Russian energy export disruptions since start of Ukraine war
US sanctions on Russia
's energy industry and exports.
Trump has also threatened tougher sanctions if there is no progress.
Here is how sanctions have impacted
Russian energy exports
since the start of the conflict.
Natural gas and LNG
Russia was the top supplier of natural gas to Europe before the war. Most gas travelled through four pipeline routes: Nord Stream running under the Baltic Sea, the Yamal line crossing Poland, transit via Ukraine, and the Turkstream line.
Europe also imports Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG).
In 2021, total Russian gas imports to the EU totalled 150 billion cubic metres (bcm) per year, or 45 per cent of its total imports, and have fallen to 52 bcm or 19 per cent since, according to the European Commission.
While the EU has not imposed sanctions on Russian pipeline gas imports, contract disputes and damage to Nord Stream caused by an explosion, have cut supplies.
As part of a fresh round of sanctions announced in July, the European Union has now banned transactions including any provision of goods or services related to Nord Stream, which albeit damaged could be revived as a gas supply route.
Transit via Ukraine ended at the end of 2024, leaving just Turkstream as a functioning route for Russian pipeline gas to Europe.
The European Commission has also proposed a legally binding ban on EU imports of Russian gas and LNG by the end of 2027, but this has not been passed into legislation yet.
The US in 2024 imposed sanctions on companies supporting the development of Russia's Arctic LNG 2 project, which would become Russia's largest plant with an eventual output of 19.8 million metric tons per year.
Oil
The US, UK, and EU all prohibited the import of seaborne crude oil and refined petroleum products from Russia during the first year of the war in Ukraine.
In addition to the embargoes, the G7 group of countries (including the US, UK, and EU) imposed a price cap on Russian seaborne crude oil for third countries at $60 per barrel in December 2022, and a cap on fuels the following February.
The EU and UK altered the crude price cap level in June 2025 to $47.60, or 15 per cent below the average market price, but the US did not back the move.
The price cap aims to reduce Russia's revenues from oil sales by prohibiting shipping, insurance and reinsurance companies from handling tankers carrying crude traded above the cap level.
Western powers have also imposed sanctions on more than 440 tankers belonging to the so-called shadow fleet that transports sanctioned oil outside of Western services and the price cap. Russia's leading shipper Sovcomflot is also under sanctions in the West.
The US has also sanctioned major Russian oil companies including Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegaz .
The measures banning Russian oil imports in the west and restricting Russian oil trade elsewhere have redirected Russian oil flows towards Asia, with China, India, and Turkey emerging as the major buyers for Russian crude.
The price cap was meant to keep Russian oil flowing to prevent a spike in
global oil prices
which would have followed a halt or severe drop in Russian exports.
Trump has, however, signalled a change in policy in recent weeks by threatening to impose secondary sanctions on India and China for buying Russian oil to put pressure on Putin to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine.
Coal
The European Union banned imports of Russian coal in 2022, seeing volumes drop from 50 million metric tonnes in 2021 to zero by 2023, according to data from Eurostat.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
13 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
US, Russian journalists bond over booze during Putin-Trump Alaska meet
US and Russian journalists were seen sharing a moment of camaraderie in Alaska, while present to cover the Trump-Putin meeting. US President Donald Trump and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin had a high-stakes meeting amid the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. Brian Glenn, the Chief White House correspondent of Real America's Voice and partner of Republican lawmaker Marjorie Taylor Greene, shared a video of his interaction with the Russian press.(X/@brianglenntv) Brian Glenn, the Chief White House correspondent of Real America's Voice and partner of Republican lawmaker Marjorie Taylor Greene, shared a video of his interaction with the Russian press. US, Russian journalists bond over booze in Alaska | Watch Glenn, who infamously asked Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, why he never wears a suit, shared a video of what the Russian media had given him. Holding up a bottle of vodka, Glenn offered some backstory too. 'I found a lost camera belonging to one of the reporters in the Russian media and he was so thankful he gave me this!,' he said. On the video, members of the Russian press can be seen urging Glenn to have a drink, which he refuses. One person even offers some 'Russian cognac'. Glenn identified them as members of the press in the video. He clinks bottles with them, but says that though he wouldn't be drinking at the moment – understandably, he was on camera. 'Here's to bridging world peace!,' Glenn also said on his X post. Girlfriend MTG reacts Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Republican lawmaker from Georgia, and Glenn's partner, shared the video, commenting 'American media and Russian media making peace and being kind! Yes this is the world I want to live in.' 'Great job Brian!!!,' she added. Trump, meanwhile, said that 'progress' had been made during the talks with Putin, but suggested not all parties were 'there yet' when it came to an immediate end to the war. Now, Zelenskyy is slated to travel to Washington on Monday to meet Trump for further discussions.
