The Price of Gas

 

The price of gas has increased tenfold. Heating our homes and operating our industries has become enormously more expensive. Ruinously so, perhaps.

However, I reckon the cost of gas has remained pretty much the same.

The cost price reflects the cash needed to extract the fuel from the ground and transport it to the point of use. I doubt there's much difference in cost between now and pre-war in Ukraine. The huge leap in price only reflects the amount people are willing to pay for the stuff.

There's also a lot of talk in the UK about us having 'our own oil and gas'. As a country we have none. We gave it all away long ago to the likes of BP and Shell who are now free to sell it to the highest bidder. And that's where the money is going. Directly into the pockets of already over-rich people who have no need for more money but feel they are entitled to it anyway.

At 20p per therm, the fossil fuel companies were making handsome profits. Now, at 200p per therm, profits have become astronomical.

How can this be? Why should people who can least afford it be paying into the dividend pot for fossil fuel investors?

It's the system. The one we've been told for decades is the only viable way to run the world. We've been lied to. Sold a pup. Exploited.

The biggest contributors to the Conservative Party and individual MP's, apart from corrupt Russian oligarchs, are the construction industry. There's a reason for this.

Let me use the construction industry, with which I am familiar, as an example of the corrupt system which applies equally to every facet of business in the country and, in fact, most of the world.

Land, like the oil and gas beneath it, ought to belong to everyone but it doesn't. Those with the might to claim vast tracts of our country grabbed it while they could. So, most of the surface of our country is controlled by a group of wealthy landowners. Like the Queen. And Chinese investment companies. And the Russian mafia, sorry, oligarchs.

So, what's the cost of land? Not a lot. Especially if you stole it many years ago.

But the price? Agricultural land can be bought for £5,000-10,000 per acre. This reflects the profit that can be made from growing crops. The exact same piece of land with permission for housing will yield over £1,000,000 per acre when sold as plots to house buyers. Our planning system is designed to enrich  housebuilders. Corruption can be no surprise when such enormous profits are involved. Influencing politicians must be extremely good value for money otherwise why invest large sums in political contributions?

In the UK, the cost of a house has little relation to its price. The price, like that of gas, depends entirely on what people are willing to pay. And their ablility to pay is more dependant on the cost of borrowing money from the banks than anything else. Bear in mind that the exact same house in one place can fetch twice the price of one in a less fashionable district. No difference in cost.

I've rambled on a bit. Sorry. I hope you get the picture. Your energy bills are stuffing the pockets of the rich. Corruption ensures this. The media make sure we remain victims because the media is controlled by the mega-rich.

It doesn't have to be like this but it's the way we've chosen. Maybe its time to choose another way.

First Principles

We all know about Climate Change. Believing it is one thing, doing something about it is another. Then there are prominent related issues like Biodiversity and Plastics in the Oceans. The situation is pretty much overwhelming. It's hard to believe that any individual can make a difference.

We're constantly being fed conflicting information. This is designed to confuse and frustrate our good intentions. If there's a report on how a plant-based diet is not only good for our health but of enormous benefit to the planet, the media will respond with 'research' based evidence that meat is good for us and that vegan families are risking the health of their children by such faddism.

Let me try to help by explaining my approach. When I was studying Chemistry I found that provided I understood the first principles I could avoid having to remember huge amounts of information. So it is with the environment. None of us can know and understand every consequence of every action. Life and our relationship with the planet is much too complex for that.

I'll give you an example to begin with.

Fracking. Why do we oppose fracking?

Proponents of fracking will argue that we need gas, that there is no risk, that the earthquakes are small and that opponents should back off.

The anti-fracking brigade cite horror stories about contaminated water supplies, the loss of value of homes adjacent to fracking sites, flammable gases coming through domestic water taps and lots more.

My advice is to forget all that. Risk assessment is subjective. Go back to first principles which is that fossil fuels have to be left in the ground if we are to mitigate climate change and avoid extinction. Extracting gas puts the carbon it contains into the atmosphere. Simply put, fracking will make climate change worse. That's enough for me.

The country, and some councils, have declared a climate emergency without doing anything except shout about it. We need to dramatically reduce our use of gas. There will be no market for fracked gas if we do that and the frackers will give up because they're only in it for the money.

The Committee on Climate Change has advised Government that 800,000 households a year need to be converted to sustainable fuel from here on in if we are to reach our carbon reduction targets. Yet almost all new houses are being fitted with gas boilers. This is wrong. Councils can and must stop this. There are alternatives and these are much cheaper if installed at the building stage rather than having to retrofit.

So that's the first principle:
Anything that will make Climate Change worse has to be avoided.