Nord Stream 2: In accordance with the EU’s Energy security strategy?

• Název práce v češtině: Nord Stream 2: V souladu se strategií energetické bezpečnosti EU?
• Název v anglickém jazyce: Nord Stream 2: In accordance with the EU’s Energy security strategy?
• Klíčová slova: Energetická bezpečnost, Energetická politika EU, Nord Stream 2, Jižní plynový koridor Evropská unie, zemní plyn, plynovody, Rusko
• Klíčová slova anglicky: Energy Security, EU Energy Strategy, Nord Stream 2, Southern Gas Corridor, European Union, natural gas, gas pipelines, Russia
• Akademický rok vypsání: 2018/2019
• Typ práce: diplomová práce
• Jazyk práce: angličtina
• Ústav: Katedra mezinárodních vztahů (23-KMV)
• Vedoucí / školitel: PhDr. Irah Kučerová, Ph.D.
• Řešitel: skrytý - zadáno vedoucím/školitelem
• Datum přihlášení: 29.07.2019
• Datum zadání: 29.07.2019
• Datum a čas obhajoby: 12.09.2019 00:00
• Datum odevzdání elektronické podoby: 30.07.2019
• Datum proběhlé obhajoby: 12.09.2019
• Oponenti: doc. PhDr. Běla Plechanovová, CSc.

Seznam odborné literatury

Aalto et al. 2014. How are Russian energy policies formulated? Linking the actors and structures of energy policy. In: Russia's energy relations in Europe and the Far East: Towards a social structurationist approach to energy policy formation. Journal of International Relations and Development. DOI: 10.1057/jird.2012.29. pp. 20-42.

Ang, B. W., Choong, W. L., Ng, T. S. 2014. Energy security: Definitions, dimensions and indexes.

Austvik, O. G. 2015. The EU Energy Union, Energy Security and Russian Gas.

Balabán, M. & Stejskal, L. 2010. Kapitoly o bezpečnosti.

Barnes A. 2017. Friend or enemy of energy security in Europe? CEPS. CEPS Policy Insight No. 2017/46. Available at: https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/PI2017_46_Barnes_NordSteam2.pdf.

Buzan, B; de Wilde, J. & Weawer, O. 1998. Security: A New Framework for Analysis.

Boussena, S., & Locatelli, C. 2013. Energy institutional and organizational changes in EU
and Russia: Revisiting gas relations. Energy Policy, 55, 180-189.

Casier T. 2011. The Rise of Energy to the Top of the EU-Russia Agenda: From Interdependence to Dependence? Geopolitics 16/3. pp. 536–552.

Casier T. 2016. Great Game or Great Confusion: The Geopolitical Understanding of EU-Russia Energy Relations, Geopolitics, 21:4, 763-778, DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2016.1185607.

Cohen, S. 2009. Geopolitics: The Geography of International Relations. ISBN 978-1-4422-2351-6.

Cherp, A., Jewell, J. 2014. The concept of energy security: Beyond the four As.

Dickel, R., Hassanzadeh, E., Henderson, J., Honoré, A., El-Katiri, L., Pirani, S., & Yafimava, K. 2014. Reducing European dependence on Russian gas. Oxford: Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.

Hughes, L. 2011. A generic framework for the description and analysis of energy security in an energy system.
Judge A., Maltby T & Sharples J, D.2016. Challenging Reductionism in Analyses of EU-Russia Energy Relations. Geopolitics. vol. 21, no. 4, 751–762. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2016.1222520.

Keohane, R. 1984. After Hegemony. Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy.

Keohane, R. & Nye, J. 1989. Power and Interdependence.

Kratochvíl, P., & Tichý, L. 2013. EU and Russian discourse on energy relations. Energy policy, 56, 391-406.

Kucharski J., Unesaki H. 2015. A policy-oriented approach to energy security. Procedia Environmental Sciences 28 ( 2015 ) 27 – 36.

Leonard, M., Popescu N. Policy Paper: A Power Audit of EU – Russia Relations.

Månsson, A., Johansson, B. & Nilsson L. 2014. Assessing energy security: An overview of commonly used methodologies.

Paltsev, S. 2014. Scenarios for Russia's natural gas reports to 2050. Energy Economics 42, pp. 262-270.

Skalamera, M. 2015. Invisible but not indivisible: Russia, the European Union, and the importance of “Hidden Governance”.

Skalamera, M. 2018. Understanding Russia’s energy turn to China: domestic narratives and national identity priorities. Post-Soviet Affairs, 34(1), 55-77.

Siddi, M. (2017). The EU’s Gas Relationship with Russia: Solving Current Disputes and Strengthening Energy Security. Asia Europe Journal, 15(1), 107–117.

Siddi M. 2018. The Role of Power in EU–Russia Energy Relations: The Interplay between Markets and Geopolitics, Europe-Asia Studies, 70:10, 1552-1571, DOI: 10.1080/09668136.2018.1536925.

Stulberg, A. N. 2015. Out of Gas?: Russia, Ukraine, Europe, and the Changing Geopolitics of Natural Gas. Problems of Post-Communism, 62(2), s. 112-130.

