Lethal Heating

09/01/2026

Tipping Point 2026: Is Australia's Great Barrier Reef on the Brink of No Return? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Sixth mass bleaching since 2016, including back-to-back events in 2024-25¹
UNESCO demands full State of Conservation report by February 2026²
Nitrogen pollution targets won't be met until 2114 at current rates³
Reef contributes $6 billion annually to Australian economy⁴
El Niño probability rises to 38% by mid-2026⁵
Over 70 Traditional Owner groups maintain 60,000-year connection⁶

The Great Barrier Reef stands at a precipice in early 2026, battered by its sixth mass bleaching event in just nine years and facing an international reckoning over its World Heritage status.¹

Scientists report that back-to-back bleaching events in 2024 and 2025 mark only the second time in the reef's recorded history that consecutive years have brought such devastation, with the most recent event bleaching both the Great Barrier Reef and Ningaloo simultaneously for the first time.¹

The latest survey data from the Australian Institute of Marine Science reveals coral cover plummeted by up to 30 per cent in the northern region between 2024 and 2025, with individual reefs near Lizard Island experiencing losses of up to 70 per cent.⁷

Ocean temperatures during November 2025 reached the highest levels on record for the Great Barrier Reef, with forecasts showing sea surface temperatures expected to remain 0.4 to 0.8 degrees Celsius above average throughout January 2026.⁸

Climate models now indicate El Niño probability rising to 38 per cent by mid-2026, a development that could deliver another catastrophic blow to reefs already struggling to recover.⁵

UNESCO's World Heritage Committee has ordered Australia to submit a full State of Conservation report by February 2026, with the reef facing potential inscription on the World Heritage In Danger list if progress is deemed insufficient.²

The crisis extends beyond climate impacts, with water quality targets consistently missed and nitrogen pollution reduction progress so sluggish that current goals won't be achieved until 2114 at existing rates.³

For the more than 70 Traditional Owner groups who have maintained connections to these waters for 60,000 years, the reef's deterioration represents not just ecological collapse but the erosion of living cultural heritage.⁶

With the reef contributing $6 billion annually to Australia's economy and supporting more than 60,000 jobs, the stakes extend far beyond environmental concerns to encompass regional livelihoods, cultural identity and international reputation.⁴

As 2026 unfolds, the question confronting policymakers, scientists and communities is stark: will this year mark a genuine turning point towards recovery, or the moment when the world's largest coral reef system crossed a threshold from which there is no return?

The Science of Collapse

The frequency and intensity of mass bleaching events have accelerated to levels that would have seemed inconceivable two decades ago.

Before the 1990s, mass bleaching was extremely rare on the Great Barrier Reef.⁷

The first major event struck in 1998, followed by another in 2002, but these were isolated incidents separated by years of recovery time.⁷

The pattern shifted dramatically in 2016 and 2017 when back-to-back bleaching events occurred for the first time, collectively affecting two-thirds of the reef.¹

Since then, bleaching has struck in 2020, 2022, 2024 and again in 2025, compressing recovery windows to dangerously short intervals.¹

Research published in January 2025 documented catastrophic mortality rates during the 2024 event, with 80 per cent of coral colonies at One Tree Island bleached by April and 44 per cent dead by July.⁹

Some coral genera, particularly Acropora, experienced mortality rates reaching 95 per cent.⁹

The 2024 bleaching event was confirmed as the most spatially extensive since monitoring began in 1986, with aerial surveys showing 73 per cent of 1,080 reefs assessed displaying some level of bleaching.¹⁰

On 40 per cent of surveyed reefs, more than half the corals were completely white.¹⁰

The southern Great Barrier Reef, which had been relatively spared in earlier events, experienced its highest recorded levels of heat stress in 2024, with coral cover declining by almost one-third to just 26.9 per cent.¹¹

These declines in both the northern and southern regions represented the largest single-year losses since monitoring began 39 years ago.¹¹

The cumulative impact of six mass bleaching events since 2016 has fundamentally altered the reef's ecology.

Coral reefs require years, sometimes decades, to fully recover from severe bleaching, yet the average interval between mass bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef has been cut in half since 1980.¹²

Recent ocean temperature data provides little reason for optimism about recovery prospects.

A Nature study published in August 2024 confirmed that ocean temperatures causing mass bleaching over the past decade are the warmest in 400 years and are directly attributable to human-caused climate change.¹³

The research showed that heat extremes in 2024, 2017 and 2020 exceeded the 95th percentile uncertainty limit of reconstructed pre-1900 maximum temperatures.¹³

Current monitoring shows no respite on the horizon.

November 2025 recorded the highest average monthly sea surface temperatures ever documented for the Great Barrier Reef.⁸

Degree heating weeks, which measure the duration and intensity of thermal stress, have begun accumulating across most reefs in the Far Northern region and on some inshore reefs in the Central and Southern regions.⁸

December 2025 surveys detected low to high levels of coral bleaching across multiple reefs in the Northern and Central regions, with sea surface temperatures in the first half of December remaining about 1 degree Celsius above the long-term average.⁸

The threat extends beyond heat stress alone.

Crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks continue to impact reefs across the Marine Park, with the most severe infestations occurring in the Southern region and the Northern region between Cairns and Lizard Island.⁸

The combination of thermal stress, predator outbreaks and cyclone damage creates what scientists describe as an elevated disturbance environment where recovery intervals are becoming dangerously short.¹⁴

Government Under Fire

Australia's management of the Great Barrier Reef faces unprecedented international scrutiny as UNESCO's deadline approaches.

In July 2025, the World Heritage Committee ordered a full review of Australia's reef management to be completed in 2026, following the sixth mass bleaching event in nine years and severe coastal flooding.²

The review represents a critical test of whether Australia's efforts are sufficient to protect this globally significant natural wonder.

If progress is deemed inadequate, the reef could be recommended for inscription on the World Heritage In Danger list.²

UNESCO flagged four key areas where Australia is falling short: cutting climate pollution, improving water quality, preparing for climate-driven disasters and ensuring sustainable fisheries management.²

The water quality failure stands as particularly damning evidence of inadequate action.

