A costume depicting Andy Burnham, made by Protest Props. Photo: Temilade Adelaja/Reuters
Andy Burnham is stuck in neutral.
…
The budget’s £100 sticking-plaster energy bung for households in four council tax bands does nothing to solve the long-term cost-of-living crisis or improve British energy security. And this seems to be something of a pattern – big talk and puny delivery. Take the failed monopoly on water: the eight new regional water councils announced yesterday will allow local leaders to “set priorities” and “shape billions of pounds of investment” but, crucially, they do not put water back into public ownership.
This is to say nothing of the climate-illiterate decision to green-light new gas drilling in the North Sea, and murmurs that approval of the much more damaging new Rosebank oil field was baked into the budget.
Alongside the can-kicking and edge-tinkering, there’s also Burnham’s admission in the summer that his government “got it wrong” on Gaza and foreign secretary Ed Miliband’s appeal at Labour conference to everyone horrified by the slaughter of Palestinians: “You were right.” Both statements are ageing like a tuna sandwich stuffed behind a radiator (if you can afford to turn yours on, of course).
…
[P]eaceful protesters opposing the ban on Palestine Action have reportedly been handed bail conditions barring them from any protest in support of… Palestine. Not Palestine Action – Palestine in general. Burnham’s willingness to keep this authoritarian and antidemocratic farce going is damning, and the footage of retirees being carried away by cops makes Britain a laughing stock on the global stage.
UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham says ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him. He says that he’s delayed the go-ahead for Jackdaw and Rosebank North Sea oil and gas extraction until after the Holborn and St. Pancras by-election – don’t want democracy interfering with Capitalism.
GB News directors Paul Marshall and Theodore Agnew superimposed in front of a North Sea oil rig. Credit: ARC Forum / Flickr (Marshall), House of Lords / Roger Harris (Agnew), Gary Bembridge (oil rig)
Lord Agnew and Paul Marshall, who also owns The Spectator, are shareholders in Equinor and Shell.
Two directors of GB News, which has loudly advocated for the new Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields, hold shares in the firms behind the projects.
Sir Paul Marshall, a millionaire hedge fund boss who also owns The Spectator magazine, and Lord (Theodore) Agnew of Oulton, a Conservative peer and donor, sit on the board of All Perspectives Ltd, the holding company of GB News.
Marshall is also one of its two principal funders, pumping money into the loss-making right-wing outlet.
GB News – which employs Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and former Tory Cabinet minister Jacob Rees-Mogg – has strongly supported new North Sea drilling, with presenters recently calling Rosebank “a no-brainer” that should be approved “instantly”.
The Labour government last week approved the development of the Jackdaw gas field near Aberdeen and is expected to make a decision on Rosebank soon.
Rosebank would create an estimated 250 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions over its 10-year lifetime, roughly 70 percent of the UK’s total annual emissions. The oil and gas field near the Shetland Islands is 80 percent owned by Adura, an “independent joint venture” by the fossil fuel giants Equinor and Shell that also owns the Jackdaw site.
At the end of June, Marshall’s hedge fund Marshall Wace held $16.3 million (around £12.3 million) of stock in Shell, according to its latest filings to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Meanwhile, Lord Agnew is a shareholder in Equinor, owning a stake in the company worth at least £100,000 according to his parliamentary register.
DeSmog first revealed Marshall Wace’s huge fossil fuel portfolio in 2023, which increased to $2.8 billion (£2.1 billion) in the first quarter of this year.
One of Marshall Wace’s biggest backers, U.S. private equity giant KKR, is itself a major investor in fossil fuels.
“GB News has gone way beyond just covering the Rosebank decision. Presenters repeatedly attacked the energy secretary for considering rejecting it, and demanded that the government ‘drill baby drill’,” said Richard Wilson, director of the campaign group Stop Funding Heat.
“The public deserves to know when the people overseeing a TV station have a financial stake in the outcome it’s pushing for”.
Wilson also pointed out that media regulator Ofcom requires “due impartiality” from broadcasters on live policy decisions, potentially including the approval of specific oil fields.
