Australia’s Crocodile Tears in the Pacific - Gregory Andrews

Lyrebird Dreaming  –  Gregory Andrews

Author Gregory Andrews is: Founder and Managing Director of Lyrebird Dreaming A former Australian Ambassador and High Commissioner in West Africa Australia’s first Threatened Species Commissioner A leader in Indigenous policy

Anthony Albanese’s social media is currently full of the Pacific. Photos from Tuvalu. Pacific leaders in floral blue shirts. Smiling children. Listening faces. Blue water surrounding islands whose future is threatened by rising seas.

“Climate change isn’t a future challenge for the Pacific. It’s a daily reality,” Albanese posted from Tuvalu this week. He also declared that the Pacific is on the “front line” of climate change and that for some island nations it represents a threat to their very existence.

He’s right. And that’s precisely what makes Australia’s behaviour so difficult to stomach.

Because while our Prime Minister spins climate empathy stories in the Pacific, his government continues facilitating expansion of coal and gas industries like there’s no tomorrow. That isn’t climate leadership. It is the central contradiction at the heart of Australian climate diplomacy.

Listen to the Pacific - but actually listen

Foreign Minister Penny Wong has been making much the same pitch. In Fiji she urged the world to “come to the Pacific” and see for itself the reality of climate change. Australia says its diplomacy is designed to elevate Pacific voices and put Pacific priorities at the centre of global climate negotiations. Great. So what are those Pacific voices actually saying?

Tuvalu’s Prime Minister Feleti Teo warned fossil-fuel expansion by countries such as Australia represents a “death sentence” for his country. Vanuatu Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu said the very least Australia should do is stop expanding fossil-fuel production.

That’s the bit Canberra seems less enthusiastic about hearing. Listening to Pacific children describe climate change is important. But listening means more than nodding and posting the photograph afterwards.

The other Australia

There’s another Australia that doesn’t appear in the Pacific selfies. In September last year, the Albanese Government gave final approval for Woodside’s North West Shelf gas processing project to keep operating until 2070 - twenty years beyond Australia’s own net-zero deadline.

By February this year, the Climate Council counted 35 fossil-fuel project approvals under the Albanese Government. The Australia Institute says almost 100 new coal and gas projects are under development in Australia.

And last week, the Hunter Valley Operations coal expansion was approved at the NSW level, potentially generating about 809 million tonnes of greenhouse pollution through to 2045. 

But there was one encouraging development. While Albanese was in the Pacific talking about climate impacts, the High Court delivered a landmark judgment over the coal mine expansion, finding fault with the way its enormous downstream - or Scope 3 - emissions had been dealt with. The message matters because the law recognised that you cannot simply pretend the emissions from Australian coal disappear when the ship leaves Newcastle.

The atmosphere has never recognised the distinction between emissions produced here and Australian fossil fuels burned overseas. Perhaps our governments should stop pretending it does.

These are not rounding errors. Australia’s own Climate Change Authority estimates that the coal and gas we export generate more than one billion tonnes of CO₂ overseas each year - more than twice our domestic emissions. Climate Analytics puts Australia’s wider fossil-fuel export footprint at around 1.2 billion tonnes annually.

The atmosphere, as I have written before, doesn’t care which country’s spreadsheet the emissions appear on. Coal dug up here and burned in Asia, heats Tuvalu too.

Climate policy in one hand, fossil fuels in the other

To be fair, Labor has introduced some real climate policies. Australia now has a 2035 target of reducing domestic emissions by 62–70 per cent below 2005 levels, renewable energy is growing, and we’re financing renewable energy, adaptation and resilience projects in the Pacific.

But that makes the contradiction harder to explain, not easier. This is no longer old-fashioned climate denial. The Albanese Government accepts the science. It talks about 1.5°C. It acknowledges existential threats to Pacific nations. It funds adaptation. Then it keeps expanding the supply of the fossil fuels causing the problem.

The International Energy Agency’s net-zero pathway is unambiguous: no new long-lead-time oil and gas developments, and no new coal mines or mine extensions, are necessary for achievement of net zero by 2050. You can’t indefinitely reconcile that with approving fossil-fuel infrastructure lasting to 2070.

This is fossil-fuelled diplomacy

Penny Wong doesn’t personally approve coal mines or gas projects. But as Foreign Minister she’s selling Australia’s climate credentials abroad while serving in a government pursuing continued fossil-fuel expansionism.

