Andy Burnham Set For Clash With MPs Over North Sea Oil And Gas
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article in The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
The prime minister must decide whether to approve the Rosebank oilfield and Jackdaw gasfield but will face opposition from backbenchers if he goes ahead
These are the first three paragraphs.
Andy Burnham faces a potential showdown with Labour MPs after suggesting faster extraction of North Sea oil and gas could help pay for the transition to clean energy.
The prime minister is preparing to decide whether to approve the Rosebank oilfield and Jackdaw gasfield after consultations on both projects closed.
Industry sources have told The Times they believe Burnham will approve Jackdaw but may resist calls to go ahead with Rosebank because of opposition from MPs.
These are my thoughts.
My Boiler, Gas And Jackdaw
Consider.
- This year my boiler died. So I spent several thousand pounds, but I did get a new gas boiler with a 12-year guarantee.
- I am now 79, so can this government, or any for that matter, give me a guarantee, that I will live to 91 to get value from my boiler?
- I know enough about heating, as I have installed a couple of systems for myself, to know that my current house is not suitable for a heat pump.
- But it may be suitable for some type of electric data centre boiler like heata, which was invented by British Gas Research. But, I’m not hopeful yet!
- Meanwhile, Centrica have done a large hand-full of deals to keep the country in enough gas to power us through the winter.
- Some of these are MiQ-certified, which is a bit like Organic for methane, except that emissions are kept to a minimum.
- I covered MiQ-certification in What Is MiQ-Certification?.
So provided we don’t get an extreme-left scientifically-incorrect government, led by someone like the lady with pink hair in Hackney, I should be able to keep myself warm in winter.
But would I vote for any party, that was going to cut off my gas supply?
But Centrica have been clever.
- They have plenty of gas storage at Rough.
- Their press releases show they are buying gas according to MiQ.
- Grain LNG Terminal, which they bought last year has an export facility, so any spare gas they have can be exported to a country to replace coal or Russian gas.
- MiQ-certified gas probably fetches a higher price.
- Centrica would be an obvious purchaser for any North Sea gas.
This gives some dates of the players and Jackdaw
- BG Group and Centrica were demerged from British Gas plc in 1997.
- BG Group discovered Jackdaw in 2005.
- BG Group were taken over by Shell in 2015.
If I was the owner of Jackdaw, I would make sure that my gas had the highest MiQ possible.
If I was energy minister, I’d enforce it.
Will Jackdaw Be A Tie-Back To Shearwater?
I’ve read that it might be, so I asked Google AI and received this answer.
Yes, Jackdaw is designed and developed as a 30-kilometer (approx. 18.5 miles) subsea tie-back to the existing Shearwater platform in the central North Sea.
Project Connection Details
Infrastructure: A multi-phase subsea pipeline links the unstaffed Jackdaw wellhead platform directly to the Shearwater hub.
Processing: Hydrocarbons extracted from Jackdaw will be processed and routed through Shearwater before final export onshore to the St Fergus terminal.
Distance: The subsea pipeline spans roughly 30 kilometers (18.5 miles) northwest from the Jackdaw field to the Shearwater installation.
I also found this detailed article on the Chemical Engineer which is entitled Shell To Invest In Shearwater Gas Infrastructure Hub.
Shell certainly seem to be doing comprehensive planning to bring the gas from Jackdaw to the mainland.
- Currently, gas from the Shearwater hub is sent to Bacton in Norfolk.
- After, Jackdaw is connected to Shearwater, the gas will be sent to St. Fergus, which is North of Aberdeen.
- Google AI says that The Shearwater hub is located approximately 140 miles (225 kilometers) east of Aberdeen in the Central North Sea.
It’s probably all in a day’s work for engineers in the North Sea, but it doesn’t sound to be the easiest project to me.
Will The Jackdaw Gas Field Be Used For CO2 Storage?
I felt this could be a possibility, so I asked Google AI, the question and received this answer.
