The European Union has been pursuing a strategic shift away from Russian gas, yet progress remains uneven. This view comes from a senior researcher at the Faculty of Economics at MV Moscow State University, stated in a column for Infotek. The expert is Alexander Kudrin, a Candidate of Economic Sciences from Lomonosov University.
According to Kudrin, the RePower EU plan initiated on May 18, 2022, has received broad attention. He notes that in 2021 Russia supplied 155 billion cubic meters of gas, with both pipeline gas and liquefied natural gas accounting for roughly 45 percent of imports and about 40 percent of EU consumption. The projection is that this level of dependence should fall considerably by 2030, reflecting a long-term strategic goal to diversify energy sources.
Kudrin highlights a central element of the plan: a targeted reduction in demand for Russian gas by 101.5 billion cubic meters within a year. He emphasizes that such a measure would represent a significant interruption to Russian suppliers, potentially intensifying pressure on the market. Nevertheless, he notes concerns about the enforceability of this threat due to the absence of robust compliance mechanisms.
The expert references skepticism from the Oxford Institute for Energy Research regarding the feasibility of achieving a substantial demand reduction. According to the researchers, increasing LNG purchases by 50 billion cubic meters seems unlikely. A more plausible outcome might be a growth in LNG imports by around 30 billion cubic meters, with a possibility of an additional 10 billion cubic meters materializing from a mix of sources. The outlook for more pipeline gas from Russia remains uncertain, Kudrin says, reflecting broader doubts about supply substitutions.
Kudrin points to the surprise of the recent heating season when European gas consumption declined more than expected. He cites data from the International Energy Agency showing a drop in consumption among OECD European countries by about 16 percent, equating to roughly 55 billion cubic meters, with industry accounting for a substantial portion of the savings and households contributing a notable share as well. This shift underscores how industrial efficiency measures and behavioral changes can create lasting effects beyond formal policy announcements.
On the LNG front, Kudrin notes that European Union members have already expanded their LNG imports in line with public policy aims. In 2022 the bloc collectively increased LNG intake by a substantial amount, a move that outpaced earlier expectations and appeared to outstrip the growth in global LNG supply. He suggests that continuing this trajectory could be feasible with the right market conditions, even if a portion of the growth in 2022 originated from Russian suppliers before the broader shifts fully took hold. The analytical takeaway is that the LNG market remains fluid, and the EU’s strategy involves both diversification and efficiency gains to reduce reliance on any single source.
Overall, Kudrin frames the energy transition as a mix of structural change and adaptive responses within European energy use. The timing and scale of reductions in gas demand, the ability to replace pipeline gas with LNG, and the evolution of domestic consumption patterns will collectively shape how the EU and its partners navigate the transition away from Russian gas over the coming years. The discussion reflects a broader international debate about energy security, market resilience, and the pace of decarbonization in the European energy landscape.