4 ms·

A bit off topic but something I’ve been wondering related to the recent escalation and posturing: What happens to Europe’s natural gas supply if there is some

A bit off topic but something I’ve been wondering related to the recent escalation and posturing: What happens to Europe’s natural gas supply if there is some kind of conflict with Russia? I can’t really imagine the pipelines would just be left running as they do normally, and isn’t Europe pretty dependent on that supply for heating and stuff?

DangerousPie 5y ago
Russia is also pretty dependent on the revenues from supplying the gas, so I'm not sure if it would be in anyone's interests to disrupt the supply.
Neil44 5y ago
Surely the loss of income from selling their energy would be too great. Any interruption to supply would destroy confidence in supply for the future. They would be better off defining a limited area for the conflict, similar to for example the Falkland islands conflict. There was a defined zone for conflict not a general all out war.
- azinman2 5y ago
  Germany needs natural gas. Russia has it. Saudi’s Arabia’s values are in direct opposition to everything America values. Yet look at the relationship. They can even kill a US citizen journalist and get away with it.
  - reducesuffering 5y ago
    Khashoggi worked for the Washington Post and lived in the US sometimes but he wasn’t a US citizen.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - azinman2 5y ago
      You're right.. he was a resident under an O visa.
  - Neil44 5y ago
    Of course we all need it, but I am convinced that half the reason we are all pumping so much money into solar, wind, heat pumps etc is to reduce the dependency. Russian would still be crazy to kill that golden goose any sooner than it has to.
    - fennecfoxen 5y ago
      If a country like Germany merely wanted to reduce their dependency on Russia, they'd frack. They have like 2 trillion cubic meters of gas down there. They have elected not to use it.
  - mandmandam 5y ago
    > Saudi’s Arabia’s values are in direct opposition to everything America values Minor correction: to everything America says that it values. Actions speak a lot louder than words, and the rest of the world doesn't believe anything America says any more. Torture camps, mass surveillance, economic espionage, illegal wars - you know all this. And if you think that's just American leaders, I suggest you try making up a fictional country and asking Americas if you think they need to be bombed. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-voters-bomb-agrabah-disney-aladdin-donald-trump https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-v... Not flaming. Just keeping things real here.
- threeseed 5y ago
  There is not going to be a general all out war. Ukraine is not part of NATO and US/EU have no interest in fighting. Instead the most severe set of financial sanctions, possibly ever seen, will be implemented e.g. disconnecting Russian banks from SWIFT. And we saw in Iran these measures do work to severely harm the economy.
- tialaramex 5y ago
  However, if you have a potential weapon and you decline to use it because having done so it will be expended and useless to you, you also need to consider that it might become obsolete and thus anyway useless despite going unused. Over time Europe intends to move to more renewable sources, not only for electricity generation and heating, but in industry too. So the value of this bargaining chip may be reduced over time. Anticipating the future is difficult. But it seems unlikely that Germany will become even more dependant on Russian gas in say, 2032 than today, so, this seems like as good a time as ever to threaten.
ivrrimum 5y ago
fennecfoxen 5y ago
This is a key reason Germany has been reluctant to take a stand on Russia's escalating adventurism. Indeed, Nord Stream 2 was meant to protect this arrangement from Ukraine. That said, imports of liquefied gas via tanker are possible, if you have the infrastructure to receive them.
- lostlogin 5y ago
  It’s perversely amusing to think on that, as Ukraine has been described as a ‘buffer state’ at times, shielding Europe from Russia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_state https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_state
IAmEveryone 5y ago
The pipelines, and other trade, operated without a glitch during the later years of the cold war. It's not unrealistic for that to continue, as both parties would probably prefer. I'm also getting the sense that the reliance on Russian natural gas is somewhat overstated at times. Only about 1/3 of the gas supplies of Europe come from Russia. That's a lot, but it is not unthinkable to compensate for in case it is lost. Between increasing local production, replacement with other fuels, or improvements in energy efficiency, it would be annoying but doable. For Russia, however, it would be financially devastating both in the short term as well as into the future, since Europe as a market would be lost for good once they achieve independence of this fuel source.
bserge 5y ago
threeseed 5y ago
US and EU have been preparing for this for some time. They expect that if Russia invades Ukraine, Nord Stream 2 will be dead and they will weaponize natural gas supply. So emergency gas supplies will be coming from Netherlands, US etc in accordance with their action plan: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/2019.10.08-nl_-_preventive_action_plan_2019.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/2019....
rasz 5y ago
Mainland pipeline gets cut off the moment Poland decides to do anything, like in Georgia 2008 when Polish president mobilized 'presidents of Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine and the prime minister of Latvia' to organize poblic manifestation of support in Tbilisi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War#International_reactions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War#Internation... He famously overrode his own staff to fly over an active war zone to get there. There is even a conspiracy theory about his death in a plane crash over Russia two years later being a retaliation. Nordstreams connecting Russia directly with Germany means Germans not only wont do anything, they will actively torpedo any support initiatives in the name of "stability".

