Nord Stream sabotage

[956 Worldwide 34444]

49 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

Low information? How about some numbers. 

Sudzha pipeline. 
 

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ukraine-can-substitute-ns1-capacity-through-its-network-gas-transit-chief-2022-09-05/

Running 36 mcm per day below max. 
365 days a year. 
13.1 bcm potential

Current Yamal flows

https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2022-09-27/eastward-gas-flows-via-yamal-europe-pipeline-rise

 

At the current flows cited, 15.5 bcm annually. 
 

Capacity of 33 bcm  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamal–Europe_pipeline

potential added capacity for Yamal

17.5 bcm

 

17.5+13.1=30.6 bcm potential flows. 
 

Still 28.6 bcm short of NS 2021 volumes. 

 

My guy, you’re confusing max capacity with what they’ve actually booked and still aren’t sending. 
 

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ukraine-has-gas-transit-capacity-spare-offset-nord-stream-1-flows-operator-2022-06-20/

 

Quote

 

GTSOU chief executive Sergiy Makogon told Reuters in an interview Sudzha's technical capacity was 244 mcm per day. That compared with Nord Stream's regular capacity of round 160 mcm per day, lately capped by Gazprom at 96 mcm.

Gazprom has already paid and booked 77.2 mcm/day capacity on the Sudzha route, but has been using only a part of that, with its current nominations, or requests for gas, at 41.7 mcm/day, he added.

 

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/europe-can-win-putins-gas-war-but-must-learn-nord-stream-lessons/
 

Quote

Nord Stream never fulfilled any need. The European Union has never imported more than 150 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas from Russia in a single year, and ample pipeline capacity has long been available to cover existing volumes. The Ukrainian transit pipeline can easily deliver 120 bcm a year, and probably 160 bcm a year, as Ukraine claims. The Yamal pipe through Belarus and Poland has steadily transported 33 bcm annually.

Nobody had any need for Nord Stream 1 or the equally large Nord Stream 2 pipelines. In recent years, Gazprom also added Turkstream to its pipeline portfolio with an additional annual capacity of 31.5 bcm. Overall, Gazprom planned for a doubling of its pipeline capacity to Europe, while at the same time Russian gas exports remained largely stagnant. The true purpose of Russia’s pipeline expansion efforts was to eliminate Ukraine as a transit country and set the stage for a full-scale military invasion, which was hampered by the Kremlin’s reliance on Ukraine’s gas pipeline network.

 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13546]

18 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

The dumb cunt gave her thoughts.

 

this is your Russian/Republican party.

Take it from Antifa-was-behind-Jan6 Sherlock.

[crash_davis 23084]

Shit's about to get real come winter.

 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

1 hour ago, Tuco said:

I think everyone on this thread understands that currently the pipelines were not being utilized because of political reasons.  I think most people who understand basic economics understand that the demand for Russian gas (or gas in general) is not a fixed number.  The worse the infrastructure for delivering it, the higher the price, the lower the usage.  

 

The speech that got delivered Friday set the Russian criteria for peace, that Kiev accepts the annexation of part of their country.  That's not going to happen, but that was the speech.  The speech also talked about how people can't heat their homes with greenbacks.  It also claimed that European leaders were betraying their people by trying to get off Russian gas, essentially driving them to de-industrialization.  So, yeah, the speech on Friday projected a vision that Russia gets the annexed provinces and then returns to supplying gas to Europe for political leverage and economic gain.  The millennia thing was discussing the history, importance, blah, blah, blah of the Russian people.  The Satanism thing was about the Western acceptance of gay and trans people.   

Link to the Kremlin transcript

I’ve read it in and watched it live in Russian. Most people haven’t had the bad fortune of parsing what Putin means for years, so I’ll annotate it.  One pretty basic principal is that he does whatever he blames other people for doing. 
 

Quote

I want to make special note of the fact that there is every reason to believe that the Western elites are not going to look for constructive ways out of the global food and energy crisis that they and they alone are to blame for

“I’m going to make the food and energy crisis worse, it’s not going to be fixed.”

 

Quote

The ongoing collapse of Western hegemony is irreversible. And I repeat: things will never be the same

 

”I am going to cause the collapse of the international system based on norms.”

Quote

Now, in order to free itself from the latest web of challenges, they need to dismantle Russia as well as other states that choose a sovereign path of development, at all costs, to be able to further plunder other nations’ wealth and use it to patch their own holes. If this does not happen, I cannot rule out that they will try to trigger a collapse of the entire system, and blame everything on that, or, God forbid, decide to use the old formula of economic growth through war. 

