SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
greenpeace
'Climate Vandalism, Pure and Simple': Defiant BP to Reopen North Sea Oil Field
"The only sensible thing to do is to pivot the North Sea to something we have an abundance of, and something that will never run out—wind," argued one climate advocate.
Aug 11, 2025
As the United Kingdom on Monday faced the onset of its fourth heatwave of this summer, climate campaigners continued to call out BP for its decision to plow ahead with reopening the Murlach oil field in the North Sea, despite fossil fuels pushing up global temperatures and the U.K. government's efforts to limit extraction in the region.
"This is climate vandalism, pure and simple," Kate Blagojevic, Europe team lead at the group 350.org, said in a Monday statement. "BP is putting its profit margins above the survival of communities, ecosystems, and future generations. Every barrel of oil from this project pushes us closer to climate breakdown, more floods, more fires, more heatwaves."
"The era of fossil fuels is over, and BP's desperate attempts to wring out the last drops of oil from the North Sea are a reckless betrayal of the public and the planet. They should be winding down, not doubling down," she declared.
Greenpeace U.K. policy director Doug Parr was similarly critical, saying in a statement that "the North Sea is on death's door. Reserves are drying up, and what's left and untapped is barely enough to keep it on life support."
The Telegraph on Sunday noted recent research from the government's North Sea Transition Authority that found there were over 3 billion barrels of oil and gas in fields already in production, 6 billion barrels in known potential developments, and 3.5 billion barrels in identified exploration zones.
According to the newspaper, BP said the Murlach field contains 20 million barrels of recoverable oil and 600 million cubic meters of gas, and is "expected to produce around 20,000 barrels of oil and 17 million cubic feet of gas per day," due to new technologies that weren't around when it was shut down over two decades ago.
Parr said that "3 billion barrels wouldn't last more than a few years at current rates of consumption, and even that assumes it is economic to extract. Whatever the political rhetoric, the oil and gas is pretty much gone, and soon, so too will the jobs of thousands of workers."
"Unless we want to remain dependent on overseas imports and watch an entire industry collapse with no plan for workers," he added, "the only sensible thing to do is to pivot the North Sea to something we have an abundance of, and something that will never run out—wind."
Although the U.K's current Labour Party leaders have pledged to avoid new licensing for fossil fuel projects in the North Sea, "BP won agreement to reopen Murlach, 120 miles east of Aberdeen, under the previous government and has since been installing equipment, with production potentially restarting next month," The Telegraph explained.
A spokesperson for Ed Miliband, U.K. secretary of state for energy security and net zero, said Sunday that "we are committed to delivering the manifesto commitment to not issue new licences to explore new fields because they will not take a penny off bills, cannot make us energy secure, and will only accelerate the worsening climate crisis."
"We are delivering a fair and orderly transition in the North Sea, with the biggest ever investment in offshore wind and two first-of-a-kind carbon capture and storage clusters," the spokesperson added.
Miliband in June announced new guidance for environmental impact assessments of proposed oil and gas projects in licensed fields, which came in response to last year's landmark U.K. Supreme Court ruling. After that decision, Judge Andrew Stewart of Scotland's Court of Session ruled in January that Equinor and Shell, which are respectively behind the Rosebank oil and gas field and the Jackdaw gas project, can't move ahead with extraction.
The June guidance means offshore developers can now submit applications for extractions in fields that are already licensed, including Rosebank and Jackdaw. In response to that development earlier this year, Mel Evans, Greenpeace U.K.'s head of climate, said that "it's only right for the government to take into account the emissions from burning oil and gas when deciding whether to approve fossil fuel projects currently pending."
"Since Rosebank and other drilling sites will pump out a lot of carbon while providing little benefit to the economy and no help to bill payers, they should fail the criteria ministers have just set out," Evans added. "Real energy security and future-proofed jobs for energy workers can only come through homegrown, cheap renewable energy, and that's what ministers should focus on."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Greenpeace Calls for Oil Giants' Ejection From Global Plastics Summit
"Corporate polluters that created this problem must not be allowed to stop the world from solving it," argued one Greenpeace campaigner.
