Energy War: The Rules of the Game in the 21st Century. Crippled game rules Crippled game rules of the 21st century

Hi friends!

In this article I want to tell you about one wonderful game in which I lost a lot of money! But despite this, I always liked the game. This is a 21-point card game.

This game, like baccarat or macau, is a kind of blackjack. She is often referred to simply as "The Point".

You can buy marked cards for playing at 21

It is believed that "Twenty-one" was invented in the USSR, since then only Russian decks of 36 cards were in circulation, and decks of 52 cards were considered a rarity. So I had to replace twos, threes, fours - Jacks, Queens and Kings. It is also referred to as a prison game.

Video learning game at 21 (twenty one)

ATTENTION: I advise you to study my course on cheating Dishonest advantage

General rules of the game.

So how is the 21 point card game played? The rules of the game are as follows.

1. First, it is decided who will be the banker, that is, the person who deals the cards and keeps track of the money in the bank. The point of the game is that the banker puts some amount into the pot, and the players try to win this money from him in turn.
2. When the cards are dealt, the banker plays in turn with each player, starting with the left hand. The player announces how much of the pot he goes to. The amount can be any, but not more than the one in the bank.
3. Let's say there are 100 rubles in the bank, and the player announces that he is going for 50 rubles. If he loses, he reports 50 rubles to the bank, and the banker plays with the next player. If he wins, he takes 50 rubles from the bank.
4. If the player scores 21 points, then he wins the machine against the banker. At the same time, he gives his cards to the banker, and the banker puts them on top of the cut card. This means that the cards are played and only those that remain below the cut are played.
5. The banker can either play to the last card, or shuffle the deck each time and deal cards from a new shuffled deck.

The order of distribution of cards and the order of the game.

“How are the cards dealt? Then what? " - you are rightly asking! I explain.

The banker begins to deal cards to each player, starting with the one sitting to his left.

In total, one card is dealt, including yourself. Cards are dealt on top of the deck.

When the banker lays down to himself last card, then he takes out a card from the bottom of the deck and puts it face down on top of the deck. So to speak, it cuts the deck.

What does it take to win?

So how do you win? You have to collect with your cards the sum of cards 21 or close to it. If you bust (more than 21), then you automatically lose! To win, you must have more points than the banker.

More precisely. Even if you have a draw, in this case they say “By the eyes!”, The banker still wins.

This is one of the advantages of playing a banker!

So you were dealt two cards, you look at the sum of their points and decide to take another card, in this case they say "More!"

If there are enough cards, then they say to the banker "Myself!" or "Play for yourself!" and the banker starts collecting cards for himself.

In the game, all cards from 6 to 10 give points at par. Jack-2 points, Queen-3 points, King-4 points, Ace-11 points.

There is another option that the Ace gives 1 point when busting. That is, if 11 points are overkill, then the Ace is considered 1 point. This is agreed in advance.

"Golden point" and other bonus combinations.

If the first two cards come two aces, then this is considered a "Golden Point" and such cards win immediately. In this case, the player immediately opens these two aces and takes the amount he was going to.

A hand with five picture cards is also considered a winning hand, regardless of how many points they score. Incentive bonuses are also paid if 21 is recruited with cards 6 + 7 + 8 or 7 + 7 + 7.

But all this is also agreed in advance.

The process of the game.

For example 6 people play. The banker distributes one card to each. For example, the first player played and lost (or won), then the player deals his cards to the banker.

The banker either puts on top or shuffles the cards to play with the next player, but the cards left by other players (who have not yet played) remain on the table. They are not shuffled. As well as the banker's card.

If the players see that the banker is going to shuffle the cards, then they can look at their card and if it does not suit them, then it can be turned over to the deck for shuffling, and after the shuffle they can get a new one. This is optional.

The banker continues to play with the next player, keeping the same card that he had previously dealt to himself. If the banker gets 20 points, he wins automatically.

The nuances of the game

There are some more rules.

The banker must take another card while he has 16 or less points and he must stop if he has 17 or more points. After both the player and the banker have collected cards for themselves, the banker asks to open the cards to compare the points.

If the player loses, he reports to the bank the amount he played and waits for the banker to play with the others. The banker folds the played cards from the top, takes the card from the bottom and continues to play with the next player.

"Hard rules" optional.

The 21-point card game is notable for its strict rules. For example.

1. If the player, for some reason, does not talk about the bust and hides it, then as a punishment he must deposit a double amount into the bank.
2. There is another option that if the player dials 21 and forgets to announce it, before the banker begins to draw cards for himself, then he also pays a fine. Usually this is the money he went to. So, friends, you can lose even with 21 points. But this is a rigid rule and is discussed in advance.
3. There is also a nuance. This is when any six comes as the first card. In this case, at the request of the player, of course, he can play dark. That is, this six is ​​considered an Ace, but they give him only one more card face down. And he can watch it only when the banker has taken the cards for himself. When the banker has collected cards for himself, the player's "dark" card is revealed and the points are compared.

Knock

The game continues until the "Knock" occurs. A knock is a situation when the bank has collected more money three times than the banker bet.

That is, if the banker opened the game by betting 100 rubles, then for knocking it is necessary that there should be at least 300 rubles. As you understand, the card game of 21 points continues just before the knock.

