Ministers have approved a gas field that will create 27 jobs, while heat pump grants face the axe in next week’s budget. They are backing the wrong horse.
Gas is in terminal decline in British homes, and today’s decision to approve the Jackdaw gas field will not change that. Every year, more developers and families choose clean electric heating over a gas boiler. My own home is one of them: it no longer burns any gas, thanks in part to the £7,500 Boiler Upgrade Scheme.
That scheme is now under threat. With Whitehall hunting for savings to fund defence ahead of next week’s budget, heat pump grants are reportedly on the table. So in the space of a week, the government could back a new gas field and cut the support that helps families leave gas behind. That is exactly the wrong way round.
Look at what Jackdaw actually offers. Over its lifetime, it would produce around 2 months of UK gas demand, a sliver of what the country burns. Its developers say it will create just 27 full-time jobs. And it will not bring down bills. North Sea gas is sold at international prices, so British households will keep paying whatever the global market demands.
What Jackdaw does do is tell investors that gas is still a safe bet. That is the last message they should be hearing. We need every pound of capital flowing into wind, solar, nuclear and the grid connections that bring cheaper, cleaner power to all of us.
There is a better use for what is left under the North Sea: leave it there. Gas is not just a fuel. It is also the raw material for the fertiliser that grows our food, and there may be times ahead when we need it far more than we do today. Keeping our remaining reserves as a strategic store would give future generations a buffer in a crisis, instead of burning it now for a short-term return.
In the meantime, we can import cleaner gas. According to the regulator’s own figures, pipeline gas from Norway is produced with less than a third of the emissions of Britain’s North Sea output.
Gas sits at the heart of both our climate crisis and our cost-of-living crisis. Gas produces over a third of UK greenhouse gas emissions. That comes from the boilers and hobs in our homes, the power stations that make our electricity and the factories that depend on it. Gas power also sets the price of electricity most of the time, so when gas spikes, everyone’s bills follow.
And gas is spiking again. With shipping under attack around the Strait of Hormuz, UK wholesale prices are near their highest since late 2022. No wonder the pressure to open new fields is so intense. The industry keeps the profits when prices soar, safe in the knowledge that the public will pick up the bill. After Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, energy support cost taxpayers £51bn in 2022-23 alone.
Here is the paradox for liberals. We should fight for everyone to have a decent income and a good life. But when jobs depend on activities that deepen the climate emergency, they can do more harm than good. As John Stuart Mill wrote, “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”
By that test, the harm is plain. Burning fossil fuels drives much of the air pollution linked to around 30,000 UK deaths a year, along with wildfires, flooding and the loss of species our ecosystems depend on. The answer is not to abandon North Sea workers. It is to make sure they are first in line for the clean energy jobs that will replace theirs.
Falling boiler sales show what good policy can achieve. Sales of new boilers fell from 1.89m in 2021 to 1.45m last year, while the market share of electric heating solutions more than doubled. But that is a small step, when the climate emergency demands a giant leap: the electrification of our homes, our roads and our wider economy.
The chancellor can take that leap in next week’s budget. Break the link between gas and electricity prices, so that cheap renewable power finally shows up on our bills. Move taxes and levies off electricity bills, so that going electric is the cheapest choice for every household. Make electricity affordable, and the switch away from gas will take care of itself.
* Mark Hofman has been a Councillor on Watford Borough Council since 2012.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Meeting Friends of Sunniside
Charlie Wilson's War
Write a guest post for Liberal England
The many contortions of Reform UK in Wales
Save the date! Lloyd George Society and Liberal Democrat History Group meeting with Damian Collins and Paul Spackman
Alex Macfie
Roland
Chris Webb
paul barker
Chris Webb
25 Comments
“ There is a better use for what is left under the North Sea: leave it there”
I’m afraid this is an extremist position to take at a time when there is still demand for gas to heat our homes. I don’t agree that is is better to import gas from abroad than make use of our own gas.