Aug 07, 2025
With representatives from 175 nations gathered in Geneva, Switzerland for the final round of talks on a global plastics treaty, Greenpeace campaigners on Thursday created a symbolic trail of black oil and hung massive banners over the entrance to the event venue demanding the expulsion of fossil fuel industry lobbyists from the summit.
Greenpeace said 22 activists from 10 European nations climbed to the roof of the Palais des Nations, where the United Nations conference is taking place, to unfurl banners reading "Big Oil Polluting Inside" and "Plastics Treaty Not for Sale."
The environmental advocacy group said that fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists outnumbered scientists 4-to-1 at the talks.
"Each round of negotiations brings more oil and gas lobbyists into the room," Graham Forbes, who is leading Greenpeace's delegation to the summit, said in a statement. "Fossil fuel and petrochemical giants are polluting the negotiations from the inside, and we're calling on the U.N. to kick them out."
"Governments must not let a handful of backwards-looking fossil fuel companies override the clear call from all of civil society—including Indigenous peoples, frontline communities, youth activists, and many responsible businesses—demanding a strong agreement that cuts plastic production," Forbes added.
The huge presence of these plastic-loving lobbyists threatens the Global Plastics Treaty.They don’t want real solutions, all they want is more profits.Tell the UN to kick them out of the plastics talks now👇act.gp/4licpMq
[image or embed]
— Greenpeace UK (@greenpeaceuk.bsky.social) August 7, 2025 at 8:55 AM
In 2022, participating nations agreed to draft a legally binding global treaty to reduce waste and toxic chemicals in some plastics contain; however, no such agreement has been reached.
"It is clear that the plastics treaty negotiators have a mountain to climb to reach an agreement by August 14th," Friends of the Earth International said Tuesday, referring to the summit's end date. "There remain substantive differences between the vast majority of states that want action and the few blockers looking to prolong the era of plastics."
There is strong opposition to curbing plastic production from the fossil fuel industry—99% of plastic is made from petrochemicals—and oil-producing countries including Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the United States.
Reuters reported Wednesday that the Trump administration sent letters to some countries participating in the Geneva talks urging them to reject "impractical global approaches such as plastic production targets or bans and restrictions on plastic additives or plastic products."
Oil producer pressure, Trump rollbacks threaten global treaty on plastics pollution. Plastics are derived from fossil fuels. www.reuters.com/sustainabili...
[image or embed]
— Antonia Juhasz (@antoniajuhasz.bsky.social) August 5, 2025 at 6:46 AM
Greenpeace noted that "the fossil fuel industry and its political allies are pushing hard to weaken the treaty's ambition."
According to the group:
If they succeed, plastic production could triple by 2050, fueling more environmental destruction, climate chaos, and harm to human health. A recent report from Greenpeace U.K. revealed that companies like Dow, ExxonMobil, BASF, Chevron Phillips, Shell, SABIC, and INEOS continue to ramp up plastic production. Since the global plastics treaty process began in November 2022, these seven companies have expanded plastic production capacity by 1.4 million tons. Over the same time period, they have also produced enough plastic to fill an estimated 6.3 million garbage trucks, or five-and-a-half trucks every minute. These companies also reaped enormous profits, with Dow alone earning an estimated US$5.1 billion from plastics, while sending at least 21 lobbyists into treaty negotiations.
A study published this week in the British medical journal The Lancet estimated that plastics are responsible for more than $1.5 trillion in "health-related economic losses" worldwide annually.
"These impacts fall disproportionately upon low-income and at-risk populations," the study's authors wrote. "The principal driver of this crisis is accelerating growth in plastic production—from 2 megatons (Mt) in 1950, to 475 Mt in 2022; that is projected to be 1,200 Mt by 2060."
