The report, Well Connected, argues that creating networks of sanctuaries in the high seas would help save the target and, importantly, it would protect key migratory species like whales and turtles.[1] It finds that a connected network of ocean sanctuaries in the Atlantic high seas would protect vital migration routes for vulnerable leatherback turtles, shielding over 35 per cent of danger zones where they are at risk of being killed by industrial fishing activity. It would safeguard almost half (44%) of humpback whale routes from ship strikes.

This new report makes a case for fully protected marine sanctuaries, which would stop industrial fishing and reduce shipping traffic from within their boundaries. Many current marine protected areas still allow for destructive industrial fishing – which renders them useless at protecting biodiversity. 

Greenpeace UK’s senior ocean campaigner, Chris Thorne, said: 

“Governments simply haven’t been protecting our precious ocean with the urgency required and delegates meeting in Armenia need big, bold solutions to put them on track. Our proposed network of Atlantic sanctuaries is exactly the sort of solution governments need to build on quickly to have any hope of tackling our ocean and climate crises, which is vital for national security. The UK government should back a network of ocean sanctuaries, from our shores right across the Atlantic, and use the UK’s diplomatic weight to champion them on the global stage. When we leave it alone, and restrict destructive activities, our ocean can bounce back, so there is hope that it will teem with awe-inspiring nature again if we defend it.”

Leatherback turtles are one of the most threatened marine vertebrates on the planet, classified as vulnerable on the IUCN red list [2]. Currently, there are no fully or highly protected areas in the Atlantic High Seas, leaving nowhere free from the threat of industrial fishing. 

Brendan Godley, from the Wilkes Atlantic Leatherback Turtle Alliance at The University of Exeter, said: 

“Leatherback turtles undertake remarkable migrations across the Atlantic, moving between tropical nesting beaches and the open ocean as far north as Canada. Conserving such wide-ranging species requires protection at a scale that matches the ecosystems on which they depend. We are therefore pleased to support this Greenpeace report, which highlights the importance of safeguarding connected ocean habitats across the entire Atlantic. By demonstrating the value of coherent networks of protected areas, the report provides a compelling case for the establishment of large-scale ocean sanctuaries that can help maintain ecological connectivity, protect biodiversity and provide safer passage for migratory species such as the leatherback.”

In the report, Greenpeace International identifies 17 sites that should form a network of fully protected ocean sanctuaries under the Global Ocean Treaty, covering locations where migrating species face the greatest threats. These sites include the Sargasso Sea where the European eel spawns, the Canary-Guinea Current Convergence Zone which supports vital fish stocks along West Africa’s coastline and the Walvis Ridge, a stepping stone for humpback whales. The areas incorporate existing marine protected areas (MPAs) – which must be upgraded to be fully protected – some sites already being explored by governments for protection and a number of new sites to form a network covering over 31 per cent of the Atlantic high seas. If implemented, this would more than double the total area of the world’s ocean that is fully protected from industrial fishing.

Greenpeace UK is calling for the UK government to work with allies to advance ambitious ocean protection plans during the UN Biodiversity conference. Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband then has an opportunity to reclaim the UK’s role as a global ocean leader by attending the first Oceans COP next year and announcing a bold plan for protecting the Atlantic Ocean.

Sarah Champion MP, chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for the Ocean, said: 

“This Greenpeace report adds to the mounting evidence that industrial scale fishing vessels pose a grave threat to our ocean, with over a million hours of fishing in just the Atlantic last year. However, if we take a joined-up approach to local sustainable fishing, together with marine conservation, both can thrive. 

“Huge networks of ocean sanctuaries are our best chance to support the UK and international commitment to protect 30% of our ocean by 2030, starting with the Atlantic on our own shores. I welcome the progress our Government has made, but ocean protection is still happening too slowly. I support this report’s recommendations for the UK to work at pace with our international allies and deliver fully protected sanctuaries right across the Atlantic, including the Sargasso Sea.” 

Ends 

The full Well Connected report is available on the Greenpeace UK website. 

Photos are available in the Greenpeace Media Library. 

Interviews are available on request. 

Contacts: 

The Greenpeace UK press office, press.uk@greenpeace.org, 0207 865 8255 (diverts to mobiles). 

Notes to Editors:

[1] Well Connected report

[2] Leatherback turtle listed as vulnerable on IUCN red list 

[3] The report analysed Global Fishing Watch satellite tracking information for the Atlantic high seas fishing fleet, revealing that in 2025, in total they spent a shocking 1.6 million hours fishing – which is equivalent to over 180 years worth of fishing in just one year.

