Coal mine stalled in 'groundbreaking' climate decision
A community environment group from the NSW Hunter region successfully challenged an Independent Planning Commission decision to allow the expansion of the Mount Pleasant open-cut mine, near Muswellbrook.
Operator MACH Energy applied to deepen the mine and double its output, extending its life for 22 years to enable the extraction of an additional 406 megatonnes of coal.
The commission consented to the expansion in September 2022 and a judicial review brought by the community group was dismissed by the Land and Environment Court two years later.
Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group took its fight to the Court of Appeal, arguing the environment court had erred and the commission failed to consider the likely climate effects in the region.
The Court of Appeal on Thursday found the commission had accepted the project's emissions would contribute to global climate change, but there was nothing in its reasons to indicate it had considered the local impacts.
The commission's consent referred to Australia's obligations under the Paris Agreement, noting that the mine's emissions would be "accounted for" in the countries where the coal was burnt.
"The commission's obligation to consider the likely impacts of the development on the natural and built environment in the locality of the mine ... required it to address the potentially adverse effects of climate change in the locality," the judgment said.
"This obligation could not be discharged by general references to the effects of global warming on the planet generally."
Environmental lawyer Elaine Johnson, the director of the firm that represented the community group, said the court's decision was groundbreaking.
"The NSW Court of Appeal has just confirmed that the local impacts of climate change on communities are a direct consequence of continued fossil fuel production in NSW," Ms Johnson said in a statement.
"From today, climate harm must be specifically considered when deciding proposals for fossil fuel expansions."
NSW Greens MP Sue Higginson also said it was a significant legal breakthrough.
"With this decision, the government must now reckon with the fact that they have a responsibility to the whole planet when it comes to allowing more coal to be dug up and burnt," Ms Higginson said.
"The status quo of setting emissions reduction targets domestically and then exporting the climate crisis is now broken with this decision."
The case will be returned to the Land and Environment Court to consider and MACH Energy was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.
The company was contacted for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Australian
21 hours ago
- The Australian
Barnaby Joyce calls for clear policy lines after ‘brutal' Newspoll
Nationals heavyweight Barnaby Joyce is calling for a strategy switch up after a 'brutal' poll found the Coalition's core support has fallen to its lowest point in 40 years. The first Newspoll published since the federal election found the primary vote for the Coalition fell further from 31.8 per cent at the May 3 vote to just 29 per cent. In worse news for Sussan Ley, she trailed Anthony Albanese as preferred prime minister, with 32 per cent to the Labor leader's 52 per cent. Though, her approval rating was 35 per cent – the typical mark for newly elected opposition leaders. Mr Joyce, who was booted to the backbench after the Coalition's brief post-election break-up, said on Monday his side needed to be clear on where it stood on issues. Opposition Leader Sussan Ley is trailing Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as preferred prime minister. Picture: Nikki Short / NewsWire 'They are brutal numbers,' he told Seven's Sunrise. 'I think the first thing you do is you be honest about them.' He said the Coalition would need to be strategic with its approach to question time in parliament if it was going to claw back support. 'Let's be frank, any person in a lower house seat … wherever it is – Watson, Farrer, New England – if you had a 3 in front of your primary vote, you would be very, very worried,' Mr Joyce said. 'If you had a 2-3 in front of your vote, you would basically kiss yourself goodbye.' Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce says the Coalition needs to find 'binary' issues to take Labor to task with. Picture: Martin Ollman / NewsWire He said the Coalition needed 'to find issues which are binary, which you are fully for, and the Labor Party is fully against'. 'If you try and work on nuances and ameliorations and views of a different issue – that's no good,' Mr Joyce said. 'That's why such issues such as net zero, I say – find a point of division. 'You don't believe in net zero, they do believe in net zero. 'You believe in looking after pensioners and power prices, they believe in abiding by the Paris Agreement. 'But if you've got another way about it, they're your numbers.'
