Result T-4 v2027/28 Capacity Auction
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/02/28/t-4-2027-28-capacity-auction/#more-71993
"But worst of all was the lack of interest of new build even to bid. Only 322 MW of new build exited the auction, mainly OCGT. This tells us that nobody is now prepared to even consider building CCGTs or other large scale generators. This is hardly surprising, given government threats to shut down all fossil fuel generation!
Of the 42.8 GW contracted, 28.6 GW is gas, begging the question of where our backup capacity will come from in 2030, if Labour win the election. Take away gas, all we are left with essentially are interconnectors:"
Https://mailchi.mp/298bb2d0191b/apple-pulls-the-plug-kills-its-electric-car-201204?e=35cf3821be
"But with 99 days to go until the EU elections in June, the narrative of a vibrant Green Deal continues to fall apart."
*Always pass on good advice, it’s the only thing to do with it. - Alexandra pub Wimbledon.
EV today: "The company has “moderated its 2030 target, but it’s still an exciting place to be”, Brown said.
Orsted’s current capacity is 15.7 GW and it aims to achieve 35-38 GW by 2030. “But it was 50 GW. That was really stretching how much we would need to deliver. So, we’ve a much more considered plan.”
Has anybody told Ed?
From the same article: "States in the US are also recognising pressure from the industry. “Typically they were bidding in at $100 per MWh, now that’s $150 MWh. At those prices, projects look viable. There’s a reset in the US, in the UK and for the whole offshore wind industry.”
Remember the wind auction that failed at £44 last September and there were stories about an uplift of 70% was needed? Well $150 is £119 so for us we would need an uplift of 170% at the next auction. Probably just a missing digit.
*I think that Ed will cover his gross negligence by focusing on onshore wind. It will cause ructions unless we move crofters off their land and build them in Scotland (its worked before). I checked the height of the Lawrence Weston 'success' story that I'm guessing will be used as a model. It took 7 years and has a 92m tower and including propeller is 149m at the tip.
*In Enfield the tallest building is a 101m - 30 storey residential tower. I expect some resistance across the country. My suggestion - build them on golf courses. Another factor is that offshore wind is steadier and stronger. Mind you, it wouldn't surprise me if somebody said that our wind is better.
There is another side to this Frac. You'll notice in Spain the preponderance of gas bottles for heating and cooking. In Ireland there are a lot of oil boilers and I only know about this because an old school friend smuggles it across the border. There is also 23andme. *At this point many of you will nod and say "I knew he'd lose it eventually".
The reference to 23andme was because it changed my life and I thought what a great investment it would be. It was private at the time so not possible then which saved me a fortune. The problem with 23andme is that you only really buy it once.
For convenience, hype and subsidy ASHPs have a siren call. If I had an oil boiler or relied on LPG I'd probably change. I'd also consider it if I was doing a total refit or a new build.
I'm suggesting that once the oil and LPG users are satisfied there isn't much of a market for ASHPs without legislation and subsidies. I think something similar is happening with EVs. They're lovely but expensive and difficult like a mistress. After the initial rush people start to cooly evaluate. Norwegians are rich and I hear they often have one of each (EV/ICE). They also have the cheapest electricity (92% hydroelectric).
Drive around a council estate and see how many cars would have difficulty accessing overnight charging and you can forget almost everything once you factor in apartments and block management.
I think we've seen the peak enthusiastic subsidised rush for both EVs and heat pumps. I wouldn't say no to either as a gift but frankly, life is cheaper and easier without them for me.
Https://public.substack.com/p/cambridge-university-climate-scientist
Listen from 15:00
Climate modelling is a huge industry along with astrology. Climate will decide our future and is measurable. Amazing, if so it is the only thing that is (apart from death and taxes). We've seen economists and scientists getting things wrong in each of our lifetimes involving some of the biggest brains out there. Everything is becoming subservient to 'climate'. Dr. Mike Hulme explains the need for humans to have a belief, a religion. He isn't accepting the hype and is looking at it in a cool, dispassionate and dare I say it, a scientific way.
In the shallow end where I paddle around I'll stick with being a contrarian and the fact that costs will impact whatever route we follow.
*latest from Goehring & Rozencwajg: "True industry insiders are all telling you to buy oil assets. The public market remains paralyzed with fear. Investing in the uninvestible requires a contrarian outlook and a strong stomach. However, we believe the benefits are well worth the risk."
On the plus side there was some entertainment https://twitter.com/MrAlexLawson/status/1762441046783398226
Miliband said he had a “good dialogue” with OEUK and the industry. “That dialogue is important in opposition and even more if we get into government.”
From his speech at International Energy Week this morning. Translated it reads that they've already rolled [OEUK] over and we aren't even in power yet. In their desperation to appear releveant OEUK are even sharing a platform with juststopoil (today 10:05 - 11:20 https://www.ieweek.co.uk/agenda). That is two corpses practising mutual CPR on each other.
I am though interested in the next panel which has BP and Shell in attendance but the big hitters from the majors seem to be giving the conference the attention it deserves imo. They have better things to do.
EnQuest aren't there it seems and that has saved a few quid though I did notice that one of our NED's, Rani Koya , is chairing a talk tomorrow 15:45 - 16:30.
Https://ourscottishfuture.org/brown-backs-plan-for-north-sea-2/
Quick read. Only Orsted and EnQuest get a mention (don't know if that's good or bad) "At Sullom Voe in Scotland EnQuest are in the process of adapting the terminal which has been processing oil since the late 1970s to enable the site to host new energy opportunities such as hydrogen production. They are also exploring the potential for a connection to the Shetland grid which would allow the terminal to operate on sustainable electricity from onshore wind farms."