Romanova, T. 2016. Is Russian energy policy towards the EU only about geopolitics? The case of the third liberalization package. Geopolitics, 21(4), (857-879).

Yafimava, K. (2013). The EU Third Package for Gas and the Gas Target Model: Major contentious issues inside and outside the EU. Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.

Yergin, D. 2011. The quest: energy, security, and the remaking of the modern world. Penguin.

Youngs R. 2007. Europe’s External Energy Policy: Between Geopolitics and the Market. CEPS. Available at: http://aei.pitt.edu/7579/1/Wd278.pdf.

Waloszyk, M. 2014. Law and Policy of the European Gas Market.

Winzer, Ch. 2011. Conceptualizing energy security. EPRG Working Paper. University of Cambridge.

Winzer, Ch. 2012. Conceptualizing energy security. Energy Policy 46 (2012) pp. 26-48. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.02.067.

Předběžná náplň práce v anglickém jazyce

Stable supply of energy is crucial EU’s economic prosperity and for well-being of its citizens. The EU in its “2020” Energy Strategy aims to achieve energy savings of at least 20% and at the same time increase the share of renewable energy to at least 20%. Even with these noble goals the EU is still and will be dependent on the import of energy as more than half of all energy consumed has to be imported from the outside of the EU territory. The key commodity in focus for this thesis will be natural gas. Over two-thirds of the natural gas needed in the EU is imported and the EU’s domestic natural gas production is declining. The dependence on the import of the natural gas and varies across the EU however in average natural gas stands for 22% of the EU’s energy consumption.

Therefore a secure gas supply is of utmost importance. The EU in its 2014 Energy security strategy stressed the importance to secure this supply. Namely by further diversification and strengthening relations with current natural gas suppliers. The strategy names specifically the Southern Gas Corridor and mentions the long-term future possibilities to get access to the gas reserves in Turkmenistan, Iraq or Iran. Another mentioned possibility for diversification is to use the growing potential of liquefied natural gas (LNG) that can be transported, similar to oil, by tankers and therefore are not constrained by territorial proximity and geographic obstacles as the traditional natural gas in pipeline is.
The aim of this thesis is to provide an overview of current state of the gas imports to the EU and its security with comparison of current projects that are underway. The main focus will be on the comparison of Southern Gas Corridor with addition of the emerging LNG capacities (Świnoujście LNG terminal) versus the Nord Stream 2 project which would connect Russia, as a supplier, directly to Germany, a member state of the EU. The work will take into consideration recent political events and current geopolitical status – namely the occupation of Crimea followed by sanctions against Russia, the fact that the Nord Stream 2 project will bypass Ukraine and Poland and thus lowering their income from transition fees and that both U.S. House of Representatives and European Parliament issued non-binding statements and resolutions advising to stop this project.
Part of the work will also focus on the Third Energy Package that entered into force in the member countries of the EU in 2009 and should further open the electricity and gas market in the EU. This has strong implications for the Nord Stream 2 project and Gazprom as it requires ownership unbundling targeting separation of the companies' generation and sale operations from their transmission networks.

Theoretical Framework & Methodology
Framework used in this thesis will be primarily outsourced from Christian Winzer and his works. Risks primarily evaluated will be the human risks (geopolitical risks and political instability) and economic aspects. Furthermore, by the review of literature we will get different views on how the energy security is approached not only by scholars in their works but also how different actors tend to view gas as an object in focus. Is it more of a commodity with a price tag and with pipelines as mere means for the commodity to reach the consumers or is it a strategic resource that can be used as a leverage for reaching different (geo)political goals?
The methodology will be focused on comparison of aforementioned gas import projects. Thorough analysis and comparison of academia texts will be put together with up-to-date data from governments, relevant institutions and also the political discourse and geopolitical reality will be taken into account.


Hypothesis
The research question is suggested in the title and asks if Is the Nord Stream 2 project necessary for strengthening of the EU’s energy security? Another research question will ask whether the North Stream project by directly connecting two countries (even though underwater and passing through several countries’ economic zones) could actually be safer for gas transport than other alternatives (land gas-pipelines or LNG carriers). Lastly the analysis will try to evaluate if the geopolitical aspects (effort to not to be dependent on Russian gas) will outweigh the risks and costs of building new infrastructure often from unstable regions.
H1: The Nord Stream 2 project is redundant and goes against the energy security of the EU.
H2: There are better alternatives for diversification of the gas imports into the EU.

Outline
Introduction
Theory
1. Theoretical framework
a. Energy security – review of literature
b. Ch. Winzer and his framework
c. Methodology
Analysis
2. Overview
a. Energy mix of the EU
b. Gas production in the EU
c. Current gas imports to the EU
d. Third Energy Package
3. Projects in focus
a. Nord Stream 2
b. Southern Gas Corridor (TANAP, TAP, SCPX)
c. LNG alternatives
4. Geopolitical risks and political instability
a. Nord Stream 2 – Russia, Germany, EU & USA
b. Southern Gas Corridor – Turkey, Black Sea & Caucasus
5. Comparison of Nord Stream 2 and Southern Gas Corridor
Conclusion