Liz Truss to be PM: Reaction

The result of the Conservative Party members ballot, at 12.40pm, confirmed that Liz Truss will be the UK’s new prime minister.

DrillOrDrop has reported her views on fracking We’ve also reported on lobbying for a lifting of the moratorium and relaxation of planning and seismicity rules.

There have been reports that Ms Truss is considering a £100bn package to help households with rising energy bills. But there has been no detail or confirmation.

We’re compiling reaction to the election from people and organisations with an interest in onshore oil and gas. We will update throughout the day as we get more comments.

Ms Truss, a member of the government since 2012 and a former management accountant for Shell, received 81,326 votes, 47% of eligible Conservative members. Her rival, Rishi Sunak, got 60,399 votes.

“Strengthen windfall tax on excess profits”

Dave Timms, head of political affairs at Friends of the Earth, said:

“As our new prime minister, Liz Truss will have to get in step with the majority of people who are dreading a devastating winter of soaring fuel and food bills, amid a spiralling cost of living crisis.

“This means putting people and the planet first by strengthening the windfall tax on the excess profits of oil and gas giants to fund a package of emergency support and energy efficiency measures.

“It’s saying no to lifting the ban on fracking, no to new coal and no to exploiting more North Sea oil and gas. These out of touch, short-sighted proposals will do little to tackle the energy crisis and will only lock us into expensive and polluting fossil fuels for decades to come.

“Truss has the solutions to address both the energy and climate crises at her fingertips. Her first actions must be immediate targeted support and investing in a nationwide, street-by-street home insulation programme, which could save millions of people £1,000 or more on their energy bills.

“Energy efficiency measures and cheap renewables are the best fixes for boosting energy security and bringing down fuel bills – they’re quick to develop and are universally popular with the public.”

IGas shares up

Shares in the shale gas company, IGas, rose more than 18% this morning to more than 96p.

“Need to freeze energy bills”

The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, said:

“I’d like to congratulate our next Prime Minister Liz Truss as she prepares for office. But after 12 years of the Tories all we have to show for it is low wages, high prices, and a Tory cost of living crisis. Only Labour can deliver the fresh start our country needs.”

Responding to reports that Liz Truss was considering freezing energy prices, Keir Starmer commented before the announcement:

We need to freeze energy bills, that’s why Labour set that out very, very clearly, weeks ago now. So I want to see that happen. It’s very important that it’s very clear who pays for this, we’ve been clear that oil and gas companies who’ve made excess profits this year should have a windfall tax, which would then pay for the energy freeze.

So yes, we want an energy freeze. It’s vital for families and households across the country. I want to see that happen. There’s no justification for an incoming prime minister not doing it, because the political will is there across the political parties.

Shale gas industry congratulations

The onshore industry organisation, UKOOG, tweeted congratulations to the new party leader. UKOOG has been pushing for relaxation of the earthquake limits on fracking and proposals for fast-tracking shale gas schemes through the planning system.

“Climate-wrecking idealogue”

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas tweeted

“Disaster for UK and climate”

Green Party co-leader, Carla Denyer, said:

“Liz Truss being selected to become prime minister, by such a small and unrepresentative group of people, is a disaster for the UK and the climate. The reported plans to encourage the oil and gas industry will do nothing to help households as they struggle with eye-watering energy bills.”

Top priorities

Greenpeace UK said the priorities for the new prime minister would be to freeze energy bills, insulate homes, no new oil and gas developments and rapidly expand cheaper renewables.

“Freeze energy bills”

Scotland’s first minister tweeted:

“Beware of creating stranded assets”

Sam Hall, of the Conservative Environment Network, said:

“Liz Truss will take office at a time of multiple crises with environmental issues at their core.”

He referred her to the organisation’s blog which sets out what it thinks she should do. It warned new oil and gas developments would take “several years for new exploration to result in production”.

“For that reason, she should be wary of creating stranded assets at a time when oil and gas demand will fall sharply, thanks to Putin’s war in Ukraine putting rocket-boosters under European decarbonisation. In addition, the maturity of the North Sea basin means UK production costs are higher than elsewhere.”

“Follow-through on promises”

Union Jack Oil, which has investments in the Wressle site in Lincolnshire, and West Newton in East Yorkshire, tweeted:

UKOG shares up

Shares in UK Oil & Gas, which has repeatedly said it is not a fracking company, rose 21% during the morning to 0.1p.

