Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
EU Science

Europe's Energy Crunch Squeezes World's Largest Particle Collider (wsj.com) 138

Posted by msmash from the tough-luck dept.
Europe's energy crisis is threatening to slow experiments into the fundamental forces of nature. From a report: The European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, is drafting plans to shut down some of its particle accelerators at periods of peak demand, said Serge Claudet, chair of the center's energy management panel. CERN is also considering how it could idle the Large Hadron Collider, the world's largest accelerator, if necessary, Mr. Claudet said. "Our concern is really grid stability, because we do all we can to prevent a blackout in our region," Mr. Claudet said.

The preparations show the far-reaching impact of Moscow's move to transform Europe's dependence on Russian energy supplies into a weapon of economic war. Emergency measures are now on the table after Russian energy giant Gazprom PJSC said Friday it would indefinitely stop natural gas deliveries through the Nord Stream gas pipeline, Russia's main artery for delivering the fuel to Europe, pushing the continent closer to gas rationing as winter approaches. Sweden and Finland on Friday said they would offer funding support to regional electricity producers, saying that Gazprom's move threatened the region's power market and its broader financial stability. The European Union is preparing plans to restructure the market to ease some of the pain.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Europe's Energy Crunch Squeezes World's Largest Particle Collider More

Europe's Energy Crunch Squeezes World's Largest Particle Collider

Comments Filter:

  • Weaponised Energy (Score:4, Insightful)

    by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @11:57AM (#62857124)

    I wonder when NATO is going to wake up and consider that this is very much an attack on utility infrastructure. I mean at this point it's not really too different than lobbing a rocket into a substation.

    • NATO isn't going to risk a nuclear war to rescue a corrupt former Soviet territory. There will be a lot of hand waving, but ultimately the only people who are going to peel the Russians out of Ukraine are the Russians.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sfcat ( 872532 )

        NATO isn't going to risk a nuclear war to rescue a corrupt former Soviet territory. There will be a lot of hand waving, but ultimately the only people who are going to peel the Russians out of Ukraine are the Russians.

        The only way the Russians will stay in Ukraine is if they are buried there. And it won't be a Russian decision. The only decision the Russians can make is how many of them stay in Ukraine permanently.

      • You're probably right. HOWEVER, it's not because they're a corrupt former Soviet territory. It's because we have our plate well and plenty full with China right now, and that's going to be the real game. One may even be able to debate whether or not we have to actually have a shooting war... China could blow a fat hole in the middle of every American household's balance sheet by going off the grid entirely. No more cheap goods, (including parts for your phones, screens and batteries,) so they all get more

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by sfcat ( 872532 )

          No more cheap goods, (including parts for your phones, screens and batteries,) so they all get more expensive

          Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, because the Chinese are the only people in the world who can assemble iPhones. I seriously doubt China will invade Taiwan anytime soon. By the time they get the technology necessary to match the US either a) the US will have upgraded to something better or b) China's population will be half of its current level (because of demographics). Either way, they will have bigger problems. Invading Taiwan is the only decision that can lead to the CCP losing power and I just don't see a C

    • Re:Weaponised Energy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AmazingRuss ( 555076 ) on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @12:09PM (#62857164)
      Are people obligated to sell you their possessions at a price that you like? Europe was dumb enough to become dependent on these dirtbags. They'll figure out a way to get by without them now, and the Russians can continue to plumb the depths of what it means to be a shithole country.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

        Are people obligated to sell you their possessions at a price that you like?

        Yes, when they've executed contracts with me which specify such prices over periods of time, hell yes.

        Europe was dumb enough to become dependent on these dirtbags.

        That would be a different issue.

      • Europe was dumb enough to become dependent on these dirtbags.

        The US would do well to wean ourselves off China too, to decrease our dependence on them.

        They are NOT our friends any more than Russia is a friend to EU.

      • Europe was dumb enough to become dependent on these dirtbags.

        This isn't so much Europe thing as it is a West vs developing world thing. The West has largely been ruled by an economic principle that pouring wealth into less desirable countries it leads to their stability of democracy and mediates extremism. Europe just largely chose gas with Russia, but we've done the same thing to China with manufacturing, India for labour. As a policy western nations have become dependent on unstable ones, unfortunately it didn't pan out how we thought it would, and these shitholes

        • Gas and Russia is not really a problem.
          It is just hyped in media and blown out of porpostion by the pro nuke and anti German haters.

