Offshore Oil and Gas: Venting and Flaring

Question

Asked by

To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress they have made in reducing emissions and wasted gas via venting and flaring on offshore oil and gas infrastructure.

UK oil and gas has one of the lowest upstream methane emission intensities globally. Industry and the Government have committed to the World Bank’s zero routine flaring by 2030 initiative and have gone beyond it with venting. The UK industry achieved the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative’s 2025 target for 0.2% methane intensity five years early, reaching 0.18% intensity by 2020. The NSTA projects that this will have decreased to 0.12% in the 2024 results, due to be published in autumn 2026.

My Lords, the Green Alliance has found that North Sea operators are still wasting gas worth £300 million a year—enough to heat around 570,000 homes. That lost gas is nearly a third of Jackdaw’s projected peak output. Why are the Government tolerating such inefficiencies? Will the Minister commit to banning routine flaring and venting in law, through the energy independence Bill, bringing the deadline forward to 2028 and directing regulators to accelerating enforcement before new drilling is approved?

The Government are not tolerating the wastage of gas in the way the noble Earl suggested. The target that we have set, which the industry is adhering to, is for zero upstream flaring and zero upstream venting by 2030. As I have set out, the intensities that go with that are reducing ahead of the target and will certainly be met by 2030.

My Lords, can the Minister explain whether, when calculating emissions from the UK, we estimate the emissions associated with imported oil and gas? If not, why not? The initial suggestions are that increasing our production would, in global terms, reduce the amount of emissions associated with our own use of energy.

I believe that that is a fairly complicated question in terms of national emissions versus overall global emissions. Obviously, as far as the UK generally is concerned, the calculations for emission purposes are based on national emissions. But, as the noble Baroness will know, there is a parallel consideration on what the case is for imported emissions and how that factors into the national figures. I will certainly write to her to clarify that position in total.

My Lords, I am sure the Minister is very aware that rapidly reducing methane emissions can help us to rapidly cool the planet, effectively buying time for longer-term carbon reduction efforts. Will the Government mandate independent third-party verification of all offshore methane emissions by 2027 so that our exporters can meet the EU’s methane import standards, which will hit us in 2027?

The ability to independently monitor those emissions has been very much enhanced by satellite technology and various aerial observances, which can accurately depict where those emissions are coming from offshore and who is emitting them, so there is an effective independent verification position in place at present, which will aid greatly towards the achievement of that target by 2030.

My Lords, whatever improvements might be made in dealing with the consequences of extraction of oil and gas from the North Sea in environmental terms, it is undoubtedly the case that the environmental and economic benefits are greater if we extract from our own native resources than if the resources are extracted from Russia and refined in a third country. Yet this Government have decided to relax sanctions on Putin’s Russia, to accept Russian oil refined in third countries and to acquiesce in the loss of jobs and investment in Aberdeen and the North Sea. How can it possibly make sense to strengthen Putin during a war against Ukraine and to leave people in Scotland jobless as a result?

No, the Government have not relaxed sanctions against Putin and Russia. I believe the noble Lord is referring to recent decisions about how to phase in new sanctions as far as Russia is concerned, particularly concerning third-party products which arise not from crude oil itself but from the refining of it, particularly in circumstances where the UK does not have that refining capacity at home. The decisions that have been taken very recently relate only to that and not to the ongoing and increased sanctions as far as Putin is concerned.

Why does my noble friend think most of the media, a good many Members of this House and informed opinion outside actually think exactly what the noble Lord, Lord Gove, asked—that we have relaxed the view on Russia? Why has that impression got around?

Well, I imagine the impression has got around because people are not listening to what is actually being said about the position of sanctions as far as Putin and Russia are concerned and how that relates to third-party products, particularly jet fuel, which is a current urgent situation. As far as the overall picture is concerned, it is clearly the case that sanctions are not being relaxed against Putin’s Russia and, indeed, on the contrary, are being increased.

Could the noble Lord follow up that answer and explain to the House in what respects sanctions are being increased?

There is a package of new sanctions which are being imposed against Russia as far as their general supplies of oil and gas and various other things on the global market are concerned. The issue I was mentioning a moment ago is one part of that, and that is the phasing in of the sanctions relating to third-party products which arise from refining, which may or may not come from Russian crude oil products.

But has the Minister not heard the comments of Ukraine’s sanctions commissioner, Vladyslav Vlasiuk, who said—and this is a direct quote—that

“temporary exemptions … may still generate additional revenues for Russia’s war machine”?

What is his answer to the commissioner? While I am on my feet, can I just say that I think it is appalling the way our own petrol refineries are warning that they are at risk of closure due to high carbon taxes? Does the Minister not agree that meeting demand through domestically refined oil products is preferable to financing Putin’s war in Ukraine, and will he commit to reviewing the tax burden which is currently risking our own refineries?

I think the noble Lord will know that the UK refineries are not able at present to refine exactly what is required as far as a profile of a country’s energy needs are concerned because of the nature of the set-up of those particular refineries and the nature of the crude oil that is coming into those refineries for refining. Therefore, it makes complete sense to ensure that we have a proper profile of imports of various refined products in not just a climate emergency but the present emergency relating to Hormuz, which may not involve UK refineries only. The quote that the noble Lord mentioned is about imports of crude oil from Russia being relaxed to countries across the world—not by the UK but relating to relaxation by other states. The UK is firmly behind the notion that there will not be crude oil coming into the UK from Russia, but the question of refined products is another matter.