30 Comments
User's avatar
Andy Fately's avatar

All this, and you didnt even mention the CSDDD, which has ruled Qatar out of sending gas because the EU is so committed to net zero. It seems that at the current pace, they will, indeed, achieve net zero as the entire continent and its inhabitants cease to exist given the lack of available energy.

good luck to you there

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

If nothing else, buyers with fewer constraints will benefit as Europe pushes supply away through regulation.

Andy Fately's avatar

it's almost as if they are trying to commit national suicide

Gareth Wiltshire's avatar

The lesson is energy abundance and diversity. The US has it. Europe lacks it and is cutting the few remaining options it has.

To an extent, this is an age old problem for Europe. Pre-Ukraine conflict, Russia exerted a similar leverage by limiting gas flows of gas through pipelines traversing certain countries.

The UK for a while was insulated from this. Large gas fields and onshore coal fields created a sort of moat, even as gas cannibalised the coal fields through price competition (aided by external coal imports). Now with short gas supplies and open gas/electricity interconnectors, the UK is fundamentally linked to the EU energy insecurity problem. The current Government’s doubling down on North Sea ban just makes the problem worse in the long term.

It’s time to promote the UKs energy industries to invest to get us back to energy abundance. If that means limiting some of the interconnector flows, just as the US can limit LNG flows, then that’s what it takes. Energy Abundance is Energy Security.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

Agreed. Energy diversity is the real constraint that matters. The EU treats limiting optionality as a sign of strength.

The Fringe Finance Report's avatar

Great article, and it sums up Europe's situation perfectly.

Like most problems in life, it is utterly self-inflicted. While that is troublesome, it’s also a source of great hope. If most of your problems in life are self-inflicted, it means you have the ability to fix them once you get serious.

And, as with people, that typically requires hitting rock bottom. Not fun, but as ex-SEAL David Goggins likes to say, "Greatness lies on the other side of suffering."

That greatness, in my opinion, is still very much there for Europe (like for any country) to take, if it so chooses, despite the current malaise.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

That’s a refreshingly constructive way to look at it. Self-imposed constraints can be reversed with the political will. Hopefully the course correction comes before the costs become irreversible.

Francis Turner's avatar

Of curse if Europe and especially the UK lifted their ban on fracking they'd have plenty of gas of their own and wouldn't be dependent on the US, Qatar or Russia....

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

Correct. Europe is energy-poor by choice.

LudwigF's avatar

Thanks for this insightful commentary.

I would add that, while the EU ‘constitution’ gives the Commission exclusive competency over trade matters, this internal rule does not in any way bind the United States, which can freely ignore it.

Should Trump wish to do so, he could give Georgia Meloni’s Italy tariff free access to the US market for its food and wine exports, while imposing tariffs on Italy’s French competitors at any level he chooses. He could give the UK a zero rate on its automobile exports and hit the Germans with 50%.

Zero for Hungary; 100% for Denmark.

And so on..

hahaha….

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

Thank you. Europe is very good at binding itself with rules and then being surprised when others ignore them.

Kris Martin's avatar

Denmark may produce as much as 74% of the US insulin supply and a large part of the Ozempic supply. I see an LNG-for-insulin contingency plan getting worked out in the background here….

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

Interesting angle. That’s the kind of cross-dependency worth watching.

dave walker's avatar

The Greenland issue seems to be quite a blip on the radar compared to much of the other topics you’ve written about. I think he wants it for various purposes he’s outlined. One that I think is of the most significant but not talked about is the lack of bureaucratic oversight. Less regulations and the lack of a deep state could allow for a much easier process for mining and processing “rare earth minerals “. But then again, I’m just guessing about anything Trump does just like most everyone else. Net Zero wins again, and the majority of people suffer for it.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

That’s a reasonable way to think about it. Greenland matters less for what it enables in isolation and more as the pressure point where existing constraints become visible.

Mitch's avatar

Please don't describe these people as European "elites". They are but literally a handful of people who are not in the same class as the elite. No real elite wants to take the country they live in into a pointless war.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

That’s fair. It’s a governing class, not an elite with real skin in the game.

Urs Broderick Furrer's avatar

Not would they want to take them down the lath of deindustrialization.

Stephen Wolfe - 10 Things News's avatar

It seems absurd that there is no method to ensure reasonable minimum stocks are maintained - but there you go, there isn’t

The Financial Pen's avatar

Another great audit of the region's decision makers' follies!

Urs Broderick Furrer's avatar

“Once again, European elites have painted themselves into a corner.” Apparently, that same corner is reliance on the weather and, as usual, that’s a bad bet.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

Exactly. Earlier generations spent centuries engineering away dependence on the weather. Today’s policies do the opposite.

Urs Broderick Furrer's avatar

It's like living through Atlas Shrugged without the benefit of the creators and innovators of staying "No, stop."

winston's avatar

Russia "bought a place at the table" for the Board of Peace by pledging $1B of the assets sequestered by the EU. The U.S. and Ukraine now have an interest in getting those funds out of EU and UK hands.

EU and several of its member nations refused to buy in, while all of those who have are the major oil and gas suppliers - with the exception of Norway.

The Norse are presented with the opportunity of economically and politically dominating most of Europe, again. The Chinese opportunity to do so is at least deprecated, slightly.

"You got to know when to fold 'em, know when to hold 'em," but at least recognize when you've been kicked out of the game.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

Power accrues to those who control resources and are willing to deploy them. It will be interesting to see how Norway uses that power.

winston's avatar

Victory is reserved for those who are willing to pay its price.

-Sun Tzu

There's also the ability to pay the price, but Europeans should already know this.

Neural Foundry's avatar

The Kollsnes single-point-of-failure detail is what really hammers home how fragile this setup is. Running a critical infrastructure system at 97% capacity with zero redundancy is exactly the kind of thing that looks fine on paper until it doesn't. The fact that Europes gas storage model functions more like commodity arbitrage than strategic reserve explains alot about why they're in this position. I watched similar dynamics play out in manufacturing supply chains during 2021, same logic.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

Precisely. Arbitrage models erase buffers, which in turn makes systems fragile.

jeff klugman's avatar

trump got what he wanted re greenland. post-maduro venezuela is being pushed to get rid of its russian, chinese, iranian and hezbollah presence. the u.s. bombed the drone-making factory there during the maduro raid and also has prevented the manufacture and placement of autonomous underwater vehicles such as ukraine has been using and which could cut off the 2 main shipping lanes to the gulf coast. similarly, the "framework" re greenland says no russian or chinese presence, and the u.s. to have right of first refusal on any developments. 5000 chinese workers were slated to go to greenland, the thin edge of the wedge. now, it ain't happening.

The Brawl Street Journal's avatar

That’s consistent with the broader picture. Greenland may be less a development project and more a denial space: who doesn’t get access matters.