DRILL OR DROP?

The campaigner challenging consent for lower-volume fracking in East Yorkshire has added a new ground to his case.

Photo: Used with the owner’s consent

Peter Lomas, from Hornsea, is taking the first legal steps against the Environment Agency (EA), over its issue of a permit at the West Newton-A site in Holderness.

The site operator, Rathlin Energy, had said lower-volume fracking is required to allow commercial exploitation of a well at the site.

The new ground is based on the Finch Ruling, a successful case at the Supreme Court brought by Sarah Finch and the Weald Action Group on climate emissions from onshore oil and gas.

In a legal letter in early April, solicitors Leigh Day set out four grounds for Mr Lomas’s challenge:

• Risk of induced seismicity
• Risk to groundwater pollution
• Impact on the Lambwath Meadows site of special scientific interest
• Failure to consider international guidance on climate change

But a second letter has recently added that the EA failed, when making its decision on the permit, to consider and undertake a detailed environmental impact assessment (EIA).

The planning permission for production at West Newton-A was passed without an EIA, in March 2022.

This was more than two years before the Finch Ruling, which stated that decisionmakers must consider the downstream carbon emissions from using oil or gas produced onshore.

The Finch ruling also emphasised the importance of public participation in the EIA process and public understanding of the environmental impact of developments.

Mr Lomas’s lawyers argued there had been no environmental information about the downstream emissions from oil or gas produced at West Newton-A.

They said the EA was obliged to assess the environmental impact of oil and gas production resulting from lower-volume fracking.

Information was needed, they said, on emissions from using hydrocarbons from the well to ensure the public could properly participate in the process.

The lawyers have also revised the fourth ground in the case. It now argues that the EA failed to consider the impact of lower-volume fracking on climate change, under its duties in the Environment Act 1995.

Leigh Day has asked for further information from the EA on the first three grounds.

The company behind the suspended oil site that is subject of a landmark Supreme Court ruling has reported declining assets and revenue.

UK Oil & Gas plc (UKOG) revealed today in delayed annual accounts that it has interests in just one hydrocarbon site.

The value of the company’s total assets and its revenue both fell by more than 60% in the year to September 2025.

During the same period, the accounts show that UKOG gave up an onshore PEDL (production, exploration and development licence) and two exploration sites.

It also sold its stake in two more UK production sites in southern England and exited from its Turkish licence interests.

The company’s remaining oil and gas site at Horse Hill – once called the Gatwick Gusher – has been mothballed since October 2024. The Supreme Court stripped the site of its planning permission in what became known as the Finch Ruling in June 2024.

A separate statement this morning announced UKOG had submitted a retrospective planning application for the reinstatement of production consent at Horse Hill. The application announcement was not mentioned in the accounts and the details have not yet been published online.

But the accounts admitted:

“There is no certainty when consent will be reinstated or that production [at Horse Hill] will recommence.

“The Group continues to evaluate available technical data and maintain cost discipline; however, the timing, level and economic viability of any future production remain uncertain.”

Loss of oil and gas assets

The accounts confirmed that in June 2025 the company relinquished PEDL246, which included the Broadford Bridge oil exploration site in West Sussex and the planned Loxley gas site, near Dunsfold, in Surrey.

UKOG said it had plugged and abandoned the Broadford Bridge wells, BB-1/1z, in February 2026, despite discussions on their geothermal potential.

The company said:

“This milestone confirms the Company’s compliance with its regulatory obligations, demonstrating its continued commitment to responsible operations and asset stewardship during its transition into clean energy.”

But it did not mention the planning requirement to restore the site to farmland, which has not yet happened, nor the planning contravention notice issued against UKOG’s subsidiary, the site operator, and the landowner.

UKOG said it relinquished PEDL246 because representatives had failed to find a farm-in partner to drill at Loxley.

UKOG also sold its subsidiary, UK (GB) Ltd, which had stakes in the Horndean (10%) and Avington (5%) oil fields in Hampshire.

It exited its Turkish licence in October 2024 and later received a claim of $100,000 from its former partner, the accounts reveal. They said UKOG directors considered there was “no remaining formal legal or contractual basis for the claim”. To date, UKOG has received nothing further, the accounts added.

Finances

UKOG said the 2025 financial year “marked a period of strategic realignment for the Group as the Group continued its transition from legacy oil production towards hydrogen storage and clean energy infrastructure”.

But according to the accounts, the company remains largely dependent on revenue from hydrocarbon sales. The auditor noted a “material uncertainty exists that may cause significant doubt on the group’s ability to continue as a going concern”.

Revenue, entirely from Horse Hill and Horndean crude oil sales, fell to £432,000 in 2025, from £1.1m in 2024. The accounts said the decline reflected lower volumes from Horse Hill, which voluntarily suspended production in October 2024.

Total UKOG assets fell from £3.361m (restated) in 2024, to £1.136m in 2025. Cash and cash equivalents were down from £1m to £40,000.

Net liabilities rose from £2.471m in 2024 to £5.684m in 2025.

Total annual losses were reduced compared with 2024, when the balance sheet included £32.544m in impairment of oil and gas assets.

Key figures

Revenue: £432,000 (2024: £1.1m)

Cost of sales: £423,000 (2024: £912,000)

Gross loss: £20,000 (2024: £189,000)

Total comprehensive loss: £4.09m (2024: £38.490m)

Admin expenses: £2.636m (2024: £1.716m)

Decommissioning provision at 30 September 2025: £1.591m (2024: £1.253m). Of the £1.591m, £1.184m was for Horse Hill and £407,000 was for Broadford Bridge.

