Energy experts have criticised former British prime minister Tony Blair’s call for greater oil and gas extraction, arguing that moving away from the country’s net zero targets would increase long-term economic and climate risks.

The criticism followed an essay by Blair in which he argued that the United Kingdom should use its remaining oil and gas reserves and reconsider its target of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

Blair’s position has renewed debate over the future of the UK’s energy policy, particularly as the country faces rising concerns over energy security, extreme weather and the cost of living.Energy specialists said expanding fossil fuel production would not provide a reliable solution to energy challenges and could expose households and businesses to continued volatility in international fuel markets.

Ed Matthew, UK programme director at the climate thinktank E3G, described Blair’s intervention as out of step with current energy and environmental pressures.Matthew said recent heat records and international energy disruptions demonstrated the risks associated with continued dependence on fossil fuels.

He argued that renewable energy offered a more stable alternative because operating costs were low once infrastructure was built.Blair’s comments came as the UK recorded periods of unusually high temperatures and increased solar power generation. Scientists have linked rising temperatures and more frequent heat extremes to climate change driven largely by greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels.

Medical professionals warned that extreme heat could increase health risks, particularly for older people and young children. Farmers also reported pressure on livestock and crops, with economic losses expected to exceed hundreds of millions of pounds.The debate has centred on whether the UK should prioritise domestic fossil fuel extraction or accelerate investment in renewable energy and low-carbon technologies.

Supporters of increased oil and gas production argue that domestic resources could improve energy independence and reduce reliance on imported fuels. Critics say fossil fuel markets remain globally connected and that new extraction would not shield consumers from international price changes.

The UK has committed to reaching net zero emissions by 2050, a target that requires substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions across electricity generation, transport, industry and buildings.Experts opposing Blair’s proposal said abandoning the target could weaken investment certainty for clean energy industries and slow the development of technologies needed for the transition.

Renewable energy capacity has expanded in recent years, with falling costs making technologies such as solar and wind increasingly competitive. However, the transition also requires improvements in energy storage, grid infrastructure and industrial adaptation.

Blair has previously questioned aspects of current climate policy and argued that energy strategies should focus more heavily on technological development and economic competitiveness.His latest comments have drawn attention because they come during a period of heightened global energy uncertainty.

International conflicts and supply disruptions have contributed to fluctuations in oil and gas prices, reinforcing arguments on both sides of the energy debate.Climate policy experts said the central challenge for governments was balancing energy reliability, affordability and emissions reduction.

They argued that investment decisions made now would influence the UK’s energy system for decades, with consequences for both economic resilience and climate risks.

The UK government has said expanding oil and gas drilling in the North Sea would increase exposure to volatile global energy markets, as political divisions intensify over the country’s long-term energy strategy.

Energy secretary Ed Miliband told Labour MPs that continued reliance on fossil fuels leaves the UK vulnerable to external price shocks. He argued that recent geopolitical tensions, including the ongoing conflict involving the United States and Iran, have reinforced the risks associated with global gas markets.

Miliband said the central lesson from recent crises was that countries dependent on fossil fuel imports remain “price takers not price makers,” and therefore exposed to fluctuations beyond their control. He added that accelerating the transition to domestically generated clean power is essential for achieving what he described as “energy sovereignty” and strengthening national security.

Energy minister Michael Shanks echoed this position, stating that the UK must reduce its exposure to fossil fuels to prevent households from bearing the cost of international disruptions. He said previous price shocks had already demonstrated the economic risks tied to dependence on gas markets.

The government’s stance has been challenged by opposition parties and some Labour MPs, who argue that domestic oil and gas production remains critical for energy security and economic growth.

The Conservative Party is expected to use a parliamentary debate to call for the removal of restrictions on new North Sea drilling. Its proposals include scrapping the windfall tax on oil and gas companies, lifting the ban on new exploration licences, and approving projects such as the Rosebank oil field and the Jackdaw gas field.

Shadow energy secretary Claire Coutinho said increasing domestic gas production would help meet national demand and reduce reliance on imports. She argued that failing to develop available resources during a period of supply instability would undermine energy security.Within the Labour Party, dissent has also emerged.

MP Henry Tufnell called for a reassessment of the current policy, suggesting that renewed drilling could support economic activity, reduce unemployment in industrial regions and limit the offshoring of carbon emissions. However, other Labour MPs indicated that there was limited support for reversing the party’s existing commitments.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to outline measures aimed at mitigating the impact of rising energy costs linked to geopolitical tensions. These include proposals to protect consumers from higher bills driven by disruptions in global oil and gas markets.

Reeves is also expected to introduce a framework to address potential profiteering, particularly in the retail fuel sector. The measures are intended to prevent excessive price increases in response to international events, including recent military activity involving Iran and its regional counterparts.

Miliband defended the continuation of the windfall tax on energy companies, stating that it has generated approximately £12 billion in revenue since the onset of the Russia-Ukraine war. He argued that removing the levy would primarily benefit corporate profits while reducing the government’s capacity to support households facing higher energy costs.

The government has positioned investment in clean and nuclear energy as a central component of its long-term strategy. Officials say reducing reliance on fossil fuels will help stabilise energy prices and insulate the economy from external shocks.

Reeves is expected to confirm that recommendations from the Fingleton review, aimed at accelerating nuclear power development, will be implemented through legislation. These reforms are intended to streamline project approvals and reduce delays linked to legal challenges.

The government is also considering mechanisms to provide indemnities for critical energy infrastructure projects, allowing them to proceed more quickly in the face of litigation. This approach is designed to address longstanding barriers to large-scale energy development.

According to a government spokesperson, the strategy includes £120 billion in public investment across energy infrastructure, including support for the Sizewell C nuclear plant and the development of small modular reactors in north Wales. These projects are intended to expand domestic energy capacity and reduce exposure to imported fuels.

Ministers argue that prioritising domestically controlled energy sources will enhance resilience against future crises while supporting economic stability.

The debate over North Sea drilling highlights a broader policy divide between short-term supply measures and long-term structural transition within the UK’s energy system.