patrick.net

Ceffer says

Unless you are willing to huddle with Bigfoot,

Eric Holder says

Europe had a goal to have gas storage at 80% by Oct 1 in order to be safe until March. As of yesterday they are at 88.2%. And Norway just opened a new pipeline. Nobody will be freezing in Europe anytime soon. Maybe except some dumb fucks like Hungarians who made themselves even more dependent on Ruscist gas than stupid cunts in Germany. Nah, not even them will freeze - they are at 77%.

I'm afraid you are mistaken. The entire gas storage capacity is much less than that which is required for electricity generation and heating through a winter. As I pointed out yesterday, Germany has by far the largest natural gas storage capacity in Europe. The capacity is 256 terawatt-hours natural gas energy content. Gas turbines have thermo efficiency around 20-40%, so that 256 terawatt-hours natural gas energy content translates to 65-100 terawatt-hours of electricity. German annual electricity generation/consumption is over 600 terawatt-hours. So total storage capacity is equivalent to about 1 to 2 months' burn rate, that's counting electricity generation use only, not counting winter heating use of natural gas. The new Norway-Poland gas pipeline is scheduled to deliver about 6.5 billion cubic meters of natural gas in 2023; that translates to about 60 terawatt-hours natural gas energy content. That's equivalent to another 1 month for electricity generation alone (and will have to spread out over a year for delivery). So combining storage and the new Norway-Poland pipeline (that can deliver in all of 2023) result in enough natural gas for 2-3 months of electricity generation for Germany. Where is the gas for the other 9-10 months going to come from? That's for electricity generation alone, not counting winter heating use of natural gas. That's for German consumption alone, not counting Polish and Baltic states' consumption needs.

And as B6dr pointed out, contrary to the most optimistic scenario I illustrated above, the Norway-Poland pipleline is primarily for Poland and Baltic states. The entire Norway-Poland pipeline is scheduled to deliver 6.5 billion cubic meters of natural gas in 2023, contrasting to 2x27.5 = 55 billion cubic meters of natural gas in a year through the twin pipes of Nordstream 1. The capacity is off by 9 fold. Frankly, even Poland and Baltic states with their nearly 50 million population, need more natural gas than the Norway-Poland pipe can deliver. So it is indeed a freeze-to-kill operation to recycle the money that Poles and Baltics (and Germans, especially East Germans) earned and saved in the past 30+ years, so the banksters won't have to deal with the dead savers showing up to withdraw money.

Ceffer says

Problem of being 'self sufficient' and moving off grid is they will find you eventually, anyway if conceded the absolute central power that they crave.

You assume they're capable of staying in power, which they aren't. I'm talking about starting over, reshaping our society into small communities that source most of what they need locally. The only other choice is slavery. Keep using their debt systems, keep relying on their central resources, keep reacting to the next planned disaster. I'm not putting a mask on again, and means I've got some fucking work to do to make I don't have ever have to.

Reality says

The capacity is off by 9 fold. Frankly, even Poland and Baltic states with their nearly 50 million population, need more natural gas than the Norway-Poland pipe can deliver.

Butinge LNG terminal was feeding LNG to Baltics and PL already after Russian pipeline shutdown. I am not sure what is its capacity, and I am not sure how much LNG Baltics + Poland will need, but they will not freeze this winter since they have planned for this eventuality. However, it is clear that their heating cost will be up in hundreds of percent.

On top of that, the usual East European tactic of screwing everyone over if it benefits them is probably in action in Belarus and Baltics. I am nearly confident that pipeline from Belarus to Latvia carrying oil refinery products is quietly functioning...

Ceffer says

Problem of being 'self sufficient' and moving off grid is they will find you eventually, anyway if conceded the absolute central power that they crave. Unless you are willing to huddle with Bigfoot, it will only be a temporary way of buying time to attempt to consolidate against the boot.

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

In 1936, their religion was under threat. After Karp Lykov's brother was killed by a Soviet patrol, Karp and Akulina Lykov with their two children, Savin and Natalia, fled their hometown of Lykovo (Tyumen Oblast) eastward. Two more children, Dmitry and Agafia, were born during the isolation. They ended up in a dwelling in the taiga, near the Yerinat River (Abakan river basin), 250 kilometres (160 mi) from any settlement. In 1978 their location was discovered by a helicopter pilot, who was flying a geological group into the region. The geologists made contact with the family, but the Lykovs decided not to leave the place.[4][1][5][6]

Akulina died of hunger in 1961, having sacrificed herself so that her children might survive. Three of the children died in 1981. Savin and Natalia suffered from kidney failure, most likely a result of their harsh diet. Dmitry died of pneumonia.[1] Karp died in 1988. He is survived by his daughter Agafia Lykova, who has over the years accumulated a herd of goats and flock of chickens and has built herself a decent hut.

