logo
‘It breaks my heart': how a refinery closure is hitting jobs and politics

‘It breaks my heart': how a refinery closure is hitting jobs and politics

The Guardian13 hours ago

Every morning in Grangemouth, chemists at Celtic Renewables's small factory feed a vial of microbes with a precisely tailored cocktail of food – liquid residues from the scotch whisky industry.
In vessels surrounded by a web of metal pipes and gleaming stainless steel valves, the microbes multiply into something other than drink: a starter solution for batches of acetone, butanol and ethanol – chemicals essential for countless everyday products.
Celtic Renewables wants more: a plant 10 times its current size. That could form part of plans to sustain Scotland's chemicals industry after Grangemouth sustained a crushing blow: the closure of the 100-year-old refinery in April, with the loss of 400 jobs. The huge complex will be reduced to a fuel import terminal, staffed by only 75 people. As many as 4,600 jobs in the refinery's supply chain could also be affected.
That closure has made Grangemouth one of the earliest tests of a 'just transition': the idea that the economy can move relatively painlessly from fossil fuels to net zero, helped along by judicious government interventions to spur new jobs in place of the old.
The Labour government fears that failure could mean voters turn their backs on it – and on the pledge to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050 – throughout what remains of Scotland's largely fossil fuel-dependent industry. Climate action by government remains popular in Britain, but parties on the right, and particularly Nigel Farage's Reform UK, believe opposition to net zero can win them power.
As the government this week unveiled a new industrial strategy, this article – the second in a series on the battle for Britain's deindustrialised areas – looks at the future for one of Scotland's industrial icons.
After the second world war, deindustrialisation wiped out much of the coal mining, shipbuilding and steelmaking that dominated employment in Scotland's central belt from Glasgow to Edinburgh. While those industries all but disappeared, Grangemouth held out, refining crude oil to feed Scotland's cars and planes taking off from Edinburgh and Glasgow.
Grangemouth's refinery traces its history back to 1924, making it the second oldest in Europe, but since 2005 it has been part of Jim Ratcliffe's Ineos chemicals empire. Ratcliffe's investments bolted together assets that others did not want, and generated huge profits. Ineos agreed a deal in 2011 for Chinese state-owned PetroChina to partner in a joint venture, Petroineos.
Petroineos executives argued in Scottish parliamentary hearings that Grangemouth was not able to compete with newer, more efficient plants in the Middle East and Africa. UK chemicals output has slumped 42% since peaking in March 2020, according to the Office for National Statistics.
Ratcliffe has faced significant criticism for cutting jobs in chemicals and at Manchester United Football Club – which he took control of last year. But he has claimed that it was UK energy policy, not his decisions, that made Grangemouth unviable. Chemicals companies report UK energy costs are five times higher than in the US and well over double those in the EU, according to the Chemical Industries Association, a lobby group. Ratcliffe is also a staunch opponent of carbon taxes on businesses.
'We are witnessing the extinction of one of our major industries as chemical manufacture has the life squeezed out of it,' Ratcliffe told the Financial Times in January. Deindustrialising Britain achieves 'nothing for the environment,' he said. 'It merely shifts production and emissions elsewhere.'
Cutting energy costs was the flagship measure of the government's industrial strategy, with exemptions for chemicals businesses for the costs of renewable energy programmes and discounts for levies to fund the grid. The measures did not include short-term help on driving down wholesale prices, the key complaint of big energy users.
What do you do with a tangle of pipes, furnaces and crackers like the Grangemouth refinery? A Scottish government-funded study, known as Project Willow, described nine options for chemical industries that could happen on the site, including plastics recycling, making chemicals from wood, or – perhaps most ardently desired – making so-called sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). Westminster has set aside £200m to support private sector investments at Grangemouth, plus £25m from the Scottish government, to support projects. Senior government sources said more money could be available if the right projects come up.
Yet each of those options comes with a price tag, ranging from the relatively manageable (£15m for turning organic waste into methane, with up to 70 jobs) to the truly enormous (up to £2.1bn for a SAF plant, and 270 jobs).
The transition does not feel pain-free in Grangemouth town centre, with the refinery chimneys visible from the end of the road. A pleasant park, rows of sandstone homes and later semi-detached houses evidence the prosperity of the early 1900s and the boom times of the 60s and 70s, but the town also has several areas counted among the 10% most deprived in Scotland. Manufacturing in 2023 accounted for 11.1% of jobs in the broader Falkirk council area. That compared with 6.9% across Scotland that year – down from 35% in 1951.
Mohammad Saleem, the shopkeeper at Sweet Talk, is already feeling the effects of the refinery closure, and has cut back opening hours, with fewer workers passing through to grab chocolate or a paper on the way to work.
'Quiet,' is his description of business in recent months. 'It used to be good before corona. After corona, that's it. This time, lunchtime, you would see crowds. Now you don't see anybody.'
'It's a disgrace,' said another shopkeeper in the centre. 'But what can you do?'
