Don't Pay

[clv101]

The increased GAS price is in my view largely a physics and resource depletion problem, with a bit of war thrown in.

But is it a political choice, to allow a few private companies like Shell to be making tens of billions in profits off these elevated household bills. A lot of people see as unjust the idea that granny can't afford to heat her flat and risks death this winter (and certain financial hardship) due to the cold while Shell executives pocket millions in bonuses and the company billions in profits. Allocation by price is a political choice. Allowing the price to escalate so high is a political choice.

[PS_RalphW]

Both contenders for the next PM have talked AGAINST allowing more solar on farmland, and NOT building more onshore Wind turbines.

[BritDownUnder]

Oh it's a political choice all right!

A political choice of weak, easily influenced by industry and pressure groups, politicians and civil servants to deplete your own resources by closing coal fired stations and becoming over dependent on gas. Politicians could have authorised building of new coal (Ironbridge? Isle of Grain?), nuclear (more Sizewell B clones, Moorside), tidal, wind etc etc in the past but they did not because of EU and American pressure, Russian influenced civil servants, activist groups, NIMBYs - take your pick.

I think the 'official' decision to let non-British companies into the North Sea was because noone had the expertise in the UK to extract it. Norway seemed to do OK in the end. I am sure political pressure had something to do with it.

I don't put great stead on the power prices quite frankly. If you want to share the profits from the power prices you buy the company or seek alternatives to its products. It is just Economics 101 of scarce price-inelastic resources.

The power prices are a result of a carefully designed power trading market in which all generators get paid the marginal bid price. Nuclear and wind and other generators will benefit but most of them are probably foreign owned (some by me - hahaha - disclosure I have got Shell, Drax and SSE shares - just about all I can still get). Clever people on this forum are into generating their own power by solar or wind. Good for them. I do the same and more people should if they possibly can.

[adam2]

The increased GAS price is in my view largely a physics and resource depletion problem, with a bit of war thrown in.

But is it a political choice, to allow a few private companies like Shell to be making tens of billions in profits off these elevated household bills. A lot of people see as unjust the idea that granny can't afford to heat her flat and risks death this winter (and certain financial hardship) due to the cold while Shell executives pocket millions in bonuses and the company billions in profits. Allocation by price is a political choice. Allowing the price to escalate so high is a political choice.

I largely disagree. To make Shell or similar firms sell gas at less than the free market price would be almost impossible. They are not going to willingly sell gas at say 50 pence a therm to the UK market when they could get ten times that much on the open market in Europe.
And even if that problem was resolved by confiscation of the gas or of the gas producing company, then we must remember that such gas can only meet a small proportion of UK demand.

Whom then decides which consumers get to buy the 50 pence a therm gas and which other consumers have to pay the market price of 500 pence a therm ? Prioritise the "needy" or the "vulnerable" perhaps. who gets to decide. And how exactly do you ensure that a nurse gets the 50 pence a therm gas, but that the "fat cat banker" has to pay the market price of 500 pence a therm or more.
And the poor would complain that the cheaper gas was still too expensive for them.
And the rich would burn oil instead.

Or perhaps both the cheap/confiscated gas and the expensive open market gas should all go into a common pool, and be sold wholesale at an average price to all consumers. That would be simpler, but still result in the average price being far higher than most would consider affordable.
Would power stations be able to use this slightly discounted gas and then export the electricity to France ? Even slightly cheaper UK gas at say 400 pence a therm would be more attractive than open market french gas at say 500 pence a therm for electricity production.

IMHO the idea is a non starter. I agree that the profits being made from gas extraction are excessive and would support a significant windfall tax on such profits.

[RenewableCandy]

I don’t want to reignite the fracking debate but I am pretty sure that fracked gas could probably be extracted from the Forest of Bowland without the water supply for London or even Manchester being compromised.

A lot of claims about the quantity of gas that is frackable have been made. I think it is worth trying it in one relatively remote area of the UK given the imminent gas crisis.

The Daily Mash once ran an article "North of England to be burned for fuel". Sadly it appears to be no longer extant, but it says it all.