You really think that 5 percent puts the UK in the same category of pain as Germany with regards to gas imports?^ if I recall correctly (and I probably do), the UK imported about 5% of their gas from Russia before the invasion. Due to the nature of the geography and, hence, existing LNG infrastructure, it was a relatively easy and quick (but just as painful) process of dropping the Russian gas imports for you guys. Though there is still, without a doubt, gas of Russian origin coming into the country due to the way the market works; such as gas purchased at the spot somewhere in the EU that may have come from Russia would be one and most obvious example. It is just the nature of the game and it is hard, if not impossible, to do something about that. Everyone is in this same bucket, knowingly and purposefully or otherwise.
Regardless, this has little to no effect on the prices you pay. Everyone tapped to the same faucet will pay the same market price and it is subsidies that make the difference for the consumers at the other end (though not really because subsidies are paid by the same consumers in the form of taxation and scarcity of social services, usually with interest when the debt is repaid at some point in the future - which now seems to be a perpetual process).
The biggest issue I take/see with this whole post-invasion setup is that while Europe pays through the nose for the gas they consume, along with the oil at “market” prices, places like China, India, Turkey, and a whole bunch of others are either making bank reselling these same products, processed or not (including to you guys) or making the Euro’s industry unable to compete since energy costs are a significant part of the equation. And it is actually both aforementioned process that are taking place simultaneously. The charts I cited above are a great illustration of that.
Furthermore, as I mentioned in the previous post, this so-called independence, while becoming even more dependent on the US, is complete insanity, in my opinion. One can easily argue that it is worse than the way things worked previously, when Russian gas and oil, to a lesser degree, were part of the game. First of all, by greatly reducing imports of the Russian gas and cutting trade to almost nonexistent in comparison to what it was, Europe lost (simply gave up) all the leverage they had over Russia. Note that Americans didn’t because still import the crucial components for their industries and whatnot, such as titanium, fertilizer, uranium, etc. When Ukraine (potentially with the American involvement) blew up the Nord Stream, with absolutely no consequences, it should be noted, Russia lost all their leverage with Europe as well. When something like this happens, neither side has any leverage at their disposal, there is no space for negotiations, which is quite apparent now, isn’t? Russian gas should have always remained a part of the equation and a mechanism, such as price cap or something similar, should have been implemented. Like @personaldesas said above, it is much harder for Russia to do something about their gas that was sent via pipe to Europe. This was a great leverage that was simply given up by Euros, who also closed all channels of communication and made it known, completely irrationally, in my opinion, that they will not settle until “Russia is defeated” first on the battlefield, then “strategically”, when the former became no longer a viable option (never was, in my opinion). Yeah, sure, Ukrainians would complain and whine, but it would have been better than what is happening now, including their own sake, whether they agree with it or not. Europe would have more leverage and pull over both, Russia and the USA, and, unsurprisingly, China. I would go as far as proposing a hypothesis, for the lack of a better word, that the conflict could have been wrapped up by now and, perhaps, a long time ago if that were the case. Just think about it, critically and rationally, settle your thoughts, etc. One, of course, first and foremost, needs to put aside their (maybe?) convictions that Russians are some barbarians that need to be dealt with as such and so on. This is all noise and nonsense that leads nowhere, as, again, we have been witnessing for years now.
Ukraine was dealt a bad hand, they are the only ones in this situation who have no cards at all. Their only card is the alleged full commitment of Europe to some futile cause. There is no strategy, there is still no plan B, nothing, but taking the events as they are unfolding and reacting, usually in an irrational way. Now they (the EU and G7, though I am sure none but EU actually is) are reportedly discussing replacing the price cap with a complete ban on maritime shipments of the Russian oil, for example. What are they gonna do, go to war with Russia over the oil they ship with their shadow fleet and otherwise? Here is the article (or one of them):
And here is a summary:
View attachment 53983
Ukraine was dealt a bad hand and it is up to us (I am going to include Canada into “us”, though we have no say at all) to provide for the best possible outcome for Ukraine and us. By blindly supporting who knows what, some unrealistic dreams, we actually deprive the Ukrainians of assessing the reality and seeing things through in a rational way and trying to figure it out. Russia will keep trashing Ukraine “as long as it takes” (yes, irony), our involvement notwithstanding. Things are going to get worse. For everyone, including Russia, but mainly Ukraine. We need to deal with that fact, not some… I don’t even know what it is we are dealing with anymore under the disguise of some future action we are to take that will suddenly make Putin/Russians/whatever realize that this war is too expensive and not worth the cause, etc, and Putin/Russians/whatever will agree to freeze the line where it is (could be way beyond what they are asking now, as it is now way beyond what they were asking before) vs previous plan (?) of them withdrawing from Ukraine altogether upon the same realization. It seems to me that there is only one serious party here and it ain’t us, however damaging and, maybe, catastrophic (doubtful, in my opinion) the current events are for that party (maybe that is where we actually stand though and we are the rational ones?).
So anyway, these are my thoughts on the subject that I can discuss with more depth, data, and details, but I think this is sufficient for an open forum. The main take away is that Europe (the EU plus UK, that should have never left the block to begin with with) should have taken the path of having their own voice, gain more independence from the US via heavy investment into their MIC, while keeping communications open with and retaining the leverage over Russia via purchases of cheaper natural gas and investing the “profits” (I am going to call the tremendous and completely unnecessary subsidies, probably approaching 8-10 times the monetary value of help sent to Ukraine) into the MIC, as well as UA defense and, most crucially, development. There would be no need to even contemplate the use of the frozen Russian assets (the righteousness and rule-of-law altitude/stance left intact and untarnished), the extreme right/left popularity would be left in check, and so on. And hey, maybe enough people would not even get completely delusional as to confusing drones with stars, helicopters and airplanes - that would remain the American thing or the “Jersey thing”, we could call it, but not anymore. Shame. I am going to copy-paste an article on the subject of the latter in a separate post below (translated from Dutch).
Of course the UK should never have left the EU but that really isn't relevant to this metric.
Most of the UK gas imports come from Norway via pipelines. The rest as LNG from USA and Qatar, thus it's fairly unlikely that much, if any, Russian gas molecules (not that it matters at these quantities) come into the UK.
