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

Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

forsvaret.dk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#291

Post by ajsnigrutin »

golergka wrote: post #265
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia likes bridges, since germany knows that they only need to sit down with the russians and make a deal (eg. no more weapons to ukraine), and the gas starts flowing. Now, even with internal pressures of protesting people in germany, there is no incentive for germans to sit down with the russians, and the only ones profiteering from this are the americans

> Now, even with internal pressures of protesting people in germany, there is no incentive for germans to sit down with the russians Yes, and that's exactly what Russia wants to signal now: "we're ready to go all in and use strategic nukes against NATO countries, we don't have anything to go back to".

Why would russia want that? Russia wants to remove nato from ukraine, take the prorussian regions, and then continue business as usual... ie. selling gas to EU.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#292

Post by electrondood »

henearkr wrote: post #199
jcranmer wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming the explosions are relevant, some possible causes, ordered somewhat (but not entirely) by my personal estimation of likelihood: * Ecoterrorists -- I discount this mostly on the basis that they would have claimed responsibility by now. * NATO sabotage -- this reduces strategic options for several EU countries (albeit a strategic option that isn't really being exercised and is almost universally disfavored). *…

The "ecoterrorist" option is just ridiculous, the methane leak is disaster for the climate.

Who benefits from polar ice caps melting? Russia. They get access to a ton of previously unavailable, strategically important land.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#293

Post by vachina »

NeverFade wrote: post #154
eloff wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that doesn't look like an accident. I have difficulty imagining accidental ignition in an underwater gas pipeline. Where would the oxygen come from? Plus it's more than one explosion on the same day - can't be a coincidence. The next question is, who did it? It doesn't seem like something in Russia's interest, they've been wanting to get that pipeline approved and operational. They invested huge sums of money to b…

> The next question is, who did it? The Russians. > It doesn't seem like something in Russia's interest, they've been wanting to get that pipeline approved and operational. Once their invasion faltered, and with the recent escalation, they had no hope of that happening. The current Russian regime will never be able to repair relations with the west to the extent that will allow the Nordstream pipelines to resume oper…

Your president gave a hint roughly 7 months ago.

> “there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2"[1]

> “We will bring an end to it.”[1]

> “I promise you: We will be able to do it."[1]

[1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#294

Post by gruez »

henearkr wrote: post #264
411111111111111 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ecoterrorism doesnt mean that its beneficial for the environment. It means that they want to terrorize polluters, regardless of the consequences.

They have no incentive to do actions that damage the environment: Ecology activist organizations are funded by donations, which would dry up completely at the instant they are proven to be involved in such a disastrous leak.

What makes you think that ecoterrorist organizations would be the sort of organizations that are registered 501(c)(3) charities and run TV commercials of cute pandas?

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#295

Post by toss1 »

joshuajill wrote: post #233
toss1 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has a LOT to gain from this. 1) They are running out of time on this war of aggression, and this will force gas price action NOW, not in December. They can sell gas through other pipelines to the EU if it accepts it. 2) Norway just TODAY inaugurated a new pipeline to the EU. Norway has warned about unaccounted-for drone activity around it's oil and gas fields. Russia is likely sending a message: "Nice pipeline…

US also has a precedent (from the other thread): > We actually did do this 40 years ago. Reagan covertly blew up a Soviet gas pipeline supplying Europe in 1982, which was publicized in 2004 when the former Secretary of the Air Force boasted about it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2004/02/27/r ... ("Reagan Approved Plan to Sabotage Soviets" (2004)) - "At the time, the United States was attempting to…

Yup, at the time it was one of the largest non-nuclear explosions in history.

Also note that this was not a kinetic/physical attack, and this sabotage almost surely was kinetic/physical.

The key factors in thinking about is so are are that 1) it's much more important for the US to maintain stable/low prices, and 2) Norway is already investigating drone activity over it's oil/gas fields, and this happens the same day as Norway announces their new pipeline opening.

[0] https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Norway-In...

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#296

Post by Tenoke »

jcranmer wrote: post #185
tpmx wrote: post #54

The Swedish national seismic network picked up two explosions within kilometers of the reported gas leak locations yesterday. The time of the first explosion: Yesterday, Monday morning at 02:03 am, second one Monday evening at 7:04pm (local time, CEST). The reports of the gas leaks came at 1:52pm and 8:41pm, respectively - by means of ships reporting bubbling at the surface level. One of the two events registered at…

Assuming the explosions are relevant, some possible causes, ordered somewhat (but not entirely) by my personal estimation of likelihood: * Ecoterrorists -- I discount this mostly on the basis that they would have claimed responsibility by now. * NATO sabotage -- this reduces strategic options for several EU countries (albeit a strategic option that isn't really being exercised and is almost universally disfavored). *…

I'd at least consider Ukraine-sympathetic non-state actors as a possibility.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#297

Post by henearkr »

electrondood wrote: post #292
henearkr wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "ecoterrorist" option is just ridiculous, the methane leak is disaster for the climate.

Who benefits from polar ice caps melting? Russia. They get access to a ton of previously unavailable, strategically important land.

Yep. Sadly this is the mindset of Putin, and why he cares so little about GHG...

I'm sure the Russian population does not think like that, but it's not as if they had their say...

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#298

Post by henearkr »

gruez wrote: post #294
henearkr wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have no incentive to do actions that damage the environment: Ecology activist organizations are funded by donations, which would dry up completely at the instant they are proven to be involved in such a disastrous leak.

What makes you think that ecoterrorist organizations would be the sort of organizations that are registered 501(c)(3) charities and run TV commercials of cute pandas?

Because funds.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#299

Post by [deleted] »

howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #181
kstenerud wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damaging the pipeline destroys a major source of Russian leverage against Germany. And now that they're desperate enough to play the nuclear card with a "this is not a bluff" chaser, it's pretty obvious that they need all the leverage they can get.

Russia already supplied Germany via Ukrainian and Belarus pipelines. NS1 & NS2 were supplying nothing prior to this incident. Russia has lost nothing in leverage, but Putin has now gained leverage internally over energy interests who view this war (and Putin) as bad for business. Strategic narcissism is focusing on Putin's threats to the West, over his internal challenge of remaining in power.

[deleted]

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#300

Post by origin_path »

ericmay wrote: post #151
fuoqi wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it cuts a huge temptation for Germans to find some compromise with Russia and allows them to sell LNG for huge profits?

Doesn't pass the smell test (also we're talking about the entire EU having issues not just Germany). Gigantic risk for the US and would eventually be found out which would destroy any semblance of relations with the EU and significantly strengthen Russia's hand. US companies (and others) are going to sell LNG to Europe for huge profits anyway. These pipelines weren't deliving gas anyway The US would prefer energy mar…

"Gigantic risk for the US and would eventually be found out"

This is predicated on the assumption that the US intelligence community would leak it anytime soon (within the current presidency). That seems like a very poor assumption. If it's never proven they did it, there's no real risk because people who don't want to believe will invent other explanations. You see it happening in this thread already - it's not the country that literally said they had ways to ensure NS2 would never activate, no, it must be the country that built it. 4D chess!

"These pipelines weren't deliving gas anyway"

No, but that could have been changed very quickly if wanted. All three pipelines were pressurized. NS2 was all new equipment, ready and waiting to go.

"The US would prefer energy markets to be stable and not have sky-high prices"

The US has consistently and strongly opposed European dependence on Russian natgas under (at least) two different presidents. Neither of them seemed to care much about the question of what to replace it with. At any rate such an operation would be signed off by Biden and highly classified, so it's not like "the US" would have an opinion on what matters more anyway, just a senile old man.

Post reply on HN