The UK Government has now approved the first of two major North Sea fields under consideration. Jackdaw, a gas field, was given the go-ahead in October, with supplies expected to reach homes by the end of the month. A decision on Rosebank, the larger field, mainly oil, is still pending. At COP31 in November, Andy Burnham said it will be made “in due course”.
Government and industry point to energy security to justify both. We think it’s worth noting what that can and can't deliver:
It won't lower bills. The price of oil and gas is set by what’s happening around the world, not by how much we produce here, as ministers themselves have acknowledged.
The security gain is small. Jackdaw could supply around 6% of UK gas production at peak, but analysis by Uplift suggests it displaces only around 2% of current gas imports over its lifetime. Rosebank, mainly oil, would displace around 1%. The UK will still need to import about half its gas, with or without these fields.
Read more about Jackdaw on the Ocean and Coastal Futures website.
Why EAND opposes Rosebank
Earth Action North Devon is against the development of Rosebank. Burning the oil it would produce adds to the carbon emissions driving climate change, and our coastline is already feeling the effects, from rising seas and eroding shores to more extreme storms. Opening up new fossil fuel fields also locks in decades of dependence on oil, while the benefits are small: no lower bills and very little extra security. Some argue the oil would still benefit the UK because it’s refined in Europe and then partly shipped back, but we’d still pay world prices for it, so it wouldn’t lower bills. We believe the money and effort would be better spent on renewables and energy efficiency, which can cut bills and strengthen security for good.
Jackdaw might be done, but Rosebank isn’t yet.
If you agree with us, join the #StopRosebank campaign:
