Sanjoy Sen is a chemical engineer. He contested Alyn and Deeside in the 2019 general election.
Rishi Sunak visited Aberdeen this week to announce the Government’s renewed backing for the North Sea oil and gas sector. In addition to green-lighting hundreds of future offshore licences, he also announced long-awaited support for Acorn, Scotland’s major Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) project.
It’s encouraging to see some decisive action in support of the North Sea just as it was becoming politically fashionable to trash it; recognition, not in evidence from Labour or the SNP, that hydrocarbons will retain a key role in the future energy mix even on the drive toward Net Zero.
All that remains now is to review the punitive tax rates (currently 75 per cent) that remain a deterrent to offshore activity.
So far, so good. But whilst we’re in the mood for some bold energy decisions, let’s not forget some other key energy sectors are also urgently in need of a kick-start – starting with CCS.
CCS takes carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, typically from major industrial sites, and stores them underground thus preventing them entering the atmosphere. Crucially, it can help energy-intensive businesses (e.g. power generation, steel) cut their emissions and stay in business.
In Acorn’s case, emissions arise from the Scottish Cluster, chiefly the Ineos Grangemouth refinery complex on the Firth of Forth. These are routed north via a redundant gas pipeline up to the St Fergus terminal before injection into the spent Goldeneye offshore gas field.
CO2 injection into reservoirs has long been used by oil companies to boost production. But permanent underground CO2 sequestration via CCS is relatively new technology. The Government sees huge potential, committing billions to CCS: its backing for Acorn accompanies support for the Humber Viking project. This follows earlier commitments to developments such as HyNet (Merseyside) and the East Coast Cluster (Tees-Humber).
Whilst the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) considers CCS vital, however, not everyone is a fan. Environmentalists are aghast, denouncing it as Big Oil’s route to perpetuating our hydrocarbon dependence; engineers note that CCS impacts power station efficiency; economists fret over the high costs
The Government appears to have timed its North Sea announcements well, with opponents finally on the back foot. After a summer of disruption following a winter of soaring bills, public support for disruptive protests is limited.
It’s a similar story overseas. In Germany, post-Ukraine reality is hitting home, and the Greens are paying a heavy price for their intransigence as new coalfields are (literally) bulldozed through. Even the Swedes are seemingly tiring of Greta Thunberg’s publicity stunts.
Last year, Sir Keir Starmer was boycotting the Qatar World Cup on human rights’ grounds. This year, he promised a ban on new North Sea drilling which would increase import dependence on that very petro-state – whilst also driving up emissions.
Following the watering-down of his £28 billion green pledge and post-Uxbridge coolness on London’s ULEZ extension, further embarrassing u-turns could be imminent.
Meanwhile, the SNP, once built on resource nationalism (“It’s Scotland’s Oil”), is now committed by its Green partner to killing off the North Sea. Stephen Flynn, their Westminster leader, has opposed the party line but remains exposed; the Scottish Conservatives will have his sub-4k majority in Aberdeen South in their sights next year.
CCS reduces emissions, creates jobs (20,000 from Acorn alone), and supports British energy security by keeping the North Sea going. But CCS in itself doesn’t increase our domestic energy output. And it can’t stem the inevitable decline in North Sea reserves.
So, we need to back other energy solutions – and one in particular. If we are to reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels and cut emissions, there’s no escaping the necessity for (lots) more nuclear.
But the latest report (Delivering Nuclear Power) from the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology committee dismisses the Energy Security Strategy (including 24 giga-watts of nuclear by 2050) as a “wish list”. Noting the start-stop nature of British nuclear development over that past 70 years, it calls for a strategic plan to start delivering both on major new power stations and the home-grown opportunity of Small Modular Reactors.
Meanwhile, as we pile on renewable capacity, intermittence becomes a growing headache. Wind speed fluctuations play havoc with the grid, whilst seasonal variations mean that high solar output on summer days can’t support high demand on long winter nights.
Investment in energy storage in all its forms (be that as hydrogen, pumped storage or batteries) is getting critical now. Let’s learn the lessons from the closure of the Rough gas storage facility, and never leave ourselves exposed again.
