It might be the time to take out as much oil infrastructure as they can. It'll be hard for some "allies" to publicly condemn those targets since blowing up oil infrastructure is so in vogue atm.
We're doing a bit of a speed run on the need for renewables and electrification into the public consciousness.
403
therealbman5 days ago
+113
[Refinery Bingo](https://i.redd.it/p7vgbwxpvgtg1.jpeg)
They’ve been doing just that.
113
flight_recorder5 days ago
+38
This is just fantastic
38
Vradlock5 days ago
+6
It will be like a pandemic for a while. Everything will cost quite a bit more and we will be depressed.
6
Donnahue-George5 days ago
+4
Happy cake day
4
DGlen4 days ago
+1
And since we've driven down supply and started to remove sanctions Russia is poised to make tons of oil money. Best to put a stop to that as much as Ukraine possibly can.
1
Spare-Loss27423 days ago
+1
With the Gulf conflict already taking 20% of the oil off the market plus now Ukraine bombing export sites, won't this put Ukraine itself at a disadvantage?
1
macross19845 days ago
+110
Oil price may have gone up but it will be a moot point so long as Ukraine keep up pressure of knocking out oil terminals and refinery from exporting the fuel and thereby deprive Putin much needed foreign currency.
110
Ihor_905 days ago
+149
Great news. F*** Russia.
149
Mysterious-Wolf97335 days ago
-77
Gas prices are going to keep going up.
-77
JamsHammockFyoom5 days ago
+46
Yeah, I’m sure the Ukrainians Russia are murdering really feel for your plight at the pump
🙄
46
Confused-Armpit4 days ago
-1
Maybe in russia, but afaik they are not big on exporting oil, except for into a few countries such as China or North Korea (but don't quote me on that). (edited cause spelling is hard)
-1
Kraelman4 days ago
+2
Why type this out if you clearly don’t know anything about it? Genuine question. Pre-Ukraine, Russia was European Union’s top oil/gas supplier.
2
HumanSnotMachine4 days ago
+1
Russia exports a lot of the world’s oil. Why not use Google and just guess right? F*** knowing sfuff
1
[deleted]5 days ago
+133
[deleted]
133
pressedbread5 days ago
+53
And as Russia is helping Iran, the US can't really condemn Ukraine for attacking them.
53
_MoneyHustard_5 days ago
+45
And yet they still will somehow
45
Fallouttgrrl5 days ago
+15
Trump pulls his head out of Putin's lap long enough to say "The strait being closed wouldn't be a problem if Ukraine just agreed to the peace plan we negotiated"
15
[deleted]5 days ago
-2
[deleted]
-2
Evol_extra5 days ago
+2
Russia would be the biggest w***** if they could realize that potential. China is not ready for an oil deficit yet.
2
-Th3Saints-5 days ago
+3
They theoretically could have done it this winter by targeting the Siberian fields energy infrastructure causing them to freeze and force redrilling shutting down production for years.
The decided that was to high an escalation and limited to targeting refining and export infrastructure.
3
IvorTheEngine5 days ago
+1
Does Ukraine have the range to hit Siberia?
1
Moderate-Extremism5 days ago
+198
I love how Trump said “We’re gonna take away all your weapons!” So daddy z be like “lol, k, drone goes brrrrr!”
198
EVpeace5 days ago
+55
Indeed, your stated premise is accurate. The juxtaposition of disarmament rhetoric with the continued operational viability of unmanned aerial systems presents a compelling illustration of modern asymmetrical warfare.
55
Moderate-Extremism5 days ago
+26
The new reality is terrifying, we really are past the golden age.
26
Reasonable-Gas56254 days ago
+4
Hold on dude, I can't flip through my dictionary that fast.
4
jay64324 days ago
+2
Hahaha
2
thatfatbastard5 days ago
+9
I haven't read a lot about howitzer barrels lately...
9
yzerman885 days ago
+20
Seems like UKR held back from deep strikes on oil infra during US-backed peace “talks”
No such worries anymore!
20
IvorTheEngine5 days ago
+5
It's more that they were targeting refineries, forcing Russia to export crude oil (at a price that barely covered the cost of extraction) instead of higher-value refined product. Now the price of crude has gone up they've switched to the docks that are needed to export that oil.
