This blog post examines a new open letter, led by Brian Eno and signed by over 100 UK artists, opposing the proposed Rosebank oil field in the North Sea.
It explains who has signed, why the music community is taking a public stand, the potential climate and cultural consequences of expanding fossil fuel extraction, and the policy tensions this project raises with the UK’s net-zero goals.
Artists Unite Against the Rosebank Oil Field
More than 100 musicians and figures from the UK music industry — including Brian Eno, Bicep, Confidence Man, Anna Calvi, Ed O’Brien and Philip Selway from Radiohead, Imogen Heap, Jon Hopkins, Paloma Faith, Robert Smith and The Blessed Madonna — have backed an open letter calling on the government to halt the Rosebank project.
The letter was initiated by Eno through EarthPercent, his climate-focused music industry group, and frames the issue as one of cultural as well as environmental urgency.
Why musicians are raising their voices
The signatories argue that approving new oil and gas developments like Rosebank would exacerbate the climate crisis and put both cultural and natural environments at risk.
They point to real-world impacts already affecting the live sector: festivals being cancelled as extreme weather becomes more common, and grassroots music venues struggling to survive amid rising energy costs.
The artists contend that continued fossil fuel expansion threatens not only the planet but the livelihoods of people and communities who depend on music.
What Rosebank would mean in practical terms
Rosebank, located west of the Shetland Isles, could supply up to 7% of the UK’s oil needs through 2030 if developed.
That statistic has been central to critics’ claims that the field is incompatible with the government’s legally binding net-zero target for 2050.
Operator Equinor is reported to be preparing to reapply for approval.
Campaigners have described Rosebank as a potential “megapolluter” that would accelerate climate breakdown if allowed to proceed.
Implications for climate policy and culture
From a policy perspective, the debate around Rosebank highlights a broader tension: how to reconcile near-term energy supply decisions with long-term commitments to decarbonise.
The artists’ letter frames this as a cultural emergency as well as an environmental one, emphasizing that the live music ecosystem — festivals, venues, artists, technicians and communities — is directly vulnerable to climate impacts and to energy market pressures.
Who signed and what they highlighted
The list of signatories combines household names and influential figures across genres, underscoring cross-sector concern.
Their arguments focus on three linked points:
What comes next
As Equinor prepares to reapply, the public debate will likely intensify.
The artists’ intervention adds cultural weight to environmental arguments and may influence policymakers who must balance energy security, climate commitments and the resilience of creative industries.
The central question remains whether new fossil fuel projects are compatible with a credible pathway to net-zero and the protection of cultural ecosystems that both enrich society and sustain livelihoods.
For those following this issue, the Rosebank case is a touchstone for understanding how climate, energy policy and culture intersect.
Musicians using their public platform signals a shift: climate policy is not only a technical debate but a societal conversation with profound implications for art, communities and future generations.
Here is the source article for this story: “Festivals are being cancelled due to extreme weather, and grassroots venues are grappling with rising energy costs”: Brian Eno and others urge government to cancel new North Sea oilfield