No, the Jackdaw gas field will not be used for CO2 storage.It is an active natural gas extraction project in the North Sea, though CO2 separated from its extracted gas may eventually be routed to external storage.
Field Status and CO2 Handling
Extraction only: The underground reservoirs at Jackdaw contain natural gas and high-pressure/high-temperature hydrocarbons rather than being purposed for carbon storage.
Onshore processing: Gas from the field comes ashore at St Fergus, where carbon dioxide mixed into the raw gas stream is removed during processing.
Broader CCS links: While Jackdaw itself is a producing asset, its operations tie into Shell’s broader involvement with the regional Acorn Carbon Capture and Storage project, which aims to pipe and sequester CO2 elsewhere.
That was a definite no, that Jackdaw will not be used for Carbon Capture and Storage, but the carbon dioxide in the gas may be stored in the Acorn Carbon Capture and Storage project.
Will Centrica Be Applying Just-in-Time-Delivery To Gas Cargoes?
One of the jobs, I was involved in was scheduling container ships for OCL, in the 1970s.
- I’m fairly certain, that ships were speeded up and slowed down, so that ports weren’t overloaded.
- It was all done with my PERT7 project management software, which ran on Time Sharing at Great Portland Street.
I can envisage a clever programmer at Centrica writing a large simulation of all their natural gas deals and calling off gas cargoes, when required.
- Gas tankers would be constantly sailing between the gas fields in the Americas and LNG Terminals like Grain, where the cargo was needed.
- It would be nice to have a local supply of natural gas to fill in the gaps between cargoes, but delaying and speeding up of deliveries would have the same effect.
- I also suspect cargoes could be diverted to Germany, Poland or the highest bidder, when there is a glut of gas.
It could be a classic example of advanced control engineering, but very similar to what OCL were doing fifty years ago.
By applying just-in-time-delivery to gas cargoes, Centrica would reduce the need for storage in the UK.
At least gas doesn’t have a sell-by date!
How Much Liquid Natural Gas Storage Is There At The Grain LNG Terminal?
Google AI gave me this answer to the question in the title of this section.
The Grain LNG terminal on the Isle of Grain in Kent has a total liquid natural gas (LNG) storage capacity of 1.2 million cubic metres (1,200,000 m³) following recent site expansions.
Terminal Storage Overview
Total Capacity: 1.2 million m³ of cryogenic tank space (increased from the original 1.0 million m³ capacity).
Tank Configuration: Consists of massive full-containment cryogenic storage tanks (such as the 190,000 m³ tanks added in phases).
System Throughput: The facility can process up to 15 million tonnes per annum (mtpa), meeting a significant share of the UK’s total gas demand.
It should be remembered that storing gas as liquid reduces the space needed.
What Is The Capacity Of A Typical LNG Carrier?
Google AI gave me this answer to the question in the title of this section.
A typical modern liquefied natural gas (LNG) carrier has a cargo capacity of approximately 174,000 cubic meters (m³).
This size has become the conventional standard for new builds, balancing port compatibility with transport scale, though global fleet capacities range widely from small-scale vessels to massive ultra-large ships.
Vessel Size Categories
Small-scale carriers: Hold roughly 1,000 m³ to 40,000 m³, used for regional distribution and bunkering.
Medium-scale carriers: Range from 40,000 m³ to 80,000 m³.
Conventional large carriers: Standard modern designs cluster around 140,000 m³ to 180,000 m³, with 174,000 m³ dominating recent ship orders.
Maxi-size carriers (Q-Flex and Q-Max): Specialized ultra-large vessels reach capacities between 210,000 m³ and 266,000 m³, primarily built to service long-distance routes out of Qatar.
Grain LNG Terminal can hold about four cargoes from the largest LNG Carriers.
My extensive experience of writing scheduling algorithms, which go back to one I wrote at ICI Mond in 1968, feels that by scheduling the arrival of the ships, there may well be enough storage at Grain LNG Terminal to keep the UK in gas.