The Reef 2050 Water Quality Improvement Plan aimed to cut dissolved inorganic nitrogen levels by 60 per cent by 2025, but nitrogen levels have been reduced by only 28.4 per cent compared with the 2009 baseline.¹⁵

The latest report card shows nitrogen pollution was cut by only 0.7 per cent in the two years to 2022.¹⁵

At this rate, the nitrogen reduction target will not be met until 2114—nearly 90 years late.³

Sediment reduction has fared only marginally better, with just 16 per cent progress towards the 25 per cent reduction target, and projections suggesting the goal won't be achieved until 2047.³

The problem is compounded by ongoing land clearing in reef catchments.

Nearly 48,000 hectares of land has been cleared in the most sensitive areas along watercourses leading to reef waters, directly counteracting millions of dollars invested in repairing streambanks and gullies.¹⁵

Agricultural runoff continues to deliver excessive nutrients, sediment and pesticides into the 35 major catchments that drain into the reef, with flood events sending contaminants more than 100 kilometres offshore.²

Climate policy presents another area of international concern.

Despite having spent approximately $2.25 billion over the past two decades on water quality improvements, Australia's climate ambitions remain misaligned with what scientists say is necessary to protect coral reefs.³

Conservation groups argue that Australia must adopt reef-safe climate policies, including cutting climate pollution by 90 per cent by 2035 and stopping approvals for new fossil fuel projects.²

The approval of new fossil fuel developments continues despite warnings that such projects are incompatible with keeping global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, the critical threshold for coral reef survival.

Extractive industries such as the wild harvest of coral for aquariums continue to operate despite growing concern over their impact, while deforestation along the coastline persists without clear progress on reduction measures.²

The Australian Government maintains that it is doing more than ever to protect the reef, pointing to unprecedented levels of investment and the comprehensive Reef 2050 Long-Term Sustainability Plan.¹⁶

Since 2014, the Australian and Queensland governments, along with private sector contributions, have committed more than $5 billion from 2014-15 to 2029-30 for conservation and protection measures.¹⁷

However, critics contend this investment has been poorly targeted, spread too thinly across the catchment rather than concentrated on areas contributing the most pollution.¹⁸

Voices from the Reef

Scientists and conservation managers working on the front lines of reef protection paint a picture of an ecosystem under siege from multiple, compounding threats.

Dr Lissa Schindler, Great Barrier Reef Campaign Manager at the Australian Marine Conservation Society, characterises the 2026 review as a critical test for Australia.

She argues that protecting the reef and keeping it off the World Heritage In Danger list requires Australia to adopt reef-safe climate policies as the number one priority.²

Dr Mike Emslie, leader of the Australian Institute of Marine Science's Long-Term Monitoring Program, emphasises the unprecedented nature of current disturbances.

Recent gains in coral cover, while encouraging, can be lost in a short time, he notes, with climate change driving more frequent and extensive marine heatwaves that shorten windows for coral recovery.¹⁹

Professor Maria Byrne from the University of Sydney, who documented the catastrophic 2024 bleaching event at One Tree Island, stresses that findings underscore the urgent need for action to protect coral reefs.

Reefs are not only biodiversity hotspots but also crucial for food security and coastal protection, she observes, noting that even protected areas were not immune to extreme heat stress.⁹

Professor Ana Vila Concejo, co-author of the One Tree Island study, describes the research as a wake-up call for policymakers and conservationists, emphasising that the resilience of coral reefs is being tested like never before.⁹

International research offers both cautionary tales and glimmers of hope for reef management.

Studies of the Mesoamerican Reef have demonstrated that comprehensive fisheries management can contribute to reef recovery even amid climate pressures, suggesting that addressing local threats can boost resilience against global stressors.

However, the scale of climate change impacts increasingly overshadows local management successes.

Dr Max Hirschfeld, AMCS Great Barrier Reef Water Quality Manager, emphasises that water pollution reduction is essential for improving the reef's resilience to survive and recover from increasingly frequent mass bleaching events, cyclones and floods.³

Without a fully costed and coordinated plan, governments risk overpromising and underdelivering to UNESCO and the Australian public, jeopardising local tourism and fishing economies, thousands of jobs and the future of the reef.³

Traditional Owner voices add crucial cultural and ecological perspectives to reef management discussions.

Through initiatives such as the Healing Country statement, Traditional Owners call for action based on holistic approaches that link environmental, animal and human health and wellbeing.²⁰

More than 65 Traditional Owner groups are actively involved in creating stronger First Nations-led processes, inclusive governance and management of the reef, employment pathways and conservation methods that recognise cultural values and diversity.²⁰

Economic and Cultural Stakes

The Great Barrier Reef's economic value extends far beyond simple tourism figures.

The reef contributes $6.4 billion annually to the national economy and supports more than 60,000 jobs across tourism, fisheries, aquaculture, research and conservation sectors.⁴

Recent analysis values the reef's total economic, social and icon asset value at $95 billion, up from $56 billion in 2017.²¹

The reef provides access for more than 2 million tourists each year, with tourism concentrated in approximately 7 per cent of the total Marine Park area, primarily around Cairns, Port Douglas and the Whitsundays.²²

Research indicates that limiting global warming to below 2 degrees Celsius could open the door to a $110 billion opportunity over the next 50 years, demonstrating that protecting the reef is also an investment in Australia's economic future.²¹

However, if reef health continues to decline, the ripple effects will be felt across Australia through fewer visitors, less investment in small businesses and regional jobs at risk.²¹

The cultural stakes are equally profound, particularly for the more than 70 Traditional Owner groups whose connections to these waters span 60,000 years.⁶

For Traditional Owners, the reef represents far more than a biodiverse ecosystem—it is a sacred, living entity embedded in culture, law and identity.²³

Sea Country encompasses the marine territories that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples own, manage and maintain spiritual connections with, holding the same cultural, spiritual and practical significance as terrestrial lands.²⁴

Indigenous philosophy makes no fundamental distinction between land and sea; both comprise country, the integrated physical and spiritual realm where ancestors created landscapes, spirits reside and living people maintain responsibilities to care for and protect.²⁴

The reef contains sacred sites, burial grounds, fish traps and places of ceremony, many dating back thousands of years, with some heritage sites now underwater from sea level rise.²⁵

Traditional ecological knowledge documents coral spawning cycles, fish migration patterns and weather predictions developed over millennia, transmitted through songlines, ceremonies and storytelling.²⁴

The deterioration of reef health threatens not just economic livelihoods but the intergenerational transmission of cultural knowledge and practices that have sustained Traditional Owner communities for hundreds of generations.