Marilyn McIlvaney, the secretary of the Kersiebank Community Project, a volunteer-run charity shop that runs a food bank, said they had seen more people under pressure in the weeks since the closure of the refinery. Redundant workers got a relatively generous 18 months of pay, but they are still tightening belts.
'They're cutting back,' she said. 'It's having a knock-on to the other businesses. It's getting worse. Food banks are queueing out the doors – some of them [users] are working.'
The question now for workers is whether Project Willow jobs come through before they have to look elsewhere. Those hopes are looking increasingly forlorn, according to Cliff Bowen, who has worked at Grangemouth for 33 years, and is now a convener for Unite, a union. He argues that the political implications will be huge.
Sign up to Business Today
Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning
after newsletter promotion
'All we asked for is another couple of years until these technologies come online,' Bowen said. 'It breaks my heart. Labour are done for a generation in this area.'
Bowen, a lifelong Labour supporter whose anger is palpable, believes that Reform UK will benefit from the loss of jobs at Grangemouth, and throughout Scotland's oil and gas economy, because it appears to offer a chance for those businesses to continue to operate.
'They're talking sense when it comes to energy supply,' said Bowen. 'People are going to vote for that, regardless of the colour on their rosette.'
Reform's support is notably strong in areas around other refineries: near Stanlow refinery it won the Runcorn Westminster byelection, while Reform is leading Westminster polls in each of the constituencies that host the UK's other refineries at Fawley in Hampshire, Pembroke in west Wales, and the plants at Humber and Lindsey in Lincolnshire. Richard Tice, the Reform deputy leader, said: 'Reform will scrap net zero which will enable lower energy costs and investment in the chemicals and refining industries, thus creating jobs and leading to the reopening of Grangemouth.'
That prescription is not seen as realistic by industry experts, even if big subsidies were offered. It would also lead to continued UK carbon emissions: the refinery was responsible for more than a quarter of all Scotland's carbon. Yet the pledge may resonate with people struggling to find work.
Labour managed a surprise victory in a Scottish parliamentary byelection earlier this month in Hamilton – leaving the Scottish National party (SNP) in second and Reform a close third. Yet Brian Leishman, who won Grangemouth back for Labour only last year in the Westminster general election, said the closure was a 'failure from the political class' – including Labour, after it failed to live up to a pre-election pledge by the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, to 'step in to save the jobs at the refinery'. The SNP is keen to win back an area it held for nearly a decade at Westminster, but also has limited room for manoeuvre because of its nearly two decades leading the Scottish government.
Leishman argued that the government should take ownership stakes in return for Project Willow funding, to prevent the area being vulnerable to the whims of distant bosses in the future. He said that Labour needed to invest in Scotland if it wanted to hold on to its previous gains.
'If you give people good jobs, good life chances, that's now you get a second term,' he said. 'If you do the basics of government well and you improve people's living standards, you'll beat Reform.'
Scottish Enterprise, the lead agency on Project Willow, is hopeful that some of the interest will translate into action soon.
Jane Martin, the managing director for innovation and investment, said she was 'aware of the need for short-term wins to turn the narrative around'. The agency is working to triage projects, and work out which will be most likely to succeed. They are a mix of 'inside the fence' at the refinery, and others outside.
'Project Willow is a really important lever but we are not only focused on those technologies,' Martin said. 'We're not shutting anything down at this stage.'
It does appear increasingly unlikely that a single employer will emerge to replace the refinery's jobs. One much vaunted possibility was an investment to produce SAF to meet the UK's mandate of 10% of all aviation fuel by 2030.
However, Michael Liebreich, a clean energy expert, said SAF was still seen as too risky for investors. SAF production (either from biological sources or using green hydrogen) is still several times more expensive than refining oil into kerosene, and nobody has dared to make the huge investment needed without a cast-iron guarantee that the product will be bought.
There does not appear to be much hope for a neat solution. The question now appears to be whether smaller projects can let the town retain a chemical industry. That could allow it to salvage something from the devastation of the refinery's closure – and prove whether a messy transition can also be just.
'We've got a redundant petrochemical facility that has land, utilities and access to great people, if we can be courageous,' said Mark Simmers, the chief executive of Celtic Renewables. 'And it does require bravery and courage, particularly for governments to say, 'We're going to create these low-carbon manufacturing jobs, and repurpose all that land and utilities and people to do something which is all about the future'.
'That then becomes an example for the world. So I really believe if people are brave and courageous and say 'let's do this', it will provide a blueprint for lots refineries in the UK and the world.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Starmer: BBC must explain how ‘appalling' anti-IDF ‘hate speech' was aired
Starmer: BBC must explain how ‘appalling' anti-IDF ‘hate speech' was aired

