Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Tuesday, 14th October 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

£750bn oil reserves remain untapped under North Sea



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 09 July 2008
A POTENTIAL prize of £750 billion in unrecovered oil and gas reserves is in the North Sea and the Atlantic frontier west of Shetland, industry leaders said yesterday.
But they warned that without new technology and investment incentives from the government, the reserves will never be recovered to boost the ailing British economy.

Under the current fiscal regime and investment plans, only around ten billion barrels of oil and gas stand to be recovered over the next two or three decades.

However, the latest economic report by Oil and Gas UK, the pan industry trade body, claims a further 15 billion barrels or more could be pumped from the UK Continental Shelf. That equates to almost half that extracted from the North Sea so far.

Malcolm Webb, the chief executive of Oil and Gas UK, said: "Barrels left in the ground do not pay taxes, do not sustain jobs, do not help secure the nation's energy supply and provide no support to the country's balance of payments. While we may have produced nearly 38 billion barrels of oil and gas over the last 40 years, the UK still has substantial oil and gas potential.

"It is estimated that somewhere between 16 and 25 billion barrels of oil and gas remain to be recovered."

A spokesman for the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform said: "Our estimate is also between 16 and 25 billion barrels in normal circumstances.

"It is the most probable extent of the reserves but there is a potential high of 39 billion barrels based on various figures we have, to do with undiscovered resources, potential resources and current reserves."

Mr Webb added: "Plans currently in place should reach about 10 billion of those barrels so the challenge in the hands of the government and industry is how to achieve the remaining 15 billion barrels.

"While realising this goal will require massive further investment from the industry, at $100 per barrel it is worth $1.5 trillion to the British economy and this is a prize which the country should not contemplate losing.

"There need to be targeted incentives for companies wishing or willing to invest the very, very considerable sums that are going to be needed to get up to that 25 billion target but, my word, that is a target worth going for."

The latest economic report, however, reveals the cost of producing a barrel of oil or gas in the UK Continental Shelf has continued to soar to record levels.

Oil and gas prices have trebled in the past seven years but the cost of "developing" a barrel of hydrocarbons has risen fivefold while the operating cost per barrel has doubled. The report also reveals money spent bringing new reserves into production fell from £5.5 billion in 2006 to £4.9 billion in 2007.

The industry is expected to submit its detailed proposals to the Treasury for changes in the fiscal regime within the next few days. Mr Webb said: "What we are looking to government to do is to give further encouragement and incentives to those companies willing to invest.

"So we are suggesting that they need to have further targeted incentives in the form of uplifted capital and balances."

According to industry leaders it is also vital to "find the right economic way" to unlock the potential of the reserves west of Shetland, where there are believed to be between four and six billion barrels.

But new technology will have to be developed to explore and develop the Atlantic frontier fields and there is no gas infrastructure in the area.

FACT BOX

• OIL was discovered in the North Sea in 1966, with the first year of full production taking place in 1976.

• The city of Aberdeen became the centre of the North Sea oil industry and today it promotes itself as the "Oil Capital of Europe."

• The oil and gas supply chain in the north-east of Scotland is estimated to be worth about £15 billion a year to the nation, with some £4 billion of that related to export activity.

• Latest figures suggest that the north-east currently supplies around three-quarters of the UK's primary energy demand.

• The UK is the world's 12th largest overall producer of oil and gas.

• The oil industry in the North Sea is estimated to support some 40,000 jobs.

• The oil boom is the main reason why the average weekly earnings in Aberdeen, at £606.30, are roughly 20 per cent higher than the Scottish average.

The full article contains 768 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 08 July 2008 11:26 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: North Sea Oil & Gas
 
1

The Great Deception,

09/07/2008 00:06:49
Maybe Alex Salmong and the SNP will embarass themselves with another silly £20M drop in the ocean token prize?

Maybe he'll get in a magazine again, he likes that you know?
2

Senga Jean,

09/07/2008 00:16:28
~1 What "fuel" are you on? Scotland again and again is shown to be the most altruistic nation on this earth by being an oil producing country and gaining little benefit and certainly nothing laid by for our bairns futures. Great Britons have wasted billions of pounds of our birthright on crazy wars and on weapons of mass destruction like Trident which we cannot fire without US permission.(not that any sane person would wish to use them)
3

Highland Mighty©,

"If a nat says it, it's not true." 09/07/2008 00:19:58
And we STILL await the nats jumping up and down excitedly by these "high-end forecasts"....

They'll be along any time soon....

This article has been here over an hour....

They usually are a lot quicker than this....