And, as an aside, I don’t buy this “ Keeping our remaining reserves as a strategic store would give future generations a buffer in a crisis” argument – climate extremists will never believe a crisis is major enough to justify burn fossil fuel.
I welcome the Jackdaw decision and hope we will continue to use our own natural resources as long as there is a continuing demand that would otherwise be met by importing.
It’s profoundly sad to see how easily greenwash is accepted by so many good Lib Dems when it comes to the UK extracting oil and gas from the North Sea rather than buying it from somewhere else (like good old Norway) and pretending we are not responsible for that bit of global warming, nor for us telling investors in Norway that gas is still a safe bet.
Until we all realise that all those nice easy government sponsored solutions like Drax, carbon offsets, carbon capture etc are nothing more than scams, designed to make us feel good about ourselves, at the cost of destroying our wider economy which is the only thing that can generate the resources we need to actually do something useful about the climate crisis.
Well said David. There are 20 million gas boilers in the UK & not everyone has a spare few grand to change to heat pumps or have a suitable system that enables it. We are crippling manufacturing all for an illusionary goal that would be a heivex by outsourcing out emissions..Utter madness
“According to the regulator’s own figures, pipeline gas from Norway is produced with less than a third of the emissions of Britain’s North Sea output.”
Why is this so – when its coming from for all practical purposes basically the same place?
I couldn’t agree more with the first 3 posts. I heard a figure of 75% of households still use gas. The council stopped installing heat pumps on my estate as they would cause noise pollution. And as Chloe says we’re not all well off to afford heat pumps and neither are we all upper middle class.
Hywel – the source of the “Norwegian gas is cleaner than UK gas” is here – https://www.petro-online.com/news/fuel-for-thought/13/sp-global/two-thirds-of-uk-and-norway-north-sea-oil-and-gas-production-has-lower-than-average-greenhouse-gas-intensity-new-analysis-finds/59378. Note too that this source is for **average** UK north sea gas vs **average** Norwegian, it does not tell us anything about Jackdaw vs the marginal Norwegian field. All North Sea gas will be lower carbon than any imported LNG, although as ever the main climate effect of gas is burning it, wherever it comes from
Sorry Jack. You are so wrong. The gas will not stay in the ground because Norway will take their share and then ours. You may want to feel pure in heart but we are not here to help other countries get wealthy. We need Jackdaw and Rose Bank.
I’d like to put in a good word for heat pumps. When my gas boiler died last year, it would have been more expensive to replace it than buying a heat pump, once the government subsidy was factored in. Also, despite asking my neighbours several times if its noisy, they’ve said they never hear it. Also, I did not need to have my pipework or radiators replaced. I’m sure there are arguments both ways, but that’s my experience
The real climate extremists are Trump, Reform, the Conservatives and fossil fuel lobbyists, who want to maximise oil and gas drilling as the climate emergency accelerates.
You don’t need to be a climate scientist to see that our climate is changing at an alarming rate. This year the UK had a record 40 days above 30°C. The consequences are already here: nearly 3,000 heat deaths in England in May and June alone, failing harvests, wildfires, drought and hosepipe bans for millions. Without action, summers like this will become the norm, not the exception.
As a liberal, I believe in an evidence-based approach, and the evidence is overwhelming: we need to do more on climate, as a society, as individuals and as a party.
I agree with Mark. How utterly depressing to read numpties parroting fossil fuel industry FFI claims, on a site allegedly supported by Liberal Democrats.
It is accepted that the Jackdaw decision will not make a profound difference to UK CO2 emissions but in fact that is not the point.
While we could not stop the use of gas at once . . no one is saying that, this is a ‘kicking the can down the road’ argument: always going to stop but never getting there.
We do not have the time. We must act now!
Mark is absolutely right, I hear a lot of talk about this being a necessary transition for energy security or cheap prices, but to quote George Monibot “If I want to travel from Devon to London, I don’t go via Cornwall.”
The worry we are backsliding is valid, there was never a question on the need to transition rapidly to clean energy, the public still overwhelmingly support such a transition and the means, so we shouldn’t abandon our position just because the other Parties have, that’s part of how we win the conversation.
