Troubling political reality of Europe’s energy reliance on Russian natural gas hits home

Guest essay by Larry Hamlin

The actions being proposed by British Prime Minister Theresa May against Russia for its recent chemical weapons attack on British soil have escalated the political reality of the consequences Europe will face because of its still growing dependence on Russian natural gas for its present and future growing energy needs.


Britain has become increasingly dependent on imported energy to meet its energy needs as has the rest of the Europe.


Instead of embracing the lower cost energy, availability and reliability of increased oil and natural gas that can be achieved through fracking technology Britain has been slow to change its energy course from its climate policy mandates for costly and unreliable renewables.

Prime Minister May’s government is now exploring alternatives that can be undertaken to decrease the countries increasing reliance on Russian natural gas.



All of Europe is facing growing needs for additional supplies of natural gas with Europe and Britain’s long standing energy policies focusing on climate change and renewable mandates further exasperating these growing and serious energy and political problems.


Natural gas provides the largest portion of Britain’s electrical energy with imports being a significant source for this energy fuel.


Britain imports about 44 per cent of its gas from Europe and Norway with Europe importing about 35 per cent of its gas from Russia.

Additionally Britain bought a shipment of liquefied natural gas from Russia to cope with severe cold weather at the end of February.

The UK has become increasingly reliant on gas imports because of declining gas from the North Sea and closure of storage facilities that supplied at peak as much as 70 per cent of its gas storage.

According to the Financial Times a U.S. liquefied natural gas tanker  ship has now been diverted from its planned route and is now headed toward the U.K. which provides yet another indication of the severity of the natural gas energy and political problems associated with Europe and Britain’s increased reliance on Russian natural gas supplies.


These energy problems of Europe and Britain stand in stark contrast to the energy and climate policies of the Trump Administration which has positioned the U.S. to be an energy independent giant which is in full control of its present and future energy supply as well as being able to provide exports to a world which through poorly conceived energy and climate policy has become increasingly dependent on the Russians for meeting both present and future energy needs.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Warren Blair
March 22, 2018 12:44 am

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of idiots.
In one way I hope Russia slowly doubles the price.
Obviously that’d be bad for those in energy poverty.
But Russia won’t do too much because it won’t want to damage its ‘investment’ in the UK/EU market.
For many other reasons the Poms must rise up and rail against their uni-party Government.
Poms will end up like the ISIS welcoming residents of Mosul who changed their mind when it was too late.

Ian Magness
Reply to  Warren Blair
March 22, 2018 1:15 am

Thanks Warren,
Always nice to be called stupid and have all of your countrymen labelled likewise.
May I remind you that the US had a global warming mad elected president for 8 years up until 18 months ago and the UK is still utterly subservient to a a global warming mad EU unelected dictatorship for a couple of years yet. These things take time, especially when the media won’t risk entering the debate.
Yes, however, the phase “if you lie with dogs you get fleas” was never more applicable than to our dealings with the recent Russian regime.

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 1:29 am

It is only the establishment politicians and bureaucrats who are idiots. We know from the Brexit referendum that the electorate are totally ignored by the London establishment (the Westminster bubble). There is nothing short of a revolution that the normal (non-idiotic) people of the UK can do about it. LibLabCon are all left wing parties believing in different shades of socialism – hence the gradual decline in the UK.

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 2:24 am

The actions being proposed by British Prime Minister Theresa May against Russia for its recent chemical weapons attack on British soil

Just like all the RussiaGate BS that has been rumbling on for over 18mths in US against Trump this ALLEGED attack “by Russia” or even “by Putin himself” is totally without evidence. But we all know the method operandi : repeat the lie often enough and it starts to become accepted as truth.
That was the basis of the AGW scam and false claims of “collusion” against Trump.
The UK govt has still produced ZERO physical evidence and nothing but spin in these claims.
The first thing to do in case of a murder or attempted murder is look at who would have gained from it. Putin did not need this scandal just before an election he was expected to walk anyway, as indeed he did. They do not need an international row leading up to hosting the FIFA world cup. They do not need to assassinate a double agent they had already tried, imprisoned and released
UK is still bitching about Russia winning the bid for the 2018 World Cup.
US has already used sanctions against Russia as a economic weapon.
US is trying to block development of Nord Sream 2 since it threatens US market position.
The Russian scientist who published the formula for Novachok defected to US in the 90s.
The UK chemical research dept. Portland Down is just miles away from where this happened. They certainly will have synthesised this product to study it.
UK is doing very poorly in negotiations for leaving EU and badly needs a distraction to make the govt. look “strong”.

Nothing is clear is clear in this murky world of spooks but the UK governments blatant refusal to back up their rhetoric with the slightest grain of physical evidence makes all their claims and grandstanding nothing but FAKE NEWS.
Which of course the media are joyously playing along with because it makes far better copy than the boring to and fro of Brexit tittle tattle.
Where is scientific scepticism and fact checking when it is most needed ? Not on WUWT , it would seem.

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 2:26 am

oops, sorry, I used the S-word : 5C4M

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 3:03 am

“Ian Magness March 22, 2018 at 1:15 am

Yes, however, the phase “if you lie with dogs you get fleas” was never more applicable than to our dealings with the recent Russian regime”

Unfortunately Ian, as Hugs intimates below, it ‘s more a case of “When domesticated bulldogs lie with fleas, they get bears”.

Andrew Cooke
Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 7:02 am

Sooooooooo………..Greg, you are saying that this is not “Glorious Mother Russia’s” fault but instead was done by the U.S.
Um…what country are you from? Who are you exactly?
Let’s use your reasoning back at you. What does the U.K. have to gain from this? The opportunity to get their gas from Russia cut off?
Your implications are that the U.S. did this? Maybe Trump didn’t like this guy cause he looked at Ivanka once 15 years ago? Oh wait, no this is all about American gas companies trying to steal business from “Glorious Mother Russia?”
Or as we would say in America, with our hand held up palm out towards your face….Whatever.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 8:16 am

Greg – you have neatly been sucked in by the Russian propoganda – well done you.
1. Putin issued a thinly disguised death threat,
2. This is not the first double agent to be killed
3. There was absolutely no chance of this affecting his position
4. Putin gains great Kudos as an international tough man
5 The chemical has been identified (they are not going to release the detail to the press, are they?)
6. Uk has nothing to gain at all from this it will be expensive to persue
7. Even if the UK was to do something like this (and they absolutely didnt), to do it in the middle of a heavily populated tourist centre is extremely unlikely.
8. The Russian press gleefully reported the imminent death of Skripal and warned others of becoming double agents (ie look what will happen to you) – this report was shown on the 10 o clock news here
9. The Russians will continue to deny anything to do with it – why wouldnt they, it works – youre not the only sucker taking up this line.
10. It looks like the opportunity was taken to contaminate the luggage of a Moscow resident before she left (the daughter)
You were so right – no evidence(sarc)

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 10:09 am

Mike Hansford
I think this whole story screams “false flag”.
Russia has a highly competent intelligence service which has considerable experience in clandestine killings abroad, accumulated over a century. How likely is it that of all the countless ways to accomplish the killings they would choose just about the only method that could be easily traced back to Russia?

