The extreme heat that’s been scorching Asia in recent weeks has produced one clear beneficiary — Russia.

As countries across the region scramble to make sure they have enough coal, gas and fuel oil to keep the lights on and air conditioners running, Russian energy being shunned by the West is looking increasingly attractive.

What began as a push from the Kremlin to fund its invasion of Ukraine has now turned into a pull from Asian economies anxious about making sure their power generators are supplied with enough fuel in what could be the hottest year on record.

“The worst place to be right now amid these searing temperatures is South Asia, especially poorer nations like Pakistan or Bangladesh,” said John Driscoll, director of JTD Energy Services Pte in Singapore.

“When you can’t even take care of your people’s basic needs, it’s very hard to care too much about international affairs.”

To get Bloomberg’s Energy Daily newsletter direct to your inbox, click here.

Russian exports to Asia of thermal coal and natural gas, the two fuels most often used for electricity generation, have grown markedly this year, figures from data intelligence firm Kpler show.

Coal volumes jumped sharply to 7.46 million tons in April, about a third higher than a year earlier. Shipments of liquefied natural gas to Asia have also been growing in recent months after prices retreated from record highs that had made the fuel unaffordable for many poorer nations.

Meanwhile, Asian imports of Russian fuel oil, a dirtier and cheaper alternative for power generation, had the two highest months on record in March and April, according to Kpler.

The impetus for the region to buy more Russian energy is likely to increase due to an emerging El Niño weather pattern, which has already sent the mercury soaring in parts of the region. Vietnam’s prime minister has warned of power shortages this month, while Myanmar is struggling with worsening blackouts.

Carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are trapping heat in the atmosphere. That’s warming the planet and is the primary driver of more extreme weather events, including heat waves.

In India, heat-driven power demand will likely be satisfied mostly by coal, said Aniket Autade, power fundamentals analyst for Rystad Energy.

Read More: A Billion Air Conditioners Will Save Lives But Cook the Planet

China and India — the most enthusiastic buyers of discounted Russian oil — are also purchasing the most coal, gas and fuel oil. They took more than two-thirds of Russian coal sent to Asia last month, according to Bloomberg calculations based on Kpler data. South Korea, however, scooped up 15% of the shipments, while Vietnam, Malaysia and Sri Lanka have also emerged as significant buyers.

For fuel oil, China and India were again the biggest buyers from Russia, with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates also major importers, the Kpler figures show.

Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka will probably import more Russian fuel oil for power generation, according to Emma Li, an analyst with Vortexa. The Middle East has also recently increased its imports, and that’s likely to continue over the summer, she said.

Pakistan said this month it was keen to pay for Russian oil imports with the Chinese yuan. The country has has placed an order for a single cargo of the crude, but is keen for a long-term deal to buy it in Chinese currency, its power minister said.

Even Japan, a close ally of the US and therefore reluctant to increase imports from Russia, might expand buying within contractual limits, according to Chris Wilkinson, senior analyst for renewables at Rystad.

“Japan may consider purchasing more LNG from Russia under its existing long-term contracts, as it is more cost-effective than buying on the spot market,” he said.

For JTD Energy’s Driscoll, the increasing purchases of Russian energy by many Asian countries highlights both the White House’s declining clout and the perilous situation many nations find themselves in.

“[They] are asking themselves: would I rather risk falling afoul of the US or forgo steep discounts on energy?,” he said. “When there’s a good deal on the table, how can poorer nations afford to say no?”

— With assistance by Aaron Clark

UAE state energy company ADNOC’s recently formed gas unit will launch on the Abu Dhabi stock market on Monday in a $2.5 billion initial public offering aimed at tapping high demand for the fuel.

Shares in ADNOC Gas, which only became operational at the start of this year, were heavily oversubscribed even after the offering was expanded from 4.0 to 5.0 percent of issued share capital in response to strong interest.