[4] Marine Conservation Institute MPA Atlas https://mpatlas.org/mpaguide/ 

• The report overlays leatherback turtle and humpback whale Atlantic migration routes, against areas of high bycatch risk and high ship strike risk respectively, to identify migratory ‘danger zones’ for these species. It then identifies 17 sanctuary sites with strong potential to reduce the threats faced by migratory species. 1 site includes all of the existing Atlantic high seas protected areas, which need to be upgraded to full protection. 5 sites; Sargasso Sea, Canary-Guinea Convergence Zone, Banana Hole, Walvis Ridge and Atlantic Equatorial Fracture Zone  are already being explored for protection by governments, scientists and NGOs. Of the remaining 11 newly identified sites, eight are already categorised as Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity 
• This report uses the term ‘sanctuary’ to align with the standards of ‘fully’ or ‘highly’ protected MPAs as defined by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Its recommendations are also aligned with a growing global consensus that strong biodiversity outcomes depend on banning industrial activity in protected areas and substantially reducing direct risks of mortality for marine life, such as bycatch from fishing and collisions with shipping.
• Protecting migratory species like whales and turtles is vital for the future of a healthy ocean. They connect different ecosystems, and their movement patterns reveal key biodiversity hotspots which are currently unprotected from destructive human activity. Analysing these animals provides vital information, identifying locations where sanctuaries can have the strongest impact in protecting marine ecosystems. Creating big protected sanctuary networks will protect vital feeding and breeding grounds not only for whales and turtles, but for the over 800 species that migrate through the ocean. Their survival depends on their safety across entire migration pathways, rather than just in single isolated pockets. 
• To calculate the danger zones, Greenpeace analysis looked at tracking data for humpbacks and leatherbacks, alongside commercial fishing and shipping data to map the areas of highest risk for species. 
• Just 3.5% of the world’s ocean is fully or highly protected – meaning there’s a ‘marine protection gap’ of 26.5% that needs closing to reach 30%. In the 34 years since the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, when countries initially agreed to establish networks of MPAs to safeguard marine biodiversity, fully and highly protected MPA coverage of the global ocean has increased by just 0.1% per year. At this rate, achieving the remaining 26.5% needed to fully protect 30% of the ocean would take the international community an estimated 265 years. 
• This new sanctuary network would cover 31% of the Atlantic high seas and protect over 6% of the global High Seas and approximately 4% of the world’s ocean. This more than doubles the current coverage of fully or highly protected ocean areas, from 3.5% to 7.5%.

The post Crucial ocean protection target 265 years off pace as UN nature summit begins appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

The Government looks set to approve more oil and gas drilling in the North Sea. Based on the facts set out below, Greenpeace wants to know, why?

This brief sets out the latest facts about the climate, energy bills, jobs and energy security for both Jackdaw and Rosebank and suggests 10 questions for journalists to ask ministers and spokespeople ahead of the decision. 

Jackdaw key facts

• Adura claims Jackdaw brings massive economic benefits, but in their own environmental statement they admit that it will create just 27 new full-time jobs. Most of the workforce already works on the existing Shearwater platform.
• Using government calculations for climate harm, burning Jackdaw’s gas will cause an estimated £16.1 billion in global damage and over 8,000 heat-related deaths.
• Jackdaw’s total gas reserves would only reduce our annual gas import dependency by 2% on average. This will not lower international gas prices paid by UK consumers.
• Adura argues that Jackdaw’s emissions are only a tiny percentage of global pollution. However, existing oil and gas fields worldwide will already produce more than double the amount of carbon the planet can handle to limit warming to 1.5°C. We already have more than enough gas to meet global supply.

Rosebank key facts

• Burning Rosebank’s 254 million tonnes of Scope 3 emissions will cause an estimated 57,000 global heat-related deaths under peer-reviewed climate models.
• Using standard UK Treasury figures for life valuation, Rosebank inflicts over £114 billion in global climate damage, wiping out its claimed £24.3 billion in economic value nearly five times over.
• 90% of Rosebank’s oil reserves are destined for international markets and all of it will be sold at global market prices, meaning no cheap oil reserved for UK consumers.
• UK taxpayers effectively shoulder over 80% of Rosebank’s development costs through generous tax reliefs.
• Equinor, which reported around $50 million in UK operating income, paid no tax or royalties to the UK in 2024.
• In 2024 Shell paid no net tax on its North Sea drilling, instead receiving £12.4 million in tax reliefs. Shell is expected to avoid a further £1 billion of tax payments through the new Adura joint venture by offsetting its future profits against Equinor’s accumulated tax losses.
• Rosebank would generate a total of 254 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent in greenhouse gas emissions over its lifetime. That’s the equivalent of nearly 70% of the UK’s entire annual emissions in 2024.
• The climate pollution from Rosebank’s reserves would be greater than the combined annual CO₂ emissions of the 73 lowest-emitting countries and territories (representing over 114 million people).

