Translated material
Project "Trubaltika"
An increase in oil exports through Primorsk may cause an unreasonable increase in the price of raw materials and protests from environmentalists
Vladimir Putin announced at a press conference yesterday that he supports the idea of creating oil and gas export routes that will not pass through the territory of third countries. Speaking about the conflict with the transit of Russian oil through Belarus, he said: “I have already given instructions to the government of the Russian Federation, and Transneft has practically begun work on a plan to expand the terminals in Primorsk by an additional 50 million tons of oil (per year. - Ed. . ). And this, I want to emphasize, will significantly reduce our dependence on transit countries.” A source close to Transneft claims that we are talking about the construction of a branch from the Druzhba oil pipeline with a starting point in the Unecha area of the Bryansk region through Velikiye Luki to Primorsk with a length of about a thousand kilometers. This project became known last week , and yesterday, according to Interfax, in the materials of the Ministry of Industry and Energy, information appeared that a decision on the feasibility of construction will be made during this year. Experts have ambivalent assessments of the initiative to redirect the oil export flow. On the one hand, they say, Russia and Europe will, of course, lose the transit risk associated with the ambitions of Belarus. However, on the other hand, the price of this oil will increase significantly and there will be a threat to the environment in the region of the Danish Straits and in the St. Petersburg area.Vladimir Putin explained the desire to depend as little as possible on transit countries as follows: “Why weren’t there any problems at all before? But you and I understand well: all these transit routes - both oil and gas - what were they like, where did they take place? Either on the territory of our single state - the Soviet Union, or on the territories of the countries of the so-called Eastern bloc. There were no problems at all, of course. But now they have arisen because transit countries seem to have realized their importance and want to receive appropriate funds for transit. But we already pay 4.2 billion dollars (per year - Ed. ) to transit countries. And therefore, if this figure goes off scale - and, in our opinion, it is already off scale - then we will, of course, look for ways of direct supplies. To do this, we are building a gas pipeline along the bottom of the Baltic Sea. To do this, we will expand our capacity to transship, say, oil in the northwest... We will accelerate the construction of pipeline systems reaching the Pacific coast in order to directly enter the emerging markets of Asia... We are in China We intend to build, and we will do it anyway... We have laid, as you know, a gas line along the bottom of the Black Sea, the Blue Stream. We are now thinking about laying a second one with possible access later either to Southern Europe or Central Europe, maybe to Hungary, maybe to another Central European country, perhaps to Austria or Italy or Israel.”
The construction of an oil pipeline along the border with Belarus to Primorsk, according to experts, will cost 2-2.5 billion dollars. Transneft, judging by the words of a source close to the company, has so far refrained from estimating this project, but promises to complete the calculations in two years. three weeks. At the same time, the port of Primorsk itself, as the source says, can already handle 110-115 million tons of oil per year. The only question is the pipeline. Now its capacity is just over 65 million tons per year (but it is possible to transport 74 million using special modes). That is why the capacity of the new oil pipeline was determined at 50 million tons per year.
However, the whole question, experts say, is what the future route of Russian oil will be: firstly, how the current buyers of raw materials from Druzhba will react to the changes, and secondly, how ready the existing maritime infrastructure is for such a significant increase in transportation. This year, Russia intends to pump about 80 million tons of oil via Druzhba in transit through Belarus. At the same time, raw materials are mainly supplied to oil refineries in Germany (about 30%), Poland (25%), Hungary and other countries. Approximately 12% (8.6 million tons at the end of last year) goes to the port of Gdansk. If these supplies are redirected to Primorsk, the transport component for buyers increases sharply. According to traders, a barrel of Urals oil (or, as they now say, REBCO) will rise in price by an average of about $3. This will primarily hit companies such as Total, Shell, ExxonMobil, PKN Orlen and Lotus. “Indeed, our plants in Germany are very dependent on oil supplies via the Druzhba route,” a representative of Total, which purchases approximately a fifth of all Russian oil exports, told Vremya Novostey yesterday. “If supply conditions change, we will study the situation on the market, but for now it is premature to predict anything.” Other buyers were unavailable for comment yesterday.
