EPTUpdate on the fighting in Kherson apparently all the remaining crossings are under fire, with some have been taken out.
edit: Now one of the most infamous Russian collaborators, Aleksey Kovalyov, has been assassinated at his house.
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 198
| Forum Index > General Forum |
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Update on the fighting in Kherson apparently all the remaining crossings are under fire, with some have been taken out. edit: Now one of the most infamous Russian collaborators, Aleksey Kovalyov, has been assassinated at his house. | ||
|
mh_mh
8 Posts
On August 29 2022 20:44 Harris1st wrote: Right now there are a lot of gas heating systems because gas was cheap. If electricity was cheap people would buy electric heating systems with or without political subsidies in place just because that's what the market dictates. Now leaving those 3 nuclear plants turned on wouldn't really change much in that regard. They are ~ 35 years old and outdated. Building new ones would be too expensive and politically almost impossible in Germany And even if it would be possible, it would take at least 5 years and probably more than 10 to get them running. since you can just invest that money into renewable energy with the only real benefit that nuclear plants don't care about the weather. Nuclear power plants need cooling water and Germany had some problems with the water level of rivers and lakes. | ||
|
Artesimo
Germany627 Posts
On August 29 2022 20:44 Harris1st wrote: I wanted to chime in real quick Right now there are a lot of gas heating systems because gas was cheap. If electricity was cheap people would buy electric heating systems with or without political subsidies in place just because that's what the market dictates. Now leaving those 3 nuclear plants turned on wouldn't really change much in that regard. They are ~ 35 years old and outdated. Building new ones would be too expensive and politically almost impossible in Germany since you can just invest that money into renewable energy with the only real benefit that nuclear plants don't care about the weather. If/when fusion cores become a thing, this changes How many people do you know that replace their oil heater on a whim? You need subsidies because electricity would have to be immensely cheaper for people to replace existing heating well before its time, and those things are good for at least 15years if I am not mistaken. Some quick googling even gives out estimates of 20+years. Replacing it can be very expensive and not something that most people would spend freely. It could immediately affect new constructions, so long term electricity just being cheaper would be enough for that, but we are talking very long term here. And that just applies to homeowners, if you rent then your landlord / the organisation that owns the building would care a lot less since they are not the ones paying the utility bill in the end. Without an incentive, it is unlikely that they would replace the old heating system before it becomes necessary, since they can only offload some of that cost to their tenants. So even if electricity was cheap, if you want meaningful change relatively quick you would require political will I think. In addition to that, the electrical infrastructure would also have to keep up. 'The market' is much more than just the price of electricity, its all the costs and benefits associated with an action, the trust in making that decision and all that. And then ofc there are details like heating pumps only being a viable option with sufficient insulation. Its not an easy feat unless you are fine with achieving it at a glacial pace. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Lwerewolf
Bulgaria78 Posts
On August 30 2022 02:59 Artesimo wrote:And then ofc there are details like heating pumps only being a viable option with sufficient insulation. Its not an easy feat unless you are fine with achieving it at a glacial pace. Heat pumps are viable regardless of insulation. Yes, the most comfy methods (underfloor or radiant ceiling) pretty much require insulation due to the output limitations, and you can't really use (passive) radiators at 35deg. outlet water temp, but AC-style (i.e. forced fan convectors) works just fine, for example. Insulation just makes every heating and/or cooling system's job easier, so it's a no-brainer to push for it. | ||
|
mh_mh
8 Posts
On August 30 2022 04:52 Lwerewolf wrote: Heat pumps are viable regardless of insulation. Yes, the most comfy methods (underfloor or radiant ceiling) pretty much require insulation due to the output limitations, and you can't really use (passive) radiators at 35deg. outlet water temp, but AC-style (i.e. forced fan convectors) works just fine, for example. No, they don't work fine! The efficiency depends on the temperature difference. A big difference results in shitty efficiency. You would need an absurdly big fan for your forced fan convention heating to lower the temperature and make it efficient. Insulation just makes every heating and/or cooling system's job easier, so it's a no-brainer to push for it. Except in all the cases, where it is not possible or absurdly expensive to retrofit insulation. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17843 Posts
