Former US President Donald Trump’s whirlwind visit to Scotland in early August 2025 has ignited a fierce debate over the future of North Sea oil production, with his pointed criticisms of UK energy policy reverberating from Aberdeen’s wind-swept coastline all the way to Downing Street. Trump’s remarks, delivered with characteristic flair, have thrown the spotlight on a pivotal moment for Britain’s energy sector, as the Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer pushes forward with its ambitious transition toward renewable energy—despite mounting pressure at home and abroad.
Standing at his Turnberry golf resort, Trump described the North Sea as “a treasure chest for the United Kingdom,” lamenting, “The taxes are so high, however, that it makes no sense. They have essentially told drillers and oil companies that, ‘we don’t want you.’ Incentivise the drillers, fast. A vast fortune to be made for the UK, and far lower energy costs for the people.” According to The Standard, Trump’s call to “incentivise” domestic oil production was as much a rallying cry as a policy prescription, and it struck a nerve with industry advocates and political leaders in Scotland.
Andrew Bowie, the Conservative MP for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, seized on Trump’s comments, penning an urgent letter to Prime Minister Starmer. Bowie’s message was clear: “As president Trump has said, the UK’s ‘very high’ tax on oil and gas companies is a deterrent to investment. President Donald Trump’s remarks during your visit – calling Aberdeen the ‘oil capital of Europe’ and urging the UK to ‘bring it back’ – reflect a sentiment shared by many in the region.” Bowie called for an immediate Downing Street summit with industry leaders and the local workforce, arguing, “Oil and gas still have a vital role to play in our energy mix and economic future; British people would rather see the UK benefit from domestic exploration and drilling than import more from Norway and Qatar.”
The controversy centers on a series of sweeping policy changes introduced by the Labour government. In June 2025, Starmer’s administration tightened environmental regulations for North Sea oil and gas, requiring project approvals to include assessments of downstream emissions—the environmental impact from burning the extracted fuels, not just the extraction process itself. The UK Department for Energy Security and Net Zero explained that this move “will ensure the full effects of fossil fuel extraction on the environment are recognised in consenting decisions.” This shift means companies must now provide detailed emissions assessments for the entire lifecycle of their projects, raising the bar for regulatory approval.
The legal landscape has grown even more complex. In January 2025, a Scottish court ruled that approvals for Shell’s Jackdaw project and the Rosebank field (jointly developed by Equinor and Ithaca Energy) were unlawful, mandating a full reassessment under the new environmental guidelines. Equinor responded diplomatically: “We are currently reviewing today’s announcement. We remain committed to working closely with all relevant stakeholders to advance the Rosebank project… We welcome clarity and can confirm that we will submit a downstream end user combustion emissions assessment in full compliance with the government’s new environmental guidance.”
Perhaps most contentious of all is the Labour government’s decision to raise the tax rate on profits from oil and gas extraction to a staggering 78 percent—one of the highest rates globally. Originally introduced as a windfall tax by the previous Conservative government in 2022, Labour Chancellor Rachel Reeves has pledged to keep this rate until 2030. For industry players, the combination of stricter regulations and steep taxes has created what Offshore Energies UK describes as an “uncompetitive” environment, especially compared to opportunities overseas and in the rapidly growing sectors of offshore wind and carbon capture.
These policy changes come at a time when North Sea oil production is already in decline. Between 2023 and 2024, crude output dropped by 11 percent, averaging about 564,000 barrels per day in 2024—a far cry from the basin’s heyday in the late 1990s. New fields such as Shell’s Penguins and BP’s Murlach, set to come online in 2025 and 2026, are expected to provide only a temporary bump, insufficient to reverse the long-term downward trend. Offshore Energies UK warns that the business climate is pushing companies to delay or cancel projects, redirecting investment toward renewables or more favorable jurisdictions.
This evolving landscape has profound implications for Britain’s energy security. The UK’s gas import dependency is projected to soar from 55 percent today to 68 percent by 2030, 85 percent by 2040, and a daunting 94 percent by 2050—even if some new oilfields are approved. This growing reliance on imports raises tough questions about supply security and price volatility, especially as global competition for energy resources heats up.
Yet, for the Labour government, the rationale for these restrictions is multi-faceted. Energy Minister Ed Miliband has argued that the clean energy transition is not just about fighting climate change, but about protecting working families from the economic shocks of fossil fuel dependence. Reflecting on the 2022 energy crisis, triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Miliband said, “The argument for the clean energy transition is not just the traditional climate case but the social justice case too – it is working people who pay the greatest price for our energy insecurity.” The government frames its North Sea policy as essential for meeting the UK’s legally binding net-zero targets, fostering new green jobs, and delivering price stability for consumers.
To that end, the government has not revoked licenses granted under previous administrations, seeking a delicate balance between current energy needs and long-term climate ambitions. Starmer himself acknowledged, “Oil and gas are going to be with us for a very long time, and that’ll be part of the mix, but also wind, solar, increasingly nuclear.” The government has chosen Aberdeen—the city once dubbed Europe’s oil capital—as the headquarters for GB Energy, a state-owned company tasked with accelerating the rollout of renewables. This move signals a broader shift, as the city and region seek to reinvent themselves as leaders in the energy transition.
Internationally, the UK’s strategy has sparked diplomatic tensions, with Trump’s criticisms highlighting a deeper philosophical divide. While Trump and his supporters see continued fossil fuel development as a path to economic prosperity and lower energy costs, the Labour government and its allies argue that the future lies in renewables, with offshore wind, nuclear, and emerging technologies like green hydrogen and carbon capture at the forefront. Offshore wind, in particular, has become a British success story, with the UK boasting Europe’s largest installed capacity and ambitious plans for further expansion.
The transition, however, is not without its challenges. For workers and communities long reliant on North Sea oil and gas, the shift demands new skills, retraining, and economic diversification. Aberdeen’s transformation into an energy transition hub is emblematic of the broader adjustments facing the region and the country as a whole. Policymakers face the difficult task of ensuring that the benefits of the green transition are widely shared, and that no one is left behind.
As Britain stands at this crossroads, the debate over North Sea oil is about more than just energy policy—it’s about the nation’s economic future, its role on the global stage, and the kind of society it aspires to build. The choices made today will shape the UK’s energy landscape for decades to come, with profound consequences for jobs, climate, and the price of keeping the lights on.
With passionate arguments on all sides, the North Sea’s legacy—and its future—remain fiercely contested, as Britain navigates the choppy waters of its energy transition.
