6 ms·

Pressure leaks hit undersea Nord Stream pipelines

34 points by lb1lf 4y ago

timonoko 4y ago
"Global Warming Effect".
- timonoko 4y ago
  - lb1lf 4y ago
    -But methane (IDK the composition of the gas in the Nord Stream, but significant methane content is a good bet) is a much more potent greenhouse gas than the CO2 resulting from burning methane. You basically get more global warming bang for your buck if releasing methane to the atmosphere than if you go through the trouble of burning it first.
    - timonoko 4y ago
      Stand Corrected. So they should just use flame thrower on those bubbles.
    - dreamcompiler 4y ago
      Yep. I kinda wish somebody would light those bubbles on fire immediately. It's possible they will have to do so to make the area safe for repair operations.
  - addicted 4y ago
    That’s not what the German Green Party is saying.
lb1lf 4y ago
It is exceedingly unlikely that this is an accident, seeing as no less than three separate pipelines were punctured at different locations within hours of each other. While none of the pipelines were currently operational, this basically ensures that even if some agreement could be reached with Russia to resume gas imports (not very likely!), it will not be possible in the short term, seeing as the operator claims damages of an unparallelled scale, without going into details. Presumably this means security around the new Norway-Poland gas pipeline to be opened one of these days is tightened. The seas it runs through are very shallow, so if throwing sufficient resources on it, it should be possible to keep anything larger than a herring from getting close without being noticed.
- netsharc 4y ago
  If I could put on my amateur geo-political-analyst hat for a moment, who could be behind this and why? Seems like a Putin move, since he dared using (probably) a sub in other nations' waters. Reason? To show Europe he means business? To show Europe he's not planning to rewind anything to the way things were in 2021?
  - lb1lf 4y ago
    If one is of a sufficiently dark view, it may even be some western power wishing to drive home the point that Russia will not - full stop - export gas in any significant quantity to Europe anytime soon. I would believe it more likely to be the Russians testing the waters, so to speak - finding out how far you can go sabotaging infrastructure. After all, starting with two non-operational pipelines makes consequences less severe at both ends, while gaining the perpetrator some experience how to evade detection. (Which may come in handy later!)
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > it may even be some western power wishing to drive home the point that Russia will not - full stop - export gas in any significant quantity to Europe anytime soon Then it would be incompetent. There is political resolve against Russia in Europe. Keeping the ability to bomb the pipes is one thing. Doing it in the midst of that resolve would be self defeating.
      - lb1lf 4y ago
        -But that resolve is feared to be weakened by falling temperatures in Continental Europe. Surely it cannot be completely outside the realm of the possible that Someone(tm) helped EU politicians do The Right Thing(tm) by ensuring they couldn't give in to Russian demands this winter even if they'd wanted to? (I believe this one's on the Russians - but I can see other actors finding it beneficial that Russian exports cannot easily be resumed. Especially as long as the Kremlin denying it had anything to do with something is largely seen as evidence it did indeed have something to do with it.)
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
silexia 4y ago
For the conspiracy theorists claiming this is the US... The current US administration has made climate change it's number one priority. It's extremely doubtful they would damage the environment in this way with methane.
- voakbasda 4y ago
  Good thing politicians are never duplicitous liars. We can trust them to do exactly what they say and know they will never dare betray their constituents.
- aa-jv 4y ago
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > Biden even announced he'd do it Looking at your recent comment history, it’s difficult to take these claims seriously, given their repetition and wrongness. But in the effort of maintaining HN’s ethos I’ll assume good faith. Your link [1] talks about Nord Stream 2. It was halted. With sanctions. With the stroke of a pen the U.S. could do the same to Nord Stream 1. [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-germanys-scholz-stress-unified-front-against-any-russian-aggression-toward-2022-02-07/ https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-germanys-scholz-stress-u...
    - aa-jv 4y ago
      Biden literally said that the US would make sure Nord Stream was taken out, that 'they would find a way to make sure it was done for good'. Why is it so difficult for you to confront this fact? I guess because if it is true, the USA has committed yet another unilateral act of aggression in its own interests, disregarding the human rights of millions of Europeans...
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        You're muddling comments made about Nord Stream 2 with Nord Stream 1. Nord Stream 2 is done for good. Europe can't buy gas through a sanctioned pipe. > Why is it so difficult for you to confront this fact? You're getting pushback for repeatedly taking Biden's comments about sanctioning Nord Stream 2 to represent incompetently bombing Nord Stream 1. (Also, for claiming we have anything resembling facts with respect to attribution.)
omega3 4y ago
Potentially sending gas via this pipeline was one of the last remaining bargain cards for Russia. In case of harsh winter they could use it to pressure European countries (cough Germany cough) into lifting the sanctions. There is no logical reason as to why Russia would have been attacking it's own pipeline.
- jusssi 4y ago
  It's not out of question that there could be a faction in Russia that would want to undermine the current regime. Edit: Or it could be a play by the current regime against any competing factions.
  - throwawaymaths 4y ago
    Lots of people in Russia have family in Ukraine
    - almost_usual 4y ago
      That didn’t seem to stop an invasion and bombing campaign.
      - throwawaymaths 4y ago
        I don't know, maybe stopping a full on military juggernaut led by a demagogue in power takes a more effort than a precision attack on an economic asset on an unguarded civilian (if strategic) asset with 500km long single point of failure
  - 4gotunameagain 4y ago
    a faction with a submarine ?
    - rasz 4y ago
      Hey, Iv seen this movie!
timonoko 4y ago
Anybody could destroy this pipeline, me myself included. I watched the pipe-laying ship from Finnish "Suuri-Pisi" Island while kayaking. https://youtu.be/0P-wd3qzCBA?t=526 https://youtu.be/0P-wd3qzCBA?t=526 So I know exactly where the pipeline goes. Nothing prevents me from packing some dynamite and Arduino-based timer in water-proof box and do some more kayaking on some dark October night.
- mox1 4y ago
  I see this type of comment all the time, you are vastly underestimating the skill required to do the thing you hypothesize. Spend 15 minutes walking through the scenario, there is a lot that can go wrong with your simple plan. Of course it is possible, but you would need to find the intersection of 1. Willing / Desire to blow up the pipeline 2. Have the skills to create an underwater bomb of correct properties to blow up a pipeline. 1 & 2 is not "Anybody". Its a relatively small set of the worlds population, probably someone with mining skills, engineering skills, probably diving skills and/or former military.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - timonoko 4y ago
    No worries. I already revised my plan. I would 3D-print Raspberry-based submersible, which would find sea bottom and then proceed South-East from Suuri-Pisi and magnetically recognize metallic oblong object. Only problem is the availability of explosive material. But maybe I can buy bombs from immigrant gangs of Stockholm....
    - 4gotunameagain 4y ago
      If you think that building an autonomous 3d printed submarine with underwater navigation and pipeline detection is the easy part and creating the explosives the hard one, then I think you should do more research on both topics :)
AbrahamParangi 4y ago
If I had to bet on who did it, I would guess Russia. Not because it’s in their best interests (it’s not) but because the Russian state planning and executing something very bad for itself is completely expected.

