>

1) It will take some time to further develop yes. Most of the new licences are however in areas that already have infrastructure and activity so they are not exactly brand new areas. 
2) We will need the energy though, most of our exports are currently gas, not oil. And last time I checked Germany and large parts of Europe is quite dependent on it. After all, we do live in a period of energy crisis. Besides gas, oil is still and will continue to be important (possibly less so over the years) well into the future. Think about everything oil is used for, from medicines to electronics. An EV, although powered by electricity, is full of components made by products made from oil. 
3) If Norway shut down its oil and gas industry in the next few years, what good would that do? The gap would be filled by other countries, it is naive to think otherwise. I for one would like us to continue producing oil and gas over countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia and other oil producing autocracies.
Anyone from Norway can explain how this is tolerated by the electorate? Judging by the EV adoption at least population is more green than these policies suggest >

Most Norwegians support further exploration and activity. And don’t think that the overall reasoning for the high adoption rate of EV cars is due to environmental reasons. If not for the extremely generous government incentives I suspect we wouldn’t be buying as many as we do. >

Interesting but sad overall 😞 >

I think quite the opposite. It’s energy that the world needs and wants. It also provides my country with massive revenues that can be used to fund new industry, technology and so much more. An industry that employs thousands of people. We can’t all enact terrible energy policies like what Germany wants and does. >

First of all, these new licences they sell probably  won't come online for years? So it's nothing to do with our current needs that may exist due to the war.
Secondly its definitely energy that we don't need as society going forward. Period. Fossil fuels should stay in the ground as much as possible if we have any chance of not fucking out environment completely. Just because we have been using it doesn't mean we "need" it.
The Norwegian government signed up to the Paris agreement and seem to be happy to emit emit emit and then use the money from it to reduce emotions later. This is like an athlete getting more and more surgeries to keep competing at the top level and earning money that they can then spend when they're old to replace all their joints. 
This is much worse (for the world) than not emitting sooner but probably less profitable for Norway. It sucks that this is the path they seem to have chosen (I am just going off what people are saying in this thread) because you already are very rich and have a sovereign wealth fund. You don't need to do this and can instead be a good example to the other petro states.