Sanjoy Sen is a chemical engineer. He contested Alyn and Deeside in the 2019 general election.
Rishi Sunak visited Aberdeen this week to announce the Government’s renewed backing for the North Sea oil and gas sector. In addition to green-lighting hundreds of future offshore licences, he also announced long-awaited support for Acorn, Scotland’s major Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) project.
It’s encouraging to see some decisive action in support of the North Sea just as it was becoming politically fashionable to trash it; recognition, not in evidence from Labour or the SNP, that hydrocarbons will retain a key role in the future energy mix even on the drive toward Net Zero.
All that remains now is to review the punitive tax rates (currently 75 per cent) that remain a deterrent to offshore activity.
So far, so good. But whilst we’re in the mood for some bold energy decisions, let’s not forget some other key energy sectors are also urgently in need of a kick-start – starting with CCS.
CCS takes carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, typically from major industrial sites, and stores them underground thus preventing them entering the atmosphere. Crucially, it can help energy-intensive businesses (e.g. power generation, steel) cut their emissions and stay in business.
In Acorn’s case, emissions arise from the Scottish Cluster, chiefly the Ineos Grangemouth refinery complex on the Firth of Forth. These are routed north via a redundant gas pipeline up to the St Fergus terminal before injection into the spent Goldeneye offshore gas field.
CO2 injection into reservoirs has long been used by oil companies to boost production. But permanent underground CO2 sequestration via CCS is relatively new technology. The Government sees huge potential, committing billions to CCS: its backing for Acorn accompanies support for the Humber Viking project. This follows earlier commitments to developments such as HyNet (Merseyside) and the East Coast Cluster (Tees-Humber).
Whilst the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) considers CCS vital, however, not everyone is a fan. Environmentalists are aghast, denouncing it as Big Oil’s route to perpetuating our hydrocarbon dependence; engineers note that CCS impacts power station efficiency; economists fret over the high costs
The Government appears to have timed its North Sea announcements well, with opponents finally on the back foot. After a summer of disruption following a winter of soaring bills, public support for disruptive protests is limited.
It’s a similar story overseas. In Germany, post-Ukraine reality is hitting home, and the Greens are paying a heavy price for their intransigence as new coalfields are (literally) bulldozed through. Even the Swedes are seemingly tiring of Greta Thunberg’s publicity stunts.
Last year, Sir Keir Starmer was boycotting the Qatar World Cup on human rights’ grounds. This year, he promised a ban on new North Sea drilling which would increase import dependence on that very petro-state – whilst also driving up emissions.
Following the watering-down of his £28 billion green pledge and post-Uxbridge coolness on London’s ULEZ extension, further embarrassing u-turns could be imminent.
Meanwhile, the SNP, once built on resource nationalism (“It’s Scotland’s Oil”), is now committed by its Green partner to killing off the North Sea. Stephen Flynn, their Westminster leader, has opposed the party line but remains exposed; the Scottish Conservatives will have his sub-4k majority in Aberdeen South in their sights next year.
CCS reduces emissions, creates jobs (20,000 from Acorn alone), and supports British energy security by keeping the North Sea going. But CCS in itself doesn’t increase our domestic energy output. And it can’t stem the inevitable decline in North Sea reserves.
So, we need to back other energy solutions – and one in particular. If we are to reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels and cut emissions, there’s no escaping the necessity for (lots) more nuclear.
But the latest report (Delivering Nuclear Power) from the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology committee dismisses the Energy Security Strategy (including 24 giga-watts of nuclear by 2050) as a “wish list”. Noting the start-stop nature of British nuclear development over that past 70 years, it calls for a strategic plan to start delivering both on major new power stations and the home-grown opportunity of Small Modular Reactors.
Meanwhile, as we pile on renewable capacity, intermittence becomes a growing headache. Wind speed fluctuations play havoc with the grid, whilst seasonal variations mean that high solar output on summer days can’t support high demand on long winter nights.
Investment in energy storage in all its forms (be that as hydrogen, pumped storage or batteries) is getting critical now. Let’s learn the lessons from the closure of the Rough gas storage facility, and never leave ourselves exposed again.