Response to ruling on Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields

In response to a ruling by the Court of Session in Edinburgh that consent for two new Scottish oil and gas fields was granted unlawfully:
Josh Burke, Distinguished Policy Fellow at the at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science, said:
“This is a critical decision, particularly on top of yesterday’s announcement by the Chancellor that she will be supporting in principle the expansion of Heathrow Airport, which will put huge pressure on future carbon budgets.
“The development of Rosebank and Jackdaw would have made no significant difference to the UK’s energy security, or the prices consumers pay for heating and electricity. The verdict rightfully quashed the approval of a new oil site in the North Sea on the grounds that the vast emissions produced when the oil and gas is burned had not properly been factored into the decision.
“The evidence is clear and should not be ignored: the development of North Sea fossil fuel infrastructure would encourage other producers around the world to carry on as well, and would be incompatible with efforts to limit global warming to 1.5 Celsius degrees. If the Government is serious about its climate commitments it must reject any future applications from Equinor, or any other company, for new development in the North Sea.”
Catherine Higham, Senior Policy Fellow at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science, said:
“Today’s judgment is the latest to confirm that the Supreme Court’s decision in Finch is widely applicable to new fossil fuel projects across the UK. This shows that the courts understand that the public has a strong legal interest in scrutinizing all the climate impacts associated with such projects. This is an example of the courts performing their constitutional role and ensuring that all relevant evidence is considered in government decision-making.
“While the proponents could still submit a new application, the implications of the project for the UK’s energy transition would then be subject to enhanced public scrutiny. While the decision about whether to proceed with North Sea oil and gas development ultimately still rests with the government, court judgments like this have the potential to change the policy context in which those decisions are made.”