Hacker News Reader

Comment by cm2187 | Hacker News Reader

I read talks of sabotage but I struggle to understand the point, surely russia wouldn’t sabotage their own pipelines (they can just shut them) and I understand they are not in use right now. In fact doesn’t that mean that the pipeline will be flooded? Is that recoverable?

View on HN

> I read talks of sabotage but I struggle to understand the point

Pure speculation: A very hard winter is predicted with sky-high energy prices. If people, the economy and industry is suffering one can easily imagine that Germany wavers and opens up the taps. If the pipes are damaged and it will cost a lot to repair and restart the flow that supports those who want to keep the gas flow off and hinders those who wanted to restart it.

> surely russia wouldn’t sabotage their own pipelines

I would agree with that. Hard to imagine what would be their point in doing that.

That's a very Putin-esque thing to do. They know that Germany is off Russian gas and they want to give them as much pain as possible so they come begging back.

The question is whether they trigger article 5 here -- I suspect not, however.

> They know that Germany is off Russian gas and they want to give them as much pain as possible so they come begging back.

Okay, but how would this particular act accomplish that? Those pipes are the means Russia would be serving the german market after "they come begging back". If Russia wants to starve Germany of gas they can just simply not pump it in the pipe. That simple. No need to blow up their own infra for that.

Pipes can be repaired. Russia has been slowing down supplies through the NS1 pipe -- down to 1/10th of Germany's normal supply before halting. [1] [2]

Blowing up a pipe that can be repaired to cause friction between allies? That's priceless. The fact that it's cause for speculation on Facebook, Reddit, HN, Twitter, etc shows exactly how disruptive of a move it was.

[1] https://www.spiegel.de/international/business/a-winter-of-pr...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/mystery-gas-leaks-hi... "Neither pipeline was pumping gas to Europe at the time the leaks were found..."

The begging back theory doesn't make sense. Sowing discontent and suspicion between allies right when some of them are electing Russia-frendly government has more merit.

It would be interesting to watch this evolving, if it wasn't fucking scary.

> when some of them are electing Russia-frendly government

What's wrong with that? I mean... we're either a democracy, and people choose their own government, or we're being governed by some other external force not obeying the wishes of the people.... if italy choses to be friendly with the russians, their people wanted that, so why not?

You can't really state that without bringing up the proven fact that the Russians have been running pro-Russian, as well as divisive campaigns all across the world.

so... russia runs a few ad campaigns and we abolish democracy... that is, if the wrong side wins?

That's... not even close to what I was saying at all.

You have a same bunch of politicians in and out of parliament, while people are going through locdowns, massive rinting of money, with scraps going to the people, lockdowns, record inflation and energy crisis, while those same politicians get paid more and more plus they steal even more, so people want some kind of change, any change, just to get rid of the current ones...

but no, it's the russians and their facebook posts, sure.

> Hard to imagine what would be their point in doing that.

Precisely because it is hard to imagine? It looks like a clandestine operation by one NATO country to limit the options of another or perhaps even the German government doing it to limit the options of its own people.

Like you I have no idea, but this is one of those areas where Occam's razor doesn't do as well as it usually does.

> A very hard winter is predicted

If you are implying that weather forecast is accurate months ahead - nobody knows what the temperatures will be this winter. Everything further ahead than 7 days is pretty much rolling the dice.

https://scijinks.gov/forecast-reliability/

You don't need a weather forecast to know that winters are cold in northern part of europe, but that doesn't matter, because with cheap energy we can heat or houses, workplaces, the industry continiues running, and then comes the spring.

With energy prices rising, people won't have money to heat their houses, industry won't be able to produce stuff, people will be left jobless, etc... meaning, a hard winter for europe.

> If you are implying that weather forecast is accurate months ahead

Nop. Hard as in a winter full of hardship, stress and problems.

> Everything further ahead than 7 days is pretty much rolling the dice.

And yet every winter it is cold here and every summer it is hot. Nobody can say which day will be sunny and which day will be stormy that far ahead, but clearly there are trends.

Cold combined with high energy prices will mean that a lot of people will go either cold, or poor or most likely both. Not so cold and so poor that everyone dies instantly, this is not a prequel to snowpiercer, but you know having a bad time.

