Fresh UK government guidance means operators must now account for emissions caused when oil and gas are used, a shift sparked by court rulings and climate campaigners

The UK government has published new guidance requiring oil and gas operators to assess the climate impact of burning fossil fuels extracted from the North Sea, not just the emissions created during production.

The move will affect controversial developments like Rosebank, 80 miles west of Shetland, and Shell’s Jackdaw gas field. It comes after a landmark Supreme Court ruling last year that said downstream or “Scope 3” emissions must be factored into environmental assessments for new oil and gas projects.

Previously, such assessments considered only the emissions caused by extracting fossil fuels, not the significant greenhouse gases released when those fuels were later used. In January, the Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled that the same approach must apply retrospectively to existing approvals for Rosebank and Jackdaw.

Although work can continue on both fields for now, no oil or gas can be extracted until fresh consent is granted.

Energy Minister Michael Shanks said the new guidance marked a significant shift, ensuring “the full implications of oil and gas extraction” are now considered. “This is a step forward in delivering a managed, prosperous and orderly transition to the North Sea’s clean energy future, supporting well‑paid, skilled jobs and boosting energy security,” he said.

Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and the North Sea Transition Authority had paused licensing decisions following the court ruling. The publication of the new guidance allows operators to resume submitting applications for consent. Those applications must now include an assessment of the warming impact of the oil and gas across its lifetime. Ministers will balance environmental impacts against economic benefits when making decisions, although no rulings are expected until the end of the summer.

First Minister John Swinney said Scotland would review the new advice, stating that “all emissions have to be considered” when making decisions about future projects.

Climate campaigners gave a wary welcome to the shift. Tessa Khan, executive director of the campaign group Uplift, said the new rules meant oil and gas firms “will finally be forced to come clean” about their climate impact. “In the case of Rosebank, it’s obvious that this project is incompatible with the UK’s climate commitments. The government’s decision will be a test of its climate credibility,” she said.

Greenpeace UK warned that approving projects like Rosebank would be a “political sleight of hand” that benefits oil firms. Its climate lead, Mel Evans, said: “Real energy security and future‑proofed jobs can only come from cheap, home‑grown renewables.”

A Shell spokesperson responded that the company remained committed to the Jackdaw gas project, calling it “a nationally important energy project” that will reduce reliance on imported gas and support the UK government’s growth agenda.

The new guidance arrives as the UK announced in its recent Spending Review £200m for the Acorn Carbon Capture and Storage scheme in Aberdeenshire. Meanwhile, Michael Shanks told the BBC he expects an announcement “soon” about the future of the Grangemouth refinery.

For now, the changes mark a pivotal moment for the North Sea oil and gas industry, putting climate concerns and long‑term energy security firmly at the centre of decision‑making.