Mint
13 minutes ago
- Mint
Bertie goes back to school
Bertie misses the years he spent in a dorm room. His inability to remember anything that failed to interest him, combined with the preponderance of Greek-riddled finance and abbreviation-laden marketing courses, quickly convinced him that he was not destined for anywhere close to the top of the class. That eased a lot of the pressure and made life straightforward—just enough classes and assignments to earn a respectable marksheet and sovereignty over the rest of his time without any attendant responsibilities. This was what he particularly cherished: reading things he liked irrespective of whether they would contribute to his grades; a cavernous library stuffed with all manner of texts; sundry sporting activities; and time spent shooting the breeze with friends he hoped would last him a lifetime. There were no finances to take care of, no office politics to navigate, and without a reality check from the outside world, no dream seemed too big. To relive those moments, Bertie looks forward to visiting college campuses and staying in a dorm room again. He got an opportunity to do so last weekend when he attended a history of investing course conducted by an old friend. The layout of the classroom, the simple mess food, and the hostel room, with a large study table and an almirah for books, took him back to the old days. Of the many investing truths that were discussed—sometimes with anecdotes and sometimes with data—the one that stayed with Bertie was the market's obsession with big events and its attempts to predict their outcomes. The continuous news cycle provides fodder to this tendency, with even savvy investors getting sucked into the preoccupation. Bertie's friend made the point that for one to make money from a big event, one has to get two things right: the outcome of the event, and then the market reaction to that outcome, which may not necessarily be what one thought would happen. Numerous examples of this were cited. The effect of Brexit, which was supposed to spell doom for global equities, lasted for just about an hour before the markets resumed their upward march. Similarly, in November 2016, when Donald Trump became US President for the first time, the S&P was up every single day of the results week—the first two because the markets thought Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in, and the next three because the markets deemed Trump's policies to be business-friendly. Something similar has happened in India after the recent surprise 50 basis points rate cut by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). On the eve of the cut, the government 10-year bond was trading with a yield of around 6.25%. If one had correctly forecasted the quantum of the cut, one would have been tempted to buy the bond. The yield today hovers around 6.40%, so bond prices have moved in the opposite direction of what one might have expected. Several reasons are cited post-facto for such counterintuitive market behaviour, like pre-positioning, which is market speak for how investors are positioned in the run-up to the event. But the truth is that markets are rarely driven by a single factor, event, or narrative. Generally, when the bulk of participants decide to focus on just one thing, something is quietly shifting elsewhere in the landscape. Bertie savoured the two days on campus, basking in the feeling of being a student again. Some old lessons were reaffirmed, some new ones learnt, and the wide-open spaces widened Bertie's frame of thinking as well and reassured him once again that no dream is too big. Bertie is a Mumbai-based fund manager whose compliance department wishes him to cough twice before speaking and then decide not to say it after all.