Wider Context

• UK oil and gas employment halved from 441,000 in 2013 to 213,000 in 2023, despite hundreds of drilling licences being issued. 
• The UK green economy is worth £100bn per year, employs over a million people and has nearly half a trillion pounds of investment in the pipeline.
• Climate impacts were estimated to cost each UK household £3,000 in 2025. 
• Shell’s Q2 profits were £7.4 billion, while the world’s five biggest oil companies made half a billion dollars per day in the second quarter of 2026 due to the Iran war. 
• UK taxpayer-funded subsidies to fossil fuel companies are worth £13.3 billion for the last seven years. That amount could fund seven years of support for North Sea workers to transition to renewable industries, at the level called for by unions and environmental NGOs.

10 Questions for Government Ministers and Spokespeople

1. Bills: How much will Jackdaw or Rosebank reduce household energy bills, and by when? If their oil and gas are sold at international market prices, what is the mechanism for delivering cheaper energy?
2. Energy security: If Jackdaw reduces annual gas import dependency by only 2% on average, how does that justify its climate damage? How does Rosebank improve UK energy security when 90% of its oil is destined for international markets?
3. Jobs: How many new, permanent UK jobs will each project create? How do ministers reconcile claims of major employment benefits with Adura’s own figures that Jackdaw provides just 27 permanent new jobs? 
4. Trump: What commitments did the PM give to Donald Trump on North Sea drilling and is the US president now dictating UK energy policy? 
5. Growth: How will licensing more drilling deliver good growth in every postcode? What lasting growth will these projects deliver, and why is further drilling a better investment than backing the UK’s surging green economy?
6. Public money: Why should taxpayers effectively shoulder over 80% of Rosebank’s development costs? What is the expected net return to the public after tax reliefs and climate damage are taken into account?
7. Climate damage: How do ministers justify Rosebank’s estimated £114 billion in global climate damage against its claimed £24.3 billion economic value? What weight have they given to the estimated heat-related deaths from both fields?
8. Pragmatism:  Ministers have promised a pragmatic approach. What is pragmatic about approving projects that add to climate damage without delivering cheaper energy or a secure long-term future for workers?
9. Political pressure: What role has lobbying by fossil fuel companies played in these decisions? Will ministers publish the evidence and records of relevant meetings?
10. Rosebank: If the Government approves Jackdaw but delays Rosebank, why is it postponing a decision on the more damaging project? When will ministers give a definitive answer?

Greenpeace UK Press Office – press.uk@greenpeace.org or 020 7865 8255

The post JACKDAW AND ROSEBANK – 10 QUESTIONS FOR GOVERNMENT appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

Labour held Holborn and St Pancras in the by-election, while the Conservative Party conference offered another bewildering display of climate denial. In Brazil, Flávio Bolsonaro’s advance in the first round of elections has raised concerns for climate campaigners, while Spain faces fresh political uncertainty following Pedro Sánchez’s decision to call a snap election.

This week also marked three years since the Hamas attacks of 7 October and the devastating war in Gaza that followed. As people continue to take to the streets, it’s important to remember that there must be space to mourn every life lost.

That sinking feeling

Greenpeace volunteers have been out in London ahead of the by-election and in Birmingham during Conservative Party conference, challenging the growing influence of climate denial in British politics.

As the Tories mounted a full-throated attack on net zero and environmental protections, new Greenpeace analysis found that 68% of Conservative seats in England contain homes at risk of subsidence, with potentially significant consequences for insurance costs. What good is being the party of homeownership if those homes are sinking into the ground?

Meanwhile, speculation is rife that with the Holborn and St Pancras by-election now out of the way and the threat from the Greens seemingly waning, the government may finally reveal its thinking on granting new drilling licenses at Jackdaw and Rosebank. We think it would be a mistake for Labour to interpret that as an indication from voters to grant the licences. And so does their newly elected MP. There’ll be an environmental and political price to pay. 

Campaigning that makes a difference

Our investigative team at Unearthed revealed that persistent ‘forever chemicals’ have been detected in almost every river and groundwater sample tested in England, raising further questions about the protection of our waterways.

There was also welcome news from Spain, where Greenpeace activists were acquitted following a prosecution linked to peaceful protest. It’s an important victory for the right to take action.

