Main page > Comments > Actual topics > Prospects and limitations of Southern Corridor

Prospects and limitations of Southern Corridor

Two news reports about progress in implementing the Southern Transportation Corridor idea have been posted lately. Firstly, the EU Council of Ministers approved the European Commission’s mandate to negotiate with Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan construction of a trans-Caspian gas pipeline. This pipeline is supposed to carry Turkmen natural gas through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey to Europe. Secondly, France’s Total declared it had discovered a large gas deposit called Apsheron in the Azerbaijani section of the Caspian Sea shelf. The amount of the reserves discovered has not been reported but preliminary estimations point to some 300bn to 350bn cu m of gas and 40m to 50m tons of gas condensate.

However, there are serious doubts that the above-mentioned news means real progress of Southern Corridor. Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan try to convince all consumers of their capacity to sharply increase production and to supply gas throughout decades. But there is no real, internationally recognized evidence of serious growth in their reserves. For instance, Turkmenistan’s assessment of its own natural gas reserves seriously differs from the competent data provided by BP statistical reviews. It will be interesting to see next summer BP’s reaction to new discoveries in Azerbaijan. In any case, too many projects claim Azeri gas (in addition to Nabucco, these are ITGI, TAP, AGRI, White Stream and Russian proposals); definitely, there will not be enough resources for all of them.

There are also many questions about the EU’s real eagerness to ensure construction of a trans-Caspian pipeline in defiance of Moscow’s opinion. The Caspian Sea has not been delimitated by the coastal countries yet. We may probably observe a large-scale “war of interpretations” of the international law regulating activities in the Caspian Sea. This case is rather confused; in particular, it is not clear whether the international maritime law and the corresponding UN convention of 1982 be applied to this sea-lake.

A lot will depend not only on relations between Moscow and its Caspian neighbors or between Moscow and Brussels. Complicated relations between the smallest Caspian states that are far from being ideal, will have great importance. There is still a dispute between Baku and Ashkhabad over the Kyapaz deposit known as Serdar in Turkmenistan. Yet, relations between these states have improved. Meanwhile, Iran hinders Azerbaijan to develop fields on the disputable area between these two countries simultaneously accusing Baku of militarization of the Caspian region and military cooperation with the USA. There are disputes concerning the civil rights of a large community of about 20m ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran.

Besides, Iran is a main potential threat to export plans of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan in the next 10 to 15 years.  Due to its reserves, Tehran can quickly change the layout of forces on the European (and not only European) gas market, if its relations with the West are normalized. Such conflicts and fears prevent Caspian states from reaching a consensus and, thus, reduce chances of such ideas as the trans-Caspian pipeline to be implemented.

By Stanislav Mitrakhovich, NESF leading expert


Bookmark and Share

Analytical series “The Fuel and Energy Complex of Russia”:

Gazprom on the background of external and internal challenges
Regulation of Oil and Gas Sector in 2019 and Prospects for 2020
Fiscal Policy on Oil and Gas Sector: Revised as Often as Wikipedia
The tax system in the oil and gas sector continues to undergo radical changes. The beginning of 2019 saw the introduction of a new tax regime: additional income tax. That experiment was supposed to start migration of the oil industry to an innovative principle of taxation: on profit, not revenue. It seemed that a new main road was found. In the same year, however, the Finance Ministry launched an overt offensive against AIT. The fear of loss of government revenue now is more powerful than the threat of causing oil production to collapse in the medium term because of a tax system that does not stimulate investment. The Finance Ministry would strongly prefer to speed up the tax manoeuvre completion that earns the state budget additional money. Oil and gas companies respond to this with individual lobbying, attempting to wangle special treatment for their projects.
Ukrainian Gas Hub: Climax at Hand
The “zero hour” comes in less than a month: the contracts for gas transit through Ukraine and for supplying Russian gas to the country terminate at 10 am on 1 January. Meanwhile, Gazprom and Naftogaz are very far from looking for a mutually acceptable solution. The entire European gas business is watching intently the negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. Everyone is waiting for a new “gas war”: the January 2009 events proved to be a serious test both to European consumers and to Gazprom as a supplier. Is there still a chance of agreement? If there is not, will Gazprom cope with its obligations to deliver gas to Europe? Is Russia bluffing as it assures that the new infrastructure and gas in underground storage facilities will enable it to get by without Ukrainian transit even as soon as this winter? What will happen to Ukraine itself at the beginning of 2020?
Digitisation and Its Implications for Oil and Gas: Myths and Possible Reality

All reports for: 2015 , 14 , 13 , 12 , 11 , 10 , 09 , 08 , 07

Rambler's Top100
About us | Products | Comments | Services | Books | Conferences | Our clients | Price list | Site map | Contacts
Consulting services, political risks assessment on the Fuel & Energy Industry, concern of pilitical and economic Elite within the Oil-and-Gas sector.
National Energy Security Fund © 2007

LiveInternet