“It’s time for Ofcom to take action,” he said. “In the meantime, it’s vital that advertisers continue to steer clear of GB News”.
Paul Marshall and Marshall Wace declined to comment. GB News and Lord Agnew were approached for comment.
GB News’s ‘Rosebank-tinted’ Coverage
Presenters and guests on GB News have vocally backed the Rosebank and Jackdaw projects.
On 26 October, Rees-Mogg, who lost his seat at the 2024 general election, was asked for his view on Rosebank, replying: “Oh, drill, baby drill. We should get on with it as fast as possible,” adding that the UK should also overturn its ban on fracking for shale gas.
On 19 August, GB News presenter Andrew Pierce interviewed Reform’s deputy leader Richard Tice about the two projects, saying: “If both of them were given the go-ahead, wouldn’t that instantly create some of the extra fuel security, energy security we need, apart from the revenue for the Exchequer?”
Tice replied, “Of course. Both should be given the go-ahead instantly,” adding that the government should grant new North Sea exploration licences, which would break its 2024 manifesto commitment.
On 22 October, Pierce himself called Jackdaw “brilliant” and said it was “madness” for Labour MPs to oppose Rosebank.
GB News political editor Christopher Hope has also made the case for Rosebank, remarking on 26 October: “We’re buying in the oil and gas we would take from Rosebank. Anyway, why not make it in [the UK] and get tax revenue from that asset?”
A few days earlier, on 16 October, he said: “It seems like a no-brainer to many, but not on the left of politics.”
GB News presenter and former Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg.
Credit: GB News / YouTube
Last week, the GB News website ran an opinion article by Russell Borthwick, the chief executive of Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce, headlined: “Jackdaw approval is a victory for common sense. Now it’s Rosebank’s turn.”
As DeSmog has documented, GB News has long backed new fossil fuels and attacked climate action. It has also given a platform to climate science deniers, including from the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), a pressure group that says more CO2 emissions would be a “benefit to the planet”.
Marshall has also personally criticised policies designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, claiming in a speech to the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) conference in February 2025 that the world has been infected by a “climate derangement syndrome”. He said “our economic prosperity and our people’s livelihoods” are being sacrificed “all for the sake of making some fractional changes to the level of CO2 in the atmosphere”.
In reality, reaching net zero emissions is predicted to cost only a fraction of UK GDP, while the extreme weather events caused by climate change could have a dramatic impact on the global economy.
Marshall’s Spectator magazine, edited by former Conservative Cabinet minister Michael Gove, has also strongly supported new North Sea drilling.
A piece last week by anti-net zero columnist Ross Clarkhailed Jackdaw as “a small victory for common sense” but lamented that Labour will not approve Rosebank so long as the UK keeps its net zero targets.
The Spectator’s “gossip columnist” Steerpike also last week accused Labour MPs of “throwing a tantrum over Jackdaw”, and concluded: “It has taken years, and so much time has been wasted, but at least the most obvious decision facing the country has finally been made. The question is whether Burnham will be brave enough to approve Rosebank as well.”
A new study found AI-driven fossil fuel productivity could increase emissions. Here are examples of companies already using AI to boost production.
When United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres warned world leaders last week in his UN address about the unchecked power of both Big Oil and artificial intelligence, he treated them as two of the defining challenges facing governments.
At the same time, the technology companies providing these AI tools are not generally held accountable for the additional fossil fuel production and emissions their products may enable.
“The danger is not technology,” Guterres told the UN General Assembly. “The danger is technology without accountability.”
A DeSmog review of company announcements, industry presentations, and other publicly available information found that, across major fossil fuel companies — Aramco, Chevron, Equinor, ExxonMobil, Shell, TotalEnergies and others — AI is increasingly being integrated into fossil fuel operations, from seismic exploration and drilling to equipment monitoring and field development.
The examples provide a real-world look at the mechanism behind a recent study published inNature: that AI can increase emissions not only because of the electricity required to run data centers, but because it can make fossil fuel production more productive and profitable.