Big contradiction to their usual claims that over "half of the oil is still there" but we won't mention that if they don't....
4

Highland Mighty©,

"If a nat says it, it's not true." 09/07/2008 00:21:42
4. And there's the first now. Where have you been?!
5

ThomasP,

09/07/2008 00:34:41
"£750bn oil reserves remain untapped under North Sea."

Still to poor, to stupid and far to incapable of going alone though.
6

ochone,

Sauchie, Clack's 09/07/2008 00:50:37
7 your right of course, what differance could any of that make to the east end of Glasgow?
7

Senga Jean,

09/07/2008 00:52:13
#6 another "petrol" head. Because you repeat your lies and banner supposed lies by others does not win the argument. I also have a life and do not sit perched like you and your Unionist pals ready to jump if a comment is made contrary to your British Imperialist personaego.
8

Castaway,

09/07/2008 01:14:23
Why is the UK (English dominated)Parliament desperate to keep Scotland within the UK ?
If we have been such a drain on English resources for so long, why didn't they kick us out years ago ?
9

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 09/07/2008 01:18:45
Nostalgia moment
10

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 09/07/2008 01:23:11
I worked on the first 2 pipelines between Loch of Skene and St. Fergus in 1975. Chased the pig from St.Fergus, after it came onshore at the pig trap, all the way to the block valve at Tarves.

Heard it going by and went back to The Gordon Arms at Inverurie.

Ah! Thems wuz the days.
11

,

09/07/2008 01:30:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

brownlie,

09/07/2008 01:44:34
5 British Pride

" .... to boost the ailing British economy"

Surely no-one in their right mind would even contemplate using SCOTTISH oil to boost the BRITISH economy.

There is no way the British economy is ailing under a unionist government.
13

jerrymanders,

09/07/2008 02:08:33
"Still to poor, to stupid and far to incapable of going alone though."

You are "too" poor to get an education, obviously.
14

jerrymanders,

09/07/2008 02:09:26
#7

as above
15

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 09/07/2008 03:04:35
I get the feeling HIGHLAND MIGHTY ain't an SNP supporter. I am. Yes I know Mr Mighty, I am one of those awful 'Nats' you have nightmares about. I realise many of our more gung ho supports stress you out by over-estimating our oil reserves and such. Lets take oil out the equation, say we had no oil, if that keeps you happy. Not a drop (I hope you don't consider that a high end forecast). A bit like Ireland or Denmark for example, although our population is a little larger than both. But no oil. These countries have larger GDP's, higher incomes, better growth rates and living standards. All that without oil.
16

cnoc nagers,

heilans 09/07/2008 05:47:37
Fair and balanced reporting or just lazy journalism not reading the full report? The other BIG piece of news in this report is that the Treasury WILL recive an extra £6 billion pounds. Remember all the denials, read how they squirm out of this one in The HERALD. If the Scotsman journalists, editors and owners want to reclaim the right to say that they are fair and balanced the read the Herld articles before writing your own. As an aside I am a Labour supporter who is becoming sick of the way in which Scotland is being misled in an attempt to beat the SNP.
17

Pilrig.,

Livingston 09/07/2008 05:58:12
5 - a slaver
18

an interested party,

09/07/2008 07:11:13
£750 billion

i wonder how many barrels that is

19

donald,

glasgow 09/07/2008 07:18:11
Making liars out of Labour again, including Maggie Maggie Curran supporter, George Galloway and the Daily Record, who claimed that the Oil is finished and it is England's.
20

Truely English,

09/07/2008 07:20:23
22
Good news for the whole country.
21

aljok.23,

the world 09/07/2008 07:41:45
Excellent. We'll have no problem organising future nuclear capabilities and planning the next war. Northern Rock is catered for and think of the potential for MP's expenses. ch-ching
22

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 09/07/2008 07:45:51
Hmm...the oil is England's...Scotland too stupid to run its own affairs...wonder how many in Glasgow's east end swallow this rubbish hook, line & sucker?

Saw Curran on a soapbox...MAN she looked scary - those shoes looked like those from the Wicked Witch in Wizard of Oz....;-)
23

Nikostratos,

09/07/2008 07:55:19
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0fb244b4-4d37-11dd-b527-000077b07658.html


he North Sea is one of the fastest-declining oil provinces in the world. The peak of oil and gas production came at the turn of the decade. Since 2002 output has been falling at an average rate of 7.5 per cent a year.

O&GUK estimates that if no new fields are developed, the North Sea will be, in effect, finished by 2020, after a further 7bn barrels of oil equivalent [boe] have been extracted.

With sustained investment, and some further discoveries, it believes the rate of decline could be slowed to 4-6 per cent a year, and a further 15bn-18bn boe ex-tracted, keeping the North Sea alive until about 2040.