The final price was set at 2.37 dirhams ($0.65) per share, towards the top of its range, raising about $2.5 billion and implying a market capitalisation of around $50 billion.

ADNOC Gas is the biggest flotation yet on the Abu Dhabi stock exchange, which opens at 9:30 am (0530 GMT).

At more than 50 times oversubscribed, it is the biggest demand ever seen for an initial public offering in the Middle East and North Africa, outstripping oil firm Saudi Aramco’s world-record $29.4 billion listing just over three years ago.

The rapidly organised IPO from ADNOC, one of the world’s biggest oil firms, follows last year’s scramble for alternative gas resources after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and comes as countries search for cleaner fuels to mitigate global warming.

Energy consultant Roudi Baroudi, who heads the Qatar-based Energy and Environment Holding firm, said he expected brisk demand when the shares start trading.

“There is every reason to expect that the massive oversubscription we saw will carry over into strong interest when the shares are floated publicly,” Baroudi told AFP.

– ‘Transition fuel’ –

Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, the United Arab Emirates’ key revenue-earner, retains a 90 percent stake in the subsidiary formed from its former gas processing, LNG and industrial gas units.

Gas is being touted as cleaner than other fossil fuels as countries around the world strive to reduce their emissions.

Baroudi said Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) was “the most important transition fuel in the move away from hydrocarbons”.

In 2021, the UAE produced 57 billion cubic metres (bcm) of natural gas, or about 1.4 percent of global output, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy.

That same year, the Emirates exported 8.8 bcm of LNG, 1.7 percent of world LNG exports, the Statistical Review said.

“As global efforts to battle climate change gain pace, the role of natural gas in general… is widely expected to grow,” Baroudi said.

“ADNOC enjoys a solid reputation, so it was to be expected that the ADNOC Gas IPO would attract strong interest.”

ADNOC Gas could be the first in a series of share offerings in Abu Dhabi this year.

At least eight companies are expected to follow in fields ranging from technology to asset management and regenerative medicine, Bloomberg said, citing Sameh Al Qubaisi, director general of economic affairs at Abu Dhabi’s Department of Economic Development.

https://www.digitaljournal.com/business/uaes-adnoc-gas-to-start-trading-in-2-5bn-ipo/article

Multilateral development banks (MDBs) have historically been reluctant to invest in nuclear energy, and the World Bank has not financed a nuclear power plant since 1959. In the absence of MDB funds, the majority of international financing for such projects has come from state banks in Russia and China, establishing Russian and Chinese companies as the primary suppliers of nuclear technology to low- and middle-income countries.