Non-current assets: £337,000 (2024: £1.705M)

Total assets: £1.136m (2024 restated: £3.361m)

Cash and cash equivalents: £40,000 (2024: £1m)

Total liabilities: £6.822m (2024: £5.832m)

Net liabilities: £5.684m (2024: £2.471m)

Operating loss: £3.9m (2024: £3.8m)

Loss before tax: £4.098m (2024: £38.490m)

Stephen Sanderson total earnings from UKOG: £243,000 (2024: £314,000

Total payments to directors: £504,000 (£457,000)

Loan interest payments: £152,000 (2024: £128,000)

Total finance cost: £202,000 (2024: £172,000)

Loans payable to non-controlling interests: £3.462m (2024: £3.310m)

Outstanding loan balances owed to HHDL shareholders at 30 September 2025: Alba Mineral Resources £2.8m (2024: £2.6m), Doriemus plc £0.6m (2024: £0.6m), UK Oil & Gas plc £18m (2024: £17.8m)

UK Oil & Gas plc announced this morning it has submitted a revised planning application for its Horse Hill site , near Redhill, in Surrey.

The company said the retrospective application seeks to reinstate consent for oil production.

Horse Hill, Surrey, England. January 2026. Photo: Goldman Environmental Prize

Planning permission for the Horse Hill site, now UKOG’s only hydrocarbon asset, was quashed by a landmark climate judgement, known as the Finch Ruling, at the Supreme Court in June 2024.

The court ruled that the planning permission granted by Surrey County Council in 2019 was unlawful. The judgement said the permission failed to take into account the climate impact of burning oil from the site.

Sarah Finch, who brought the challenge on behalf of the Weald Action Group, was last month awarded the leading international award, the Goldman Environmental Prize.

The Weald Action Group said this morning:

“This is an appalling but predictable move by UKOG. After repeatedly claiming they were transitioning away from fossil fuels, they have now submitted plans to Surrey County Council to restart oil production at Horse Hill, showing that they are still relying on this site as a financial lifeline.

“There is simply no room left in the rapidly dwindling global carbon budget for any more fossil fuel developments.  Instead, the site should be urgently decommissioned and fully restored. Given their disastrous financial position, with cash reserves reported at just £32,000, this application appears to be a way by which UKOG can further delay meeting these costly obligations.

“Enough is enough, this cannot be allowed to drag on any longer, and this application must be rejected.”

Immediately after the Supreme Court judgement, UKOG said it was working to reinstate planning permission.

This required a revised application with information on the carbon emissions from combustion, known as downstream or scope 3 emissions.

Surrey County Council reported in November 2024 it was waiting for this information.

Since then, UKOG has promised the details but repeatedly delayed submission.

At the time of writing, the new application was not listed on the county council planning register.

When the application has been validated, a public consultation is expected on the new information.

In a statement today, UKOG said:

“The Company has worked closely with its planning advisors and SCC to prepare the revised planning submission, which includes updated ecology, environmental and technical baseline studies and an assessment of downstream emissions in accordance with the Supreme Court judgment.

“A successful planning outcome would permit stable production at Horse Hill to resume, generating valuable revenues which would help support the Company’s ongoing transition to its announced clean energy projects in Dorset and Yorkshire.”

UKOG’s chief executive, Stephen Sanderson, said:

“This retrospective planning submission seeks to address the Supreme Court’s ruling on SCC’s 2019 Horse Hill planning consent in a thorough and transparent manner. Horse Hill remains a valuable UK onshore asset and, subject to planning consent, has the potential to generate revenues that can be responsibly reinvested to support the Company’s strategic transition towards hydrogen storage and other clean energy initiatives.

“The Company continues to pursue a balanced approach, managing its legacy oil and gas assets while actively investing in the UK’s energy transition and clean power future.”

UK Oil & Gas (UKOG) previously announced production had voluntarily ceased in October 2024.

More reaction

The local MP, Chris Coghlan (Lib Dem)

said:

“Last year I urged the government and Surrey County Council to ensure Horse Hill is restored to woodland. It’s no surprise that UKOG has now submitted a retrospective planning application, but with the company’s financial track record, I am worried they will not be able to deliver proper site restoration. Any decision by Surrey County Council must recognise residents’ concerns and guarantee that the site is fully returned to woodland.”

Salfords and Sidlow Parish Council said in a statement:

“In 2024, Salfords and Sidlow Parish Council supported local resident Sarah Finch in her ground-breaking legal challenge against Surrey County Council’s decision to extend planning permission for the oil drilling site at Horse Hill which is in our parish. Councillors recognised Sarah’s argument that the Environmental Impact Assessment failed to include the effects of emissions released from burning the extracted oil, assessing only emissions from the development itself.

“What began as a local campaign evolved into a five-year legal battle that climbed through the courts, culminating in a historic ruling by the UK Supreme Court in June 2024 and, crucially, the planning permission being overturned. The Parish Council was delighted to see Sarah Finch and her colleagues at the Weald Action Group recently being awarded the 2026 Goldman Environmental Prize for Europe. Sarah’s landmark legal victory is already reshaping climate accountability across the UK and beyond.

“In August 2025, we also wrote to Tim Oliver, leader of Surrey County Council, expressing concern as to who will be responsible for restoration of the Horse Hill oil site in the event the UK Oil and Gas (UKOG) entered formal insolvency.

“The Parish Council has been advised on 5 May 2026 that UKOG will be submitting a retrospective planning application for reinstatement of production consent at the Horse Hill site. Once formally notified, Councillors will review all the new planning documents and make representation on the application on their merits including consideration of protection to our Green Belt and the local environment.”

• UKOG also announced today the month-long suspension of its shares had been lifted. Trading was suspended after the company missed the stock market deadline for publishing its accounts. The accounts, due to be published at the end of March 2026, were released this morning (5 May 2026). DrillOrDrop has reported on the contents of the accounts.

