Jackdaw, Rosebank and the renewables alternative: what could the same money build?

Would you buy an authentic tiger rug that was sold to raise funds to protect tigers?

Would you buy into gas-generated energy to fund the energy transition?

On 21st October 2026 the UK government approved the Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea. A decision on the Rosebank oil field, developed by the same company, has not yet been made^{2, 7}

For the same money, renewables would produce far more energy. Admittedly, in this case, we’d be swapping apples and oranges: Gas and oil can be delivered quickly and used for heating and transport. Wind and solar make electricity, which is cheaper per unit once built, and does not directly replace a gas boiler.

Jackdaw cost about £2.1bn, for around 11 years of production, giving a maximum 6% boost to UK gas production.^{2, 3} This investment could build about 1.3 GW of onshore wind (≈4.4 TWh of electricity a year), or 3.2 GW of solar (≈3.4 TWh), or 0.5–0.6 GW of offshore wind (≈2.3–2.7 TWh).

In terms of the cost of the energy supplied, Jackdaw’s gas is sold at the market price, so it does not lower bills by itself. The Energy Secretary said it will not bring bills down this winter.⁵

What has been decided

Jackdaw is a gas field off the coast of Aberdeen, run by Adura, a joint venture between Shell and Equinor. Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh approved it on 21 October. The government says it will raise domestic gas production by about 6% at peak and run for up to 11 years. Reuters’ own calculation is that at peak (40,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day) it would cover just under 4% of Britain’s daily gas demand.²

Adura says Jackdaw will involve £2.1bn of investment, safeguard 273 existing jobs and create 27 new direct jobs, and add £2.9bn to the economy. Those are the developer’s estimates.^{3, 5}

The government also announced an Energy Wealth Fund, starting with £2bn, to put oil and gas revenues towards clean energy.²

Rosebank is the largest untapped oil field in the North Sea, west of Shetland. Equinor’s figures (from when it was first approved in 2023) are up to 300 million barrels of oil, a peak of 69,000 barrels a day, and £8.1bn of direct investment⁹. Adura puts the combined investment for Jackdaw and Rosebank at £10.8bn.⁶

No decision has been made. The Guardian reported that the Energy Secretary is minded to refuse it, but this is not final. She has said the case differs from Jackdaw because Rosebank’s oil is exported. Unions including the GMB and Unite want it approved.^{7, 8}

Both projects were first approved in 2022. Their consents were overturned in 2025 after a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that the emissions from burning the fuel must be assessed, which is why the government had to decide again.^{6, 15}

Same money, different energy

To compare fairly I used the government’s own cost research for renewables and the capital cost per kilowatt it contains. The sums below are my own arithmetic, not figures from any one source.

For Jackdaw’s £2.1bn:

• Onshore wind: at about £1,588 per kW, this buys roughly 1.3 GW. At a 38% load factor that is about 4.4 TWh of electricity a year, for around 35 years in the central case.¹²
• Large-scale solar: at about £659 per kW, roughly 3.2 GW. At a 12% load factor (typical for the UK) that is about 3.4 TWh a year, for around 38 years¹².
• Offshore wind: at roughly £3,450–£3,980 per kW all-in, about 0.5–0.6 GW. At a 50% load factor (the figure Carbon Brief uses) that is about 2.3–2.7 TWh a year.^{1, 13}

For £10.8bn (both fields, using Adura’s combined figure):

• Onshore wind: about 6.8 GW and 22.7 TWh a year.
• Solar: about 16.4 GW and 17.5 TWh a year.
• Offshore wind: about 2.7–3.1 GW and 12–14 TWh a year.

What the fields produce, for comparison:

• Jackdaw at its peak produces gas holding roughly 25 TWh of energy a year (my conversion from 40,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day). Its lifetime output is reported as around 40 million barrels of oil equivalent, or roughly 68 TWh over about 11 years.^{2, 4}
• Rosebank at its peak would produce about 25 million barrels of oil a year (69,000 a day), plus some gas⁹. Around 80% of the oil produced in UK waters is currently exported.¹
• Putting these side by side: over its life, the £2.1bn of onshore wind would produce roughly 150 TWh of electricity, compared with about 68 TWh of gas energy from Jackdaw. Burned in a gas power station at around 50% efficiency (my assumption), Jackdaw’s gas would give about 34 TWh of electricity. Carbon Brief’s analysis assumes a heat pump is about 300% efficient and a gas boiler about 85%. On those figures one unit of electricity gives about 3.5 times as much heat when used in a heat pump as the gas used in a boiler would.¹

What would the energy cost?

Renewables. In the latest government auction (AR7), developers agreed to sell electricity for 20 years at these prices (in 2024 money, rising with inflation):

• Solar: £65 per MWh
• Onshore wind: £72 per MWh
• Offshore wind: £91 per MWh^{10, 11}

For comparison, the government puts the cost of building and running a new gas power station at £147 per MWh, and wholesale power averaged £81 per MWh in 2025¹⁰. Independent cost research for the government gives a central estimate of about £46 per MWh for both onshore wind and solar in 2023 prices, with a wide range (roughly £27–£91 for onshore wind, £30–£65 for solar)¹². That figure covers the cost of building and running the plant, not the contract price.

Gas from Jackdaw. The gas is sold at the market price rather than at a cost to the UK. In 2026 the UK wholesale price has swung between roughly 100 and 150 pence per therm. It was 126p in March, around 99p in late June and about 150p for winter delivery in mid-August^1,14. At 100–150p that is about 3.4–5.1p per kWh of gas energy (£34–£51 per MWh). If that gas were burned in a power station at 50% efficiency (my assumption), the fuel alone would cost roughly £68–£102 for each MWh of electricity.

