The small pipeline playing an oversized role in the energy crisis

Published

3 years ago

December 8, 2022

admin

The chances are you haven’t heard of the BBL pipeline.

It’s a 235km steel tube which runs under the North Sea between Balgzand in the northern tip of the Netherlands and Bacton in Great Britain.

It’s one of those bits of innocuous infrastructure which, most of the time, no-one except energy analysts pay all that much attention to.

But let’s spend a moment pondering this pipe, because it could prove enormously consequential for all of us in the coming months.

Indeed, BBL has already played a silent but essential role in the Ukraine war and, for that matter, the fate of Europe, because this is one of the two main pipelines transporting gas between the UK and Northern Europe.

Actually, BBL is the smaller of the two pipes, the other of which is the rather unimaginatively-named “Interconnector” pipe. But the reason it’s worth focusing on BBL is because in the past few days something rather interesting happened there.

Before we get to that, though, it’s worth reminding ourselves of the big picture here, the challenge facing Europe: a desperate shortage of energy.

Here’s the best way of understanding it: this time last year, Europe (including the UK) was consuming roughly 85 billion cubic metres of natural gas a month. Of that, about 21 billion cubic metres (bcm) – roughly a quarter – came via Russian pipelines.

That gas didn’t just go into our boilers and gas-fired power stations.

It was a feedstock which helped us manufacture chemicals and fertilisers.

It fed us, it fuelled industry, it helped keep the lights on.

In the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, suddenly Europe couldn’t take that 25% of its energy for granted any more. And indeed, most of the Russian supply has since dwindled (it’s now down 81% to about 4bcm a month).

And so much of what might today be categorised as economic news – the rocketing rate of inflation, the squeeze on household incomes and the recession we’re now sliding into – really comes back to this gap, between the gas we used to consume and the gas we can now lay our hands on.

And the short answer is that getting hold of that extra gas isn’t easy at all.

Partly that’s because most of the non-Russian sources which are already pumping gas into European pipelines (which is to say: mainly Norway but, to a lesser extent, the UK, Netherlands and Algeria) are already producing about all they can.

These days you can ship gas (in the form of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), a supercooled liquid) across the ocean from Qatar and the US, but that depends on a few things.

The first is actually getting hold of that gas. The UK on Wednesday published details of a new “US-UK Energy Security and Affordability Partnership” which aims to provide more LNG to the UK. That matters because Britain and Europe are essentially competing with China and other Asian nations on global markets for these cargoes.

The second (and perhaps even more important) factor is having terminals where you can receive and re-gasify the LNG and then feed it into your domestic pipeline network.

But there are only so many of these ports and regasification facilities in Europe. Germany, for instance, has none (though it’s got some temporary capacity coming up soon). The UK has lots. Indeed, it has more LNG capacity in its three ports (two at Milford Haven, one at Isle of Grain) than Belgium and the Netherlands have in total.

The logic of this was that back at the start of the conflict, it looked quite plausible that the UK would become a sort of energy “land bridge” across which gas could be transited to Europe. And that indeed is precisely what happened, which brings us back to the pipeline crossing from the UK to the north of Europe.

Over the past year, a stupendous amount of LNG has been coming into UK ports, drawn in by the stupendously high gas price, from where it has been transferred across the UK’s pipeline network and thence into the European system.

To put this into perspective, in the four summers since 2017, the average amount of natural gas transferred from the UK was around 5.7 trillion cubic metres. This past summer the total was 20.5 trillion cubic metres.

It’s worth dwelling on this for a moment, for it represents one of the under appreciated stories of the Russia-Ukraine war.

Much of the gas which replenished the storage facilities in Europe, which should help them survive the coming winter while keeping homes heated, despite the absence of Russian gas, came via the UK – via the BBL and Interconnector pipelines.

And that’s actually understating it, because those pipelines were only so wide, and so could only carry a certain proportion of the LNG flowing into the UK, but what also happened this summer is that UK gas power plants went into overdrive, burning that gas and turning it into electricity, which was also fed via undersea cables into Europe.

This mattered. Much of France’s nuclear power fleet was out of action this summer as water levels in French rivers ran too low to provide the necessary coolant. British electrons were part of the explanation for why the lights never went out in France.

This astounding flow of gas (which of course has its own climactic consequences) caused some interesting price fluctuations this past year. As we reported earlier in the summer, it helped suppress UK day-ahead gas prices down to surprisingly low levels.

For a period in May and June, the UK wholesale gas price was less than half the level in continental Europe – because the UK was awash with all these natural gas molecules trying to fit themselves into these steel pipes coming out of Bacton.

But in recent weeks those flows have begun to drop, which brings us to the interesting thing that changed in the past few days.

For the first time since the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the extraordinary rollercoaster in the gas market, a small quantity of natural gas begun to flow back into the UK.

It’s important not to overstate this. The numbers are very small indeed. But it’s a reminder that actually, in “normal” times, these pipelines serve a very different purpose from the one they’ve served in recent months.