Recognition and empowerment of Indigenous leadership, knowledge and cultural rights is essential not only for social justice but also for the long-term sustainability of the reef.²³

Through programs such as Traditional Use of Marine Resources Agreements and Indigenous Land and Sea Ranger initiatives, Traditional Owners are increasingly integrated into decision-making, compliance, monitoring and education activities.²³

The Reef Trust Partnership allocated $51.8 million towards co-designed, Traditional Owner-led reef protection, representing the largest single investment in Indigenous reef protection to date.²⁶

Paths to Resilience?

The question confronting Australia in 2026 is whether genuine pathways to reef resilience remain viable or whether tipping points have already been crossed.

Scientific consensus points to rapid, deep emissions cuts as the fundamental prerequisite for reef survival.

Research confirms that achieving strong greenhouse gas emissions reductions remains the only pathway to limit climate change impacts and reduce risks to the reef and all the world's coral reefs.²⁷

Even under the most optimistic future warming scenario, one in which global warming does not exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial times, all warm-water coral reefs are virtually certain to pass a point of no return.²⁸

The European Union has set a binding 2040 climate target of reducing net greenhouse gas emissions by 90 per cent compared to 1990 levels.²⁹

Conservation advocates argue Australia must adopt comparable ambition, with calls for 90 per cent emissions cuts by 2035 to be considered truly reef-safe policy.²

Alongside emissions reductions, intensive catchment interventions offer opportunities to reduce local stressors.

Rehabilitation of just 5 per cent of a land parcel to wetlands can reduce nitrogen pollution by 20 to 50 per cent, highlighting the potential of coastal wetland protection and restoration programs.³⁰

The Australian Government announced an additional $192 million in funding for water quality improvements in August 2024, with welcome focus on protecting and restoring coastal wetlands that trap sediment and filter water pollution.³¹

Targeting pollution hotspots rather than spreading funding thinly across entire catchments could significantly improve cost-effectiveness of interventions.¹⁸

The Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program represents the largest marine research program of its kind globally, working with more than 300 researchers to design and prove solutions that help shield reefs from climate change impacts and fast-track recovery and regeneration.³²

Research focuses on identifying genetic markers indicating corals most likely to survive heat stress, developing methods to help other corals become more heat tolerant, prototyping equipment to help cool and shade reefs during summer months and establishing 90 monitoring sites to prioritise response efforts.³²

However, restoration efforts alone cannot substitute for addressing root causes.

As one researcher observed, enabling coral reefs to survive current conditions requires a combination of global greenhouse gas reductions to stabilise temperatures, best-practice management of local pressures and the development of interventions that support reef adaptation and recovery in response to a changing climate.¹⁴

The integration of Traditional Owner knowledge with Western science offers another promising pathway.

Traditional Owners have nurtured harmonious and reciprocal relationships with the reef over millennia through deep spiritual and cultural connections that are now recognised as vital to collective action needed to protect the reef into the future.²⁰

Indigenous peoples and local communities are known to be highly effective stewards of 80 per cent of the planet's remaining biodiversity, suggesting that empowering Traditional Owner leadership could significantly enhance management effectiveness.²⁰

The path forward requires coordinated action across multiple scales and timeframes.

In the immediate term, Australia must demonstrate sufficient progress to UNESCO by February 2026 to avoid In Danger listing.

Over the next five years, meeting revised water quality targets, accelerating emissions reductions, stopping destructive land clearing and expanding Traditional Owner-led management will be essential.

But the ultimate question remains whether political will can match scientific urgency before ecological tipping points foreclose options for recovery.

What Must Happen Now

Regional planners and policymakers face a compressed timeline to reduce long-term risk to the Great Barrier Reef over the next five years.

Immediate priorities include developing a fully costed implementation plan for achieving water quality targets by 2030, with funding directed to pollution hotspots rather than spread evenly across catchments.

Nitrogen and sediment reduction strategies must be accelerated through enforceable regulations on agricultural practices, mandatory erosion control measures and comprehensive coastal wetland protection and restoration programs targeting at least 5 per cent of priority land parcels.

Land clearing in reef catchments, particularly along watercourses, must be halted immediately and existing clearing prosecuted under environmental regulations.

Climate policy must align with science-based targets, including 90 per cent emissions reductions by 2035 and moratoriums on new fossil fuel project approvals that would push temperatures beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius warming.

Traditional Owner leadership in reef management must be substantially expanded through increased funding for Indigenous ranger programs, formal co-management arrangements incorporating cultural protocols and enhanced representation in governance structures.

Crown-of-thorns starfish control efforts require sustained funding and coordination, while extractive industries incompatible with reef protection should be phased out.

Monitoring and adaptive management systems need strengthening to provide real-time data supporting rapid response to emerging threats.

Finally, Australia must demonstrate to UNESCO and the international community that these measures represent genuine commitments backed by adequate resources rather than aspirational goals repeatedly deferred.

Without comprehensive action across all these fronts, 2026 risks marking the year when the world's largest coral reef system passed from vulnerability into irreversible decline.

References

Back to Top

08/01/2026

From the Courtroom to the Climate Frontline: How Australian Litigation Is Redrawing the Boundaries of Climate Accountability

Key Points

Australian courts now sit at the centre of a fast-growing wave of climate litigation, spanning human rights, corporate disclosure, greenwashing, and government accountability. ¹
Landmark cases have tested whether governments owe a legal duty of care to protect children and First Nations communities from climate harm, with mixed outcomes but powerful political reverberations. ²
Regulators and investors are increasingly using misleading and deceptive conduct provisions to challenge greenwashing and weak climate-risk disclosure in financial markets. ³
Community-led actions have forced agencies such as the NSW Environment Protection Authority to confront greenhouse gas pollution directly in their policies and plans. ⁴
International human rights bodies have found Australia in breach of obligations to Torres Strait Islanders, adding global pressure on domestic climate policy. ⁵
The next five years will see climate risk regulation harden, with mandatory disclosure and closer scrutiny of net zero claims reshaping how governments and corporations plan for a warming world. ⁶

In courtrooms across Australia, climate change has shifted from a distant policy debate to a live legal risk for ministers, regulators, and company directors.

