Industry

Latest UK onshore oil production – November 2021

Follow onshore oil production trends with our review of the latest official monthly data

Key figures

Daily production: 14,155 barrels per day (bopd)

Weight: 55,654 tonnes

Volume: 67,515 m3

Volume of onshore as a proportion of UK total oil production: 1.81%

Headlines of the month: Big changes in oil production at Stockbridge, Bletchingley, Humbly Grove and Wareham. Total weight and volume fell in line with the shorter month. Daily production was up but less than 1%.

The data in this post was compiled by the Oil & Gas Authority (OGA) from reports by oil companies. It is published three months in arrears. All the charts are based on the OGA data.


Details

Daily production up slightly

  • November 2021 saw an increase of 0.65% in daily production on October 2021
  • But November remained below average daily production for the past previous months
  • The month ranked eighth highest for daily production over the same period
  • Compared with the best of the past 12 months, November’s daily production was 4.3% lower
  • Daily production was down 2.4% on November 2020 and down 11.18% on November 2019

Volume and weight down

  • Volume of onshore oil produced in November 2021 was down about 2.6% compared with October 2021, in line with the shorter month
  • Weight was down 2.54% on the previous month
  • Volume remained below 70,000m3 for the third consecutive month and weight was below 60,000 tonnes for the tenth consecutive month

Contribution to UK total oil production

  • November 2021 reversed the trend of falling onshore contributions total UK oil production, rising from 1.73% to 1.81%
  • This was the highest contribution since July 2021 (1.88%)
  • And the fifth highest month in the past 12

Top 20 fields

Five fields in the Weald (Stockbridge, Bletchingley, Storrington, Singleton and Horndean) saw increases in production. But output fell at the Dorset fields of Wytch Farm, Wareham and Kimmeridge

Stockbridge saw production more than double in November 2021 on the previous month, up to 1,045 tonnes.

Bletchingley was up 50% to 236 tonnes and Storrington rose 29% to 163 tonnes.

Humbly Grove fell 74% on October 2021 to 154 tonnes and Wareham was down 32% to 202 tonnes.

Horse Hill dropped 7% to 243 tonnes after a rise in October 2021

The top ranking UK onshore fields, Wytch Farm and Welton, both fell slightly on the month before

Production rose at half the top 20 fields (in order of % increase, largest first): Stockbridge, Bletchingley, Storrington, Singleton, Whisby, Horndean, Beckingham, Cold Hanworth and Scampton North

Production fell (in order of % fall, largest first) at: Humbly Grove, Wareham, Long Clawson, Corringham, Glentworth, Horse Hill, Kimmeridge, Gainsborough, Wytch Farm and Welton

Stockbridge, Hampshire

  • According to the November 2021 data, production rose dramatically at Stockbridge.
  • Weight was up from 509 tonnes in October 2021 to 1,045 tonnes. Daily production also more than doubled from 124 bopd to 263 bopd.
  • This is the highest production at Stockbridge since August 2019.

Bletchingley, Surrey

  • Production bounced back from a sharp fall in October 2021.
  • Weight was up from 158 tonnes to 236 tonnes.
  • Daily production rose from 39 bopd to 60 bopd.
  • But production is still not back to levels in the summer and early autumn, when average daily rates were 74-88 bopd.

Storrington, West Sussex

  • Production recovered at Storrington after a fall in October 2021
  • Weight was back at above 150 tonnes
  • Daily production reached 39 bopd, the highest level since April 2021

Humbly Grove, Hampshire

  • Production dropped sharply and the site fell in the rankings from 4 to 18
  • Weight of produced oil sank to 154 tonnes, from 600 in October 2021
  • The site’s contribution to UK onshore oil totals fell from 1.05% in October 2021 to 0.28%

Wareham, Dorset

  • Production at Wareham dropped nearly 100 tonnes between October and November 2021 to 202 tonnes
  • Daily production dropped to 49 bopd, the lowest level in the past 12 months apart from August 2021
  • The site’s ranking fell from 11 to 14