Winter in Europe has huge variations in severity. The difference between a cold and a mild winter can make an annual 15% difference in gas consumption in Germany, for example [1]. The difference between running out of gas and not running out of gas falls right between those two weather scenarios.

Winter being generally colder than summer - that's climate, which is different from weather.

[1] https://www.focus.de/finanzen/boerse/konjunktur/studie-skizz...

Russia doesn't really stand to gain here. Ukraine and the United States stand to gain the most by removing the option for Europe to capitulate to Russia this winter.

Ukraine isn't on the Baltic Sea, but do they need to be? Honestly, I don't know the resources that would be required to accomplish this. Would some special forces with diving equipment and a fishing boat be enough?

> Would some special forces with diving equipment and a fishing boat be enough?

Sections are shallow. (No clue about the blast sites.) With zero information on the extent of the damage beyond measured pressure drops, folks dropping weighted dry bags of dynamite from kayaks is in scope.

A supposed expert on Twitter claims it is divable:

https://twitter.com/CovertShores/status/1574750260743880710

This should have its own submission or be at the top of the thread.

The biggest gain is for Russia, remember the long "repair" of NS1? Blocking the filling of gas reserves in Western Europe? Repair here, sabotage there and bam Germany has less gas for winter.

Russia can just close the valve.

Germany has an option to talk with russia to make a deal, so russia reopens the valve... some other forces don't want that.

Russia can close valve pretending they didn't close it but at the same time sending a warning.

It is a 101 of economical warfare.

What warning? They literally said they'll close the valve.

With the closed valve, they have an upper hand at negotiations about gas, especially if the german people get cold and start sharpening the pitchforks for their own (german) politicians... now, even if the germans want to negotiate, there will be no gas until the pipelines are fixed, and it doesn't seem that will happen soon

It is Russia, they have their ways.

Nobody believes in their 'repairs' and temporary issues with the pipeline. I really hope it is destroyed.

If they wanted they could reuse the old pipeline that is on land on Polish territory.

BTW. It is not only my suspicion: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/28/nord-stream-pipelin...

We have lots of automated machinery/robots/underwater drones that could do it remotely.

> Would some special forces with diving equipment and a fishing boat be enough?

Might not even need divers. Just a fishing boat, a GPS, a limpet mine, and a few hundred feet of rope. Dangle the mine in the water at the right depth as you cross the path of the pipeline and let go when it attaches. Set the timer for weeks or months so you're long gone by the time anyone starts investigating.

(If the pipelines are made of a non-magnetic material like stainless steel maybe you'd need to do something more sophisticated.)

Maybe we'll know more once investigators inspect the damage, but I think practically anyone could have done this based on what we know so far.

One reason I could imagine Russia herself would do this is because they might assume Nordstream is now an essentially obsolete asset, so has more value in their ability to demonstrate the fragility of OTHER gas pipelines, including the one inaugurated this very day between Norway and Poland.

ed: https://twitter.com/ASabadus/status/1574729027570769920

Also, Apparently Norway has recently warned about drone activity near hydrocarbon rigs: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/norway-oil-safety-re...

Yeah, I assume this is Russia gesturing to that new Norwegian pipeline and saying "nice pipeline, it'd be a shame if something were to happen to it".

Everyone knows they have the capability to do it. What prevents them from doing this is that if they do it, NATO will start sinking russian submarine in the north and baltic seas and we are in a shooting war. So I really don't see the point.

We know they are lying. They know they are lying. They know that we know they are lying. We know that they know that we know they are lying. And still they continue to lie.

Goal of the sabotage is to keep Europe in the war. If opening up the gas pipeline were an option, Germany would be tempted to do it, once the heating season starts.

The conspiracy theory is that either the United States or some member of NATO sabotaged the pipeline so that Germany will not have the option of easing up on sanctions in order to purchase Russian Gas this winter.

Not every theory about conspiracy is a conspiracy theory.

Fixed version:

> The theory is that either the United States or some member of NATO conspired and sabotaged the pipeline so that Germany will not have the option of easing up on sanctions in order to purchase Russian Gas this winter.

Even the German government might have done it in a "burn the boats" strategy.

I don't think Russia had interests in doing it, unless it is for some internal power play.

edit: or plausible denial when they won't send gas to Europe this winter. But do they even need the deniability at this point?

