Stop funding Putin’s war, Boris! – Net Zero Watch

Posted: February 25, 2022 by oldbrew in Energy, fracking, fuel poverty, opinion, Politics, Shale gas
Tags: ,

The era of silly but damaging climate games is over, or should be. The world has far more serious matters to attend to.
– – –
London, 25 February – Net Zero Watch has called on Boris Johnson to stop all Russian gas imports and follow through on his statement to Parliament yesterday that the UK should use domestic hydrocarbons “rather than pointlessly importing them from abroad.”

According to the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy the UK has imported 73,770 Gwh of Russian LNG in the last 4 years. At 4 pence per kwh – that gas has a value of £2.95bn.

In other words, Britain has been funding Putin’s war machine to the tune of £14 million per week.

As analysts predict that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine risks driving up household energy bills to more than £3,000 per year, pushing millions of families into fuel poverty and threatening tens of thousands of businesses, the government’s reluctance to use all available means to alleviate the growing cost burden is effectively adding to the economic and geopolitical crisis.

Net Zero Watch director, Dr Benny Peiser said:

There is a global LNG market now and no need to import any Russian gas whatsoever. The government should stop all Russian gas imports with immediate effect as LNG is available from other parts of the world.”

One of the most effective responses to Russia’s war efforts (in addition to sanctions, asset seizures and travel restrictions for Putin’s London-based oligarchs and their families) is for the UK to revitalise North sea exploration for oil and gas and finally kick-start a shale gas revolution to enhance Britain’s energy supply and national security.

Full press release here.

Tim Worstall/NZW: Restarting UK Shale Gas (pdf)

  1. Gamecock says:

    ‘In other words, Britain has been funding Putin’s war machine to the tune of £14 million per week.’

    There are good reasons for Britain to move to energy independence. But the above assertion is just silly.

  2. Phoenix44 says:

    Gamecock, why is it silly? If we provide the foreign exchange necessary for Putin to buy say semi-conductors to put in tanks, then how are we not funding his war machine? If the gas stays in the ground, or fetches a much lower price, fewer semi-conductors, fewer or worse tanks surely?

  3. Gamecock says:

    Russia gets money from selling gas. Declaring they spend it on their military is stupid.

    We don’t know what they do with the money. I’ll bet you THEY don’t know what they do with the money.

    Peiser tries to make a morality play out of buying Russian gas by claiming it is ‘funding Putin’s war machine.’

    Which is silly.

  4. ivan says:

    I would think that Net Zero Watch would be pushing for the use of shale gas from the UK gas fields — opps, sorry I forgot that princess Nut Nut put an end to all UK energy production.

    Now would be the time for the drilling operation to go to full speed and at least a couple of large coal fires power stations be built. Doing that would start the UK on the road to energy independence especially if the government tells the greens to bugger off.

  5. oldbrew says:

    ivan – NZW are pushing for shale gas, see Tim Worstall link at end of post.
    – – –
    Is this the future since UK & EU gas prices went ballistic?

    One-in-six prepayment customers ‘avoided using energy for at least two days’

    Nearly 35% have sat in a coat and hat indoors to avoid turning the heating on, new survey suggests

    The poll of 500 prepayment customers also shows almost 21% of them have skipped hot meals because they cannot afford to top up.

  6. bonbon says:

    BoJo, out of the goodness of his heart, offered Kiev a government-in-exile in Britain.
    Has anyone here even checked the Kiev Azov Brigade?
    For these to parade at Trafalgar Sq, would be a sight to see! Chickens coming home to roost!
    All paid for by UK taxpayers of course.

  7. ivan says:

    oldbrew – That should be shouted from the rooftops and the MSM. Until that happens very little change will occur. The government need to get into gear, stop wasting money on renewable subsidies and put that money into reliable 24/7/365 energy production.

    J Nova has an excellent take on free market energy costs.–thinnks-we-have-a-free-market-in-energy/

  8. oldbrew says:

    Analysis-Geopolitical clouds gather over Europe’s climate change plans

    ‘While soaring gas prices are the main driver of recent increases in energy bills, a growing number of states – especially from the bloc’s poorer east – warn of public pushback if ambitious green goals hike costs in future.

    “We used to be a fairly sizable group of countries arguing for more ambition. We’re not a huge number left,” one EU diplomat said.’

  9. Phoenix44 says:

    Gamecock, you are being pedantic. If Putin had less money would he be able to maintain the level of military spending? Very unlikely. With less foreign exchange, could he buy what he needs for his military? Very unlikely. And we know that Putin has built substantial reserves to withstand sanctions using foreign exchange. The USSR collapsed because it couldn’t keep spending what it needed on its military.

  10. Gamecock says:

    Mr Phoenix.

    “If Putin had less money would he be able to maintain the level of military spending?”

    He’s an ex-Soviet. “Ex” is debatable. He’d starve children to spend on his military. His spending has double ought zero to do with how the Gazprom business is going. Gross revenue on sales is irrelevant, anyway. Gazprom’s margins on gas sales ain’t all that great.

    Peiser throws out moralistic fallacies all the time. I encourage you to be pendantic whenever you read something from him.

  11. Gamecock says:

    After further review, ‘In other words, Britain has been funding Putin’s war machine to the tune of £14 million per week.’ is just stupid.

    No pendantry needed.

  12. oldbrew says:

    Government reply…

    Russia-Ukraine and UK energy: Factsheet
    FAQ on Russia-Ukraine and UK energy supply

    From: Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy
    Published 25 February 2022

    There are no gas pipelines directly linking the UK with Russia and imports from Russia made up less than 4% of total UK gas supply in 2021.

    But we also get the fatuous propaganda:

    Thanks to the £90 billion investment we’ve been making in renewable energy since 2012, we already have one of the most reliable and diverse energy systems in the world.

    As the Business and Energy Secretary has said, the more clean, cheap and secure power we generate at home, the less exposed we will be to expensive gas prices set by international markets.
    – – –
    Conveniently forgetting that most of the £90 billion ‘investment’ was made when gas was far cheaper than renewables, that home-produced gas from fracking was deemed a waste of time, and the main gas storage site was shut down.

    Such facts aren’t suitable for the ‘factsheet’ 🙄

  13. stpaulchuck says:

    we’ve got the same insanity here in the US. Presidunce Xiden shut down huge parts of our domestic oil and gas industry. Oil prices basically doubled, gasoline went up over 40%, etc. The excess costs are going right to Putin and OPEC. We were exporting gas and oil before Slow Joe, now we are importing, hugely.

    Total cognitive dissonance. They want total divorce from so-called fossil fuels yet the nonsense alternatives are windmills and solar plants, about as effective as spitting into the wind. When there IS a wind that is. Now they are after our nuclear plants. Insanity!

  14. oldbrew says:

    Fracking was ended on a ‘false pretext’ and should be resumed with ‘vigour’, MPs say
    Some of the tremors used to justify the moratorium on shale gas exploration in Britain were ‘almost imperceptible’, the UK regulator said

    By Edward Malnick,
    26 February 2022

    A government spokesman said: “Fracking would have no effect on domestic energy prices in the near term. To boost energy security, we need to move away from expensive fossil fuels and generate more cheap, clean power in the UK.”
    – – –
    We ask again: if intermittent renewables are cheap, why are we heavily subsidising them? And what’s the government’s answer to the intermittency, e.g. little solar in winter and none after dark, multi-day wind lulls at any time? Putting on the dogma blinkers doesn’t answer the questions.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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