While the emergence of a "Gas OPEC" (a much cherished wish of both Algeria and Russia) is indeed nothing to laugh about, one should be careful with the IEA demand projections. I spoke about this with one of the writers of the recent Clingendael gas paper to find out where all this projected new natgas demand/dependence is coming from and it turns out that it hinges on the assumption that the UK and Germany, but mostly Eastern Europe will replace all their ageing nuclear and coal-fired power plants with gas-fired ones in the following decades. While that makes sense in their fundamentals analysis (purely on a exploration/transport cost basis, gas is potentially the cheapest/carbon-optimal option for Europe), this is a huge assumption if security of supply concerns start weighing more and Europe opts for nukes, coal or wind instead.

At the moment, the Russian gas molecules don't go any further than mid-Germany. If all the projected LNG terminals are built on the west coast of Europe, this point might even get pushed back further east. Now I don't know what is the less desirable option: a Russia that supplies natgas to a dependent Europe at will, or a pissed off Russia that invested billions in pipelines just to see no demand for it (and with little revenue flow at risk when it does pick a fight).