What we’re watching

Beyond Westminster, a potentially landmark legal case in Boulder, Colorado, is testing whether fossil fuel companies can be held financially responsible for climate damages. It’s another reminder that accountability for the climate crisis is increasingly being fought for in courtrooms as well as through politics.

In the arts, a look back at the powerful work women artists have created in response to sexual violence is a reminder of the role creativity can play in challenging injustice. Meanwhile, protests in India are putting electoral reform firmly on the agenda. And fans of Demon Copperhead (like us) have Barbara Kingsolver’s new book to look forward to.

From climate accountability to democratic rights and the power of art, there’s plenty to keep us pushing for change. And we’ll keep doing exactly that.

Will

The post Political shifts and people power appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

The data shows that 246 constituencies contain properties at some risk of subsidence between now and 2050 – 45% of all 543 constituencies in England. Of these, 76 are currently held by Conservative MPs, while Labour hold 118 seats, the Liberal Democrats hold 39, Reform hold 6 and the Greens hold none.

The data comes as the Conservatives gather for their annual party conference in Birmingham where they are calling for a bonfire of regulations that protect the environment and net zero targets. One of the main causes of subsidence is changes in the moisture level of the underlying soils, exacerbated by extremes of wet and dry weather that are getting worse because of a changing climate.

Lily-Rose Ellis, climate campaigner for Greenpeace UK, said:

“People’s homes are at risk of literally sinking into the ground along with any credibility the Conservatives once had on the environment. Their love affair with oil and gas will please Donald Trump and the fossil fuel industry, but will do nothing to help their constituents facing the risk of sinking homes, rising premiums and plummeting property values. Previous Conservative leaders understood that cutting carbon is essential to protecting what we love – from our countryside to our homes to our children’s futures. Kemi is all about playing climate politics – not conserving our future.”

The data also shows that 50% of the properties in Katie Lam’s Weald of Kent constituency, and 56% of the properties in Kemi Badenoch’s North West Essex seat, are at risk of subsidence by 2050. 

Kemi Badenoch is expected to use her keynote speech at the Conservative conference to undermine climate action and expand the burning of fossil fuels, despite the high energy bills and fuel prices paid by consumers as a result of foreign wars. Under her leadership, the Conservatives have pledged to scrap the 2050 net zero target and to maximise extraction of oil and gas from the North Sea under Trump’s slogan “drill, baby, drill”.

Subsidence is a particular risk in areas where homes are built on clay, which includes large areas of the South East where the Conservatives are strong. It also includes very significant numbers of homes in Labour-held seats in London – a key political battleground in the coming Mayoral and General elections. 

ENDS

Contact

Greenpeace UK Press Office – press.uk@greenpeace.org or 020 7865 8255

Notes

The figures come from Aviva’s Building Future Communities 2025 constituency statistics. They count properties at possible or probable risk of subsidence by the 2050s, based on British Geological Survey data under the UKCP09 medium emissions projection. Party holdings are taken from the Parliament API as of 23 September 2026. Data on subsidence was not available for Wales and Scotland. Data is available on request.

The 68% figure is a Greenpeace calculation based on the data and the numbers of seats held by each party. A constituency is counted as being at risk if it contains any property in a subsidence risk area. These are area-based projections, not predictions that individual properties will suffer subsidence; the level of risk to individual properties varies widely within constituencies. 

Of the seats where more than half of properties are at risk, 27 are held by the Conservatives and 78 are held by Labour – most of them in London. Outside the capital the two parties hold 22 such seats each.

The post As Conservatives slam net zero at conference, data shows 68% of their seats contain properties facing subsidence risk  appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

The Environment Agency (EA) tested for trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) in groundwater for the first time, finding the chemical in 43 out of 49 samples taken. TFA was also present in all 50 surface water samples tested by the EA, echoing findings from a University of York and Fidra study last year. Testing on the effects of TFA in animals has indicated that it could impair fertility and harm babies in the womb.

No specific limits for TFA in surface water or groundwater currently exist in the EU or UK. However, the EU sets a 100 ng/L groundwater limit for certain pesticide breakdown products, which TFA can be. Of the 49 groundwater samples tested, 42 were above this level and 28 exceeded 1,000 ng/L. The highest concentration was 10,202 ng/L in groundwater near Finchingfield in Essex, comparable with levels described as “exceptionally high” by Swiss authorities. 