I wonder, if for some time, Centrica have known, that they don’t need Rough for natural gas storage, which is why they have ambitions to turn it into hydrogen storage.
What Is MiQ-Certification?
This is one for AI
I asked Google AI and received this answer.
MiQ certification is an independent, third-party framework that grades natural gas and oil based on how well operators manage and reduce their methane emissions.Developed by RMI and SYSTEMIQ, the MiQ standard assigns facilities a transparent grade from A through F to help create a market for certified low-emissions gas.
Key Evaluation Pillars
Methane Intensity: Measures the quantity of methane lost relative to the total amount of gas produced.
Company Practices: Evaluates internal corporate policies and operational management procedures.
Monitoring Technology: Checks the deployment and effectiveness of advanced detection and measurement tools.
How the System Works
Independent Auditing: Certified, accredited third-party auditors perform rigorous on-the-ground asset evaluations.
Grading and Issuance: Facilities receive a grade (A-F) determined by their lowest score across the core pillars.
MiQ has a web site.
Centrica And MiQ
In February 2026, I wrote Centrica Energy And Seneca Resources Company Sign First-of-Its-Kind Long-Term MiQ Methane Emissions Certificates Agreement, which was based on a Centrica press release with the same title.
This is the sub-heading of the press release.
Centrica Energy and Seneca Resources Company are proud to announce a groundbreaking agreement, marking the first long-term deal of its kind to support independently verified methane emissions from an MiQ-certified US natural gas producer, helping to underpin reductions over time. This ten-year agreement underscores the commitment of Centrica and Seneca to support global efforts to reduce methane emissions.
It looks to me, that Centrica have put down a marker for the sort of gas deals they would like.
Could MiQ Certification For Methane Be A Bit Like Organic Certification For Food?
Google AI gave this answer to my question.
MiQ certification for methane and organic certification for food share a similar core concept: both are independent, third-party verification systems that audit production standards to provide transparency, market differentiation, and trust for buyers.
How They Are Alike
Independent Auditing: Both systems rely on certified, independent third parties to inspect operations and verify claims rather than trusting self-reporting by producers.
Graded Labels: Organic food uses labels like “100% Organic” or “Made with Organic Ingredients” to show quality levels, while MiQ uses a letter grading scale (from A to F) based on methane intensity, quantification accuracy, and company practices.
Market Incentives: Both create economic value for cleaner practices, allowing producers to market their goods at a premium or meet growing demand from eco-conscious buyers and regulators.
How They Are Different
Core Focus: Organic certification measures a broad set of agricultural practices (avoiding synthetic pesticides, GMOs, or artificial fertilizers), whereas MiQ strictly measures methane emissions intensity and management in oil and gas operations.
Measurement Approach: Organic food rules are largely binary compliance standards (you use or do not use forbidden substances), while MiQ uses continuous or periodic performance metrics to score the precise volume of leaked or vented gas.
Regulatory Role: Organic standards are heavily codified by government bodies (like the USDA or EU rules), whereas MiQ operates as an independent, non-profit standard backed by market adoption rather than direct government mandates.
I think it is a classic case of great minds thinking alike or did MiQ just apply, what they saw was working with Organic food and apply it to methane?
Aberdeen For £76.85 On A Walk-Up Basis On LNER
Yesterday, I was chatting with a friend, who had had trouble getting a reasonably priced ticket of any sort to Aberdeen.
- In the end she’d taken the Caledonian Sleeper, as she needed to get to Aberdeen early.
- I asked her, if she’d tried the LNER walk-up tickets, where you get what they haven’t sold, at a better price than the full price.
- I talked about these tickets in An Affordable Trip To Doncaster.
She hadn’t heard of them.
So this morning, I went to King’s Cross to look at LNER’s offers for travel to Aberdeen.
- I would have been able to get a Super Off Peak Single with my Senior Railcard for £76.85 on any one of four trains, each with a single change.
