Russian Gas ban - A problem for Europe or suicide for Russia?

[Smartprofit]

Self-hypnosis is cool, but useless
Please provide a list of enterprises for example in Germany that have ceased operations due to the unavailability or high cost of gas from alternative sources? And then let's see how it really is, and not fantasy according to propaganda manuals

PS I am absolutely sure that if you answer something, it will be an ordinary set of fakes from Russian propaganda

I'll help him, this is what I have heard from the person who was saying Germans would freeze: Germany didn't freeze because it has the strongest economy in Europe, this helped them.
Now their prediction is that Germany survived this year but they are in danger for next year.
There are so many predictions from pro-russians but not so funny is that these people change their words when their predictions fail but still are highly confident that they are wise and their next predictions will come true. Again, it will fail and they'll find an explanation like Germany has a big economy and they survived.

I partially agree ... And I will also express my opinion.
The fact is that in the EU, there are a sufficient number of both "manual media" and journalists (as well as politicians, "opinion leaders", "specialists", ....) performing the tasks of the Kremlin dwarfs. This has been known for a long time, and before, through one, they openly supported Russia, in the hope that Putin's plan would work, and Europe would become the obedient servant of the Kremlin, and they would be at the "Kremlin trough", supported by the Kremlin, which generously pays for moral prostitution.
Did not work ! And now they are not so openly, covertly, continue to post news as part of the "information propaganda operation." Now budget data in Russia is classified, but you can find data for 2016-2020 in the archives - billions of dollars were allocated there to "support loyal media in the EU"! And they continue to work them out, and continue to receive funding, through such stuffing that looks quite realistic.
But it is worth digging into the "problem", and it turns out that if there are fears, then only in the Kremlin, fears that they will be left without money, having irreversibly lost the European gas market. What should Germany be afraid of if in 3 months, after the cessation of supplies from Russia, they rebuilt their consumer gas market, and replaced more than 90% of the gas supplied from Russia with STABLE and ALTERNATIVE supply channels? Due to the warm winter - at the moment, almost 75% of the gas remains in the storage facilities in Germany, of the volume that was stored for this winter. Spring is coming and temperatures are high. There's still a year ahead of us to improve supply, lower prices, and stock up, even if next winter is very cold.
Once again I repeat - check ALL the information, it's not difficult. But you will see how many falsehoods and deliberate distortions of information are pouring even from the pages of such respected publications.

Now there is another warning - Putin on Tuesday delivered a nuclear warning to the west over Ukraine, suspending a landmark nuclear arms control treaty, announcing new strategic systems had been put on combat duty and warning that Moscow could resume nuclear test. Now what is more alarming than this?

This is a natural step in the current situation.  Cold War between the Western world and Russia. 

However, this does not mean that Russia will use nuclear weapons.  The use of even tactical nuclear weapons is an absolutely insane move.  Nuclear weapons were not originally intended for its use in military conflicts.  It is exclusively a tool to deter a potential adversary from aggressive actions. 

The use of nuclear weapons by Russia will cause a very negative reaction from China and India. 

I'm not talking about the USA, Great Britain and other countries of the Western world....

Therefore, I perceive it solely as a tool for escalating tension.

[Sithara007]

This is a natural step in the current situation.  Cold War between the Western world and Russia. 

However, this does not mean that Russia will use nuclear weapons.  The use of even tactical nuclear weapons is an absolutely insane move.  Nuclear weapons were not originally intended for its use in military conflicts.  It is exclusively a tool to deter a potential adversary from aggressive actions. 

The use of nuclear weapons by Russia will cause a very negative reaction from China and India. 

I'm not talking about the USA, Great Britain and other countries of the Western world....

Therefore, I perceive it solely as a tool for escalating tension.

I don't think that there is a big possibility of Russia using tactical nukes in Ukraine. Even in frontline cities such as Bakhmut and Vuhledar, there are still thousands of civilians trapped in the basements and bomb shelters. A majority of them are ethnic Russians and in case Russia uses tactical nukes, then these people will be destroyed. And the other option for Russia will be to use tactical nukes on cities that are mostly inhabited by ethnic Ukrainians, such as Lviv and Ternopil. But this will result in retaliatory strikes by NATO.

