North Sea oil and gas producers should finance carbon storage matching the emissions from burning their fuels, Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland argued, saying the plan could free about £21 billion in U.K. public support.
Freedland said the government had set aside about £21 billion for carbon capture and storage (CCS). He argued that requiring companies to fund the work could leave public money available for priorities such as schools, hospitals and defense. The proposal would shift more of the cost of managing emissions to fossil fuel producers as the U.K. weighs climate goals against growth and household costs.
Freedland proposed introducing a storage requirement in stages across North Sea production. He presented the proposed Rosebank oilfield, northwest of Shetland, as a test of the policy. He compared its projected 25-year operating life with roughly 10 years for the Jackdaw gasfield, which he described as smaller.
To make the case for CCS, Freedland pointed to Norway’s Sleipner site, where carbon storage has operated for three decades. He also cited government estimates that the U.K. CCS industry could support about 50,000 jobs in the 2030s, more than further fossil fuel extraction would provide, according to the column.
Michael Jacobs, who served as climate and energy adviser to Gordon Brown in Downing Street, told Freedland, “We need to destroy the demand for oil and gas.”
Freedland reported that a carbon-storage requirement was under “live” consideration by ministers. He also said a decision on Rosebank was approaching, though he gave no date. The government would still face a separate choice on the field while setting out how its decisions fit its emissions goals, he argued.
