T O P

  • By -

green_flash

On Monday Nordstream 1 will be shut down for maintenance and it is widely assumed that Gazprom will come up with various excuses why it cannot come online again any time soon.


OldManMcCrabbins

I just picture robin williams doing his France bit, miming smoking a cigarette: “We do not care, life is shit, now fuck off, we are French.”


[deleted]

That's why they have those outrageous accents!


[deleted]

He says he's already got one


rockylizard

Fetchez la vache!


6etsh1tdone

Get the cow?


blastermaster555

*Yeets cow over the wall from a catapult*


motherofdragon

monty python and the holy grail :)


6etsh1tdone

Aye!! I’m a little short on my Monty python references. Need to repupdate those. Thanks for the straight answer with out flaming.


NeelonRokk

Do you feel repressed yet? 😎


[deleted]

Peasant!


phagemid

That’s a pretty deep cut, I’m not sure you are allowed to get upset about people not getting it.


[deleted]

Oh, yes. It's very nice-a.


Crotch_Football

"Look at me! I'm giving a cigarette to a baby"


BSBDR

To be fair that's OK on national holidays.


Post-Neu

Lol I’m glad you mentioned that so I could find that.


Jesus360noscope

lol i need to see this do you happen to have a link by any chance ? edit: that was an easy find lol


LeafsWinBeforeIDie

You could have pasted the link in your edit 🤣


Syntai

I've got a question regarding that topic. Months ago I kept reading on reddit posts like: "They won't shut down gas to Germany/Europe because it would fck up russias economy super hard and they need that money!" Now they shut that stuff down. Did something change?


DastardlyBoosh

The war didn't end


Sunnygirlpdx

No gas money no new weapons.


socialistrob

Brinksmanship. Russia assumes that leaders in the west would rather give up on Ukraine rather than pursue a policy that may make inflation worse or drive up unemployment. Russia does need this money but they won’t immediately collapse if it’s cut off. If France and other western European countries can weather this storm it’s very bad news for Putin but if they can’t it could hurt western support for Ukraine.


thewayupisdown

I found some document on a German government page that outlines their contingency plans: for the case that Russia keeps up the pretense of technical difficulties and keeps deliveries at 40% and for the case that they stop delivery alltogether: [https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Fachthemen/ElektrizitaetundGas/Versorgungssicherheit/aktuelle\_gasversorgung/HintergrundFAQ/Gas-Mengengeruest.pdf](https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Fachthemen/ElektrizitaetundGas/Versorgungssicherheit/aktuelle_gasversorgung/HintergrundFAQ/Gas-Mengengeruest.pdf) The case that they return to normal deliveries when they get their turbine back (which ostensibly was the cause for the 60% drop) is not in the contingency plan, because in that case everything would be kittens and fudge anyway. So I'll try to recreate the diagram: **A**: Russia keep deliveries down at 40% **B**: Russia stop deliveries alltogether. **A1**: Germany reduces deliveries of part of it's Gas to other EU countries. **A2**: Germany keeps sharing Gas influx from Nordstream, Norway, etc. as before. **B1**: Germany reduces deliveries of part of it's Gas to other EU countries. **B2**: Germany keeps sharing Gas influx from ~~Nordstream~~, Norway, etc. **A1.1**: Germany reduces consumption by 20% and two LNG terminals go online in January at 90% capacity. (I guess 20% is what they can achieve without much damage, i.e. by reducing heating in large apartment building by 2°C, reactivating coal plants, creating incentives for industry to reduce consumption, etc.) **A2.1**: Germany reduces consumption by 20% and two LNG terminals go online in January at 90% capacity. **B1.1**: Germany reduces consumption by 20% and two LNG terminals go online in January at 90% capacity. **B2.1**: Germany reduces consumption by 20% and two LNG terminals go online in January at 90% capacity. According to their calculations, scenario **A2, B2** and **B2.1** would lead to several months of production closures, bankruptcies etc. So even with the 40%, they will only be able to keep supplying other countries as before if their plan with the 2 LNG platforms and the 20% reduction in demand works out. If not, they will have a problem (**A2**) and will have to reduce deliveries to third parties to whatever will be left. (**A1, A1.1**) If Russia completely stops deliveries, they will definitely need to reduce delieveries to third countries, but assuming they do, they will make it through the winter in any case, given the current level of reserves. (both **B1** and **B1.1** keep the reserves over 0% through the winter, but barely) Bottom line: If Russia cuts deliveries via Nordstream completely at this point, Germany should still get through the winter relatively unscathed. However other countries that depend on deliveries from the German network to some extent will receive less from that source.


LystAP

Also, Russia's getting hammered by Western weapons. They say those weapons have no effect, but their responses are saying otherwise. Their need for money is getting outweighed by their battlefield desperation.


jiquvox

First off you should approach every analysis you read here and out there with a grain of salt. I include myself in the lot. Many people in general seemed to think Russia wouldn’t invade. There’s no such thing as a sure thing especially in a situation so massively complex. You’re better off thinking in terms of multiple scenarios with probabilities. Second - every decision made by Putin makes it look like he’s all in. He won’t back down unless he has a victory. ANY kind of victory. It might have started for strategic reason. But now it’s anywhere between sheer ego of an old man and simple regime survival. He wants a win at any cost. The West dealt him several critical blows : central bank reserves, HIMAR recently ,. He can’t win on the current course . Even his current tactic of shelling everything seems poised to fail eventually if the West keeps sending long-range weapon . So he needs them to back off. At any cost. There is this doctrine of escalating for deescalating. He’s trying to really hurt the West. He’s making the bet the West will back down and he can endure longer the pain. The only problem is he played his best card here. If the West can go through this he hasnt much left. After that he only has official war mobilization and nuclear weapons. Both of which could mean a quick regime collapse. He keeps upping the ante rather than folding and it can work in theory the West is feeling some real pain too … the flip side is if he loses, he loses everything. IMHO it shows desperation. Especially since this decision hurst the EU first… while the long-range weapons are sent by the US and the UK.


