• Adura, the Rosebank operator, commissioned the report, and Public First carried it out, so the figures are an operator-sponsored scenario rather than official data.
• The report puts UK gross value added at £35.3bn over 2026–2035 if Rosebank and other planned fields are approved and £24.5bn if not, a £10.8bn gap.
• Supported North Sea jobs would average 13,860 a year with approvals and 10,530 without, a gap of about 3,300 a year, of which 2,400 sits with Adura.
• Adura is awaiting government sign-off on Rosebank and Jackdaw; Energy Voice reports rumours that Jackdaw is favoured while Rosebank is uncertain, which is unconfirmed.
• A court ruling means the UK Government must reconsider Rosebank's approval, according to Shetland News; the court, date and grounds are not given there.

A report commissioned by Adura, operator of Rosebank, says refusing consent for the field and other planned developments would cost the UK £10.8bn in gross value added over 2026–2035 and about 3,300 supported North Sea jobs a year. Energy Voice reported the figures on 13 October 2026. They come from a study paid for by the developer, while the government decision remains outstanding.

What the report claims

Public First, which carried out the report, puts UK gross value added at £35.3bn over 2026–2035 if Rosebank and other planned fields are approved and £24.5bn if they are not. Supported North Sea jobs average 13,860 a year with approvals and 10,530 without. Energy Voice reports that 2,400 of the 3,300-job gap would come from Adura. These are modelled outcomes from a sponsored study, not audited outturn figures.

Where the decision stands

No fresh consent decision has been reported. Shetland News says public consultation closed on 17 August 2026, that OPRED will consider its findings, and that a ministerial decision follows. Energy Voice reports on 13 October that Adura is still awaiting sign-off on Rosebank and Jackdaw. It also relays rumours that the government leans toward approving Jackdaw but is uncertain on Rosebank. That is unconfirmed and should be read as talk, not policy.

Why a new decision is needed

Shetland News reports that a court ruling, following a challenge from climate campaigners, means the UK Government must reconsider Rosebank's approval. The article does not name the court, give a date or set out the grounds, and this desk has not seen the judgment. The detail matters because the scope of any reassessment shapes how long a decision takes, and Shetland News says Rosebank could be operating in 2027 only with full approval.

How to read the numbers

The £10.8bn is the gap between an approval case and a refusal case in a report whose commissioner stands to gain from approval. The sources reviewed do not set out the price path, production profile or other assumptions behind it. No official figures from the regulator or government were available to set against it, so the number cannot be checked here. The Adura-sponsored report, with a foreword by Nick Butler, is one side of an open policy argument.

What to watch

The next markers are the ministerial decision on Rosebank and Jackdaw and how it handles the court-driven reassessment. Shetland News gives Adura's project figures: £8.7bn of investment, peak output of about 69,000 barrels of oil per day, and 3,500 construction jobs at peak. These are the operator's own estimates. This is analysis of a policy dispute, not investment advice or a trading call.