My column last week on two pipelines brought some comments from friends, so much so I need to complete the story with respect to the investments and the alleged market impact on Russia and Europe.

The current situation in the Gulf is proof that a Qatar pipeline to Europe through Syria exists only in the mind of those who were seeking an easy explanation to the Syrian tragedy. However, let us disregard this and assume that the project was a serious proposition.

Paul Cochrane in the Middle East Eye quotes Naser Tamimi, an independent Qatari energy expert, as saying that “With the existing infrastructure, Qatar doesn’t have enough gas to sell to Europe through a pipeline, as most contracts currently are [LNG] to Asia and long-term, while demand within Qatar is rising.”

The highest demand for gas is actually in Asia and the Middle East and for the foreseeable future. Tamimi goes on to say, “A pipeline has to be economically justifiable and secure demand from buyers in the long-term to recover pipeline costs. Maintaining the pipeline and paying transit fees to host countries, in the most optimistic scenario, would cost between $7-$9 per [million] British Thermal Unit (BTU) to reach Europe.

“LNG is cheaper, even with the most expensive scenario, at $5-$5.50 per [million] BTU.”

Gas prices have been depressed due to the decline in crude prices and the abundant availability of gas. In Europe, the average 2015 CIF prices for imported pipeline gas were $6.61 and $6.53 per million BTU in Germany and the UK. Prices went further down during 2016 and the average European Union price in May 2017 was $5.35 a million BTU.

Demand for gas is increasing in Europe, albeit at slower rate than before. The US Energy Information Administration says demand in 2012 was about 504 billion cubic metres (bcm) and is forecast to increase to 716 bcm by 2040. However, European production is going down fast and, therefore, imports are expected to increase substantially from their level of about 220 bcm in 2015, the majority from Russia.

According to BP’s 2017 “Energy Outlook”, “LNG imports are expected to supply around two-thirds of the increase in imports, with rising pipeline imports from Russia providing the remainder.”

In fact, Russia is well on its way to diversify and increase its gas supply to Europe. Nord Stream 2 financing agreement was signed in April between five European energy companies and Nord Stream 2 AG for doubling capacity via a new 1,200-kilometre line under the Baltic Sea to deliver 55 billion cubic metres (bcm) a year of natural gas. The line is expected to be completed by 2019.

At the same time, Gazprom announced that it had started construction of the Turk Stream pipeline under the Black Sea to Turkey, which aims to provide gas to the European part of Turkey and eventually to the European Union and may be commissioned by 2019. This is now seen as a substitute for the defunct South Stream pipeline to Bulgaria and further on to other European countries, which was cancelled in 2014.

The Turk Stream pipeline may be followed by two lines to Greece and Italy, each having a capacity of 15.75 bcm a year.

The same argument about a perceived Qatar pipeline to Europe equally applies to an independent Iran pipeline to the same market. In addition, Iran needs to invest more to satisfy its own gas demand north of the country, especially in winter where gas imports from Azerbaijan are reported. Financing a 5,600-kilometre pipeline of 56-inch diameter is a hurdle Iran is unlikely to cross given its own economic situation and those of the transit countries, especially with lack of interest from any European country.

Let no one forget that Russia’s competitiveness to supply gas to Europe was the main reason for the cancellation of the Nabucco pipeline in 2013, which was supposed to bring Caspian natural gas to Europe. The project capacity was more than 30 bcm and its cost was initially estimated at $10 billion, but eventually rose to $25 billion.

The two phantom pipelines of Qatar and Iran are each bigger than the 3,900 kilometre Nabucco and may cost more also, which throws their competitiveness out of the window if they were ever to be.

I do not think that we have heard the last word about these pipelines, but please let us not attribute the Syrian tragedy to either. Let us find the wisdom to salvage what remains to the Syrian people.