          The problem is: COAL! and the real real problem is OIL!

          Europe, especially Germany got lots of its oil from Russia, far over 50% (don't remember the number, but it is higher than the Gas percentage), and even worth for coal. Coal can be aquired on the world market, without dramatic increase. Oil, not so much.

          Gas is only "complicated", as we have many branches in the industries a

        • Gas and Russia is not really a problem.
          It is just hyped in media and blown out of porpostion by the pro nuke and anti German haters.

          The problem is: COAL! and the real real problem is OIL!

          Europe, especially Germany got lots of its oil from Russia, far over 50% (don't remember the number, but it is higher than the Gas percentage), and even worth for coal. Coal can be aquired on the world market, without dramatic increase. Oil, not so much.

          Gas is only "complicated", as we have many branches in the industries a

      • If you look at it from a pure capitalist point of few: the money Europe saved the recent 30 years, far out weights the money they now pay extra for a couple of years.

        And if you dig deeper into the capitalizm meme:
        As always the rich earned^H^H^H^H^H^Hmade a lot of money during that time, and even more now ...
        While the poor have to "pay the prize"

      • Are people obligated to sell you their possessions at a price that you like?

        No, but they are obligated to sell you their possessions as required by a mutually agreed contract. There's a reason Russia hasn't come out and said "we're turning off your gas because we don't like you", it's because they are obligated to meet the conditions of a signed contract. They instead make all sorts of wild equipment related claims. They are (bullshit) claiming force majeure, somehow all 8 turbines on NS1 failed within a year on the pipeline. Somehow they can't take delivery of the one repaired one

    • Choosing to not sell something isn't an act of war.

      Russia is breaking their contract with Germany, but that will be dealt with in the proper way.

      • Europe should have seen the writing on the wall when Georgia was invaded in 2008. If you make deals with known crooks and aggressors, you are asking for it.

        • Europe should have seen the writing on the wall when Georgia was invaded in 2008.

          Easy to say in hindsight. To me, even when Russia too Crimea it wasn't clear what was going on.

        • It's more complicated than that, EU is not a single mind, there were warnings all the way from the central European countries, which were ignored and Germany's plan for the future was to be the major distributor of Russian oil and gas in Europe (remember all the tensions regarding the Nord-Stream 2?). Germany closed most of their nuclear power plants and became dependent (~60% of their energy) on Russia, hence so little support for Ukraine possibly. Even Ukraine pays Russia for gas and Russia pays Ukraine f

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hey! ( 33014 )

        It's a voluntary act taken with the intention of inflicting pain on an enemy that will compel that enemy to do something it doesn't want to. Sure, it may not meet your definition of "act of war". But it is a move in a conflict.

        • Conflict is not war. Adults have ways of settling conflicts without killing each other.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by DarkOx ( 621550 )

            and nation states are not individuals.

            Do they have ways to settling conflicts without the use of force, maybe. Diplomacy is thing but generally speaking it depends on an underlying threat of force, or in the quarter century mono-polar Pax American and the Pax Ramona before it finding yourself outside the protection ^H^H^H^H^Hpeace umbrella. No wise or self respecting nation trades aware their self determination without believing at least in the possibility the other side could and possibly would make them

            • I'm not sure what your point is. Are you trying to say that the EU and Russia should start shooting at each other? That's not a good idea.

              Do they have ways to settling conflicts without the use of force, maybe.

              Yes, they do. Germany has already started (and succeeded) at finding other suppliers of oil.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by DarkOx ( 621550 )

                I am saying we are in practical terms at war now - a new cold war. Just like the last one the reasons its not a hot war are both sides believe the other does represent and existential threat, and neither is convinced it could nuke the other into oblivion before they figured out what was happening and returned fire.

                its a peace of a kind but it is a peace thru firepower. It is the capability and readiness to use violence that makes the other "adult" resolutions possible. Without the threat of violence the "ad

                • More tech like Iron Dome and Patriot batteries.

                  I don't know why we haven't delivered this stuff yet. Kharkiev is crying.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by hey! ( 33014 )

            All war is conflict, some conflict is war. And sometimes, conflict is war hidden under a transparent fig leaf.

            What we have in Ukraine is a classic proxy war, which is particularly useful when a geopolitical rival is foolish enough to get itself entangled in a quagmire. Proxy war has no formal status in international law, which is kind of the point: you can injure your rival while pretending (unconvincingly) that you aren't a belligerent. If the other side wanted they could *justifiably* point to your ac

            • Attempting to undermine another country's economy by cutting off energy, or even *credit*, is not some means of settling a conflict like a mature adult.

