A Scots judge has ruled that the approval for drilling at the Rosebank oil field, a massive proposed development off Shetland, by the former Tory government was unlawful. The Court of Session in Edinburgh upheld a legal challenge by green campaigners, blocking the drilling plans. This decision marks a significant victory for environmental groups advocating against new fossil fuel projects in the North Sea.
Greenpeace, Uplift, and other activists argued that insufficient consideration was given to the emissions produced by burning fossil fuels at the proposed sites of Rosebank and the Jackdaw gas field off the coast of Aberdeen. The UK Government, under then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, and the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) were accused of acting unlawfully when granting consent for these projects. The approval for Shell’s Jackdaw field development in 2022 and Equinor and Ithaca Energy’s plans for drilling in the Rosebank field in September 2023 were both challenged.
In his judgement, Lord Ericht deemed the decision to grant consent as unlawful and ruled for it to be “reduced” (quashed) and reconsidered. This means that if developers wish to proceed with the projects, they will need to restart the approval process and provide new environmental impact assessments. Lord Ericht also specified that no oil or gas extraction should occur until a new decision on consent is reached.
Despite the ruling, Equinor, the lead partner on the Rosebank project, expressed their willingness to continue progressing with the development while awaiting new consents. They highlighted the economic benefits of the project, stating that it is crucial for the UK’s economic growth and for supporting UK businesses. Shell, the developer of the Jackdaw field, emphasised the importance of such projects in meeting the UK’s energy needs.
The decision was celebrated by campaigners, with Greenpeace UK’s senior campaigner, Philip Evans, calling it a “historic win” and stressing the need for full consideration of the climate impacts of such projects. Similarly, Uplift’s executive director, Tessa Khan, highlighted the significance of accounting for the climate harm caused by oil and gas extraction. The court’s ruling signifies a shift towards more stringent scrutiny of fossil fuel projects and their environmental implications.
In conclusion, the legal ruling against the Rosebank oil field approval demonstrates a growing awareness and concern for the environmental impact of new fossil fuel developments. This decision sets a precedent for more thorough consideration of climate effects in future energy projects, reflecting a broader shift towards sustainable energy practices.