Trump Urges Starmer to Abandon Wind Power in Favor of North Sea Oil

[Social Media]

 

Trump Urges Starmer to Abandon Wind Power in Favor of North Sea Oil

 

Donald Trump has called on UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to ditch his government’s support for wind energy and instead focus on ramping up fossil fuel extraction in the North Sea. In a typically outspoken post on his TruthSocial platform, the U.S. president suggested that the United Kingdom should move away from what he described as “costly and unsightly windmills” and embrace offshore oil drilling to reduce its energy bills.

 

“Our negotiated deal with the United Kingdom is working out well for all,” Trump wrote, referring to the recently finalized trade agreement between the two countries. “I strongly recommend to them, however, that in order to get their energy costs down, they stop with the costly and unsightly windmills, and incentivize modernized drilling in the North Sea, where large amounts of oil lay waiting to be taken.”

 

Trump claimed that there is “a century of drilling left” and proposed Aberdeen as a strategic hub for this renewed fossil fuel effort. He also took aim at the UK’s existing tax system, saying it discourages drilling activity. “The old fashioned tax system disincentivizes drilling, rather than the opposite. UK’s Energy Costs would go WAY DOWN, and fast!” he added.

 

His comments come at a time when the UK is seeing some relief in energy prices. Ofgem, the UK’s energy regulator, recently announced a 7 percent decrease in household energy bills starting in July. This means the average annual bill will drop by £129 to £1,720.

 

Despite the decrease, energy costs remain substantially higher than in previous years. Ofgem noted that the level of bills in July will still be £152 more than during the same period last year. The regulator has also encouraged consumers to shop around, with some households potentially saving up to £200 a year by switching to cheaper tariffs.

 

Trump’s comments are likely to stir political debate in the UK, where energy policy is a key part of the Labour government’s strategy to transition toward net-zero emissions. Starmer’s administration has supported a mix of renewable energy sources, including wind and solar, as part of its broader climate agenda. However, with energy prices remaining high and North Sea reserves still substantial, Trump’s remarks may resonate with those advocating for greater energy independence and lower costs.

 

As the energy conversation continues, Trump’s remarks have injected a provocative new angle, challenging the UK's green ambitions with a blunt call to return to fossil fuels.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-05-24

 

 

[FlorC]

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

Trump’s remarks have injected a provocative new angle, challenging the UK's green ambitions with a blunt call to return to fossil fuels.

aka a return to reality.

[Chomper Higgot]

Trump doing his best to encourage patriotic Brits to back their own government against interference from foreign despot.

 

 

[JonnyF]

Trump is correct of course.

 

But us Brits will have to wait until the next election to get a government brpadly in line with the GOP.

 

It's just a case of how much damage Labour can inflict before then.

[daveAustin]

Sort your own backyard out, Donald. 

[JonnyF]

12 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

Sort your own backyard out, Donald. 

 

That's what he's doing.

 

While smoking a cigar and casually pointing out all the filthy garbage on ours. 

[Chomper Higgot]

“Our negotiated deal with the United Kingdom is working out well for all,” Trump wrote, referring to the recently finalized trade agreement between the two countries. “I strongly recommend to them, however, that in order to get their energy costs down, they stop with the costly and unsightly windmills, and incentivize modernized drilling in the North Sea, where large amounts of oil lay waiting to be taken.”

 

Nice deal you have here, it would be a shame if you didn’t do something I want you to do that causes me to reconsider our nice deal.

[rudi49jr]

Now imagine if Starmer (or any other European leader) would urge Trump to  abandon oil in favor of wind power. Trump and MAGA would all get their panties in a bunch and scream blue murder, for sure.

Who died and made Trump king of the universe?

[supersomchai]

Dogma over economics

wind power is cheaper and less polluting

Trump is an idiot!

[Lacessit]

Remember Trump offering the fossil fuel industry carte blanche if they would donate $1 billion to his re-election?

 

He's in Big Oil's pocket.

[Magictoad]

Trump is right about this. Britain's net zero policy is lunacy given that the UK only produces less than 1% of the world's pollution. So it's merely a vainglorious, waste of time and money organised by Starmer  & MAD Milliband his acolytes and performing seal.

[WDSmart]

ALL energy technologies create more pollution in their life cycle than usable energy, but windmills are certainly less polluting than burning oil.

[PETERTHEEATER]

Just make sure there is enough oil to lubricate the wind turbine bearings.......

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, WDSmart said:

ALL energy technologies create more pollution in their life cycle than usable energy, but windmills are certainly less polluting than burning oil.

It's whether the energy generated during the life cycle is more than the energy used to create the energy harvester.

 

In that respect, solar is superior to wind energy. Solar has no moving parts, wind turbines do.

 

However, the UK does not get enough sun for solar to be viable.

[newbee2022]

Do you need more proof to know that Donnie got some intellectual problems?

He's the most stupid leader in the world.....as 40% of American voters, who follow him

[cjinchiangrai]

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Remember Trump offering the fossil fuel industry carte blanche if they would donate $1 billion to his re-election?

 

He's in Big Oil's pocket.

Worse, the UK would need to buy energy from Putin. Between that and dismantling the wind towers next to the Scottish golf course, Trump would be thrilled. 

[WDSmart]

10 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

It's whether the energy generated during the life cycle is more than the energy used to create the energy harvester.

 

In that respect, solar is superior to wind energy. Solar has no moving parts, wind turbines do.

 

However, the UK does not get enough sun for solar to be viable.

