Tag Archives: jackdaw

Vince Cable writes: Drill, baby, drill…or not

Now that the Prime Minister is back from his trip to see Donald Trump and has enjoyed the emotional warm bath of his party conference, he rejoins the world of hard choices. The budget looms. A more immediate question is to decide on whether to proceed with drilling for gas and oil in the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields in the North Sea.

The politics are awful. Environmentalists regard the issue as central to the government’s credibility on climate change. The Labour v Green battle in Camden provides context. On the other hand, rejection of the developments will send a negative signal to those, including bond traders, who are looking for signs of commitment to economic growth and those who worry about energy security. Both sets of voices have been loudly heard at Labour conference not least from the new Scottish Labour leader, Michael Marra, who wants to press ahead with both developments. For her part, Kemi Badenoch has made this a signature issue for the Tories and will be shouting ‘Drill baby drill’ next week. President Trump will undoubtedly provide his own, loud backing for fossil fuel exploitation: if he can tear himself away from his plans to construct a giant ballroom and a triumphal age honouring his rule

In fact, the serious arguments are complex and allow for a nuanced approach. I took to the airwaves last week to defend Ed Davey’s decision to back the Jackdaw field on its own separate merits. Jackdaw is a Shell development (spoiler alert: I used to work for them 30 years ago). The gas field, east of Aberdeen, is already underway but was paused by a Greenpeace injunction seeking a climate change assessment. The field should provide around 5% of gas demand in the UK and that gas would be otherwise imported. Gas will remain a transitional fuel while renewables are developed and there are good reasons for producing it in Britain rather than importing it (Norway is the major and uncontroversial source; the USA and Qatar more subject to political intrusion). Ed was right on this issue and his experience as Energy Secretary gives credibility to his assessment. (I confess that I had more difficulty defending the proposed subsidy on motor fuel). 

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , and | 1 Comment
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Peter Davies
    "The Greens’ major objective is to preserve the planet as a liveable space for humanity." I'm not convinced that is still in their top three....
  • Peter Wrigley
    I think it helps to look at the parties in terms of their major objective, or usp if you prefer. The Liberal Democrats' major objective is to preserve, prote...
  • James Hill
    @David Allen There is 0% chance that the result of the next election is a Tory-Lib Dem coalition. And the tax cut proposed by Ed has also been proposed by the t...
  • James Hill
    @Rob Heale The problem with VAT, is generally when rates are lowered, the savings are not passed on to consumers and instead pad out profit margins. This has me...
  • James Hill
    @Peter Davies I agree, I think higher rates of pension credit should be looked at – would be a much more effective, targeted and cheaper way to reduce pension...