              It's much, much better than an actual war.

            • What we have in Ukraine is a classic proxy war,
              No it is not, as one of the big parties is directly involved.

              The Iran - Iraq war was a proxy war for example.

              Your argument makes sense from a point of view of the EU, for us Ukraine is a proxy to fight Russia, but: we gain not really anything from that.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by hey! ( 33014 )

                A proxy war can be proxy on only one side, like the Soviets in Afghanistan or the Americans in Vietnam.

    • How is this modded insightful? The countries that depended solely on Russian resources for survival have only themselves to blame. Don't look at NATO look in the mirror.
    • NATO has figured it out. The problem is what to do about it.

      NATO has been highly successful. Through a combination of combined arms capabilities, massive international cooperation, and an equally massive nuclear weapons stockpile, NATO actually achieved something unparalleled in human history: it raised the cost of an actual shooting war so high that it has become cost-inefficient, and effectively obsoleted, an actual shooting war with any of it's members. It practically eliminated warfare completely

    • I wonder when NATO is going to wake up and consider that this is very much an attack on utility infrastructure. I mean at this point it's not really too different than lobbing a rocket into a substation.

      Wait... are you seriously suggesting NATO declare Article V because the Russians won't sell them gas anymore? Especially after Europe was warned that they'd become too dependent upon it? And in the case of the Germans, literally laughed at those warnings? You ARE essentially arguing "Either sell us the gas, or we'll prod the US, UK, and France into nuking you".

      This is insane. You people have gone insane.

      • Sold. Not sell. Reneging on an agreed upon international supply contract.

        And yes, this is what it means to weaponise resources.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Tailhook ( 98486 )

      The people that weaponized energy are the Europeans.

      Russia can do as it pleases with it's own resources and Europe can go fuck itself; Europe put itself in this position and that lesson needs to be learned. Trying to parley Europe's failure into a justification for escalation is cognitive fraud and you need to cut it out.

      There are legitimate reasons to consider escalating conflict with Russia, but this isn't one of them. This is just Europe discovering the consequences of its own misguided policies.

  • Bad idea (Score:5, Informative)

    by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @12:22PM (#62857212) Journal

    The preparations show the far-reaching impact of Moscow's move to transform Europe's dependence on Russian energy supplies into a weapon of economic war

    It will hurt EU this winter, but after that Europe won't be buying much Russian oil. Russia shot themselves in the foot.

    • Russia will still sell their oil and gas - to someone else. In the end it is a game of musical chairs of who buy whose oil. BTW, there are many nuclear power stations in the European Union that are built and maintained by Russia. The biggest calamity is that Europeans now cannot get Russian ice cream and cheese - There is actually nothing special about it - it is just made the way your grandma would have made it!

      • Russia will still sell their oil and gas - to someone else.

        Maybe eventually. They aren't building a pipeline to China anytime soon.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sfcat ( 872532 )
        How? Only India and China are buying and that is only on the black market. There are no pipelines that lead from Siberia to India or China. They are currently shipping via sea and that will only last until someone decides they want that very expensive boat loaded with valuable crude oil which is unguarded. Basically you are betting nobody is greedy enough to steal...in the entire west...hahahahahahahahaha...

      • The biggest calamity is that Europeans now cannot get Russian ice cream and cheese - There is actually nothing special about it - it is just made the way your grandma would have made it!

        Granny's secret ingredient - just a pinch of polonium!

      • It's not so easy to swap buyers as you might think. Prices are set by supply and demand. Reduce demand for your product by cutting off potential buyers, and you have to settle for lower prices from the ones remaining.

        If you doubt it, check out current oil prices [oilprice.com]. The two main international oil price benchmarks are Brent Crude (currently selling for 92.57) and WTI Crude (currently 86.65). Compare to Urals Crude, the main benchmark for Russian oil, which is stuck down at 72.91. Or check out this graph [neste.com] of

        • This is even more relevant than you are letting on. The movement of oil internationally is largely fungible with the overwhelming majority being moved by ships. Oil isn't an interchangeable product, different regions provide different types of oil which are preference by certain refiners which is why you sometimes see odd things such as one country exporting oil while their refineries import it from elsewhere. The fact that Urals is crashing is significant in that customers are looking elsewhere, and more i

  • 55 MPH particle speed limit now!

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close