What do US President Donald Trump, Dale Vince — a prominent former funder of Just Stop Oil — trade unions and business groups all have in common? Each has called on Britain to optimise its North Sea fossil fuel reserves. I find myself increasingly in agreement. This week, I outline why.

In pursuit of net zero greenhouse emissions, successive UK governments have crimped production and investment in the basin. Britain now charges a steep 78 per cent energy profits levy and has banned the issuance of new exploration licences.

The conflict in the Middle East reiterates the importance of slashing dependence on oil and gas. The reality, however, is that even under the most optimistic green transition scenarios, they will remain an important part of Britain’s energy mix.

The independent Climate Change Committee estimates the UK will require between 13bn and 15bn barrels of oil and gas equivalent until 2050, the country’s target net zero date. Less polluting natural gas, in particular, will be a vital “bridge fuel” as the clean energy network is developed. Sectors that provide components for the green transition, such as steel, mining and chemicals, will need it too.

Indeed, today the UK uses gas to meet around one-third of its energy consumption, more than 40 per cent of which is produced domestically. The rest is imported by pipe from Norway — which continues to drill fruitfully in the North Sea, near UK waters — or as liquefied natural gas (LNG), primarily from the US and Qatar.

The question, then, is whether the UK produces more of the gas it needs or imports it. The case for greater domestic sourcing is strong.

For starters, it would be the greener option. The average carbon intensity of imported LNG — including liquefaction and transportation — is almost four times that of UK natural gas production, finds the North Sea Transition Authority, a public body. Once combusted, LNG emissions are still 17 per cent higher. Greater domestic supply would reduce the global carbon footprint of the gas the UK consumes.

North Sea gas resources can also be used to support the shift to wind power and carbon capture. But the accelerated decline in basin activities is sapping green assets such as ports, subsea storage reservoirs and offshore construction skills before they can be repurposed. (UK firms in the sector are reporting a significant loss of talent to foreign projects.)

Oil and gas operations in the North Sea support around 200,000 workers, according to British Chambers of Commerce research. Trade unions say employment opportunities are shrinking much faster than new energy sector posts are arising. Reviving gas production would improve the ability to transition workforces into emerging renewable industries. This would also help avoid a political backlash — similar to the demise of coal and manufacturing — especially in north-east England and Scotland. As it is, Britons are growing sceptical of the green transition.

Next, the sector can boost tax revenue. It has contributed over £400bn in production taxes since the late 1960s and is expected to contribute a further £19bn in receipts until 2030. Enabling more North Sea activity would raise additional income that can be reinvested in the clean energy shift or used for emergency measures during future price shocks.

“If prices go through the roof, the government gets a chunk of tax revenue that it can use to cover some of the extra energy costs we would all face,” wrote Tim Leunig, chief economist at innovation agency Nesta, in a recent article. “In effect, being a producer as well as a consumer is a form of insurance.”

Finally, the Iran war underscores the importance of domestic energy stocks. Indeed, another reason to heed Trump’s advice to “open up the North Sea” is, well, to protect Britain from the US and other nations that might exploit its energy dependence. Even small gains in UK gas reserves would weaken energy exporters’ leverage.

Domestic production can also be used to build a greater gas store against future shocks. (Britain currently has gas storage capacity of just 12 days.) There is now growing realisation that fossil fuel exports through the Strait of Hormuz could be disrupted for a long time. Fierce competition for LNG, particularly from fast-growing Asian nations, also makes reliance on gas imports costly and volatile.

North Sea gas won’t insulate Britain from higher bills, as it would still trade at global prices. Still, there are some offsetting cost advantages, beyond higher tax revenues, says Kathryn Porter, a UK-based independent energy consultant.

“By displacing LNG we avoid costs associated with liquefaction, shipping and regasification,” she said. “If it is cheaper to produce our own oil and gas than to import it, then we should, irrespective of how soon the basin may run out.”

What’s feasible? The North Sea has passed its heyday. But NSTA estimates up to 3.3bn barrels of oil equivalent in recoverable and commerical gas reserves could remain. It projects a further undiscovered oil and gas potential of about 15.8bn barrels of oil equivalent. (1bn barrels of oil equivalent is enough to meet roughly 15 months of Britain’s oil and gas demand, estimates Offshore Energies UK, a trade body.)

Clearly, Britain is not going to drill its way to energy autarky. But independent analysis commissioned by OEUK from the Westwood Global Energy Group estimates the industry could provide 7.5bn barrels of oil and gas equivalent between now and 2050 — half the UK’s needs under the CCC’s net zero scenario. This would require a less stringent tax regime, more licensing and regulatory stability. The industry reckons these measures could unlock £385bn in economic value.

Number-crunching by the FT’s Lex column also shows that a revitalised oil and gas sector could viably provide energy for 40 per cent of the country’s needs in the 2030s.

So even with modest reserves remaining, there is logic in sweating the declining asset. UK-produced gas can facilitate a stabler green transition by providing some revenue, jobs and supply security at home while preserving valuable economic infrastructure and political capital. Rather than outsourcing emissions elsewhere via imports, utilising the North Sea also sets a more credible international example on how to manage the shift to renewables.

In turn, a pragmatic response to Britain’s second energy shock in four years would be to signal stronger commitment to net zero goals by doubling down on renewable, nuclear, grid and storage investments, while also easing the energy profits levy and lifting the moratorium on gas exploration.

The national debate over the basin has been binary; the green transition and expanded gas production are often cast as opposites. Yet, in reality, letting the North Sea economy wither too quickly risks slowing Britain’s path to net zero.

Where do you stand? Send your thoughts in the comments, to freelunch@ft.com or via X @tejparikh90.

Food for thought

This article in Nature highlights how the AI arms race between teachers and students is hotting up.

Free Lunch on Sunday is edited by Harvey Nriapia