{"id":3560,"date":"2026-05-01T10:01:15","date_gmt":"2026-05-01T08:01:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/?p=3560"},"modified":"2026-05-01T11:01:56","modified_gmt":"2026-05-01T09:01:56","slug":"factcheck-nine-false-or-misleading-myths-about-north-sea-oil-and-gas-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/en\/2026\/05\/01\/factcheck-nine-false-or-misleading-myths-about-north-sea-oil-and-gas-3\/","title":{"rendered":"Factcheck: Nine false or misleading myths about North Sea oil and gas. #3"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

We are facing surging oil prices and rising costs for fertilisers, food and other commodities. Trump\u2019s reckless actions in Iran are pushing the global economy to the brink of an economic crisis. Many are seizing the opportunity to start drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea. This Carbon Brief paper debunks the myths surrounding drilling in the North Sea.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This paper appeared first in Carbon Brief<\/a> on 25 March 2026 and was written by Daisy Dunne, Josh Gabbatiss, Molly Lempriere and Simon Evans. This text has been republished here under a CC license<\/a>. We will publish it in five parts. Read part 1 here<\/a>. (Note: Most of these fact-checks also apply to other countries around the North Sea, such as Germany and the Netherlands.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

MISLEADING: \u2018The head honchos of the green lobby say we should drill\u2019<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Numerous media outlets have picked up on supportive comments from what the Daily Telegraph<\/a> has called \u201cnet zero\u2019s champions<\/a>\u201d, backing the use of North Sea oil and gas. Writing in the Daily Telegraph<\/a>, shadow energy secretary Claire Coutinho said: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cFrom the wind lobbyists at RenewableUK to the chair of Great British Energy (Miliband\u2019s \u2018clean energy\u2019 propaganda outfit), the head honchos of the green lobby say we should drill.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This point was similarly made in an editorial in the Sun<\/a>, which stated that \u201cOctopus energy chief Greg Jackson\u2026and even the head of RenewableUK have called for North Sea reserves to be reopened urgently\u201d. These comments were in reference to a handful of specific interventions that, in reality, were far more nuanced than simply calling for more drilling. Indeed, some of the so-called \u201cnet-zero champions\u201d have clarified that they are not calling for new licenses at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the Daily Telegraph<\/a>, Tara Singh, chief executive of RenewableUK, wrote that \u201cit is entirely sensible to support continued domestic oil and gas production in the North Sea\u201d. Similarly, Jackson wrote in the Daily Telegraph<\/a> that \u201cwe should use what\u2019s available from the North Sea\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Daily Telegraph published<\/a> news stories<\/a> to accompany both of these articles with the headlines \u201cwind industry chief urges Miliband to restart North Sea drilling\u201d and \u201cMiliband must reopen the North Sea, Octopus boss says\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On LinkedIn<\/a>, Juergen Maier, chair of the government\u2019s publicly owned, clean-energy company Great British Energy, set out several arguments in favour of more North Sea production. These included slowing job losses in the region, the lower carbon intensity of North Sea oil and gas compared with imports and extra production supporting tax revenues. His comments were picked up by the Financial Times<\/a> and the Daily Telegraph<\/a>, with the latter saying the comments from \u201cMiliband\u2019s clean-energy tsar\u201d will \u201craise eyebrows\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, neither Singh, Jackson nor Maier called for new oil and gas licences \u2013 and they stressed that North Sea oil and gas will not bring down energy bills. In fact, their position is similar to that of the UK government, which sees<\/a> domestic fossil fuels playing an \u201cimportant and valuable role\u201d into the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Singh wrote: \u201cBeing serious about the UK\u2019s important role in gas also means being honest about its limitations. The North Sea is a mature basin, not a limitless national asset.\u201d She added that politicians should not imply that more domestic drilling would bring down energy bills, as \u201cit will not\u201d. Instead, she wrote that new renewable generation offers \u201cbetter value\u201d for consumers, both when gas prices are normal and at \u201ccrisis levels\u201d. (See:\u00a0FALSE: \u201cReopening the North Sea would lower bills.\u201d<\/a>)\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Expanding on her piece on Twitter<\/a>, Singh clarified \u201cwe don\u2019t represent the [oil and gas] sector and we\u2019re not arguing for or against new licences\u201d, adding: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cBefore anyone gets too excited: I\u2019m calling for a depoliticised conversation about energy in the UK \u2013 not an overhaul of policy to favour oil and gas.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\"Tara<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In his comment for the Daily Telegraph, Jackson added<\/a>: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWe\u2019re kidding ourselves if we think this is a panacea \u2013 it\u2019s 20 years since the North Sea could meet all our needs \u2013 we\u2019ve depleted the most abundant reserves and the remainder will be less productive and more expensive. But it makes sense to use what we have whilst we\u2019re so dependent on gas.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