Horse Hill, Surrey

  • Daily production, at 60 bopd, was the lowest for the previous 12 months (excluding September 2021 when production was suspended for a fortnight)
  • Weight and volume of oil also fell on the previous month and remain below pre-shutdown levels
  • Horse Hill climbed one place in the rankings, from 12 to 11 in November 2021

Wytch Farm, Dorset

  • The UK’s largest onshore producer saw production fall by nearly 2,000 tonnes in November 2021 (46,241 tonnes), compared with October 2021 (48123)
  • Daily production was down to 11,845 bopd, from 11,930 bopd in October
  • This was the lowest level since July 2021
  • The field’s contribution to total UK onshore oil production fell to just over 83%, down from 84.25% the month before

Top producers

UK onshore oil production by company

The largest onshore producer, Perenco, saw its weight of oil fall about 2,000 tonnes to 46,644 tonnes following falling production at Wytch Farm, Wareham and Kimmeridge. The company’s contribution to total UK production dropped to 83.81% in November from 85.16% in October 2021.

Production from IGas fields rose almost 1,000 tonnes to 7,782 tonnes. This represented 13.98% of UK onshore oil production in November 2021, up from 11.97% in October 2021.

EP UK Investments, which operates Humbly Grove, dropped in the rankings from third to seventh place.

UK Oil & Gas, the parent of the Horse Hill operator, saw production fall slightly from 261 tonnes to 244 tonnes in November 2021.

Egdon Resources’ fields increased production from 157 tonnes up from 129 tonnes. But Europa Oil & Gas was down to 150 tonnes from 182 tonnes.

Non-producers

For another month, 12 onshore UK oil fields produced no oil. As in October 2021, they included:

  • Angus Energy sites in Brockham in Surrey and Lidsey in West Sussex
  • Egdon Resources fields at Kirklington, Dukes Wood and Waddock Cross
  • IGas fields at Avington, Egmanton, Nettleham, Scampton and South Leverton
  • Britnrg Limited site at Newton-on-Trent

18 replies »

  1. Well good morning folks, it’s Sunday 6th March 2022 and the world seems to have gone insane with cries of war, war, and not jaw, jaw. Meanwhile, as always, it’s not the governments and big corporations that suffer from their machinations. Quite the opposite, in fact, the military industrial complex rub their collective in glee at the increase in their profits and power mongering. It’s only the people who suffer. In a world where the megalomania, greed, profit and insanity of those who only want their own power over the very people who pay their extortionate lust for more, more, more.

    The fossil fuel industry is no different, when was the last anyone saw that the fossil fuel industry “providers” willingly volunteered to support people who can’t afford to pay their bills and feed themselves and their children. Has any one of them made a donation through any form of windfall tax, voluntary or enforced? What would be the true taxation of their real profits if the real figures were revealed from hidden in offshore and onshore tax havens and moved around in shell companies to avoid detection? Or to donate a part of their profits to help peoples in any country to reach some form of liveable self-sustaining status? Reduce fuel prices just to help low paid workers families?

    For the song today, I thought I would find something to say about war and peace. This one sprang to mind. So here is: Roger Waters formerly of Pink Floyd “Us and Them”

    Roger Waters Lyrics
    “Us And Them”

    Us and them
    And after all we’re only ordinary men

    Me and you
    God only knows it’s not what we would choose to do

    “Forward!” he cried
    From the rear
    And the front rank died
    And the general sat
    And the lines on the map
    Moved from side to side

    Black and blue
    And who knows which is which and who is who?

    Up and down
    And in the end it’s only round and round and round

    “Haven’t you heard
    It’s a battle of words?”
    The poster bearer cried.
    “Listen, son,”
    Said the man with the gun,
    “There’s room for you inside.”

    “Well, I mean, they’re gonna kill ya, so like, if you give ’em a quick sh…short, sharp shock, they don’t do it again.
    Dig it? I mean he got off light, ’cause I could’ve given him a thrashin’ but I only hit him once.
    It’s only the difference between right and wrong, innit? I mean good manners don’t cost nothing, do they? Eh?”

