Climate campaigners say the Rosebank oil field will be a ‘defining test’ of the government’s credibility on climate change. (Lucy North/PA)
Equinor, which owns the majority of the oil field, stressed it was committed to advancing the ‘Rosebank project’
Climate campaigners have challenged the UK Government to “do the right thing” and turn down plans for drilling in the Rosebank oil field.
The group Uplift – which wants to see a “rapid and fair transition away from oil and gas production in the UK” – said whether the green light is granted for the development would be the “defining test of this Government’s credibility on climate change”.
It came as it was confirmed Equinor, which owns an 80% majority stake in the oil field, confirmed it has submitted a scope 3 assessment – setting out all associated greenhouse gas emissions for the project, in compliance with new guidelines from UK authorities.
And the company said it is “fully committed” to working with all relevant bodies to “advance the Rosebank project”.
The Rosebank field, which is located some 80 miles west of Shetland, is the UK’s largest untapped oil field and is estimated to contain up to 300 million barrels of oil.
…
Robin Wells, director of Fossil Free London, said: “In the face of this decision on the biggest undeveloped oil field in the North Sea, we must be crystal clear. Rosebank will be the defining test of this Government’s climate promise.”
Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him and his Deputy Richard Tice. He says that Reform UK has received £Millions and £Millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
An oil drilling platform off the coast of Aberdeen. Officials are understood to have looked at a range of proposals in recent weeks. Photograph: Simon Price/Alamy
[Guardian] Exclusive: Energy secretary examining ways to allow oil and gas exploration without breaking manifesto promise
Ed Miliband is planning to encourage drilling in the North Sea despite a manifesto promise not to grant new licences on new parts of the British sea bed.
The energy secretary is looking at ways in which the government can allow companies to look for and produce more oil and gas without breaking Labour’s pre-election pledge not to issue new licences on new fields.
The plans, which will be announced in the coming months as part of a wider strategy for the North Sea, come amid pressure on one side from climate activists to stop all drilling, and on the other from Donald Trump to “drill, baby, drill”.
A government spokesperson said: “The strategy will set out how the government intends to meet its manifesto commitments to ensure no new licenses to explore new fields and maintaining existing fields for their lifetime.” They said the government would meet its manifesto commitments “in full”.
Miliband has been working on proposals for the North Sea for months as the government looks for ways to maximise the lives of existing oil and gas fields without allowing completely new exploration.
Labour promised in its manifesto not to grant any new licences on new fields, and ministers are now looking at how they can implement that while also gaining an economic return from the sizeable industry which already exists. Oil and gas companies employ about 30,000 people from their base in north-east Scotland.
dizzy: It looks like yet more broken promises from the Labour party, seems to be what they’re really good at. Expanding airports is ignoring climate commitments, a huge danger with the North Sea is Rosebank.
Protesters march with an anti-fossil fuel banner during the demonstration in London on January 15, 2023. (Photo: Vuk Valcic/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
“The only sensible thing to do is to pivot the North Sea to something we have an abundance of, and something that will never run out—wind,” argued one climate advocate.
As the United Kingdom on Monday faced the onset of its fourth heatwave of this summer, climate campaigners continued to call out BP for its decision to plow ahead with reopening the Murlach oil field in the North Sea, despite fossil fuels pushing up global temperatures and the U.K. government’s efforts to limit extraction in the region.
“This is climate vandalism, pure and simple,” Kate Blagojevic, Europe team lead at the group 350.org, said in a Monday statement. “BP is putting its profit margins above the survival of communities, ecosystems, and future generations. Every barrel of oil from this project pushes us closer to climate breakdown, more floods, more fires, more heatwaves.”
“The era of fossil fuels is over, and BP’s desperate attempts to wring out the last drops of oil from the North Sea are a reckless betrayal of the public and the planet. They should be winding down, not doubling down,” she declared.
Greenpeace U.K. policy director Doug Parr was similarly critical, saying in a statement that “the North Sea is on death’s door. Reserves are drying up, and what’s left and untapped is barely enough to keep it on life support.”
The Telegraph on Sunday noted recent research from the government’s North Sea Transition Authority that found there were over 3 billion barrels of oil and gas in fields already in production, 6 billion barrels in known potential developments, and 3.5 billion barrels in identified exploration zones.
According to the newspaper, BP said the Murlach field contains 20 million barrels of recoverable oil and 600 million cubic meters of gas, and is “expected to produce around 20,000 barrels of oil and 17 million cubic feet of gas per day,” due to new technologies that weren’t around when it was shut down over two decades ago.