That’s the problem. Australia is effectively offering Pacific countries money to strengthen coastlines against rising seas while continuing to dig up and export the fuels raising those seas. We help pay for the seawall while keeping the carbon pipeline open.

The Australia Institute and Australian Conservation Foundation were so appalled by this contradiction that this week they bought a full-page advertisement in the Fiji Times, apologising to Pacific nations for Australia’s continuing coal expansion. I’m sorry too.

And that should embarrass Canberra far more than any hostile question at a press conference. I’ve been writing for years that Australia can’t seriously claim climate leadership while expanding coal and gas. In 2023 I wrote that our fossil-fuel exports had to end. More recently I argued that physics doesn’t respond to political spin. Nothing happening in Tuvalu this week changes that argument. It just makes it more urgent.

Anthony Albanese is right to listen to Pacific children. Penny Wong is right to ask the world to listen to Pacific nations. Now Australia needs to listen too. Because the Pacific doesn’t need our crocodile tears. It needs us to stop making the problem worse. And by the look on this girl’s face, she’s not impressed!

Photo from Chris Bowen’s social media feed

Gregory Andrews Climate Change Articles

• Community vs Coal: Climate’s ‘The Castle’ Moment
• Climate and National Security: why is Albanese keeping the evidence secret?
• Climate Warming Faster Than We Planned For?
• Weather Whiplash: Fasten Your Seatbelts
• Australia’s Flagship Climate Policy Is Failing to Cut Emissions
• Winter's Here, The Snowfields Are Open, But There's No Snow
• Worried About Climate Collapse? Here's Ten Things You Can Actually Do
• Fossil Fuel Fascism: When a Dying Industry Tries to Take Democracy With It
• Climate Policy Counts Dollars and Tonnes. What if We Counted the Dead?
• The Climate Crisis is a Health Crisis
• The Science Is In: Global Warming Is Accelerating
• While We Watch Iran, the Planet Keeps Burning
• Have your say on Canberra's next Climate Strategy: It will be make or break
• Science Warns of Future Where Billions Bake
• Two Years to 1.7°C: the “Prediction Game” We Can't Afford to Lose
• Emergency Photo Ops Aren't Climate Leadership
• Why Fascists Reject Climate Science
• Don't Be Distracted: Earth's Life Support Systems Are Collapsing
• Diesel rebates for miners and a new EV tax? Australia's climate policy double-think
• What Gas is That? Get to Know Your Climate Pollutants

Coal Approvals Test Australia's Climate Promise to the Pacific - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Fresh coal and gas approvals have strained Australia's standing
with Pacific neighbours before the Fiji pre-COP talks

Key Points

Tuvalu's Prime Minister Feleti Teo calls planned fossil fuel expansion in Australia and elsewhere a “death sentence”.[1] New South Wales approved a 19-year extension of Hunter Valley Operations to 2045, with estimated emissions of 809 megatonnes.[2][1] About 98 per cent of the mine's emissions are Scope 3, released when importing countries burn the coal.[3] Bowen's $7.29 million Pacific package forms part of an existing $50 million energy partnership.[4][5] Renewables supplied 49.9 per cent of east coast grid generation in late 2025, against an 82 per cent target for 2030.[6] Australia endorsed the 2018 Boe Declaration, which names climate change as the single greatest threat to Pacific security.[1]

Marica Malumuca, 66, likens her tent in Fiji to a balloon when heavy rain bulges the canvas. 

Two cyclones cracked the ground beneath her village of Nabavatu in 2021. She has waited five years in a temporary settlement of 37 tents.^[1]

That story sits behind the pre-COP31 talks, a set of preparatory meetings now under way in Fiji. 

The meetings precede November's United Nations COP31 climate summit. 

Canberra promotes renewables at home, yet Pacific governments keep pointing to its coal and gas exports.^[1]

A “Death Sentence” and the Pacific Response

Tuvalu's Prime Minister Feleti Teo calls planned fossil fuel expansion in Australia and elsewhere a “death sentence”. 