The knock is also the final round of the game. All players also take turns trying to win the pot. They go for different amounts, you can, of course, go to the whole bank, saying "Va-bank!"

When all the players have played and the last player who will play with the banker is left, the rest of the players can look at the cards of this last player and also put some amount on his cards.

And all my cheating lessons can be found

I advise: ,

It seems I wrote everything I remembered.

Now I think it became clear to you what this card game is 21 points. Learn, play, especially since the game is good and certainly deserves your attention.

Thesis. Most dramatic form games "Cripple" it is Justification Due to Mental Illness. In transactional terminology, the thesis of play is understood as follows: “What do you want from such an emotionally unbalanced woman (man) as I am? So I don't want to kill anyone? " To which the jury should, in the patient's opinion, understand him and answer as follows: “Well, what are you! We didn’t even think to demand it from you ”. “Justification due to mental illness” as a legal game is common enough in American society. Similar cases should not be confused with a situation where a person actually suffers from the deepest psychosis and cannot be held responsible for his own actions.

The thesis of the game is as follows: "Well, what do you want from a cripple?" Indeed, what can you expect from a disabled person who can handle only his wheelchair? However, facts are known when, during the Second World War, some disabled people with a wooden leg managed to perform quick dances in amputation centers of military hospitals, and, amazingly, they did it very skillfully.

There are blind people who are successful in the political sphere. Also known are deaf people who fruitfully work as psychotherapists and psychiatrists, and people who have lost their hands, but who know how to use a typewriter.
Research proves that as long as people with real, perhaps exaggerated or even imaginary disabilities do not complain about their lives, then they should not get into it. However, when such a person turns to a psychotherapist for help, the question may arise: did he dispose of his own life correctly and can he even rise above his problem? In the United States, psychotherapists have to face opposition from a broad masses of the educated public. Even the closest and dearest of the patient, who usually complain more about the inconvenience that are associated with his injury, can at worst quarrel with the psychotherapist, even if the patient's own affairs begin to improve significantly. And even if a psychotherapist specializing in game analysis understands their motivation perfectly, his task cannot be made easier. Anyone who plays the game “I’m just trying to help you,” may be in constant danger that their game may be thwarted if the patient unexpectedly decides to rely on himself in the future. Sometimes these players (for example, relatives) are able to make tremendous efforts to interrupt the course of treatment.

Both of these aspects can be illustrated by the case of Miss White's stuttering client. This man was playing a game of the classic form "Cripple". He could not find a job and quite rightly attributed this bad luck to his problem - stuttering. Meanwhile, as he himself said, he was only interested in the work of a traveling salesman. As a free citizen, he naturally had the right to look for work in almost any area of ​​interest to him, but since he stuttered, his choice made him doubt the sincerity of his intentions. And when Miss White was going to spoil his game, the reaction of the agency's management became very unfavorable for her.

The game "Cripple" is especially detrimental in clinical practice, because the patient can find a doctor who plays the same game and with the same motto. Then no results should be expected. Sometimes justifications can be based on ideological arguments, for example: "What do you expect from a person if he lives in the same society as you?" One patient was able to combine this option with sending to a "psychosomatic cause": "What do you expect from a person with a psychosomatic symptom?" He went from one psychotherapist to another, and almost every such specialist accepted only one excuse, while rejecting another. As a result, none of them could make him feel confident in his position in life. However, it was also not possible to move him from this position, abandoning both arguments. And the patient seemed to prove that psychotherapy is unlikely to help anyone.

To justify their symptomatic behavior, sometimes quite often patients resort to a variety of arguments. It can be situational stress, head trauma, colds, or extensive stress caused by American culture, modern lifestyles, or the economic system. An educated player easily confirms his words by sending to the authorities: “I drink, but I'm Irish”; "It wouldn't have happened if I was living in Hawaii." In fact, the patients of mental hospitals around the world are very similar to the patients of mental hospitals in America. In clinical practice, as well as in sociological surveys, it is necessary to very carefully consider such specific types of excuses, such as "If it were not for him" or "I was framed."

The most interesting are the following excuses: What do you need from a) neurotic; b) an alcoholic patient; c) being treated by a psychoanalyst; d) a person who grew up without a father. All of them can be crowned with the following considerations: "If I do not do this business, then I will never again be able to reveal the background of personal behavior, which means that I will never recover."
The add-on game to "Cripple" is called "Rickshaw". Her thesis: "If there were rickshaws in this city, then I would never get into such trouble."

Antithesis. The anti-Cripple is not too difficult, provided that the therapist clearly distinguishes between their own Parent and Adult and that both parties are well aware of the psychotherapeutic purpose of their common relationship.
If the psychotherapist acts as a Parent, then he can be both a "kind" and a "harsh" Parent. In the role of the “kind” Parent, he accepts the patient's excuses, especially if they are in line with his personal views. At the same time, he can explain the situation for himself as follows: until the end of treatment, people are not able to take responsibility for their own actions. In the role of the "severe" Parent, he rejects the patient's excuses, and a "fight" begins between them for a moral gain. The Cripple player is usually very familiar with both alternatives and knows how to extract maximum satisfaction from each.

