Re: Nordstream: Pipe Down
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2022 9:12 pm
It would even be better to burn it off, but I guess that's not really possible.
It makes it difficult to approach the damage sites if there's a raging inferno at sea level.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 9:12 pmIt would even be better to burn it off, but I guess that's not really possible.
It happened accidently, remember this - clicky?Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 9:12 pmIt would even be better to burn it off, but I guess that's not really possible.
I know my usual approach to most problems is to work out if they will be improved by setting them on fire, but I do wonder if this problem really is.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 9:12 pmIt would even be better to burn it off, but I guess that's not really possible.
Not sure, I agree, Martin. Every comment on the subject I saw since Wednesday estimated it would be Monday or Tuesday before all of it was released. And until then, they couldn't send someone down to have a look. So I am not sure it is being fed gas deliberately. Ask again next week.
Seeing as reports were that the pipeline pressure had already reached seabed pressure, the release should have stopped/reduced to a trickle. This is what I do as a job.temptar wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:54 amNot sure, I agree, Martin. Every comment on the subject I saw since Wednesday estimated it would be Monday or Tuesday before all of it was released. And until then, they couldn't send someone down to have a look. So I am not sure it is being fed gas deliberately. Ask again next week.
Lighting it is trivial. Lighting it safely isn't; you need to fire a flare into the gas cloud and even then hope that it hits a bit of gas which is at the flammable limit (quite small, even for methane, it's between 5-15% in air and the stoichiometric sweet spot is 9.5%) and then hope that the flammable limit cloud stays where the fire is, or it gets snuffed out. And flares aren't very accurate; accuracy isn't something you need when the requirement is mainly: go up, be visible.EACLucifer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:18 amI know my usual approach to most problems is to work out if they will be improved by setting them on fire, but I do wonder if this problem really is.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 9:12 pmIt would even be better to burn it off, but I guess that's not really possible.
Actually lighting it is probably quite trivial.
Ukraine captured a whole bunch of thermite cluster ammunition for the BM-21 Grad. Fire of a few of those, and anywhere stoichiometry is correct, it will lightMartin_B wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 8:08 amSeeing as reports were that the pipeline pressure had already reached seabed pressure, the release should have stopped/reduced to a trickle. This is what I do as a job.temptar wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:54 amNot sure, I agree, Martin. Every comment on the subject I saw since Wednesday estimated it would be Monday or Tuesday before all of it was released. And until then, they couldn't send someone down to have a look. So I am not sure it is being fed gas deliberately. Ask again next week.
Lighting it is trivial. Lighting it safely isn't; you need to fire a flare into the gas cloud and even then hope that it hits a bit of gas which is at the flammable limit (quite small, even for methane, it's between 5-15% in air and the stoichiometric sweet spot is 9.5%) and then hope that the flammable limit cloud stays where the fire is, or it gets snuffed out. And flares aren't very accurate; accuracy isn't something you need when the requirement is mainly: go up, be visible.EACLucifer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 7:18 amI know my usual approach to most problems is to work out if they will be improved by setting them on fire, but I do wonder if this problem really is.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 9:12 pmIt would even be better to burn it off, but I guess that's not really possible.
Actually lighting it is probably quite trivial.
https://twitter.com/oalexanderdk/status ... wut4Zqlx5A
The Swedish Coast Guard is reporting that while the larger Nord Stream 2 leak in Danish waters has stopped, the smaller one in Swedish waters has increased in size.
They currently have no explanation for this.
As the smaller leak is closer to the origin point and Russian compressor station, it could be possible that Russia is pumping additional gas into the pipeline.
Woodchopper wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:25 pm
The Swedish Coast Guard is reporting that while the larger Nord Stream 2 leak in Danish waters has stopped, the smaller one in Swedish waters has increased in size.
They currently have no explanation for this.
As the smaller leak is closer to the origin point and Russian compressor station, it could be possible that Russia is pumping additional gas into the pipeline.
https://twitter.com/oalexanderdk/status ... wut4Zqlx5A
To keep reminding people of the threat? To try to own the environmentalists?plodder wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 10:06 pmWoodchopper wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:25 pm
The Swedish Coast Guard is reporting that while the larger Nord Stream 2 leak in Danish waters has stopped, the smaller one in Swedish waters has increased in size.
They currently have no explanation for this.
As the smaller leak is closer to the origin point and Russian compressor station, it could be possible that Russia is pumping additional gas into the pipeline.
https://twitter.com/oalexanderdk/status ... wut4Zqlx5A
I’m not sure I understand what the point of pumping extra gas would be
Putin believing that global warming would turn the Russian Steppes into a version of the North American prairie, becoming a global food supplier which other countries would have to beg food from? This isn't the craziest theory I can come up with, either!
It's an alternative to wasting it in other ways. They have gas to waste. The Russians are flaring off lots of gas because it is too complicated to reduce production down to the levels they are selling. BBC, 26-8-22: Flaring $10m of gas a day near Finnish border.
Yeah, simultaneity rules that out completely.bjn wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 2:23 pmI’m not wise enough to judge this take on the pipe failures, but the supposition is that methane hydrates formed the in the pipes and attempts to clear them led to failure. Incompetence causing both the formation and the destructive efforts to clear them. The Russians apparently have form for this, having previously destroyed a surface pipeline trying to clear such a blockage with a blowtorch(!).
Any opinions?
Happening to both pipelines near simultaneously and nearby make me dubious.
https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html
Hydrate blockages in stationary pipelines are possible, as any water present will collect in low points and the conditions of the pipelines (~100-200 bar, seabed temperature in Baltic Sea) means that the water can form hydrates relatively easily. If there's enough water then a hydrate blockage is possible.dyqik wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 2:29 pmYeah, simultaneity rules that out completely.bjn wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 2:23 pmI’m not wise enough to judge this take on the pipe failures, but the supposition is that methane hydrates formed the in the pipes and attempts to clear them led to failure. Incompetence causing both the formation and the destructive efforts to clear them. The Russians apparently have form for this, having previously destroyed a surface pipeline trying to clear such a blockage with a blowtorch(!).
Any opinions?
Happening to both pipelines near simultaneously and nearby make me dubious.
https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html
And both pipelines forming them at the same time when they are different age pipelines, and one has been in use for years, and one never got fully turned on is also a rather large coincidence.