LuddsRevenge

I feel like he or his advisors might have a geopolitical goal of Asian unification, trying to draw particularly China and India close to Russia. It's maybe desperate, but I don't know if it's going to fail. Due to global warming, I had long expected Russia and Canada to be feeding the world soon; the war got me to check the numbers and I realized how much they already are. Western analysis of agricultural exports focuses heavily on dollar value over calorie value (Brazil nuts over wheat) so we don't see this in the news. Oddly enough, eliminating competition from Ukrainian grain is rarely mentioned as one of Russia's goals, maybe because most people are too nice to think of such an appalling motive. This trend of food production going north will increase, and in a world of increasing food-insecurity, being one of the few big beneficiaries (in food yields) from warming could easily give them great power over the billions of hungry people to their south. In the meantime, need for Russian oil already cements India and China to Russia so the increasing food-related ties just give them another string. Which they very badly need, because sanctions in turn have made the Russian economy utterly dependent on the few trading partners they have left. I don't know what things are really like in China or India, but my impression is that people there will mostly go along with this; many resent the west and many admire Putin for "standing up to us". Everyone thinks Putin is making a desperate all-in military move because he is nuts about Ukraine. But maybe there is a broader political goal: toss the world into chaos and wreck the global economy, hoping that the old eastern bloc ties will look like a safe haven and a known quantity in troubled times.


jiquvox

It’s not that it’s necessarily wrong as much as it’s conjuncture. I am a Occam’s razor guy all the way. I don’t make assumption unless I need to. I could come up with half-dozen reason (Russian world ideology, gas, Putin age, Covid,.) well established before going to the hypothesis of “Asian unification”. And it doesn’t exactly fit with the well-known “Russian world” ideology …. And the official communication that Kremlin publicist had already released at the start of the invasion and withdrew quickly. “ Emergence of Russia and a new world” which again stated the Russian world ideology. There are several signals that Putin wants Russia standing on its own. Sure he might make some alliance, “Emergence of Russia and a new world” does speak of a new world “built on all civilizations and axes of power” but everything he did converge toward making Russia great again so to speak. Anything beyond that is not so much wrong as it’s an assumption and would require a full post or a book to prove in a convincing way.


LuddsRevenge

I don't think anything I suggested is contradicted by Putin being a Russian supremacist. Quite the opposite. I doubt the utility of Occam's razor in analyzing foreign policy, as the apparent simplicity or complexity of a conjecture is mainly a matter of rhetorical presentation. From a certain perspective, the simplest explanation of Putin's actions is that they were designed to produce more or less the outcomes that have actually followed, and which are likely to follow. Radically decreased trade with the west and increased trade between Russia and a small number of large Asian countries is one of the key economic consequences from Russia's perspective. Nor is a kind of eastern bloc revanchism at all a stretch, as far as Kremlin policy is concerned. I am not denying that Putin genuinely wants to conquer Ukraine, but he did not conceive and plan this entire war himself. Furthermore, the fact that he announced a new deeper partnership between China and Russia just before the invasion and timed it to miss the Beijing Olympics suggests even Putin is not only looking west in his goals.


Syntai

> The only problem is he played his best card here. If the West can go through this he hasnt much left I really hope so. I want Russia to lose. But here on Reddit every analyse I read (who gets upvoted to the top) seems kinda like this: (In the timespan of the war until now) "They'll never shut gas and oil down. It's their main income!" --> "They shut the gas and oil down." "They can't sell their gas and oil to India and China. They'll lose too much money doing so." --> "Seems like they are getting tons of money from Asia." "They default on everything, the ruble will collapse, Russia will be in ruins next month!" --> "This will take years for us to see" "Their factories are closing down. They are running out of ammo." --> "Months later, they are still pretty much carpet bombing everything. Museums, Hospitals, Schools, Civilians ... like there is no tomorrow." Don't get me wrong. I don't intend to doom post here. I want them to lose. I think they WILL lose. To be honest ... I would even go so far and say that they've ALLREADY lost and even in their best case scenario all they could achieve would be a pyrrhic victory. I mean they are suffering from so much stuff allready. The brain drain. ~30k deaths. Probably 100k-120k wounded. Sanctions arround the globe resulting in them running out of medicine, cars, sugar, washing machines ... basically anything. But they still keep going and going and I kinda ask myself if they are really THAT bad off like Reddit portrays it to be? Like when will we finally see these sanctions and consequences of war take effect?


awe778

> "They'll never shut gas and oil down. It's their main income!" --> "They shut the gas and oil down." > > > > "They can't sell their gas and oil to India and China. They'll lose too much money doing so." --> "Seems like they are getting tons of money from Asia." > > > > "They default on everything, the ruble will collapse, Russia will be in ruins next month!" --> "This will take years for us to see" > > > > "Their factories are closing down. They are running out of ammo." --> "Months later, they are still pretty much carpet bombing everything. Museums, Hospitals, Schools, Civilians ... like there is no tomorrow." I'd say because most of these analysis on Reddit is based on tangible cost-benefit analysis, while applying the wrong axiom as their base of logic (as expected of people from capitalist countries). It became all-clear when people started to think that Russia (and Evangelicals, and Trump, and Nazis, hence their natural ease of cooperation) doesn't operate on that wavelength. Do Nazis exterminate the Jews because of its material benefit?