    Down and out
    It can’t be helped but there’s a lot of it about

    With, without
    And who’ll deny it’s what the fighting’s all about?

    Out of the way
    It’s a busy day
    I’ve got things on my mind
    For want of the price
    Of tea and a slice
    The old man died

    Have a good Sunday with family and friends, and please do what you can to help those people fleeing Ukraine.

    Peace be with you all.

    • Yes, they have.

      The donation is called taxation. And even after that, they have invested £billions in renewable energy, and Ineos, for example, have donated material FOC to the NHS during the Covid crisis, donated large amounts of money to help people in the developing world, funding environmental projects in other countries and supplying significant amounts of finance to help treat and rehabilitate wounded servicemen.

      But, when they do all of these things there are some who just want to dismiss by stating “greenwashing”.

      Of course if more of the same is wanted, then the industry needs encouraging to be in the UK to do more in UK, rather than overseas! The golden goose should not be scared away, but nurtured.

      Meanwhile, I note the US frackers are fracking away like mad, but warn the rest of the world their ability to replace Russian oil and gas in the short term is limited. But, their golden goose will look after a lot in the USA that need help and support, as will the one in Norway. Makes the UK one look rather malnourished in comparison, but it can still be fattened up a little bit more. “We” know it makes sense.

      • Since someone has become so “attached” to anything that dares to bring the fossil fuel industry into disrepute… I believe that is called “gatekeeping”….

        Then, whilst being so voluble and defensive of the fossil fuel corporations and how “generous” they are to actually pay (some) of the taxes they are, by law, forced reluctantly to pay…. Taxes do not go to the most vulnerable at all, taxes go into the coffers of the government who are lobbied by the multinational corporations and such tax money from the British taxpayer (since the government has no money of its own) and is more likely to be spent on filling the kleptocratic pockets of their own Russian funders and supporters…..

        Then he/she/it, can inform us/we/everyone, where all the substantiated verified, fact checked and document linked proof, that 1 in 5 people worldwide die per year of fossil fuel pollution? And then to so volubly and defensively move on to answer all the other 20+ questions that clearly demonstrate that fossil fuel pollution has plunged the planet into the 6th major extinction level event in the Earths history, is causing rapid increases in the Earths’ temperature which is estimated as 2.4 degrees Celsius, and which is causing the melting of the polar ice caps and rise in sea levels which will drown low-lying land across the world?

        Then he/she/it can move on to explain that the fossil fuel corporations are so reluctant to pay their due taxes. That the fossil fuel industry corporations employ highly paid accountants to minimise what they do have to pay. To play off spurious invented costs against profits to minimise their tax bills. Get massive subsidies and tax relief from the governments to offset their tax bills. And hide their accountant concealed profits into offshore and onshore tax havens, where the trillions get continuously moved around into multiple complex fake address shell companies and tax-free “trusts”.

        None of that is addressing the energy poverty of anyone, nor of extreme poverty anywhere in the world. Like I said, the multinational fossil fuel corporations are extremely well-placed to help out energy poverty and just plain poverty around the world. But they do nothing to alleviate any poverty of any description. Merely reluctantly being forced to pay minimum taxes to corrupt governments and the rich elite bribery does not go one miserly miserable step towards doing anything about poverty. Precisely the opposite is true.

        As for proof of all that, then I have plenty of substantiated proof of that to contribute. However, before I do that, he/she/it can supply the substantiated verified and document linked proof I have been asking for well over a year now about the deaths and health dangers from fossil fuel pollution.

        Have a Nice Day.

        • Ahh, there you have it. Doesn’t like what is done with taxes now, to avoid the issue that taxes are taken. Well, they are taken, Phil C, so that was your error, and it is such errors that bring the antis into disrepute. I think that is called fake news. Keep up the “good” work.

