Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland practically giving away its oil and gas :(

Options
  • 10-06-2007 11:52am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 171 ✭✭


    http://www.wsm.ie/story/2187

    Something I've been reading about the last while and it makes me sick. How in gods name can they be so thick. The above link has some good info and I'll post more links when i get home that I've read.

    Of all the **** ups and stupidity, this could well be the most expensive and wasteful the Irish governments have ever accomplished. The people of this country have been shafted out of their natural resources.


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 594 ✭✭✭Judt


    Well, it's done, and the Irish people have no more say in the matter. No point in crying about it now, and if you wanted to then you had your chance a few weeks back and didn't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,424 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Judt wrote:
    Well, it's done, and the Irish people have no more say in the matter. No point in crying about it now, and if you wanted to then you had your chance a few weeks back and didn't.

    Corrupt contracts are not legally binding.
    (and if they are, then we should change the feckin law)


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Akrasia wrote:
    Corrupt contracts are not legally binding.
    (and if they are, then we should change the feckin law)
    In fairness, Oil and gas that wouldnt have been economically viable to extract 20 years ago is very attractive now given the high prices.
    How in the hell were a government a quarter of a century ago supposed to know this?
    Their logic was ,we may aswell give it away if it means getting it out of there.
    No gas meant no benefit at all whereas gas out meant some benefit.

    As for corrupt contracts are you saying shell paid Burke and that it wasnt a case of,the oil/gas is difficult to get at so we'd better incentivise it ?

    Off to conspiracy theories we go...


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,424 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Tristrame wrote:
    Their logic was ,we may aswell give it away if it means getting it out of there.
    No gas meant no benefit at all whereas gas out meant some benefit.
    That's not logic, that's stupidity.

    You might as well say 'the price of potatoes are low at the moment and I can't afford to farm, so I might as well give away my potato field free of charge so that when the price of potatoes rises again, someone else will be able to make a fortune, but at least I'll have the benefit of knowing there won't be a shortage of Tayto crisps'

    What benefit does the gas bring to Ireland if we don't get any royalties from it? None. What benefit does Ireland get if someone else develops the resource and keeps all the profits? None. So why develop the resource at all? Why not leave it where it is until it is of benefit to us?

    You can't say 'energy security' because if they were concerned about insecure supplies, then any first year (junior cert) economics student would tell you that low or uncertain supply leads to increasing prices, so then you can't say that the current high prices were totally unpredictable....

    400 BILLION euros worth of Irish resources have been given away by members of the Irish parliament who have since been found to be engaged in corrupt activities elsewhere... This is not a 'conspiracy theory' it is a national disgrace.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Akrasia you've no idea how business works clearly. There was substantial cost and risk with drilling for Oil. The Irish government simply could not do it in the 60's,70's and 80's. Without the foreign companies the gas and oil would still be in the ground and we would probably not know it existed. At the time there was alot of Oil in the middle east which was much easier to get out of the ground and much cheaper as a result. Their had to be favourable conditions for the likes of shell to some, and keatings demands would not have been met, since investments elsewhere carried less risk and more revenue.

    As pointed out by the article, successive governments involving FG/FF and labour have allowed the situation to develop. These contracts where entered into in good faith and the government is bound by them. The oil companies have laid out money for decades at huge risk, and now that it's finally paying off, we cry foul, come on. It's like the east point toll bridge all over again.

    Also maybe I missed it, but who had been found guilty of corruption that was involved in these deals. It's far more like that they felt any money, even crumbs, was better then nothing at that time.

    Final note. It isn't 400 Billion, or anything like that. That looks like a rough estimate of revenue, costs need to be taken out of that first.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,559 ✭✭✭Tipsy Mac


    Getting our own oil and gas sold back to us at market prices is no benefit to the country whatsover. All we are getting is 12.5% corporation tax which is nothing when these companies write off all drilling expenses. If it was not economically viable to take the oil out of the ground some years ago it should have been left there, it will become easier to take it out of the ground in the future at a time when the price of oil will be alot more expensive.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,418 ✭✭✭Jip


    Also, for every well where a company finds gas or oil there are many more where they get nothing so it's not like they're striking it rich everytime, there's a significant amount of investment involved upfront that doesn't guarantee a return.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement