Judicial Review Commences for Rosebank Oil Field Approval

Proceedings have commenced in Edinburgh regarding a legal challenge concerning the approval granted for the UK’s most significant undeveloped oil field. A judicial review, initiated jointly by the environmental organizations Greenpeace and Uplift, is currently being heard at the Court of Session. These groups aim to halt the progression of the Rosebank oil field, situated off Shetland, and the Jackdaw gas field, located off Aberdeen. Conversely, oil companies assert the critical importance of these projects. Should the legal action prevail, operators would be required to submit new environmental impact assessments for endorsement prior to the commencement of drilling operations. Activists advocating for the cessation of these projects staged a demonstration outside the courthouse on Tuesday morning. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), the regulatory body, authorized drilling in the Rosebank field in September of the previous year. Shell’s plans for the Jackdaw field received NSTA approval in 2022, following an initial refusal based on environmental concerns. According to the environmental organizations, regulators “unlawfully ignored” the impact of emissions resulting from the combustion of extracted oil and gas when permission for the fields was granted. Uplift further alleged that regulators were “failing to be transparent” during the consent process and stated that the Rosebank project would harm marine ecosystems in the North Sea. In August, the UK government announced its decision not to contest any legal actions concerning Rosebank and Jackdaw. This stance effectively acknowledged that the initial approvals were unlawful. This development followed a Supreme Court judgment in June, which mandated that regulators must account for the comprehensive environmental impact of new ventures, encompassing the consumption of fossil fuels by end users. It is anticipated that the oil companies will concede the unlawfulness of the decisions to greenlight Rosebank and Jackdaw, attributing this to an inadequate assessment of the emissions these projects would generate. Their focus is expected to shift towards determining the path forward for the projects, considering that operations have already commenced. Ruth Crawford KC, representing Greenpeace in the proceedings, informed the court that the greenhouse gas emissions emanating from Rosebank and Jackdaw would be “sizeable and significant,” leading to a “substantial impact” on both the environment and human health. She further stated that the UK government had acknowledged an “error of law” in its failure to consider the greenhouse gas emissions (identified as Scope 3 emissions) resulting from the eventual combustion of oil and gas extracted from Rosebank and Jackdaw. Ms Crawford contended that while issuing a licence is ultimately a political determination, it must only occur subsequent to a lawful consenting procedure that incorporates an environmental impact assessment considering Scope 3 emissions. She asserted that politicians, when evaluating oil and gas ventures, ought not to focus solely on immediate concerns but also on their protracted climatic consequences. In this particular instance, she maintained, they neglected this responsibility (due to the unavailability of data regarding Scope 3 emissions). She argued that permitting these two fields to advance without a fresh environmental impact assessment that incorporates Scope 3 emissions “would be to completely ignore that a crucial part of the decision making has not happened and will never happen.” Greenpeace, she clarified, was not seeking the removal of oil rigs and drilling apparatus. Instead, it was merely requesting that the implicated oil and gas companies “do no further work to get petroleum from the fields.” She concluded by stating: “The work must stop. No more. No less.” Alastair Duncan KC, representing Uplift, affirmed or supported numerous arguments presented by Greenpeace. He additionally responded to written statements submitted on behalf of the oil and gas corporations, whose legal representatives are anticipated to address the court later in the week. These submissions, he noted, essentially portrayed the companies as “an innocent third party” that had legitimately depended on what seemed to be a “stable legal landscape” when making multi-million pound investment choices. Conversely, Mr Duncan contended that the legal environment had been highly volatile, and Rosebank’s developers, Equinor and Ithaca, were now “the beneficiaries of an unlawful decision,” seeking the court “to allow them to continue to be the beneficiaries of an unlawful decision.” Mr Duncan proceeded to detail an additional objection regarding the approval of consent for Rosebank. He asserted that, in authorizing the field, the Oil and Gas Authority (presently known as the North Sea Transition Authority) had unlawfully and illogically neglected to provide justification for its determination. Uplift holds a third grievance against the decision, alleging that both the former government and the regulatory body did not sufficiently evaluate the marine environmental effects of Rosebank. The Rosebank field is co-owned by the Norwegian energy conglomerate Equinor and the British company Ithaca Energy. They have stated that the project would generate approximately 1,600 employment opportunities during its construction phase and sustain around 450 UK-based positions throughout its operational lifespan. Equinor chose not to provide a statement while the legal proceedings were active, but affirmed its ongoing commitment to “work closely with all relevant parties to progress the project.” The company further stated: “It is vital for the UK and will bring benefits in terms of local investment, jobs and energy security.” A spokesperson for Shell asserted that the Jackdaw development had proceeded in accordance with all pertinent approvals and licences. He further remarked: “Jackdaw is a vital project for UK energy security and the project is already well advanced.” He continued: “Stopping the work is a highly complex process, with significant technical and operational issues now that infrastructure is in place and drilling has started in the North Sea.” He concluded: “Jackdaw will provide enough fuel to heat 1.4m UK homes as older gas fields reach the end of production.” The UK government has previously committed to oil and gas maintaining a significant economic role “for decades to come” as the nation shifts towards clean energy sources. The Scottish government has previously indicated a “presumption against” new oil and gas exploration. Nevertheless, First Minister John Swinney stated in June that it would remain necessary “for a period of time” to assist the country in achieving its net-zero objectives by 2045. Both administrations declared it unsuitable to comment on ongoing legal proceedings. The NSTA similarly refrained from commenting on the active case.