Bryan A
Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 10:20 am

Hopefully, once the Brexit is completed, the UK can become Great once again and get with the Fracking Program thereby ending their dependence on the Russian Gas Teat.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 10:20 am

I would imagine they thought it would be untraceable – after all it is ‘highly sophisticated’ and designed specifically for safe transport and safer administration – and theres every chance considering the (unfounded)suspicion that surrounds any secret establishment like Porton Down that it can be blamed on the UK trying to defame Russia – thats pretty weak as we would have very little to gain from what is happening at the moment.
More likely (IMO) this is an anti Putin faction within the Kremlin that wants him discredited – in such a corrupted regime there are bound to be powerful enemies of Putin within. Why else, as you say, would they leave such an obvious trail and do the deed in such a public manner. Even so this would still be a ‘Russian’ problem to sort out, whether it was sanctioned or not by Putin.

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 10:52 am

We here in the US had an extreme leftist in the Whitehouse for eight damaging years. Obumus only emboldened the left, and the enviro-nuts came out from every hole that they were hiding in. Now we have an actual leader who actually leads. And while I’m not a Trump fan, I do appreciate that he’s putting the country first. The joke who was the democratic nominee, would’ve done nothing to improve the country, and most likely continued Obumus’ policies of appeasement and helping out their friends in alt left wing nut places.

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 10:56 am

Lets review what you said.
Our prime minister is the daughter of a vicar. The attack took place in one of Europe’s most holy cities. It was packed with tourists. Those quickly on the scene including the emergency services were affected. Those who were present in the various places the victims visited were affected.
Do you SERIOUSLY believe the UK-a great upholder of the rule of law-would really deliberately attack people in this random manner?
In suggest you look at Putin’s record as regards the complete disregard he has for his citizens-let alone those from outside his country- and his need to get his own way and punish his enemies and look big on the domestic and world scene..
To suggest that the Uk Govt is using this as an excuse to look strong is beyond belief. As for quibbles about the world cup. Its happening this year. Why on earth do you think we are still irritated by it? Many of us -me included-couldn’t care less about the world cup.
I am surprised and disappointed in your comments..

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 12:05 pm

“The actions being proposed by British Prime Minister Theresa May against Russia for its recent chemical weapons attack on British soil …”
What “chemical attacks”? That dog don’t hunt, Fake as can be.

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: “The actions being proposed by British Prime Minister Theresa May against Russia for its recent chemical weapons attack on British soil …”
I don’t know what games are afoot but the official line from the UK Govt and the MSM doesn’t add-up. Check this out (The author/blogger is a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan)
Also this . . .
“Comrade Putin, we have successfully stockpiled novichoks in secret for ten years, and kept them hidden from the OPCW inspectors. We have also trained our agents in secret novichok assassination techniques. The programme has cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but now we are ready. Naturally, the first time we use it we will expose our secret and suffer massive international blowback. So who should be our first target? The head of a foreign intelligence agency? A leading jihadist rebel in Syria? A key nuclear scientist? Even a Head of State?”
“No, Tovarich. There is this old retired guy I know living in Salisbury. We released him from jail years ago…”
WARNING If you harbour any doubts at all about the plausibility of Mr Johnson’s story, you are a crazed conspiracy theorist and a traitor. Plus you will never, ever get employed in the BBC or corporate media.

Reply to  Ian Magness
March 22, 2018 10:25 pm

“In suggest you look at Putin’s record as regards the complete disregard he has for his citizens”
Back in the real world, Putin defends Russians while Theresa May has “complete disregard he has for the citizens”.

Phil Rae
March 22, 2018 12:50 am

Sadly, there’s nothing surprising about this news. The UK has closed coal burning power stations left and right and its energy policy has increasingly been held hostage to the ridiculous commitments made to the “green energy” lobby. Helped by the increasingly “disconnected-from-energy-reality” BBC and its constant output of scare stories about pollution and the imagined horrors of hydrocarbon fuels, people in the UK and increasingly living in cloud cuckoo land. They imagine that windmills and solar power along with wood pellets from America and ridiculously-inefficient biofuels will power one of the world’s largest economies and that everybody will be driving electric cars by 2040! What a shambles!
Even worse, north of the border, in frigid Scotland, the cryptocommunist Scottish Nationalist government along with their allies, the unelected and unelectable Green Party have managed to put a moratorium on fracturing despite plentiful evidence that the country has significant natural gas reserves under ground. In the 1850s, before the Drake well in Pennsylvania, Scotland was arguably the world’s major oil exporting country, thanks to paraffin (kerosene) produced by retorting oil shale around the Firth of Forth. What a tragic and stupid downfall – an energy-rich country left vulnerable to the whims of energy geopolitics by its own stupid leaders!

Reply to  Phil Rae
March 22, 2018 10:54 am

To the short-sited greenies: There Is No Utopia!

Alan Tomalty
March 22, 2018 12:51 am

Talk about committing economic suicide. According to the graph, Britain still needs fossil fuels which release CO2 oh no not that CO2 really!!!! that pollutant CO2 sarc//// for more than 50% of its electricity needs. This despite a massive campaign to go green. And now they are dependent for some of their gas and an increasing amount ;;on a kleptocracy run by a stone cold killer. The irony. One of my grandfathers was born in England and then moved to Canada, but before that he fought for England /Great Britain in the trenches in World War 1. He survived a gas attack from the Germans but it was poison gas , not the kind that you heat your homes with. I got to know him and if he was alive today he would disown his country of birth at the stupid policies they are advocating and carrying out.

Alan Tomalty
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
March 22, 2018 1:02 am

England needs another Churchill now at its moment in dire need as it is slipping into the quagmire of lefttism/socialism. Unfortunately Canada is just as bad with a loonytune prime minister Justin Trudeau that changed its Environment department to “Environment and Climate Change Canada.” We will never forget also that as soon as Trudeau became prime minister he ordered that Canada’s jets stop bombing ISIS positions. Yes you read that right. I am embarrassed to be a Canadian.

Reply to  Alan Tomalty
March 22, 2018 6:40 am

Mr. Trudeau may not be as popular among Canadian’s as he once was:
“Justin Trudeau Approval Rating Now Below President Trump as Right Wing Parties Surge In Canada”

Reply to  Alan Tomalty
March 22, 2018 10:58 am

Maybe Canada will correct itself. What can happen though, is a complete swing to the left, followed by a swing to the right. Usually a major swing of this type happens when there is a crisis, man made, natural or otherwise.

Reply to  Alan Tomalty
March 22, 2018 5:50 pm

I’m waiting for Trump to kill NAFTA just before the US elections. Between that and the current attack on law-abiding gun owners that will lose Trudeau many of his rural seats, it should ensure he’s out of power next year.

