LAND and Environment Court Justice Brian Preston's rejection of the Rocky Hill coal mine in February was reported around the world because it considered climate change for the first time.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
It wasn't the only reason Justice Preston refused Gloucester Resources' appeal of an earlier commission's rejection of the proposal, but it was an endorsement of arguments made by environmental groups for years. And that made news.
The Rocky Hill proposal just outside Gloucester was in the "wrong time because the (greenhouse gas) emissions of the coal mine and its coal product will increase global total concentrations of (greenhouse gases) at a time when what is now urgently needed, in order to meet generally agreed climate targets, is a rapid and deep decrease in emissions", Justice Preston said.
Not as widely reported were his comments on a common argument put forward by the mining industry to support Australian coal mine proposals - that refusing an Australian mine would only increase greenhouse gas emissions because dirtier mines in India or Indonesia would make up the shortfall.
The argument was particularly valid for coking coal mines, which provide coal required to produce steel, the Land and Environment Court was told.
Justice Preston rejected the "market substitution" argument.
There was no proof other mines would go ahead, and wealthy countries like Australia had a responsibility to take the lead on climate change, he said.
Justice Preston was reported to have delivered a speech at a climate change conference in 2011 about lawsuits increasing pressure on politicians to respond to climate change.
"While courts are bound by domestic or international norms in their activity, and cannot bring about dramatic change, climate change litigation has proved to be a vehicle through which matters that are important to communities are being brought to the attention of the governments and, hence, act as a catalyst for executive action," a copy of his speech to the conference notes.
The NSW Department of Planning says the Rocky Hill decision should have no impact on how decision-makers consider greenhouse gas emissions in coal mine applications, because there are no laws for such change. But the pressure is there.
Issue: 39,216.
