Russia Flaring Around 4.34 Mcmd of Gas Normally Bound for Nord Stream 1

https://www.pipeline-journal.net/news/russia-flaring-around-434-mcmd-gas-normally-bound-nord-stream-1

by JeanMarcS • 4 years ago

30 60 4 years ago

the flaring at Gazprom’s Portovaya plant is an “environmental disaster," with about 9,000 tons of carbon dioxide being emitted every day

This is hyperbole. Venting the gas would be an environmental disaster. Flaring just burns it somewhere different.

ohiovr4• 4 years ago

It was going to be burned anyway. It is either this, or cap the wells. Methane is worse for the environment than CO2.

blibble• 4 years ago

you're forgetting the extra gas burnt as a result of that gas not being sold

so at least 2x as much carbon is being produced (and even worse if the flared gas is replaced by coal instead of more gas)

gvb• 4 years ago

This is not hyperbole.

a) A lot of gas is feedstock for chemical reactions generating products e.g. fertilizer. Russia is burning that gas and creating 100% pollution rather than useful products.

b) For all the Russian gas would have been burned in Europe, this effectively doubles the pollution because Europe has to replace the gas that Russia is flaring off from alternate sources.

Teever3• 4 years ago

But isn't that fertilizer then packaged, shipped around the world, stored in warehouses, all of which produces more emissions, until it's finally put into the ground to grow crops which are harvested (again more emissions) which are then packaged, chipped around the world (again more emissions), until they feed mostly animals which produce methane, which are then transported, slaughtered, processed, packaged, distributed to grocery stores (starting to see the pattern here, more emissions) all so we can doot-doot-beep-beep around in our little air conditioned emissions machines to the store to pick up and cook and then throw like a 1/3 of the meal away because left-overs aren't as satisfying?

fulafel• 4 years ago

Burning it either way is a environmental disaster, even though venting would be worse still. We need to globally ramp down fossils extraction quickly.

credit_guy• 4 years ago

So this increases the global greenhouse emissions by about 0.0066%.

peanut_worm• 4 years ago

Assuming Europe buys gas from somewhere else then yes it is still an environmental disaster double the gas is being burned

ohiovr4• 4 years ago

With any luck.

hedora• 4 years ago

I find it strange that they don't set a negative price for natural gas, thus giving domestic producers an incentive to pause production.

Some natural gas is produced as a byproduct of pumping oil, but is that enough to glut their market on its own?

mikewarot2• 4 years ago

I find it strange that they don't set a negative price for natural gas

They did, that's what the flare is. I expected it[1].

thus giving domestic producers an incentive to pause production.

They can't "pause" production, it's either go, or halt forever.

If they don't flare off the gas, then pressure builds in their lines, or, worse yet, they have to "shut in" the wells, which means their output is effectively lost for all time. There is a massive, irreplaceable investment in those wells and infrastructure that Russia can't afford to lose.

Natural gas contains water, these wells are in permafrost, which means if the flow stops, that water freezes, cracking the wells or the pipes from them. The last time Russia had a supply disruption, during the Soviet Collapse, this happened. They just finished repairing the damage in 2021.

If it happened again, they wouldn't be able to hire Western experts to repair it again, at any price.

1 - https://twitter.com/mikewarot/status/1562677637549412355

spywaregorilla• 4 years ago

they have to "shut in" the wells, which means their output is effectively lost for all time.

What does this mean? Like the physical well asset is no longer useable? Or that the resource itself is forever unuseable even if you just make another well, if that concept even makes sense at all?

Normille4• 4 years ago

  >much of this gas would have been used to feed into the pipeline grid and sold on to Europe. Because Russia has sharply cut supply to Europe...

More of this Orwellian spin that Russia 'cut the supply'.

The EU sanctioned Russia and cut off their access to the global banking system and to their foreign currency holdings. They also announced that they'd be stopping buying any Russian gas at all by 2023. So Russia demanded Europe pay for their gas in Roubles. Because why wouldn't they in those circumstances? Most of Europe refused to pay in Roubles so Russia [and again, why wouldn't they?] said "If you don't pay, you can't have the gas"

The fact that this series of events is being constantly spun across multiple western media sources now as an arbitrary 'Russia turned off the taps' --in attempt to divert anyone from asking whether the west [and the EU in particular] has spectacularly shot itself in the foot here-- is disgraceful.

And we have the gall to criticise countries like China for the dishonesty of their press!

brnt2• 4 years ago

Does Russia have to invade Ukraine? Does it have to keep killing civilians?

They could put an end to this today, but they won't, because the loss of face is worse than the loss of life.

eshch5• 4 years ago

The last sentence is applicable to both sides by the way.

Especially because of https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/08/ukraine-ukrai...

But both sides are hostages of their own politics and narratives of who's good and who's bad.

impossiblefork3• 4 years ago

Yes, but that doesn't change who is cutting off whom.

Russia invaded Ukraine and diverse countries who did not understand the significance of their choice to make themselves dependent on Russian gas had to take what peaceful measures they could to deny resources to Russia, but obviously the Rusdians aren't going to sell something in return for something they can't access-- it's equivalent to nonpayment. There's no readon not to say that openly.

The only bad thing about this affair is that some countries are trying to substitute their Russian gas for Azerbaijani gas, which is just as bad war-of-aggression wise , even though that is of course further away from Europe.

ohiovr4• 4 years ago

Reality is millions of people could freeze to death that probably couldn't find Ukraine on a map 10 months ago. Since the only view you get from is the one behind the electronic curtain it isn't surprising you are so misled. The green party in Germany laughed at the suggestion by Trump that Europe is too dependent on Russian gas.

