9 September 2015, Energy Post, The Urgenda judgment: a “victory” for the climate that is likely to backfire. The Dutch government has decided to appeal the widely publicised “Urgenda” ruling from the district court in The Hague, ordering the Netherlands to step up its climate change actions. According to Lucas Bergkamp, Partner at Hunton & Williams and Emeritus Professor of International Environmental Liability Law at Erasmus University Rotterdam, there are good reasons why we should hope that the court of appeals will overturn the ruling. According to Bergkamp, it sets a dangerous precedent for judicial activism, is inconsistent with European law and will even undermine international climate negotiations. Read More here
Category Archives: The Mitigation Battle
3 September 2015, Renew Economy, Graph of the Day: Big carbon cuts will not pull down economy. Australia Prime Minister Tony Abbott insists that the world should protect its one and only planet, but not at the cost of economic growth. Apart from the question of what sort of economic growth could be achieved in a degraded environment – think of the impacts on crops and agriculture, water scarcity, infrastructure and storm damage – here is some good news: setting ambitious targets to cut carbon emissions does not need to impact economic growth. How do we know this? Because the Abbott government’s own modelling tells us so. They commissioned economist Professor Warwick McKibbin to model the impact on various levels of emission reductions out to 2030. The blue bars on the left show us the various modelling of economic growth assuming no emission reductions. The dark bars show the impact with a 26 per cent target by 2030, and a 45 per cent target. Read More here
August 2015, The Australia Institute, Key administration statistics – 3rd Party Appeals and the EPBC Act. Details from a forthcoming Australia Institute Report
- Since the EPBC Act commenced in July 2000, there have been approximately 5500 projects referred to the Minister under the environmental impact assessment provisions.
- Of the 5500 referred, around 1500 have been assessed as requiring formal assessment and approval.
- 12 projects have been refused approval.
- 9 projects have been deemed to be ‘clearly unacceptable’ (i.e. rejected prior to proceeding to formal assessment and approval).
Key 3rd party litigation statistics. Read More here
28 August 2015, The Conversation, Newcastle’s ‘divestment’ is a chance for the world’s largest coal port to consider its future. The City of Newcastle council’s Tuesday night endorsement of an “environmentally and socially responsible” investment policy threw more mud than a pig wrestling competition at the country show. The controversy thickened this morning as stories emerged that the council also recently accepted an A$12-million offer to expand coal terminals at its port, the world’s largest in terms of coal exports. Amid jeers of hypocrisy and cheers of climate leadership, what can we really say about this policy move in one of New South Wales’ historic coal towns? Investment, not divestment. The council’s unprecedented move to adopt an investment policy which applies traditional investment criteria but also adds a “preference for environmentally and socially responsible investment (if criteria are met)” might rate a media mention, given the recent fossil fuel divestment move by certain universities and governments. But Newcastle’s historical dependence on coal means that the council’s decision sparked a media frenzy and councillors have been in overdrive explaining the policy and their position towards the region’s major industry. Defending both the nuance and intention of the Investment Policy, Newcastle Lord Mayor Nuatali Nelmes explained to ABC Newcastle that “it is not at all and never will be about undermining the coal industry”. Similar statements have been made by the councillor who moved the climate-friendly policy motion, 23-year-old Declan Clausen. Prime Minister Tony Abbott has come out against the policy. Read More here