Celebration, concern and ambivalence: Jackdaw approval met with mixed response from UK chemical engineers

PRODUCTION at the Jackdaw gas field has been approved by the UK government after nearly two years of uncertainty, attracting a mixed response from the chemical engineering community. 

A Scottish court ruled last January that the government must consider the impacts on global emissions from burning gas produced at Jackdaw before it could be approved. Former developer Shell and current owner Adura have since supplied evidence to support their claim that the project is in line with net zero goals, while fierce public debate ensued on the significance of the UK committing to new North Sea oil and gas projects. 

The government today announced it believes Jackdaw will not prevent the UK from meeting its net zero targets and that the project should go ahead. 

Sanjoy Sen, a member of IChemE’s oil, gas and energy transition special interest group (SIG) committee, welcomed the government’s decision as an “enabler to the energy transition”. He told TCE: “The UK has already made huge progress in the overall energy transition, with over half our electricity now generated from renewables. But new-build nuclear is not yet on stream and global tensions continue to impact the supply of imported gas.

“Over the coming decade, Jackdaw will play a vital role in supporting domestic energy security.”

However, former chair of IChemE’s clean energy SIG Geraint Evans said he had “mixed emotions” about the announcement. On the one hand, he said: “I see it as a backwards step because we should be going hell for leather for net zero.” However, he “recognise[s] the importance of energy security” that he believes will benefit from Jackdaw. “I would rather not support it, but I do.” 

Meanwhile, University of Aberdeen lecturer and IChemE Fellow Tom Baxter said “the biggest case for [Jackdaw] is probably energy security. That is a clear plus.” While there could be a “slight benefit” for the climate by reducing the UK’s dependence on imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the US, produced with far greater emissions than domestic natural gas, the overall impact on global emissions will “not even be measurable,” he argued. 

As a normally unmanned installation, Jackdaw will only create 27 new jobs while safeguarding the existing 273 jobs on Adura’s Shearwater platform where Jackdaw gas will be processed. Baxter said Jackdaw will have “very little” impact on the chemical engineering community in north-east Scotland. It could help “sustain skills”, and there could be “one or maybe two” new process engineering jobs, but largely any benefits will be “all in the margins,” he added. 

The government said today that the first gas from Jackdaw could be produced as early as the end of this month. Announcing the decision this morning, UK energy secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh said: “This decision will support the country’s energy security with homegrown gas this winter and help minimise the UK’s use of imported higher emission fuels as we continue our transition to renewables and nuclear.”

However, there was mixed messaging from the government regarding the impact of Jackdaw on energy costs. In his official statement after Jackdaw approval was confirmed, prime minister Andy Burnham said his government’s “pragmatic approach to the North Sea” will “bring down bills”. This was contradicted by the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero, whose 92-page document confirming approval said: “The secretary of state is of the view that Jackdaw will not materially affect energy prices or consumer bills as the UK is a price-taker in global oil and gas markets.” Jackdaw’s impact on energy bills was given “negligible” weight in the government’s assessment.

Intense debate

One of Adura’s main arguments supporting Jackdaw was that it will help lower global emissions by reducing the UK’s demand on LNG imported from the US, whose production releases an average 85 kgCO2e for every produced barrel of oil equivalent (boe) compared to the expected 18.5 kgCO2e from Jackdaw. 

However, LNG currently accounts for 20% of UK gas demand – less than the far cleaner Norwegian pipeline gas, which meets 37% of demand with emissions intensity of just 8 kgCO2e/boe. Adura’s argument that Norwegian pipeline gas is at full capacity was rebuked by the government, which said this only applied to high demand periods in the winter. For other periods, “without Jackdaw gas there would be increased flows via Norwegian pipelines in addition to increased supply from other sources” including LNG, the government noted. 

Jackdaw production is also expected to significantly increase the overall production intensity of the Shearwater platform, taking it above the UK Continental Shelf average to 31 kgCO2e/boe.

Rosebank awaits

Uncertainty remains over whether the government will approve Adura’s much larger Rosebank oil field west of Shetland. Compared to the total maximum emissions of 36m tCO2e expected to be generated as a result of Jackdaw production and combustion, Rosebank could be responsible for 250m tCO2e. In addition, while the vast majority of Jackdaw gas is expected to be burned in the UK, most of the oil from Rosebank will likely be exported to refineries abroad given the UK’s low refining capacity. 

Adura CEO Neil McCulloch said: “Our attention now turns to Rosebank. It follows Jackdaw in the regulatory process but the case for approval is equally strong. We believe that applying the same rigorous evidence-based approach can lead to a similarly positive decision.” 

However, climate specialist and IChemE Fellow Richard Clarke told TCE: “If Jackdaw presages the opening up of Rosebank, that would nudge us towards more heatwaves and storms, yet do little to improve energy security and prices. The UK needs to accelerate the energy transition to low-carbon sources and storage to limit emissions and temperatures.”