• Oil and gas facilities in Russia have caught fire in recent weeks following suspected drone attacks.
  • In the latest attack, an oil refinery in the southwestern Volgograd region was ablaze on Saturday.
  • Russia’s air-defense systems have proven to be less effective against small drones.
  • Inky@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    5 months ago

    Generally agree, but damaging gas facilities can have undesirable consequences. An extreme methane leak is worse than combusting that gas

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      In the short run, yes, but not in the long run.

      The gas contained in the facility at any one time is nothing compared to the total output had it continued to operate for however many years it would otherwise be functioning.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Only so long as it’s not rebuilt or replaced (e.g. in India to cope with reduced oil from Russia).

        Environmentally, this isn’t good. As a state at war, they are an excellent target to up the pressure.

        • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          War in general is horrible for the environment, but if a few burning refineries over a short period of time can stop a war, then it may be a net benefit.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          They could just as easily build one in India without this one being destroyed and either way, replacing it costs money. You’re talking absolute nonsense.

          • cynar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Supply and demand applies. In the short term, oil usage is fairly inelastic. If supply is squeezed, by Russia not being able to produce, then prices climb. This encourages the building of new plants, or the expansion of old ones due to rising profits. It also encourages affected nations to build plants, to secure their own national requirements.

            To fix things, you need to attack both supply and demand. Demand is helped by reduce the friction with moving away from oil, as well as providing cost competitive alternatives. Supply is helped by forcing the externalised costs back into its pricing. This reduces profitability, and increases the pressure to change away from oil.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Supply and demand applies.

              Not on the local level with a global commodity like oil.

              If supply is squeezed, by Russia not being able to produce, then prices climb

              Not necessarily, no. Other oil producing countries might elect to release some of their reserves or increase production to keep prizes down. As I said, global commodity.

              Aaaand the rest just keeps on in the same way of assuming that local supply has vital effects on the price of a global commodity, so I’m just gonna stop repeating the point you keep missing in your zeal to make one less oil refinery in the world a bad thing 🤦

    • HuddaBudda@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      True… but also there are safety mechanisms that shut off the flow of methane in events such as this. As the last thing you will want is combustible methane on your facility fire that was just bombed.