Enter the Top Five Economies By 2020 On Its Current Course

Andrei Illarionov


Yezhednevniy Zhurnal (http://ej.ru/?a=note&id=7187)

June 27, 2007

Apparently the intoxicated air of the White Nights and black-tie riverboat dinners played cruel tricks on some of the participants in the recent Petersburg Economic Forum [June 8-10, 2007]. The sheer volume of inaccuracies, distortions and absurdities uttered at the form could only invite humor.
A high bar was set by former president of the World Bank James D. Wolfensohn, who asserted that “since 1995 Russian GDP has increased by five times, after declining by 50% from 1991 to 1995.” One would think that for the former head of the respected international organization there could be no secrets in the statistical data of the world’s countries. But apparently there were.

If the current head of the board of directors of Citigroup has a problem accessing the Internet, then perhaps he could inquire with the statistical department of his own bank, turn to his colleagues at the IMF, or as a last resort take an interest in the work of the Russian Federal Statistical Service. Anyone there would be glad to answer him precisely: from 1991-1995 Russian GDP declined by 34.6%, and from 1995-2006 it grew by 55.6%. It may be that James Wolfensohn is, as [Russian Minister of Economic Development and Trade] German Gref has called him, a friend, but the truth is more valuable.

The switching of concepts in the speech of the Russian President was much more refined: “In the first quarter of this year direct foreign investment in the Russian economy rose by two and half times compared to the previous year. And accumulated foreign investment reached $150 billion.” The listener might have gotten the impression that the last figure related to the direct foreign investment that was mentioned in the first sentence. But that would be incorrect. The $151 billion figure was the total amount, as of April 1, 2007, of all foreign investment - not only direct, but also portfolio (investment in equities and shares totaling less than 10% of a company’s total capital, and the purchase of bonds, notes and other promissory paper), as well as other investments (such as trade credits and credits to the government).

The only true indicator of a country’s attractiveness for investment is direct private investment. As of April 1, 2007 it totaled $73 billion in Russia. This is a significant amount. However, if we compare it with the size of the Russian economy, it looks rather modest - only about 7% of GDP. Not including direct foreign investment in energy the figure is even smaller - just 4.5% of GDP. By way of comparison: in Ukraine accumulated foreign investment exceeds 19% of GDP; in Latvia, Lithuania and Poland it is 25%; in Georgia, 42%; and in Estonia it is 59% of GDP.

Proclamations of a macroeconomic type opened a whole new frontier of humor. “If 50 years ago 60% of world GDP originated in the Big Seven countries, today it is the opposite: around 60% of world GDP comes from countries outside their borders,” continued the Russian President. It is true that in 2006 the share of the Big Seven countries totaled 41% of world GDP. But it is also true that 50 years ago the Big Seven produced not 60% but 51% of world GDP. Hence the reduction in their share of the world economy over the past 50 years declined from 51% to 41%, or by one-fifth - not nearly as sharply as depicted in the Russian President’s speech.

Of course, one could gloat over the decline in the weight of the Big Seven in the world economy. But it would be worthwhile to first consider how the place of Russia itself has changed in the world. In comparison with the Big Seven, the relative weight of Russian GDP over the past 50 years has declined from 12.1% to 6.3%, and in comparison with world GDP it has fallen from 6.2% to 2.5% - that is, by two and a half times. Now that is a shift of a truly tectonic nature. And it is hard to argue with the President when he says that “the world has truly changed, literally before our eyes.”

But even these pronouncements paled against the forecasts. Mr. Wolfensohn “promised” that “the economies of Russia and the developing countries will grow 20 times by 2050, while the developed countries will grow by only 2.5 times.” Even if that could happen, a better illustration of the embellishment “We too ploughed” [TN: said of someone who makes overly much of his modest contribution] could hardly be found. That the economies of China, India and other developing countries may reach the size of the current Big Seven economies has not been a secret to anyone for a long time. The challenge this presents to Russia would be well worth considering.