This is a valid conspiracy.... when it gets cold, people will protest, and demand that their government sits down with putin and make a deal... with the pipes blown, the government can say that they can't do anything, and that it's not their fault.

> Even the German government might have done it in a "burn the boats" strategy.

I would prefer to assume governments are somewhat rational actors, who at least try to act in the interest of the own country.

In this case, the biggest loser from destroying NS1 and NS2 is Germany, second-biggest Russia and the rest of the Europe, sorted descending by the dependency on Russian gas.

As for the winners, we have the USA and Ukraine as biggest immediate winners, and indirectly and in the long-term India, China, Arab countries, ...

Ok, what if NATO collectively (or at least the affected members) decided to destroy the pipeline in a show of resolution?

Let's say secret negotiations are ongoing (it would be surprising if they weren't) with Russia regarding a winter ceasefire. Russia annexes the occupied regions to force the hand and be in a better position, then offers gas in exchange of no NATO military help during the ceasefire.

NATO rejects the offer and blows the pipeline to show it is off the table.

Perhaps I should have said 'conjecture' instead. I felt like using the term conspiracy because the explanation seems plausible while simultaneously devious and covert.

Another conspiracy theory is, that Russia did it, to sow these types of doubt.

Isn't that exactly from their playbook? I mean the neofascist book by Dugin about pseudo-geopolitics that they made required reading at the military universities. "Foundation of Geopolitics" is the name.

This is every nation states playbook.

No, it's not. My state never tried to do anything even remotely like what's described as standard practice in the book (and what's provably being done by them here).

Where do you live and how do you know they haven't done anything like this?

This state doesn't even have the agencies that would do it, much less a budget for them. The agencies we have - they have reporting requirements, and these are checked to be accurate by elected auditors.

Where do you live Andorra or Lichtenstein or some place like that which has like 10 people? I can't imagine any country that has some decent amount of people not having agencies who would be capable of doing stuff like this.

I think you have no idea what you're talking about. Read the book. Very few states would be able to do the things described there, and even less of them (1-3, maybe) could hide it.

I think you are grossly underestimating the ability of agencies. If you think only 1-3 countries could actually pull off something like this, then you are wrong.

I said only 1-3 could keep it secret. More could pull it off, but not in secrecy. Anyways, the main point is that we know for a fact thanks to our constitutional audit office that nothing even remotely like this is being done by our three/four-letter agencies. :-)

If you're going to claim that every single random person elected into this office (so several hundreds of people) was coerced into lying to keep it private, not a single leak has ever happened even though this state is not exactly known for its (cyber)security, that they somehow magically generated the funds for it even though we're really not rich at all and every US$ million missing is immediately visible, and that they managed to make everything else check out perfectly as if nothing was happening - then sorry but I think you're being way more than overly paranoid. I don't want to be rude but you should visit a psychologist if you're seriously considering this claim.

The thing is, there's no reason anybody here would do it. We don't have anything like the national pride of other nations like the US or even the Russians. We don't care, nationalism and patriotism is considered laughing matter here. The agents would burst out laughing if you suggested a plan like this - even if it was plausible, you'd be seen as insane. The only thing we have is strong anti-communism, so anything that resembles these times is pretty much not possible here - and the newspapers are fishing to expose you for it.

Simply put, no, not every state does stuff like this. Don't normalize it.

>I said only 1-3 could keep it secret. More could pull it off, but not in secrecy.

Seems unlikely. USA, UK, Russia, and China could all keep it secret. I'm sure other Western countries likely could as well like Germany.

>Anyways, the main point is that we know for a fact thanks to our constitutional audit office that nothing even remotely like this is being done by our three/four-letter agencies. :-)

You are so certain it couldn't happen in your country and yet you haven't stated the name despite me asking you twice. Perhaps you are afraid you claims won't stand up to scrutiny?

Do you really think that there is zero corruption in your country? That no agency claims to pay more for an item then they do to skim money?

>If you're going to claim that every single random person elected into this office (so several hundreds of people) was coerced into lying to keep it private, not a single leak has ever happened even though this state is not exactly known for its (cyber)security,

I don't know how your agencies work and since you refuse to give the name then I have no reason to trust your claims. You think 100s of people are all auditing every single agency and purchase all while having 100% perfect accuracy?

