Hamilton student to battle NZ Government in landmark climate lawsuit
A law student from Hamilton is preparing to challenge the Government in the High Court on Monday over what she says is a “failure” to properly address climate change.
Sarah Thomson, 26, claims that New Zealand’s targets under the Paris Climate Agreement are “unambitious” and fail to reflect scientific consensus on climate change.
The case, which is the first of its kind in New Zealand, will be heard over the course of three days from June 26 in the Wellington High Court. Members of the public are expected to gather outside the court on Monday morning in a show of support.
Thomson says she decided to launch the lawsuit two years ago after becoming “terrified” about what her future could look like.
“We’re already seeing the effects of climate change right now. Every year we’re experiencing more extreme weather like cyclones, droughts and floods. Entire communities are being left devastated, yet our Government is burying its head in the sand, business as usual,” she says.
“As a young person with my future on the line here, I’m terrified at how blasé our Government’s response to climate change has been. I never want to have to look my kids in the eye and explain to them how we let this happen.”
Thomson says she’s been inspired by climate change litigation around the globe, including the 900 Dutch citizens who filed a case against the Dutch Government, and a case in the US where 21 kids are suing the Federal Government.
She has the backing of several world-renowned climate change experts, including the “father of climate change awareness”, former NASA researcher, James Hansen, who is giving evidence in the case.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) author and Victoria University of Wellington Professor, Dr James Renwick, is also giving evidence.
Renwick says New Zealand’s targets for emissions reductions aren’t good enough. One of the targets under review is New Zealand’s contribution under the Paris Agreement, which commits New Zealand to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 11% below 1990 levels by 2030.
“It is now recognised that the world must get to zero emissions as quickly as possible, preferably by 2050 with emissions starting to decline no later than 2020, if we are to meet the Paris goals,” he says. “New Zealand must play its part and ramp up its emissions reduction goals urgently.”
The lawsuit will ask the Minister for Climate Change Issues, currently Paula Bennett, to justify the way in which New Zealand’s climate targets have been set.
In her preliminary Statement of Defence, Bennett has denied that the Government needs to set a target that strengthens the global response to climate change to hold warming to below 2°C.
But Thomson says as a developed country, New Zealand has an obligation under the Paris Agreement to take a global lead in combating climate change.
“So far, the Government has shirked its responsibilities by saying New Zealand is too small to make a difference, but it’s just not a legitimate excuse when we’re facing a problem that requires global action and accountability,” she says.
“The case is about transparency and accountability. On the issue of climate change, the Government has been persistently evasive. In court it will have to justify its inaction on climate change before a judge and before the New Zealand public.”
Thomson has also released a video inviting Prime Minister Bill English to dinner while she’s in Wellington to talk through her concerns about the Government’s response to climate change. The video makes reference to English’s now infamous taste in pizza toppings.
Alas Sarah you have been sold a pup, and you have fallen for it hook line and sinker.
Yes climate change is going to lead to the extinction of over 98% of current life on the planet. That is what over 405 ppm CO2 will result in, there is nothing humans can do AT SCALE to reverse this situation.
For the best information about our current situation you need to listen to Professor Guy McPherson @ guymcpherson.Com
Guy is one of the only ‘academics’ publicly stating the facts.
Where as James Hanson is like your cancer doctor telling you to up your vitamin C intake.
Humanity is a heat engine, “Everything we do creates CO2” reading this message has added more CO2 To our environment, your court case will add more CO2
Kiwisaver is 100% dependent on the continued manufacture of CO2, that is what GROWTH is all about
Every new born is equel to a potential 70 years of more CO2 emissions
We were warned back @ the Reo earth conference we had 10 years to reverse our CO2 emissions, and even back then they didn’t understand how bad the situation was
The ‘safe’ level of CO2 for a human friendly atmosphere is a MAX of 315 ppm and no more than about .7 ppm CH4, which hasn’t been exceeded for the past 800,000 years, until 1960 ish. Currently we are seeing a global average of nearly 1.9 ppm CH4, with spikes of 2.5 (ish). Acording to a few people CH4 is 150 to 300 times worse/stronger a GHG than CO2 giving ‘us’ a CO2e reading of anywhere between 700 – 1000 ppm
That is probably enough time wasting on my part.
