In a landmark decision in June 2024, the UK Supreme Court ruled that planning authorities must consider the full environmental impact of fossil fuel projects, including downstream or "scope 3" greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from burning extracted fuels. This decision has major implications for future fossil fuel developments in the UK and highlights the judiciary's role in addressing climate change.
Background of the Case
The case stemmed from a legal challenge by Sarah Finch, representing the Weald Action Group, against Surrey County Council’s approval of an oil drilling project at Horse Hill. Finch argued that the council failed to assess the climate impact of emissions from burning the extracted oil—a major omission given the UK’s climate commitments.
Initially, both the High Court and the Court of Appeal dismissed the claim. However, the Supreme Court, in a narrow 3-2 ruling, decided in Finch’s favor, declaring the council’s approval unlawful due to its failure to assess downstream emissions. (SOURCE)
Implications of the Ruling
This decision sets a precedent requiring environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for fossil fuel projects to include both direct emissions from extraction and indirect emissions from fuel use. Experts suggest that the ruling could lead to a surge in climate litigation, empowering environmental groups to challenge projects that do not fully account for their emissions. (SOURCE)
Impact on Ongoing and Future Projects
Following the ruling, several fossil fuel projects have faced legal challenges. For instance, the High Court recently applied the Finch precedent to block planning permission for a coal mine in West Cumbria. (SOURCE)
Additionally, environmental groups have filed lawsuits against new North Sea oil and gas licenses, arguing that the government failed to adequately consider their climate impact. (SOURCE)
Industry Response
Despite the ruling, some companies have continued operations. UK Oil and Gas (UKOG), for example, is still extracting oil at Horse Hill, arguing that the ruling does not require an immediate halt. Meanwhile, Surrey County Council maintains that these operations are illegal and is considering enforcement actions. (SOURCE)
Conclusion
The UK Supreme Court's ruling marks a major step forward in environmental law, ensuring that fossil fuel projects fully account for their climate impact. By mandating the inclusion of scope 3 emissions in EIAs, the decision aligns with global efforts to combat climate change and holds developers accountable. This case will shape future fossil fuel policies in the UK and could serve as a model for environmental accountability worldwide.
Works Cited:
Comments