Some Pacific leaders repeatedly call on Australia to stop expanding fossil fuel projects.^[1]

Tuvalu and Vanuatu lead the public criticism of Australia's latest approvals. Vanuatu's Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu says Australia should at minimum stop future expansion, and it fails to do so. Fiji's Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka says the best help Australia can offer is renewable energy support.^[1]

Tuvalu averages only two metres above sea level and faces inundation as early as 2050. In Fiji, cyclones have left families living in tents. More than half of Pacific infrastructure sits in coastal areas exposed to rising seas.^[1][7]

UNSW researcher Wes Morgan says emissions from coal and gas exports more than double those of Australia's domestic economy. He argues that this record contradicts the partnership narrative Canberra pursues with Pacific island countries. He calls the export of coal and gas Australia's biggest contribution to the climate crisis.^[1]

Hunter Valley Operations and Fossil Fuel Approvals

Extending Hunter Valley Operations would add an estimated 809 megatonnes of greenhouse gas to the atmosphere. A megatonne equals one million tonnes. The plans also allow the mine to extract an estimated 430 million tonnes of coal.^[1]

The New South Wales Independent Planning Commission approved a 19-year extension of the mine on 30 September. Glencore and Yancoal can now mine to 2045 at the largest coal project in the state's history.^[2][3]

About 98 per cent of the project's emissions are Scope 3, released when importing countries burn the coal. The commission acknowledged that share in its decision. Paris Agreement accounting counts emissions where fuel burns, so exported coal never appears in Australia's national inventory.^[3]

Resources Minister Madeleine King opened a new gas project in the Northern Territory's Beetaloo Basin. A day later, at the Pacific Islands Forum, Vanuatu's Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu said Australia was doing too little.^[1]

Climate Finance and the Funding Gap

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen announced a $7.29 million package to accelerate renewable energy across the Pacific. The money funds grid modelling, technical experts and an early careers program for energy professionals. A separate memorandum of understanding backs Vanuatu's transition, and the announcement quotes one regional figure.^[4]

Expansion of gas and coal is a “slap in the face” for Pacific governments, ABC News reports. Those governments seek a partner on what they see as an existential threat. Aid and resilience funding sit awkwardly beside exports that deepen that threat.^[1]

The $7.29 million forms part of the $50 million Australia-Pacific Partnership for Energy Transition, known as APPET. Attendees noted that the package repeats an earlier announcement rather than adding new money.^[5]

The Vanuatu memorandum commits Australian tools and expertise to integrate cheap solar energy into Vanuatu's grid. It also supports a skilled local workforce. Bowen says the agreement strengthens Vanuatu's energy sovereignty.^[4]

Domestic Policy and Renewable Commitments

The Albanese Government targets 82 per cent renewable electricity by 2030. Renewables supplied 49.9 per cent of generation in the National Electricity Market, the main east coast grid, in late 2025. Bowen says Australia remains on track while conceding challenges.^[6]

The NSW Net Zero Commission, an independent state body, advised that new coal extensions conflict with legislated targets. Those targets sit in the state's Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act, and the advice cites the Paris Agreement. The planning commission approved the mine anyway, reasoning that importing countries will account for the emissions.^[3]

The Australian Greens demand that Labor rule out federal approval for the project before COP31. They say the decision now sits on the desks of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Environment Minister Murray Watt. In their view, Pacific talk of climate leadership contradicts approving hundreds of millions of tonnes of new coal.^[8]

Bowen defends Australia's approach by pointing to progress on renewable energy. The mine still needs federal approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. That national law guards threatened species and ecosystems, and environment groups urge Canberra to reject the project.^[9]

Diplomatic Pressure and Climate Leadership

Australia serves as President of Negotiations for COP31, the United Nations climate summit in November. The Australia Institute and Australian Conservation Foundation ran a Fiji Times advertisement apologising for the coal expansion. Some Pacific leaders question Australia's climate record, which tests its credibility as lead negotiator.^[8][9]

Australia joined Pacific Islands Forum leaders in endorsing the Boe Declaration on Regional Security in 2018. The declaration names climate change as the single greatest threat to Pacific livelihoods, security and wellbeing. It also commits signatories to limit global warming to 1.5°C.^[1]

At the pre-COP meetings, Amnesty International Secretary General Agnès Callamard said world leaders must listen to Pacific communities and act. She warned that concern without action offers no defence against rising seas.^[9]

The Falepili Union, a climate and security treaty with Australia, takes its name from the Tuvaluan word for good neighbourliness. Weeks after Tuvalu ratified it in 2024, climate minister Maina Talia called new fossil fuel projects “immoral and unacceptable”. He said the approvals questioned Australia's claim to be a “member of the Pacific family”.^[10][7]

Conclusion

Australia offers the Pacific solar funding, grid modelling and a leading role in climate diplomacy. It also approves coal and gas projects that Pacific governments describe as a threat to their survival. Both facts shape how Pacific neighbours judge Canberra.

