Frequently asked questions about our efforts to stop new gas fields

A. The core of the case

Q1. Why are new oil and gas fields a legal problem?

Scientific research from the IPCC, UNEP and the International Energy Agency shows that limiting global warming to 1.5°C leaves no room for new oil and gas fields. Existing fossil fuel production capacity is already sufficient to complete the energy transition within climate limits.

Despite this, the Dutch government continues to approve new oil and gas extraction projects in the North Sea. These projects increase greenhouse gas emissions, create long-term fossil lock-in and undermine the State’s duty to protect people, ecosystems and future generations from dangerous climate change.

We therefore emphasize that during an escalating climate crisis, the Dutch State cannot continue to lawfully approve new fossil fuel extraction without fully assessing the climate impacts and its obligations under human rights law, international climate law and Dutch administrative law.

Q2. What exactly are you demanding?

We are demanding that the Dutch government stops approving new oil and gas extraction projects that are incompatible with the 1.5°C limit and the State’s climate obligations.

Concretely, we call for:

• no new permits for oil and gas fields that expand fossil fuel production;

• a full assessment of the climate impacts of new extraction projects, including the emissions caused by the eventual combustion of the extracted oil and gas;

• decision-making that complies with the Paris Agreement, the European Convention on Human Rights, international law and Dutch administrative law;

• an energy policy that accelerates the transition away from fossil fuels, instead of locking the Netherlands into decades of additional production.

Q3. Why do you call this a climate case if it is about permits?

Every new oil or gas permit creates a legal and economic pathway for more extraction, more emissions and more fossil infrastructure. Once companies invest in drilling, production facilities and related infrastructure, they have strong incentives to continue extraction for years in order to recover those investments.

That is why permitting decisions are climate decisions. They determine whether the Netherlands is genuinely moving away from fossil fuels, or whether it continues to expand the very activities that drive dangerous climate change. This case is about whether the State can still approve new fossil fuel projects while claiming to comply with its climate and human rights obligations.

B. The legal framework

Q4. Why do you believe new oil and gas permits are incompatible with climate law?

Because approving new fossil fuel extraction moves in the opposite direction from what climate law requires. The Paris Agreement requires states to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C and to base climate action on the best available science. The Dutch Supreme Court in Urgenda and the European Court of Human Rights in KlimaSeniorinnen confirmed that states must take effective measures to protect people from dangerous climate change. In addition, the International Court of Justice has made clear that states must act with a high degree of vigilance and prevention to avoid significant harm to the climate system. We believe that opening new oil and gas fields is not compatible with these requirements.

Q5. Why are Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights relevant?

Articles 2 and 8 ECHR protect the right to life and the right to respect for private and family life, and climate change threatens both. The Dutch Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights have recognised that states have positive obligations to protect people from the real and serious risks of climate change. That means the government cannot only adopt long-term targets on paper, they must also take effective, practical measures to prevent further harm.

Approving new oil and gas extraction increases the emissions that drive climate change. That is why these decisions must be assessed in light of the State’s human rights obligations.

Q6. Why is Dutch mining law relevant?

Under Dutch mining law, oil and gas extraction is prohibited unless the Minister grants permission. The starting point is therefore not that fossil fuels may automatically be extracted. The State must make a legal decision allowing extraction to take place.

In our view, climate impacts must be part of that decision. The Minister cannot ignore the foreseeable environmental and climate consequences of new extraction, including the emissions caused by the eventual use of the extracted oil and gas.

Where those impacts are not properly assessed, the decision is not only inconsistent with climate and human rights obligations, but also with the standards of careful decision-making and proper reasoning under Dutch administrative law.

C. Climate impact and fossil lock-in

Q7. Why are new gas fields incompatible with the 1.5°C limit?

Because the remaining carbon budget is extremely limited. The International Energy Agency has concluded that no new oil and gas fields are needed in a pathway consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C. UNEP has also warned that planned fossil fuel production already far exceeds the levels compatible with the Paris Agreement. This means that new gas fields add new fossil fuel supply in a world that must rapidly reduce fossil fuel production and consumption.

Q8. What do you mean by fossil lock-in?

Fossil lock-in means that new investments in fossil fuel infrastructure make it harder to move away from fossil fuels later.

A new gas field requires major investments in exploration, drilling, platforms, pipelines and production planning. Once those investments are made, companies have a strong financial incentive to continue extraction for as long as possible. Governments may also become reluctant to restrict production later because of economic, legal or political consequences.

That is the danger of new permits: they do not only allow extraction today, but also create pressure to continue fossil fuel production for years or even decades.

D. Process and support

Q9. What has Advocates for the Future done so far?

Advocates for the Future is challenging several decisions that allow new oil and gas extraction in the North Sea.

First, we filed an objection against the Minister’s decision of 12 June 2025 granting Eni Energy Netherlands B.V. a permit for the extraction of hydrocarbons in blocks L07e and L08f in the North Sea (the L7-F gas field). We submitted detailed grounds of objection asking the Minister to revoke the permit and reject Eni’s application.

Second, we submitted a formal response to the draft decision approving Eni’s extraction plan for the L7-F gas field and related project decisions.

Third, we filed an appeal against the Minister’s decisions of 22 December 2025 approving the extraction plan submitted by ONE-Dyas B.V. and granting an environmental permit for oil and gas extraction in the F06-IJssel field, located in blocks F06a, F06b and F06c&d.

Across these procedures, we raise the same fundamental question: can the Dutch State still lawfully approve new oil and gas extraction during an escalating climate crisis?

Q10. What is the current status of the case?

All procedures are still ongoing. We continue to monitor new oil and gas permits closely and are prepared to take further legal steps where necessary.

Q11. What could these cases achieve?

These cases can help set an important legal boundary: new fossil fuel extraction must be assessed against climate science and the State’s legal obligations.

If Dutch courts recognise that new oil and gas permits cannot be approved without a proper assessment of climate impacts, human rights obligations and fossil lock-in effects, that would affect not only these specific projects, but also future fossil fuel permitting decisions.

The broader goal is to make clear that the energy transition cannot be built on new fossil fuel expansion.

Q12. Are you trying to shut down all gas use immediately?

No. Our cases are about new oil and gas fields. We recognise that the Netherlands is still dependent on fossil fuels today. But that dependence is precisely why the government must avoid decisions that prolong it. Existing fossil fuel use must be phased down as quickly and fairly as possible. Opening new fields moves in the opposite direction.

The question is not whether fossil fuels disappear overnight, but whether the State should still approve new fossil fuel extraction while the climate crisis is escalating and the legal obligation to reduce emissions is becoming stronger.

Q13. How can people support this case?

Everyone who wants a livable future can support this case by sharing information about the risks of new oil and gas fields, following our updates and helping build public pressure against new fossil fuel expansion. These cases will be fought through legal procedures, but the broader question is political and societal: should the Netherlands continue to open new fossil fuel fields in the middle of a climate crisis? We believe the answer is no: there is no legal room for new oil and gas fields.