The UK government has rejected all the recommendations of a cross-party committee of MPs to speed up decarbonisation of energy supply.
The proposals included a clear end date for new licensing of oil and gas activities and for an earlier ban on flaring.
In January 2023, the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) said the end date for licences should “fall well before 2050”.
It also recommended that ministers consult on when the date should be, based on oil and gas production currently being planned by the UK and elsewhere and on the remaining global carbon budget if temperatures were to be limited to 1.5°C.
In its response to the committee, published today, the government said:
“While we are working to drive down demand for fossil fuels, even when the UK has achieved net zero in 2050, some oil and gas will be needed for certain industrial purposes and essential products.
“Even with significantly reduced fossil fuel use in 2050, the UK is projected to remain a net importer of both. A faster decline in domestic production would mean greater reliance on imports, at greater expense, and in the case of gas, potentially resulting in additional global emissions.”
The government added that it had implemented a climate compatibility checklist to assess whether offering new oil and gas licenses remained compatible with meeting climate targets. It said:
“it would not be helpful environmentally, economically or in terms of maintaining offshore skills for the transition, to reduce domestic production where this merely increases our dependency on imports.”
On flaring, the EAC had recommended:
“The routine flaring of unwanted fossil gas must be banned outright, as it has been by Norway since 1971.”
It said the government should introduce an amendment to the Energy Bill to provide for a “total prohibition” of flaring from installations in UK jurisdiction not later than the end of 2025.
In response, the government said it already had “ambitious to end routine flaring and venting”. It said:
“As well as the challenging target we set of 2030, we have signed up to The World Bank Zero Routine Flaring initiative, which aims to eliminate routine flaring of gas globally.
“Under the initiative we have committed to make every effort to ensure that routine flaring from existing oil fields ends as soon as possible, and no later than 2030.”
The EAC said today:
“Ministers have not engaged in a meaningful way with many of the committee’s recommendations and have not acknowledged the slow progress achieved through policy incentives on energy efficiency in the past 10 years.”
The committee said it looked forward to “more significant” government announcements later in March on what ministers are calling “green day”. The energy security and net zero secretary had predicted these announcements to be a “big bang moment”. They will include publication of a revised version of the net zero strategy and the government’s response to the net zero review by Chris Skidmore.
The EAC chairman, Philip Dunne MP, said:
“Over the course of several months our committee heard from expert witnesses on how the UK could phase out fossil fuels while ensuring that households could continue to power and heat their homes. Our report took forward many of these proposals, supported by evidence that the measures were practicable and achievable.
“It is therefore disappointing to find not only that in its response to our report the Government failed to accept a single recommendation, but also that it did not engage at all with many of the proposals we had made.
“Instead, we received a response which reiterated existing policy initiatives. These initiatives in themselves are clearly insufficient to accelerate emissions reductions at a pace necessary to put us firmly on the path to net zero.”
Mr Dunne said the government had another chance, later this month, to demonstrate its ambition by setting out achievable targets and coherent action plans.
DRILL OR DROP? 
Well the Conservative Government has managed to reduce our life expectancy and now wants to make us extinct.
How does reducing our domestic production and increasing imports have any impact on life expectancy in the UK? And make us extinct?
Suggest you read the linked document to get some global background on the continuing but declining use of hydrocarbons.
Click to access bp-energy-outlook-2023.pdf
Oh, before that happens Paula C your plastic keyboard will have worn out!
Life expectancy has actually risen since fossil fuels started to be utilized. Perhaps it is the ambulances, perhaps many other things, but it is the reality. Meanwhile, I notice whenever there is a natural disaster there is still a sudden need for fossil fuel to save people’s lives and maintain their life expectancy. Your solution? Exactly. Let them become extinct.
In your own little piece of the world, Martin, and of course, that’s all that matters.
The crassness of Martin’s inevitable and totally expected contribution to the common good scarcely needs underlining to those with an ounce of intelligence or empathy.
The problem of course is that he takes himself seriously, but then so do most of his ilk.
My advice, Paula, for what it’s worth, and I know this isn’t much, is “Don’t take the bait and feed the ego!”
MFC is a big contributor to this page and I agree; ‘Don’t take the bait and feed the ego’. When people, like most of the right and tories, who are entrenched in fossil fuels and reluctant to save what’s left of us. you really are banging your head against the wall. Fortunately, the opinion of the people is growing against the glib, head in the sand fossilers.
From ons.gov.uk
The UK imported £30.0 billion of oil in 2021 (£17.6 billion crude oil, £12.4 billion refined oil), and exported £28.3 billion of oil (£17.9 billion crude oil, £10.4 billion refined oil).
Norway was the UK’s main crude oil supplier in 2021, with 49.9% (£8.8 billion) of the total crude oil imports coming from Norway (Figure 5). Russia was the primary supplier of refined oil in 2021, with 24.1% (£2.9 billion) of total refined oil imports coming from Russia.
The UK primarily exported crude oil to the Netherlands (£6.2 billion) and China (£3.9 billion). Refined oil was mainly exported to the Netherlands (£2.4 billion) and Belgium (£2.1 billion).
So how about cutting exports and thereby cut the need for imports.
As far as 1720 and Jeanne, well they didn’t take the bait. They just waffled on about individuals, without knowledge.
Entrenched in fossil fuels? What a very silly piece of fake news. I use fossil fuel, as every other poster on this page does. I don’t use the opportunity to declare my virtue, or beat myself up, about doing so. You create the demand Jeanne, why whinge about those willing to supply it? If you don’t want to eat something, don’t. If you don’t want something supplied, don’t buy it. It is demand that creates supply regarding fossil fuel, and has done so for a very long time. There are very few countries left in the world where it is the other way round. N.Korea and a few others. I trust you have no need of medical intervention as you may find the leaches were replaced many years ago by many advances thanks to fossil fuels. I trust you have a small dietary intake, as without fertilizer there wouldn’t be a lot of food produced in this country. Look at current food price inflation at levels that are hurting the poorest. The reason? The cost of the agricultural inputs, with the huge rise in fertilizer prices one of the major ones.