The study found that AI-driven productivity gains in fossil fuel production accounted for most of the modeled increase in global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions. It estimated that AI could increase global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions by between 1.2 and 4.8 percent, with productivity gains in fossil fuel production accounting for most of that increase.
In one example of AI gains, Norwegian energy company Equinor re-scanned the Norwegian continental shelf with “new seismic technology and AI,” resulting in 27 new discoveries of oil, Hege Skryseth, the company’s executive vice president, chief technology officer, said during a June presentation for Equinor’s Capital Market Day.
“By reprocessing the data, the seismic image became much sharper, leading to the discoveries,” Skryseth said. “AI was key here, from automated data interpretation to efficient well planning.”
Chevron is also using AI to produce oil that was “previously considered unreachable.”
In the oil company’s recently launched podcast — in which racing driver Tanner Foust and Chevron Chief Technology and Engineering Officer Ryder Booth chat from a pickup truck tailgate — Booth said that breakthroughs at Anchor, an oil and gas development, represented the “first time unlocking kind of a new horizon around the world.”
“AI, it’s attracted to big data and big opportunities, and the oil and gas industry has big data,” Booth said. Last year, Chevron said it had improved drilling and fracking efficiency in the Permian Basin by over 30 percent.
The value of these productivity gains is significant. A recent McKinsey & Co. report estimated that, for the upstream oil and gas sector, AI can generate $65 billionin profitsannually in the short term, which could increase to $230 billion when the technology is deployed at its “full potential.”
AI-driven efficiency gains have already reduced operational costs by up to 18 percent; and industry executives attribute about 5 percent of their current revenue to “AI-driven initiatives,” according to a 2025 report from IBM, which has multiple partnerships with oil and gas companies.
‘Done in seconds and live-streamed’
At Equinor’s enormous Johan Sverdrup oil field in the North Sea, “data flows up from the ground faster than the oil,” the company’s site states, at the rate of “10,000 Netflix movies a second.”
The company is also using AI to optimize the placement of subsea equipment and wells.
“What used to take 2-3 weeks and involved flying hard disks to shore with helicopter for analysis can now be done in seconds and live-streamed,” Equinor said.
ExxonMobil is also embracing enormous datasets. In 2019, ExxonMobil partnered with Microsoft to use AI in its Permian Basin operations, a move Exxon said would “generate billions of dollars in value” and produce up to an additional “50,000 oil-equivalent barrels a day by 2025.”
The oil giant also said that gains in efficiency from advanced technologies, including AI, “is a first step” towards letting systems respond to events without human intervention.
Holly Alpine, a coauthor of the Nature study, said the significance of such partnerships is easy to miss when attention focuses on the emissions produced by powering AI systems.
“For some reason, tech companies are exempt from accountability for the tech they are creating,” she told DeSmog.
Alpine and her husband, Will Alpine, another author of the Nature study, previously worked for Microsoft, but left after coming to the conclusion thatthe company hid how its products were harming the climate. The couple then founded the Enabled Emissions Campaign, a nonprofit that calls attention to tech’s role in fossil fuel production and advocates for better regulations.
She said that now, oil companies like Exxon pumping 50,000 barrels a day is “actually quite a small deal.”
“The deals have only grown in size, and we realized that that was not part of Microsoft’s accountability whatsoever, even though they are the company creating the technology that is making this happen.”
A recent Reuters article about Exxon’s use of automated drilling in the Permian Basin, which said the company plans to increase production in the region to 2.5 million barrels a day, didn’t mention if Microsoft was still involved with the project; on Exxon’s website, references to Microsoft partnerships still link to the announcement from 2019.
Microsoft did not confirm whether it’s still partnering with Exxon on those operations, but the tech company is the leading cloud provider for the oil and gas industry, according to Kimberlite Research, followed by Amazon and Google.
Data CentersAreIntertwined with AI
Just two years ago, fossil fuels’ share of the world’s energy supply was projected to decline in coming years. Then, AI data centers began expanding rapidly, and with them, the argument that fossil fuels must scale up, too, for the U.S. to win the “AI arms race.”