Russia is aware of its responsibility to the international community and will make every effort to ensure that cooler heads prevail.

“Russia will not be one of those cooler heads and will try to make the entire system collapse.”

Quote

That is why politicians in Europe have to convince their fellow citizens to eat less, take a shower less often and dress warmer at home. And those who start asking fair questions like “Why is that, in fact?” are immediately declared enemies, extremists and radicals. They point back at Russia and say: that is the source of all your troubles. More lies.

 

“Russia is, in fact, trying to freeze Europe and is the source of troubles.”
 

 

 

[Tuco 5076]

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I’ve read it in and watched it live in Russian. Most people haven’t had the bad fortune of parsing what Putin means for years, so I’ll annotate it.  One pretty basic principal is that he does whatever he blames other people for doing...

It's definitely easier to make an argument when you can just change what people say and then say "OMG, look what he said!" You brought up the speech and claimed it validated your argument.  It doesn't. 

And FWIW, there isn't a disagreement about any of your edits, unless they are meant to mean that Russian will not ship gas again regardless of what happens with Ukraine or sanctions.  I think everyone accepts that Russia is using energy exports as a weapon.  What you have failed to explain is why he would he would spend any effort to blow up a pipeline he mostly owns.  For propaganda?  Ok, I think it's pretty thin.  If you believe it, cool, but I think you are stretching way too far to make it compelling.  

[Dahobbs 17447]

36 minutes ago, Tuco said:

It's definitely easier to make an argument when you can just change what people say and then say "OMG, look what he said!" You brought up the speech and claimed it validated your argument.  It doesn't. 

And FWIW, there isn't a disagreement about any of your edits, unless they are meant to mean that Russian will not ship gas again regardless of what happens with Ukraine or sanctions.  I think everyone accepts that Russia is using energy exports as a weapon.  What you have failed to explain is why he would he would spend any effort to blow up a pipeline he mostly owns.  For propaganda?  Ok, I think it's pretty thin.  If you believe it, cool, but I think you are stretching way too far to make it compelling.  

You're ridiculous. Of course it was Russia. No one else had anything to gain from blowing up a pipeline that wasn't doing anything. Russia did the same thing its been doing for over a decade, creating situations that cause confusion and doubt in the West. That's it. And you're feeding into it by speculating that Poland or fucking Ukraine would have done it. No one else has anything to gain and a whole shit lot to risk by blowing up the pipeline. Also, hint 3,056 that it was Russia: Russia blames "Anglo-Saxons." Come the fuck on man. 

Edited October 3, 2022 by Dahobbs

[Tuco 5076]

24 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

You're ridiculous. Of course it was Russia. No one else had anything to gain from blowing up a pipeline that wasn't doing anything. Russia did the same thing its been doing for over a decade, creating situations that cause confusion and doubt in the West. That's it. And you're feeding into it by speculating that Poland or fucking Ukraine would have done it. No one else has anything to gain and a whole shit lot to risk by blowing up the pipeline. Also, hint 3,056 that it was Russia: Russia blames "Anglo-Saxons." Come the fuck on man. 

Really.  You honestly believe that "no one else had anything to gain" ?  Not Ukraine? Not Poland? Not the US?  Nothing to gain in damaging a pipeline those three parties have pushed against for years?  You honestly believe that? I mean, the valves were shut, so that alleviated everyone's concerns moving forward, right?

I know that when the war drums are beating no one wants anyone to dissent.  But, that's also the time when propaganda gets spun up the most.  Currently the belief is that Russia blew up a pipeline it spent years lobbying for and constructing, and your evidence is "but Putin said Anglo-Saxons!" Would he have said something different if he didn't blow it up?  

Tell me, do you think people should have questioned the logic for invading Iraq a little more?  Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who lied a bunch.  It would have been unpatriotic to question our reasoning against his lies.  Right?  I'm not even questioning a US position here, just rampant speculation from the internet.  And you think that's too far.  

Edited October 3, 2022 by Tuco

[956 Worldwide 34444]

1 hour ago, Tuco said:

It's definitely easier to make an argument when you can just change what people say and then say "OMG, look what he said!" You brought up the speech and claimed it validated your argument.  It doesn't. 

And FWIW, there isn't a disagreement about any of your edits, unless they are meant to mean that Russian will not ship gas again regardless of what happens with Ukraine or sanctions.  I think everyone accepts that Russia is using energy exports as a weapon.  What you have failed to explain is why he would he would spend any effort to blow up a pipeline he mostly owns.  For propaganda?  Ok, I think it's pretty thin.  If you believe it, cool, but I think you are stretching way too far to make it compelling.  

Once you accept what pretty much every U.S. and central/Eastern European energy expert said about NS1/2, it isn’t a stretch at all: it was always there mostly to create opportunities for Russia to blackmail Europe with energy. Once it’s not serving that purpose and won’t in the future, there’s no reason no to blow it up in a bid to incite panic and blame your enemies. 
 

The single best indicator that Russia did it is also in the speech and that is the assertion with zero evidence that the “Anglo-Saxons” (US/UK) did it. 

Edited October 3, 2022 by 956 Worldwide

[Tuco 5076]

13 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The single best indicator that Russia did it is also in the speech and that is the assertion with zero evidence that the “Anglo-Saxons” (US/UK) did it. 

1. What would he have said if it the Russians didn't do it? 

2. If that's the "single best indicator" you have, then you don't have shit. 

Edit to add: I think our main disagreement is whether Russia thinks there would ever be a future in shipping gas to Europe.  I think they are planning on things eventually returning to some form of normal.  You think...I'm not sure what...that they are engaged in some sort of apocalyptic battle that precludes ever shipping gas again(?).  Maybe you could explain what you think Putin believe the next 25 years will entail, assuming defeat Ukraine for the annexed provinces. 

Edited October 3, 2022 by Tuco

[hobbes2702 12846]

[Dahobbs 17447]

10 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Really.  You honestly believe that "no one else had anything to gain" ?  Not Ukraine? Not Poland? Not the US?  Nothing to gain in damaging a pipeline those three parties have pushed against for years?  You honestly believe that? I mean, the valves were shut, so that alleviated everyone's concerns moving forward, right?

Yes, I honestly believe no one else had anything to gain. 

Ukraine: what the fuck does it gain? It risks alienating necessary allies and giving credence to Russian claims that Ukraine is a terrorist state. 

US: Risks alienating allies and ruining the strong leadership it has provided to this point. Gains? Uh, again, I have no idea.

Poland: their opposition to the pipeline was always about it's potential to enable Russian energy blackmail. I'm pretty sure all of Europe realizes Poland was right about this now. That's why Nordstream 2 never got approval to run in the first place. Again, why blow up a non-operating pipeline when you've already accomplished your goal? Risks: same as above. 

Germany: hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahaha

Russia risks nothing (an asset that isn't going to be used anytime soon if ever). It gains confusion and doubt in the enemy. It gains creating internal conflict among its enemies. It gains a propaganda point it can use to justify further attack on Ukraine. It gains a propaganda point it can use to further convince Russians they are under attack. 

But sure. Let's have a healthy debate about this. Or, just maybe, you should listen to the folks that know Russian and Russians. 

[Dahobbs 17447]

And, if that is not enough, everything about this is consistent with Russia's actions over the last 20 years. It immediately blamed Ukraine, and when that didnt get the reaction it wanted, it turned around and blame Anglo-Saxons, as if Russia would have any fucking clue as to the ethnicity of the attackers but not be able to identify the exact responsible country. You're buying into bullshit. Be better. 

[wildcat09 29258]

The only question that really matters here is "is it stupid?" You just need to ask that, understand that the answer is "yes," and then look around and determine which state actors have been doing stupid shit here and which have not. The list of states doing stupid shit is: Russia. The list of states doing not-stupid shit is: everyone else. It's simple.

[Dahobbs 17447]

13 minutes ago, Tuco said:

You think...I'm not sure what...that they are engaged in some sort of apocalyptic battle that precludes ever shipping gas again(?).  Maybe you could explain what you think Putin believe the next 25 years will entail, assuming defeat Ukraine for the annexed provinces. 

Gee, I wonder how anyone could think that the country that is threatening nuclear war if it doesn't get to keep the land it stole might be engaging in an apocalyptic battle, or at least interested in creating the appearance of one. Just mind numbing dumbness from you right now. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33843]

y'all got this shit figured out yet? or you still arguing with the russian bot?

[956 Worldwide 34444]

36 minutes ago, Tuco said:

1. What would he have said if it the Russians didn't do it? 

2. If that's the "single best indicator" you have, then you don't have shit. 

Edit to add: I think our main disagreement is whether Russia thinks there would ever be a future in shipping gas to Europe.  I think they are planning on things eventually returning to some form of normal.  You think...I'm not sure what...that they are engaged in some sort of apocalyptic battle that precludes ever shipping gas again(?).  Maybe you could explain what you think Putin believe the next 25 years will entail, assuming defeat Ukraine for the annexed provinces. 

It’s hard to have a conversation about this when you won’t grasp the simple fact that he can already send all the gas Europe can buy without either NS pipeline. 
 

