A court ruling has thrown the UK’s plans for the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil fields into disarray, highlighting the increasing tension between energy security and environmental protection.
The decision, made by Lord Ericht, found that the consent granted to these projects was unlawful due to the failure to evaluate downstream emissions resulting from the burning of the extracted fuels.
Supporters argue that these massive projects could provide thousands of jobs and billions in economic benefits. For instance, Equinor and Ithaca Energy, the owners of the Rosebank field, have highlighted the project’s potential to create 1,600 construction jobs and support 450 long-term UK-based jobs.
Similarly, Shell has emphasised the importance of the Jackdaw field for the UK’s energy security, stating that it will supply gas to 1.4 million homes.
However, environmental groups such as Greenpeace and Uplift have successfully challenged the consent, arguing that the emissions from the oil and gas produced by these fields were unlawfully overlooked in the decision-making process.
“This is a historic win – the age of governments approving new drilling sites by ignoring their climate impacts is over,” said Philip Evans, senior campaigner at Greenpeace UK, according to a report by LBC.
“The courts have agreed with what climate campaigners have said all along: Rosebank and Jackdaw are unlawful, and their full climate impacts must now be properly considered.”
The ruling comes at a critical time as the UK aims to boost domestic energy production and reduce reliance on imported gas. However, it also underscores the need for a balanced approach that considers both energy security and environmental protection.
“The public interest in authorities acting lawfully and the private interest of members of the public in climate change outweigh the private interest of the developers,” Lord Ericht stated in his judgement.
The suspension of these projects raises questions about the future of North Sea oil exploration and the UK’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions. As the UK moves forward, it must navigate these competing interests and ensure that any new projects are developed in a way that respects both legal and environmental obligations.
The UK government’s initial approval for the Rosebank oil field and Shell’s Jackdaw gas project has been invalidated following a court ruling that deemed the consent decisions unlawful due to the failure to account for downstream emissions from oil and gas production.
This case exemplifies the ongoing tension between energy security and environmental protection. The projects, prior to the legal challenge, promised significant economic and employment benefits. Rosebank, led by Equinor, is set to create 1,600 construction jobs and 450 long-term positions, while Jackdaw, developed by Shell, would supply enough gas to heat 1.4 million homes.
However, environmental groups like Greenpeace and Uplift have argued that these developments directly contradict the UK’s climate commitments.
Greenpeace UK’s senior campaigner, Philip Evans, noted that “the courts have agreed with what climate campaigners have said all along: Rosebank and Jackdaw are unlawful, and their full climate impacts must now be properly considered”.
The stakes are high, with Rosebank poised to produce 300 million barrels of oil when it comes online in 2026-27, and Jackdaw aiming to generate 40,000 barrels of oil equivalent daily at peak production.
Despite progress in reducing emissions, with the UK upstream sector already cutting emissions by 28% since 2018 and targeting a 50% reduction by 2030, these projects face significant hurdles following the court’s decision. The Supreme Court in June delivered a landmark ruling that deemed the original consent decisions unlawful.
The Court of Session in Edinburgh has ruled that while work on both projects can continue, new consents must be sought with more comprehensive environmental impact assessments that include downstream emissions.
Lord Ericht specified that no oil or gas should be extracted before a new decision on consent is made.
Uplift’s executive director, Tessa Khan, highlighted that “Rosebank can’t go ahead without accounting for its enormous climate harm”.
Khan added: “The continued burning of oil and gas is why we’re seeing more extreme weather like Storm Eowyn and flooding that have claimed lives and caused hundreds of millions of pounds in damage and cleanup costs”.
The UK Labour government, while pledging to halt new oil and gas licenses, hasn’t committed to revoking existing ones, leading to a complex situation where technical and safety concerns prevent immediate halting of work on these projects.
The outcome of the judicial review has cast doubt on the future of Rosebank and Jackdaw, underscoring the need for a balance between energy security and environmental obligations.