Parr said that “3 billion barrels wouldn’t last more than a few years at current rates of consumption, and even that assumes it is economic to extract. Whatever the political rhetoric, the oil and gas is pretty much gone, and soon, so too will the jobs of thousands of workers.”
“Unless we want to remain dependent on overseas imports and watch an entire industry collapse with no plan for workers,” he added, “the only sensible thing to do is to pivot the North Sea to something we have an abundance of, and something that will never run out—wind.”
Although the U.K’s current Labour Party leaders have pledged to avoid new licensing for fossil fuel projects in the North Sea, “BP won agreement to reopen Murlach, 120 miles east of Aberdeen, under the previous government and has since been installing equipment, with production potentially restarting next month,” The Telegraph explained.
A spokesperson for Ed Miliband, U.K. secretary of state for energy security and net zero, said Sunday that “we are committed to delivering the manifesto commitment to not issue new licences to explore new fields because they will not take a penny off bills, cannot make us energy secure, and will only accelerate the worsening climate crisis.”
“We are delivering a fair and orderly transition in the North Sea, with the biggest ever investment in offshore wind and two first-of-a-kind carbon capture and storage clusters,” the spokesperson added.
Miliband in June announced new guidance for environmental impact assessments of proposed oil and gas projects in licensed fields, which came in response to last year’s landmark U.K. Supreme Court ruling. After that decision, Judge Andrew Stewart of Scotland’s Court of Session ruled in January that Equinor and Shell, which are respectively behind the Rosebank oil and gas field and the Jackdaw gas project, can’t move ahead with extraction.
The June guidance means offshore developers can now submit applications for extractions in fields that are already licensed, including Rosebank and Jackdaw. In response to that development earlier this year, Mel Evans, Greenpeace U.K.’s head of climate, said that “it’s only right for the government to take into account the emissions from burning oil and gas when deciding whether to approve fossil fuel projects currently pending.”
“Since Rosebank and other drilling sites will pump out a lot of carbon while providing little benefit to the economy and no help to bill payers, they should fail the criteria ministers have just set out,” Evans added. “Real energy security and future-proofed jobs for energy workers can only come through homegrown, cheap renewable energy, and that’s what ministers should focus on.”
Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark RichardsDonald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him. He says that Reform UK has received millions and millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.
The government has been accused of making a “secret exchange deal” with fossil fuel firms to compensate for the tax hike.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves told a fossil fuel giant that the industry would receive a “quid pro quo” in return for higher taxes on its windfall profits, DeSmog can reveal.
In a meeting with the Norwegian state energy company Equinor on 27 August last year, Reeves suggested that the government’s carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) subsidies were a payoff for oil firms being hit with a higher tax rate.
Minutes of the meeting obtained by DeSmog state that Equinor CEO Anders Opedal raised concerns over the Energy Profits Levy – also known as the “windfall tax” – and “its impact on the value” of Equinor’s UK portfolio.
In response, Reeves said that raising the windfall tax from 35 percent to 38 percent was a “manifesto commitment”, but stated that “Equinor should recognise the quid pro quo – the funds raised enable government investment in CCUS etc.”.
CCUS is the controversial practice of trapping the emissions produced by fossil fuel plants before they enter the atmosphere.
The technology is accused of being a favourite climate “solution” of the fossil fuel industry since it allows for the continued extraction of oil and gas. Experts have also suggested that the technology is not economically viable at scale.
The Labour government announced in October that it would provide £22 billion in subsidies to CCUS projects over 25 years following a surge in lobbying by the fossil fuel industry, as revealed by DeSmog.
Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer MP claimed that Reeves and the Labour government had been “caught out making promises in a secret exchange deal which goes against the interests of the British people”.
Denyer added: “In public they claim to be taxing fossil fuel giants more fairly by raising the windfall tax, but behind closed doors they are giving back with dodgy deals to allow the fossil fuel corporates to continue with business as usual under the guise of CCUS – an expensive distraction and largely unproven technology.”
An Equinor spokesperson said: “Government regularly meets with companies like Equinor. This is standard and necessary practice. As with any official meeting, minutes were taken of the conversation between the chancellor and Equinor CEO as a public record of what was said and readily available via a Freedom of Information request.”
Equinor is one of the principal firms investing in the UK’s CCUS sector. In December, the government signed deals with Equinor, BP, and TotalEnergies to develop carbon capture facilities in Teesside. This will involve the development of the Net Zero Teesside Power plant, which will be 25 percent owned by Equinor and aims to be the world’s first gas-fired power station featuring CCUS.
