Ukraine: North Stream 3?...

[Ed Lee]

Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire section from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months, by the time they get to it. Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected steel and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS 3?

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Gazprom-Large-Section-Of-Nord-Stream-Needs-To-Be-Replaced.html

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Oct 2022 00:01:26 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ed Lee
<edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote in
<a3297450-511d-4174-8149-fc606a7796abn@googlegroups.com>:

Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire section
from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months, by the
time they get to it. Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected steel
and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS 3?

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Gazprom-Large-Section-Of-Nord-Stream-Needs-To-Be-Replaced.html

Who should \'pay\' for it you mean?
It is the low life US Military Industrial Complex mafia that wants - and makes wars everywhere
and makes money at all cost by trying to destroy the competition.

Quite the opposite that the Great Chinese Leader who is now starting his next term, Mr Xi, is
doing, he is HELPING other countries.
US is DESTROYING other countries.
So, maybe China and Russia and many other countries can unite and make the US PAY for this act of terror.
And so it happened

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 6:36:17 PM UTC+11, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Oct 2022 00:01:26 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ed Lee
edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
a3297450-511d-4174...@googlegroups.com>:
Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire section
from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months, by the
time they get to it. Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected steel
and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS 3?

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Gazprom-Large-Section-Of-Nord-Stream-Needs-To-Be-Replaced.html
Who should \'pay\' for it you mean?
It is the low life US Military Industrial Complex mafia that wants - and makes wars everywhere
and makes money at all cost by trying to destroy the competition.

Quite the opposite that the Great Chinese Leader who is now starting his next term, Mr Xi, is
doing, he is HELPING other countries.

In much the same way that US used to. US banana republics \"helped\" US by supplying bananas and the US helped them by building up the ports from which the bananas were shipped.

The Chinese belt-and-road initiatives are equally \"helpful\".

> US is DESTROYING other countries.

Not so you\'d notice.

> So, maybe China and Russia and many other countries can unite and make the US PAY for this act of terror.

Putin\'s takeover of the Crimea wasn\'t exactly an act of disinterested altruism, and the bridge that got blown up was designed to back up that takeover.

Calling damaging it \"an act of terror\" is what you\'d expect Putin to do. Dropping missiles on civilians in the Ukraine, way behind the war front, really are acts of terror, but Putin won\'t admit it, and neither will you.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christensen]

søndag den 16. oktober 2022 kl. 09.31.00 UTC+2 skrev Don Y:

On 10/16/2022 12:01 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire
section from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months,
by the time they get to it.
But that doesn\'t necessarily mean the pipe, itself, is compromised over
that same distance. One would assume that a pipe intended to be surrounded
by salt water would have some sorts of internal mechanisms that isolate
\"exposed\" sections of pipe in the event of a pressure loss -- simply
because a rupture could render many miles of laid pipe \"unrecoverable\".
Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected
steel and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS
3?
The more interesting issue is who would have assaulted the pipeline.

A (rational) european actor would be cutting off their own energy supply.

well, some some of the EU population are beginning to say \"screw Ukraine, just give Putin what he wants, we want cheap gas\"
Without the pipelines Putin can\'t deliver so it avoids that discussion

 

[Don Y]

On 10/16/2022 4:10 AM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

søndag den 16. oktober 2022 kl. 09.31.00 UTC+2 skrev Don Y:
On 10/16/2022 12:01 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire
section from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for
months, by the time they get to it.
But that doesn\'t necessarily mean the pipe, itself, is compromised over
that same distance. One would assume that a pipe intended to be
surrounded by salt water would have some sorts of internal mechanisms that
isolate \"exposed\" sections of pipe in the event of a pressure loss --
simply because a rupture could render many miles of laid pipe
\"unrecoverable\".
Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected steel and won\'t last
long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS 3?
The more interesting issue is who would have assaulted the pipeline.

A (rational) european actor would be cutting off their own energy supply.

well, some some of the EU population are beginning to say \"screw Ukraine,
just give Putin what he wants, we want cheap gas\" Without the pipelines
Putin can\'t deliver so it avoids that discussion

A valid point. When Putin wants Europe, the rest of the world should
shrug with equal nonchalance? Esp if it helps keep THEIR energy costs
down?

(It seems Merkel has got to be rethinking her attitude towards Russia;
I guess her strategy didn\'t pan out too well...)