Over the past decade, Australia has become one of the world's busiest jurisdictions for climate litigation, with dozens of new filings and judgments each year touching everything from coal approvals to superannuation marketing.¹

A new generation of cases now targets duties of care, human rights obligations, and the integrity of climate disclosures, rather than only attacking individual fossil fuel projects.²³

Young people, First Nations leaders, bushfire survivors, and institutional investors are using the law to test whether governments and corporations can ignore escalating climate risk.¹⁵

Regulators such as ASIC and APRA, under pressure from global markets, are warning that climate risk is a core financial stability issue, not a niche environmental concern.⁴

At the same time, a series of high-profile rulings has drawn sharp lines around what courts will, and will not, do when asked to set climate policy from the bench.¹⁴

The result is a contested, rapidly evolving legal landscape, where every judgment sends signals to planners, investors, and communities about how far the law will stretch to meet the climate crisis.²³

For regional Australia in particular, the outcomes of these cases will shape who bears the costs of fires, floods, and rising seas in the decades ahead.²³

Australian climate litigation in context

Australia now ranks among the top jurisdictions globally for the number of climate-related cases, reflecting both its fossil-fuel-heavy economy and its acute exposure to climate impacts.²³

Data from the University of Melbourne's Australian Climate Change Litigation database show that 46 climate-related judgments or new proceedings were recorded in 2021 alone, up from 31 in 2020 and 27 in 2019.²³

These cases fall into categories that include project approvals, corporate accountability, constitutional and human rights claims, and actions aimed at expanding access to justice for climate-affected communities.

Behind the statistics sit repeated climate-linked disasters, including the Black Summer bushfires, coastal inundation in the Torres Strait, and intensifying flood cycles, which have supplied both plaintiffs and evidence of harm.¹⁵

Testing duty of care: Sharma and Pabai

One of the most closely watched cases of recent years was Sharma v Minister for the Environment, brought in the Federal Court by eight children. They argued that the Environment Minister owed them a duty of care when deciding whether to approve a coal mine expansion in New South Wales.¹⁴

In 2021, Justice Bromberg found at first instance that the Minister owed Australian children a duty to take reasonable care to avoid causing them physical harm from climate change when exercising powers under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. This novel ruling drew global attention.¹⁴

On appeal in March 2022, the Full Federal Court unanimously overturned that duty of care. It held that the statute could not be read as creating such an obligation. Recognising it would involve an impermissible step into high-level policy choices reserved for the executive and legislature.¹⁷

The judges did not disturb the factual findings about the seriousness of climate risk, but refused to extend negligence law to require the Minister to protect children from that risk when deciding project approvals.¹⁷

A similar duty-of-care argument surfaced in Pabai Pabai and Guy Paul Kabai v Commonwealth of Australia, a class action filed in the Federal Court on behalf of Torres Strait Islanders threatened by sea-level rise and erosion.²¹

The applicants alleged that the Commonwealth owed concurrent duties to set greenhouse gas targets consistent with the best available science and to fund adaptation measures, such as seawalls, to protect their islands and culture.²¹

In July 2025, Justice Wigney rejected the claim, finding that the Commonwealth did not owe them a duty of care. Even if it did, any additional emissions arising from inadequate targets would make only an extremely small, unmeasurable contribution to global temperature rise and associated harm.²⁴

The ruling echoed the reluctance seen in Sharma to impose broad negligence duties on the federal government for global climate outcomes, even as the court accepted the seriousness of the risks confronting Torres Strait communities.²⁷

Human rights and the Torres Strait

While Australian courts have so far declined to recognise a domestic duty of care in these cases, an international human rights body has reached a starkly different conclusion about the Commonwealth's obligations to Torres Strait Islanders.⁵

In September 2022, the United Nations Human Rights Committee found that Australia had violated the rights of a group of Torres Strait Islanders under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It had failed to take adequate adaptation and mitigation measures to protect them from climate impacts.⁵

The Committee held that Australia had breached rights including the right to culture and the right to be free from arbitrary interference with private life, family, and home, given the Islanders' deep spiritual connection to their land and the physical threats posed by rising seas and flooding.⁵

It directed Australia to provide effective remedies, including compensation, consultation with affected communities, and urgent measures to secure the long-term habitability of the islands, adding international pressure on domestic planners and policymakers.⁵

References

1. Trends in Australian Climate Litigation: 2021 – University of Melbourne

2. Sharma v Minister for the Environment – Environmental Law Australia

3. O'Donnell v Commonwealth of Australia – Equity Generation Lawyers

4. APRA's response to climate-related financial risks – APRA

5. UN Human Rights Committee finds Australia violated Torres Strait Islanders' human rights – Human Rights Law Centre

6. Claim against Commonwealth Government highlights climate-related corporate governance risk – DLA Piper

7. Corporate governance update: climate change risk and disclosure – ASIC

8. Climate Change Class Action Relating to Australian Sovereign Bonds Permitted to Proceed – Jones Day

9. CPG 229 Climate Change Financial Risks – APRA Prudential Practice Guide

10. Sharma and others v Minister for the Environment – Climate Change Litigation Database

11. Bushfire Survivors Hail Landmark Legal Win on Climate – Environmental Defenders Office

12. ACCR expands landmark Federal Court case against Santos – ACCR

13. Sharma and others v Minister for the Environment – judgment summary

14. NSW Environment Protection Authority Court Case – Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action

15. Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility expands landmark case against Santos – EDO

16. Sharma v Minister for Environment – Equity Generation Lawyers

17. Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action Inc v Environment Protection Authority – Case summary

18. Greenwashing proceedings in Federal Court – ACCR

19. Pabai Pabai and Guy Paul Kabai v Commonwealth of Australia – Climate Change Litigation Database

20. Pabai decision: Federal Court finds no duty of care to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change – Corrs Chambers Westgarth

21. ASIC sues Mercer for greenwashing – Peters & Peters

22. Australian and Pacific Climate Change Litigation Database – University of Melbourne

23. ASIC's first greenwashing case results in $11.3 million penalty against Mercer – ASIC media release

24. Climate Change Litigation – Law Society of NSW briefing paper

25. Case Overview: Torres Strait Islanders and Climate Change – University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review

Back to Top

07/01/2026

2025 was a big year for climate in the US courts - these were the wins and losses - The Guardian

The Guardian - Dharna Noor

Americans are increasingly turning to courts to hold big oil accountable.
Here are major trends that emerged last year

But the year also brought setbacks, as Trump attacked the cases and big oil worked to have them thrown out. The industry also worked to secure a shield from current and future climate lawsuits.

Here are some major trends that emerged in US climate accountability litigation last year.

