Putin announces 'military operation' in Ukraine.

[Mice!]

17 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

Germany has the worlds 4th largest gas storage capacity, about 10 weeks supply.  It is currently about 55% full, but they want to 'top it up' to near 100% because in winter, up to 60% of the daily gas usage can be drawn from the storage reserve, so top up in summer, run down in winter.  At present with only 40% of normal flow coming from Russia, they are worried about entering winter with low stored reserves.

Certainly makes things interesting..

The total capacity for injection and withdrawal from German gas storage facilities is around 23 billion cubic meters of gas. Germany ranks fourth among the world’s largest storage countries. Only in the US, Ukraine and Russia there are even greater capacities.

I wonder where the Ukraine store there gas?

https://erdgasspeicher.de/en/gas-storage/gas-storage-capacities/

17 minutes ago, discobob said:

whereas we have 2 days worth of storage.......

But....

So we have gas, but I hope someone is looking at just how costly those repairs were?

[discobob]

2 minutes ago, Mice! said:

But....

The thing is though we are totally dependant on the spot rates at which the gas is taken out of the ground - whereas with a long term storage we can at least ride out peaks (and troughs) to give a much more predictable rate....

[Mice!]

5 minutes ago, discobob said:

The thing is though we are totally dependant on the spot rates at which the gas is taken out of the ground - whereas with a long term storage we can at least ride out peaks (and troughs) to give a much more predictable rate....

That's what the link says about Germany,  but they can't produce their own gas, or at least nothing like enough.

I can't imagine how much a facility/facilities would cost though to store 23 billion cubic meters of gas, but it would be a lot more useful than HS2

[Rewulf]

11 minutes ago, Mice! said:

wonder where the Ukraine store there gas?

Wonder why the Russians haven't destroyed it? 

Ergo, I wonder why the Ukrainians haven't destroyed the pipelines bringing Russian gas and oil over to Europe? They were most upset about the turbine delivery, as it enabled Nordstream to get back up to speed. Yet they have 100s of miles of pipeline in their Western territory bringing cash into Russian coffers every day. 

Makes you wonder who's really running the show? 

Oligarchs schmoligarchs. 

 

[Yellow Bear]

3 minutes ago, Mice! said:

I can't imagine how much a facility/facilities would cost though to store 23 billion cubic meters of gas, but it would be a lot more useful than HS2

IIRC they were going to build a big underground one in north Wales but this was vetoed by the Welsh assembly (aided by the green lobby) on so called safety grounds.

[Mice!]

20 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

IIRC they were going to build a big underground one in north Wales but this was vetoed by the Welsh assembly (aided by the green lobby) on so called safety grounds.

Sounds about right,  never mind all the jobs it would have created.

21 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Wonder why the Russians haven't destroyed it? 

Ergo, I wonder why the Ukrainians haven't destroyed the pipelines bringing Russian gas and oil over to Europe? They were most upset about the turbine delivery, as it enabled Nordstream to get back up to speed. Yet they have 100s of miles of pipeline in their Western territory bringing cash into Russian coffers every day. 

Makes you wonder who's really running the show? 

Oligarchs schmoligarchs. 

 

Why would the Russians destroy it if they can control it? That's why I said where is it?

And I get why the Ukrainians haven't blown the pipes, because they supply the countries who are sending them weapons.

[Rewulf]

15 minutes ago, Mice! said:

Why would the Russians destroy it if they can control it? That's why I said where is it?

Why would they need it, its gas from areas they control filling it? 

 

15 minutes ago, Mice! said:

And I get why the Ukrainians haven't blown the pipes, because they supply the countries who are sending them weapons

Why did they kick off so bad about the turbine then, its an integral part of Nordstream, that feeds Germany. 

Swings and roundabouts I suppose, but it's a weird strategy to let the country that's murdering, raping, and destroying your infrastructure, carry on transporting its resources across your land, that feeds its war effort? 

A better strategy would have been to destroy the pipes early on, blame it on the Russians, thus galvanising the EU into more stringent actions, and depriving Russia of half its gas revenue. 

Ukraine did actually partially destroy some refineries, on Russian soil early on, which wasn't well reported, and seems to never have been attempted again, makes me wonder if they got told to stop that kind of thing, hurts profits you know? 

Edited July 22, 2022 by Rewulf

[JohnfromUK]

1 hour ago, Mice! said:

So we have gas, but I hope someone is looking at just how costly those repairs were?

The gas supply in the UK is by private companies.  Why should the government subsidise the repair of their facilities?

 

[discobob]

1 hour ago, Yellow Bear said:

IIRC they were going to build a big underground one in north Wales but this was vetoed by the Welsh assembly (aided by the green lobby) on so called safety grounds.

Dont!!!

My blood will start boiling at our useless assembly - its too early in the day 🤬

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Why should the government subsidise the repair of their facilities?

because it may have stopped them having to dole out mill/billions to people on benefits to help cover their tax bills - it is a critical infrastructure so it would benefit everyone in the UK 

Instead of just benefitting the (in the main) feckless types

[JohnfromUK]

1 hour ago, discobob said:

The thing is though we are totally dependant on the spot rates at which the gas is taken out of the ground

Not strictly so; we have long term 'bought forward' contracts for the supply of gas - largely from Norway.  In very simple terms, when I sign a contract with my supplier to have gas for 2 years at a fixed price, they (Octopus in my case) sign an equivalent contract with their suppliers.  Its how the supply business should work.  Of course if we went to war with Norway, or Norway defaulted on the contract, there is a problem, but that is deemed an acceptable risk.

Octopus did explain this when persuading peoiple like me to sign up for long term deals.  The risk was thet the world spot price would fall - and I would be buying my gas more expensively as the contract had a termination payment should I wish to end it early.

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, discobob said:

because it may have stopped them having to dole out mill/billions

The better answer was to sign up for long term 'bought forward' contracts from our suppliers. 

Personally I think we should have storage, but paid for by the gas (and gas generated electricity) supply industry (i.e. from gas and electricity bills) - not from general taxation.  That way the bigger users pay more.  The idea that taxpayers subsidise everything risky is not a good way forward.

The Gov't should merely supply the legislative framework to ensure a safe and reliable supply (as is done with electricity etc.) and supervised by the existing regulator.

[Mice!]

8 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

The gas supply in the UK is by private companies.  Why should the government subsidise the repair of their facilities?

 

I agree they shouldn't,  but the government should be able to guarantee supply,  Germany look to have the right idea, so it would make sense for the government to own the facility and be able to sell the gas.

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Mice! said:

I agree they shouldn't,  but the government should be able to guarantee supply

See my post above which will have crossed!

[Rewulf]

Apparently Germany has HAD to take 10 coal fired power stations out of mothballs to cover against the 'threat' of Russia stopping supplying gas.
The greens are unhappy , but understand it has to be done to keep the lights on.
Net zero targets however, are out the window, thanks Vlad !

https://www.businessinsider.com/germany-coal-power-plants-russia-cuts-natural-gas-climate-energy-2022-6?r=US&IR=T#:~:text=Germany has taken a "bitter,by around 60% last week.

The issue with the story is, Germany has been in a quandary over this energy shortfall for some years, they cancelled their nuclear programme , and dont use wind or solar much, which is strange considering how vocal they are about carbon targets.

This story from 2020

https://networks.online/power/germany-to-switch-on-more-coal-fired-power-despite-2038-exit/

Greta was unavailable for comment last night.

[Boybrit]

Germany is getting their gas supplied again but not at the full capacity from Vlad, this is not all going into storage as their industry is a huge user so there may yet be a winter of discontent. They do have around 50% forest coverage and perhaps that might help keep the homes in the burbs warm although the cubic metre price for wood has tripled in the last few weeks. Blame it all on Covid and Brexit?

[Stonepark]

21 hours ago, Mice! said:

I agree they shouldn't,  but the government should be able to guarantee supply,  Germany look to have the right idea, so it would make sense for the government to own the facility and be able to sell the gas.

Rough field only had 9 days worth of storage 3.3Bm3, compared to Germany's 10 weeks of storage at 23.3Bm3,

 

Rough field was only ever designed to be an emergency supply and price balancing and could provide 10% of gas for 13 weeks as we had our own supplies and reliable deliveries from Norway topping those up.

 

Where as Germany's storage is providing 50% of gas demand for up to 20 weeks (i.e. winter).

 

The next one that is going to hurt is electricity. Gov has just approved another sub sea interconnector, this time between UK and Germany to export surplus renewable power to Germany...... how is that going to lower UK electricity prices?

[Mice!]

19 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

The next one that is going to hurt is electricity. Gov has just approved another sub sea interconnector, this time between UK and Germany to export surplus renewable power to Germany...... how is that going to lower UK electricity prices

You would think they'd be using the renewable power before producing more??

[Mungler]

23 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Wonder why the Russians haven't destroyed it? 

Ergo, I wonder why the Ukrainians haven't destroyed the pipelines bringing Russian gas and oil over to Europe? They were most upset about the turbine delivery, as it enabled Nordstream to get back up to speed. Yet they have 100s of miles of pipeline in their Western territory bringing cash into Russian coffers every day. 

Makes you wonder who's really running the show? 

Oligarchs schmoligarchs. 

 

It’s blindingly obvious and simple, Ukraine doesn’t want to cut off Europe’s gas supply - the consequences of that will be worse than the consequences of letting the gas flow.

 

[Stonepark]

16 minutes ago, Mungler said:

It’s blindingly obvious and simple, Ukraine doesn’t want to cut off Europe’s gas supply - the consequences of that will be worse than the consequences of letting the gas flow.

 

There is also one very good reason of self interest.

By allowing the transport of gas Western Ukraine are by default protecting the remainder of their power and energy infrastructure as you need electricity to pump the gas.

 

If Western Ukraine stop the gas transport, Putin will demolish the rest of the infrastructure.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Mungler said:

It’s blindingly obvious and simple, Ukraine doesn’t want to cut off Europe’s gas supply - the consequences of that will be worse than the consequences of letting the gas flow.

Did you miss the bit where I said 'Do it early on and blame it on the Russians' who would not believe the Ukrainians over the Russians ?

It may seem like a step too far, or an outrageous act, but Ukraine are fighting for their survival are they not, and as the war progresses, there may not be a lot of country to fight for.
I appreciate the only thing keeping Ukraine going at the moment is the flow of arms and money from the west, I watched a commentator (who seemed pretty pro Ukraine to me) say that Ukraine has around a weeks worth of ammunition at any one time to fight with, and if that ammo flow from the west stopped.....
So no , of course they are going to want to keep the gas going, to keep the EU happy, it also keeps Russia happy too.
 

My question of why either side havent destroyed each others gas infrastructure was purely hypothetical, but unless the questions are asked ~?

1 hour ago, Stonepark said:

If Western Ukraine stop the gas transport, Putin will demolish the rest of the infrastructure.

Quite possibly, but to read some MSM reports , Putin is hell bent on total destruction of Ukraine, and the genocide of every Ukrainian, obviously he needs to do that before he can move onto the rest of Europe, thus fulfilling his 'dream' of recreating the Russian empire /USSR 😆

[Rewulf]

This is very interesting , and shows the selective nature of western MSM reporting.
For those of a cynical nature, Ive tried very hard to find a pro Russian connection between WION/Gravitas, and Im struggling to find anything at all, they seem , on the face of it, pretty unbiased.

 

[derbyduck]

On 22/07/2022 at 11:46, Mice! said:

I agree they shouldn't,  but the government should be able to guarantee supply,  Germany look to have the right idea, so it would make sense for the government to own the facility and be able to sell the gas.

the government did own it ! it was called British Gas  and Margret Thatcher sold it off in 1986 !

[Old farrier]

26 minutes ago, derbyduck said:

the government did own it ! it was called British Gas  and Margret Thatcher sold it off in 1986 !

Well that’s not quite as I saw it 

the people of Great Britain owned it and the government of the time managed it for the peoples benefit 

then they sold it off along with water electricity and heaven knows what else 

a government shouldn’t own anything they are just custodian until the next election 

just my view on it 

[Mice!]

28 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

government shouldn’t own anything they are just custodian until the next election 

Certainly how it should be. 

1 hour ago, derbyduck said:

the government did own it ! it was called British Gas  and Margret Thatcher sold it off in 1986 !

I new that, and I don't want or expect the government to own the rail, water or power companies,  but looking forward the likes of gas storage facilities has to be a good thing, but I can only see the Gov being able to fund it.

[Mungler]

Here’s one worth watching. It’s long but it’s considered and it’s less than complimentary about russia and so will be dismissed out of hand by a few on here.
 

 

Interestingly, one of the Putin apologists on here told us the Ukraine war would be over by now. The strategic targeting that the Ukrainian forces have been able to carry out with the HIMARS has had a dramatic and very cost effective impact.