“Good time to become a divestment campaigner”

UK Divest responded:

“Ex-Shell Liz Truss wants to approve 130 new oil and gas licenses which will fuel the cost of living crisis and climate breakdown. If you’re not a divestment campaigner, now’s as good a time as any to start.”

“New oil and gas licences won’t help”

The Stop Cambo campaign against new drilling in the Cambo field off Shetland tweeted:

“Clean energy answers”

Labour’s energy spokesperson, Ed Miliband, tweeted:

“The answer to the fossil fuel crisis is a clean energy sprint. Solar and wind energy are currently nine times cheaper than gas. But Truss wants to block solar, says nothing about lifting the onshore wind ban, not the mission we need to insulate homes.”

41 replies »

  1. Keir Starmer commented “But after 12 years of the Tories all we have to show for it is low wages, high prices, and a Tory cost of living crisis”.
    I’d personally call it a cost of lockdown crisis, for which Starmer was calling for more of!

    • We had 10 years of austerity, 20,000 police officers axed, libraries closed, legal aid and legal budgets axed, zero pay rises for nurses, doctors and other front line services. Whether you support Brexit or not none of us can deny that trade and business has not been negatively impacted, you just have to look at the number of businesses that no longer export to Europe . We then had the pandemic and a war in Ukraine contributing to the high energy costs. But look at how badly the U.K. is performing compared to other European countries, how we have the worst decline in GDP in the G7, lowest economic growth forecast in the G7, higher inflation, how we have become poorer over time compared to our European neighbours.
      Austerity, a lack of investment, failing to insulate buildings, we have the worst performing housing stock in Europe, failing to transition away from our over dependency on gas more quickly is now leaving us in the dreadful position we find ourselves in. If David Cameron hadn’t “cut the green ****” and hadn’t wasted a decade going “all out for shale” we would be billions better off. The government cannot shy away from the impact of their decisions over the last 12 years.
      The worry is we risk having more of the same with Liz Truss.
      The CBI is squarely behind net zero, I’m not sure they would welcome a climate sceptic JRM heading up BEIS.



      • In 2021, the UK imported £14.5 billion of gas from Norway, which accounted for 77% of all gas imports, there are more renewable’s now and licenses than there have ever been….. WHAT is your point? MAYBE you should pay more TAX? Or you a devout Labour suporter?

        Cameron initiated, but people haven’t been sitting on their hands, It has not taken 12 years of impact over decisions.

        • I pay tax, but that is irrelevant. I am not a devout Labour supporter are you a devout Conservative supporter? More irrelevance. My point is because of poor decisions and lack of progress we, as a country, have been left over dependent on gas. Gas a climate destroying fossil fuel. We could have more renewables and be less dependent on gas and have reduced emissions further. And we lost over a decade due to David Cameron cutting back on green energy and green investment. It was not all to do with lockdown nor Starmer. Has that been understood in the playground now?

          • You cannot run everything on renewable!!!! Period! Renewable’s produces electricity!! You require the derivatives, these are produced by fossil fuels, what do the greens not understand!! WE CANNOT AFFORD TO GO CARBON NEUTRAL! Hence the Energy Crisis! You say we have been left dependent on Gas, what do you propose we should use as al alternative to gas, providing renewable’s do NOT fill the gap with the required derivatives. Transport, Medical, the UK food supply chain requires hundreds of thousands of miles of airline miles, unless you want to eat seasonal UK fruit and Veg. Good Luck! Carbon Net Zero is NOT Sustainable. Do some research!!!

          • KatT, we have over 52GW of heavily subsidised renewable generating capacity. That’s above the highest demand peak of 48.76GW seen during winter 2021.

            During 2021 that 52GW of renewable capacity produced 39.6% of the UK’s total electricity demand.

            The important point you seem to keep missing, is that electricity only provides 19% towards our total energy demand.

      • Well, looking at your confused post, I am not surprised you then quoted the CBI, KatT!

        I am sure British industry would welcome competitive energy costs. Those countries who do not have competitive energy costs will indeed suffer an economic slowdown. Whilst OPEC decide to control production to keep prices up, and Putin adds to that! Maybe taking back control could become a slogan?

        Shying away from decisions? It is that shying away for the last 20-30 years that has UK in the position it is in. Your solution? Just a lot more of the same. Nope, more of the same gives the same result, but bigger.

        Shale-I think you have just got the gig (using anti parlance.)

        It will not take long, but I suspect your draft is much nearer to what will happen, compared to the desperate lobbying of those who feel they will be disappointed.

          • You mean the facts that there was a Banking Crisis, that has still not been recovered from, KatT?