Multilateral development banks (MDBs) have historically been reluctant to invest in nuclear energy, and the World Bank has not financed a nuclear power plant since 1959. In the absence of MDB funds, the majority of international financing for such projects has come from state banks in Russia and China, establishing Russian and Chinese companies as the primary suppliers of nuclear technology to low- and middle-income countries.
While this approach has allowed MDBs to avoid controversy, they must acknowledge that the world has changed. The urgent need to curb greenhouse-gas emissions, together with Russia’s war in Ukraine and subsequent surge in oil and gas prices, has increased global demand for nuclear power. With the 2011 Fukushima disaster fading in the rearview mirror, even Japan is planning to restart its reactors. France, The Netherlands, and the United Kingdom have all announced plans to build new nuclear power plants, Sweden is considering it, and the European Union now allows nuclear energy to be labelled as a green investment. In the United States, the federal government is expected to pump about $40bn into the sector over the coming decade, and private investment in nuclear energy is surging.
This change in sentiment coincides with rapid technological advances. The development of smaller and safer reactors has made nuclear power cheaper, faster to deploy, and easier to maintain. Whereas the construction of traditional nuclear power plants has historically been a major national undertaking, with costs frequently running into the dozens of billions of dollars, so-called small modular reactors allow for a more tailored approach and more manageable financing packages.
This is particularly important for developing countries, which must figure out how to expand their power supply while curtailing greenhouse-gas emissions as they become increasingly industrialised and urbanised. The International Energy Agency estimates that demand for energy in Africa will jump by one-third by the end of the decade, owing to population and income growth, as well as improved access.
While increased MDB support for renewable energy has helped put developing economies on the path toward carbon neutrality, most countries still rely on coal-fired power plants and natural gas for baseload electricity production. To complete the shift away from fossil fuels, governments must complement wind and solar energy with low-carbon sources that are not dependent on weather conditions.
But without nuclear power (or hydroelectricity, but not all countries have that option), governments will find it difficult to replace their fossil-fuel baseload. While it may be possible to achieve this by combining renewable energy with utility-scale battery storage, the costs are prohibitive, and modern batteries come with their own sustainability issues. Geothermal energy could also play this role, but currently it is limited to areas where geothermal heat is available close to the Earth’s surface. New technologies could expand access to geothermal power, but they are costly.
By abandoning their reticence about nuclear power, MDBs could help scale up low-carbon energy supply while enhancing global security. Western countries’ withdrawal from nuclear energy over the past few decades has enabled Russia to establish itself as the leading international provider of reactors, services, and financing for nuclear-power projects. At a time of heightened geopolitical tensions, it is in the interest of MDBs’ democratic shareholding governments to establish an alternative for emerging countries interested in nuclear power but hesitant to make their energy security dependent on Russia. Simultaneously, MDBs would promote better safety and sustainability standards.
Given that international development agencies tend to follow MDBs’ lead, and that private financing of energy infrastructure projects in developing countries often depends on multilateral lenders’ risk-mitigation policies, MDBs should reverse their position on nuclear power. Otherwise, Russia and China will remain the world’s primary suppliers of such projects.

To be sure, MDBs must carefully assess proposed nuclear energy projects to ensure that they meet appropriate technological and sustainability standards. While some under-resourced countries with weak institutions might not be ready to pursue nuclear power, MDBs are uniquely positioned to support emerging economies seeking alternatives to Russian and Chinese technologies and financing.
The climate crisis, too, has created unprecedented momentum for reform. The US, Germany, a G20 expert panel, and Barbadian Prime Minister Mia Mottley have all called for strengthening MDBs’ capacity to support developing countries in mitigating and adapting to climate change and in mobilising private financing for this purpose. Meanwhile, the World Bank recently published an “evolution roadmap” that aims to increase its capacity to respond to climate change.
Reforming MDBs’ financing structures and energy policies is crucial to supporting developing countries in mitigating the worst effects of climate change. Moreover, Russia’s war against Ukraine has revealed the critical role of the multilateral financial system as a bulwark against tyranny. Since the start of the war, the World Bank has disbursed $16bn in financial support to Ukraine, with other multilateral finance institutions providing comparable amounts. By explicitly permitting MDBs to finance nuclear power, their shareholding governments could weaken Russia’s still-considerable influence in emerging countries.
The momentum generated by nuclear energy’s renaissance, the geostrategic imperative to reduce Russia’s role as the dominant international provider of nuclear energy infrastructure, and the looming climate crisis, has presented MDBs with a unique opportunity to update their nuclear energy policy. To fight climate change and achieve a safer, more sustainable future, they must seize it. — Project Syndicate

(Disclaimer: The opinions and arguments expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the OECD or its member countries.)

* Håvard Halland, Senior Economist at the OECD Development Centre, is a former senior economist at the World Bank and a former visiting scholar at Stanford University.
* Jessica Lovering, Executive Director of the Good Energy Collective, is a fellow at the Energy for Growth Hub and the Fastest Path to Zero Initiative at the University of Michigan.

The challenge for politicians is to devise fair policies that protect people from the inevitable shocks

Russia’s war on Ukraine has sent shockwaves around the world. Oil prices have skyrocketed and food prices have soared, causing political instability. The last time food prices were this volatile, riots erupted across the Arab world and from Burkina Faso to Bangladesh. This time, the energy and food shock is happening against the backdrop of the Covid-19 pandemic. When will the shocks end?