Mint
13 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump's punishing tariffs to deepen the slump in one large corner of Indian banking
Mumbai: Indian banks have low exposure to the sectors in the direct line of US President Donald Trump's tariffs. Yet, as trade disruption ripples through the economy, they may not escape a further slowing in corporate loans. Sectors including textiles, jewellery, apparel, seafood, machinery and mechanical appliances, chemicals, and auto components are expected to bear the brunt of the 50% tariffs on Indian goods entering the US. Direct lending by top banks such as State Bank of India, ICICI Bank and HDFC Bank to these industries is estimated to be about 10% of the overall loans, limiting the impact on lenders. What is concerning is the second-order hit. There are three primary reasons behind concerns about a potential slowdown in corporate credit growth on account of tariffs, according to analysts at Fitch group company CreditSights. 'First, we expect banks to be more cautious to lend to export-oriented companies, particularly in sectors heavily reliant on US demand, as the 50% tariff would have a significant impact on their businesses," Lim Ze Hao, analyst, financials at CreditSights, told Mint. It is likely that export orders are put on hold or even scrapped as US buyers seek cheaper alternatives from countries with lower tariffs, he said. Second, with the high tariff rate now and some uncertainty over where the tariff rate will eventually settle, exporters and manufacturing firms are likely inclined to pause expansion plans, resulting in reduced demand for bank loans. According to Ze Hao, finally, the 50% tariff rate will also have a moderate drag on India's GDP growth. 'Slower GDP growth typically translates into slower overall system loan growth, as businesses become more conservative about expanding operations because of slower demand, and consumers will also be more cautious about making major purchases." India's growth rate is estimated to decline by 20-30 basis points as US President Donald Trump imposes tariffs on trading partners to fulfil his election promise of bringing back jobs to the US. India faces one of the highest levies, at 50%, including 25% for buying Russian energy. Indian conglomerates have already flagged uncertainties emanating from tariffs. Corporate credit slump Reliance Industries, in its annual report, warned that 'continuing geopolitical and tariff-related uncertainties may affect trade flows and demand‑supply balance" for its oil-to-chemicals business that encompasses transportation fuels, and polyesters, among others. JSW Steel said in its annual report that 'the policy uncertainty is adversely affecting business and consumer confidence". Demand for corporate loans wasn't strong even before Trump started using tariffs as a negotiating stick. Indian banks have been waiting for corporates to borrow more. A recovery in credit demand has been impeded by the companies' reluctance to embark on new capital expenditure and their use of internal accruals, instead of bank loans, to fund projects. Bank loans to industries—micro, small, medium, and large—stood at ₹39.3 trillion at end-June, up 5.5% on year. Yet, the growth has slowed down from 8.1% seen in the previous year. The segment accounted for 21.4% of the overall non-food credit of banks in June, down from 22.1% in the same period of the previous financial year. Non-food credit excludes loans to the Food Corporation of India. A Mint analysis of cash holdings of 285 BSE-listed firms, excluding banking, financial services and insurance companies, showed a 12% year-on-year rise to ₹5.09 trillion in FY25. However, new project announcements—a proxy for capital expenditure—fell 5% in FY25, following a 3% contraction in FY24, Mint reported on 6 July, citing data from the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE). Lenders still optimistic Banks are hopeful that corporate loan demand will recover.C.S. Setty, chairman, State Bank of India (SBI), said on 8 August that corporate loan demand is expected to be at least 10% in the December quarter of the current financial corporate loan book grew 5.7% year-on-year, down from 15.9% a year earlier. The state-owned lender's total domestic loan book expanded 11.1% in the June quarter versus 15.6% a year earlier. Sashidhar Jagdishan, chief executive of HDFC Bank, told analysts on 19 July that the bank is 'not seeing anything great on the capital, private capex side as yet". However, the private lender 'shall surely participate in across all our segments, whether it is rural, whether it is retail, whether it is MSME and whether it is corporate as well". But it's not just that the demand for corporate loans has slowed down. 'There is a general demand slowdown, whether it is consumption in general or demand for corporate loans," said Anil Gupta, senior vice-president and group head of financial sector ratings, Icra Ltd. 'Banks would be ready to fund but in an uncertain environment, loan growth may remain tepid in the near term." According to Gupta, exporters may be in a wait-and-watch mode, given the uncertainty on tariffs and possible additional costs, which may reduce demand for working capital loans. As far as term loans are concerned, he said, clarity on demand revival may revive private capital expenditure.