34 points by lb1lf 4y ago

timonoko 4y ago

"Global Warming Effect".

timonoko 4y ago
- lb1lf 4y ago
  -But methane (IDK the composition of the gas in the Nord Stream, but significant methane content is a good bet) is a much more potent greenhouse gas than the CO2 resulting from burning methane. You basically get more global warming bang for your buck if releasing methane to the atmosphere than if you go through the trouble of burning it first.
  - timonoko 4y ago
    Stand Corrected. So they should just use flame thrower on those bubbles.
  - dreamcompiler 4y ago
    Yep. I kinda wish somebody would light those bubbles on fire immediately. It's possible they will have to do so to make the area safe for repair operations.
- addicted 4y ago
  That’s not what the German Green Party is saying.

lb1lf 4y ago

It is exceedingly unlikely that this is an accident, seeing as no less than three separate pipelines were punctured at different locations within hours of each other. While none of the pipelines were currently operational, this basically ensures that even if some agreement could be reached with Russia to resume gas imports (not very likely!), it will not be possible in the short term, seeing as the operator claims damages of an unparallelled scale, without going into details. Presumably this means security around the new Norway-Poland gas pipeline to be opened one of these days is tightened. The seas it runs through are very shallow, so if throwing sufficient resources on it, it should be possible to keep anything larger than a herring from getting close without being noticed.

netsharc 4y ago
If I could put on my amateur geo-political-analyst hat for a moment, who could be behind this and why? Seems like a Putin move, since he dared using (probably) a sub in other nations' waters. Reason? To show Europe he means business? To show Europe he's not planning to rewind anything to the way things were in 2021?
- lb1lf 4y ago
  If one is of a sufficiently dark view, it may even be some western power wishing to drive home the point that Russia will not - full stop - export gas in any significant quantity to Europe anytime soon. I would believe it more likely to be the Russians testing the waters, so to speak - finding out how far you can go sabotaging infrastructure. After all, starting with two non-operational pipelines makes consequences less severe at both ends, while gaining the perpetrator some experience how to evade detection. (Which may come in handy later!)
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > it may even be some western power wishing to drive home the point that Russia will not - full stop - export gas in any significant quantity to Europe anytime soon Then it would be incompetent. There is political resolve against Russia in Europe. Keeping the ability to bomb the pipes is one thing. Doing it in the midst of that resolve would be self defeating.
    - lb1lf 4y ago
      -But that resolve is feared to be weakened by falling temperatures in Continental Europe. Surely it cannot be completely outside the realm of the possible that Someone(tm) helped EU politicians do The Right Thing(tm) by ensuring they couldn't give in to Russian demands this winter even if they'd wanted to? (I believe this one's on the Russians - but I can see other actors finding it beneficial that Russian exports cannot easily be resumed. Especially as long as the Kremlin denying it had anything to do with something is largely seen as evidence it did indeed have something to do with it.)

