The United States government has long maintained that the development of a second Nord Stream gas pipeline would render Europe too dependent on gas from Russia, making the continent vulnerable to political manipulation.
Oil pipelines in the Gulf region have become a conspicuous strategic target in the growing confrontation between Iran on the one side and the United States, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and even Israel on the other.
U.S. President Donald Trump signed executive orders last week to speed up the construction of transnational and national pipeline projects.
This comes after making promises on the campaign trail for the presidency to remove regulatory barriers to energy projects.
In what has become a common refrain in the Canadian Oil Industry, Enbridge Energy is delaying the startup of its long planned Line 3 replacement crude oil pipeline through northern Minnesota.
The Trump administration, seeking to justify its fascination with coal, a product that is increasingly out of favor with most other industrialized countries worldwide, is arguing that gas pipelines are too vulnerable to hacking, threatening American energy security. Therefore, the United States, it is argued, need more coal in the energy mix.
The Yalu River running through Manchuria has long served as the well-known border between China and North Korea. What is less known, but equally significant, is the short, aging 30 km Friendship Pipeline constructed in part under the Yalu.
This week the House of Representatives followed the Senate in voting overwhelmingly to impose broad sanctions on Russia for behavior deemed unacceptable to the United States, particularly the alleged cyber hacking of the US election.
As a general proposition, the longer the pipeline the more difficult it is to build it. This is related not just to technical issues surrounding construction. More than ever the success of a particular pipeline project depends on how well the pipeline operator can navigate the political thicket of interest groups along the proposed pipeline route.
Perhaps no issue better highlights the differences between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Donald Trump as candidates for the U.S. presidency than energy policy.
