Why I support Rosebank being given the green light as an SNP MSP
Writing for Scotland on Sunday, Jack Middleton explains why rejecting Rosebank means ‘passing up billions in revenue’
Room for nuance has largely been squeezed from the conversation on Scotland’s energy needs. It’s incumbent on us all, especially politicians with a public platform, to reverse that. To deal in facts, not rhetoric.
The most significant of which is that we depend on oil and gas for 75 per cent of our total energy requirements.
People are right to be angry that our reliance remains so high. Angry that we haven’t moved fast enough on renewables. But that doesn’t remove our demand for oil and gas.
A demand so significant that we’ve become increasingly reliant on imports. In the case of gas, more reliant on fracked shale from Trump’s America.
I’m pleased that Jackdaw will soon be pumping homegrown gas into the grid to heat Scottish homes. Attention now turns to Rosebank. Circumstances differ, but on energy security and jobs the debate holds even greater magnitude.
Those against the project contend that 89 per cent of Scotland’s crude oil is exported overseas. That’s true.
Industrial vandalism wiped out UK refineries - including Grangemouth – meaning most of the oil produced in Scotland is exported, primarily to Rotterdam.
But when the oil reaches The Netherlands, it’s not the end of the story. An important question to ask is, where does it go next?
Leading expert Professor John Underhill, Director of Aberdeen University’s Centre for Energy Transition, highlighted that a significant volume returns to the UK in the form of refined products like diesel and aviation fuel. To such an extent that 65 per cent of Scotland’s oil will ultimately supply the UK market.
Our demand serves mostly cars, lorries, tractors and aviation. But also domestic industries, our armed forces and emergency services.
We don’t yet have the sustainable alternatives at scale to match that level of demand - and as is the case with gas, in lieu of increased domestic supply, we’re relying more on oil imports to sustain ourselves.
Mostly from the USA, lining the pockets of Trump, but also heavily from Norway, who are drilling in the same basin. Other nations too like Kazakhstan, Angola and Cameroon.
Rejecting Rosebank means we’re passing up billions in revenue that should be spent in Scotland and instead handing that wealth to other nations who’ll support their own workforce.
Conversely, approving Rosebank would sustain around 600 jobs throughout its lifetime, up to 3,500 at peak production alongside Jackdaw and provide 10 per cent of the UK’s oil production.
Internationally, the most important aspect to consider is what will happen to the oil that doesn’t return to the UK. It’ll enter the international market and be used to meet European demand as the continent fights to keep down its need for Russian oil.
With Putin’s illegal war in Ukraine placing us on the edge of war, we’ve a moral duty to support our European neighbours. It was a dark day when the UK softened sanctions on Russian oil. Nobody wants those restrictions weakened further.
Worse, Trump sold out Ukraine by opening the door to Russian diesel – the first shipment arrives in the US soon.
We wouldn’t tolerate such a betrayal, so we must double down on our principles and play our role in securing our region. It’s the tone of approach taken by our friends in Norway and Denmark who’ve tweaked their oil and gas strategies to reinforce Western European energy independence.
It’s the approach Scotland should take too. While not in control of our own resources, it challenges those of us who believe in independence to think like an independent European nation today.
To play our role in the international community, we can’t sit on our resources and push Europe towards Putin’s pumps. Every barrel of oil we export to Europe is one less barrel bought from Russia.
READ MORE: Labour urged to approve Rosebank 'by Christmas' amid speculation oil project could be blocked
My position isn’t an argument against climate action; I want to drastically speed up our journey to renewables by investing every penny of tax generated into Scotland’s future industry.
For jobs yes, but also because securing net zero and a meaningful transition unlocks over £100 billion for our economy.
My position, not arrived at lightly, is about how we reach that point without sacrificing energy security, industrial capability and the livelihoods of the workers expected to build the transition.
The UK government must examine Rosebank’s environmental impact rigorously and judge it on the evidence. We must also confront the consequences of refusing to produce resources we’ll continue to consume.
The Rosebank conversation poses difficult questions and it’s our duty to rise to that challenge. A challenge I believe Scotland can and should meet.
Jack Middleton is the MSP for Aberdeen Central and a former special adviser to John Swinney
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.