5
GreatGojira5 days ago
+77
Slava Ukraini!
77
owen__wilsons__nose5 days ago
+30
Had no idea Novorossisyk had a regional Burning Man event
30
RandomTurkey2474 days ago
+2
They're having a fire sale. Everything must go (up in flames)!
2
AnnoyingBus5 days ago
+37
Good news
37
head_leak12345 days ago
+4
Find it so weird that I read news like this while I see conservative media talk about how Russia is handedly on its way to winning the war.
4
Donnahue-George5 days ago
+12
Keep it going, I will gladly pay 10-20x more for gas or other things if it means that russia will be crippled and the current admin in the US collapses
12
copperblood5 days ago
+24
News you love to hear
24
Turtle_With_Grudge5 days ago
+31
The world will change fundamentally due to the actions of a handful of meglomanical butchers. Like we are going to see entire societies restructure, imperialist nations die from their own gluttony and barbarism, and a very determined Global South claim their standing on the world stage.
There is no putting Pandora back in the box. The petrochemical infrastructure being eliminated is on a pace no environmentalist would ever dream possible. And no economist could accurately predict what the world will look like 5, 10, 20, 100 years from now.
31
Leather-Map-81384 days ago
+2
I love good news human interest stories to start the week!
2
beefstake5 days ago
+3
Good. Trump forced them into this by dropping sanctions on Russian oil and not following up with arms support. If you don't give them tools to fight a conventional war they will necessarily fight an asymmetric one.
Iran is in a very similar position, if there is significant ramp up of conventional force against Iran they will lash out by destroying more energy infrastructure.
3
UsagiTsukino5 days ago
+4
God damn russia, can't you already stop this war that the oil prices are getting down?
4
EldritchMacaron4 days ago
+2
Instruction unclear: ordered Trump to bomb another school
2
jay64324 days ago
+1
Все буде Україна!
1
YggdrasilFree5 days ago
+1
Amazing work, keep the pressure on and nullify their whole economy!
1
catscanmeow5 days ago
-38
arent all these attacks on oil throughout the world accellerating climate change even faster? "lets just burn years worth of fuel in one day"
-38
beekeeper19815 days ago
+28
It's not years worth of oil.. stopping the ability of export means they have so stop extracting as much.
28
RandomTurkey2474 days ago
+1
And if they don't have a place to store it, wells need to be shut down, which are difficult to restart. Then maybe, we start to slow the tide of suicide by oil.
1
Chafram5 days ago
+34
They might increase oil price so much that renewables will be cheaper in comparison and more investment will flow in renewables R&D.
34
[deleted]5 days ago
+24
[deleted]
24
catscanmeow5 days ago
-22
not all at once, it would have been spread out over years and trees would have had more time to absorb the carbon emissions easier
-22
probablypoo5 days ago
+15
You're vastly underestimating how much oil we use per day and also overestimating how much oil we stockpile.
15
catscanmeow5 days ago
-16
if they burn all the oil in existence at once in one day would be that a good thing or a bad thing for the environment?
-16
probablypoo5 days ago
+12
That would be very bad, not sure what that have to do with anything though since they haven't even blown up 0.000001% of all oil in existance
12
catscanmeow5 days ago
letting an oil field burn thousands of tons of oil at once seems pretty bad to me, but alright
and it’s not like they’ve put out the fires yet. do these countries even have the infrastructure to put out a perpetual fire?
0
Solesky15 days ago
+17
Technically greenhouse gas emissions will go down if there's no oil
17
VeryluckyorNot5 days ago
+8
Indeed but they will also force everyone to get the minium on electrics if not full switch.
8
Trashbitex5 days ago
+4
You clearly don’t comprehend how much a years worth of fuel for the entire planet is if you think we’re currently blowing that up daily.
4
catscanmeow5 days ago
+1
i never said it was a years worth of fuel for the entire planet i said its a years worthof fuel from that location
why do you think i meant the entire planet?
1
Ambrant5 days ago
+6
your point?
6
catscanmeow5 days ago
-3
That burning a shitload of oil all at once is bad for the environment, the point was clearly laid out in the original comment.