Big oil suits progressed but faced challenges

In recent years, 70-plus US states, cities, and other subnational governments have sued big oil for alleged climate deception. This year, courts repeatedly rejected fossil fuel interests’ attempts to thwart those cases. The supreme court denied a plea to kill a Honolulu lawsuit, and turned down an unusual bid by red states to block the cases. Throughout the year, state courts also shot down attempts to dismiss cases or remand them to federal courts which are seen as more favorable to oil interests.

But challenges against big oil also encountered stumbling blocks. In May, Puerto Rico voluntarily dismissed its 2024 lawsuit under pressure. Charleston, South Carolina also declined to appeal its case after it was dismissed.

In the coming weeks, the supreme court is expected to decide if it will review a climate lawsuit filed by Boulder, Colorado, against two major oil companies. Their decision could embolden or hinder climate accountability litigation.

“So far, the oil companies have had a losing record trying to get these cases thrown out,” said Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity, which backs the litigation against the industry. “The question is, does Boulder change that?”

After Colorado’s supreme court refused to dismiss the lawsuit, the energy companies filed a petition with the supreme court asking them to kill the case on the grounds that it is pre-empted by federal laws. If the high court declines to weigh in on the petition – or takes it up and rules in favor of the plaintiffs – that could be boon for climate accountability cases. But if the justices agrees with the oil companies, it could void the Boulder case – and more than a dozen others which make similar claims.

That would be a “major challenge”, said Wiles, “but it wouldn’t be game over for the wave of litigation”.

“It would not mean the end of big oil being held accountable in the court,” he said.

The American Petroleum Institute, the nation’s largest oil lobby group, did not respond to a request to comment.

New and novel litigation

Climate accountability litigation broke new ground in 2025, with Americans taking up novel legal strategies to sue big oil. In May, a Washington woman brought the first-ever wrongful-death lawsuit against big oil alleging the industry’s climate negligence contributed to her mother’s death during a deadly heat wave. And in November, Washington residents brought a class action lawsuit claiming fossil fuel sector deception drove a climate-fueled spike in homeowners’ insurance costs.

“These novel cases reflect the lived realities of climate harm and push the legal system to grapple with the full scope of responsibility,” said Merner.

Hawaii this year also became the 10th state to sue big oil over alleged climate deception, filing its case just hours after the Department of Justice took the unusual step of suing Hawaii and Michigan over their plans to file litigation. It was a “clear-eyed and powerful pushback” to Trump’s intimidation, Merner said.

Accountability shield

Big oil ramped up its efforts to evade accountability for its past actions this year, said Wiles. They were aided by allies like Trump, who in April signed an executive order instructing the Justice Department to halt climate accountability litigation and similar policies.

In July, members of Congress also tried to cut off Washington DC’s access to funding to enforce its consumer protection laws “against oil and gas companies for environmental claims” by inserting language into a proposed House appropriations bill. A committee passed that version of the text, but the full House never voted on it.

2025 also brought mounting evidence that big oil is pushing for a federal liability shield, which could resemble a 2005 law that has largely insulated the firearms industry from lawsuits. In June, 16 Republican state attorneys general asked the Justice Department to help create a “liability shield” for fossil fuel companies against climate lawsuits, the New York Times reported. Lobbying disclosures further show the nation’s largest oil trade group, as well as energy giant ConocoPhillips, lobbying Congress about draft legislation on the topic, according to Inside Climate News.

Such a waiver could potentially exempt the industry from virtually all climate litigation. The battle is expected to heat up next year.

“We expect they could sneak language to grant them immunity, into some must-pass bill,” said Wiles. “That’s how we think they’ll play it, so we’ve been talking to every person on the Democratic side so that they keep a lookout for this language.”

What to watch in 2026: plastics and extreme weather cases

Despite the challenges ahead, 2026 will almost definitely bring more climate accountability lawsuits against not only big oil but also other kinds of emitting companies. This year, New York’s attorney general notched a major win by securing a $1.1m settlement from the world’s biggest meat company, JBS, over alleged greenwashing. The victory could inspire more cases, said Merner, who noted that many such lawsuits have been filed abroad.

Wiles expects more cases to accuse oil companies of deception about plastic pollution, like the one California filed last year. He also expects more lawsuits which focus on harms caused by specific extreme weather events, made possible by advances in attribution science – which links particular disasters to global warming. Researchers and law firms are also developing new theories to target the industry, with groundbreaking cases likely to be filed in 2026.

“Companies have engaged in decades of awful behaviour that creates liability on so many fronts,” he said. “We haven’t even really scratched the surface of the numerous ways they could be held legally accountable for their behaviour.”

References

Back to Top

06/01/2026

Greenwashing, illegality and false claims: 13 climate litigation wins in 2025 - The Guardian

The Guardian – Isabella Kaminski

Legal action has brought important decisions,
from the scrapping of fossil fuel plants to revised climate plans

Businesses and governments alike have been forced to make tangible changes to their plans.
Photograph: Clemens Bilan/EPA

This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Paris agreement.

It is also a decade since another key moment in climate justice, when a state was ordered for the first time to cut its carbon emissions faster to protect its citizens from climate change.

The Urgenda case, which was upheld by the Netherlands’ supreme court in 2019, was one of the first rumblings of a wave of climate litigation around the world that campaigners say has resulted in a new legal architecture for climate protection.

Over the past 12 months, there have been many more important rulings and tangible changes on climate driven by legal action.

Rosebank and Jackdaw approval ruled illegal

The year started with a bang when UK government approval of the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields in the North Sea was ruled illegal by the Scottish court of session, because it did not account for greenhouse gas emissions caused by burning the extracted fossil fuels.

The judgment relied heavily on a 2024 supreme court ruling in a climate case brought by campaigner Sarah Finch. That ruling also led the high court to throw out planning permission for a new coalmine in Whitehaven, Cumbria, after which the company withdrew its plans.

The government published new guidance in June on how these assessments should be undertaken, although the ruling does not automatically prevent regulators from approving fossil fuel projects once they have fully analysed their impacts.

Equinor published a revised environmental assessment of Rosebank in October and a decision on approval is imminent. The government has hinted that it may give consent again, and Greenpeace has vowed further legal action if that happens.

Plans to build Brazil’s largest coal plant scrapped

Civil society organisations have been campaigning for years against a coalmine and power plant in the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul planned by the coal company Copelmi. If it had gone ahead, it would have been the largest coal plant in Brazil.

