FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

North Sea Oil

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

No wonder Teresa May tells Scotland "Now is not the time"

.

Investors Chronicle reported that politicians in Westminster were underestimating the value of Scotland’s oil and gas to undermine the case for Scottish independence. Former Chancellor Dennis Healey admitted that this ploy was used in the 1970s

.

• To date 42 billion barrels of oil and gas have been produced from the North Sea using conventional production techniques and there is a consensus that there are remaining conventional reserves of around 24 billion barrels.

• Oil and gas recovered from the Upper Jurassic Kimmeridge Clay formation through new techniques could add an estimated 21 billion barrels, almost equivalent to the estimated 24 billion barrels of oil and gas reserves remaining.

• Up to an additional £300 billion in tax revenues though this 21 billion barrels to either the UK Treasury or a Scottish Government either independent or with full control of oil and gas revenues.

• On top of the up to £365 billion estimated to be currently obtainable in tax revenues through conventional means between now and 2040, combined with this up to £300 billion from these new sources of oil and gas production would see North Sea oil and gas revenues of up to a staggering £665 billion, more than double the total taxation from oil and gas received to date (£313 billion).

.

and today A NEWLY discovered oil field west of Shetland could be one of the biggest in North Sea history, it was claimed today.

Hurricane Energy’s latest studies show that the Lancaster and Halifax oil fields are actually one body featuring a column of oil a kilometre deep

.

That on top of other newly found fields such as;

Claire Ridge

Laggan-Tormore

Edradour and Glenlivet

Mariner

Rosebank-Lochnagar

Schiehallion

Loyal, Foinaven and East Foinaven fields

Scotland's oil is running out, this is just a new beginning

.

Such an expansion in West Coast oil and gas would be as significant an economic transformation as the original explosion in North Sea oil and gas in the 1970s. This would also have a significant impact on Scotland’s overall finances. It would give Scotland further finances in invest in the growing renewables sector, other manufacturing sectors and improve public services.

north-sea rich countries such as Norway, Qatar, Kuwait have been transformed as a result of their natural resources. In contrast, Westminster Government has squandered North Sea oil and failed to establish an energy investment fund

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icklybitMan
over a year ago

Ayrshire

"north-sea rich countries such as Norway, Qatar, Kuwait" I lolled Billy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Lets just go through the numbers on this bit.

"Up to an additional £300 billion in tax revenues though this 21 billion barrels to either the UK Treasury or a Scottish Government either independent or with full control of oil and gas revenues".

21 billion barrels at 50 dollars a barrel equals 1050 billion dollars, now how are you getting 300 billon(370 billon dollars) pounds tax revenue of a total of 1050 dollars of oil?.

The reality is theres just huge assumptions in all those figures, i mean the oil companies arent exactly reliable for giving correct reserve figures in the first place, they always over egg things as "giant reserves of 100 years" makes great headlines, remember all those oil company forecasts of trillions of barrels of oil and gas under southern England?.

Oil in Scotland has been used as a political tool since it was discovered

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

You have to admit it has been vastly squandered by Westminster

Do you truly believe North Sea Oil & Gas is running out sick boy

do you think new platforms, fpso's and new refineries are being built at a cost of £billions just for fun

.

from previous comments on other threads its obvious you are pig sick about this

and the difference between the North Sea and your London Fracking is that Development of these finds are already in motion - North sea, whether it be HP/HT wells or thick crude reservoirs where HSP / ESP's are required

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You have to admit it has been vastly squandered by Westminster

Do you truly believe North Sea Oil & Gas is running out sick boy

do you think new platforms, fpso's and new refineries are being built at a cost of £billions just for fun

.

from previous comments on other threads its obvious you are pig sick about this

and the difference between the North Sea and your London Fracking is that Development of these finds are already in motion - North sea, whether it be HP/HT wells or thick crude reservoirs where HSP / ESP's are required"
.

So you dont see this headline timing as political?.

Im not pig sick about anything,i hope theres oil there and it makes some decent money for the Scottish oil industry and yes i think Westminster squandered the oil issue in the first place in the early 70s but they did sort of have their arm up they're backs from the IMF, Tony Benn was the energy minister at the time pleaded for extra time for the revenues to come through alas the decision was made to sell off the rights for instant wonga. So yes its always been a political tool

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The age of oil is comming to an end.What little scotland has will be left in the earth by mid 2030s.Pump it out as quick you can as it will be worthless soon.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

"
The saudis have a policy of pumping it out as fast as they can now keeping the price down.The writings on the wall.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If you want an independence or even just more wealth in Scotland, why don't you come up with an industry which is sustainable and employs a large number of people.

