Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea • Hacker News Board

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#371

Post by jjslocum3 » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:46 PM UTC

tgv wrote: post #213

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). *…

None of these make much sense. It's pretty idle to speculate, and the list is most likely incomplete and inaccurate. It only feeds the trolls. Then again, this whole thread is full of fingerpointing without evidence. If HN can't contain itself, what won't the twitter and facebook, and –may God forget– Truth Social do?

In this tweet from the US State Department's twitter account on 2022-01-22 (a month before the most recent invasion), a US official says: "... I want to be clear with you today. If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, NordStream 2 will not move forward." It's not evidence, but contextually incriminating nonetheless.

https://twitter.com/statedept/status/1486818088016355336

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#372

Post by LargoLasskhyfv » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:47 PM UTC

origin_path wrote: post #286

formerly_proven wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 build it after all. NS2 never entering service was settled for good over 200 days ago. NS1 has been shut down by Russia, but it was at best dubious before this whether it would ever be used operationally again.

It wasn't "settled for good", that's silly, it was still there pressurized and ready to go. Germany recently saw protests by people who wanted to open it, and some politicians saying it needed to be opened, and it is safe to assume that if things got really bad in Germany this winter they would have opened it. Clearly, whoever has attacked these pipelines knew perfectly well that the story about Russia being unwillin…

The last remains of Baltops 2022 passed by there about just short of a week ago.

https://www.kreiszeitung.de/lokales/schleswig-holstein/fehma...

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#373

Post by Tomte » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

randmeerkat wrote: post #370

Tomte wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukrainian sabotage -- pretty much the only actor for whom sabotage makes rational sense. That would be a tragic miscalculation. If it comes out that Ukraine is responsible, German public sentiment will turn hard . No more military shipments, maybe even rapproachement with Russia. If it's a state actor, I'd think about Poland first.

> That would be a tragic miscalculation. If it comes out that Ukraine is responsible, German public sentiment will turn hard. > No more military shipments… What shipments[1]? [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/16/ukraine-slams-germany-for-fa...

That's PR. Germany is one of the big weapons suppliers. For some reason we don't want to ship tanks, which the Ukrainians really want (I've read it's because our government is terribly afraid of German-built tanks rolling into Russia, which would give the populace there a visceral reaction).

But everything smaller than a tank, including lots of hardware that proved extremely valuable in this war, is being shipped.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#374

Post by Symbiote » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:51 PM UTC

scohesc wrote: post #344

techdragon wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not really sure how they could have both failed explosively (based on seismic evidence) within 24hrs … this is either the one of the unlikeliest un-exploded ordinance event in history… or someone did this deliberately. Seismologists are pretty good at telling explosions from earthquakes and other things because they are one of the most common noises they have to clean out when studying natural events.

Can one explosion at one place in the pipeline cause vibrations down the pipeline, possibly weakening another joint/seal further on? Not sure. I know nothing about underwater pipelines :P Does all the gas leaking to the surface cause boats to sink if they get too close from the change in density?

There have been three explosions in two different pipelines, North Stream 1 (the older one, which was in normal use until earlier this year) and North Stream 2 (the new one, which was pressurized but never delivered gas commercially).

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#375

Post by Symbiote » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:53 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #360

Const-me wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it would have to be extremely substandard to have failed this quickly Yes, but that’s assuming proper maintenance. Russia doesn’t have domestic technology to build or maintain complicated infrastructure like these undersea pipelines. International sanctions against Russia are rather wide. For instance, Halliburton (a US oil field service company) no longer operates in Russia: https://www.halliburton.com/en/about-us…

>It’s possible these sanctions affected the ability of Russians to maintain the pipeline, which might cause that thing to fail prematurely. even assuming they were cut off the moment the invasions began, are pipelines really that fragile that they explode if they're not maintained for 6 months?

North Stream 1 was only shut down on 31 August for "scheduled maintenance".

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#376

Post by therusskiy » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:54 PM UTC

Tade0 wrote: post #216

kstenerud wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia turned the taps off in order to raise pressure for European concessions in order to turn them back on again. Germany has been tepid in its Ukrainian support because they want to have their cake and eat it, too. Now they can't no matter what. With the pipes permanently broken (at least for this winter), Russia has lost that leverage.

