I've read your article about Europe's energy dependency with great interest.

As self-employed advisor for sustainable energy, living in the north of Netherlands (right above the Slochteren natural gas field), I recognize a very positive side effect of this gas crisis in Ukraine. I can say that this political incident has caused an huge shock-effect in whole Europe, realizing once again European dependency on fossil fuels in combination with our small and soon ending fossil reserves.

Maybe you didn't realize it, but the positive effect of this gas crisis is that our policy towards promoting renewable energy, starting with biofuels, has been given a substantial boost on EU level and in several European countries. Things must first go wrong to stimulate the political drive to change a current situation.

Furthermore, I am very curious about the real motivation for president Bush to promote renewables. Suspect he did this for political reasons, as his position weakens. But, this can also be an opportunity to help the US administration on forming a policy to promote renewable energy. But raising money for a new policy will be extremely difficult with the US ever-rising deficits.

Why, o, why, didn't the US choose for spending 2 billion dollar a month on promoting renewable energy, in stead of financing a useless war in Iran for the same amount of money, making itself so unpopular. Promoting renewables would be a much more sympathetic way of changing the oil addiction of your country in a couple of decennia and creating a huge amount of new jobs, plus renewable technology is likely to grow into a huge export factor!

Stef Folmer
Lageland

I rarely comment on issues in my mailing lists, but I have to tell you that the Gazprom article was a little harsh and not entirely fair to the truth.   Truth is, market prices are what it's about - you in the west have been extrapolating it for ages. The idea that the Russians are back to the business of rebuilding their Great Evil Empire every time some "west-oriented" politician squeals about a business dispute involving Russia that he's unhappy with, is a little overused, and getting lame, to tell the truth. This journo pathos is beginning to be such a joke, I don't even want to begin to tell you.   Your article's reference to the fact that Ukraine stole, as in S-T-O-L-E, gas intended for shipment to Western Europe is less than obvious. More than that, you infer that it's again the Russkies' fault in all.   And last thing, how does it make a good business sense for Russia to continue to support Ukrainian economy with cheap gas so that it may continue making low quality industrial goods no one wants? Or, for example, cheap steel that is then dumped in the US. Just curious...   Sergei S. Moscow   Any privately own business would charge Ukraine the price everybody else is paying. I don't see where the Russia status is in play here. Ukraine wanted to separate from Russia, join NATO etc. - they can do it, although I don't think it would be in the best interest of Ukraine. But if they do, they have to play the same game as others do.   It looks to me, the Ukraine would like to have the cake, and eat it too. I don't think they can get that. It will be either cake, or eating, not both. It is just plain logic. It is nothing wrong when the government is acting in the interest of its own citizens (Russians), is it?   Mark Kmicikiewicz CKE TECHNOLOGIES INC.