source:https://energyindustryreview.com/analysis/submarine-cables-risks-and-security-threats/
Ulf Kristersson felt strangely AWOL as Magdalena Andersson commandeered the microphones after the attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines earlier this week. Fortunately for him, Andersson said she’d keep him in the loop. Where was he? He was busy asking for two more weeks to get his government together. No real sign, yet, on how that’s going.
Meanwhile, the pipeline attack has shaken things up. There have been many “I told you so”s from the experts involved from when the pipes were first laid down: Not only was Europe made vulnerable through gas-dependency, but the pipes themselves were unprotected. Now we know that a few divers with know-how and a half decent boat can get the sabotage job done.
Other vulnerabilities
Are other undersea facilities equally vulnerable? Why, yes. Although satellite-borne internet connectivity is growing, the vast majority of internet connections are through undersea cables similar in shape, size and assailability to Nord Stream pipelines. If we get grumpy waiting even a full second for a website to load, it’s easy to imagine how a bigger disruption would go down. If the other pipelines that are right now actively delivering oil to Europe for heating and cooking are hit, the situation would likely be near-on catastrophic. It is no surprise that one of the main daily newspapers here recently listed what preparedness items one should have on hand if our situation even just temporarily goes sideways.
As there were already no gas shipments being made through the pipelines, though, there was no particular spike in the already dangerously high electricity prices. This was a small silver lining. The EU meeting several weeks ago made no progress on a possible price cap, but the EU continues to try to find ways to bring in more oil, to ease its costs, or just bring in some money to hand out later.
If not one way, then another
Several options are on the table at the EU meeting today, SvD reports. These include a revenue limit for non-gas electricity producers (instead of limiting how much something can cost, like a price cap, it limits how much profit can be made), a “solidarity contribution” from coal-, oil-, or gas-based energy producers, and finally an appeal to reduce energy consumption in general by 10%. Arguments against these business measures are similar to the arguments against price-caps – namely that it reduces the incentive for producers to supply Europe with gas even while there is a huge shortage. In addition, a lot of exceptions to these measures will likely be needed to let them get passed. This will water down their effectiveness. Finally, the first measure listed here would even disincentivize the kind of renewable energy production that Europe actually wants to encourage. None of these measures will take place right away – these things often take months. They are certainly meant to help. But a threat of “solidarity fees” as one part calls it, or “taxes” as others might say, has a wet-blanket effect on hopes for the near term.
Muddling through
The EU is trying, but there is no detour that will take us past the coming winter. It isn’t looking good now. Worse is likely to come if the war in the Ukraine makes Putin more desperate. In the long run, everything is worse if Putin succeeds. But out of necessity comes innovation, and there are a lot of people working on these problems. Who knows from where an idea might come.