 

[Gerhard Hoffmann]

Am 16.10.22 um 13:10 schrieb Lasse Langwadt Christensen:

søndag den 16. oktober 2022 kl. 09.31.00 UTC+2 skrev Don Y:
On 10/16/2022 12:01 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire
section from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months,
by the time they get to it.
But that doesn\'t necessarily mean the pipe, itself, is compromised over
that same distance. One would assume that a pipe intended to be surrounded
by salt water would have some sorts of internal mechanisms that isolate
\"exposed\" sections of pipe in the event of a pressure loss -- simply
because a rupture could render many miles of laid pipe \"unrecoverable\".
Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected
steel and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS
3?
The more interesting issue is who would have assaulted the pipeline.

A (rational) european actor would be cutting off their own energy supply.

well, some some of the EU population are beginning to say \"screw Ukraine, just give Putin what he wants, we want cheap gas\"
Without the pipelines Putin can\'t deliver so it avoids that discussion

That is limited to Putin\'s proctonauts.

Northstream 1&2 could be justified by > 60 years of reliability,
even during the cold war.
That is no longer true. No way back.

It remains to be seen if the alternatives are any better.
In the long term there is no alternative to being autarc
with photovoltaic, H2 and wind. Germany is still a net
electricity exporter, even with only 3 nuclear power plants left.

Interesting how compression turbines fail, NS1, NS2, the
Druschba pipeline had a problem, too.

Is that known in the mean time what happened to the
Bornholm electricity cable?

Gerhard

 

[Gerhard Hoffmann]

Am 16.10.22 um 14:58 schrieb Gerhard Hoffmann:

Interesting how compression turbines fail,  NS1, NS2, the
Druschba pipeline had a problem, too.

Is that known in the mean time what happened to the
Bornholm electricity cable?

I forgot the fiber optic cables at 2 locations 250 miles away
from each other and at the same time, that killed railway
traffic for half a day in Northern Germany,

> Gerhard

 

[Ed Lee]

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 12:31:00 AM UTC-7, Don Y wrote:

On 10/16/2022 12:01 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire
section from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months,
by the time they get to it.
But that doesn\'t necessarily mean the pipe, itself, is compromised over
that same distance. One would assume that a pipe intended to be surrounded
by salt water would have some sorts of internal mechanisms that isolate
\"exposed\" sections of pipe in the event of a pressure loss -- simply
because a rupture could render many miles of laid pipe \"unrecoverable\".

If they said \"small section\" need to be replaced, then i would think so. But they said \"large section\" and how large is large? Potentially the entire section under-water is large.

The pipes are welded in-place and sealed with concrete from outside. No sure how strong is the seal inside, but they didn\'t expect exposed sea-water for extended period of time.

Putin the Poor is desperate to get Europe back into Russia gas dependency. I am sure he wants a time machine to go back to February.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 04:10:13 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
<langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

søndag den 16. oktober 2022 kl. 09.31.00 UTC+2 skrev Don Y:
On 10/16/2022 12:01 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire
section from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months,
by the time they get to it.
But that doesn\'t necessarily mean the pipe, itself, is compromised over
that same distance. One would assume that a pipe intended to be surrounded
by salt water would have some sorts of internal mechanisms that isolate
\"exposed\" sections of pipe in the event of a pressure loss -- simply
because a rupture could render many miles of laid pipe \"unrecoverable\".
Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected
steel and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS
3?
The more interesting issue is who would have assaulted the pipeline.

A (rational) european actor would be cutting off their own energy supply.

well, some some of the EU population are beginning to say \"screw Ukraine, just give Putin what he wants, we want cheap gas\"
Without the pipelines Putin can\'t deliver so it avoids that discussion

And some of the Russian population are beginning to say \"we won\'t
fight for the Motherland.\"

Maybe compromise and let him have europe up to West Germany and maybe
Austria. He probably doesn\'t want Greece or Sweden.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 00:01:26 -0700 (PDT), Ed Lee
<edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire section from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months, by the time they get to it. Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected steel and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS 3?

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Gazprom-Large-Section-Of-Nord-Stream-Needs-To-Be-Replaced.html

After the Deepwater Horizon blowout in the gulf, multiple gadgets were
emergency fabricated to restrict and collect and finally clamp off the
flow. The successful one stopped the leak in about three months.

I haven\'t heard of any plans to fix this one. The Nord Stream pipes
may never be repaired.

Maybe some older German houses still have coal-burning fireplaces.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 07:32:44 GMT, Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Oct 2022 00:01:26 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ed Lee
edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote in
a3297450-511d-4174-8149-fc606a7796abn@googlegroups.com>:

Large sections of NS 1 & 2 need to be replaced. Practically the entire section
from Russia coast to Germany coast will be under-water for months, by the
time they get to it. Inside of the pipe-line is probably unprotected steel
and won\'t last long under sea-water. Who would risk and finance NS 3?

