Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

baldelectrician wrote: »

The dark blue shaded bit is Scotland's territorial waters (as defined by fishing rights), 90% of the current oil fields in UK waters are in Scotland's geographical area.

The lighter blue shaded area on the map shows the rest of the UK continental shelf.


The map clearly shows the areas of oil to the east coast of Scotland- what is more noticeable is the area to the west- only 30% of Scotland's reserves are in the east. There is much oil (and gas) off the west yet untouched.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/2c4bnc/oil_and_gas_reserves_off_the_west_coast/

The economics of getting that out of the ground at current prices are horrible. There is a reasonable chance that most will never be pumped.

elantan

Shakethedisease wrote: »

In 1987 the Tories had been in power in the UK for 8 years. So it was English Toryism. And the Scottish Labour party were pushing exactly the same narrative. Only on a bigger platform. You're being selective.

But only enough to have 1 MP out of 59 and that's been the situation more or less for nearly two decades now. Again, he was right. If the Conservatives win power, it's almost certainly English voters that put them there. And that's fine. However, it is rather a problem when one of the constituent nations of the UK, never vote for them.. or at least, not in enough numbers to gain more than, well 1 MP. Labour starting to look and sound much the same didn't help matters. They paid the price for that in May.



I think you're perhaps a little worried to be honest. And like in many other outlets, it's the anti-SNP stuff that's starting to ramp up a gear again. I don't know if elantan and Leanne will agree with me there, but I can see it. They'll have to be stopped winning a majority in May. At all costs.

Imo people such as yourself are scared they'll win again like they did in 2011. Bide their time, and call another referendum. Only unlike 2011, a Yes win isn't something only to be worried about for the last 2 weeks of the campaign. Next time instead of starting off at 25% support.. they'll be firing the gun at 45-50% support.

What you might call 'grievance and risk' politics others might call 'opportunity and change'. And at the end of the day, the SNP have independence as one of their cornerstone policies. It's why they were founded after all. Can hardly be much of a surprise to you that they haven't given up on it just yet.

Yes I would agree it's getting to almost hysterical levels now

.string.

Generali wrote: »

The economics of getting that out of the ground at current prices are horrible. There is a reasonable chance that most will never be pumped.

More info, to supplement your remark:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/business/13203508.West_of_Shetland_project_poses_challenges_for_oil_and_gas_firm/


Remark: on making searches on Scottish oil it's best to limit it to the last year to avoid pre-referendum "optimism" by the Yes campaign.

Mistermeaner

baldelectrician wrote: »

The dark blue shaded bit is Scotland's territorial waters (as defined by fishing rights), 90% of the current oil fields in UK waters are in Scotland's geographical area.

The lighter blue shaded area on the map shows the rest of the UK continental shelf.


The map clearly shows the areas of oil to the east coast of Scotland- what is more noticeable is the area to the west- only 30% of Scotland's reserves are in the east. There is much oil (and gas) off the west yet untouched.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/2c4bnc/oil_and_gas_reserves_off_the_west_coast/

That doesn't answer the questions

Generali

.string. wrote: »

More info, to supplement your remark:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/business/13203508.West_of_Shetland_project_poses_challenges_for_oil_and_gas_firm/


Remark: on making searches on Scottish old it's best to limit it to the last year to avoid pre-referendum "optimism" by the Yes campaign.

The economics of shale plus the imperative to keep global warming to a reasonable amount (2C looks unlikely now to me FWIW) means that a lot of the oil that is untapped off the Scottish coast is likely to remain untapped.

The wells will keep pumping where they are but I can't see anyone sinking new wells at a price below $80/bbl and I don't think we'll ever see that price again, occasional spikes excepted.

elantan

I would agree a lot of the oil I think will remain untapped ...

elantan

It is fascinating how for a lot of countries oil is a boon ... it's a chance to improve yer lot ... for Scotland it's a curse ... and I find it fascinating how it can go round 65 million and be seen as a great thing but for 5 million it is a curse

Unless of course your Iraqi etc ... then it's an even worse curse than it is for the Scots to be fair

CLAPTON

elantan wrote: »

It is fascinating how for a lot of countries oil is a boon ... it's a chance to improve yer lot ... for Scotland it's a curse ... and I find it fascinating how it can go round 65 million and be seen as a great thing but for 5 million it is a curse

Unless of course your Iraqi etc ... then it's an even worse curse than it is for the Scots to be fair

Oil is a financial benefit just like the Scottish participation in the slave trade was a financial benefit.
However, it will not fund the extravagant spending plans of the SNP.
Think Venezuela rather than Iraq.

.string.

elantan wrote: »

It is fascinating how for a lot of countries oil is a boon ... it's a chance to improve yer lot ... for Scotland it's a curse ... and I find it fascinating how it can go round 65 million and be seen as a great thing but for 5 million it is a curse

Unless of course your Iraqi etc ... then it's an even worse curse than it is for the Scots to be fair

I've only seen the word curse appear in whinge statements such as the one above. But maybe others (non SNP leaning) may have used unseen by me.

However the oil fields might well end up being a curse due to close down and potential clean up costs. No small matter that and one which a Natland would have to bear alone.

elantan

.string. wrote: »

I've only seen the word curse appear in whinge statements such as the one above. But maybe others (non SNP leaning) may have used unseen by me.

However the oil fields might well end up being a curse due to close down and potential clean up costs. No small matter that and one which a Natland would have to bear alone.

Ohhh but your forgetting were better together ... we pool and share our resources remember . So that would be Scotland paying 0.8% and rUK 92%