Climate Integrity

Our latest report warns of the legal risks for Australian companies lobbying against climate action. Companies who say they are committed to the #ParisAgreement then lobby to weaken, delay or block climate reforms and policies are exposing themselves to significant legal risks. We compared InfluenceMap lobbying data to the public climate commitments made by nine companies: AGL, Origin Energy, Rio Tinto, BlueScope, Qantas, South32, Woolworths Supermarkets, Coles Group and Telstra, and their industry associations such as the Business Council of Australia Half of the companies assessed were found to be making inadequate or incorrect disclosures about their lobbying. In multiple cases, companies were found to have publicly supported a policy while simultaneously lobbying to weaken or delay legislation via an industry association. This report serves as a wakeup call to company directors on the legal risks of misaligned lobbying and as a tool for investors and customers to assess the credibility of companies’ claims and commitments to real and tangible climate action. Full report: https://lnkd.in/gWtBmWn9

Net zero is a loophole. But this is how we can close it. ⬇️ In this article, Climate Integrity Director Claire Snyder argues for a national carbon removals budget that allocates removals fairly to the most deserving uses – rather than the highest bidders. Read now ➡️ https://lnkd.in/gtUiBZ49 

Would you pay $1 extra on your flight booking to support on-the-ground climate relief? Our recent ACCC complaint against Qantas for potential greenwashing made a point of how misleading airline carbon offset schemes can be. But what if there was a better way for airlines to support climate solutions? We haven’t seen many positive outcomes from COP29. But the idea of a “global solidarity levy” on high-polluting industries gained momentum and is a green shoot of progress in an otherwise disappointing conference. Such climate levies would make polluters pay for tangible climate relief efforts around the world. Read the full story here ➡️ https://lnkd.in/gH4TdQSt

'Net Zero' has become a loophole, so how do we stop it from being exploited? Today, Climate Integrity alongside Dr. Kate Dooley is launching a policy briefing paper outlining the need for a sustainable carbon removals budget in Australia. Carbon dioxide removal has a role in the transition to net zero, but carbon removal into land is limited by sustainability constraints that are frequently ignored. Too often, Australia’s biggest emitters rely on unrealistic carbon removal targets to meet their Net Zero pledges. Australia is a member of a small group of high-income, high-emitting countries that are responsible for almost 75 percent of land use for carbon removal within climate pledges. Our over-reliance on future carbon removals and 'offsetting' could delay necessary emissions cuts, undermining domestic and global efforts to meet the Paris Agreement goals. Australia urgently needs to establish a carbon removals budget and framework to manage the sustainable and ethical use of carbon dioxide removals. Find out more ➡️ https://lnkd.in/gQ6uwAKQ

Does paying a few extra dollars really “offset” the climate impact of your flight? Anyone who has booked a Qantas flight in recent years will be familiar with the “fly carbon neutral” tick box at checkout. It provides you the option to contribute a few dollars to conservation projects and gives you the impression that by doing so you have somehow neutralised or compensated for the fossil fuel emissions from your flight. But it’s not that simple. Not even close. In March this year, “fly carbon neutral” was one of a number of green claims made by KLM Royal Dutch Airlines airlines that was found to be misleading by a Dutch court, and now more than 20 airlines in Europe are under scrutiny from regulators for similar claims. Last month, Climate Integrity asked the ACCC to investigate whether Qantas’ representation of offsets in this way has the potential to mislead consumers into thinking that by opting in to 'Fly Carbon Neutral’ and offsetting their flight means their flight is ‘sustainable’ and makes no significant contribution to climate change. Find out more ➡️ https://lnkd.in/ggZv45mc

Is it ethical for governments and companies to rely on carbon removals in their 'net zero' plans? Are they contributing to unsustainable land use change? A new paper in Nature from our expert network member Kate Dooley sounds the alarm on looming social and environmental impacts from land use change driven by unsustainable demand for carbon removal. A staggering 1 billion hectares of land would be needed to satisfy the demand for land-based carbon removal in national climate pledges. That's more than the combined areas of South Africa, India, Turkey and the European Union. Over reliance on offsetting in ‘net zero’ strategies at the global, national and corporate level is creating a land pressure crisis. This increasing competition over land could drive negative repercussions on biodiverse ecosystems, food sovereignty, and vulnerable and land-dependent peoples’ tenure and livelihoods. Read the details here ⬇️

Aviation is one of the more challenging industries to decarbonise. That’s why airlines need to be transparent about those challenges, and their climate initiatives need to meet high-integrity standards. Consumers and shareholders have a right to make informed decisions based on clear and accurate information – without having to wade through vague climate claims and misleading statements. A Dutch court recently found KLM Royal Dutch Airlines was greenwashing. How does our recent complaint against Qantas compare? Swipe through below to find out ⬇️ Dive into the full complaint here ➡️ https://lnkd.in/gZSRd8g5

This Wednesday at 12pm, join Climate Integrity Director Claire Snyder in conversation with our friends Groundswell Giving as part of their 'Groundswell Changemakers' series. 🎤 If you're interested in a behind-the-scenes look at how (and why) we do what we do, Claire will be discussing all things Climate Integrity, including (but not limited to) our recent complaint to the ACCC about Qantas' potential greenwashing. This will be a free, online event, and you can grab your tickets via Humanitix here ➡️ https://lnkd.in/g2PG_-6j

Keen to learn more about the corporate climate policy engagement landscape in 2024? Join our friends InfluenceMap for their webinar next week ⬇️

Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) are the silver bullet for decarbonising the aviation industry, right?! Not quite. In March 2024, an Amsterdam court ruled advertising by KLM Royal Dutch Airlines that talked up the positive benefits of SAFs was misleading and unlawful. The truth is that reducing emissions now by using existing solutions is far more efficient and effective than relying on future breakthroughs. Waiting for new, better, cheaper technologies is a clear choice to continue to emit. That’s why last week, Climate Integrity requested the ACCC investigate Qantas’ potentially misleading and deceptive net zero and sustainability claims. In the complaint, we pointed out Qantas’ reliance on and marketing of SAFs. But what exactly are SAFs, what challenges do they face and what role can they really play? Glad you asked ➡️ https://lnkd.in/eJ-jx4Mq