Member Info for romaron

"Keir Starmer hears ‘frank and honest’ views on energy during Aberdeen visit."

He visited yesterday along with Ed Miliband. Energy Voice wrote this:

"Shadow Scottish Secretary Ian Murray and Scottish Labour’s energy spokeswoman Sarah Boyack were also in attendance to hear the views of industry.

The event was organised by the chamber and advisers from consultancy True North.

Labour has previously defended its energy strategy, despite criticism from industry and trade unions, claiming it will deliver “jobs and investment” for the city.

But veteran oil tycoon Sir Ian Wood said the plans will “place in jeopardy tens of thousands of jobs”.

The billionaire businessman said it “makes absolutely no sense” to reduce reliance on domestic oil and gas production “only to increase imports from overseas”.

Do we even know if Sir Ian Wood was there and spoke? Is there any information regarding who attended from the O&G Industry or was it just a teaser from Labour regarding the base for GB Energy which is of course intended to speed up the destruction of the O&G Industry in the UK and encourage imports of fossil fuels. Any info appreciated.

"onshore wind is more than twice the long-term cost of gas-fired power and the cost is going up. offshore is between three and four times as expensive, and is at best only coming down slightly."

https://climatedebate.co.uk/is-wind-power-9-times-cheaper-than-gas/

ben pile posted this link yesterday via x. he said this:

wind power has been an abject failure. it is costs every single household £thousands, it is making businesses and industries uncompetitive. it is sending them overseas.

every single government intervention to try to save these heath-robinson contraptions results in greater expense. and meanwhile, the green lobby pump £millions into bull**** fear and smear campaigns to gaslight critics, and to mislead the public with claims such as "wind power is nine times cheaper than gas".

i feel vindicated.

I had a quick glance at the ECIU. The minute I read 'not for profit' I tend to lose interest. It is another of these organisations that tap into the 'philanthropic foundations'. This is almost Jess Ralston's first job. She didn't leave University until 2018. This is more a case (imo, I'm guessing) of a producer at the BBC wanting a comment from somebody who has a title from a company nobody has ever heard of (first time for me too) that sounds well on the introduction. Head of Energy at Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit - sounds impressive, doesn't it. They then go on for a few minutes quoting information that about 1 percent of the public will understand. She is totally wrong with the assertion that more offshore wind will reduce the need for gas. If the wind doesn't blow it doesn't matter how much capacity you have. She did pretty well but she's hardly impartial

I don't know about you but in my first job I started off doing filing and running errands for the boss. Bit of night-school but basically you learned on the job. I've nothing against her but they need to fill out the news and she was available. It promotes her and her organisation. The BBC is cost conscious and she wouldn't have got a fee. They love cheap. She said that the last CfD round didn't reflect the real world with inflation and the damage to supply lines (partly caused by the high price of gas she said). Inference - price-gouging by profiteering major oil companies.

I doubt the listeners were even interested and will have learned little more than if they'd googled. She filled a space. Offshore wind auctions aren't crowd pullers.

Gas and oil are essential to the security of the UK and every day living. The whole industry is suffering due to EPL but it is the renewable companies that continue to receive government hand-outs and most aren't British either. The hostility towards O&G shows no signs of abating. Both parties are tin-eared when it comes to fossil fuels.

The last CfD auction for offshore wind drew NO bids for new projects at the price offered. I think we'll see something similar in the O&G Industry. I cannot see any incentive to develop a new field. Companies will look overseas for new projects. It is absolutely crazy that this country would rather pay double the price for intermittent energy and forgo revenue but happily pay additional costs for foreign imports.

AS the industry moves into the breakers yard stage of the once proud O&G industry I suppose our tax credits will mean we have a limited future. Without the credits we would be finished imo. Why haven't we any champions?

Not so windy today

https://twitter.com/aDissentient/status/1725162356555075892

Https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/britain-boost-offshore-wind-auction-power-price-guarantees-by-66-2023-11-16/

“This is a vital part of our plan to have enough homegrown clean energy, bringing bills down for families and strengthening our energy independence,” Claire Coutinho said.

I wish the government would stop reducing my bills. I can't afford to pay them any longer.

A new word for me. I didn't realise that what some of us have been banging on about the cult like almost religious zealotry of the eco-warriors that there was support in Academia and a word that explains it (or tries to) better than any of us can (certainly me). I came across this video after my last post and am so pleased that I wasn't alone with the phenomena that is gripping certain young people who are risking their future careers by being misled and lied to under the banner of 'climate disaster'. It is in young people's nature to rebel and I see nothing wrong in that but to see it controlled by sinister, professional disruptors like Ed Miliband, Roger Hallam and Dale Vince is really disturbing.