Seriously, oil will not support you alone, and it wont last long. Not to mention you might not even get to extract it considering the legal legislation surrounding preserving and keeping fishing grounds clean.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

The saudis have a policy of pumping it out as fast as they can now keeping the price down.The writings on the wall."

They are investing ever more in solar, wind and tidal energy - another big alarm for all the oil luvvies.

Oh and they are increasing training in digital tech, another big alarm bell. When an oil rich nation starts actively diversifying it's economy and sectors you know the cash cow is running dry.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

The saudis have a policy of pumping it out as fast as they can now keeping the price down.The writings on the wall.

They are investing ever more in solar, wind and tidal energy - another big alarm for all the oil luvvies.

Oh and they are increasing training in digital tech, another big alarm bell. When an oil rich nation starts actively diversifying it's economy and sectors you know the cash cow is running dry."
Thats a good point .Shouldn't Scotland be investing in renewables as a long term strategy and not oil.Plenty of wind and tide to harness in Scotland.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

The saudis have a policy of pumping it out as fast as they can now keeping the price down.The writings on the wall."

Actually OPEC and Russia agreed a quota cut but it has not made much difference up to now.

Trump has promise tax cuts to frackers so he does not need to rely on forgien oil.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

The saudis have a policy of pumping it out as fast as they can now keeping the price down.The writings on the wall.

They are investing ever more in solar, wind and tidal energy - another big alarm for all the oil luvvies.

Oh and they are increasing training in digital tech, another big alarm bell. When an oil rich nation starts actively diversifying it's economy and sectors you know the cash cow is running dry.Thats a good point .Shouldn't Scotland be investing in renewables as a long term strategy and not oil.Plenty of wind and tide to harness in Scotland. "

Scotland exports most of its renewable electricity to England.

Due to the rediculase way electricity is charged to be entered into the national grid it is expensive forcing up the cost for consumers.

A manky coal fired power station as long as it is near a centre of population is paid to put their input into the grid.

Clean wind energy has to pay to use the grid because of the transmission distances.

That is ducking nuts !!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I had a quick read up before so i could post to war guy?

Even bp had stated they did not expect oil prices to rise for at least 20 years because of the glut of fracked oil in the US.

Now im not sure but 20 years puts us at what 2037, arent supposed to be off oil by then, havent Germany already said all new cars there will be electric only by 2025?? I dont know thats just what id read will the oil business still be volume intensive by 2037?, if so and theres billions of barrels all over the middle East that could be much easier extractable does that mean its never going above a low price level?.

These are questions id want investigated before taking them into account on any referendum

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Thats a good point .Shouldn't Scotland be investing in renewables as a long term strategy and not oil.Plenty of wind and tide to harness in Scotland."

Well there's plenty of hot air at the moment seriously though we should all bee looking at solar wind and tidal now and ditch the oil

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


""Thats a good point .Shouldn't Scotland be investing in renewables as a long term strategy and not oil.Plenty of wind and tide to harness in Scotland."

Well there's plenty of hot air at the moment seriously though we should all bee looking at solar wind and tidal now and ditch the oil "

Scotland does invest in renewables. See my previous posts but we don't do much solar

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *avagliamMan
over a year ago

London


"I had a quick read up before so i could post to war guy?

Even bp had stated they did not expect oil prices to rise for at least 20 years because of the glut of fracked oil in the US.

Now im not sure but 20 years puts us at what 2037, arent supposed to be off oil by then, havent Germany already said all new cars there will be electric only by 2025?? I dont know thats just what id read will the oil business still be volume intensive by 2037?, if so and theres billions of barrels all over the middle East that could be much easier extractable does that mean its never going above a low price level?.

These are questions id want investigated before taking them into account on any referendum"

You make it sound as if the UK in fact doesn't need the Scottish oil: Why then bother keeping Scots in the union, if all they have is worthless fields producing worthless brent crude...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anes HubbyCouple
over a year ago

Babbacombe Torquay

You do have to wonder if the SNP would be so interested in independence if there was no oil....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issing in actionWoman
over a year ago

Llanelli

You could also wonder if England wouldn't be so desperate to keep them as their bitch if they didn't have oil

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You could also wonder if England wouldn't be so desperate to keep them as their bitch if they didn't have oil"
True..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

The saudis have a policy of pumping it out as fast as they can now keeping the price down.The writings on the wall.