Reality says

The entire Norway-Poland pipeline is scheduled to deliver 6.5 billion cubic meters of natural gas in 2023

And just for comparison LNG tankers average 150,000 cubic meters in capacity, which is enough gas to supply some 42,000 U.S. homes for a year. Pipelines are capital intensive (upfront) but you can see why they are desirable. I believe they usually require guarantees for 10 years for investors to be comfortable that they will be able to turn a profit.

EBGuy says

And just for comparison LNG tankers average 150,000 cubic meters in capacity, which is enough gas to supply some 42,000 U.S. homes for a year. Pipelines are capital intensive (upfront) but you can see why they are desirable. I believe they usually require guarantees for 10 years for investors to be comfortable that they will be able to turn a profit.

Thanks for the info, which makes the situation even more dire than my analysis above showed. If average LNG tanker only carries 150,000 cubic meters of natural gas, that means filling the Norwegian terminal with 6.5 billion cubic meters will require 43,333 tanker-loads. Distance from Halifax to Norway is about 3000 miles, and those tankers likely travel at 15-20 knots, meaning a round trip taking 3 weeks. Even if the tankers don't need any downtime for maintenance, each tanker can only make 14 round trips in a year (with rotating crew members to keep the ships shuttling at all time). 43,333 / 14 = 3095. That's the number of LNG tankers required at the minimum. There are only 641 LNG tankers in the entire world! All the LNG tankers fleet in the entire world shuttling between Halifax (the northeast-most non-freezing major port on continental North America) and Norway can only replace about 2% of what Nordstream-1 delivered.

BTW, "LNG tankers average 150,000 cubic meters in capacity, which is enough gas to supply some 42,000 U.S. homes for a year" doesn't sound right. I just looked up my own natural gas usage, the total in the last 12 billing months was a little over 1200 therms, converted to metric units is about 3500 cubic meters. 150,000 cubic meters would be able to sustain 43 homes like mine in southern New England for a year (summer usage for heating water and gas stove cooking is about 15 therms per month, but winter heating can be as high as over 250 therms in Feb, despite Feb being a shortened month), not anywhere close to the 42,000 US homes figure. That's for heating use only, not including electricity generation. Most of central Europe has weather comparable to or colder than New England, not Florida weather. According to USDA zone map, my house is in the warmest part of Zone-6 (in a city and within 10 miles from the sea/ocean). Most of Germany is in Zone 6 and Zone 5 (colder); most of Poland and Baltics are deep into Zone 5.

Bd6r says

Butinge LNG terminal was feeding LNG to Baltics and PL already after Russian pipeline shutdown. I am not sure what is its capacity, and I am not sure how much LNG Baltics + Poland will need, but they will not freeze this winter since they have planned for this eventuality. However, it is clear that their heating cost will be up in hundreds of percent.

Any tanker going into the Baltic Sea would only divert from the 641 global LNG tanker count for shuttling between Halifax and Norway. As calculated in my post above, 3000+ LNG tankers are needed to fulfil the 6.5 billion cubic meters target for the Norway-Poland pipeline. There are only 641 LNG tankers in the entire world as of this year.

From a friend of mine in the Netherlands:

And the gas prices are skyrocketing here. We are currently paying 180EUR per month for electricity and gas combined, but our provider wants to raise it to 400EUR per month! My colleague at the office is now paying 693EUR, while her usual was 336EUR. Hopefully, this war in Ukraine will resolve soon and things will go back to normal. People in Europe are kind of depressed about this since we just came out of a pandemic a few months ago…

Patrick says

People in Europe are kind of depressed about this since we just came out of a pandemic a few months ago…

I hear burning WEF and Globalist apparatchiks make excellent fuel for warmth, albeit a bit stinky.

Reality says

If average LNG tanker only carries 150,000 cubic meters of natural gas, that means filling the Norwegian terminal with 6.5 billion cubic meters will require 43,333 tanker-loads. Distance from Halifax to Norway is about 3000 miles, and those tankers likely travel at 15-20 knots, meaning a round trip taking 3 weeks.

