A world-first greenwashing case that seeks to carry oil and fuel firm Santos accountable for its internet zero commitments started within the federal courtroom as we speak, introduced by considered one of its personal shareholders, the Australasian Centre for Company Accountability (ACCR).
The organisation claims Santos didn’t have a correct foundation for saying it had a transparent pathway to cut back emissions by 26% to 30% by 2030 and attain internet zero by 2040, which constituted deceptive or misleading conduct in breach of Australian company and client legal guidelines.
“We’ll be submitting that Santos lacked reasonable grounds for making these statements,” the centre’s barrister, Noel Hutley SC, stated as a 13-day trial started on Monday.
Along with emissions reductions targets, the case was anticipated to focus on the corporate’s representations associated to its description of pure fuel as a “clean fuel” and representations of blue hydrogen (produced utilizing pure fuel with carbon seize and storage) as “clean” and “zero emissions”.
Hutley advised the courtroom Santos’s local weather change “plan” was not a plan in any respect, however reasonably “little more than a series of speculations … cobbled together in a matter of weeks”.
The centre holds shares in companies reminiscent of Santos to attempt to pressure them to satisfy the targets of the Paris Local weather Settlement, a world treaty on local weather change that was signed by the vast majority of nations, together with Australia, in 2016.
Santos, which has operations in Australia, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste and the US, has been accused of “greenwashing” by way of claims it may assist Australia meet the Paris goal of internet zero emissions by 2040.
Hutley referred to paperwork that indicated Santos was conscious that hydrogen manufacturing would improve its direct emissions, which he stated wasn’t adequately mirrored in its experiences and internet zero roadmap.
Neil Younger KC, representing Santos, disputed the character of the paperwork and the way they have been being interpreted.
He stated traders would have understood that not all the things included within the roadmap was a longtime undertaking. They’d have additionally been conscious {that a} “step change” transformation was required to assist the event of markets for hydrogen and carbon seize and storage, he stated.
after publication promotion
Santos’s declare that pure fuel was a clear gas associated to the gas’s position as a transition gas and the relative greenhouse emissions in comparison with coal, he stated.
Younger stated the corporate’s dedication to internet zero emissions by 2040 was a goal, and never a promise for achievement or a prediction.
ACCR was asking the courtroom to make declarations that Santos had engaged in deceptive or misleading conduct, and for injunctions prohibiting Santos from partaking in misleading conduct in future and forcing it to situation a corrective discover in regards to the environmental impacts of its operations.
Opening statements will proceed into Tuesday, with the case as a result of conclude on Friday 15 November.
– With Australian Related Press