Angus Energy has applied for permission to store condensate, a flammable liquid produced along with gas, at its field in Lincolnshire.

Proposed plan for condensate storage at the Saltfleetby-B site in Lincolnshire.
Source: Angus Energy application

The company said it would store a maximum of 47.03 tonnes of flammable liquid at the Saltfleetby-B site, at South Cockerington, near Louth.

A public consultation, by Lincolnshire County Council, ends on Friday 8 May 2026

The Angus application said:

“The condensate is delivered from a wellhead into surface pipework and vessels where natural gas, condensate and water are separated.”

It added:

“The location of the pipework is located along the edge of the site boundary.”

The company said the condensate would be stabilised in temporary storage in two tanks, each with a capacity of 31.8m3. It would be loaded into one road tanker a day.

The application is needed because the proposed volume of condensate is above the limit allowed in regulations.

The company is seeking a Hazardous Substances Consent, which aims to ensure that necessary measures are in place to prevent major accidents and limit the potential consequences should an accident happen.

Lincolnshire County Council is the Hazardous Substances Authority for Saltfleetby. Comments can be made to the council at: County Offices, Newland, Lincoln, LN11YLor online through the planning register

Responses

The Health and Safety Executive said its specialist major accidents risk assessment unit was currently assessing the application. It estimated this may take 13 weeks.

Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue said it would require Angus to install a fire hydrant conforming to BS750-2012 within 90m of the site entrance.

The highways authority did not object to the proposal. It said the plans would “not be expected to have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety or a severe residual cumulative impact upon the local highway network or increase surface water flood risk”.

Star Energy oil revenues fell more than 20% in 2025, compared with the year before, according to annual accounts. The company also announced a share placing aimed at raising £8.4m.

Star Energy’s Welton oil site, gathering centre and headquarters. Photo: Star Energy Placing

The company announced it proposed to place about 56 million new ordinary shares at a price of 15p, intended to raise about £8.4m gross.

It also proposes to raise £31,000 with the issue of more than 200,000 ordinary shares to directors of the company. An additional subscription aims to raise £0.6m with the issue of further new ordinary shares.

Star Energy said the proceeds would “support its strategy for significantly increase profitable production”.

Accounts Receipts

Star Energy accounts reported it received £33.5m from oil production in 2025, down from £42m in 2024.

It said the fall was mainly because of lower prices and a stronger exchange rate between the US dollar and pound sterling.

The average pre-hedged realised oil price in 2025 was $66.1/bbl (barrel), compared with $76.9/bbl in 2024, the company added.

The accounts also showed that gas revenues fell to zero in 2025, compared with £0.2m in 2024. This was because of the permanent shut-in of gas-to-grid production at the Albury site in Surrey, the company said.

Electricity revenue rose to £0.9m in 2025, up from £0.6m in 2024. This was largely because of higher prices and volumes, the company said.

Production

Star Energy’s oil production fell 5% in 2025 compared with the year before, the accounts reported.

The company said it produced 1,886 boepd (barrels of oil equivalent per day) in 2025, compared with £1,989 boepd in 2024.

It said the fall was largely because of unplanned National Grid power outages during summer infrastructure upgrades, as well as a process pipeline failure.

Problems with water disposal at the Stockbridge oilfield in Hampshire, also constrained production, the company said.

Star Energy predicted production would average 2,000 boepd in 2026. It said no shutdowns were scheduled. The pipeline issue had been resolved and grid works completed. At Stockbridge, a production well would be converted to a water injector.

Spending

Star Energy said capital expenditure in 2025 totalled £5.3m.

Of this, £2.6m was spent on the Singleton gas-to-wire project in West Sussex. The company said it also paid for an oil plant upgrade at Bletchingley, in Surrey, and optimisation work across oil and gas fields.

In 2026, Star Energy said it expected capital expenditure to reach £6.6m. This would include £2.6m to complete the Singleton gas-to-wire project, forecast to come online in the first half of 2026 with production of 74 boepd.

The company added that it also planned to spend £1m on what it called “quick returning incremental projects”. The rest would be spent on regulatory improvements, site resilience and projects to reduce operating costs.

Abandonment activity in 2026 was expected to cost £1.4m.

According to the accounts, there was no significant write-off of exploration and evaluation assets recorded in 2025. The write-off in 2024 was £1.9m, mainly relating to the Godley Bridge PEDL235 in Surrey.

Sales

Star Energy said it received £6.3m from the sale of the Holybourne oil terminal in Hampshire during 2025.

It also received 6.3m in April 2025 from the sale of non-core land

An agreement to dispose of three Croation geothermal licences, released E5.2m of restricted cash, Star Energy said.

2025 key figures

Revenue: £34.7m (2024: £43.7m). Oil revenue: £33.5m (2024: £42m). Gas revenue: £0 (2024: £249,000)

Adjusted EBITDA: £7.7m (2024: £11.1m). Related to oil and gas: £9.9m (2024: £15.1m)

Underlying operating profit: £1.7m (2024: £5.9m)

Net cash from operating activities: £6.3m (2024: £2.3m)

Operating cash flow before working capital movements: £8.7m (2024: £8.8m)

Loss after tax: £7.8m (2024: £12.6m)

Net debt: £4.3m (2024: £7.5m)

Cash and cash equivalents (excluding restricted cash): £7.6m (2024: £4.7m)

Net assets: £34.8m (2024: £42.6m)

Drawings under loan facility: £11.9m

Restricted cash: £4.5m

Savings on general and administrative expenses: £2m+

Decommissioning spending: £0.4m (2024: £1.1m)

Tax on profit: £8.9m (2024: £8.133m)

Net production: 1,886 boepd (2024: 1,989 boepd)

Anticipated net production in 2026: 2,000 boepd

Anticipated operating costs in 2026: $44 per boe

2025 capital expenditure: £5.3m

2026 forecast capital expenditure: £6.6m

Updated to include share placing

The founder and director of a company behind new plans to use UK onshore gas for bitcoin mining, has resigned.

