Ukraine 18: Pump up the S-300’s… Dance Dance…

[Erik of Hazelfield]

In other news that hasn’t been much discussed in this thread yet, winter is coming - and it may weaken Europe’s resolve to keep up the sanctions. 
 

Putin is increasing the use of the gas weapon, having turned off the Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline. They’ve been citing maintenance reasons but from what I’ve read (can’t find the source now) Putin is more and more open with the fact it’s due to political pressure.

Much of Europe, especially Germany, is dependent on Russian gas for heating. But even the nations which are not will be feeling the price hike. Here in Sweden for example the electricity bills have risen by a factor of at least 4, often more, and that’s in summer when the consumption is low. Houses here are heated by electricity, increasingly by various variants of heat pumps but often by direct electric heating. The kind of increase in electricity bills that many households will experience this winter is brutal - for many, untenable. The situation is similar in pretty much all of Europe. The war is no longer something that happens to someone else far away - the consequences will be felt all across the continent.
 

Governments are scrambling to reduce the effects by introducing various (expensive) price protection schemes, but it will still hurt. We’re looking at one of the most severe recessions and reduction in living  standards that Europe has felt since possibly WW2. Putin’s hope is that Europe will be divided over this and that many countries will be pushed to abandon sanctions, stopping weapon shipments to Ukraine and maybe try to push Ukraine to accept concessions to end the war and have Russia resume gas deliveries. 

We just bought a house and the electricity bills coupled with the raised interest rates, increased food prices  and parental leave will definitely be felt. Luckily we have some savings so we should be ok, but others will face a tough winter. 

[The Anti-Targ]

I guess over the last few decades we've been trained not to stand on principle but to do what keeps us comfortable, and only take a stand if we can afford it. Sacrificing for the war effort is some quaint notion only relevant to bygone ages. A thing our grandparents did for some kerfuffle involving a German dude with a funny moustache.

If Russia is right, that Europe will fold like a cheap suit as soon as winter starts to bite, then perhaps Russia deserves to keep the territory it can hold until then. Let's not worry about the pain and suffering of Ukraine, so long as we can keep our power bills reasonable, that's the real win.

Also, what the hell has Europe been doing the last couple of decades while the the governments of almost the whole world have known and accepted they need to cure us of our addiction to fossil fuels? All the bluster about Trump ruining it for us for 4 years, backing out of the Paris climate agreement and all that. Seems most of us have not been leading by example to try to bring the US into line, and weaken Russia's ability to hold an entire continent to hostage. The right thing to do environmentally was also the right thing to do geopolitically, and yet that happy confluence was still not enough to do what's needed.

I am of course saying this from the comfort of the other side of the world where we more or less enjoy energy independence, at least for electricity generation. And we are heading into summer. So I am not facing a choice between being warm and comfortable and not dying from the cold and sticking to my guns to kick Putin out of Ukraine. I hope I would be willing to suffer to defeat a tyrant, but I won't know until it happens.

[Wade1865]

1 hour ago, Erik of Hazelfield said:

In other news that hasn’t been much discussed in this thread yet, winter is coming - and it may weaken Europe’s resolve to keep up the sanctions.

Erik of Hazelfield -- ooo, phenomenal update on the conditions in Europe, very helpful and wanted! My impression was the the UK would suffer most -- financially and, correspondigly, physically -- as some will be forced to reduce energy consumption. I suspected Germany would suffer much, as well, though they seem to be more likely to adequately prepare. Ultimately, Vladimir's political and military incompetence will reinforce Europe's willpower -- frankly, they don't have a choice, hahaha.

Europe's resolve, and my continued holding of oil & gas positions, will prevail!

[Derfel Cadarn]

The UK only relied on Russia for about 5% of ita gas, however the rising price for gas is where we’re feeling it

[Which Tyler]

The UK will mostly suffer due to I creased global prices, and being led by an amoral moron. Not reliance on Russia

[Wade1865]

12 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

The UK only relied on Russia for about 5% of ita gas, however the rising price for gas is where we’re feeling it

10 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

The UK will mostly suffer due to I creased global prices, and being led by an amoral moron. Not reliance on Russia

Derfel Cadarn et al. -- good to know, thank you.

