Supported byOwner's Engineer
Clarion Energy banner

Serbia needs diversification of gas supply

Supported byspot_img

One of the good sides of the agreement from Washington is that Serbia agreed with the American policy of diversification of gas supply, said today the former ambassador to Belarus and foreign policy expert Srecko Djukic, emphasizing that diversification is key for the energy security of a country.
Serbia, as a landlocked country, has an extremely unfavorable situation in terms of diversification of gas supplies and procurement, which is very unfavorable from the point of view of Serbia’s energy security, Djukic told Tanjug.
He explains that because of that, Serbia cannot use liquefied gas, nor does it have neighboring countries rich in gas, so it must count on gas through transit countries.
“All the quantities of gas that we consume today come from Russia, that is, one country, and everything goes through Ukraine and Hungary, the shot is very unfavorable from the point of view of Serbia’s energy security,” Djukic emphasized.
He points out that the energy security of a country is measured by the possibility of obtaining gas from several alternative sources and several supply routes.
Therefore, as he says, we must also count on liquefied gas, which is offered by the Americans through the Greek terminal in Alexandropoulos.
It does not have to be a priori American gas, it can be Qatari and in the end Russian, Malaysian, anyone’s liquefied gas is the one that is cheaper, says Djukic.
“We have to work on the fact that decades have passed behind us, that gas enters Serbia from several sides, from Croatia, Romania and Bulgaria, having in mind the Southern Gas Corridor, gas that goes from Azerbaijan, through Georgia, Turkey, Greece, Albania, for southern Italy and which also supplies Bulgaria,” says the interlocutor of Tanjug.
He also adds that Serbia must count on the possibility of supplying gas from the southern European gas corridor when the next stage of the extension of the Adriatic gas pipeline takes place.
As he says, one of the perspective possibilities for supplying Serbia with gas is the eastern Mediterranean that is, obtaining gas whose exploitation is being prepared jointly by Israel, Cyprus and Greece.
“There are possibilities for an alternative supply of gas to Serbia, so that we do not depend on only one country – Russia and one direction. This is important also because of political relations and technogenic catastrophes that happen or can happen and leave the country without gas. EU policy, diversification of the source of supply where the gas comes from and the directions of supply,” said Djukic.
He also believes that it is very important to import our gas system with neighboring countries, which are in the EU or which are not members.
This is also done by EU countries, which have an interconnected gas system, so for example, a consumer in Portugal can very easily procure gas if, for example, Poland has surpluses, explains Djukic.
“That is the meaning of the whole energy security policy, that is, diversification,” he emphasized.
By the way, the philosophy of energy security regarding gas has changed in the past ten years, not only with European consumers who are also the largest consumers of gas in the world.
Djukic explains that the approach has changed for those who produce gas and supply large world markets with gas, as well as for Russia itself, which no longer sends its gas exclusively through Ukraine and Belarus to Europe, but sends it to the North Stream and the Turkish Stream, but all it also sends more liquefied gas to the market, as do other gas-rich countries.
“The supply price is decisive, but what has happened in the gas market in recent years is that the price of liquefied gas is not so dramatically high compared to gas from the pipeline. If before it was two or more times higher price of liquefied gas others, that price has now dropped significantly.”
Thus, the share in the consumption of liquefied gas has increased a lot, if it used to be between three and five percent, now it far exceeds 30 percent.
So, the perspective of liquefied gas is very good and that also determines that we have to count on liquefied gas either through Alexandropoulos in Greece, then through Bulgaria to Serbia or Krk in Croatia or maybe from Albania and Montenegro where reception facilities can also be built in the future, stated Djukic.
He points out that the technology of transporting liquefied gas has advanced a lot, so it is no longer as problematic on that issue as before and that it now has a significant advantage because it is easy to manipulate.
It is very convenient for transferring to consumers and can even be transported in containers, which is significantly cheaper than making gas pipelines.
He adds that in the agreement between the USA and the EU, a plan was made to build a plant for receiving liquefied gas, and that these terminals are not only for American gas because it is expensive, but that it can also be for any other: Russian gas, gas from the Middle East, Malaysia, Australia, Nigeria.
The so-called spot market of liquefied gas where the best price is negotiated.
Asked whether he expects the Turkish Stream to work or what it is called in Bulgaria, the Balkan Stream, which will carry Russian gas, and whether it will have a similar fate as South Stream, whose construction was previously suspended by Bulgaria, he said that there is great uncertainty. Turkish Stream, but also North Stream 2.
“Because the United States, as a key ally of the EU and the leading NATO country, imposed sanctions on the completion of the North Stream gas pipeline, but they also greatly aggravated the issue of building the Turkish Stream and the Balkan gas pipeline. The United States has the concept that Europe is too dependent on Russian gas to stop the penetration of Russian gas on the European market, because that could become Russia’s strategic advantage on the European continent.”
In that sense, I do not see any indications that America is giving in, despite the fact that the Turkish Stream is being built through Serbia and Bulgaria, Djukic added, emphasizing that his opinion is that “there is considerable uncertainty” over the construction of that gas pipeline, Kurir reports.

Supported by

RELATED ARTICLES

Supported byClarion Energy
spot_img
Serbia Energy News
error: Content is protected !!