Greenpeace UK and Uplift argue oil project is "incompatible” with UK climate commitments

The UK government is facing two separate legal challenges over its approval of the massive Rosebank oil project in the North Sea.

Both Greenpeace UK and climate group Uplift argue the approval of the oil field breaks the Government’s net zero pledges and fails to acknowledge the project’s environmental harm and emissions impact.

Uplift claims the Energy Secretary failed to prove how the oil field was consistent with the UK’s legally binding net zero emissions target and argues, the government did not provide a good enough assessment of the environmental impact of Rosebank on marine life.

In Greenpeace UK’s application, it argues the Environmental Impact Assessment used to approve the oil field did not consider downstream emissions, and is therefore invalid. The campaign group also argues that there is no evidence Scottish Ministers were consulted on the impacts of Rosebank, which it claims breaches Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations.

Greenpeace also argue oil contamination could affect whales and wild birds, while the drilling and cable laying under the sea could destroy habitats for species that live on the seabed.

Rishi Sunak gave the go-ahead for the controversial undeveloped oil field in September, set to be the UK’s largest untapped oil field containing an estimated 500 million barrels of oil. With Norwegian owner Equinor set to receive £3 billion in tax breaks.

Executive director of Uplift, also a climate lawyer, Tessa Khan, said: “If Rosebank goes ahead, the UK will blow its own plans to stay within safe climate limits. It’s that simple.

“If the government disagrees, it needs to provide evidence and prove it in court. The regulator also needs to be open about its reasons for approving a huge oil field when we’re facing a worsening climate crisis.”

Climate campaigners have argued that Rosebank will not help lower bills for UK households or boost UK energy security, as the oil will mostly be exported. Khan emphasised that the legal case is about, “forcing our government to put the public’s safety first, over their need to profit”.

A UK Government spokesperson said: “The UK is a world leader in reaching net zero – cutting emissions faster than any other major economy – and as the independent Climate Change Committee recognises, we will still need oil and gas as part of our energy mix.

“We will continue to back the UK’s oil and gas industry, which underpins our energy security, supports up to 200,000 jobs, and will provide around £50 billion in tax revenue over the next five years – helping fund our transition to net zero.”

Both campaign groups have applied to the Court of Session in Edinburgh for a judicial review of the Government’s decision to grant consent for the project.

(Image credit: Friends of the Earth Scotland)

Hannah Davenport is news reporter at Left Foot Forward, focusing on trade unions and environmental issues

Comments are closed.