            And, that in spite of that, there was only austerity lite, with the (successful) policy being adopted it was better to keep people in work even if it meant they might not get huge annual pay increases?

            Or, that UK came out of the pandemic earlier than other European countries, so had the growth from that, and now other European countries are doing the same? (Although the whole recovery bit is now swamped by cost of energy issues.)

            Rather important points to ignore. When you do, you simply distort recent history, and most memories do cover a 10 year span. So easy to “forget” and create a narrative-but it is not a correct one, and indeed others will have understood that.

  2. Rumour has it Moggy will become Minister for Business!

    Maybe that is why Egdon/Igas/Angus/UKOG share prices are all shooting up.

    Perhaps it was coupled with her promise to “deliver, deliver, deliver”.

    (After 12 years of Labour opposition they have yet to have a female leader, but do have a Sir, who happens to use moisturizer. Not sure that is an alternative. What strange times.)

  3. I’m just working on Truss’ first press release….

    “I am today announcing decisive action in response to the current energy crisis facing households and industry in the U.K. This crisis was not of our making, but brought on by President Putin’s destructive and unwarranted decision to cut off gas supply to mainland Europe. He must not be allowed to use energy supplies to support his barbaric invasion of Ukraine. Not only will I be putting an immediate cap on energy bills I will be taking steps to ensure our energy security long term..

    Under our feet we have vast reserves of gas waiting to be harvested and if only 10% of that resource is realised it could provide a reliable source of energy for our people for the next 50 years. We cannot allow our children and elderly to be held to ransom by a vicious despot. I will be taking immediate steps to bring planning matters related to onshore and North Sea gas and oil exploration under my government’s direct control. This is an emergency situation. Winston Churchill’s government during the Second World War, managed to drill 100 oil wells in just one year to support the oil needs of our armed forces. We will bring forward. the same determination to our needs today. We will take firm and uncompromising action to ensure our future energy security is ensured.

    At the same time we will not forget the need to consider the need to reduce greenhouse gases and urban pollution but at the present moment the energy needs of our people must take precedence. There is no alternative. “

    First draft but I’m quite pleased with it so far.

    • ‘I will be taking immediate steps to bring planning matters related to onshore and North Sea gas and oil exploration under my government’s direct control.’
      Direct control? With Jacob Rees Mogg as Business Secretary making the decision? What happened to the moratorium on fracking would be lifted ‘if local communities support it?’
      If Liz Truss were to contemplate employing this as a press release it would only confirm the impression already held by many that she is about as reliable as her predecessor on the truth front. Her prospective scriptwriter would also do well to remember that Ms Truss has been voted into office by just 81,326 out of a population of around 67 million and that the 2019 Tory manifesto stated that the moratorium on fracking would remain in place until there was any scientific evidence that seismic events in relation to fracking could be predicted and controlled in a way that prevented damage and disruption and was acceptable to local communities. Since the government seem to be reluctant to publish the BGS report into said scientific evidence it appears doubtful the BGS’ conclusions have been favourable to the frackers.
      Her enthusiasm for fracking smacks more of her puppet masters in the climate change denying ERG than supplying any energy needs of the people. Truss’s ally, Kwasi Kwarteng admits, even if it was possible, commercial production would have no effect on the energy crisis since it would be years away and any gas produced would be sold on the open, global market to the highest bidder. As he himself said ‘the fracking companies aren’t charities.’

  4. Never let a good crisis get in the way of profit, I’m sure there will be lots of unforeseen holdups, the industry already knows what the reaction will be , we’ve had years of experience and have learned a lot of new tricks 😊

  5. Hmm, Jono.

    You may need a lot of new tricks if the locals are supporting and you are against, and adding significantly to their energy bills.

    Stampede management may be required. Not usually that successful. Get out of the way or be trampled underfoot.

  6. Oh dear , Oh dear , have you heard the desperate pro-frackers on here ???????

    Even knowing the proven health impacts , the environmental and climate impacts of the high energy intensive, scraping the bottom of the fossil fuel process, otherwise known as Fracking is ….. They just don’t care .

    They just don’t care about the health of you or your children .

    They just don’t care about the environmental or climate impacts .

    They just don’t care that homes in Fracking areas will plumit in value … They also don’t care that these homeowners will find it difficult to obtain buildings insurance.

    These are the FACTS and the health, climate and environmental impacts of Fracking are indisputable , for anyone disputing what I say , I will be delighted to put forward the evidence on this page .