The groups argued that the Nova Seival plant and Guaíba mine breached Brazil’s climate obligations, and that the licensing process had not been undertaken properly. In 2022, a court suspended the licences and set out requirements for how the process should be revised. But in February this year, Copelmi formally withdrew its plans, saying the project had become unfeasible.

German court opens door for climate damages claims

On the face of it, it sounds like a failure that a German court rejected a climate case brought by a Peruvian farmer and mountain guide against German energy company RWE.

Saúl Luciano Lliuya had sought 0.47% of the overall cost of building flood defences to protect his home from a melting glacier, a proportion equivalent to RWE’s contribution to global emissions.

But the decade- old case had always been a stretch, and in reality it set a potentially important precedent on polluters’ liability for their carbon emissions.

So it was not a surprise when later in the year a group of Pakistani farmers whose livelihoods were devastated by floods three years ago fired the starting shot in a new legal claim against two of Germany’s most polluting companies.

EnergyAustralia settles greenwashing lawsuit with parents

In May, EnergyAustralia settled a greenwashing lawsuit brought by a group of Australian parents.

Climate action group Parents for Climate claimed EnergyAustralia breached Australian Consumer Law when promoting electricity and gas products because the carbon offsets used to secure certification were not backed by meaningful reductions in emissions.

As part of the settlement, the utility company acknowledged that carbon offsets do not prevent or undo damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions and apologised to 400,000 customers who were part of the scheme.

It was the first case in the country to be brought against a company for marketing itself as carbon neutral.

International courts issue landmark climate opinions

Two international courts issued landmark advisory opinions on climate change in July.

First was the inter- American court of human rights, which found that there is a human right to a healthy climate and states have a duty to protect it. This was closely followed by the international court of justice, which said countries must prevent harm to the climate system and that failing to do so could result in their having to pay compensation and make other forms of restitution.

The two documents are already being referenced in climate lawsuits around the world. And attempts were made to use them as leverage during climate talks in Brazil last month, although this proved more difficult than anticipated.

New South Wales coalmine expansion annulled

Approval for the largest coalmine expansion in New South Wales was annulled in July because the state’s independent planning commission did not take into account the project’s full greenhouse gas emissions.

Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group, working with the Environmental Defenders Office, filed the case in 2023, arguing MACH Energy’s Mount Pleasant Optimisation coal mining project near Muswellbrook would worsen climate change and threaten a unique species of legless lizard.

The court of appeal said the commission failed to account for “scope 3” emissions when the coal is exported and burned overseas.

Apple scales back carbon neutrality claims

In August, a Frankfurt court ruled that Apple was not allowed to call its Apple Watch “carbon neutral”.

It agreed with German NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe that the company could not demonstrate long-term carbon neutrality because the claim was based on funding eucalyptus groves in Paraguay, leases for which expire soon.

Apple is trying to get a similar greenwashing case against it in the US dismissed.

A few months later, tech news websites noticed that Apple had stopped marketing its newly launched watches as carbon neutral in other countries too.

Hawaii to cut transport emissions after lawsuit

Last year, Hawaii agreed to settle a lawsuit by 13 young people, represented by Our Children’s Trust, who said it was breaching their rights with infrastructure that contributes to climate change.

The settlement acknowledged the constitutional rights of Hawaii youth to a life-sustaining climate, and the state promised to develop a roadmap to achieve zero emissions for its ground, sea and inner island air transportation systems by 2045.

In October, it delivered. The energy security and waste reduction plan includes new electric vehicle chargers, investments in public and active transport, and efforts to sequester carbon through native reforestation. It will be updated annually.

Campaigners called the plan a “critical milestone”.

Campaigners put end to coal power plant in Kenya

Environmental campaigners won a key climate case challenging approval of a coal power plant in Lamu, on Kenya’s southern coast, in October.

Litigation against Amu Power (a joint venture between Centum and Gulf Energy) and the Kenyan National Environment Management Authority began a decade ago and construction was ordered to stop in 2019.

The environment and land court finally upheld a revocation of the plant’s licence because of flaws in the environmental assessment, particularly a lack of proper public participation. Climate change impacts had also not been properly assessed.

TotalEnergies ordered to stop greenwashing in France

Later in the month, TotalEnergies was found to have made false claims about its climate goals in a French court for false claims about its climate goals.

Les Amis de la Terre France, Greenpeace France and Notre Affaire à Tous, with the support of ClientEarth, claimed TotalEnergies’s “reinvention” marketing campaign broke European consumer law by suggesting it could reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050 while continuing to produce fossil fuels.

The Paris judicial court ruled that some claims on the company’s French website were likely to mislead consumers because there was not enough information about what they meant.

Meat companies settle greenwashing claims

In early November, New York agreed a $1.1m settlement with Brazilian meat company JBS’s US arm to end a lawsuit claiming the company misled customers about its efforts to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.

The money will be used to support climate-smart agriculture programmes that help New York farmers adopt best practices to reduce emissions, increase resiliency and enhance productivity. JBS USA also agreed to reform its environmental marketing practices and report annually to the New York office of the attorney general for three years.

Soon after, Tyson Foods also agreed to stop saying it will reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and marketing beef as climate friendly to settle a greenwashing lawsuit brought by agriculture industry watchdog Environmental Working Group.

UK government publishes tougher climate plan

The UK government published a revised carbon budget and growth delivery plan in October after its previous plan was ruled unlawful by the high court.

The new document reaffirms the UK’s commitment to decarbonise its electricity supply by 2030 and reduce greenhouse gas emissions drastically by 2037, with specific measures for energy, transport, agriculture, homes and industry.

It follows a successful lawsuit by the Good Law Project, Friends of the Earth and ClientEarth. After the striking down of the original net zero strategy in court in 2022, the trio argued that the “threadbare” revised version was still not good enough.

However, campaigners are planning another round of legal action challenging national climate strategy, this time at the European court of human rights.

Three Norwegian oilfields ruled illegal

Licences for three oilfields in the North Sea were declared illegal in November by a Norwegian court because they were approved without the full impacts of climate change being considered.

The Borgarting court of appeal upheld a claim by Greenpeace Nordic and Natur og Ungdom challenging permission for the Equinor-operated Breidablikk and Aker BP’s Yggdrasil and Tyrving fields.

The decision closely followed the European court of human rights’s dismissal of a lawsuit by the same claimants against Norway , which nonetheless set important standards for how states should undertake environmental impact assessments of fossil fuel projects.