As the resources of the North Sea are depleted, its fields become less attractive: they are generally smaller – 90 per cent of all prospects are now less than 50m boe, very small by international standards – and more difficult to develop. It is becoming ever harder to persuade international companies with opportunities elsewhere to invest in the UK.
24

Louis Catorze,

09/07/2008 08:24:04
"Scotland again and again is shown to be the most altruistic nation on this earth by being an oil producing country and gaining little benefit and certainly nothing laid by for our bairns futures"

Yeah #4..it's all being spent right now on grand schemes that cannot possibly (however worthy) last long term. (tuition fees, healthcare for the elderly etc etc).

And it's getting pedantic here, but at the moment we do live in Britain, so really it is being spent in this country.

Possibly even for ALL our futures.
25

Lisbon-Lion,

Glasgow 09/07/2008 08:35:23
750 BILLION AND ALL WILL BE SQUANDERED BY ENGLAND.

6 weeks ago I was in Saudi Arabia and Iran, in both countries petrol costs 9p per litre (Yes 9p). Last week I was in Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Bahrain and petrol was 20p per litre. 99% of their economy comes from oil and gas and they are investing this wealth for their future generations. Scotland has the same wealth as Kuwait and Bahrain yet we are slowly slipping into a 3rd world country.

Scottish people, please WAKE UP and realise that we are the only country in the world with huge natuaral wealth, yet we are allowing Westminster to waste our resources.

History will judge us as the most stupid people on the planet for allowing this to happen.
26

Nikostratos,

09/07/2008 08:48:08
#27

Do you not think at 9p and 20p a litre they may be wasting a valuable resource.
27

The Honest Lad,

Musselburgh 09/07/2008 08:51:57
Oil will be surplus to requirements soon and worthless when the new technologys are introduced into the market. No more petrol / diesel vehicles. Renewable energy.
28

Mikey,

09/07/2008 08:52:51
Why, they have so much of it they can export it!
29

Marian,

09/07/2008 08:54:39
Iain Macwhirter a leader write of the Herald recently wrote recenttly “Scotland, even within the UK, is a nation with its own legal system and jurisdiction. It is perfectly legitimate for Alex Salmond to claim that Scotland is the only oil-producing nation in the world not to have benefited directly from oil wealth. And they don't have to be independent states.

In 1976, the Canadian province of Alberta established the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund to set aside a proportion of government revenues from oil royalties. The same year the US state of Alaska set up the Alaska Permanent Fund which pays an annual cash dividend to every person who has been resident in the state for over a year.

The mother of all oil funds is of course the Norwegian state savings vehicle, renamed the Government Pension Fund of Norway in 2006. It is now worth some £192bn and owns one percent of European equities. Wall Street banks come to the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund for emergency bail-outs."
30

Nikostratos,

09/07/2008 09:11:19
#29


how? when? where?cost?

31

John S,

09/07/2008 09:14:42
Margaret Thatcher's Bernard Ingham.
"they smelt money"
"as greedy as sin as they were"
"the only thing that fueled nationalism was
the smell of oil, money and oil"
"it really is the most monstrous piety"
see - tinyurl.com/6ymamn

I presume he did read the McCrone 1974 report ?
Written by a leading government economist in 1974, it sets out how oil would have given Scotland one of the strongest currencies in Europe.The report also stated that Scotland would have had "embarrassingly" large tax surpluses.
The report was kept secret by our caring and socialist Labour Party who was in Government at the time.
32

Jambo Number 1,

09/07/2008 09:34:07
Does anyone else think Margaret Curran bears a striking resemblance to Gillian McKeith. Difference being that Margaret talks cr @p of course.
33

Saoghal Beag,

09/07/2008 10:07:17
13 jamboden, do we have to wait that long before he packs his bags and waddles of to his beloved london in his union jack y fronts.....can you picture that...!
34

Boggle fey the Bog,

09/07/2008 10:13:57
# 26 Looey the fowerteenth, you may 'live in 'Britain', but I live in Scotland, which unfortunately happens to be an annexed part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, if you wish to be a pedant, 'Britain' does not actually exist as a country.

BOT this is an old story Traquir has regularly, over the last 6 or 8 weeks been pointing this out and how none of the Onionist 'newspapers' have been publishing it.
Is this now happening because there is a 'Buy-Election' on the go, and the Onionstas are trying to suggest that all this 'newly discovered potential wealth and revenue, is safe in their hands?

Well judging by the way they have squandered everything else, I wouldn't trust them with a penny carmel.

Just as an aside since Broon went to the Treasury, Mr Prudent, with his 'brilliant ideas' has increased the cost of running Inland Revenue to 49pence in the pound, that is for every £1 collected 49 pence is devoured by HMRC in the cost of running their Department, so get rid of that lot and taxation could start at 5p in the pound on 'earned income'!!