Rathlin Energy’s West Newton-B site in East Yorkshire. Photo: We Said No

John Hodgins, a Canadian geologist, left the Rathlin Energy board on 1 April 2026, according to the official Companies House register.

He had been a director since January 2008.

Rathlin operates two sites in Holderness, East Yorkshire, at West Newton-A and B.

The company’s majority investor, Reabold Resources, has proposed using gas from the sites to generate electricity for crypto currency transactions. See DrillOrDrop report from August 2025

Mr Hodgins is the chief executive of Connaught Oil & Gas Ltd, Rathlin’s former parent company, based in Calgary, Canada.

He has worked in western Canada, the North Sea, China, the US and Australia, as well onshore in the UK.

Before joining Connaught, he held positions in eight different oil and gas companies.

Rathlin’s most recent accounts, for the year ending 31 December 2024, reported that Mr Hodgins held 427,272 ordinary shares and 272,000 share purchase options.

In the past two years, two other directors have resigned, Howard Mayson (April 2024) and Paul McGarvey (May 2025), as well as Rathlin’s auditor. Paul Harris joined the board in March 2025.

Earlier this month, an environmental campaigner took the first steps in a legal challenge to the approval by the Environment Agency of lower-volume fracking at West Newton-A.

North Yorkshire councillors are free to issue a formal refusal of plans by Europa Oil & Gas for drilling for gas and lower-volume fracking at Burniston, near Scarborough.

Banner at Burniston decision meeting, 24 April 2026. Photo: DrillOrDrop

The council’s strategic planning committee voted almost unanimously (11 votes and 1 abstention) in a “minded to” refusal of the planning application last Friday afternoon (24 April 2026) .

The formal decision had to wait for a ruling by the local government secretary, Steve Reed, on whether another environmental impact assessment was needed.

Earlier this month, Friends of the Earth asked Mr Reed to consider an additional screening direction for the Burniston plans. The organisation suggested that more information was needed on the environmental impact of the application.

Friends of the Earth said this afternoon it had now received a reply from the minister, which said:

“the Secretary of State declines to issue a screening direction in response to your request.” 

In a statement issued on 29 April 2026, North Yorkshire Council’s head of development management, Martin Grainger, said:

“We have been notified by the Secretary of State that the Government does not intend to re-screen the application.

“Officers will now look to finalise reasons for refusing the application in line with members’ decision. A formal decision notice will then be issued in the near future.”

Friends of the Earth said this clears the way for councillors to issue a formal refusal.

Tony Bosworth, of Friends of the Earth, said:

“With the final issue resolved, North Yorkshire councillors can now formally reject this damaging and unnecessary fracking proposal at Burniston.”

The organisation is urging the government to ensure that its promised ban on hydraulic fracturing will include all fracking techniques for fossil fuels, including the lower-volume proppant squeeze intended for Burniston.

Environmental campaigners have argued for more than six years for the closure of a legal loophole that allows fracking techniques using volumes of fluid below the legal threshold.

The moratorium, introduced in England in 2019, prevents only operations using more than 1,000m3 per fracking stage or more than 10,000m3 in total.

Mr Bosworth said: 

“Fracking blights our countryside, won’t lower UK energy bills, and remains deeply unpopular. 

 “The focus now shifts to the government: it must deliver on its promise to ban fracking for good – with no loopholes. That means covering all forms of fracking, including ‘proppant squeeze’. If it fails, communities across England will remain under threat.” 

Yesterday, Europa Oil & Gas formally announced to investors it intended to appeal against the North Yorkshire decision.

DrillOrDrop report of the decision meeting and reaction

Updated 29 April 2024 with statement from North Yorkshire Council

Opponents of plans to drill and frack for gas in the North Yorkshire village of Burniston are celebrating tonight after the decision to oppose planning permission.

Photo: DrillOrDrop

North Yorkshire councillors voted almost unanimously against the application by Europa Oil & Gas. More details

After the meeting in Scarborough, Chris Garforth, of the local campaign group, Frack Free Coastal Communities, said:

“This is a victory for science, for common sense, and for the people who live on this coastline.

“The planning committee has listened to the evidence and to the 1,600 people who objected. Now we need the government to close the loophole in the fracking moratorium, and make sure no community anywhere in the UK faces this fight again.”

A joint statement from FFCC and Frack Free Scarborough, added:

“Today North Yorkshire councillors did the right thing. They listened to over 1,600 objections, they listened to the science, and they said no to a reckless scheme that would have put our coastline, our water and our community at risk.

“This victory belongs to everyone who took action. To those who leafletted, who put money in the campaign pot, who marched to the proposed site, who took to social media, who organised and attended meetings, lobbies, fairs, and social events, and of course to those who did the laborious work of exposing the contradictions in the application and the planning process.

“All those actions, individual and collective, sent one message loud and clear: we will not tolerate companies whose only interest is profit gambling with our geology, our natural resources, our environment and our health. 

“Europa wanted to use Burniston as a testing ground for an experimental technique. Today, councillors refused to let that happen. But this fight isn’t over. Europa may appeal. And in any case, applications like this one will continue to be pushed on communities across England as long as fossil fuel companies are able to exploit the loophole in the moratorium that allows lower volume hydraulic fracturing and other unconventional techniques. 

“We will keep campaigning here in North Yorkshire and across the UK until that loophole is closed and all forms of hydraulic fracturing are banned for good. And we stand in solidarity with communities everywhere fighting to keep fossil fuels in the ground.

