Member Info for romaron

OPRED is part of the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero headed by Secretary of State Grant Shapps. In the Sunday Times OpEd yesterday Dominic Lawson wrote - " last month Grant Shapps, the energy security secretary, warned that “polluting sources of energy are destroying our planet” – which leaves them hopelessly exposed to attacks on their record by the likes of Just Stop Oil."

Just whose side is he on?

Very prescient of Dominic Lawson. Mrc - I will recant my opinion of OEUK if they are building a case against the unlawful and unfair attacks the industry are sustaining.

This helps: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65254022

Look at the chart listing "The 5 companies spilling the most oil in UK seas"

Even with my lack of attention I'd be drawn to the fact that Dana seems to be an outlier and requires double checking. It says below "Source: FOI/EIR data, Uplift" - That gives limited cover to the BBC but not much to Uplift.

This explains the EV article reporting "In response to the clarification, executive director Tessa Khan said: “OPRED has corrected its figures but, as far as we can see, the data is still not in the public domain."

Well it seems there are plenty repeating the Uplift findings and I'm in the public domain. I sense that Khan is backtracking here. I imagine Dana Petroleum's owners ( I hope I've got this right because my research is worse than Uplift's) Korea National Oil Corporation are a little peeved that on 13 April until today their share price has dropped 6.60%. I suggest it might be a good idea to run the article past their lawyers.

That worries the Sun or Mail? What about Twitter? I am being as casual as they are. Has any one pushed back against the 9X cheaper. The activists won that hands down by getting it into the minds of the public. The public just remember "much cheaper". Big lies grow by repetition. The industry has done marvelously so far on the PR front, NOT.

Of course 95% of the NS leakage was legal. So you could arguably claim, by playing with figures, that anybody who tips oil or fat down the sink is 100's of times more guilty but now I'm getting silly. Locking up grannies for criminal genocide is a step too far.

They are playing "catchup". I'd say 1-0 to Uplift. Accuracy and detail is unnecessary if you're playing to the gallery.

The response by OEUK is insipid. It makes me despair. The press will condense it into a catchy headline. Don't they realise that you have to occasionally have to fight dirty or at the minimum respond with an eye-for-an-eye. Many years ago I did Judo and one of the first lessons you learn is "Kaeshi-waza". In simple terms you respond with the same technique. By attacking you almost always leave your self at risk if your attack fails. Uplift always attacks, often without a response.

How would I respond? I'd explain that the industry is far more conscious of the damage done to the environment than the average UK housewife and far less a problem. They {housewives] are tipping cooking oils down the sink to the tune of some 18m litres EVERY year. This is 5 X (they love their multiples at Uplift) the amount that the industry is audited for over 5 years or suggest that the average housewife is a 25 X more dangerous to the environment than the North Sea energy industry.

That would swiftly be turned into a headline after rudimentary checking. Organs like the Mail or Sun would have great fun with it. Uplift and juststopbreathing could then face accusations of letting the average UK housewife off the crime of genocide. Or, are they the next target?

That was part of the 15:00 Severe Alert (red triangle flashing)

Funnily enough, though, if a poll last week is correct, even the younger demographic most sympathetic to the aims of the disruptive “climate demonstrations” are not that much so. According to YouGov, only 8 per cent of 18 to 24-year-olds identified as “very favourable” to the campaign. And among all adults, only 4 per cent were “very favourable” and just 12 per cent “somewhat favourable”.
But then, Roger Hallam tried the democratic path to political influence and it didn’t go well. When he stood for the 2019 European parliament elections in London, he won 0.04 of the total votes (924 ballots to be precise). And in the 2021 election for London mayor, his party’s candidate came 20th out of 20. Count Binface won five times as many votes.
My suspicion is that the great majority of people genuinely aren’t prepared to make the sacrifices “for the planet” demanded by groups such as Just Stop oil, even if they claim not to disagree with its aims, only its tactics. This can now be seen in the opposition to the London mayor’s ultra-low emission zones.
In truth, while the disruptors of Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil constantly claim to be in the spirit of the suffragette demonstrators of a century ago, they actually have a contempt for the parliamentary democracy that those women campaigned for.
I’d go further: it is only a dictatorship that could achieve what they want. And it would not last very long. Like a sort of ecological version of Pol Pot’s Year Zero. Minus the slaughter, of course, unless Roger Hallam is right about my fate.