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Starmer: BBC must explain how ‘appalling' anti-IDF ‘hate speech' was aired

Sir Keir Starmer has demanded the BBC explain how 'appalling' chants of "death to the IDF" were broadcast as part of its coverage of Glastonbury. Police are assessing footage of sets by Bob Vylan, who led crowds in chants of 'free, free Palestine ' and 'death, death to the IDF', the Israeli Defence Force, and Irish rap trio Kneecap, who suggested fans 'start a riot' outside one of the band's upcoming court appearance. The prime minister said: 'There is no excuse for this kind of appalling hate speech... The BBC needs to explain how these scenes came to be broadcast.' The Independent understands the row is expected to discussed when MPs on the Commons culture committee meet on Tuesday, raising the spectre that BBC bosses, such as the director general Tim Davie, could be called to give evidence to Parliament. The culture secretary Lisa Nandy has spoken to Mr Davie about Bob Vylan's performance. Sir Keir added: 'I said that Kneecap should not be given a platform and that goes for any other performers making threats or inciting violence.' Health secretary Wes Streeting denounced the scenes as 'appalling' and said 'the BBC and Glastonbury have got questions to answer about how we saw such a spectacle on our screens." On social media, the Israeli Embassy said it was "deeply disturbed by the inflammatory and hateful rhetoric expressed on stage at the Glastonbury Festival". But, in response Mr Streeting also told the Israeli government to get its 'own house in order" and take violence against Palestinians more seriously. The shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately said the BBC should have cut the live feed for Bob Vylan's performance. 'I think if you were in the BBC and seeing that you were broadcasting that to the nation, that can't be the right thing,' she said. 'I mean, yes, I believe in free speech, but that was incitement to violence. It was incitement to kill. That is not something that we support in this country. And I think the BBC should have shifted to something else.' Former Conservative culture secretary Lucy Frazer said the BBC 'failed in its responsibility to the licence fee payer', while ex-BBC executive and presenter Roger Bolton told Times Radio the channel "should have cut away" from the performance and "cancelled the broadcast" after the chants of "death to the IDF". Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called the scenes at Glastonbury "grotesque", writing on X: "Glorifying violence against Jews isn't edgy. The West is playing with fire if we allow this sort of behaviour to go unchecked." A BBC spokesperson said: "Some of the comments made during Bob Vylan's set were deeply offensive. "During this live stream on iPlayer, which reflected what was happening on stage, a warning was issued on screen about the very strong and discriminatory language. We have no plans to make the performance available on demand." Glastonbury Festival said it was "appalled'' by the actions of Bob Vylan, adding: "Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence.'' Kneecap, from Belfast, hit the headlines in recent weeks after Liam Og O hAnnaidh, who performs under the name Mo Chara, was charged with a terror offence. Discussing his bandmate's forthcoming court date, Naoise O Caireallain, who performs under the name Moglai Bap, said they would "start a riot outside the courts", before clarifying: "No riots, just love and support, and support for Palestine". In the run-up to the festival, several politicians called for the group to be removed from the line-up, including Sir Keir, who said their performance would not be "appropriate". During the performance, Caireallain said: "The prime minister of your country, not mine, said he didn't want us to play, so f*** Keir Starmer." Asked about the Israel embassy's response to chants at Glastonbury, Mr Streeting added that he would 'say to the Israeli embassy, get your own house in order in terms of the conduct of your own citizens and the settlers in the West Bank. "I think there's a serious point there by the Israeli embassy I take seriously. I wish they'd take the violence of their own citizens towards Palestinians more seriously." He said what people should be talking about in the context of Israel and Gaza is the humanitarian catastrophe and the fact that Israeli settlers attacked a Christian village this week. He added: "All life is sacred. And I find it pretty revolting we've got to a stage in this conflict where you're supposed to sort of cheer on one side or the other like it's a football team."

