Paul Hickin is Chief Economist and Editor-in-Chief, leading the strategic direction and content development across Petroleum Economist, Hydrogen Economist, and Carbon Economist. Recognised as one of Cititec’s 50 Voices in Commodities Worth Following, he combines deep market insight with editorial excellence. Paul brings more than two decades of experience in financial and commodity news and analysis, underpinned by senior editorial and leadership roles at globally respected organisations including S&P Global Platts (now Commodity Insights), Dow Jones Newswires, and The Wall Street Journal.
In this conversation, he shares his perspectives on the recent tensions and developments in the Gulf region and how these are reshaping the balance between energy security and the energy transition. He reflects on whether such events could accelerate or delay the global shift away from hydrocarbons, and offers his outlook on how energy markets may evolve over the next 10 to 15 years. He also discusses how editorial independence is maintained in a highly politically sensitive sector, and what it takes to deliver high-quality analysis in today’s fast-moving information landscape, including the growing role of AI.
Let’s start with the big picture – how do you see the balance between energy security and the energy transition evolving over the next decade? What do you think people still get wrong about that trade-off today?
Paul Hickin: One of the biggest missteps has been the obsession with net zero rather than reducing emissions and the demonisation of fossil fuels. It has led to absurd policy decisions which have prevented sensible energy transitions – say from coal to gas – and led to importing more oil and gas rather than greenlighting oil and gas projects domestically; purely because of political optics.
Key lessons have been that without cheap, reliable and abundant energy, clean energy goals are a non-starter, that energy complacency has been counterproductive to transition aims and that every country has to follow a unique path – there is no one size fits all.
Turning to the Gulf, how do you see recent tensions and developments in the region affecting that balance? Are such events accelerating the shift away from hydrocarbons?
Paul Hickin: What the conflict has meant is that diversification and optionality are far more important than efficiency; that regional and global partnerships will be key; that pipelines are just as important as shipping and that storage and redundancy cannot be understated as insurance policies as can be seen with the pivotal Saudi and UAE oil lines that have helped mitigate the fallout.
It is hard to say what it means for hydrocarbons per se as it can be read from both sides: to double down on a crucial revenue earner and maximise it and whether the cost of clean energy options may be too much post-crisis or as a crucial diversification strategy to spread more risk away from oil and gas.
You have been recognised as one of the ‘50 Voices in Commodities Worth Following’ – as a content creator and thought leader, what, in your view, makes a strong and genuinely trusted voice in this space today?
Paul Hickin: You would have to ask others that – but I do try to be honest, humble, and truly independent. I try to think of alternative perspectives and believe in the importance of a plurality of voices to understand complex issues.
We are all learning, the energy world is rapidly changing in unexpected ways, and it is important to never rest on one’s laurels.
What does it take today to produce truly trusted, high-quality analysis in a fast-moving information landscape? How do you personally balance speed versus accuracy while building credibility with a global audience?
Paul Hickin: First and foremost is to listen and reflect.
Thankfully at Petroleum Economist we don’t need to be first like a newswire which has less to say but also realise without timeliness then you are already out of date. We constantly strive for the right balance and offer a unique voice in the space.
In a space that is both politically sensitive and commercially impactful, how do you ensure real editorial independence? What tends to test that the most?
Paul Hickin: Data without context is empty numbers, and context without data is opinion. But where you get the data from is also key – verifiable or getting several sources are important to ensure you can deliver respected analysis.
Don’t chase headlines, don’t try to twist viewpoints and don’t allow PR dressed up as analysis. Trust and respect is built over time but it can be lost in a blink of an eye.
Data has fundamentally transformed commodities reporting over the past decade. How is that evolution accelerating with AI and digital tools? How do you foster real innovation in what has traditionally been a conservative industry?
Paul Hickin: AI is a double-edged sword – it can speed up research and analysis, but it still needs experts to check, understand and interpret and is only as a good as the research it can scrape – whether that is free material or higher quality content AI tools at Petroleum Economist enables.
Like with the age of the Internet, there is lots more information out there and it all comes down to who you can trust. If something is given away for free in terms of data or analysis you have to always wonder what is the catch? If every analyst is saying the same thing, you must also ask what are they missing? AI can be an echo chamber or an enabler.
What really distinguishes a great energy editor today from a good one? How has that role evolved as content creation has become a bigger part of the job?
Paul Hickin: There is no secret sauce – show up, do the research, have robust and open discussions with your teams, keep your hand in, but don’t micromanage and lead from the front. Your team members are experts on their beats, and your job is to see the bigger picture and join the dots.
Looking ahead 10 to 15 years, how do you see energy markets themselves evolving, and how should energy intelligence, analysis, and journalism adapt to remain relevant in that changing landscape?
Paul Hickin: With electrification and a wider energy mix it will be harder to keep across such a diverse mix and experts in one may miss key elements in others. Look at the way metals and critical minerals are becoming a huge part of the energy conversation or how coal has never gone away even though much crucial analysis around it has.
We have to be mindful of clean energy snobbery and digital trendiness as if renewables or AI are end goals not part of an evolving and ongoing energy story. Look at the way gas has not stood still with the changes in LNG or how oil’s end user role continues to shift towards petrochemicals.
We should also be careful how environmental and energy coverage have been cleaved apart given how closely related they are and a failure to understand both sides misses the bigger picture and leads to us-versus-them rather than plural but collective thinking.