But there was no time for such considerations in Saint Petersburg. Otherwise the predictions of a twenty-fold growth rate in the economic prospects of Russia could hardly have come to light. For a country with a population that is shrinking at the rate of Russia’s, a 20-fold increase in GDP would require a 25-fold increase in GDP per capita. How could this be achieved even theoretically, if in all of world history there has never been such a rate of growth for a country with a population of more than 1 million souls? The world record holders for economic growth rate, which have come to symbolize “economic miracles”, look much different: over 43 years, the growth rate in Japan in per capita GDP was 10 times; in Korea - 12 times; in Taiwan - 13 times; in China - 17 times.
If one were to rely on the official forecasts of the World Bank and IMF, then even extrapolating a continuation of the unprecedented high growth rate of the past few years for the world economy, the GDP growth rate in the developing countries by 2050 is unlikely to exceed 8 times, while that of the developed countries would be five times.

The height of pseudo-scientific futurology was achieved in the presentation by Russian First Vice-Minister Sergei Ivanov: “By 2020 Russia’s GDP will place it in the top five economies of the world”, and “Russian per capita GDP in terms of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) will amount to $30,000 on the basis of 2005 prices.” First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitriy Medvedev agreed with this assertion.

Alas, the promises made by the candidate-successors [to President Putin] will never come true. And not just because in order for the per capita GDP per person in Russia to reach $30,000 it would have to reach 50% of the per capita GDP of the most developed countries of the world (especially the U.S.), which has never happened in 150 years of Russian history. And not even on the doubtful basis of extrapolating a constant high growth rate for Russia and low growth rate for Europe.

The problem is that higher economic growth rates require a completely different institutional environment. The growth rate depends not only and not so much on the volume of investment - international or domestic - as on the condition of social and government institutions - private property rights, division of government powers, freedom of mass media, independence of the judiciary, civil rights, political rights, and legal order.

World history knows of not a single case in which a country not having energy revenues and being unfree (in the sense of political rights, civil freedoms, legal order and defense of property rights) achieved a GDP of even $17,000 per person. For countries with energy revenues the insurmountable barrier has been somewhat higher, but is nonetheless far short $30,000.

Alas, present-day Russia is just such an unfree country, and the situation with its key social and governmental institutions excludes the possibility of its entry into the group of the most developed countries.

The Russian economy might have grown more quickly on account of its oil industry, but as a result of the government’s breakup of Yukos, and other swindles, the annual growth rate in oil extraction has fallen from 13% to 2%. The Russian economy might have grown more quickly on account of its gas segment, but independent gas producers are being crushed by Gazprom, which has increased production over the past eight years by only 0.6%. The Russian economy might have grown quicker on account of its manufacturing sectors. But not a single sector of Russian manufacturing (with the exception of gas) has to this day exceeded the production levels achieved even in the time of the Soviet Union. For example, Russian machine building is now only one-half what it was in the time of the Soviet Union. So perhaps we should consider as an economic success for 2020 not the entry of Russia into the group of the top five economies of the world, but simply the resurrection of the volume of machine building to the level seen in 1990.

Russia nonetheless still has a chance to become a developed, attractive and respected country. But for this to happen much has to be done. Including a lot that will directly contradict what is being done by current forecasters of our “bright future”. Russia has a chance, if it is ruled not by lawlessness but legal order. If all our citizens become genuinely equal before the law, if the judiciary deals with criminal conduct irrespective of whether it is by an entrepreneur, an officer of the FSB, or the son of a First Prime Minister. If government companies can refrain from stealing the property of others, strangling independent producers, and in the end are de-monopolized. If billions of dollars stop flowing from the pockets of Russian taxpayers into endless national project boondoggles, “miracle-weapons” and government “nanotechnologies”.

Russia can save its historical chance if the current political path, being pursued by both Vice Prime Ministers, is curtailed. But Russia has no chance if it continues on this path.

[Capn_Birdseye]

Come on WebErr please don't be so naive, Andrei Illarionov has got his own agenda and history.

He is an ardent proponent of extreme laissez-faire capitalism and as such has fallen out with many within the Kremlin over several years.

In 1994 he resigned in a fit of pique as chief economic adviser to Viktor Chernomyrdin because he disagreed with his economic policy.

In 2004 he resigned as economic adviser to Putin in protest at Putin signing the Kyoto Treaty of which he is an outspoken critic.