This video is 2 hrs long but don't despair. From 1:30 is the most interesting part imo. She even mentions David Cameron 2 weeks before he is appointed Foreign Secretary I hope you'll find it as gripping and illuminating as I did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQbdNXQcT3E

What I particularly took from it was just how important energy security is and the dangers we are ignoring. You cannot fight a kinetic war on renewable energy. I don't have a military background but anybody who does must be appalled at the risks the UK is running by abandoning fossil fuels too early and too quickly. Helen Thompson is impressive and arrives at conclusions that for me are balanced and based on history and recent events going back to the Suez crisis which is still an important lesson (she goes back even further).

My immediate thought after watching this video was that we need to secure our fossil fuel reserves. After Gaza (we don't know the consequences yet) and Ukraine continuing we are living in a particularly dangerous time. This will eventually get through to Labour who will gradually realise they've backed the wrong horse. In fact, Labour are just as bellicose as the Tories in my experience. We talk about 'black swans' and I think they are breeding faster. Something could easily escalate the Gaza conflict into a much bigger conflagration. It is NO accident that we built two aircraft carriers. The UK Military must be dumbfounded that one of the major political parties is prepared to dump fossil fuels in a hurry.

BUY OIL

I forecast that over the next few months the TRUE cost of renewables will start to be obvious to the man in the street. This is likely to make the eco-zealots even crazier as one of their main arguments is demolished. They'll start preaching that saving the lives of billions (yes, jso did say that) cannot have a price on it. Meanwhile death rates in the UK will continue to fall as they have for all of my lifetime. The goal of Net Zero is the same as that of the (for example) Seventh Day Adventists who both use the term "transition" in their dogma.

As the Seventh day Adventists say - they know it's true because it says so in the bible. So that's the proof then? Juststopoil are on even flimsier ground with their claims of the great 'rapture' that we will enjoy without cars, meat and no air travel. I don't see that as a winner.

The UK is firmly secular; thank God.

Https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/11/14/wind-farm-orsted-government-cash-viability-offshore-britain/

I do hope that Ørsted explains why they were silent when Ed Miliband was promoting the fact that renewables were 9X cheaper than fossil fuels. Was that 9X cheaper but without offshore?

At least she won't be deceived by the hype from climate activists and dreamers.

Personally I'd prefer the update after the Autumn Statement anyway. It does make more sense. I'm not getting overexcited about the board meeting. The government broke it; we need their assistance in mending it. The ball is in their court [the government's] to a large extent

Orsted's share price jumped today by 5% (now only 52% down on the year). Important as they supply almost half of all our offshore wind.

The reason.

After losing $4bn in US offshore wind projects, triggering massive impairment charges, they have sacked their chief financial officer and its chief operating officer.

Conclusion: Americans are much smarter than us. Red Ed will dig them out over here.

*To our Swedish friends - you won't be left out. He'll dig out Vattenfall too.

I imagine the drip, drip selling is associated with the Swedish delisting. Just look at the last 2 UT's. Closed yesterday at 14.24 on 526,504 shares. Opened this morning at 13.59 on 10,533 shares.

Before bots market makers would throw a tiny amount in to test the water. The UT's are to some extent just a daily price that often is driven on insignificant amounts with no specific major driver. I'd imagine most divestment by Swedish investors is coming to an end. We've got our update and a faint possibility there may be a bone thrown to us in the Autumn statement. Until then best to ignore imo. Even without the Swedish influence there is always the negativity towards the sector. We need news.

This is the perfect riposte. By far the best analysis I have seen. Uncommon knowledge. Bjorn Lomborg believes in climate change but not the policy, impact or perspective. Many, many more people die from cold. In China they estimate deaths of 80,000 per year from heat. Against that 1.15 mio die from cold. Heat is easier to manage than cold. Winter lasts a lot longer than a few hot days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf7WOy9QvwA

Hi Martinen - I have sympathy for the Swedish holders but few of us will read the rules. Are you saying that there is a danger of those transferring shares being locked in and unable to trade for 4 weeks? That is long enough to make anybody nervous and I'd rather be out than trapped. Or have some early birds transferred already and it is only the procrastinators who'll be trapped.

Barry Gardiner around 15:22 Q248 on the transcript "At the moment, because of the windfall tax—that tax take that we levy on oil and gas producers—is at 75%, which is just below the international average, which is 76%, I think. When the windfall tax ceases to operate next year, we will fall back down to 30% tax take, which is the lowest in the entire world. Do you think that people who are struggling to pay their electricity and gas bills this winter will understand why it is that we are not anywhere near other countries in terms of the revenue that we take into the public purse in this country from the oil and gas producers, but that we are subsidising new production in the North sea basin by 92 pence in the pound? Will they not consider that this is a really extraordinary state of affairs?"

Clumsy error on the windfall tax ending next year. The only thing that surprised me was when Mark Garnier Q200 (Tory said this:

"We have had a number of oil and gas companies, or energy companies, come in. When I questioned them, they raised the point that because of what is going on in the UK— because of the political discourse in this country about potential greater windfall taxes, and them being almost pariah companies because of the carbon emissions that come from their products—British-based oil and gas exploration companies and energy companies have lower credit ratings than their counterparts in other countries. " he then went on to ask CC that with her experience of financial markets he would like her opinion on the difficulty of companies ability to raise money. She replied: "That’s an interesting question that I can take away. I have spoken to various people across industry—I think about 200 so far in terms of investment and energy stakeholders. The credit rating point hasn’t been raised with me, but I will go and sense-check that. The important thing is that overall, we have a positive investor landscape."