Now where's Wee John McFall, you know, thon MP fur West Dunbartonshire, who is Chair o' the Treasury Committee, is he no lookin intae this.

Aye, an Madge Curran is like really a good choice fur the East End, nae contest, eh!
35

JoeMiddleton,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 10:17:37
At least 'The Great Deception' has an accurate name for himself. Question: What kind of person would delight in running down their own country and pretending we are too poor and daft to rule our own affairs? Answer: A unionist
36

Louis Catorze,

09/07/2008 10:53:10
#36...first annexation in history that involved the signatures of the ruling elite of the country being annexed.

ho hum..
37

The Spook in Leith,

09/07/2008 11:06:50
#5Highland Mighty©,"If a unionists says it, it's not true." 09/07/2008 00:19:58
And we STILL await the nats jumping up and down excitedly by these "high-end forecasts"....

They'll be along any time soon....

This article has been here over an hour....

They usually are a lot quicker than this....

Big contradiction to their usual claims that over "half of the oil is still there" but we won't mention that if they don't....

..erm only 38 posts (mine 39) on this article ?? not the sort of forecast you predicted but lets face it your rubbish at forcasting anything on economics.. This oil argument has been won by the SNP over the last few weeks soz its just rubble being flung around now by you, happy GERS day mong..
38

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 11:18:06
33 John S
So many people quote McCrone as some kind of gospel when the facts are that his projections turned out to be wrong. It was written in 1974 shortly after the Arab oil embargo caused the price of oil to rise to $40 per barrel. However as production from other non OPEC countries came into play, OPEC could not maintain the embargo and the price slumped to reach as low as $10 per barrel at one stage. For 20 years or so the price was usually in the region of $20 -$30 per barrel. Taking inflation into account this was well below the 1974 price.

Instead of looking at what McCrone said might happen, look at what actually has happened by checking BERR oil and bas statistics. North Sea oil and gas revenues started in 1964/65 (43 years ago) when the first licences were sold. Total revenues since then have amounted to approx £140bn. This has been adjusted for inflation to give a figure of £248bn in today's prices. So the average revenue per year has been 248/43 = 5.8bn in today's prices. However the latest GERS figures, which are accepted by the SNP, show that, without oil and gas revenues the deficit per year in Scotland is £10.2bn in today's prices.

Where, therefore, is the embarrassing surplus?
39

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 11:27:05
Site Surveys commence in the next couple of months with drilling due in early 2009. Current share price of Falklands Oil is at 99p. With estimated resreves of 60 billion barrels perhaps now is the time to buy?
Up the Brits :)
40

,

09/07/2008 11:32:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
41

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 11:32:11
39 The spook
You cannot possibly say the the oil argument has been won by the SNP. Look at post 40.
42

European Scot,

09/07/2008 11:33:40
25 Nikostratos

" The North Sea is one of the fastest-declining oil provinces in the world. The peak of oil and gas production came at the turn of the decade. Since 2002 output has been falling at an average rate of 7.5 per cent a year."

We get this negative comment from you, in spite of reading, in this Unionist publication, that there are 750 billion pounds worth of oil in the North Sea.

In this same article:-

""It is estimated that somewhere between 16 and 25 billion barrels of oil and gas remain to be recovered."
" Plans currently in place should reach about 10 billion of those barrels so the challenge in the hands of the government and industry is how to achieve the remaining 15 billion barrels."
"While realising this goal will require massive further investment from the industry, at $100 per barrel it is worth $1.5 trillion to the British economy and this is a prize which the country should not contemplate losing."

$1.5 trillion would make quite a bit of a difference to an Independent Scottish economy too, and Scotland most certainly, should not contemplate losing it.
Even only 90% of it !
43

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 11:39:20
Anyway must go now. off to pick up my Sash from the drycleaners! " ..and off to fight by day and night we pounded the rebels in many a fray..."
44

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 11:44:16
44 Europen Scot
So many people don't seem to understand how oil revenues work. $1.5 trillion is not the revenue that would accrue. It would be the price for which the oil is sold. From that the oil companies have to deduct their costs. The remainder is then taxed - this is the revenue which accrues.