This is what he had to say about Kyoto:

Kyoto is killing off the world economy like an "international Auschwitz," "The Kyoto Protocol is a death pact, however strange it may sound, because its main aim is to strangle economic growth and economic activity in countries that accept the protocol's requirements."
Source: Moscow Times, 15 April 2004 (http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1056#src1)

18 May, 2004
No link has been established between carbon dioxide emissions and climate change.
Source: BBC interview (May 2004) (http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1056#src6)

30 January, 2004
Kyoto costs too much and could not be ratified, Illarionov gives briefing at press briefing at the National Press Club in Washington, sponsored by the International Council for Capital Formation.
Source: ICCF (http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1056#src2)

29 September, 2003
Gave presentation at World Climate Conference, Moscow, where he questioned the influence of human interference on climate change. Used slides provided by the International Council for Capital Formation.
Source: Environmental delegates (http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1056#src3)

He seems to have a serious problem with climate change:

http://www.gateway2russia.com/st/art_267961.php

http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=-4816

In short, Andrei Illarionov lacks credibility and intellectual credence so I would not rely on anything he has to contribute to this debate!

[Ninjahedge]

Kyoto is killing off the world economy like an "international Auschwitz,"

Oop.

He pulled a "Hitler".

[Capn_Birdseye]

Oop.

He pulled a "Hitler".
I think the choice of expression says a lot about the man and where he's coming from Ninja!

[Eugenious]

I think the choice of expression says a lot about the man and where he's coming from Ninja!

And Putin compared the United States to the Third Reich. I think Illarionov is definitely the better of the two, infact Illarionov with his liberal reforms is responsible for the growth and boom that Russia is experiencing now. While Putin and his cronies are responsible for the destruction of Russia's image in the west, wholesale murder of dissent and free press and so on and so forth.

Illarionov is a saint compared to Putin.

Illarionov has more credibility and intellectual credence then all of Russia's current government.

[Capn_Birdseye]

I am afraid Andrei Illarionov is a deluded arrogant individual who, like Icarus with his wings of wax, flew too close to the sun, and paid the ultimate price.

Here is a man who:

- says the Kyoto Treaty is killing off the world economy like an "international Auschwitz"

- says categorically that there is no link between carbon dioxide emissions and climate change

- says Kyoto is an assault on economic growth, the environment, public safety, science, and human civilisation, and has adverse affects on the rights & freedoms of Russian citizens

- says global warming is not a public health or environmental issue

How can you take such a man seriously? He was described by his colleagues as "a flawed malicious individual, who thinks he's right and everyone else is wrong".
I'm inclined to go along with that assessment.

[Eugenious]

How can you take such a man seriously? He was described by his colleagues as "a flawed malicious individual, who thinks he's right and everyone else is wrong".
I'm inclined to go along with that assessment.

So an individuals views on Global Warming are more important than ones views on morality, politics, history, reality, humanity, etc etc...?

There are many congressman in US congress that dont believe in Global Warming not to mention the whole US Dept of Interior. There are many famous scientists and global leaders that dont believe in Global Warming. Illarionov is not alone on this, and he has a right to his views.

Illarionov proved to be a man of principle and a man that holds certain human values in high esteem in a country and government which does not place much value or respect for human life.

Illarionov is by far the better man when it comes to doing his job and that is give an economic recovery and turn around a hundred year old anti-individual and anti-business policy of the Russian government.

So don't give me this bull#$#T about his Global Warming views which has nothing to do with liberty, freedom and other things that Putin does not believe in.

Putin filled the Kremlin with thief's and history will shows who's right just like it has with all dictators.

[Capn_Birdseye]

So don't give me this bull#$#T about his Global Warming views which has nothing to do with liberty, freedom and other things that Putin does not believe in.
All I'm trying to do Eugenious is point out an obvious fact. Here we have a supposedly learned man who repudiates, in absolute terms,some basic facts about climate change, e.g., stating quite categorically that it's not an environmental issue! Now that's a pretty bold statement to make! Either he knows something that the rest of the scientific community don't know or the man is a fool. Which is it?