Keir Starmer's plan to win back ‘authoritarian-leaning' voters
Keir Starmer's plan to win back ‘authoritarian-leaning' voters

Times

timean hour ago

  • Times

Keir Starmer's plan to win back ‘authoritarian-leaning' voters

Sir Keir Starmer wants to win back 'authoritarian-leaning' voters by ramping up Labour's messaging on tackling migration and crime. Downing Street strategists have drawn up plans to restore trust in politics among two groups of people identified as 'grafting realists' and 'striving moderates'. The former are largely disengaged with political news, but likely to live in social housing and receive benefits, meaning they have often have direct contact with the government. According to official documents seen by The Times, these voters have lower than average levels of trust in politicians. Internal polling commissioned by Downing Street said these 'grafting realists', who make up about 14 per cent of the population, exhibit 'authoritarian-leaning views, particularly around crime and immigration'. Guidance drawn up by the Cabinet Office's New Media Unit suggests that this group, mostly female and with an average age of 45, are more likely to get their news online or from social media, although a notable portion 'avoid the news due to anxiety'. It says: 'They are more disengaged with the news, politics and current affairs than average, see politicians and the media as more of a force for bad than for good, and feel the truth may be being hidden from them.' The strategy team, launched by No 10 last year, recommends advertising in supermarkets, on buses and through social media influencers to target this group. Topics such as 'controlling immigration' and 'tackling crime' should be prioritised, it adds. • Keir Starmer on the benefits U-turn and his toughest week yet The second group being targeted by Starmer are known in No 10 as 'striving moderates'. With an average age of 44 and likely to have children, they are 'slightly more' trusting of the government but despondent about their own prospects, and also make up 14 per cent of the population. According to the guidance: 'This segment are more pessimistic than optimistic about their own future and are the most likely of all segments to feel powerless to change their own lives. Despite this, they feel more positively towards politicians and pay higher levels of attention to the news, politics and current affairs than average. Overall, they hold moderate political views.' Migration is identified as an important issue for 'authoritarian-leaning' voters TIMES PHOTOGRAPHER JACK HILL Prioritising evidence of action on plans to build 1.5 million homes is advised. Martin Lewis's Money Saving Expert website and the advice forum Mumsnet are given as examples of 'how to reach' the second group of voters, as well as traditional newspapers, TV and radio news. • No 10 seeks influencers to spread Starmer's word on social media The strategy is a government one being implemented by civil servants, rather than overtly political. However, Labour insiders said it was crucial to their plans for the next election as they aim to restore trust in the government to deliver on its promises and see off the threat of Nigel Farage's Reform party, who they see as 'populist'. Last week Starmer admitted that his first year in office has been blighted by a struggle to sell his plans to voters. 'We haven't always told our story as well as we should,' he told Sky News during a trip to the G7 summit in Canada.