Also, note what the companies are saying. Most of the remaiming oil and gas is in small and less accessible fields. This makes the costs much higher. They are therefore asking for tax breaks to develop them. Both of these factors would reduce any revenues. Don't get carried awway. The picture is not as rosy as it appears from the headline.
45

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 11:48:43
Fields that were marginal until recently now look a lot more viable including the difficult to access reserves in the North sea and indeed the falklands. Obviously to an extent the future of these reserves depends on the price sustaining in real terms-there is no reason to suppose it wont. In SA we have SASOL-which is our synfuel-oil from coal enterprise. this was initiated in the bad old apartheid days when we were subject to embargoes. Then it was not economically viable but has now come into its own and Sasol is xpanding and showing record profits. Interesting too that article on the Scottish gold mine that is now viable because of the soaring price of gold!
46

European Scot,

09/07/2008 12:04:22
46 Ugly George

Firstly may I suggest that you look again at your post at 40.
It is, coincidentally, your figure of 40 dollars a barrel which is incorrect.
At the time of the McCrone report, 1974, Oil peaked at around 16 dollars a barrel, as a result of the Yom Kippur war.
I suggest you read this article from 'the Independent', not an SNP publication !

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/how-black-gold-was-hijacked-north-sea-oil-and-the-betrayal-of-scotland-518697.html

Secondly how surprising to read that you are suggesting $1.5 Trillion worth of oil may be reduced by tax breaks !
I can't help thinking that the remaining amount, might be of some significance to an Independent Scotland, rather more so, than the sum it currently receives.
47

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 12:06:59
47 Geoff
Marginal fields may become viable but it appears that the oil companies need more convincing that the price of oil is going to stay high before they invest substantial amounts. According to the UK oil and gas report on which this article is based,investment (as opposed to opreating costs) actually fell in 2007 despite a rising price of oil.

Brazil and Kazakstan are developing huge oil fields which will come on stream in the next few years. These are much larger than any of those ever discovered in the North SEA. Canada is expanding production from the Athabasca tar sands (up to 175bn barrels of reserves) and Iraq is seeking a huge rise in production. There may be a feeling among oil companies that, if and when, these all come into play the price of oil may fall again. This is what happened in the eighties.
In these circumstances the companies might not want to risk big investments on small fields.
48

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 12:15:15
48 European Scot
Sorry. You are most definitely and conclusively wrong. The price of oil peaked at $40 per barrel after the Yom Kippur war in 1973. I will bet you any amount of money you care to mention that this is the case. Check other sources rather than one newspaper and check the BERR oil and gas website and you will find that everything I have quoted is correct.

As far as your second point is concerned it is not possible to tell how much revenue would accrue from the $1.5 trillion. So much depends on costs, price of oil etc.
49

European Scot,

09/07/2008 12:20:05
47 Geoff

Morning young man ! Well it is relative !

As you say many hitherto marginal fields are coming in to play.
Another point is the future advance of oil recovery technology, which one day will have oil companies developing known, but currently inaccessible reserves.
Add to that the discovery of new fields, and the life expectancy of North Sea Oil may well exceed the current prediction of 100 years.
50

The Spook in Leith,

09/07/2008 12:21:32
LMAO, i made ref to Highland mighty in my post and he had not posted for well over 10 hours on this article then he posts around 20 mins after my post, talk about trolling the forums ..

#40 I in no way and many others would not take what your write as Gospel, the fact remains Scotland has and still remains economic viable to run its own independent affairs..
51

,

09/07/2008 12:26:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
52

scunnin,

Germany 09/07/2008 12:28:53
How interesting .. we pay twice, one to come up with the technology and two when we buy the petrol!! What an incentive to invest!
53

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 12:32:56
49 Ugly George-thank you for that info. There are a few wild cards prominent amongst which is the potential for significant reductions on the demand side. I dont think that consumers have realised anywhere near the huge potential for savings -on a micro and macro level. Even with runaway Chinese/Indian demand fuelling the fire,price increases are going to blunt demand which may curtail consumption and thus reduce price. This uncertainty as you correctly point out may make oilmen wary of the huge investment risks chasing difficult to extract oil! On the other hand we are chasing a finite resource! interesting times!
54

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 12:36:51
51 European Scot
Study the websites of UK oil and gas and BERR oil and gas and you might have a clearer understanding of how the oil and gas industry operates. At the moment you are merely quoting selected erroneous information from sloppy journalism.

The issue is not how much oil or how long it will last but the rate of production. Oil may be produced in 100 years time but if it is only 1000 barrels per day then that is insignificant.
55

The Spook in Leith,

09/07/2008 12:39:57
#53

What has gone wrong for you? you did not put the word "GERS" in your post!! oh boo hoo did you get turned down for a season ticket for ibrox ?

