TurkStream gas pipeline could slow EU, Russia decoupling: Vladimirov
Russian LNG sales in the continent are actually rising, and gas supply through the TurkStream pipeline has not only survived but expanded.
The Reuters Power Up newsletter provides everything you need to know about the global energy industry. Sign up here.
It's true that Russian pipeline gas exports to the European Union have plummeted since the start of the war in Ukraine, falling from over 155 billion cubic metres (bcm) in 2021 to under 40 bcm in 2024.
But in the same period, Russian LNG sales to the EU nearly doubled to around 25 bcm, with France, Belgium, Spain and Netherlands buying over 90% of the volumes. The ban on Russian LNG transhipment via EU ports has actually boosted direct spot gas purchases.
This trend should reverse under the new EU Roadmap as it calls for member states to develop detailed national plans for phasing out Russian gas in the next two and a half years. However, the Commission provides no clear legal framework for enforcing these targets.
Meanwhile, the Turkstream pipeline, which runs under the Black Sea to Turkey and on to Southeast Europe, accounts for all of the Russian energy giant Gazprom's remaining pipeline exports to the bloc. In Q1, 2025, volumes through TurkStream's European section rose 16% year-on-year to around 4.5 bcm, driven by higher demand in Hungary and Slovakia.
Since Turkstream's launch, more than 63 bcm of Russian gas has reached the EU, generating over 20 billion euros ($22.72 billion) for Gazprom, while supplying gas to Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Romania, Moldova, North Macedonia, Bosnia, Hungary and Slovakia.
In 2025, Hungary has emerged as the leading importer, with Russian gas imports expected to rise to around 8 bcm, up from 6 bcm in 2023. Slovakia, which previously received its Russian gas via Ukraine, has begun importing from TurkStream, facilitated by Hungary's expansion of the cross-border transmission capacity from 2.6 to 3.5 bcm/year. Slovakia's state gas supplier, SPP, confirmed in March 2025 that it would expand its long-term contract with Gazprom, valid until 2034.
These flows are driven by steep Gazprom discounts. Based on EU custom-based data, Russian pipeline gas sold to EU buyers via TurkStream in 2024 was priced 13–15% lower than alternative options.
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY
Alternative gas supply options exist. U.S. LNG exports will surge 15% in 2025, adding 22.5 bcm, enough to replace Russian pipeline gas and cut the U.S. trade deficit with the EU by up to $10 billion per year. These exports could reach LNG terminals in Turkey, Greece, Croatia and Italy, and then flow throughout Central and Easten Europe (CEE) via interconnectors with over 30 bcm/year in capacity.
However, swapping overdependence from one supplier to another may also be risky at a time when U.S. leadership is becoming less reliable. Additionally, U.S. LNG exporters charge Europe more than North American buyers and demand 20–25-year contracts, clashing with the EU's decarbonisation goals.
CEE governments, notably Hungary and Slovakia, have opposed the phaseout of Russian gas, claiming it will drastically increase energy costs and undermine Europe's competitiveness. Yet, a closer look at market differentials and gas company financial reports suggests that the Russian gas price discount does not reach consumers and instead flows to Gazprom-linked suppliers.
To encourage this process of supply diversification, the EU could ban spot gas purchases immediately as they do not require long-term gas contract modifications. The deadlines for phasing out all Russian gas imports in the Roadmap could also be brought forward to the end of 2025, and the EU could make the target binding.
This process could trigger force majeure clauses in long-term Gazprom contracts, though legal experts warn courts may not accept the argument. Still, a better strategy may be to claim that the seismic geopolitical changes since 2022 are forcing companies to renegotiate or cancel their contracts.
To avoid bottlenecks, the European Commission's roadmap commits to help coordinate LNG imports, strengthen the gas demand aggregation mechanism and use interconnections more efficiently to reach landlocked countries. The EU also wants to oblige member states to implement a certification and traceability system for gas origin, requiring all suppliers to disclose the source of gas entering the EU, and ban Russian gas deliveries.
If the EU is serious about truly decoupling from Russian energy, then TurkStream needs to be addressed. The bloc must also rethink energy security to avoid overreliance on any one power. The new roadmap gives Brussels the legal and policy tools to act, but without political resolve, dependency could quietly persist.
(The views expressed here are those of Martin Vladimirov, the Director of the Geoeconomics Program of the Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD).