The Advertiser
3 days ago
- The Advertiser
Barnaby Joyce wants Australia to abandon net zero - but his 4 central claims don't stack up
One-time Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce sought to dominate the first sitting week of the current federal parliament by proposing a divisive plan to reverse Australia's net zero emissions target. The campaign, backed by fellow former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, aims to repeal what Joyce calls Australia's "lunatic crusade" of net zero by 2050. It comes as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley convenes a working group to set a way forward on climate and energy policy following the Coalition's historic election defeat. Meanwhile, the Albanese government is considering Australia's next round of emissions reduction targets. And scientists warn just three years remain for the world to keep global warming below the vital 1.5°C threshold. If Australia is to take meaningful climate action, federal parliament must engage with the facts honestly and without distortion. So let's take a closer look at whether Joyce and McCormack's latest claims withstand scrutiny. Joyce describes as "perverse" the notion that Australia's net zero goal can meaningfully help address global climate change. This claim is not backed by science. Every tonne of greenhouse gas emissions adds to global warming. What's more, Joyce's claim ignores the near-universal agreement of nations signed up to the Paris Agreement - including Australia - to pursue efforts (including domestic measures) to limit the average global temperature rise to 1.5°C. It's true that collective national efforts to curb warming have so far been insufficient. But that doesn't mean they should be abandoned. McCormack claims there is a growing global shift against net zero, and Joyce describes it as "a peculiar minority position". This statement is not backed by evidence. In fact, the number of countries, cities, businesses and other institutions pledging to get to net-zero is growing. In the United States, President Donald Trump has dismantled climate policy, damaging that nation's progress towards net zero. But many US states have retained the target, and global climate action will continue regardless of Trump's actions. A landmark court ruling this week is likely to further strengthen global pressure for nations to ramp up emissions reduction. The advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice observed countries are legally obliged to prevent harms caused by climate change - including by regulating the fossil fuel industry. As others have noted, Australia must now reconsider its stance on approving new fossil fuel projects - including those geared to export markets. Joyce claims a net zero policy agenda is "treacherous" for Australia's security and will "inflame our incapacity" to contend with geopolitical threats. But evidence suggests the opposite is true. There is a significant link between climate change and certain types of military conflicts. Research predicts the Australian Defence Force will become involved in more wars as the climate crisis escalates, and respond to more frequent climate-related disasters inside our borders. Both Joyce and McCormack say the net zero target and associated renewable energy rollout is devastating regional Australia. The Institute of Public Affairs, a prominent right-wing think tank, this week launched a documentary making similar claims. Joyce cited division in rural communities over renewable energy. In reality, there is significant support in regional Australia for such technology. A poll last year by Farmers for Climate Action found 70% of regional Australians in renewable energy zones support the development of renewable energy projects on local farmland. Joyce also pointed to "the removal of agricultural land from production" to support his stance. However, analysis shows very little farmland is required for the clean energy transition. What's more, the cost of inaction is high. Climate change is disproportionately affecting cost of living for regional households - for example, due to higher insurance premiums. Joyce also appears deaf to the myriad regional voices calling for stronger climate action. The Mackay Conservation Group, for example, is challenging Whitehaven's Winchester South coal mine in Queensland's Land Court. Similarly, an environment group based in the NSW Hunter Valley this week successfully appealed the expansion of MACH Energy's Mount Pleasant coal mine. Clearly, the efforts of Joyce and McCormack to undermine Australia's net zero goal are not backed by evidence. The Coalition must heed the facts - not backbench pressure - as it weighs its climate and energy policy. Only then can Australia avoid reigniting the divisive climate wars that stalled progress and positioned Australia as a global laggard. Likewise, the Albanese government must not be distracted from the climate action task. Australia's next round of climate targets should be based on the best available science, and make a meaningful, credible contribution to the objectives of the Paris Agreement. One-time Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce sought to dominate the first sitting