Dominic Lawson

I can understand the fear in the studios of challenging people such as Ms Rumbelow. Various newspapers have been targeted by groups like hers, and no broadcaster fancies being treated similarly. But if it were actually the case that “millions of people” would be killed by licensing new North Sea oil production, who otherwise live, then the tactics of mass disruption would be unquestionably justified. The truth is that the thing which would cause many deaths (mostly the elderly from cold) is if the UK attempts to do as Just Stop Oil demands, and ends all hydrocarbon use in the next two years.
In this context, it may be of interest that over the past 20 years the upward movement in temperatures in England and Wales, generally attributed to the effects of mankind on the climate, has been accompanied by a reduction of over half a million in temperature-related deaths. Swings and roundabouts.
If there is a genuine threat to the continuation of the human species, at least in the English- speaking world, it may well come from the morbid terror of climate change itself. Edred Whittingham, the 25-year-old student who disrupted the snooker championships so colourfully, declared that he opposed having children himself on “moral grounds...because I can’t guarantee there will be a habitable place to grow up into.” And, not long ago, The Spectator carried a cover piece by a man in his thirties saying that he and his wife would not be having children, because they “can’t protect them from the all-consuming dread that comes with the looming prospect of climate disaster … the best I could hope for would be that my children would die peacefully before the worst sets in.”
“Cheer up, it may never happen” won’t cut it with this lot. But what could persuade them to reconsider their morbid despair? Especially when they discover that the UK is responsible for little more than 1 per cent of global CO2 emissions, and that even if we stopped the lot, as they demand, the world’s most populous nations, China and India, have made it clear they still have a lot of fossil-fuel powered growth to be done in the coming decades.

Since I am, apparently, to be executed for my offences against the climate, there’s nothing to lose by saying a few more words on the matter, while enjoying one last cigarette. The man who put a film on YouTube under the headline “Dominic Lawson will be hanged for climate crimes” is Roger Hallam, the co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, now engaged in one of its periodic spasms of public disruption.
Hallam sensibly added the proviso that he was only predicting my execution, not proposing it. But following his minimisation of the significance of the Holocaust (“just another f***ery in human history”) in an interview with a German newspaper, Hallam had already been cut off financially from the organisation he inspired. The money to finance the activities and legal costs – and also those of the related group Just Stop Oil – comes in part from the Climate Emergency Fund, which in turn is founded and funded by the American philanthropist Aileen Getty. No prizes for guessing where her family’s money originally came from.
Getty’ fund declares, in sympathy with applicants for its funding of “disruption” (such as that last week at the World Snooker Championships): “Feelings of grief and terror are healthy and normal responses to the climate emergency. Let them motivate you to get heroically involved!”
Claims that humanity is facing imminent extinction – hence the “terror”- are at the heart of every such demonstration. The most influential of the terrorised has been poor Greta Thunberg. Although, encouragingly, last month she deleted a 2018 tweet from her account that read: “A top scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years.” Turns out the “top scientist” had never made such a forecast.
Neither is the case that the assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have ever predicted human extinction, planetary death, or anything approaching it, as a result of increasing anthropogenic carbon emissions. They predict lots of bad things if humanity does not find a way of reducing CO2 emissions, mostly because of the effects of rising sea levels; but nothing apocalyptic. In the West, the politicians do use such language – last month Grant Shapps, the energy security secretary, warned that “polluting sources of energy are destroying our planet” – which leaves them hopelessly exposed to attacks on their record by the likes of Just Stop Oil.
The same mindset has captured much of the British broadcasting industry, which means that when those engaged in such disruptive protests are interviewed, their arguments are never challenged: only their tactics. Thus, last year, when Indigo Rumbelow of Just Stop Oil was being questioned about the blocking of the M25, and she told Sky News’s Mark Austin that to license more oil and gas production in the North Sea “will kill millions of people”, the presenter responded: “Yes, but what about your tactics?”

Exactly M - and we have the ludicrous situation that 40 EU lawmakers dictating to our elected Prime Minister to cancel Rosebank. You then have a Scottish lawmaker, Fergus Ewing, pointing out that importing the gas that Rosebank could provide will need to be replaced by LNG which has 4 X the emissions of Rosebank gas.

I would be happier if Energy Voice changed their report heading "EU Lawmakers call on UK to scrap Rosebank oilfield plan" to something more accurate such as, "A fringe group of 40 Green EU MPs support juststopoil".