The evidence shows a gap between domestic progress and exported emissions. Roughly 98 per cent of the Hunter Valley emissions fall outside Australia's national inventory. The Pacific funding also draws on an existing program.

Accountability now rests with federal decision makers. The fate of Hunter Valley Operations will show whether climate diplomacy shapes resource governance. Communities from Nabavatu to Tuvalu will judge the answer.

References

1. Pacific leaders challenge Australia's fossil fuel expansion ahead of pre-COP31 talks in Fiji. ABC News report carrying Teo's warning, Regenvanu's criticism, the 809 megatonne estimate, the Boe Declaration and the Fiji displacement account.

2. Largest climate policy failure: Giant NSW coal mine extension approved, with conditions attached. Renew Economy report on the Independent Planning Commission approving the full 19-year extension to 2045.

3. NSW's largest coal mine project is set to expand. Here's what authorities got wrong about the trade-offs. Expert analysis of the roughly 98 per cent Scope 3 share, the Net Zero Commission advice and the commission's reasoning.

4. $7.29 million to strengthen Pacific energy security. Australian Government media release announcing the Pacific package and the Vanuatu memorandum of understanding.

5. 1.5°C to stay alive: Pacific countries demand the world makes good on climate promises. Pre-COP explainer noting that the $7.29 million forms part of the existing $50 million energy partnership.

6. Bowen says renewables transition on track after 7 GW added to grid in 2025. Trade report on the 82 per cent target and the 49.9 per cent renewable share in the December 2025 quarter.

7. Australian climate action must go beyond 'lifeline' for Tuvalu. Lowy Institute analysis of Tuvalu's elevation, inundation risk and the origin of the Falepili Union's name.

8. Labor must reject Hunter Valley coal mine before COP31. Australian Greens media release setting out their demand on federal approval and Australia's COP31 role.

9. Australia to face Pacific heat on fossil fuels at climate talks. News report on Bowen's defence, the Fiji Times advertisement and Amnesty's call for action at pre-COP.

10. Australia's 'immoral' coalmine decision akin to drowning its Pacific neighbours, Tuvalu's climate minister declares. Guardian Australia report, republished by the Pacific Islands News Association, on Maina Talia's response after the Falepili Union.

Back to top ↑

High Court Invalidates Mount Pleasant Expansion in Landmark Climate Ruling - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

The High Court has dismissed MACH Energy's appeal over the Mount Pleasant expansion and invalidated its 2022 development consent. [1] A three-judge majority found the Independent Planning Commission failed to consider conditions for minimising greenhouse emissions to the greatest extent practicable. [1] Scope 3 emissions from coal burned overseas comprise about 98 per cent of the project's projected greenhouse emissions. [1] The Court rejected the NSW Court of Appeal's reasoning about the locality-specific climate impacts under section 4.15(1)(b). [1] Mount Pleasant sits near Muswellbrook and remains approved for 10.5 million tonnes of run-of-mine coal annually under its existing consent. [4] The ruling strengthens scrutiny of coal expansions by making emissions-minimisation obligations central to NSW mining approvals. [1]

The High Court has invalidated a major coal expansion after finding NSW planners failed their emissions-minimisation duty.

The ruling came on Wednesday in Australia's first climate change case to reach the nation's highest court. 

A three-judge majority dismissed MACH Energy Australia's appeal over its proposed Mount Pleasant Optimisation Project near Muswellbrook. ^[1]

The decision leaves the 2022 approval for the expansion invalid and sends the matter back into the NSW legal system. 

The ruling turns on a narrow statutory obligation with consequences reaching far beyond one Hunter Valley mine. ^[1]

The Court's decisive finding

The Mount Pleasant project sought to extend mining until 2048 and raise extraction from 10.5 million tonnes to 21 million tonnes of run-of-mine coal annually. 