“The government has promised to discuss the fracking ban in the autumn. We’ll be putting pressure on ministers to make sure low-volume techniques like proppant squeeze are included. Because the science is clear: they carry the same risks as the fracking banned in 2019.

“More fundamentally, we’re in a climate crisis. Drilling for oil and gas, at any scale, using any technique, makes that crisis worse. Real energy security comes from a swift and just transition to renewables, not from extracting the last drops of fossil fuel from our coastline.

“Today is a victory for our community and for good sense. Tomorrow we continue the fight for a safer, cleaner future for all.”

Frack Free Scarborough campaigner, John Atkinson:

“This is what people power looks like. Hundreds of us stood outside Scarborough Town Hall today, and the planning committee heard us. But this isn’t just about Burniston or Scarborough. It’s a message to every community in Britain fighting fossil fuel companies: you can win.”

Cllr Richard Parsons, chair of Burniston Parish Council, said:

“Burniston Parish Council and our community are so pleased that the Planning Committee Councillors were minded to reject this hydraulic fracturing gas drill application, from Europa.

“It was clear the councillors understood the potentially devastating consequences of this plan had this application been given the green light. The overwhelming vote to reject the application is a clear message to any company, who wish set up this type of drilling operation and expect to be given the go ahead without full scrutiny.

“There have been many parts of the application process that are at the very least, troubling.

“Our Communities had the right to expect that this application would be scrutinised in full, along with every objection and comment, in order to arrive at a planning recommendation, that in itself , would stand up to full scrutiny, before the application was heard by the Planning Councillors

“Thankfully, those Councillors were prepared to ask the right questions and arrive at the right decision.

“I do wonder if the applicant fully understands what they were asking for.

“We have heard many times the CEO of Europa, Mr Holland, saying, ‘This is Yorkshire gas for Yorkshire people’.

“Anyone who has knowledge of this industry should know that’s not how it works. Any gas produced is sold on the international market at international prices, not locally.

“It is now time that our Government stood by their promises, close the fracking loophole and by doing so keep all of our Communities safe in the future. No community should have to suffer the uncertainty for the future that this community has been put through. I call upon our government to get their act together and deliver on their promises, now.

“Let’s also not forget the nearby communities of Foxholes and Wold Newton who are experiencing the same problems owing to a current planning application from Egdon Resources, for a drill site in their area.

“I can only hope that after the hearing for the Burniston drill site, North Yorkshire Council listen to those communities, question every detail of that application fully, accept nothing without scrutiny and make the decision that keeps those communities safe.”.

Tony Bosworth, a campaigner with Friends of the Earth, said:

“We’re delighted that North Yorkshire Council is minded to reject this damaging and unnecessary fracking proposal. This is a huge victory for local people who stood up to protect their community.

“The people of Burniston should never have been put under this threat in the first place. Ministers have promised to ban fracking for good – but proppant squeeze is just fracking under another name.

 “Friends of the Earth has opposed the Burniston application because fracking blights our countryside, won’t lower UK energy bills, and remains deeply unpopular with communities. If the Government is serious about stopping fracking, ministers must act swiftly to close the loophole that could allow proppant squeeze fracking to go ahead. If they don’t, more communities will be put at risk.”

Steve Mason, a North Yorkshire councillor and anti-fracking campaigner, said:

“Common sense prevailed. North Yorkshire Council has sent fracking packing.”

Cllr Rick Maw, a North Yorkshire and Scarborough town councillor, said:

“This wasn’t a rubber-stamp exercise. It was detailed, serious scrutiny. Tough questions were asked, evidence was tested, and arguments were challenged from all sides, exactly how democratic decision-making should work.

All the while, hundreds of protesters stood outside, making their voices heard, and a packed public gallery sat behind us – a powerful reminder that this decision carries real weight for our communities, our environment, and future generations. And today, that message was heard loud and clear. North Yorkshire Council has said no to fracking.

“This outcome didn’t happen in isolation. It reflects sustained public pressure, grassroots campaigning, and the determination of people who refuse to see their local environment put at risk for short-term gain.”

The local MP, Alison Hume, said on social media:

“I’m relieved that Europa Oil and Gas’ application to frack in Burniston has been rejected.

“The North Yorkshire Council Strategic Planning Committee has made a courageous and correct decision in rejecting the advice of council officers.

“From the moment the Europa made their first move, I have stood shoulder to shoulder with my constituents, who overwhelming opposed this plan, throughout and, as I told them outside Scarborough Town Hall before the planning meeting took place, will continue to do so.

“I have lobbied tirelessly in Westminster to close the loophole in the fracking moratorium Europa were looking to exploit and will keep pressing ahead to ensure that so-called ‘proppant squeezes’ should be included in the fracking ban.

“This afternoon was a triumph for local democracy and local campaigning.”

Europa Oil & Gas did not make a formal public statement to investors immediately after the meeting. But its chief executive, William Holland, told reporters the company would lodge an appeal. He said:

“We will go straight to appeal and we are confident of winning.”

Mr Holland added:

“I’m very disappointed because fairly the planning officers did a very thorough job and they’re the ones that really understand the technicalities very very well and they recommended it for approval.

“Now there’s obviously some concerns here and a lot of those concerns are not really part of this planning decision but they’ve been the cause of people to reject it.”

Europa issued a statement to investors at 7am on Monday 27 April 2026. The statement said:

“The Company is disappointed with the committee’s decision, which directly contradicts the NYC planning officers’ endorsement of its plans for the well after an exhaustive review process, and Europa intends to appeal the decision once the final recommendation has been delivered.

“The Company is confident that on appeal the planning permission will be approved. Following implementation of the Wressle development, which was approved on appeal, the initial local opposition and concern has disappeared and the local community is now highly supportive. This clearly demonstrates how a well-run operation can be conducted without negatively impacting local amenity and how the community can realise a material benefit.”