($1 = 0.8801 euros)
Opinions expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect the views of Reuters News, which, under the Trust Principles, is committed to integrity, independence, and freedom from bias.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
.jpg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
3 minutes ago
- The Independent
Putin's right-hand man tells Lindsey Graham to ‘Work on America' in response to peace talk demands
The former president and prime minister of Russia brushed off Senator Lindsey Graham's demand to 'get to the peace table' and end the war with Ukraine, saying neither he nor President Donald Trump could stop Russia from its military objectives. Dmitry Medvedev, a high-ranking Russian official who currently serves as deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, snarkily responded to Graham on X on Monday after the South Carolina senator echoed Trump's request for Russia to negotiate to end the war. 'To those in Russia who believe that President Trump is not serious about ending the bloodbath between Russia and Ukraine: You and your customers will soon be sadly mistaken. You will also soon see that Joe Biden is no longer president,' Graham told Medvedev. 'Get to the peace table.' But Medvedev waved off Graham's threat, insisting, 'It's not for you or Trump to dictate when to 'get at the peace table.'' 'Negotiations will end when all the objectives of our military operation have been achieved. Work on America first, gramps!' Medvedev said. The exchange between Medvedev and Graham occurred on the same day that Trump warned Russian President Vladimir Putin that he had 10 to 12 days to make progress on a peace deal to stop the war with Ukraine, or Russia would face 'severe tariffs.' Russia invaded Ukraine more than three years ago, and since then, the two countries have been battling. Ukraine has relied heavily on support from allies, including the U.S., to fight Russia. Trump had initially opposed providing Ukraine with financial, humanitarian, and military aid. He heavily campaigned on the idea that he could 'end' the war between Russia and Ukraine swiftly. However, it's proven difficult for the U.S. president. Earlier this month, Trump said he would give Putin 50 days to strike a deal. However, he shortened that timeframe on Monday while expressing some frustration with Putin's lack of effort in striking a ceasefire. Hours later, Medvedev took to X to warn Trump that 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia' would lead to war between Russia and the United States. That's when Graham stepped in to demand Russia begin peace negotiations. The Independent has asked Graham's office for comment. From Medvedev's response, it appeared Russia is in no hurry to stop the fighting in Ukraine. That was all but formally confirmed on Monday evening after Russia bombarded Ukraine with a series of missiles. At least 22 people were killed as part of the Russian strikes, which targeted a Ukrainian prison camp and a Ukrainian hospital. At least one of those people killed was a pregnant woman, the Washington Post reported. Should Russia fail to come to the peace table talks, Trump could impose hefty sanctions – which would be on top of the sanctions the U.S. has already imposed on Russia. Graham, who has largely supported the U.S. sending aid to Ukraine, has co-sponsored bipartisan legislation that would impose a 500 percent tariff on imported goods from countries that purchase Russian oil, gas, uranium, and other products.
Telegraph
3 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Brexit row as Labour aligns with EU on breathalysers for British cars
'Following the UK's exit from the EU, differences between UK and EU regulations mean some manufacturers make cars specifically for the GB market,' said a government spokesman. 'This can add costs to the manufacturing process, which are liable to be passed onto GB consumers, so we're considering aligning with EU car safety regulations to keep car prices down.' Unlike the animal health rules, the European Commission has not asked the UK to align on car safety, which is a purely British decision. British and European law were identical, but in 2022, after the UK left the EU, Brussels introduced the General Safety Regulation 2 (GSR2), which means the rules have diverged. From July last year, all new vehicles in the EU have had to be pre-installed with an interface allowing a breathalyser-based locking system to be connected to the car. This system stops the car working if the driver fails the breathalyser test. The GSR2 also requires Event Data Recorders (EDRs) – similar to airplane black boxes – and Driver Drowsiness Warning (DDAW) in new vehicles. DDAW uses technology to monitor drivers and alert them if they appear to be getting sleepy, while EDRs record data such as the speed travelled before an accident. GSR2 rules already apply on all cars sold in Northern Ireland, which continues to follow many EU rules under the Brexit deal to prevent a hard Irish land border. Divergence risks making it more difficult for Northern Irish consumers to access the British car market, with fears it could push up costs if it continues for much longer. The Government believes that aligning with the EU rules will protect the UK's internal market and mean Northern Irish drivers can keep buying from the mainland. It told The Telegraph all regulatory changes were assessed for their