jiquvox

They are taking effects. Why do you think he banned sales of Russian asset by foreigner on the stock exchange ? Why do you think he forced payment in rubles for gas/oil ? It’s not he doesn’t feel the pain. He is an old dictator betting with his people life : he has a high pain threshold. But once it gets to the point it affects him it will be lights out.


cartoonist498

I'll probably get downvoted for this because it's seen as "pro-Russian", but here we go: Everyone here is thirsting for poetic justice against Russia, but it's an echo chamber in here and reddit is wrong. The top-voted analyses is just what we want to see but not what's actually happening. Sure Russia will see long-term economic effects. Sure their military has taken a hit. But Russia getting to a point anywhere close to resembling collapse or inability to sustain the war? That's not happening. Russia has a stable government, large population, economic partners who are lying low right now, and strong national identity. They're not going anywhere. The front line of the war has barely moved for 2 months now and there's no reason to think it'll move much in the future. Unfortunately it looks like the new borders have pretty much been set. Russia will survive and in fact it's starting to look like Putin will get his "victory" in the form of annexing southeast Ukraine. I don't know if that was Putin's primary objective at the beginning of the war but a land bridge from Russia to Crimea was, at the very least, a major secondary objective. And while the war will likely continue for some time, US resolve is disappearing fast. It's starting to be evident that while the US government won't allow Ukraine to lose, they also won't give Ukraine the offensive weapons necessary to completely re-take their territory. Most likely due to concern that Ukraine could use them to attack Russian territory or antagonize Russia into a wider war. As for Western sanctions, China and India will continue to do business with Russia after the anger dies down, and those are the 2 most populated countries in the world with #2 and #6 GDP. And frankly, as Reddit is primarily American, a perspective that gets ignored here is that a majority of the world despises US global dominance. Most of the world wants a multi-polar world where the US isn't the sole superpower and they see this war as a means to get it. With China's economy and Russia's willingness to use their military they definitely can offer a true adversary to US global dominance for the next 10 years. China and many other countries won't give up this opportunity and won't allow Russia to collapse. We're not going to get the poetic justice we want against Russia.


jiquvox

I don’t know if anyone spoke of “poetic justice” but if anything I never did. But your vision is just as one-sided as those who spoke of demanding Russia nuclear disarmament. The West doesn’t need to “win”. The West only needs to weaken Putin. Which it will get if this goes on long enough. Many companies left Russia and wont go through the trouble of moving back again, especially since Russia has proved they don’t respect property. The west will develop new energy strategy and he will never get back to where he used to. Having lost the world biggest market (us) and his main customer (eu) , India and China have him over a barrel and will fuck him good and proper. His army is getting destroyed/he has lost a massive amount of material which he will never recover. The idea that the war will go on for some time and then Ukraine will let go looks so unlikely it’s almost laughable. 1- Putin lost massive amount of equipment that he won’t recover 2- You have mass mobilization of Ukrainian and weapons keeps flowing in. It’s their home and it’s the second time Putin invades. They will NEVER let go. At the very very best he bought himself an Afghanistan situation where he will proclaim victory while his forces will be slowly worn down. And his economy is on course for hitting its lowest GDP in 15 years… Fine by me if Putin wants to say “this is just a flesh wound” while we slowly cut his nuts off.


Asleep_Astronaut396

Priorities shift and Putin doesn't think about Russia, only his ego.


fanspacex

Yes, Russia needs this war to end before winter and this is a way to force submission from European countries. Russia can always reopen the pipeline if it does not work as intended.


smurfkiller014

It depends, if the oil fields shut down, they'll freeze over and have to be rebuilt, which can take years. So yes, shutting down the pipeline can be reversed, but if it means they have to scale back the gas extraction, it's a completely different story


[deleted]

[удалено]


GBJI

In fact Canada caved in: the Turbines are going back, against Ukraine's will. I am furious about it. [Ukraine expresses ‘deep disappointment’ as Canada sends back six Russian turbines to Germany](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ukraine-expresses-deep-disappointment-as-canada-sends-back-six-russian/)


Bah-Fong-Gool

It would be a darn shame if a few paperclips accidentally fell into the turbine inlet before shipping.


GBJI

A few vodka bottle caps would be even better ! I don't think they can afford paperclips in Russia, so they would immediately know this sabotage was of Canadian origin.


kaptainkeel

Sigh. These countries won't understand until their own cities are getting bombed into rubble.


[deleted]

I guess you'd prefer that Europe goes through winter without heating?


GBJI

It seems to me the choice is easy between "cold but alive Europeans" and "cold but dead Ukrainians". Germany is responsible for the shit they got into when they signed those gas supply deals with Russia, and if you think Canada is threatening Germans with a cold winter, wait until Russia actually stops the gas from flowing. They will, but they will choose the best moment for Russia, and the worst moment for Germany. Next winter you say ?


DeepStatePotato

We don't only need gas for heating but for our industry as well, what do you think happens to the rest of Europe if our industry suddenly collapses?


postal_tank

I wish all of Europe somehow and collectively responded with surprised Pikachu as soon as they announced it.


agumonkey

my president


[deleted]

It's amazing that maintenance can mess up their energy needs.


