Search our blog for articles and insights right here, just type your interest and dive into a world of knowledge.
Popular articles
Supreme Court Rules Long-Term Climate Impact Must Be Considered in Oil Well Approvals
The UK Supreme Court has decreed that local authorities must factor in the long-term climate impact of onshore oil wells when granting planning permission. This landmark decision has the potential to reshape the future of fossil fuel developments in the country. Environmental advocates had contested the approval process for an oil well site's retention and expansion in southern England, arguing that it overlooked the greenhouse gas emissions from using the extracted oil.
Judicial Decision and Rationale
By a narrow margin, three out of five Supreme Court judges sided with the environmental campaigners, ruling the planning approval unlawful due to its failure to consider emissions in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Justice George Leggatt, one of the judges who supported the appeal, underscored the undeniable significant impact of these emissions on climate.
Leggatt stated, "These emissions, which can easily be quantified, will have a significant impact on climate. The only issue is whether the combustion emissions are effects of the project at all. It seems to me plain that they are."
Implications for Future Fossil Fuel Projects
Environmental campaigners believe this decision could serve as a turning point for new oil, gas, and coal development approvals. Sam Fowles, a planning and environment law specialist, remarked, "It is extremely difficult to overstate the significance of this case. This could be the beginning of the end of new fossil fuel extraction in the UK."
The 2019 case in question involved Surrey County Council granting Horse Hill Developments, partly owned by UK Oil & Gas Plc, permission to retain two oil wells and drill four more near Gatwick Airport. The initial EIA assessed the construction, production, and decommissioning impacts but omitted the downstream emissions from using the refined oil.
Environmental Campaigners' Challenge
The Weald Action Group (WAG), an alliance of local organizations opposing oil and gas extraction in southeast England, estimated that using the refined oil would result in over 10 million tonnes of carbon emissions. A campaigner representing WAG initiated a legal challenge against the planning approval. The High Court in London and the Court of Appeal initially dismissed the challenge, maintaining that the council had not acted unlawfully and that policy-making was a government prerogative.
In his Supreme Court judgment, Justice Leggatt emphasized, "There was no basis on which the council could reasonably decide it was unnecessary to assess the combustion emissions."
