Franglais:
North Sea oil and gas are more expensive to produce than many forms of green energy.
It will take longer to find and exploit new fields that it will to expand existing off shore wind farms etc.
Tory Alok Sharma
“rejects the idea that more North Sea gas would better protect the UK from any deliberate squeezing of supply by Russia. It comes after MPs who have established a ‘Net Zero Scrutiny Group’ call for the government to allow more drilling.”
The current Chancellor has said that UK production will not significantly affect the price of oil and gas.
(I suppose he was excluding the chance of Nationalisation? Y`know actually use UK oil for the UK not international shareholders of international companies?)
Why has former Shell employee Truss, supported in her campaign by ERG members, leader of a party in receipt of oil and gas funds jumped this way I wonder?
google.com/search?q=tory+fu … e&ie=UTF-8
None of them have the balls for that starting with Thatcher, only Norway has come closest in the North Sea by having a sovereign wealth fund.
TheFlyingTanker:
Franglais:
North Sea oil and gas are more expensive to produce than many forms of green energy.
It will take longer to find and exploit new fields that it will to expand existing off shore wind farms etc.
Tory Alok Sharma
“rejects the idea that more North Sea gas would better protect the UK from any deliberate squeezing of supply by Russia. It comes after MPs who have established a ‘Net Zero Scrutiny Group’ call for the government to allow more drilling.”
The current Chancellor has said that UK production will not significantly affect the price of oil and gas.
(I suppose he was excluding the chance of Nationalisation? Y`know actually use UK oil for the UK not international shareholders of international companies?)
Why has former Shell employee Truss, supported in her campaign by ERG members, leader of a party in receipt of oil and gas funds jumped this way I wonder?
google.com/search?q=tory+fu … e&ie=UTF-8
None of them have the balls for that starting with Thatcher, only Norway has come closest in the North Sea by having a sovereign wealth fund.
Norway is doing exactly what we’re doing.Tying their own people to an all electric energy policy so that they can export ( squander ) their oil and gas resources.All based on the climate scam as a pretext.The difference is they have loads of hydro power.
Carryfast:
Norway is doing exactly what we’re doing.Tying their own people to an all electric energy policy so that they can export ( squander ) their oil and gas resources.All based on the climate scam as a pretext.The difference is they have loads of hydro power.
The Norwegians have loads of hydro power…because they have built loads of hydro power stations.
We would have loads of tidal power… if we had built loads of tidal power stations.
Technology has come on in leaps and bounds, (and there are better returns to be had now rather than a couple of decades ago, it is too easy to use rosy glasses), but to think of expanding, and becoming even more reliant on old carbon tech today, is surely foolish in the extreme.
Companies don`t need to think about long term investment the same as Govs do, or at least should. Letting “the market decide” is the wrong choice for the good of the country. Listening too much to biased commercial advisors is a bad option.
They must have done their sums as the next 5 yearly emission targets loom which run until 2032 for carbon budgets, The UK passed it’s zero emission reduction targets for 2018-2022 but are not on track to meet it’s 2023-2027 emission targets so I’m not sure how they’re going to get away with more fossil fuel extraction licences?
lancpudn:
They must have done their sums as the next 5 yearly emission targets loom which run until 2032 for carbon budgets, The UK passed it’s zero emission reduction targets for 2018-2022 but are not on track to meet it’s 2023-2027 emission targets so I’m not sure how they’re going to get away with more fossil fuel extraction licences?
I honestly doubt they give any sort of thought at all to 2032.
Franglais:
Carryfast:
Norway is doing exactly what we’re doing.Tying their own people to an all electric energy policy so that they can export ( squander ) their oil and gas resources.All based on the climate scam as a pretext.The difference is they have loads of hydro power.
The Norwegians have loads of hydro power…because they have built loads of hydro power stations.
We would have loads of tidal power… if we had built loads of tidal power stations.
Technology has come on in leaps and bounds, (and there are better returns to be had now rather than a couple of decades ago, it is too easy to use rosy glasses), but to think of expanding, and becoming even more reliant on old carbon tech today, is surely foolish in the extreme.
Companies don`t need to think about long term investment the same as Govs do, or at least should. Letting “the market decide” is the wrong choice for the good of the country. Listening too much to biased commercial advisors is a bad option.
Why did France choose nuclear not tidal if it’s supposedly good enough for the job.