Something I also don’t see spoken about is the Liberal potential of energy independence; both solar and small-scale wind power have the potential to significantly increase individual freedom in this country by <a href="https://www.hivehome.com/blog/solar/advantages-of-solar-energy"reducing reliance on the national grid, providing the very same security from the fluctuating prices that proponents of Jackdaw seem to be arguing for.
We know the Government has withheld the publication of a report suggesting that, at our current rate, we are could experience ecosystem collapse in some areas of our planet by as early as 2030. I say this not fearmonger, but to remind people of the scale of our responsibility here. We should be careful in engaging in short-termism over energy prices when the real cost is coming directly out of our planet’s pocket.
People stating simple hard facts are not “numpties” parroting fossil fuel propaganda. The UK doesn’t have enough power storage to run a 100% renewable grid and needs gas when the wind doesn’t’ blow and the sun doesn’t shine. As if we’re going to use gas, as Ed Davey has said, the carbon footprint of Jackdaw will be lower than that of gas imports. The government decision says it plainly: “Jackdaw gas production would be less emissions intense than the average for the UK continental shelf, and less emissions intense than the mix of imported gas that would otherwise be used to heat and provide power for UK homes and businesses.”
@Tim Roger’s
“ The gas will not stay in the ground because Norway will take their share and then ours”
Excellent point. I haven’t read that argument anywhere before but it makes perfect sense. It reminds me of a Laurel and Hardy screen in which they had bought a soda between them and planned to drink half each – Stan Laurel started first but drunk the lot, explaining that he couldn’t help it because his half was the bottom half…
Realising that gas fields are not located conveniently within maritime borders, I’m sure Norway would have been delighted if we had decided not to extract our share of the gas field.
North Sea gas is sold at international prices…
Natural gas is mostly consumed in the country where it’s extracted. Around 20% is exported across borders by pipeline and 10% as LNG (Liquified Natural Gas). Although traded internationally there is no world market price. UK prices track those on the continent (Netherlands TTF) as both markets are connected via pipelines and compete for the same LNG supplies. The US is a separate market. Currently, the spot price at Henry Hub is $2.8 per MMBtu while the UK NBP price is over 10 times higher at $29.7…
Henry Hub Natural Gas [USD/MMBtu]:
https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/NYMEX-NN1!/?timeframe=12M
UK NBP Natural Gas (USD/MMBtu):
https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/NYMEX-NBP1!/?timeframe=12M
NBP = National Balancing Point, a virtual location in the UK pipeline network where supply and demand balance at the quoted price.
MMBtu = Million British Thermal Units (1 MMBtu = 10 Therms).
From exporting virtually none in 2016, the US is now the world’s largest gas producer and exporter. Today’s export volume is expected to double by 2032.
For an insight into why Europe is not (yet) being flooded with cheap US gas see ‘Understanding the Henry Hub-TTF Spread: How Price Differentials Drive Global Gas Markets’:
https://natgaschart.com/blog/henry-hub-ttf-spread
Real energy security depends on electrification powered by homegrown renewables. Expensive oil and gas pushed inflation up to 3.5% in September and helped send government borrowing costs to their highest since 2007. Gas is also failing to keep people warm.
And we can’t afford to run two grids indefinitely. About 4.3 million homes in Great Britain are off the gas grid, and within a few weeks, the Future Homes Standard will effectively end gas boilers in new homes. That’s more than a decade after the Conservatives scrapped the zero-carbon homes plan the Lib Dems backed in coalition.
@Mark Hofman
“Real energy security depends on electrification powered by homegrown renewables.”
If you’re implying all our electricity should be from renewable resources (ideally yes) how quickly can that be achieved?
What renweable resources would you include? Tidal?
>”Over its lifetime, it (Jackdaw) would produce around 2 months of UK gas demand”
“The owners of the site, … estimate Jackdaw has around 10 million cubic metres of recoverable gas.”
