Apr 9, 2025
How Nord Stream might receive a new opportunity for operation
There is widespread speculation that the Nord Stream pipelines might be restarted if a peace agreement is reached between Russia and Ukraine. However, is Europe truly ready to begin importing large quantities of Russian gas again?
By early 2025, Russian gas supplies in Europe had diminished significantly.
Warsaw had imposed strict sanctions on the Yamal pipeline, Kyiv allowed its transit agreement with Gazprom to expire, and Russia was still struggling in the aftermath of the destruction of nearly all Nord Stream pipelines in 2022, leaving only one operational.
The remaining part of Russia's energy network? TurkStream running through Bulgaria, which is itself cut off from Russian gas.
Just four years prior, Gazprom had delivered 157 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas to Europe, equivalent to 1,600 LNG tanker shipments. In 2024, that number plummeted to only 54 bcm, with 17 bcm transiting through Ukraine—a route that is now shut down.
However, not all hope was lost for Russia.
The first indication of a shift came from a Swiss court managing the insolvency of Nord Stream 2 AG in early January, when it postponed foreclosure proceedings to May.
The stated reason was that the incoming Trump administration and the new government in Berlin could have "significant effects" on the economic viability of the pipeline company.
Three months later, the Kremlin indicated it would be "interesting" if the US compelled Europe to purchase more Russian gas. An American financier is looking to capitalize on the dormant billion-dollar structures lying on the Baltic seafloor.
Some in Germany are receptive to the concept.
In a social media post last month, Thomas Bareiß, a former influential member of the Christian Democrats (CDU) and a senior official in the economy ministry, suggested that, in peace, "gas can once again flow, perhaps this time through a pipeline under US control," a sentiment echoed by other politicians since.
Yet, many remain silent on the issue.
The industry group BDI and the center-left SPD have refrained from commenting, while others in the CDU stated that the resumption of Russian pipeline flows is "not currently up for discussion."
However, the situation could rapidly change, warns Susanne Nies, an energy expert at Helmholtz Zentrum in Berlin, noting two potential scenarios.
One possible scenario involves a "gas swap deal" between the US, which is interested in Ukraine's pipelines as part of a broader effort to seize valuable infrastructure, and Gazprom at the Russian border, to then sell the gas to Europe labeled as American.
Alternatively, gas could simply flow "through the Baltic Sea, using Nord Stream 1 and 2," she explained.
"The Americans could insist that we purchase Russian gas again," she continued, indicating that the new German government "might very well say 'we did not want to, but we had to for peace.'"
This intertwining of peace and business could be significant: “While no one can say by how much, it is clear that a considerably larger share of Russian gas would reduce European gas prices,” stated Jilles van den Beukel, an energy analyst at the Dutch think tank HCSS.
The potential resumption of flows from Gazprom has thus become more about "economic considerations" than energy security concerns, he added.
All attention is on Brussels.
Within Europe, Brussels and Berlin are the primary decision-makers in this situation.
Aside from pressuring Kyiv to resume gas transit through its territory, "the undamaged segment of Nord Stream 2 is vital for reinstating gas flows to Germany in the short term," remarked van den Beukel.
Berlin must agree, especially considering the necessity of certifying the pipeline. But Brussels also has a role, aligned with the EU's recently revised gas market regulations.
The so-called “empowerment procedure” established the previous year grants the European Commission authority to block gas pipeline agreements with third countries, according to Jack Sharples of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
With the resumption of Nord Stream likely to be left to “private businesses,” the German regulator would need to take “utmost account” of Brussels' perspectives.
This positions the Commission as “the final entity that could veto this, placing a significant burden on Brussels,” Nies noted, emphasizing how the currently postponed “EU roadmap for the phase-out of Russian oil and gas is a crucial test.”
The expert expresses confidence: “Germany would not dare to revive Nord Stream 2 on its own.”
Yet, “in the worst-case scenario, we find ourselves reliant on both Putin and Trump simultaneously.”
Reviving the dormant giant
The day after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin's ambassador to Brussels remarked that the Baltic Sea pipelines were merely a “sleeping beauty” paused for the moment, a statement that was soon followed by multiple explosions that destroyed most of them later that year.
It posed a challenge, but not an insurmountable barrier. “Technically, restoring Nord Stream 1 is achievable,” asserted van den Beukel.