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Gazprom-Large-Section-Of-Nord-Stream-Needs-To-Be-Replaced.html

Who should \'pay\' for it you mean?
It is the low life US Military Industrial Complex mafia that wants - and makes wars everywhere
and makes money at all cost by trying to destroy the competition.

Germany started two world wars that killed about 100 million people.
Before that we had Caesers and huns and emperors and kaisers and kings
in basically constant european war. Sadly, Pax Americana only kept
europe mostly peaceful for 75 years.

Quite the opposite that the Great Chinese Leader who is now starting his next term, Mr Xi, is
doing, he is HELPING other countries.

Taiwan. Tibet. Mongolia.

https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/world-news/china/955728/all-countries-china-territory-disputes

You admire this?

 

[whit3rd]

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 4:24:36 AM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote in
news:651a418b-ae1e-4f79...@googlegroups.com:

well, some some of the EU population are beginning to say \"screw
Ukraine, just give Putin what he wants, we want cheap gas\"

That is pretty goddamned stupid. It was an invasion of a sovereign
nation. Would they feel the same if Putin was encroaching on their
homelands? So, cheap gas is worth the price of criminally
slaughtering civilians in said sovereign nation? And then simply
declaring an annexation of them publicly and thinking that is all it
takes to make it so.

Also, by annexing a territory, he\'s declaring that the
natives of that region are subject to his military draft... that\'s a
very discomfiting bit of positive feedback generating negative effects.

 

[Mike Monett VE3BTI]

Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> wrote:

It remains to be seen if the alternatives are any better.
In the long term there is no alternative to being autarc
with photovoltaic, H2 and wind.

The obvious option is Thorium Molten Salt Reactors. These can power the
planet for thousands of years. They cannot explode or melt down and are
walk-away safe.

TMSRs achieve around 99% burnup, where conventional Pressurized Water
Reactors can ony achive 0.5% - 0.7% burnup.

The highly dangerous waste from conventional reactors last for thousands of
years. TMSR waste lasts for 300 years or less. In fact, molten salt
reactors can burn PWR waste as fuel.

TMSR reactors do not need water for cooling. They can be placed anywhere.
In fact, China is developing molten salt reactors in the desert.

PWR reactors need to be huge to recover development and installation costs.
This means long distance transmission lines must be built to deliver the
energy to customers.

TMSR reactors can be much smaller. This eliminates the need for long
distance transmission lines. The reactors can be placed close to the cities
that need the energy. Since they cannot explode or melt down, there is no
danger that PWR reactors give. TMSR cannot produce a TMI, Chernobyl or
Fukushima.

TMSR runs at a much higher temperature than PWR, 500C to 800C vs 315C. This
allows critical CO2 to be used as a transfer fluid. This means turbines
that convert the energy to electricity can be much smaller and much less
expensive.

As internal combustion engines are being phased out in favor of electic
vehicles, electricity demand will increase. As current sources of energy
are already maxed out, new sources must be found.

Thorium may turn out to be the only viable option.



--
MRM

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 12:48:53 PM UTC+11, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:

Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:

It remains to be seen if the alternatives are any better.
In the long term there is no alternative to being autarc
with photovoltaic, H2 and wind.
The obvious option is Thorium Molten Salt Reactors. These can power the
planet for thousands of years. They cannot explode or melt down and are
walk-away safe.

If they are generating power - which is to say heat - they can always melt down.
They certainly aren\'t walk-away safe.

TMSRs achieve around 99% burnup, where conventional Pressurized Water
Reactors can only achieve 0.5% - 0.7% burnup.

You\'ve still got to take the fission products out of the reactor. If you don\'t they eventually soak up enough neutrons to stop the fission cycle,

The highly dangerous waste from conventional reactors last for thousands of
years.

Conventional reactors fission U-235. Thorium reactors fission U-233. In both cases the fission products are a spread of elements with about half the atomic weight some of them are very radioactive and some of them stay radioactive for thousands and tens of thousand of years. Conventional reactor contain quite a bit of U-238 and some of that gets turned into Pu-239, which does pose particular problems, but thorium reactor waste is still very dangerous and does need to stored esecurely for a very long time.

> TMSR waste lasts for 300 years or less.

Nonsense,

> In fact, molten salt reactors can burn PWR waste as fuel.

Pressurised water reactors do generated Pu-239, and you can burn that as fuel. You\'d have to process the waste to extract the Pu-239.