Reply to  Alan Tomalty
March 22, 2018 9:03 am

Its far worse than those misleading graphs. They show capacity not energy. Plus most of the heating in the UK is by gas.
There will have to be a conveyor belt of LNG ships from the US and a return to coal, otherwise the UK will be eating humble pie with Putin and his successors. Alternatively half the population could freeze to death I suppose.

Reply to  jim
March 22, 2018 10:36 am

Ah, yes. That diverted LNG tanker going to the UK is the first cargo from a newly operational LNG liquefaction facility, Cove Point in Maryland.

March 22, 2018 12:54 am

“… renewable mandates further exasperating these growing and serious energy and political problems.”
So, I’m picking nits. Sorry, it’s been a long day.

Jimmy Haigh
March 22, 2018 1:02 am

We’ve been telling them this would happen for years.

March 22, 2018 1:03 am

“It couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of idiots.” We agree on this
But, not on this: “In one way I hope Russia slowly doubles the price”.
This sentiment is cruel because those in energy poverty in the UK are the aged, the unemployed and the handicapped. And winter deaths from cold vastly exceed summer deaths from heat.
I hope that the UK Government becomes proactive in accelerating the development of natural gas by fracking sufficient to remedy their reliance on foreign fuel sources.
I hope that UK domestic natural gas becomes sufficient to make uneconomic the importation of wood chips from the US South to fire the Drax power plants.

John Dowling
March 22, 2018 1:07 am

Bear in mind that there is no actual proof that would stand up in a court of law that the Salisbury poisoning was done by Russia. It is all driven by circumstantial evidence and the anti-Russian meme that has been going on for over 2 years. There are so many unanswered questions over this affair. There is no reason for Great Britain and Russia to be at odds over any normal commercial relationship as they do not compete for anything. The USA and EU are determined to have NATO troops right on Russian borders and the Russians, who are neurotic over their borders which have been invaded so often don’t like it. If you poke a bear with a sharp stick often enough eventually it will bite back, but there would have been no logic in a highly public botched murder of an exchanged double agent.

Reply to  John Dowling
March 22, 2018 1:55 am

‘Bear in mind that there is no actual proof that would stand up in a court of law that the Salisbury poisoning was done by Russia’
You’re right. Putin publicly incited hatred against the pardoned agent, so it -might- be unofficial Russia. Or maybe Trump? It is so fashionable to scapegoat Trump.
No, it was the FSB and it happened according to what Putin wanted.

Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 2:05 am

‘If you poke a bear with a sharp stick often enough eventually it will bite back’
This is not a bear, but a rapid dog that bites whatever you do.
‘borders which have been invaded so often don’t like it’
Borders. Right, Russian fighter pilots don’t know where their borders are. They fly over their neighbours…
I’m trying to think who invaded… Crimea? Ukraine? The bear doesn’t know where it’s cage is.

Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 2:07 am

Oops, ‘apostrophe misplaced. Apologies.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 4:30 am

Hugs – March 22, 2018 at 2:05 am

I’m trying to think who invaded… Crimea? Ukraine? The bear doesn’t know where it’s cage is.

Hugs, iffen I didn’t think that you were a recent graduate of a Politically Correct public school system then I might be inclined to ask you to ……. “try to think who invaded Russia’s “FRIENDLY” border the last time it was invaded”.
Apparently being clueless of the answer, …… I guess I’ll hafta tell you that it was the German army via the orders of AH, the Nazi dictator, that conducted said invasion ……. and the Russians suffered over twenty million (20,000,000) deaths ….. and the Russian people sure as ell ain’t gonna forget,…. anytime soon, ….. that dastardly act of being invaded .
“HA”, it is really ironic that the lefty-liberal socialist-minded US residents ain’t about to forget the “terrorist invasion” on 9-11 that caused 3,000+ deaths …… while conveniently forgetting and/or ignoring the “terrorist invasion” of Russia that caused 20,000,000+ deaths.

DC Cowboy
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
March 22, 2018 5:25 am

You seem to have missed the fact that the German attack started in Poland not Russia, after the Russians crossed their ‘friendly’ border with Poland in an unprovoked ‘terrorist invasion’ of Poland (I’m sure it was, as Stalin claimed, to ‘save’ the Polish people – the thousands of murdered Polish army officers in Katyn not withstanding – guess they ‘saved’ them by killing them) and the German attack started about 2 weeks before Stalin was to kick off his own attack on the Germans.

Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 4:41 am

In what universe could it possibly serve Russia to murder anybody with a poison only available to States or state operatives. Just take a moment and think that if they did do it, then they are being incredibly stupid. And to believe this is to be remarkably dismissive of reality!
Why are we all so incredibly naive these days! ;-(

Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 6:31 am

They do it because:
1) They can
2) They know that there are enough useful idiots who will proclaim Russian innocence no matter what they do.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 12:31 pm

DC Cowboy – March 22, 2018 at 5:25 am

You seem to have missed the fact that the German attack started in Poland not Russia,

DC Cowboy, I don’t recall looking for anything so how could I have missed it? Has President Trump stirred up too much of that mind altering ”swamp gas” in your DC neighborhood, …… or what?????????????
DC C, just what the ell does the “starting date” of Germany’s invasion into Poland have to do with my question of …… “who invaded Russia’s “FRIENDLY” border the last time it was invaded””?
As soon as “the fog” clears, ……. maybe you might try addressing the question I asked.
And ps, …. DC Cowboy, ….. betcha the next thing you will be telling someone is the fact that, ….. SURPRISE, SURPRISE, ….. Germany’s bombing attack of Great Britain actually started at the English Channel.

Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 1:29 pm

Samuel, you are buying a red herring.
Russia attacked already 1939 before Natchis went there.
And they do pester their neighbours all the time. They haven’t yet chutzpah to fly fighters over Alaska, but they have constantly navigation problems preventing them to keep their military in their own aerospace.
People who read RT of course might hear a completely different story. Be aware they lie on their doings routinely.
That mentioning Crimea causes an aggressive response shows how well Russian prop works today.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Hugs
March 23, 2018 4:00 am

Samuel, you are buying a red herring.
Russia attacked already 1939 before Natchis went there.

“DUH”, …. was Russia attacked …… or did Russia do the attacking?
Hugs, me thinks you are copycatting the “talking-heads” partisan Democrats that appear on cable TV “talk” shows. They are apparently paid great sums of money by their mentors …. NOT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, …….. because iffen one was asked, ……
Is it raining today in Peoria?”,
…….. they would immediately respond by stating …..
Its the Republicans fault that it is snowing in Florida
….. and then continue on a tirade about POTUS Trump not supporting the Paris AGW Flim-flam Scam.
Childish minds in adult bodies is a sure sign of retrograde evolution of human mental attributes. It is defined by the evolutionary survival fact that …… “If you don’t use it …. you lose it”.

Reply to  John Dowling
March 22, 2018 3:06 am

The glee with which RT and other Russian media outlets revealed the news tells you all you need to know.

Reply to  Graemethecat
March 22, 2018 1:32 pm

Good point.

