Energy experts and industry leaders are urging the government to approve the stalled Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea, citing heightened energy security fears triggered by the ongoing crisis in the Middle East and the strategic blockage of the Strait of Hormuz.
Legal Hurdles and the Emission Question
The push for development comes against a backdrop of significant legal setbacks for the project. In a landmark ruling in June 2024, the UK Supreme Court mandated that the environmental impact assessments for all new fossil fuel projects must account for the downstream emissions created when the extracted oil and gas is eventually burned. This principle, stemming from the case brought by Sarah Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group, was directly applied to Jackdaw in January 2025, when the Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled its initial consent unlawful.
Consequently, the government stated it would not challenge the judicial reviews brought against Jackdaw and Rosebank by Greenpeace and Uplift. A new environmental guidance regime was consulted on and published in the summer of 2025, allowing projects to reapply. The Jackdaw application is now under fresh assessment by the Offshore Petroleum Regulator for Environment and Decommissioning (Opred), which has requested further details from the developer, Shell. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has stressed that “no decisions on Jackdaw have been made” and that speculation to the contrary is incorrect.
Industry Calls and Project Significance
For the industry, the delay is a missed opportunity for domestic energy security. Lord John Browne, the former chief executive of BP, argued the field should “absolutely” be approved, stating that stopping investments halfway through damages market confidence. Shell has emphasised that Jackdaw remains an important development, providing fuel that could heat 1.4 million homes and support security as older fields decline.
Trade body Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) has echoed these calls. Its energy policy director, Enrique Cornejo, said the UK must “play its part in boosting the supply of energy” by approving key projects like Jackdaw. OEUK chief executive David Whitehouse stressed the need for a mixed approach, stating, “This is not an either renewables or oil and gas scenario.” The GMB trade union has also urged the government to back the project, highlighting job creation and security.
A Shifting Political Landscape
The geopolitical context is applying new pressure on politicians. The blocking of the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for roughly a quarter of global seaborne oil, has sent shockwaves through energy markets, spiking prices and freight costs. While Europe is not facing immediate shortages, the volatility has intensified the focus on domestic production.
This has prompted a notable shift in Scotland, where First Minister John Swinney has softened the SNP government’s previously cautious stance on new drilling. He acknowledged the “much greater risk to our energy security” and suggested that importing hydrocarbons, which is more carbon-intensive, should be a factor in climate compatibility tests. Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Alex Cole-Hamilton agreed, noting extraction from the North Sea avoids the additional emissions of long-distance imports.
At a UK level, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has indicated that Jackdaw and Rosebank will proceed, emphasising the importance of North Sea oil and gas to the economy for decades and confirming the government would honour existing licences. This presents a complex picture for Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, who in opposition labelled the Rosebank project “climate vandalism”. Reports suggesting he is now minded to approve Jackdaw have been officially denied by his department, which says he does not yet have the full information required for a decision.
Environmental Opposition and Climate Warnings
Environmental campaigners remain fundamentally opposed, arguing that approval would lock in decades of harmful emissions. Philip Evans, senior climate campaigner at Greenpeace UK, stated that Jackdaw would produce “millions of tonnes of CO2 and vast methane leaks,” accelerating climate change and the associated costs of extreme weather. He contends the only path to real security is a rapid move away from fossil fuels, a position shared by Scottish Greens candidate Patrick Harvie, who points to Scotland’s abundant renewable resources.
Friends of the Earth Scotland has also argued that any gas extracted would belong to Shell and be sold on the open market, with no guarantee it would lower domestic energy bills. The campaigners’ legal victories have forced a recalculation, embedding the consideration of so-called ‘scope 3’ emissions firmly into the planning process.
The Balance of Security and Transition
The debate unfolds as the UK grapples with its energy profile. The country is a net importer of hydrocarbons, bringing in 42% of its natural gas consumption. Its domestic gas production has been declining, and while it has proven reserves equivalent to about three years of consumption at current rates, the North Sea Transition Deal aims to pivot the industry’s existing infrastructure towards cleaner technologies like hydrogen and carbon capture.
Political leaders like Scottish Labour’s Anas Sarwar advocate for a “balanced approach,” supporting a continued role for oil and gas alongside massive investment in renewables and an end to the “ideological block” on nuclear power in Scotland. As the independent regulator continues its assessment, the government insists decisions will be made “in an appropriate and timely manner,” leaving the future of the Jackdaw field suspended between urgent calls for energy security and binding legal commitments to confront the climate impact of burning fossil fuels.
