7 ms·

How big of a deal is it for the pipelines to be filled in seawater?

s_dev 4y ago
Pipelines are finished -- can't be used for anything now. Maybe scuba training or something in the future. With some luck maybe exposed parts will assist aquatic life in forming reefs etc. The harsh reality is this project should never have been given the go ahead -- it made economic sense but not political sense.
- bboygravity 4y ago
  Germany essentially switched from baseload nuclear to baseload Russian gas. I personally can't think of any other logical explication than German politicians having been "bought by Russians" to explain that decision. I definitely saw this kind of stuff coming like 10+ years ago as they went full steam ahead with energiewende.
  - lm28469 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder > Gerhard Fritz Kurt "Gerd" Schröder is a German lobbyist and former politician, who served as the chancellor of Germany from 1998 to 2005| > Since leaving public office, Schröder has worked for Russian state-owned energy companies, including Nord Stream AG, Rosneft, and Gazprom They're not even trying to be subtle about it, it's just plain sad
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    > I personally can't think of any other logical explication than German politicians having been "bought by Russians" to explain that decision. German here. Russian gas was absurdly cheap, I paid 5ct/kWh in 2015 and that included taxes. Large industry which was exempted from at least some of these paid even less. There simply was no economically viable alternative, even renewables today are more expensive than Russian gas was back then. Yes, there may also have been corruption involved as well (just look at former Chancellor Schröder who started the entire NS1/2 mess, Merkel just ran along with it), but the primary motivation always has been price. Hell even the primary motivation for NS1/2 was price, as there are no transit fees associated with it, unlike Drushba/Soyuz. The second motivation obviously was to reduce the leverage of Ukraine. Side note: Assuming a household with 12.000 kWh/a thermal energy consumption, that was 600€ a year/50€ a month back then. At current gas prices, it's ten times that... which is the cause for widespread discontent and outright existential fear in society at the moment. When you only have 200-300€ left after rent and necessities, 50€ for heating is manageable - but 500€ certainly is not, and the new gas prices representing the current future market prices that will hit in next year aren't even priced in. > I definitely saw this kind of stuff coming like 10+ years ago as they went full steam ahead with energiewende. Lol what? Energiewende? You mean Mr. Altmaier and his conservative friends sabotaging the wind and solar industry wherever they could, leading to well over 100k lost jobs [1]? Fuck that shit. [1] https://www.iwr.de/news/erneuerbare-energien-beschaeftigen-ueber-300-000-menschen-in-deutschland-news33964 https://www.iwr.de/news/erneuerbare-energien-beschaeftigen-u...
    - lm28469 4y ago
      > There simply was no economically viable alternative, nucl... ah no that's bad
      - mschuster91 4y ago
        > nucl... ah no that's bad The madness factor of nuclear power - safety, waste, availability factor (France!) - aside, nuclear power is economically even worse than brown coal [1, page 8], once you include externalized costs such as teardown, maintenance of the permanent waste dump sites or the insurance that an NPP would need without the taxpayer guarantee. [1] https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/887090/1867659c1d4edcc0e32cb093ab073767/WD-5-005-22-pdf-data.pdf https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/887090/1867659c1d4edc...
        qnsi 4y ago
        does it take into consideration future emission costs? I speak a bit of german but not enough. I think it says in 2021 prices of everything?
      - lostlogin 4y ago
        OP gave the price - would nuclear have been cheaper than that? And if even if it was, it takes an age to come online. It should have been done, but the reasons it wasn’t aren’t just outright corruption or anti-nuclear sentiment.
      - colinmhayes 4y ago
        Nuclear is the opposite of economically viable. It's the most expensive way to generate electricity.
    - s_dev 4y ago
      >There simply was no economically viable alternative This was the lie that German politicians propagated after having been compromised. The obvious reality is Nuclear is economically and environmentally viable.
_visgean 4y ago
Some german sources said that unless it gets fixed soon the seawater will quickly corrode the metal pileines. Other people said that this can be prevented by pumping gas (air?) to keep the tube over pressurised but not sure for how long this can be done or whether it is happening. But if there are multiple holes at least a portion of this is definetely filled with water by now.. But I think by now the project is dead, its just a scrap metal..
doikor 4y ago
The Finnish gas grid provider said that it is not too bad as long as they are not left in that state for too long. To fix them they would have to be filled with seawater anyway as you would need equal pressure on inside and outside the pipe to do any fixes. But more importantly I doubt there is any political will to actually fix these. Russian gas in EU is as good as dead in the short term future. And by the time there would be the will to use these pipes again EU should have moved off gas for the most part anyway.
Amarok 4y ago
Hard to say, if they get filled with ice plugs could be out of commission permanently.

