UK oil and gas faces new threat after ‘perplexing’ Supreme Court ruling
Ruling made on end-use carbon emissions from the Horse Hill field onshore UK
The UK Supreme Court has made a ruling about carbon emissions from a producing oil and gas well in the UK that could have implications for current and future legal efforts against oil and gas activities.
The Supreme Court’s decision by a three to two majority found that a local authority in England — in its 2019 grant of planning consent for the operator UK Oil & Gas’ production at the onshore Horse Hill field — did not request and consider in its assessment an estimate of the end-use carbon combustion emissions of produced hydrocarbons from Horse Hill.
The ruling retrospectively requires that the end-use combustion emissions must be included in the development's environmental impact assessment, and assessed as part of the grant of planning consent for the development, the operator UK Oil & Gas responded on Thursday.
The company now plans to work closely with the Surrey County Council to rectify the situation, either via an amendment to the original 2018 planning application's EIA or via a new retrospective planning submission.
Stephen Sanderson, UK Oil & Gas’s chief executive, said: “The court’s rather perplexing retrospective ruling, which is counter to all prior judgements, further underscores why the company’s focus over the past few years has shifted away from oil and gas and firmly towards creating and delivering strategic underground hydrogen storage, an essential element of the UK’s future low carbon energy system.”
The ruling could make it easier for climate activists to launch successful legal actions against oil and gas activities, reported the Reuters news agency.
“This historic ruling is a watershed moment in the fight to stop further fossil fuel extraction projects in the UK and make the emissions cuts needed to meet crucial climate targets,” Reuters reported Friends of the Earth lawyer Katie de Kauwe as saying. “It is a huge boost to everyone involved in resisting fossil fuel projects.”
Greenpeace UK hailed the court's ruling as a "HUGE CLIMATE WIN", writing in a series of posts Thursday on X.com (formerly Twitter): "In reality the emissions caused by actually burning the fossil fuels is MUCH HIGHER than the emissions caused to extract them.
"The landmark ruling could finally force authorities to consider the emissions produced from burning the fossil fuels when deciding whether to approve permits for new fossil fuel extraction projects."
Campaigners also claimed the judgement could affect the ongoing legal challenges in the UK against the Rosebank oilfield development, reported the BBC news service.