Chevron gets permission for deepwater drilling – first in UK since BP disaster

Posted by tracy - 1 October 2010 at 10:52am - Comments

We've just found out that the government gave Chevron permission to begin deepwater drilling in the waters west of Shetland late last night. This is the first deepwater oil drilling in UK waters since the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. We expect Chevron will begin drilling in the next few days.

In the last week our activists spent 50 hours in the water in front of Chevron's drill ship, 100 hours on their anchor chain, and over the last 24 hours 16,000 people sent emails to Climate and Energy Secretary Chris Huhne urging him not to grant Chevron the license. It's been a Herculean effort by all and we can't thank you enough for your support.

The government's decision to open up drilling in ever more difficult and dangerous places to reach is totally irresponsible move and shows clearly that they've not learned the lessons from the BP oil disaster. That's why we're preparing to take them to court.

We're preparing legal action against the government in order to stop the granting of new permits for deep water drilling - we hope it will stop hundreds of new wells being sunk. Last month our lawyers wrote a ‘letter before action' to ministers which is the first step for seeking a judicial review of the decision to push ahead with new deep water drilling.

We're asking the government to stop giving out these licenses for new offshore drilling and to carry out a comprehensive new environmental assessment into offshore oil. It's not just irrational to give out licenses without this new environmental assessment; we believe it's also a breach of European and UK law.

Our lawyers have a strong record. You may remember that they helped us to get the last government's nuclear and aviation policies changed.

But our lawyers don't come cheap. We think our planet is worth it, but we need your help. Please donate today to help cover our legal costs to stop deepwater drilling in the UK.

Article tagged as: chevron, chris huhne, deepwater drilling, exploration, go beyond oil, government, oil, shetland, stena carron

Comments Commenting is now closed

Did you ever get your helicopter back?

By Username - 1 October 2010 at 11:45am

Uk is a great country...!!! I think all the people from Uk can force the goverment to make a law to avoid this situation... "...the people are over the goverment, not they over us..." greenpeace in argentina obtained a great victory against the miner companies, just making a law to avoid the destruction of glaciares... all citizen from Uk can sign for this law... the "NO deepwater drilling..." and it is for me the main point...!!! !!!...March wild and brave... never stop to blow like a storm...!!!

By forest song - 1 October 2010 at 2:48pm

Joss: "The effect of the action was to delay Chevron drilling. If they had reached the drill site earlier, the licence would have been issued earlier " This is actually not the case. The Stena Carron was on stand by one mile from Lerwick awaiting the license before you attached yourself to it. If you had not done so, it would have waited there (as it is logistically easier and cheaper) until the license was granted, then sailed to location and begun drilling. Because of your interference, the ship made the decision after your pod was removed to sail to location and await the license there, so that it could begin drilling immediately upon approval, rather than give you another opportunity to interfere after license approval and then perhaps cause a real delay. As it turned out, you only delayed it reaching location, NOT drilling, so the effort was effectively in vain. But congratulations, you have won yourself some bad publicity, incurred legal expenses, haven't changed the law, put your campaigners' lives and the rig crew's lives at ridiculous and unnecessary risk, and even managed to turn otherwise indifferent people AGAINST your cause, all becuase of your reckless and fruitless publicity stunt. I hope it was worth it?

By atomic - 2 October 2010 at 7:13pm

Joss, Thanks for the logical response but, for the record, I never called you cynical, I said it was I who was being cynical. I appreciate the confirmation although I still don't understand your comment 'we certainly delayed it' - if the licence was granted after your action ended I don't understand what effect your action had. Can you also clarify what Greenpeaces definition is of 'Deepwater' drilling. In previous blogs you have stated that the Lagavulin well is only in 500m of water - surely this is not deepwater???? The blowout in the Gulf of Mexico was in over 1500m of water. Thanks in advance

By norbert999 - 1 October 2010 at 4:09pm

The effect of the action was to delay Chevron drilling. If they had reached the drill site earlier, the licence would have been issued earlier - my point was that we consider it extremely unlikely that they would hire a massively expensive ship and crew for an extended period just on the off chance a licence might be issued - ergo they were extremely confident that they were going to get one (it was in fact issued within hours of the second injunction being place upon Greenpeace and or action beingcalled off).

As to the depth at which they will be drilling - the Lagavulin well is in fact in 1,569m of water - slightly deeper than the Deepwater disaster, and in a much harder to access location should anything go wrong.

Joss

Online Producer GPUK

By jossc - 1 October 2010 at 5:45pm

Could you please find the time to jot a few pointers regarding the safety of Greenpeace's actions in regard to the Stena Don? I read in statements from Greenpeace that the Stena Don was forced to stop drilling because of your actions. Statements also pointed out that the rig had not and was not going to encounter an oil or gas strike at the time you climbed aboard which made the occupation 'entirely safe'. As per Cairn Energy statement, the rig encountered oil and gas at several stages of the drill, following which a decision was made to continue to drill the well even deeper. I, and others on here, have questioned the safety aspect of Greenpeace's actions yet never received any response. Could you please confirm or deny whether Greenpeace did indeed endanger the rig and its crew as well as the fragile Greenland environment by interupting a live drill where gas or oil could have been encountered at any time? If so, the recklessness of the operation would have potentially have caused exactly that which Greenpeace are campaigning against. I do hope that you could find the time to answer, what most would see as most important safety considerations. This would allow people to 'get off your back' and win you some marginal observers of your actions.

By wikkid - 1 October 2010 at 8:45pm