Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline • Hacker News Board

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#311

Post by Moiman » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:32 PM UTC

fsh wrote: post #71

ohgodplsno wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Green" energy minister that lobbied Europe to have natural gas recognized as a "green" source of energy, while doing their utmost to block any other country from moving on with nuclear ? Super green.

This is literally the opposite of what the minister has said: https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Meldung/20220101-eu-taxonom... Please don't spread misinformation.

Doesn't the minister represent opinions of coalition in EU tables? I don't see any misinformation here.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#312

Post by Arnt » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:33 PM UTC

modo_mario wrote: post #220

Arnt wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the Wikipedia articles on the various pipelines, there is some technical readiness, at least 3%. As of today, the only operational pipeline carries about 3% of what Gazprom exports to Europe. It may be possible to boost that quickly, and the pipeline will eventually have a capacity of 30-40% of the European exports.

And this helps to prevent Ukraine and other such eastern companies from having political pressure since instability there or intent to close the pipes to deprive Russia of revenue can just be sidestepped

If you meant that since Russia has pipelines to China and also through the Ukraine, I think you might want to look at their capacity and current usage.

Even if Russia had as much pipeline capacity to China as it has towards Europe, simply switching its exports isn't possible like that. Diverting 20% of Russian exports from Europe would require increasing Chinese usage by 100%.

Doable, I'm sure, given the time to build a few dozen new gas-fired power plants and shutting down as much coal-fired capacity, but not done in a week.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#313

Post by nmehner » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:33 PM UTC

ehvatum wrote: post #288

_ph_ wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear plants are not a real replacement to gas. First of all, a lot of gas gets used for heating - nuclear isn't useful there. Then it is used for providing flexible power, to ramp up and down as quickly as possible to follow the production of renewables. Only a small fraction of the gas goes into "base load" usage. So the government might look into the nuclear power plants to dampen the price level for electricity…

> Germany most of all now has to correct the mistakes by the previous government and very quickly has to push for building up more wind and solar capacity. If any of what you say is true at all, how did France survive for so long on nuclear power?

See https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/c...

France uses 40.7 billion cubic meters of gas (0.6 per capita), while Germany uses 86.5 (1.03 per capita). Given that France has a warmer climate the difference is not all that big. France does not survive on nuclear power alone.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#314

Post by parasense » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:35 PM UTC

Economic consequences should be more than just NordStream.

RU is both strong, and fragile in terms of economics.

Their energy exports are strong, so that is clearly the biggest target.

But depriving them import/export of non-energy stuff would probably cause significant economic impacts.

However, the RU economy/society is resilient to contraction, being a quasi-commie society.... One only need look to North Korea for an example of how economic sanctions function, and dysfunction.... The RU is large enough to sustain a level of economic sanctions.

If the western world only has economic consequences, well clearly that's a gambit RU is willing to accept.

A new cold war will take decades to play-out.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#315

Post by nmehner » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:39 PM UTC

DeathArrow wrote: post #203

_ph_ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is dead for all purposes unless the political climate changes radically. Whatever the Russian plans for a gas supplier to Germany were, they are limited to what the existing pipelines can deliver. I hope, we can reduce the dependency on Russian gas quickly, even if it means the additional effort of shipping LNG from the US or other sources. Mid-term it should be highest priority to get rid of fossil fuels as quick…

>Mid-term it should be highest priority to get rid of fossil fuels as quick as possible. This line of thinking double prices to gas, natural gas and electricity in the last year. Please stop it!

How does renewable energy double the gas price? That does not make any sense.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#316

Post by zzleeper » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:41 PM UTC

parasense wrote: post #314

Economic consequences should be more than just NordStream. RU is both strong, and fragile in terms of economics. Their energy exports are strong, so that is clearly the biggest target. But depriving them import/export of non-energy stuff would probably cause significant economic impacts. However, the RU economy/society is resilient to contraction, being a quasi-commie society.... One only need look to North Korea for…

But what are the options?

- Don't do anything AKA appeasement? Then Russia will keep on invading countries (Georgia Ukraine), fostering enclaves in other countries (Moldova) and maybe even annexing Belarus (who is one mistake away from that). Also, remember how appeasement usually worked in the past...

- War? Then you end up with WW3

By depriving as many resources as possible for Russia, you are limiting the scope they have to keep funding their huge armies. Maybe it won't help that much, but it's better than the alternatives.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#317

Post by kbart » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:42 PM UTC

mechanical_bear wrote: post #294

vadertemp wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US has not deployed to Ukraine because its not in its national interest whereas Russia does have an immediate security concern with NATO expansion to its borders after the end of the cold war. US has deployments all over the world after WWII in order to bully and protect its own interests. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/10/infographic-us-mili...

Is there a legitimate concern that NATO would occupy/attack Russian territory?

No. All ex-Soviet countries that joined NATO did that willingly as a way to protect their independence (looking at the examples of ex-Soviet countries that did not, it's clear that was the right decision). The "threat" of NATO invading Russia is bullshit and whataboutism.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#318

Post by parasense » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 4:52 PM UTC

rosndo wrote: post #234

DeathArrow wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't LNG from US be much more expensive than gas from Russia? Why would European countries pay for it?

Because they’d rather depend on an ally than an openly hostile state. Because the US would massively subsidize LNG exports to EU in order to support their allies?

> Because they’d rather depend on an ally than an openly hostile state.

That's the assumption, but it doesn't follow natural economic laws.... where price ultimately prevails.

One only needs to look at how global oil prices were weaponized, in essence Persian-gulf oil producers openly conspired to sell barrels of oil cheaply to deprive their South American oil exporting competitors from realizing higher gains. And... one only needs to look to Argentina to see how that played out. The point is, energy importers prioritize lower price, and energy exporters are willing to maintain lower prices to protect their cartel or monopoly.

Russia has provided affordable cheap natural gas as a strategic goal to create an effective monopoly in Europe. Not recognizing this monopoly is a form of denial or rationalization, and isn't very helpful. Europe simply cannot cut away the lower energy prices, as that has deep macro economic consequences.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#319

Post by oytis » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

AndyMcConachie wrote: post #293

ttyyzz wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How am I going to heat my house?

Don't know why you got downvoted. All these Americans in this thread can have all the opinions they want. They're not getting screwed by high gas prices right now.

Not everyone in Europe is in a comfortable position where they can care about gas prices more than they care about Russian expansion.

Re: Germany shelves Nord Stream 2 pipeline

#320

Post by parasense » Tue, Feb 22, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

mechanical_bear wrote: post #298

ttyyzz wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How am I going to heat my house?

How is my grandmother going to have a house after EU lets a Russian tank drive over it?

The EU is dependent on RU energy exports. It's that simple.

Noble principles do not heat homes, or feed the hungry.

You are free to construct a dichotomy of tanks rumbling over homes, or homes being deprived of heating during hard winter.... but you will only succeed in illustrating the Nash Equilibrium, and fail to be persuasive otherwise.

Try to look at the big picture.