impact on safety and cost. It has already changed British law to mirror Brussels' regulations on in-car e-call systems. The systems automatically contact emergency services if there is a serious accident. There have also been moves to create the legal base for the installation of the breathalyser technology, but not yet to make it mandatory. Even though the safety technology is not compulsory in Britain, many manufacturers install it already because their vehicles are destined for the EU market. Mike Hawes, the chief executive of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders said: 'With the heavily integrated nature of the UK and European automotive sectors, regulatory alignment supports efficient production, keeping costs down for consumers while retaining the widest possible model choice.' Sam Lowe, a trade expert and partner at Flint Global, said: 'Ensuring you only need one type approval for the entire European market is a cost saver for anyone selling across all the different countries even if the UK for example had a distinct, better or more simple, regulation. 'The savings have to be pretty big to offset the cost of doing things twice and slightly differently.' 'Alignment by stealth' However, industry sources and the Government said there was some evidence that manufacturers had begun making cars just for the British market, which is the second largest in Europe. Brexiteers said that proved that divergence could work and accused the Government of 'alignment by stealth'. Labour has used statutory instruments, a mechanism to update legislation, to mirror the EU changes to regulations already on British law books as a legacy of bloc membership. Sir Iain Duncan Smith, a former Tory leader, said: 'They are sneaking this through because statutory instruments do not end up in debate. This is a game being played out where they keep incrementally moving back towards the European Union. This is their plan. This is not a one-off.' Sir Iain said that aligning to typically more draconian EU rules would make cars more expensive and trade deals with car-producing countries, such as the US, harder. 'It screws up all your trade potential elsewhere. Your negotiating capacity is massively reduced,' he added. 'We lose all the competition, all the trade potential, and we lose control. Because now some faceless bureaucrats in Brussels run the UK, which is what we left the EU to stop.' Mark Francois, the chairman of the Conservative European Research Group, added, 'This is still rule-taking from the EU, however you try and dress it up. Our car industry is already under massive pressure from Chinese dumping of electric vehicles on world markets, so something which stifles domestic innovation and adds to regulatory burdens hardly helps.'
Telegraph
3 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Abramovich ally loses Supreme Court battle over Russian sanctions
A Russian oil tycoon has accused the UK Government of 'virtue signalling' after he failed to overturn sanctions in the Supreme Court. Eugene Shvidler, a billionaire businessman with close ties to Roman Abramovich, the former Chelsea FC owner, has lashed out at policymakers over claims he was punished for 'purely political purposes'. His criticism related to a ruling handed down by the Supreme Court on Tuesday, which upheld sanctions imposed following Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine three years ago. Mr Shvidler, who previously served on the board of companies owned by the former Chelsea owner, claimed he was hit with sanctions purely because of his 'Russian heritage'. He singled out Grant Shapps for criticism, as he said the former defence secretary grounded his private jet to 'save face' and wrongly accused him of being one of 'Putin's cronies'. The Moscow-born oil tycoon, who now lives in the US but remains a British citizen, said: 'The Government's decision-making on who to sanction is often not about targeting those who really have supported and benefited from the Russian state, but more about cheap virtue-signalling for purely political purposes.' 'Orwellian approach' His comments come after the Supreme Court rejected Mr Shvidler's bid to repeal the sanctions on Sunday. In taking his case to Britain's highest court, Mr Schvidler claimed the sanctions imposed on him were disproportionate considering he had never had any involvement in Russian politics and had left the country in 1989. He also argued that the sanctions breached his rights under the European Convention of Human Rights, partly on the basis that he had little influence over Mr Putin's decision-making. However, the Supreme Court found against Mr Schvidler after ruling that the sanctions were justified in trying to stop the war in Ukraine. In particular, it said they could send a signal to the 'Russian elite'. The top court added that while there is 'no doubt that the measures have had a severe, open-ended and drastic effect on Mr Shvidler and his family', such harsh sanctions are needed to be effective. Yet not all of the five Supreme Court judges agreed. In a dissenting judgment, Lord Leggatt said ministers had taken an 'Orwellian approach' by freezing Mr Shvidler's assets in the hope that he would 'speak out in support of government policy'. Lord Leggatt also criticised a series of social media posts sent out by Mr Shapps in which he described Mr Schvidler as a Putin ally. 'These aspersions were all baseless,' he said.