I believe Norway itself produces shitloads of Nat gas (4th in world after Russia, Qatar, US), why does it need to be shipped to there from Halifax?

From article I quoted above:

The pipeline will transport natural gas from the Norwegian shelf via Denmark and through the Baltic Sea to Poland.

The flows from Norway along with supplies via liquefied gas terminals are central to Poland's plan. The country was cut off from Russian gas supplies in April, allegedly for refusing to pay in roubles.

In 2020 Lithuania imported about 1.5M tons of LNG via Butinge. They will have more now via the new pipeline.

Ceffer says

I hear burning WEF and Globalist apparatchiks make excellent fuel for warmth, albeit a bit stinky.

Borrow the sulfur scrubbers from the old coal fired plants.

Bd6r says

I believe Norway itself produces shitloads of Nat gas (4th in world after Russia, Qatar, US), why does it need to be shipped to there from Halifax?

Because all the talks have been about replacing Russian gas with LNG shipment from the US. Halifax was actually a very optimistic loading location, as the gas pipeline through New England is already severely capacity-limited in winter even without any offloading onto tankers in Halifax. Any loading port south of NYC would add 1000+ miles shipping distance, requiring 33+% more tankers for the same flow rate.

The flows from Norway along with supplies via liquefied gas terminals are central to Poland's plan. The country was cut off from Russian gas supplies in April, allegedly for refusing to pay in roubles.

The plan might be freezing locals to death, so the banksters don't have to pay back deposits. 50 million population (Poland and Baltics) need much more than 6.5 billion cubic meters in a year. In USDA Zone-5 weather, summer vs. winter gas usage are entirely different. In my Zone-6 (10 degrees warmer than Zone-5) house, winter per day gas usage is nearly 20x that of summer. LNG shipment is a joke compared to the scale of big pipelines like Nordstream-1. The Norway-Poland pipeline can replace about 11% of NS-1, the LNG shipment can perhaps replace 2%. What's to replace the remaining 87% requirement?

For some real numbers, my house is kept to 68-degrees in winter in the warmest part of Zone-6. So a Zone-5 comparable house kept to 60-degrees F would consume at least comparable amount of natural gas as mine, 3500 cubic meters in a year, with 60% of that consumed in the three months of winter. Assuming those nearly 50 million people are packed into 10 million homes comparable to mine (5 people to a household, very high density assumption), that requires 35 billion cubic meters in a year, with about 20 billion cubic meters in the 3 months of winter. At significantly lower than 60F indoor temperature, a lot of people are going to get sick and die from cold.

https://www.eugyppius.com/p/felix-eick-welt-reporter-on-why-dismantling?publication_id=268621&post_id=75782262&isFreemail=true

Felix Eick, Welt Reporter, on Why Dismantling Nord Stream Means Cutting Putin's "Arteries of Power"

Back in August, before the Nord Stream attacks, it was possible even for dim Green journalists to see that destroying the pipelines would be to Russia's disadvantage. ...

Two months ago, even arrant fools like Felix Eick could see that destroying Nord Stream would hurt Russia. Now that somebody has actually destroyed Nord Stream (or the better part of it), we have to read harebrained theory upon harebrained theory about why Russia is actually responsible and how the end of these pipelines confers an overwrought twelve-dimensional chess advantage to Putin or helps Gazprom escape hypothetical lawsuits or permits Russia to escape sanctions.

Russia and Germany harmed. Which European country is shedding no tears over that one?

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

Russia and Germany harmed. Which European country is shedding no tears over that one?

Those dopey Germans laughing at Trump don't look so smart now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfJv9QYrlwg

Russia has been threatening to shut down energy to Europe for years long before the current war in Ukraine. What fool would ever rely on Russia for their energy supplies in the future after all this? Fool me once....

Bd6r says

In 2020 Lithuania imported about 1.5M tons of LNG via Butinge. They will have more now via the new pipeline.

Lithuanian has a population of less than 3 million. 1.5M ton of LNG is equivalent to about 2 billion cubic meters of NG. At that ratio, 38 million Poles need 26 billion cubic meters of NG. The new pipe line from Norway to Poland can only deliver 6.5 billion cubic meters in all of 2023.