Reply to  John Dowling
March 22, 2018 3:26 am

and the timing was pi**poor if it were a russian plot..
many including myself are rather sceptical
especially at the haste to blame and the refusal to work with russia as well as the prior all destroyed inspections BY the supposed oversight whatever global committee on such products
meanwhile uk n usa and israel are all making/testing etc chem warfare and bioweapons

Mark Hansford
Reply to  ozspeaksup
March 22, 2018 8:30 am

No they are not – and I dont think Russia is any longer either – however the technology exists and small stockpiles will exist too. It is vital for the military anywhere to be prepared for any kind of attack – it would be very stupid to shut down the research into how to protect yourself from these toxins. You never know when a madman or his henchmen are moved to use these weapons – Saddam did and it looks like at the very least and agency within the Kremlin did too. Even if Russia were not responsible in some way – there is no denying that this particular toxin has been used – so it proves the need to be aware of its properties in advance. The Skripals and the police officer would be dead but for the work of the Porton Downs of this world

Reply to  John Dowling
March 22, 2018 4:22 am

John Dowling: Right on! Those poor maligned Russians. And the invasion and annexation of Crimea. Fake news! Meddling in Western elections, doping of athletes, murder of political opponents. All fake news.

Reply to  Trebla
March 22, 2018 1:34 pm

If you ask Russia, they never attacked Crimea. You know what? They lie on this. They work a lot with cyberwarfare.

Reply to  Trebla
March 22, 2018 6:38 pm

“Those poor maligned Russians”
Maligned Russians? What about the Ukrainians? The coup in Kiev? The fascist government with neon@zi ministers? Rings a bell?
(And yes there are n@zis in the pro-Russia, Soviet Union nostalgic Ukrainian side, too.)
The first vote of the new Ukrainians representatives: make a law that forbids the use of the Russian language in almost any context, destroying the civil life of a large part of the Russian speaking minority. That law was never applied, or even officially enacted; but it was a provocation and it was obvious Russia would react. It’s almost as if the new power wanted a confrontation.
That Western leaders and policy experts cannot see that just proves that the “foreign policy experts” they consult are just recycling anti-Russia talking points like the MSM. Or maybe these Western leaders get all their “intel” from CNN.

Reply to  John Dowling
March 22, 2018 12:15 pm

The Brits won’t make a sample available (which is mandated under international law).
And no one who immediately responded was harmed; if it was the chemical alleged, it would have affected everyone near the area.
Plus the Doctors examining the alleged victims said they saw no signs of ill health.
Not to mention the fact that the two allegedly attacked are curiously missing.
And BTW, the big Brit chemical weapons lab is just down the road a bit.
Coincidence, of course.

Reply to  Wally
March 22, 2018 1:37 pm

What are you babbling? Hello?

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Wally
March 25, 2018 11:34 am
Martin A
March 22, 2018 1:09 am

Britain is an island sitting on a lump of coal. Its only energy problem is its adherence to the CAGW religion.

Leo Smith
Reply to  Martin A
March 22, 2018 2:52 am

Sitting on a lump of coal so far down its not worth even trying to get it up.
Cheaper to bury from the USA.
It is also sitting on enough plutonium to run the entire grid for 10 years.

Julian Flood
Reply to  Leo Smith
March 22, 2018 3:37 am

Did you know there are seabed deposits of monazite sand off the Falklands?
Things that make you go Hmmmm….

Smart Rock
Reply to  Leo Smith
March 22, 2018 7:25 am

Coal bed methane. Easily accessible, fast returns (compared with opening underground mines), and cheap. Of course you have to do a little fr**cking to get it (oh, save us)

March 22, 2018 1:33 am

When are all idiot politicians going to realise their first job is to protect their country, their citizens and the country’s economy. We citizens have a responsibility to hold them to account starting with fining a (probably nonexistent)bunch of lawyers willing to take class actions on behalf of all of us dudded by the whole AGW farce.

Reply to  Quilter
March 22, 2018 3:29 am

When will the citizens realise that the politicians’ job is to first protect their cushy jobs (they will never have a cushier job in their entire life), not the citizens, and not the country and not the economy (unlike us, they can vote themselves a legally binding pay increase!).

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Quilter
March 22, 2018 4:28 am

Methinks the first job of any politician (as they see it) is to get reelected, no matter how or why.

March 22, 2018 1:34 am

I meant finding not fining.

Reply to  Quilter
March 22, 2018 9:56 am

Freudian slip?

March 22, 2018 1:38 am

There’s plenty of coal under ground in the UK and Europe. Perhaps it’s time to reopen those abandoned coal mines and fire up those shuttered coal fired power plants again.
Coal will save the world.

richard verney
March 22, 2018 1:39 am

I strongly support fracking both for the US and for the UK, since perhaps its most significant advantage is that it enables a country to become energy independent and not beholden to geo-political interests elsewhere, It is the rise of US fracking that has allowed the US to take a less overt role in the Middle East as can be seen in the recent forays into Libya and Syria where the US has only been a bit player. It would be a godsend if the UK could enjoy such luxury, and free itself from Saudi influence.
Whilst Europe is beholden to Russian gas, and good relations with Russia are a necessity for Europe, I have seen a detailed analysis (I think on Paul Homewood’s site: notalotofpeopleknowthat) that suggests that the UK gets only about 3% of its gas from Russia. That 3% could easily be replaced if only the UK had a sensible energy policy.
Of course in times of crisis, ie., when reserves are running very low and wind and solar are contributing nothing of substance to the energy mix (a frequent occurrence in winter), the final 3% can be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
Let’s hope that once the UK is freed from the jack boot of Europe, it will adopt a more sensible energy policy and will further promote and invest in fracking.

Reply to  richard verney
March 22, 2018 7:46 pm

I think that the Tories are just as ecolunatic as you can be. They believe there is such thing as “renewable” energy that is not inherent free (so you make people pay for it, because in the end, somewhat, it pays for itself, or something).
Many policies and legal decision are facially absurd (for a 12 years old). I think being facially absurd is ground for nullification. If now, the legal system is absurd and should be nullified completely.
They went with the nonsense because they love it.

March 22, 2018 1:51 am

Greens colluded with Russians to get the EU dependent on Russian gas. Putin knows how to rule his #kleptocracy.
I suggest to stop depending on Russia.

Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 9:09 am

Do you know how much of the MA electricity is currently generated by LNG from Yamal, Russia?

JJM Gommers
Reply to  Hugs
March 22, 2018 1:12 pm

Europe is less dependent on russian gas than russia depends on the hard currency they receive from it. That’s causing them to look for alternatives, like China. The Nordstream 2 is bonus for them. Besides, the Skripal case has an obscure origin, neither Russia, England or the USA are directly involved.

George Lawson
March 22, 2018 2:11 am

Putin is not likely to interfere with his gas supplies to Europe. If he does so he will be endangering the hugely important contribution that natural gas makes to his nations economy. In addition, any reduction in supplies is sure to receive a response from consumer countries in the form of additional sanctions which would further damage his economy and his gas industry in Russia. It would also hasten consumer countries into finding their own alternative gas and oil supplies rather than risk the uncertainty of relying on continuous supplies from an unstable Russia, reducing his long term projections for income from gas, so important to the country’s failing economy.
What is important is for the British government to get of its backside and allow shale gas exploration in as many areas as possible across the country, the success of which will reduce our reliance on imported gas, and at the same time contribute massively to our own economy.

Andrew Dickens
Reply to  George Lawson
March 22, 2018 2:07 pm

I read yesterday that the UK obtained only 1% of its gas from Russia last year. Most of the UK’s gas imports come from Norway. If the Rent-a-mob crowd would pack up and let us frack we would never need trouble Russia again for gas supplies.

March 22, 2018 3:00 am

You don’t bit the hand that warms you and the death of one person does not define international policy to a sane person.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  Donald Kasper
March 22, 2018 8:34 am

‘death of one person’ – are you kidding

Reply to  Donald Kasper
March 22, 2018 10:04 am

Correct. Someone at the top needs to be taking the long view, weighing the matter logically. On the other hand, some reaction is required (beyond the proverbial “sternly worded message”), lest your enemy consider WMD gas attacks on your soil a viable, everyday policy.

Ph.D. Guy
March 22, 2018 3:02 am

Yes, I am old enough to remember President Reagan’s warning to Europe and they chose to ignore those warnings.
‘In a memo to the White House in July 1981, advisers in the Ronald Reagan administration urged opposition to a new pipeline from Russia’s oil- and gas-rich regions to Europe, warning that it would weaken the West’s bargaining hand. “Our strategy is aimed at limiting Soviet economic leverage over the West,”…

March 22, 2018 3:18 am

If you were a skeptical senior Tory MP/Minister/PM and you wanted a long-term decrease in reliance on Russian gas how would you frame an argument that would receive broad support? How could that be achieved in the face of a lack of alternatives and with all major political parties and almost all the leaders fully in the AGW hysteria camp? How could you convince Britons to support development of home-grown gas reserves and/or nuclear so that Putin could be cut out of the equation?
Frame the Russians in the murder of one or more known defectors would be a good way to start. That gets the anti-Russian sentiment charged up immediately, not just in Britain but elsewhere as well. If the British laboratories know how to detect the poison, then chances are they know how to make it. So far there is not much corroboration that stuff was even present. Note that the inventor of the Russian poison now lives in the USA.
Similar tactics have been employed against other tyrants, for instance Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction.
Its a very nice conspiracy theory anyway.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  RobR
March 22, 2018 10:28 am

I think you’ll find that the likes of Porton Down will not obey an illegal order and produce an illegal wmd for covert dissemination, and the thought that any subordinate could do so is laughable. But its otherwise a good plot for a film!!

March 22, 2018 3:28 am

Enough of the anti-Russia hysteria. I’m sick of it. When will we ever say no to America?

Reply to  Cointreau
March 22, 2018 1:54 pm

If the US tried to force Europe into not doing any business with Russia, the EU should nullify all US patents and copyright.

Phil Rae
March 22, 2018 3:31 am

After having another look at that Daily Mail graphic, I notice that they don’t show the gas interconnectors between UK and Norway. Britpipe runs into north-eastern England and the Frigg line runs to St Fergus in Scotland. Both supplied a significant portion of UK natural gas and are still operational to the best of my knowledge. These systems are separate from the main European gas grid.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  Phil Rae
March 22, 2018 8:37 am

It was a map of the Russian grid……as far as I am aware Norway is not part of Russia.
And yes thank goodness for Norway or we would be far greater tied into that Russian grid

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Mark Hansford
March 25, 2018 8:42 am

Russia does not own the overland grid depicted on the map, which is highly misleading, not least in ignoring all the North Sea gas landfalls. Instead, try this map (requires Flash):

Julian Flood
March 22, 2018 3:49 am

There’s a piece on about the nerve gas attack in the UK, RESPONDING TO SALISBURY, which advocates going all-out for energy independence. My comment on that was
“I find Russia very puzzling. Their real enemy in the long term — or if not an enemy then overwhelming rival — is China, an empire which is expansionist and lacks sufficient natural resources to feed its imperial ambitions. Russia may see itself encircled by enemies, but the West lacks the commitment and drive to seriously threaten Russia’s interests. Sometimes it is necessary to cooperate with those whose shared interests make that cooperation an advantage, and that in the long term is the case here. If Russia is to survive then it must choose the West as its ally. Otherwise the Dragon will devour it.
I have said before, Russia is playing chess but China is not playing games. It will take a long time for bridges to be repaired between Russia and the West but it is vital for Russia to choose the right allies. At the moment it is not doing so.
Look East, Mr Putin. In the words of Nolan at The Charge ‘There sir, there is your enemy.’
BTW, the problem with the UK’s energy policy is the lacklustre, time-serving and acquisitive political class. Some of them are just plain ignorant: one Minister for Energy I dealt with was not aware that wind power needed storage if it was ever to become truly useful, but then he had a first class PPE degree from Oxford so what did I expect.
Are we stupid? Well, we keep electing these pillocks so maybe we are.

charles nelson
March 22, 2018 3:59 am

There is not the slightest evidence for a ‘recent Russian chemical attack on uk soil’.
Watts Up With That should try a little harder to keep opinionated stuff like this in the comments section and not in the headlines of features.

richard verney
Reply to  charles nelson
March 22, 2018 4:53 am

I fully agree with you. Opinions like that should not appear in an Article, unless it is made abundantly clear that it is simply the opinion of the author.
That said, there is no evidence presently within the public domain, one way or the other. The Government obviously has some evidence but that evidence has not been released. Presently, there is simply an assertion by the Government, and nothing more than that.
Many years ago, one would never question such an official statement from Government, but we now know that our Government repeatedly lies to us, for example, it lied to the public over the dodgy dossier regarding WMD and the reasons for the Iraqi war, and has recently lied with a dodgy dossier on Project Fear seeking to persuade the electorate to vote remain in the EU. The Government has lost all trust, and that is the reason why people are sceptical, and some even hostile to what the Government claims.
Any sane person would consider that the Russian State, or rogue elements within the Russian state are a prime candidate for this attack. Whether they are the perpetrator can only be established by hard facts, once all the evidence is in, and properly and accurately analysed.
My big gripe with this is the over reaction. When one is a spy, or a double agent, one runs the risk of being liquidated. This risk comes with the territory. Whilst I do not wish to see anyone hurt or killed, non of this poses much risk to the British public. It may pose a risk to dissident Russians, but not much of a risk to the British people.
The British public faces far greater risks, particularly with regard to terr@rism and returning Jih@dis and preachers of hate, or the growing use of knife crime and acid attacks in cities, child sexu@l exploitation by Musl1m men which is widespread across our lands, and may have harmed 10,000s of young girls, and yet the Government does nothing to address these issues, which issues pose real and substantial threats to British citizens. When one is managing a country, it is issues like that that should be high up on the agenda. The de@th of one or two Russian spies, or ex spies, whilst regrettable and which is something not to be ignored, ought to be a relatively low priority in the overall scheme of things. Deal with the big issues, before the little issues.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  richard verney
March 22, 2018 8:54 am