By the way, a few days ago US big oil (XOM and SHEL) initiated a process to offload some declining natural gas production assets, intending to capitalize on 1) increasing energy costs in Europe and 2) relieve cost pressures when some of those assets undergo exfiltration operations. America, amirite? Nevertheless, it should moderate prices to some degree.

[Liffguard]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I guess over the last few decades we've been trained not to stand on principle but to do what keeps us comfortable, and only take a stand if we can afford it. Sacrificing for the war effort is some quaint notion only relevant to bygone ages. A thing our grandparents did for some kerfuffle involving a German dude with a funny moustache.

This line would be much easier to swallow if there was any indication that there will be even a token effort to spread the sacrifice around. In the UK at least, there is no such indication. As it stands, the working class, the lower middle class, and small business owners are going to be hammered. The rich and large businesses are going to be fine. Hell, they'll almost certainly come out richer when they take advantage of the crisis to buy up even more assets on the cheap.

If we're being asked to sacrifice our living standards and go into major recession for the sake of Ukraine's defense then so be it, but it's entirely reasonable to then turn to the rich and powerful and tell them "you first." Massive windfall taxes, major wealth taxes, energy price caps, rent caps, small business support, eviction freezes, benefit payment increases etc.

And if they're not willing to make that sacrifice (and to be clear, they aren't), then you can at least understand why it would stick in the craw of the people who are just trying to get by that they're being called appeasers for voicing their displeasure at having to get along with even less.

[Erik of Hazelfield]

I realise now that my post probably came off as a bit whiny. For the record, I do agree that standing up against tyranny and for democracy is worth a lot of sacrifice, and the Ukrainians are obviously taking the brunt of it so compared to them we don’t even have much to complain about.
 

This is more about feasibility. Replacing Russian gas takes more than a few months, probably 2-3 years or more. When people start freezing in their cold houses, when they start defaulting on their payments, when industries are forced to close due to high energy costs - then governments across Europe will feel increased pressure to do something about it. It can get ugly real quick. We may not be talking about just some regular recession, this could be far worse than anything we’ve seen in a very long time. I don’t think most people realise just how bad it can get.

Of course this could all have been avoided if Europe started moving away from Russian oil and gas back in 2014, because the reasons were there already, but that would have required some foresight and courage from our politicians so of course we couldn’t have that.

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I guess over the last few decades we've been trained not to stand on principle but to do what keeps us comfortable, and only take a stand if we can afford it. Sacrificing for the war effort is some quaint notion only relevant to bygone ages. A thing our grandparents did for some kerfuffle involving a German dude with a funny moustache.

If Russia is right, that Europe will fold like a cheap suit as soon as winter starts to bite, then perhaps Russia deserves to keep the territory it can hold until then. Let's not worry about the pain and suffering of Ukraine, so long as we can keep our power bills reasonable, that's the real win.

Also, what the hell has Europe been doing the last couple of decades while the the governments of almost the whole world have known and accepted they need to cure us of our addiction to fossil fuels? All the bluster about Trump ruining it for us for 4 years, backing out of the Paris climate agreement and all that. Seems most of us have not been leading by example to try to bring the US into line, and weaken Russia's ability to hold an entire continent to hostage. The right thing to do environmentally was also the right thing to do geopolitically, and yet that happy confluence was still not enough to do what's needed.

I am of course saying this from the comfort of the other side of the world where we more or less enjoy energy independence, at least for electricity generation. And we are heading into summer. So I am not facing a choice between being warm and comfortable and not dying from the cold and sticking to my guns to kick Putin out of Ukraine. I hope I would be willing to suffer to defeat a tyrant, but I won't know until it happens.

I think that would be a miscalculation on Putin's part.  The assumption is that the inhabitants of democracies are soft and decadent whereas the inhabitants of dictatorships are tough and resilient.  I don't think history really bears that out.

