Energy security - Blown up out of all proportion ?

The Sunday Times reports today that Whitehall has now identified the Milford Haven LNG terminal and the (now) 5 terminals at Bacton in Norfolk represent key weaknesses in the energy supply of the UK.The TImes says , "They fear that infrastructure sites are relatively poorly defended, often only by unarmed security staff." (Pic Bacton BBL pipeline site under construction earlier this year)

They suggest that a new armed force be formed similiar to the Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC), a dedicated police force that protects more than 40 nuclear power plants and other civil nuclear sites - and incidentally introduced by Tony Wedgewood Benn in the 1960's.

The Norwich Evening News on the 20th November reported that "two known Al Qaida suspects had been spotted reconnoitring the Bacton gas site on the coast.". Apparently the suspects were "sufficiently well traced [on intelligence files] for it to be worrying.” Whatever that means.

It is also "thought" laptop computers seized in terror arrests since the scare, which happened in September, contained information and plans about the Bacton site.

The vulnerability of gas supplies to terrist attacks was evident a long time ago -see "The Bigger the Bang - The Louder the Silence " 4/8/04 @ Investigating New Imperialism after the massive explosion at Geislinghen , Belgium on Friday July 30th 2004 which has now claimed the lives of at least 16 dead, 200 injured very badly burned. No explanation has ever been presented to explain the caue of this event, news of which stopped suddenly only days after the event.

On June 30th 2004 a single rotting and rusty petrol pipeline in Tucson operated by Kinder Morgan Partners broke , this disrupted petrol supplies across Western USA and drove up the price of petrol to over US$4 in California as the US celebrated Labor Day. Which shows that you do not need to blow up a pipeline for disruption to supplies to cause massive economic and social dislocation.

Due to delays and absence of planning the UK now have massive concentrations of gas pipelines and equipment at Easington, Bacton, Isle of Grain and Milford Haven (4th largest UK port). The port of Milford Haven will be handling highly dangerous cargoes and opposition to their arrival has been stifled or ignored (FOE statement re terrorism threat 8/4/04) and open public debate forbidden by public servants.

An excellent, brief but detailed explanation of the problems is available at Hansard House of Lords 27 Oct 2005 : Column 1338 by Lord Crickhowell of Pont Esgob . (Nick Edward Cons. MP Westminster and Trintity Cantab - see pic) In which he published the respsonse by a DTI official to the HSE for the need for progressing the matter speedily..

"the project would make an important contribution to UK security of gas supply from winter 2007/8 . . . any delay would jeopardise reliability (security) of supply".

He also stated, a comment which many who are concerned about the safety of Milford Haven, it's port and gas pipelines might well ponder deeply...

"In response to a PQ from me, the Secretary of State for Transport stated that there were no plans to review the existing arrangements. I pray that no serious accident involving LNG will occur, but it seems clear that the present arrangements, fractured between shore and ship, and with marine controls that are not sufficiently independent, open or subject to second-party review, are seriously flawed. Any major accident would not only have a tragic impact on those directly affected, but would have devastating consequences for LNG operators and British energy policy."

Let us hope that Lord Crickhowell has no cause to relish with grim satisfaction how accurate he was in identifying the haste and lack of safety concerns he exposed that day - and which were so swiftly and silently ignored.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick (David Hannay Winchester , New College Ox,) ex FO Mandarin encapsulated the current position with fearful accuracy, based on wide and deep experience of the political process;

"Each of the solutions (to energy supply) stirs up controversy and opposition to an extent that makes putting off decisions a seductive option—hence our present quandary. We have been putting off taking decisions for quite a few years, and they have not become any easier to take."

He went on to add in a further statement of the bleeding obvious (This was 12 months ago) ;

"What is needed is not so much reviews and debates as decisions. The former may be necessary preliminaries to the latter, but, if they do not lead on expeditiously to the latter, this country will continue to slide towards a position in which the security of its energy supplies is less and less assured."

Not only is the arrival and distribution of gas upon which the economic survival of the UK depends, susceptible to damage and danger either by malign forces but also by natural decay and neglect. The sources of this gas are increasingly in the hands of people to whom our economic success is secondary.

This children, is called energy security.