week of the current federal parliament by proposing a divisive plan to reverse Australia's net zero emissions target. The campaign, backed by fellow former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, aims to repeal what Joyce calls Australia's "lunatic crusade" of net zero by 2050. It comes as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley convenes a working group to set a way forward on climate and energy policy following the Coalition's historic election defeat. Meanwhile, the Albanese government is considering Australia's next round of emissions reduction targets. And scientists warn just three years remain for the world to keep global warming below the vital 1.5°C threshold. If Australia is to take meaningful climate action, federal parliament must engage with the facts honestly and without distortion. So let's take a closer look at whether Joyce and McCormack's latest claims withstand scrutiny. Joyce describes as "perverse" the notion that Australia's net zero goal can meaningfully help address global climate change. This claim is not backed by science. Every tonne of greenhouse gas emissions adds to global warming. What's more, Joyce's claim ignores the near-universal agreement of nations signed up to the Paris Agreement - including Australia - to pursue efforts (including domestic measures) to limit the average global temperature rise to 1.5°C. It's true that collective national efforts to curb warming have so far been insufficient. But that doesn't mean they should be abandoned. McCormack claims there is a growing global shift against net zero, and Joyce describes it as "a peculiar minority position". This statement is not backed by evidence. In fact, the number of countries, cities, businesses and other institutions pledging to get to net-zero is growing. In the United States, President Donald Trump has dismantled climate policy, damaging that nation's progress towards net zero. But many US states have retained the target, and global climate action will continue regardless of Trump's actions. A landmark court ruling this week is likely to further strengthen global pressure for nations to ramp up emissions reduction. The advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice observed countries are legally obliged to prevent harms caused by climate change - including by regulating the fossil fuel industry. As others have noted, Australia must now reconsider its stance on approving new fossil fuel projects - including those geared to export markets. Joyce claims a net zero policy agenda is "treacherous" for Australia's security and will "inflame our incapacity" to contend with geopolitical threats. But evidence suggests the opposite is true. There is a significant link between climate change and certain types of military conflicts. Research predicts the Australian Defence Force will become involved in more wars as the climate crisis escalates, and respond to more frequent climate-related disasters inside our borders. Both Joyce and McCormack say the net zero target and associated renewable energy rollout is devastating regional Australia. The Institute of Public Affairs, a prominent right-wing think tank, this week launched a documentary making similar claims. Joyce cited division in rural communities over renewable energy. In reality, there is significant support in regional Australia for such technology. A poll last year by Farmers for Climate Action found 70% of regional Australians in renewable energy zones support the development of renewable energy projects on local farmland. Joyce also pointed to "the removal of agricultural land from production" to support his stance. However, analysis shows very little farmland is required for the clean energy transition. What's more, the cost of inaction is high. Climate change is disproportionately affecting cost of living for regional households - for example, due to higher insurance premiums. Joyce also appears deaf to the myriad regional voices calling for stronger climate action. The Mackay Conservation Group, for example, is challenging Whitehaven's Winchester South coal mine in Queensland's Land Court. Similarly, an environment group based in the NSW Hunter Valley this week successfully appealed the expansion of MACH Energy's Mount Pleasant coal mine. Clearly, the efforts of Joyce and McCormack to undermine Australia's net zero goal are not backed by evidence. The Coalition must heed the facts - not backbench pressure - as it weighs its climate and energy policy. Only then can Australia avoid reigniting the divisive climate wars that stalled progress and positioned Australia as a global laggard. Likewise, the Albanese government must not be distracted from the climate action task. Australia's next round of climate targets should be based on the best available science, and make a meaningful, credible contribution to the objectives of the Paris Agreement. One-time Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce sought to dominate the first sitting week of the current federal parliament by proposing a divisive plan to reverse Australia's net zero emissions target. The campaign, backed by fellow former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, aims to repeal what Joyce