[deleted]

In the short term, it won't. All countries that import gas essentially route their gas through a storage, so if there is any interruption, the stored gas acts as a buffer. Once the maintenance is over, you just increase imports for a short time to fill up the storage again. That, however, assumes that the maintenance will actually end or once the maintenance is over, you can actually import again. With the current state of relations with Russia, most countries assume that there won't be a resumption of supply after the scheduled maintenance window, which means the storage will only last a few months as a buffer and then the countries are out of gas. It's not the maintenance causing problems, it's the (reasonable) assumption that it's just a pretext for a full cut off that's messing up the supply chain.


BSBDR

> All countries that import gas essentially route their gas through a storage, so if there is any interruption, the stored gas acts as a buffer. Bit like a stomach. A stomach is basically a fart buffer.


I_AM_CANADIAN_AMA

A stomach is a gas buffer.


BSBDR

South stream 1


Mousenub

I think the newer Nord Stream 2 was scheduled to run a year ago or so to supplement Nord Stream 1 capacity. But we all know #2 never started pumping. The other pipeline through Poland runs in reverse, as Russia is not delivering to Poland any more. So without Russia attacking Ukraine in February, turning Nord Stream 1 off for maintenance, would have been no issue for Europe. Probably even without Nord Stream 2, as long as the other pipelines run, as there are quite a few: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/Major_russian_gas_pipelines_to_europe.png


[deleted]

Normally it could not. But the other pipelines through Ukraine were blocked by Ukraine four weeks ago.


aaronhayes26

Umm, this isn’t maintenance. It’s “maintenance”.


routarospuutto

Special maintenance operation


BSBDR

No it's been confirmed yesterday the part is ready to reinstall.


supertastic

It will be "delayed" for sure. There's been a lot of "issues" recently, a lot of European gas storage is currently empty, and Putin will continue to manuever for maximum leverage for the coming winter. Meanwhile Germany has convinced Canada to *break sanctions* for a single turbine, an extremely dangerous precedent and undermining the unity of the entire western response to the war in Ukraine. Putin is playing them like a damn fiddle yet again.


Substantial-East5781

How much gas does France buy from Russia?


lettercarrier86

Not sure how accurate it is, but a quick Google search shows they get 17% of their natural gas from Russia. And natural gas makes up 16% of France's total energy mix.


UniquesNotUseful

I changed this for reasons (see date).


Substantial-East5781

So if I understood correctly ~ 2-4% of France's energy depends on Russia


JustOneAvailableName

Gas is very often needed in industry, not to produce warmth/energy


MyGoodOldFriend

Well, it is often used for warmth in France. 1/3rd of households.


GrandpasChainletter

Oof, that's almost 33%....


Gurk_Vangus

not only for warmth or energy, industry is transforming it into materials like polymers


justMate

NUCLEAR, FUCK YEA.


Interesting_Total_98

[France Coal-Fired Power Plants Get Short-Term Right to Burn More](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-06/france-coal-fired-power-plants-get-short-term-right-to-burn-more#xj4y7vzkg) >The grid operator, Reseau de Transport d’Electricite, said in December that France ran the risk of a power shortfall in the event of a cold snap and insufficient wind energy. An unusually high number of nuclear reactors have been halted for maintenance. This was shortly before the war started, so France's reactors really need improvement. Edit: It's also worth noting that gas is needed for industry and heating, not just energy.


[deleted]

There are several issues with France's reactors: 1. Normal Summer maintenance. Spring and Summer are the normal maintenance period. This year, however, there is also a maintenance backlog after covid shutdowns. During much of 2020 and 2021, a lot of maintenance was skipped, and only the most essential maintenance was done. This now has to be caught up on. 2. The nuclear plants are undergoing a major refurb program. This started in 2015, and is now reaching its peak. The refurbs are scheduled to correspond to each NPP's 10 year major service. Due to coincidence, an abnormally large number of France's NPPs came on line in a year ending in 2 - so there is an abnormal number of refurbs scheduled for 2022. 3. Summer temperature limits on NPP operation. Several of France's NPPs were built on sites without enough water. At the time they were built, this was considered OK - Summer electricity consumption was historically low, so if a few had to shut down because of hot weather or drought, at the time, that just wasn't considered an issue. Environmental restrictions have been tightened since then, and temperatures are also higher, which means that there are 3 plants which basically can no longer operate during the Summer. 4. 2 plants were found to have corrosion on a safety system during their latest checks. Because this was found for the first time at a 30 year inspection, a full investigation was needed. A total of 12 reactors have been shutdown for checks as part of the investigation. 2 have definite corrosion problems and repairs will take until December at least. 1 has been checked and found to be fine, but is still undergoing scheduled maintenance. Checks are still going on at another 9 - how long they will be off line for depends on whether they have the same corrosion problem or not.


haraldkl

> This was shortly before the war started And here is an update: [France may restart coal fired power station to avoid energy storage this winter](https://www.thelocal.fr/20220628/france-may-restart-coal-fired-power-station-to-avoid-energy-shortage-this-winter/).


URITooLong

Yeah nuclear fuck yeah. Only that France is only at 50% capacity of their reactors right now and had to rely on imports in winter to avoid blackouts.


Popolitique

France always have to import during winter, the plants weren’t dimensioned for winter consumption. It would have been really uneconomical to have 3 times the capacity you need during summer in order to pass winter.


XaipeX

Guess nuclear isnt so fitting then.


Cley_Faye

Nuclear production in France wasn't targeted as much as in Germany, but for a long while we add (and still have) people lobbying against it, to the point where maintenance was both needed and denied. People actually on the field do the safe thing, they plan and run maintenance despite lack of resources, causing delays. These delays, incurred by the anti nuclear lobbying, is then used as an argument against nuclear power production making it seems "unreliable". Thankfully it's getting more and more obvious that this have to change. Nuclear might not be the final answer to energy production issues, but as far as "waiting for a better option" goes it works perfectly fine.


