It was by no means certain (to put it mildly) that fracking could make a significant contribution to reducing the energy shortfall faced by the U.K. in the next few years, but the decision by Liz Truss to reverse Britain’s blanket ban on fracking was a sign that, unlike Boris Johnson, a climate fundamentalist, she took the country’s energy needs seriously. And it’s also worth noting that, even if the details were, uh, vague, as to how exactly this would be accomplished, her decision replaced central control with community assent. Fracking would only be permitted if the locals agreed, reflecting the political reality of drilling in a small, overcrowded island, rather than, say, south-eastern New Mexico, a part of the U.S. better known for (alleged) UFO mishaps than for any lack of space. It’s worth adding that, in the U.S., people own the rights to the minerals that may lie beneath their property. In the U.K., they (sadly) do not, thus removing some of the economic incentives to agree to frack. Promises to spend money “on the community” generally don’t do the trick.
In any event, the thought that some fracking might be permitted somewhere was too much for many MPs, including quite a few in the Tory party.
And so (via the Daily Telegraph):
Rishi Sunak has reimposed the ban on fracking as one of his first acts as Prime Minister.
Downing Street confirmed on Wednesday that he was bringing back the moratorium on any new drilling sites.
It reverses the decision made by Liz Truss, his predecessor, to end the embargo.
She had promised to ramp up fracking across the UK to help make Britain energy self-sufficient.
But the move angered many Tory MPs who represent constituencies where locals are opposed to drilling.
It is to be hoped that Sunak’s move was nothing more than a recognition of political realities both within the Conservative party and beyond it, and that he simply concluded that this was not a drill worth dying on. It will be more interesting to see if he retains Truss’s plans to issue up to a hundred more licenses for oil and gas. His past record suggests that he will, which is encouraging.
Sunak’s more significant challenge will be what to do about the commitment by the U.K. to net zero emissions by 2050, a piece of recklessness put into law by the Conservatives with broad cross-party support in 2019. Net zero is and will remain broadly popular with voters until the moment that its effects are too destructive and/or intrusive to be shrugged off and can no longer be blamed on Putin. When that moment comes, the consequences for whoever is running the country won’t be pretty.
If Britain is to be successful in rebuilding its energy security in a timely fashion — as it needs to be — that will not be accomplished by either nuclear power (which is, however, an essential long-term part of the solution) or renewables. Fossil fuel companies will have to be allowed (and, in certain respects, encouraged) to do their bit, net zero or no net zero. Resolving that conundrum is not something that Sunak can safely postpone until after the next general election.
What he does will be telling.