Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?

Q3 Social Sciences Baltic Journal of Law and Politics Pub Date : 2018-12-01 DOI:10.2478/bjlp-2018-0012
M. Szydło
{"title":"Disputes Over the Pipelines Importing Russian Gas to the EU: How to Ensure Consistency in EU Energy Law and Policy?","authors":"M. Szydło","doi":"10.2478/bjlp-2018-0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Europe is divided on how to construct and exploit pipelines importing Russian gas to the EU. The division evinces two opposing models, which I label (1) the Overcapacity and Exemption-Based Model and (2) the Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based Model. As those labels suggest, these models are premised on different assumptions as to the number and capacity of such pipelines that the EU requires, and as to how far those pipelines should be subject to EU energy law. The struggle between these models is not merely a legal one. More fundamentally, it is an economic and geopolitical one involving a wide range of stakeholders: public and private. This article evaluates the two models. By describing the legal disputes concerning OPAL and Nord Stream 2 and analysing their wider legal, economic and geopolitical implications, it argues that the second model (Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based) is clearly superior in today’s context. It is fully aligned with the objectives and provisions of EU energy law. In particular, it is consistent with that law’s aim of diversifying the external suppliers, sources and routes of gas supplies available to the EU. This article concludes that this latter model must win in the OPAL and Nord Stream 2 disputes, and, moreover, that it must be implemented with respect to all eastern import pipelines and connected pipelines before any further pro-competitive or pro-integrative reforms to the EU’s energy law and policy.","PeriodicalId":38764,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of Law and Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baltic Journal of Law and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2018-0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Europe is divided on how to construct and exploit pipelines importing Russian gas to the EU. The division evinces two opposing models, which I label (1) the Overcapacity and Exemption-Based Model and (2) the Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based Model. As those labels suggest, these models are premised on different assumptions as to the number and capacity of such pipelines that the EU requires, and as to how far those pipelines should be subject to EU energy law. The struggle between these models is not merely a legal one. More fundamentally, it is an economic and geopolitical one involving a wide range of stakeholders: public and private. This article evaluates the two models. By describing the legal disputes concerning OPAL and Nord Stream 2 and analysing their wider legal, economic and geopolitical implications, it argues that the second model (Optimal Capacity and Regulatory-Based) is clearly superior in today’s context. It is fully aligned with the objectives and provisions of EU energy law. In particular, it is consistent with that law’s aim of diversifying the external suppliers, sources and routes of gas supplies available to the EU. This article concludes that this latter model must win in the OPAL and Nord Stream 2 disputes, and, moreover, that it must be implemented with respect to all eastern import pipelines and connected pipelines before any further pro-competitive or pro-integrative reforms to the EU’s energy law and policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
俄罗斯输往欧盟天然气管道之争:如何确保欧盟能源法律和政策的一致性?
欧洲在如何建设和开采从俄罗斯进口天然气到欧盟的管道问题上存在分歧。这种划分证明了两种相反的模型,我将其称为(1)基于产能过剩和豁免的模型和(2)基于最优产能和监管的模型。正如这些标签所表明的那样,这些模型基于不同的假设,如欧盟要求的此类管道的数量和容量,以及这些管道应在多大程度上遵守欧盟能源法。这些模式之间的斗争不仅仅是法律上的。更根本的是,这是一个经济和地缘政治问题,涉及广泛的利益相关者:公共和私人。本文对这两种模型进行了评价。通过描述有关OPAL和北溪2的法律纠纷,并分析其更广泛的法律、经济和地缘政治影响,本文认为,在当今的背景下,第二种模型(最优容量和基于监管的)显然更优越。它完全符合欧盟能源法的目标和规定。特别是,它符合该法律的目标,即使欧盟可获得的外部供应商、来源和天然气供应路线多样化。本文的结论是,后一种模式必须在OPAL和北流2争端中获胜,而且,在对欧盟能源法律和政策进行进一步的有利于竞争或有利于整合的改革之前,必须对所有东部进口管道和连接管道实施这种模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Baltic Journal of Law & Politics (BJLP) is a scholarly journal, published bi-annually in electronic form as a joint publication of the Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy and the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania). BJLP provides a platform for the publication of scientific research in the fields of law and politics, with a particular emphasis on interdisciplinary research that cuts across these traditional categories. Topics may include, but are not limited to the Baltic Region; research into issues of comparative or general theoretical significance is also encouraged. BJLP is peer-reviewed and published in English.
期刊最新文献
Assessing Determinants and Impact of Possible Russian Influence in the Western Balkan Countries Algorithmic Parody Protection in the European Union: CDSM Directive and DSA Regulation Perspective Resilience and Vulnerabilities Related to Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: The Emergence of a New Club of Nato and EU Members Control of Criminal Intelligence: An Evaluation of the Lithuanian Situation in Light of International Practice Psychological Workplace Violence Against Older People in Lithuania
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1