Friends of the Earth International campaigner Sam Cossar-Gilbert noted that "coastlines across the Global South are drowning in plastic waste that isn't ours."
"Shipped in from wealthy nations under the guise of 'recycling,' the plastic waste trade forces marginalized communities to absorb the consequences of someone else's convenience," he added. "This is not just environmental degradation—it's environmental injustice. We refuse to accept false solutions that sacrifice frontline communities and the environment."
Forbes asserted that "this is a battle for our survival."
"Corporate polluters that created this problem must not be allowed to stop the world from solving it," he added. "Governments must show courage and deliver a strong treaty that puts people and planet first, not short-term corporate profits."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Governments Fail to 'Rise to the Moment' as Seabed Meeting Ends Without Mining Pause
"There is still a chance to stop this industry before it begins, but only if governments stand up for science, equity, and precaution now," one campaigner said.
Jul 26, 2025
Despite growing momentum, world governments failed to agree to a moratorium on deep-sea mining as the 30th session of the International Seabed Authority wrapped up on Friday.
The authority's July meeting was the first since U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to expedite permits for deep-sea mining under U.S. authority and The Metals Company (TMC) promptly applied for U.S. permits. Governments rebuked the U.S. and TMC for their unilateral approach and did not agree on a mining code that would allow the controversial practice to move forward under international law. However, campaigners said more decisive action is needed to protect the ocean and its biodiversity.
"Governments have yet to rise to the moment," Greenpeace International campaigner Louisa Casson said in a statement. "They remain disconnected from global concerns and the pressing need for courageous leadership to protect the deep ocean."
Casson continued: "We call on the international community to rise up and defend multilateralism against rogue actors like The Metals Company. Governments must respond by establishing a moratorium and reaffirming that authority over the international seabed lies collectively with all states—for the benefit of humanity as a whole."
Defending Multilateralism
The International Seabed Authority (ISA) gains its authority to regulate deep-sea mining under the United Nations Law of the Sea, to which the U.S. is not party. TMC, however, could suffer consequences for bypassing the international process, as other countries and companies may decide not to do business with it.
At the most recent session, the ISA's council decided not to revoke exploratory permits it had previously granted to TMC and its subsidiaries. However, it approved an investigation on Monday into whether mining contractors such as TMC subsidiaries Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. and Tonga Offshore Mining Limited were abiding by their obligations under international law.
"TMC has been testing the limits of what it can get away with, a bit like a child seeing how far it can go with bad behavior," Matthew Gianni, cofounder of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC), told The New York Times.
"The member countries of the ISA have basically sent a shot across the bow, a warning to TMC that going rogue may well result in the loss of its ISA exploration claims," Gianna explained, adding that the investigation also served as a warning to other companies who might consider following TMC's example.
"The Trump administration's pursuit of deep-sea mining isn't about global stewardship—it's about sidestepping it."
Casson agreed: "The international community's message to The Metals Company is clear: Violating international law, ignoring scientific consensus, and disregarding human rights will have consequences. This is also a warning to any companies or governments choosing to align themselves with [TMC CEO] Gerard Barron's business model—they must be prepared to bear the reputational fallout of trying to destroy the ocean."
At the same time, a U.S. representative spoke on Thursday, doubling down on Trump's dismissal of the international process and earning instant push back from Brazil, France, and China
"As a non-party to the Law of the Sea Convention, the United States is not bound by the convention rules dealing with seabed mining through the International Seabed Authority," the U.S. statement said in part.
The statement came days after Greenpeace released a report titled Deep Deception: How the Deep-Sea Mining Industry is Manipulating Geopolitics to Profit from Ocean Destruction, which details how TMC and other deep-sea mining companies are exploiting national security concerns to lobby U.S. lawmakers to fast track deep-sea mining.