Pipelines are finished -- can't be used for anything now. Maybe scuba training or something in the future. With some luck maybe exposed parts will assist aquatic life in forming reefs etc. The harsh reality is this project should never have been given the go ahead -- it made economic sense but not political sense.

bboygravity 4y ago
Germany essentially switched from baseload nuclear to baseload Russian gas. I personally can't think of any other logical explication than German politicians having been "bought by Russians" to explain that decision. I definitely saw this kind of stuff coming like 10+ years ago as they went full steam ahead with energiewende.
- lm28469 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder > Gerhard Fritz Kurt "Gerd" Schröder is a German lobbyist and former politician, who served as the chancellor of Germany from 1998 to 2005| > Since leaving public office, Schröder has worked for Russian state-owned energy companies, including Nord Stream AG, Rosneft, and Gazprom They're not even trying to be subtle about it, it's just plain sad
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > I personally can't think of any other logical explication than German politicians having been "bought by Russians" to explain that decision. German here. Russian gas was absurdly cheap, I paid 5ct/kWh in 2015 and that included taxes. Large industry which was exempted from at least some of these paid even less. There simply was no economically viable alternative, even renewables today are more expensive than Russian gas was back then. Yes, there may also have been corruption involved as well (just look at former Chancellor Schröder who started the entire NS1/2 mess, Merkel just ran along with it), but the primary motivation always has been price. Hell even the primary motivation for NS1/2 was price, as there are no transit fees associated with it, unlike Drushba/Soyuz. The second motivation obviously was to reduce the leverage of Ukraine. Side note: Assuming a household with 12.000 kWh/a thermal energy consumption, that was 600€ a year/50€ a month back then. At current gas prices, it's ten times that... which is the cause for widespread discontent and outright existential fear in society at the moment. When you only have 200-300€ left after rent and necessities, 50€ for heating is manageable - but 500€ certainly is not, and the new gas prices representing the current future market prices that will hit in next year aren't even priced in. > I definitely saw this kind of stuff coming like 10+ years ago as they went full steam ahead with energiewende. Lol what? Energiewende? You mean Mr. Altmaier and his conservative friends sabotaging the wind and solar industry wherever they could, leading to well over 100k lost jobs [1]? Fuck that shit. [1] https://www.iwr.de/news/erneuerbare-energien-beschaeftigen-ueber-300-000-menschen-in-deutschland-news33964 https://www.iwr.de/news/erneuerbare-energien-beschaeftigen-u...
  - lm28469 4y ago
    > There simply was no economically viable alternative, nucl... ah no that's bad
    - mschuster91 4y ago
      > nucl... ah no that's bad The madness factor of nuclear power - safety, waste, availability factor (France!) - aside, nuclear power is economically even worse than brown coal [1, page 8], once you include externalized costs such as teardown, maintenance of the permanent waste dump sites or the insurance that an NPP would need without the taxpayer guarantee. [1] https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/887090/1867659c1d4edcc0e32cb093ab073767/WD-5-005-22-pdf-data.pdf https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/887090/1867659c1d4edc...
      - qnsi 4y ago
        does it take into consideration future emission costs? I speak a bit of german but not enough. I think it says in 2021 prices of everything?
    - lostlogin 4y ago
      OP gave the price - would nuclear have been cheaper than that? And if even if it was, it takes an age to come online. It should have been done, but the reasons it wasn’t aren’t just outright corruption or anti-nuclear sentiment.
    - colinmhayes 4y ago
      Nuclear is the opposite of economically viable. It's the most expensive way to generate electricity.
  - s_dev 4y ago
    >There simply was no economically viable alternative This was the lie that German politicians propagated after having been compromised. The obvious reality is Nuclear is economically and environmentally viable.

_visgean 4y ago

Some german sources said that unless it gets fixed soon the seawater will quickly corrode the metal pileines. Other people said that this can be prevented by pumping gas (air?) to keep the tube over pressurised but not sure for how long this can be done or whether it is happening. But if there are multiple holes at least a portion of this is definetely filled with water by now.. But I think by now the project is dead, its just a scrap metal..

doikor 4y ago

The Finnish gas grid provider said that it is not too bad as long as they are not left in that state for too long. To fix them they would have to be filled with seawater anyway as you would need equal pressure on inside and outside the pipe to do any fixes. But more importantly I doubt there is any political will to actually fix these. Russian gas in EU is as good as dead in the short term future. And by the time there would be the will to use these pipes again EU should have moved off gas for the most part anyway.

Amarok 4y ago

Hard to say, if they get filled with ice plugs could be out of commission permanently.