Reference no: EM13944825
At the European Summit on March 20th and 21st, government leaders were supposed to agree climate and energy targets for 2030. Instead, they discussed Crimea, Ukraine and Russia. Leaders were right to postpone discussion of the targets, but wrong to postpone action on reducing Europe's dependence on Russian gas. Russia supplies around a third of the EU's gas. So the Union is to an extent dependent on Moscow - as it discovered when the Russians turned off the gas flow though Ukraine in 2009. But the Kremlin is, to a greater extent, dependent on revenue from oil, gas and coal exports - above all to the EU. Indeed, over half of the Russian government's revenue comes from the sale of fossil fuels: 19 per cent each from gas and oil and 14 per cent from coal. The EU summit conclusions did refer to the need to diversify sources of gas, and asked the European Commission to prepare a report on this. That approach lacks the urgency which the situation in Ukraine demands. If EU leaders want to impose sanctions on Russia which may change its behaviour, rather than simply slapping Putin's wrist, they should reduce purchases of Russian energy as far and fast as possible. To do that, they must develop alternative energy sources. That would cost money, but deliver major energy security, foreign policy and climate benefits. - See more at:
Europe energy strategy tends to focus on energy efficiency, alternative sources of gas, renewable energy, coal and gas with carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear power. How the new policies and technologies will impact the Oil and Gas Industry in terms of production and consumption? What would be the new strategies to tackle these impacts?