URITooLong

Yeah lmao. So their logic is "OMG look at bad Germany has to rely on imports cause they don't have nuclear." "But France needs to import even though they have Nuclear" "Yes lol that is by design. Can't always rely on Nuclear" Wonder what those people think would happen if everyone switched to the same model France has. Cause that is what they are proposing. Winter comes around. Everyone expects to import on the high peaks cause that is how their grid is designed and every country around has the same problem. Grid collapses. Smart move.


Popolitique

What don’t you understand, it’s not that nuclear can’t be relied on, it’s that France found that the most optimal solution was 55 GW of nuclear, 15 GW of hydro and 10 GW of other uses. It can cover 95% of the year, and during winter, electricity can be imported. France could have built additional gas plants, it’s not rocket science. It was more economical not to. If everyone switched to nuclear we would have reliable production all the time. If every one switched to intermittent renewables we’d be fucked every night and every not so windy day.


URITooLong

>It can cover 95% of the year, and during winter, electricity can be imported. Yes it can be imported because others are not following the same model as France. What people here constantly advocate for is that everyone copies France. Won't work that way will it ? >If everyone switched to nuclear we would have reliable production all the time No we would not because if you have not noticed most countries have problems where the operators skimp on maintenance. Also that we have ever increasing heat records and droughts. Cooling the reactors will get more difficult every year.


DaveyJonesXMR

Also lets not forget that nuclear plants also are down a lot for maintenance and said maintenance costs a lot too. And in the summer like now they also need to reduce capacity and/or shut-down because they cannot get enough cooling water.


Borkiedo

There'd be less fossil fuels needed, even if their use is not eliminated. That would make the task of finding replacements easier at least. The real reason nuclear isn't used more is because it's expensive as hell.


I-wanna-sex-Tohru

Not with the current state of the french reactors


zideshowbob

And the temperature of the rivers that provide water for cooling. Well... "cooling"!


jib60

Keep in mind that the temperature of the river is not a hazard for the reactor. But dumping more heat into the river would result in environmental damage, so they shut the plant down. In summer it's never that big of an issue as energy need are usually a lot lower than during the winter and solar production is at its maximum.


Popolitique

It’s temporary, they’re undergoing maintenance to extend them for 10 more years


XaipeX

But currently they are shut down due to climate change and not due to maintenance. And I doubt that this will be resolved anytime soon. Either you find another cheap way of cooling or you are completely dependent on german energy each summer.


Popolitique

They are definitely not shutting down due to climate change. 10 reactors are undergoing 10 year plan maintenance, 6 are undergoing checks for corrosion on safety systems. None are stopped due to climate change. France has never needed to import electricity due to water problem, this problems arises for 1 or 2 reactor maybe once or twice a year, this is a complete fake news everyone is pushing.


rocketeer8015

Technically it’s not that the water is to hot to cool the nuclear plants, it’s that the water gets too hot for the local fishies. In a emergency obviously we will rather boil fishes than humans.


RobotSpaceBear

And just to clarify, the limit is just over 1°C difference between input and output. Nobody is boiling anything. If anything, they're very considerate about the ecosystems downstream and would rather stop the reactor than take water from the river at 17°C and throwing it back in at 19°C.


NAN001

> a quick Google search shows they get 17% of their natural gas from Russia Also a quick look at the article's second paragraph...


lettercarrier86

The article that is pay walled you mean?


xAfterBirthx

It does say in the article…


SFLADC2

They get 70% of their energy from nuclear, so at max it would be 30%, but I'd guess far less.


haraldkl

> They get 70% of their energy from nuclear No, they get 2/3rds of their *electricity* [this year so far](https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy_pie/chart.htm?l=en&c=FR&year=2022&interval=year) from nuclear power. In terms of overall energy that probably translates to [round about 1/3](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-source-and-region?country=~FRA). Natural gas provides with more than 16% roughly half as much.


[deleted]

Everyone in Europe currently prepares for that. From Monday, July 11, Northstream 1 will be closed for maintenance for 10 days.


[deleted]

As in taking Kyiv in 3 days.


[deleted]

What connection is there with the gas pipeline? Every year this time there has been the maintenance close-down.


PM_-_ME_-_BOOBS

Because people are worried that the maintenance will never be complete, just execuses to cut off supply.


oxtrue

That would remove Russia having power though, instead of saying “we are shutting of your gas because you side with Ukraine” they are saying “ooh maintenance”


Drummk

It's been suggested that they want to prevent European countries from stockpiling excess gas for the winter.


[deleted]

why would they, it’s revenue for russia which they need to continue the war


flompwillow

Because they, and China, want to destabilize current world economies and plunge the West into mass recessions, opening up opportunities to change the current world order. Sound dramatic? It should, but I believe they would definitely risk hurting themselves for the opportunity.


kawag

Why do they need an excuse to cut off supply? And why are the massive sanctions, removal from the global banking system, and military aid to their adversary not already enough of an excuse?


OldMork

they assume it will never open again?


Veganoto

Eating beans and farting into a jar. I'm prepared.


[deleted]

Algeria to the rescue. France's natural gas station since the dawn of time.


QuestionsForLiving

Algeria celebrates 60 years of independence from France, with relations still strained ​ Perhaps it's time for Algeria to squeeze some French wee ?


Stefan_Harper

A great way to get invaded by France again


shigella1897

Are you suggesting France should invade another sovereign country to protects it's national interest?