The NSW Independent Planning Commission approved the project in September 2022 after a public assessment. ^[3]

The High Court examined clause 2.20 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Resources and Energy) 2021. 

That provision required the Commission to consider conditions aimed at ensuring greenhouse gas emissions were minimised to the greatest extent practicable. ^[1]

The project would produce overwhelmingly downstream emissions from coal combustion after export. The High Court recorded Scope 3 emissions at about 98 per cent of the project's total greenhouse emissions. ^[1]

The Commission imposed conditions affecting emissions generated directly by mining and associated operations. The majority found it failed to consider whether conditions could also minimise the much larger Scope 3 component. ^[2]

A narrow majority with a wider consequence

Chief Justice Gageler and Justice Jagot dissented on the decisive emissions-minimisation issue. Justices Gordon, Edelman and Beech-Jones formed the majority that found the Commission's consideration legally inadequate. ^[2]

The majority's finding creates a powerful constraint on future NSW fossil-fuel approvals. Planning authorities must confront the statutory obligation to consider practical measures that could minimise emissions from developments. ^[1]

The judgment therefore differs from the NSW Court of Appeal's earlier reasoning. The state court had found the Commission failed to consider how climate change would affect the locality of the project. ^[2]

The High Court rejected that reasoning as the basis for invalidity. All five judges agreed that the Commission had complied with section 4.15(1)(b) concerning likely environmental impacts, leaving the Scope 3 conditions issue as the successful ground. ^[1]

The mine behind the case

Mount Pleasant operates in the Upper Hunter Valley about three kilometres north-west of Muswellbrook. MACH Energy Australia owns the operation, which began mining after acquiring the project from Rio Tinto. ^[4]

The existing consent permits production of up to 10.5 million tonnes of run-of-mine coal annually. Coal travels by rail towards the Port of Newcastle for export markets and to domestic customers. ^[4]

MACH's proposed Optimisation Project would have more than doubled annual extraction capacity. The Commission approved approximately 444 million tonnes of run-of-mine coal over the project's life and extended operations towards 2048. ^[3]

MACH's own published information puts the mine's total marketable thermal coal reserves at about 474 million tonnes. The figure illustrates the scale of the resource behind the litigation. ^[5]

The Scope 3 problem

Scope 3 emissions arise indirectly through activities outside the operator's direct control. At Mount Pleasant, the dominant source involves burning exported coal in overseas power stations. ^[7]

The legal dispute therefore reached beyond the mine's fences and machinery. It asked whether a planning authority could approve extraction while leaving the overwhelming downstream emissions outside meaningful conditions. ^[1]

The High Court's majority answered the legal question through the wording of the NSW planning policy. The Commission needed to consider whether conditions could minimise greenhouse emissions to the greatest extent practicable. ^[1]

That finding leaves the merits of particular emissions controls for the planning process. The Court did not rule that Mount Pleasant's emissions automatically make the project unlawful or that coal mining itself must cease. ^[2]

What the ruling means for NSW coal

The decision arrives as NSW faces a substantial pipeline of coal mine extensions and expansions. The NSW Net Zero Commission identified 17 such proposals in the planning system in late 2025. ^[6]

The ruling therefore reaches into a planning system containing projects seeking longer operating lives or higher production. Each proposal must now confront the legal significance of greenhouse emissions and practicable mitigation conditions. ^[1]

The case also demonstrates how a community challenge can expose a specific administrative failure inside a large industrial approval. DAMSHEG pursued the matter through NSW courts before reaching the High Court. ^[7]

For mining companies, the judgment increases legal risk around approval conditions. For planners, it demands closer attention to the statutory language governing greenhouse emissions before consent reaches the final stage. ^[1]

The Mount Pleasant case began as a local challenge to a vast industrial expansion in the Hunter Valley. It reached Australia's highest court because climate pollution created a legal question about planning responsibility.

The High Court ultimately chose a narrower path than the NSW Court of Appeal. Its decisive finding concerned the failure to consider practicable conditions for minimising greenhouse emissions.

That distinction matters. The judgment leaves climate attribution questions unresolved while placing a clear statutory duty at the centre of future fossil-fuel planning decisions.

References

1. MACH Energy Australia Pty Ltd v Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group Inc [2026] HCA 35. The High Court's judgment sets out the statutory questions and the Court's findings on Scope 3 emissions.

