Hacker News Reader

Comment by the_cramer | Hacker News Reader

Currently, Russia delivers less gas than expected, due to "technical issues". Repairs, that ought to be finished 21st of July. This is most likely not true and just a pressure point for Russia. If the repairs "fail" then Russia could switch of all of the gas. "Oops something broke"...

The german government is not deciding against the people in this case. (i believe... a german). German people are highly against nuclear and think that renewables could immediately solve our problems. This is just a lack of information and a ton of ignorance on the peoples side.

Apart from that our politicians are really "soft" in my eyes and i don't believe they will help the situation much in relation to Russia.

edit: Don't know about the rest of EU. That's why i state "my" countries perspective more.

View on HN

> Repairs, that ought to be finished 21st of July. This is most likely not true

Why should it be not true? Planned maintenance is fully normal and certainly occurs on that infrastructure. The differences to normality are:

-- that sanctions have made the maintenance operations problematic: e.g. one turbine was held in Canada, and its release was agreed days ago only upon request from Germany. Why and how this process was impacted by the sanctions I do not know: it is what is reported by journalists;

-- that during normal operations, during maintenance on the main pipeline the gas is redirected to the secondary pipeline in Ukraine, hiding the technical works through such backup system. The secondary pipeline is inactive because of the war.

> Why should it be not true

Anyone taking anything coming out of Russia at face value hasn't been paying attention or is painfully naïve.

The post was about these maintenance operations. I have not met a commentator calling their current need not credible. Normally they last similarly to what was stated; in this specific case to take for granted that normal operation will not resume more data is needed if you want to be out of a simple "place your bets" discussion.

Diffidence is a generic scalar, function result of the speaker - ok -, but diffidence over something specific calls for extra consideration, not just immediate dismissal.

Edit:

That the stream will return flowing - this was never something that we assumed. But for what the interruption of services is concerned, as pure normalcy, see the graphics at The Economist from S&P - the dents are quite regular...:

https://cdn.espresso.economist.com/files/public/images/20220...

Just in order to calibrate diffidence to the right places.

Not sure if related, but a few months ago there was a massive explosion at one of the terminals, I think. Wouldn’t be surprised if this was a sabotage operation.

Neither nuclear nor renewables would be useful right now for heating homes or powering the industry. There are few who would claim so - except for those, who try to abuse the gas shortage to push for nuclear, despite the decision about nuclear taken over 10 years ago.

It is not "right now". If nuclear was still an option, cheap electricity was an option, a lot of households would have electrical heating, heat pumps and etc. Now they all depends on gas for some time now because of these politics.

Europe generates a lot of electricity from gas.

Especially in regards to Germany we would not have the current problem if we had decided or acted differently. Maybe pro-nuclear, maybe more building alternatives. For now you are right, we won't be able to activate anything nuclear till the winter.

The funny thing is, the same people arguing against nuclear power (with mostly ridiculously unscientific arguments against all statistics) will be the ones complaining about the situation and that politics should save us all.

I am very interested in the pro/contra nuclear discussion and the more i know about it, the more our current situation saddens me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com