They won’t. So, we can choose either resignation and despair, or a policy agenda to build social and political resilience against future shocks. Those are our options, and we had better start taking them seriously, because the shocks are likely to get worse. On top of geopolitical crises, the climate emergency will bring even greater disruptions, including ferocious floods, mega-droughts, and possibly even a simultaneous crop failure in key grain-producing regions worldwide. It is worth noting that India, the world’s second-largest wheat producer, recently banned exports as part of its response to a devastating heatwave this spring.
But here’s the thing: reducing vulnerability to shocks, for example, by embarking on energy and food revolutions, will also be disruptive. The energy system is the foundation of industrialised economies, and it needs to be overhauled to phase out fossil fuels within a few decades. Huge industries like coal and oil will have to contract, and then disappear. And agriculture, transportation, and other sectors will need to change radically to become more sustainable and resilient.
The challenge for politicians, then, is clear: to devise fair policies that protect people from the inevitable shocks.
One idea with significant potential is a Citizen’s Fund, which would follow a straightforward fee-and-dividend equation. Companies that emit greenhouse-gas emissions or extract natural resources would pay fees into the fund, which would then distribute equal payments to all citizens, creating an economic cushion during a period of transformation and beyond.
This is not just an idea. In 1976, the Republican governor of Alaska, Jay Hammond, established the Alaska Permanent Fund, which charges companies a fee to extract oil and then disburses the proceeds equally to all the state’s citizens. In 2021, each eligible Alaskan received $1,114 – not as a “welfare payment” but as a dividend from a state commons (in this case, a finite supply of oil). The largest dividend ever paid was during Republican Sarah Palin’s governorship in 2008, when every Alaskan enjoyed a windfall of $3,269.
In 2017, James Baker and George Shultz, two former Republican secretaries of state, proposed a similar plan for the whole United States, estimating that fees on carbon emissions would yield a dividend of $2,000 per year to every US household. With backing from 3,500 economists, their scheme has broad appeal not just among companies and environmental-advocacy groups but also (and more incredibly) across the political aisle.
The economics is simple. A fee on carbon drives down emissions by driving up the price of polluting. And though companies would pass on these costs to consumers, the wealthiest would be the hardest hit, because they are by far the biggest, fastest-growing source of emissions. The poorest, meanwhile, would gain the most from the dividend, because $2,000 means a lot more to a low-income household than it does to a high-income household. In the end, most people would come out ahead.
But given that food- and energy-price shocks tend to hit low-income cohorts the hardest, why make the dividend universal? The reason is that a policy of this scale needs both broad-based and lasting support, and people are far more likely to support a programme or policy if there is at least something in it for them.
Moreover, a Citizen’s Fund is not just a way to drive down emissions and provide an economic safety net for the clean-energy transition. It would also foster innovation and creativity, by providing a floor of support for the entrepreneurs and risk-takers we will need to transform our energy and food systems.
A Citizen’s Fund could also be expanded to include other global commons, including mining and other extractive industries, plastics, the ocean’s resources, and even knowledge, data, and networks. All involve shared commons – owned by all – that are exploited by businesses that should be required to pay for the negative externalities they create.
Of course, a universal basic dividend is not a panacea. It must be part of larger plan to build societies that are more resilient to shocks, including through greater efforts to redistribute wealth by means of progressive taxation and empowerment of workers. To that end, Earth4All, an initiative I co-lead, is developing a suite of novel proposals that we see as the most promising pathways to build cohesive societies that are better able to make long-term decisions for the benefit of the majority.
Our most important finding is perhaps the most obvious, but it is also easy to overlook. Whether we do the bare minimum to address the grand challenges or everything we can to build resilient societies, disruption and shocks are part of our future. Embracing disruption is thus the only option and a Citizen’s Fund becomes an obvious shock absorber. — Project Syndicate