Unless you are talking about a microstate that doesn't seem likely.

>that they somehow magically generated the funds for it even though we're really not rich at all and every US$ million missing is immediately visible, and that they managed to make everything else check out perfectly as if nothing was happening

No one is talking about millions of dollars. You need a couple people, scuba gear and explosives. You might be able to find people with scuba gear who could volunteer for such an assignment. Explosives don't have to cost millions. Crap, people in your government could have paid for it out of pocket.

>then sorry but I think you're being way more than overly paranoid. I don't want to be rude but you should visit a psychologist if you're seriously considering this claim.

Spending potentially less than a thousand dollars isn't really some sort of conspiracy theory.

>The thing is, there's no reason anybody here would do it.

Do you know every single person in your country well enough to know their politics? If you do then you live in a microstate which was already something I was asking you about.

>We don't have anything like the national pride of other nations like the US or even the Russians. We don't care, nationalism and patriotism is considered laughing matter here.

Seeing how much you are posting to defend your country, this sure seems like a lie.

>The agents would burst out laughing if you suggested a plan like this - even if it was plausible, you'd be seen as insane.

You know every single agent right?

>The only thing we have is strong anti-communism, so anything that resembles these times is pretty much not possible here - and the newspapers are fishing to expose you for it.

Doesn't seem likely, but since you haven't stated the name of your country I can't show any evidence to the contrary.

>Simply put, no, not every state does stuff like this. Don't normalize it.

Prove it by giving me the name of your country so I can check.

Have you read it? I have. I doubt many countries are studying how to create a Eurasian super-state to take on the western European and American alliance. What you're thinking is a general-purpose Clausewitz or Sun Tzu is actually a very specific book about building a very specific world view.

It’s not a conspiracy theory. Some group conspired to sabotage the pipelines. It’s a conspiracy fact. The only theoretical aspect is who did it and that’s more of a hypothesis at this point. It’s a conspiracy hypothesis.

Could we please have at least a shred of evidence of sabotage before we move on to the phase where we conclude there was sabotage? Sorry to be a stickler about major geopolitical crises.

Two pipelines bust at once on Nord 1 and 2?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/sep/27/nord-stream...

There are 3 separate but simultaneous "accidents" on the pipelines. Do you have a proposal which would explain that and not involve sabotage?

They could have been fitted with explosives before for some reason and it was triggered by accident.

but it's a theory as of now and hence a "conspiracy theory". I'd like to mention that for me "conspiracy theory" is not a term I frown upon. It's been labelled as something equivalent to "dangerous tin foil hat bullshit" by some politicians and news outlets who'd like us to believe that history unfolds linearly and obviously.

"For me the word doesn't mean what everyone else thinks it means"

nice try, buddy ;)

That depends on how heavily it got damaged, and how easy it is to restore the damage.

Russia don't want Germany and others to sue Gazprom on international arbitrage for the missing gas volume contractualized on decades and using the frozen russian asset to pay the penalties, so is creating those force majeure using plausible deniability like leaking turbine and now NS1/2

The point would depend on who did it. If it was the US, then it was to keep their promise to shut down NS1/2 but after Germany had topped up[1][2]. If it was Russia, then the point is to increase prices by creating volatility through insecurity and to make a threat (they have other pipelines like Yamal that are still running.[3]) If it was some other gas-exporting country (seems unlikely), then likewise, to spike prices.

1. https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1490792461979078662

2. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is...

3. https://www.planete-energies.com/en/medias/infographics/gas-...

I would think the US would be more subtle than two simultaneous leaks. That looks like an actor who doesn’t care about being identified.

Why would the US care if they were seen as doing it when they already announced that they were going to do it[1]?

1. https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1490792461979078662

This would probably be helped by some kind of citation, or at least an explanation of what is meant here.

It is linked above. https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1490792461979078662

It is a tweet posted in February 7th by ABC News:

Pres. Biden: "If Russia invades...then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."

Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?"

Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that."

They clearly meant via the use of either sanctions or other political / legal means, which is exactly what happened because Nord Stream 2 never opened.

I think that's far from clear, verging on very naive. They spent the existence of both pipelines trying doing exactly what you described but could not stop them. Clearly they meant bomb it. And, no, I'm not saying they did. As my other comment indicates Russiais just as if not more likelythe culprit.

