The recent failure of negotiations over the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline has left Russia without a critical energy lifeline to China. President Vladimir Putin departed Beijing on Tuesday without finalising the long-anticipated gas deal, a development that analysts say hands Britain and Europe a strategic advantage in the ongoing energy stand-off. The pipeline, which would have carried 50 billion cubic metres of natural gas annually from Russia’s Yamal fields to China, was seen as Moscow’s primary hedge against Western sanctions. Its collapse means Russia remains heavily reliant on European buyers, a dependency that weakens its geopolitical position.
From a climate perspective, the stalled pipeline is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it delays the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure, buying precious time for the global energy transition. On the other, it risks prolonging Europe’s dependence on Russian gas via existing routes, unless alternative supplies are secured. Britain, having accelerated its shift to renewables and liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports, is now better positioned to weather supply disruptions. The UK’s energy security hinges on diversified sources: domestic wind and solar, Norwegian pipeline gas, and Qatari LNG. Russia’s loss is a net positive for British leverage in energy negotiations, but it does not solve the underlying climate crisis.
The physics of the situation is stark. To keep global warming below 1.5°C, we must slash fossil fuel use by 45% by 2030. Every new gas pipeline locks in decades of emissions. The Power of Siberia 2 would have flowed for at least 30 years, adding roughly 1.2 gigatonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere. Its failure is a small victory for the biosphere, but it is not a reason for complacency. The energy transition is a race against entropy. We are burning through our carbon budget at a rate that would require two Earths to sustain. Britain’s increased leverage should be used to accelerate green investments, not to bargain for cheaper gas.
This is not a simple tale of winners and losers. Russia will now seek other buyers, potentially India or Central Asian states, though the infrastructure constraints are immense. China, meanwhile, has signalled its intent to prioritise domestic renewables and nuclear over Russian gas, a move that aligns with its net-zero ambitions. The net effect is a fragmented global energy market, where fossil fuel assets become stranded faster than anticipated. For British policymakers, the message is clear: double down on efficiency, storage, and grid modernisation. The leverage gained must be spent on climate action, not geopolitical games.
In the long arc of planetary history, this pipeline non-deal is a footnote. But in the context of the 2020s, it is a signal. The age of Russian gas dominance is waning. The question is whether we will seize this moment to build a clean energy system, or squander it on short-term political gains. The science demands we choose wisely.
