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.

Ministers are set to gather in Santa Marta against the backdrop of fuel shortages and rising prices following what the International Energy Agency has described as the largest oil supply shock on record, driven in part by constraints around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical transit route for global energy supplies.

The conference, co-hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands, was initiated amid frustration with the pace of negotiations under United Nations climate frameworks, where consensus-based processes have struggled to produce a clear pathway for reducing fossil fuel dependence.

Organisers say the current energy crisis has reinforced the strategic need for a managed transition, even as some governments increase coal use in the short term to stabilise domestic supply.Energy security considerations are expected to weigh as heavily as climate commitments during the discussions, reflecting the policy dilemma facing both advanced and developing economies.

Countries including Australia, Canada and Norway are expected to attend alongside emerging producers such as Angola, Mexico and Brazil, as well as coal-reliant economies like Turkiye and Vietnam. European nations including Germany, France and the United Kingdom are also set to participate.

However, several of the world’s largest fossil fuel producers and consumers, including the United States, China, Saudi Arabia and Russia, will not be represented, limiting the scope of any immediate global alignment.Colombia’s environment minister Irene Vélez Torres said the meeting has gained increased relevance in light of recent geopolitical developments, describing it as an opportunity to foster more direct engagement between producers and consumers on an issue often constrained in multilateral forums.

Analysts say the smaller, focused format may allow for more candid discussions but could also dilute outcomes given the diversity of national interests. Climate scientist Bill Hare of Climate Analytics noted that broader participation can make it harder to reach specific commitments, while supporters argue the inclusion of fossil fuel-producing nations marks a necessary step in advancing negotiations.

Participants from climate-vulnerable states, including Tuvalu and Vanuatu, are expected to push for accelerated timelines, citing the disproportionate impact of climate change and their reliance on imported energy. Officials from these countries have framed the current crisis as further evidence of the need to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Global investment in clean energy now outpaces spending on fossil fuels by roughly a factor of two, yet emissions from coal, oil and gas reached a record high in 2025, underscoring the gap between policy commitments and implementation.

The Santa Marta meeting is not expected to yield binding agreements but will contribute to a voluntary roadmap on fossil fuel transition being developed under Brazil’s leadership, as countries continue to grapple with balancing climate goals and energy security.