Calling it “energy” makes it sound almost noble. Just say oil and gas reserves.
Let us not forget Britain drained the North Sea reserves in the short span since WWII, and all of that was burned to build an infrastructure that now decays, demanding generational renewal.
Exploiting reserves is not a bold strategy for independence, it steals from future generations and times of true crisis.
North Sea oil was mostly developed in the seventies (a bit earlier for exploration etc), and the "West of Shetland" field is barely touched, nor the stuff west of Glasgow due to Faslane nuclear base, supposedly. There was little exploitation of North Sea oil in the late forties and early fifties. There is considerable opposition to development now.
Most of the money went to London. Most of the oil was in Scottish waters but the money left Scotland, and Aberdeen does not seem to be future proofed.
What a waste.
Calling it “energy” makes it sound almost noble. Just say oil and gas reserves.
Let us not forget Britain drained the North Sea reserves in the short span since WWII, and all of that was burned to build an infrastructure that now decays, demanding generational renewal.
Exploiting reserves is not a bold strategy for independence, it steals from future generations and times of true crisis.
Adam Tooze has a good talk called "Electrostates, Petrostates and the New Cold War"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLnxzkiB-GI
North Sea oil was mostly developed in the seventies (a bit earlier for exploration etc), and the "West of Shetland" field is barely touched, nor the stuff west of Glasgow due to Faslane nuclear base, supposedly. There was little exploitation of North Sea oil in the late forties and early fifties. There is considerable opposition to development now.
Most of the money went to London. Most of the oil was in Scottish waters but the money left Scotland, and Aberdeen does not seem to be future proofed.
“Impious hands rifled the bowels of their mother Earth for treasures better hid” - Milton, Paradise Lost