What the West faces is the loss of a couple per cent of GDP - tough but bearable.  That's nothing to the carnage being inflicted on the Russian economy.

[Knight Of Winter]

3 hours ago, Erik of Hazelfield said:

and it may weaken Europe’s resolve to keep up the sanctions. 

I think this is a key point, for much of Putin's strategy depended on it.

I don't think it's controversial to say that Russia's recent history has been one of hardships and suffering. Be it Putin's regime, of communist USSR before that, or czarist Russia before that - Russia undoubtedly faced much larger degree of scarcity and government oppression that any of the Western countries. So he counts that his people, used to harsh life for generations - won't make much of a ruckus when western sanctions hit the fan.

In his mind - it's the West who are weak and complacent. The doctrine he preaches to Russians is how Russia is strong and robust, while West is decadent, corrupt and weak. I bet he counted on European politicians being unwilling to impose sanctions, or failing that - on European citizens being unwilling to part with comforts that Russian gas brings them and pressuring their political leaders into stopping the sanctions. Well, it's up to us to prove him right or wrong. 

[Jace, Extat]

6 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I think that would be a miscalculation on Putin's part.  The assumption is that the inhabitants of democracies are soft and decadent whereas the inhabitants of dictatorships are tough and resilient.  I don't think history really bears that out.

What the West faces is the loss of a couple per cent of GDP - tough but bearable.  That's nothing to the carnage being inflicted on the Russian economy.

Soft and decadent are exactly the words I'd use to describe America, which is all the 'West' that matters. They're putting up a dome in Chicago!

[Loge]

13 hours ago, Maithanet said:

What do you mean by before annexation?  I don't see any Russian claim of annexation being at all meaningful in this conflict.  Putin could announce Kherson to be part of Russia tomorrow and vow to defend it with all Russian resources.  Nothing would change - the Ukrainians certainly wouldn't stop. 

If Russia annexes the occupied territories then the Russian forces are no longer invading Ukraine. They are defending the Motherland against foreign terrorists.

[Wade1865]

9 minutes ago, Loge said:

If Russia annexes the occupied territories then the Russian forces are no longer invading Ukraine. They are defending the Motherland against foreign terrorists.

Loge -- yes, very sharp. UKR undoubtedly recognized the [political] threat of annexation, as indicated by its increased OPTEMPO and corresponding counteroffensives. Although it could have been used as pretext, a casus belli; no less than the USS Maine or the Gulf of Tonkin incident; its utility -- when coupled with RUS's revealed incompetence and UKR's recent territorial seizures -- is dwindling.

[mormont]

I may be naive on this, but I tend to the view that while European leaders will indeed come under pressure as the winter begins, they are under far more pressure not to cave. They know full well that invading Ukraine is a line in the sand that they can't let Putin cross, even if it hurts their own voters. 

The fear seems to be based on the fact that fighting this war will cost Europeans. But not fighting it will cost much more. 

[Wade1865]

3 minutes ago, mormont said:

I may be naive on this, but I tend to the view that while European leaders will indeed come under pressure as the winter begins, they are under far more pressure not to cave. They know full well that invading Ukraine is a line in the sand that they can't let Putin cross, even if it hurts their own voters. 

The fear seems to be based on the fact that fighting this war will cost Europeans. But not fighting it will cost much more. 

mormont -- yes; Europe won't cave. Although its populations will suffer and a move towards deglobalization has been confirmed, all Western governments are in a win-win situation at this point (with much credit to Uncle Joe and allies). I've got substantial assets invested in this; hence, I'm 100% confident. In fact, I'm tentatively considering an extended visit to Kiev or Odessa to assess possibilities. The only way this derails is if the PRC pushes its geographic intentions to the left (i.e., sooner than later).

[Proudfeet]

I have a dumb question.

If gas is not coming from Russia, it's coming from somewhere else. If there is sufficient production capacity from alternative sources, why do the price increases look so obscene*? If there is not sufficient production capacity and its a bidding war, who goes without? Or are we just being bilked by the oil and gas oligarchy? 

