And then how long would it take for the pressure to relieve from pipeline? 200 bar spewing out for hours slowly going down to the 8 bar or whatever it is at 250 feet, I guess you could imagine that ablating away the ground around the holes. I wouldn’t expect a circular crater from that sort of wear though.
Would love to see the Swedes and Danes report, hopefully they release it soon.
Fwiw I blew up the pipeline
I don’t know, but have you seen a pressure vessel burst? This is 1/10 the pressure and a relatively small volume (of water).
You can do your own calculation of stored energy for compressed gas if you want: Excel worksheet. You might be surprised. I assumed a volume of 10 m^3. I never completely trust my calculations, but I get an equivalent of ~170 lbs of TNT.
There’s far more stored energy in that pipeline than the explosion that ruptured the pipeline, no question. But the absolute magnitude of the energy isn’t going to form a blast crater, right? It’s going to be the magnitude of the instantaneous pressure wave, which from the pipeline breach is going to be limited to 200 bar. A chemical explosive could be much higher than that.
There are three significant sources of energy that could have contributed to blast effects we have some evidence of (size and location of pipe fragments, crater size, and seismographic signals). There was chemical energy in the explosive, but also chemical and elastic energy in the gas. Energy is energy but how much of it ends up in kinetic energy of materials in the ground depends on many factors so if you want to say that popping a balloon that big wouldn’t put a big dent in the sea floor, fine. But it would have contributed to seismic signals and to how the pipe came apart. It should be considered in estimating how much explosive was used. There are plenty of people who could do this kind of analysis but none of them seem to be talking. Maybe no one is asking.
I don’t think the chemical energy of the gas could be a factor. What’s the oxidant?
Thermal dissociation of water in high temperature plasma? That’s a stretch. I’m not an expert. But even experts can be surprised. If you looked at the videos from a few days ago, those people, who had lots of experience, couldn’t accurately predict what would happen in simple experiments. I doubt even the people who did this had a very good idea what the result would be. There’s no precedent I know of. I don’t see the point of speculating further without more information.
pu can’t even enjoy spending time with xi, the populace is warning him to shut up, lest he end up like milosevic qaddafi or sadaam.
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1638125186946936832
I agree and that brings me back to my original point: all this “debunking” based on the scant information we actually have is pointless and not informative. It begs the question of how the operation was done, which we have very little information on. Even Sy’s story, the most detailed account we have, is very vague with very few specifics.
hersh posts something with virtually no support - KEEEED says zomg look how 100% factual this is
competent actual journalism - look guys there’s a lot of known unknowns
I checked out of this thread for however long it’s been but the last thing I remember is Keed posting an article with scant information and using it to claim that the US probably blew up that pipeline. It’s quite a thing to miss all the goalpost shifting and return just in time to see the goalposts on the other side of the field.
I thought the US or the UK did it long before Sy published his article and said so in this thread. Sy’s article didn’t really move the needle for me at all. It’s certainly not any sort of proof that the US did it.
…
You’re joking, right.
This article isn’t any kind of proof that the US is responsible. Cool fan fic tho.
I honestly don’t understand your confusion. Yes, I think the US blew up the pipeline. Yes, I thought that before Sy’s article. Of course I understand that Sy’s anonymously sourced article isn’t conclusive proof that the US blew up the pipeline and never claimed it was. I believe him but that’s just based on the trust I have in Sy’s journalism. If you think me saying “you guys will never guess who blew up the pipeline” with a link to Sy’s story is identical in meaning to saying look at this IRONCLAD PROOF that the US is responsible, well, I can’t help you there. It’s obviously not and I never claimed as much.
“You’ll never guess who blew up the pipeline” followed by article claiming that the US definitely did it seems to be pretty strong linkage between the article and proof that the US did it. If you can’t see how that would be the interpretation, well can’t really help ya.
You see what you want to see. I’m not particularly interested in correcting your bad faith misinterpretations. I’ve repeatedly said that Sy’s story could be wrong and there’s no way to evaluate the truth of it other than relying on his journalistic reputation. That’s not proof at all. Sy might be sure but everyone else just has to trust him, or not.
This is just tone policing nonsense. Oh, you think my snarky one sentence commentary with the link to Sy’s story was too declarative sounding?
Well, who cares what you think.
You had dozens of opportunities to make it clear there wasn’t certainty, instead you chose:
gtfooh with this nonsense.
It’s fine if you didn’t intend for your contention to be taken seriously.