As such there are no "tactical" nukes. Nukes are nukes no matter what they are called. Even the best tactical nuclear weapon will result in the deaths of thousands of civilians, along with the military manpower and equipment. There is no magical nuclear weapon that will only kill the soldiers. And at this point, I don't think that Putin is lunatic enough to commit such a mistake, which would result in his strongest allies deserting him.

[Argoo]

I don't think that there is a big possibility of Russia using tactical nukes in Ukraine. Even in frontline cities such as Bakhmut and Vuhledar, there are still thousands of civilians trapped in the basements and bomb shelters. A majority of them are ethnic Russians and in case Russia uses tactical nukes, then these people will be destroyed. And the other option for Russia will be to use tactical nukes on cities that are mostly inhabited by ethnic Ukrainians, such as Lviv and Ternopil. But this will result in retaliatory strikes by NATO.

As such there are no "tactical" nukes. Nukes are nukes no matter what they are called. Even the best tactical nuclear weapon will result in the deaths of thousands of civilians, along with the military manpower and equipment. There is no magical nuclear weapon that will only kill the soldiers. And at this point, I don't think that Putin is lunatic enough to commit such a mistake, which would result in his strongest allies deserting him.

A tactical nuclear strike against Ukraine by Russia is generally pointless from all sides. Putin doesn't really care about the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine, who will suffer from its use on the front lines in Ukraine. Now, "liberating" the settlements in the Donbass, the Russian troops are deliberately destroying them almost completely so much that it is simply impossible to restore them, and the Russian-speaking civilian population is dying there in the first place. In order to fight further under conditions of nuclear destruction, Russian troops will need to have special protection, and there are very big problems in them and with conventional equipment.

Attacking the western part of Ukraine is like attacking NATO countries, since the radioactive contamination will spread to them as well. And Putin has already been unequivocally warned that they will strike back not only at Russia, but also personally at Putin in his bunker.

In addition, militarily, a tactical nuclear strike will not solve anything militarily. Ukraine will continue to defend itself under any conditions. But it will become clear to the world that Putin's Russia will need to be destroyed and the impending threat eliminated.

[Smartprofit]

This is a natural step in the current situation.  Cold War between the Western world and Russia.  

However, this does not mean that Russia will use nuclear weapons.  The use of even tactical nuclear weapons is an absolutely insane move.  Nuclear weapons were not originally intended for its use in military conflicts.  It is exclusively a tool to deter a potential adversary from aggressive actions.  

The use of nuclear weapons by Russia will cause a very negative reaction from China and India.  

I'm not talking about the USA, Great Britain and other countries of the Western world....

Therefore, I perceive it solely as a tool for escalating tension.

I don't think that there is a big possibility of Russia using tactical nukes in Ukraine. Even in frontline cities such as Bakhmut and Vuhledar, there are still thousands of civilians trapped in the basements and bomb shelters. A majority of them are ethnic Russians and in case Russia uses tactical nukes, then these people will be destroyed. And the other option for Russia will be to use tactical nukes on cities that are mostly inhabited by ethnic Ukrainians, such as Lviv and Ternopil. But this will result in retaliatory strikes by NATO.

As such there are no "tactical" nukes. Nukes are nukes no matter what they are called. Even the best tactical nuclear weapon will result in the deaths of thousands of civilians, along with the military manpower and equipment. There is no magical nuclear weapon that will only kill the soldiers. And at this point, I don't think that Putin is lunatic enough to commit such a mistake, which would result in his strongest allies deserting him.

It is very difficult for me to understand the logic of leaders who make military and political decisions.  Earlier (in 2007-2014) it was easier to do this, because management decisions were cold, prudent and pragmatic.  

There was not even a shadow of empathy and kindness in them, but they were still adequate and pragmatic.  

Now, when I want to understand what decisions the country's military-political leadership will make in the future, I watch an interview with the Russian turbo-patriot Girkin (Strelkov).  It very accurately reflects the mood of the country's elite.  

Girkin is very critical of the possibility of using nuclear weapons on the territory of Ukraine on the grounds that these territories belong to Russia and destroying their own territories is madness.  

At the same time, he does not rule out the possibility of using nuclear weapons against Western countries if they are directly involved in hostilities.

[DrBeer]

Now there is another warning - Putin on Tuesday delivered a nuclear warning to the west over Ukraine, suspending a landmark nuclear arms control treaty, announcing new strategic systems had been put on combat duty and warning that Moscow could resume nuclear test. Now what is more alarming than this?