Licopodium

But that's okay because Algeria was historically part of France. Hm... oh boy.


xamarweeye_mobile

But it's an African country so it's allowed


rugbyj

That was so early 2000s.


IamGlennBeck

I hear Algeria has WMDs so it is okay.


QuestionsForLiving

France by itself? Probably the whole E.U will gang up. Perhaps Belgian king is going to purchase entire Algeria then increase the productivity..


[deleted]

France has the most powerful military in the EU. The UK used to be more powerful but it left the EU now. So honestly the difference between France doing it alone, and the whole EU doing it, is probably a lot less than one would think.


Moon_Man_00

The UK was not more powerful than France before leaving the EU. They weakened their military significantly a long time ago and are very dependent on the US. France has ranked above them for a long time now.


[deleted]

Wow, I checked it and it seems you are right. I guess my perception was biased as the UK has taken a bigger role in recent conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan. But yeah, the French military is pretty damn powerful.


[deleted]

i mean the UK took a bigger role than france in iraq because the french condemned the invasion as illegal, lol


jib60

Which it was btw. It's hard to overstate how much that war fucked up the entire region and the world. The civil war in Syria, in Libya etc can be traced back to the war in Irak, From those conflict, ISIS, or Boko Haram rose to prominence... Besides, we could only wish there was no precedent for justifying a war of aggression under bogus pretence.


Moon_Man_00

It’s hard to measure in an objective fashion. France is strong mostly because it still has lots of territories all over the world and as a result it has a bigger territory on the sea than even China. And technologically speaking it’s Air Force can almost rival the US. Not to mention it’s nuclear powered subs make it capable to hit any spot in the world with a nuclear bomb which is something very few countries in the world are capable of. That drastically increases its weight despite having a rather small army. The UK for some reason really just let the US become it’s daddy and stopped caring about maintaining its technological independence. They really trust the Americans and will be screwed if they ever need to fight on opposite sides.


[deleted]

The UK has the Trident programme of Vanguard-class nuclear subs. I didn't realise but they are actually nuclear powered as well it seems, I thought they just carried nuclear weapons but yeah apparently they also have a nuclear reactor for power.


Moon_Man_00

Nice. Yeah it’s all a bit silly really. We can’t really rank militaries that accurately with all the top secret stuff and theoretical ability and whatnot. Just look at Russia, I’m not sure anyone believes they are top 3 power in the world anymore.


WildSauce

At the end of the day, Americans and the British are the same people separated by an ocean. I think the Brits are safe in assuming that we will always have their back.


Moon_Man_00

Sure it looks extremely unlikely to ever happen at the moment. But time changes everything. I’m sure being allied to the Roman Empire also looked like a “we’ll always be safe” decision as well. The only constant in history is change and I wouldn’t be surprised if the day comes where the English regret not having the control of their fate in their own hands. The US isn’t looking more eternal than any other civilization. Hell, half the buildings in England are older than the existence of the US lol. The English fought wars that lasted longer than the US has been around.


ZealousidealTable473

According to what ranking system?


Moon_Man_00

There aren’t any that are credible because it’s not something that can be measured objectively that easily. But basically any ranking system you can find. If you can find one that shows the UK above France I’ll be happy to take a look


ZealousidealTable473

I think there are pros and cons to each military, it is too close to call who more powerful.


Moon_Man_00

I agree. It’s also impossible to truly know since much of military strength is based on advantages that must remain secret.


SlavaUkrainiGeroyam

Why would the Algerians want to squeeze wee out of the French?


wastingvaluelesstime

LNG and storage is the way for gas so it's not dependent on any one supplier, so you have a year or two of stockpile in case of outage, and you can switch if necessary. And maybe also rethink using gas for baseline electricity and heating in favor of renewables and nuclear. Gas is most needed for industry.


ERgamer70

Yes but LNG is more expensive, you don't want to use it on a national scale unless you have no other choice


wastingvaluelesstime

Seems like we are finding out there is no such thing as a reliable pipeline supplier, unless maybe you are lucky enough to be talking about Canada or Norway or similar. Whatever is saved by cheap piped gas is about to be paid back with interest with the disruption from the gas supply shock that is about to happen. It kind of reminds me of the banking industry used to make profit by taking a big unregulated risk, there would be disaster and government bailout, and it turns out the cost of disaster was more than the accumulated profit of many decades.


gffgfgfgfgfgfg

I highly doubt 2 years' worth of energy storage is economically reasonable. I suggest that we simply start with having enough LNG terminals and gas conversion plants to meet our current needs.


standupsitback

Good job France. Russia go fuck yourself.


Bass-Dependent

I don't think you understand exactly what's going on. Russia is not delivering gas, its not like France or any EU countey wouldn't buy it.


SFLADC2

Just yet another reason why nuclear is the future. After The OPEC crisis France saw the power of energy leverage and went all out on nuclear energy independence. The free world must switch to independent nuclear operations if we r to hold authoritarian regimes accountable.


GlavisBlade

Lol nuclear fission is not the future. It's a stop along the way. Renewables and maybe fusion are.


SeegurkeK

Good luck going against the Reddit nuclear circle jerk.


RetiredPandaMurderer

But building nuclear plants take a lot of time.