It is was very naive why did no one take it literally when he first said it? Back then it was very clear what he meant.

> I would think the US would be more subtle than two simultaneous leaks.

There are three leaks.

> That looks like an actor who doesn’t care about being identified.

I don't see anyone being identified, do you?

My bet is on some sort of deniable operation from either Ukraine, or one of the other former soviet countries with a bone to pick against Russia. It's not like Russia isn't shy in waving around how much an asset the pipeline is to them.

Or like an actor who likes to be misidentified. There's one player in the global propaganda game who has completely given up convincing anyone of their positions, they've gone all in on the fallback strategy of making noone trust anyone. They wouldn't care if a false flag operation fails to really convince antibody, just casting doubt would already be good enough.

Well it’s not hard to connect the dots so why be subtle? If Russia knows it wasn’t Russia, it sure as hell wasn’t Germany. Who else is there that would have the desire and the means?

Why forget the obvious, Ukraine?

They already showed they are capable of doing terrorist actions on Russian territory while keeping silent about it. Baltic pipeline would be a children play for them, since an army can't protect it.

Their enemy will not be able to sell gas to Europe without going through what is left of Ukraine. Since Poland stopped Jamal, they can basically dictate transit price and let Russia finance their army.

> Why forget the obvious, Ukraine?

Because Ukraine has no submarines and they don't have access to the Baltic Sea even if they had any?

Some people are claiming somebody could have dived to it. I don't know if that is the case, but I would assume Ukraine would be capable of sending a couple people who know how to dive a few countries over. They also likely have plenty of explosives.

There is quite a bit of risk involved in a covert operation like this for Ukraine. Let's just imagine they sent a special ops team covertly into Denmark (onto the island of Bornholm which is mostly reached by airplane or ferry) and planted some explosives on the pipeline in a secret dive operation.

There are quite a bit of scenarios in which this could go terribly wrong or be successfully attributed after the facts.

The paramount Ukrainian reliance on western support to have any chance to win this war makes me think that the risk/reward ratio for this operation would make it super unlikely that Ukraine would consider doing this.

Odd that this is downvoted. I do wonder what possible methods could have been use to undertake this. Are there underwater drones that are capable? Could a small private boat have just gotten into position about the pipeline and dropped the explosive?

It’s downvoted because it repeats Rashist propaganda - there were no terrorist attacks by Ukraine.

> They already showed they are capable of doing terrorist actions on Russian territory while keeping silent about it. Baltic pipeline would be a children play for them, since an army can't protect it.

So far Ukraine has only hit legitimate military targets within Russia, unlike Russia who repeatedly uses it acts of terror, rape, genocide and torture as a active part of its war machine. It's a large stretch to call what Ukraine has done 'terrorist actions'.

Who knows what inner factions are forming, or perhaps are just imagined to form by a paranoid inner inner circle. If the group that considers themselves too deeply invested in the war for reversal believes that there's another group forming around the idea of switching the gas billions back on, the former might very well want to remove that option.

Russia has probably been in a civil war for quite a while now, a backroom civil war of the elites with the TV-controlled masses completely uninvolved. Think of all those mysterious hospital windows falls... gas pipeline sabotage fits right in.

The most convincing "Russia did it motive" I've seen so far (and I don't believe it but it's more plausible than other reasons I've seen that Russia would do it) is Putin doesn't want any of the elites around him thinking they can remove him and then get their money flowing quickly again.

you think using western, market-centric logic. you can't use this mode of thinking to understand russia. this might as well be internal russian faction warfare.

There's a theory I've seen that Russia could have sabotaged Nord Stream to evade breach-of-contract penalties for shutting off gas. I don't know how credible that theory is though, and there are plenty of alternative parties and potential motives. Practically anyone with a boat and a limpet mine could have done this. (Maybe we'll get more clarity as the damage is inspected.)

> "...surely russia wouldn’t sabotage their own pipelines (they can just shut them) and I understand they are not in use right now."

The EU, through von der Leyen, has more or less made it clear that no more gas will ever be bought from Russia, not even if the war would suddenly end today with Russia retreating entirely from Ukraine's territory. The pipelines have been forfeited.