I'll disappoint you a little!
Putin personally, representatives of the Kremlin and a pack of propagandists have repeatedly squealed about the strikes on London and Warsaw, and "we have the right", and even transfer the Strategic Missile Forces to a high level of readiness! And even the other day, when Biden paid a visit to my beloved Kyiv, he tried to launch his rocket, as it should be "unparalleled" Guess the result of the exercises? Launch failed!

Now let's get back to Russia's "withdrawal" from the treaty.
1. Firstly, it does not withdraw, but suspends its implementation without withdrawing from the contract. Strange huh? Those. it seems to relieve itself of any obligations, but the agreement is valid - and the United States is obliged to fulfill it. And now the most interesting. One of the key points of the agreement is the possibility for the parties to carry out visits and checks of the FI STATE of the second participant. And then we move on to part two:
2. There is a lot of indirect evidence that Russia's nuclear triad is the same fake as everything else in Russia. Let me explain. Since 2014, Ukraine has stopped serving Russian nuclear weapons. Did not know ? The nuance is that most of the strategic missiles are the development of the Ukrainian plant Yuzhmash. There are specialists only at Yuzhmash. Russia does not have them. as there is no engineering documentation in order to figure out what and how to REGULARLY service. A missile is a very complex technological solution with tens of thousands of control points and verification protocols ... In total, the main part of the Strategic Missile Forces has not been serviced for 8 years. They either lie in storage warehouses, because they are in mines, or on mobile platforms (auto / railway). For 8 years, they were either completely not served, or served by "hand-assed specialists." What is worse is not even clear. A unilateral refusal to fulfill contractual obligations will not allow US representatives to visit the facilities and, therefore, make sure that a significant part of Russia's nuclear potential is inoperable. Well, Russia serves it "under sauce" - "we are ready to apply it and we will not even comply with the agreement now"

[Sithara007]

A tactical nuclear strike against Ukraine by Russia is generally pointless from all sides. Putin doesn't really care about the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine, who will suffer from its use on the front lines in Ukraine. Now, "liberating" the settlements in the Donbass, the Russian troops are deliberately destroying them almost completely so much that it is simply impossible to restore them, and the Russian-speaking civilian population is dying there in the first place. In order to fight further under conditions of nuclear destruction, Russian troops will need to have special protection, and there are very big problems in them and with conventional equipment.

Attacking the western part of Ukraine is like attacking NATO countries, since the radioactive contamination will spread to them as well. And Putin has already been unequivocally warned that they will strike back not only at Russia, but also personally at Putin in his bunker.

In addition, militarily, a tactical nuclear strike will not solve anything militarily. Ukraine will continue to defend itself under any conditions. But it will become clear to the world that Putin's Russia will need to be destroyed and the impending threat eliminated.

OK.. for the first time I can agree with all of your points. The last point is quite important. Even if Russian uses tactical nukes, it will not result in Russia winning the war. Ukraine has more than one million soldiers in active duty right now and they are well distributed across the 1,300 km long frontline. Using one or two tactical weapons to destroy concentrations of Ukrainian troops will not have an impact of the Ukrainian Armed forces to continue fighting. So in the end, for Russia it will cause more harm compared to good since their remaining allies will desert them. 

[MusaPk]

OK.. for the first time I can agree with all of your points. The last point is quite important. Even if Russian uses tactical nukes, it will not result in Russia winning the war. Ukraine has more than one million soldiers in active duty right now and they are well distributed across the 1,300 km long frontline. Using one or two tactical weapons to destroy concentrations of Ukrainian troops will not have an impact of the Ukrainian Armed forces to continue fighting. So in the end, for Russia it will cause more harm compared to good since their remaining allies will desert them. 

There is a surprise visit of President Biden to Ukarine 3 days back just to show solidarity. US president visiting Kyiv is an indication that it's a safe city. While Chinese foreign minister is meeting Russian president in Moscow. When two big powers are standing opposite to each other, there is a rare chance of cease fire. One year of conflict is about to complete and still we have no clue when this will end.

[Theones]

OK.. for the first time I can agree with all of your points. The last point is quite important. Even if Russian uses tactical nukes, it will not result in Russia winning the war. Ukraine has more than one million soldiers in active duty right now and they are well distributed across the 1,300 km long frontline. Using one or two tactical weapons to destroy concentrations of Ukrainian troops will not have an impact of the Ukrainian Armed forces to continue fighting. So in the end, for Russia it will cause more harm compared to good since their remaining allies will desert them. 