Normille4• 4 years ago

  >Does Russia have to invade Ukraine? Does it have to keep killing civilians?

You're changing the argument. I'm not arguing whether Russia was morally right or wrong to invade Ukraine. I'm arguing that Europe [in particular] was incredibly short-sighted to choose to respond by effectively forcing Russia to cut off our gas supplies in the run up to winter.

eshch5• 4 years ago

Well, it's democracy at stake. Doesn't it justify everything? Because if not, this example is not the biggest issue.

Anyway, a bit of hypocrisy doesn't hurt.

opensores2• 4 years ago

Would a democracy be practicing a genocide on its people for eight years and counting ? Would a democracy promote right wing extremism, much less arm them with heavy weaponry (eg 155mm shells and artillery)? Would a democracy embed such people and war criminals into its own military? To shoot its very own troops if they dared retreat from a suicidal order? Would a democracy shell a nuclear waste repository for days on end when this threatens a good portion of Europe with decades long lasting effects and a loss of major breadbasket region areas for agricultural production over these decades.

Tell me, what sort of democracy is this?

Would a democracy murder its own citizens and stage propaganda psyops to deceive the remainder of its population?

Would a democracy condone a project such as the below mentioned, and even be directly collaborate with its founder and members:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myrotvorets

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Myrotvorets&actio...

Chechen proverb (allegedly) "A man is not the one who knows how to fight, but the one who knows exactly who his enemy is".

As far as I can tell, to get back a democracy you need to do away with a junta first.

dzhiurgis• 4 years ago

Sanctions are against Russia, Gazprom is “private” company…

scyzoryk_xyz3• 4 years ago

This is a straw man argument.

Everyone, “western media” included is fully aware that not buying the gas is about cutting off the money for financing the war. No one is “spinning” a story around Russia arbitrarily cutting off supplies - we know it’s neither technical issues nor rouble payments that are the root cause here. It’s a literal unprovoked and premeditated war that someone is using to retain their firm grip on power.

We’re not buying the gas because we don’t want it. We might be “shooting ourselves in the foot” economically/industrially, but that is the price that must be paid if Europe is to be worth living in.

rdtwo5• 4 years ago

| We’re not buying the gas because we don’t want it. |

Yep that’s exactly what’s happening.

ghostwriter3• 4 years ago

but that is the price that must be paid if Europe is to be worth living in.

Could you clarify, is it going to be worth living in because, by buying Qatar's LNG, it will help Qatar to fund Jabhat al-Nusra in waging a war in Syria? [1] [2]

[1] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/qatar-funnelled-millions-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra_Front#Qatari_involvem...

z_zetetic_z• 4 years ago

And where would they buy the roubles? And with what? However you cut it, buying gas from Russia means sending them EUR somehow. So the rouble thing is just a divertion from the real issue, which is people dying in Ukraine.

ghostwriter3• 4 years ago

People aren't dying on the territories controlled by Russia, unless there are shellings and saboteurs from Ukraine [1] [2] [3], and Zelensky doesn't seem to be interested in peace negotiations unless it's on his terms, which means the war can be propagated back into the territories that have already began to recover. Does it actually serve interests of common folks who could care less about their flag of the day?

[1] https://www.youtube.com/c/%D0%9C%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%83%D0%...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqcmvyHrmrmIC7nM1sA3_Uw/vid...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMtEJAgFT2M

AnonymousPlanet2• 4 years ago

Russia is throttling the throughput although there are no sanctions for gas and all contracts with the German side are still in place.

Russia's behaviour is as if you had announced to cancel your internet contract next year and they suddenly throttle your internet this year to spite you.

You're the one putting a spin on things and I wonder why.

ohiovr4• 4 years ago

It's childish to down vote this.

lizardactivist• 4 years ago

It's done out of necessity, not to spite anyone or to hurt the whole world.

The gas has to go somewhere, but if the regular receiver (EU) doesn't want it or denies the seller the ability to charge for it (sanctions) then you can't just keep compressing and piping it somewhere else forever.

barbazoo• 4 years ago

Rystad said that Russia is burning gas that would otherwise have been exported to Europe through the pipeline, which usually accounts for more than a third of Europe’s gas imports but where flows have been throttled back to just 20% of normal levels.

Doesn't seem to be a black and white situation given that the pipeline delivers gas at 20% its capacity. AFAIK it's Russia throttling on their end, is that not correct? Russia itself isn't even claiming it's payment related. Do you have different information?

nickff• 4 years ago

Russia claims that it cannot deliver gas due to sanctions-related parts and maintenance issues with the pumping equipment. It is likely that the Russian strategy is to drive down EU gas reserves to the point where the EU drops its sanctions in exchange for gas this winter.

AnonymousPlanet2• 4 years ago

None of this is the case. There are no sanctions in place for gas and the flow of money would proceed normally and has been so far.

There are no technical reasons for the throttling, yet this is what the Russians claim.

MomoXenosaga• 4 years ago

Short term Europe is fucked. Long term Russia is fucked.

Ten years from now Europe will be importing gas from Quatar and Gabon. And even if hypothetically Russia conquers half of Ukraine it won't offset the loss of gas contracts. There's a reason why OPEC only tried that oil embargo stunt once- alternatives are found.

Russia Flaring Around 4.34 Mcmd of Gas Normally Bound for Nord Stream 1

Related Stories