Andy Burnham’s North Sea oil conundrum | UK Politics | The New Statesman

1위@maryobrien55681 day ago

I find these discussions about the political games of politics whilst ignoring the facts around the likely impacts of the collapsing of our climate incredibly frustrating and depressing.번역 보기

2위@FontaineDerby1 day ago (edited)

BP are not daft which is why they are selling a business with dwindling resources. The UK has used 93% of its oil and gas reserves whereas Norway still has 43% of its reserves intact which is why Norway is the UK's largest gas supplier, accounting for 45% to 47% of the UK's total gas supply. Oil and gas production in the UK North Sea peaked in 1999 and has declined by 75% since then. Because the North Sea reserves are in long-term decline, Norway consistently provides the vast majority (nearly 70%) of all gas imported into the UK via dedicated cross-border pipelines. The Rosebank and Jackdaw developments are estimated to receive roughly £3.96 billion in tax relief subsidies through the UK's Energy Profits Levy investment allowances (£3.75 billion for Rosebank and £210 million for Jackdaw). In comparison, industry estimates project the fields will generate £1.4 billion in tax revenues by 2029, potentially rising to £3.8 billion by 2034.번역 보기

3위@AF-dx7zs1 day ago

Dale Vince is a charlatan - he attacks the idea of heat pumps with misinformation because he has a grass gas side to his business. But that couldn’t never replace all the gas we use in the UK - not enough land to grow all the grass! Heat pumps which produce 4 units of heat per 1 unit of energy is a much, much better way to go. Countries like Sweden have managed this alongside efficient district heating.번역 보기