From the Adult's point of view, the therapist must reject both forms. To the patient's question: "What do you need from a neurotic?" - or to another similar question, he answers: “I don't want anything. The problem is, what do you expect of yourself? " His only requirement is this: when the patient needs to answer such a question seriously, and the only concession he can make is to give the patient a long time to answer - from five to six weeks to five to six months, depending on their relationship and the level of preliminary preparedness of the patient.

Blackjack is traditionally one of the most popular and massive card games... There are many reasons for this, first of all it is the dynamism of the game itself and the simplicity of the rules. However, not everyone knows the rules of blackjack in detail, and therefore in this article we will analyze them in more detail.

Blackjack rules

If you ask inexperienced players "what is the task of playing blackjack", many will answer - to score 21 points. Which is not entirely true, since the real goal is to beat the dealer. And how this will be done is another question. The task is to score more points than the dealer, but at the same time no more than 21 points (in this case, an overkill is obtained). In this case, the meaning of the cards is as follows:

• from ten to two - from 10 to 2 points, respectively;
• drawings (jack, queen or king) - 10 points;
• ace - 1 or 11 points (if the sum is not more than 21, then 11, otherwise 1).

The player moves first and this gives the dealer an advantage. Since, in the case of a player's bust, he loses in any case.

If the player has more points than the dealer, then he won in a 1: 1 ratio (bet € - got two).

If both the dealer and the player scored the same number of points, then in this case, each remains at his own.

It should be remembered that getting 21 points does not mean that you have received blackjack. Blackjack is when you get 21 from two cards (ace + picture). Then the winnings are paid not 1: 1, but 3: 2 (that is, put the euro - got back 2.5). 21 points obtained as a result of any other combination (ace + 5 + 5, 7 + 8 + 6, king + 7 + 4) is considered not blackjack and is paid 1 to 1.

What then depends on the player? What opportunities does he have in order to do right choice... The player can take cards until he considers it necessary to stop. But the dealer is obliged to take until the moment he scores 17 or more points. Even if the player has less amount.

Player capabilities

In addition, the player has the following options:

• Hit - take further;
• Stand - stop;
• Split. If the player was immediately dealt two cards of the same weight (2 and 2, 5 and 5), then he can leave them as they are, or he can split them. In this case, the player additionally makes a second bet of the same size as the previous one;
• Double. A player can double his bet if he received a 10 or an ace with the first card. After that, exactly one card is issued;
• Triple. The player can make an additional bet after the double and receive another card from the dealer. This makes sense if the second is a small card;
• Surrender. If the player is not satisfied with his set of cards (after receiving two starting cards), then he can resign. In this case, he does not lose the entire bet, but only half;
• Insurance. Insurance against the dealer's blackjack, which is possible only when the dealer has 10 or ace).

Game strategies

There are many different strategies for playing at 21. There is a well-known strategy base game in the form of a table, where it is clearly stated what needs to be done in a given situation (when to take further, when to stop, when to double). It does not guarantee a win, but still your bets will have a higher mathematical expectation than if you play without any system at all. In addition, you can try to count cards. But this method is too complicated (especially if you play with 5 or more decks), and secondly, it is not very legal. In live casinos.

In conclusion, I would like to say that it is always necessary to know the rules of the game for success, be it basketball or blackjack, but in the second case you still need a little bit of luck.

This game will require agility, resourcefulness and quick thinking from the guys. Children like the game very much and fascinates them a lot, despite its not quite politically correct name (other names of this game are "Invalid" and "Cripple of the 21st century"). She will especially be loved by those who started playing such games with ball in a circle like a Dog or Hot potato.

Cripple game rules

The players stand in a circle and throw a ball to each other. If someone could not catch him, then the player who threw the ball “takes” from the penalty box any part of the body to choose from. For example, a leg (the player continues to play while standing on one leg), an arm (you need to catch the ball with only one hand), an eye (they cover it), a mouth (do not talk).

If the “one-legged” threw the ball to one of the players, but he did not catch it, the “cripple” can, instead of “taking away” a part of the body, return something missing to himself and continue the game already quite “healthy”. The “Cripple” who did not cope with his loss (for example, who did not stand on one leg or did not catch the ball with one hand) leaves the circle. The last player to survive is declared the winner.

Attempts by the EU leadership to force Russia to ratify the Energy Charter Treaty led to the fact that the “rules of the game” began to change in the world energy market. In our time, markets have indeed become global, and abrupt changes in one of the regions inevitably lead to changes in all others. The quotation marks are not used by chance - these "rules" are not set forth in any legislative act, they are used by default, and sometimes it is quite difficult to see them.

"Combat actions" of the energy war of the 21st century are most actively waged on the "gas front". Oil has become a classic exchange commodity; trade in it can be limited only by imposing some types of embargoes against certain states, or by waging a traditional or "hybrid" war. The embargo is the US action against Iran, the ground war is the defeat of Iraq, the hybrid war is Libya. As you can see, there are options, but they are not used so often, the results are very controversial. Since 2014, discriminatory measures against the Russian oil sector have been quite numerous, the result is little different from zero. The only thing that can be credited to the European Commission is that Russia's cooperation with the OPEC countries is gaining momentum, which reduces the reality of the EC's dreams of diversifying supplies and success in lowering prices. This is a good result, worthy - the less dependent on consumers the oil-extracting industries of the producing countries, the better these countries are. I would like to believe that, under pressure from the EC, the GECF, the Forum of Gas Exporting Countries, will begin to come to the fore, but so far it is difficult to guess what the prospects may be.

