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

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry’s row lingers

Published

6 hours ago

December 8, 2025

admin

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry's row lingers

Shares in The Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC) have fallen slightly on debut after the completion of its spin-off from Unilever amid a continuing civil war with one of its best-known brands.

Shares in the Netherlands-based company are trading for the first time following the demerger.

It creates the world’s biggest ice cream company, controlling around one fifth of the global market.

Primary Magnum shares, in Amsterdam, opened at €12.20 – down on the €12.80 reference price set by the EuroNext exchange, though they later settled just above that level, implying a market value of €7.9bn – just below £7bn.

The company is also listed in London and New York.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

Unilever stock was down 3.1% on the FTSE 100 in the wake of the spin off.

The demerger allows London-headquartered Unilever to concentrate on its wider stable of consumer brands, including Marmite, Dove soap and Domestos.

The decision to hive off the ice cream division, made in early 2024, gives a greater focus on a market that is tipped to grow by up to 4% each year until 2029.

But it has been dogged by a long-running spat with the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s, which now falls under the TMICC umbrella and accounts for 14% of group revenue.

Unilever bought the US brand in 2000, but the relationship has been sour since, despite the creation of an independent board at that time aimed at protecting the brand’s social mission.

The most high-profile spat came in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s took the decision not to sell ice cream in Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories on the grounds that sales would be “inconsistent” with its values.

Unilever responded by selling the business to its licensee in Israel.

A series of rows have followed akin to a tug of war, with Magnum refusing repeated demands by the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s to sell the brand back.

Magnum and Unilever argue its mission has strayed beyond what was acceptable back in 2000, with the brand evolving into one-sided advocacy on polarising topics that risk reputational and business damage.

TMICC is currently trying to remove the chair of Ben & Jerry’s independent board.

It said last month that Anuradha Mittal “no longer meets the criteria” to serve after internal investigations.

An audit of the separate Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, where she is also a trustee, found deficiencies in financial controls and governance. Magnum said the charitable arm risked having funding removed unless the alleged problems were addressed.

The Reuters news agency has since reported that Ms Mittal has no plans to quit her roles, and accused Magnum of attempts to “discredit” her and undermine the authority of the independent board.

Magnum boss Peter ter Kulve said on Monday: “Today is a proud milestone for everyone associated with TMICC. We became the global leader in ice cream as part of the Unilever family. Now, as an independent listed company, we will be more agile, more focused, and more ambitious than ever.”

Commenting on the demerger, Hargreaves Lansdown equity analyst Aarin Chiekrie said: “TMICC is already free cash flow positive, and profitable in its own right. The balance sheet is in decent shape, but dividends are off the cards until 2027 as the group finds its footing as a standalone business.

“That could cause some downward pressure on the share price in the near term, as dividend-focussed investment funds that hold Unilever will be handed TMICC shares, the latter of which they may be forced to sell to abide by their investment mandate.”

Business

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros ‘could be a problem’, Donald Trump says

Published

9 hours ago

December 8, 2025

admin

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros 'could be a problem', Donald Trump says

Donald Trump has said he will be “involved” in the decision on whether Netflix should be allowed to buy Warner Bros, as the $72bn (£54bn) deal attracts a media industry backlash.

The US president acknowledged in remarks to reporters there “could be a problem”, acknowledging concerns over the streaming giant’s market dominance.

Crucially, he did not say where he stood on the issue.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

It was revealed on Friday that Netflix, already the world’s biggest streaming service by market share, had agreed to buy Warner Bros Discovery’s TV, film studios and HBO Max streaming division.

The deal aims to complete late next year after the Discovery element of the business, mainly legacy TV channels showing cartoons, news and sport, has been spun off.

But the deal has attracted cross-party criticism on competition grounds, and there is also opposition in Hollywood.

The Writers Guild of America said: “The world’s largest streaming company swallowing one of its biggest competitors is what antitrust laws were designed to prevent.

“The outcome would eliminate jobs, push down wages, worsen conditions for all entertainment workers, raise prices for consumers, and reduce the volume and diversity of content for all viewers.”

Republican Senator, Roger Marshall, said in a statement: “Netflix’s attempt to buy Warner Bros would be the largest media takeover in history – and it raises serious red flags for consumers, creators, movie theaters, and local businesses alike.

