A Rare Bit Of Good News - Jackdaw

[irc]

Finally! A decision that was obviously in the national interest is taken. Approval for gas production to start.

All the loony campaigners against this could not seem to grasp the point that UK gas consumption is set by demand not by how much of that demand comes from UK production.

Posted from a warm house heated by a gas boiler - just like most of the loons campaigning against this.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cw8rzgvlmjznt

Edited by irc on Wednesday 21st October 10:22

[Randy Winkman]

I dont know much detail but on the face of it this seems like a sensible compromise to me. UK jobs and a bit more self sufficiency. Possibly only a small amount but better than nothing.

[dingg]

All the infrastructure in place as is Rosebank anyone who imagined that these two wouldn't get the go ahead is living in dream world.

Net zero needs putting to sleep.

Ridiculous situation and the green tail wagging the dog.

And anyone with at least an ounce of common sense should KNOW this.

[No ideas for a name]

What I don't really understand is why the infrastructure required is apparently sitting there - and no doubt has been for ages.
The BBC obviously don't understand, but are on about drilling starting... and being on supply by the end of this month.

Clearly the rigs and connecting pipework must already be in place.
It is ludicrous that it hasn't effectively been turned on sooner.

I realise it doesn't affect the price* as it is a global commodity, but does affect the security of supply.

• Price: Surely, being locally produced, it is actually cheaper. By this I mean it doesn't have the delivery costs of buying from elsewhere.

i.e. the 'out of the ground' price must be different than the delivered price.

The only argument for not extracting today, are if keeping that gas underground for a few years while the global supply changes, might result in its value being significantly more later.

[Scotty2]

Funny how the Energy Minister giving the approval has used the arguments we were all were shouting about when they delayed it 2 years ago!

OK, it might not bring down the price, BUT the result is: Less importation of gas from trouble zones. Security of supply. Tax revenue. Jobs. Skill retention.

It took them 2 years to figure that out?

Same argument for Rosebank in a way.

Madness not to.

ETA: Yes, they are not going to "start drilling", it's nearly ready to go as stated above. In time to help over the winter, which makes the reluctance even more stupid...

Edited by Scotty2 on Wednesday 21st October 10:30

[AlexanderV8]

dingg said:

Net zero needs putting to sleep.

Perhaps carbon monoxide poisoning would be an appropriate method.

[JagLover]

irc said:

Finally! A decision that was obviously in the national interest is taken. Approval for gas production to start.

All the loony campaigners against this could not seem to grasp the point that UK gas consumption is set by demand not by how much of that demand comes from UK production.

Posted from a warm house heated by a gas boiler - just like most of the loons campaigning against this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cw8rzgvlmjznt

It is only the bizarre state of modern politics that makes it controversial to start with. We will be using significant amounts of gas for the duration of the life of this field so why is it preferable to import this gas?.

[JagLover]

No ideas for a name said:

I realise it doesn't affect the price* as it is a global commodity, but does affect the security of supply.

• Price: Surely, being locally produced, it is actually cheaper. By this I mean it doesn't have the delivery costs of buying from elsewhere.

i.e. the 'out of the ground' price must be different than the delivered price.

Gas isn't a global commodity but a regional one. It still likely wont do much to affect European gas prices, but there isn't a global price, hence why gas is so much cheaper in the US.

[Camoradi]

Great news. I really don't get the popular obsession with net zero. Why not net 15% (of current usage) or 20% or 10%. Or maybe just be pragmatic and say we need to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels at a sensible rate?

Similar with the 2 child benefit cap. 2 and unlimited are not the only options FFS.

Politicians are such a bunch of binary grandstanding simpletons.

[No ideas for a name]

JagLover said:

Gas isn't a global commodity but a regional one. It still likely wont do much to affect European gas prices, but there isn't a global price, hence why gas is so much cheaper in the US.

Ah.. thanks for the clarification. I assumed the difference was US gas being burnt in the US didn't have the distribution cost of liquifaction and shipping of US gas being burnt in Europe.

[Hippea]

Great news, just shows what a sensible government we now have. Another step in the right direction

[xeny]

Camoradi said:

I really don't get the popular obsession with net zero..

Because adding CO2 to the atmosphere indefinitely is a bad idea?

[Camoradi]

xeny said:

Camoradi said:

I really don't get the popular obsession with net zero..

Because adding CO2 to the atmosphere indefinitely is a bad idea?

I don't disagree with reducing emissions, but I suspect there is a level of human CO2 emissions above net zero which would be quite sustainable and achieve equilibrium.

[HarryW]

Right decision imho.

[SDK]

Yep good call on this.
Securing more UK jobs and will finally (hopefully) stop all of the BS comments about North Sea gas reducing UK bills

dingg said:

All the infrastructure in place as is Rosebank anyone who imagined that these two wouldn't get the go ahead is living in dream world.

Net zero needs putting to sleep.

Ridiculous situation and the green tail wagging the dog.

And anyone with at least an ounce of common sense should KNOW this.

"Net Zero needs putting to sleep" and then mentions "Common sense"
Yes, what we need is more reliance on expensive fossil fuels, which we don't own or have any control over the supply.

Sounds like perfect common sense

The only factor causing UK household bills to rise 8% in October and by another ~25% in January is because of the increased gas price.
Yes, we definitely need more of this.

...and this is "common sense"

Scotty2 said:

Security of supply.

Let's be realistic - this new project is producing less than 3% of UK gas demand. It's not adding anything to security of supply

Edited by SDK on Wednesday 21st October 12:04

[Don Roque]

'Net Zero' needs to go entirely. This is a good first step, but there is still more to be done.

[HarryW]

We also need to increase our gas storage capacity (buffer) to help smooth out the sharp fluctuations in the spot market.
The uk buffer is measured in days whilst Europe is weeks/months.

We’ve been led down a path of just in time, which was foolhardy.
Also green subsidies are slowly been removed from the price cap calculation whilst loading it onto gas generation of electricity.

Edited by HarryW on Wednesday 21st October 12:22

[SDK]

Don Roque said:

'Net Zero' needs to go entirely.

Why does it?

[irc]

SDK said:

Let's be realistic - this new project is producing less than 3% of UK gas demand. It's not adding anything to security of supply

Edited by SDK on Wednesday 21st October 12:04

6% according to the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/oct/21/ab...

Which is a good reason to remove the van on nee drilling licences.

If things got really tight in a cold winter who kniws how critical 6% could be?

[S600BSB]

A pragmatic decision in the sense that it will make a small contribution to helping the UK transition to the future which is a mix of renewables and nuclear.