Coal has been practically out of the game since the signing of the Paris Agreement on climate change in Europe - the European Union is actively developing a new religion, giving it the intricate name “decarbonization of energy”. Separate pockets of resistance to adherents and fanatics of this religion still remain in Europe - Poland and Estonia do not feel like voluntarily giving up the basis of their energy security (coal and brown coal in the first case, oil shale in the second), but how long will they last with such activity of the European Commission , difficult to predict. Yes, a few words about what is happening around this Paris Agreement. The fact that the United States officially withdrew from it was told by the media around the world, the criticism of this step was universal, all-embracing, and the Russian media and a number of domestic experts did not hesitate to join it. The chorus of these voices drowned criticism of the Paris Agreement itself - not everyone agrees with the scientific rationale on the basis of which it was developed. There are 23 countries that have signed the Agreement, but do not feel like immediately ratifying it - they are not satisfied with its mandatory provision that by 2020 it is necessary to revise the state strategy in the field of CO2 emissions downward. One of these countries - the Russian Federation... In short, the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement, Russia was not a part of it at all. But this, of course, is a separate topic for conversation.

Nuclear energy is now "outlawed" for most European countries, the voiced aloud reason is concerns about nuclear and radiation safety, the real reason is the loss of technologies and competencies. The only EU state that is fighting for its place in the reactor building market is France, but this struggle is being conducted in such ways that only discredit nuclear energy in the eyes of European citizens. Three-fold exceeding of contractual deadlines and estimates, a multitude of violations detected by nuclear supervisory authorities - this is how the “French atomic charm” looks like, and it is not at all obvious that it will be possible to get rid of it. However, there are exceptions here too - Rosatom signed contracts for the construction of nuclear power plants in Hungary and Finland, currently they are undergoing various additional approvals. It cannot be ruled out that the Czech Republic and Bulgaria will return to projects for the construction of new "nuclear" power units, although making predictions about what Bulgaria will do is a thankless task. If the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party gives approval for funding, a nuclear power plant will be built in England, but so far on the "nuclear front" in Europe, everything is in the future with varying degrees of probability.

Natural gas obstinacy

Thus, the “hostilities” of the energy war of the 21st century are primarily associated with the formation and functioning of regional gas markets. Gas, unlike oil, is extremely stubborn - it continues to successfully resist globalization and liberalization, refusing to become a global commodity. Gas refuses to collect in deposits on the territory of countries fighting for European values, even such a radical measure as a vote in the European Parliament does not help. The laws of physics and chemistry, on the basis of which the technology of liquefaction of natural gas works, have the audacity to disobey the directives of the European Commission and the verdicts of the US Congress. Gas insidiously refused to collect in large quantities even under the lands of the region, the countries of which are showing the greatest economic and demographic growth - we are talking about the Asia-Pacific region. Gas is terribly totalitarian, its deposits support the economies of states where the rights of the LGBT community are not fully respected - Russia and Iran occupy the first and second lines in the ranking of countries in terms of its reserves.

Of course, the countries of Southeast Asia look with envy at Europe, where the spot gas market has emerged and is developing, but Mother Nature ordered that there is no system of main gas pipelines in Southeast Asia - the distances from large fields are too great. Due to all this, there is simply no single world market for natural gas. There is a gas market in Europe, there is a gas market in Southeast Asia, a single gas market in Latin America is just emerging, in Africa, the massive use of gas in the economy is still only in projects - of course, with the exception of Egypt. Such “exoticism” for our media space, like Australia, requires more and more attention every year - promising deposits have been identified here, several liquefaction plants have already been built, and several more projects are being implemented. Geographic proximity to Southeast Asia makes Australia's LNG sector an increasingly important player.

Before the start of the "shale revolution" the USA was the largest gas importer, but now the situation is changing dramatically - America has turned from an importer into an exporter. Here we will have to separately consider both phases of this transformation - at first, the States began to sharply reduce gas purchases, in connection with which their traditional suppliers switched to other markets, thereby fundamentally changing them. Now the United States is beginning to try to increase exports - and this will be yet another change, albeit not as rapid as Donald Trump wants. The fact that even one consumer / producer is able to fundamentally change the situation on the regional market can be seen in the example of Japan, which, after the disaster of the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant and the shutdown of all nuclear reactors, in a matter of months became the largest importer of LNG. The measures taken to improve energy efficiency, the launch of several nuclear power plants have suspended the growth of purchases, but during this time China came to the fore with its program of replacing coal-fired thermal power plants with gas ones. In 2017, there were several months when China overtook Japan in gas imports, this year, according to the results of the first half of the year, China is already stable in first place.