> Russia turned the taps off in order to raise pressure for European concessions in order to turn them back on again. I don't want to sound dismissive, but that's a characteristically western take on things. Nord Stream 2 was largely redundant and Russia missed the window to use those pipelines against Germany by allowing it to fill it's storage. Russia is no stranger to causing damage to itself just to ensure that t…

Putin treats Russians as his property, but money from gas goes directly into his and his friend's pockets. His friends he listens to.

He also uses these money to arm police to keep population at bay.

There's also some weird pride he takes in having gas.

May be something else is in play here, but I don't think how this can be benefitial to his cause.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#377

Post by TheSpiceIsLife » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:55 PM UTC

Do we know yet if the leak has been flared?

Or has the damaged pipe bee shut off and the leak stopped?

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#378

Post by trasz » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:56 PM UTC

origin_path wrote: post #350

throwaway4good wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Assuming it would not be beneath the US or proxies to do such a thing.) It would not make sense right now. Germany was nowhere reopening Nordstream 2 and if it came to that the US would have other effective means of blocking its use before reaching to outright sabotage.

What other effective means? The USA already imposed direct sanctions on Germany to try and stop Nord Stream 2 from being built, a very hostile move that supposedly resulted in 'incomprehension' in the German Foreign Office. It didn't work. Nowhere near (re-)opening: we don't really know this. The Greens are loud and extreme (saying they don't care how much pain Germans suffer) but we don't know what's going on behind…

USA being the obvious suspect would only be a problem if people believed this to be a bad thing. I’m from Poland, Europe, and I’m really happy about those pipelines exploding, because it clears a major strategic problem, and I suspect there are more people who feel this way.

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#379

Post by detaro » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 5:58 PM UTC

randmeerkat wrote: post #370

Tomte wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukrainian sabotage -- pretty much the only actor for whom sabotage makes rational sense. That would be a tragic miscalculation. If it comes out that Ukraine is responsible, German public sentiment will turn hard . No more military shipments, maybe even rapproachement with Russia. If it's a state actor, I'd think about Poland first.

> That would be a tragic miscalculation. If it comes out that Ukraine is responsible, German public sentiment will turn hard. > No more military shipments… What shipments[1]? [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/16/ukraine-slams-germany-for-fa...

If you think >750 million € worth of equipment is nothing, I want your budget :D

It's funny how public perception of that works. Yesterday saw someone getting mad that 1.3 million of arms exports (paid, not stuff given for free) into another country was approved, "while they refuse to export to Ukraine".

Re: Gas Leak in the Baltic Sea

#380

Post by lb1lf » Tue, Sep 27, 2022, 6:00 PM UTC

techdragon wrote: post #313

Const-me wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it would have to be extremely substandard to have failed this quickly Yes, but that’s assuming proper maintenance. Russia doesn’t have domestic technology to build or maintain complicated infrastructure like these undersea pipelines. International sanctions against Russia are rather wide. For instance, Halliburton (a US oil field service company) no longer operates in Russia: https://www.halliburton.com/en/about-us…

I’m not really sure how they could have both failed explosively (based on seismic evidence) within 24hrs … this is either the one of the unlikeliest un-exploded ordinance event in history… or someone did this deliberately. Seismologists are pretty good at telling explosions from earthquakes and other things because they are one of the most common noises they have to clean out when studying natural events.

There is another option which is being discussed in Norwegian media now - that the Russians have used the pipelines essentially for storage of excess gas (Seeing as the pipelines are basically, combined, a 5M cubic meter pressure vessel)

That would go a long way towards explaining how several ruptures happened in relatively short succession - pipes being loaded up with too much gas (after all, the more gas stored, the more money in the bank for later on!)

Once the first one burst, someone probably re-evaluated that idea, but letting off gas in sufficient quantities fast enough may not have been possible.

Of course, if this was indeed the case, I assume it will very soon be very evident - I can't imagine that the rupture caused by an external force will be indistinguishable from that of it rupturing due to overpressure.