    Sadly you will quickly note , that some of these PRO-Frackers like MARTIN and ELI-GOTH have a touch of temporary blindness , or they just pretend they can’t see the evidence when it’s put forward.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, think about what I’ve said and if you have any doubts, just Google , Fracking Cancer, Fracking birth defects , Fracking home values, it’s all there ……..

    REMEMBER……… The effects of Asbestos and Smoking were known decades before the truth came out …… Sadly in this world some people are willing to protect the most toxic of industries , for the same of MONEY .

    What a world we live in .

    [Typo corrected at poster’s request]

    • Nope. That is pure conjecture based upon some selected USA stuff., or even more conjecture for stuff predicted for the UK without any experience at all to base it upon-commonly known as fabrication. And, amongst that can be found not only that, but stuff put forward to show something that a bit of delving will show the opposite-see previous post about Chesapeake Energy, where 2020 had to be proposed as a “normal year” to make the piece get hammered into the jigsaw . 2020 was a very abnormal year, for people and for industry. Not sure how many people found 2020 a normal year, but I don’t know any, and yet that is what has to be believed to accept this nonsense.

      Meanwhile ladies and gentlemen, whilst gas was $47 per MMBtu in Holland, it was $7 per MMBtu in USA.

      So, I can see that evidence, I can see the evidence of 53% of people local to possible fracking sites supporting fracking if it helps their energy costs, indicating they are aware of that. So, a lot of people are indeed very interested in money now and for this winter. Those who are not, are amongst the fortunate few, but should do better than insult those less fortunate where money is not only important, but may be vital.

      Just remember $7 v $47, and who wishes the UK to be in the $47 category. Then, ask why? For the sake of MONEY. Unfortunately, ladies and gentlemen, as you are observing, it is your money.

      • OH dear MARTIN ,

        Still in ” denial ”

        Well let’s see what the readers choose to believe.

        You , with your OPINIONS backed up with the usual sweet nothing , or the Peer Reviewed Studies and reports from professional , credible organizations that JACK puts forward.

        How about this MARTIN from HARVARD UNIVERSITY school of Public Health

        FRACKING linked to increased risk of early DEATH


        What are your thoughts???????

        • USA Jack. They also have forest fires caused from poorly maintained electricity distribution. So, UK should stop our electricity distribution?

          Meanwhile, just to note how Jack operates, apart from Chesapeake Energy recently, I take you back to when the National Trust were trying to prevent seismic surveys by INEOS. They failed, as INEOS challenged, and it was shown they did not have the authority to stop it-which just about every landowner in the area concerned already knew. Not only a waste of time, but a waste of funds.

          Jack, who at the time seemed unaware of criticism against the NT for how it was conducting it’s affairs, claimed that the numbers of members would be important in resisting INEOS, even whilst it was evident many staff and members were not happy with the NT management at that time.

          Fast forward to today, and reports show that the AGM for the NT is going to be a stormy affair. Why? Because NT members are still unhappy with NT spending/wasting membership money! There is even an organization, Restore Trust, who are seeking to place tighter controls upon what is done with members contributions.

          Jack’s response will be that is somehow hatred towards the NT! Nope, Jack, just knowledge of what the situation really is.

          So, for the really desperate stuff, Jack is your man (?).

          • OH dear MARTIN ,

            STILL DEEPLY BITTER against the National Trust .

            You just can’t get over the fact that they gave a firm two finger salute to all things Fracking on their land .

            MARTIN Let me assure you , it will stay that way . NO FRACKING

            MARTIN , you know nothing about the National Trust , like everything you say , it’s just your wild Off-The-Cuff OPINION backed up with the usual sweet nothing.

            MARTIN do you really want JACK to cut and paste an my comments on Chesapeake Energy again. , really ??????

            • MARTIN

              When it comes to seeing the hard facts , the real indisputable evidence that JACK puts forward on this forum , exposing the dangers of Fracking..

              Your STILL pretending you’ve not seen this evidence.

              WHY IS THAT ?????????

        • your scraping the barrel now jack of all trades master of none, i have just realised you have been typing in to a search engine the word ‘fracking’ and ‘c*ncer’ and posted obscure links to sites, with pure speculation and credibility hanging by a very thin thread of i would rephrase that again your credibility is well and truly shot!! As has been explained to you, on previous threads c*ncer is not specific to a all genetics and maybe accelerated and hosted by certain environmental or behavioral triggers. The tendency to develop some types of cancer is believed to be inherited — that is, the genes you were born with might carry a predisposition for cancer.

