Member Info for romaron

https://on.ft.com/3JIIYm2

A pal who doesn't post sent me the link. From FT minutes ago:

"UK Government expected to offer energy companies windfall tax relief"

Dear Ron,

Thank you for contacting the Mayor and for your interest in the climate crisis. London was one of the first major cities in the world to declare a climate emergency and has set one of the most ambitious carbon reduction ambitions for net zero 2030, faster than any comparable city. Renewable energy such as wind, solar and heat pumps will play a vital role in reducing emissions in London, as well as reducing the amount of energy required to heat and power our buildings. You can read more about the Mayor’s plans to reduce carbon emissions here:
https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-and-strategies/environment-and-climate-change/climate-change/zero-carbon-london/pathways-net-zero-carbon-2030
It is also true that on the whole renewable energy is now cheaper to produce than energy from fossil fuels, and this trend is predicted to continue. The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) found that the cost of electricity from onshore wind fell by 15%, offshore wind by 13% and solar PV by 13% in one year alone (2020-2021) across the G20, whilst fossil fuel prices have increased. You can read more about this report from IRENA here:
https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/renewables-cheapest-form-power

With regards to your concern around mobility around London, the Mayor believes in the right to protest, but has been clear that it must always be done peacefully, safely and within the law. The Mayor shares the passion of those who campaign to highlight the urgent need to tackle the climate crisis – this is an issue he cares deeply about, and it is evident from the extreme weather events London has experienced in recent years that much more needs to be done to tackle the climate emergency. However, dangerous and disruptive protests can risk turning public opinion against a vitally important cause. The Mayor asks anyone looking to protest to think carefully about their tactics, to co-operate fully with the police and to act peacefully, safely and lawfully.
Thank you again for taking the time to write to the Mayor.

Kind regards

Henry Hall

Principal Policy Officer

Climate Change Team

*I wrote to him on 16 Feb.

Actually Pelle that might be an idea. My problem with Discord is that it takes me forever to translate. Many Swedes speak good English so we would have potentially less interference. You might even get HMH to contribute? Worth thinking about. I like the pub idea. Basically you need an environment to expound on various aspects and hopefully get less trolling or irrelevant comment. I often want to say more but hesitate because it can look like a take over and because of no moderator presence the topic can veer off into nonsense or an argument. Could the Discord guys give us a break for a few hours without breaking threads?

Dumbly - here's an example of why a debate might improve stuff. Zing Tsjeng was very good but spoiled it with the last piece. However, you cannot really criticise her too harshly when she is only repeating what Keir Starmer, Red ED and Caroline Lucas quoted in public. It is incredibly disappointing that there isn't an off the shelf rebuff to this clearly incorrect statement.
TBF many of us would expect public figures to have some standards in research and honesty and could easily make the same mistake. Let's face it there is no definitive cost comparison and it should be within the wit of the industry to get an accepted expert(s) in the field to come up with some numbers of their own.
I did immediately email the quote to OEUK and others. They must have their reasons for not openly challenging this misrepresentation..

#a small comment on this - my daughter recently had a masterclass with the head of Al Gore's communications. I've tried to get her interested but failed. She did however criticise my heading the "Big Lie" for the 9X perfidy. She sent me this "Perhaps it is misleading using it in a general sense, but from the above report it appears to show one deal where this was true at the time.
saying 'it is a LIE' = people won't listen to you
saying 'the statistic was true for one deal (if that's the case) but is no longer accurate and is now being used to mislead people' - people will"

There was a noticeable difference between the standard of debate in the Hose of Commons and on Question Time. The difference is that millions watch QT. The industry should get a champion on QT.