You are absolutely correct in the first two sentences you have written above! 🖕 

And, I would ask what you mean by "viable" in your last sentence, because  ALL energy harvesting technologies (solar, wind, tidal, fossil fuel, nuclear, etc.) create more pollution during their life cycle than the usable energy they harvest and make available to us. That was my point. It takes more power to create, run, maintain, and eventually dispose of all energy harvesting technologies than the usable energy they ever produce in their lifetime.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, WDSmart said:

You are absolutely correct in the first two sentences you have written above! 🖕 

And, I would ask what you mean by "viable" in your last sentence, because  ALL energy harvesting technologies (solar, wind, tidal, fossil fuel, nuclear, etc.) create more pollution during their life cycle than the usable energy they harvest and make available to us. That was my point. It takes more power to create, run, maintain, and eventually dispose of all energy harvesting technologies than the usable energy they ever produce in their lifetime.

I can accept the carbon footprint of a wind turbine is larger than the carbon it saves.

 

I would like to see a credible link that verifies your assertion with respect to solar panels.

 

I asked AI how many joules it took to manufacture a solar panel, and how many joules it then generated in its lifetime.

 

"While it takes a significant amount of energy to manufacture a solar panel (around 6.84×109 J for a single panel), the energy it generates over its lifetime is considerably higher (approximately 5.91×1010 J for a single 400W panel over 25 years in a moderate sun location).

This means that a solar panel typically generates many times more energy than was used to create it, leading to a positive "energy payback time" (the time it takes for a solar panel to generate the amount of energy that went into its production), which is generally a few years."

[proton]

4 hours ago, supersomchai said:

Dogma over economics

wind power is cheaper and less polluting

Trump is an idiot!

 

They dont work and are not cost effective, pollute the landscape and are garbage after 20 years

[proton]

3 hours ago, Magictoad said:

Trump is right about this. Britain's net zero policy is lunacy given that the UK only produces less than 1% of the world's pollution. So it's merely a vainglorious, waste of time and money organised by Starmer  & MAD Milliband his acolytes and performing seal.

 

if the uk disappeared tomorrow it would have no effect on the climate

[Surasak]

While SILLY Milliband has his fingers in the pie, Trump might just as well whistle into the wind.

13 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

Trump Urges Starmer to Abandon Wind Power in Favor of North Sea Oil

 

Donald Trump has called on UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to ditch his government’s support for wind energy and instead focus on ramping up fossil fuel extraction in the North Sea. In a typically outspoken post on his TruthSocial platform, the U.S. president suggested that the United Kingdom should move away from what he described as “costly and unsightly windmills” and embrace offshore oil drilling to reduce its energy bills.

 

“Our negotiated deal with the United Kingdom is working out well for all,” Trump wrote, referring to the recently finalized trade agreement between the two countries. “I strongly recommend to them, however, that in order to get their energy costs down, they stop with the costly and unsightly windmills, and incentivize modernized drilling in the North Sea, where large amounts of oil lay waiting to be taken.”

 

Trump claimed that there is “a century of drilling left” and proposed Aberdeen as a strategic hub for this renewed fossil fuel effort. He also took aim at the UK’s existing tax system, saying it discourages drilling activity. “The old fashioned tax system disincentivizes drilling, rather than the opposite. UK’s Energy Costs would go WAY DOWN, and fast!” he added.

 

His comments come at a time when the UK is seeing some relief in energy prices. Ofgem, the UK’s energy regulator, recently announced a 7 percent decrease in household energy bills starting in July. This means the average annual bill will drop by £129 to £1,720.

 

Despite the decrease, energy costs remain substantially higher than in previous years. Ofgem noted that the level of bills in July will still be £152 more than during the same period last year. The regulator has also encouraged consumers to shop around, with some households potentially saving up to £200 a year by switching to cheaper tariffs.

 

Trump’s comments are likely to stir political debate in the UK, where energy policy is a key part of the Labour government’s strategy to transition toward net-zero emissions. Starmer’s administration has supported a mix of renewable energy sources, including wind and solar, as part of its broader climate agenda. However, with energy prices remaining high and North Sea reserves still substantial, Trump’s remarks may resonate with those advocating for greater energy independence and lower costs.

 

As the energy conversation continues, Trump’s remarks have injected a provocative new angle, challenging the UK's green ambitions with a blunt call to return to fossil fuels.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-05-24

 

 

 

[Lacessit]

7 minutes ago, proton said:

 

They dont work and are not cost effective, pollute the landscape and are garbage after 20 years

AI again:

 

"By comparing the estimated embodied energy (1.08×1013 J) with the lifetime energy generation (8.28×1014 J), it's clear that a wind turbine generates significantly more energy than it consumes during its manufacturing and installation.

The "energy payback time" for wind turbines is relatively short, often cited as a few months to around a year, meaning they quickly generate enough clean energy to offset the energy invested in their creation. This makes wind power a highly energy-efficient form of electricity generation."

 

Horses for courses. Solar panels are installed where there is plenty of sun. wind turbines where there's a lot of wind.

 

Trump would not know what a joule was if it bit him on the @rse.

[The Cyclist]

20 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Trump would not know what a joule was if it bit him on the @rse.

 

You are probably correct.

 

What he does know is that the UK's Nut Zero is mentalism at its finest.

 

China / Russia / The US / India / Japan

 

5 reasons out of many, as to why it is mentalism.

 

Even if the UK reached Nut Zero, it would be as effective as a fart in space.

[MarkBR]

9 hours ago, FlorC said:

aka a return to reality.

<deleted>

[Negita43]

Do it Keir - Trump provides enough wind power as it is 🌬️

[PETERTHEEATER]

I have a solution to the world's energy problem but I'm having difficulty connecting the generator to my wife's lower jaw.