          If you don’t like what is done with taxes then you have a vote, if you are entitled to one, to influence what is done with them. Then, you could always lobby your MP, as sometimes the antis think that is the right thing to do, even if they contradict that a few days later. Shock/horror, there are people in UK who have an ISA who plan not to pay tax they can avoid paying. And, yes, they might then do some better things with their money they save, than the Government would have done with it. Just like some of the oil companies, where I have already supplied examples. Even little old Cuadrilla were helping to fund science education. I don’t seem to remember too much praise for that! Other small UK on shore companies are supplying Community Funds. What are the antis doing? Costing communities up to £400k and also delaying supply of the community funds, whilst they crowd fund legal challenges that could have been donated to the poor. Keep up the “good” work.

          Actually, taxes will be used shortly to reduce the impact of fuel poverty in UK-quite a few £billions in fact.

          Meanwhile, your approach is kill the golden goose simply because you have a newly found dogma against golden geese, having taken your fill of them, and allow said taxes to slip over the horizon to some regime where you or I have absolutely no control over what they do with their taxes. Pretty obvious what Putin has been doing with his. Meanwhile, Brent Crude reaches $130/barrel today, which will raise some more UK taxes to be diverted to those suffering fuel poverty, although I suspect it will be announced shortly that it will go to increased defence spending. If that is what happens, the majority will agree and be happy, there will be a minority who will not agree, be unhappy and protest. US frackers will frack away with gusto, with US politicians calling for a ban on Russian oil. The minority will protest about the first bit, the majority support the second bit.

          Such is life.
          .
          Except, there are not quite so many in fuel poverty as some would like to suggest as household savings rose during the two Covid years for many in the UK. Probably intended to be spent on the overseas holidays they missed, but may now have to rethink when the energy bills arrive. All those posh airports may be a little quite for a little longer. But, just think of all that aviation fuel that will not be required.

          Meanwhile, Mrs. C was canvassed yesterday by the local Green candidate. Nice guy, she just doesn’t agree with the policies, ie. she is green but not by being conned to be Green. Pointed out an error of fact in one of his recent leaflets. The reply? “Poetic licence”!!

          Lot of it about, it would appear.

          Have a nice day in the Spring sunshine. I am off to plant some more sweat peas. Sorry, local florist, but I need to transfer some more production to a more local source of supply and eliminate some more transport emissions. Every little bit helps.

          • Ha! Ha! No answer was the stern reply! Tut! Tut!

            Nope. I have made no errors at all. Quite the opposite. It was, and is, all fact. Where have I once said that I do not like where taxes are spent? Nope. That false “excuse” for not answering, is just more myth and tragic fabrication, fantasy and myth. Since you failed to actually read what I did say.

            I suggest you/they/it actually read what I did say. And not just trot out your pre-prepared deviations and false narratives ad nauseam and ad infinitum.

            Nope. Again. All the errors (and deflections, deviations, avoidances and deceptions) are in the text of the “contributor” above. It’s like the antithesis of the Radio 4 program, “Just a Minute” isn’t it? Where the fossil fuel protagonists trot out “deliberate hesitation, repetition and deviation”?

            Typical of the antitheses, isn’t it.

            Furthermore, I’ve seen more honesty and accuracy in a Party Gate Political manifesto broadcast? And that’s saying something!

            Nope. Please provide the substantiated evidence that anything I have said is not true? That is 21 questions about fossil fuel pollution causing 1 in 5 deaths worldwide per year. Careful, who, or whatever you are. The number of questions you haven’t answered will soon be in the middle hundreds, the way you/they/it is going? Oops!

            And in all that world of errors from he/she/it/they. There are more errors in that “contribution” above and the usual blatant fake news false narratives and false accusations to avoid the truth than the usual dismal display than anyone can give a frack for.

            I must have trodden on many more than the usual exposed array of frantic raw nerves to elicit such a desperate misinformation response as that load of….stuff…. Perhaps it’s (another fantasy word from the fictional fantasy world non-existent library), that the “contributor” is posing as a melting “snowflake”. Such are the oversensitive, defensive and delicate sensibilities from that source about the Real World facts and the truth about the fossil fuel industry paying no more tax than they can not avoid paying.