Earlier this year, following a DeSmog investigation, Equinor retracted the claim that it stores 1 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually at its flagship carbon capture project in the North Sea. Equinor has not captured 1 million tonnes of CO2 per year at the site since 2001, and only captured a tenth of that figure in 2023.
The firm made an $28.7 billion (£21.2 billion) post-tax profit in 2022 after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered higher oil and gas prices – a figure that stood at $8.8 billion (£6.6 billion) in 2024.
Tessa Khan, executive director of the campaign group Uplift, said: “Oil companies, like Equinor, have held sway over successive UK governments, for years shaping policies to benefit their bottom line and slowing down climate action. This Labour government must stand up to them and put our needs – for affordable clean energy and a safe climate that we can pass on to our children – ahead of their insatiable need to profit.”
The House of Commons’ Public Accounts Committee (PAC) – which scrutinises government spending decisions – released a report in February describing the UK’s CCUS subsidies as “risky”.
The report noted that the government has downgraded its ambitions for CCUS storage, scrapping its previous commitment of storing 20 to 30 million tonnes annually by 2030. It also highlighted that the UK’s new CCUS projects don’t allow the government to share any potential profits or for local consumers to benefit from lower energy bills.
The committee also reported that producing liquid natural gas, which will be used in the UK’s CCUS projects, leaks more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than previously thought.
“This could undermine the rationale for pursuing certain schemes,” the report said.
After being sued by environmental consultant Andrew Boswell over the Net Zero Teesside scheme, the previous Conservative government admitted that it had not taken into account the plant’s full potential emissions, which Boswell estimated could reach more than 20.3 million tonnes during its lifetime.
In summer 2024, a judge rejected Boswell’s case, which argued that officials did not fully explore the environmental impacts of the scheme before approving it. The government also won the appeal in May.
Boswell, who leads the Scrap Carbon Capture campaign, called Reeves’ Equinor meeting “an outrageous spectacle”.
“She begs Norway’s oil colossus to tax its huge profits, and then gifts it with far more in return – many billions over decades for climate-wrecking CCUS.”
Equinor and Shell have formed a joint venture to become the UK’s largest North Sea fossil fuel producer. In November, the government admitted that it had unlawfully approved the development of the country’s largest untapped oilfield, Rosebank, which is operated by Equinor, by not taking into account the climate effects of burning the oil and gas extracted from the field. Equinor intends to re-apply for approval to develop the project.
The Labour government has been steadfast in its support for the UK achieving net zero emissions by 2050, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer stating that “home grown clean energy” is “in the DNA” of his administration.
The Climate Change Committee stated in its 2025 appraisal of the government’s net zero policies that the UK needs to scale up its CCUS capacity to 73 million tonnes a-year by 2050 to help meet its climate commitments.
“Investment in carbon capture and storage is a gamble on unproven technology,” said Lily-Rose Ellis, campaigner at Greenpeace UK. “All it does is give oil and gas giants carte blanche to continue causing planet destroying emissions in the hopes that one day they might be able to capture the carbon and store it for all of eternity. Public money should be spent on renewables which guarantee to lower emissions, bring bills down, and boost the economy with new jobs.”
“Equinor has been a reliable energy partner to the UK for over 40 years,” a company spokesperson said, “providing a stable supply of oil and gas, developing the UK’s offshore wind industry, and pioneering solutions to decarbonise the UK economy, including carbon capture and storage.
“Using our experience of decarbonising energy production in Norway, including safely storing carbon emissions under the North Sea for over 25 years, we are supporting the UK to develop its own home grown energy transition.”
A government spokesperson said: “We are delivering first of a kind carbon capture projects in the UK, supporting thousands of jobs across the country, reigniting industrial heartlands and tackling the climate crisis.
“Money raised from changes to the Energy Profits Levy made at the Autumn Budget last year support the transition to clean energy, enhance energy security and independence, provide sustainable jobs for the future, and help protect electricity bills against future price shocks”.
The UK government will soon face a momentous decision over whether to approve production in the Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland.
Rosebank is the UK’s biggest undeveloped field. Its proponents – the largest of which is Norwegian state-owned petroleum company, Equinor – estimate that it will produce the equivalent of up to 500 million barrels of oil between 2026 and 2051. When burned, this oil will generate up to 200 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, which is more than the combined annual emissions of 28 low-income countries.