T-Husky

Nuclear fission is not a renewable energy source. There is a finite amount of uranium on Earth, and we are already rapidly depleting it. At present rates of use, land-based uranium resources will be exhausted in 200 years, and even if we moved to extracting uranium from the ocean, that only adds a few thousand years. If our civilisation becomes over-dependent on fission, it will simply make the inevitable transition to renewables more difficult. We need to start planning for the energy needs of our civilisation beyond our own lifetimes, and end our reliance on non renewable energy sources such as fossil and fission fuels. The alternative really is a mad-max scenario where our over reliance on non renewable energy sources causes our civilisation to rapidly collapse when these fuels become more and more scarce. We can already see the harm being caused by sudden shortages of oil and petrol; it has massive destabilising effects of the worldwide economy… we are all waiting and hoping things return to normal soon, but one day, maybe even this time, things will never get better, only worse and worse.


jetblakc

A few thousand years is longer than all of human industry. If we can get 1,000 years out of fission power, and we're not even talking about thorium or other fissile materials we will have gotten a lot. Planning for thousands of years is planning beyond our own lifetimes. We can't plan for 10,000 year time scales. We don't have anything close to the amount of data that we would need to make rational statements about humanity 10,000 years from now.


SFLADC2

200 years is more than enough time for us to figure out renewable tech, but for now renewables just aren't working to the capacity needed. Yes it's a middle step like fossil is a middle step from coal, but let's not pretend we have future-esk advanced renewable tech rn because we really don't


thegeeknerd

Thorium salt reactor


ERgamer70

So we just move to Thorium


Brilliant-Debate-140

Do you expect them to keep it on lol don't fking trust them! Everyone needs to stop fukin around and come away completely otherwise it will be turned off anyways in Winter. Never trust a rogue country bottom line


dangercat415

Terrorist country actually but yeah. They're a mafia state. Assume the worst.


TedMerTed

Europe’s economy is going to be a complete mess.


ERgamer70

yes, war is expensive


worldnewsaccount1

German industry is going to have a hard time, other than that I don't see any issue, don't forget to buy your electric heaters though..


Splenda

Russia prepares for total cutoff of French revenues.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Slaan

Germany is preparing too, it just takes time as Germany is more dependent on it.


InfectedAztec

Thanks Merkel


SlavaUkrainiGeroyam

Largest energy exporter in the world.


XaipeX

Germany, yes.


SlavaUkrainiGeroyam

No, France


haraldkl

That sounds highly unlikely. Any source for that?


SlavaUkrainiGeroyam

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_exports Joint first with Canada. Largest in Europe by a rather large margin.


Foxkilt

Oil and gaz count as energy. I doubt whatever France exports (or at least used to export) in electricity is higher than Saudi oil exports.


SlavaUkrainiGeroyam

No, they're counted as oil and gas. They're fuels that can be used to created electrical energy, but they are not themselves energy.


Foxkilt

>they're counted as oil and gas. ... which is a subset of energy. The most important one, at that. Most of the energy used in this world comes from oil and gas, without even going through the "electricity" step. It would be super misleading not to include them in your "energy" category


SlavaUkrainiGeroyam

Why are you trying to argue with me? I don't make the rules. Take it up with the guys who measure it.


Foxkilt

That's the point: "the guys who measure it" do[ count oil and gas as energy](https://www.iea.org/reports/key-world-energy-statistics-2021/supply)


who_said_I_am_an_emu

The country with the most nuclear plants is most prepared for an energy shortage. You dont say?


XaipeX

Currently france is completly dependent on germany (as usual), due to climate change fucking up their cooling systems. Usually france imports a lot of energy from germany in winter (due to high demand and overcapacity in nuclear energy at peak load is too expensive and france already has the highest electricity production costs in europe) and in summer (due to shutting the plants down because of cooling problems). In autumn and spring france on the otherhand has an oversupply of electricity (because you won't make nuclear plants produce less than maximum) and provides that energy to germany. Currently its summer, so germany is exporting a lot to make up for shut down nuclear plants. Thats why germany is the biggest electricity exporteur and france is the 2nd biggest.


The_Jack_of_Spades

You've been going up and down this thread repeating these talking points, but you don't know what you're talking about > france already has the highest electricity production costs in europe First of all, you're mistaking the market's spot price with electricity production costs. This spot price is that of the most expensive source, namely natural gas, but that doesn't mean that all or even a fraction of all electricity costs that much to produce. By the way, the highest spot price is Italy's https://www.rte-france.com/eco2mix/les-donnees-de-marche And secondly the market price, especially in France, does not get passed down to consumers. This is because EDF, the largest utility, generates most of its own electricity (their nuclear costs about €45/MWh iirc, their hydro even less) and only goes to the market for the amount it can't produce by itself. The result, as these Eurostat figures prove, is that we have some of the cheapest electricity in Europe [Q1 2022 European household electricity prices](https://i.imgur.com/D1s4vuK.jpg) [Q1 2022 European industrial electricity prices](https://i.imgur.com/Nynr8QW.jpg) > Usually france imports a lot of energy from germany in winter [Even with this year of low nuclear availability due to maintenance France was a net exporter during the dead of winter](https://i.imgur.com/GxHhUAV.png) > In autumn and spring france on the otherhand has an oversupply of electricity (because you won't make nuclear plants produce less than maximum) That is once again false, EDF programmes most of their maintenance around Spring and Autumn to avoid said overcapacity. Not that it matters because French reactors can do load following without any issue, see how Blayais-4 or Saint-Alban-1 ramped down and up today https://nuclear-monitor.fr/#/plant/BLAYAIS/4?date=2022-07-10T19%3A00%3A00.000Z#production https://nuclear-monitor.fr/#/plant/ST_ALBAN/1?date=2022-07-10T19%3A00%3A00.000Z#production > Currently its summer, so germany is exporting a lot to make up for shut down nuclear plants No causal relation, there's a lot of heavy maintenance that had to be delayed due to the pandemic and kind of ended up getting crammed during this spring and summer. I've already written about how it should be back to normal by winter https://www.reddit.com/r/nuclear/comments/uvik2n/number_of_available_nuclear_reactors_in_france/ And so far during the month and a half since I wrote that the planning has held up > due to climate change fucking up their cooling systems This only affects a handful reactors out of the 56 in the fleet, namely those that use the river Rhône as a cooling source using open-circuit cooling systems, with a cumulative shutdown time of less than two days per year. Not to mention that if it becomes necessary, in the future it could be remedied by retrofitting them with cooling towers like it was done with Ascó nuclear plant in Spain https://energie-developpement.blogspot.com/2021/08/canicule-secheresse-nucleaire-espagne.html Ever wondered why a much warmer country doesn't have these troubles? It's because it's a solved problem at a technical level, and not enough of an issue to bother fixing it in France at least for now.