Mr Holland added:

“Our planning application for the well at Burniston was underpinned by 13 expert reports and exhaustive preparatory work. It was also recommended by the council’s own planning department. We shall appeal the decision and remain of the view that the well can be safely and efficiently delivered and is in the best interests both of the local community and the country.”

Updated 27/4/26 with Europa Oil & Gas statement to investors

Councillors have opposed controversial plans to drill and frack for gas in the village of Burniston, near Scarborough.

North Yorkshire Council’s strategic planning committee meeting in Scarborough. Photo: DrillOrDrop

Members of North Yorkshire’s strategic planning committee voted almost unanimously, with just one abstention, against an appraisal gas well and proppant squeeze, a form of lower-volume fracking.

Councillors rejected the application this afternoon because they said it represented major development on the North Yorkshire Heritage Coast, against local policy.

The meeting decided there would be an unacceptable impact on residents living within 500m of the site and the development was against mineral policy because of lighting and the rig height would harm the North York Moors National Park, which is protected by a 3.5km buffer zone.

Councillors said there would be an unacceptable impact on tourism and offered no definite economic benefits. The proposal was also contrary to the council’s climate commitment and there was a risk of induced seismicity and damage to local cliffs.

The decision overruled the recommendation of officials, who had said the plans, by Europa Oil & Gas, should be approved.

Councillors voted for a “minded to” refuse decision.

The formal decision will be deferred until the local government minister has reviewed what should be included in the detailed environment statement that accompanied the application. This follows a request by Friends of the Earth earlier this month.

The vote, which came after more than four hours of discussions and presentations, was greeted with cheers from the public gallery.

Europa Oil & Gas said it would appeal.

Official support

Principal planner, Amy Taylor, told the meeting:

“The application is recommended for approval as it is considered on balance that there were no material planning considerations that warrant its refusal and there would be no unacceptable adverse environmental impacts resulting from the proposed development.”

She said noise, air quality, lighting, vibration and other impacts on local residents and the landscape would be controlled by 36 conditions.

She reported that the North York Moors National Park authority had not opposed the development, about 800m from its boundary, despite its concerns about the principle of the development for climate change.

But Ms Taylor said the plans were acceptable in climate change terms.

Local opposition

The meeting heard that all the local parish and town councils opposed the scheme, including Burniston, Newby & Scalby, Cloughton and Scarborough.

Other objections included Yorkshire Wildlife Trust, Salby and Newby Village Trust, Frack Free Coastal Communities, Frack Free Scarborough, Frack Free Ryedale, North Yorkshire Moors Association, CPRE and Friends of the Earth.

Key concerns included earthquakes, water contamination, increased traffic, noise, air pollution, climate change and damage to landscape, wildlife, recreation and tourism.

A large rally of opponents gathered outside the meeting. Only 20 members of the public were allowed into the council chamber to watch the meeting.

There are two formal complaints against the way the application was handled by council officials.

Proppant squeeze

The company’s scheme proposes to drill from farmland on the edge of Burniston, close to fragile cliffs on the North Yorkshire heritage coast.

Site construction is expected to last seven weeks, followed by two weeks to mobilise drilling equipment and five weeks for drilling with a rig up to 38 m high.

As part of its testing programme, Europa plans to carry out up to four stages of lower-volume fracking. The operations aim to release gas by creating fissures in the rocks surrounding the wellbore.

The company denies this is fracking. It says its operation does not propose to use the volume of fluid high enough to qualify for associated hydraulic fracturing (1,000m3 per fracking stage or 10,000m3 in total). These operations are currently prevented in England under a moratorium

Ms Taylor told the meeting that proppant squeeze was “fundamentally different” from higher volume fracking.

But campaigners have argued that Europa Oil & Gas is exploiting a legal loophole which allows operators to carry out fracking despite the moratorium.

They have pointed out that 500m3 of fluid that could be used in each stage at Burniston would exceed that injected by Cuadrilla at Preston New Road in Lancashire in 2019, which caused earthquakes felt across the Fylde region.

Councillors question plans

Many of the 12-person planning committee appeared sceptical at times about Europa’s proposals. Members spent more than 90 minutes asking questions about the application.

Cllr Andy Brown (Green), who proposed refusal, said the application contradicted policy on the North Yorkshire heritage coast, which states that major development was unlikely to be accepted unless it contributed to the area’s protection. This was a prime reason for rejection, he said.

Cllr Brown also said the application was covered by the region’s mineral plan policy on fracking. There were 38 homes within 500m of the site, he said.

There was no adequate assessment of seismic impact, he said. Fugitive releases could not be prevented by conditions. The flare stack would be on the site for 15 weeks. That was a lot of impact, he added.

He said the site could be seen from the North York Moors National Park. We do not have adequate information of light pollution from the flare stack, he said. There was also no assessment of the impact on tourism, he said. It would have a negative impact, he said.

There were also concerns about the the risk of earthquakes, possible methane leaks from the site, stability of the local cliffs, the economic impact, light pollution and the effect on tourism.

Opposition speeches

Chris Garforth, of Frack Free Coastal Communities (FFCC), said:

“Today is a major test of the council’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions; a test too of your minerals plan, key provisions of which this proposal ignores, notwithstanding the officer’s assertions”.

He said:

“To be clear, this application is a type of hydraulic fracturing or fracking, as defined by your minerals and waste joint plan”.

He said many of the objections concerned seismic risk from fracking.

The minerals plan asked for an assessment of the potential for induced seismicity and compelling evidence that it can be managed and mitigated to an acceptable level.

But he said:

“There is no assessment, no evidence – compelling or otherwise – in the application nor the officers’ report. Therefore, as the decision maker, how can you be satisfied that other regulatory regimes will work effectively as national planning guidance tells you to be?”

He also said there had been no health impact report, against council policy.

Gas from North Yorkshire would not bring domestic energy security. The only economic benefit would be for the company’s investors and shareholders.

The proposal would blight the landscape, which attracts visitors to the heritage coast

Katie Atkinson, planning consultant for FFCC, said the application was “strewn with errors and inconsistencies”.

“The company says it will restore the site after appraisal. But the planning documents also say it will retain equipment on site.

“Meanwhile, the proposed planning conditions are inadequate to protect residents’ health and amity, including night time noise levels which the World Health Organisation says are harmful to health through the lack of sleep.”

She said 920 residents live within 1km of the site.    

She added:

“We believe the application is contrary to several national planning policies and several of our own minerals local plan policy and your responsibility to further the purposes of the national park. We ask that you refuse this unwanted and unnecessary proposal.”

Helen Bore, vice-chair of Newby and Scalby Town Council, said there were noted geological faults around the drilling site.

She said local planning policy required that proposals should be supported by detailed evidence about seismic risk. No such evidence exists, she said.

She said the industrial development was out of keeping with the local environment. It is in heritage coast and near the Cleveland Way. Where is the high level of protection in this application, she asked.

She also asked how North Yorkshire Council could be certain that Europa Oil & Gas, a company on the junior stock market, would have the funds to restore the site. She asked for a cash-backed bond before planning permission was approved.

She also said Europa’s suggestion that the proposal was short-term and temporary was “seriously misleading”.

Councillors were making the decision on behalf of local people, she said. She asked them to refuse the application and for there to be a recorded vote.

Karen Fanthorpe, a member of Cloughton Parish Council, challenged that the application was temporary and time-limited. Europa had always been clear that they intended to drill for oil on the coast, she said.

She described the current application as a “foot in the door”. Future applications would be harder to resist because the area had already been industrialised, she said.

The local community would get no benefit but bear all the costs, she said.

She also said there were key issues missing in the planning report:

• geological faults
• potential impact on UK energy security – we expect it to be less than 1%
• climate change
• mineral waste dump under Scalby that has not been consulted upon
• financial robustness of the company

Demand proper answers on this matter before a decision is made, she said.  Future generations are relying on you. She also called for a financial bond.

The chair of Burniston Parish Council, Richard Parsons, said the application was the first step in the industrialisation of a piece of beautiful countryside.

He said two 25m wind turbines had previously been refused on landscape grounds. The site is not suitable for a development of this nature, he said.

He said there had been a recent cliff fall near the site. You have responsibility to be sure the site is suitable and secure, he said.

You are expected to make a decision without the evidence. The responsibility lies here and now, he said.

For our residents, this application means night lighting, within sight of the dark skies area, as well as dust and vibration. This would destroy the peace that Burniston represents. People will not come to see an industrial site on a hill.

You must not be fooled by the words temporary or short-term, he said. He urged them to protect our coast, our economy and our community. He urged them to refuse the application. This is the wrong proposal, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Cllr Derek Bastiman, who represents Burniston on North Yorkshire Council, told the meeting he had lived in the Burniston area all his life.

He said the government was seeking to remove the great weight in favour of hydrocarbon applications.

According to the North Yorkshire minerals plan, the proppant squeeze meets the definition of fracking, he said.

If this application were approved, he said, it would open the door to fracking across North Yorkshire.

The application does not comply with local planning policy, he said.

This site is a “dead weight” to the heritage coast. It does not protect the landscape, it will destroy it. He described it as “vandalism”.

The council had a responsibility to protect its residents. Think long and hard about this application and the damage it will do, he said.

North Yorkshire Councillor Rich Maw said:

You are being asked to decide that this application is sufficiently certain and sufficiently evidenced and robust and I would say it is not.

He said the proposal lacks seismic evidence and a health impact assessment.

Cllr Maw said the council was treating the application was for exploration when it was for appraisal. The council was not applying appraisal requirements to assess the impacts of any future production, he said.

Steve Mason, North Yorkshire Councillor, an anti-fracking campaigner and sustainability researcher, said:

“This application is presented as small and limited. It isn’t. It creates the appearance of fitting with policy, without actually doing so. This is not sound planning.”

He said:

“There are three main ways this application games the system. First, a fracking proposal is re-labelled to avoid the UK ban on fracking. And to evade our Minerals plan’s stricter, yet considered, approach.

“Second, ‘low volume’ is implied as meaning ‘low risk’, despite the evidence to the contrary. 

“Third, the climate impact from burning the gas is treated as too uncertain to count, even though the Supreme Court’s Finch case judgment, says otherwise, and our own policy demands the complete assessment of development as a whole.”

He said:

“The applicant frames a “proppant squeeze” as not fracking. I disagree and so does our policy. A proppant squeeze is simply part of the fracking process. Shatter the rock, squeeze in the proppant to hold the cracks open, release the gas. Our minerals plan defines fracking by what it does and its intent: stimulating rock to produce hydrocarbons.”

He said the Burniston site could produce three weeks of UK gas usage in total but with large-scale industrial impacts.

This development would industrialise a heritage coastline. It conflicts with the existing national planning policy framework, fails the test on climate change and conflicts with North Yorkshire’s own climate reduction plan.

“North Yorkshire must not be returned to an experiment for unconventional gas exploitation again.”

Company speeches

Paul Foster, Europa’s planning officer, said the application was for a single appraisal well. It was not for production.

He said there would be impacts but they were time-limited and could be controlled by planning conditions.

Subsurface, including potential seismic effects, would be controlled by separate regulatory regimes, such as the Environment Agency, HSE or the North Sea Transition Authority.

The issue was whether the application was acceptable in planning terms, he said. He asked the committee to approve the application.

