17th June 2026
As the UK continues its drive towards net zero, one of our closest neighbours is taking a rather different approach.
Norway has announced plans to extend the life of one of its major North Sea oil fields, arguing that Europe will continue to need oil and gas for many years to come. At the same time, Norway remains one of the world's biggest investors in renewable energy and is pressing ahead with offshore wind, carbon capture and other low-carbon technologies.
It raises an important question.
Should the UK also continue developing parts of the North Sea while accelerating investment in renewable energy, or is it right to discourage further oil and gas development?
It is not simply a choice between oil and wind
The debate is often presented as though Britain must choose between fossil fuels and renewable energy.
The reality is much more complicated.
Even the most optimistic forecasts suggest the UK will continue using oil and gas for many years. They are needed not only for transport but also for aviation, shipping, chemicals, plastics, manufacturing and, for millions of homes, heating.
If demand continues during the transition, the question becomes:
Is it better to produce more of our own energy or import increasing amounts from overseas?
The Norwegian approach
Norway's policy is based on a relatively straightforward argument.
Continue producing oil and gas while there is demand, but use the revenues to help finance the transition to a lower-carbon economy.
Oil income has helped build one of the world's largest sovereign wealth funds while also supporting investment in new energy industries.
Norway does not appear to see a contradiction between producing oil today and investing heavily in the technologies of tomorrow.
The UK's different approach
The UK Government has signalled that the future lies firmly with renewable energy.
Investment is being encouraged in:
offshore wind
carbon capture
hydrogen
nuclear power
electricity storage
grid improvements
These are all essential if Britain is to reduce emissions and improve long-term energy security.
However, critics argue that reducing investment in North Sea oil and gas before alternative industries have fully matured risks creating an economic gap.
The Aberdeen question
Perhaps nowhere illustrates this better than Aberdeen and the north-east of Scotland.
For decades the city has been Europe's oil and gas capital, developing a highly skilled workforce of engineers, technicians, offshore specialists and supply-chain businesses.
Many of these skills are directly transferable to offshore wind, floating wind, marine engineering and carbon capture.
The difficulty is timing.
Many people working in the industry argue that investment in traditional oil and gas has fallen faster than replacement jobs have been created.
As a result:
experienced workers are leaving the industry
some are moving overseas to countries where oil investment continues
companies are reducing activity
apprentices face greater uncertainty
local businesses lose experienced staff and valuable contracts
If those skilled workers leave permanently, Britain risks losing expertise that will also be needed for building future renewable energy projects.
A transition needs people as well as technology
Governments often talk about a "just transition."
For many workers, that means more than a slogan.
A successful transition requires:
existing jobs to remain viable while new industries expand
retraining opportunities
confidence for businesses to invest
clear long-term government policy
If the gap between declining oil investment and growing renewable industries becomes too large, communities can suffer significant economic damage.
Could the UK do both?
Perhaps the real question is not whether Britain should choose oil or renewables.
Instead, it is whether we can manage both during the transition.
A balanced strategy might include:
continued development of economically viable North Sea fields
rapid expansion of offshore wind
greater investment in tidal energy, particularly around Scotland's coastline
new pumped-storage hydro schemes
improved electricity grids
battery storage
support for hydrogen and carbon capture
In other words, continue reducing emissions while maintaining energy security and protecting skilled employment.
Learning from history
Britain has faced major industrial transitions before.
The move from coal to oil, the decline of heavy manufacturing and the growth of the digital economy all created winners and losers.
One lesson stands out.
Transitions work best when the new industries are established before the old ones disappear.
If established industries decline too quickly, skills are lost, communities suffer and rebuilding can take decades.
The challenge ahead
There is broad agreement that the UK must reduce carbon emissions.
There is much less agreement about how quickly traditional energy industries should decline while new industries develop.
The goal should surely be to avoid replacing dependence on imported fossil fuels with dependence on imported renewable technology or imported energy.
Britain already possesses world-class offshore engineering expertise.
The challenge is ensuring those skills are retained and transferred rather than lost.
Norway's decision to extend oil production is unlikely to change the global direction of travel towards cleaner energy.
What it does highlight is a different philosophy.
Rather than ending one industry before another is fully established, Norway is attempting to use today's energy revenues to help build tomorrow's economy.
Whether that proves to be the better model remains to be seen.
For the UK, the real challenge may not be choosing between oil and renewables at all.
It may be managing the transition well enough to protect jobs, maintain energy security and ensure that the skilled workforce which powered Britain's offshore energy industry is still here to build the next generation of clean energy projects.
The Norwegians despite having a big stake in oil are trying to slow down its decline while they invest more in renewables.
The UK should consider carefully in view of what has happened in Hormuz about doing likewise.