• Owen Gaffney is an analyst at the Stockholm Resilience Centre and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

Lhe tocsin is sounding at full speed in the German cities and countryside at the start of summer. A whole prosperity built on low-cost energy is going up in smoke. For the first time since 1991, the country’s trade balance, a national pride, plunged into the red in May, and the government is expected to submit a law to parliament this week authorizing it to come to the aid of the country’s energy companies. At the forefront of which is the company Uniper, one of the main importers of gas across the Rhine. The state could advance him nearly 9 billion euros and enter his capital, as he did with Lufthansa at the height of the health crisis.

Make no mistake, as the Minister of the Economy, environmentalist Robert Habeck, said this Sunday: “We are not facing erratic decisions but facing a completely rational and very clear economic war. » Faced with rising prices and falling deliveries, he openly talks about rationing energy. Unheard of since World War II.

With its trade deficit of nearly 85 billion euros (excluding services), France is obviously in no position to give any advice, and even less to be happy about the situation, Germany being its first partner. Over the last twelve months, Berlin still records a surplus of more than 170 billion, but the trend is not good. In May, sales abroad fell by 0.5% while imports increased by 2.7%. The main culprit is of course inflation, with import prices up 30% in May year on year, while export prices rose only 16%.

Achilles’ heel

Vibrant heart of happy globalization with its extremely sophisticated logistics chains, Germany appears to be the first victim of the current new situation. His model was based on cheap Russian gas, tight industrial organization and unlimited Chinese outlets. These three well-oiled machines suddenly seize up with the war in Ukraine, the logistical chaos and the confinements in China.

First short-term observation: European sanctions have not only not brought Russia to its knees, but have had the opposite effect. By announcing restrictions that will only come later, the West has caused an immediate surge in gas prices which fully benefits Russia. Its currency has stabilized and its budget has even gone into surplus. It might have been necessary, as the economist Philippe Martin suggests, to immediately impose customs duties or a ceiling price. Not easy. Second observation, that of the extreme dependence of our economies, and especially of Germany, on imported gas. Unlike the United States, energy sovereignty is Europe’s Achilles’ heel, and its reconquest will be long and painful.

L’Allemagne a dévoilé son premier déficit commercial depuis trente ans et envisage d’aider les entreprises du secteur énergétique, comme Uniper, qui subissent de plein fouet la guerre en Ukraine. Une mobilisation qui repose la question de la souveraineté énergétique de l’Europe souligne Philippe Escande, éditorialiste économique au « Monde ».

Le tocsin sonne à toute volée dans les villes et les campagnes allemandes en ce début d’été. Toute une prospérité construite sur une énergie à bas coût est en train de partir en fumée. Pour la première fois depuis 1991, la balance commerciale du pays, fierté nationale, a plongé dans le rouge en mai, et le gouvernement devrait soumettre cette semaine au Parlement une loi l’autorisant à venir au secours des entreprises énergétiques du pays. Au premier rang desquelles figure la société Uniper, l’un des principaux importateurs de gaz outre-Rhin. L’Etat pourrait lui avancer près de 9 milliards d’euros et entrer à son capital, comme il l’a fait avec Lufthansa au plus fort de la crise sanitaire.

Ne nous trompons pas, comme l’a affirmé ce dimanche, le ministre de l’économie, l’écologiste Robert Habeck : « Nous ne sommes pas face à des décisions erratiques mais face à une guerre économique complètement rationnelle et très claire. » Face à la hausse des prix et à la baisse des livraisons, il parle ouvertement de rationner l’énergie. Du jamais-vu depuis la seconde guerre mondiale.