I think you also don’t grasp the crisis he’s engulfed in of his own making that means thinking 25 years or even five years down the road is currently irrelevant.  He needs to win this war now and is is taking increasingly desperate measures. Mobilization out front should have told you. 
 

If he had won and succeeded at his war aims, then a chastened Ukraine with a friendly government functions just fine as a gas transit nation.  The only reason he built NS was to bypass an unfriendly Ukraine and as you now know, he decided to use other means to address that issue in February although it didn’t work.
 

If he loses then he’s got far bigger problems than a gas pipeline because he has managed to turn a war of choice into one that’s likely existential for his regime. 

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

Jesus, people actually buying Russia's bullshit?  This is just another BS excuse Putin can throw at the wall for 'tactical nukes are now on the table'. 

 

Also, it's actually hilarious some of you think that picking top Russia was the correct answer in the poll...fucking morons. 

[TexArcher 37519]

Fun stat: 100% of the people who think there is more than a 0% chance that someone other than Russia sabotaged the pipeline are fucking morons.

[Dahobbs 17447]

Responsible parties in order of likelihood:

1) Russia

2) Russia

3) Russia

4) Aliens

5) Latveria

6) Alternate universe Russia

.....

3097) Still not Ukraine or anyone in NATO. 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Jesus, people actually buying Russia's bullshit?  This is just another BS excuse Putin can throw at the wall for 'tactical nukes are now on the table'. 

 

Also, it's actually hilarious some of you think that picking top Russia was the correct answer in the poll...fucking morons. 

See, here’s the thing. In the early 2000s I was credulous and got duped by a pretty convincing lie told by the U.S. government. I learned my lesson from that and now I’m completely credulous when it comes to stupid lies told by the Russian government. 

[Humble Beast 258]

6 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

My guy, you’re confusing max capacity with what they’ve actually booked and still aren’t sending. 
 

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ukraine-has-gas-transit-capacity-spare-offset-nord-stream-1-flows-operator-2022-06-20/

 

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/europe-can-win-putins-gas-war-but-must-learn-nord-stream-lessons/
 

 

Shit. You were right and I was wrong on that one. 

[Biff Tannen 45499]

[bernorange 8348]

7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Yes, I honestly believe no one else had anything to gain.

This statement baffles me.  You are usually a bit more considered in your thought than this.

At the start of the war, all anyone could talk about as sanctions were first being considered was whether or not NS2 would be included/affected.  The Nord Stream pipelines were always a great concern for the west.

Biden himself threatened to "end" the pipelines if Russia invaded. 

Quote

...  ultimately this is also a tremendous opportunity.  It’s a tremendous opportunity to once and for all remove the dependence on Russian energy and thus to take away from Vladimir Putin the weaponization of energy as a means of advancing his imperial designs.  That’s very significant and that offers tremendous strategic opportunity for the years to come ...
-Secretary of State Antony Blinken

https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-and-canadian-foreign-minister-melanie-joly-at-a-joint-press-availability/

I'm by no means claiming that we blew up the pipelines, but it's downright intellectually dishonest to claim that we don't stand to gain from it or otherwise had no motivation to do so.

I started this thread with the intention of having some light hearted non-serious fun, but Immamac screwed that up, so if there is going to be real discussion, we should be real about things.  Also, I believe angry narwhals were responsible and fuck Putin.

[Dahobbs 17447]

17 minutes ago, bernorange said:

This statement baffles me.  You are usually a bit more considered in your thought than this.

At the start of the war, all anyone could talk about as sanctions were first being considered was whether or not NS2 would be included/affected.  The Nord Stream pipelines were always a great concern for the west.

Biden himself threatened to "end" the pipelines if Russia invaded. 

https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-and-canadian-foreign-minister-melanie-joly-at-a-joint-press-availability/

I'm by no means claiming that we blew up the pipelines, but it's downright intellectually dishonest to claim that we don't stand to gain from it or otherwise had no motivation to do so.

I started this thread with the intention of having some light hearted non-serious fun, but Immamac screwed that up, so if there is going to be real discussion, we should be real about things.  Also, I believe angry narwhals were responsible and fuck Putin.

You realize of course that the physical pipeline was never the concern. It was what it represented: European dependence on Russia. That isn't a thing anymore.

And Biden did exactly what he promised. Nord Stream 2 was shutdown before it ever got started. Nord Stream 1 has been providing fuck all for weeks. Europe is rapidly moving away from dependence on Russian resources. The physical pipeline is irrelevant now. No need to blow it up. Which is precisely why Russia did it. 

