Talk:Nord Stream 1

message: Since yesterday, 26 Sep 2022, there have been three identified "leaks" in the NS1 and NS2 pipelines.  Sabotage is suspected.  The article has this as a stub for the events:
On 27 September 2022, unexplained large pressure drops have been reported in both of the NS1 and one of the 2 NS2 pipelines.  as well as a located gas leak in Danish waters from NS2 late on 26 September.  Two separate leaks in NS1 have been reported—one in in the Danish economic zone and one in the Swedish zone—while the NS2 leak is in the Danish zone.  Both Berliner Zeitung and Le Monde newspapers have asked if it is sabotage, and a Kremlin spokesman said it could be. Both pipelines were not in operation at the time of these incidents, but do contain gas.Pressure drop now also in Nord Stream 1: Was it sabotage?, Berliner Zeitung, 27 September 2022.Sabotage suspected over leaks in Nord Stream gas pipelines, Le Monde, 27 September 2022.
Currently in the lede.  Needs to yet be explicated in the History section.  Heck, such a major event in two multi-billion dollar pipelines probably warrants an article on the event, and just leaving a summary in this article.  Net:  article needs further improvement.  N2e (talk) 15:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ships are now being asked to steer around the large 700-meter gas flow that is coming to the surface in the Baltic, by maritime authorities.  And TankerTrackers.com has released a satellite photo of the affected area of the upswell of gas. Nordstream Gas Pipeline rupture 13 nautical miles southeast of Bornholm Island, Denmark.  N2e (talk) 15:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: A new article has been created by editors for this notable event/sabotage? with undersea explosions.  2022 Nord Stream gas leaks  Many sources now.  Will eventually need to be summarized as an overview in this article too.  N2e (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

text:  A natural reason for the explosion has not been rejected yet. Lower weight gas molecules inside a closed vessel containing a mixture of motionless gases tend to slowly diffuse towards the highest point of the vessel, which is near Bornholm in this case. No data is available for calculation, so a need for research has only been suggested today on Facebook.--C. Trifle (talk) 09:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Reliable sources seem to think it's sabotage. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If you mean sources like media and politicians, I doubt if one can regard them as 'reliable' relating to the matter at hand. They mainly concentrate on side issues. I have not found a single article that would: (1) show any underwater photos of the places where the leaks occured  (2) prove that some bombs exploded from the outside of the pipes. I understand that, at the beginning, the area of the leaks was not available for taking photos because of the natural gas bubbles. But what seems really strange to me is (3) the lack of stability analysis of that system of pipelines, or a similar system, including differential equations.  There were many accidents for various reasons and explosions sometimes occure inside the pipe. C. Trifle (talk) 11:25, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

text: I could understand one pipeline, but 2 within hours of each other? Please. 76.121.252.180 (talk) 01:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Nord Stream Background Information, August 2016, a quote: "The pipelines have a constant internal diameter of 1,153 millimetres. However, Nord Stream designed the pipeline with three different design pressure sections (220, 200 and 177.5 bar) and pipe wall thicknesses (34.4, 30.9 and 26.8 mm respectively) corresponding to the gas pressure drop over the long journey from Russia to Germany. By designing each section according to the changing pressures, Nord Stream was able to save on the amount of steel used, and thus the costs of the pipes." Thinner walls far from the compressor are justified if the fluid flows. However, if it does not, the "dynamic pressure" component in Bernoulli's equation equals zero. In my opinion, this implies that the static pressure in parts of the pipeline far away from the compressor could increase. --C. Trifle (talk) 21:00, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: 3, not two. 2 on Nord Stream 1 and one of 2 on Nord Stream 2. 2A00:1FA0:836:A007:290B:E250:E21C:955 (talk) 06:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Natural gas is around 95% methane, with few other gases, mostly of the same density. As you said, separation of gases due to density differences, is slow. So their "impact" when hitting a wall is also slow, and gradual. Bornholm is at the low point of the pipelines, not the high point. The sea bottom is pretty much flat on most of the route, that's why they chose that route. So no wall to hit, just miles and miles of horizontal pipe. TGCP (talk) 20:19, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Large undersea gas "leaks" in both NS1 + NS2 

message: The reference to 59.2bn m³ being shipped through the pipeline is actually incorrect. The Russian government and Gazprom both normalise the energy content of gas using an assumed energy content that is lower than the energy content of the gas that was pumped into the Nord Stream pipeline. The physical gas flows were in line with the pipeline's 55bn m³/yr capacity. 2.27.195.37 (talk) 15:51, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capacity