Of the surface-water readings, the highest was 6,412 ng/L in the River Ancholme in Lincolnshire. Although the number of test locations were limited and not nationally representative, the highest readings of TFA were as follows: 

• River Ancholme in Lincolnshire: 6,412 ng/L
• Mardyke in Essex: 6,093 ng/L
• River Witham in Lincolnshire: 6,067 ng/L
• New Bedford River meeting the River Great Ouse in Cambridgeshire: 5,830 ng/L
• River Gipping in Suffolk: 5,771 ng/L

The reading from the River Ancholme is nearly three times the level (2,200 ng/L) that would breach the EU’s new limit for PFAS in rivers and lakes if TFA were the only PFAS present. Currently TFA is included as part of a group of 25 PFAS for which the EU has set a surface water standard.[1]

TFA is a type of PFAS, a family of highly persistent man-made chemicals. It is produced when other fluorinated chemicals, including some pesticides, refrigerants and industrial chemicals, break down. Animal studies prompted the EU chemicals agency in June to recommend TFA be classified as toxic to reproduction. In July, the European Food Safety Authority also significantly lowered its health-based tolerable daily intake limits. 

TFA’s extreme persistence means it can remain in rivers, soils and plants for hundreds of years, creating a growing burden of pollution for wildlife and the ecosystems they depend on.

Among the surface waters tested were five rivers designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest. These included the River Idle Washlands in Nottinghamshire, where samples showed TFA levels at 3,301 ng/L, and the River Wensum in Norfolk – a rare chalk river habitat, supporting more than 100 plant species and a rich variety of wildlife – where levels were recorded at 1,800ng/L.

Professor Hans Peter Arp, an environmental chemist at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology and an expert on TFA, said the Environment Agency results were among the worst sets of data he had seen: “The TFA that is on the Earth today will be on the Earth for the next thousand years, and the TFA concentrations we see now are probably the lowest we’ll see in your lifetime…

“Groundwater has always been viewed as a source of clean [drinking] water. When, for instance, your lake becomes polluted, it was always the Plan B. So when I see that groundwater is starting to be polluted, it just means that there’s not a Plan B.”

TFA is not effectively removed using commonly applied water treatment processes and scientists have warned that concentrations will continue to rise unless emissions are tackled at source.

The chemical is formed from PFAS pesticides, including the herbicide flufenacet, which remains widely used on crops such as wheat and barley in Britain, despite no longer being approved in the EU, in part because of concerns that it could contaminate groundwater with TFA.

Nina Schrank, Senior Campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: “These results are alarming to say the least. A toxic chemical linked to reproductive harm, and so persistent that today’s pollution could remain in our environment for generations, is already widespread in England’s rivers and groundwater. 

“The government needs to tackle this dangerous pollution urgently and at source. The EU is already ahead of the UK in considering safe limits for TFA and ministers mustn’t let us fall behind. This data is also evidence enough for immediate action: properly support farmers with the funding and advice they need to reduce pesticide use, and tackle other chemicals that break down into TFA now.

“We cannot sit back and allow further contamination to build up year after year.” 

Ends

Notes to editors:

The full Unearthed/Watershed investigation is available here and the full data set is available on request.

Interactive map of the Environment Agency results: https://watershedinvestigations.com 

[1] TFA is included in the latest update to the EU Water Framework Directive as part of an Environmental Quality Standard (EQS) covering a group of 25 PFAS. The annual-average EQS for inland surface waters is 0.0044 µg/L expressed as PFOA equivalents. TFA has a relative potency factor of 0.002, meaning that if TFA were the only PFAS present, the equivalent concentration would be 2,200 ng/L. This is not a standalone legal limit for TFA, and individual samples cannot by themselves establish a breach of an annual-average EQS. 

The legislation specifically highlights the need to consider a separate TFA standard at the next review: “For surface water, TFA should therefore be included in a sum of 25 PFAS with an EQS in Annex I to Directive 2008/105/EC. At the next review, the Commission should consider establishing a separate EQS for TFA in Annex I to Directive 2008/105/EC.”

For Groundwater, it states: “For groundwater, the Commission should also consider establishing a quality standard for TFA, whether separate or as a part of a sum.”
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32026L0805#ntc26-L_202600805EN.006301-E0026 

The post Toxic ‘forever chemical’ linked to reproductive harm found in almost all rivers and groundwater tested in England appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

The move comes as new research suggests the uncapped bidding process could add up to £38 per year onto the average household energy bill in the UK. [2] From today, the Ofgem energy price cap rises to approximately £1,723 per year for a typical household energy bill – an increase of about £60.

Greenpeace UK’s legal challenge focuses on the Morgan Offshore Wind Project off the coast of Lancashire in the Irish Sea. The previous developers pulled out of the 1.5GW project in January, and the Crown Estate announced in July it was seeking a new developer before the end of this year. But Greenpease understands the ‘streamlined process’ still includes uncapped fees.