Of the 40 - 29 are in the Green party alliance, 5 in The Left group.

I obviously have too much free time. I'm not against wine bars as long as they sell beer too but never realised that many of the other patrons were revolutionaries. I like choice and have eclectic tastes.
I've been investigating the attraction of Australia to our junior doctors. We know conditions, weather and salaries are better for them but it is still a long way away.
Could this have anything to do with it?
Fossil fuel export value brings in 20% of existing export value or $76 billion in Australia.
UK GVA from extractive industries in 2021 was £26bn up from £18bn in 2021. Around 85% of that was oil and gas so converting and using US dollars (1.25 say) between $19bn and $28bn.
They don't have a windfall tax in Australia on fossil fuels. They do though have a strict immigration policy and environmental standards and like us are an island. They also (like Norway) have less people to share the rewards with.

Conclusion - don't get ill in the UK.

Most of us are apolitical and the so called "climate crisis" has drawn us on here into the political arena. If I believed fossil fuels would lead to extinction of the human race and life on this planet of course I wouldn't invest in them and the investors I personally know feel the same. I do believe they have the potential to damage the environment as does practically everything we do and use. That's why we have sewage farms for instance. We are reducing carbon into the atmosphere but must not forget the benefits of fossil fuels and that moving away was never going to be easy. They were one of the most important factors in the world's population growing from 2 to 8 billion in the last century and the billions lifted out of poverty and sickness.
Politicians and "environmentalists" seem to think that the public are unaware of the facts. They aren't. They are aware that life is always about trade-offs.
Then there is protest which cannot be allowed to prevent the majority going about their normal business. Most of the public are unaware of the Public Order Bill that is in its final stages and being fought every step of the way by Labour. I wasn't trapped approaching the Dartford Crossing but I'd bet practically everyone who was are pleased that the courts have decided that Laws are there for a reason and the sentence handed out to the perpetrators of the crime have received a sentence that fits the offence. Holidays, appointments, funerals, jobs, schooling the list is long and the "protest" was decided by unelected zealots who think they are somehow doing it for us, the public.
This is a test for UK democracy. If the public think the sentence is unfair then they will protest. This is hopefully putting a marker down on what is acceptable and what isn't. It will be interesting to see the response from Labour and extreme environmentalists. If the public accept this as fair how will they justify opposition and a continuance of similar protests.

I don't know what verdict the court of public opinion will bring. I think the sentence is justified. A message needed to be sent. An interesting weekend ahead.

Just had a Eureka moment (no damage, they have pads for that nowadays) regarding the "climate crisis". There is a common denominator with their storm troopers and that is age. They also quickly revert to name calling and I am incandescent at being described as a conspirator to criminal genocide.
The lobbying by the industry is pretty ineffective against these storm troopers. It is also pretty rubbish at defending the wild accusations. Strangely this works against the industry as a kinda "no comment" response which is often taken as an indication of guilt.
At my one and only juststopoil meeting they told me they had a problem with attracting the 30-50 demographic. That is because that demographic has a living and/or a family to support imo. Most activists have a vague "job" and are not too proud to take benefits from the capitalist system. I'd say their average age is 20-28. There are odd older supporters with spare time (think Jeremy Corbyn?) and I met my first anarchist there, nice guy.
The Skeet guy committed a libel on TV against Piers Morgan and blithely ignored the threat to be sued by pointing out he had no money. It makes him feel invincible. I guess he thinks it'll help him get a job with Greenpeace or the UN (another talking shop).
The activists are noisy and disruptive but may well have fired their best shots. People are tired of them. Repetition whilst helping reinforce messages does eventually disappear in a meaningless fog. "Soaring energy bills" will sound kinda stupid when they're back to pre war levels and hard as they try it wasn't the UK O&G industry that started the Ukranian war.
I think they are weakening and have built their argument on a tissue of lies and supposition. They are actually weak and could be going through their death throes. The industry isn't denying all their claims but does know a bit about energy and costs. Net Zero will need fossils for the transition. Sensible people know this.
The industry has to play the long game and leave the hyperbole to activists and opposition politicians. I do worry though that they have conceded a lot of space to the zealots.