There is a surprise visit of President Biden to Ukarine 3 days back just to show solidarity. US president visiting Kyiv is an indication that it's a safe city. While Chinese foreign minister is meeting Russian president in Moscow. When two big powers are standing opposite to each other, there is a rare chance of cease fire. One year of conflict is about to complete and still we have no clue when this will end.

US is accelerating the war and China is also trying to gain benefit because they want to get oil and gas from Russia. Putin meets china top diplomat in Moscow
US warn china may supply weapon

[serveria.com]

This is a natural step in the current situation.  Cold War between the Western world and Russia. 

However, this does not mean that Russia will use nuclear weapons.  The use of even tactical nuclear weapons is an absolutely insane move.  Nuclear weapons were not originally intended for its use in military conflicts.  It is exclusively a tool to deter a potential adversary from aggressive actions. 

The use of nuclear weapons by Russia will cause a very negative reaction from China and India. 

I'm not talking about the USA, Great Britain and other countries of the Western world....

Therefore, I perceive it solely as a tool for escalating tension.

I don't think that there is a big possibility of Russia using tactical nukes in Ukraine. Even in frontline cities such as Bakhmut and Vuhledar, there are still thousands of civilians trapped in the basements and bomb shelters. A majority of them are ethnic Russians and in case Russia uses tactical nukes, then these people will be destroyed. And the other option for Russia will be to use tactical nukes on cities that are mostly inhabited by ethnic Ukrainians, such as Lviv and Ternopil. But this will result in retaliatory strikes by NATO.

As such there are no "tactical" nukes. Nukes are nukes no matter what they are called. Even the best tactical nuclear weapon will result in the deaths of thousands of civilians, along with the military manpower and equipment. There is no magical nuclear weapon that will only kill the soldiers. And at this point, I don't think that Putin is lunatic enough to commit such a mistake, which would result in his strongest allies deserting him.

I agree that there is no point in using nukes in Ukraine. There will be lots of civilian casualties but the military effect would be questionable.

But this will result in retaliatory strikes by NATO.

I don't think Putin is particularly afraid of this. The only NATO country capable of effective nuke strike on Russia is the US. And if they'll do it, Russia will launch their long-range nukes immediately turning Washington, London and many other big cities into ashes. This will be the end of the world as we know it or maybe even the ultimate apocalypse.

which would result in his strongest allies deserting him.

But who are Russia's allies? Belarus is a sockpuppet, North Korea is a communist rebel state. These countries have nothing to lose and they will support any Russia's move. China and India are not allies but business partners at best.

[coupable]

OK.. for the first time I can agree with all of your points. The last point is quite important. Even if Russian uses tactical nukes, it will not result in Russia winning the war. Ukraine has more than one million soldiers in active duty right now and they are well distributed across the 1,300 km long frontline. Using one or two tactical weapons to destroy concentrations of Ukrainian troops will not have an impact of the Ukrainian Armed forces to continue fighting. So in the end, for Russia it will cause more harm compared to good since their remaining allies will desert them. 

There is a surprise visit of President Biden to Ukarine 3 days back just to show solidarity. US president visiting Kyiv is an indication that it's a safe city. While Chinese foreign minister is meeting Russian president in Moscow. When two big powers are standing opposite to each other, there is a rare chance of cease fire. One year of conflict is about to complete and still we have no clue when this will end.

US is accelerating the war and China is also trying to gain benefit because they want to get oil and gas from Russia. Putin meets china top diplomat in Moscow
US warn china may supply weapon

Russia may not need military support as much as it needs economic support to face Western sanctions. It is not easy for Russia to stop energy supplies to Europe without having friends to support it. These friends are mainly China and India. Of course, these friends buy Russian gas for less than half of its price, thus boosting their energy reserves. China is benefiting from this war without being a party to the military confrontation, whether through participation or supply. Russia could not have withstood this war (against America and its allies on Ukrainian soil) without China's support.

[Sithara007]

But who are Russia's allies? Belarus is a sockpuppet, North Korea is a communist rebel state. These countries have nothing to lose and they will support any Russia's move. China and India are not allies but business partners at best.