His article, titled \u201cMy plan to safeguard Britain\u2019s energy supplies\u201d, only briefly mentioned the North Sea and stressed the importance of \u201creduc[ing] our dependency on gas\u201d. He continued to set out other potential steps for increasing energy security and bringing down bills, including building nuclear efficiently, cutting energy waste, reforming the electricity market, rolling out domestic renewable generation and breaking the link between gas and electricity<\/a>that \u201clets global chaos dictate our prices\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a follow-up interview with Jackson in the Independent<\/a>, which emphasised these alternatives, he added that the UK was \u201cdeluding\u201d itself if it thinks it can \u201cget enough out of the North Sea and in a market where the price is set internationally\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For his part, Maier clarified<\/a> on LinkedIn that he was a supporter of a \u201c managed energy transition\u201d making use of all available energy sources, but adding that this includes \u201cthe end game being mostly renewable energy generation\u201d. He also explicitly rejected the notion that more North Sea oil and gas would bring down bills, noting: \u201cIt doesn\u2019t; indeed, energy costs are rising at this very moment because of fossil fuels.\u201d Again, this mirrors the view expressed by government ministers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maier also subsequently pushed back against the media coverage of his original comments, writing in a follow-up post on LinkedIn<\/a> that the claim he was pressuring Miliband over North Sea drilling was \u201cwrong\u201d and that he is \u201cfully supportive of the government position\u201d. He added: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cI see this as consistent with an \u2018all energy\u2019 approach to the transition. That the end game is renewables and that we need to give supply chain companies enough time to transition. I have said this numerous times in many speeches and posts here.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

FALSE: \u2018The UK is the only country in the world banning new oil and gas licenses\u2019<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

On LinkedIn<\/a>, Conservative politician and shadow energy secretary Claire Coutinho claimed that the \u201cUK is the only country in the world banning new oil and gas licenses\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Her comment was made in response to a post about Denmark, which, in 2020, made a landmark decision<\/a> to stop issuing new oil and gas licences and end all fossil-fuel extraction by 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The post noted that Denmark is now considering<\/a> \u201cextending one or more production licenses\u201d in the Danish North Sea, in response to the energy crisis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, as Coutinho surely knows, this is not the same as issuing new licences \u2013 and is more comparable to Labour\u2019s move to allow some additional \u201ctieback<\/a>\u201d drilling at existing fields, announced<\/a> in 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Denmark and the UK are not the only countries to end new oil and gas licences. Other nations to do so include Ireland<\/a>, France<\/a>, Portugal<\/a> and Colombia<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In fact, there is an international coalition of nations that have pledged to end new oil and gas production, known as the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance<\/a>(BOGA).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This group is helping to convene the first meeting<\/a> of nations that want to take immediate action to phase out fossil fuels, which is taking place in Santa Marta, Colombia, in April. Around 40-80 nations<\/a> are expected to attend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Carbon Brief understands that the UK will have a senior representative at the conference. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite showing its support<\/a> for BOGA, the UK is currently not a member. A senior official once told Carbon Brief that this is because the UK does not currently meet the required end date for stopping all fossil-fuel production.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

We are facing surging oil prices and rising costs for fertilisers, food and other commodities. Trump\u2019s reckless actions in Iran are pushing the global economy to the brink of an economic crisis. Many are seizing the opportunity to start drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea. This Carbon Brief paper debunks the myths … Lees verder<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"iawp_total_views":3,"footnotes":""},"categories":[106],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3560","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-untold-news-that-matters"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3560","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3560"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3560\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3584,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3560\/revisions\/3584"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3560"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3560"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3560"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}