"The U.S. statement confirms what Deep Deception has already exposed: The Trump administration's pursuit of deep-sea mining isn't about global stewardship—it's about sidestepping it," Arlo Hemphill, Greenpeace USA's project lead for the Stop Deep-Sea Mining campaign, said in a statement. "By rejecting the ISA's authority while claiming environmental responsibility, the U.S. is trying to have it both ways—and in doing so is advancing a 'smash and grab' agenda that puts ocean health and international cooperation at serious risk."
'Growing Resistance'
Ultimately, ocean advocates agree that the only way to protect the deep sea is for governments to agree to a precautionary pause on a practice they argue would do irreparable harm to ecosystems science barely understands.
The consensus for such a pause is building, with Croatia becoming the 38th nation to support one during the latest ISA meeting.
"The ISA is paralyzed by a small group clinging to outdated extraction agendas while blocking even the most basic reforms," Simon Holmström, the deep-sea mining policy officer for Seas at Risk, said in a statement. "The firm rejection of the U.S. and The Metals Company's power grab, alongside 38 countries now calling for a moratorium or precautionary pause, shows growing resistance to sacrificing the planet's least understood ecosystem for corporate short-term profit."
"To even consider a new form of ecocide on our already ailing planet is both reckless and irrational."
Several nations spoke strongly in favor a moratorium, including Palau, Panama, and France.
"Exploiting the seabed is not a necessity—it is a choice," said His Excellency Surangel S. Whipps Jr., president of the Republic of Palau, on Tuesday. "And it is reckless. It is gambling with the future of Pacific Island children, who will inherit the dire consequences of decisions made far from their shores."
A Pacific leader from Solomon Island also defended the interests of the Pacific Ocean community: "As Pacific people, we continue to carry the trauma of what extractive industries have already done to our homes. Mining companies that came with promises, stripped our lands and waters, and left behind ecological, cultural, and spiritual scars. We cannot let that cycle repeat itself, in the ocean that connects us. That sustains us. And that defines us."
Olivier Poivre d'Arvor of France called for a pause of 10-15 years: "Our message is clear: no deep-sea mining without science, without collective legitimacy, without equity [...] France is calling for a moratorium or a precautionary pause. What for? Because we refuse to mortgage the future for a few nodules extracted in a hurry, in favor of a few."
However, campaigners argued that many governments continued to fall short of the commitments they had made at the U.N. Ocean Conference (UNOC) in Nice in early June.
"Thirty-eight states have now joined the call for a moratorium or precautionary pause, with Croatia joining the coalition during this Assembly," said DSCC campaign director Sofia Tsenikli. "But too many other states, which were bold in their ocean promises at UNOC, are not putting this into action at the ISA. Governments must meet their promises by doing what it takes to implement a moratorium before it's too late."
Farah Obaidullah, founder and director of The Ocean and Us, argued that the ocean already faces too many other threats to add the additional burden of deep-sea mining.
"The health of the high seas including the seabed is critical to our own. Yet our shared heritage faces an onslaught of threats from climate and nature collapse, escalating tensions, and failed leadership," Obaidullah said. "To even consider a new form of ecocide on our already ailing planet is both reckless and irrational. We know that deep-sea mining will devastate life in the deep ocean, wipe out species before they have been discovered, and impact ocean functions, including carbon sequestration. When it comes to the ocean we have no time to lose. We cannot colonize and conquer our shared heritage which belongs to us all. There is only one responsible way forward, and that is to secure a moratorium on deep-sea mining."
DSCC's Gianni also argued strongly for a pause: "Being on the fence or remaining silent is not a politically defensible position. We are risking severe ecological damage, and future generations will ask what we did to stop it. There is still a chance to stop this industry before it begins, but only if governments stand up for science, equity, and precaution now, and take action to prevent companies within their jurisdiction from cooperating with rogue mining operations."
Greenpeace's Hemphill concluded: "Governments must secure a moratorium that leaves no room for a desperate industry to force through a mining code. The science is not ready. The legal framework is not in place. The world must not be bullied into an irreversible mistake for the benefit of a few."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular