Climate activists challenge Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields in court

Climate activists are taking legal action against the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields in the North Sea, with their case set to be heard in court. Greenpeace UK and Uplift will argue that the emissions resulting from burning oil and gas from these fields were unlawfully disregarded during the approval process in the Court of Session in Edinburgh. They claim that the burning of oil and gas extracted from these fields is not only illegal but also hazardous, posing a threat to a protected area in the North Sea and its marine ecosystem. According to Uplift, the Rosebank oil field, located west of Shetland, contains fossil fuels equivalent to approximately 500 million barrels of oil, with 90% of its reserves being oil and the rest gas. The potential CO2 emissions from burning all the reserves are estimated to be around 200 million tonnes.

In response to the legal challenge, the UK Government has decided not to contest the judicial reviews brought against the Rosebank and Jackdaw fields in order to save public funds. Mel Evans, the climate team leader at Greenpeace UK, expressed determination to confront the fossil fuel industry’s pursuit of profit, naming companies like Equinor, Shell, and Ithaca. On the other hand, a spokesperson for Shell emphasised the importance of the Jackdaw project for UK energy security, citing the project’s advanced stage and contribution to heating 1.4 million UK homes. Equinor also affirmed its commitment to the Rosebank development, highlighting the project’s benefits in terms of local investment, job creation, and energy security.

The legal case is scheduled to commence at 11am on Tuesday, with the outcome anticipated to have significant implications for the future of oil and gas extraction in the region. With climate change concerns at the forefront, the activism and legal challenges by Greenpeace UK and Uplift underscore the growing resistance to fossil fuel projects and the call for more sustainable energy alternatives. Stakeholders await the court’s decision as a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over environmental protection versus industrial development in the North Sea.