Those who are ignoring those consequences have the gall to talk about having empathy. What a load of ignorant opinion. They need to get educated. I can help them to start at the beginning. “Fact,” something that is true. “Empathy”, what you would apply to one of the poorest nations in the world to be able to develop from being one of the poorest nations in the world, such as Mozambique.
Meanwhile, the licenses are going ahead. People’s opinions? They want to have energy they can afford, and their employers can afford, and ignore lies about energy security from places they have no control over. Sorry, that one was as daft as believing the sun always shines and the wind always blows. It really is not difficult. If you do not control the source of supply you have no control upon the security of that supply. A supply contract? Nope, force majeure. Goodness, even Malcolm is half way there!
Just received an E-mail from my energy supplier. My monthly DD up £67 per month from April 1st. Would be even more without those “nasty” UK oil and gas companies paying 75% tax to be redirected to keep the price down. The ones over the horizon are not contributing, they are filling their pockets. Even Shell are not contributing that much as they have decided over the horizon has less costs applied from “opinions”. Perhaps the opinionated would like to empathetically contribute having produced those consequences? Doubt it. I am, even though not contributing to those consequences.
I wonder how many of the virtue signalers on this site have been gifting the fossil fuel windfall tax contribution to their energy bills to charity? Must be a lot, if the opinions of the people are that strong. LOL.😊
Thanks for the humour. If it was not that, then it would be hypocrisy, so I will think kindly and go with humour.
Enjoy your weekend, and let’s hope the cold winds from the north starting on Sunday don’t last too long. My tomatoes are ahead of themselves, and “we” wouldn’t want to be importing more stuff “we” can produce ourselves, would “we”? Not unless “we” are a tomato exporter, or shipper!
Malcolm – The UK can’t refine and manufacture the amount of oil-based products it uses. Overall refinery capacity in the UK has fallen by around 30% since 2010. This means we rely on other countries to produce the products we need.
Oil from the UKCS is mainly ‘premium crudes’, meaning they are relatively simple to refine and in high demand. Much of it is transported to refineries in hubs around Europe. Some are in the UK and others in nearby countries such as the Netherlands.
Each refinery specialises in different grades of crude oil and producing particular fuels and chemicals. The UK then imports the fuels and other refined products that it needs to balance customer demand with domestic refinery production.
Essentially the UK is part of a network of refineries with countries exporting and importing according to which specialised products they produce and need.
Historically the UK refineries were configured to refine crude oil from the Middle East which was lower grade and sour. Unlike UKCS crude which is generally light and sulphur free.
Oil from Norwegian fields Ula, Gyda, Ekofisk, Valhall & Hod is transported by pipeline to Teesside in the UK – this will probably be recorded as imports. There is no pipeline to Norway for these fields.
Imports are generally flat year on year; exports are decreasing as UKCS fields deplete.
Most of our diesel was imported from Russia; this has been replaced by diesel from the Middle East.
It is not as simple as replacing imports by cutting exports.
Well you couldn’t make it up. The government’s first climate strategy was deemed unlawful in the High Court last July and despite all warnings and recommendations its latest plans are even worse and to be presented on “Green Day”. This is spitting in the face of people, nature and science. This government is criminally liable for mass murder, past and future.
What on earth is “Green Day”??
Obviously so popular there is one Green in the HoC. Good job the majority decide for the other 364 days, so one day in 365 seems pretty generous. I do still remember with a smile the car crash interview when the Greens tried to explain their way they would run the economy! Just a thought, but maybe that is a key reason there is only one?
“Just a thought”! A thought! If only! It’s your leitmotiv., Martin.
The ‘Blues’ have done a really good job on the economy, haven’t they? Why ever should we want to give a socially- and humanitarian- oriented party a chance? Too much integrity, perhaps?
If I ever needed a justification for giving my vote to the Greens, I need no further reason than the smirk underlying the smile above. Not much chance of indulgently smiling at the Blues’ management of the economy.
‘Green Day’, as the article makes clear, is the day the Blues have chosen to present what promises to be a non-event – their green -washed answer to the planet’s environmental problems which they have exacerbated. In the face of all the advice concerning expediting the demise of FFs, the Blues wish to give them a new lease of life. Why? To save the planet, stupid!
Drill! Drill! Listen to the cash registers!
Well, 1720, you can add your vote to anyone you like. It may make a difference but it may not.
Based upon your previous understanding of what Parties have been actually doing, which I could reference again if you like, then you can add to the other uniformed voters.
For those who have welcomed the support within their cost of living from the 75% tax paid by the oil and gas companies then just maybe they would like them to be encouraged to stay and pick up those costs rather than clear off over the horizon, pay less tax and still produce on behalf of UK consumer who ends up with no windfall, higher prices and the value of their currency reduced for when they have the temerity to want to holiday abroad.
Meanwhile, USA, EU and UK have committed over £1 trillion to Green. That is a pretty noisy cash register. Yet, “we” still have to rely upon oil and gas to extract us from the mire! Never mind, you can just deny the arithmetic and the physics. Too late, already done but £1 trillion plus now in black and white. Now to start explaining why it is not working initially, to rehearse for much more later. As a starting point, if bans are applied by certain countries to stop “Green” biofuel from cereals, will the compensation to those who built the factories come out of the £ trillion? What about the forest trashed by Mr.Musk in Germany? Tree re-planting to come out of it? There could be a whole lot of process without much progress.