Two can play at that game. This week at a robust Scottish First Minister Question Time Scottish SNP member Fergus Ewing asked the following question.
"Here in Scotland and the UK we will need and continue to need and rely on gas for decades to come. The gas is imported in many cases from the U.S.A. But their gas is produced with over FOUR TIMES, FOUR TIMES, the carbon emissions of Rosebank; therefore does the First Minister agree with me that sacrificing development of our own gas resource would not only decimate ten's of thousands of highly skilled, well paid jobs in a form of economic masochism advocated by the wine-bar revolutionaries [pointing] in the Green Party but also make climate change WORSE, actually WORSE not better."

He got told off by the Deputy Presiding Officer (his sister) for breaking Parliamentary procedure.

The reply was queasy and Labour would be proud. Extraction would not be immediate but a JUST transition is required and of course more Green investment.
It emphasised the balancing act that Hamzah Yusuf faces in appeasing both sides of the power sharing agreement. Are we seeing a revival of Scottish self-interest? The Greens get very hissy if their demands are not met. Will the Jocks let the tail wag the dog as they do on the Left in Westminster?

*you can hear it on BBC iplayer today from 12:38 Politics UK.

Are Labour saying that we'll kill the goose, a.k.a as the North Sea O&G industry, that is central to their plans to tackle the cost of living "crisis" [everything in the Labour world is a "crisis"] but continue to count the golden eggs in their financial projections for future years? You can't have both. Their numbers will eventually have to be presented for audit.

were in action again last night using the platform helpfully provided by the BBC programme Question Time. Absolutely predictable. (44:00) Wes Streeting (Labour) promising to get bills down by finding an EXTRA £10.4 bn out of windfall tax on excess profits of BIG energy companies. Of course he brought up non-doms too.
Carla Denyer (Green Party) (50:40) "renewables were, I think that may not be most up to date, recently 9 X cheaper than gas". Really? She claims scientific knowledge and wind is her speciality. She couldn't bring herself to go all in on the corruption of the figures.
Merryn Somerset Webb and (surprising to me) Lord John Sentamu were by far the most interesting but allowed less time than the politicians. I will try to find out what MSW was trying to say at 36:00 before being cut off by Fiona Bruce.

Carla Denyer made a point that she is an engineer (6 years). She toyed with it imo and it was a springboard to a political career/mission. She is a Quaker. 37 years old.

The usual hyperbole was used. "Energy crisis" and the one that gets me - "soaring energy bills". They're not soaring; they're floating down yet nobody corrects these evangelists or politcians campaigning.

*a positive from the programme was that the audience from York weren't as enthusiastically applauding the tropes from Labour and the Greens. Of course it may just be that people from Yorkshire aren't as easily duped as Southerners?

Shareholders:
EnQuest – c.13%
CNR – c.25%
Taqa – c.25%
NEO – c.10%
Shell – c.10%
Total – c.9%
BP – c.6%
Others – c.2%

Afraid I'm gonna my ignorance here. Who is CRN? I wanted the figures because I thing Taqa is a very large and interesting company. TAQA is Arabic for energy and one of Abu Dhabi's flagship companies. Lots of potential and the
U.A.E. remains a friend of the UK. They value our importance and innovation. I'm sure AB has nurtured the relationship.

This is excellent. I never thought Piers Morgan would impress me. Fantastic - problem is more people watch GMB:

https://www.google.com/search?q=james+skeet+juststopoil&rlz=1C1GGRV_enGB751GB751&oq=james+skeet+juststopoil&aqs=chrome..69i57.6568j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:ed98b914,vid:_opAun6NEEY

Please don't describe them as intellectuals. Some are; the majority are simpletons learning how to adapt to the real world.
Most are sincere but misguided. They are susceptible individuals who don't find religion exciting enough.

The guy from juststopoil on GMB this morning was shrill and animated making wild statements of their opinions as facts. Trump does it all the time so it is dangerous. They just keep repeating the hackneyed message full of half-truths and exaggeration. The biggest problem is that they have strong political support from the Left. Labour have challenged every step of the way the passage of the Public Order Bill which is in its final stage.
I don't think the industry does itself any favours with the timid rebuttals. BP and Shell have abandoned ship so we're really only left with companies the majority have never heard of. Hydrogen won't be the saviour for instance but we have to accept that global warming is guaranteed.

At risk of raising your blood pressure even higher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c4iFUpXD7w

Try and keep up M - Profit stopped mattering in the UK around 2020. They became obscene and unnecessary. Might be different in Belgium. You'll be fine with your Jeremiah Johnson skills.
Meanwhile juststopoil is on Breakfast TV accusing the government of criminal acts of genocide. The public are checking holiday flights.