Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

European natural gas imports and storage reserves

bruegel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 296 posts

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#281

Post by mythrwy »

trasz wrote: post #279
mythrwy wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's what I see happening. Some back and forth, increasing desperate Neocons with no reverse gear pushing the thing. Western society is over indebted and teetering. Eventually the world explodes in fire, billions die, and some version of MAGA presides over a much reduced United States when it ends. (I'd rather believe your prediction but do not). There might be a way to avoid the scenario (unlikely at this juncture…

To the vast majority of the world this is a good thing, if anything - they get oil cheaper, because Russia can no longer sell it to the west. To US this means more money being pumped into the industry, which is good for their economy. EU... EU has already been through something much more hardcore - COVID - and temporarily shutting down some gas-dependent factories will reduce revenues, but it's not the end of the wor…

Well, although I wish it were not so, it's an interesting time to be alive.

We will see.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#282

Post by teh_klev »

theroofian wrote: post #255
dnh44 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cheap energy is great for Germany's energy intensive heavy industries, and strategically important. Russia and Germany getting cozy and growing together economically couldn't have made the US or the UK very comfortable and I believe this was at least a part of the US motivation to pull Ukraine from Russia's orbit. I mean it makes a lot more sense to me than the US actually giving a shit about Ukrainians and their fre…

Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. This is a reasonable take, especially following the way the US reacts to any prospects of getting the Nord Stream 2 started. “US pulling X from Y’s orbit” has been happening around the world since at least the 70s, nothing surprising here.

> “US pulling X from Y’s orbit” has been happening around the world since at least the 70s

It's been going on for far longer than that and pretty much since the late 1940's.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#283

Post by trasz »

trasz wrote: post #263
dnh44 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno maybe? I don’t think the outcome is obvious. It’s easy to imagine Ukraine coming out just as big a loser as Russia even if they “win”. The EU is in for a tough time too. I do wonder where we’ll be in 12 months time.

Well, Azerbaijan seems pretty convinced, they wouldn’t risk fighting them otherwise. Georgia sounds interested too. And those are small countries, they are making a colossal bet here.

BREAKING: It appears Kazakhstan might be finally leaving the union they had with Russia; China just acknowledged they will guarantee Kazakhstan's security, which essentially means a huge middle finger towards the "second army of the world".

Unfortunately it also means Armenia is screwed. That's what you get for putting trust in Russia.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#284

Post by The_Colonel »

gdy wrote: post #275
The_Colonel wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I responded to you that Russia has both long and recent history of imperialism in this region.

Just like almost anyone else which makes it a deflection and not an answer.

No, the countries in question have been recently threatened only by Russia.

The only other recent aggressor was by that point completely pacified Germany.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#285

Post by gdy »

The_Colonel wrote: post #284
gdy wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like almost anyone else which makes it a deflection and not an answer.

No, the countries in question have been recently threatened only by Russia. The only other recent aggressor was by that point completely pacified Germany.

Again, you are justifying an action by the reaction to it.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#286

Post by The_Colonel »

gdy wrote: post #285
The_Colonel wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the countries in question have been recently threatened only by Russia. The only other recent aggressor was by that point completely pacified Germany.

Again, you are justifying an action by the reaction to it.

No, these aggressions happened in the recent history (< 100 years) before NATO accessions. Once in NATO, these countries were off limits (= main lure of the membership).

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#287

Post by Schroedingersat »

modo_mario wrote: post #52
Schroedingersat wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where are the nuclear reactors? Same place as usual. Decades behind schedule, 3x over budget, often cancelled, and then sitting idle in spite of near unlimited public subsidy. All while tying up enough money in cleanup costs for a single disaster to double worldwide wind capacity.

Somehow this does not seem to be an issue for most nuclear power plants built in the past in Europe or most built elsewhere today. Here in Belgium the reactors were built and gridconnected in 4-6 years and China still seems to pull similar with it's French or more modern designs.

The EPRs are all going just great

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taishan_Nuclear_Power_Plant

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_Point_C_nuclear_powe...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Pl...

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#288

Post by roenxi »

red_trumpet wrote: post #69
roenxi wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The future will show large nuclear arsenals are the worst policy. It is not the 1930s and Russia is not Germany. The borders of the USSR have retreated over most of our lifetime, Moscow controlled all of Ukraine as recently as 1990 and gave it up more-or-less voluntarily. If the US can invade the middle east and not be called an authoritarian regime, I don't think we need to draw a red line at the Ukraine border agai…

> If the US can invade the middle east and not be called an authoritarian regime... First, I wouldn't call this authoritarian[1] but imperialistic[2]. But semantics aside, I don't really get that line of argument. Do you think the US invading parts of the middle east was justified? If you do not, how can this comparison be used to justify Russia's invasion of Ukraine? I do condemn both invasions! [1] https://en.wikip…

Ah, thankyou. I was struggling to find the right word.

> But semantics aside, I don't really get that line of argument. Do you think the US invading parts of the middle east was justified? If you do not, how can this comparison be used to justify Russia's invasion of Ukraine?

Both invasions were horrific. But the response to the US invasion of central Asia by other Asian powers was "eh, what can you do?". I don't see why the Russian invasion of Ukraine needs to be treated so differently, pouring in weapons, levelling sanctions, triggering various crisises, increasingly aggressive rhetoric and so forth. If Asia can get invaded and we all take it in stride, Europe can get invaded and we can admit the idea that we could again take it in stride. These people aren't so different from each other.

The response should be a lot more thoughtful. More people need to acknowledge that in all likelihood that Russia is acting deliberately in response to long-term pressure and not because Putin is a special evil.

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#289

Post by gdy »

The_Colonel wrote: post #286
gdy wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, you are justifying an action by the reaction to it.

No, these aggressions happened in the recent history (< 100 years) before NATO accessions. Once in NATO, these countries were off limits (= main lure of the membership).

You are going in circles: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32829679

Re: European natural gas imports and storage reserves

#290

Post by The_Colonel »

gdy wrote: post #289
The_Colonel wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, these aggressions happened in the recent history (< 100 years) before NATO accessions. Once in NATO, these countries were off limits (= main lure of the membership).

You are going in circles: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32829679

You're going in circles. We're not discussing why Russia started CSTO, but why CEE nations felt the need to enter NATO. The fact that Russia was also invaded in its history bears no relevancy in this matter.
Post reply on HN