This research explores the different envisioned roles of gas infrastructure for integrating offshore wind into the energy system of the North Sea Region (NSR). In this research, the NSR is defined as consisting of the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Norway, Denmark and the United Kingdom. The NSR is characterized by the increasing use of their considerable offshore wind potential, its current decommissioning developments of coal and nuclear energy, and its history in supplying, transporting and consuming natural gas. Within the NSR, there are different visions on how to integrate and leverage the full potential of offshore wind. This research focuses on how these coexisting visions can be made more compatible; by being able to exist or occur together without problems or conflict. Of particular interest to us due to its large economic benefit is the repurposing of gas infrastructure. Electricity and gas infrastructure are interrelated by electrolysers producing hydrogen gas using electricity and gas-­fueled power plants producing electricity. Focusing on the integration of offshore wind in the energy system and the envisioned role of gas infrastructure, this research initially identified several important themes in different energy visions, such as the locations envisioned for placing electrolysers. In short, these themes entail both technologies, infrastructure choices, socio­economic drivers, policies and regulations. Subsequently, this research concluded that some themes are envisioned differently by various actors. These differences lead to multiple types of (in)compatibility of the different envisioned future energy systems in the NSR. In order to answer our main research question, the current state of compatibility in the NSR is characterized. This is done by subdividing the different identified themes into four different groups with varying (in)compatibility levels termed ‘Group A. Celebrated themes’, ‘Group B. Themes where actors envision the same approach’, ‘Group C. Themes with competition between different types of approaches’ and ‘Group D. Themes where there is no co­existence possible’. This research concludes that there are differing visions of themes in the NSR, that for a large part are based on fixed underlying societal and geographical themes. It is therefore impossible for actors to collaboratively pursue one uniform compatible energy integration vision, with the exact same details envisioned by every actor in the NSR. Therefore, this research recommends collaborative futuring, defined as maintaining one’s vision whilst considering other existing visions within the relating geographical and dimensional (gas, electricity, hydrogen, offshore wind, etc.) scope. Considering the four previously mentioned groups, when one is ‘collaborative futuring’, one accepts that not every theme can develop into a group ‘A. Celebrated themes’, but that one must prevent themes developing into or being a group 'D. No co-existence' theme. In order to gain insight into how different themes can be collaborated upon, this research has designed a ‘collaboration framework’ to structure the (in)compatibility levels of different themes.