‍

‍Rosebank: The government’s climate test

Parliamentary Briefing

Rosebank: key information

The UK government has the opportunity to make a new decision on whether to approve or reject Rosebank – the UK’s largest undeveloped oil field.
Rosebank is majority owned by Adura - a new 50/50 joint venture between Shell and Equinor and now the biggest oil and gas producer in the UK. The oil companies have reapplied for drilling permission for Rosebank. This follows the field’s initial approval by the previous government being ruled unlawful for failing to take into account the full impact that burning Rosebank’s reserves will have on the climate.
The new decision on Rosebank is subject to a tightened environmental impact assessment process, requiring the full emissions from burning Rosebank’s reserves to be counted for the first time.
The assessment of Rosebank’s full climate harm is now required alongside existing appraisals of its economic impact and compatibility with UK energy policy, which includes the government’s new objective “to take a globally standard-setting, 1.5°C and climate science-aligned approach to future oil and gas production”.
With the government now assessing new projects on their compatibility with climate goals, Rosebank will be a defining test of this government’s climate credibility.

Rosebank is a red line for the UK’s climate commitments

Rosebank’s projected CO2 emissions are vast – more than the 700 million people living in the world’s poorest countries produce in a year. It will be obvious, when all Rosebank’s emissions are counted, that developing this vast oil field is not compatible with a liveable climate or the UK’s climate commitments.
A recent academic study concluded that opening any new North Sea oil and gas fields is inconsistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C. This is because emissions from burning reserves in existing and planned oil and gas fields globally would exceed the remaining carbon budget for 1.5°C by a long way.
The Climate Change Committee advises that limiting the expansion of fossil fuel production must be a key priority for the UK government and that “UK policy on future oil and gas production should be aligned with Global Stocktake calls to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels”. While acknowledging that the UK will continue to need some oil and gas until it reaches net zero, the Committee is clear that “this does not in itself justify the development of new North Sea fields”.
Approving Rosebank – which has received international media attention due to the controversy surrounding it – would undermine not just the government’s climate credentials, but its clean energy mission. New oil risks sending contradictory signals to investors, undermining the confidence and capital needed to deliver the UK’s clean power goal.

Rosebank is a bad deal for the UK

Due to the UK’s generous oil and gas tax regime, the UK public would shoulder over 80% of the costs – and the vast majority of risk – from developing Rosebank. In a base-case scenario with a long-term average oil price of $70 a barrel, Rosebank could result in a net loss of over £250 million to the UK Treasury, while the field’s owners Equinor and Ithaca would earn £1.5 billion in profit.
Since Equinor is majority-owned by the Norwegian state, Norwegian citizens stand to gain far more from Rosebank than the UK does. In effect, Rosebank is a redistribution of wealth away from the UK public to one of the richest countries in the world.
The claim that oil and gas profits are needed to invest in the transition does not stand up to scrutiny. Equinor – like most oil and gas companies operating in the North Sea – is not investing in renewables. Less than 1% of Equinor's energy came from renewable sources in 2024. More broadly, only seven out of 87 North Sea operators plan to invest anything in renewable energy by 2030.

Rosebank will not deliver energy security or lower bills

90% of Rosebank’s reserves are oil, not gas, the majority of which will be exported. Equinor has said that Rosebank’s oil "will be sold on the open market, and the most likely destination for that oil is the continent of Europe."
Rosebank’s minimal gas reserves only have the potential to reduce UK annual gas import dependency by just 1% on average.
The UK’s exposure to fossil fuels is the primary driver of high energy bills for families and businesses. The UN Secretary-General has said that “The greatest threat to energy security today is fossil fuels. They leave economies and people at the mercy of price shocks, supply disruptions and geopolitical turmoil.”
Approving Rosebank would send contradictory signals to investors, undermining the confidence and capital needed to deliver the Clean Power Mission and locking the UK into a cycle of dependency, precisely when the government’s goal is to reduce UK billpayers’ exposure to volatile fossil fuel markets and unlock the benefits of clean energy. It would also contradict the Prime Minister’s statement that “Climate action is at the heart of this government’s mission for the protection and prosperity of Britain and the world.”

‍Rosebank will not protect North Sea workers

New fields like Rosebank will not stem the decline of jobs in the North Sea, which is now a mature basin in steep decline. Over the past decade, the number of jobs supported by the North Sea oil and gas industry has more than halved, despite new fields being approved
The industry claim that Rosebank will create thousands of jobs is inflated. Equinor estimates that an average of 500 UK-based jobs could be supported throughout the entire lifetime of the field. The main offshore vessel is being built in Dubai, which Scottish trade unionists called a “shocking betrayal of Scotland’s workers”.
With the North Sea’s oil and gas reserves in terminal decline, the only way to protect workers is to invest in renewable industries with a long-term future and to create clear pathways into new, good-quality jobs in those industries.

Rosebank faces broad, sustained opposition

The Stop Rosebank campaign represents over one million people and more than 500 civil society organisations, united in calling for an end to all new oil and gas developments in the UK, and a properly funded plan for energy workers and communities.
Over 250 organisations - including RSPB, Amnesty International UK and The Church of Scotland - signed an open letter calling for Starmer to reject Rosebank. Our campaign has also received the support of over 700 scientists and experts, 400 faith leaders, dozens of MPs and MSPs from every major political party, trade unionists, healthcare workers, farmers, young people, parents, fuel poverty campaigners and public figures.
In April, Stop Rosebank handed in 1 million petition signatures to 10 Downing Street, supported by Avaaz, Change.org, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the Earth Scotland, Global Justice Now, Greenpeace and 350.org.
Rosebank faces opposition from across the political spectrum. 46 MPs and 11 MSPs have officially signed the Stop Rosebank Pledge, and Rosebank has been mentioned over 100 times in the UK Parliament including a dedicated parliamentary debate over the environmental impact of the field.
Leader of the Liberal Democrats Ed Davey previously said Rosebank should not go ahead, with the party’s Energy Spokesperson restating this position in the House of Commons last year. Leader of the Green Party Zack Polanski warns Labour would “lose all credibility” on climate change if the government approves Rosebank. Even Labour’s former Business Secretary and current Chief Whip has previously said “We don't support Rosebank. We think the priority for the country should be transitioning away from fossil fuels.”

Stop Rosebank MP Pledge

We ask you to please join a growing list of cross-party MPs who have officially shown their support for our campaign through the Stop Rosebank MP pledge:

“I pledge to oppose the Rosebank oil field and advocate for a properly funded just transition for oil and gas workers and communities. I will advocate to fix the UK's broken energy system and mitigate climate breakdown through real solutions such as scaling up renewables, reducing our reliance on oil and gas and insulating our leaky homes.”

For a safe climate and affordable energy, we must end new oil and gas expansion while restoring Scotland’s position as a climate leader, and securing a properly-funded plan for a transition in the North Sea that supports workers and communities.

MP Briefing | No New Oil and Gas & Rosebank Oil Field