November 26, 2025

expert reaction to expected government North Sea Strategy

Scientists comment on the Government’s North Sea Strategy. 

Dr Anupama Sen, Head of Policy Engagement at the Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, said:

“Maintaining the course on net zero is the safest way to secure Britain’s long-term economic prosperity and  security, while delivering jobs and investment. Our 2024 analysis set out six key climate tests that any new North Sea oil & gas licensing should pass if it is going to be truly net zero. As things stand, the decision to allow extraction in existing or adjacent fields, without any clear plans to capture and permanently store the additional carbon emissions, means the Government’s North Sea transition plan would fail one of our six tests. 

“Regardless, while new drilling may bring limited short term economic benefits for the economy, it is unlikely to reduce people’s energy bills by any significant margin because the oil and gas extracted will be sold to the markets and sold back to consumers at the current price of the day. Our new policy brief released today shows the best way to help people struggling with bills while the grid is being upgraded is to implement a social tariff to even out electricity costs across the country and provide support where it is needed most.”

Dr Kabari Sam, Senior Lecturer & Researcher in Environmental Systems at the University of Portsmouth, said:

“It is understandable but nearly unjustifiable to liberalise extraction licence in the North Sea. This in my opinion is to ramp up economic resources through additional tax income, extend domestic oil and gas production thereby reducing reliance on imports. Also, with Norway and other countries expanding drilling in the North Sea, the UK might want to increase intensity for global competitiveness. 

“However, it poses eminent danger to the UK’s net zero goal policy. This would lead to expanded exploration and extraction of fossil fuel on the North Sea with disproportionate impact on ecosystem and their dependents. The UK risks slowing progress toward net zero by 2050 and may draw criticism from environmental groups and scientists. The UK has a global reputation for leading a paradigm shift to net zero and this singular act might jeopardise that reputation in the global community.”

Prof Jon Gluyas, Ørsted/Ikon Chair in Geoenergy, Carbon Capture & Storage, Durham University, said:

“The UK oil and gas industry is dying and tens of thousands of jobs have been lost in recent years.  Exploration opportunities are slim, finds likely to be small and take years to come in stream.  Relaxation of restrictions will neither assist growth nor increase job numbers and is likely to be perceived as abandoning net zero goals. 

“Despite this apparent doom, the UK can still benefit massively from geoenergy derived from the North Sea and the UK land area.  It would secure and grow job numbers, massively improve UK energy security, retain the knowhow and skills base developed by the oil and gas industry over the past 60 years, and deliver net zero and better.  This is not a daydream!  There are massive opportunities to develop geothermal energy using our accumulated skills and knowledge, store carbon (dioxide) in the subsurface permanently, store hydrogen for later use and even produce the existing old fields more efficiently at net zero (on average less than half the oil has been produced from existing fields and around 70% of gas from existing fields).  Moreover, in some instances it may be possible to convert stored CO2 accumulations into thermosiphon driven power plants.  This plus using carbon dioxide to enhance oil and gas recovery would make carbon dioxide a commodity compared with its present status as a waste product.

“To do this requires a coherent energy plan, commitment and early stage investment.  All of the technologies are proven.

“Relaxation of exploration rules must also ensure that any new fossil fuels are offset by carbon injection and that the learnings from continued drilling are explicitly applied to improve our skills in developing geothermal energy, energy geostorage and CCS.”

Declared interests

Kabari Sam: “None”

Jon Glyuas: “I am employed by Durham University and consult on energy transition matters and projects via a variety of other commercial organisations.  I am President of The Geological Society.  I am a founder of the National Geothermal Centre which is neither funded by the petroleum industry nor by central government.”

Anupama Sen: “No conflicts to declare”