Agreed. At this point, Russia has only a handful of allies, including DPRK, Iran, Belarus, Venezuela and Nicaragua (and a few breakaway regions such as Abkhazia and Transnistria). China and India are wary of the growing US influence and therefore they want Russia to act as a buffer. But at the same time, business comes first for them. At this point, both the countries are benefitting from the supply of cheap Russian hydrocarbons. But in case the Americans implement secondary sanctions, then I don't think that these two countries will have any option other than to stop their imports from Russia.

[Smartprofit]

But who are Russia's allies? Belarus is a sockpuppet, North Korea is a communist rebel state. These countries have nothing to lose and they will support any Russia's move. China and India are not allies but business partners at best.

Agreed. At this point, Russia has only a handful of allies, including DPRK, Iran, Belarus, Venezuela and Nicaragua (and a few breakaway regions such as Abkhazia and Transnistria). China and India are wary of the growing US influence and therefore they want Russia to act as a buffer. But at the same time, business comes first for them. At this point, both the countries are benefitting from the supply of cheap Russian hydrocarbons. But in case the Americans implement secondary sanctions, then I don't think that these two countries will have any option other than to stop their imports from Russia.

Secondary sanctions against countries as huge in size and GDP as China and India, in my opinion, are absolutely meaningless. 

In fact, this means imposing sanctions on half of the planet..... 

After all, China and India in this situation are defending only their pragmatic interests. 

It is precisely with this, in my opinion, that the recently announced plan of China to resolve the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is connected (as they try to diplomatically call the ongoing events).  China needs confidence in the supply of energy, food and chemicals. 

China is accustomed to planning its financial and economic activities for 5 years in advance and is not interested in increasing confrontation in the modern world.

[Argoo]

After the reduction of gas supplies from the Russian Federation and the embargo against Russian crude oil, on February 5, sanctions against Russian oil products came into force. Some analysts and market participants feared that the restrictions would lead to a shortage of diesel and other petroleum products, but this did not happen, as European states instantly and painlessly rebuilt the logistics of supplies from Russia to the Middle East and Asia.

Diesel deliveries in January already surpassed those of December, with the share of imports coming from the Middle East and Asia rising to 60%, a record for the last 7 years. Deliveries of Russian oil products to Europe now amount to only 282,000 barrels per day.

Thus, the European countries almost did not notice the refusal of Russian supplies. This was facilitated by an active search for alternative suppliers, a decrease in domestic consumption, as well as warm weather in the winter before, which made it possible to significantly increase fuel reserves in storage facilities.

Another Russian plan to freeze Ukraine by direct bombardment of the energy infrastructure and put pressure on the countries of Europe by sharply reducing gas supplies not only did not produce any result, but also led to the opposite results. Now Europe is almost completely united in support of Ukraine.

[coupable]

But who are Russia's allies? Belarus is a sockpuppet, North Korea is a communist rebel state. These countries have nothing to lose and they will support any Russia's move. China and India are not allies but business partners at best.

Agreed. At this point, Russia has only a handful of allies, including DPRK, Iran, Belarus, Venezuela and Nicaragua (and a few breakaway regions such as Abkhazia and Transnistria). China and India are wary of the growing US influence and therefore they want Russia to act as a buffer. But at the same time, business comes first for them. At this point, both the countries are benefitting from the supply of cheap Russian hydrocarbons. But in case the Americans implement secondary sanctions, then I don't think that these two countries will have any option other than to stop their imports from Russia.

Secondary sanctions against countries as huge in size and GDP as China and India, in my opinion, are absolutely meaningless.  

In fact, this means imposing sanctions on half of the planet.....  

After all, China and India in this situation are defending only their pragmatic interests.  

It is precisely with this, in my opinion, that the recently announced plan of China to resolve the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is connected (as they try to diplomatically call the ongoing events).  China needs confidence in the supply of energy, food and chemicals.  

China is accustomed to planning its financial and economic activities for 5 years in advance and is not interested in increasing confrontation in the modern world.

This is exactly what Putin needed to declare war on internationally supported Ukraine.  No one enters a regional war without supporters.  And China is ignorant if it loses this opportunity to get its enemies involved in a long-term war (years at least) and benefit from weakening them to support its economy.  China only cares about its economy. Of course, this is their right, especially if we consider that they are facing the Western alliance in an undeclared war, whether economically or militarily.

[Sithara007]

There is a study published by Tania Babina of the Columbia University and a few others, titled: "Assessing the Impact of International Sanctions on Russian Oil Exports". The document can be accessed here:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4366337

The study claims that Russia sold it's crude oil well above the levels it announced in public after the price cap was introduced. Also, for the year 2022, Russia had a record surplus of $282 billion, with exports totaling $532 billion. During this period, they exported $142 billion worth of crude oil, $83 billion worth of oil products and $108 billion worth of natural gas.

According to their calculation, the price for Urals crude in December 2022 (when the price cap was implemented) averaged $74 per barrel (much higher than the figure of $52 per barrel that was reported). On top of that, the report also claims that India imported 1.6 million barrels of crude daily from Russia during December 2022, while for China, the figure is 2.8 million barrels.

[Bialke]

Gas and electricity is as cheap as fun in Europe. The problem is the middleman.

Gas was 1 Cent on the wholesale, but 40 Cents on the housholds. On the wholesale the price of electricity was negative really long times last year. So basically the housholds should get payed to use electricity. But the problem are the middlemen.

Two and three years ago the oil price was negative a lot of times.

There are a lot of different markets and middlemen.

For example the wholesale trading has spot and future markets (I make it easy.). And there are a lot of speculants on the future markets. But if it is the date to get the gas or oil for the future, the speculants do not have the storing facilitys. So the cost for the storing is becoming more expensive as the costs for the futures and speculants have to sell it to a negative price. The rest they can store they sell for the cheap gas + the negative price of the sold gas - So this is one reason gas for the housholds is very expensive.

If you trade futures one the wholsale very good you can make a fortune. But if you stuck with the futures and get the gas, you cannot just dump it to the nature. You have to store it. And if you do not have the storing facility and you cannot sell it in this amount to the households, you are fu....! But no, you can sell it negative and then make the rest expensive to your customers.

[pooya87]

Two and three years ago the oil price was negative a lot of times.

You are confusing different things that aren't related.
The oil price wasn't negative itself, oil was still expensive so was gas and they still are. But in a short period of time when US was torn apart by COVID pandemic the demand for oil dropped so much that the companies couldn't use the oil they were receiving on ships as fast so they remained on ships for a long time. The cost of just shutting down your shipping business and letting the ship holding the oil on sea is a lot more than just dumping it for free so they started giving discounts and even paid to get rid of the oil hence the "negative price".

So basically the housholds should get payed to use electricity

You have to remember that energy (gas, oil, electricity, ...) doesn't just magically appear at your doorstep! A lot of effort is put into its extraction, purification, processing, shipping, conversion, ... and it all costs a lot of money.

[serveria.com]

There is a study published by Tania Babina of the Columbia University and a few others, titled: "Assessing the Impact of International Sanctions on Russian Oil Exports". The document can be accessed here:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4366337

The study claims that Russia sold it's crude oil well above the levels it announced in public after the price cap was introduced. Also, for the year 2022, Russia had a record surplus of $282 billion, with exports totaling $532 billion. During this period, they exported $142 billion worth of crude oil, $83 billion worth of oil products and $108 billion worth of natural gas.

According to their calculation, the price for Urals crude in December 2022 (when the price cap was implemented) averaged $74 per barrel (much higher than the figure of $52 per barrel that was reported). On top of that, the report also claims that India imported 1.6 million barrels of crude daily from Russia during December 2022, while for China, the figure is 2.8 million barrels.

This! Many seem to disregard the fact that Russia keeps exporting and the West keeps buying both oil and natural gas. They even seem to earn more than the did before the war started. So those who are waiting 1-2-6 months for Russia to run out of money/resources seem to be waiting in vain! 

[DrBeer]

There is a study published by Tania Babina of the Columbia University and a few others, titled: "Assessing the Impact of International Sanctions on Russian Oil Exports". The document can be accessed here:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4366337

The study claims that Russia sold it's crude oil well above the levels it announced in public after the price cap was introduced. Also, for the year 2022, Russia had a record surplus of $282 billion, with exports totaling $532 billion. During this period, they exported $142 billion worth of crude oil, $83 billion worth of oil products and $108 billion worth of natural gas.

According to their calculation, the price for Urals crude in December 2022 (when the price cap was implemented) averaged $74 per barrel (much higher than the figure of $52 per barrel that was reported). On top of that, the report also claims that India imported 1.6 million barrels of crude daily from Russia during December 2022, while for China, the figure is 2.8 million barrels.