Last October, Greenpeace raised the alarm that the Crown Estate is exploiting its monopoly position as legal owner of the entire UK seabed outside of Scotland to charge hefty fees for leases of the seabed. For its fourth leasing round in 2019, the estate moved to an uncapped bidding process that resulted in developers paying much higher option fees. 

This has massively boosted the estate’s profits and the Royal Household’s income, at the expense of the wind power sector and energy bill payers. The estate made over £1 billion in 2024/25 and its profits have skyrocketed, turning the seabed into its most lucrative source of revenue. At the same time, the Crown Estate Commissioner’s pay has risen fivefold from around £385,000 a year in the period 2015-2020 to a staggering £1.9m in 2024/25. 

Will McCallum, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK said: “The Crown Estate is acting like the cat that got the cream. Its role may be to extract profit from the King’s land, but that must not be at the expense of the common good. Accelerating homegrown renewable energy is the aim of this government and the solution to sky-high energy bills, so why is the estate cranking up costs for developers and households? Its latest plan to auction the Morgan site shows it remains intent on milking the seabed for every last penny of profit. The Chancellor should step in and put a cap on these fees to help lower bills and stop this outrageous profiteering”

A report published this week by the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, based at the University of Oxford, finds that the option fees paid to the Crown Estate mean that developers need to sell electricity at prices 30-59% higher than they would without the fees. It also finds that if all new offshore wind projects to meet the government’s 2030 Clean Power target passed these additional prices on to bills, it would cost consumers an extra £36-£72 billion between 2035 and 2054. This would add roughly £19 to £38 to household energy bills in 2035, falling to £14 to £29 by 2054.

For comparison, the cut in VAT on electricity bills that Andy Burnham announced on his first day as prime minister, which comes into force today, should reduce bills by about £45 a year.

Despite negotiations with Greenpeace leading to some minor changes, the group alleges in its ‘pre-action protocol’ letter to the Crown Estate that the Morgan auction “suffers from materially the same legal defects” as previous auction rounds, and that this approach represents a “continuation of their short-sighted and irresponsible disregard for the impact that extortionate lease pricing would have on the offshore wind market”.

Greenpeace is concerned the conditions of the Morgan auction could be replicated in future leasing rounds for much larger areas of the seabed. The campaign group is calling for the Chancellor to intervene to ensure the Crown Estate puts a cap on option fees including in the sixth round expected to launch in the first half of next year. The excess profits from the last auction round should be invested in measures to conserve the seabed around the British isles.  

Ends

For interviews, or a copy of the legal letter sent to the Crown Estate, contact press.uk@greenpeace.org / 020 7865 8255  

Notes:

[1] The Crown Estate manages all of the land and property belonging to the King, and provides revenue to the Treasury and the Royal Household. As the legal owner of the entire UK seabed outside of Scotland, it runs auctions to lease blocks of seabed to offshore wind developers, generating income from option fees and leasehold rents.

[2] The Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment report, Headwinds: how seabed leasing risks adding costs to clean energy, can be found here.

The post Greenpeace threatens legal action against Crown Estate over ‘extortionate’ fees for offshore wind farm in Irish Sea appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

A quick recap. Jackdaw was approved by the Conservative government in June 2022, followed by Rosebank in September 2023. Greenpeace challenged both decisions in court, working with Uplift on Rosebank, on the fairly fundamental basis that you can’t decide whether a new oil or gas field is compatible with our climate commitments without considering the emissions created when that oil and gas is actually burned.

The Supreme Court agreed with that principle in the Finch case in June 2024. Following the general election, the Labour government then decided not to defend the previous government’s approvals of Jackdaw and Rosebank in court, and the approvals were subsequently ruled unlawful.

Since then, we’ve had new environmental guidance, a public consultation and another change at the top of government. The consultation has now closed and we’re waiting for the next decision on the future of the fields.

Which brings us to Andy Burnham and Miatta Fahnbulleh.

This will be one of the first big climate and energy tests for the new government, and it comes after another record-breaking summer. Miatta spoke this week about bringing bills down, ending the price volatility that comes with our reliance on fossil fuels and working with civil society to deliver change. The decision on Jackdaw and Rosebank is a pretty immediate opportunity to demonstrate what that means in practice.

Our view hasn’t changed: neither field should go ahead.

For all the industry’s promises about jobs and energy security, it’s worth asking who actually benefits. Jackdaw would create just 27 new direct full-time jobs, according to the developer’s own assessment. And the oil and gas produced won’t be reserved for British households at cheaper prices – it will be sold by private companies on international markets, at international prices.

