The lost gas fields that could power Britain for decades

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

h/t Ian Magness

From the Telegraph:

Far out under rough Atlantic waters lies the Glendronach gas field.

Discovered eight years ago off the coast of Shetland, the reservoir has the potential to start pumping gas into the system within two to three years, heating homes and supporting industry.

However, the reality is radically different.

Despite being one of the largest unexploited energy assets in UK waters, Glendronach’s fate is far from secure.

The gas is there, as is the technology to extract it.

But Britain’s politicians have pushed Glendronach and others like it into a limbo that could prove permanent.

Facing rising taxes and windfall levies – imposed by the Conservatives and increased by Rachel Reeves – investors are pulling their money out of the North Sea. Ed Miliband’s ban on exploration has only made matters worse.

Glendronach is just one of dozens of gas and oil fields lying under British waters that are now at risk.

Hundreds of miles away in the southern North Sea, the Glengorm gas field – which could provide Britain with millions of cubic metres of gas – has also faced difficulties. Today, its economics are too uncertain for it to be progressed.

Jackdaw and Rosebank, the UK’s most controversial virgin fields, are similarly in doubt. Last week, Miliband put operator Adura’s permit applications on hold. Jackdaw is capable of providing 6pc of the UK’s gas within months.

According to Offshore Energies UK, there are 51 known fields in British waters that could feed gas into UK pipes. Their progress has been halted not by geology but by politics and taxes.

Another 60 projects – mostly extensions to existing fields – have been held back for the same reason, says Ben Ward, market intelligence manager at the trade body.

It means, in total, an equivalent of 3.25 billion barrels of oil have been left to languish in the ground, accounting for both oil and gas projects.

Oil is largely exported, so its main benefits are in jobs and taxes. However, the gas would be flowing straight into our pipes, supporting us through the latest energy crisis. So how much are we missing out on from those frozen fields?

Ward’s estimate is 1.5 billion barrels’ worth, equating to 250 billion cubic metres of gas, or between three and four years of UK needs. That lost production, he points out, does not mean we use less gas – it just means we have to import more.

“UK domestic gas production could be sustained at 140 million barrels of oil equivalent a year,” Ward says. “But projections from the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), the industry regulator, now suggest it will fall to around 40 million by 2035.

“This matters a lot to the UK. The gas in those fields could reduce our reliance on imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the 25pc predicted by 2030, under current policies, to single digits.”

The blocked projects are just one part of the picture. There are many more potential sources of gas and oil lying under UK waters, industry experts say.

Last month, Chris Cox, the chief executive of Serica Energy, now one of the UK’s largest gas and oil producers, suggested that the waters west of Shetland may hold five trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas.

Cox, whose company recently took over the Glendronach project and hopes to move it on, says it may sound “like a big number, and it is”.

“It’s equivalent to supplying every household in the UK for five years. And yet, some people continue to say that the amount of gas we can produce in the UK is not significant.”

Some of that gas lies in areas that are already licensed, but the rest – perhaps the majority – is in unlicensed sectors. This means Miliband would have to lift his ban on exploration before it could be drilled. He has made clear there is little chance of such a move.

Britain may also be sitting on huge onshore gas resources too. Exploration firm Egdon Resources has reported early evidence for a giant gas field under Lincolnshire containing 425bn cubic metres – enough to meet the UK’s needs for a decade if proven.

The problem is that gas could only be extracted by hydraulic fracking, which, like new exploration, is currently banned.

Full story here.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 9 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
53 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 7, 2026 2:20 am

One month from today England gets to vote in the local elections (which the present Government tried and failed to cancel).

In the last week in April, if things carry on as they are now, shortages of gasoline, diesel and home heating oil should hit as the last tankers through have delivered their stuff. The price of gas for home heating should rise. The growing split in the Labour Government between Miliband and his critics should become apparent.

Very hard to predict the future – and the Conservative Party appears to be having a revival in the polls. But it still looks like a Labour wipeout and a big Reform surge. With energy policy and Net Zero being important factors – not so much directly as in their manifestations in the cost of living.

Miliband seems determined to go down with the ship on Net Zero. There is quite some chance that after a poll disaster, Starmer is toast, is replaced by Miliband, who then puts pedal to the metal and drives faster than ever to the cliff.