So lets see Richard, have I got this right. A foreign superpower indescriminately bumping of people they dont agree with, is not a terrorist act just because they are spies! He was exchanged in an agreement with Russia – he should be untouchable (it sort of makes the agreement pointless). This is arrogance and vanity – so often the result of leaders in place for too long. how long do you think it will be before they start bumping off political leaders around the world they dont agree with. If he was to target Boris Johnson for instance – would that also be ok because you dont happen to agree with him either.
The British public and any other countries public always face multiple risks and I am sure some are given higher priority than others. Not to show political strength and unity now with this poisoning would give heart to all the other threats you mention……why do you think IS never admit to gheir terrorist acts (unless it looks good and terrifying on facebook or youtube)

Reply to  richard verney
March 22, 2018 6:08 pm

“He was exchanged in an agreement with Russia – he should be untouchable (it sort of makes the agreement pointless).”
Bingo. Which is exactly why the Russian government had no incentive to kill him. Why will anyone exchange spies in future if they think the Russians will just kill them later?
Until there’s some actual proof of who did it, this just appears to be another case of the usual suspects yelling ‘Russians under the bed!’ Quite why they want to start WWIII is beyond me.

richard verney
Reply to  richard verney
March 23, 2018 12:39 am

So lets see Richard, have I got this right. A foreign superpower indescriminately bumping of people they dont agree with, is not a terrorist act just because they are spies!

I never said that it was not a terr@rist act, although there are good arguments that it was not. Lots of ordinary people in London feel that they run a small risk when using public transport, or going to a concert, or walking down a busy shopping street of being caught up in an Isl@mic inspired atrocity, but I doubt that anyone seriously considers that they may be collateral damage to a radioactive or nerve agent attack being carried out on a a Russian spy. These attacks, which are targeted attacks, not indiscriminate, are so infrequent that they may instil terr@r in the ex Russian spy/spiv community, but not in the general public at large.
We frequently draw subjective distinctions regarding atrocities. For example, when schools or hospitals are bombed, we say how dreadful it is that women and children, or doctors, nurses patients are killed, but we do not have the same concern when it is men, or when it is soldiers.
Most people can rightly see see the difference between say a plane being flown into a building killing about 3000 ordinary citizens, or a lorry being driven into pedestrians on an evening stroll on the promenade in Nice killing about 90 people, and that of the targeted elimination of one or two ex spies,
My point is quite simple that in the order of atrocities, it is not as high ranking as say the the 2017 Manchester bombing which killed 22 people and injured 500, mainly young school girls attending a concert. That of course is a subjective view, but I suspect it is one shared by the vast majority of ordinary British (and American) citizens.
The further point is that it is the job of the British Government to protect British citizens (wherever they may be) not foreigners. It is no job of the US government to protect me, an Englishman, in England. Once again, this suggests that the UK government should prioritise matters that are more likely to cause harm to British citizens, than those which pertain to risks being run by Russian nationals.
I am not saying that there should not be any response. I am merely saying that the role of Government is one of management, and good management should prioritise and deal first with the greatest risks facing the British citizen.

……why do you think IS never admit to gheir terrorist acts (unless it looks good and terrifying on facebook or youtube)

On the contrary, IS frequently promptly admit liability for IS inspired actions.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  richard verney
March 23, 2018 9:04 am

well thanks for the clarification and I agree mostly. However this isnt an over reaction I dont think. It is a necessary action to avoid an escalation of similar incidents or other terrorist factions will carry out their own actions with a justifiable feeling of impunity…..just deny it and it will all go away!!
You say that it is not the job of the US, for instance, to protect Uk citizens. This isnt exactly true as we are members of NATO and an attack on one is an attack on all. Admittedly we have to invoke the specific clause to ensure that NATO will respond but still it is our job and any other member of NATOs job to protect the citizens of all the member states.

March 22, 2018 4:07 am

The old adage of energy is life; cheap energy is prosperity had been lost in the EU and the Left Greens virtually insure they will have neither.

March 22, 2018 5:50 am

So much for the liberal open borders we’re all one policies….set themselves up for blackmail

Bruce Cobb
March 22, 2018 6:23 am

Problem 1: Too much reliance on NG.
Problem 2: Too much reliance on “renewables” aka expensive unreliables.
The electrical power grid there is horribly out of whack, even without the expensive unreliables. It’s total insanity, and the damage done could take decades to remedy. Continuing down the expensive unreliables road will cause further damage, taking even longer to repair. Sad.

March 22, 2018 6:41 am

You have to hand it to the Russian policy moles in the UK and EU. They played them like a fiddle.

March 22, 2018 6:55 am

When the Germans invaded Russia, guess who their largest trading partner was?

March 22, 2018 6:58 am

May is nothing short of a total disaster across the board. She was the worst Home Secretary this country ever had and is going to top that stunning effort by becoming the worst ever British Prime Minister. There is something deeply unhinged in the woman’s head but the low cunning, deceit and treachery areas of her central nervous system are functioning in stellar form.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  cephus0
March 22, 2018 9:33 am

Funny how much respect she gained from this strong line then – if we are to go down the line of worst PMs – shes got a long way to go before she gets as bad as Ted Heath who got us into the EU mess we are in now by allowing unbelievably bad agreements to be put in place and lying to the general public as to the objectives of the then EEC.
Very difficult to judge leader on what they do now when we are talking everyday politics – it will need probably 50 years before one can truly judge a particular leader. Trump could very well be a disaster as most of the media predict but he could also be the catalyst for change in the USA’s political system. The same could be said about Brexit and one way or another Teresa May will be judged on this performance alone – unless of course a diplomatic incident such as this one blows up in her face!

William Astley
March 22, 2018 7:03 am

Note the name game. Britain get 24% of their energy from ‘renewable’ energy = Good? Right?
A large part of the British ‘renewable’ energy is not green. i.e. It is a fact that a large part of the ‘renewable’ energy does not help the pointless effort to reduce CO2 emissions and harms the environment.
It is all a stupid pointless political game. Fake engineering studies. Fake science. Fake economics.

UK now burning 33% of world’s wood pellet imports
The world produced a record 26 million tonnes (Mt) of wood pellets last year, fuelled by increasing demand for renewable power.
Despite record volumes, the UK increased its share of imports to a third of the 14Mt total, according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
UK wood pellet imports have risen rapidly as Drax, its largest power station, has progressively converted units to burn biomass instead of coal. UK imports have tripled since 2012 and its share of global trade has risen to 33%, up from 17% in 2012.