At the same time, the fossil fuel and technology industries are becoming increasingly intertwined. AI data centers require enormous amounts of electricity, and natural gas supplies more than 40 percent of the power used by U.S. data centers, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
“AI’s advance will depend not only on the design labs of Silicon Valley, but also on the gas fields of the Permian Basin,” Mike Wirth, Chevron’s chairman and CEO, said in 2024.
In the face of power grid constraints, some data centers are turning to natural-gas power plants built onsite, a setup known as “behind-the-meter” generation, like Chevron’s Kilby project with Microsoft. U.S. data centers’ investments in new gas turbines recently surpassed the total investments of every country except the U.S., according to an IEA report.
Meanwhile, the oil and gas companies are benefiting both from using AI to increase efficiency, and from supplying the additional energy that its data centers demand.
AI and Net Zero Aims
Online, Microsoft promotes AI tools as a way to “accelerate the energy transition,” “reduce emissions,” and “accelerate climate innovation.”
Instead, AI may be having the opposite effect, prolonging our reliance on fossil fuels and delaying a broader transition to cleaner energy.
“In the absence of continuous reinvestment, oil and gas production would fall by approximately 8 percent annually,” the Nature paper says, quoting IEA reports, and “technological progress has repeatedly delayed ‘peak oil’ forecasts by unlocking resources previously considered un-viable.”
Equinor’s website recognizes the growing scarcity of oil reserves, noting that undersea oil and gas discoveries have dramatically declined in recent decades. “Even with planned projects, the (production) trend is downward,” it states. “Gently at first, but more noticeably if we don’t act fast to create new resource opportunities. This will affect value creation across Norway.”
Chevron’s Booth, meanwhile, says there’s still enough oil, “and technology and innovation will unlock that,” though he also admitted we would need all forms of energy to meet the world’s demand.
In spite of concerns about future scarcity, wartime windfalls and beneficial policies have recently brought record profits for major oil and gas companies, news reports show.
After the August Nature article showing that AI helps the fossil fuel industry create more pollution, Johanna Fornberg, a Greenpeace senior research specialist, said in a statement that, while Big Tech continues to promise that AI technologies will benefit humanity and offer climate solutions, “what is hidden from that story is the aggressive support tech companies provide to fossil fuel companies to continue producing oil and gas that harms communities and the climate.”
Microsoft’s 2025 Responsible AI Transparency Report also said that its enterprise contracts “incorporate our AI Services Code of Conduct, which requires our customers to implement responsible practices (such as human oversight and access controls) and prohibits using our AI services in ways that inflict harm on individuals, organizations, or society, or affects individuals in any way that is otherwise prohibited by law.”
Alpine said very little action is being taken to regulate the use of AI’s climate impacts. Microsoft announced in 2022 that it would only work in certain capacities with companies with net zero targets, she said, but “they don’t follow any standards for net zero.”
That principle, which is listed on Microsoft’s website, says the company may provide “technical or engineering resources to develop or co-develop specialized subsurface exploration and extraction services” or provide products at no cost to energy customers with goals to reach net zero Scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions by 2050.
Exxon and Chevron have both walked back their plans to reach net zero by 2050, saying that necessary advancements in technology and policy that are beyond their control haven’t materialized. Exxon now says it’s on track to achieve net zero across its Permian Basin operations by 2035, while Chevron “continues to have the aspiration” to achieve net zero, but without a timeline.
Microsoft did not respond to a question about whether the changes to Exxon’s and Chevron’s net zero goals has affected the companies’ agreements. Chevron, Equinor, and Exxon also did not respond to requests for comment.
Equinor says it intends to become net zero by 2050 “as part of its commitment to do zero harm to people, the environment, and material assets.”
UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham says ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him. He says that he’s delayed the go-ahead for Jackdaw and Rosebank North Sea oil and gas extraction until after the Holborn and St. Pancras by-election – don’t want democracy interfering with Capitalism.Donald Trump urges you to ignore facts and reality and 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 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.
Green MP, Adrian Ramsay, has responded to Ed Miliband’s speech at Labour conference, where he said that parties that deny the dangers posed by the climate crisis are a threat to national security. The foreign secretary went on to ask: “Let us therefore ask each and every party, where do you stand on tackling the climate crisis?