            Aww! Shame? Dear! Dear! How Sad! Never mind…. No surprises there.

            • Still, I notice, nothing to answer any of my questions about fossil fuel pollution causing 1 in 5 deaths worldwide per year, or even address the truth about fossil fuel corporations employing well paid accountants and offshore/onshore tax havens and salting their real trillions away in complex shell companies and trusts. All to avoid paying the full due tax they should be due to pay by law.

              No efforts by any of the multinational fossil fuel corporations to help out so much as one person in poverty, be that from energy poverty, financial poverty, or just corrupt totalitarian governments and corrupt rich elites tainted with greed and profiteering while their people starve and freeze to death. Those that aren’t killed by fossil fuel pollution, that is…..

              What was it the usual suspects said? Oh yes, from the very plastic keyboards of that/those “contributors”….”there are too many people in the world”, and it’s all their fault? Oh, Yeah? Right on Put-in… Put-up…Pay-up…Push-off….out of Ukraine

              No answers from the usual suspect, only deliberate misrepresentations of anything I said, (no change there) just more deviation from subject with the desperate apocryphal “personal his-story”. And blank refusal to be honest and answer the 20+ plus questions about fossil fuel pollution questions I have been asking all the fossil fuel protagonists (= antitheses) for over a year now.

              Total silence and deflection, deviation and just plain nonsense is all you/they/anyone can trot out just to make false accusations, that make no logical sense at all. No answers to anything real about fossil fuel pollution and the reluctance of the fossil fuel corporations to pay their complete due at all.

              There is an interesting alternative or indeed an addition to a windfall tax for the antitheses to crow about, that clearly puts the antitheses in a wild panic of loss of dividends from a windfall tax. And that is the fact that the fossil fuel industry gets tax relief and massive subsidies:

              BP reported a profit of $12.8bn (£9.4bn) for last year, following Shell’s announcement last week of $19.3bn in profits. Little of the money is going to taxpayers: Channel 4 revealed that BP has paid no tax on its North Sea oil and gas for five years.

              US fossil-fuel companies took billions in tax breaks – and then laid off thousands
              https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/02/fossil-fuel-companies-billions-tax-breaks-workers

              A group of 77 firms involved in the extraction of oil, gas and coal received $8.2bn under tax-code changes that formed part of a major pandemic stimulus bill passed by Congress last year. Five of these companies also got benefits from the paycheck protection program, totaling more than $30m.
              Despite this, almost every one of the fossil-fuel companies laid off workers, with a more than 58,000 people losing their jobs since the onset of the pandemic, or around 16% of the combined workforces.

              How Much Tax Do Oil Companies Pay In Uk? MARCH 1, 2022
              https://www.ictsd.org/how-much-tax-do-oil-companies-pay-in-uk/

              UK has biggest fossil fuel subsidies in the EU, finds commission
              https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/23/uk-has-biggest-fossil-fuel-subsidies-in-the-eu-finds-commission

              The UK leads the European Union in giving subsidies to fossil fuels, according to a report from the European commission. It found €12bn (£10.5bn) a year in support for fossil fuels in the UK, significantly more than the €8.3bn spent on renewable energy.

              So the answer is even more obvious than the windfall tax, since there won’t need to be anything “demanded” by law, but the answer may be to simply not refunded to fossil fuel industry corporations their subsidies and tax relief benefits. Put them on Universal Credit, perhaps? That can be done in tandem with a windfall tax as well.

              Cut the fossil fuel industry tax relief and massive subsidies to minimum, or nothing at all, and use that money specifically for the poor and those working families who cannot pay the increases in fossil fuel bills so that they can feed themselves and their children and keep warm too.

              Not to salt all that away in government tax coffers to favour their Russian funders and paymasters and to pay for bombs to kill innocent civilians in Yemen, Syria and elsewhere in the world rather than actually doing anything about Russia and Ukraine but “sanctions”.