Most wood energy schemes are a ‘disaster’ for climate change
However this new assessment from Chatham House suggests that this policy is deeply flawed when it comes to cutting CO2.
According to the author, current regulations do not count the emissions from the burning of wood at all, assuming that they are balanced by the planting of new trees.
Duncan Brack, the independent environmental policy analyst who wrote the report, says this idea is not credible.
“It doesn’t make sense,” said Mr Brack, who is also a former special adviser at the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change.
“The fact that forests have grown over the previous 20 or 100 years means they are storing large amounts of carbon, you can’t pretend it doesn’t make an impact on the atmosphere if you cut them down and burn them.”
“You could fix them in wood products or in furniture or you could burn them, but the impact on the climate is very different.”
Mr Brack says the assumption of carbon neutrality misses out on some crucial issues, including the fact that young trees planted as replacements absorb and store less carbon than the ones that have been burned.
Another major problem is that under UN climate rules, emissions from trees are only counted when they are harvested.
However the US, Canada and Russia do not use this method of accounting so if wood pellets are imported from these countries into the EU, which doesn’t count emissions from burning, the carbon simply goes “missing”.
Burning wood pellets can release more carbon than fossil fuels like coal per unit of energy, over their full life cycle, the author argues.
Often the products have to travel long distances increasing the emissions associated with their production and transport.

Reply to  William Astley
March 22, 2018 7:24 am

Beside “missing” carbon you also have missing integrity and missing public policy competence. The only thing done well is tactics around the system.

Original Mike M
Reply to  William Astley
March 22, 2018 7:34 am

Trump should outright BAN all bio-fuel exports, especially wood pellets, to the UK. Our southeast lowland swamp habitats being decimated by this nonsense.
Let them cut down their own trees … oh wait … they hardly have any left.

Reply to  Original Mike M
March 22, 2018 9:16 am

Ban it now and ask questions later.

Reply to  Original Mike M
March 22, 2018 4:07 pm

It’ll grow back. That clear cut will be forest within 10 years.

Michael Keal
Reply to  William Astley
March 22, 2018 3:14 pm

I don’t believe the UK government is stupid enough to believe that trashing forests to burn in Drax thereby emitting more plant food, err sorry polluting CO2 than burning coal would is really ‘saving the planet’ any more than I do.
What it does do, together with all those unsightly whirligigs and solar farms, is keep electricity prices nice and high so the sweetheart deal with the Chinese to build the new Hinkley nuclear power station doesn’t prompt too many to start asking awkward questions because there may be more to it than ‘the climate crisis’.
Here’s hoping more of my UK brethren start reading UKIP daily and vote accordingly in the next election. And even if our Westminster lovies really are just plain stupid then all the more reason to do so.

Original Mike M
March 22, 2018 7:11 am

It’s been over a 150 years since we laid a transatlantic telegraph line to England so aren’t we ready for a transatlantic gas pipeline by now? I envision one nuke powered ship, (convert a retiring nuke aircraft carrier) as a continuous extruding/laying vessel being steadily supplied the plastic along the way. I’m just guessing … say a 6′ diameter pipe with a 6″ wall is 8.6 ft^2 area. About 2000 miles = 10,000,000′ from east Newfoundland to Pembroke comes to 3.4 million cubic yards of plastic to melt and extrude along the way. (Even with nuke power it’s going to take a lot of time to melt so much plastic – 5kts is probably optimistic?)

Mark Hansford
Reply to  Original Mike M
March 22, 2018 9:01 am

Good carbon sink! – the only problem with that is it would float, so how many tons of weights would be needed to sink it

Original Mike M
Reply to  Mark Hansford
March 22, 2018 1:24 pm

They can weigh it down with spent nuclear fuel rods.

Reply to  Original Mike M
March 22, 2018 10:14 am

The problem is the Atlantic is getting wider by a couple of inches every year.
The transatlantic cable was broken repeatedly.
It was a lot easier to repair a wire cable than it will be to repair a pipeline.

March 22, 2018 7:26 am

So start the hunt for the trolls that helped this outcome along at the advocacy groups and online.

March 22, 2018 7:40 am

I am surprised renewables have cornered over 20% of Britain’s electricity market. Should be expensive, but probably subsidized.

Reply to  Chad Jessup
March 22, 2018 10:09 am

It hasn’t, fake stats.

Reply to  jim
March 22, 2018 2:04 pm

OK, I will check additional sources.

Reply to  Chad Jessup
March 22, 2018 4:02 pm

A good bit of that renewable figure is wood pellets that produce 15-20% more CO2 than the coal they replaced.

Reply to  Chad Jessup
March 22, 2018 9:47 pm

I can call coal “renewable” if I want to.
“Renewable” definition is arbitrary and capricious. Including in “renewables” coal, methane and uranium (all of which are only mined, transported, and turned into electricity by humans) makes it less capricious.
Humans are renewable. And natural.

March 22, 2018 8:26 am

I still don’t understand what would be the motive for Russia of the attempted murder, or, even if it had some reason, why Russia would use such mean (nerve gas? seriously?), instead of any more conventional way to achieve the same result. This looks very stupid. However, I know for sure that even the most experienced secret service DO make blunder from time to time, like, this sort of thing. So “this is most stupid” doesn’t rule out some Russian involvement.
On the other hand, I fully understand
* why Russia did, and still do, finance and help “green” anti-nuke, pacifist, anti-US, anti-fracking lobbies.
* why some UK politician with bad poll rating would discover some foreign enemy to gather support, and in this respect, Russia is just perfect
* why Putin is laughing, as this also work in Russia, and obviously helped his re-election

Mark Hansford
Reply to  paqyfelyc
March 22, 2018 9:09 am

Have you read the news! It was an undetectable 2 part highly sophisticated toxin that only becomes toxic when mixed and was administered in powder form (the term used was nerve agent not gas). So they used a bang up to date easier to administer highly developed toxin designed specifically for this use. This nerve agent is a Russian product – for us to synthesize it would be to dishonour our international treaties. Within these treaties will be a clause that allows research into the defence against known toxins. Porton Down is subject to regular independent international checks on its operations

Reply to  Mark Hansford
March 25, 2018 6:31 am

Ho do you know this Salisbury hit story isn’t all fake news, Mark?
How do you know that anyone was poisoned at all?
How do you know the entire incident isn’t a hoax?
Have you visited the victims in hospital and examined them personally?
Or are you putting your faith in sources that you can verify are honest, truthful and trustworthy?

Mark Hansford
Reply to  Mark Hansford
March 27, 2018 4:22 pm

Because I flaming well live there, I am ex services and some of my friends work at Porton Down thats how

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  paqyfelyc
March 25, 2018 8:34 am

You do not understand the motive for them trying to kill someone who was responsible for revealing some 300 Russian spies to the West, when perhaps they fear there is another potential traitor in the FSB? I suggest you could start by watching the Godfather films.