They are investing ever more in solar, wind and tidal energy - another big alarm for all the oil luvvies.

Oh and they are increasing training in digital tech, another big alarm bell. When an oil rich nation starts actively diversifying it's economy and sectors you know the cash cow is running dry.Thats a good point .Shouldn't Scotland be investing in renewables as a long term strategy and not oil.Plenty of wind and tide to harness in Scotland.

Scotland exports most of its renewable electricity to England.

Due to the rediculase way electricity is charged to be entered into the national grid it is expensive forcing up the cost for consumers.

A manky coal fired power station as long as it is near a centre of population is paid to put their input into the grid.

Clean wind energy has to pay to use the grid because of the transmission distances.

That is ducking nuts !!!!"
Maybe the Greens and SNP can change this once your free of Westminster and be a beacon for sustainability.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You could also wonder if England wouldn't be so desperate to keep them as their bitch if they didn't have oil"
.

Its a bit of a myth your creating there, they had a referendum sanctioned by Westminster, which is the UKs parliament (even Scotlands), Westminster have already said they can have another once brexit is done! Even i can see why they wouldnt want to do two big things at the same time.

Once thats over they can choose to leave or stay, i dont think anybodys desperate to keep anybody as some bitch as you claim.

The fact of the matter is Scotland gets as much money back as it makes today under the Barnet formula, and they get a pretty good amount of devolution (more than Wales).

If there still not happy they can leave, shake hands, no hard feelings

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You do have to wonder if the SNP would be so interested in independence if there was no oil...."
.

Theyve been going since the 1930s, the oil is just a political tool theyve used since it was discovered in the 70s, many Scots since Charlie have not been happy with the union.

There foreign excursion didnt work out as well as englands and they bankrupted themselves and were forced into a union with the old enemy, get over it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"You do have to wonder if the SNP would be so interested in independence if there was no oil.....

Theyve been going since the 1930s, the oil is just a political tool theyve used since it was discovered in the 70s, many Scots since Charlie have not been happy with the union.

There foreign excursion didnt work out as well as englands and they bankrupted themselves and were forced into a union with the old enemy, get over it"

70's

try going back a further decade

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hello all,

oil and gas will still be required for a long time to come. Incidentally, scotland is now a net importer of electricity since they shut down a reliable coal station (Dungannon?). The idea that wind and solar will take over is utter nonsense and is just not happening, it is actually causing more problems to the grid than assistance.

The state of south australia has had a couple of recent statewide black out and Germany, on the 24th January this year, was so very close to a country wide black out all due to an over reliance on wind and solar power.

Alec

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icklybitMan
over a year ago

Ayrshire


"

There foreign excursion didnt work out as well as englands and they bankrupted themselves and were forced into a union with the old enemy, get over it"

Now now, the "colonised" up here won't take kindly to that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge

If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *avagliamMan
over a year ago

London


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales? "

What if Scotland only wants to be independent and that's it? And why westmonster cares if Scotland becomes independent: Aren't Scotland's important hydrocarbon reserves worthless?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

What if Scotland only wants to be independent and that's it? And why westmonster cares if Scotland becomes independent: Aren't Scotland's important hydrocarbon reserves worthless? "

None of your post relates to what I just said.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icklybitMan
over a year ago

Ayrshire

It doesn't want to be, if you go by the referendum two years ago. And opinion polls have shown that the population hasn't changed and still does not want it.

We have no idea the plans for independence, but we do know that we will be out of the UK and out of the EU. The projected oil boom has not materialised (quite the reverse) and our economy is lagging behind the rest of the UK.

All I hear are emotional arguments and constant whingeing about WM, I,ve yet to see a credible prospectus for independence.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *avagliamMan
over a year ago

London


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

What if Scotland only wants to be independent and that's it? And why westmonster cares if Scotland becomes independent: Aren't Scotland's important hydrocarbon reserves worthless?

None of your post relates to what I just said. "

Right... I understand your post. If Scotland wants to leave the union is surely because they understand they can be more than what they are now as country; they see Ireland, Australia, New Zealand for examples on how life can be after leaving the English crown aka UK: They have the resources, the location and the people. Scotland should have guts to make it happen: westmonster is there prepared to sabotage with their newspapers, with their intelligence ready to inflict fear and create scandals.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

What if Scotland only wants to be independent and that's it? And why westmonster cares if Scotland becomes independent: Aren't Scotland's important hydrocarbon reserves worthless?