“Rough will now be able to store up to 54 bcf (circa 1.5 billion cubic metres) of gas”
This nicely demonstrates the limitations of privatisation.
A rational decision would be to connect Jackdaw so that it could be readily accessed, but keep it as part of our gas storage infrastructure. However, as everything has been privatised, this won’t happen so the gas from Jackdaw will be sold on the open market and we, the taxpayer will pay Centrica to operate a storage facility for gas purchased from the open market. …
@Richard Cripps – “I’d like to put in a good word for heat pumps. When my gas boiler died last year, it would have been more expensive to replace it than buying a heat pump, once the government subsidy was factored in.”
Just remember the heat pump has a similar life span to a modern gas boiler namely circa 16 years; there are no grants and almostly certainly never will be for the replacement of your heat pump. Just another thing to factor into your calculations.
Given a modern home has a design life of 60 years, in assessing costs and lifetime environmental impact of heat pumps and other home heating solutions. we should be assessing costs (and waste/recycling) over 60 years.
@Nonconformistradical – “If you’re implying all our electricity should be from renewable resources (ideally yes) how quickly can that be achieved?”
I think a better question is by when do we need to have minimised our usage of fossil fuels, especially carbon based fuels. I suggest, based on the economic data and forecasts on world consumption and production, by 2040…
However, if we don’t get a resolution to events blocking the flow of energy from Russia and Iran in the coming months, it will be much sooner.
@Tim – Yes I saw the source and looked at it though it didn’t make a lot of sense given my level of knowledge of this.
But taking that as correct I was curious as to why Norwegian gas piped to the UK should be so low carbon than UK extracted gas. It makes sense that LNG is as it needs trucking across the atlantic on fossil fuel burning ships
Hywel – I doubt Norwegian gas will be lower carbon than Jackdaw. It is the case (as that report showed) that the remnants of old UK gas fields are (slightly) higher carbon, in exactly the same way that it is takes more effect to get the last bit of yoghurt out of a pot. But when you open a new pot, it is easy again…
I think it’s really disappointing to see another poster call those who disagree with them a numpty. That kind of patronising insult devalues their argument. The decision to approve jackdaw will support thousands of skilled jobs in the supply chain, boost the economy, possibly lower bills and improve energy security. The trade unions support it. Renewables will continue to go from strength to strength but gas will still be needed as 75% of British homes still use it. There’s no point imposing heat pumps on council estates, housed outside blocks, if they exceed acceptable noise levels. Burnham has made a pragmatic decision and the right one.
World fuel consumption rises by 2%pa, or doubles every 35 years. In any given 35 year period, as much energy is consumed as in the whole preceding history. Renewable still make up a very small fraction of world energy demand.
You might remember the story of the inventor, the chessboard and the grains of rice. 1 on the 1st square, 2 on the 2nd, 4 on the 3rd and so on.
Things that cannot continue will stop.
Hywel 23rd Oct ’26 – 8:18pm:
I was curious as to why Norwegian gas piped to the UK should be so low carbon than UK extracted gas.
Mostly because UK production platforms use gas-turbines to compress gas to move it via pipeline to the shore and for several other purposes. These turbines account for around 80% of their Scope 1 emissions. By contrast, Norwegian platforms are supplied with hydro-electricity by a network of subsea cables and hubs to run their compressors. There would be little point in electrifying UK North Sea platforms as the marginal source of UK electricity is from gas-fired generators anyway.
The comparison is fallacious. If the Norwegian platforms were not using this “clean” hydro-electricity it would be available for someone else to use, perhaps, via the NordLink Interconnector, a German factory that is currently using electricity from coal-fired power stations. So, as usual, the ‘greenhouse gas’ emissions are merely being moved from one location to another.
It makes sense that LNG is as it needs trucking across the Atlantic on fossil fuel burning ships
The main reason LNG Scope 1 (production) emissions are much higher at 85 KgCO2e/boe is because it requires a lot of energy to cool (to -162˚C) and compress gas to liquefy it. Shipping and regasification are smaller contributors.