*at least for the UK from what I'm reading

[kiko]

6 hours ago, Erik of Hazelfield said:

Much of Europe, especially Germany, is dependent on Russian gas for heating.

Because I hear this line repeated again and again, for your reference this statistics :

German gas suppliers

It's in German but you can scroll down to the graphics. It shows where we are receiving our gas from

 

 

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

43 minutes ago, Proudfeet said:

I have a dumb question.

If gas is not coming from Russia, it's coming from somewhere else. If there is sufficient production capacity from alternative sources, why do the price increases look so obscene*? If there is not sufficient production capacity and its a bidding war, who goes without? Or are we just being bilked by the oil and gas oligarchy? 

*at least for the UK from what I'm reading

Keep in mind that the (1) COVID pandemic didn't exactly help oil production over the past years among some OPEC contries, which limits their supply; (2) the environmental push to limit oil production; and (3) OPEC knows that its oil is in high demand now, which gives it greater bargaining power in this upcoming crisis. 

[Werthead]

All the countries of Eastern Europe and I suspect Scandinavia (it's easy to forget that even Norway has a direct land border with Russia, and Sweden knows that in the advent of war with Russia, Gotland will be Russia's #1 target in the Baltic region) are very well prepared to withstand whatever it takes to stop Russia on the borders of Ukraine before they get anywhere near their own borders, and aren't exactly strangers to hardship themselves. Even pro-Russian forces in Hungary and I suspect Serbia are happy to be friends and allies with Russia from a distance, not on their doorstep. The threat of Russian forces rolling across Europe I think is even causing Germany to wake up. I think the main dangers of "well, this is happening far away, let's give up," are more likely in southern Europe, but of course they're the countries that can survive a European winter much, much more easily. The UK's resolve in the war is also pretty much unquestionable at this point.

As for nukes, none of the Russian military bloggers with Kremlin connections seem to think it's even remotely likely. They note the same issues as people are mentioning elsewhere: tactical nukes on the battlefield are only about as useful as a fuel air bomb or thermobarics which don't risk poisoning your own troops with fallout, nuking Kyiv would simply harden the whole world against Russia and the use of strategic nuclear weapons also risks a misfire or malfunction that could either damage Russia itself or trigger WWIII (however unlikely that is). Russia also risks alienating current strong allies. Mevedev keeps mentioning the idea but he'd also threaten to nuke Belarus for forgetting to return the lawnmower, so that's kind of meaningless.

I think it's viable to start asking questions about the endgame of the war and the exit strategy, where things will ramp up and get bumpy again, but I think if Russia was prepared to use nuclear weapons it would have used them at the start of the conflict, if only as a demonstration to try to intimidate Ukraine.

[Loge]

1 hour ago, kiko said:

Because I hear this line repeated again and again, for your reference this statistics :

German gas suppliers

It's in German but you can scroll down to the graphics. It shows where we are receiving our gas from

 

 

Yes, but it doesn't say how much gas Germany imports /consumes. After Russia has stopped supply, their percentage has obviously dropped. That's a pretty meaningless (or downright deceptive) statistic. The real question is: can other sources make up for the deficiency? The answer is: probably not. We'll have to make do with substantially smaller quantities of gas than we used to consume.

The Bundesnetzagentur  has some real figures:

https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Fachthemen/ElektrizitaetundGas/Versorgungssicherheit/aktuelle_gasversorgung/_downloads/09_September/220907_gaslage.pdf;jsessionid=B3814627FCDBC5803AB7266059DB305A?__blob=publicationFile&v=2

Nordstream 1 can supply 55 TWh / month. That's a little less than 2 TWh / day. Norway, the Netherlands, and Belgium together provide between 2.5 and 3 TWh / day and that figure hasn't changed over the last two months, so it's probably as much as they can deliver. Not much more than Nordstream alone at full capacity and definitely way below consumption figures in the winter (120 TWh/month or 4 TWh/ day).

Bottom line: without Russian gas there is a shortage, and that's what being dependent on Russian gas means.