Some dodgy claims about North Sea oil & gas circulating in the media today, thanks to an open letter co-ordinated by @OEUK_
Two main points I'd like to debunk, nicely summarised by OEUK chief David Whitehouse on @BBCr4today this morning... 🧵
"We want to maintain our own energy security by providing our own oil & gas and those very companies are now investing in that broader energy transition." 🤔
1) This suggestion that domestic O&G production contributes to UK energy security is misleading
O&G produced in the UK does not belong to the UK, and there is no guarantee it will be consumed here
The UKCS is owned by corporations that sell their O&G on international markets - nothing compels them to keep their O&G in the UK or consumed by the UK.
2) O&G producers are investing in the energy transition?
Not according to the @IEA, who found last year that "oil and gas companies currently account for just 1% of clean energy investment globally – and 60% of that comes from just four companies."
Nobody wants to see people lose their jobs, or communities suffer
That's why an honest and supported transition is important
luckily, @RobertGordonUni found "over 90% of UK’s O&G workforce possess skills that have medium to high transferability to offshore renewables sector."
The writing's on the wall for the North Sea and the O&G companies that operate there
There's a lot of opportunities for the future workforce, but they're not in oil and gas, they're in renewables
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Yesterday the @Telegraph published a comment piece by Viscount Matt Ridley about renewable energy, littered with misleading claims.
What to make of it? 🧵
Ridley says: "Miliband... wants to double onshore wind, quadruple offshore and treble solar capacity. If he has a plan to deal with the resulting volatility & intermittency, he has yet to reveal it."
Or maybe Ridley has yet to find it? Lab's mission doc:
👀"Invest in carbon capture & storage, hydrogen & long-term energy storage to ensure sufficient zero-emission back-up power and storage for extended periods without wind or sun, while maintaining a strategic reserve of backup gas power stations to guarantee security of supply."
An opinion piece in the @Telegraph on Friday by Lord Lilley posed a series of (frankly misleading) 'questions' about clean energy
(Lilley is a former trustee at climate-denial group Global Warming Policy Foundation)
Let's try and answer them for him... 🧵
Q: "If wind and solar are cheaper than gas, why subsidise them?"
Government schemes ("subsidies") provide important financial incentives to developers to take on the upfront construction costs of wind and solar (which can be more than gas).
These schemes enable massive cost savings once assets are operational, and so wind and solar are cheaper than gas on a lifetime basis
Subsidies help get them built in the first place, delivering those lifetime cost savings to consumers
Some questionable comments made by the Executive Chairman of Ithaca Energy (an oil and gas company with interests in the North Sea)
on @BBCr4today this morning, in relation to the Finch judgment by the Supreme Court yesterday
A short 🧵...
Myerson claimed: "Approx 70% of British energy supply is O&G. Now that is a reality that is unlikely to change significantly over the next few years, some may say decades."
@thecccuk shows by 2050, oil demand will fall by 85%, and natural gas by 70%
The Government chose to focus on "new" gas power plants - a clear political game
New plants were always likely to be built (under any govt) and it's not a change in policy
It's all about playing politics in run up to Election...🧵
@theCCCuk states: "Meeting residual demand is manageable...and cost-effective with a small amount of unabated gas at the margin in 2035 (up to around 2% of annual electricity production)."
The PM uses this to justify the "new" approach to building more gas plants
But this isn't a new plan; National Grid & National Infrastructure Commission think we need 20-30GW of back up capacity in 2035 (when grid is decarbonised)
We currently have 27GW; govt analysis 'suggests' 15GW 'could' retire by 2035