Avec son déficit commercial de près de 85 milliards d’euros (hors services), la France est évidemment mal placée pour donner le moindre conseil, et encore moins pour se réjouir de la situation, l’Allemagne étant son premier partenaire. Sur les douze derniers mois, Berlin enregistre encore un excédent de plus de 170 milliards, mais la tendance n’est pas bonne. En mai, les ventes à l’étranger ont baissé de 0,5 % quand les importations ont augmenté de 2,7 %. Le premier coupable est bien sûr l’inflation, avec des prix des importations en hausse de 30 % en mai sur un an, alors que le prix des exportations n’a progressé que de 16 %.

Talon d’Achille

Cœur vibrant de la mondialisation heureuse avec ses chaînes logistiques sophistiquées à l’extrême, l’Allemagne apparaît comme la première victime de la nouvelle donne actuelle. Son modèle reposait sur un gaz russe à bon marché, une organisation industrielle au cordeau et des débouchés chinois sans limite. Ces trois machines bien huilées se grippent d’un coup avec la guerre en Ukraine, le chaos logistique et les confinements en Chine.

Premier constat de court terme : les sanctions européennes n’ont non seulement pas mis à genoux la Russie, mais ont abouti à l’effet inverse.

بارودي يؤكد صوابية طلب لبنان الخاص بالمباحثات والمفاوضات على الحدود البحرية ويؤكد صوابية طلبه مستعيناً بقضايا مماثلة حصلت في السابق وتم البت بها من قبل محكمة العدل الدولية

كَثُرَت في الفترة الأخيرة الخيارات المتاحة في نظر بعض المسؤولين في لبنان، لتأمين مصادر يتم عبرها تسديد أموال المودِعين… فما أن طُرِح إنشاء الصندوق السيادي، حتى ارتأى البعض اللجوء إلى رهن جزء من احتياطي الذهب… لكن ما لم يكن في الحسبان أن يقترح أحدهم استخدام أموال ثروة لبنان النفطية لتسديد الودائع ولتغطية كلفة الدين العام! علماً أن مفاوضات ترسيم الحدود البحرية بين لبنان وإسرائيل عالقة منذ أيار 2021، ولا تزال الضبابية تلف هذا الملف محلياً ودولياً.

الخبير الدولي في مجال الطاقة رودي بارودي يعلّق, في حديث إلى موقع القوات اللبنانية الإلكتروني، على الفائدة المالية من حقول النفط التي يؤمَل أن تشكّل الثروة النفطية للبنان، ليؤكد أنه “في حال حصول لبنان على جزء من حقل كاريش, فإن حصته لا تكفي لتغطية الدين العام اللبناني حتى وفق أسعار النفط والغاز المعتمدة حالياً”، ويقول “ربما قد تغطي حصّة لبنان من حقل كاريش أو غيره، جزءاً ضئيلاً فقط من الدين العام”.

ويعتبر أنه “من غير المؤكد ما إذا كان لبنان سيتمكّن من الحصول على الخط 23، من دون معالجة مجموعة من الأخطاء الجسيمة التي ارتُكِبَت عند البدء بوضع الخطوط من 1 الى 23 قبل نحو 12 عاماً”.

ويكشف بارودي عن أن حقل “كاريش” المكتشَف العام 2013 يحتوي على 2.5 ترليون قدم مربّع من الغاز. وهذا الحقل تم اكتشافه من قبل الشركة الإسرائيلية “ديليك” العام 2013 والتي باعته بدورها إلى “إينيرجيان”.

ويقول، إذا تم احتساب الكمية على أساس أسعار الغاز والنفط الحالية، فإن المردود المتوقع من حقل “كاريش” يتراوح ما بين 22 و25 مليار دولار أميركي. لكن لا يمكن تقدير مردود حقل “قانا” لأنه قد يكون ممتداً إلى إسرائيل، كما أن حقل “كاريش” متداخل بين لبنان وإسرائيل.

