© Supplied by Teekay The UK government has issued new guidance for environmental impact assessments for proposed oil and gas projects, after a Scottish court last year overturned approval for the Rosebank and Jackdaw developments in the North Sea.
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) said the revised guidance provides “clarity” on how oil and gas developers should account for downstream, or scope three, emissions in their consent applications.
DESNZ said the guidance “will ensure the full effects of fossil fuel extraction on the environment are recognised in consenting decisions”.
Offshore developers can now submit their applications for oil and gas projects, a process which had been put on hold following the Finch Supreme Court judgement.
Energy minister Michael Shanks said the new guidance “offers clarity on the way forward for the North Sea oil and gas industry”.
“It marks a step forward in ensuring the full implications of oil and gas extraction are considered for potential projects and that we ensure a managed, prosperous, and orderly transition to the North Sea’s clean energy future, in line with the science,” Shanks said.
© Supplied by Roddie Reid/ DCT“We are working with industry, trade unions, local communities and environmental groups to ensure the North Sea and its workers are at the heart of Britain’s clean energy future for decades to come – supporting well-paid, skilled jobs, driving growth and boosting our energy security.”
The announcement comes as Labour continues to attract strong criticism from the North Sea oil and gas sector over the impact of its taxation and energy policies.
Rosebank and Jackdaw
Last year, a Scottish court overturned environmental approvals for the two North Sea oil and gas projects in a case centred on downstream emissions.
Campaign groups Greenpeace and Uplift had lodged the case after regulators and the previous Conservative government gave approval for Equinor and Ithaca Energy’s Rosebank project in 2023 and Shell’s Jackdaw project in 2022.
Despite overturning the two approvals, the Court of Session ruling allowed development work on the Rosebank and Jackdaw projects to continue while the operators resubmit their consent applications.
Following the ruling, the Labour ministers indicated they would consult with the industry on introducing changes to allow the oil and gas projects to go ahead.
Labour has argued the actions are in line with their 2024 election manifesto, in which the party said it would not issue exploration licences for “new fields”, but vowed to manage North Sea production “in a way that does not jeopardise jobs”.
© Supplied by Shell UKIn its submission to the court, Shell said it has already spent more than £800 million on what it said is a “nationally important” gas project.
Meanwhile, Equinor and Ithaca said they have already committed more than £2.2bn on Rosebank, the UK’s largest remaining untapped oil reserve.
Rosebank a test of Labour’s ‘climate credibility’
Environmental campaign group Uplift, one of the groups which challenged the government’s approval of Rosebank in court, said the new environmental guidance for oil and gas firms comes at a “critical moment” for climate action.
Uplift executive director Tessa Khan said the new rules mean North Sea oil and gas companies “will finally be forced to come clean over the enormous harm they are causing to the climate”.
“In the case of the Rosebank oil field, which Equinor can now seek reapproval for, it is overwhelmingly obvious that the project is incompatible with the UK’s climate commitments,” Khan said.
© Supplied by Andrea Domeniconi“Whether or not this government then follows the science and rejects Rosebank will be a real test of its climate credibility.”
Khan said the Rosebank project is “a bad deal for the UK”.
“It won’t lower fuel bills or boost our energy independence – most of its oil will be exported – and yet, thanks to generous tax breaks, the UK public will cover most of the costs of developing it,” Khan said.
Rosebank ‘should fail’ climate test
“Given the amount of pollution it will create – more than the annual emissions of the world’s 28 lowest-income countries – the case for rejection could not be stronger.”
Meanwhile, Greenpeace UK head of climate Mel Evans said Rosebank and other North Sea oil and gas projects “should fail the criteria ministers have just set out”.
“The government knows that drilling for fossil fuels is an economic dead end,” Evans said.
“Approving these projects would be a political sleight of hand that would benefit oil giants like Equinor and Shell, while leaving us hooked on fossil fuels just as another war in the Middle East is pushing up oil prices.
“Real energy security and future-proofed jobs for energy workers can only come through homegrown, cheap renewable energy, and that’s what ministers should focus on.”