People with geopolitical expertise have offered the theory that it may be a "red flag" operation by Russia, granting them some sort of excuse to mobilize in international waters in the Baltic.

> granting them some sort of excuse to mobilize in international waters in the Baltic

Russia already has Kaliningrad.

If people get cold, and ursula doesn't want to negotiate, people will want to replace ursula... This makes it better for her (and many other eu governemnts) since negotiations wont bring back the gas.

Why don't you include the US and EU as the possible saboteurs? I mean we have the whole Gulf of Tonkin incident as precedence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident

Yep, many internal pressures in EU for talks with russia (due to energy prices), and people wanting their poltiicians replaced, because they're the only ones standing between the people and cheap gas. On the other hand, US now can sell overpriced gas to EU while still hurting russia... if the pipes reopen, russia gets money, eu gets gas, US loses overpriced exports.

So yeah... us and eu would be my first suspects

How is that analogy supposed to work?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident#Second...

Yes, the US administration knowingly misrepresented the facts but in the end the only thing that happened was some US ships firing at shadows in the fog they believed to be enemies. Nothing that had not happened before in far more dramatic fashion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogger_Bank_incident

Russia is looking for all shorts.of excuses to escalate

I don't think Russia has any interest in escalating.

Putin seems to be taking the approach of sowing as much chaos as possible. A hot war with the west is useful to him to rally the country behind him. Escalation is just another tool.

Putin seem to be barely able to wage a war against Ukraine, wanting to drag NATO openly in it seems crazy. And no, I don't buy that Putin is crazy.

I don't have any idea about who blew up the pipeline but it's clear that Putin sees his only way out of the mess he has put himself in is escalating to the point where western countries are worried enough about the consequences to let him have some kind of concessions in Ukraine. That's not crazy if you see it as your only option.

They already do so non-stop. So far Putin has always won by escalating and it's his only option now.

Russia has every interest in escalating so that the EU backs off from supporting Ukraine. If you watch Russian state tv this is very obvious.

Russia is escalating everyday, your argument is proven wrong.

I've only thought about it for a minute- but I might speculate that it is a signal from Russia- "even if we decide we want to turn the gas back on, you might not be able to get it when you want it."

    Dear Russia


    Thanks for confirming so clearly that you are an untrustworthy and manipulative partner. 


    Best,
    -The Rest of Europe.

Incentives don’t align for Russia (lose revenue) and Russia could just turn off the gas if it wanted to. Putin is a wildcard, but still, if he wanted to “teach Europe a lesson” he would just come out and say I’m turning the gas off, freeze to death.

Also, Biden promised that they had the capability and desire to take out the pipelines if Russia invaded so there is that. Plus, the US would stand to profit from exporting LNG to Germany.

Russia would only be losing potential revenue if the pipelines would be getting used any time soon, which is highly unlikely. They already did turn off the gas, now this just confirms it for the long term, with the added bonus of lots of people immediately blaming the US for it. Middle Eastern nations would benefit far more than the US, which has basically sold all of its capacity for LNG already. The EU is looking to sign LNG deals with those nations, see for example Scholz touring the Gulf region recently.

Since there is no direct effect (the pipelines has been out of use for a long time), the effect must be indirect. As such we can't know and will likely never know for sure why it happened or by whom.

It could be Russia. Russia is the prime suspect in 99% of the cases when there is a hostile military operation on Swedish/Danish water. It isn't like Russia were using the pipelines, and it possible that spinning this as an attack on Russia will result in popularity gains for Putin.

Why would russia want that?

People in most of eu are getting angry at their governments and demand some sort of negotiations so the pipes get reopened before people start freezing to death in their homes.

With pipes destroyed, even if people get mad, most governments can now just say "there's nothing we can do".

“Freezing to death” is just Putin’s propaganda; even before war Russian gas was about 30% of imports, now it’s no longer necessary at all: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is...

So, why are the politicians telling people not to heat their houses above 19°C, to wear sweaters at home, to limit showers to a few minutes and why are eg. steel mills already shutting down in germany?

Yeah, if a country doesn't have enough gas to keep everyone's house at a comfy 35C, that's like basically the same as everyone freezing to death

There's a difference between 35°C in your home, and shutting down industry and telling people not to shower.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com