In September 2023, the former Conservative government approved the application for the largest undeveloped oil field in the UK’s North Sea: Rosebank. Owned by Norwegian oil giant Equnior, Rosebank holds around 500 million barrels of oil equivalent and overlaps with a Marine Protected Area. Its development would have significant implications for climate and nature, do next to nothing to support energy security or lower bills and would be a step backwards on a path to transitioning away from oil and gas. The controversial field has received widespread opposition and is under legal challenge.
Rosebank will not deliver energy security or lower bills
- Rosebank is a complex, high-cost and risky field which will not begin producing for many years.
- 90% of Rosebank’s reserves are oil, not gas, the majority of which will be exported. Equinor has said that Rosebank’s oil "will be sold on the open market, and the most likely destination for that oil is the continent of Europe."
- Stopping the Rosebank development would not stop Equinor’s existing production, and oil and gas will continue to be produced from existing fields in the North Sea for many years to come.
- The central problem facing the UK is not one of energy supply but energy affordability. Average energy bills are 50% more than three years ago and millions are in energy debt. Increasing domestic supply through fields like Rosebank will make no difference to gas prices - a fact that former Conservative government ministers have publicly admitted.
- The only way to permanently lower bills and deliver genuine energy security is to insulate homes and accelerate the building of homegrown renewable energy - moves which are popular with the public. Polling shows that the public are three times more likely to think renewable power will bring their bills down than fossil fuels, and that the previous Conservative government’s decision to backtrack on key energy transition timelines played a key role in their election defeat.
Rosebank will not support a just transition
- The North Sea’s shift away from oil and gas production is already underway, as the basin’s reserves decline. Over the past decade, the number of jobs supported by the oil and gas industry in the UK has more than halved, despite new fields being approved.
- Equinor suggests Rosebank will create 1600 jobs, but in reality it will support an average of 255 UK-based jobs directly – less than a sixth of the advertised number.
- In a declining basin, the only way to create long term, secure jobs is to invest in a just transition and support workers into clean energy industries that have a future.
Rosebank would be disastrous for the climate
- Burning Rosebank’s oil and gas would produce over 200 million tonnes of CO2, more than the 28 lowest-income countries produce in a year combined. These are among the same countries that have contributed the least to the climate crisis and are already experiencing its worst impacts.
- The International Energy Agency, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and numerous climate scientists agree that new oil and gas developments put the Paris Agreement goal to limit the global average temperature increase at serious risk. Governments already plan to produce 110% more fossil fuels in 2030 than is consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C.
- In its latest progress report to UK parliament, the Climate Change Committee is clear that limiting the expansion of fossil fuel production must be a key priority for the government this year and that “UK policy on future oil and gas production should be aligned with Global Stocktake calls to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels”.
- Analysis shows that developing Rosebank would push the UK’s oil and gas industry further beyond its targets for reducing production emissions. Rosebank would hit first oil in 2026-2028, start declining in 2033 and stop producing in 2051, a year after the UK economy should have reached net zero.
- Even if Rosebank is electrified, which Equinor has said would not happen until 2030 at the earliest, the industry would still overshoot the reductions required to bring emissions from production to net zero by 2050. Further, electrification of Rosebank and nearby fields could require the diversion of enough energy to power more than 450,000 UK homes.
Rosebank poses a direct threat to ocean life
- Rosebank will have a pipeline through a specially-protected seabed - the Faroe-Shetland Sponge Belt, potentially harming this fragile ecosystem and the creatures within it.
- Modelling shows that a major oil spill from Rosebank could risk serious impact to at least sixteen UK Marine Protected Areas. The area that will be impacted by the development is also visited by numerous species of dolphin, whales, seabirds and commercial species such as haddock.
- Polling shows that three quarters of the UK public are opposed to oil and gas developments in protected areas of the sea. In 2019, Canada banned oil and gas developments in its protected areas, and other jurisdictions have similar measures in place. The UK risks falling behind.
- The approval of Rosebank undermines the government’s target to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 as leader of the Global Ocean Alliance.
Rosebank’s approval is widely opposed and potentially unlawful
- The decision to grant a development consent to Rosebank is now under legal challenge from Uplift and Greenpeace. The organisations have grounds to believe that the approval of Rosebank is unlawful based on failures in the assessment of environmental impacts created by burning Rosebank's oil, the incompatibility of Rosebank's development with the UK's climate targets, and lack of transparency in the decision-making process.
- A recent decision by the UK Supreme Court ruled that the granting of planning permission for an oil drilling project in Surrey was unlawful for ignoring the combustion emissions that would occur when the oil is burned. Following this decision, it is more likely that the legal challenge to Rosebank will be successful and if it is, the original decision to grant consent to the field will be quashed, providing the Labour government with the opportunity to make a fresh decision on Rosebank that takes its full climate impact into account. It is hoped that, in these circumstances, the new government would reject the field.