Pretty reasonable argument suggesting that the pipeline explosion was an accident due to Russia's legendary incompetence.

- Gas kept in the pipe for months and months which could form hydrate crystals that could cause an explosion while Russia tried to drain the pipe.
- 2 explosions 17 hours apart relatively close together? What type of attack is that knowing that Russia would have had vessels at the site within short order?
- Russia is not making a big fuss blaming Ukraine or screaming at the UN about it.

https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html

Reality says

Thanks for the info, which makes the situation even more dire than my analysis above showed.

Your analysis was so dire, I figured something must be off. Then I hit on this:
Tanker capacities are sometimes stated in cubic meters, but this can be confusing because this is cubic meters of liquid not gas.
Using the conversions from this page, I calculated that an average LNG tanker (150,000 cm) contains 94.4 million cubic meters of uncompressed gas. Perhaps some one can check my work. So the methane expands over 629 times from its volume at -162 deg C (LNG transport temperature). The 43,333 tanker-loads is replaced by a more reasonable 69 trips. I think....

From this page, looks like I am in the right neighborhood:
The LNG carriers are two units with capacity of 174 thousand cubic meters each, which means the size of the cargo that each vessel will be able to transport is approximately 100 mcm after regasification.

EBGuy says

Tanker capacities are sometimes stated in cubic meters, but this can be confusing because this is cubic meters of liquid not gas.

I see. That's very good news indeed. Sub-100 round trips by the tanker fleet is much more feasible than 40k+ round trip by worldwide total of 641 tankers (many of which, perhaps the majority, are smaller than 150k cubic meters).

That solves the 6.5 billion cubic meter (gas) pipeline feed source, sufficient for the three Baltic States (less than 10 million population combined). Poland needs about 26 billion cubic meters (gas) for its 38 million population, and Germany needs about 55 billion cubic meters (gas) for its 80+ million population. About half of the annual total has to be delivered in the winter season.

socal2 says

Pretty reasonable argument suggesting that the pipeline explosion was an accident due to Russia's legendary incompetence.

- Gas kept in the pipe for months and months which could form hydrate crystals that could cause an explosion while Russia tried to drain the pipe.
- 2 explosions 17 hours apart relatively close together? What type of attack is that knowing that Russia would have had vessels at the site within short order?
- Russia is not making a big fuss blaming Ukraine or screaming at the UN about it.

https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html

That explanation makes no sense: there is not nearly enough oxidizer in the pipeline to create an explosion that would register 2+ on the Richter Scale. A 200lb ice ball hitting the pipe wall in the bend won't register on the seismograph tens of miles away at all. If methane hydrates exploded on its own on the sea floor, there would be explosions on the sea floor all the time, and the seismograph would be registering them all the time . . . in that case there would be no point for NATO/US to have a dense network of listening devices on the Baltic sea floor to listen for all potential sorties by Soviet submarines coming out. The entire Baltic sea floor has been covered by the dense network of sensors, so we have been told as one of the good uses of taxpayer money during the Cold War.

Reality says

Because all the talks have been about replacing Russian gas with LNG shipment from the US. Halifax was actually a very optimistic loading location, as the gas pipeline through New England is already severely capacity-limited in winter even without any offloading onto tankers in Halifax. Any loading port south of NYC would add 1000+ miles shipping distance, requiring 33+% more tankers for the same flow rate.

As far as I know, pipeline from Norway will be filled with Norwegian nat gas, so Halifax is irrelevant. US nat gas goes to Butinge.

Bd6r says

As far as I know, pipeline from Norway will be filled with Norwegian nat gas, so Halifax is irrelevant. US nat gas goes to Butinge.

Unloading at Butinge would just add 200-400 miles to the trip, compared to unloading on Norwegian coast, in the mistaken analysis I did above (I didn't realize the 150,000 cubic meter capacity quoted for those ships was liquid NG volume not gaseous NG volume) but does make economic sense when shipping capacity is not the limiting factor.

If Norway can export enough additional natural gas to Germany and Poland to replace entirely what was delivered by NS-1 (and NS-2 in the near future), cutting the Nordstream lines won't hurt/kill as many Germans and Poles in the coming winter as I initially thought would be the case. The shipping distance from Norway to Polish terminal is much shorter than from the US, even by LNG tankers. A big "If."