On August 30 2022 02:59 Artesimo wrote: How many people do you know that replace their oil heater on a whim? You need subsidies because electricity would have to be immensely cheaper for people to replace existing heating well before its time, and those things are good for at least 15years if I am not mistaken. Some quick googling even gives out estimates of 20+years. Replacing it can be very expensive and not something that most people would spend freely. It could immediately affect new constructions, so long term electricity just being cheaper would be enough for that, but we are talking very long term here. And that just applies to homeowners, if you rent then your landlord / the organisation that owns the building would care a lot less since they are not the ones paying the utility bill in the end. Without an incentive, it is unlikely that they would replace the old heating system before it becomes necessary, since they can only offload some of that cost to their tenants. So even if electricity was cheap, if you want meaningful change relatively quick you would require political will I think. In addition to that, the electrical infrastructure would also have to keep up. 'The market' is much more than just the price of electricity, its all the costs and benefits associated with an action, the trust in making that decision and all that. And then ofc there are details like heating pumps only being a viable option with sufficient insulation. Its not an easy feat unless you are fine with achieving it at a glacial pace. To chime in on this I will share a mostly irrelevant story: A few years ago I've moved to a new apartment. I still live there, it has gas heating which has been a pain in the ass for me. Reason? I have a gas heater that's been faulty from the beginning. I wanted to replace it with newer heater (the one I use is no longer in production and they don't even allow construction of such heaters because EU norms etc.), to no avail. It turns out that those heaters were obsoleted like 5-6 years ago in the EU and I can't replace it for a new one because the way they're built and their exhaust method would disable all of the other heaters in my building (unless you have a separate chimney/ventilation system to the rest of the building). So, I'm stuck trying to find overpriced repairs and replacement parts for the faulty old tech because I can't switch to a newer one unless all the other building residents agree to do it. I've even tried to switch to alternate heating source (electric etc.) and it turns out that if you have an apartment in a building it's pretty much a no go (you can fairly easily choose to switch if you live in a standalone house and are willing to invest). There's more problems associated with that than just gas itself. Edit: Just for clarification, I don't have some 50 year old gas heater in my apartment. It's fairly recent (5-10 years) top of the line heater from a renowned German company (Junkers). | ||
|
Lwerewolf
Bulgaria78 Posts
On August 30 2022 05:12 mh_mh wrote: No, they don't work fine! The efficiency depends on the temperature difference. A big difference results in shitty efficiency. You would need an absurdly big fan for your forced fan convention heating to lower the temperature and make it efficient. Except in all the cases, where it is not possible or absurdly expensive to retrofit insulation. AC units do just fine without a giant fan. They happen to be the most efficient air source heat pumps around - in terms of heating air, at least. You can figure out the rest. Absurdly expensive is, I guess, a matter of perspective. I'm not too sure how adding external insulation to a building can be impossible. Even if it were the case, I'd like to know the total amount of such cases where it's "absurdly expensive" or "impossible". Anyways, off-topic. | ||
|
SC-Shield
Bulgaria878 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On August 30 2022 07:35 SC-Shield wrote: Isn't attack on Belgorod actually bad? Russia may try the nuclear threat card once again.. I know they're mostly paper tigers but soldiers need to fight only within Ukraine and eventually Crimea's borders only. That's, of course, if it's not staged attack from Russia itself. If Russia is launching attacks from Belgorod, it's fair game as far as I'm concerned. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14208 Posts
What might be new is when Ukrainians cross into Crimea or take down the Kerch bridge and strand so many Russians in Crimea under threat of HIMARS or harpoon missiles. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17843 Posts