2. High Court dismisses MACH Energy appeal over Mount Pleasant coal mine extension. The report records the three-two majority and the Court's treatment of the locality issue.

3. Mount Pleasant Optimisation Project Conditionally Approved. NSW Independent Planning Commission details the 2022 approval and proposed production increase.

4. Mount Pleasant Optimisation Project Environmental Assessment. NSW planning material describes the existing operation, production capacity and proposed expansion.

5. Mount Pleasant. MACH Energy's project information states the mine has about 474 million tonnes of marketable thermal coal reserves.

6. Coal Mining Emissions Spotlight Report 2025. The NSW Net Zero Commission identifies 17 coal mine expansions or extensions in the planning system.

7. High Court hears bid to overturn block on 22-year Mount Pleasant coal mine extension. ABC News explains the Scope 3 dispute and the community group's case.

8. Mount Pleasant Optimisation Project. NSW Planning Portal records the project's assessment history and current court-related status.

Back to top ↑

Warming Pushes Mosquito-Borne Disease Deeper Into Australia - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Warming and flooding are widening the reach
of mosquito-borne disease across Australia

Key Points

Warmer, wetter conditions widen the zones where dengue and malaria mosquitoes can thrive.[1] Associate Professor Katie Anders warns that dengue outbreaks could spread further south as temperatures rise.[2] CSIRO identifies mosquito-borne disease as the most climate-sensitive communicable disease type in Australia.[3] Domestic water tanks could extend Aedes aegypti into most major cities during warm summers.[4] La Niña rainfall helped Japanese encephalitis reach the south in 2022, causing 30 confirmed human cases and six deaths.[5] Mer Island recorded eight locally acquired dengue cases in 2024, the first Torres Strait outbreak since 2017.[6]

In 2024, public health teams mobilised on Mer Island in the Torres Strait to contain dengue. 

Eight locally acquired cases had emerged, the first outbreak detected there since 2017. 

Responders combined active case finding, health promotion and vector control, which targets disease-carrying mosquitoes.^[6]

A new Monash University review places that outbreak inside a wider global pattern of climate-driven disease risk. 

Dr Toby Cumming, a research fellow at the Monash School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, led the work. 

The review examines how climate and other forces shape malaria and dengue risk.^[1]

How Warming Redraws the Mosquito Map

Cumming says rising temperatures and altered rainfall expand areas where Anopheles and Aedes populations can thrive. 

Anopheles mosquitoes spread malaria, a parasitic disease, while Aedes mosquitoes spread dengue, a viral illness. 

Local variability and seasonal effects complicate the picture, yet the impacts on both diseases look broadly similar.^[1]

CSIRO ranks mosquito-borne illness as the most climate-sensitive type of communicable disease in Australia. Its 2024 discussion paper expects warming, rainfall and flooding changes to aid transmission. The national science agency treats the threat as a planning priority rather than a distant possibility.^[3]

CSIRO identifies three mechanisms. Pathogens mature faster inside the mosquito, which shortens the incubation period before a bite can transmit infection. Suitable habitat spreads to new regions, and mosquito survival and breeding seasons lengthen.^[3]

Dengue-affected areas keep growing as temperatures rise across the world. Transmission now reaches higher altitudes and temperate regions with little historical experience of the disease. Australian health planners face a map that shifts with every warm season.^[2]

Dengue Moves South

Southern Australia sits outside the malaria risk zone, yet dengue already affects warmer areas such as far north Queensland. Anders, an associate professor at Monash, warns that outbreaks could spread further south as temperatures rise. Far north Queensland therefore offers an early indicator for the rest of the country.^[2]

Places without a long history of dengue are increasingly recording local outbreaks. Anders points to southern Europe and the southern United States. She says Australia needs to stay highly aware of that trend, because local outbreaks can follow.^[2]

A peer-reviewed study modelled the range of Aedes aegypti, the main dengue vector. It tested today's climate alongside projected warming scenarios for 2030 and 2050. Researchers then compared the results with transmission limits drawn from historical Australian epidemics.^[4]

South-east Australia has dried, and communities face escalating water restrictions. The study concludes that a proliferation of domestic water storage tanks could expand the mosquito's range. That would create dengue risk in most major cities during their warm summer months.^[4]

