Greenpeace granted permission for judicial review of Rosebank and Jackdaw fields

Greenpeace UK has been granted permission by the Scottish courts for judicial review of the controversial Rosebank oil field, and the Jackdaw gas field. Greenpeace's legal grounds on which they are taking the fight to Equinor, Shell and Ithaca, have all been given permission by the court, and a date has been set for the case to be heard on 12 November 2024.

Greenpeace argues that for both Rosebank and Jackdaw the impact of emissions caused from burning the oil and gas extracted from those fields was unlawfully ignored. Since the Supreme Court ruled in June that these emissions must be taken into account, the government decided it would not defend the cases - a tacit acceptance of the illegality. Greenpeace will argue that burning the oil and gas whilst ignoring its harmful effects is both illegal and unsafe in the middle of a climate crisis. In the case of Rosebank, they also argue that it would damage a protected area of the North Sea and the diverse marine life it supports.

Mel Evans, Greenpeace UK's climate team leader, said: 

“It's welcome news that we have permission on all of our legal grounds to challenge Rosebank and Jackdaw in two months' time. We will continue to fight the corporate greed of fossil fuel companies like Equinor, Shell and Ithaca, and we look forward to our day in court. 

“Both the government and the Supreme Court agree that you cannot ignore the emissions generated from burning fossil fuels. Equinor, Shell and Ithaca know this, and they know that the consents for these fields are unlawful. But despite this they are continuing to develop them during this judicial review, putting people, marine life, and our climate at further risk. 

“Rosebank and Jackdaw will do nothing to help our energy security or bring down our bills, the oil and gas extracted will be sold on the international market, making these companies, their bosses and shareholders even richer. 

“If it went ahead, the Rosebank oil field could release as much carbon as 56 coal plants running for a year, costing UK taxpayers billions in subsidies, while lining the pockets of its big oil owners. And the Jackdaw field will produce more CO2 than the annual emissions of Ghana. The oil companies are trying to hide this from the public and the government. That's why we're taking the fight to the oil companies in the Scottish courts in November.”

Ends 

Notes to Editors

1.  

2. Rosebank, 80 miles north-west of Shetland, contains around 500 million barrels of oil, which when burned would emit as much carbon dioxide as running 56 coal-fired power stations for a year. The UK public will carry almost all (91%) the cost of developing the field, with Rosebank's owners set to receive around £3 billion in tax breaks. Yet the project won't cut household energy bills: Rosebank's oil will be sold on the world market and most will be exported, and UK oil and gas production does not make a material difference to the price UK consumers pay.

3. Greenpeace UK notes that the Energy Secretary's consent for Rosebank and JAckdaw was based on an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which deliberately excluded consideration of downstream emissions. It argues that the decision is invalid because "in excluding downstream emissions" the EIA did not meet the requirement to assess the “direct and indirect effects of the use of the extracted hydrocarbons on human health, the environment, and climate change.”

4. Greenpeace UK also argues that Rosebank is unlawful because it breaches the Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations and there is no evidence that Scottish Ministers were consulted about its impacts.

5. Drilling will take place in the Faroe-Shetland Sponge Belt Nature Conservation Marine Protected Area (NCMPA) and only 25km from an important breeding site for seabirds in the Seas off Foula Special Protected Area. Drilling and laying subsea cable will destroy habitats for sponges and other species living on the seabed while oil contamination would affect whales and wild birds.

6. Uplift is also mounting a separate legal challenge on Rosebank with additional grounds.

7. In June this year, the UK Supreme Court ruled in favour of Sarah Finch and the Weald Action Group in a separate legal fight against oil drilling plans in Surrey. The court concluded that the approval process should have considered the emissions created when the oil is burned after being sold – and not just the emissions from extracting the fuel. This decision sets a precedent for the Rosebank and Jackdaw cases.