The UK Government has been accused of “complacently standing by” while oil and gas drilling starts in the Arctic despite the risks to the environment and climate.
Companies such as Shell are not yet able to demonstrate they could clean up an oil spill in the harsh but pristine conditions of the Arctic, MPs on the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) said.
And a recent report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned that only a third of already proven fossil fuels can be burnt before 2050 if global temperatures are to be kept from rising by more than 2C, widely regarded as the threshold for “dangerous” climate change.
As a result, exploring for new reserves in the Arctic is “needlessly risky”, the MPs argued, and they accused ministers of failing to provide a coherent argument to support its view that exploring for oil and gas in the Arctic was compatible with avoiding dangerous climate change.
The report scrutinising the Government’s Arctic policy follows an EAC report published last September which called for a halt to drilling in the Arctic until there were stronger protections against oil spills.
The latest report from the committee points to problems Shell has encountered in the Arctic in the past year, particularly the grounding of its Kulluk rig in December and the questions raised by US regulators as a result.
The US Department of the Interior has said that Shell entered the 2012 drilling season “not fully prepared” in terms of developing and testing critical systems, and had serious deficiencies in management of contractors, oversight and execution of operations in the Arctic.
Shell’s problems, which led to it pausing its 2013 drilling plans, reinforced the need for a moratorium and the introduction of much higher – preferably unlimited – financial liability to cover any drilling that takes place in the future, the committee said.
The MPs also reiterated their call for a sanctuary to be established in the Arctic, which is protected from oil and gas development.
EAC chairwoman Joan Walley said: “What happens in the Arctic will affect the UK, impacting our weather systems and biodiversity.
“Yet this Government is complacently standing by and watching new oil and gas drilling in the region, even though companies like Shell cannot prove they could clean up an oil spill in such harsh conditions.”
In 2006, David Cameron was famously photographed in the Arctic, “hugging” a husky, as part of efforts to establish his green credentials while in opposition.
Ms Walley said: “David Cameron should visit the Arctic again to see the huge changes that have taken place since he was last there and renew his commitment to protecting the region.
“The rapidly-disappearing Arctic sea ice should be a wake-up call for his Government to tackle climate change, not pave the way for a corporate carve-up of the region’s resources.”
The EAC report said the latest data showed an “alarming rate of decline” in Arctic sea ice which scientists point to as a sign of global warming, and the Met Office continued to predict the Arctic could be ice-free in summer by 2025 to 2030.
The Arctic is a key part of a the climate system, with the white ice area reflecting heat back out from the surface.
Earlier this week scientists warned that the melting of the Arctic was an “economic time bomb” with the release of methane – a key climate change gas – from permafrost under the sea of northern Russia potentially costing £40 trillion, almost as much as the whole world economy in 2012.
A Government spokesman said: “We disagree with the committee’s call for a moratorium on new oil and gas drilling. We are very aware of the possible environmental impact of an oil spill in the Arctic and support the use of the highest drilling standards.
“However, the UK is not an Arctic State and it is not for us to tell other countries which resources they can and cannot extract from their own sovereign territory.
“We also believe that our approach to oil and gas exploration in the Arctic is consistent with our commitment to limit average global temperature increase to two degrees.
“The UK does have strong environmental, economic, scientific and political interests in the Arctic and this summer we will be publishing an Arctic Policy Framework for the first time.”
But WWF Scotland director Lang Banks said: “Shell’s Kulluk rig fiasco last year is just a taste of the dangers to come if the world doesn’t begin to end its addiction to fossil fuels.
“However, it’s not just the big oil majors that are hunting for oil in the Arctic. People may be surprised to learn that companies in Scotland are also putting our planet in peril.
“Scotland has the best climate targets in the world and huge ambitions for renewable energy so it is particularly ironic that a Scottish company is leading this risky hunt for oil.
“This report underlines why it’s time for Cairn Energy to abandon its Arctic oil plans and hand back its licences.
“We believe Scottish companies like Cairn Energy should be leaders in clean energy instead of desperately seeking to squeeze out every last drop of oil no matter the risks.
“The Arctic can’t afford the risk of oil spills and the planet can’t afford the risk of burning the oil that lies in the Arctic.”
Ruth Davis, political director at Greenpeace UK, said: “The committee’s report makes it clear yet again that the Government’s Arctic policy is both reckless and internally inconsistent.
“Drilling for oil in the Arctic is incompatible with the UK’s climate change goals and creates unmanageable risks to a unique and vulnerable ecosystem.
“Whilst the Government claims that protecting this pristine environment is central to the UK’s stance on the Arctic, its failure to face up to the dangers of drilling in the far north suggests its real interests lie in promoting the irresponsible plans of companies like Shell.”