Now shutting down its dangerous expensive nuke plants and is importing our gas while telling us to go all nuclear electric to save the planet.EDF energy running that scam of course.
If it was about the good of the country the government would be keeping our own oil and gas to be burnt at home and not exporting it to France and Germany etc.While telling us to go nuclear at £1 per kWh.
Ouch! Our government have just reaffirmed it’s carbon budget emission reductions of 68% by 2030 ahead of COP27 
That’s higher than the EU’s ‘Fit for 55%’ emission reductions by 2030.
“Reaffirming the UK’s commitment to slashing carbon emissions by at least 68% of 1990 levels by 2030 shows a determination by the new administration to demonstrate continued global climate leadership as it prepares to hand over the COP Presidency in November,” said Environmental Audit Committee chairman Philip Dunne MP.
edie.net/uk-reaffirms-carbo … -concerns/
lancpudn:
Ouch! Our government have just reaffirmed it’s carbon budget emission reductions of 68% by 2030 ahead of COP27 That’s higher than the EU’s ‘Fit for 55%’ emission reductions by 2030.
“Reaffirming the UK’s commitment to slashing carbon emissions by at least 68% of 1990 levels by 2030 shows a determination by the new administration to demonstrate continued global climate leadership as it prepares to hand over the COP Presidency in November,” said Environmental Audit Committee chairman Philip Dunne MP.
edie.net/uk-reaffirms-carbo … -concerns/
I aim to be a gold medal winner in the next Olympics. I will do that by being quicker than everyone else.
By eating pizza and sleeping a lot I am confident that I will succeed. I have faith in myself, and wont listen to the nay-sayers.
Alike the past few years, talking of a target or an ambition, is not the same a having an Actual Viable Plan!
Franglais:
lancpudn:
Ouch! Our government have just reaffirmed it’s carbon budget emission reductions of 68% by 2030 ahead of COP27 That’s higher than the EU’s ‘Fit for 55%’ emission reductions by 2030.
“Reaffirming the UK’s commitment to slashing carbon emissions by at least 68% of 1990 levels by 2030 shows a determination by the new administration to demonstrate continued global climate leadership as it prepares to hand over the COP Presidency in November,” said Environmental Audit Committee chairman Philip Dunne MP.
edie.net/uk-reaffirms-carbo … -concerns/
I aim to be a gold medal winner in the next Olympics. I will do that by being quicker than everyone else.
By eating pizza and sleeping a lot I am confident that I will succeed. I have faith in myself, and wont listen to the nay-sayers.
Alike the past few years, talking of a target or an ambition, is not the same a having an Actual Viable Plan!
.
What ‘plan’ is there other than putting fossil fuels beyond use by whatever means obviously including economic.To force the move to all nuclear electric at £1 per kWh.
All so that our oil and gas resources can be exported.
Franglais:
lancpudn:
Ouch! Our government have just reaffirmed it’s carbon budget emission reductions of 68% by 2030 ahead of COP27 That’s higher than the EU’s ‘Fit for 55%’ emission reductions by 2030.
“Reaffirming the UK’s commitment to slashing carbon emissions by at least 68% of 1990 levels by 2030 shows a determination by the new administration to demonstrate continued global climate leadership as it prepares to hand over the COP Presidency in November,” said Environmental Audit Committee chairman Philip Dunne MP.
edie.net/uk-reaffirms-carbo … -concerns/
I aim to be a gold medal winner in the next Olympics. I will do that by being quicker than everyone else.
By eating pizza and sleeping a lot I am confident that I will succeed. I have faith in myself, and wont listen to the nay-sayers.
Alike the past few years, talking of a target or an ambition, is not the same a having an Actual Viable Plan!
They will need to get their backside in gear then because those are legally binding standards.
lancpudn:
Franglais:
lancpudn:
Ouch! Our government have just reaffirmed it’s carbon budget emission reductions of 68% by 2030 ahead of COP27 That’s higher than the EU’s ‘Fit for 55%’ emission reductions by 2030.
“Reaffirming the UK’s commitment to slashing carbon emissions by at least 68% of 1990 levels by 2030 shows a determination by the new administration to demonstrate continued global climate leadership as it prepares to hand over the COP Presidency in November,” said Environmental Audit Committee chairman Philip Dunne MP.
edie.net/uk-reaffirms-carbo … -concerns/
I aim to be a gold medal winner in the next Olympics. I will do that by being quicker than everyone else.