That, if it happens, would light a fire under Reform. This is an extraordinary moment in British politics. There has probably not been a period of a greater split between political class and general population for 100 years. Either Labour Party, Conservative Party (or even both) could go the way of the Liberals in the 1920s. Worry about what will replace them, if they do.

strativarius
Reply to  michel
April 7, 2026 2:50 am

Very hard to predict the future

Many have tried, especially using climate models…

We have around ~6 months or so before the heating will have to go back on. They have 6 months to come up with a plan; but don’t hold your breath. They will not budge before 2029.

strativarius
April 7, 2026 2:43 am

It’s clear nobody is listening to any sense in the government. When Miliband is the de-facto PM it’s hardly surprising. In fact, the media is playing its part in maintaining the net zero narrative and the dire need to leave coal, oil and gas behind.

Philip Evans, a senior climate campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: “Our fossil fuels are provided by a volatile global market which we cannot control, and is regularly upturned by reckless wars and blockades. The only path to real security is to leave fossil fuels behind as quickly as possible.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero told the Guardian: “Our priority is to deliver a fair, orderly and prosperous transition in the North Sea in line with our climate and legal obligations, which drives our clean energy future of energy security, lower bills, and good long-term jobs.”Grauniad

I could mention the finds off the Falkland islands… Mad Ed can’t do anything to stop the Falklanders from exploiting their resources.

Media blackout:

UK can’t stop Falkland Islands extracting millions of barrels of oil

the Falkland Islands seems intent on approving the development of a huge oilfield in its territorial waters.

Rockhopper Exploration said its views on the exploration and development of the Sea Lion basin remain unchanged, and it is proceeding with drilling. According to multiple UK media reports over the weekend, the vast and untapped basin holds at least 800 million barrels of oil.Offshore Technology

So, the bottom line is we could exploit the North sea, fracking and the Falklands. But we can’t.

Reply to  strativarius
April 7, 2026 2:53 am

Surely the present government policy isn’t going to be sustainable? And if they replace Starmer with Miliband in May or June, surely that will just increase the scale of the 2029 wipeout?

atticman
Reply to  michel
April 7, 2026 3:00 am

With any luck! But, seriously, has no-one asked themselves why Argentina was so keen to “get The Falklands back” all those years ago? I don’t think it was a vanity project on the part of Galtieri.

If we’d known then that oil would be “out of fashion” by now, would we have bothered to re-take the islands?

strativarius
Reply to  atticman
April 7, 2026 3:10 am

As I recall the original discoveries were made in the 1990s.

When it’s turning to crud at home a war can be a useful distraction.

1saveenergy
Reply to  strativarius
April 7, 2026 3:38 am

You’re right, it saved Thatcher.
But I can’t see this war saving Trump, he’s dug himself a hole & keeps screaming for more spades (opps, can’t say that) shovels.

strativarius
Reply to  1saveenergy
April 7, 2026 4:15 am

Er no, It saved Galtieri for a time.

A General Needed a Distraction. He Started a War.

1saveenergy
Reply to  strativarius
April 7, 2026 3:57 pm

Strat: You need to read history.
Argentina had claimed the islands for decades & the British government
had signalled that the islands were a useless drain, even offering the Falklanders cash to move to New Zealand & had also suggested returning them to Argentina & leasing back Hong Kong style.

Galtieri, was a far-right-wing despot who had been supported into power by the USA ( because of the American paranoia over communism), so he assumed he would get USA backing if needed; he was desperate to stay in power, so he thought invasion was a good move.

In the UK, PM Thatcher was on the ropes due to her fights with the unions & the disastrous Poll Tax, which meant she would lose the next election.
Intelligence reached London in February that an invasion was being prepared, so plans were implemented for requisitioning suitable ships & puting troops on a silent standby. When the invasion took place, the task force was quickly assembled. The conflict ended on June 14 1982.

British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher cleverly converted the widespread patriotic support into a landslide victory for her Conservative Party in the parliamentary election of 1983.

You may find these enlightening –
https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/cold-war/falklands-conflict/why-the-falklands-conflict-happened
https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Falklands_War_order_of_battle:_British_naval_forces

A quote from your link … is pertinent to today’s madness …
“The Falklands conflict was brief, brutal, and oddly decisive — and its lessons about political risk, military reach, and the cost of miscalculation have never gone out of date.