ويُلفت إلى أن إسرائيل أنجزت التحضيرات اللازمة لبدء الإنتاج النفطي وذلك بعد أعوام عدة من الدراسات وعمليات الاستكشاف، فقد عاودت شركة “إينيرجيان” المطوِّرة لحقل “كاريش” الحَفر في الحقل ذاته بحثاً عن المزيد من الغاز والنفط، ويوضح أن “إسرائيل تقوم حالياً بالحَفر في محاذاة الخطّ اللبناني التفاوضي “29” لتنتقل بعد ذلك إلى شمال “كاريش”.

ويُذكِّر في السياق بأن “لبنان أعلن في رسالَتَيه إلى الأمم المتّحدة الأولى في 22 أيلول 2021 والثانية في 28 كانون الثاني 2022، أن حقل كاريش يقع في منطقة متنازع عليها… لكن على الرغم من ذلك، يتم التنقيب في المياه المتنازَع عليها عموماً، ولا سيما في البلوك رقم “9” المُعطّل حالياً إلى أن تُحّل قضية الترسيم بين لبنان وإسرائيل”.

أما بالنسبة إلى الموقع الجغرافي لحقل “كاريش” المكوَّن من جزءين: شمالي وجنوبي (الخريطة مرفقة)، يؤكد بارودي من خلال الدراسة التي أعدّها خلال السنوات الممتدة من العام 2011 إلى العام 2021، أن “حقل كاريش الشمالي يَبعد عن الخط المقترح من قبل لبنان في 14 تموز 2010 (الخط 23) حوالي 7 كلم و116 متراً، كما أن حقل كاريش الجنوبي يَبعد عن الخط نفسه، حوالي 11 كلم و170 متراً جنوباً، وذلك بحسب الخريطة المرفقة والتي تؤكد المواقع والبُعد عن الحَقلين”.

أما بالنسبة إلى البلوك الإسرائيلي الرقم “72” والمتداخل في الأراضي اللبنانية، فهو ملاصق بشكل مباشر للخط “23”، بحسب بارودي.​

في الوقت الذي يفتش فيه لبنان عن وسائل ليست مكلفة لإنتاج الطاقة الكهربائية تاتي الأدلة تباعا التي تشير إلى أن استغلال الشمس والرياح في حوض البحر الأبيض المتوسط هي وسائل قادرة على تأمين الطاقة لدول عديدة في المنطقة ومن ضمنها لبنان الذي يتخبط منذ ٢٥ عاما من أجل تأمين الكهرباء من خلال الطاقات البديلة ورغم هذا التخبط يبقى الأمل موجودا إن وجدت الإدارة والإرادة لتفعيل هذا الملف،وفي هذا الإطار أتى الكتاب الجديد لرودي بارودي الرئيس التنفيذي لشركة استشارات الطاقة والبيئة القابضة ومقرها في الدوحة.

وقال الكتاب إن أنتاج الطاقة بواسطة رياح البحر الأبيض المتوسط الساحلية يمكنه أن يضاهي انتاج الطاقة من المفاعلات النووية في العالم أجمع،و أنه إذا اتخذت الدول الأورو-متوسطية الخيارات الصحيحة، فإن الطاقة المتجددة بالإضافة لأنشطة “الاقتصاد الأزرق” الأخرى المتعلقة بالبحر يمكن أن تشكل الأساس لنهضة اقتصادية إقليمية.

الكتاب وهو بعنوان “المناخ والطاقة في البحر الأبيض المتوسط:”ما يعنيه الاقتصاد الأزرق لمستقبل أكثر خضرة”،وقد نُشر هذا الكتاب من قبل شبكة القيادة عبر الأطلسي،وهي مؤسسة فكرية مقرها واشنطن العاصمة، بالتعاون مع مطبعة معهد بروكينغز.

