What to know about the debate around oil and gas drilling in the North Sea

LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s decision to approve a gas extraction project off the coast of Scotland was a disappointment to environmental groups, which have long argued that going ahead with more drilling will accelerate climate change.

The decision on whether to approve new oil and gas projects in the North Sea has been a key test of Burnham’s government, which insists it is committed to transitioning to renewable energy.

The government gave the green light on Wednesday for the Jackdaw gas field east of Aberdeen. It is still weighing a decision for a second North Sea project, Rosebank, said to be the U.K.’s largest untapped oil resource.

Environmental groups have urged Burnham to refuse permission for the projects, saying they would accelerate climate change at a time when the U.K., like the rest of Europe, faces record extreme heat linked to human actions including burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas.

But opposition politicians, the oil and gas industry and U.S. President Donald Trump have piled pressure on Burnham to give the green light, arguing it would protect jobs, cut household bills and boost Britain’s energy security.

British officials have been expected to make a decision since August, when public consultations on the two projects closed.

The two oil and gas projects off Scotland

Rosebank is an oil field that also will produce gas. Located 80 miles (130 kilometers) north of Scotland’s Shetland Islands, it is estimated to be the largest undeveloped oil and gas field in the U.K., reportedly with capacity to produce 300 million to 500 million barrels of oil within about 25 years.

Jackdaw is a gas field 150 miles east of Aberdeen on Scotland’s northeast coast. Production there was expected to last under a decade. The Shell Group, one of the project’s co-developers, predicts the field can produce around 6.5% of the U.K.’s gas production at its peak.

The projects were granted permission but overruled in court

The former Conservative government previously approved production at both sites, which were scheduled to start operations later this year.

But a court in Edinburgh ruled last year that the approvals were unlawful, after considering a legal challenge from Greenpeace and another nonprofit.

“The public interest in authorities acting lawfully and the private interest of members of the public in climate change outweigh the private interest of the developers,” Judge Andrew Stewart ruled at the time.

Critics say drilling won’t bring significant benefits

Critics have argued that the oil and gas reserves in Britain’s North Sea holdings are small and would make little difference to energy bills because prices are decided by international markets. They contend that new developments would increase carbon emissions while failing to contribute to Britain’s energy security.

Analysts at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, a London-based nonprofit, estimated that more than 90% of the oil and gas likely to be produced from the North Sea has already been extracted.

“We’ve just had record-breaking heat waves this summer, wildfires, half of the country’s still in drought. We’re facing potential crop failures and food shortages this winter from a super El Niño,” said Victoria Smith, a Fossil Free London activist.

“Drilling for new oil and gas now … would just be a wild decision, completely reckless by this government,” she said.

Almost 600 climate and health experts wrote a joint letter to the government last month arguing that approving the projects would breach the U.K.’s national and international climate commitments.

Separately, critics also have raised concerns about Rosebank’s links to Israeli company Delek Group, which activists say profited from Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Green Party leader Zach Polanski is among critics who have asked how the U.K. can ensure revenue from any oil and gas production did not finance the settlements.

Supporters of drilling include Trump

Supporters of further drilling say it will not make a significant difference to emissions and is vital for protecting jobs. Some also argue that domestic production will result in less carbon emissions than importing oil and gas.

The governing Labour Party is split on the issue. Some warned that going ahead will renege on the party’s pledge in its 2024 manifesto not to issue new licenses for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea.

Others disagree. “If we do not proceed with Jackdaw and Rosebank, investment will leave the UK, jobs will disappear and expertise will be lost,” lawmaker Graeme Downie said.

The issue became more politicized after Trump waded in. The U.S. president, who criticized former Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s energy policies, claimed in August that people in Aberdeen were “dancing in the streets” following reports that Burnham would approve new drilling.

In his first phone call with Trump, Burnham reportedly said the U.K. “can’t ignore” resources in the North Sea, adding he would take “a pragmatic approach” to further drilling.

Britain’s government has declined to directly comment, only saying the North Sea “remains a vital national asset.”

“Any decision will take into account all relevant evidence, including environmental assessments and public representations received as part of the regulatory process,” the energy security department said.

___

Associated Press journalist Kwiyeon Ha contributed to this report.