I see many early analyses of the EU's #oil#embargo against Russia but one crucial point that is not mentioned very often is that the package is almost certainly going to include a #shipping#insurance ban.
The insurance ban would not just affect Russian oil exports to Europe. It would affect Russian oil exports everywhere else.
There is a precedent: restrictions on oil tanker insurance was one of the key means by which the US and Europe successfully limited #Iran's oil exports from 2012 to 2015.
Russia has successfully rerouted supplies of crude from Europe and the US to Asia. That's what happens if you try to impose a unilateral embargo on a single producer in a global commodity market.
In theory, an insurance ban can close much of the loopholes.
In practice, there are still questions. Will the UK and US join the EU in adopting the shipping insurance ban? Can insurers from China, Russia, etc. step in, potentially with government guarantees?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Can Russia really turn off the gas taps to Europe? Some thoughts. 🧵
Russia can afford to turn off the taps. Russia earns 5x more from export of oil than from export of gas (pipeline + LNG) and it holds over $630 bn in foreign reserves. But that does not imply it will cut-off gas deliveries to Europe.
During the 2014 Ukraine crisis, when Russia annexed Crimea, gas supplies to Europe kept on flowing. They were interrupted only in June, months after the annexation, and with relatively little impact (since it was summer). tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.108…
Ja, invoer van aardgas gaat gepaard met geopolitieke risico’s. Maar slechts 27% van het gas dat wij verbruiken gaat naar productie van elektriciteit. Al dan niet verlengen 2 reactoren is dus hoogstens een druppel op een hete plaat.
Mensen voorspiegelen dat je Poetin’s gaswapen kan ontwapenen met verlenging D4/T3 is misleidend en leidt de aandacht af van veel sterkere oplossingen om onze importafhankelijkheid te verminderen (efficiëntie, hernieuwbare energie, etc.)
But some arguments seem debatable, or even contradictory. A thread.🧵
The first argument goes like this: the clean energy transition will cause more price volatility, and this will strengthen the geopolitical hand of petrostates.
In reality, volatility has been a permanent fixture of fossil fuel markets as @Bob_McNally has shown. If anything, renewables bring more fuel diversity to the energy system and lower price volatility. In fact, @JasonBordoff has made this argument before: bit.ly/3ANcPVf