Pipeline Prospects for Europe

In the European gas market, if compressed, the following happens. No competition for pipeline gas is foreseen in the medium term - last year Gazprom delivered 194.4 billion cubic meters, this year the volume is expected to be 205 billion cubic meters, at the same time two more trunk pipelines are being built to increase the supply of Russian gas. The actively "advertised" project for gas supplies from Azerbaijan is excellent, but 10 billion cubic meters, which will be supplied to Europe through the "Southern Gas Corridor" major changes will not be called. Trends in the European gas market in last years can be described by the formula "5% and 5%" - consumption grows by 5% per year and own production is falling by 5% per year. In 2017, gas consumption in Europe exceeded the target of 500 billion cubic meters, so the absolute figures here are completely different. It is for this reason that the talk that the gas transmission system of Ukraine after the full capacity of Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream "will be of no use to anyone" will remain just talk. No matter how the political situation develops, the EU, as they say, will "lay its bones", but the system of gas pipelines, equipped with underground gas storage facilities, will keep. The maximum throughput capacity of the Ukrainian gas transportation system is 140 billion cubic meters of gas per year, which ensures the energy security of Europe for a long period of time. The July tripartite consultative meeting of the European Commission - Russia - Ukraine showed that Europe's desire to ensure the reliable functioning of the Ukrainian gas transportation system is only growing.

Analytical online magazine Geoenergetics.ru already gave a short analysis of the results of this meeting. The European Commission will insist that Ukraine, which has ratified the Energy Charter Treaty, changes its legislation as soon as possible to meet its requirements. One of them is that the owner of the GTS and its operator should be different legal entities that are independent of each other. This will change Naftogaz a more adequate negotiator - most likely, such an operator will be a company that will be created under strict dictate and control by the EC. In order for the payment for transit services to be sufficient for repairs and modernization, at least 60-70 billion cubic meters of Russian gas must pass through the GTS of Ukraine per year. Here in order to have Gazprom new consumers appeared for such volumes, the EC, as Shefchovich said, "Will be an honest broker" Is a literal quote.

The European Commission (EC) has several more pipeline projects, which in the mid-term it would be more correct to consider them as projects. There is a project to unite the fields found in recent years on the shelf of Israel and Cyprus, from which, in theory, it is possible to "hold out" to the south of Europe. But for this it will be necessary to first sort out relations with Turkey and the Republic of Northern Cyprus, which believe that the Aphrodite field is partially located in the territorial waters of Northern Cyprus. After that, a serious scientific and technological problem will have to be solved - so far no one in the world has laid a gas pipeline at a depth of about 5'000 meters in an earthquake-prone area and in waters with a high content of hydrogen sulfide. Europe could count on the development and implementation of projects for gas supplies from Iran - its resources quite allow this option, but new discriminatory measures against Iran by the United States have led to the fact that European gas companies, one after another, withdraw from any projects on its territory. There is a project to unite the fields of Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan, which theoretically are capable of increasing the capabilities of the Southern Gas Corridor, but it will have to start by agreeing with the Turkmen authorities on an independent international audit of its fields, then solving the problems of gas transit through the Caspian Sea. Even under the most favorable conditions, the implementation of these projects will take at least ten years, therefore the objective reality is sad for the EC leadership and optimistic not for Gazprom, and for all major European gas concerns working with him as a reliable and predictable supplier. In the next 5-7 years Europe will have to stay with what it has - with the projects of main pipelines being implemented by Russia and with the Ukrainian gas transportation system. Will this be enough - only time will tell.

The Dutch government has made a final decision to stop production from the Groningen field from 2025, and here they are currently extracting 25 billion cubic meters of gas annually. A forecast by a group of Norwegian geophysicists has been published, according to which, by 2030, production in the North and Barents Sea will decrease from the current 110 billion cubic meters per year to 30-40.

Groningen gas field, Netherlands, Photo: lenergeek.com

In the summer of 2009, when it was already obvious that Russia would withdraw from the Energy Charter, the European Union adopted the so-called "Third Energy Package" Third Energy Package... The formal goal is, of course, "the development of liberal European values, the liberalization of the gas and electricity markets in Europe." In practice, the TPP is tough antimonopoly legislation, which can be applied, inter alia, for political reasons. In 2009, the word “sanctions” had not yet entered the political vocabulary of our Western partners; European bureaucrats were actively using the language of Aesop. The EC gave the EU member states a year and a half to bring their national legislation in line with the provisions of the TP in order to liquidate the vertically integrated gas and energy companies as such. The legal goal of the TPP is to prevent situations when monopolists supplying energy carriers block competitors' access to consumers by owning distribution networks. If a company imports natural gas, read how “cooperates with Russian Gazprom»- it should not be able to control the companies that own the distribution networks. A softer option - the vertically integrated importing company retains ownership of the distribution networks, but transfers the operational management of them to independent companies. Especially for the countries of Eastern Europe, the third option was left - the importing company can be both the owner and the operator of distribution systems, but only under the strict control of independent or state regulators. How long the possibility of this third option will remain for them is still unknown, there have been no new EC directives on this matter. TEP has already had an impact on business several times Gazprom in Europe, more on that later.

The frontiers of a liberal economy

In 2009, the EC seriously considered an attempt to reduce its market share Gazprom by increasing LNG supplies. At that time, Norway, Qatar and Algeria supplied LNG to the EU, but Qatar was the largest supplier. In this case, it makes no sense to consider in detail which Qatari companies were engaged in this business - as in any country (with the exception of the United States) that has deposits of energy resources on its territory with volumes that allow them to be exported, the oil and gas industry in Qatar is located in the hands of the state. You can blame Russia as much as you like for maintaining a state monopoly on gas exports, but this is the world practice.

