And Turkmenistan is already very important to Russia and China in terms of gas. Europe is definitely interested, but it may stand in line. Europe may use Turkenistan gas through Russian existing or planned pipelines. Or Europe may forgo Russian plans, and wait for Nabucco. Whether Turkmenistan will also wait is another issue. True, Turkmenistan has new gas finds, and can insure more customers in the future. Europe will soon have to demonstrate if it is willing to embrace the diversification projects funded and supplied by Russia, or it is interested in postponing Russian pipeliness carrying gas from Russia and other suppliers, including Turkmenistan, in favor of Nabucco pipeline. Naturally, as in other business ventures of such magnitude, risks are high to pipeline builder. Should quantities be in short supply, the project will end up costing their investors dearly. Russia's projects have a built in advantage of having vast reserves. Additionally, Russia has already built a pipeline (Blue Stream) under Black Sea, and it will not be a a major new undertaking to built a partially parallel pipeline to traverse to Bulgaria. In that sense, South Stream is by far more cost effective. Unfortunatelly, the heavy hand of politics is pushing hard for Nabucco, forgetting that someone's money is at stake, and that either private investors --- such as retirement funds, or public investors, i.e. already suffereing taxpayers of Europe, are supposed to lay their money on the line to build a pipeline with uncertain future. It is also the question of legal rights to build pipeline accross Caspian Sea. With the Russian pipelines being more economical, and the advancements of LNG transport, and the future of gas from in Iran, Europe need to set its sights much higher then the current thinking allows.