You say his views have nothing to do with liberty and freedom, but the man himself has said quite clearly that its his view that "Kyoto is an assault on economic growth, the environment, public safety, science, and human civilisation, and has adverse affects on the rights & freedoms of Russian citizens" (quote)

[Eugenious]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chekism


Contemporary Russia

According to former Russian Duma member Konstantin Borovoi, "Putin's appointment is the culmination of the KGB's crusade for power. This is its finale. Now the KGB runs the country." [4] Olga Kryshtanovskaya, director of the Moscow-based Center for the Study of Elites, has found that up to 78% of 1,016 leading political figures in Russia have served previously in organizations affiliated with KGB or FSB [5]. She said: "If in the Soviet period and the first post-Soviet period, the KGB and FSB people were mainly involved in security issues, now half are still involved in security but the other half are involved in business, political parties, NGOs, regional governments, even culture... They started to use all political institutions."[5]

The KGB or FSB members usually remain in the "acting reserve" even if they formally leave the organization ("acting reserve" members receive second FSB salary, follow FSB instructions, and remain "above the law" being protected by the organization, according to Kryshtanovskaya [6]). As Vladimir Putin said, "There is no such thing as a former KGB man" [7]. Soon after becoming prime minister of Russia, Putin also claimed that "A group of FSB colleagues dispatched to work undercover in the government has successfully completed its first mission." [4]. Moreover, FSB has formal membership, military discipline, an extensive network of civilian informants [8], hardcore ideology, and support of population (60% of Russians trust FSB [9]), which makes it a perfect totalitarian political party [3]

Some observers note that current Russian state security organization FSB is even more powerful than KGB was, because it does not operate under the control of the Communist Party as KGB presumably did in the past. [10] [5] Moreover, the FSB leadership and their partners own most important economic assets in the country and control Russian government and State Duma. According to Ion Mihai Pacepa,

"In the Soviet Union, the KGB was a state within a state. Now former KGB officers are running the state. They have custody of the country’s 6,000 nuclear weapons, entrusted to the KGB in the 1950s, and they now also manage the strategic oil industry renationalized by Putin. The KGB successor, rechristened FSB, still has the right to electronically monitor the population, control political groups, search homes and businesses, infiltrate the federal government, create its own front enterprises, investigate cases, and run its own prison system. The Soviet Union had one KGB officer for every 428 citizens. Putin’s Russia has one FSB-ist for every 297 citizens." [11]

Some observers describe Chekism as the rule of Mafia. They consider Russian government as "a band of over 6,000 former officers of the KGB — one of the most criminal organizations in history — who grabbed the most important positions in the federal and local governments, and who are perpetuating Stalin’s, Khrushchev’s, and Brezhnev’s practice of secretly assassinating people who stand in their way." (referring to the murder of Alexander Litvinenko) [12] Others emphasize terrorism as a favorite tool of Chekism to frighten population and enforce its political power [13] [14] [15]

Andrei Illarionov, a former advisor of Vladimir Putin, describes contemporary Chekism as a new socio-political order (the Power Model), "distinct from any seen in our country before". In this model, members of the Corporation of Intelligence Service Collaborators [Russian abbreviation KSSS] took over the entire body of state power, follow an omerta-like behavior code, and "are given instruments conferring power over others – membership “perks”, such as the right to carry and use weapons". According to Illarionov, this "Corporation has seized key government agencies – the Tax Service, Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Parliament, and the government-controlled mass media – which are now used to advance the interests of KSSS members. Through these agencies, every significant resource of the country – security/intelligence, political, economic, informational and financial – is being monopolized in the hands of Corporation members." The ideology of "Chekists" is "Nashism (“ours-ism”), the selective application of rights", he said. [16]

[Capn_Birdseye]

So an individuals views on Global Warming are more important than ones views on morality, politics, history, reality, humanity, etc etc...?
If you want to hold up as an exemplar a man who describes Kyoto as a "Auschwitz" and dismisses any link between carbon dioxide and climate change, and totally rejects global warming as an environmental threat, then all I can say is be my guest!
Its not a case of being "more important", (to use your phrase), its a more a case of intellectual credence, an ingredient sadly missing.

[ablarc]

I guess ultimately all global politics is about control of oil.




(Do we really have to live in Suburbia?)

[ablarc]

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/08/03/world/03arctic-600.jpg
Notice the icepack in the photo at left is broken up and discontinuous; you can't walk on the North Pole in August 2007.

Could you, fifty years ago?

[WebErr]

Third photo is very funny!!! :D
Putin placed image of Stalin in the North Pole... :D
Damned "bloody Putin's regime"...:D :D :D

(I think after end of Cold War journalists just don't know what kind of "common enemy" write about. ;))

Where is balalaika-weapon, nuclear vodka and battle bears? ;)
And what now about "old rusty Russian submarines"? :p

... now wait answer of Canada... and their nonrusty submarines... :)

OMG... OOOIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLL (like Rocky in "Chip & Dail") ;)