None of your post relates to what I just said.

Right... I understand your post. If Scotland wants to leave the union is surely because they understand they can be more than what they are now as country; they see Ireland, Australia, New Zealand for examples on how life can be after leaving the English crown aka UK: They have the resources, the location and the people. Scotland should have guts to make it happen: westmonster is there prepared to sabotage with their newspapers, with their intelligence ready to inflict fear and create scandals. "

But if they are basing their independence upon a resource that is finite, wouldn't that be a bit foolhardy? If the only way independence works is with oil, and the oil wont be there in 100 years, what will then happen to the country?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge

OP you should check out the thread called "Trump", you're a big fan of his right? Apparently he has lots of secret technologies that will end the world reliance on oil, make it obsolete. That's how he is going to make America great again, and create thousands up on thousands of jobs. So where does that leave your oil plans?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *avagliamMan
over a year ago

London


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

What if Scotland only wants to be independent and that's it? And why westmonster cares if Scotland becomes independent: Aren't Scotland's important hydrocarbon reserves worthless?

None of your post relates to what I just said.

Right... I understand your post. If Scotland wants to leave the union is surely because they understand they can be more than what they are now as country; they see Ireland, Australia, New Zealand for examples on how life can be after leaving the English crown aka UK: They have the resources, the location and the people. Scotland should have guts to make it happen: westmonster is there prepared to sabotage with their newspapers, with their intelligence ready to inflict fear and create scandals.

But if they are basing their independence upon a resource that is finite, wouldn't that be a bit foolhardy? If the only way independence works is with oil, and the oil wont be there in 100 years, what will then happen to the country? "

Please read again my post, specially where it says "resources, people and location"... That should hopefully answer your question on what will happen after 100 years.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

What if Scotland only wants to be independent and that's it? And why westmonster cares if Scotland becomes independent: Aren't Scotland's important hydrocarbon reserves worthless?

None of your post relates to what I just said.

Right... I understand your post. If Scotland wants to leave the union is surely because they understand they can be more than what they are now as country; they see Ireland, Australia, New Zealand for examples on how life can be after leaving the English crown aka UK: They have the resources, the location and the people. Scotland should have guts to make it happen: westmonster is there prepared to sabotage with their newspapers, with their intelligence ready to inflict fear and create scandals.

But if they are basing their independence upon a resource that is finite, wouldn't that be a bit foolhardy? If the only way independence works is with oil, and the oil wont be there in 100 years, what will then happen to the country?

Please read again my post, specially where it says "resources, people and location"... That should hopefully answer your question on what will happen after 100 years. "

But they have those resources now, they have those people now, and they are in the same location now as they will be if they vote to become independent.

I think it would be a terrible shame if Scotland decided to leave. I prefer to work together and focus on what unites us, rather than what divides us. I believe that we only get stronger by working together, and only get weaker by dividing into smaller and smaller groups.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Pump the oil out quick and invest all the money in renewable energy.Future proof

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no doubt there is plenty of oil.

at fifty something dollars a barrel it is not the big cash cow it was.

Opec do not seem to have the power they once had to drive the price up again.

The saudis have a policy of pumping it out as fast as they can now keeping the price down.The writings on the wall.

They are investing ever more in solar, wind and tidal energy - another big alarm for all the oil luvvies.

Oh and they are increasing training in digital tech, another big alarm bell. When an oil rich nation starts actively diversifying it's economy and sectors you know the cash cow is running dry.Thats a good point .Shouldn't Scotland be investing in renewables as a long term strategy and not oil.Plenty of wind and tide to harness in Scotland.

Scotland exports most of its renewable electricity to England.

Due to the rediculase way electricity is charged to be entered into the national grid it is expensive forcing up the cost for consumers.

A manky coal fired power station as long as it is near a centre of population is paid to put their input into the grid.

Clean wind energy has to pay to use the grid because of the transmission distances.

That is ducking nuts !!!!Maybe the Greens and SNP can change this once your free of Westminster and be a beacon for sustainability. "

Considering I am anti snp and their lap dogs the greens I doubt it !!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales? "

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK"

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"OP you should check out the thread called "Trump", you're a big fan of his right? Apparently he has lots of secret technologies that will end the world reliance on oil, make it obsolete. That's how he is going to make America great again, and create thousands up on thousands of jobs. So where does that leave your oil plans? "

What do you think OP, is Trump's clean energy secrets going to make oil obsolete?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern. "

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

"
.