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

silexia 4y ago

For the conspiracy theorists claiming this is the US... The current US administration has made climate change it's number one priority. It's extremely doubtful they would damage the environment in this way with methane.

voakbasda 4y ago
Good thing politicians are never duplicitous liars. We can trust them to do exactly what they say and know they will never dare betray their constituents.
aa-jv 4y ago
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > Biden even announced he'd do it Looking at your recent comment history, it’s difficult to take these claims seriously, given their repetition and wrongness. But in the effort of maintaining HN’s ethos I’ll assume good faith. Your link [1] talks about Nord Stream 2. It was halted. With sanctions. With the stroke of a pen the U.S. could do the same to Nord Stream 1. [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-germanys-scholz-stress-unified-front-against-any-russian-aggression-toward-2022-02-07/ https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-germanys-scholz-stress-u...
  - aa-jv 4y ago
    Biden literally said that the US would make sure Nord Stream was taken out, that 'they would find a way to make sure it was done for good'. Why is it so difficult for you to confront this fact? I guess because if it is true, the USA has committed yet another unilateral act of aggression in its own interests, disregarding the human rights of millions of Europeans...
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      You're muddling comments made about Nord Stream 2 with Nord Stream 1. Nord Stream 2 is done for good. Europe can't buy gas through a sanctioned pipe. > Why is it so difficult for you to confront this fact? You're getting pushback for repeatedly taking Biden's comments about sanctioning Nord Stream 2 to represent incompetently bombing Nord Stream 1. (Also, for claiming we have anything resembling facts with respect to attribution.)

omega3 4y ago

Potentially sending gas via this pipeline was one of the last remaining bargain cards for Russia. In case of harsh winter they could use it to pressure European countries (cough Germany cough) into lifting the sanctions. There is no logical reason as to why Russia would have been attacking it's own pipeline.

jusssi 4y ago
It's not out of question that there could be a faction in Russia that would want to undermine the current regime. Edit: Or it could be a play by the current regime against any competing factions.
- throwawaymaths 4y ago
  Lots of people in Russia have family in Ukraine
  - almost_usual 4y ago
    That didn’t seem to stop an invasion and bombing campaign.
    - throwawaymaths 4y ago
      I don't know, maybe stopping a full on military juggernaut led by a demagogue in power takes a more effort than a precision attack on an economic asset on an unguarded civilian (if strategic) asset with 500km long single point of failure
- 4gotunameagain 4y ago
  a faction with a submarine ?
  - rasz 4y ago
    Hey, Iv seen this movie!

timonoko 4y ago

Anybody could destroy this pipeline, me myself included. I watched the pipe-laying ship from Finnish "Suuri-Pisi" Island while kayaking. https://youtu.be/0P-wd3qzCBA?t=526 https://youtu.be/0P-wd3qzCBA?t=526 So I know exactly where the pipeline goes. Nothing prevents me from packing some dynamite and Arduino-based timer in water-proof box and do some more kayaking on some dark October night.

mox1 4y ago
I see this type of comment all the time, you are vastly underestimating the skill required to do the thing you hypothesize. Spend 15 minutes walking through the scenario, there is a lot that can go wrong with your simple plan. Of course it is possible, but you would need to find the intersection of 1. Willing / Desire to blow up the pipeline 2. Have the skills to create an underwater bomb of correct properties to blow up a pipeline. 1 & 2 is not "Anybody". Its a relatively small set of the worlds population, probably someone with mining skills, engineering skills, probably diving skills and/or former military.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- timonoko 4y ago
  No worries. I already revised my plan. I would 3D-print Raspberry-based submersible, which would find sea bottom and then proceed South-East from Suuri-Pisi and magnetically recognize metallic oblong object. Only problem is the availability of explosive material. But maybe I can buy bombs from immigrant gangs of Stockholm....
  - 4gotunameagain 4y ago
    If you think that building an autonomous 3d printed submarine with underwater navigation and pipeline detection is the easy part and creating the explosives the hard one, then I think you should do more research on both topics :)

AbrahamParangi 4y ago

If I had to bet on who did it, I would guess Russia. Not because it’s in their best interests (it’s not) but because the Russian state planning and executing something very bad for itself is completely expected.