Winter is Coming. Next Chapter, Nordstream
The northeastern states may suffer higher energy prices than most, thanks to New Jersey and New York banning new pipelines. And what to make of the Russian gas pipeline explosions?
From the CO2 Coalition, based here in northern Virginia:
Winter is coming for New England…
and it will be painful
Residents in New England are feeling the pain of skyrocketing electric and natural gas bills.
Frank Lasee is a friend of the CO2 Coalition and just returned from a speaking engagement in New Hampshire where he met a local business owner. The owner’s electric bills had averaged $1,632 per month until a recent rate increase. His most recent bill was $4,839, which is three times the amount of the previous months.
The New England situation is self-inflicted by wrong-headed state and federal policies. The electricity grid for the area is the New England ISO, and electricity for the grid is primarily sourced from natural gas. Natural gas prices for the area are some of the highest in the nation; yet abundant, low-cost gas is located just to the south in the prolific reservoirs of Pennsylvania, West Virginia and eastern Ohio. Because the states of New York and New Jersey have banned any new pipeline construction, those reserves are stranded and unavailable to customers in the northeast.
Compounding that problem is that New England is not allowed to import inexpensive American liquified natural gas (LNG) because the Jones Act requires all carriers delivering products from one American port to another to be American flagged. There are no American flagged LNG carriers.
These problems can be solved easily, but it likely won’t happen until even more economic pain and blackouts are felt by the unfortunate citizens.
What to Make of Nordstream’s Explosions?
A very good friend and respected military historian emailed me the other day, titled “cui bono?”
That Latin phrase translates, “who benefits?” He was referring to the explosion of the Nordstream I pipeline several kilometers (miles, if you prefer) from the Danish border. Like the rest of us who are paying attention to this significant geopolitical event with enormous consequences, we want to know who was behind it and why?
The pipeline serves not just Germany with Russian gas but much of Europe. Nordstream is owned and managed by a consortium of energy companies that include Gazprom (Russia, 51 percent), Wintershall Dea (Germany, 15.5 percent), E.ON (Germany, again, 15.5 percent), ENGIE (French, 9 percent), and Gasunie (Dutch, 9 percent). Nordstream 1 alone carried up to 2 billion cubic feet of gas, enough to supply some 13-14 million homes. You almost double that to 3.9 billion cubic feet when adding Nordsteam 2, which also appears to have been damaged, even though it has never gone online.
So, what are the questions and answers? Warning: what follows is convoluted speculation.
I don’t know, but we can rule out nothing, including an actor that is neither American nor Russian, at least their “official governments.” I can think of no rational strategic interest that would lead either to blow it up. And remember that munitions dumped into the Baltic Sea after World War II remain a concern. Might that have been a factor?
Why might Russia have done it?
Having said that, Russia turned it off weeks ago to punish Germany. It remained a bargaining chip for Russia in the event of a severe German winter that might have them whimpering and begging Putin to resume gas flows in exchange for withdrawing support of Ukraine. Oops.
Russia might also have used the event - not the first time in their history - to pull a Hernan Cortes “burn all the ships” moment. But the events are not all that comparable. Cortes burned his ships in 1519 to tell his troops that there was no turning back on their way to conquer the Aztecs eventually. Suppose you believe Putin is a rational actor. Why would he cut off his ability to divide Europe and NATO with maintaining control through dependence on his energy?
Putin is blaming the US for the event, but rather meekly while offering no evidence. Russia is only one of two and possibly three state actors (countries) (China being the other) with the means to use underwater drones and explosives to deliver a charge strong enough to break through a foot of concrete surrounding the pipeline in the relatively shallow Baltic Sea waters.
In addition, a new pipeline went from Norway (with declining North Sea reserves) to Denmark and Germany to deliver natural gas. Was Russia sending a message on what they were capable of doing? That doesn’t make a lot of sense, either, since now EU countries and Norway will be all over the security of that pipeline. But again, Putin has miscalculated repeatedly since his frustrating dalliances with NATO and EU some 20 years ago.
NATO (including the USA and their European partners) have condemned the attack and promised retaliation. Hopefully, they won’t take their cues from this Hans Blix scene from South Park’s “Team America, World Police.” (WARNING: LANGUAGE ALERT!)
Why might the US have done it?
First, the US has done it before. In 1982, Thatcher badly wanted a pipeline from Siberia to Europe. Reagan was strongly opposed. I’ll let a 2018 Daily Caller tell the story:
“Reagan wanted to punish the Soviet Union for its repressive actions in Poland, as well as prevent a Western European dependency on Soviet fuel. He issued sanctions against the companies doing business for the pipelines, a September 1982 United Press International article explained.
“The British and French companies issuing the materials defied the sanctions and continued to ship materials to build the pipelines. At this point, the pipelines were likely to continue regardless of U.S. intervention.
The sanctions were a sore spot between the United States and Britain. Thatcher said that she was “deeply wounded” by the sanctions, according to the UPI article. “[Reagan] did not quite realize how serious it was to us,” she said in a television interview.
“Meanwhile, the U.S. government learned the Soviets were looking to steal American software to operate the pipelines, The Telegraph reported in February 2004. Via a KGB spy in France, the U.S. gave the Soviet Union “booby-trapped software” that would explode one of the pipelines.
“I don’t get the amnesia people pretend to have,” Grover Norquist, a close ally of the late Reagan and founder of Americans for Tax Reform, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
“The targeted pipeline went boom in 1982. It was “the most monumental non-nuclear explosion and fire ever seen from space,” former U.S. Air Force Secretary Thomas Reed said, according to The Telegraph. There were no casualties, but the explosion shocked even the U.S. government.”
Given the increasing degree of cyberattacks between the US and Russia (and a very strong potential next round of “sanctions”), I can’t help but wonder if this wasn’t at play if the Russians or Gazprom were actually “repairing” the pipelines as publicly claimed previously.
But is President Biden and his Administration even capable in thought or deed of pulling off such a maneuver?
Does another country with expertise in pipelines have such capability? Does a hostile NGO (non-governmental organization) like Greenpeace, with a history of violent attacks on energy and food infrastructure, have that capability (highly doubtful)? What about other actors, like Israel (why them), or Iran, with all their issues and pathetic military? How could they have pulled that off, given the volume of traffic in the Baltic Sea? What about China, looking to increase Russia’s dependence on their new-biggest customer, perhaps with a long game for other ambitions over Russian land and resources?
Other than one Polish Member of the European Parliament known for his provocative tweets, Europe seems persuaded that Russia blew up the pipeline to ensure a miserable winter for the EU and especially Germany in retaliation for Ukraine. That seems the most plausible explanation if a head-scratcher. But then again, I am not persuaded we are dealing with a rational actor.
It’s not the first time an armed mine disposal vehicle has been spotted near the pipeline.
I have no other ideas. “I know nothing,” to quote the legendary Sergeant Schultz from Hogan’s Heroes fame.
We have much to learn. Everyone’s reactions remind of a high-stakes poker table, with James Bond on one end. . . .We should stay tuned for other clues likely to emerge. Watch the “coup” space, especially, despite a dearth of media from Russia.
One cannot help but wonder if Germany, the largest country in Europe, is the key piece on the chess board and may connect the Nordstream explosions and Ukraine. Germany and Russia have. . . history.
I hope Elon Musk makes his Starlink satellites available to more than Ukraine and Florida.