Again, no one but Russia had anything to gain from blowing up an inactive pipeline. And no one in this thread has named one way in which anyone besides Russia benefits. To do so would require (1) ignoring the immediate previous conditions of the pipeline, (2) ignoring European moves away from Russian oil/gas dependence, and (3) ignoring that any benefits were negligible in comparison to risks if discovered. But maybe you're up for the challenge. So, take your shot: Explain how any country besides Russia benefits. Bonus points if you can include a full risk-award analysis without it all sounding fucking stupid. 

 

 

Edited October 4, 2022 by Dahobbs

[bernorange 8348]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

(1) ignoring the immediate previous conditions of the pipeline, (2) ignoring European moves away from Russian oil/gas dependence, ...

The pipelines being shuttered at a moment in time doesn't guarantee being shuttered in perpetuity.  The German people were staging nationwide protests before the pipelines were hit.  Political pressure on the German rulers was mounting to make a deal with Russia.  Pipelines go poof and the pressure is off of German leaders to make a deal.

[Dahobbs 17447]

24 minutes ago, bernorange said:

The pipelines being shuttered at a moment in time doesn't guarantee being shuttered in perpetuity.  The German people were staging nationwide protests before the pipelines were hit.  Political pressure on the German rulers was mounting to make a deal with Russia.  Pipelines go poof and the pressure is off of German leaders to make a deal.

It is not like Russia is physically unable to supply Germany with gas right now. The pipelines were/are irrelevant for supplying today's demand. So your entire thesis is invalid. 

Edited October 4, 2022 by Dahobbs

[CTC2 2745]

Shit is pretty complicated.

https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/88062

[Dahobbs 17447]

18 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

Shit is pretty complicated.

https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/88062

No, it isn't. Russia did it.

Quote

One irony of the attack is that Russia’s Gazprom potentially stands to benefit: it will no longer need to invent excuses not to supply Europe via Nord Stream 1. Now it can claim a force majeure, which will dramatically reduce the risk of compensation claims for non-delivered volumes. This logic, however, does not explain the damage caused to Nord Stream 2. On the other hand, the Nord Stream consortium companies and eventually Gazprom might even hope to collect some insurance for the damaged pipelines. Given that they already looked set to become a stranded asset, that would be far from the worst outcome for the giant company.

Russia benefits every which way. And Russia didn't risk anything by doing it, you know, since the pipelines weren't doing anything and would be relatively trivially to repair if shit changed. People need to stop overthinking shit and/or carrying water for Russian bullshit. 

Edited October 4, 2022 by Dahobbs

[Bama Chick 28596]

Congratulations to anyone buying this conspiracy theory bullshittery.

You’re aligned with Putin and this buffoon.

[Tuco 5076]

Congratulations to anyone buying this conspiracy theory bullshittery.

You’re aligned with Putin and this buffoon.

Can you quote anyone on this thread who believes the US blew up the pipeline?

[Tuco 5076]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

It is not like Russia is physically unable to supply Germany with gas right now. The pipelines were/are irrelevant for supplying today's demand. So your entire thesis is invalid. 

Sure.  All they need to do is ship it through the country that they invaded and is currently kicking their ass.  And pay them transit fees, which were about $1.2B prior to the start of the war. But that's irrelevant. 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

Oh, look at this. Russia’s Gazprom announces that it can deliver gas, but only if Germany allows them to turn on the NS2 pipeline that got shut down before being operational after Moscow invaded. 
 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-03/gazprom-ready-to-ship-gas-via-shelved-nord-stream-2-pipeline

Idiot Anglo Saxon frogmen fucked it up! They didn’t blow it up right! Russia can fix this, if you’ll just do the thing that Russia wanted you to do! 
 

I swear, when it comes to Russia some people have barber shop floor sweepings for brains. 

Edited October 4, 2022 by 956 Worldwide

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

2 hours ago, Tuco said:

Can you quote anyone on this thread who believes the US blew up the pipeline?

Putin did it. 

[MagicSoccerSpray 1725]

 

I don't think there's enough time or crayons, to explain that Russia did it, to these morons.

[bernorange 8348]

8 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

... So your entire thesis is invalid. 

Invalid except for the fact that the protests did stop.  Not sure why you insist on calling Blinken a liar or a dope either.

[immamac 42519]

20 minutes ago, bernorange said:

Invalid except for the fact that the protests did stop.  Not sure why you insist on calling Blinken a liar or a dope either.

I thought this thread was a joke, you think there's a discussion here? Now I'm going to delete this thread after locking it - there is no discussion here, at least not warranting it's own thread and unless you have actual and specific evidence of another country blowing up these pipelines then it's a very fucking safe assumption it was Russia.