It is impossible that credit ratings hadn't come up imo so I find her response disingenuous or didn't she speak to EnQuest, Ithaca or Harbour?. I wonder if he set her up for a response or excuse for the Chancellor to tinker with the EPL at the Autumn Statement next week?

*The high taxes of State owned companies is pretty irrelevant in some ways as it is nominal because most of it comes back to them either as more net profit if they lower it or the higher rate. They are so big that their strength is their size and sovereign credit rating. They are only a tad more exciting than Gilts or Treasury Bills.

Https://www.these-islands.co.uk/publications/i390/an_inconvenient_fact.aspx

Not only Labour telling lies. SNP too.

I had a quick glance but will watch through. I really only looked at Barry Gardiner. He hasn't really changed since the Audit Committee a year ago but the situation has. The 92p tax was brought up by him as though it is out of the public coffers rather than complicated deferred tax [it would help if we could get a more accurate description rather than concede the ground to anti-fossil campaigners] but my main gripe is how he makes an argument that at first glance seems hard to argue against. That is that the current tax on NS producers at 75% (15:22) is close to the International average. He then said that when the windfall tax falls next year (I thought it was there until 2028?) it will drop to 38% the lowest in the entire world. I can't find it but I don't think it is my imagination but he again used Norway and (I think) UAE with even higher tax rates. What he never mentioned was that these are by and large publicly owned companies operating in their jurisdiction and it delves into the area of what tax you should put on the fire brigade or ambulance service if discussing security. He of course would not mention the US tax rate on producers where free enterprise is encouraged and they are currently making a fortune from fossil fuels.

Add this to the mix:

"Of all current and pending British offshore wind capacity, 82.2% is owned by companies located overseas, according to the Common Wealth think tank. On top of that, more than two-thirds of offshore wind firms operating in the UK have their base elsewhere in Europe." Google

"Orsted has 12 operating wind farms in the UK, five in Denmark, four in Germany, and one in the Netherlands." your find

So much for GB Energy.

Plus this : https://twitter.com/simonwakter/status/1723629089045479441

Hi Stevo - re your interest in futures. I follow this guy erratically on X : https://twitter.com/Big_Orrin/status/1722921871748767962

I like what he writes but I only understand a fraction of it. What do I get from it? An acceptance that I know very little about the physical oil market and settlements. It really is a case of you have to be in it to win it.

I imagine quite a few of those involved only understand a fraction as well or specialise in (say) refineries, insurance, storage or even futures. You will have an interest in other areas without knowing the whole mechanics. A threatened port strike or insurance changes for instance will impact. All I know is that I used to drink at the City FOB and most imbibers didn't have a clue or care less what its name was.

That is why I find your views and explanation on tax educational. They are a fact of life and are hurting us at the moment but the pain seems to be spreading to the renewable sector. People don't like being so obviously lied to. Labour have supported juststopoil, Sadiq Khan, Dale Vince etc. and have made a rod for their own back. I expect them to realise the cul-de-sac that Ed Miliband has led them into and work out an escape plan. I think that would be to our benefit.

As I mentioned before I know a lot about Forex forwards but nothing is so advantageous as a tip on a large amount or what a big player is doing. I have a pal who ran a real time information service for a major City bank. This was housed in an aircraft hangar sized trading room along with traders and client advisers (salesmen). The traders used codes to hide their orders because all the salesmen (whose loyalty was to their client, not the bank) had only one real question. What was Brevan Howard (for example) doing? If they could get this info to their client it would be valuable. Of course the Bank of England worried about this in a competitive dealing room, hence the codes. Problem is that the number of big hitters isn't that high and how long does it take to learn a few PIN numbers.

My point is that often it isn't a case of what you know but who you know. Saying that even the biggest players get it wrong from time to time.

But it cannot be too long before the science of anthropogenic global warming itself is openly challenged. Being essentially scientific gibberish, this is something it is far too weak to survive. As the cult of computer modelling yields to the rigour of actual observation, increasing numbers of Charles III’s subjects will wake up to the fact that they, and their society, have been the victims of a decades-long con trick which is now seriously endangering their security, and they will not be happy with those who foisted it upon them.

https://harrumpf.com/2022/09/11/dont-just-do-something-stand-there/

this too resonates: "Particularly upset are those carpet-baggers who are up to their ears in ‘renewables’ investments, which they know will be toast if (let’s hope that’s a ‘when’) Lomborg’s ideas become mainstream, and displace the prevailing narrative of doom."

https://harrumpf.com/2022/09/29/climate-of-dissent/