I'll post excerpts from the article later on when I get caught up. This is a book review of The Bridge: Natural Gas in a Redivided Europe, by Thane Gustafson, publication date, January 7, 2020. If one can't get past the Bloomberg paywall, one can find much about the book by googling the title/author. One link is at the Harvard University Press. From that:
A noted expert on Russian energy argues that despite Europe’s geopolitical rivalries, natural gas and deals based on it unite Europe’s nations in mutual self-interest.With regard to the Bloomberg article I replied to the reader who made a very interesting observation. This op-ed / book review completely failed to mention explicitly US exports of NGLs to Europe.
Three decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the breakup of the Soviet empire, the West faces a new era of East–West tensions. Any vision of a modern Russia integrated into the world economy and aligned in peaceful partnership with a reunited Europe has abruptly vanished.
Two opposing narratives vie to explain the strategic future of Europe, one geopolitical and one economic, and both center on the same resource: natural gas. In The Bridge, Thane Gustafson, an expert on Russian oil and gas, argues that the political rivalries that capture the lion’s share of media attention must be viewed alongside multiple business interests and differences in economic ideologies. With a dense network of pipelines linking Europe and Russia, natural gas serves as a bridge that unites the region through common interests.
Tracking the economic and political role of natural gas through several countries—Russia and Ukraine, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and Norway—The Bridge details both its history and its likely future. As Gustafson suggests, there are reasons for optimism, but whether the “gas bridge” can ultimately survive mounting geopolitical tensions and environmental challenges remains to be seen.
This was my reply which, if one doesn't read the Bloomberg article, may not make sense. I was going to edit my response but I'm running out of time so I will post it as is, not ready for prime time, and come back to it later, if interested. Here's my reply to the writer regarding the Bloomberg article:
I'm not going to buy the book but maybe it will be at Barnes and Noble. I'm curious if the author even mentions Hunter Biden. If not, that will tell me all I need to know about the credibility of the writer. After all, supposedly the writer tracked everything else:Very observant. I might have missed that angle -- not a word about US exports. Wow, what blinders the writer was wearing.It is amazing how often Ukraine is in the news. One country of hundreds, and Ukraine always seems to come up in conversation.With this huge NG story, it is obvious what Russia, Ukraine, and Hunter Biden were up to, and Trump knew it, and either Bloomberg did not know it or he refused to print stories about the Bidens. Most likely the latter.But until Trump mentioned it, did even 10 US senators know about the Biden crookedness? And if they did, did they care?Finally, these writers always seem to try to find a way to put a "dig" into Trump. That was the reason I quit subscribing to the New Yorker. No matter how far removed from politics an article might be, it seemed the writer had to include a shot at Trump if she/he wanted the article to be published.I thought it was a bit of stretch by the writer to suggest there were lessons here for Trump. Trump is simply sticking up for America; and, oh by the way, point out that it's a huge risk for Europe to put all their fossil fuel eggs into one Russian basket.
Tracking the economic and political role of natural gas through several countries—Russia and Ukraine, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and Norway—The Bridge details both its history and its likely future.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.