Go on sling your hook and get out and get some fresh air you big piece of ear wax
56

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 12:50:23
European Scot-Good Day old chap! To paraphrase Steve Martin from Dirty Rotten Scoundrels-"It is better to be good than not"!-It is better to have oil than not-no matter what the future! You wicked Nats of course always spin it to make your Independence proposals look rosier whilst the more level headed like Highland Mighty and myself prefer a more conservative (note the small 'c') approach!
57

,

09/07/2008 12:52:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
58

European Scot,

09/07/2008 12:54:40
50 Ugly George
" Sorry. You are most definitely and conclusively wrong. The price of oil peaked at $40 per barrel after the Yom Kippur war in 1973. I will bet you any amount of money you care to mention that this is the case."
If you care to read the following you will find that the figures quoted in my post are actually correct.
This is information from 'Energy Information Administration, Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government.'
If you check this site there is a graph of oil prices between 1970 and 2006.
You will see that at the time of the McCrone report, 1974, the price was as indicated in my post, and in 'The Independent' article.
Prices started climbing in 1979, but reached the 40 dollar mark in the eighties.
Now how much was that bet worth ? Less any tax breaks of course !

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/AOMC/Overview.html

56 Ugly George
" Study the websites of UK oil and gas and BERR oil and gas and you might have a clearer understanding of how the oil and gas industry operates. At the moment you are merely quoting selected erroneous information from sloppy journalism."

Study the above ! The journalism wasn't sloppy !
59

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 12:54:59
59 Jackie Priest-"fish brain"-what colourful invective Jackie!
58 Spook-"big piece of ear wax"!! Hey Spook, between you and Jackie you certainly are enriching the art of insult! John Cleese certainly couldnt acuse yous of being "Non creative garbage!" Hope u are well!:)
60

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 12:58:40
59 Jackie Priest
Please see post 40 for a proper perspective on allocation of oil and gas revenues. These revenues fluctuate enormously from year to year and you cannot get a realistic picture by just quoting one year as you are doing with the 6bn which involves an estimated, projected figure of £16bn for the current year. Look at the whole picture since the start of oil and gas revenues as I have done in post 40.
61

,

09/07/2008 13:02:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
62

,

09/07/2008 13:04:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
63

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 13:09:40
62 European Scot
Sorry to point this out again but you are still wrong and the journalism is sloppy. The graph you mentioned is an inflation adjusted graph to give the price in real terms. The actual price did peak at $40 per barrel in 1974. That is common knowledge. I don't know why you continue to dispute it.
64

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 13:09:58
64 Jackie Priest-the extreme face of Scottish Nationalism.
65

,

09/07/2008 13:10:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
66

,

09/07/2008 13:11:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
67

john z,

edinburgh 09/07/2008 13:13:00
Hallelujah!!

It's only taken the Scotsman two months to report what newspapers such as the times and Daily Telegraph, were reporting weeks ago.

So, the North sea ia worth 15 billion a year, well, that is almost half of the total annual budget of 33 billion for the whole of Scotland.

Can anybody in Scotland not yet see, why people like Gordon Brown won't let Scotland have independence?? And before anyone jumps in and says the Scots can have independence anytime they like let us remember, because it is in Hansard

In PMQ's several weeks ago. the Prime minister Gordon Brown (a traitor to the Scots if ever there was one) said;

I will use any powers available to me to preserve the union.

For those who can't or won't comprehend that statement, it actually means in unequivocal terms, Gordon Brown will use all possible means at his disposal to block Scottish Independence, even if the people of Scotland want it.

Scotland will be free from media bias and nefarious attempts to prevent Independence, only when the Oil is finished.

Or to make it easier for Labour supporters to understand, Oil is what makes London try to prevent Independence, but the argument for Independence for Scotland is by no means dependant upon oil.

Interestingly I've just watched Harriett Harman at PMQ's talking in the most sneering, anti-Scottish condescending terms about the Scottish Government, whilst remarking that Alex Salmond claims the Westminster AND Holyrood salary. Of course being a London Labour stooge, she doesn't know Alex gives one salary to charity.

But I do wonder, what can this mean for their candidate Margaret Curran in Glasgow East, who if elected will be an MSP AND an MP. Does Harriett Harman not approve of her either???? The Labour party is a total Joke.
68

danielrober,

09/07/2008 13:18:12
It may not be a popular comment but i'm glad investment is slowing down a litle for the North Sea oil and gas industy.

We have become far too dependent on this sector and constaly rely on these guys bailig us out of fiscal problems, SNP, Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem and even the Green party. Don't worry oil and gas will pick up the bill. Windfall tax here, VAT their, secured boring, or government spending it all needs to be paid for.

A little thinking space might see this sector appraciated more and encourage other industrial activities to increase their efforts, back into profitablity. After all the subsidies asked for by other sectors comes from this sector.

