PowerSwitch Main Page
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

This is on a government website

Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Government and Society
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 9063
Location: south east England

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2015 10:12 pm    Post subject: This is on a government website Reply with quote



Shale gas – an inconvenient truth for the anti-fracking lobby

Andrea Leadsom, Minister of State, 23 September 2015 — Shale gas

Energy strategy in Britain has three big goals; keeping the lights on, keeping the bills down, and moving to a clean energy future.

We need to meet the UK’s demand for energy, using clean and low carbon energy sources if we are to continue to combat climate change and grow the economy – a point emphasised in the recent report from the independent Task Force on Shale Gas.

This isn’t something which will simply happen overnight, it will take time as we start to move to more renewable and low carbon energy sources. There is a big challenge in how we get from where we are today – dependent on coal and gas for over 50% of our energy – to a low carbon future. Moving from coal to gas would make a huge contribution to reducing our carbon footprint, and is the ‘bridge’ we need for many years to come.

The anti-fracking lobby seem to think there is a bottomless pit of bill-payers’ money to fund renewable energy generation. There isn’t, and even if there was, we would still need gas – as a reliable source of electricity when the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow.

Even as our reliance on fossil fuels for generating electricity reduces, we will still need to use gas for heating and cooking in our homes and for producing products including soap, paint, clothes and plastic.

The Task Force on Shale Gas was clear about this, stating that “it is not feasible to create a renewable and low carbon industry in the short term in the UK that can meet the UK’s energy needs as a whole.”

This means that gas will continue to play a big part in our energy mix for years to come and that’s why the Government is looking into the opportunity of using home-grown shale gas supplies instead of relying on overseas imports.

If we are going to make this work, we need to make sure that it is entirely safe, protecting the environment and minimising the impact on local people.

The UK has over 50 years’ experience of safely and successfully producing gas in this country, both for onshore and offshore. We will be using all our expert knowledge as we explore for shale gas.

Shale gas will bolster our energy security and provide jobs and financial security for communities and families across the UK. An independent study says there could be 65,000 new jobs from a successful UK shale industry.

In 2003, we were a net exporter of gas. By 2030 we expect to be importing close to 75% of the gas we consume. By making the most of our home-grown gas we can safeguard our own domestic supply whilst also cutting our carbon emissions.

There’s also a huge financial benefit for local communities. We are working with industry to make sure local people, communities and local authorities keep some of the income from shale gas development.

Operators will pay communities £100,000 for each exploration well site plus 1 per cent of production revenue, worth £5m-£10m, to be used as the community sees fit.

It’s an inconvenient truth for those who don’t want to acknowledge the economic and environmental benefits that Shale gas could bring, never mind the crucial role it could play in ensuring we have sufficient and reliable gas supplies.

People quite rightly expect Government to explore all the options to deliver on our goals of keeping the bills low, the lights on, and moving towards a greener future.

As a friend of mine put it:

"so, essentially, this 'inconvenient' truth is the very thing that -motivates- many in the 'anti-fracking lobby': yes, the state and a large proportion of voters want 'business as usual'. but the lobby is trying desperately to get an acknowledgement that this is untenable, and that deferring the crisis can only deepen it."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 18542
Location: Lincolnshire

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From Wikipedia's entry on Andrea Leadsom

On 9 April 2014 Leadsom was appointed Economic Secretary to the Treasury in the mini-reshuffle caused by Maria Miller's resignation from the Cabinet.

Following her appointment, it was discovered that she had placed her shares in a buy-to-let property company, which she had started with her husband in 2003, into trusts for the benefit of her children. This is a move that is commonly used to avoid inheritance tax. She also took advantage of offshore banking arrangements for the property company in an apparent contradiction to George Osborne’s attempts to crack down on tax avoidance.[12] A spokesperson for Leadsom said: “This is a normal corporate situation and all tax that is due is being paid. None of the loans for the properties are based offshore”.

There was further criticism when it was revealed that she had received a series of donations totalling £70,000 from a firm based in London but owned by her Guernsey-based brother-in-law, Peter de Putron, via a holding company in the British Virgin Islands tax haven.[13] Leadsom’s husband Ben is a director of the firm which made the donations, which were used to pay the salaries of staff in Leadsom’s Westminster office after her election as MP; the firm has also made donations of £816,000 to the Conservative party.[14] Because the firm making the donations, Gloucester Research (later becoming GR Software and Research) was based in London the donations conformed to the rule banning political donations from abroad. The Labour MP Tom Watson said: “These very large donations might be within the rules, but it certainly isn’t right that a Treasury minister has been taking money in this way. Most reasonable people will see this as completely unreasonable”.[13]

As the government minister responsible for financial services she oversees the regulation of hedge funds, including London-based DP Management which is owned by her benefactor Mr de Putron, who is married to her sister.

And now she's in charge of energy and climate. Rolling Eyes

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Government and Society All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group