Might be some leverage here: "Making use of existing facilities wherever possible will reduce the risk of a surge of decommissioning activity which given the existing tax system would place a significant burden on the UK Exchequer. A managed transition also matters for financial reasons. Under the North Sea tax regime developed in the 1970s the costs of decommissioning oil and gas fields which cease production falls in part of the UK Government – with the companies reclaiming tax previously paid. This process has already begun – eg at Shell’s Brent field – but there is much more to come. An estimate by the North Sea Transition Authority published in 2022 suggested that the total industry costs between 2022 and 2067 for decommissioning all upstream UK oil and gas infrastructure would be £ 46bn. The Exchequer cost in the form of tax repayment and reduced income from Offshore Corporation Tax is estimated at £ 21.8bn. The risk is that these costs will come much sooner if investors decide that the limited opportunities and the political risks attached to further investment in oil and gas development do not justify any further substantial spending. If as a result they choose to initiate the decommissioning process the costs to the Treasury through the next Parliament would be considerable." Otherwise just a rehash of what is already out there.
Hi Dumbly, I accept that OEUK should represent the industry consensus and if this is it then I will reevaluate my holding. We get treated like something that you've trodden on and are expected to be acquiescent. The Government have the upper hand but we could have a united response that doesn't have to come from a lobby group which if the CBI is anything to go by is ignored anyway (and pretty useless). The reason for the OEUK looks increasingly dated. It facilitates smaller companies advertising their wares and of course an annual awards event whilst at the same time giving employment for those looking for something less stressful with the comfort blanket of a .org.
If the likes of EnQuest, Spirit and Neo for instance were to put a moratorium on taking over old fields from the majors then that would attract attention. It is very marginal if they are profitable anyway under the present fiscal regime and that is promised to get more draconian. It would also maybe stimulate the majors to be more supportive towards those left on the UKCS. Perhaps we need to take some lessons from the junior doctors or the unions. You don't feed a crocodile hoping that it will eat you last.
Thanks for that L7. Sometimes the obvious eludes us.
I've only read it once but find it appalling. No leadership and pure appeasement. I know they [OEUK] are about as effective and self-serving as the CBI but can you imagine the US O&G industry penning something similar?
In the introduction I take particular offence at this: " From operators to the supply chain and across the lifecycle from production to decommissioning" - so without resistance we agree to Labour's intention to ban exploration.
and this "ensure access to capital throughout the transition for both green and transitional activity." - What about the 'traditional' development of an oil or gas field. Are the terms FDP and FID consigned to history? Do 'traditional O&G no longer need finance?
Then this wimpish sentence. "Continue offering of oil and gas production licences to attract investment in domestic oil and gas, including regular offshore production licence rounds that focus on infrastructure-led exploration and development of previously identified resources."
Whatever happened to balls. If this is the best the industry can come up with it deserves to fail. We've been given no respite or breaks. It is pure capitulation based on Labour 'being nice to us'. We need champions prepared to challenge government. Rolling over and surrendering has never worked. What is the risk? We're on the floor anyway.
What I don't get about Scotland is that I can understand the Independence debate but I really cannot understand the SNP stance on O&G. Its as though they [the SNP] speak for the whole country in the same way that Sadiq Khan speaks for the rest of England. Scottish Labour will dutifully follow Westminster labour. Do the majority of Scots really subscribe to the ideology of climatism? They risk more financially than the English imo. whatever happened to Scottish pragmatism.
“companies must see the UK as an attractive country to invest in”.
Not governed by a spiteful populist administration quick to tax raid and loot older industries and speeding up their demise.
Back to my point. A few politicians will read this. OEUK gets a pat on the back but has probably been totally ignored due to its vested interest. The investment community will ignore it. The effort should be made on explaining all of this to the British public and using social media where most news is read by VOTERS. Start by explaining the real cost and breakdowns of energy bills. I'm getting there but struggle with mine.
Bring on the bklackouts - then they'll take notice.
Hi Dumbly, it is a frustration of mine. What are we always the red or amber line on a graph. The Free Speech Union meeting I went to on Thursday was an improvement on juststopoil but in many ways no better. You get entrenched opinion and repeated mantras and arguments. I shut off to many of the QA speakers as I'd heard them so many times before. I'm lucky enough to have insight (although I don't fully understand it) into the modern world and AI. Those involved in climate activism (both sides) haven't really moved on and it's like expecting the CBI or the Cof E Synod to lead us out of this stasis. We are suffering from POOR politics and an ideology of climatism. It isn't a scientific threshold any longer but a political threshold. That is no way to treat such an important industry
Our defence luckily is common sense and economics. The numbers don't lie and it is clear from the media that climatism is not for mainstream voters.
Energy independence today but more expensive. Almost NO interconnection.
https://grid.iamkate.com/
Https://grid.iamkate.com/
I'm looking at 07:35pm National Grid Live
Solar 0%
Wind 28.2%
Gas 32.1%
I'm more interested in the imports (interconnectors). Norway 3.8% and France 9.9%
I mention this because we know Norway's electricity is 92% hydro electricity whilst France is 65% nuclear and 12% hydoelectric. We can't compete there.
3 distinct Focus groups in Rochdale. Q. “what are the biggest issues facing the country at the moment?” folowed by “What are the biggest issues facing Rochdale?”
“In every case NHS, cost of living and crime were raised far more frequently and by more people than world affairs. Others included education and schools, immigration and the management og the local council.” Sunday Times today.
monkey, don’t you have climate up North?
Great find KO 12:33
https://grid.iamkate.com/ more solar than wind. Still only 21% of electricity produced here by renewables and of course electricity is only part of the countries requirement. Smart meters will help future rationing.