As far as I know valves were shut quickly. The big leak was a result of remaining gas (under pressure?) between the valves that could escape. It was a lot, as the pipes run for 100s of km under the sea, so even with valves shut there was just a lot gas in the pipe.

[+] Valmond@lemmy.world -6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

What a shit article. Seriously. It's just babble about methane and weird comparisons and not about why it would be "twice as bad" (not big) or I just gave up after 8 pages of crap.

Why do people upvote this kind of crap?

[–] Garibaldee@lemm.ee 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What a shit comment. Seriously.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So what's the "twice" in the article eh?

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's written in the first two paragraphs of the article:

The 2022 explosion and leak of the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea resulted in the release of 485,000 tonnes of methane into the atmosphere, according to a new study of the disaster.

The methane released from the pipeline was the largest human-caused methane emissions event in history. But the magnitude of the release is twice as bad as previously thought, according to a new study conducted by the United Nations Environment Programme and published in Nature. Prior studies estimated the methane released from the disaster at between 75,000 and 230,000 tonnes.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You're just thinking twice as bad means twice as much, that's just sloppy writing.

Edit that should be "at least twice as much" too.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Thank you. I will immediately write this down in my little black book of things that I don't give a shit about.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago

Like u can read and write