Oil and gas needs time, people and money. Far too much is asked of this industry.
69

,

09/07/2008 13:19:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
70

Sair Elba',

Brigadoon 09/07/2008 13:22:21
#10

Useful stooges are always in demand... they provide superb targets when things get a bit rough. The current crop...Brown, Darling, Martin, Browne, Salmond, Alexander etc etc etc are invaluable as whipping boys...and girls of course.

As Wan Hung Lo used to say 'Scots rush in where fools fear to tread.'
71

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 13:24:28
62 European Scot
PS As I said before the bet is any amount you care to mention.
72

,

09/07/2008 13:25:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
73

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 13:29:43
74 John Z-notwithstanding your comments I do not believe that if a majority of Scots want independence there is any way GB or anyone else would be able or indeed want to prevent it! Why can not some of you accept that there are reasons other than oil that motivate the vast majority of Unionists in their quest to maintain and defend the union? Scottish Nationalism is a valid cause. But so is British Nationalism. It will play its self out one way or another. But calling the Labour supporters in Glasgow East" brain dead monkeys" for example will not I think, advance your cause.
But if thats your style pray continue. As a Unionist i'm not complaining.
74

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 13:39:13
74 John Z
As I mentioned to others, please look at post 40 to obtain a proper perspective of oil and gas revenues.
75

European Scot,

09/07/2008 13:43:18
70 Ugly George

Are you suggesting that in 1974 the actual price of oil peaked at 40 dollars ?
Are you talking actual prices at the time ?
The article refers to prices at the time, it talks of number of barrels produced, at the time.
Or are you talking about an equivalent today ?
This was about then, 1974, when the price of oil was 16 dollars a barrel.
Under the graph you will see "dollars-of-the-day" and, "have not been adjusted for inflation."
They are in actual prices at the time.
If you want to talk about prices of the equivalent of 40 dollars a barrel in today's prices, then perhaps you should have clearly indicated that in your original post.
You didn't.
So to repeat, the price of oil in 1974 was 16 dollars per barrel.
Not equivalent, actual !
76

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 13:48:23
74 John Z
Oil and gas revenues may amount to £15bn this year but that is not the same as your assertion of "worth £15bn a year" These revenues have fluctuated hugley reaching £12bn in 1984 and slumping to £1bn in 1991. The revenues were only 7.8bn last year. Also production is falling and costs are rising. The report from UK oil and gas on which this article is based makes that very clear. You therefore cannot assume that the the figure of £15bn (even if it turns out to be correct) will be consistent. If the current price of oil is a speculative bubble (which many think it is) the consequent fall combined with rising costs and falling production would shatter that figure of £15bn.
77

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 14:00:01
81 Jackie priest-Jackie-im sure your a nice guy too and no there is nothing wrong with you wanting to see Scotland independent. Sometimes though it is not what you say but the way you(or i or anyone else) says it. There is a passion in some of your posts that is admirable in some respects but also if u dont mind me sayin, ugly and seemingly intolerant of the other side. But hell if you want to knock all kinds of verbal sh*te out of each other thats also fine-dont want to impose my ideas on anyone. As one gets older one generally mellows-its all down to chemicals I suppose.
78

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 14:05:16
81 Jackie -actually these forums are good outlets for anger and passion and participants should debate as they see fit-i dont want to pontificate-on re-reading my posts Im starting to sound a little preachy. Sorry.
79

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 14:08:42
83 european Scot
My apologies - I was looking at the wrong graph. You had the right figure and I had the wrong one. Name your charity and I will make a donation

However this does not alter my central point that McCrone's analysis turned out to be incorrect. There were 3 or 4 years of high revenues in the eighties but these slumped dramatically as the price of oil fell back and costs rose. If you look at my post #40 you can see that the overall picture of oil and gas revenues since their inception cannot possibly be construed there being any overall surplus let alone an embarrassing one.
80

truthsleuth,

09/07/2008 14:12:13
You should all remember the oil prduction belongs to BP Shell etc and should quote how much it is worth after they have taken their cut.
81

Thomas1,

09/07/2008 15:25:56
It's Scotlands oil,the only problem is we're part of the UK.An oil fund for the future is a great idea,
break the union.
82

brownlie,

09/07/2008 15:35:14
68 Geoff

I usually read your posts with a deal of interest but when you refer to British Pride as level-headed it is obvious that you do not read his postings properly.

When he begins to lose his argument he invariably loses control and throws abuse left, right and centre and certainly does no credit to the cause you both espouse.
83

,

09/07/2008 15:48:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
84

European Scot,

09/07/2008 15:49:13
87 Ugly George

Thank you, Ugly George ! I appreciate your honesty.
Perhaps a donation to the SNP ? ! !
The other point worth mentioning about the McCrone report, is it seems to have been based upon Oil production levels of around 500,000 barrels, that is now treble this figure.
So with that increased output, and the tremendous increase in the price per barrel, it would seem to suggest that what the professor wrote then, may now be underestimating Scotland's potential wealth.
85

,

09/07/2008 15:49:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

,

09/07/2008 15:51:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
87

,

09/07/2008 15:59:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
88

brownlie,

09/07/2008 16:02:47
91 British Pride

so, you are going to deny being abusive in the same way you denied making the comment about innocent Iraqis being killed even after the time and date of your posting was identified.