However, the Borgarting court stopped short of ordering the fields to stop producing oil, giving the Norwegian government six months to sort out the licences.

References

Back to Top

05/01/2026

Climate Change Threatens Sydney's Plate: Can Urban Farming Save the City? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Sydney's population to reach 5.9 million by 2034, intensifying food demand.¹
Peri-urban production at risk, potentially losing 90% vegetables by 2031.²
Vertical farms like Urban Green produce 80kg microgreens weekly in CBD.³
Policy gaps in zoning hinder scaling urban ag.⁴
Toronto's green roof bylaw offers model for rooftops.⁵
Short-term: Map vulnerabilities; long-term: Zoning reforms.⁶

As Greater Sydney swells towards 6 million residents, climate-driven disruptions loom over its food supply.

Peri-urban farms, vital for fresh produce, face obliteration from urban sprawl and extreme weather.

Yet, innovations like vertical farming signal Sydney's path to resilience.

Global warming exacerbates droughts and floods, straining regional suppliers.

Urban agriculture offers a buffer, repurposing city spaces for local production.

This report maps vulnerabilities and charts a course for Sydney to lead in sustainable urban food systems.

Evidence from government projections and research underscores the urgency.

Population Pressures Reshape Demand

Greater Sydney's population hit 5.56 million in June 2024, growing by 107,500 people that year alone.¹

Projections show it reaching 5.9 million by 2034, a 13 per cent rise.¹

Household shifts towards smaller units and time-poor families drive demand for convenient, processed foods.²

Low-SES areas consume fewer fresh vegetables, heightening vulnerability to supply shocks.²

Urban land competition intensifies as housing sprawls into farmland.³

Mapping the Fractured Food System

Sydney relies on peri-urban farms for 20 per cent of demand, including key vegetables and eggs.³

These areas face 60 per cent production loss by 2031 without intervention.¹³

Imports fill gaps, but climate risks like floods expose supply chains.¹⁸

Distribution hubs cluster in west, vulnerable to disruptions leaving days' reserves.³

Consumption habits favour takeaways amid cost pressures.⁸

Climate Shadows Over the Foodbowl

Warming amplifies droughts, hitting regional suppliers beyond Sydney Basin.¹⁸

Peri-urban soils offer climate refuge with reliable rainfall.¹⁸

Yet sprawl erodes this buffer, projecting 90 per cent vegetable loss.¹³

Food deserts emerge in Western Sydney, worsening health inequities.¹³

Urban Farming's Dual Edge

Vertical and hydroponic systems slash water use by 95 per cent.¹¹

They cut emissions via short food miles and year-round yields.¹¹

Social gains include community health and jobs, but energy demands pose trade-offs.¹⁶

Equity risks arise if high costs exclude low-income access.²⁴

Policy Labyrinth and Gaps

NSW frameworks like PIPAP fund abatement but overlook urban ag scaling.¹²

Greater Sydney Commission urges preserving peri-urban zones.²¹

Zoning prohibits residences near farms, yet lacks urban farming incentives.²¹

Barriers include high rates and planning delays.²⁷

City of Sydney's ecology plan hints at green potential.³⁰

Tech Frontiers in the Sky

Urban Green Sydney's basement farm yields 4 tonnes microgreens yearly.¹¹

Stacked Farm's AI robotics enable pesticide-free growth in 16 days.²³

Solar-powered hydroponics at Green Square produce 200kg monthly.¹⁶

These integrate renewables for climate resilience.¹⁶

Repurposing the Urban Fabric

Rooftops and basements transform into farms, cooling cities.¹⁴

In Sydney, 1 Shelley Street hosts CBD's largest vertical setup.¹¹

Horsley Park masterplan blends farming with parklands.²⁵

Toronto's bylaw mandates green roofs, yielding 10,000 pounds at Ryerson.¹⁹

Global Lessons from City States

Singapore incentivises rooftops via tax breaks for food security.²⁴

Toronto's policy created 1.2 million sq ft green space since 2009.¹⁹

These counter shocks like pandemics and heatwaves.²⁴

Sydney can adapt such mandates for local resilience.²⁴

Socio-Economic Ripples

Urban farms boost affordability, cutting costs 30-40 per cent.²⁴

They create jobs, reduce waste, enhance health.²⁴

Community gardens foster identity, but need equity focus.¹⁴

Action Roadmap Ahead

Short-term: Map supply chains, pilot rooftop incentives.²⁶

Medium-term: Reform zoning for ag rates, Metro-Rural Framework.²⁶

Long-term: Mandate green roofs, integrate AI farms in planning.²¹

These position Sydney as urban farming leader.²⁷

Five-Year Imperative for Planners

Regional planners and policymakers must prioritise peri-urban protection, enact urban ag zoning reforms, and fund tech pilots to avert climate food risks by 2031.

References

Sydney will need innovative housing solutions... - ABC News
Social determinants of household food expenditure... - PMC
Who is responsible for ensuring food security in NSW... - UTS
Peri-urban farming: the key to Sydney's food future - UTS
Sydney CBD's largest vertical urban farm... - Charter Hall
Agriculture Industry Snapshot for Planning Greater Sydney - NSW DPI
How to feed hungry urban dwellers? 8 cities... - Sustainable Urban Delta
Resilient food systems | Sydney's Food Futures - Sydney Food Futures
Consumer Insights Tracker 2023 Technical Report - Food Standards
Urban sprawl is threatening Sydney's foodbowl - The Conversation
How Urban Hydroponics is Revolutionizing... - Biomass Producer
EPA Climate Change Policy and Action Plan - EPA NSW
How Urban Agriculture Zoning Is Transforming... - Biomass Producer
Farms Beneath the Skyline: Rooftop Agriculture... - Earth5R
Horsley Park Urban Farming Master Plan 2019 - Western Sydney Parklands
Cities that feed us: how to create urban farming in Sydney - YouTube
Stacked Farm is pioneering fully automated vertical farming - Innovation Aus
Urban Ecology Strategic Action Plan - City of Sydney - City of Sydney

Back to Top

04/01/2026

Resolutions for a Warming World: How Every Generation Can Help Cool the Planet in 2026 - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Teens can lead through school campaigns and digital activism.^[1]
Young adults shape carbon footprints via career and mobility choices.^[2]
Middle-aged households drive impact through energy retrofits.^[3]
Seniors mentor via volunteering and advocacy.^[4]
Small actions scale through generational collaboration.^[5]
2026 marks a pivotal year for personal climate commitments.^[6]

In Sydney's sprawling suburbs, the first days of 2026 brought record heat that sent families fleeing to air-conditioned malls.

Shade cloth fluttered over playgrounds, while power grids strained under demand.

Across the Southern Hemisphere, similar scenes unfolded from Melbourne to Brisbane.

Yet amid the swelter, New Year's resolutions offered a quiet counterpoint.

Climate scientists have long stressed that individual actions matter when scaled across millions.

Behavioural shifts in diet, travel, and energy use can cut global emissions by up to 30 per cent, according to models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.^[1]

This article explores resolutions tailored to four generations: teenagers, young adults, middle-aged adults, and seniors.

Each group wields unique leverage in 2026, from youth activism to senior advocacy.

Through stories and evidence, these steps show how personal pledges can drive systemic change.

2026 offers a chance to channel climate anxiety into tangible progress.

Generation Green: Teens Leading Everyday Change

Sixteen-year-old Mia Thompson stood before her Brisbane high school assembly last January.

She pitched a meat-free Monday campaign for the cafeteria.

By term's end, 60 per cent of students participated, cutting the school's food carbon footprint.

Teenagers like Mia represent a rising force in climate action.

High schoolers can organise clothing swaps to curb fast fashion's emissions, which rival aviation.^[2]

They might launch Instagram campaigns tracking plastic waste or join youth eco-councils.

"Young people bring fresh energy to climate fights," says Dr Sarah Chen, a youth climate educator at the University of Queensland.

"Their campaigns stick because peers trust peers."

Students could also audit school energy use, pushing for LED lighting upgrades.

Programs like Australia's School Eco-Curriculum provide templates for such projects.

Digital activism amplifies reach: one viral TikTok on local pollution can mobilise hundreds.

These steps build leadership skills while shrinking personal footprints.

Actions with Impact: Young Adults Stepping into Sustainable Lifestyles

In Melbourne's share-house scene, 28-year-old architect Liam Patel rethought his commute.

He ditched weekend flights for train trips, saving 1.5 tonnes of CO2 yearly.

Young adults in their 20s and 30s stand at a crossroads for lifelong habits.

Careers matter: choosing green building firms or renewable startups shapes industry norms.

Climate-friendly investments through apps like Superhero or Spaceship can steer capital from fossil fuels.^[3]

Urban living cuts car dependence; cycling or e-scooters slash transport emissions, the largest household source.

"Early lifestyle design locks in low-carbon paths," notes Prof Emma Wilson, a sustainability expert at Monash University.

Resolutions might include car-sharing subscriptions or plant-based meal preps.

Many join community gardens, fostering food security amid supply chain risks.

These choices compound: one study's models show urban millennials could halve lifetime emissions versus car-centric peers.^[4]

Balancing Life and Planet: Middle-Aged Adults Rethinking Consumption

Forty-five-year-old Perth teacher Rachel Nguyen eyed her energy bills last summer.

She installed solar panels and a smart thermostat, trimming usage by 25 per cent.

Middle-aged adults juggle mortgages, kids, and routines ripe for climate tweaks.

Home retrofits yield big wins: insulation upgrades cut heating needs by 40 per cent in Australian homes.^[5]

Community solar programs let renters join without upfront costs.

Sustainable diets matter too: swapping beef for lentils twice weekly halves a family's food emissions.

Parents can teach eco-literacy through family challenges, like zero-waste weeks.

Research from the CSIRO shows households drive 70 per cent of Australia's consumption emissions.^[6]

Workplace advocacy works: pushing for hybrid models reduces office commutes.

These steps balance practicality with impact for busy lives.

Wisdom and Stewardship: Seniors as Climate Mentors

Retiree Ken Walsh, 68, traded golf for tree-planting with Sydney's Bushcare volunteers.

His group restored 5 hectares of bushland last year.

Seniors hold unmatched experience for climate stewardship.

Storytelling bridges generations: sharing 1970s drought tales builds resilience.

Volunteering with Landcare or Clean Up Australia amplifies reach.

Personal networks sway policy: letters to MPs from elders carry weight.

"Seniors mentor because they've seen change unfold," says Prof Margaret Grey, a gerontology researcher.

Reforestation projects suit mobility: one hour weekly sequesters meaningful carbon.

Local advocacy for resilient infrastructure protects communities long-term.

Emotional bonds grow too: grandkids cherish planetary gifts from grandparents.

A Shared Year Ahead

2026 beckons as a year of generational alliance against warming.

Teens' campaigns inspire parents' retrofits, which seniors reinforce through advocacy.

Families model change, rippling to communities and councils.

Behavioural science confirms: social norms shift fastest through peer networks.

Australia's National Climate Restoration Fund could amplify such efforts.

Collective resolutions form a global promise to stabilise at 1.5°C.

Start small, stay consistent, connect across ages.

The planet cools one household, one campaign, one mentor at a time.

Make 2026 the year resolve meets reality.

References

Back to Top

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

LH LINKS

	DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
	CLIMATE CHANGE - BUREAU OF METEOROLOGY
	CLIMATE CHANGE AUTHORITY
	CLIMATE INSTITUTE
	CLIMATE MAP
	ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE - CSIRO
	CLIMATE CHANGE IN VICTORIA
	WWF - GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE
	INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE
	REALCLIMATE
	NASA GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
	CONTRACTION AND CONVERGENCE
	CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH CENTRE
	NEW SCIENTIST
	CLIMATE CHANGE INSTITUTE
	NATIONAL CENTRE FOR EPIDEMIOLOGY & POPULATION HEALTH
	CENTRE FOR CLIMATE ECONOMICS & POLICY
	CENTRE FOR CLIMATE LAW AND POLICY
	CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE NETWORK
	ENERGY CHANGE INSTITUTE
	JPRATT27
	350 AUSTRALIA
	GREENBIZ
	COLLAPSE OF INDUSTRIAL CIVILIZATION
	CLIMATE NEWS NETWORK
	SCIENCE ADVANCES
	IFLSCIENCE
	ABC CLIMATE CHANGE
	RESPONDING TO CLIMATE CHANGE
	NATURE GEOSCIENCE
	UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
	UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME
	REPORTING CLIMATE SCIENCE
	SPARE
	SPARE