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

Nordstream: An Accident?

thelawdogfiles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 176 posts

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#71

Post by namaria »

DisjointedHunt wrote: post #62
namaria wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Polarization weakens the conversation. A reminder not to make assumptions one way is not an argument for running on the opposite direction.

There's no argument for "running on the opposite direction". The OP piece doesn't meet any reasonable standard to be considered an intellectual submission and hence the terse response. Highly speculative opinion not grounded in fact and blatantly pushing a conclusion . . . what else can you say? Why is this even submitted to HN? A conversation starter?

I was clearly responding to a comment ironically saying we should trust the mainstream press if we argue we shouldn't trust random blogs

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#72

Post by raverbashing »

photochemsyn wrote: post #65

These two pipelines have very different operational histories so the simultaneous formation of a 'methane hydrate plug' in both pipelines seems highly unlikely at best. There's also no apparent reason why such a methane hydrate plug should cause seismic-scale explosions in both pipelines. As far as motivation, the US agenda on Europe's fossil fuel market since at least 2008 has been to lock out Russian suppliers (who…

> Now, would Russia want to blow up its own pipelines when it can simply shut them down for 'maintenance'

Because they can break the contracts due to "force-majeure" clauses, which shutting down won't let them do

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#73

Post by mannykannot »

MauranKilom wrote: post #35

Can someone explain the chemistry of natural gas exploding by itself? In my understanding, you need oxygen for that to happen. There's a bunch of oxygen in the H2O, but what exactly would the products of an explosive reaction between natural gas and water be? Hydrogen and CO2? Don't think there's much energy to be released there... I can totally buy the "you depressurized only one end, so you had a plug slam into the…

Methane reacts with water (steam) when they are hot enough (over about 700 °C) but I am skeptical of it being explosive.

https://9to5science.com/reaction-of-water-and-methane

An article linked to by the author mentions a case of rapid disassociation of the hydrate on heating, but the heat was applied to the pipeline externally, and probably at a point such that the disassociation occurred within the body of the plug, as opposed to one of its ends.

https://petrowiki.spe.org/Hydrate_plug_removal

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#74

Post by mistrial9 »

photochemsyn wrote: post #65

These two pipelines have very different operational histories so the simultaneous formation of a 'methane hydrate plug' in both pipelines seems highly unlikely at best. There's also no apparent reason why such a methane hydrate plug should cause seismic-scale explosions in both pipelines. As far as motivation, the US agenda on Europe's fossil fuel market since at least 2008 has been to lock out Russian suppliers (who…

IMHO there are two big motivations it seems -- one is that some sub-group that is not doing well right now, might advance their position with the act of war; or some sub-group stands to make a lot of money quickly, with this act of war.

It is hard to believe that top-level commanders on any side, would act directly .. in other words, no one that is doing well right now, would pull this trigger.. when you look at the person making the statements, look behind them to the left and the right, to see the actual suspects.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#75

Post by bombcar »

wil421 wrote: post #56
MauranKilom wrote: post #35

Can someone explain the chemistry of natural gas exploding by itself? In my understanding, you need oxygen for that to happen. There's a bunch of oxygen in the H2O, but what exactly would the products of an explosive reaction between natural gas and water be? Hydrogen and CO2? Don't think there's much energy to be released there... I can totally buy the "you depressurized only one end, so you had a plug slam into the…

If you have pressures above 3,000psi any sudden leak or hole will be pretty catastrophic. Not an explosion like a fire explosion, something more like explosive decompression in a plane. Anyway I think they Swedes have pinned it down to an explosion, as in a bomb, based on seismometers.

Water pressure at 80 meters would be about 130 psi, so the pipe is 2800 psi over "ambient" which gives it a certain amount of "pop" should it do so.

But it's also designed to not pop (and do we have any examples of a catastrophic pipe failure vs a leak?).

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#76

Post by namaria »

ravi-delia wrote: post #21
Ekaros wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who actually gains from this in the long run... Certainly not Germany or Russia... Should make it pretty clear. It could be UK as tradition of breaking down Europe, but they are having enough issues that the timing is entirely wrong... I don't think China cares, so maybe Arabs, but I doubt. Only really leaves USA and we know what they have historically been up to.

Poland benefits but doesn't have the operational capacity. US can't really expect to sell much gas to Europe regardless, so if it was then it would be for anti-Russia reasons, which seems like a stretch. Objectively the funniest possiblity is that some cargo ship dragged it's anchor across miles of ocean and a captain is very very worried right now

Why do you think Poland doesn't have the operational capacity?

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#77

Post by mannykannot »

wil421 wrote: post #56
MauranKilom wrote: post #35

Can someone explain the chemistry of natural gas exploding by itself? In my understanding, you need oxygen for that to happen. There's a bunch of oxygen in the H2O, but what exactly would the products of an explosive reaction between natural gas and water be? Hydrogen and CO2? Don't think there's much energy to be released there... I can totally buy the "you depressurized only one end, so you had a plug slam into the…

If you have pressures above 3,000psi any sudden leak or hole will be pretty catastrophic. Not an explosion like a fire explosion, something more like explosive decompression in a plane. Anyway I think they Swedes have pinned it down to an explosion, as in a bomb, based on seismometers.

The thing is, the author repeatedly stresses how explosive methane is, without offering any plausible source of oxygen.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#79

Post by criddell »

m000 wrote: post #15

> No military is going to arrange for two pipes in the same general area to be destroyed 17 hours apart. This is only true if the operation was conducted in hostile waters. Just saying.

> No military is going to arrange for two pipes in the same general area to be destroyed 17 hours apart.

That makes me think a military probably did do it.

Re: Nordstream: An Accident?

#80

Post by MichaelCollins »

yreg wrote: post #64
cpursley wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your theory just doesn't check out. With the pipelines destroyed, Russia can't blackmail the EU with energy as easily as they could before. And why would they destroy infrastructure that they poured billions into when they could have just turned off the taps any time they pleased? The pipelines now being destroyed is a really bad thing for Russia, a worse thing for the EU and a great situation for the USA (and Poland…

Russians have kind of the same possible motivation as everyone. To take the option of some future DE/RU agreement regarding restoring the flow of gas off the table. To force everyone to fully commit to their current strategy.

> To force everyone to fully commit to their current strategy.

I agree the destruction of the pipeline does have this effect, but Russia seemingly wants NATO support for Ukraine to falter, not persist. Russia seems to want NATO to deviate from their current strategy.

Post reply on HN