              But Boris of course is also talking about “golden geese” translated into Ballingdon Boy talk as “clobber”:
              Boris Johnson says Labour want to ‘clobber’ oil and gas profits as he defends fossil fuel giants
              https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-pmqs-energy-prices-loan-b2011155.html

              Such is not life. Such is avoidance of life. Such is fantasy and myth. Such is nothing at all. Such has no value or relevance in the Real World to real people.

              A lot of that about, it would more than appear…..error….error…..error…..error………

              • Oh dear!

                More of the same.

                I have already answered your point about the 1 in 5 deaths. Don’t accept it. Given my reasons. [Edited by moderator]

                The N.Sea will receive some encouragement for companies to stay in the area and produce taxes. Someone in the Treasury has to get that balance right, otherwise companies will just go to areas where production costs are lower and tax revenue will be lost to the UK. Boris is correct, that silliness from Labour is incorrect. They had not even bothered with an Impact Assessment as they knew it was silly and would only be picked up by those who couldn’t be bothered to consider the bigger picture. Goodness, even the SNP rubbished the whole thing, and they are not renowned for their arithmetic..

                But, then arithmetic doesn’t need to add up for some.

                I repeat, the Government has already announced £billions targeted to help those in fuel poverty. Some of that may have come from taxation upon the fuel companies.

                • Oops! Oh, Dear! Oh, Dear! Nope wrong again. That is fake news, false narrative and what can only be referred to as untrue….you cant run away from the truth, fantasy and myth merely prolongs the inevitable inconvenient truth……

                  You haven’t answered anything at all, who or whatever you are. Not once have you provided substantiated detailed fact checked and verified linked documents or anything at all to answer even one of my 20+ questions about the fact that 1 in 5 people dies worldwide per year of fossil fuel pollution. And that fossil fuel corporations salt away trillions of their profits away in accountancy generated offshore/onshore tax havens in fake multiple shell companies and move them around to avoid detection from the tax authorities.

                  As I said, blank denial is not an answer, it is merely a contrarian irrelevance.
                  [Edited by moderator]

                  Nope. Much better to answer the 20+ and rising questions and answer the subsidies and tax relief that the fossil fuel corporations get back, and give me all of that in substantiated fact linked proof, that anything I have said about fossil fuel pollution is not true in any way at all.

                  While you are at that, you/they/it can research for one good reason why a windfall tax and a reduction of subsidies and tax relief of the fossil fuel corporations other than the minimal tax they have to pay by law, and why that will not benefit the poor working families to heat their homes and feed themselves and their children. You/they/it carefully avoided that as well, I see.

                  It is no good attempting to brush off the facts by saying that the government will pay billions to the poor and energy poverty-stricken. Because that is money that the British taxpayer has paid to the government. The government only has the taxpayers’ money. They have none of their own. It is the fossil fuel corporations that are profiteering off this price rise now and in April. It is the fossil fuel polluting corporations that should pay for and support the poor and the energy poverty-stricken out of their trillions in tax havens and shell company trusts they have salted away. I see you/they/it do not mention that either. Dividend depletion phobia, perhaps?

                  Where has that “moralising” cry of the fossil fuel price rises in April will lead to poor working families being forced to choose between feeding themselves and their children or heating their homes, gone to? That evaporated quicker than a frack in Lancashire, didn’t it? A moraltoriam on morals and ethics, perhaps? (see what I did there? Ethics morals and moraltorium? No? Oh well, never mind)

                  Or are such professional moral and ethical codes of practice responsibilities and concerns only “academic” as you/they/it said?

                  [Edited by moderator]

                • So, people pay taxes to the Government! Shock/horror.

                  So do companies!

                  Government only has tax payers money? Nope-more fake news. How is that the UK has not been borrowing £billions upon £billions? Which has to be paid back via taxation upon UK companies and individuals. That is the real world, not the Wonderland that some seem to inhabit.

                  So, fossil fuel companies are paying more tax, as much of their tax is related to profitability. Kill off that golden goose and that will cease. And guess what? Then the individual would pick up more of the taxation burden. Typical anti idea. Dogma over reality and no interest in the outcome, yet pontificate about poverty. Absolute hypocrisy, not even an attempt at an Impact assessment.

