𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

To drill or not to drill, that is the question. In the seven weeks since the Iran war exploded, sending oil and fuel prices surging, the debate over North Sea oil and gas has intensified.

Kemi Badenoch, Nigel Farage, Donald Trump and Tony Blair are all in favour of more drilling to help boost Britain’s domestic energy production. On the flip side, Sir Keir Starmer – led by his Energy Secretary Ed Miliband – is staunchly against it.

So who is right? Will new drilling boost the UK’s energy security, will it help lower bills for hard-pressed consumers and will it protect jobs?

There is also the question of whether new drilling is compatible with our climate commitments to protecting the plant.

Should we, to quote the US President, “drill baby, drill”?

For more than half a century, oil and gas extracted from the North Sea has been central to the UK’s energy system and acted as the bedrock of a power generation.

Things boomed in the 1980s and peaked in 1999.

Since then, output has fallen by more than 65% and today accounts for less than 15% of the UK’s electricity.

The charge towards Net Zero has changed everything.

In 2024, less than half the UK’s gas came from North Sea reserves, and it is estimated that more than two-thirds will need to be imported from overseas by 2027, rising to 94% by 2050.

But claims that supplies are dwindling should be treated with caution.

Sites controlled by Britain still contain three to four billion barrels of oil and gas – up to £200 billion-worth.

The Tories and Reform UK say we should use up our remaining resources to protect the nation’s energy security in the short and medium term.

Conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have shown how susceptible the UK is to major energy shocks, driving up bills for millions of consumers.

However, Labour are insisting it remains deep beneath the North Sea even while other countries drill.

Mrs Badenoch describes this as “economic insanity” and says the policy is “killing jobs and the industry” across the UK.

While President Trump this week launched an attack on Mr Miliband’s “crazy” ban on new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, branding it “tragic”.

He claimed that UK oil and gas output could rival that of Norway if drilling were to be encouraged.

It’s not just the Right-wing of politics and the fossil fuel industry urging the Government to reconsider.

Tony Blair’s think-tank has called for the ban to be overturned.

So has the Labour-supporting GMB Union.

The head of RenewableUK, the trade association for wind, wave and tidal power, wants to see drilling continued in the North Sea, as do energy company bosses like Greg Jackson of Octopus.

Even Rachel Reeves is said to be keen to get her hands on the revenue that would flow in from our oil and gas fields.

But Mr Miliband has so far resisted calls to weaken his North Sea crackdown, claiming that more drilling will not reduce bills or provide substantial amounts of new energy.

Earlier this month, it was revealed that dozens of North Sea oil and gas fields were being blocked from development by Labour’s net zero policies.

Apache, a Texas-based oil producer, is among those preparing to withdraw from the North Sea.

It has said it will pull out by 2029, with the decision driven partly by the increase in windfall tax on fossil fuel producers.

Control of licensing for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea lies with the UK government, which under Labour has a policy of not permitting new developments.

However, that opposition has softened since the last general election, with permission for new drilling on or near existing fields, known as “tiebacks”, being granted last year.

Mr Miliband and the industry regulator, the North Sea Transition Authority, are currently considering whether to give final approval to two major oil and gas fields – Rosebank and Jackdaw.

Jackdaw, which is about 150 miles east of Aberdeen, is a gas field which could be connected to the UK network within months.

Rosebank, about 80 miles north-west of Shetland, is Britain’s largest untapped oil field – which would also produce some gas – and would take longer to become operational.

Both sites have already been granted licences, though work to begin extracting oil and gas from them has been halted due to legal challenges from environmental groups.

Energy firms have been told they will not be able to begin production at Jackdaw or Rosebank until a fresh decision has been made by the government.

So it would appear that in our hour of need – with petrol, diesel and energy prices soaring – a helping hand is on our doorstep.

According to industry body Offshore Energies UK, oil and gas supplies about 75% of the UK’s energy needs and will meet about a fifth of demand by 2050.

Prof Paul de Leeuw, director of the Energy Transition Institute at Robert Gordon University, says that while it was essential to make the world greener and cleaner, having the North Sea on its doorstep was helpful for the UK during an energy crisis.

“It is particularly helpful on gas, which can pump straight into the gas system here,” he recently told BBC Scotland News.

He said that Jackdaw could produce about 6% of the UK’s gas demand.

The professor pointed out that the UK gets about 85% of its gas from the North Sea – from both UK and Norwegian sites – with the rest predominantly made up of liquified natural gas shipped from the US.

Due to the crisis in the Middle East, demand and prices for the US gas supplies are increasing.

Rosebank would take longer to come “on stream”, he says.

Most of its oil – which is owned by multinational companies – would be sent to the Netherlands because the UK’s remaining refineries are not set up to process the heavier type of crude oil extracted from the North Sea.

The refined products – such as diesel or jet fuel – would then have to be reimported to the UK.

Prof de Leeuw said that opening up Rosebank and Jackdaw would help increase energy security in Europe, which is heavily reliant on imports from elsewhere.

The number of jobs supported by the oil and gas sector has more than halved in the past decade – from 441,000 in 2013 to just 213,000 in 2023, according to industry data.

Employment in oil and gas is set to decline regardless of the predicted levels of production from the basin.

Even the enormous Rosebank oil field, if approved, would support just 255 direct and 137 supply chain jobs in the UK on average over the lifetime of the field, according to its developer Equinor.

But investment would help protect the industry for longer.

The knock-on effect of potentially lower energy costs would also help struggling businesses, like Denby Pottery which has just gone into administration citing high energy costs.

Britain’s chemical industry is 60% smaller than it was in 2021 and heavy industry is suffering.

Finally, there is the environmental argument.

Shell estimates that gas from the Jackdaw field could produce 35.8million tonnes of carbon over its lifetime, the equivalent of 90% of Scotland’s emissions for 2023.

However, the energy giant says the field would be more likely to produce about 23.6million tonnes – equivalent to 60% of the 2023 figure, and the figure is less than if gas has to be imported from abroad.

The downstream/end use emissions from Jackdaw are a fraction of those estimated for the Rosebank oil field, where the extracted oil is expected to produce almost 250million tonnes over its lifetime.

Greenpeace UK says more North Sea drilling would not improve energy security “one jot”.

It has said more wind and solar power would reduce dependence on oil and gas and create more secure jobs.