I find it fascinating to be witnessing the present bizarre change in geopolitics (from a safe distance), but the whole world will suffer the consequences for generations.

MarkW
Reply to  1saveenergy
April 7, 2026 7:27 pm

Everyone who isn’t a communist is a member of the far right, and everything bad that happens in the world is somehow America’s fault. Life sure is simple when you see everything through the eyes of your ideology.

1saveenergy
Reply to  MarkW
April 8, 2026 12:19 am

Mark, are you really suggesting Galtieri, wasn’t a far-right-wing despot ?

[“everything bad that happens in the world is somehow America’s fault.”]

No, everything bad that happens in the world caused by humans is generally the result of religious fervour, political greed or a combination of both; throughout history, most countries are/have been guilty of such.

Derg
Reply to  1saveenergy
April 7, 2026 8:11 am

Trump will be fine. Don’t worry your little head. Closing the border to illegals was his greatest triumph.

Reply to  Derg
April 7, 2026 1:21 pm

So far..

If he can get rid of the Iranian Islamic zealot regime and change it to one that wants to be a productive part of the world.. the whole Middle East will thrive, and be a much safer place…. Trump will be the one that did it.

Gregg Eshelman
Reply to  bnice2000
April 8, 2026 12:51 am

If Trump can keep our tyrant/despot/dictator loving Democrats from sabotaging things. They desperately want the mullahs to stay in power in Iran.

IMHO we should airdrop large amounts of portable battery packs, folding solar panels, Starlink internet systems, 9mm pistols and ammo all over Iran.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Gregg Eshelman
April 8, 2026 7:13 am

They desperately want whatever Trump is against. That’s their sole purpose. Trump could say “killing puppies is horrible”, and the protestors would be out in the streets advocating the murder of puppies.

strativarius
Reply to  michel
April 7, 2026 3:03 am

Bear in mind Starmer is a figurehead only at this point, he is not in charge and hasn’t been at least since the start of the war in Iran – it was Miliband who said no to Trump etc.

Miliband will ‘cry betrayal’ if Labour U-turns over North Sea oil and gas amid Cabinet split over new drilling
…recently reported that Mr Miliband could be minded to approve a project at Jackdaw, a major gas field off the coast of Aberdeen.  His department dismissed the speculation as ‘incorrect’ and insisted no decisions had yet been made.

‘The only way to truly protect ourselves from these price spikes is to get off the rollercoaster of fossil fuel markets.’ – Daily Mail

We are in a game of energy chicken; will the backbench Labour MPs speak up or keep their heads down? It’s…. Very hard to predict the future

1saveenergy
Reply to  strativarius
April 7, 2026 3:49 am

[“Very hard to predict the future”]

And with the Met Office data alterations, it’s also very hard to predict the past !!

strativarius
Reply to  1saveenergy
April 7, 2026 4:36 am

That isn’t really a problem, for as Orwell foretold:

“Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the  past”

See Michael E Mann and his hockey schtick

MarkW
Reply to  strativarius
April 7, 2026 10:31 am

Switching from energy that is always available and sometimes expensive to one that is sometimes available and always expensive, only makes sense to a complete idiot.

Reply to  michel
April 7, 2026 5:13 am

Given the damage inflicted on the country in less than two years by this cluster**** of a government, the thought of them clinging on for another three years doesn’t bear thinking about whichever moron is notionally ‘leader’.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  strativarius
April 7, 2026 7:19 am

It’s clear nobody is listening to any sense in the government.”

It’s all in keeping with the grand plan. None of this is by mistake.

April 7, 2026 3:12 am

So a few years is now decades.
Time really flies when you get older…

strativarius
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
April 7, 2026 3:19 am

The alarmists are not going to trumpet that which pains them to hear. Obviously.

Have you not got a solar product to place today? I do look forward to seeing what I’m missing.

Beta Blocker
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
April 7, 2026 6:57 am

MUR, it’s worse than that. If we continue to breath air containing 430 ppm CO2, sooner or later, we will all be dead.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Beta Blocker
April 7, 2026 7:22 am

I don’t know about you, but I breathe air.

Beta Blocker
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
April 7, 2026 7:42 am

A critical ‘e’ is missing from the gag! The missing vowel that broke the gagilogical chain of reasoning! Alas, peer review might have caught the error. But I didn’t want to wait a year just to be told I couldn’t vocalize my gag.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Beta Blocker
April 7, 2026 8:52 pm

Consider my comment your peer review. 🙂

AleaJactaEst
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
April 7, 2026 1:34 pm

’bout time you got down to room temperature.