> TMSR reactors do not need water for cooling. They can be placed anywhere. In fact, China is developing molten salt reactors in the desert.

That molten salt reactor is a U-233 breeder reactor. It isn\'t designed to generate power, which is to say heat, so it doesn\'t need much cooling. and it does run hot which means it doesn\'t need active coloing.

> PWR reactors need to be huge to recover development and installation costs.

They also need to be huge to generate enough heat to generate commercially interesting amounts of power.

> This means long distance transmission lines must be built to deliver the energy to customers.

Not necessarily.,

TMSR reactors can be much smaller. This eliminates the need for long
distance transmission lines. The reactors can be placed close to the cities
that need the energy. Since they cannot explode or melt down, there is no
danger that PWR reactors give. TMSR cannot produce a TMI, Chernobyl or
Fukushima.

Sure they can. If they are generating enough heat to generate enough power to be commercially interesting, they can melt down

> TMSR runs at a much higher temperature than PWR, 500C to 800C vs 315C. This allows critical CO2 to be used as a transfer fluid. This means turbines that convert the energy to electricity can be much smaller and much less expensive.

Perhaps. There is no such thing as \"critical CO2\". The reference is to

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

> As internal combustion engines are being phased out in favor of electric vehicles, electricity demand will increase. As current sources of energy are already maxed out, new sources must be found.

Solar cells and wind turbines don\'t generate radioactive waste that has to be stored securely for hundreds of thousands of years.

> Thorium may turn out to be the only viable option.

The Australian electricity generating businesses see solar cells and wind farms as perfectly viable options., and are investing in nothing else. They are aware that they are going to have to invest in pumped storage and grid scale batteries, and this is starting to happen.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[whit3rd]

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 10:21:19 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

> Mr Xi was elected by the people, as was Biden

Huh? Xi was elected by the party, not the people.

 

[whit3rd]

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 10:21:19 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

> Given the fact het ukrain kept shelling Donbass even after the 2014 agreement...

After a few of Putin\'s appointees agreed with Putin? That happens EVERY year,
Ukraine has no obligation to honor that kind of agreement.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:06:18 -0700 (PDT)) it happened whit3rd
<whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
<618173ab-6239-460e-8fbe-3b8ce4823eccn@googlegroups.com>:

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 10:21:19 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Mr Xi was elected by the people, as was Biden

Huh? Xi was elected by the party, not the people.

and the party is: a representation of the people.
In \'merrica the Military Industrial Complex brings forward some puppet
that in the Biden case plays racism, sex, drugs, crime, and provokes
war in Europe to increase tax payer funded useless weapon sales,
like his PARTY did when Bil Klignon was preCedent.
The more brainless the guy the better he is suited for the puppet role.
Now the demon-crates even bring back Osama into the race
to keep the black voters... as most of \'merrica is appalled by
how things are these days under Biden and his demon-cratic government.

And you all fall for it!

Living standards in the US are in the very low area compared to the world.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/standard-of-living-by-country

close to China!
Netherlands (where I am in Europe) place 7
UK place 14
USA place 20
China place 23

 

[whit3rd]

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 11:37:38 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:06:18 -0700 (PDT)) it happened whit3rd
whi...@gmail.com> wrote in
618173ab-6239-460e...@googlegroups.com>:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 10:21:19 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Mr Xi was elected by the people, as was Biden

Huh? Xi was elected by the party, not the people.
and the party is: a representation of the people.

Only according to propoganda posters.
The party is composed of every member that Xi hasn\'t
purged in recent years... that election is fixed by back-room
intimidation tactics.

 

[Mike Monett VE3BTI]

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 10:21:19 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Mr Xi was elected by the people, as was Biden

Huh? Xi was elected by the party, not the people.

Phil pointed out earlier that Jan delights in making outrageous statements,
then laughs as people rise up to respond. A classic troll.



--
MRM

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:58:14 -0700 (PDT)) it happened whit3rd
<whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
<cc92b095-0218-4a28-8084-dae7d604284en@googlegroups.com>:

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 11:37:38 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:06:18 -0700 (PDT)) it happened whit3rd
whi...@gmail.com> wrote in
618173ab-6239-460e...@googlegroups.com>:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 10:21:19 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Mr Xi was elected by the people, as was Biden

Huh? Xi was elected by the party, not the people.
and the party is: a representation of the people.

Only according to propoganda posters.
The party is composed of every member that Xi hasn\'t
purged in recent years... that election is fixed by back-room
intimidation tactics.

Infighting is everywhere, also in the US, it is part of human nature.