Thanks to recent courtcases, the climate effects of those “combustion emissions” will need to be taken into account by the government when it decides whether to approve production at Rosebank. In a new report, two colleagues and I reviewed the evidence concerning the implications of new oil and gas fields in the UK.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
There is a rapidly dwindling global carbon budget for holding temperature increases to below 1.5°C of warming (the more conservative end of the Paris agreement’s temperature goal).
Globally, the emissions from burning the fossil fuels in oil and gas fields and coalmines that are already operating or under development far exceed that budget. In this context, Rosebank’s combustion emissions are highly significant, as they add considerably to that excess.
We also found that the projected production from existing fields is sufficient to meet or exceed global oil and gas demand in modelled economic scenarios in which climate warming is restrained to within 1.5°C. This is further evidence that new fields are not consistent with achieving globally agreed temperature goals.
However, it is often asserted by supporters of new fields that keeping UK oil in the ground won’t reduce global emissions, because another producer will supply the demand and reap the benefits. This is a gross and dangerous oversimplification which, according to the United Nations Environment Programme, “defies basic economics of supply and demand”.
Allowing a new field like Rosebank would increase the supply of oil globally, resulting in a fall in its price which, though small, would cause more oil to be consumed. As UK government advisers at the Climate Change Committee have acknowledged, new petroleum projects “support a larger global market overall” for petroleum. Stopping Rosebank would have the opposite effect, and lead to less oil consumed.
Rosebank is found about 80 miles west of Shetland and its puffins. Philippe Clement / shutterstock
The oil industry likes to trumpet the UK’s relatively low upstream emissions – that is, from the process of extracting oil – compared with those of competitors overseas. But this is a distraction from the bigger issue: the additional greenhouse gases emitted from consuming the extra oil that new fields produce.
A recent peer-reviewed study by economists and experts in the emissions-intensity of oil and gas production concluded that limiting oil supply will almost always lead to lower overall emissions, regardless of the intensity of upstream emissions from different fields. It is highly likely that leaving Rosebank’s oil in the ground will result in lower global greenhouse gases than would occur if the field were developed.
However, this focus on Rosebank’s aggregate emissions ignores two further reasons the field’s development consent should be refused on climate grounds.
A litmus test of climate leadership
First, exploiting new sources of oil supply like Rosebank locks in future oil and gas production, ultimately making it economically, politically and legally harder to wind the industry down.
Second, as the Climate Change Committee also stated, decisions by the UK government concerning petroleum production have an important “signalling effect” internationally and at home.
Internationally, the UK government has rightly acknowledged that climate action “must be accelerated drastically” to keep the average global temperature rise “below 1.5°C”.
The UK has a proud reputation for climate leadership. It was the first country to enact a legally binding framework to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it rapidly phased out coal-fired power generation, and in 2019 it became the first country to adopt a net zero emissions target.
Building on this legacy, the foreign secretary David Lammy has vowed to “push for the ambition needed to keep 1.5 degrees alive”. But approving Rosebank would signal to the world that the UK government is not sincere about keeping the Paris agreement’s 1.5°C goal “alive”, after all.
Some might think that aspirations to climate leadership are futile given the Trump administration’s “drill, baby, drill” approach to fossil fuels. But Trump’s recklessness at a critical time for global climate efforts makes UK climate leadership more important than ever.
The UK already chairs a suite of international energy transition alliances focused on the international phase-out of coal-fired power, the scale-up of renewables, and the financing of these transitions. It could plug a gap in its influence by rejecting Rosebank and joining the Beyond Oil & Gas Alliance, a “club” of (currently) 25 national and sub-national governments that are working to phase-out oil and gas production and persuade other countries to follow suit.
And it could deepen cooperation with the EU to drive down oil and gas demand and scale up clean energy throughout the region, yielding benefits that will outlive the Trump administration.
Domestically, rejecting Rosebank would send a powerful signal to investors about the sincerity of the government’s commitment to achieve economic growth by becoming a “clean energy superpower”, as the governing Labour party pledged to do at the last election.
But the benefits of clean prosperity must extend to the people and communities caught up in the transition, too. The UK’s North Sea oil and gas reserves, along with the jobs their production supports, are in terminal decline.
Oil and gas workers and the communities in which they are based already face a volatile future. New fields like Rosebank would create some additional jobs in this declining industry. But they cannot arrest its long-term decline.
The government recognises that this transition is already taking place and will continue. With targeted regional and industrial investment, support for workers and their families, and careful planning that meaningfully involves affected communities, the UK has an opportunity to demonstrate to the world how to achieve a just transition away from oil and gas.