                  So, I repeat, the golden goose is paying more tax and that is available for whatever the Government wish to do with it, including supporting those in fuel poverty. There is no need for a windfall tax, just keep the golden goose laying those golden eggs, and encourage her to pop out a few more. She will then not fly away but be there to rinse and repeat going forward, until she has moved past her egg laying age.

                  Oil and gas prices are dictated by the balance between supply and demand. Demand is currently a lot higher than supply, yet you suggest action that would result in reduced supply!! What a silly approach without any compassion for those in poverty, who suffer the most.

                  It may be awkward to address the issue that the world is so dependent upon fossil fuel after years of suggesting it isn’t, but I fear it is all too apparent to most people currently even without the resort to such silly contrived excuses.

                  The golden eggs will be encouraged whilst a few will try and justify killing off the goose. Only one winner. Thank goodness for reality over hysteria.

                • [Edited by moderator]

                  And pray, who pays all of that £$billons and £$billions of loans back to the central banks?

                  Oh, Yes! The taxpayer! Shock Horror! Regardless of whether that is a person or company. Not the government! That is the inconvenient Real World facts for you. Not your “Malice in Blunderland” magic money “golden goose” and “golden eggs” delusional fantasies.

                  Oops! Truth alert! Error! Error! Delete! Delete!

                  Once again. Sorry whoever, or whatever you are, there are no “golden geese” or “golden eggs” for that matter. It’s all a fantasy delusion. The Real World requires something to actually be done in the Real World about the severe circumstances that the fossil fuel corporations greed and profiteering have caused. Not those fantasy delusions about “golden geese” and “golden eggs”, from some fairy tale world of pixie dust and unicorns too obscure to be of any use to man nor beast.

                  Sorry, whoever, or whatever, you are. Merely attempting to protect the dividend payouts and to preserve the enormous profits of the fossil fuel industry, who salt the main hidden £$trillions of profits in offshore and onshore tax havens, won’t wash any more.

                  Nope. Real world solutions are required. And whoever, or whatever, you are? You have not provided one answer to any question about the deaths of 1 in 5 people from fossil fuel pollution per year, and you have not provided any excuse not to levy windfall taxes and to reduce the subsidies and tax relief on fossil fuel corporations to support for the people who will be forced to either pay their fuel bills or feed themselves and their children.

                  End of story.

                  Have a Nice Cry.

                  Enjoy!

                  Enjoy!

                • And another rinse and repeat of nonsense.

                  No, social media does not overcome truisms that have been established over centuries where populations see what happens and develop a statement that encapsulates it.

                  Golden geese will produce bigger and better golden eggs when the price of oil and gas is high, as profitability does that when it is taxed. A self generating windfall tax that requires no geese to be killed in the process. The N.Sea is no longer a cozy habitat for Golden Geese-see Cambo goose that decided it was not the best place to produce eggs-but, with some encouragement, others will stay and do so. A windfall tax would achieve the opposite.

                  UK requires those golden geese to be doing just that, to provide increased corporate taxation to be utilsed to help reduce the impact of the increase in fossil fuel prices to the public. That is what is happening. I await my chunk coming shortly, not too long after having received the winter fuel allowance. Killing off the golden geese is a silly suggestion that simply defines the lack of understanding that some seem so generous in demonstrating. It is very obvious why no impact assessment has been attempted for the suggestion of a windfall tax. It was a suggestion aimed at fooling the gullible and not worthy of one. I am not gullible. That is my reason not to support it.

                  I addressed your 1 in 5 nonsense, and will only repeat part of my comment:

                  My wife was told by 3 consultants she would not live more than 1 year longer without treatment that happened to involve a lot of fossil fuel derived products. There was no one from the BMA there telling her not to go ahead-if there had been they would have been told to go away and multiply. She had the treatment, so far so good with a lot more fossil fuel derived product going forward to allow that to continue. Leeches were not advised as her cure.

