fluffy666 Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Apologies if already posted.. http://www.economist.com/node/21552564 Interesting to note that UK Oil production was down to about 1 million barrels/day (the 1999 peak was 2.9 mb/d, IIRC); the last decent field to come online was Buzzard in 2007; that is past maximum now. An independent Scotland would not account for all the oil (there's a bit that's english, and would consume about 150,000 barrels per day anyway. At the current rate, then, Scotland would become an oil importer before 2030, and would be an increasingly minor oil exporter even by the time they got actual independence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovelyhead Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Apologies if already posted.. http://www.economist.com/node/21552564 Interesting to note that UK Oil production was down to about 1 million barrels/day (the 1999 peak was 2.9 mb/d, IIRC); the last decent field to come online was Buzzard in 2007; that is past maximum now. An independent Scotland would not account for all the oil (there's a bit that's english, and would consume about 150,000 barrels per day anyway. At the current rate, then, Scotland would become an oil importer before 2030, and would be an increasingly minor oil exporter even by the time they got actual independence. Yawn. It's about more than just money and oil. At least it is to me anyway. I don't care if we would be worse off. At least we would be determining our own future. Why the need for the "haggisistsas" comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erat_forte Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 It is quite convenient for the ruling elites and the London-based political and economic vested interests that the current set-up just happens to be the best, most efficient, most equitable, most democratic, most progressive set-up possible, the envy of the world and impossible to improve on no matter which way you think of changing it. Whether you think there should be more integration with Europe, more integration with NATO, a change in the constitution of the UN, stronger local and regional government in the UK, changes to the election system, adjustments to the houses of parliament, or a re-assesment of the legal and constitutional powers of the various assemblies, parliaments and quangos which together make up the beurocratic and legal framework running society in England, Scotland, the UK, Europe, the West and the whole world, No, none of those suggested changes could possibly have any positive effect because it is totally without question that the current political & economic system is the best possible system and it is all running perfectly. Now, what's on TV tonight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Hun Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Yawn. It's about more than just money and oil. At least it is to me anyway. I don't care if we would be worse off. At least we would be determining our own future. You are in a small minority on that. As the article points out, 75% of Scottish would not pay the price of an iPad for independence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluffy666 Posted April 16, 2012 Author Share Posted April 16, 2012 Yawn. It's about more than just money and oil. At least it is to me anyway. I don't care if we would be worse off. At least we would be determining our own future. Why the need for the "haggisistsas" comment? Sorry about the comment, it was inappropriate for a guardianista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abroad Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Reports of the death of North Sea Oil have been on the cards since it was first opened up. The main point is that Scotland has a smaller population than London, any impact of oil is hugely magnified. If the economist is to be believed then global supply is drying up, this of course will drive up prices which will make other fields viable as will the advance of new technology. However they argue the case both ways in the negative , resources are drying up and prices will fall.....Only one thing is certain. As soon as the oil is gone the Union is done an dScotland will be kicked into touch, Scots if they were wise should get out now while there is money left....Why else are Westminster holding so tightly to the so called subsidy junkie..... As to the usual hypothetical nonsense about Scotland having to have have bailed out the whole of RBS and HBOS. This has been covered numerous times. Banks were bailed out by national treasury of each country where they had operations(RBS also got bailed by to some extent by the US Fed). Only 5% of RBS operations were in Scotland......this was what was done by Fortis and Dexia in Benelux....and everywhere else on planet reality. It wasn't about bailing out the banks it was about saving the faith in the banking system. if the system had failed the governmnet would have been on the hook in each country due to bank depositors guarantee anyway. If one big retail bank fails they all will. As to EU membership question...again old rubbish regurgitated. Its simple, multiple Euro sages have said tha Scotland would have no issue with entry to the EU, they also said that if they had to renegotiate then the RUK would too....which might actually suit the Tories. Economist piece reads like the usual lazy journalism on the whole issue of independence or not. I'm all for recycling but after a while the cardboard gets a bit soggy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erat_forte Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 You are in a small minority on that. As the article points out, 75% of Scottish would not pay the price of an iPad for independence. Quite right. Also, 75% of British people would pay well over the odds for a house. So the minority who argue that the system could be improved should shut up and accept the status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone baby gone Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Scotland is about more than oil... Lots of water (you might be needing some of that down South sooner rather than later ), not to mention hydro-electric power and expansive coastline for tidal power generation. 5 million people and a disproportionate share of the UK's natural resources. Yes please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovelyhead Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 You are in a small minority on that. As the article points out, 75% of Scottish would not pay the price of an iPad for independence. It all depends on who you ask, where you ask and also the way the question was asked. That stat is meaningless. Sorry about the comment, it was inappropriate for a guardianista. Are you referring to me as a guardianista or yourself? Quite right. Also, 75% of British people would pay well over the odds for a house. So the minority who argue that the system could be improved should shut up and accept the status quo. Indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluffy666 Posted April 16, 2012 Author Share Posted April 16, 2012 It is quite convenient for the ruling elites and the London-based political and economic vested interests that the current set-up just happens to be the best, most efficient, most equitable, most democratic, most progressive set-up possible, the envy of the world and impossible to improve on no matter which way you think of changing it. Whether you think there should be more integration with Europe, more integration with NATO, a change in the constitution of the UN, stronger local and regional government in the UK, changes to the election system, adjustments to the houses of parliament, or a