“One company should not have full vertical control of the content and the distribution pipeline that delivers it. And combining two of the largest streaming platforms is a textbook horizontal Antitrust problem.

“Prices, choice, and creative freedom are at stake. Regulators need to take a hard look at this deal, and realize how harmful it would be for consumers and Western society.”

Paramount Skydance and Comcast, the parent company of Sky News, were two other bidders in the auction process that preceded the announcement.

The Reuters news agency, citing information from sources, said their bids were rejected in favour of Netflix for different reasons.

Paramount’s was seen as having funding concerns, they said, while Comcast’s was deemed not to offer so many earlier benefits.

Paramount is run by David Ellison, the son of the Oracle tech billionaire Larry Ellison, who is a close ally of Mr Trump.

The president said of the Netflix deal’s path to regulatory clearance: “I’ll be involved in that decision”.

On the likely opposition to the deal. he added: “That’s going to be for some economists to tell. But it is a big market share. There’s no question it could be a problem.”

Business

Young people may lose benefits if they don’t engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Published

12 hours ago

December 8, 2025

admin

Young people may lose benefits if they don't engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Young people could lose their right to universal credit if they refuse to engage with help from a new scheme without good reason, the government has warned.

Almost one million will gain from plans to get them off benefits and into the workforce, according to officials.

Latest updates from the Politics Hub

It comes as the number of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) has risen by more than a quarter since the COVID pandemic, with around 940,000 16 to 24-year-olds considered as NEET as of September this year, said the Office for National Statistics.

That is an increase of 195,000 in the last two years, mainly driven by increasing sickness and disability rates.

The £820m package includes funding to create 350,000 new workplace opportunities, including training and work experience, which will be offered in industries including construction, hospitality and healthcare.

Around 900,000 people on universal credit will be given a “dedicated work support session”.

That will be followed by four weeks of “intensive support” to help them find work in one of up to six “pathways”, which are: work, work experience, apprenticeships, wider training, learning, or a workplace training programme with a guaranteed interview at the end.

However, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden has warned that young people could lose some of their benefits if they refuse to engage with the scheme without good reason.

“Doing nothing should not be an option,” he told Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“If someone just took that attitude, yes, they would then be subject to, you know, the obligations that are already part of the system.”

“What I want to see is young people in the habit of getting up in the morning, doing the right thing, going to work,” he added.

“That experience of that obligation, but also the sense of pride and purpose that comes with having a job.”

The government says these pathways will be delivered in coordination with employers, while government-backed guaranteed jobs will be provided for up to 55,000 young people from spring 2026, but only in those areas with the highest need.

However, shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately, from the Conservatives, said the scheme is “an admission the government has no plan for growth, no plan to create real jobs, and no way of measuring whether any of this money delivers results”.

She told Sky News the proposals are a “classic Labour approach” for tackling youth unemployment.

“What we’ve seen today announced by the government is funding the best part of £1bn on work placements, and government-created jobs for young people. That sounds all very well,” she told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“But the fact is, and that’s the absurdity of it is, just two weeks ago, we had a budget from the chancellor, which is expected to destroy 200,000 jobs.

“So the problem we have here is a government whose policies are destroying jobs, destroying opportunities for young people, now saying they’re going to spend taxpayers’ money on creating work placements. It’s just simply the wrong answer.”

Ms Whately also said the government needs to tackle people who are unmotivated to work at all, and agreed with Mr McFadden on taking away the right to universal credit if they refuse opportunities to work.

But she said the “main reason” young people are out of work is because “they’re moving on to sickness benefits”.

Ms Whately also pointed to the government’s diminished attempt to slash benefits earlier in the year, where planned welfare cuts were significantly scaled down after opposition from their own MPs.

The funding will also expand youth hubs to help provide advice on writing CVs or seeking training, and also provide housing and mental health support.

Some £34m from the funding will be used to launch a new “Risk of NEET indicator tool”, aimed at identifying those young people who need support before they leave education and become unemployed.

Monitoring of attendance in further education will be bolstered, and automatic enrolment in further education will also be piloted for young people without a place.