In my opinion if Ukraine is able to recapture west side of the river it'll then turn into an artillery duel across it and most likely Kherson will be leveled like Mariupol. Pure speculation on my part though. | ||
|
StasisField
United States1086 Posts
On August 30 2022 16:50 Manit0u wrote: I don't think retaking Kherson will be a brief affair. And even if they do get a foothold there all their previous efforts will also work a bit against them as they won't be able to cross the river themselves. In my opinion if Ukraine is able to recapture west side of the river it'll then turn into an artillery duel across it and most likely Kherson will be leveled like Mariupol. Pure speculation on my part though. I agree, retaking Kherson should be a lengthy affair. I think it's estimated Russia has 25k troops in the region. I've seen people claiming on twitter that Russian soldiers are fleeing and surrendering en masse but that screams propaganda and I've seen nothing to confirm it yet. This, like the rest of the war, will most likely be a long, drawn out, bloody affair. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On August 30 2022 18:39 StasisField wrote: I agree, retaking Kherson should be a lengthy affair. I think it's estimated Russia has 25k troops in the region. I've seen people claiming on twitter that Russian soldiers are fleeing and surrendering en masse but that screams propaganda and I've seen nothing to confirm it yet. This, like the rest of the war, will most likely be a long, drawn out, bloody affair. Even this much is difficult to speculate on. On the one hand, I doubt UA is entirely ready for a full counter-offensive at this stage. So their aim is to probably abuse the fact that up to 25k RU troops are stuck on the wrong side of the Dnieper, with low supplies. This means that they can be attacked without too much fear of RU artillery evening the battlefield. Nor is RU aviation close enough because of the attacks on Crimea. So, for the overall war goal of causing maximum attrition on RU forces, this small counter-offensive should be ideal. On the other hand, there is plenty of upside for UA. Should RU troops and planners panic, there will be opportunities for greater prizes, including taking Kherson quickly, capturing a great deal of equipment, and causing weakening on other fronts, allowing for easier counter-offensives in the next month or so. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
August 31 summary of the previous day - Russia is trying to regain lost initiative and is trying to restart the offensive in Donbass. The next 7-8 days will show whether Russia still has reserves to increase offensive activity. If not, it can be assumed that Ukraine will be able to develop the offensive within a few weeks. ... It is known for certain from the Kherson region that Ukraine has continued to focus on rocket and artillery attacks on Russian units. Losses of Russian units have increased significantly over the past three days. Ukrainian troops have certainly moved forward a little, but they probably want to minimize losses. Therefore, it would be more logical to assume that Ukraine will continue with long-range fire strikes. Russian units, at least on most of the front, have not yet run away, they are showing decent resistance.We can say for certain that the supply route across the Dnieper is not operational, and Russian units will not be able to offer active resistance for a very long time (perhaps for a week if the transport of supplies cannot be restarted). Therefore, the liberation of Kherson or other settlements is probably not at issue in the next days. Russia is definitely trying to relaunch an offensive in Donbass. The leaders are certainly not satisfied with the current situation, and it is necessary to show that the offensive capability of the Russian army continues to exist. The current moment is important in this sense - can Russia still have troops for some offensives. And will it be possible to organize an offensive in a larger area than trying to take the city of Bahmut in Donbass, the capture of which in itself will not give any great advantage for the future. It is quite significant that Russian communication is trying in every possible way to hide the offensive of the Ukrainian troops. At the same time, posts that talk about the activities of Ukrainians are also spreading across Russian social media. A parallel approach or information space is emerging, which, as you know, is always especially dangerous for this type of government that is not renewed by elections. + Show Spoiler + 31. augusti kokkuvõte eelenva päeva kohta - venemaa üritab kaotatud initsiatiivi tagasi saada ning üritab uuesti käivitada pealetungi Donbassis. Järgmised 7-8 päeva näitavad, kas venemaal on veel reserve ründeaktiivsuse tõstmiseks. Kui ei, siis võib eeldada, et Ukraina suudab mõne nädala jooksul pealetungi edasi arendada. ... Hersoni piirkonnast on kindlalt teada, et Ukraina on keskendunud jätkuvalt raketi ja