We can briefly go over, for example, the list of OPEC countries. Algeria's oil and gas is a company Sonatrach with 100% of the shares in the hands of the government, Angola is Sonangol, Ecuador - PetroEcuador, Iran is NIOC (National Iranian Oil Company) and NIGC (National Iranian Gas Company), Saudi Arabia - Saudi aramco etc. You can check it yourself - there are no exceptions, there are only state-owned companies everywhere, no games in the liberal economy. Why is this so and not otherwise? Here is a quote from a speech by the leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei:

“Oil and gas should be removed from the country's budget revenues and turned into a factor of economic progress and the power of Iran. It is unwise and extremely flawed to spend oil and gas revenues on solving everyday problems. Countries that sell their oil and gas in accordance with the needs and policies of Western oil corporations, and do not make efforts to develop local industries, only fill the pockets of their rulers, but do not receive real profits, since the industry of these countries remains undeveloped. It is necessary to take measures so that the country can sell oil and gas on the basis of its own decisions and interests, but for this it is necessary to make a lot of efforts and achieve real progress, it is necessary to make the country a leader in scientific technologies through research efforts ”.

Strictly speaking, there is nothing to add - the export of energy resources should be organized in such a way as to guarantee the sustainable development of the state and the entire people for many years to come.

Controlling stake Qatargas and RasGas, the production company and the company in charge of the LNG project are wholly owned by the state-owned company QatarPetroleum... Accordingly, Qatar's gas business follows almost exactly the rules laid down by Ayatollah Humenei, which are reflected in the terms of contracts that Qatar offers to its consumers. Contracts should be medium and long-term, the gas price formula should be tightly linked to the oil price, and the consumer should specify exactly where the LNG will be supplied. Qatar began to impose the latter condition more and more demandingly, more and more harshly after the events of spring 2011.

Southeast Asia - premium gas market

After the disaster at the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant, Japan shut down all 54 of its nuclear reactors, and in a matter of months has become the world's largest importer of LNG. Since that time, the Asian LNG market has become a premium in relation to the European one - the price excess sometimes reaches 100%, since climatic features also affect. The maximum gas consumption in Europe is in the winter - you need to heat the population, but the maximum load on power plants in Southeast Asia is in the summer months, when it is necessary to ensure the operation of numerous air conditioners. As a result, the growth in gas demand in Southeast Asia is much more serious - cooling is always much more expensive than heating. The reason is that only electricity is required for the operation of air conditioners, and everything is somewhat different to heat our premises, since combined heat and power plants and combined heat and power plants are becoming more widespread. In order to increase the efficiency of the turbines, the rotation of which ensures the generation of electricity, steam began to be overheated significantly above 100 degrees Celsius - the boiling point of water depends on pressure, the higher the pressure, the higher the boiling point. Steam heated to 500-600 degrees ensures the rotation of the turbine, but it does not have time to lose all temperature. After the turbine, it is sent to an additional heat exchanger, where steam provides heating of water, which then enters the heating system of our homes. In short, in CHP plants the energy of burning natural gas is used twice, one of the consequences is that during the heating season the price of gas in Europe rises by percent, and not several times, as sometimes happens in Southeast Asia in the summer heat.

LNG terminal in Japan

If we average the prices of LNG over the year, then the average "premium" of the Asian market in relation to the European one is from 30 to 40%. Qatar is well aware that European companies may well engage in trivial speculation - having achieved discounts due to spot prices taking into account, the Europeans can send gas carriers to Southeast Asia. Not only can they take away part of the market from Qatar in this way - such speculators can also bring down prices in Southeast Asia. The EC continues to insist that spot prices should be taken into account in the LNG price formula, and Qatar has stopped trying to overreach European officials. As the terms of contracts for the supply of LNG to Europe come to an end, Qatar sends all the released volumes of LNG to Southeast Asia. The method is simple - the contract has ended, and Qatar refuses to sign new ones, trying to find new consumers in Southeast Asia by this time - no one there tells them anything about any spot, everyone is satisfied with the pegging of the price to the price of a barrel of oil. As a result, Qatari LNG has not become and in the foreseeable future will not compete with Russian pipeline gas in the European market - Qatar has no incentives to do this.

There are traditional consumers among gas companies in those countries where main gas pipelines have not reached - Spain, Portugal, some volumes go to Italy, Greece, Turkey, and Qatar is quite enough. The occupancy rate of European regasification terminals does not rise above 26-27% - Qatar has no desire to even try to compete with Gazprom... In the summer of this year, LNG from Yamal began to flow to Portugal - it decided to diversify its suppliers by signing a mid-term contract with NOVATEK... Have you heard anything about Qatar resisting this, rushing to engage in dumping? So we have not heard - Qatar such games are simply unnecessary, he probably managed to find new consumers in Southeast Asia by that moment.

A coincidence? ..

Yes, one more interesting fact about 2011. No, we are not fans of conspiracy theories, we will just list the facts. 2009 - Qatar made an offer to Syria on the Arab Pipeline project along the Qatar route ⇒ Saudi Arabia ⇒ Jordan ⇒ Syria ⇒ Turkey ⇒ Europe. 2009 - a rapid growth in shale gas production in the United States and a gradual decrease in the volume of LNG imported by this country. The United States did not begin to "cut" suppliers from Qatar, but it was already obvious that sooner or later this sales market for Qatar would end. Of course, even then Qatar began to think about new sales markets - and it was then that we heard most of the words on the topic "Qatar will come to Europe and eat Gazprom"... Bashar al-Assad's refusal to participate in the Arab gas pipeline project initially did not cause any demarches on the part of Qatar - after all, the construction of an IHP of such length could not be completed "in the blink of an eye", but it was possible to redirect gas carriers towards Europe, not America quick and easy.

