<
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-24/climate-court-case-back-to-fight-government-over-coal-mines/103456186>
'There's a case happening at the moment that highlights the strange place we
are at in the shift away from fossil fuels.
A Queensland environmental group took federal Environment Minister Tanya
Plibersek to court over two coal mine extensions, arguing that she did not
consider the impacts of the emissions released when the coal is burnt.
The minister used two arguments that have been deployed for decades to justify
Australia's coal exports.
They're known by environmentalists as the "drug dealer's defence" and the "drop
in the ocean" argument.
The "drug dealer's defence" can be summed up like this: if we don't sell this
coal, someone else will, so it doesn't make a difference.
But with global demand for coal expected to peak as early as 2026, according to
the International Energy Agency, can Australia still claim that it's simply
meeting the demand of the market?
The second argument made by the minister was that emissions from these mines
don't make a significant contribution overall to climate change. Nicknamed the
"drop in the ocean" argument, it's also on shaky grounds legally in 2024, with
other courts rejecting it.'
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