As a visibly physically disabled MP, my view on the welfare bill is clear: we need a reset and fast
As a visibly physically disabled MP, my view on the welfare bill is clear: we need a reset and fast

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

As a visibly physically disabled MP, my view on the welfare bill is clear: we need a reset and fast

In March 2020, when the Conservative government looked like an outlier in appearing to pursue a Covid strategy centring on herd immunity, for the first time in my life I felt raw, hot fear. Thinking of my toddler and what might happen if I caught coronavirus and was treated under the then Nice guidelines 'frailty' score was too much. I sobbed deeply. After 10 years of austerity, I knew then that disabled people would pay an enormous price for the pandemic thanks to the government's handling of it. Disabled people did: almost 60% of Covid-related deaths involved disabled people in that first wave. I vowed then that I would do all I could to use my skills and experiences of 20 years working in disability law and policy to deliver a country that treats disabled people with dignity and respect. Five years later, I am one of the only visibly physically disabled members of parliament. I was proud to be elected last year as the first person to have grown up in my constituency to go on to represent it in parliament for more than a century. I am proud, too, that Labour's manifesto committed to championing the rights of disabled people, and to the principle of working with disabled people to ensure our views and voices are at the heart of all we do. Consequently, since April, I have been engaging relentlessly with government, at the very highest level, to change its proposals as set out in the universal credit and personal independence payment bill. I made it clear from the start I could not support the proposals on personal independence payments (Pip). Pip is an in-work benefit, designed to ensure disabled people can live independently. There are 4 million disabled people in poverty in the UK. As a matter of conscience, I could not support measures that would push 250,000 disabled people, including 50,000 children, into poverty. Nor could I accept proposals that used a points system, under current descriptors, that would exclude eligibility for those who cannot put on their underwear, prosthetic limbs or shoes without support. The concessions now announced are significant, including that all recipients of Pip who currently receive it will continue to do so. I know this will be an enormous relief for many of my nearly 6,000 constituents in receipt of Pip and for disabled people across the country. However, I will continue working, as I have done from the beginning, to look at these concessions carefully against the evidence on the impact upon disabled people, including my constituents, and disabled people's organisations. Fundamentally, I will be looking for further reassurances that the detail will fulfil Labour's manifesto commitments to disabled people. The social model of disability must be central to this – removing barriers to our inclusion in society. Proposals must take a mission-led approach across all five missions to break down barriers to opportunity for disabled people. I hope to see three things from government, embedded in the text of the amendments, if the bill reaches the report stage. First, the review being led by Stephen Timms, the minister for social security and disability, must not be performative. The government must not make the same mistake twice. I strongly recommend bringing in a disabled expert on equality and employment law, such as Prof Anna Lawson at the University of Leeds, to support this work. Second, the government must consult disabled people over the summer to understand the impact of the proposed changes from November 2026 on future claimants. These must mitigate risks of discrimination for those current recipients with similar disabilities and against pushing new disabled claimants into poverty after November 2026. In doing so, it must produce an impact assessment that also reflects the impact of unmet need for future recipients on health and social care services, and clarifies the application of new criteria on those receiving Pip if they get reassessed. Third, growth must mean inclusive growth. In implementing the £1bn employment, health and skills support programme, there needs to be a clear target for closing the disability employment gap. Importantly, there needs to be a commitment to a sector-by-sector strategy on closing this gap and a skills training strategy for the employment support workers enabling disabled people into work. These approaches outperform cuts or sanctions in getting disabled people into sustainable employment. This matters. The Conservatives left us with a pitiful 29% employment gap and 17% pay gap for disabled people. The Labour government has an opportunity to bring in a new era of policymaking for disabled people that takes a laser focus in closing this gap. The disability sector believes that this can be reduced by 14%; generating £17.2bn for the exchequer. We must seize this moment to do things differently and move beyond the damaging rhetoric and disagreements of recent weeks. In line with the prime minister's statement that reform should be implemented with Labour values of fairness, a reset requires a shift of emphasis to enabling disabled people to fulfil their potential. I will continue to engage with government and disabled people's organisations, to fight for a country that treats disabled people with dignity and respect. Marie Tidball is Labour MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on autism and co-chair of the disability parliamentary Labour party Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store