Why Dengue Climbs While Malaria Falls

Dengue rates are rising globally. Malaria has declined in general, despite more favourable climate conditions. Anders says better drugs and risk-reduction campaigns could explain the gap.^[2]

Cumming credits mosquito control and drug therapies with major gains against malaria. The malaria record shows that climate suitability alone fails to predict disease burden. Sustained public health investment can outweigh a climate that favours the mosquito, at least for one disease.^[1]

Rapid urbanisation offers a second explanation for the divergence between the two diseases. Aedes mosquitoes, which carry dengue, suit urban environments, while malaria is more typically a rural disease. Tropical cities keep growing, which favours the mosquito that carries dengue.^[2]

Anders says a new vaccine and Wolbachia-based control offer a chance to curb dengue. Wolbachia, a bacterium that cuts mosquitoes' ability to transmit viruses, now operates in Cairns, Townsville and other northern Queensland centres. Anders calls it largely responsible for cutting northern Queensland outbreaks to almost zero over a decade.^[2]

Japanese Encephalitis and the Flood Years

Japanese encephalitis virus, a mosquito-borne flavivirus, circulated in tropical north Queensland between 1995 and 2005. Until 2022, the disease's southern limit sat in far north Australia. Badu Island, in the Torres Strait, recorded three cases and two deaths in 1995.^[5]

In 2022 the virus spread across the southern states, causing 30 confirmed human cases and six deaths. La Niña, a Pacific Ocean climate pattern, delivered extraordinary rainfall in 2021 and 2022. An estimated 740,546 Australians live within the dispersal range of mosquitoes from infected piggeries.^[5]

Authorities declared the outbreak a communicable disease incident of national significance on 4 March 2022. By mid-July, more than 70 piggeries across four states carried the virus. Heavier rainfall had drawn migratory water birds further south and increased mosquito breeding.^[7]

Researchers at QIMR Berghofer, a Brisbane medical research institute, feared the virus had become endemic, meaning permanently established. Clinicians could only manage symptoms, because infection has no specific treatment. Two effective vaccines existed in 2022, yet limited supplies forced authorities to prioritise high-risk groups.^[8]

Frontline Communities and the Governance Gap

The Mer Island outbreak affected a Torres Strait Islander community off the northern tip of Queensland. Authors from the Torres and Cape Public Health Unit documented the response. They stress the importance of testing in primary healthcare, vector control and ongoing surveillance to limit local transmission.^[6]

CSIRO proposes criteria for assessing future communicable disease risk across Australia. The criteria include disease severity and the disproportionate burden on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Those criteria place First Nations health inside national risk planning.^[3]

A February 2025 Medical Journal of Australia editorial reviewed Australia's Japanese encephalitis surveillance efforts to date. It urged authorities to shift from a reactive surveillance and response approach. Australia had launched its first National Health and Climate Strategy in 2023.^[9]

Cumming says the research reinforces the need for a coordinated approach. That approach spans interventions on both climate and non-climate factors driving mosquito-borne disease. Effective tools already exist, so the remaining gap lies in delivery.^[1]

Mosquito-borne disease is reaching further into Australia as the climate warms and rainfall patterns shift. Dengue risk could extend south, and Japanese encephalitis has already reached the southern states. The evidence demands attention from every level of government.

Evidence from Queensland and from global malaria control shows that targeted tools can suppress disease despite favourable climate conditions. Success depends on sustained investment, surveillance and rapid response. Delay hands the advantage back to the mosquito.

Accountability rests with governments that fund surveillance, vaccines and vector control. Frontline communities, including Torres Strait Islanders, face the earliest exposure and warrant prioritised protection before the next outbreak arrives. Preparation costs far less than a failed response.

References

1. Monash University Researchers Warn Climate Change Expands Mosquito Disease Risks . Summarises the Monash review and quotes lead researcher Dr Toby Cumming on climate drivers and coordinated responses.

2. Climate change raises major disease risks for Australia (AAP) . Reports Associate Professor Katie Anders on southern dengue risk, the malaria decline and Wolbachia in northern Queensland.

3. Climate and communicable disease: Discussion paper (CSIRO, 2024) . Rates mosquito-borne disease as the most climate-sensitive communicable disease type and proposes risk assessment criteria.