suurtükitule rünnakutele vene üksustele. Vene üksuste kaotused on viimase kolme päeva jooksul oluliselt kasvanud. Kindlasti on Ukraina väed ka pisut edasi liikunud, aga arvatavasti ei soovita liiga suurte kaotuste hinnaga rünnata. Mispärast oleks loogilisem eeldada, et Ukraina jäktab seni veel kaugtulelöökidga. Vene üksused vähemalt suuremal osal rindest veel ära jooksnud ei ole, osutavad korralikku vastupanu. Samuti võib kindel olla, et varustusteed üle Dnepri ei toimi ning aktiivset vastupanu ei suuda vene üksused väga kaua osutada (vahest nädala jagu, kui vedusid käima ei saada). Seega- Hersoni või teiste asulate vabastamine ei ole ilmselt veel lähipäevade teema Venemaa üritab kindlasti uuesti käivitada pealetungi Donbassis. Praeguse seisuga juhid kindlasti rahul ei ole ja vaja on näidata, et vene armee pealetungivõimekus on jätkuvalt olemas. Praegune hetk on selles mõttes oluline - kas venemaa suudab veel vägesid mõneks pealetungiks. Ning kas pealetungi suudetakse korraldada ka suuremal ala, kui üritada ära võtta Bahmuti linna Donbassis, mille vallutamine iseenesest ei anna mitte mingisugust suurt eelist edasiseks. On küllaltki tähenduslik, et venemaa kommunikatsioon üritab igati maha salata ukraina vägede pealetungi. Samas levib ka venemaa sotsmeedias postitusi, mis ukrainlaste tegemistest räägivad. Tekkimas on paralleelne käsitlus või inforuum, mis teadupärast on alati eriti ohtlik seda tüüpi valitsustele, mida ei uuendata valimistel. | ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation618 Posts
First of all, since many Russians are apolitical and they do not consider Russian government as "theirs", they don't like the idea that somebody will held them personally responsible for the actions of that government, and they are more likely to retaliate against those, who banned them, rather than against Putin, and to support Kremlin actions even more. And Kremlin will easily use it in propaganda: "See, we told you, they aren't against us, they are against all of you!". Second, tourists spent money, that they earned in Russia, in western countries. The same countries that fund Ukraine. Now these money will go to the countries that do not actively support Ukraine, or do not support it at all (with exception of Turkey), or even worse, they stay in Russia and help fund the Russian war effort. Third, as SC-Shield said, it's hard to show someone, that your grass is greener and how it should be made greener, if you build the fence yourself. On the topic of counteroffensive, few notes from the other side: 1) Counteroffensive forces have a lot of of western vehicles (Polish T-72 and Dutch YPR were caught on video, along with M777 and HIMARS supporting the advance). 2) The main sucessful advance is in the direction of Sukhoi Stavok village, 5-6 kms. AFU troops took the village, but since it is in the middle of the steppe, they are being shelled from all sides with little cover. 3) Offensive triggered some partisan activities in Kherson, one Russian patrol was shot at, attackers reportedly killed. 4) Huge helicopter and missile activities from Crimea, people living in Crimea and Kherson say that they hear helo engines constantly. 5) Both sides arty working day and night, up to the gun barrels blowing up. 6) Currently offensive is stalled after some success on the first day, but Russian/DPR sources report about additional UA forces moving to the Kherson front, as well as possible offensive in Kharkiv area, towards Izyum probably. 7) Losses are of course unclear, but at least 8 AFU tanks and 7 IFVs, along with other equipment, are taped on AFRF UAV cameras being destroyed/damaged. Also wounded are being transfered to Odessa, as well as a lot of people giving blood for transfusion there, so hospitals in Mykolayv seems not to be able to handle all wounded. Though another possible issue that Mikolayv has clean water problem. Previously it was getting water from Kherson, but now the supply is cut, an waterways around Mykolayv are saltwater, which destroys pipes, especially sewer pipes and cleaning facilities, which leads to supplied water being turned to literal shit. So not exactly healthy and clean environment. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11990 Posts
First of all, since many Russians are apolitical and they do not consider Russian government as "theirs", they don't like the idea that somebody will held them personally responsible for the actions of that government They may not like that idea, but they are still supporting what the government does. I know that it sucks, but the fact of the matter is that their government is waging an offensive war for territorial gain completely against all international law. They can't just say "Well, that has nothing to do with me". Maybe if most of the Russians would stop passively supporting Putins regime, you could actually change stuff. Saying that you are apolitical and that all of this does not concern you is supporting the status quo. | ||
| ||
