Unlucky, thanks for the post. Hope you don't mind my take on it.
Firstly, oil prices are improving. Plus, if independent, we wouldn't practically pay the oil companies to take it out of the ground for us. We would tax them more appropriately, as pretty much all other oil producing countries do. We here in the UK give them subsidies. Which was good when it looked like the oil industry was going to collapse, but now that new fields are being found and lots of investment by said oil companies is being made, should be looked at again. Tax breaks to help the industry, fair enough, but all tax? When you see how much Shell and BP have paid other countries in tax, even when oil prices were at their lowest, and compare that with the subsidies we are giving them. Oil companies pay tax everywhere except the UK/Scotland. I saw on a comment thread somewhere someone asking Is that bad management/incompetence or is it deliberate policy? Which just happens to tie in to the Westminster/Unionist mantra of Scotland's oil being worthless. The oil sells for the same price whether it was extracted in Scottish waters or in Norway.
I am scratching my head at your divorce analogy. Yes, two lots of utility bills would have to be paid etc, but Scotland wouldn't be paying both. Scotland would have one lot of bills to pay and they would all relate to Scotland. Someone divorcing doesn't pay both parties' line rental, wifi, etc etc. We live on the same island but I see us as being in different houses (countries) when independent and neither would be paying for the other.
And I also don't understand why you say Westminster is listening to Scotland in the Brexit negotiations. The SNP gave Teresa May enough rope - Scotland wanted to Remain and Nicola Sturgeon stated that she would settle against her better judgement for an arrangement where Scotland remained in the single market, but that proposal was not even discussed. It was dismissed out of hand. That is Westminster refusing to even countenance discussion with Scotland about Brexit, never mind work with them. What you mean is Westminster want to work with Scotland if Scotland will agree to forget everything the majority in Scotland voted for, lie down and roll over and say 'OK, no bother, bring on the hard Brexit and I'll just wave my cheerleader pompoms over here for you. Oh, and see if you can use our fishing rights to get you some juicy deals for London's financial stuff, why don't you'. If the SNP don't do that then they are so unreasonable. OK, I see now that Scotland having access to the single market is an absolute no-no for some reason; not even a reason why is given except that we are one union, precious union, etc etc, like Scotland doesn't exist except as a region of the UK. Nicola Sturgeon has done the opposite of what you say, she has asked for talks and compromise and has been given not one single chance to discuss anything relating to Brexit at all. Hell, even before Brexit, Westminster bargained away Scotland's fishing rights without a Scottish MP or MEP having a say. Nigel Farage didn't even go to most of the meetings. So, I don't believe there was ever any intention of 'working with Scotland to all of our advantage'.