Nordstream Pipe theories

Well, supposedly someone related to the Biden admin made noises re: blowing up the pipeline.

But it was just somebody bloviating in the normal manner of politicians, and not really in power of anything.

I’m still curious about other potential actors, such as OPEC, China, Ukraine, random smaller terrorist organizations.

I hadn’t actually heard the “it’s russia” side of the argument here it is from wikipedia:

Arguing for Russian involvement[edit]

A researcher from the Royal Danish Defence College argued that Russia would benefit from more disturbances in the European gas market.[57]

Finland’s national public broadcasting company Yle compared the incident to the two explosions in 2006 caused by remote-controlled military-grade charges.[58] The explosions halted Russian gas supply to Georgia after the country had started seeking NATO membership.[58]

Ukrainian presidential advisor Mykhailo Podolyak said it was “a terrorist attack planned by Russia and an act of aggression towards the EU”, Russia wanting to “destabilise the economic situation in Europe and cause pre-winter panic”.[51][53]

In an interview with the German broadsheet Süddeutsche Zeitung,[60] a former CEO of the national Ukrainian gas supplier Naftogaz, Andriy Kobolyev, gave his assessment that Russia was behind the explosions, arguing:

  • Gazprom had an interest in being able to cite an act of God as the reason for non-delivery, which the explosions would constitute. Failing such an act of God, Gazprom would be liable to pay damages between 10 and 30 billion dollars as stipulated by their long-term contracts, which its European clients would be able to recover from its assets in Europe. Constructing such an act of God was thus in Gazprom’s financial interest.
  • Kobolyev thinks it almost unconceivable that anybody could get close to the pipelines undetected by the Russians, but (to a lesser degree) also undetected by NATO marine forces operating in the Baltic Sea. Hence, the charges had most likely been inbuilt into the pipelines.
  • It had been standard practice in the Soviet Union to fit each piece of newly built critical infrastructure with explosive charges so it could quickly be destroyed in case of war, so for the Russians to continue this practice would not have been far-fetched.
  • More concretely, he stated that when completing the Nord Stream 2, the Akademik Cherskiy pipe-layer vessel was accompanied by Russian military vessels, which transshipped equipment, exactly at the location where the explosions later occurred. This was on record, he stated. Also, (due to Western sanctions) only Russian vessels were involved in the final construction phases. In addition, the military vessels accompanying the Akademik Cherskiy had been commissioned by the Russian Navy to perform acts of sabotage. (In the interview, he did not specify the names of the military vessels in question.)
  • Contrary to some reports, the leaks did not amount to the pipelines being destroyed for good; rather, he claimed, while internal corrosion would have shortened their service life by about 10 to 20 years, they could be repaired within a month.
1 Like

And yeah, this is appealing, but I’d rather see it scienced out, what with me being an actuary.com and all.

You read my original link?

Yeah. And I like it but it totally lacks any details. Like how big is a “typical” hydrate plug explosion. Because it might be totally realistic or it might not be.

Of course maybe we just don’t have any notion of what hydrate plugs do, but that makes me not want to use them in my explanation.

1 Like