Gas flaring is common, usually for safety reasons, but never on this scale and on an ongoing basis. Experts leave some hypotheses:
- not wanting to close the liquefied natural gas production plant, because reactivation is more expensive and technically more difficult;
- there are unresolved technical challenges related to the large amount of gas flowing through the pipeline;
- there is difficulty in handling and transforming the gas, burning being the safest way to solve the problem;
- as a result of trade embargoes imposed by the European Union that may prevent Russia from receiving materials needed to replace parts or upgrade equipment.
The consequences, on the other hand, are much clearer.not only in economic terms – with Russia showing that it can lower prices if it wants – but also in environmental terms.
Burning is better than simply releasing methane into the atmosphere, which has a high greenhouse effect, but this daily flame produces about nine thousand tons of carbon dioxide (COtwo) every day. The soot produced by the incomplete burning of the gas can be transported to the Arctic, where it settles on snow and speeds up the rate at which it is thawing.
Source: Observadora