I could not find a published production cost per unit for Jackdaw or Rosebank, so I cannot give a “cost of energy” for the fields themselves. Prices have been volatile and I could not confirm today’s price.

The case for the drilling

• Jackdaw gas should start flowing within weeks, which no new wind or solar farm could match³
• It is domestically produced gas for a country that still depends heavily on gas for heating, and the Energy Secretary says it improves security of supply “by a small but meaningful amount”⁴
• It protects hundreds of jobs and brings tax revenue, some of which will go into the Energy Wealth Fund^{2, 5}
• Industry bodies argue this is not “either renewables or oil and gas”, and that both are needed⁶

The case against

• Jackdaw is small. Estimates of its share of UK gas demand range from about 2% over its lifetime (environmental groups) to just under 4% at peak (Reuters)^{2, 6}
• It will not lower bills, because the UK gas price is set by wider markets⁵
• It is short-lived, about 11 years, while the renewables bought with the same money would run for decades^{2, 12}
• Carbon Brief’s analysis says North Sea gas output is set to fall 99% by 2050 regardless, and that clean power does more to cut gas imports than new drilling¹
• For Rosebank in particular, reports say it would emit around seven times the carbon of Jackdaw, and most of the oil would be exported⁸

Things to keep in mind

• Not like for like. Jackdaw’s £2.1bn only gets gas out of the ground. You still need power stations or boilers to use it. A wind farm’s capital cost produces electricity directly, with free fuel.
• Sunk costs. Jackdaw was due to flow within weeks of approval, so much of the £2.1bn may already have been spent. I could not confirm how much. If so, the choice in October was whether to let a largely built field produce, not whether to spend £2.1bn from scratch. That is my inference.
• System costs. The renewable figures above do not include grid upgrades, storage or back-up for calm, dull days. Offshore wind’s £91 per MWh is close to the roughly £94 below which two consultancies (both commissioned by wind developers) estimated it lowers overall energy costs.¹¹
• Different jobs. Gas heats most British homes today. Wind and solar only displace it if heating is also electrified, for example with heat pumps.¹
• Who is making the claims. Carbon Brief is a climate-focused publication, and Adura and Offshore Energies UK are industry voices. I have attributed claims to whoever made them.
• Licences versus these projects. Carbon Brief’s analysis is mostly about issuing new licences. Jackdaw and Rosebank already held licences.

Bottom line

On the numbers, the same capital spent on renewables would generate much more energy over its life, and at a lower cost per unit of electricity. But whether Jackdaw was a “good idea” depends on how you weigh speed, energy security this winter, heating needs, jobs and tax revenue against climate commitments and what the money could otherwise do. Reasonable people weigh these differently, so I have set out the evidence on both sides rather than giving a verdict. Rosebank is a different case, with more oil, more emissions and mostly exported output, and it is still undecided.

Notes on Facts/References

• Jackdaw’s approval date, the 6% and 11-year figures, the £2.1bn investment (government and developer statements as reported by Reuters, ITV and PA), and the AR7 strike prices.
• Single-source or developer figures: the job numbers and £2.9bn boost (Adura); the carbon comparison between Rosebank and Jackdaw (reported from Labour sources); Rosebank’s £8.1bn (Equinor, 2023).
• Conflicting figures: Jackdaw’s reserves. A 2022 report quoted Shell at 120–250 million barrels of oil equivalent, while a 2026 report gives about 40 million barrels as the lifetime output. I used the recent figure.^{4, 16}
• The offshore wind capital cost is my reading of tables in the government’s 2025 cost study and its 2026 peer review (about £3,450–£3,980 per kW including development and grid connection). The peer review’s infrastructure figure (£750 per kW) is confirmed by a trade press summary¹³

Sources

1. Analysis: Why clean energy will cut UK gas imports by more than North Sea drilling, Carbon Brief, 2026-03-11.
2. UK Approves Long-delayed Jackdaw Gas Field on Energy Security Grounds, Reuters, 2026-10-21
3. Government approves drilling in Jackdaw gas field, ITV News, 2026-10-21
4. Jackdaw: what does it actually mean for business, you and energy prices, The Scotsman, 2026-10-21
5. UK government approves new North Sea gas field, says tax revenue will fund clean energy, Solar Power Portal, 2026-10-21
6. Jackdaw gas field in North Sea set to be approved, reports suggest, STV via PA News, 2026-09-26
7. War Of The Rosebank: Labour Split As Crunch Decision On North Sea Oil Drilling Looms, HuffPost UK, 2026-10-23
8. Labour likely to reject drilling at Rosebank oilfield after approval of Jackdaw, GB News, 2026-10-25
9. UK gives go-ahead for contentious 300 million barrel Rosebank oil project, S&P Global, 2023-09-27
10. Q&A: New UK onshore wind and solar is ‘50% cheaper’ than new gas, Carbon Brief, 2026-02-11
11. The Energy Edit: what do the offshore wind auction and the Warm Homes Plan mean for energy bills?, Nesta, 2026-02-02
12. Renewable Energy Generation Cost and Technical Assumptions 2024: Onshore Wind and Solar PV, Arup for DESNZ, 2025-07
13. Offshore wind generation cost peer review report, DESNZ (Grant Thornton UK LLP and BVG Associates), 2025-12-25. Summary: UK government review recommends lower offshore wind cost estimates, Windtech International, 2026-01-16
14. UK wholesale gas prices, Catalyst Commercial, 2026-08-13 and UK Energy Market Report, 2026-06-25
15. Starmer signals plans to approve North Sea oil project, Yahoo News, 2025-02-06
16. Shell given green light for large North Sea gas field, The Daily Telegraph, 2022-06-02