Baltic States – CIS, Energy, Gas, Latvia, Lithuania, Transport

Developing the liquefied natural gas terminal jointly with Latvia would be the cheapest option for Lithuania, the daily points out.

"It is unprofitable for each country to have an own terminal. Latvians have the whole infrastructure and they propose to work together. Obviously, this is a better option than building (a terminal) in Lithuania and investing 700 million litas in it," Vidmantas Jankauskas, a former head of the National Control Commission for Prices and Energy.

"Commercially, it would be the most suitable for the Baltic countries. Latvians are capable of building such a terminal, because they have the experience and will receive EU aid. Also, that will require less investment," Jurgis Vilemas, a Lithuanian energy scientist said to Lietuvos Rytas.

Jurgis Vilemas also opposes Lithuania building its own nuclear plant, the Lithuania Tribune emphasizes.

Lietuvos Rytas, on the other hand, in many occasions sounds as Gazprom's mouthpieces in Lithuania, informs LETA/ELTA.

Lithuania is not convinced that a Baltic liquefied gas terminal should be build in Latvia, since it could be built by companies related to Gazprom.

"If, as the word is, the builder would be a Gazprom subsidiary, it would be a Gazprom terminal, and Lithuania will not approve to this. It would not be an actual gas supplies alternative. There are reports that the terminal would be intended for exports, which is clearly in line with Gazprom's interests," Ceslovas Stankevicius, the chairman of the Lithuanian parliament's European Affairs Committee, Alfa.lt.

Lithuania does not object Latvia building its own liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal, still Vilnius will also build its own LNG terminal, Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite pointed out.

"Both projects do not conflict, Lithuania still plans to build a terminal of lower capacity in its territory but wouldn’t mind if Latvia built a bigger centre," Grybauskaite said on February 10, 2011.