Best Of

a

FPT, with regards to North Sea oil and gas:

Jobs
Energy security
Balance payments
Not wanting to syphon cash to despots and dictators

Stopping UK production will not reduce CO2 emissions. Importing LNG from Qatar rather than piping gas ashore has a much greater carbon footprint.

Nor will it reduce consumption. Not while the government is subsidising new build CCGT and blue hydrogen projects tolock in demand for natural gas for decades to come.

I honestly don’t get it. Labour, SNP, Scottish Greens - trying to shut down a viable energy source because reasons. Reform. Wanting to shut down the new viable energy source because reasons. Tories, honestly had no idea they were still here.

Ditch net zero say Reform, we need to ditch Net Stupid. I don’t understand the rationale of any policy on energy that doesn’t combine bringing up more oil and gas with a transition to renewables.

Re your last sentence neither do I

For me the transition needs to be on a sensible timescale and not an arbitrary date

You sound like one of our contractors. So this IT transition will be complete in roughly 2130.

Frankly, arbitrary dates are not the way to transition unless they are realistic

We put man on the moon 66 years after the first powered flight. 2050 is not only realistic, it's pathetic.

Thumping tables isn’t an answer either.

The moon landing decision was made long *after* 1) Staging rockets was proved, 2) the multi stage rocket equations were developed and proven 3) fuels with sufficient ISP were developed. And demonstrated in working rocket engines.

Which meant that scientists could tell JFK that they could land multiple tons on the moon, given a jillion dollars.

There are large areas, in non-burning applications of fossil fuels where we don’t have the answers. Yet.

Politicians with arts degrees demanding the tide turn won’t turn the tide.

If Ed Quetaband was actually useful, the U.K. would be building a non-fossil fuel steel works. That technology is on the edge of practicality - first trial plants are being built elsewhere - and may offer cheaper steel in the long run.

But he is hooked on the reductionist approach. Which, in reality, just means sending the emissions abroad with the jobs.

I really do not like Richard Tice but in his interview with Trevor Phillips he is straightforward with his answers no matter they are unworkable

What’s the point of being straightforward if the policy is unworkable. Anyone can go out and tell people what they want to hear ?

Which is why opposition is easy and governing is hard. Opposition is especially easy when you don't have a governing track record, you rely on the general public not understanding the place of the rule of law, you treat the courts and judges as if they are a sort of enemy and an absurd imposition on the rest of us, the media conspire not to ask searching questions on intractable economic and fiscal matters, and many voters prefer to believe that a Reform state can cut expenditure on everyone else while maintaining all the free stuff for oneself.

FPT, with regards to North Sea oil and gas:

Jobs
Energy security
Balance payments
Not wanting to syphon cash to despots and dictators

Stopping UK production will not reduce CO2 emissions. Importing LNG from Qatar rather than piping gas ashore has a much greater carbon footprint.

Nor will it reduce consumption. Not while the government is subsidising new build CCGT and blue hydrogen projects tolock in demand for natural gas for decades to come.

I honestly don’t get it. Labour, SNP, Scottish Greens - trying to shut down a viable energy source because reasons. Reform. Wanting to shut down the new viable energy source because reasons. Tories, honestly had no idea they were still here.

Ditch net zero say Reform, we need to ditch Net Stupid. I don’t understand the rationale of any policy on energy that doesn’t combine bringing up more oil and gas with a transition to renewables.

Re your last sentence neither do I

For me the transition needs to be on a sensible timescale and not an arbitrary date

Net Zero gets branded as zero emissions. This is incorrect. It’s balancing the emissions against renewables to get to a net zero, not an actual zero.

I’d rebrand it. “Energy Freedom”.
We can’t really refine our own oil so we have to export it - we’re reliant on imports.
We can’t bring up enough gas now - a quarter of power is from burning gas and we have to import half. Burn more gas even with more production = reliance on imports.
Wind? That is ours. Reform demand that we literally switch the windfarms off. The “patriots” in Reform want us reliant on foreigners.