calls Australia's "lunatic crusade" of net zero by 2050. It comes as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley convenes a working group to set a way forward on climate and energy policy following the Coalition's historic election defeat. Meanwhile, the Albanese government is considering Australia's next round of emissions reduction targets. And scientists warn just three years remain for the world to keep global warming below the vital 1.5°C threshold. If Australia is to take meaningful climate action, federal parliament must engage with the facts honestly and without distortion. So let's take a closer look at whether Joyce and McCormack's latest claims withstand scrutiny. Joyce describes as "perverse" the notion that Australia's net zero goal can meaningfully help address global climate change. This claim is not backed by science. Every tonne of greenhouse gas emissions adds to global warming. What's more, Joyce's claim ignores the near-universal agreement of nations signed up to the Paris Agreement - including Australia - to pursue efforts (including domestic measures) to limit the average global temperature rise to 1.5°C. It's true that collective national efforts to curb warming have so far been insufficient. But that doesn't mean they should be abandoned. McCormack claims there is a growing global shift against net zero, and Joyce describes it as "a peculiar minority position". This statement is not backed by evidence. In fact, the number of countries, cities, businesses and other institutions pledging to get to net-zero is growing. In the United States, President Donald Trump has dismantled climate policy, damaging that nation's progress towards net zero. But many US states have retained the target, and global climate action will continue regardless of Trump's actions. A landmark court ruling this week is likely to further strengthen global pressure for nations to ramp up emissions reduction. The advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice observed countries are legally obliged to prevent harms caused by climate change - including by regulating the fossil fuel industry. As others have noted, Australia must now reconsider its stance on approving new fossil fuel projects - including those geared to export markets. Joyce claims a net zero policy agenda is "treacherous" for Australia's security and will "inflame our incapacity" to contend with geopolitical threats. But evidence suggests the opposite is true. There is a significant link between climate change and certain types of military conflicts. Research predicts the Australian Defence Force will become involved in more wars as the climate crisis escalates, and respond to more frequent climate-related disasters inside our borders. Both Joyce and McCormack say the net zero target and associated renewable energy rollout is devastating regional Australia. The Institute of Public Affairs, a prominent right-wing think tank, this week launched a documentary making similar claims. Joyce cited division in rural communities over renewable energy. In reality, there is significant support in regional Australia for such technology. A poll last year by Farmers for Climate Action found 70% of regional Australians in renewable energy zones support the development of renewable energy projects on local farmland. Joyce also pointed to "the removal of agricultural land from production" to support his stance. However, analysis shows very little farmland is required for the clean energy transition. What's more, the cost of inaction is high. Climate change is disproportionately affecting cost of living for regional households - for example, due to higher insurance premiums. Joyce also appears deaf to the myriad regional voices calling for stronger climate action. The Mackay Conservation Group, for example, is challenging Whitehaven's Winchester South coal mine in Queensland's Land Court. Similarly, an environment group based in the NSW Hunter Valley this week successfully appealed the expansion of MACH Energy's Mount Pleasant coal mine. Clearly, the efforts of Joyce and McCormack to undermine Australia's net zero goal are not backed by evidence. The Coalition must heed the facts - not backbench pressure - as it weighs its climate and energy policy. Only then can Australia avoid reigniting the divisive climate wars that stalled progress and positioned Australia as a global laggard. Likewise, the Albanese government must not be distracted from the climate action task. Australia's next round of climate targets should be based on the best available science, and make a meaningful, credible contribution to the objectives of the Paris Agreement. One-time Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce sought to dominate the first sitting week of the current federal parliament by proposing a divisive plan to reverse Australia's net zero emissions target. The campaign, backed by fellow former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, aims to repeal what Joyce calls Australia's "lunatic crusade" of net zero by 2050. It comes as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley convenes a working group to set a way forward on climate and energy policy following the Coalition's historic