By eating pizza and sleeping a lot I am confident that I will succeed. I have faith in myself, and wont listen to the nay-sayers.
Alike the past few years, talking of a target or an ambition, is not the same a having an Actual Viable Plan!
They will need to get their backside in gear then because those are legally binding standards.
And what do the present Gov care for rules and laws?
Truss, Kwarteng, Rees-Mogg, won`t be losing out will they?
To keep inside our obligations, yes, we need to do more.
It ain`t gonna happen, is it?
Franglais:
To keep inside our obligations, yes, we need to do more.
It ain`t gonna happen, is it?
You mean our obligations to a corrupt bent deal, that means unaffordable energy prices for us at the risk of nuclear disaster, so that even more/all of our oil and gas resources can be exported.
Franglais:
lancpudn:
Franglais:
lancpudn:
Ouch! Our government have just reaffirmed it’s carbon budget emission reductions of 68% by 2030 ahead of COP27 That’s higher than the EU’s ‘Fit for 55%’ emission reductions by 2030.
“Reaffirming the UK’s commitment to slashing carbon emissions by at least 68% of 1990 levels by 2030 shows a determination by the new administration to demonstrate continued global climate leadership as it prepares to hand over the COP Presidency in November,” said Environmental Audit Committee chairman Philip Dunne MP.
edie.net/uk-reaffirms-carbo … -concerns/
I aim to be a gold medal winner in the next Olympics. I will do that by being quicker than everyone else.
By eating pizza and sleeping a lot I am confident that I will succeed. I have faith in myself, and wont listen to the nay-sayers.
Alike the past few years, talking of a target or an ambition, is not the same a having an Actual Viable Plan!
They will need to get their backside in gear then because those are legally binding standards.
And what do the present Gov care for rules and laws?
Truss, Kwarteng, Rees-Mogg, won`t be losing out will they?
To keep inside our obligations, yes, we need to do more.
It ain`t gonna happen, is it?
You’d have thought that the UK government would be tired of losing high court cases by now, I read yesterday that Germany are experiencing the same thing & are knee deep in court cases over them going back to fossil fuel electricity production by the very same people who keep taking the UK government to the cleaners, Greenpeace, Clientearth & the W.H.O. & German citizens from the four major cities Munich, Düsseldorf, Berlin, and Frankfurt.
lancpudn:
You’d have thought that the UK government would be tired of losing high court cases by now, I read yesterday that Germany are experiencing the same thing & are knee deep in court cases over them going back to fossil fuel electricity production by the very same people who keep taking the UK government to the cleaners, Greenpeace, Clientearth & the W.H.O. & German citizens from the four major cities Munich, Düsseldorf, Berlin, and Frankfurt.
Firstly a misguided vocal minority with sympathetic judges ( and royals ) on their side isn’t democracy.
While the majority have made it clear that we can’t afford the nuke, biomass and solar fuelled all electric utopia that the minority are trying to impose on us.
While also being anything but green.
Carryfast:
lancpudn:
You’d have thought that the UK government would be tired of losing high court cases by now, I read yesterday that Germany are experiencing the same thing & are knee deep in court cases over them going back to fossil fuel electricity production by the very same people who keep taking the UK government to the cleaners, Greenpeace, Clientearth & the W.H.O. & German citizens from the four major cities Munich, Düsseldorf, Berlin, and Frankfurt.
Firstly a misguided vocal minority with sympathetic judges ( and royals ) on their side isn’t democracy.
While the majority have made it clear that we can’t afford the nuke, biomass and solar fuelled all electric utopia that the minority are trying to impose on us.
While also being anything but green.
Looks like the UK government have just lost their latest court case again for not keeping to their NetZero commitments
The latest news from clientearth.
"The UK government will not be appealing our net zero court win
After our win in court against the UK Government over its flawed net zero strategy, the Government has now confirmed that it will not appeal.
This summer, the Government had to defend its net zero strategy. The court agreed with us, Good Law Project and Friends of the Earth, finding the strategy to be unlawful.
We argued that the Government had failed to show how its plans would meet key targets to cut emissions – a crucial step in keeping a just and liveable world within reach.
We held the government to account for its climate plan – and won. This is what we can do with the power of the law ."