re-assesment of the legal and constitutional powers of the various assemblies, parliaments and quangos which together make up the beurocratic and legal framework running society in England, Scotland, the UK, Europe, the West and the whole world, No, none of those suggested changes could possibly have any positive effect because it is totally without question that the current political & economic system is the best possible system and it is all running perfectly. Now, what's on TV tonight? Scottish independence would make English London-centralism much worse. Personally I'd be a fan of more EU integration, if it wasn't for the extreme levels of graft.... the only thing that can put checks on large multinationals are large nation states or economic blocs. The way I see it is that essentially, the SNP are exploiting nationalist sentiment as a tool to gain power, which is generally dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovelyhead Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Scotland is about more than oil... Lots of water (you might be needing some of that down South sooner rather than later ), not to mention hydro-electric power and expansive coastline for tidal power generation. 5 million people and a disproportionate share of the UK's natural resources. Yes please! Agreed. I just don't understand the huge hostility of a majority of posters on this site every time this issue is brought up. There are always insults included too without any reason for it. (See sub heading of this thread). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluffy666 Posted April 16, 2012 Author Share Posted April 16, 2012 Are you referring to me as a guardianista or yourself? Me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Yawn. It's about more than just money and oil. At least it is to me anyway. I don't care if we would be worse off. At least we would be determining our own future. Why the need for the "haggisistsas" comment? No you wouldnt. Nothing would be different. Today Brussels will determine your future, and tomorrow, regardless of England, Brussels would too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovelyhead Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 No you wouldnt. Nothing would be different. Today Brussels will determine your future, and tomorrow, regardless of England, Brussels would too. Alas you are right. Hopefully though, by the time (if) Scotland gets independence, the european union may have collapsed and there will be no EU to join! Plus at the moment Scotland is at the third tier of decision making with Westminster above them and then the EU. At least we would hopefully have more say if the EU is still around. It has to be better than our current position no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swissy_fit Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 5 million people and a disproportionate share of the UK's resources. Yes please! Quite a lot of people think that's what the Scots have right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AThirdWay Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 You are in a small minority on that. As the article points out, 75% of Scottish would not pay the price of an iPad for independence. That's not what it says at all. Read it again, and then have a think about why there is such debate on the actual wording of the question posed in a Scottish vote for independance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Democorruptcy Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Scotland has more water and that will be their new oil. Imagine how much England will need when they keep packing in the immigrants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovelyhead Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Scotland has more water and that will be their new oil. Imagine how much England will need when they keep packing in the immigrants. If Scotland could charge 1p per litre there would be no need for oil money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone baby gone Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 No you wouldnt. Nothing would be different. Today Brussels will determine your future, and tomorrow, regardless of England, Brussels would too. Brussels? No point joining the EU until the oil runs out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeeky Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 If Scotland could charge 1p per litre there would be no need for oil money! That's £10 per cubic meter! The UK has miles of coast lines, for that price it would be significantly cheaper (up to £1 a meter cubed) to use desalination plants, all we would need it plenty of power... or a bolt on or two to the odd nuclear plant we have across the country, which are typically already on the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guillotine Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 I don't see why Scotland should not increase in power and influence to at least match the Irish Republic. But the political power of the socialists could stymy their development and presumably they will not be tempted into the Eurozone. They have similar resources, manpower and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Hun Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 That's £10 per cubic meter! The UK has miles of coast lines, for that price it would be significantly cheaper (up to £1 a meter cubed) to use desalination plants, all we would need it plenty of power... or a bolt on or two to the odd nuclear plant we have across the country, which are typically already on the coast. Its now possible to desalinate water without a large amount of energy. I suspect its cheaper than pumping it from Scotland, although NW England probably has enough water in the lakes for the rest of the UK. Edit: From what I can gather, desalination is cheaper than transporting water 400miles, at around $0.36/m3 I don't see why Scotland should not increase in power and influence to at least match the Irish Republic. There has never been anything to stop Scotland doing that, although it was a super power in banking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Game_Over Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Apologies if already posted.. http://www.economist.com/node/21552564 Interesting to note that UK Oil production was down to about 1 million barrels/day (the 1999 peak was 2.9 mb/d, IIRC); the last decent field to come online was Buzzard in 2007; that is past maximum now. An independent Scotland would not account for all the oil (there's a bit that's english, and would consume about 150,000 barrels per day anyway. At the current rate, then, Scotland would become an oil importer before 2030, and would be an increasingly minor oil exporter even by the time they got actual independence. Another F*ck up the left are responsible for. Well I for one hope they do get independence because it will mean Labour will never win power in England again. Mind you, the Scots will be bankrupt in a generation and we will then have to save their sorry backsides yet again I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone baby gone Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Mind you, the Scots will be bankrupt in a generation and we will then have to save their sorry backsides yet again I suppose. If the English are as bankrupt then as they are now, they might struggle to save anyone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swissy_fit Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 If the English are as bankrupt then as they are now, they might struggle to save anyone... True, but remember it's the UK that's bankrupt - for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.