          You posting the above with NO merit of proof is absolutely absurd. Research does not mean search engine!! You should have concentrated a little more at Nursery with those crayons.

      • MARTIN ,

        LIZ TRUSS said that she would leave the final say on Fracking to LOCAL people to decide….

        On that basis , FRACKING is NOT going to happen.


        Who is going to be stupid enough to vote , to increase their own risk of Cancer, , Asthma and birth defects for new born children ???????

        Who s going to be stupid enough to vote , to decrease the value of their homes ???????

        Who is going to be stupid enough to vote for more noise, large vehicle movement, more airborne pollution, more light pollution in theirs villages and towns ???????

        Come on MARTIN even in your world , whether that be planet earth or Fraggle Rock , you can see that’s going to be a NON starter

        • On that basis, 53% would allow it to happen, Jack.

          But, you have decided that you wish to avoid those numbers. They still exist.

          Re. the NT, see what I mean?

          Jack, the NT were never involved in stopping fracking on their land. They were involved in trying to stop seismic testing on their land, having already been told no fracking would take place on their land. The area concerned has already had a lot of seismic testing because of the previous coal mining, so landowners in that area did have previous experience of what was required, and what could be insisted upon. NT decided to ignore that and then, what happened? They had to back down. No idea what that will have cost, but it will not be cheap. They stopped nothing. What stopped something was the moratorium in UK.
          So, Jack, why would I be bitter? I am no longer a member of the NT so how they waste money is of no concern to me, but it obviously is to others who are members-hence Restore Trust. Once again, you claim knowledge and then seem totally unaware of the conflict of interests that are not only still going on within the NT and it’s members but are predicted to become even more acute.
          Why would I be bitter Jack? Would it be MONEY? Nope, it was INEOS, who are privately owned, so no shareholders apart from the directors.

          So, in two bits of nonsense from you, you have confirmed what you posted a few hours ago. You know very little about the issues, and when that is challenged all that the readers get is a lot of nonsense. There are now so many repeats of exactly the same pattern, where does the nonsense end and reality begin, Jack? And, why would anyone bother trying to determine whether 90:10 or 50:50?

          • OK MARTIN ,

            YOU want JACK to join up the dots for you.

            So against Fracking are the National Trust , they were even firmly against the non intrusive seismic testing on their land….

            When taking note of the above you can see how strongly people are against all things Fracking related .

            • No, you did not join up the dots, Jack. Your dots have the usual pattern-that of a blunderbuss.

              Good attempt at deflection, mixed with evasion and backtracking, but NT LOST! Then there was the moratorium, so nothing transpired, except the NT had a legal bill after they LOST.

              No wonder Restore Trust is so anxious that members money is not wasted, who perhaps just want to enjoy the experience NT can offer, without having to pay an arm and a leg due to overheads that could, and should have been avoided. You may be surprised Jack, but the RSPCA have been through a similar process, where many will support much of the day to day activity, but deplore their excursions into activism that takes resource for better, or less costly, day to day activities.

              Maybe bitterness to you is getting the facts straight. However, I prefer to think of it as reality.

              • MARTIN

                WHAT don’t you understand, NOBODY wants Fracking , especially the 2nd largest landowner in the UK ,the National Trust and that’s fantastic news. 😀

                Now if a company like INEOS has to use bully boy tactics with court action , to get permission to do simple, non invasive seismic testing on National Trust land , then this clearly spells out even to the most basic life forms on this planet, Fracking is NOT welcome in any shape or form .

                • So, still ignoring the 53% then, Jack. So, more denial.

                  Not the fault of INEOS that someone thought they could interfere with a legitimate right. They did try and sort with the NT and avoid the need for legal action.

                  So, as you state now, simple non invasive seismic testing with no fracking intended at the end of it on NT land.

                  What a waste of time and money. Make a gesture by all means, but not with other people’s money without their agreement. So, Restore Trust has a job to do.

                  As far as your silly comment about the petition, why would anyone want to sign that? (Goodness, your search engine must be worn out.) Those petitions end up with what? Boaty Macboatface! (Some more time on your search engine may be needed for that.) It will be the people local who will decide, if the moratorium is lifted. You have stated that yourself. 53% Jack. Remember them? The ones you dismissed as nobodies.

                  I am surprised you take so much effort Jack after having insulted most of the UK population. The target audience remaining is not that large.

