Would Tom Greatrex please stop fucking lying?

Finally George Osborne seems unable to resist repeating one of the most pervasive myths of shale gas extraction in the UK: that it will deliver significantly cheaper energy bills, as in the USA.

Differences in geology, extraction rights and the market realities (including the fact that the UK is plugged into a European market many times larger than itself, whereas the US is currently unable to export shale) mean experts have repeatedly warned that this is unlikely to be the case.

They include the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser, David MacKay, who said that “the effect of UK shale gas production on gas prices is likely to be small.”

This is complete nonsense.

As discussed at length here.

Shale is not likely to reduce prices particularly from where they are now. However, shale will reduce prices substantially from where they are predicted to be if we don’t frack for shale.

The important point to recall is that DECC forecasts that gas prices are going to double in the coming decades. It’s the only way they can make their ridiculous sums about renewables add up. And the forecasts are that shale will stop that doubling. Which indeed is not a reduction in current prices but then only a mendacious fuckwit would use that to insist that shale will not reduce energy bills.

10 comments on “Would Tom Greatrex please stop fucking lying?

  1. Is anybody taking into account that other European countries probably (in some cases we already know, certainly) have large reserves and will exploit them too?

    Shale gas will have a positive effect on prices. Stopping them going up (if you wish to keep investing in washed -out useless’green’ sources) or reducing them (a little or substantially depending on your policies). It will lead to cleaner air, warmer people, more industrial investment (and heaven forbid, jobs), greater energy security and reliability, less subsidy expense (watch out windmills), a lower land-print, faster incorporation to the network and time to examine other reliable, cost-effective sources for the future.

    Mr. Putin and the arab producers are truly worried about it and they should be. I cannot think of a single Russian or middle-east consumer product that I would buy.

    It is a true boost to the economy because it is a natural resource and needs no input to create it. It is a gift. Some might see it as a gift from God. Personally, I just think we are real lucky!

    We can, if we want, regulate and tax it until it does us no good. But you would have to be a very, very people-hating person to do that, wouldn’t you?

  2. The automatic corollary of the claim that shale won’t reduce gas prices because the EU market is insatiable is that there will be an insatiable market for our gas at current prices, which means we will have an incredibly favourable trade gap.

    If we just allow the effort to be made.

    Inexplicably none of those pushing the “it won’t reduce prices” argument, including our state broadcaster, ever mention the “the high prices mean vast amounts of money” corollary.

  3. The comment keps on being made that it won’t reduce energy prices because so much will be exported. And they say that as if it were a bad thing! In any other circumstance, such a boost to our exports would be grabbed with both hands!

  4. No-one at the Guardian or the BBC wants any kind of economic boon to land while the Tories are in (some semblance of) power.

    Bilbaoboy – dates and hookers.

  5. It’s clear enhanced methane (and other hydrocarbons) recovery is a threat to a whole raft of vested interests – stating the obvious I know, but when you line them up:

    (1)Greens & eco NGO crew – their touted “renewables” start to look more obscene that ever.

    (2)Mainstream UK Politicos – “we’re greener than you” see (1)

    (3)UK Public Servants – “we’re greener than you” see (1)

    (4)Mainstream Media (esp BBC) – “we’re greener than you” see (1)
    (5)UK Mainstream Academia – “we’re greener than you” see (1)
    (6)Eco subsidy freeloader contingent -(STOR crews, wind, biomass, solar etc., etc.)

    (7)Existing gas exporters – protecting their margins/investment, as you do.

    (8)Existing gas retailers – price fluctuations are unwelcome as is any transparency in pricing.

    (9)Nuclear business – nothing to do with France “banning fracking”?

    is it any real surprise?

    I don’t claim that it’ll be a “miracle cure” because I’ve seen millions lost on geology gambles in oil, gold, bauxite, iron ore, diamonds – but it’ll be a bit of a miracle if a few wells get drilled and treated with the massed overt and covert opposition in place. There are a few cracks beginning to appear (I’ll get my coat…) but the opposition is well organised and lavishly funded.

    The geology based hazards touted are provably pretty trivial – so the obstruction emphasis is shifted onto far more subjective areas. Even the threat of a clean, relatively lower cost source of energy is enough to spur those with something to lose into action. This is a disruptive technology and must be resisted / tamed / fashioned to our own ends…

    Locomotive Acts anybody?

  6. Indeed.

    There is no way that any kind of lowered energy price should be allowed.

    To do so would be my death warrant as the director of a particularly profitable company

    signed

    The chairmen of all the current energy generation utilities…

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.