At the same time, a representative of one of the European trading companies, in a conversation with Vremya Novostey, suggested that, hypothetically, a situation could even arise in which it would be more profitable to purchase oil from Iran: “If Russia transfers oil from the pipeline to the sea (i.e., it supplies not via an oil pipeline, but by sea transport. - Ed. ), then the entire supply economy will break down for all companies in Europe. After all, no one included an increase in the price of Urals due to a change in the type of transportation in long-term contracts - and oil transportation in Europe usually takes place on the basis of multi-year contracts. If Russia is now unable to come to an agreement with Belarus and is ready to accept an almost unjustified increase in the cost of raw materials, then dealing with this oil becomes risky.” In addition, the port in Primorsk sometimes freezes in winter. And if oil companies sometimes manage to redirect supplies from the Novorossiysk direction to the northwestern direction, since in the Bosporus the delay of ships is now, according to them, 22 days and has already led to losses, then in the case of transferring part of the supplies via Druzhba to Primorsk such a “ transfer” will no longer be possible.
But Vladimir Putin responded to such concerns at a press conference yesterday: “I don’t see anything wrong with the fact that our main consumers in Europe are either talking about or moving to diversify their energy policy. This does not scare us, because we, in turn, are diversifying our delivery routes to different consumers and different markets. Of course, they scare us a little with this. After all, when we hear that they will diversify sources, it means that we must think about where we will sell our goods. So I say, we are building in the Far East, we intend to build in China.”
However, it is clear that Russia will still not give up exporting oil to Europe - the fields of Eastern Siberia will be used in the eastern direction, and it is absolutely unprofitable to redirect Western Siberian fields there. Therefore, these threats - both from Western countries and from Russia - can only be regarded as a kind of mechanism for political bargaining. And since deliveries will continue anyway and, as Russia insists, priority will be given to sea routes, it is quite obvious that we will have to face limitations in the capacity of the Danish straits and environmental problems.
If the volume of transshipment in Primorsk increases by 50 million tons of oil per year and all this oil is supplied to Europe through the straits, then supplies through them will increase by 17%, an expert from one of the oil transportation companies calculated. At the same time, the number of vessel passages through the strait will increase by a quarter (currently about 6 thousand passages per year). It is clear that Denmark and Sweden, where environmental issues are very serious, unlike Russia, will oppose such a development of events. After all, there are already tanker collisions there. “In a good way, the authorities of St. Petersburg should also oppose this project,” says the expert, “after all, if transshipment increases in Primorsk, four tankers will be loaded per day. This is a lot for such a port. And if at least one collision with an oil spill occurs - and with such frequency it is almost inevitable - then the consequences will be more than serious.”
Therefore, most likely, in such conditions, oil from Primorsk can only be delivered by sea to Gdansk and further along the Druzhby route. But in this case, by getting rid of the transit country called “Belarus,” Russia will strengthen the position of the transit country “Poland.” So we still need to understand whether the game is worth the candle. So far we have managed to come to an agreement with PKN Orlen, but how this concern will behave if the price of Russian oil increases (after all, it will be supplied not through a pipeline, but by sea) is a big question.
So it is quite understandable why Transneft has now taken a very cautious position on the issue of building a branch from Druzhba and does not comment on the situation - it cannot but know all the pros and cons of this project. However, as news agencies report, it was Transneft that proposed this route to the government as one of the measures to reduce the Belarusian transit risk. But this proposal was prepared very quickly - firstly, during the New Year holidays, secondly, during the crisis in relations between the two countries, and thirdly, almost immediately after the Belarusian side, during the escalation of the conflict, promised to submit to court personally against the president of the company, Semyon Vainshtok.
The decline in oil production growth rates in Russia will continue in 2007 , the Ministry of Industry and Energy reported yesterday. According to him, production volume is planned at 490 million tons, which is 2.08% higher than in 2006. In 2006, production growth was 2.1%, in 2005 - 2.4%, in 2004 - 9%, in 2003 - 11%. In 2006, oil production amounted to 480.02 million tons. “In 2007, the volume of oil production with gas condensate is planned to increase to 490 million tons. A further increase in oil production is envisaged based on the introduction of enhanced oil recovery methods that increase the oil recovery factor,” the Ministry of Industry and Energy said in a statement. In 2006, 212.99 million tons of oil were exported to non-CIS and Baltic countries (including exports from refinery terminals), which is 0.7% less than in 2005. 36.92 million tons were supplied to the CIS countries (97.1% compared to 2005). Compared to 2005, supplies to Belarus and Kazakhstan increased, while supplies to Ukraine decreased. As a result of the decline in exports, oil supplies to the domestic market increased. INTERFAX-ANI