Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has created new data in the energy sector against the backdrop of a global transition – albeit at different speeds – towards climate neutrality. The European side suddenly and unpleasantly realized that in a relationship of interdependence, similar to the one that it has developed with Moscow, in a crisis, the supplier has an advantage in using the situation over the supplier. I recall a conversation with an energy executive last April when he categorically ruled out Russia’s transition to burning natural gas. But finally the unthinkable happened. Therefore, when you are in the position of the buyer, you are at a disadvantage because you cannot control the offer and depend on the irrationality of the offer.

In any case, Brussels has neglected in previous years, largely at the behest of Berlin, the creation of alternatives to Russian natural gas, and some European circles have argued that in this way we will keep Moscow tied to the European chariot. It took the annexation of Crimea, and then the war in Ukraine, for Europeans to wake up and realize the obvious: the absence of alternatives significantly narrows the space for negotiating maneuver and increases dependence on oligopolies. This delay for at least the next two years will be paid by households and businesses with shortages and power outages, and certainly very expensive – prices were going up even before the start of the war. Unfortunately, the Europeans are not yet able to influence prices in any way. And the proposal by the European Commission to set a price ceiling for natural gas at 275 euros per thermal megawatt-hour, when the corresponding prices in August 2021 were 28 euros, shows the distance that separates Brussels from the needs of the people, but also the economies of Europe. It should be noted that liquefied natural gas currently has high prices.

Last week I was in Brussels where I confirmed the confusion about the future of energy. The transition to green energy remains a priority, however the combination of renewable sources and more traditional forms is unknown and depends on many variables. The EU has previously underestimated the importance of natural gas as a transitional fuel. And if the return to domestic production of coal and lignite is an option with a time horizon of no more than three years, and nuclear power is a taboo offering solutions, then natural gas is de facto becoming a bridge to “green”. era. However, the downside is that Europe’s so-called domestic sources are shrinking, dependence on imports is increasing, and the raw materials needed for the energy transition are largely in Chinese hands.

Inclusion of Cyprus and Greece in EU energy planning. and as producers, it adds reliability and predictability to a highly volatile energy environment.

And the mobilization of recent months has paid off: the European Union has applied to import liquefied natural gas (LNG) to countries such as Mozambique, Nigeria, Trinidad, Qatar and the United States, but with the exception of the latter, where sufficient quantities have been secured, other solutions are either problematic (eg, Qatar struck a 27-year deal with China earlier this week) are either not economically viable or do not contribute much to the attempt to differentiate from Russia.

To this end, the eastern Mediterranean can add its productive capacity to secure the Old Continent, both mainly through renewable energy sources and natural gas. As for the latter, however, the clock has already turned and time is not an ally. However, the inclusion of Cyprus and Greece in the EU energy plans, not only as a transit country, but also as producers, is of particular value, as it adds confidence and predictability to a highly uncertain energy environment.

As far as Greece is concerned, ExxonMobil’s decision to almost double its seismic survey volume while continuing similar mobility in other parts of the Greek territory expresses strong confidence in our country. Observing the seriousness and origin of the companies involved, as well as the interest of foreign companies with presence and knowledge of the Eastern Mediterranean and Balkan regions (Chevron and Shell), we understand that there is faith and expectation of the prospects of discovering deposits in our subsoil. And it makes sense to accelerate and combine the stages of our research program with an eye on the war in Ukraine, the accompanying market needs and our desire to exhaust the boundaries of our transformation into a regional landmark for the transit, distribution and production of various forms of energy.

* Mr. Konstantinos Filis is Director of the Institute of International Affairs and Associate Professor at the American College of Greece. Under his leadership, the book “The Future of History” (Papadopoulos Publications) is published.