يحث الكتاب صانعي السياسات على اغتنام فرصة تاريخية أصبحت ممكنة من خلال التقدم التكنولوجي السريع،ويدعو بارودي الحكومات المتوسطية للتعامل مع البحر ككنز مشترك عابر للأجيال، من خلال الاستفادة بشكل أساسي من التقنيات الجديدة لإدارة موارده واستغلالها بأمان وبشكل مستدام لتحقيق أقصى فائدة ممكنة منه على المدى الطويل.ويحتوي الكتاب على دراسة حصرية أجرتها شركة فوغرو Fugro، المزود الرائد عالميًا للذكاء الجغرافي،والتي تقدر إمكانات طاقة الرياح البحرية في منطقة البحر المتوسط بحوالي 500 مليون ميغاواط – أو ما يعادل تقريبًا إنتاج الطاقة من جميع المفاعلات النووية البالغ عددها 440 على الكوكب.

و قال بارودي، الذي عمل في مجال الطاقة لمدة أربعة عقود، إنه في حين أن تغير المناخ وتلوث الهواء والحاجة إلى تقليل انبعاثات الكربون هي في حد ذاتها أسباب قوية للاستثمار في الطاقة الخضراء،فإن النتائج ستتجاوز بكثير الفوائد البيئية.

ولفت في خلال مؤتمر حوارات أثينا للطاقة،حيث تم إطلاق الكتاب بشكل مبدئي قبل طرحه الرسمي في وقت لاحق من هذا العام في واشنطن،إلى أن  تقديرات قوة الرياح التي استخدمتها تستند إلى التقنيات القياسية الحالية المستخدمة في يومنا هذا و لن تحصل البلدان التي سوف تتبنى طاقة الرياح على الأسبقية في التحول من الوقود العادي إلى الطاقة النظيفة فحسب، بل ستكسب أيضًا مزايا اقتصادية واجتماعية ومزايا أخرى.

وأكد بارودي إن طاقة الرياح ستوفر على تلك البلدان المليارات من واردات النفط والغاز، وستزيد من أمن الطاقة لديها، وتجعل اقتصاداتها أكثر قدرة على المنافسة و سوف يجنب الهواء النظيف سكان تلك البلدان الأمراض والأوبئة، وسيوفر التطور والتنمية الصاعدة وظائف أكثر وأفضل لسكانها، ويحد من الفقر وعدم المساواة. وفي كثير من الحالات، ستوفر صادرات الطاقة المزيد من الإيرادات للاستثمارات في مجالات التعليم والنقل والبنية التحتية.

وقال بارودي: أشجع بقوة على الاستفادة القصوى من فرصنا كمنطقة واحدة، وكذلك على الحفاظ على موارد الطبيعة للأجيال القادمة. أردت أن يساعد الكتاب في جعل أكبر عدد ممكن من الأشخاص يفهمون القرارات المعروضة علينا ويفعلون كل ما في وسعهم – سواء أكانوا صانعي سياسات، أو مستثمرين أو أصحاب اعمال صغيرة أو مهندسين أو مواطنين، أوما إلى ذلك – لضمان اتخاذ القادة وغيرهم من صناع القرار الخيارات الصحيحة.

وأضاف بارودي: ما أقترحه هو أنه يمكننا ويجب علينا استخدام جميع الوسائل المتاحة لدينا، ليس فقط لإنتاج الطاقة النظيفة باستخدام الرياح البحرية، والطاقة الشمسية، والأمواج، والمد والجزر، والطاقة الحرارية الجوفية تحت سطح البحر، ولكن أيضًا لإعادة اختراع الركائز الأخرى للاقتصاد الإقليمي، من تربية الأحياء المائية ومصايد الأسماك التقليدية إلى السياحة والنقل البحري.

وختم بارودي كلامه بالقول يمكن للمعدات الحديثة والتطبيقات المبتكرة أيضًا أن توسع اقتصادنا الأزرق ليشمل مجالات مثيرة مثل الأبحاث البيولوجية لاكتشاف أدوية جديدة، أو التعدين الآمن والمسؤول في أعماق البحار للتنقيب عن المواد الحيوية المستخدمة في صناعة الهواتف المحمولة والبطاريات المتطورة التي ستساعدنا على الابتعاد عن الوقود العادي.