Today, Fiona Harvey watches from the sidelines as European industry is priced out of existence and concludes that it just can't be helped. Her case seems to be that high energy prices are simply unavoidable, firstly because green energy levies are nugatory and secondly because the shale revolution can't happen here. The second part of this argument is justified with a quote from Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the International Energy Agency.
Europe is unlikely to be able to emulate the US's exploitation of shale gas and oil, partly because it lacks the natural resources and favourable geology, and also because the continent is so much more densely populated.
This seems a bit strange to me. What are these "natural resources" that we lack? There's undoubtedly an enormous resource of oil and gas-bearing shales in Europe, not least here in the UK.
The unfavourable geology argument is also one that has been contradicted by actual shale geologists. It seems that the geology is different in every shale play:
the Appalachian Plateau is a foreland fold thrust belt of the first order.......fractured, faulted, and folded to no end...Other North American Gas shale plays that are about as structurally complex including the Woodford and Fayetteville. While the Barnett and Eagle Ford are somewhat less complex they are also faulted. Only the Haynesville might approach a layer cake and even this as some subtle complexities.
And as for the dense population, this cuts both ways. Although shale developments make a very small impact on the environment, there will be inevitable planning delays this side of the pond, but the dense population also brings great advantages, with gas and other infrastructure likely to be close to the wells, bringing cost advantages and avoiding the large numbers of truck movements needed stateside.