| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Science & Technology | |
| Nord Stream take from someone that worked in the field. Deep breakdown and Russian incompetency | |
| 2022-09-30 | |
| [LawDogFile] Ok, the Nord pipeline incidents. Sigh. I shouldn’t do this, but … I call them “incidents” for a reason. I grew up in overseas oilfields. I try to, by training, observe everything from as objectively neutral a viewpoint as possible. In my experience when anything involving energy-industry hydrocarbons explodes … well, sabotage isn’t the first thing that comes to mind. And honestly, when it comes to a pipeline running natural gas under Russian (non)maintenance, an explosion means that it’s Tuesday. Or Friday. Or another day of the week ending in “y”. “But, LawDog,” I hear you say, “It was multiple explosions!” Yes, 17 hours apart. No military is going to arrange for two pipes in the same general area to be destroyed 17 hours apart. Not without some Spec Ops guy having a fit of apoplexy. One pipe goes up in a busy shipping lane, in a busy sea, and everyone takes notice. Then you wait 17 hours to do the second — with 17 hours for people to show up and catch you running dirty? Nah, not buying it. The Nord pipelines weren’t in use. To me, that means it’s time for maintenance! Hard to maintain pipes when product is flowing. Pipelines running methane, under saltwater, require PMCS* quicker than you’d think, and more often than you’d believe. I would bet a cup of coffee that any of the required weekly and monthly checks and services since the Russians took over have been pencil-whipped. (See Andreev Bay 1982.) They officially shut it down in July of 2020 for maintenance, and had cornbread hell getting it back on-line, and “issues” with maintaining flow throughout the next year; shut it down again in July of 2021, with bigger “issues” — we say “issues” because the Russians won’t explain what these issues were — and even more problems, including unexplained, major disruptions in gas flow in Dec21/Jan22; Feb 22; and April 22. Yeah, there’s problems with those lines. And these are the same folks that PMCS’d Chernobyl. So. They’ve got pipelines with issues that are currently pressurised (with highly flammable, if not outright explosive, natural gas/methane), but not moving product. It’s time to find out what those issues are. And they blew up. My shocked face, let me show you it. Next time, tell Sergei to put out the cigarette before pulling a pressure test. Is there a possibility of sabotage? Yeah. Especially in the current world situation — but folks thought the Kursk went down because of hostile actions, too. So, yes, hostile actions are a possibility, but mass amounts of explosive hydrocarbon gas + 300 feet down under salt water + shoddy Russian maintenance = “Nobody could have possibly seen this coming”, and yet another entry into the extensive Wikipedia page on “Soviet/Russian disasters”. “But what issues could happen in an undersea pipeline that could cause ruptures?” Oh, my sweet summer child. Many, many, many. You might go far as to ask, “What issues won’t cause a rupture in an undersea pipeline?” — It’d be easier to list. However, in this case involving a natural gas pipeline under the pressure of 300 to 360 feet (8 atmospheres to 10 atm.) of water, I’d like you to turn your eyes towards a fun little quirk of nature called “methane hydrates”. Well, actually, I’d like you to meditate upon “hydrate plug”, but give me a moment. Under certain circumstances of pressure, temperature, and water presence natural gas/methane will form solid hydrates, with concomitant amounts of fun.
| |
| Posted by:DarthVader |
| #12 Interesting discussion. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2022-09-30 17:28 |
| #10 Heard a big one some 30 miles+ away go pop. Could even hear the burn-off. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2022-09-30 13:24 |
| #9 Weren’t there supposedly “detonations?” With this theory, it was a massive depressurization event. Several hundred pounds of hydro plug ripping through the pipe wall at a bend and the several hundred bars of pressure in the pipe coming out very quickly. Can trip seismographs and sound like an explosion. Experts can tell the difference but most of those will be in SCIFs and have classified information around that area. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2022-09-30 13:16 |
| #8 Weren’t there supposedly “detonations?” |
| Posted by: Lowspark 2022-09-30 13:05 |
| #7 I am under the impression that the undersea leg(s) are a European Project - Russian pipeline on land connecting to said project - if that is so, wouldn't they be responsible for the maintenance of said structure? Out of my understanding; just trying to make sure the pieces on the board are set up right, and please correct or expand. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2022-09-30 12:52 |
| #6 Hopefully Europeans can keep warm by burning the furniture of anyone involved in an energy policy decision the last 20 years. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2022-09-30 12:41 |
| #5 A plausible theory to a non-expert like me. Russian industry has never been a model of efficiency. But Biden and Nuland implicated themselves by threatening to "end" the pipelines back in January if Putin invaded Ukraine. Putin invaded Ukraine and now the pipelines have ended. Cause and effect? Dunno but I don't hear the White House denying it. We have theories and we have theories. Another theory is that it's gonna be a cold winter in Europe. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2022-09-30 12:22 |
| #4 MI6 / MoD InfoOps bullshit: “fact” Actual facts and evidence that destroy MI6 / MoD InfoOps bullshit: “conspiracy theories” |
| Posted by: Mad Eye Whinelet7283 2022-09-30 09:52 |
| #3 “Republicans pounce“ “Russians pounce“ People I hate pounce |
| Posted by: Mad Eye Whinelet7283 2022-09-30 09:49 |
| #1 Chemistry, physics, and Russian maintenance. Very plausible; very convincing; very likely. Don't need no nefarious bad guys. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2022-09-30 08:38 |