Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tade0 | Hacker News Reader

His idea of an alternative was LNG from the US, which was easily twice as expensive - no wonder he wasn't taken seriously at the time.

In hindsight he was right, but by accident.

View on HN

Putting LNG on ships vs a pipeline is not a real substitute, financially or otherwise. Not for several years and incredibly higher environmental devastation in the process.

It’s an entirely adequate substitute if you don’t base your export dependent economy on cheap Russian gas, and heat your homes with it during winter at the same time, see: East Asia.

Never commit two crimes at the same time.

Or you could just not join in on a US proxy war whose only objective is to weaken Russia. Pretty rich criticizing Europe for relying on cheap Russian gas when the US economy would collapse overnight if OPEC, or even just the Saudis and a few others boycotted it.

If an independent geopolitical position had been charted at quite literally any point over the past however many decades, that may have been an option, yes.

Mexico alone provides more crude oil to the US than Russia and Saudi Arabia combined, it is 2022, not 2001.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-produc...

Neither of those countries pose an existential threat to the North American equivalent of Northern & Eastern Europe (who may take issue with a lack of enthusiasm in weakening Russia) either.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com