Shush now, the Nazis are talking and your ruining their propaganda

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

.

Shush now, the Nazis are talking and your ruining their propaganda "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

"

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too."

I agree but some Scots are seriously trying the patience of some English people!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too."

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?"

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum."

Thing is, I'm not having a go here, It just seems a bit of a contradiction that more older people voted to keep the union while more older people voted for Brexit. (Apparently) Maybe when you get to a certain age you do realise what is for the best. (Ok, just a little go )

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum.

Thing is, I'm not having a go here, It just seems a bit of a contradiction that more older people voted to keep the union while more older people voted for Brexit. (Apparently) Maybe when you get to a certain age you do realise what is for the best. (Ok, just a little go )"

You are comparing two different electoral groups though, being asked two different questions.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum.

Thing is, I'm not having a go here, It just seems a bit of a contradiction that more older people voted to keep the union while more older people voted for Brexit. (Apparently) Maybe when you get to a certain age you do realise what is for the best. (Ok, just a little go )

You are comparing two different electoral groups though, being asked two different questions. "

Not really

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

I agree but some Scots are seriously trying the patience of some English people! "

Please don't confuse wee nippy sturgon and the snp with Scotland.

In the run up to the Westminster elections she stated a vote for snp was not a vote for independence! !!!

Now she said it is a mandate for a referendum! !!

THE SNP ARE NOT SCOTLAND

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum.

Thing is, I'm not having a go here, It just seems a bit of a contradiction that more older people voted to keep the union while more older people voted for Brexit. (Apparently) Maybe when you get to a certain age you do realise what is for the best. (Ok, just a little go )

You are comparing two different electoral groups though, being asked two different questions.

Not really"

Ok well we will have to agree to disagree on that point then.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum.

Thing is, I'm not having a go here, It just seems a bit of a contradiction that more older people voted to keep the union while more older people voted for Brexit. (Apparently) Maybe when you get to a certain age you do realise what is for the best. (Ok, just a little go )

You are comparing two different electoral groups though, being asked two different questions.

Not really

Ok well we will have to agree to disagree on that point then. "

Fair enough. But you think the young educated people of Scotland are wrong don't you?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum.

Thing is, I'm not having a go here, It just seems a bit of a contradiction that more older people voted to keep the union while more older people voted for Brexit. (Apparently) Maybe when you get to a certain age you do realise what is for the best. (Ok, just a little go )

You are comparing two different electoral groups though, being asked two different questions.

Not really

Ok well we will have to agree to disagree on that point then.

Fair enough. But you think the young educated people of Scotland are wrong don't you?"

I think Leave voters are wrong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you are serious about being a fully independent country, you can't base that decision purely on how it's going to survive today, but in 100 years, 200 years, 500 years.

Does anyone in the world, even the most pro-oil person in the world, believe we will still be reliant on oil over those time scales?

Independence was not calculated on oil, read the white paper

oil price as we all know is volatile, people forget in 1999 it was down to $12, a lot lower than it has been today.

Oil is an added bonus which obviously will be taken into revenue, regardless of price.

Why do you think Tory Westminster is so desperate to keep Scotland within the UK

Most national governments dont want to see the break up of the nation they govern.

It is not just Westminster that wants Scotland in the UK.

The majority of Scots voted to stay within the Union in the once in a lifetime referendum.

You're completely right, it's not just Westminster that wants Scotland to stay, the majority of British people, I would say, want Scotland to remain too.

But the majority of young well educated Scots want independance, voted that way last time and support it this time too. How do you square that with your support for the young well educated in the Brexit vote (if they did vote remain) and the idea that they know best?

If that's the case then sturgeon should wait as long as possible before holding the next referendum.

Thing is, I'm not having a go here, It just seems a bit of a contradiction that more older people voted to keep the union while more older people voted for Brexit. (Apparently) Maybe when you get to a certain age you do realise what is for the best. (Ok, just a little go )

You are comparing two different electoral groups though, being asked two different questions.

Not really

Ok well we will have to agree to disagree on that point then.

Fair enough. But you think the young educated people of Scotland are wrong don't you?

I think Leave voters are wrong. "

Thats a yes then.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top