1saveenergy
April 7, 2026 3:44 am

Millibad is a 5th columnist out to destroy the UK; so far, the bastard’s succeeding. (:-((

Bruce Cobb
April 7, 2026 3:48 am

The inmates are running the asylum. “Hey everybody, let’s all put our fingers in the light sockets so we’ll light up like Christmas trees! Wheeeee!!!”

don k
April 7, 2026 5:23 am

The sad thing about anti-fracking is that Methane (natural gas) has its available energy stored in C-H bonds. As hydrocarbons get heavier, an increasing percentage is in C-C bonds or C=C double bonds. The result, for those who care about CO2, is that actual electrical generation in anti-fracking domains depends on Carbon heavy resources like coal or diesel that produce up to twice as much CO2 per watt delivered as natural gas.

Not that one should hydraulically fracture every available resource. Fracking shallow beds has a certain potential for releasing a mixture of Methane and unpleasant gases like Sulfur Dioxide or Hydrogen Sulfide into the Water table. Not a good idea. And no one in their right mind is going to frack in geologically unstable areas like coastal California. Comes the earthquake — there WILL be an earthquake sooner or later — and the frackers will be sued for a zillion dollars. Won’t matter all that much whether they actually caused the quake. Liability and damages will be determined by a jury of probably very confused lay people.

MarkW
Reply to  don k
April 7, 2026 10:35 am

The areas being fracked are thousands of feet below the water table.

Reply to  don k
April 8, 2026 3:29 pm

A jury of their peers – and we know how well that is working.

GiraffeOnKhat
April 7, 2026 5:58 am

Why can’t we agree on a measure for gas? There is mention of cubic metres and cubic feet in almost adjacent paragraphs.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  GiraffeOnKhat
April 7, 2026 7:24 am

I propose “Feet-Meters”. We can call them FeeTers.

April 7, 2026 6:02 am

Meanwhile, it’s snowing here this morning in Wokeachusetts.

Beta Blocker
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 7, 2026 7:01 am

A friendly suggestion. Take a walk over to your neighbor’s house and ask him how much power his rooftop solar panels are delivering.

davidinredmond
Reply to  Beta Blocker
April 8, 2026 7:08 am

especially the ones on north facing roofs, which seems a popular placement option in the Boston ‘burbs

Beta Blocker
April 7, 2026 7:13 am

Nuclear power using SMR’s distributed as necessary around the country would work well to reduce the UK’s dependence on foreign LNG for heating and for consumer needs.

But getting from here to there would take twenty-five years and would require that all money now being spent on wind and solar be spent on nuclear.

Nuclear power is strictly a public policy decision. A France-like nuclear buildout option won’t be given serious consideration as long as Labour and Ed Milibrain control the UK government.

2hotel9
April 7, 2026 7:39 am

They are not lost, I can go over and show them where they are right now.

Joe Crawford
April 7, 2026 8:59 am

Reminds me of my time in Houston, TX in the ’70s, back during one of the gas crises. The MSM was telling everybody to conserve gas because the people in the North East were freezing. Houston Lighting & Power’s answer to that was “screw ’em”. HL&P had enough gas in underground storage to last another 10 years or so and no way to ship it up there since they wouldn’t allow pipe lines.

Reminds me of what y’all are going through with your government restrictions on hydraulic fracking and exploration. Guess it just has to get a lot worse before it can get better.

Reply to  Joe Crawford
April 8, 2026 3:31 pm

The common saying in the Fort Worth area was “let those damnyankees freeze to death in the dark”. (Yes, damnyankees is one word.)

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
April 11, 2026 9:23 am

‘Bout the only thing I remember about Fort Worth was back years ago when some poor rancher was suing a strip club ’cause their was no way he could have gotten the $25,000 worth of entertainment in one night that showed up on his Amex :<)

April 7, 2026 9:58 am

If Iran does not meet his ultimatum, “a whole civilisation will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” Mr Trump threatened on Tuesday.

This is deranged. Its not deranged to want to eradicate Iran’s nuclear program, and whether its right or wrong to actually try and do it, its not deranged to fight to do it. But to talk like this about whatever you are going to do is absolutely deranged.