Rosebank isn’t exactly providing a great advert for the alternative either. Production has already been pushed back after two pieces of drilling equipment, including a safety valve, were accidentally dropped 1,100 metres to the seabed.

So consumers don’t get cheaper energy. Workers don’t get the scale of secure, long-term jobs being promised. And more North Sea drilling doesn’t free us from volatile global fossil fuel prices.

The clearest beneficiary is the oil and gas industry itself.

North Sea workers and communities deserve a much better offer: serious investment in clean industries, secure jobs and a properly managed transition. The brutal and badly managed closure of Britain’s coal industry showed what happens when governments fail to plan properly for workers and communities. We shouldn’t repeat those mistakes.

So after four years of campaigning, court cases, consultations and political change, we’re back to a relatively simple choice: approve more oil and gas fields that take us further in the wrong direction, or start investing properly in what comes next.

We’ll be pushing Andy and Miatta to choose the latter.

Areeba

The post Jackdaw and Rosebank – how did we get here? appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

The UK’s recognition of settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing in Palestine was a significant moment. For many campaigners it will feel too little, too late given the devastation in Gaza. But political positions don’t change on their own. People marched, organised, took direct action and kept pushing the government to go further. There is still much more to do, including ending UK arms sales to Israel.

Closer to home, charges were dropped against eight activists who climbed the Staythorpe gas-fired power station last year – welcome news at a time when the right to peaceful protest remains under pressure.

Nature and energy in focus

Nature was also high on the agenda this week. At the Wild Summit, civil society came together behind a campaign to protect 30% of land and sea, while new Green Party candidate Zack Polanski made a strong case for greater political action to tackle the nature crisis. Unfortunately we did not hear the same level of ambition from the Minister representing Defra.

Meanwhile, new Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh brought environmental organisations and energy businesses together at DESNZ, setting out priorities including bringing bills down and reducing the price volatility associated with fossil fuels.

There’s an immediate opportunity to put those ambitions into practice: Jackdaw and Rosebank.

After years of campaigning, court cases and consultation, the government faces a choice over the future of these two North Sea oil and gas fields. Greenpeace’s position is clear: they shouldn’t go ahead. Instead, we need investment in clean energy alongside a properly managed transition that delivers secure jobs for North Sea workers and communities.

Reasons to keep pushing

There were other signs of debates moving forward too, from growing political attention on AI to new analysis showing how close we could be to positive climate tipping points in clean technologies. Progress rarely happens neatly or all at once. But this week was another reminder that supposedly fixed political positions can change.

The job is to keep pushing them in the right direction.

Areeba

The post Politics, pressure and what comes next appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

Deputy Leader Richard Tice’s speech to the Reform UK party conference in Birmingham was disrupted by an automated banner rising from the stage. 

Greenpeace unfurled the remote control banner on the main stage of Reform’s party conference. It depicts Nigel Farage as ‘Mr Monopoly’ from the famous board game, carrying a sack of cash, with the slogan ‘Collect £5 million, burn the planet’.

Analysis [1] by Desmog indicates that two-thirds of Reform’s funding is from donors with financial interests in fossil fuels, totalling more than £24 million. When recently asked about the link between climate change and this summer’s extreme weather, Mr Tice, Reform UK’s energy spokesman, told people to “enjoy” the hot weather, which was “fantastic” for English wine.[2] 

Amy Cameron, Programme Director for Greenpeace UK, said:

“Tice wants to celebrate this summer’s relentless heatwaves and droughts because they’re improving English sparkling wine. But the only thing being toasted in England is our farmland, and the only way you could miss that is if you’re paid not to notice.

“Reform disguise themselves as champions of ordinary people, but they’re funded by billionaires who profit from keeping us hooked on oil and gas, while the rest of us deal with the catastrophic climate consequences. When this summer’s searing temperatures give way to winter storms, 90% of homes in Tice’s own constituency, Boston and Skegness, will be at risk of flooding. 

“We need to quit the expensive fossil fuels that are wrecking our climate. A more secure, independent energy future is within reach – we just need the politicians in the pocket of the oil and gas lobby to get out of the way.” 

The protest highlights that Reform’s agenda favours the billionaires with fossil fuel interests who fund the party through Reform’s denial of climate change, as the nation is facing drought, heatwaves, wildfires and crop failures, and other countries suffer even more. 

The investigation by the Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards[3] into the £5 million ‘gift’ donated to Farage by Christopher Harborne, Reform UK’s biggest donor and a billionaire with interests including cryptocurrency and a jet fuel business, is ongoing. 