DangerousPie 5y ago

Russia is also pretty dependent on the revenues from supplying the gas, so I'm not sure if it would be in anyone's interests to disrupt the supply.

Neil44 5y ago

Surely the loss of income from selling their energy would be too great. Any interruption to supply would destroy confidence in supply for the future. They would be better off defining a limited area for the conflict, similar to for example the Falkland islands conflict. There was a defined zone for conflict not a general all out war.

azinman2 5y ago
Germany needs natural gas. Russia has it. Saudi’s Arabia’s values are in direct opposition to everything America values. Yet look at the relationship. They can even kill a US citizen journalist and get away with it.
- reducesuffering 5y ago
  Khashoggi worked for the Washington Post and lived in the US sometimes but he wasn’t a US citizen.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - azinman2 5y ago
    You're right.. he was a resident under an O visa.
- Neil44 5y ago
  Of course we all need it, but I am convinced that half the reason we are all pumping so much money into solar, wind, heat pumps etc is to reduce the dependency. Russian would still be crazy to kill that golden goose any sooner than it has to.
  - fennecfoxen 5y ago
    If a country like Germany merely wanted to reduce their dependency on Russia, they'd frack. They have like 2 trillion cubic meters of gas down there. They have elected not to use it.
- mandmandam 5y ago
  > Saudi’s Arabia’s values are in direct opposition to everything America values Minor correction: to everything America says that it values. Actions speak a lot louder than words, and the rest of the world doesn't believe anything America says any more. Torture camps, mass surveillance, economic espionage, illegal wars - you know all this. And if you think that's just American leaders, I suggest you try making up a fictional country and asking Americas if you think they need to be bombed. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-voters-bomb-agrabah-disney-aladdin-donald-trump https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-v... Not flaming. Just keeping things real here.
threeseed 5y ago
There is not going to be a general all out war. Ukraine is not part of NATO and US/EU have no interest in fighting. Instead the most severe set of financial sanctions, possibly ever seen, will be implemented e.g. disconnecting Russian banks from SWIFT. And we saw in Iran these measures do work to severely harm the economy.
tialaramex 5y ago
However, if you have a potential weapon and you decline to use it because having done so it will be expended and useless to you, you also need to consider that it might become obsolete and thus anyway useless despite going unused. Over time Europe intends to move to more renewable sources, not only for electricity generation and heating, but in industry too. So the value of this bargaining chip may be reduced over time. Anticipating the future is difficult. But it seems unlikely that Germany will become even more dependant on Russian gas in say, 2032 than today, so, this seems like as good a time as ever to threaten.

ivrrimum 5y ago

fennecfoxen 5y ago

This is a key reason Germany has been reluctant to take a stand on Russia's escalating adventurism. Indeed, Nord Stream 2 was meant to protect this arrangement from Ukraine. That said, imports of liquefied gas via tanker are possible, if you have the infrastructure to receive them.

lostlogin 5y ago
It’s perversely amusing to think on that, as Ukraine has been described as a ‘buffer state’ at times, shielding Europe from Russia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_state https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_state

IAmEveryone 5y ago

The pipelines, and other trade, operated without a glitch during the later years of the cold war. It's not unrealistic for that to continue, as both parties would probably prefer. I'm also getting the sense that the reliance on Russian natural gas is somewhat overstated at times. Only about 1/3 of the gas supplies of Europe come from Russia. That's a lot, but it is not unthinkable to compensate for in case it is lost. Between increasing local production, replacement with other fuels, or improvements in energy efficiency, it would be annoying but doable. For Russia, however, it would be financially devastating both in the short term as well as into the future, since Europe as a market would be lost for good once they achieve independence of this fuel source.

bserge 5y ago

threeseed 5y ago

US and EU have been preparing for this for some time. They expect that if Russia invades Ukraine, Nord Stream 2 will be dead and they will weaponize natural gas supply. So emergency gas supplies will be coming from Netherlands, US etc in accordance with their action plan: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/2019.10.08-nl_-_preventive_action_plan_2019.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/2019....

rasz 5y ago

Mainland pipeline gets cut off the moment Poland decides to do anything, like in Georgia 2008 when Polish president mobilized 'presidents of Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine and the prime minister of Latvia' to organize poblic manifestation of support in Tbilisi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War#International_reactions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War#Internation... He famously overrode his own staff to fly over an active war zone to get there. There is even a conspiracy theory about his death in a plane crash over Russia two years later being a retaliation. Nordstreams connecting Russia directly with Germany means Germans not only wont do anything, they will actively torpedo any support initiatives in the name of "stability".