Kenneth Glad
What once looked like a domestic solution is now being tested against a far more unstable global backdrop.
Tensions tied to the Iran-linked conflict have rattled energy markets, forcing governments to confront an uncomfortable question: how secure are their fuel supplies in reality? In the UK, that uncertainty has sharpened the political fight over new North Sea drilling.
In comments reported by The Guardian, International Energy Agency chief Fatih Birol challenged the idea that expanding North Sea output would offer meaningful protection. Projects such as Jackdaw and Rosebank have been promoted as strategic assets, but their real-world impact appears limited.
“It is up to the government, but these fields would not change much for the UK’s energy security, nor would they change the price of oil and gas. They would not make any significant difference to this crisis.”
New exploration, he suggested, is even harder to justify. Long development timelines mean any additional supply would arrive well after current pressures have eased, leaving the UK exposed to global pricing regardless.
Fragile system exposed
The disruption linked to Iran and the Strait of Hormuz has done more than tighten supply. It has exposed just how concentrated and vulnerable the global energy system remains.
Birol pointed to a shift already under way in government thinking: “Their perception of risk and reliability will change. Governments will review their energy strategies. There will be a significant boost to renewables and nuclear power and a further shift towards a more electrified future.”
His conclusion was blunt. “The vase is broken, the damage is done – it will be very difficult to put the pieces back together. This will have permanent consequences for the global energy markets for years to come.”
A single chokepoint disrupting flows on this scale has raised wider concerns, rippling into sectors from food production to high-tech manufacturing.
A different trajectory
Many energy economists now draw comparisons with the oil shocks of the 1970s, but with one crucial difference: viable alternatives exist at scale. That changes the direction of travel. Instead of reinforcing fossil fuel dependence, this crisis may accelerate its decline.
Birol framed renewable investment as the safest path forward, saying: “I never heard that anybody ever regretted” such spending, and adding: “I don’t see any downsides for renewable energy.”
In the UK, that argument is gaining traction among policy specialists. Ed Matthew of E3G said: “The UK’s fossil fuel reserves have been depleted by 90% and will do nothing to bring down bills.” Tessa Khan of Uplift warned that further drilling risks locking the country into “a volatile and increasingly outdated fossil fuel system.”
With governments preparing for international talks on moving away from fossil fuels, this moment is beginning to look less like a temporary shock and more like a pivot point for the global energy system.
Source: The Guardian