                  There are a lot more people alive, and living well due to fossil fuel derived products, than there are dying from any cause, let alone fossil fuel. Strange there are not studies being promoted around that? No, it isn’t, because that is well known already and requires no more publicity.

                  That is the reality of the situation, that some just want to try and weaponize. It really says more about their lack of understanding of reality than anything else, and what they will try and weaponize. And the BMA does have previous in that respect.

                  An interesting change of approach, though, from demonizing fossil fuel companies for existing, now to try and demonize them for not providing even more benefits to the public! Careful, the result may be even more reliance upon fossil fuel.

                  Still not qualified for the Champions League would be another way of putting it. But I did enjoy the excuse.

                • Air pollution is the biggest environmental threat to health in the UK, with between 28,000 and 36,000 deaths a year attributed to long-term exposure. There is strong evidence that air pollution causes the development of coronary heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease and lung cancer, and exacerbates asthma.
                  From:
                  Public Health England
                  Published on 11 March 2019
                  https://www.gov.uk/government/news/public-health-england-publishes-air-pollution-evidence-review

                  And what causes air pollution? Fossil fuels. Definitive evidence from HMG.

                  this also was sent to me by a friend only today:

                  Hearsay Evidence in United Kingdom
                  Definition of Hearsay Evidence
                  https://lawi.org.uk/hearsay-evidence/

                  “In accordance with the work A Dictionary of Law, this is a description of Hearsay Evidence : Evidence of the statements of a person other than the witness who is testifying and statements in documents offered to prove the truth of what was asserted. In general, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the rule against hearsay).”

                  There are exceptions however. But perhaps the evidence of the emanant British Medical Journal would take precedence over any decision.

                  So, if you are willing to submit your hearsay evidence to a Court Of Law. Then may I suggest you employ the services of a Solicitor, or a Barrister and supply them with your hearsay evidence, which will then be judged by the court as either appropriate to the facts, or not? Otherwise hearsay evidence is termed as “inadmissible”.

                  Shame.

                • You mean that air pollution exacerbated by all those doing the “right thing” and having a wood burner fitted? Or the Ash created for the Cash?

                  I do feel sorry for the doctors though. All those new injuries to deal with from use of E scooters. Hardly as significant as the problems the health professionals have in the DRC dealing with the issues amongst children handling cobalt, but must be annoying.

                  But, then what is inadmissible to some would not be ignored by any jury with any compassion.

                  Good job the legal system considers all the evidence.

                • Nope. I meant precisely what I said and I supplied the proof.

                  That fossil fuel pollution has been verified and substantiated by Public Health England
                  Published on 11 March 2019

                  In case you missed the quote:

                  “Air pollution is the biggest environmental threat to health in the UK, with between 28,000 and 36,000 deaths a year attributed to long-term exposure. There is strong evidence that air pollution causes the development of coronary heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease and lung cancer, and exacerbates asthma.”

                  That is only long term exposure, short term fossil fuel air pollution exposure, particularly for children in their development and growth, is far more pernicious. you cant have failed to notice, how younger and younger children are now suffering from heart and lung conditions, sometimes fatal, when those numbers were extremely rare previously. So how many short and long term health conditions have not been associated with fossil fuel air pollution, due to lack of knowledge of just precisely what causes such conditions, but are a direct effect of fossil fuel pollution?

                  2020 population figures indicate that there were from:
                  https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates

                  “The population of the UK at mid-year 2020 was estimated to be 67.1 million people” approximately 579,800 deaths from all causes.

                  So some mathematics would indicate that’s about 0.053% of the total population. However, deaths from all causes in UK 2020: 579,800, out of a population of 67.1 million. So 1 in 5 of 579,800 = 115,960 overall deaths from fossil fuel pollution. Not an entirely glowing result for the fossil fuel industry is it?

                  As for the legal position on hearsay, well that is in their jurisdiction, everyone has to abide by that. That is democracy in action. Some will not be happy about that, but that is reality for you.

                  You can appeal of course. But not to me.

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s