Tice is also under investigation by the Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards for possible failure to declare an interest, and a company controlled by Tice is being investigated by the Metropolitan Police for donations given to Reform.[4]

Unearthed, Greenpeace’s investigative journalism unit, and Data Desk recently published an investigation revealing that a jet fuel business owned by Harborne is contracted to supply fuel to the US military from refineries taking oil from Russia and Iran.[5] Recent reporting has also revealed evidence of Reform accepting potentially illegal donations from overseas.[6]

Footage and stills are available here.

ENDS

Contact

To arrange interviews on site, or for any other requests, contact Greenpeace UK Press Office – press.uk@greenpeace.org or 07739 963 301

Notes

1. https://www.desmog.com/2026/04/30/reform-uk-nigel-farage-millions-donations-fossil-fuel-interests-climate-science-deniers/ 
2. https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/standards-and-financial-interests/parliamentary-commissioner-for-standards/complaints-and-investigations/allegations-currently-under-investigation-by-the-commissioner/ 
3. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/aug/17/reform-uk-richard-tice-stop-tackling-climate-crisis-enjoy-heat 
4. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/aug/03/standards-watchdog-investigating-reform-richard-tice 
5. https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2026/07/01/christopher-harborne-jet-fuel-russian-iran-oil-reform-uk/ 
6. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86xj5z7x61o 

The post Tice speech interrupted by Greenpeace banner appeared first on Greenpeace UK.

High-resolution images and video footage of the action are available here. 

Activists installed the land art on Sychnant Pass (within Eryri National Park) in Conwy, Wales, where “terrifying” wildfires recently incinerated vast parts of the landscape. Greenpeace used the scorched earth as a canvas to send a message to the new PM: “Our house is on fire Andy”, accompanied by an illustration of Burnham poised to pour oil and gas over the flames.

The 1,120 m² artwork, made using eco-friendly, plastic-free paint, draws on Greta Thunberg’s famous speech in 2019, where she urged world leaders to take action to stop climate change. 

The protest lands at the end of a summer defined by climate extremes. Following successive heatwaves throughout June, July and August, the UK is on track to record its warmest summer on record. Drought conditions now grip almost three-quarters of the country, with over 27 million facing water restrictions. These extreme conditions have proven deadly, with May and June’s heatwaves accounting for an estimated 2,700 excess deaths. 

It also lands on the final day of a public consultation on whether to approve Rosebank, a controversial oil field branded a “carbon bomb” by campaigners and “climate vandalism” by Ed Miliband. Consultation for Jackdaw, another gas field in the North Sea, closed a week before.  

Despite Labour’s stated climate commitments, Prime Minister Andy Burnham has left the door open to approving these licenses under the guise of a “pragmatic” approach to energy security.

“The PM wants to be pragmatic, but there is nothing pragmatic about watching communities be battered by climate chaos while the Prime Minister flirts with expanding the very industry driving it. This summer has been an endless showreel of fossil-fuelled disasters playing out across the country. As the Conwy community reels from their own, we’re urging Andy to see through the self-serving promises of Big Oil and take an honest look at the real world consequences of more North Sea drilling.

“More drilling means more heatwaves, more droughts, more wildfires, and more suffering for the communities Burnham represents. The climate crisis is already hitting working people hardest — firefighters on the front line, bus drivers exposed to inhumane conditions, nurses collapsing on the job. 

“Does the Prime Minister really want to stand with the oil companies making billions, rather than the millions already paying the price? Our message is simple: be brave – say no.”

The environmental and moral consequences of more drilling in the North Sea are significant. Estimates show that the Rosebank project would generate a total of 254 million tonnes of CO₂ over its lifetime – equivalent to nearly 70% of the UK’s entire annual emissions in 2024. 

Oxfam research suggests that if both the Rosebank and Jackdaw fields are approved, their combined lifetime emissions would contribute to an estimated 65,495 excess heat deaths globally – equivalent to wiping out the entire population of Clacton-on-Sea.

Evidence also shows that approving Rosebank would not lower energy bills, nor meaningfully impact the UK’s energy security – with 80% of Rosebank’s oil reserves destined for export and all of it sold at global market prices. The government’s own energy factsheet confirms this, saying: “We are price-takers, not price-makers.”

ENDS

Contact: 

Molly Robson, Press Officer at Greenpeace UK

press@greenpeace.org or 020 7865 8255 

The post Activists paint giant climate warning to Burnham on mountainside scorched by wildfires  appeared first on Greenpeace UK.