Jess Ralston Profile picture
Aug 22 6 tweets 2 min read Read on X
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."

👀

iea.org/news/oil-and-g…
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
 

Keep Current with Jess Ralston

Jess Ralston Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jessralston2

Aug 8
Yesterday the @Telegraph published a comment piece by Viscount Matt Ridley about renewable energy, littered with misleading claims.

What to make of it? 🧵 Image
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:

labour.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
Image
👀"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."
Read 12 tweets
Jul 30
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... 🧵 Image
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

& delivering energy security benefits too.
Read 19 tweets
Jun 21
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%

theccc.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
Myerson said "The question is do we produce it ourselves, or do we import oil and gas from abroad?"

This implies that new licences could provide enough oil & gas to meet UK demand

But in the past 13 years, hundreds of new licences have resulted in just 16 days’ worth of gas 🤔
Read 9 tweets
Jun 12
The @Telegraph is reporting comments from GMB that Labour's Clean Power by 2030 target is "unviable" and will lead to "power cuts and blackouts".

How accurate are those claims? 🧵 Image
Firstly, what's the difference between Labour and Conservative plans?

Labour's target is 100% clean power by 2030

Conservatives' target is 95% clean power by 2030

= not significantly different in scope.

bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…
On cost?

@AuroraER_Oxford found Labour’s target would require £116bn investment over the next 11 years, while Tories' target would require £105bn

So the difference between those plans is around £1bn per year

that's less than 0.1% of the UK’s total expenditure for 2024-25👀
Read 7 tweets
Apr 16
Pretty baffling response to our new energy security analysis in the @Telegraph this morning

where we actually end up agreeing on something...

🧵 Image
1. I'm pleased Kirby agrees that relying on gas imports is not patriotic

But suggesting that we should rely on North Sea O&G and FRACKING instead is pure fallacy

Lancashire isn't Texas & the UK's geology is so fundamentally different from the US's that fracking is a red herring Image
- Remaining North Sea/UKCS reserves are 70% oil. Roughly 80% of UKCS oil is exported

- Fracking is "unlikely ... to significantly reduce the UK’s import dependence" @UKERCHQ

It's also so deeply unpopular with public & Tory MPs that it was the final nail in Truss's coffin 👀 Image
Read 6 tweets
Mar 14
What to make of Govt announcements this week?

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 Image
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

(note the language here; this isn't a given) Image
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(