Europe's growing hunger for gas and Russia's desire to diversify export routes mean a pipeline under the Baltic Sea will be completed, even if worried neighbouring states manage to delay the scheme.
The countries around the Baltic Sea are divided over the 1,200 km (745.6 miles) pipeline that will cost at least 5 billion euros ($7.3 billion) and take 55 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas a year directly from Russia to Germany.
Russian gas monopoly Gazprom wants to diversify export routes away from Ukraine, Poland and Belarus, while Germany wants to feed its expected rise in demand for gas. The Baltic states and Poland fear the link may increase Russia's influence while Sweden is uneasy over the environmental impact, including the effect of stirring up sediment.
Finland and Denmark are less worried by the project. "It will be delayed, the price will be higher, but I think it will be built," said Arkady Mosher, director for the Russia programme at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
Frank Umbach, head of international security issues at the German Council on Foreign Relations and a sceptic over the need for the pipeline, agreed it would be completed but delayed. "The original date for the pipeline to become operational in 2010 has become unrealistic," he said. The cost could also rise to between 8 billion and 10 billion euros, he added.
The pipeline's builder, Nord Stream, is 51 percent owned by Gazprom. German partners E.ON and BASF each have 20 percent and a recent entrant, Dutch pipeline operator Gasunie, has 9 percent. Two lines are to be built, one coming on stream in 2010 with a capacity of 27.5 bcm and a second of the same size in 2012.
Poland, Lithuania and Estonia worry that allowing Gazprom to avoid current routes to Europe via Belarus, Poland and Ukraine means they will be vulnerable to political pressure from Moscow.
The fear is that Russia will be more able to impose its will on neighbouring states or cut their gas supplies, once it no longer relies so heavily on pipelines across their soil to send its exports west to Europe. They point to Moscow's disputes over energy prices with Ukraine and Belarus as a sign of the pressure they could face.
They have also been angered at a lack of consultation, leading to a bilateral Russian-German project, even though all the nations concerned except Russia are European Union members.
A Polish minister compared the plan to the pre-World War Two Molotov-Ribbentrop pact between Hitler and Stalin to carve up Poland and the Baltics. Some also fear a higher Russian military presence to guard the pipeline. Nord Stream rejects suggestions its plans will be delayed, though it has already had to change the route once.
It decided to take the pipeline north around the Danish island of Bornholm to avoid piles of German chemical and conventional munitions dumped by at sea by the victors after World War Two. This added 8 km to the route.
Estonia also recently rejected an application to survey in its waters. "Admittedly, we are facing some administrative unknowns which we are tackling with great care and resolve," said Hans-Peter Floren, transport and storage management head at E.ON Ruhrgas and a member of the Nord Stream shareholder committee.
"The consortium upholds its timetable," he added. However, further demands could come once the consortium publishes its environmental impact assessment next year. Sweden has already asked Nord Stream to look at taking a more southerly route,further away from its waters. Strong rhetoric from opponents could also persuade the builders to adopt a slower approach to show they take concerns seriously.