When Oil & Gas UK published its latest production forecast last month, chief executive Malcolm Webb appealed for the industry not to be used as "a political football" in the constitutional debate, an echo of my own plea in this column in July.
It was inevitable that the question of oil revenues would feature prominently in the Scottish constitutional debate; witness the various and widely reported lively exchanges last month.
When the Energy Bill was published in May last year, I wrote here that it seemed a decent attempt to address the intractable challenge of how to incentivise the switch to low carbon generation while at the same time keeping the lights on and the bills just about affordable.
Brian Wilson on the rumblings of political point-scoring rhetoric cascading through the airwaves
It doesn't quite match Edinburgh Zoo's two pandas in its enclosure, but All Energy will have two elephants in the room, writes Brian Wilson
As pious hopes go, suggesting that the North Sea should not be used as a political football in the current Scottish constitutional debate must rate pretty high.
Brazil is where the action is. I feel sure that these words have been used in other contexts but right now they are particularly true of oil and gas, for companies that like a challenge and an opportunity.
For those unfamiliar with EU-speak, the quite positive response from Oil and Gas UK to the news of political agreement on offshore safety legislation might have seemed a little surprising.
Just about everyone, with the not-very-notable exception of Donald Trump, favours offshore wind farms - at least in principle.
It's the time of year when finding someone else to do the hard work makes sense. So in that festive spirit, I am delighted to defer to a recent speech made by Ian Taylor, president and chief executive of Vitol, the global trading company.
According to every test of opinion, there is general support in Scotland for the development of renewable energy. That should be a great platform for progress and relative consensus.
I am writing this from Moscow where I have been spending quite a bit of time recently for a variety of reasons - football, Harris Tweed, energy. My enthusiasms are nothing if not eclectic.
I was talking to the executive of a major energy company this week and he told me he had been in the job for 11 years.
Do Energy Ministers matter? Discuss! Unfortunately, the subject is once again relevant due to the unexpected and unwelcome removal of Charles Hendry from the post.
Coal is often treated as the embarrassing relation of the energy family. Everyone depends on it but would prefer not to say so. It neither courts headlines nor receives plaudits - but without it, the well-worn phrase about the lights going out would soon turn to reality.
Energy treaties with Norway seem to happen with puzzling regularity these days. Last October, the then UK energy secretary, Chris Huhne, and his Oslo counterpart signed "an historic energy agreement" - according to a DECC (Department of Energy & Climate Change) press release - to "co-operate further on renewables, oil and gas and the use of technology such as carbon capture and storage".
Those of you who turn to Energy to escape from the interminable debate about Scotland's constitutional future may be in for a disappointment.
The Scottish Government has launched an oil and gas industry strategy which targets higher long-term recovery rates, increased exports and £30billion annual sales by 2020.
Governments love target-setting for two not very good reasons. The first is that the targets, set in the distant future, invariably sound more impressive than the current reality.
The decision by RWE and E.ON to pull the plug on nuclear new-build in the UK is a product of German politics and priorities. However, it raises serious issues for energy policy that need to be addressed with some urgency.
One of the few certainties about the Green Investment Bank which is due to open its doors later this year is that it will not be short of prospective customers.
It is not necessary to be a raging opponent of the European Union and its works to believe that sometimes it becomes involved in matters that are better left to the discretion of national governments.
The biggest question at the heart of Scotland's future power supply is not about renewables, though that is where the main focus tends. Rather it is Longannet.
AT LEAST Ofgem delivered on one promise - that it would publish the findings of its catchily-named TransmiT exercise before Christmas and indeed it came as a gift-wrapped package for the onshore wind industry.
WHENEVER I see the words "jobs joy" in a headline, I skip the first six paragraphs in order to search for the nitty-gritty. Does the project exist or is it proposed? Therein sits a crucial world of difference.