I repeat, you do more harm for the unionist cause than any other poster on this thread.
89

European Scot,

09/07/2008 16:04:47
95

When it comes to certain Unionist posters on here, I take my cues from N.A.S.A. and their policy regarding the Moon.
No point wasting any time, energy, and resources, trying to communicate, having firmly established, there are zero signs of any Intelligence there.
90

,

09/07/2008 16:12:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
91

wattie>x 1,

PLYMOUTH 09/07/2008 16:25:16
Our Scottish nation is rich in natural resources and in the year 2008 its people should be enjoying a high standard of living equal to anywhere on mother earth. Her economic history has been marginalised down through the years to suit our cousins South of the Border who were never regarded as being foremost British until quite recently, when Brown's brain wave suddenly appeared on the political scene hoping with the assistance of the English Electorate, it would improve and assure his future political survival.
Will he?
His opportunism can hardly be equalled any where else in the UK.
92

Micropacer,

09/07/2008 16:26:20
Highland Mighty your 1 man crusade for Scottish Unionism is utterly pointless and makes you look foolish.

Not the fact you support the Union or even the fact most of your posts are inane drivel.

Simply the fact you are irrelevant. You have 1 vote and you continual posting will not influence anyone.

So the question is - why do you do it?

If you are retired you should be playing golf or something more interesting.

If you are unemployed go get a job.

If you are employed then your wasting some companies time on here.

93

,

09/07/2008 16:30:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

,

09/07/2008 16:33:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
95

,

09/07/2008 16:59:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
96

Nikostratos,

09/07/2008 17:10:30
#44 European Scot

You cheeky monkey i made no comment only gave a link to a report from Oil & Gas UK, who give an entirely different slant on the oil potential in the north sea.

His words not mine..........you should read the article...(.)(.) with your eyes open
97

Geoff,

sa 09/07/2008 17:21:23
103 Meths-see you missed the ton tonight? Losing your touch?

Danielrober-I think it was you who asked me the other night about Scots emigration to SA?-Im getting old so forget. One intersting and unusual wave of emigration to SA in the sixties was that of scottish footballers!! We had a professional NFL-not up to british standards but still well supported. Many Scottish players and their families settled here to play fitba- any fellow fifty plus year olds might remember-Willie Allan,Billy McGilverray, Frankie Mcguigan,the Hume brothers,Willie McIntosh,Jimmy Kerr to mention a few!
98

McMadman,

http://scottishreferendum2008.blogspot.com 09/07/2008 17:21:54
Highland:

Your spinning under so many posting names would be childish were it not for the fact that it is so amusing.

Lets look at GERS conclusion para 3 that you are fond of speaking to:

"In 2006-07, the estimated net fiscal balance, in Scotland, that is the estimated current budget balance plus estimated net capital investment, was a deficit of £10.2 billion (9.7 per cent of GDP) excluding North Sea revenue, a deficit of £9.4 billion (8.8 per cent of GDP) including a per capita share of North Sea revenue or a deficit of £2.7 billion (2.1 per cent of GDP) including an estimated geographical share of North Sea revenue."

Of note:

1. This simply ESTIMATES ONLY the deficit positions based on certain scenarios, it does not confirm or otherwise where those oil revenues are distributed.

2. It is in all likelihood not based on anywhere near the current $145 per barrel price of oil.

3. There appear to be some £750 billion punds worth of reserves - see headline of this thread.

You have made the point that without including the oil reserves scotland may experience difficulty in not breaching the EU limit on GDP borrowing - 3% per annum. But clearly from your own beloved GERS, the fact is that an independent Scotland would easily sit within that figure.

It would most likely also have a GDP deficit of much less than 50-60% (despite many denials from you you fail to say or evidence why not) thus making it less of a problem than say, the following:

Germany (65%) France (64.2%) Italy (104.2% - JEEZUS !) Belgium (84.9%) Austria (59.1%) Greece (94.5%) Portugal (63.6%) Hungary (66%) Cyprus (59.8%) and Malta (62.6%)

Oh dear. Even with existing oil revenues Scotland is easily sustainable as an independent economy. The confirmation that there a further 15 billion barrels in addition to that already known to be there kinda blows away your argument that an independent scotland is economically non viable.

99