Adrian Ramsay said “Ed Miliband is right to highlight the threat that climate breakdown poses to our national security – though the government is still to release all the evidence UK intelligence agencies have provided on this.
“The Foreign Secretary also asked today where each and every party stands on tackling the climate crisis. Good question.
“The Green Party is unequivocal: no new drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea. No green light for a third runway at Heathrow. And we want to see massive investment in upgrading our homes, cleaning up our energy system, and improving transport to tackle the climate crisis and cut people’s bills.”
“So we ask Labour: where do you stand on these issues?”
Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London. (Photo: Handout/Chris J. Ratcliffe for Greenpeace via Getty Images)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 Richards
This morning the Green Party leadership, Green MPs and Green peers co-signed a letter to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Miatta Fahnbulleh, to urge her not to approve the Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea, citing the fact that it will not reduce energy prices, protect jobs, or give the UK energy sovereignty.
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
The full text of the letter is as follows:
Dear Miatta,
Do not approve Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea.
We are writing in response to alarming reports that you intend to give the go ahead to the Jackdaw gas field as soon as next week. As Green MPs and peers we cannot sit back and watch you proceed unchallenged with this act of climate vandalism.
Approving new drilling at Jackdaw will not take a penny off energy costs nor protect jobs. As you said last month, “if you care about affordability, North Sea does not solve that problem for you”, with UK bill-payers still facing the highest energy prices in three years this winter, as a result of our continued exposure to volatile global gas markets. Further, jobs in the North Sea have been in decline for two decades. Jackdaw would only create 27 direct full-time jobs, with the platform unstaffed for most of its operating life and much of the construction already having taken place in Norway. It is completely dishonest of your government to use the legitimate concerns of job security and the cost of living to falsely justify more fossil fuel extraction.
Approving Jackdaw will not give the UK energy sovereignty. Even under the most optimistic scenarios Jackdaw is projected to contribute just 2% of UK gas demand over its lifetime (Uplift, 2026). We know that the only way to achieve energy sovereignty is to get the UK off fossil fuels as fast as possible, by significantly scaling up renewable energy and electrification.
Approving new oil and gas will add fuel to the fire of the climate emergency. Last week, the UN Environment Programme warned that “immediate and sustained cuts to greenhouse gas emissions” were crucial to avoid the worst impacts of climate breakdown. Approving more fossil fuels, at a time when the UK has just experienced record-breaking and deathly heatwaves and wildfires, is a complete dereliction of responsibility.
Approving Jackdaw will line the pockets of shareholders. The operating company, Adura, a joint venture between Shell and Equinor, has been criticised for potentially allowing Shell to write off £1.3 billion in UK tax (Global Witness, 2025). Shell has also faced criticism that it paid little or no tax in this country over several years despite huge global profits. Instead of new drilling, we need to ensure that the existing tax instruments, like the windfall tax, actually bring in the revenue that was promised, and end the subsidies that multinational oil and gas companies have received at UK taxpayers’ expense.
We are therefore urging you to be straight with the public – and instead focus on measures that would actually bring down bills and create secure jobs, like scaling up cheaper home-grown renewables, rolling out a fully-funded national home insulation programme, fully decoupling the price of electricity from gas, and ending rampant profiteering by energy companies.
Your government promised change, not continuity. Approving Jackdaw, after the hottest summer on record, isn’t doing things differently. The new Prime Minister must not repeat Keir Starmer’s mistake of treating climate and nature as second order. Change starts with ruling out all new oil and gas.
Yours sincerely,
Carla Denyer MP Dr Ellie Chowns MP Adrian Ramsay MP Hannah Spencer MP Siân Berry MP Zack Polanski, Leader of the Green Party Mothin Ali, Deputy Leader of the Green Party Rachel Millward, Deputy Leader of the Green Party Anthony Slaughter, Wales Green Party Leader Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb
Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London. (Photo: Handout/Chris J. Ratcliffe for Greenpeace via Getty Images)