Oh what a masterpiece
A perfect example of how Kremlin propaganda is stupidly, primitively FALSE And it will try to pour any base reading into the ears of gullible citizens, just to try to show that Russia is not a complete ass in the economy
They have already glorified their president, he turns out to be not only a "dexterous scout", but also a successful locksmith, and in general he is a marine pikhotin )) And these are the words of the most miserable under-furrer!

But then again, as usual, I will bring you back to reality, and I will try to remove propaganda noodles from "your ears"!

So, a couple of real facts that you can check right now:
1. According to a study by the Finnish research center CREA, due to a combination of restrictions and discounts on Russian oil, Moscow loses about €160 million a day.
CREA estimates that Russia's revenue from fossil fuel exports fell 17% in December 2022 compared to the same month the previous year. And the Russian Ministry of Finance reports a 7.5% increase in revenues (specified - in RUB) from the sale of oil and gas in the same period. But the reason is not an increase in income, but an increase in the tax for Gazprom and a fall in the ruble by 20% It looks like I know how to increase Russia's income from oil by 1,000,000 times! Truth in rubles. True, a loaf of bread will cost 1,000,000 rubles
2. The US authorities continue to lower the "financial curtain" over the Russian economy, cutting off more and more banks from the ability to conduct dollar transactions.
On Friday, on the anniversary of the start of the war in Ukraine, the US Treasury announced the expansion of sanctions against the banking sector of the Russian Federation, including 11 more credit institutions in the "black lists".
Under the new "ban" were:
Moscow Credit Bank is the 7th in Russia in terms of assets and the 9th in terms of deposits of individuals. Uralsib Bank (24th in terms of assets), Ural Bank for Reconstruction and Development (28th), MTS Bank (32nd), which recently opened an office in the UAE, one of the main anti-sanction hubs.
In addition, Metallinvestbank (47th place), Lanta-Bank (109th place), Zenit Bank (35th place), Bank St. Petersburg (18th place), SDM remained without dollar correspondent accounts. - Bank (82nd place), as well as banks "Primorye" (100th place) and "Levoberezhny" (72nd place).
The largest privately owned Alfa Bank has been under US blocking sanctions since April. Sovcombank, also included in the top 10 of Russia, was banned on the day the war began - February 24, 2022.
https://www.moscowtimes.ru/2023/02/24/ssha-otklyuchili-ot-dollarov-pochti-vse-krupnie-chastnie-banki-rossii-a35073
3. Deputy head of the US Treasury announced new sanctions against the Russian Federation. Future punitive measures from the US, EU and other countries will affect Russian purchases of dual-use goods, Wally Adeyemo said. Washington intends to announce new sanctions in the coming days.
4. On the anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the EU officially approved the 10th package of sanctions against the terrorist country. It included large-scale bans on the supply of technology to the Russian Federation, as well as a "diamond" embargo and sanctions against Iranian suppliers of drones, with which Russia attacks Ukraine.
5. And about the successes of the "second army of the world", with the largest fleet of "modern equipment", which is "invincible for backward Western weapons": The Russian invaders continue to reopen the oldest Soviet scrap metal, experiencing a shortage of equipment. Thus, the first shots of the reactivated BTR-50Ps sent to the database zone in Ukraine appeared. BTR-50P was produced from 1954 to 1970. Russia has up to 1 thousand of them in storage

[Rikafip]

Oh what a masterpiece
A perfect example of how Kremlin propaganda is stupidly, primitively FALSE And it will try to pour any base reading into the ears of gullible citizens, just to try to show that Russia is not a complete ass in the economy

As a matter of fact, the paper that Sithara shared is not pro-Kremlin propaganda at all and not that writers are are against the sanctions, but some of them (like Tania Babina) even ask for stricter ones. Just take a look at her Twitter profile (she is Ukrainian btw).

Based on our analysis, we conclude that a central focus of policy going forward should be the enforcement of existing sanctions on Russian oil – along with the lowering of the oil price cap. As far as oil products are concerned, we show that it is significantly less feasible to redirect exports away from the European market. This suggests that the EU embargo on oil products, which took effect on February 5, 2023, will prove to be a powerful additional tool to further curb Russian export earnings and fiscal revenues.