The newly approved Rosebank oil field project in the North Sea could have a detrimental effect on the climate – and the ocean
The North Sea just beyond the Northern Isles is home to a spectacular array of marine mammals. Porpoises, dolphins and the occasional Orca cross through its choppy waters, and several baleen whale species travel there to fill up on krill.
It is also home to what this week has been the subject of serious controversy across the UK: the North Sea Rosebank field.
The government approved the fossil fuel site, which contains around 300 million barrels of oil, for development earlier this week.
The oil giants who own the project – the Norwegian state-owned Equinor, Canada’s Suncor and UK-based Ithaca Energy – expect the extraction to begin between 2026-2027. They want to remove 245 million barrels in the first five years.
The North Sea Transition Authority, the private company that regulates new oil projects in the UK, claimed the approval was given ‘taking net zero considerations into account throughout the project’s lifecycle’.
Related articles:
But the decision has sparked outrage from environmental and conservation groups and has been condemned by over 50 MPs and political figures.
That’s because scientists and climate organisations have issued repeated warnings over the last few years that in order to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees centigrade, there can be no new fossil fuel projects.
Silje Ask Lundberg, North Sea Program Manager at Oil Change International, said: ‘The science could not be more clear: there is no room for a single drop of oil from new fields … This is proof positive the government is siding with oil and gas giants over a liveable future for all.’
An International Energy Agency report suggested on Tuesday that ‘no new oil projects are needed’ anywhere around the globe, as the market is predicted to reach its peak in the next decade.
Rosebank will likely affect the seabed and marine life in the North Sea
On top of its climate impacts, the Rosebank project will have a negative impact on the ocean landscape and marine life in the North Sea.
The construction plans include drilling a total of twelve wells into the seabed, with production pipes leading up to floating production storage and offloading vessels at the surface.
Equinor has argued that this floating technology – as opposed to permanent offshore oil rigs – actually make the project much more environmentally friendly than the majority of oil projects.
But research indicates that offshore oil drilling can have a number of detrimental effects on local ecosystems, ranging from noise pollution and sediment plumes to lethal oil leaks.
Surfers Against Sewage, the UK charity campaigning for cleaner oceans, said on X: ‘Giving the go-ahead for the Rosebank oil field is a short-sighted and DANGEROUS decision.
‘Rosebank will cause the destruction of the seabed & fish, shellfish, marine mammals and cephalopods’ habitats.’
What ecosystems could Rosebank damage?
The construction site stretches into a channel of the continental shelf frequented by the vulnerable porbeagle shark and the endangered basking shark. Fin whales and sperm whales have been spotted there, and a number of fish species use the channel as a nursery.
Equinor’s environmental report notes that the site construction has ‘the potential to lead to changes in the seabed’ including a ‘direct loss of benthic species and habitat’ and ‘wider indirect disturbance’ to surrounding habitats.
Plumes of sediment caused by drilling activity could smother and suffocate sponges, corals and slow-moving sea creatures, and the predators that rely on them.
The Rosebank oil field will also require a pipeline to export gas, which will cross through the Faroe-Shetland Sponge belt, a marine protected area recognised as a ‘vulnerable marine ecosystem’.
How do offshore gas projects affect sea life?
There are a number of ways offshore gas projects tend to affect regional wildlife populations. These start with noise pollution caused by construction but also the shipping activity that surrounds storage facilities. Noise can deafen dolphins and whales, which a study has linked to the mammals becoming stranded.
But by far the worst-case scenario is oil spills and leaks. In deep-sea projects, leaks often go unnoticed for a long time, as the oil disperses immediately into the water. The chemicals and components of the material can travel for miles in sea currents, and are easily absorbed by shellfish.
Making their way through the food chain, these chemicals can poison fish, turtles, whales, dolphins and birds. They can also damage the immune and reproductive systems of exposed animals, lowering population numbers.
Meanwhile, large-scale oil spills from damaged wells and tankers can outright suffocate wildlife by entering their lungs or gills, or cause hypothermia by interrupting the insulation abilities of fur-bearing animals, according to the National Ocean Service.
Criticism of Rosebank by ocean-lovers
Ocean biodiversity is facing an unprecedented rate of decline, largely driven by human pressures. Adding to these pressures with new offshore fossil fuel projects like Rosebank has been greeted with wide-spread criticism from charities and environmental campaigners.
Organisations including Oceana, the Marine Conservation Society and Wildlife and Conservation Link are calling on the government to halt the development of the Rosebank oil field. Emergency protests were called in Edinburgh and London on Wednesday, with more marches set to take place this weekend.
