Today (Tuesday) Greenpeace is in the High Court to challenge the
UK Government’s reckless decision to greenlight a new licensing
oil and gas round, with fossil fuel companies submitting more
than 100 licences to explore for new oil and gas. The oral
hearing today is a permissions hearing for Judicial Review on
this decision.
This comes one month after stark warnings from the IPCC and UN
Secretary General which yet again restated that there must be no
new fossil fuel development if the world is to limit warming to
1.5C, outlining that current approved projects are already enough
to take us beyond that point.
Greenpeace is challenging the Government on the basis that it has
botched the decision making process, carried out by Jacob Rees
Mogg in the first days of the Truss administration, and
failed to properly assess the climate impact of this new oil
and gas licensing round. None of the Government’s tests look at
emissions created from burning fossil fuels, despite the fact
that this will amount to more than 80% of the total emissions
generated from the new licences. The Government is also expected
to imminently approve the permit for Rosebank oilfield, the
biggest undeveloped oil field in the North Sea, so vast that it
would blow the UK’s carbon budget.
New oil and gas will do nothing to help our energy security, as
the oil and gas belongs to the companies extracting it who will
sell it at the prevailing price on the international market.
Campaigners argue that only prioritising renewables, upgrading
the grid, and stopping energy waste from our homes can achieve
this.
Legal experts have described the North Sea as the world’s
“highest risk” area for oil
and gas legal disputes. By focussing on old fashioned and dirty
fossil fuels the UK government is also falling dangerously far
behind other countries on their commitment to green growth
investments, only committing to £20bn over 20 years compared to
landmark programmes and billions committed to by the US with the
Inflation Reduction Act, and other significant investments from
the EU and China.
Philip Evans, Greenpeace UK’s climate campaigner,
said:
“We’ve had warning after warning that there must be no new oil,
and now time is running out. Yet the Government continues to
ignore the experts, approving new oil and gas without even
bothering to check the full climate impact. That’s why we’re
challenging them in the High Court today. If disagrees with the IPCC
assessment, the IEA, and warnings from the UN Chief we’d love to
hear his rationale.
“Relying on fossil fuels is disastrous for our energy security,
the cost of living, and the climate. So why is the Government
hell bent on approving new licences? It begs the question of
whose interests they really serve.
“The Government must instead properly tax fossil fuel companies
and use the money to upgrade our old fashioned electricity grid,
invest in cheap home grown renewables and lift planning blocks
that hold them back, and invest in stopping energy waste from our
homes. This is the only way we can tackle the scandal of the cost
of living, guarantee our energy security, and help the
climate.”
Ends
Notes to Editors
2. Greenpeace UK has instructed Kate Harrison of Harrison Grant
Ring.
3. Greenpeace’s initial application for Judicial Review on the
Government’s new oil and gas licences was rejected, so today
Greenpeace brings it to the High Court for an oral hearing.
4. Greenpeace argues that the Government has botched this
decision by failing to follow the Strategic Environmental
Assessments rules for plans which will affect the environment,
and has unlawfully failed to design its Climate Change Checkpoint
to take into account the environmental damage caused by burning
the oil and gas.
5. Greenpeace also argues that the co-defendant, the Oil and Gas
Authority, has unlawfully opened the new licensing round.
