4 ms·
This is like comparing buying bottled water instead of using the taps in your house. Yes, technically you can do this, but transporting that bottled water is pa
by Traster 5y ago
This is like comparing buying bottled water instead of using the taps in your house. Yes, technically you can do this, but transporting that bottled water is painful, and at the scale of a whole country doing it, is a huge logistical challenge. You could eventually get to the point where LNG replaced the pipelines, but that's not going to happen overnight, and the European energy grids need to heat homes this winter.
- Majromax 5y agoThat's not quite it. The bottled water / tap water comparison is still transporting exactly the same commodity. Liquefied natural gas, however, is much denser than its non-liquefied equivalent. Per Wikipedia, Nordstream 1 can deliver 55 G(m^3)/yr of natural gas. Per a US government source (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=50598 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=50598), the United States has an LNG export capacity of about 12 G(ft^3)/day, or about 120G(m^3)/yr. I imagine the operational costs of a direct pipeline are lower than the cost of liquefaction, transport, and re-gasification, but from the notice that LNG exists this is probably has an O(1) effect on price, not O(10). Fortunately, Europe is also beginning to exit "this winter," so the energy situation is less dire than if this invasion had occurred in December going into January.