Paparazzi Ethnography

6/30: Laundry in Helsinki, gave me a few hours to ponder Arkhangelsk, SPB, Moscow. Game changer — April, at the Arctic Council meeting, Stockholm, I suggested the trend in predictions over the past 15 years could not, or did not, anticipate game changing events, such as increases to oil and gas production through fracking techniques. As a consequence, was it then premature to discuss opening the Arctic to oil and gas development, and if so, how could everyone in the room consider the option as settled? The question took form during the Economists Summit, Oslo, March, when a more general statement emerged from the audience about the logic of opening the Arctic to oil and gas developments given the current condition of security of supply and insecurity of demand. By the time I arrived at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, June, the topic was global outlook on natural gas. At the International Energy Agency (IEA) Launch of the 2013 Medium Term Gas Market Report, Maria van der Hoeven, Executive Director, IEA, suggested that low natural gas prices in the United States, high prices in Europe, and stratospheric prices in Asia were symptomatic of the lack of a global gas network. Moreover, the mismatch left open opportunities for Russia to capture Asian prices by directing hypothetical Arctic natural gas pipeline projects toward China. Over supply in Europe from United States exports would dampen demand years to come. The question was reformulated as follows: Going back 15 years, we see reverse cycles of demand-supply security. In the late 1990s, increasing demand and a flush of natural gas availability opened the possibility of a turn toward electricity power generation based on natural gas. By the early 2000s supply tightened while demand was peaking. Throughout the 2000s tightening supply destroyed demand along with other factors of volatility, until 2006 when supply begins to pick up, and by 2010 there is general acknowledgement of supply abundance during a period of weak market demand. These reversals of security affecting the fortunes of supply-demand relationships, did not deter IEA, alongside all other consultants, from making continued strong predictions. According to M. Hoeven, the question is best addressed in terms of asking what are the “game changers”. How would China’s economy move forward, how would supply increases take place in areas where hydrofracking technologies are still nascent. Finally, I posed the question to panel members at RPGC, Moscow, who were quick to point out that they do not, indeed, pose forecasts, but in fact, scenarios. Business “likes stability, stability of trends moving forward into the future”. But given past events, volatility and swings in the nature of global gas markets and its resilience toward globalization, could they mention game changers that would alter the scenario landscape.