While it remains difficult given that “only a handful of companies and vessels are capable of executing it” due to the “large diameter and concrete encasement” of the pipelines requiring significant lifting effort, Beukel is optimistic that
By early 2025, Russian gas supplies in Europe had diminished significantly.
Warsaw had imposed strict sanctions on the Yamal pipeline, Kyiv allowed its transit agreement with Gazprom to expire, and Russia was still struggling in the aftermath of the destruction of nearly all Nord Stream pipelines in 2022, leaving only one operational.
The remaining part of Russia's energy network? TurkStream running through Bulgaria, which is itself cut off from Russian gas.
Just four years prior, Gazprom had delivered 157 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas to Europe, equivalent to 1,600 LNG tanker shipments. In 2024, that number plummeted to only 54 bcm, with 17 bcm transiting through Ukraine—a route that is now shut down.
However, not all hope was lost for Russia.
The first indication of a shift came from a Swiss court managing the insolvency of Nord Stream 2 AG in early January, when it postponed foreclosure proceedings to May.
The stated reason was that the incoming Trump administration and the new government in Berlin could have "significant effects" on the economic viability of the pipeline company.
Three months later, the Kremlin indicated it would be "interesting" if the US compelled Europe to purchase more Russian gas. An American financier is looking to capitalize on the dormant billion-dollar structures lying on the Baltic seafloor.
Some in Germany are receptive to the concept.
In a social media post last month, Thomas Bareiß, a former influential member of the Christian Democrats (CDU) and a senior official in the economy ministry, suggested that, in peace, "gas can once again flow, perhaps this time through a pipeline under US control," a sentiment echoed by other politicians since.
Yet, many remain silent on the issue.
The industry group BDI and the center-left SPD have refrained from commenting, while others in the CDU stated that the resumption of Russian pipeline flows is "not currently up for discussion."
However, the situation could rapidly change, warns Susanne Nies, an energy expert at Helmholtz Zentrum in Berlin, noting two potential scenarios.
One possible scenario involves a "gas swap deal" between the US, which is interested in Ukraine's pipelines as part of a broader effort to seize valuable infrastructure, and Gazprom at the Russian border, to then sell the gas to Europe labeled as American.
Alternatively, gas could simply flow "through the Baltic Sea, using Nord Stream 1 and 2," she explained.
"The Americans could insist that we purchase Russian gas again," she continued, indicating that the new German government "might very well say 'we did not want to, but we had to for peace.'"
This intertwining of peace and business could be significant: “While no one can say by how much, it is clear that a considerably larger share of Russian gas would reduce European gas prices,” stated Jilles van den Beukel, an energy analyst at the Dutch think tank HCSS.
The potential resumption of flows from Gazprom has thus become more about "economic considerations" than energy security concerns, he added.
All attention is on Brussels.
Within Europe, Brussels and Berlin are the primary decision-makers in this situation.
Aside from pressuring Kyiv to resume gas transit through its territory, "the undamaged segment of Nord Stream 2 is vital for reinstating gas flows to Germany in the short term," remarked van den Beukel.
Berlin must agree, especially considering the necessity of certifying the pipeline. But Brussels also has a role, aligned with the EU's recently revised gas market regulations.
The so-called “empowerment procedure” established the previous year grants the European Commission authority to block gas pipeline agreements with third countries, according to Jack Sharples of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
With the resumption of Nord Stream likely to be left to “private businesses,” the German regulator would need to take “utmost account” of Brussels' perspectives.
This positions the Commission as “the final entity that could veto this, placing a significant burden on Brussels,” Nies noted, emphasizing how the currently postponed “EU roadmap for the phase-out of Russian oil and gas is a crucial test.”
The expert expresses confidence: “Germany would not dare to revive Nord Stream 2 on its own.”
Yet, “in the worst-case scenario, we find ourselves reliant on both Putin and Trump simultaneously.”
Reviving the dormant giant
The day after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin's ambassador to Brussels remarked that the Baltic Sea pipelines were merely a “sleeping beauty” paused for the moment, a statement that was soon followed by multiple explosions that destroyed most of them later that year.
It posed a challenge, but not an insurmountable barrier. “Technically, restoring Nord Stream 1 is achievable,” asserted van den Beukel.
While it remains difficult given that “only a handful of companies and vessels are capable of executing it” due to the “large diameter and concrete encasement” of the pipelines requiring significant lifting effort, Beukel is optimistic that