Britain doesn’t have much domestic storage for natural gas. While Germany has about 266 terawatt-hours of storage capacity, the UK has only 53, barely enough to keep boilers going for more than a week or two.

However, the UK strategy in recent years has been to use Europe as a kind of storage system. Think of these underground caverns as a kind of bank.

You deposit gas in them in the warm months and take it out when it gets cold. And in “normal” times the UK has “deposited” its gas in Europe in the summer, sending much of the stuff that came out of the North Sea (and some stuff from those LNG terminals) across the two pipelines and those molecules went into European storage.

And in winter, the UK would typically “withdraw” the gas from Europe when it got cold and it needed a little more for peoples’ boilers. Into Europe in the summer; out of Europe in the winter.

But that brings us to this winter. The UK has put an extraordinary amount of gas into European storage in the summer. What happens if it gets really cold? In any normal winter, it would need to get that gas out of Europe via those pipelines. But this, of course, is not a normal winter. There is a chance that the remaining flows of gas from Russia dry up further, meaning there could be a real shortage. In such circumstances, what happens?

If the market carries on working, then that would push up prices high on continental Europe, but the logic is that in order to attract that gas across the channel, the UK would have to pay even higher prices than continental Europe. In other words, while prices in the UK have been lower than Europe for most of the summer, they could well be higher than Europe for most of the winter.

There is a sign that this is already happening.

In the past couple of days, those prices have converged. But there is also a scarier question: what if the market doesn’t function, because of political interference? What if European nations decide that storage in, say Germany (or for that matter the European Union) cannot leave? Where does that leave the UK, which tends to rely on those pipeline flows from Europe in the event of a cold snap.

The short answer is that no-one really knows. What we do know is that this story isn’t over yet. Gas prices are already eye-wateringly high, especially when you consider that the Government is effectively subsidising them. It’s not implausible that they get even higher.

Business

Thames Water debt pile rises further despite return to profit

Published

7 hours ago

December 3, 2025

admin

Thames Water debt pile rises further despite return to profit

Cash-strapped Thames Water has revealed a further rise in its debt pile while recording a return to profit on the back of inflation-busting hikes to bills.

The UK’s largest supplier said the 31% rise to customer bills since April had allowed it to increase capital investment by 22% to £1.3bn amid demands it improve performance in preventing sewage spills and stopping leaks.

Thames Water said it recorded a 20% drop in pollution incidents over the six months to the end of September, and leakage performance was holding steady despite the “extremely dry summer”.

Money latest: How much is a fair restaurant tip?

While waste complaints dipped by 11%, according to the company, there was a 42% surge in the number of customers complaining about the hike to bills.

Thames Water revenue rose 42% on the same period last year to £1.9bn, helping a return to profit after tax of £328m on the back of a £190m loss during April-September 2024.

The company said profitability was damaged by higher debt serving costs.

Its debt pile was recorded at £17.6bn – a rise of 5%.

The results were released against the backdrop of continuing talks involving the government and regulators over a proposed rescue deal by major Thames Water creditors.

Their consortium is known as London & Valley Water.

It effectively already owns Thames Water under the terms of a financial restructuring agreed early in the summer but regulator Ofwat is yet to give its verdict on whether the consortium can run the company, averting the prospect of it being placed in a special administration regime.

Without a deal the consortium, which includes investment heavyweights Elliott Management and BlackRock, would be wiped out.

Ofwat, which is to be scrapped under a shake-up of industry oversight, has been leading scrutiny of London & Valley’s operational plan and proposed capital structure.

The prospective deal would write off billions of pounds of the company’s debt and inject billions in fresh equity, in return for an adjustment in the regulator’s approach to future financial penalties.

Thames sees the creditors’ proposal as the only viable solution.

Despite huge hikes to household bills – allowed across England and Wales to bolster aging infrastructure including storm overflows – the company says its financial turnaround has been hampered by record fines for things like sewage leaks and bonuses to retain key staff.

Sky News revealed on Tuesday that its remuneration committee will meet next week to decide whether to proceed with nearly £2.5m in retention payments to 21 senior managers.

Read more from Sky News:
Reeves hit by Labour rebellion
The Bank of England’s take on ‘elevated’ risks

Thames Water chief executive Chris Weston said the company had made good progress on its operational and transformation targets.

“This progress has all been achieved as we also manage the recapitalisation of the business. We continue to work closely with stakeholders to secure a market-led solution that we believe is in the best interests of our customers and the environment.

“This in turn will allow the transformation of Thames to continue, a programme that will take at least a decade to complete and will restore the infrastructure and operations of the company.”

Business

FIFA backs away from dynamic pricing for all World Cup 2026 tickets

Published

7 hours ago

December 3, 2025

admin

FIFA backs away from dynamic pricing for all World Cup 2026 tickets

FIFA has backed away from using dynamic pricing for all 2026 World Cup tickets amid concerns about the cost of attending the tournament in North America.