                  You do realize Jack-probably not as it might not feature on your search engine-that in UK many communities were very much against wind turbines in their locality UNTIL they were offered inducements, including discounted energy bills and then they suddenly changed their minds? Similar with EVs. Inducements needed before UK would accept them. UK people quite like inducements.
                  So, perhaps wise not to dismiss the 53%, they are just showing what others have already shown. But you will, as they are inconvenient and you are unable to account for that.

                • OH MARTIN please ,

                  Let JACK remind you again

                  When a petition reaches 100,000 signatures on the governments online petition website , it actually gets considered for debate in parliament .

                  The petition, END THE BAN ON FRACKING


                  After running for SIX MONTHS and ending on the 22nd August 2022 only got .

                  ” DRUM ROLL PLEASE ”

                  18,820 signatures out if a UK population of 68,661,014

                  You may now try and brush off the relevance of this particular petition , but I’d like to put money on it it that you you and your close chums in the pro fracking movement worked tirelessly to try and get this petition of the ground

                  Again I say ,18,820 is the very best you could do out of a population of more than 68.66 MILLION people

                  So ABYSMAL is the pro fracking movement, that may I suggest the next time you have a conference, DO NOT under any circumstances book anything bigger than a small village church hall .

                  😅🤣😅 53% hahaha don’t make me laugh , pull the other one, it’s got bells on

                • Ahh, Jack, so you state in one post you are in agreement with letting the locals decide, and then at the first hint of measuring their opinion, you want to deny them their voice. It’s not novel, Jack. The same situation existed with on-shore turbines.

                  Now, that may make you laugh, you make a lot laugh yourself, but beyond that is the reality. You can try and deny that with your silly search engine activity, but fortunately the majority of people who do use a search engine in UK are a bit more professional at it than yourself.

                  For instance. Try plonking in “The link between power lines and wildfires in USA”, Jack.

                  (I will not supply the links. DYOR.)

                  Goodness, I could fill pages with the results, including the property destroyed and deaths resulting, and down in Texas where fracking is your focus, over 4000 wild fires reported that were a result from power lines in a three and a half year period.

                  Then, having filled DoD pages with the links, then I could hysterically propose, with lots of shouting, that no electricity distribution should happen in UK. Then, if that failed, I could add many more pages around the numbers of people killed domestically from electrical accidents or property destroyed from electrical malfunction. And, I am sure I could find some electrical company who had financial difficulties in the midst of the pandemic, and then ignore how well they did outside of the pandemic, claiming the pandemic was the normality.

                  Not worried whether it was an idea you came up with Jack, or one that was handed to you, but it is a desperately poor one.

              • OH and MARTIN ,

                Let’s talk about Fracking popularity then .

                Have you seen the results of this truly miserable petition , END THE BAN ON FRACKING ???????

                It’s on the governments public petition website.

                It ran for SIX MONTHS and ended on the 22nd August 2022…….. It got a total of 18,820 people signing the petition.


                In a UK population of more than 68.66 MILLION people , this petition gained a laughable, paltry 18,820 votes.

                OH YES , SURE , Frackings really hitting the big time in popularity , HAHA

  7. Except analysis of the facts shows from lots of sources, not just the one below, state that fracking, even if it is viable, will not lower energy prices and will have barely any influence on energy security. North Sea gas production has increased by 26% but has had no impact on lowering prices.
    There is no certainty whether fracking will be viable or the size of the shale resource, BGS rowed back on their initial estimate. And when Cuadrilla’s claims were fact-checked it was shown over 20, 000 wells would need to be drilled and fracked, in our very small and densely populated country.
    And we mustn’t forget the government is back in court in March to provide more detailed plans to show how net zero will actually be delivered, tightening up on vague policy and wriggle room. Not sure how a fracking industry will fit into that.
    So Liz Truss might say all sorts but reality and facts are what count.


  8. That is not true, KatT.

    The proposal that has attracted 53% local support DOES lower energy prices. Ermm, maybe that is why 53%, when there wasn’t 53% when energy prices would not be significantly lowered?

    You have also forgotten the windfall tax. That DOES lower energy prices. There is no windfall tax if there is no UK production.

    So, two examples of where UK production does, or may, lower energy prices.

    Are there really so few factual arguments to support your proposition?

  9. The price of the financial support needed to stabilise energy prices for households and industry is reported to be 170 billion pounds, which is 5% of U.K. GDP or the same as the annual budget of the NHS. No wonder Liz Truss is looking to increase local supply.

    • Indeed Shalewatcher and as you say, Liz will see that we have local supply! The rest can burn manure, and live in a mud hut!

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