Reports indicating that Andy Burnham, as incoming Prime Minister, is considering allowing new North Sea oil and gas drilling have prompted a mixed reaction from scientific experts. The potential policy shift comes as the UK grapples with the dual challenges of energy security and climate change commitments, with analysts weighing the practical implications of such a move.
Professor Jon Gluyas, Emeritus Chair in Geoenergy Carbon Capture & Storage at Durham University, highlighted the complexities involved. He argued that ceasing domestic oil and gas production would likely not reduce the nation's carbon emissions, as the UK would simply import these fuels if they remain more cost-effective than low-carbon alternatives. Conversely, Professor Gluyas noted that new North Sea exploration is unlikely to enhance energy security or lower consumer prices in the short to medium term, given that it typically takes over a decade to license, explore, develop, and bring a new field into production in a mature basin.
Professor Gluyas further explained the differing market dynamics for oil and gas. Oil is traded globally, meaning increased UK production could improve the balance of payments and support jobs, but would not influence international prices. Gas, however, operates on a regional market, with about 40% of the UK's supply coming from domestic production and another 40% via pipeline from Norway. The volatile Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) market, which accounts for the remainder, was a significant factor in recent price surges, and its associated liquefaction and shipping processes are highly polluting, though these emissions are not attributed to the UK's carbon account.
Looking for alternative strategies, Professor Gluyas suggested that the UK could better exploit existing producing fields. He pointed out that less than 50% of oil is typically recovered from most oilfields, and while gas recovery is better, significant quantities remain. He proposed that injecting CO2, which needs to be removed from the atmosphere, into these fields could enhance recovery, potentially yielding 2-3 extra barrels of oil for every tonne of CO2 injected, and achieve a near-zero net carbon footprint. This method, he noted, has been successfully employed in Texas since the 1970s.
However, Professor Gluyas stressed that such measures offer only a temporary solution. He underscored the imperative of continued development in wind and photovoltaic (PV) panel electricity generation, alongside better utilisation of heat sources, including solar, waste, and particularly geothermal energy. He highlighted that the UK possesses an essentially inexhaustible geothermal resource, which is currently barely exploited, and could displace all gas-fired heating. Recent work by the UK National Geothermal Centre suggests that replacing LNG with secure, domestically produced geothermal energy would significantly improve the balance of payments, create high-skilled jobs, substantially reduce carbon emissions, and enhance public health through cleaner air.