Reply to  michel
April 7, 2026 1:28 pm

Eliminating the whole radical zealot Islamic ideology and the rampant terrorism and hatred that they foster, would be a great benefit to all the planet.

The Iranian people could live free from oppression and become a worthwhile part of a new, modern Middle east. Arab nations know this is the way forward, but it can’t happen while the Islamic terrorist regime exists in its current form.

Reply to  bnice2000
April 8, 2026 12:54 am

Its a common point of view, but it misses my point. My point is that talking as Trump does, then reversing himself, then off on another series of wild threats, none of that is doing anything to ‘eliminate the whole radical zealot Islamist ideology’. If anything it is strengthening it, and it also raises worries about Trump’s mental grasp of the situation and his mental stability.

As to the ‘new modern Middle East‘? Doubt it. It took a Reformation in Europe (and nearly 200 years of religious wars!) to get to a new modern Europe. There is no sign of anything analogous in Islam. The division between Sunni and Shi’ite has existed since 1700 and isn’t anything like the Protestant/Catholic split – both adhere to the same social norms and both believe in a theocratic state. The split is primarily about governance.

I can see no sign that any ‘new modern Middle East’ has any chance of emerging. Turkey, after nearly a century of secularization, is a classic example. It took repeated military coups and periods of military rule to keep the country secular in the 20c, and in the end even that failed and we have the current reversion to a more or less Islamic state. We are not going to see Islam turning into a sort of Middle Eastern Church of England, getting out of politics and abandoning jihad and supporting universal human rights and freedom of religion. It is not going to happen. You are not going to see Christian churches opening in Saudi, or the blasphemy laws in Pakistan repealed.

People worry about an Islamic Iran with nuclear weapons – and given history and the pronouncements of the regime they are right to be worried. Always listen carefully to what dictators say, they do really mean it.

But Trump’s rants are doing nothing about that. In fact, by producing an impression of vacillation and derangement they are actually making any solution less likely.

davidinredmond
Reply to  michel
April 8, 2026 7:15 am

I’ll gladly tolerate trump’s rants over obama and biden shipping pallets of cash and gold to fund the mullahs’ nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs.

Reply to  davidinredmond
April 8, 2026 7:38 am

I’ll gladly tolerate Rump’s rants….

But Trump has become slowly but noticeably unhinged having changed from saying “you’re fired” to celebrity apprentices, to bragging about how big his rallys are…to saying “you’re fired” to FBI directors, attorney general, secretary of Defense, to saying “you’re fired” to whole foreign political administrations….to how he is going to fire whole countries…and fire by fire whole populations…

Remember the saying about… good men doing nothing…

Joe Crawford
Reply to  DMacKenzie
April 8, 2026 8:50 am

Read his book on how to negotiate. How would you negotiate with someone who believes and for 47 years has repeated the phrase: “Death to America”. And, has gotten away with capturing and killing Americans when their only reaction is to send them tons of dollar bills. How do you convince someone like that that you mean business. My guess is you have to appear crazier that he is. That’s what Trump did and it has apparently worked.

Reply to  Joe Crawford
April 8, 2026 10:36 am

”it has apparently worked”….
Uhhhmmm….Iran’s regime said “bomb us all you want Mr T, it makes you look like a total jerk to the world…then not getting the requested total surrender, Trump telephoned Pakistan who is supposed to be arbitering…and said “call a 2 week cease fire and tell everyone both sides have accepted”…Iranian spokesman “bombs still falling”…it is just so easy to make Trump look bad on this if you just let people die…

1saveenergy
Reply to  bnice2000
April 10, 2026 2:24 am

Eliminating the whole radical, zealous Christian, Jewish & Islamic ideologies ( all claiming they are doing the work of the god of Abraham), and the rampant terrorism and hatred that they foster would be a great benefit to the entire planet.

Remember, what we are seeing in the Middle East now is the result of actions & brutality taken in the First Crusade (1095-1099), called for by Pope Urban II.

Bob
April 7, 2026 3:28 pm

Government should not be in charge of energy production or transmission, it is clear. Look at the UK what a miserable mess.

Billyjack
April 8, 2026 4:49 am

Just for the record, the term is hydraulic “fracturing” or “fraccing”. The term “frack” was invented by the glue heads that have gone organic because it starts with “f” and ends with a “k” implying another verb in their limited vocabulary.