Fleet of Qatari LNG tankers, Photo: oilandgaspeople.com

But in 2011, events suddenly began to develop rapidly. Fukushima-1, a jump in LNG prices in Southeast Asia and - the beginning civil war in Syria, one of the main goals of which was the removal of the uncompromising Assad from power. Once it became apparent that Qatari LNG was affecting market share Gazprom will not be on the European gas market, the expansion of DAISH * and other delights have begun. Qatar was not going to carry LNG to Europe - there were no problems with its sale, but there were no reasons to abandon the pipeline project. No, we are not asserting anything - we are simply surprised at such a chronological coincidence, nothing more. Yes, and one more thing - from considering the situation on the European gas market, Australian LNG projects after 2011 can be safely deleted. No one will be lucky for such a distance gas, where spot prices rule the show, instead of supplying it to the premium market of Southeast Asia, which is much closer.

Here is the first unspoken rule of the European LNG market - if you want to see gas from Qatar here, be ready to sign a contract for at least 7-8 years, agree in advance to peg the price to a barrel and get ready to accept Qatari gas carriers. Qatar owns the world's largest fleet of gas carriers, and the problems of increased freight in recent years are the last to worry about.

LNG, produced in USA

It was almost three years ago that US-made LNG began to appear on the regional markets. No, not "American LNG", namely "LNG produced in the USA" - Mr. Trump never says "American LNG", but only "LNG, produced in USA". The difference is by no means a philological one - it is very important, since it reflects the essence of what is happening with the production of LNG in this state.

The United States has long been the world's largest importer of hydrocarbons. It is for this reason that their legislation is "sharpened" for the purchase of energy resources - all the postulates of the liberal economy are implemented in it. There is a very simple way to help oneself analyze hydrocarbon passions - one must remember what a vertically integrated company is and the fact that in relation to hydrocarbons the countries of the world are divided into only two camps: some have significant gas and oil fields on the territory of others absent. There are large deposits - there are also vertically integrated companies, in 99 cases out of a hundred controlled by the state. A classic example is Russia and Gazprom. Gazprom explores and develops fields independently, independently finds sales markets and, in the same way, builds trunk gas pipelines, underground gas storages and distribution networks. From theodolite to the hob burner in Russia - Gazprom trying to act according to the "principles of Humenei".

There are no large sources - there are no vertically integrated companies either, the rigid bridle of the Third Energy Package is thrown over the surviving dinosaurs. Some companies extract or import gas, store the second, distribute it to the end consumers by the third, our Western partners are afraid of monopolies like the devil of incense. Foaming-at-mouth liberal economics theorists assert that competition is bound to lower end prices and increase energy security. In fact, there are chains of intermediaries, prices not lowering, but lifting up, but this is not the point now. Laws, in many ways similar to European ones, are in force in the United States. Any company that has produced natural gas (both shale and traditional) has the right to sell it only on the gas exchange Henry hub, the legislation does not provide opportunities for signing direct contracts with end users. Prices Henry hub- market-oriented, sensitive to oil exchange quotations. Obtaining export licenses is extremely difficult in bureaucratic terms - for many years the United States fought to provide natural gas to its own market both through imports and by ensuring that gas produced on its own territory would not leave it. Another consequence of those times was the lack of production and construction of gas tankers in the United States. Well, there was no demand for this product - the sellers themselves regularly transported LNG on their own or chartered gas carriers, there were no problems with this. The fact that Donald Trump now has a desire to strengthen the export of LNG is, of course, commendable, but the legislation in his country is what it is, it will take more than one year to change it with all the enthusiasm.

The emergence of a new branch of the US economy

We are adopting logic and, taking into account these initial conditions, we are trying to imagine how the start of a completely new business for the United States could look like - the liquefaction of natural gas and its export. The pioneer of this business was the company Cheniere energy, here on her example and consider. The capacity of the Sabina Pass LNG plant she built in Louisiana is 19 billion cubic meters of gas per year, almost the same as that built NOVTEK the Yamal LNG plant, which cost $ 20 billion to launch. As in our, Russian case, the future owner of the plant did not have such a free amount.

“Hello gentlemen bankers! We have a great desire to build a plant for the liquefaction of natural gas, there is a territory for construction and an agreement with the authorities to obtain an export license ”.

The logic of gentlemen bankers, in general, is the same in any country - unless they are representatives of Islamic banking. Bankers earn their daily bread on interest on loans issued and really want the business they lent to have a minimum of commercial risks. Whether or not to give credit to this one Cheniere energy, if she does not have a deposit, is there only an opportunity to buy gas on the Henry Hub? This is for vertically integrated companies with assets everything is in perfect order - wells, fields, gas pipelines and other gas stations, and in this case there was no smell of anything like that. Refuse? Become an obstacle to the development of new American business, instead of gaining additional rating? No, it is not profitable and not reasonable. It is reasonable to help the “pioneers” build their business in such a way that it will guarantee the return of borrowed funds along with interest. To remove commercial risks, to leave only that which brings profit in any market conditions.

