ListNook

lastpassonright Mar 31, 2026 +32

Any country that doesn't begin a serious transition to renewable energy is setting themselves up for disaster. Maybe this war will finally make that clear.

32

SidewaysFancyPrance Mar 31, 2026 +6

Anyone seriously proposing we continue to invest in and rely on oil is a Judas goat marching us all to our dooms in exchange for a pocketful of silver.

6

ARobertNotABob Mar 31, 2026 +2

There are those perfectly willing for all to die later as long as they get their pocketful of silver now.

2

watch-nerd Mar 31, 2026 +6

There is no renewable replacement for jet fuel yet.

6

Interesting_Bend_737 Mar 31, 2026 +6

Agreed If there is a silver lining to this war it is that the increase in fossil fuel prices will make alternatives more economically viable and lead to greater developments. There has been little incentive to develop renewable technologies when the c**** cheat of fossil fuels was always available. The shock will be painful though

6

[deleted] Mar 31, 2026 +1

[deleted]

1

theonefinn Mar 31, 2026 +2

Well yes that is what should have been done with the profits from the north sea in the 90s, which is when Norway started up the fund. The world of today (nor the value of the remaining North Sea Oil) is not the same as it was in the 90s.

2

thickwhiteduck Mar 31, 2026 +2

Climate change is a good reason in itself.

2

TapCat13 Mar 31, 2026 -3

In ways, Israel and the USA are saving the world! Go go Greta!!

-3

iwantboringtimes Mar 31, 2026 +7

> More drilling in the North Sea would do nothing to improve the UK’s energy security, former military leaders have said, as a new analysis finds no fossil fuel importer is safe from chokepoints in the global supply chain. > The government should focus on a rapid transition to a mix of wind, solar, tidal and nuclear energy to ensure the UK’s future security, the former military leaders told the Guardian, as well as a programme of energy efficiency and a “major renewal” of the electricity grid.

7

watch-nerd Mar 31, 2026 +9

I honestly don't get why this is an either/or discussion instead of yes/and. Yes, lots of renewables are good. Yes, you still need carbon sources for things that can't run on renewables (e.g. jet fuel). Also, surely North Sea oil has fewer supply chain choke points than something coming from the Middle East, so the security point makes no sense to me at all.

9

iwantboringtimes Apr 1, 2026 +1

> jet fuel there's already solar companies making liquid fuels (for years) Maersk was already using such for at least one of their ships last year or in 2024.

1

watch-nerd Apr 1, 2026 +2

Making liquid jet fuels out of what?

2

iwantboringtimes Apr 1, 2026 +1

it's speed-up version of a biodigester they use solar energy to speed up the production of example - methane from organic waste

1

watch-nerd Apr 1, 2026 +1

And how much volume can it output vs current jet fuel needs?

1

iwantboringtimes Apr 1, 2026 +2

naturally, it takes time to scale up am just letting you know the option is out there

2

watch-nerd Mar 31, 2026 +3

Wouldn't having as many options as possible be a good thing?

3

Rincey4k Mar 31, 2026 +5

The issue isn’t whether “more choice is good.” It’s about whether this specific choice ‘expanding North Sea oil’ meaningfully improves UK energy security. It doesn’t. If the question is: “Would producing more North Sea oil materially improve UK energy security?” The answer is: No. Because oil and gas are traded on global markets, the UK doesn’t get a protected, cheaper, or more secure supply just because it was extracted here. Prices and availability are still dictated by global forces. If the question is: “Would producing more North Sea oil create more commercial opportunities for companies to sell oil?” The answer is: Yes. Companies get more barrels to sell into the global market. That’s a business benefit, not an energy security benefit. These are two different questions. Saying “more choice is good” answers the second question, not the first. It doesn’t change the fact that more North Sea drilling does not translate into greater UK energy independence or security.

5

watch-nerd Mar 31, 2026 +3

"the UK doesn’t get a protected, cheaper, or more secure supply just because it was extracted here." Not cheaper, I agree. Global markets are what they are. But surely it's more secure and less vulnerable to choke points. It's right next door, after all.

3

Automata-Omnia Apr 1, 2026 +3

UK doesn't have a supply issue from chokepoints, the refined oil comes from Norway and US. For petroleum energy security UK would need to invest in domestic refineries alongside extraction, however due to extreme energy costs this is not viable without significant subsidy, nevermind overcoming the NIMBY and Green opposition groups that would trap it in planning approval hell for decades.

3

chefdangerdagger Mar 31, 2026 +2

>experts say the North Sea is a “mature basin” whose output has declined by 75% since its peak. They say 90% of its reserves have gone. From [this article](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/28/north-sea-oil-gas-licences-conservatives). The North Sea gas and oil is practically gone, and what's left is increasingly hard to get. This whole debate is completely pointless. The last government was pro fossil fuels and all the licences they gave out in their entire stint amounted to a months worth of energy in total. The only way to get energy security is to invest in alternatives.

2

watch-nerd Mar 31, 2026 +1

Ah, it's tapped out. The trick is one can't get complete energy security from alternatives, though. Unless one is willing to gimp things like air travel for which there is no renewable option.

1

Imminent_Extinction Mar 31, 2026 +3

[The UK has decent geothermal potential](https://www.bgs.ac.uk/news/new-platform-highlights-geothermal-potential-across-the-uk/).

3

ARobertNotABob Mar 31, 2026 +3

It does, but there's some NIMBYism arising from the earthquakes at two geothermal sites in Cornwall, causing people's view of it to be not dissimilar to fracking.

3

Farewell-Farewell Apr 1, 2026 +1

You can have both a focus on renewables AND more oil and gas exploration and exploitation. The latter produces economic benefit that can support the switch to renewables; the former is the future for energy consumption. People who think the debate is an either/or issue are missing the point. Sadly, policymakers seem to be blinkered and are happy to sacrifice economic benefit unnecessarily. Not a problem – we'll just import everything and export nothing.

1

MakoSmiler Mar 31, 2026

What do military leaders know about oil? The global supply chain doesn’t concern us if whe’re drilling for ourselves. wtf is this “news”?

0

More drilling in North Sea ‘not the answer’ for UK energy security, say former military leaders | Oil

💬 Send a Message

26 Comments