Member Info for ocelot

Https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-66006142

RNS of 03/05, wasn't paying attention.

The proposed uppermost zone, from approximately 255-285 metres, corresponds to a 12-hour period of strong oil odour at surface and the recovery of light c. 38˚ API oil within fluids returned to surface from the same depth. (RNS of 04/05)

30 metres = 98.4 feet, looks bigger!

ZYX098,

Re your post of 17:07: we are in full agreement.

At the present time, it is Starmer who is expressing the ambition to undertake reform, the government seems to be constrained by its own backbenchers.

Italy’s Eni SpA expanded the reach of its natural gas business with the joint acquisition of explorer Neptune Energy Group Ltd. for $4.9 billion.

The deal, done in conjunction with Eni-controlled Norwegian producer Var Energi ASA, adds assets from North Africa to the North Sea and boosts the companies’ gas output at a time when Europe is in desperate need of the fuel ...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-23/eni-var-energi-agree-to-buy-neptune-energy-for-4-9-billion?sref=Em01M8Hr

28/06/23 is next Wednesday.

Net zero is going to require a radical overhaul of the way things get done in the UK.

Given the Conservatives' reliance on a more rural vote, it may well require the more urban electorate of a Labour government to achieve this.

At which point, some of the very same people so keen to stop onshore oil exploration will again be protesting, this time against net zero and its threat to the countryside.

"Some things are worth celebrating. Scottish Power boss Keith Anderson has just started to 'build a £4bn offshore wind farm'. The only downer? The seabed licence was granted by Gordon Brown. Little wonder Anderson reckons 'we are just too slow' ...".

Another article focusing on all of the obstacles in the way of achieving anything like net zero. Some of these obstacles are exactly the same as those used by protestors to slow down oil projects.

PPS: although, somewhat selectively, they appear to have omitted dairy farming.

PPS: the banner the protestors are holding entitled "count the carbon" is quite telling, showing pictures of a range of industries and sectors that could be affected by Sarah Finch's case.

PS: the economy, on the other hand, may become even slower-moving than it is already and suffer.

The OEP said the meaning of ‘indirect effects’ should be a matter of law. It said:

“It would therefore be helpful if the UK Supreme Court could lay down some clear principles on the meaning of ‘indirect effects’ in the context of this case and more generally.”

A ruling in the case is expected in three to six months. If Sarah Finch is successful, the case will have major implications for fossil fuel developments in the UK.

-------------------------

... and major implications for all other developments involving "indirect effects". If Sarah Finch is successful, therefore, the legal profession will have every reason to be grateful to her.

Https://drillordrop.com/2023/06/22/new-watchdogs-first-legal-challenge-opposes-government-over-counting-carbon/

1 of the 3 tweets:

UKEn: Minister for Energy Efficiency backs our hydrogen storage project at Portland Port and says: “2025 is an ambitious but achievable timeline for designing a business model, which provides both investor certainty and value for money for Government”.

Thought my posts had been buried but they've risen to near the top of the pile!

With some of the legal arguments (I have too many green boxes to know whether this has been posted by anyone other than myself):

https://drillordrop.com/2023/06/21/campaigners-at-supreme-court-in-challenge-over-climate-impact-of-fossil-fuels/

Estelle Dehon KC and Marc Willers KC, for Sarah Finch, said: ...

They said:

“Such downstream greenhouse gas emissions are required to be assessed at the point of fossil fuel extraction by a growing body of national courts around the world.”

If the Court of Appeal decision was upheld, it would leave the United Kingdom as an “outlier”, they said ...

------------------

Odd argument, not based on UK legal considerations at all.

https://drillordrop.com/2023/06/21/campaigners-at-supreme-court-in-challenge-over-climate-impact-of-fossil-fuels/

ZYX098,

to 1. and 2. my answer is "don't know".

You had previously made your point 2. which is what prompted me to make my post of 12:25, to remind myself (and others) of the precise language UKOG had used!

The lady in the 2nd photo is wearing a placard which reads: "No Fracking Permits".

After all this time, basic misunderstandings are still there.

The traditional photo outside the Supreme Court:

https://drillordrop.com/2023/06/21/pictures-campaigners-gather-outside-supreme-court-for-landmark-legal-challenge/