Alastair Stuart, Europa’s chief operating officer, said he acknowledged that this was the local people’s landscape and environment.

He said all that was proposed was a single borehole, drilled for  five weeks, followed by testing, and restoration. Nothing else can happen without a further planning application.

The decision should be evidenced-based and fair. It must be able to be defended and upheld, he said.

You are being asked whether this can be done acceptably, under strict condition, or not at all. If Europa were allowed to go further in the development, he was sure it would win local trust.

He said the decision today was not about national energy policy but about whether this development was acceptable at tis location.

Some of the concerns raised were dealt with other regulatory regimes.

 Jamie McGill, also from Europa, read quotes from some local residents living near the Wressle oil site in North Lincolnshire, in which the company is an investor.

He said despite earlier reservations, they had not noticed any impact of the site. The comments included that people did not know it was there, it had proved to be a considerate neighbour and there had been no major impacts.

A local councillor said there had been “no problem with it”. The mayor of Broughton said the operator, Egdon Resources, had been a good neighbour. Mr McGill also referred to a community benefit fund, paid from production revenues.

William Holland, the company’s chief executive, said he was confident in Europa’s planning process, because it had done it before at Wressle in North Lincolnshire.

The views of the community had changed positively over time based on their experience of the Wressle site, he said.

Campaigners outside began shouting “Liar, liar, pants on fire”

Mr Holland said the company was committed to working constructively with the local community. He hoped the quotes from Wressle would reassure people.

He said likening Burniston with Preston New Road was like comparing apples and pears. He said the earthquakes during shale fracking at Preston New Road were why fracking had been banned and proppant squeeze was not.

Mr Holland said a production well at Burniston would lead to Yorkshire gas for Yorkshire people.

People in the public gallery shouted in response.

We will update this article so please check back for more details

Anti-fracking campaigners are gathering outside a crucial meeting in Scarborough to voice their opposition to gas plans in the North Yorkshire village of Burniston.

Councillors are due to decide this afternoon whether to grant planning permission to Europa Oil & Gas for its proposal for drilling and lower-volume fracking at the site near the North York Moors National Park.

Europa Oil & Gas has denied that its operations are fracking, describing it as “proppant squeeze”. But it has accepted that it intends to inject fluid at pressures high enough to fracture rocks surrounding the wellbore.

The intended volume, of four stages, each using 500m3, are higher than those used by Cuadrilla at Preston New Road in 2019, which caused earthquakes felt across the Fylde region of Lancashire.

Clare Topham, vice chair of Burniston Parish Council and a member of the local campaign group, Frack Free Coastal Communities, said:

“We, the people of Burniston and Scarborough, are united in our opposition to this threat. We must denounce this for what it is: a money grab in the area we live, it will not benefit us at all. This cannot happen. No matter what the result, this is not going to be the end of the matter. There is a possible judicial review and also the ombudsman case.”

She said campaigners had been “fighting a fracking application with one arm, and pushing our elected body to do their job with the other”.

“Burniston Parish Council voted unanimously against this absurd proposal for fracking. Cloughton Parish Council, Newby and Scalby Town Council, and Scarborough Town Council have all objected very strongly. There are nearly 1700 objections on the planning portal. Our MP Alison Hume is opposed.  Over 10,000 people signed the parliamentary petition. We are all overwhelmingly united in our opposition.

“The meeting being held today should not be happening. We have not been presented with sufficient evidence such as a 3D seismic study. We believe North Yorkshire Council have bypassed strict legislation relating to this application. This application is INCOMPLETE, INACCURATE, and MISLEADING.

“I pity the members of the Strategic Planning Committee. They are reliant on a flawed officers’ report. Only three of them have visited the site to see it is not how the applicant has described it. A description accepted without question in the officer’s report.”

Simon Bowens, of Friends of the Earth, urged members of North Yorkshire’s strategic planning committee to “stand with residents, not developers. Stand with science, not spin, Stand on the right side of history”

He said:

“Today, councillors have a clear choice. They can side with a fossil fuel company that has tried to downplay the risks of its proposal. Or they can listen to the evidence, the science, and the community — and reject this planning application.

“Let’s be absolutely clear about what is being proposed.

“Over the last 18 months, Europa have tried to hoodwink the community into believing that this isn’t really fracking, it’s a proppant squeeze, its been used for decades, its just low volume and therefore nothing to worry about.

“Let’s be clear – injecting fluids underground to force fossil fuels to flow carries real, known risks — no matter what label is used.”

John Atkinson, of Frack Free Scarborough, told campaigners:

“I’m sick to death of hearing the term ‘proppant squeeze’ and other nonsense jargon that allow the government and oil companies to continue fracking.

“Enough of the film flam, the deceit, the trickery and lies the oil and gas industry use to try and persuade us that fracking is harmless.  I would imagine most people here today know exactly what these snake oil salesmen are all about. But if you don’t know – I can tell you in four words:   It’s all about profit.”

Julie Forgan, environmental rep for Unison in York said:

“those is power now think that fracking might not be fracking and might not be dangerous – it’s all lies to protect the profits of the rich at the expense of the planet and our lives on it. I hope you win today. But if you don’t I know you will keep campaigning and I hope we can work in unity with all those that are fighting similar fights to protect the world around them.”

CLARE_TOPHAM_BURNISTON_COUNCIL_LOBBY_SPEECHDownload SIMON_BOWENS_FRIENDS_OF_THE_EARTH_LOBBY_SPEECHDownload JOHN_ATKINSON_FRACK_FREE_SCARBOROUGH_SPEECHDownload JULIE_FORGAN_YORK_UNISON_ENVIRONMENTAL_REP_LOBBY_SPEECHDownload

The decision meeting begins at 1pm. Details here and link to Youtube webcast

All photos in this article by DrillOrDrop