Member Info for Dumbly

Hard-hitting interview with Exxon Chair Paul Greenwood on R4 around 0625 (sorry, I can’t access BBC sounds for link) about the Mossmorran closure. Heavy criticism of the government’s policy towards the NS and carbon taxes. Difficult to know relative impact of market conditions, plant age/effectiveness, carbon taxes, and government policy towards the NS, so all use the situation to makes the points they want.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-11-18/debates/5F4620E7-351B-438C-8F0D-D78C389654F6/ExxonmobilMossmorran

Goldman issued a note yesterday forecasting Brent at $56 in 2026, rising in 2027 and at $80 by late 2028. Naturally… with lots of caveats.

AA, looks like you got it right about "getting cold feet over raising income tax and breaking manifesto promises", let's hope you're wrong about "illogically concluding they need to keep EPL intact". The dice have been cast so, as you say, there should be leaks soon. EnQuest and others will have plans whatever the big decisions are on EPL/successor regime and licencing/consenting etc. Obviously a 2026 end to EPL is the best outcome but even more important is clarity, and within weeks this should be there to finally allow things to happen.

Don’t punch or kick a compute - they have a long memory.

Indeed, Kraken, an ABSOLUTE must listen for anybody interested in energy in the UK and the North Sea. Good that still plenty of lobbing to get the changes needed, but on the budget, I wonder if it is possible just 2 weeks out that the big decisions have not already been taken. If Labour think the carrot of ending the false windfall tax only in 2029 will lead to serious investment now, then they are deluded. Unfortunately, tho, this is my expectation. I expect to hear something along the lines of the TEMPORARY windfall tax on oil and gas profits applied through the Energy Profits Levy will be replaced from March 2029 with a fiscal regime to capture PERMANENTLY windfall profits in the sector, and that the details of this new regime will be communicated by the end of this year. Labour must bring the implementation forward as it would be highly presumptuous of them to imply it will be in their gift to do anything in 2030 as the latest date for the next GE is 15/8/29. They probably also want to reduce the gap between their “offer” and what Reform or the Conservatives could offer (although, by then there will be bigger issues in play surrounding new licencing and NZ in general). To appease, where needed, the emphasis will be on the permanent nature of the new regime. The detail is likely to be provided together with the NS strategy, re-consenting detail and decision on Rosebank and Jackdaw. Of course, Labour could use the same argument, that a windfall tax remains and indeed has been transformed from a TEMPORARY measure to a PEREMENENT one, so no manifest commitment has been broken, and implement the new regime in 2026, but this feels unlikely.

Hunbah, then considering Stevo’s comment “In H125 Malaysia generated a pre tax profit of $18.9m”, the annual pre tax profit is likely closer to $40m than the “≈ $185 m to EnQuest pre-tax” you posted yesterday? Not picking holes, just trying to understand.

With acknowledgement and thanks to flexmw on the Serica board

This is worth a listen if you have the chance :

Will the UK sacrifice the North Sea to Net Zero? with Kathryn Porter & Martin Copeland.

(Posted two links as unsure which one will work best..)

https://share.transistor.fm/s/0c487ba3

https://x.com/in_mavericks/status/1988185900333797781?s=46&t=uz3in5yMdDdYvqnOjeh9vg

Thanks, Kamrat, Hunbah. Taking Hunbah's calc of pre-tax profit to EnQuest of $185m and deducting 38% corporate tax (correct?) would mean the annual net profit in Malaysia is...40% of EnQuest's MC. The contribution of the Malaysia business alone should generate a MC higher than the current.

Https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/business/local/6891503/aberdeen-must-prepare-for-the-worst-warns-former-oil-and-gas-uk-chief/

Papajoga, if the EPL stays to 29 or 30 and the conditions afterwards are known and acceptable (altho nothing here is guaranteed) then considering EnQuest's tax assets the company will still be in a good position to buy UK production from those paying full CT/ST/EPL and/or looking to exit the NS.

Upomrga, Starmer’s “doubling down” comment was meant in support of the UK’s O&G industry. “Speaking to Scottish journalists in Downing Street, the Prime Minister said that while no final decision had been made [on Rosebank and Jackdaw] he wanted to “double down” on the need for oil and gas in the UK’s energy mix “for many years to come.””.

The industry and its leaders have been treated disrespectfully by UK governments. Cash has been expropriated under false pretenses. Trust in UK government is low. Who wants to hang where not welcome. Let’s first see what the budget brings, but if it is just a carrot of fiscal changes from 2029, best to expedite the exit by offloading soonest as much production as possible to those with tax assets they are willing to share. This is likely the best plan whatever the budget brings.

Https://www.forbes.com/sites/we-dont-have-time/2025/10/26/the-timing-that-could-break-cop30/

Maybe Lula could convince Starmer and and Miliband to follow his lead.

“Brazil's main oil and gas targets are to increase production and by 2030 to become the world's fourth-largest oil producer.”

Rom, paid my due, I just watched it too. Without knowing the background and views of the members as well as you I had a similar impression. Agree with what you say in both posts. Nothing much to add. Katy Heidenreich from OEUK did a good job. Loch, I agree, it's disturbing if this is indicative of how these Committees work. If it's not known and accepted now that first and foremost the EPL is what's holding back investment and the future of the NS then it never will be. What is not needed is more meetings and another Inquiry.

This inquiry has been initiated by:

Energy Security and Net Zero Committee

Commons Select Committee

The Energy Security and Net Zero Committee scrutinises the policy, spending and administration of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and its public bodies, including Ofgem and the Committee on Climate change. You can follow the Committee on X (formerly Twitter) @CommonsESNZ.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/664/energy-security-and-net-zero-committee/

Miliband is about to publish his North Sea Strategy, so there will be plenty yo scrutinize. Feels like here the cart has been out before the horse - the objectives of such an inquiry should feed into developing strategy.

Yet another bloody inquiry and call for evidence… WTF more do these people need to know!

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/664/energy-security-and-net-zero-committee/news/210020/new-inquiry-and-call-for-evidence-managing-the-future-of-uk-oil-and-gas/

Following an initial evidence session in Parliament on the role of the UK’s refinery industry in the energy transition, the Committee is launching a new inquiry and call for evidence on the future of UK oil and gas.

In the initial session in Parliament on October 29, witnesses from the industry highlighted the need to address the oil and gas industry’s fiscal environment. They reinforced the Scottish Affairs Committee’s conclusion that there needs to be a revision to the Energy Profits Levy where “a lack of clarity on the fiscal regime beyond 2030 has created uncertainty for industry in the North Sea. The Energy Profits Levy at its current rate of 38%, which brings the headline rate of tax to 78%, is seen by many in industry as no longer proportionate”.

Ad, when journos get the ESIM wrong I wonder how accurate the rest of their reporting is.

The ESIM has specific price thresholds for oil and gas. For the financial year 2025-26, these are:

Oil: $76.12 per barrel

Gas: £0.59 per therm

No, joto, let’s hope… she has not 😜

Never, Reeves wants the investment now. Investment in 3 years won’t help them. Better the industry communicates immediately and clearly that such tinkering, as you suggest, will not deliver significant new investment now. It will be bad for the company, the industry, and the country. Whichever way you look at it, an option for Harbour must be to sell up and deploy resources more effectively elsewhere.