March 22, 2018 8:34 am

U.S. to Become a Major LNG Exporter :
There is currently only one operational liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal in the United States; it has been operating since early 2016. Cheniere Energy is exporting LNG at its Sabine Pass facility with three trains and a capacity of about 2 billion cubic feet per day. Its total capacity is expected to be 3.5 billion cubic feet per day when all 5 trains are completed. Cheniere is in the process of getting contracts and financing for a sixth train.
There are five additional LNG projects under construction with a total capacity of about 7.5 billion cubic feet per day that will come online in 2018 and 2019, making total U.S. LNG export capacity about 10 or 11 billion cubic feet per day within just a few years. Four more projects with a capacity of almost 7 billion cubic feet per day are approved but not yet under construction. These terminals will make the United States one of the top three LNG exporters in the world; the other two major exporters are Australia and Qatar.[i] Australia is expected to overtake Qatar as the world’s largest LNG exporter by 2020.[ii]
Between 2016 and 2020, the United States is expected to account for about half of the 20 billion cubic feet per day of new LNG export capacity worldwide.

March 22, 2018 8:55 am

Alleged attack. The signature is there, but the evidence is circumstantial, and easily reproduced.
Well, it wasn’t the Libya solution, or the failed Syrian solution, where the identity of the attackers were published and praised.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  nn
March 22, 2018 9:19 am

I would expect that the current treatment that the Skripals are undergoing is to be kept in an induced coma (standard nerve agent practise I believe), from which they may never recover (this is a very effective agent). Until they do recover I would imagine sure fired proof is going to be hard to come by as the point of administration is still unclear.
However I dont think Teresa May would stand up in front of the worlds press and in full consultation with our European and Nato allies, and get their full support unless she was pretty sure of her ground and this would be the nature of the toxin. She would also have to be pretty sure of her ground to make the direct double accusation she did – either they were aware of the use of this toxin or they had lost control of its whereabouts. That would suggest that there are no identifiable sources of this toxin in the UK.
But who knows – the statement that Russia has no knowledge of this poisoning is after all so convincing isnt it(sarc)

Reply to  Mark Hansford
March 22, 2018 3:01 pm

Ok, it is just an incredible coincidence that the lab most likely to have the poison is a mere 12km down the road!
The UK’s most controversial military laboratory Porton Down* (The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory), the British army base, which analysed the nerve gas, that same lab that does pioneering research into chemical and biological weapons, is a mere 20 minutes down the road!
Sure, I follow you, there’s nothing to see here…Not!
*DSTL Employs 3,000 scientists and has an annual budget of £500 million.

Mark Hansford
Reply to  Mark Hansford
March 22, 2018 6:53 pm

good grief – really. Porton Down picked Salisbury because its within walking distance – really!!!! Thats your argument – you really are plucking at straws arent you. Its not an incredible coincidence, it is just a coincidence. By your reckoning then Litvenenko should have been attacked within walking distance of Aldermaston……..good grief

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Mark Hansford
March 25, 2018 8:30 am

Scott Wilmot Bennett
Did it not occur to you that the Russians wanted the Porton Down Labs to be in on testing for the poison, partly so they could evaluate its capabilities including the ability (or not) to provide antidotes?

Jon Jewett
March 22, 2018 9:46 am

Drill here. Drill now. Pay less. Texas oil men proved Sarah Palin’s thesis to be true with fracking. Unfortunately, the self-anointed elite here were too stupid to understand and I suspect that the British elite are also. All of a sudden, Russia is out number one geopolitical foe. Hmmm….. The elite were too stupid to understand that at the time, also. They really aren’t very bright, are they.

March 22, 2018 12:01 pm

“Britain imports about 44 per cent of its gas from Europe and Norway..”
What, has Norway moved? Has it shifted east into Asia? Or maybe this is that common misconception that Europe and the EU are the same thing. Maybe when the UK leaves the EU the UK, like Norway, will shift into another continent. Asia? Africa? Take your pick. Maybe like gender no longer having anything to do with biological facts, which continent you are in will no longer have anything to do with geography. Maybe we will all be able to decide for ourselves what continent we live in. It’s called Continental Self-Identity. (Israel and Morocco have already put this idea into practice by competing in the Eurovision Song Contest and Israel takes it a stage futher by competing in the European section of the qualifying stage for the Football World Cup. Turkey is dabbling with the idea by applying for membership of the European Union when the vast majority of its territory lies in Asia.) And anyone living in, say, the UK who wants to be regarded as Asian will have to be treated as such by everybody else. And anybody not treating that person as Asian will, of course, be a bullying hatemonger. Allied to this, of course, is the well-known fact that race is nothing more than a social construct. So we can now all identify ourselves as part of whatever race we want to. So, in a clever move, President Trump could declare that he is the first all-black, Asian President of the USA. And then the liberal media would have to treat him with the upmost respect. And anybody criticising him would just be a racist. And maybe one of the more imaginative academics who belong to the fictitious consensus could produce a paper proving that climate change is disrupting the location of continents and that by 2050 such relocation could cause world conflict as we have never seen it. Or that climate change is causing changes in people’s race. Something along the lines that extreme weather is making White people more Black and Black people more White. Furthermore he could discover that there is a 97% certainty that people living in a certain continent will grow tails unless carbon emissions are drastically reduced. As Louis Armstrong once sang, ‘it’s a wonderful world’.

March 22, 2018 1:17 pm

Hey maybe the Russians can build a gas pipeline to South Australia and bypass the Australian gas fields in the process.

March 23, 2018 3:28 pm

In a report published by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) in April 2011, World Shale Gas Resources: an Initial Assessment of 14 Regions outside the United States, technically recoverable shale gas resources in Europe were estimated at 605 Tcf. This represented a little over 9% of the global shale gas resource potential. I’m sure the discovery of potential has increased in the last 7 years. Why would Europe not expeditiously develop these domestic resources rather than depend on Russia? It boggles the mind.

It doesn't add up...
March 25, 2018 8:26 am

Let’s not over-exaggerate: the pipeline map is simply wrong in its attempt to show that Nordstream gas flows to the UK. It doesn’t. Nordstream gas stays within Germany. There is a very big landing of Norwegian gas at Emden, just the German side of the border with the Netherlands, much of which supplies the Dutch H-gas (as opposed to the low calorific value L-gas, Groningen gas field supplied) network. Balgzand also takes gas direct from Dutch offshore and onshore production. The UK may get small quantities of LNG landed at Rotterdam and Dunkirk via the interconnector pipelines, but the Zeebrugge connector (the main volume flow) is supplied by Zeepipe – again from the Norwegian sector. Noway dominates UK imports, and has been squeezing out Qatar (and other) LNG. Only the cold snap saw the UK adding LNG imports, including so far 4 Yamal cargoes (the first of which was allegedly re-exported in early January, and another arrived after transshipment at Montoir, near St Nazaire, France). Most of the Yamal cargoes landed at continental ports have been transshipped for onward delivery to Asian customers.
UK gas imports:comment image
Of course, Gazprom has a large London based gas trading operation, with over 1,000 personnel. They buy and sell gas, trading out of their Nordstream and Baumgarten availabilities and buying gas produced in the North Sea and onshore in Europe. Last year they claim to have sold 16bcm in the UK market – but every last cubic metre will have been purchased or obtained on exchange (Gazprom have no interest in Yamal LNG). Gazprom are planning to scale back their London office, repatriating many jobs to St Petersburg: this plan was already in place when the recent poisoning events took place.

%d bloggers like this: