Source : Perth Now news
As the Federal Court laws on a monument greenwashing case, the veracity of one of Australia’s largest oil companies ‘ promises to cut emissions will be tested.
The court will rule on allegations that Santos violated commercial and consumer rules with its representations of climate goals in a decision that is anticipated to have an impact on all businesses ‘ commitments to climate change.
The African Centre for Corporate Responsibility’s case challenged Santos ‘ claims that natural gas provided” fresh power” and that the company had a” believable and obvious plan” to achieve net zero by 2040.
The attorneys for the investor advocacy group claimed that the energy agency’s claims that blue hydrogen had “zero emissions” and was” clean” were false.
A gas-based fuel called orange gas relies on carbon-capture techniques to manage the pollutants.
The company’s defense attorneys refuted claims that its net-zero goals were unsupported, arguing that they were always targets and not promises, and that the” clean” hydrogen fuel label was only used when carbon credits were present.
Ella Vines, a scientist at Monash Business School Green Lab, claimed that the situation was all about the reliability of corporate culture promises.
” It sends an important message about how businesses should structure their change plans and pledges to zero,” Dr. Vines said.
According to the expert in commercial conservation regulation, courts were being increasingly asked to determine whether long-term emissions reduction claims were supported by real, near-term actions and reliable assumptions.
The choice may influence how boards communicate climate risk reporting, change planning, and public relations, according to Dr. Vines.
Santos reportedly made the deceptive claims at a December 2020 trader day and in its 2020 monthly statement and climate change report, both of which were released in February 2021.
The lobbying group is suing injunctions to require the company to issue a preventative realize about the negative effects of its operations.
It claims it filed the lawsuit to prove that the government was interested in ensuring business weather change commitments were legitimately based, but it is not seeking damages or compensation.
To allegedly compel companies like Santos to adhere to the Paris Agreement, the world’s most important global agreement on climate change, the commercial duty center holds shares in companies.