Buying gas on Henry Hub is risky, since everything here depends on oil prices. Sale of LNG in performance Cheniere energy, which does not have such experience in markets where no one is sympathetic to competitors - also a risk. If we remove both risks, leave only and exclusively the production process itself - everything is fine, the business will proceed calmly and measuredly, providing financial flows in the required volumes. The buyer must buy gas on Henry Hub himself, pay for the liquefaction work, and then do whatever he considers necessary with the resulting LNG. But where are the buyers willing to take the double risk come from? Business with Cheniere energy should be more attractive than doing business with Qatar's state-owned gas companies. If you remove the link to the delivery point from the Qatari contracts, then this hypothetical trader will have complete free rein - he will be able to supply LNG to the one of the markets where spot prices and profits will be maximized. That, in fact, is all - if Cheniere energy will be able to "get" such traders, you can finance the construction of an LNG plant. Yes, but what will happen if the market conditions turn out to be such that the trader does not dare to take risks and suspends all operations? Hmm, traders work calmly with Gazprom and with the same Qatari companies under contracts where they have a “download and / or pay” condition! Hence, for Cheniere energy such a condition should become strictly obligatory - “liquefy and / or pay”. Signed a contract - paid the insurance amount, an analogue of the rent. I started to liquefy - paid the rest, did not liquefy - the minimum amount was credited to the accounts Cheniere energy, enough to pay off the loan.

This is what the activity looks like Cheniere energy and her Sabina pass... 95% of the operation time of the liquefaction equipment was leased out on the basis of long-term (more than 10 years) and medium-term (from 7 to 10 years) contracts. 5% are allocated for the most Cheniere energy as a kind of "tribute to American patriotism" - the American company got the opportunity to declare itself as an LNG trader, got the opportunity to gain experience in regional markets. Who became customers Sabina pass? For example, BP, which operates in all gas markets, professionally handling any risks. Companies from Japan and Southeast Asia with their own distribution networks at home. British Сentrica, which owns 30% of the island's gas distribution networks. In March of this year, the second LNG plant with an export license was commissioned in the USA - Cove point with a processing capacity of 5.5 billion cubic meters of gas per year, but its construction was also funded by credit money, and here the contracts look exactly the same as for Sabina pass... Competition with Gazprom in the European gas market? Now! For 10 years ahead, capacities for 3.0 billion cubic meters have been contracted by Japanese companies, for another 2.3 billion cubic meters - by Indian companies. The remaining 200 million cubic meters can, of course, get to Europe, only against the backdrop of supply volumes Gazprom(194.4 billion cubic meters in 2017) this is somehow not at all funny.

And Donald Trump is extremely correct - only "LNG, produced in USA", nothing else. Because the President of the United States does not want to look stupid - he perfectly understands that he does not have any legal mechanisms to force the same BP transport LNG not to the premium market in Southeast Asia, but to some kind of Europe, where you will have to compete with Gazprom by lowering prices. If Trump is the president of the United States at least twice, he will not force Asian companies to refuse gas supplies "to their homes." Even if Trump decides to arrange a "raider seizure" of LNG plants, the result he wants will not be achieved. All contracts will be terminated, all traders will leave - and what's next? Subsidize the company-owners of factories with budgetary funds, so that they themselves began to buy gas for Henry hub and independently trade LNG in different markets? But for this it is necessary to turn upside down all the US legislation, which does not allow the government to become an economic entity, does not allow direct support of individual companies without special decisions of the Congress and the Senate, and prohibits the existence of vertically integrated hydrocarbon companies.

Here are two more unspoken rules of the LNG market. LNG produced in the United States can appear on any market, but no purposeful "American Stream" can be created - traders will take LNG wherever it is beneficial to them, and not to the government and the President of the United States.

Liberal economy of the EU on guard of the interests of Russia

Another rule inevitably follows from the peculiarities of the EU legislation, in which all the postulates of the liberal economy are implemented. The European Commission is not an economic entity; it does not have legal mechanisms at its disposal that can force European gas companies to refuse cooperation with some suppliers in favor of others. Not so long ago, Jean-Claude Juncker promised Donald Trump that the EU "will increase purchases of American shale gas." Theoretically beautiful and intimidating for Gazprom, there are practically only two options - these purchases will be increased either by Jacques-Claude Juncker personally, or by some new companies registered in the EU, which will receive funding from the EU budget by a decision of the European Commission. One can imagine even such a development of events, but the question immediately arises - who, in fact, will work with such “newcomers” who will offer gas to consumers at prices 50-60% higher than the prices of Russian pipeline gas? Is that only those who have experienced the impact of the "Novichok" - for example, the leadership of the Republic of Lithuania. But the European gas market and the gas market of Lithuania is not even an elephant and a Pug, it is an elephant and a biting insect on Pug's tail. What else did Juncker promise? To build new LNG terminals in Europe? The salary of the President of the European Commission is large - let him build.

Any analysis of the state and prospects of the LNG gas market, the events taking place on it, makes sense to do only if all the above rules are taken into account in the analysis. This Analytical Online Magazine Geoenergetics.ru and try to do it.

In contact with