Good luck
Robert Thankyoufornotbreeding Atack
http://Www.oilcrash.com
http://www.vhemt.org
And maybe the best ‘post’ crash docos 22after.com all be a bit amaturerish
I think there is a lot of value in her approach.
We have a govt in name only and a political process swamped by transnational corporate interests. These are both drivers of the mess we are in.
Holding our shell Govt to account is a valid step towards a survival even if it is residual and limited in scope.
Guy does not have a full picture but I respect his estimation based on his view of data from outside his field of expertise.
Holding this government to account has to be a good thing – no matter what the reason.
…. Boring I know,but here I go again.
The last time the environment was @ 405 ppm + there was next to no life on the planet, I’m sure we all agree on that fact ?
The last time the environment saw the rise of CO2 from below 315 ppm to above 400 ppm it took 10,000 years or some such … not the 200 years it has taken this time around.
The last time the environment was above 400 ppm there was NO ICE …. the reason being it had all melted around the 315 ppm ish mark, as back then the environment would have sat around 315+/- for maybe 500 – 2,000 years, giving the ice time to melt. What we are seeing now is the melting ice rapidly catching up to the environmental NORM of NO ICE above 315 is ppm CO2, what we are seeing in the Arctic and the East Siberian Arctic Shelf methane is UNPRECEDENTED, apart from maybe when the asteroid helped create the Siberian Traps
Now CO fucking 2 hangs around in the atmosphere for about 1,000 years – one thousand years – again 1,000 years, Idiot wishful thinking humans haven’t got a snowballs chance in hell of removing any of the atmospheric CO2, in a time frame that would save our sorry arsses (all 7.3 billion of them), burying 7.3 cadavers would help but very little.
To try to save our idiot arsses we would need to place the whole world on a war footing, every cent ‘they’ currently waste on killing innocent people, or building fucking roads/cars/subdivisions/maternity wards etc would have to be spent on rapid/next to impossible effort to remove CO2.
It would mean no more law students that is for sure.
About the only point of debate is when all this shit is going down, an ice fee Arctic (maybe this year) is going to be the indicator for most of the pig ignorant lied to masses that, that point is bloody close. Another great indicator of our demise will be the failure of our grain crops, actually happening now – see France and Texas.
So yeah pissing against the wind, just leaves you with wet pants, and that will be about the only result of this futile BS campaign.
Believing this could change things only shows how uneducated people are, and how they believe the utter bullshit coming out of the bought and paid for trough feeding so called scientists (James Renwick for one) who are out and out afraid of telling us the truth, because their lifestyle depends on idiot government grants to do more so called research, swanning around Antarctica emitting tons and tons of CO2 at the expense of lied to tax payers, thanks James, how do you sleep nights?
Roll on 2025 a ?
https://guymcpherson.com/2017/06/edge-of-extinction-im-an-optimist/
http://robinwestenra.blogspot.co.nz/2017/06/interview-by-nick-breeze-with-dr.html
24 June, 2017
A new scientific paper published in Nature Communication Journal demonstrates that the mechanisms of destabilisation of subsea permafrost, contrary to previous claims, provide new insights into increased emissions from the worlds largest deposits of methane, that exists in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS).
The subsea permafrost has for thousands of years acted as a seal, restricting the flow of gas through the water column to the atmosphere. This paper clearly shows that permafrost degradation and the occurrence of gas migration pathways are key factors in controlling the emissions.
Die off is ahead it appears.
The rate of die off and how it develops is not really known as the progression of damage with methane and continued human generated emissions is guess work but based on some fairly solid modeling.
Erlich has warned for decades and the MIT study in 1968-72 lays down some graphs which are surprisingly consistent with where we are today. Guy does a service of creating alarm but many ignore that.
So in-spite of decades of research and finding presented, the controlling power merchants still talk shit across the board.
Growth and rising populations are temporary and will reverse with years not decades.
There would appear that no escape form widespread decline of humans and other species is feasible. Food production has peaked and grain production peaked in 1987 but still half the world grain is used for feeding animals or making bio fuel by greedy nations.
Crazy stuff but it doesn’t take too many crazies in power to keep the present rate of destruction on course.
When did you use a car last fly in a plane, turn a heater or air conditioning on, buy a throw away appliance, get food in a package or buy a luxury or convenience item not available to people in poorer lands.
NZders per head of population emissions are tens of times higher than an Afghan peasant.
You may be a par of the problem. What are you doing about it.