Hi Dumbly - I'm probably a minority because I am quite upbeat about EnQuest at the moment. It could easily change with the imminent energy report and what might be in it. WARNING - bit of a ramble incoming.
On the BBC Question Time yesterday @ 51.50 Zing Tsjeng a guest said "renewable energy is already 9 X cheaper than gas. Why are we still relying on gas when we could just switch to renewable energy?"
Against this we had the sensible discussion in Parliament earlier (which was avoided by most Labour members) and each speaker had their own constituency and views that weren't made for headline purposes.
This is interesting. "In October Novah Venture Holdings gave £52,260 to the Tories. Nova is controlled by Jacques Tohme founder-director of Tailwind Energy." source Private Eye. Tailwind and Serica are now one as of yesterday (I believe). For that sort of money you at least get a chat with a minister so I take it as a good sign. Today EV states that Serica is now in the top 10 list of NS producers. I'm guessing but I think we're ahead of them.
Back to the subject. I think that depending on any adjustment Hunt makes to EPL (if any) we have our own debate on here following the lines of the Trilemma debate rather than QT. We limit it to (say) 8 core posters who post their view/opinion. I think it timely because there are certainties and a lot of hot air out there. Yes, renewables will continue to grow but at some stage the true costs will be brought to bear. I think we are at the crossroads and some renewable companies will make a profit; others not. They aren't a surefire investment in that respect.
I think we have the debate on the 1st and 2nd April weekend. Any changes to EPL will be known by then and trolls normally get switched off. I'd like you to be involved, mrc, Therapist, Pelle, January, londoner7 if they're interested.
Things are developing, most of which we can only guess at but I'd be interested in others views which don't entail guessing the price of oil, the FTSE or political expediency.

Found it: " I look forward to the further detail on the £20 billion announced by the Chancellor last week on CCUS and the progression of track 2. I also look forward to the Energy Bill, currently on Report in the other place but due to come back here soon, I am told." David Duguid (listen from 15.50)

Juxtaposition - If you listen to the last 5 minutes of QT energy gets a message. Compare it to this intelligent and cross party debate even allowing for the fact that the Labour seats were "woefully empty" (c. 15:48)
They woke and ignorant responses from QT were all self-congratulatory but the journalist/ political presenter Tom Newton Dunn pointed out that Net Zero is lovely but long term. Election cycles are short term and not one person had considered how we are going to pay for it [net zero]. Personally I think we'll get world peace before we stop using fossil fuels.

*Security is fine. The Russian submarines sniffing around the North Sea are actually only oligarch holiday trippers.

I went through it because there was a comment about "the other place" that I still can't find. It was a reference to the announcement we're expecting "imminently" or in the next few days but before the end of March regarding the Energy Bill. It seems those attending weren't too sure either. This was a debate and very sensible with a lot of knowledge; it even included good news for us but indirectly. I'm no expert on political manoeuvering but this isn't reading a bill or getting legislation through but it has a place and any publicity is good publicity. Somewhere in the Hansard report I linked is a statement saying we are 'net importers' of O&G which kinda blows a hole in Tessa Khan's ignorant statement in Energy Voice.
I think they are laying the ground for a softening of the hostility towards the UKNS fossil fuel industry. A measured debate with experts is a lot different to PMQT where point scoring, ridicule and baying is all that counts.
I suspect the muted public fight back against the EPL is because lobbying was being done directly out of the public eye.
I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't an element of Andrea Leadsom angling for a role involved in the transition because it is gonna be around a long time. It was actually pleasant for once to hear grown-ups talking.

Red Ed or Captain Hindsight as Dr. Kieran Mullan described him. "I have also noted with interest that it seems that the original Captain Hindsight, the Leader of the Opposition, has now been joined by a lieutenant in the form of the shadow Energy Secretary, whom I notified that I would mention him. When I looked through Hansard to find his contributions over the last few years, I was shocked to discover that he had not spoken about energy security in 2021, or in 2020, or in 2019; in fact, he had not spoken about it for 10 years when he finally did so in March 2022. Maybe he has spoken about it elsewhere and I have missed it. I can, however, confirm that the shadow Minister has been much more successful in that regard, raising the matter repeatedly. Perhaps he should put in for a job from the Leader of the Opposition."

"For the past 40 years, my constituency has been home to the two largest oil terminals in western Europe: Flotta in Orkney and Sullom Voe in Shetland, which provide a visual demonstration of the just transition. EnQuest, the terminal operator at Sullom Voe, is now working on projects involving hydrogen, carbon capture, use and storage, and offshore electrification of production. It is a visual illustration of transition, but again it shows just how ill served we are by binary choices. All the time, we seem to be told, “You can have renewables or you can have hydrocarbons, but you can’t have both.” That is dangerous nonsense. We have allowed production of oil and gas on the UK continental shelf to decline in recent years, and it has been to our detriment. It was never put in these terms at the time, but I cannot think why anyone ever thought it would be a good idea to rely on Vladimir Putin for the purchase of our gas and Mohammed bin Salman for the production of our oil when we have a rich resource on our own doorstep. As we heard from the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (David Duguid), the production of oil and gas in the North sea or to the west of Shetland is much less carbon-intensive than importing it from other parts of the world.

The point, surely, is this: it is not an either/or. There is no route to decarbonisation and achieving net zero other than one that goes through oil and gas production. I do not want to see the future generations of my constituents working in oil and gas. I do want to see them work in renewables, but I think that that will be much more likely if we take a long, hard, clear-eyed look at what happens in the future with oil and gas production on our own continental shelf."

Well Jan you must have been listening to a different debate to me. It was verbose and wide ranging but it was the most sensible and realistic discussion I've heard in months, probably years. There is actually a consensus building and we are [O&G] one of the legs of the stool. Tidal got a lot of mentions but nuclear was a bit marmite. Hydrogen hardly mentioned at all whilst geo-thermal had some support. If you ignore Ian Blackford there was much to be encouraged by.
The EnQuest mention: "I want to finish on the subject of the energy profits levy. Opposition parties have called for and continue to call for ever higher taxes on oil and gas producers. Compared with almost every other business that currently pays corporation tax of 19%—due to rise next month to 25%—oil and gas companies were already paying 40%, with the EPL bringing them to 75% overall. Contrary to Opposition parties’ calls for a straightforward punitive tax, I welcome the investment allowance provided by this Government. However, the allowance is not available for all investment opportunities, including in renewables, as has been pointed out. I am told by OEUK that over 90% of members have downgraded their investment plans in the UK as a result of the EPL. I recognise that the revenues raised by this tax go some way towards paying some of the energy support provided by this Government, but I look forward to engaging with the industry and Government on how and when the profits made by these companies in this country are deemed to have returned to a more normal level.

The EPL has a particular impact on smaller independent operators such as Harbour, Ithaca, Spirit, EnQuest and a number of other small businesses, which do not have the resources of BP and Shell to invest elsewhere in the world. Another impact on the small independent producers comes from the revisions to the EPL to eliminate the price floor, which has had the unintended consequence of reducing lending capacity available from banks to the sector. Unlike some larger companies, the smaller organisations cannot afford to fund capital expenditure solely from their own balance sheets.

The independent operators will be vital to ensure the continued development of North sea oilfields as the major companies redeploy assets elsewhere, and are therefore critical to help the Government avoid the costs of stranded North sea assets in the medium to long term. That will be critical to safeguard the UK’s security of energy supply in years to come, while at the same time those companies’ resources, skills and expertise are used to ensure that we make the energy transition to net zero as planned."

It's all in here: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-03-23/debates/D89DAEEA-D828-49EE-A5F4-F9292CEDC2F2/EnergyTrilemma

Parliament TV and BBC iplayer

On now

Disagree Modestus - until they get a better system (if there is one?) then good luck to the traders. They can also lose a bucket load so where do you start? Currency speculation and Central banks; the betting industry? Competition is better than central government control - it is a price we pay and in the scheme of things it isn't that much and of course I'm jealous.
I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist but interesting the stuff that's coming to the boil around now. I did wonder what the industry was up to but they haven't passively accepted the government measures. Another small thing I read in Private Eye. An American involved with Tailwind industry has donated to the Tory party. Perfectly legal if you're a non-resident but have a UK company. It is beginning to look more promising. The Vitol story is part of the fightback imo. Deflection.

Hi Pelle - https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/4f7fa4c7-0a74-4d31-9678-68ee308295bc

It starts at around 10 a.m. and seems it could be afternoon if the schedule is anything to go by (4th on agenda). I'm hoping it's after 2 p.m. as I'm out until then. I don't know if Andrea Leadsom is speaking but I'm guessing she's probably a supporter of the O&G industry. Her husband and brother-in-law are in hedge funds and extremely rich and influential. We shall see.

*can you get our parliament TV in Sweden?

Talking of illiterate economics the Labour MP for Gateshead, Ian Mearns, pointed out that the electricity standing charge for his constituents had gone from an average 22p a day in 2019 to 58p next month. He seems to think it wrong to pay for connection to the grid and asked the PM if he could either get them back to 2019 levels or removed entirely. At least they can't blame the O&G industry for that (I think).

..... for Labour the money-tree is flourishing.

*It is fine to lamp the O&G industry with arbitrary charges and taxes. We're even less popular than the Metropolitan Police.

I think I've got most of it. Neale Hanvey pops up and says that 35bn of KwH was generated and went south in 2021 and is likely to be 124bn in less than 8 years. Out of this multi-million pound bounty Scotland gets almost nothing. He accused Sunak's government of robbery and naked exploitation of Scotland's people and resources and asked what has the PM to say in defence of his government's actions?

Sunak vigorously replied saying - "Actually, this government is a strong supporter of Scotland's North Sea oil industry and it's the economic ILLITERATE policies of I think almost all opposition parties to prohibit any new exploration of fossil fuels in the NS which would then have us pay billions of pounds to foreign energy companies and ship that energy here with twice the carbon emissions. It's a completely absurd policy.
It is BAD for SECURITY
It is BAD for the ECONOMY
and that's why we're better off with conservatives in charge!"

*Neale Hanvey is a member of the Alba party and shook his head as though denying they were in favour of banning exploration. There may be something in this as their leader Alex Salmond is a realist and as slippery as his surname. Our Scottish posters may have something to add here.

This is seriously good news imo. My only disappointment is that the camera didn't pan on Hunt during the exchange to see if his expression changed. I have to say, Sunak was quite impressive. He is growing into the role.

I only caught the end of it but a Scottish MP attacked the Tories for keeping the revenue for North Sea oil and gas. Sunak answered by saying that they alone [Tories] in the House support further exploration rather than import from abroad with twice the emissions.

Sunak is onside. Is Hunt?

*when the replay is available I'll post his actual quote.

Hopefully the arguments that Labour produce will be refuted by facts and reality. If we can do it I'm sure the industry can brief a few MPs.

Thanks Pelle - I'm out until early afternoon but I'll try and catch it on Parliament TV.

*O/T Andrea Leadsom's children and my daughter used to play together at February half-term at Schloss Ledenburg, Kitzbühel. AL brought a nanny - I struggled with the hotel bill.

In same article Tessa Khan of Uplift is quoted:
“The industry will have you believe that the choice facing this country is between North Sea oil and gas or imports. However, the real choice is between our continued reliance on expensive and polluting fossil fuels and shifting onto cheaper, cleaner homegrown renewables. Of course oil and gas companies want us to stay hooked on their product. Overwhelmingly, though, the majority of the public support the latter.

“The truth is that the UK exports 80% of all North Sea oil and the vast majority of what’s left in the basin is oil, not gas. The industry will spin the line that the windfall tax will lead to increased imports, when it’s actually just geology.”

---
Two things wrong here. The public aren't overwhelmingly in favour of cleaner homegrown renewables. Put the word "cheap" in and they'll agree. Renewables aren't cheap.
A total misrepresentation of the importance and flows of oil in and out of the UK. Crude oil becomes refined products that is beyond the comprehension of the man in the street. From google: "
The UK imported £30.0 billion of oil in 2021 (£17.6 billion crude oil, £12.4 billion refined oil), and exported £28.3 billion of oil (£17.9 billion crude oil, £10.4 billion refined oil).29 Jun 2022
We are NET IMPORTERS