What does Ukraine, the CIA, and M6 have on you guys, that you go to such extreme lengths to avoid the most obvious explanations? Did you all chart a trip on the Lolita express together or something?

This is what propaganda does to people. You can't admit you were fooled, because it's so damaging to your ego, so you double down on the lies, and logic gymnastics, rather than admit you were wrong. And because we have a bunch of sociopaths running things, this type of behavior is encouraged because it fosters extremism, and keeps the fingers pointed at each other.

Meanwhile, the NWO keep killing innocent Russians and Ukrainians. Europeans are getting squeezed into poverty, and billions of dollars are being laundered every month, robbing all of us. And none of you give a shit, because you're too busy justifying why you fell for such an obvious con.

Wake the fuck up! When you agree with every mainstream media outlet, every WEF leader, and the most senile person ever to set foot in the White House, you are wrong!

Good summary @NuttBoxer

NuttBoxer says

logic gymnastics

I'm very impressed at the logic gymnastics required to blame Putin for an act of sabotage which is 100% in favor of the US deep state.

1. Biden: "I am going to have the Nordstream pipeline destroyed! Ha ha."
2. Biden orders pipeline destroyed.
3. PDS crowd: "Look at what Putin did!"

This forum was a ray of light and sanity through the scamdemic. To see people fall to propaganda who held strong these past two years, it just feels like such a step backwards.

Like I joked before, it lends credence to the idea of mind control through vaxxing and 5G.

I don't really believe that's possible, but this does seem like exactly the kind of use the oligarchy would have for it.

I've been tracking the ticker UNG but also natural gas companies like Devon and Suncor.
.



.

GNL says

WookieMan says

Hell my wife makes more than engineers, doctors and attorneys golfing, taking people out to lunch and sitting at conferences. I don't consider it work, but good for her and good for me.

Pharma sales rep, correct?

Escort.

Patrick says

I'm very impressed at the logic gymnastics required to blame Putin for an act of sabotage which is 100% in favor of the US deep state.

1. Biden: "I am going to have the Nordstream pipeline destroyed! Ha ha."
2. Biden orders pipeline destroyed.
3. PDS crowd: "Look at what Putin did!"

a simpler question is who benefits from destroying the pipeline (stronger argument, I believe, than ramblings of a senile geezer). The simplest possible answer is other nat gas producers
the only thing that does not compute with me is that Trump managed to shut this pipeline down, then Bidet reopens it, only to blow up? that tells me it may be a player other than usa which blew it up, but then again, we have woke idiots in power who may act illogically. Finally, I can not completely exclude Russian incompetence.

Bd6r says

PDS

Putin Dick Suckers???

Bd6r says

Bd6r says

PDS

Putin Dick Suckers???

No, Putin Derangement Syndrome, just like TDS. But you knew that.

Bd6r says

who benefits from destroying the pipeline

America.

America does not want this war to end, and so it is in America's interest to prevent Putin from using the lure of turning on the gas to end the war.

Also in America's interest to have Europe more dependent on the US for energy.

Doesn't the destruction of NS1 open up the possibility of retaliation by destroying other pipelines? There is such a thing as underwater drones, correct?

socal2 says

Pretty reasonable argument suggesting that the pipeline explosion was an accident due to Russia's legendary incompetence.

- Gas kept in the pipe for months and months which could form hydrate crystals that could cause an explosion while Russia tried to drain the pipe.
- 2 explosions 17 hours apart relatively close together? What type of attack is that knowing that Russia would have had vessels at the site within short order?
- Russia is not making a big fuss blaming Ukraine or screaming at the UN about it.

https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html

Jesus Christ. The convoluted thinking people go through when they strain to trust this lying fucking government.

The US blew it up. There, that's the simplest explanation with the least number of assumptions.

richwicks says

The US blew it up. There, that's the simplest explanation with the least number of assumptions.

The benefit of this is that now Germany and other European countries will hate the USA more as it hurts Germany, et al the most.

Its a political theater victory for them to pin this on the USA. Also Russia can just seal it off and divert all its natural gas to China, India, etc. China can sell Russian oil as well. Easy fix for Russia.

.

Now predictable Satanist inversion lying requires that they blame the victim as the perp. It's' another IQ test.

Ceffer says

Now predictable Satanist inversion lying requires that they blame the victim as the perp. It's' another IQ test.

How does Russia financially get harmed from this pipeline sabotage ? Who gets hurt the most ? Germany ?

.