4. Australia's Dengue Risk Driven by Human Adaptation to Climate Change (PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases) . Models Aedes aegypti range under 2030 and 2050 scenarios and links domestic water tanks to dengue risk in major cities.

5. Japanese Encephalitis Emergence in Australia: The Potential Population at Risk (Clinical Infectious Diseases) . Documents the 2022 range expansion, its drivers and the population living near infected piggeries.

6. An outbreak of dengue virus type 3 on Mer Island in the Torres Strait, Australia in 2024 (Communicable Diseases Intelligence) . Describes the first detected Torres Strait dengue outbreak since 2017 and the community public health response.

7. Japanese encephalitis: a recent rise in Australian cases (Medicine Today) . Outlines the national significance declaration, infected piggeries and weather drivers behind the 2022 outbreak.

8. Extreme concern over Japanese encephalitis risk this summer (QIMR Berghofer) . Warns of possible endemic spread and limited vaccine supplies after the 2022 outbreak.

9. Policy responses to climate crisis and health in Australia: a need for urgency (Medical Journal of Australia, 2025) . Reviews Japanese encephalitis surveillance and urges a shift beyond reactive responses.

Back to top ↑

The 1.5-Degree Line Is About to Break. What Happens Next Is Up to Us - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Critical climate limit: Exceeding 1.5°C pushes Earth out of the stable Holocene environment that enabled modern human civilisation to develop. Irreversible tipping points: Crossing 1.5°C risks triggering planetary tipping points, such as the permanent collapse of major polar ice sheets. Imminent threshold breach: Scientific data indicates the world will inevitably crash through the 1.5°C limit within the next three to five years. Disastrous warming trajectory: Rising global energy demands keep humanity on a dangerous trajectory toward 3°C of warming by the century's end. Multi-front response needed: Returning to safe levels requires phasing out fossil fuels, transforming food systems, and scaling massive carbon removal technologies simultaneously. Feasible solutions exist: Scientists remain optimistic because proven solutions exist; the primary challenge is rapidly accelerating their scale and deployment pace.

The world will breach 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming within three to five years, according to the United Nations Environment Programme's Overshoot Report. 

 

Potsdam Institute director Professor Johan Rockström says the consequences will be severe.

 

On the BBC World Service's The Climate Question, Professor Rockström calls 1.5 degrees a scientific limit, not a target.

 

Warming beyond it pushes the climate outside the stable range that allowed agriculture and civilisation to flourish. 

 

Scientists have mapped 16 tipping-point systems, and six face roughly even odds of collapse if warming stays above 1.5 degrees. 

 

The Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets alone hold enough water to raise sea levels by 10 metres.

Progress exists. Norway sells almost exclusively electric cars, the European Union has cut emissions by more than 25 percent, and solar and wind keep expanding. 

 

Yet clean energy has only met rising demand, so fossil fuel use still grows about 1 percent a year. The current trajectory leads toward 3 degrees by 2100.

 

Professor Rockström warns that climate models assume everything goes right: emissions fall 5 percent annually, agriculture becomes a carbon sink, forests and oceans keep absorbing half of emissions, and carbon removal technologies scale to billions of tonnes. 

 

Direct air capture costs about $500 a tonne, against a peak EU carbon price of $100. Planting trees alone offers little relief.

 

Even the best scenario peaks near 1.7 degrees and likely destroys coral reefs and European glaciers. 

Still, Professor Rockström stays optimistic. He argues the solutions exist and the narrow window remains open.

 References 

BBC World Service: The Climate Question

UN Environment Programme Overshoot Report: UNEP - Limiting Overshoot: Navigating Exceedance of 1.5°C

Scientific Assessment on Tipping Points: Science Journal - Exceeding 1.5°C global warming could trigger multiple climate tipping points

Planetary Boundaries Core Research Update: Stockholm Resilience Centre - All planetary boundaries mapped out for the first time

The Legal Framework for 1.5°C: UNFCCC - The Paris Agreement

Institutional Framework Site: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Planetary Boundaries Framework

UN Environment Programme Emissions Tracking: UNEP - Emissions Gap Report

Carbon Market Framework: European Commission - EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)

Review Paper on Tipping Elements: Sage Journals - Two decades of climate tipping points research: Progress and outlook

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Assessment: International Energy Agency - Direct Air Capture Technology Report