Talk:Great Sea Interconnector

The article looks biased

I think the main author User:Karaol is probably linked with the Euroasia Interconnector Company. Even the top image, that is cited as his own work, is used in the Interconnectors cite without attribution [1].

The article fail to mention the controversy between Greece an Euroasia interconnector that forced Greece to start the part connecting Attika with Crete as a National project. Instead it only mentions that Greece is supporting the Euroasia Interconnector. I will probably add a section about it. Botaki (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Delays and infrigement

(I moved the discussion here from my page) Botaki (talk) 15:09, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

First of all you had wrong impression about my work. I have no connections to Euroasia at all, not even indirect. My work is connected to programming and to energy.You added one full section connected to Ariadne Interconnector. Since you started you could maybe start new article about Ariadne Interconnector. That is Crete-Attica part that was previously part of Euroasia, but it is no more.Some data could and mentioning could be in our article, but really details about Ariadne tenders are not necessary. As I noticed you used only one source of information, energypress. It was very biased. Therefore you have not mentioned for example respected Kathimerini , that at the time Euroasia was not in delay (European bodies confirm that) and you not mentioned that IPTO actually took over Crete-Attica contrary to European law, as confirmed you European Commission. European Commission warned that Athens would face infringement procedures.https://www.kathimerini.gr/economy/business/1032201/freno-ston-diagonismo-admie-gia-diasyndesi-kritis/ https://www.financialmirror.com/2019/07/05/greece-starting-to-feel-squeeze-after-u-turn-on-cyprus-electric-cable/ But infringement process and trials could take lot of time. Therefore I suspect that Euroasia decided to give up Crete-Attica. That is something we don't know, but we know that not only European Commission but also ACER mentioned that Crete Aticca takover was contrary to European law. When Euroasia gave up they asked at least to be preserved interconnectivity on Crete and again there were some problems reported. --Karaol (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Karaol I don't see any mention of the Crete-Attika being contrary to the European Law to the sites you link. Instead I have cited in the article that Council of Greece decided that it was legal. From my understanding, Euroasia feared that the Crete Attika part will not be compatible due to different voltage. Also Crete-Attika interconnector is part of the original plan for the interconnection. I don't think it is irrelevant. Instead the article looks very promotional to me. You mention half of what the sites cite. I cite a lot energypress because i could easily find a timeline of what was happening. I can cite more cites if you like. And lastly Crete Attika is already under construction for a year I think. Euroasia has not even started. So delays are valid to me. And I continue to believe you and vermed22 are probably connected with Euroasia Botaki (talk) 14:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

The translation of the title about Hatzidakis' support "Χατζηδάκης: Η Ελλάδα στηρίζει την ηλεκτρική διασύνδεση Κύπρου-Κρήτης - Αναγκαίο "κακό" η υλοποίηση του τμήματος Αττική-Κρήτη ως εθνικό έργο" => "Hatzidakis: Greece is supporting the interconnection of Cyprus and Crete - We were forced to construct of the Crete - Attika as a national project even if it looks "evil"." (The second part is difficult to translate to English accurately) Botaki (talk) 15:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

At the time when Crete-Attica part was illegaly taken over there was no delays (If delays exist later they are result of these actions). Mentioning delay at time when they did not exist is one sided view from Greek side. Neutral side by EU Commission and ACER was that there are no delays (see articles above). And EU Commission was so shocked by such behavior that sent letters about infringement procedure.--Karaol (talk) 16:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Karaol Do you have any source? I don't understand how taking a part of the project from Euroasia creates delays. Euroasia needs to construct a smaller project. It should be done faster. And delays are about the Crete Link and not about the project. If a project is on time, it does not mean it has finished early. The timeline can be to finish late. 16:37, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

https://www.financialmirror.com/2019/05/27/energy-crete-up-in-arms-over-station-site-as-ariadne-issues-cable-tenders/ Also [here|https://www.kathimerini.gr/economy/business/1032201/freno-ston-diagonismo-admie-gia-diasyndesi-kritis/] (in greek from kathimerini )Σε μια παράλληλη εξέλιξη, o ACER, o σύνδεσμος ρυθμιστικών αρχών της Ευρώπης, επιβεβαίωσε στην ετήσια έκθεσή του (1/7/2019) πως το έργο της ηλεκτρικής διασύνδεσης Κρήτης – Αττικής που εκτελείται υπό την αιγίδα του Εuroasia ως τμήμα του PCI Aττική – Κρήτη – Κύπρος – Ισραήλ, βρίσκεται εντός χρονοδιαγράμματος υλοποίησης. Αυτό, καθιστά αβάσιμους τους ισχυρισμούς της ΡΑΕ περί καθυστερήσεων, τους οποίους εξάλλου είχε απορρίψει νωρίτερα και η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή.--Karaol (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Kathimerini wrote that at that time it was no delay. It was no delay in Crete link. European institution confirmed that, but still that part of project was unlawfully taken over. And Financial mirror writes about infrigement procedure.--Karaol (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Karaol I found the document they cite [2] It says on time with a note saying "The Agency’s classification based on the comparison of the commissioning date provided by the project promoter with the commissioning date in the Agency’s 2018 PCI monitoring report.". So it is information provided by Euroasia. ACER just compared the dates provided by Euroasia on it's 2018 and on it's 2019 report. And about legality, courts decide what is legal. And supreme court of Greece decided that it was. Botaki (talk) 18:14, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes ACER checks each year if projects are in delay. Only possibility to steal somebody else project was in case if ACER decides that project is in delay. Project was not in official delay, therefore there should be no mentioning of delay in wikipedia article. Politicians could talk about delay, but there was no official delays, only political.--Karaol (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Here is some more about infrigement procedure, warning letters from EU and obvious illegal actions. https://www.ekathimerini.com/economy/243530/brussels-piles-on-pressure-over-greece-cyprus-israel-electricity-cable/ --Karaol (talk) 22:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Euroasia-route-map.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:32, 10 March 2021 (UTC)