The organisers insisted they always planned to ring-fence tickets at set prices to follow your own team.

But the announcement comes just days ahead of Friday’s tournament draw in Washington DC, which Donald Trump plans to attend.

Fans will have to wait until Saturday to know exactly where and when their teams will be playing in next summer’s tournament.

Variable pricing – fluctuating based on demand – has never been used at a World Cup before, raising concerns about affordability.

England and Scotland fans have been sharing images in recent days of ticket website images highlighting cost worries.

But world football’s governing body said in a statement to Sky News: “FIFA can confirm ringfenced allocations are being set aside for specific fan categories, as has been the case at previous FIFA World Cups. These allocations will be set at a fixed price for the duration of the next ticket sales phase.

“The ringfenced allocations include tickets reserved for supporters of the Participating Member Associations (PMAs), who will be allocated 8% of the tickets for each match in which they take part, including all conditional knockout stage matches.”

FIFA says the cheapest tickets are from $60 (£45) in the group stage. But the most expensive tickets for the final are $6,730 (£5,094).

There will also be a sales window after the draw from 11 December to 13 January when ticket applications will be based on a fixed price for those buying in the random selection draw.

It is the biggest World Cup with 104 matches after the event was expanded from 32 to 48 teams. There are also three host nations for the first time – with Canada and Mexico the junior partners.

FIFA defended using fluctuating pricing.

“The pricing model adopted for FIFA World Cup 26 reflects the existing market practice for major entertainment and sporting events within our hosts on a daily basis, soccer included,” FIFA’s statement continued.

“This is also a reflection of the treatment of the secondary market for tickets, which has a distinct legal treatment than in many other parts of the world. We are focused on ensuring fair access to our game for existing but also prospective fans.”

The statement addressed the concerns being raised about fans being priced out of attending.

FIFA said: “Stadium category maps do not reflect the number of tickets available in a given category but rather present default seating locations.

“FIFA resale fees are aligned with North American industry trends across various sports and entertainment sectors.”

Ireland, Northern Ireland and Wales could also still qualify.

Business

Rachel Reeves hit by Labour rural rebellion over inheritance tax on farmers

Published

10 hours ago

December 3, 2025

admin

Rachel Reeves hit by Labour rural rebellion over inheritance tax on farmers

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has suffered another budget blow with a rebellion by rural Labour MPs over inheritance tax on farmers.

Speaking during the final day of the Commons debate on the budget, Labour backbenchers demanded a U-turn on the controversial proposals.

Plans to introduce a 20% tax on farm estates worth more than £1m from April have drawn protesters to London in their tens of thousands, with many fearing huge tax bills that would force small farms to sell up for good.

MPs voted on the so-called “family farms tax” just after 8pm on Tuesday, with dozens of Labour MPs appearing to have abstained, and one backbencher – borders MP Markus Campbell-Savours – voting against, alongside Conservative members.

In the vote, the fifth out of seven at the end of the budget debate, Labour’s vote slumped from 371 in the first vote on tax changes, down by 44 votes to 327.

‘Time to stand up for farmers’

The mini-mutiny followed a plea to Labour MPs from the National Farmers Union to abstain.

“To Labour MPs: We ask you to abstain on Budget Resolution 50,” the NFU urged.

“With your help, we can show the government there is still time to get it right on the family farm tax. A policy with such cruel human costs demands change. Now is the time to stand up for the farmers you represent.”

After the vote, NFU president Tom Bradshaw said: “The MPs who have shown their support are the rural representatives of the Labour Party. They represent the working people of the countryside and have spoken up on behalf of their constituents.

“It is vital that the chancellor and prime minister listen to the clear message they have delivered this evening. The next step in the fight against the family farm tax is removing the impact of this unjust and unfair policy on the most vulnerable members of our community.”

The government comfortably won the vote by 327-182, a majority of 145. But the mini-mutiny served notice to the chancellor and Sir Keir Starmer that newly elected Labour MPs from the shires are prepared to rebel.

Speaking in the debate earlier, Mr Campbell-Savours said: “There remain deep concerns about the proposed changes to agricultural property relief (APR).

“Changes which leave many, not least elderly farmers, yet to make arrangements to transfer assets, devastated at the impact on their family farms.”

Samantha Niblett, Labour MP for South Derbyshire abstained after telling MPs: “I do plead with the government to look again at APR inheritance tax.

“Most farmers are not wealthy land barons, they live hand to mouth on tiny, sometimes non-existent profit margins. Many were explicitly advised not to hand over their farm to children, (but) now face enormous, unexpected tax bills.

“We must acknowledge a difficult truth: we have lost the trust of our farmers, and they deserve our utmost respect, our honesty and our unwavering support.”

Labour MPs from rural constituencies who did not vote included Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower), Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury), Torquil Crichton (Western Isles), Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire), Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley), and Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall), Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk), Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby), Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk), Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth), Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay), Perran Moon, (Camborne and Redruth), Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire), Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal), Henry Tufnell (Mid and South Pembrokeshire), John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) and Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr).