The Environmental Costs of The Rosebank Oil Development

Amy Stanton
1 day ago
4 min read

Maria Baeva explores the environmental impact of the Rosebank oil field and its implications for the UK’s climate commitments.

Photo by: Clyde Thomas

A not-for-profit paper, advocating for those topics that matter. Subscribe from £1.16 today.

World Leaders are being called upon to address the planet’s rising temperatures and take action to slow the effects of global warming, ensuring a liveable future for generations to come.

However, not everyone shares this sense of urgency, as powerful industries and governments continue to invest in new fossil fuel extraction projects. In a push to drive action, environmental activists have taken matters into their own hands, launching powerful campaigns to protest new oil and gas field developments across the UK.

One reserve in particular that has grabbed the public’s attention is Rosebank, currently the UK’s biggest new development. There is much to unpack when it comes to the UK’s presence and contributions in the world of fossil fuel generation and Rosebank is just the tip of the iceberg.

Did you know? Rosebank is the UK’s biggest undeveloped oil field, located 80 miles off the Shetland coast, With 90% of the reserves being oil, it is projected to release 200 million tonnes of CO2 over its lifetime.

What is Rosebank?

Rosebank is the UK’s biggest undeveloped oil field, located 80 miles off the Shetland coast. In September 2023, the Government then under the Conservative Party approved the development of the field by the Norwegian oil giant, Equinor, and its partner Ithaca Energy. After the initial go-ahead, the Rosebank development is expected to begin oil extraction between 2026 and 2028.

With 90% of the reserves being oil and projections of over 200 million tonnes of CO2 being released into the atmosphere over its lifetime, the Rosebank development in the North Sea would have a significant impact on the planet. In terms of scale, the emissions that would be generated by Rosebank would be equivalent to the annual CO2 emissions of all 28 lowest-income countries in the world, including Uganda, Ethiopia and Mozambique.‍

Naturally, such a large amount of human-generated carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere would cause numerous problems, further contributing to the climate crisis by accelerating global warming, leading to rising sea levels and ocean acidification.

It would also see a pipeline being laid through a protected area of the North Sea, threatening the diverse marine life it supports while also undermining global efforts to reduce fossil fuel use amid consistent rising temperatures around the world.

The Rosebank project sparked controversy even before its development was completed. On the one hand, it will have a significant negative contribution to the ongoing climate crisis. On the other, Equinor have claimed that the development would create 1,600 jobs and contribute to energy security which, in light of the energy spikes that have impacted the UK, make for a compelling case.

However, a report published by Uplift casts doubt on the number of jobs that could be created, suggesting that only around 255 would be made available from the development.

Where Did It All Start?

Beyond the obvious impact it would have on the planet, the harsh reality is that Rosebank is neither the first nor the last oil field development to be proposed and approved by the UK.

Take Cambo for instance, the UK’s second largest undeveloped oil and gas field and Rosebank’s neighbour by approximately 20 miles. It became a widely discussed topic in 2021, with the hashtag ‘#StopCambo’ flooding the internet to halt the development and prevent an estimated 132 million tonnes of CO2 emissions from being released into the atmosphere.

This debate unfolded against the backdrop of COP26, where world leaders convened to discuss strategies for achieving net-zero emissions. The summit’s agenda focused on acknowledging the climate emergency caused by human-induced global warming, developing a unified action plan and prioritising the transition away from fossil fuels. Considering these discussions, the UK’s commitment to developing Cambo faced strong opposition from climate activists and the wider public.

"With 90% of the reserves being oil and projections of over 200 million tonnes of CO2 being released into the atmosphere over its lifetime, the Rosebank development in the North Sea would have a significant impact on the planet."

Where Does This Leave Us Now?

In December 2021, Shell, a major stakeholder in the Cambo project, announced it would pull out, citing the lack of economic justification for investing in the development, along with concerns over delays. Shortly after, Cambo’s remaining stakeholder, Siccar Point Energy, put the development on hold as it assessed its next steps. While campaigners, who protested the project successfully, have halted its progress for the time being, the broader outcome remains uncertain. It is still unclear whether the Cambo development will resume or if another stakeholder will step in.

As for the Rosebank development, in 2024, environmental campaigners, Uplift and Greenpeace, each made a separate case to the Court of Session in Edinburgh, aiming to overturn the UK government’s approval of the Rosebank oil field and the Jackdaw gas field, located 150 miles east of Aberdeen. In January of this year, the court ruled that due to the environmental impact not being fully considered during the planning process, the approval for both projects was unlawfully granted.

While this is encouraging news for climate activists who fought hard to be heard, the battle is far from over. Although the court ruled against the projects, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, hinted that they would likely still be approved in the future, stating that “North Sea oil and gas is going to be really important to the UK economy for many, many decades to come.”

The Road Ahead

The fight against fossil fuel expansion is intensifying, with Rosebank emerging as a symbol of the broader struggle between those advocating for meaningful climate action through fossil fuel divestment and a government whose decisions appear to stray from the UK’s net-zero commitments. While campaigners have scored a few significant legal victories, the persistence of governments and oil giants like Equinor, Ithaca Energy and more show us that the road to net zero is going to be a long and laborious one.