Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by blargthorwars | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

blargthorwars

Europe is buying billions of Russian gas and petrochemicals.

https://energyandcleanair.org/financing-putins-war/

The first step when finding yourself in a hole is to stop digging.

View on HN

Except they can't.

Europe is struggling with soaring energy costs and a lack of alternatives. Whether it's red tape or unfortunate geography, Europe cannot afford to turn off the Russian gas tap.

A benevolent US would see this and find ways to bridge the gap for Europe and lower its energy costs, further choking Russia.

A less benevolent US would see this and encourage it to continue, weakening both parties and sowing internal feuds within Europe.

Feels kinda like you're removing Europe's agency here. "Red tape" is just another way of saying "terrible policy decisions for decades". If they dug themselves into a hole before, what's to stop them from doing it again when after you help them fill in the hole a little bit?

Western and Central Europe has been dependent of Eastern Europe for centuries. This doesn't change just when a dictator owns these lands.

France made great strides towards energy independence until they started to walk back nuclear.

Because it takes decades to stop digging a hole you've taken decades to dig.

It's not like we can make dozens of nuclear power plants appear out of thin air.

Best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time is today.

What is the plan today?

Indeed. My point is rather that Europe has given no indication of changing tack. As such it seems premature to try to help them out of the hole.

A less intelligent US currently encourages the EU to stop investments in wind/solar

Wind and solar can not replace oil and gas without a working energy storage solution which is not feasible for many if not most countries except for those with suitable geography for hydroelectric storage. As it stands now every GW of solar/wind generating capacity needs to be combined with a similar GW of either nuclear or fossil capacity. Especially in the case of nuclear power it does not make sense to build generation capacity and not use it since it is in the planning and building phases that the largest investment lies. Once built a nuclear power plant should run at capacity to recuperate the costs of building and the coming costs of dismantling it. Fossil plants do have relatively high running costs so they are more suitable as backup solutions, especially quick-started gas turbine installations running on natural gas. Of course these power plants need a fuel source which ties their use to all the geopolitical politicking around supply sources, emissions and supposed 'climate impact'.

One good solution would be for wind and solar and other renewable power to be used for the creation of an easily storable fuel which can be used in e.g. gas turbines.

When I was a boy I learned about this cool new technology of storing energy in chemical reactions. Fascinating stuff. Super convenient for balancing the power demand curve. Cheap too. (See economics examples from southern Australia) You could even deploy it at the edge by simply splitting the cost with residents. Imagine if everyone drew power during the demand trough and then replayed it during the demand peak. Now grid balancing is way easier for providers, green power can produce as much as it wants whenever it wants.

Although every country should invest in home-grown battery technology just in case China bites off Taiwan and we gotta cut them out of the global economy too.

I don't know what kind of "lowering" you are referring to, but the US is selling more gas than ever to the EU:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-lng-exports-surge...

At three times the price it used to pay Russia

at least some of that is gonna be shipping.

Yes, LNG is more expensive than pipeline gas. This is known. That would have been a good reason to build more pipelines to Norway.

We already turned off the tap (look at the link above). It is just unimportant countries like Hungary and Slovakia that still import pipeline gas (and they're not making any friends...) . Would be great to pressure them more. Till this year Ukraine still imported nat gas from Russia btw.

LNG is a fungible commodity that is traded world-wide. Don't see much beyond symbolic value here in refusing it. Trying to enforce a price cap would be great there, but needs coordination.

Hello from Slovakia. The gas pipeline from Russia through Ukraine into Slovakia (and further west/south) does not work since January 2025, it was turned off by Ukraine. If there is still gas flowing from Russia, it's through other pipelines, most likely Turkstream, and that too will end in time: https://www.politico.eu/article/bulgaria-end-russian-gas-flo...

We, as far as I know, also sadly import oil from Russia. I expect that to end soon too, because of a combination of political pressure and Ukrainian attacks.

Our current government is pretty close to Putin and Orban and it would be very welcome if the rest of EU attacked this issue more, as you mention.

I am not backing Trump here at all, but in his first term he pointed out how over reliant Europe is for Russian energy. A few Euro leaders practically laughed in his face (publicly, on TV) and told him with smirks on their face that he was mistaken. They attempted to frame him as a crazy person for even suggesting it's a problem. A man like Trump does not strike me as somebody that will forget and forgive that. I would not expect a benevolent US after. Why would anybody help Europe after their refusal to even admit the problem?

Europe is not a single entity, it's mainly the German politicians that ignored the problem.

This actually goes even further back to the Obama era in 2011.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/natosource/text-of-spe...

> Indeed, if current trends in the decline of European defense capabilities are not halted and reversed, Future U.S. political leaders– those for whom the Cold War was not the formative experience that it was for me – may not consider the return on America’s investment in NATO worth the cost.

This is Slovakia and Hungary, not "Europe". The future of Hungary in the EU is not certain.

This is what Wendelstein and Iter are for. It's still gonna take a bit, unfortunately. In the meantime, all we can do is continue renewable buildout.

The beauty of having your opponent in hole when you own both the shovel and the ladder, is they can’t figure out how to stop digging.

What part of this is Hungary and such?

That is mostly Germany. Once Germany stops buying oil from Russia other countries will be forced to stop too.

Could you give some evidence for this claim? Here is some counterevidence: [1] says that the top buyers of Russian energy include:

• Hungary: 416 million euros ($488m)

• Slovakia: 275 million euros ($323m)

• France: 157 million euros ($184m)

• Netherlands: 65 million euros ($76m)

• Belgium: 64 million euros ($75m)

[2] suggests that China and India are the main buyers. I don't how reliable those sources are. There is also the problem of how to classify 'laundered' oil that was bought and resold by, e.g. India.

[1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/3/how-much-of-europes...

[2] https://energyandcleanair.org/june-2025-monthly-analysis-of-...

Looks like I have old data. Germany stopped buying officially oil from Russia. We will see now pressure on other countries to follow.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com