EDINBURGH-based oil explorer Cairn Energy has insisted drilling should continue in the Arctic despite a report from MPs calling for a moratorium.
Cairn, which has drilled eight wells in the Arctic in the past two years, says exploration can be done safely and governments and their peoples have a right to exploit their natural resources .
But MPs on the Environmental Audit Committee want exploration halted until a beefed-up safety regime is imposed and an internationally recognised environmental sanctuary established.
Committee chairman Joan Walley MP said: "The oil companies should come clean and admit that dealing with an oil spill in the icy extremes of the Arctic would be exceptionally difficult.
"The infrastructure to mount a big clean-up operation is simply not in place and conventional oil-spill response techniques have not been proven to work in such severe conditions."
A 2008 study by the US Geological Survey found the area in the Arctic Circle may hold 90 billion barrels of oil and 1669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Shrinking ice and technological advances have made Arctic resources more accessible. But high costs have led to limited development in the region.
Equipment problems this week forced Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell to postpone its Arctic drilling programme. In July BP said it would not proceed with a $1.5 billion (£925 million) oil project in Alaska.
Cairn has so far drilled only dry wells in its exploration off Greenland. Despite having its headquarters and rigs invaded by protestors, it has said it is keen to try elsewhere from 2014.
But the environment committee cited a lack of conclusive evidence that current techniques to deal with other spills would work in Arctic conditions. It fears if there were an oil spill just before the winter, it might not be possible to cap the leak until the following summer.
The report said: "While we welcome that both Shell and Cairn have accepted they are responsible for cleaning up oil spills, at whatever cost, we are surprised that neither has put a financial estimate on the cost to their business of dealing with a 'worst case' oil spill.
"On one level that may be a matter for shareholders, but there does need to be public transparency to provide assurance that cost will not be a bar on dealing with the consequences of any spills being fully tackled."
A Cairn spokeswoman said: "Cairn believes that governments and their people have the right to explore for natural resources in their sovereign territory, with the potential to strengthen both their energy security and economy.
"The government of Greenland and its people are no different to any other part of the world. Cairn strongly believes that is possible to explore for energy resources both sustainably and safely in Greenland."
The group said there is already a robust regulatory regime operating in Greenland, where it has been operating since 2007.
The committee, whose members include Edinburgh North and Leith MP Mark Lazarowicz, wants drilling halted until a pan-Arctic oil spill response standard is in place; oil companies prove they can meet the costs of a clean-up; further research is conducted on oil spill response techniques in the Arctic; and the establishment of an environmental sanctuary.
Green Party MP Caroline Lucas, who is a member of the committee, said: "The UK government has a responsibility to respond to this report and to show vital leadership on the issue by doing all it can to urgently secure a moratorium on Arctic drilling – starting with companies registered in this country."
WWF Scotland director Richard Dixon said: "We believe Scottish companies like Cairn Energy should be leaders in clean energy instead of desperately seeking to wring 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."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article