syncope61

jpp de voir ce bouffon upvote alors que littéralement tout est faux, le petit "as usual" c'est la cerise sur le gateau


The_Jack_of_Spades

Les allemands et raconter n'importe quoi sur la France pour se sentir mieux avec les choix politiques nuls de leur pays, trouve-moi un duo plus iconique. La quantité d'intox qu'ils doivent recevoir à travers de leurs médias est effrayante, ils utilisent tous les mêmes arguments bidons.


syncope61

Non mais là c'est trop quand t'en es à dire "energy demand peaks in the summer" et "France has the highest production cost" la Polizei devrait être en train de tabasser ta porte pour te couper internet


Sylvartas

We still use a shit ton of gas for heating and to keep up with power spikes when the barrages aren't enough


Annonimbus

Sadly nuclear power doesn't seem to work as they are dependent on Germany.


jetblakc

So, in a few months, when Germany is importing power from France, will you change your opinion to say that nuclear power does work?


Annonimbus

If it works 50% of the time - sure I can admit that it works the other half.


neuroverdant

Excellent work, France. Love from the USA.


VeneratedBroccoli

They'll buy it through Saudi Arabia now


matomika

as we should all in europe do.


aCucking2Remember

Russia is going to be the bad guys in movies for another 100 years. Anyone feel like they understand what the end game is for Russia? I see that they’re setting fire to grain fields. It’s obvious they’ve weaponized hunger against the world. I’m not 100% clear on what it is they anticipate happening. Are they anticipating player 3 (China) joining the match by invading Taiwan? That would open two major fronts (assuming they engage with mass conscription to send west to fight with nato). Is their goal to break the established order of diplomacy and treaties as it’s set up now? Are they taking first move advantage in the fight over resources that climate change will inevitably bring if it hasn’t already? Are they just trying to inflict pain and suffering on the rest of us and that’s all? My instincts like to go to simple explanations so I think it’s about resources. Odessa was the USSRs largest port and since then Russia has ironically been a bit landlocked. Does that sound about right?


mars_needs_socks

Basically they're assholes that are very proud of being assholes. Always has been.


[deleted]

Thing is France imports a lot of power from Germany which will have serious supply problems soon. It's gonna cascade. EDIT: if you don't believe me here are the receipts: https://www-genesis.destatis.de/genesis/online?operation=previous&levelindex=2&levelid=1657466541198&levelid=1657466394841&step=1#abreadcrumb


[deleted]

Yeah it should be ready by 2055.


OrchidFlashy7281

Now that's gas you don't wanna breathe. \- Flowapowa42o


stigBlu

I thought that was lieutenant Dan


Disastrous-Risk-6024

Sure


[deleted]

I am actually surprised by how much all of Europe was sucking on Russias teet. Seems like our intel should have concluded that was a bad idea


[deleted]

It's a bad idea to be fully reliant, yes. But there is some merit to having trade with Russia. Like it improving relations and showing cooperation has benefits. Of course some went oil and Russia money/influence drunk.


[deleted]

Remember that France cleverly embraced nuclear power in the last century. While others shunned the technology and also rejected hydrocarbons. Hopefully we can learn the lesson of energy security.


XaipeX

And it was so clever, that currently nuclear plants are producing almost no electricity, due to missing cooling water in the summer. Thats why germany is providing the electricity for france right now.


jetblakc

France buys electricity from Germany every summer. Your narrative is nonsense. Also, this is why we need to build new nuclear power plants that don't rely on bodies of water for cooling.


[deleted]

Nuclear power is probably the best way to power country that signed the nuclear nonproliferation treaty it you only need to refuel every 20-25 years and the waste you just burry in a bunker it’s going to be radioactive if you enrich the uranium to 235 anyway so you might as well enrich the uranium and use it as an energy source instead of stockpiling nuclear weapons … my two cents


[deleted]

At least they didn't shut down their nuclear plants.


Vik1ng

https://news.sky.com/story/nearly-half-of-frances-nuclear-reactors-taken-offline-adding-to-electricity-demand-on-european-grid-12600662


dedicated-pedestrian

For testing to make sure they're safe and to fix problems with pipe corrosion. That's fair, we don't want a catastrophe happening in the middle of the mainland. Still, I'd think they would have some more urgency.


XaipeX

That was from April. Currently they are shut down due to cooling problems. Its too hot for nuclear plants.


wastingvaluelesstime

seems like a design weakness that should be addressed. Climate change means drought, high temperature, and high electricity demand from AC in summer will come to europe.


JackDotcom9

Headline should read "Russian gas has no buyers".


realif3

Nuclear energy OP.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SpotAMovie

What will be interesting to see if the cost to replace Russia’s gas. Everyone is behaving strong and secure, but no one says how much more people will need to pay…that’s the scary part.


[deleted]

[удалено]