- Now back home, I am certain, that I could have gone both ways for £76.85 each way.
But I suspect that the intelligent machines at King’s Cross could have sold me a Super Off Peak Return for a better price than £153.70.
If I want to book at the beginning of September, I can do it for £132.45 from a reputable ticket site.
Do We Need More Anglo-Scottish Rail Services?
I have spent nearly sixty years analysing data and as the walk-up tickets seem to bottom out for Aberdeen at £76.85 and some trains are labelled as Sold Out, I feel that we need to add more capacity in Anglo-Scottish services.
- My friend’s difficulty in booking an Aberdeen ticket would seem to indicate that.
- Are travellers between London and Edinburgh, Glasgow and Stirling deserting the airlines in favour of zero- or at least lower-carbon rail travel?
I believe some AI is needed.
Are Anglo-Scottish Travellers Travelling By Rail Instead Of Flying To Cut their Carbon Footprint?
Google AI gave me this answer.
Yes, a significant and growing number of Anglo-Scottish travellers are choosing rail over flying between London and Scottish cities like Edinburgh, motivated partly by the fact that train travel emits up to 90% less carbon than the equivalent short-haul flight.
Travel Trends and Shift to Rail
Majority preference: On the Edinburgh-to-London corridor, rail has overtaken air as the preferred choice, with over 57% of travellers taking the train rather than flying.
Public sector leadership: Government bodies and public sector organizations have actively adopted “think rail first” policies, driving a steep decline in domestic work-related flights to London.
New operators: The arrival of budget-friendly rail competitors like Lumo alongside established operators like LNER has increased capacity and lowered average advance ticket costs, making the shift easier.
Why Travellers Choose Trains
Lower emissions: A train journey from London to Edinburgh accounts for roughly 12.5kg of CO2e per passenger compared to over 165kg of CO2e via a commercial flight.
Door-to-door convenience: City-centre to city-centre train connectivity bypasses airport security queues, baggage drops, and long transfers to and from outlying airports.
Productivity: On-board Wi-Fi and stable table space allow for continuous work that is difficult to maintain during a cramped short-haul flight.
I would only fly from London to Scotland, if I wanted to write about the flight.
My Interim Conclusion
It would be my conclusion, that we need more Anglo-Scottish rail services.
But how?
East Coast Digital Programme
The East Coast Digital Programme has its own web site.
As a Graduate Control Engineer, I suspect, it will bring the following benefits.
- Continuous running at 140 mph on some sections of the East Coast Main Line, as opposed to the current maximum of 125 mph.
- The 14 mile Selby Diversion was built in 1983 by British Rail, with a maximum speed of 160 mph to avoid the Selby coalfield. Trains at 125, 140 and 160 mph will take 6.72, 6 and 5.25 minutes.
- Will we see more 160 mph running? I wouldn’t be surprised,as in 1989 on Stoke Bank between Peterborough and Grantham, an InterCity 225 was recorded at a speed of 162 mph.
- The high speed capabilities of the InterCity 225 were again demonstrated via a 3 hours and 29 minutes non-stop run between London and Edinburgh on 26 September 1991.
- Trains can be flighted, where one train sets the speed and others follow. Think cycling pursuit at 140 mph with 10-car trains.
- As I indicated in Hopes Railway Station In Picturesque Village Could Become ‘Gateway’ To Northumberland Coast, strategic stops could be added to improve connectivity.
- Proven ideas from other lines with full digital signalling will be able to be applied to the East Coast Main Line.
- Journey times will be reduced.
In the 1960s, the sections, that I worked in at ICI, were applying digital control to complex chemical plants and this gave large productivity benefits.
West Coast Digital Programme
I believe that what can be applied to the East Coast Main Line can also be applied to the West Coast Main Line.
Could There Be Better Transport Connections Between Leeds/Bradford and Glasgow/Edinburgh?
The Anonymous Widower 