-3
Ambrant5 days ago
+4
There was a question with an obvious answer. I assumed you are trying to make some point. Other than this obvious statement. I can see now I was mistaken. Burning oil is bad for environment, good point. AFU will try to increase the frequency of the strikes
4
ciaDisinfo5 days ago
+3
it’s like weeks of fuel at most. plus removing extraction capacity means less is taken in the future and higher prices means renewables suddenly have a much higher return on investment.
3
catscanmeow5 days ago
+1
thats if they have the ability to stop it from burning though.
and theres more than one refinery burning right now, its happening in many countries
1
MindSlay3r4 days ago
+1
Good thing that russians attack on Ukraine have no effect on climate, thank God.
Also explosion of the dam at the Kakhovka hydroelectric power station done by russians and the subsequent flooding also had no impact on the environment, sure sure
1
Aedeus5 days ago
+1
You lot running low on narratives?
1
catscanmeow5 days ago
+2
What do you mean you lot? People who care about carbon emissions?
Narrative? Are you paranoid or something? Why are you trying to draw a narrative?
Is this a pro oil thing that's going over my head?
2
Can-t-ban-me-lol5 days ago
+2
There's a war happening in the middle east. The CO2 emissions from bombs and explosives is absurdly high. If the whole planet switched to EVs for a year, it qoorobanyl wouldn't offset the damage Trump is doing with his war
2
RandomTurkey2474 days ago
+1
But if we stop blowing up Russian oil tanks and refineries in Michael Bay ways, how will we break the record again in 2026 for highest atmospheric CO2 concentration?
1
SwissArmyKeif5 days ago
+1
Climate change has a low priority for Ukraine right now.
1
catscanmeow4 days ago
+1
Sure, but theres more than one war
1
jay64324 days ago
You seem to prioritize the environment, based on your **uncertain opinion** about this oil that’s burning, over a country’s and its people’s freedom.
Am I correct? Is that your position?
0
catscanmeow4 days ago
-1
asking a question isnt an opinion my question was how bad is this for the environment, not whether war is justified
why did you say A country? there are several wars
climate change effects all countries freedom
-1
jay64324 days ago
Well when people responded to your question with information, you’ve continued to respond & push back against their answers.
So it seems like you have an opinion on the subject, even though you’re obviously unsure of all of the facts.
This post is about Ukraine’s attacks on russia; and you’re asking about *these* attacks. So how is anyone supposed to know you’re talking about other wars or all wars, unless you explicitly say that?
I said a country’s and its people’s freedom; because that’s what Ukraine is fighting for right now.
Climate change will, in the long term, affect all countries, yes. But right now, in the immediate present, Ukraine and its people’s freedom and future is at stake.
0
catscanmeow4 days ago
when i said "all these attacks thoughout the **world**" it was about all attacks in the world, if i was only talking about one country i would have named one specific country. thats how specificity works... do you not know what the word all means?
0
jay64324 days ago
+1
Ukraine has conducted a lot of attacks on russia’s oil industry lately. So, “all these attacks,” could easily be interpreted to mean all of Ukraine’s attacks.
If you look at other responses, I’m not the only one who interpreted your question to be specifically about Ukraine.
So in the future it’s probably best to be a bit more specific / clear. But fair enough
1
catscanmeow4 days ago
we are on listnook, and listnook has posted about many oil attacks like the ones on kuwait yesterday, on the front page.
thats why i phrased things that way "all these attacks throughout the world" because they were the top headlines of the day
0
jay64324 days ago
+1
Okay, I see now why you kept pushing back when people answered your question.
You’re bullheaded.
1
[deleted]4 days ago
+1
[deleted]
1
jay64324 days ago
No. Refusing to acknowledge / accept that maybe you did a shit job of expressing yourself clearly, when multiple people interpreted your comments the same way, is what makes you bullheaded.
0
catscanmeow4 days ago
+1
oh and i checked what i said "all these attacks throughout the world" was literally what i said in my first comment
what about "world" is confusing?
1
catscanmeow4 days ago
+1
reread my intial comment and then explain why the word "world" implies only one country
82 Comments