Irony pipe

Companies involved in the extraction and export of hydrocarbon raw materials occupy the same place in modern Russia as the military-industrial complex occupied in the USSR. The lobbyists of the fuel and energy complex, like the lobbyists of the military-industrial complex once, significantly influence the development of not only their own industries, but also the rest of the economy, and at the same time legislation and politics.

Among lobbyists, of course, there is a hierarchy. Just as the strengthening of the “nuclear missile shield” was an indisputable priority then, so now the interests of Gazprom are above all else. Sergei Mironov expressed this idea honestly and succinctly, he summed up the results of the now cursed 90s as follows: “We managed to save the main thing - nuclear weapons and Gazprom.

By itself, the parallel cannot but be alarming. Any one-sidedness is dangerous. Setting on a superpower, whether military or energy, while restraining the development of competition, sooner or later leads to the fact that the feet of clay once again cannot withstand the colossi of the military-industrial complex or the fuel and energy complex.

Of course, I am not proposing to end Russia's notorious raw material curse by refusing to develop the fuel and energy complex. You can just develop it in different ways. Until now, it has developed exclusively by the method of building monopolies. In what, naturally, "Gazprom" most succeeded.

„

Setting on a superpower - at least military, even energy - sooner or later leads to the fact that clay feet once again cannot withstand the colossi of the military-industrial complex or the fuel and energy complex

”

Still, he has in his hands a “natural monopoly” in the form of a pipeline system, on which clusters of other businesses are strung, both specialized ones related to gas exploration and production, and completely non-core ones - starting from the reconstruction of palace complexes in the small homeland of the second and third Russian presidents and ending with the content of racehorses. All together is definitely not a model of transparency. But this is half the trouble. The trouble is that monopoly leads to stagnation.

How else to explain that the first gas liquefaction plant in the United States was built in the 40s, in the "backward" Algeria - in the 60s, and in Russia - only in 2009 on Sakhalin? Because the strategy of "Gazprom" follows from the pipe. Why, they think, should they indulge the development of the spot segment of the gas market (with immediate payment at exchange prices), based on the supply of liquefied gas? It is necessary by all means to impose long-term pipe contracts on the buyer! But the global gas market is not developing according to the logic favorable to Gazprom. Therefore, the spot market is growing. And the faster, the lower the prices on it compared to those fixed in the long-term contracts of the Russian monopolist. And in a crisis, price scissors diverge quite widely - three times.

It turns out that Gazprom voluntarily gave away part of the gas pie to competitors and, moreover, refused to develop markets that could not be reached with a pipe. This is a strategic loss, and it is due to the pipe monopoly. Its logic is as follows: if consumers refuse the Gazprom pipe (it is understood that this cannot be), then we will take up liquefied gas.

The trouble is that time is running out, and broadcast statements that Russia will sharply increase the supply of liquefied gas to Europe, capture 20% of the American market, become the exclusive supplier of liquefied gas to Singapore, are closer to good wishes, and not to real opportunities.

It's time to remember: the government liberals of the 90s from Boris Nemtsov to German Gref fought for the reform of Gazprom. It was understood that the "natural monopoly" pipe would remain with the state, and the rest of the gas business would be demonopolized. I am sure that this was the way to a more dynamic development of the gas industry. The main volume of exports, in particular, would still come from the pipe, but today's gap in the export of liquefied gas would be reduced.

But Gazprom is inviolable. What Vladimir Putin explicitly stated in 2003. The principle of manual control in modern Russia is more important than efficiency.