election defeat. Meanwhile, the Albanese government is considering Australia's next round of emissions reduction targets. And scientists warn just three years remain for the world to keep global warming below the vital 1.5°C threshold. If Australia is to take meaningful climate action, federal parliament must engage with the facts honestly and without distortion. So let's take a closer look at whether Joyce and McCormack's latest claims withstand scrutiny. Joyce describes as "perverse" the notion that Australia's net zero goal can meaningfully help address global climate change. This claim is not backed by science. Every tonne of greenhouse gas emissions adds to global warming. What's more, Joyce's claim ignores the near-universal agreement of nations signed up to the Paris Agreement - including Australia - to pursue efforts (including domestic measures) to limit the average global temperature rise to 1.5°C. It's true that collective national efforts to curb warming have so far been insufficient. But that doesn't mean they should be abandoned. McCormack claims there is a growing global shift against net zero, and Joyce describes it as "a peculiar minority position". This statement is not backed by evidence. In fact, the number of countries, cities, businesses and other institutions pledging to get to net-zero is growing. In the United States, President Donald Trump has dismantled climate policy, damaging that nation's progress towards net zero. But many US states have retained the target, and global climate action will continue regardless of Trump's actions. A landmark court ruling this week is likely to further strengthen global pressure for nations to ramp up emissions reduction. The advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice observed countries are legally obliged to prevent harms caused by climate change - including by regulating the fossil fuel industry. As others have noted, Australia must now reconsider its stance on approving new fossil fuel projects - including those geared to export markets. Joyce claims a net zero policy agenda is "treacherous" for Australia's security and will "inflame our incapacity" to contend with geopolitical threats. But evidence suggests the opposite is true. There is a significant link between climate change and certain types of military conflicts. Research predicts the Australian Defence Force will become involved in more wars as the climate crisis escalates, and respond to more frequent climate-related disasters inside our borders. Both Joyce and McCormack say the net zero target and associated renewable energy rollout is devastating regional Australia. The Institute of Public Affairs, a prominent right-wing think tank, this week launched a documentary making similar claims. Joyce cited division in rural communities over renewable energy. In reality, there is significant support in regional Australia for such technology. A poll last year by Farmers for Climate Action found 70% of regional Australians in renewable energy zones support the development of renewable energy projects on local farmland. Joyce also pointed to "the removal of agricultural land from production" to support his stance. However, analysis shows very little farmland is required for the clean energy transition. What's more, the cost of inaction is high. Climate change is disproportionately affecting cost of living for regional households - for example, due to higher insurance premiums. Joyce also appears deaf to the myriad regional voices calling for stronger climate action. The Mackay Conservation Group, for example, is challenging Whitehaven's Winchester South coal mine in Queensland's Land Court. Similarly, an environment group based in the NSW Hunter Valley this week successfully appealed the expansion of MACH Energy's Mount Pleasant coal mine. Clearly, the efforts of Joyce and McCormack to undermine Australia's net zero goal are not backed by evidence. The Coalition must heed the facts - not backbench pressure - as it weighs its climate and energy policy. Only then can Australia avoid reigniting the divisive climate wars that stalled progress and positioned Australia as a global laggard. Likewise, the Albanese government must not be distracted from the climate action task. Australia's next round of climate targets should be based on the best available science, and make a meaningful, credible contribution to the objectives of the Paris Agreement.
AU Financial Review
3 days ago
- AU Financial Review
US reaches new trade deal with European Union
Global pharmaceutical giants, including Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson, are paying a tiny fraction of the billions of dollars they earn from drug sales in local taxes, at a time when they're lobbying US President Donald Trump to force an overhaul of Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. An analysis of earnings statements filed with the corporate regulator by five of the biggest US and European drugmakers shows the companies on average pay between 2 per cent and 4 per cent of their Australian sales in income tax. The numbers may make for uncomfortable reading for drug multinationals as they step up efforts to loosen the PBS' grip on the pricing of key medicines.
