
Podcast: Download (Duration: 1:00:00 — 55.0MB)
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Android | RSS | More
The Sustainable Hour no. 559 | Transcript | Podcast notes
This week’s Sustainable Hour dives into two groundbreaking developments – one global, the other plastic – both signalling a shift in how we tackle the climate crisis.
The rule of law catches up with the climate crisis
The show opens with a powerful declaration from the International Court of Justice (ICJ): countries now have clear legal obligations to prevent environmental harm caused by climate change. This ruling, requested by Pacific Island nations and youth activists, sets a new international legal standard. It states that governments must not only reduce emissions but also stop subsidising and licensing fossil fuel production – or risk legal consequences.
Corporate lawyer Robert Hinkley joins us to unpack the implications. He describes the decision as a “watershed” moment – one that threatens both governments and polluters with monetary damages unless action is taken urgently. Hinkley argues this marks the end of the era of pledges without consequences and calls for a simple legal reform to corporate law: that companies must pursue profit but not at the expense of severe environmental damage.
We also hear reflections from Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland, and Pacific youth leader Vishal Prasad, whose emotional speech reminds us of the deep human and cultural motivation behind this legal win. More info below.
Litter in need of laws: the war on cigarette butts
Our second guest, environmental advocate Shannon Mead, zooms in on a local yet massive problem: cigarette butt pollution. Shannon is the founder of No More Butts, a grassroots initiative turned national charity, tackling the 8.9 billion cigarette butts littered across Australia every year.
Shannon shares how cigarette filters – falsely marketed as safer – are in fact plastic, toxic, and entirely unnecessary. His call? A national ban on cigarette filters, which have been proven to offer no health benefit while wreaking havoc on waterways, wildlife and public spaces.
He also invites all Australians to join The Big Butt Hunt on 20 September – a nationwide clean-up day focused on collecting and raising awareness about this most littered item on the planet. More info below.
Music with a message
The episode features two new original songs:
“Butt Hunters Unite” – an upbeat call to action encouraging Australians to hit the streets (and beaches) with tongs and buckets in hand, and “Burn Baby Burn” – a satirical song voiced from the perspective of the fossil fuel industry, exposing the absurdity of their rhetoric in the face of escalating climate collapse.

– An upbeat call to action encouraging Australians to hit the streets and beaches with tongs and buckets in hand. Inspired by Shannon Mead from No More Butts in The Sustainable Hour no. 559

– A satirical song voiced from the perspective of the fossil fuel industry, exposing the absurdity of their rhetoric in the face of escalating climate collapse. The Sustainable Hour no. 559
→ More songs from The Sustainable Hour
. . .
Colin Mockett’s Global Outlook
Headlines this week:
• ICJ ruling changes the legal landscape for climate action
• António Guterres’ new UN report: “The fossil fuel age is flailing and failing”
• Record floods in Pakistan, highlighting the urgent need for climate justice
• UK turns to home energy upgrades as the next climate frontier
• David Suzuki warns “the fight is lost” – but others say the fight is just beginning
Tony’s concluding comments
As we leave this week’s episode, let’s rejoice and be motivated by the students from Vanuatu and other Pacific Island states who, in reality, took on the entire fossil fuel industry which up till then, had been seemingly untouchable legally for all the death and destruction they had caused by knowingly inflicting their toxic products on the world and refusing point blank to take any responsibility for their role in this.
Emboldened by their sense of outrage at this injustice, they turned to the highest court on our planet the International Court of Justice. We owe these students so much for taking on this six year campaign.
When Shannon Mead realised the problems that cigarette butts caused, he didn’t sit around complaining and waiting for someone else to solve the issue. He set out to solve it. This attracted a whole lot of support from good people who shared his concerns.
There is much for us to learn from these two determined campaigns.
. . .
Links and actions
→ No More Butts: www.nomorebutts.org
→ International Court of Justice advisory opinion: read our summary – or go to www.icj-cij.org
→ UN Secretary-General’s new report: “Supercharging the New Energy Era”: www.un.org
“In August, countries are convening on Geneva for what is called the resumed session or the resumed fifth session to negotiate a global plastics treaty. And essentially this is an attempt at an international level to agree on the parameters of what needs to be done to deal with plastic pollution and everything from looking at limiting plastic production, which is important for relevance across several sectors in industries. We rely so much on plastic and there are other alternatives. So looking at production caps, but also dealing with legacy waste that is still existing.”
~ Shannon Mead, founder, No More Butts
→ Subscribe to The Sustainable Hour podcast via Apple Podcasts or Spotify
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

We at The Sustainable Hour would like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land on which we are broadcasting, the Wadawurrung People. We pay our respects to their elders – past, present, and emerging, and extend that respect to all First Nations people.
The traditional custodians lived in harmony with the land for millennia, nurturing it and thriving in often harsh conditions. Their connection to the land was deeply spiritual and sustainable. This land was invaded and stolen from them. It was never ceded. Today, it is increasingly clear that if we are to survive the climate emergency we face, we must learn from their land management practices and cultural wisdom.
True climate justice cannot be achieved until Australia’s First Nations people receive the justice they deserve. When we speak about the future, we must include respect for those yet to be born, the generations to come. As the old saying reminds us: “We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.” It is deeply unfair that decisions to ignore the climate emergency are being made by those who won’t live to face the worst impacts, leaving future generations to bear the burden of their inaction.
“The Indigenous worldview has been marginalised for generations because it was seen as antiquated and unscientific and its ethics of respect for Mother Earth were in conflict with the industrial worldview. But now, in this time of climate change and massive loss of biodiversity, we understand that the Indigenous worldview is neither unscientific nor antiquated, but is, in fact, a source of wisdom that we urgently need.”
~ Robin Wall Kimmerer, weallcanada.org
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EDITORIAL
The world court has ruled. Now it’s time for our government to rewrite the rules of pollution
The true impact of the ICJ advisory ruling will hinge on what happens next, and, critically, on the laws that follow.
By Mik Aidt
The court’s decision is not binding, but it sends a powerful message: governments must act. For their message to achieve its full transformational potential, countries must now enact strong domestic legislation that compels major emitters to stop polluting. That’s how the advisory opinion will gain force – not in courtrooms, but in parliaments.
In theory, it calls for coordinated global action – 200 nations passing laws that effectively bring greenhouse gas emissions to an end. These new laws must be bold and uncompromising. We cannot afford half-measures that allow polluters to exploit loopholes or tie up the law in endless legal challenges. Too much time has already been lost to delay and denial.
Of course, this will not be easy. It means confronting powerful interests and deeply entrenched legal norms. Corporate rights and fiduciary duties are hardwired into the legal systems of most countries.
But it can be achieved if the people of the world speak with one voice that corporations must no longer be allowed to knowingly endanger the planet until government can pass a law to make them stop.
Central to this shift is a rethinking of corporate responsibility. From the moment a company is formed, it must no longer be granted the legal right to cause severe environmental harm. Instead, environmental responsibility must be embedded in corporate governance itself – not as an optional extra, but as a founding principle.
The principle suggested by Robert Hinkley in this episode is sound: no corporation should be allowed to profit by knowingly causing severe harm to the environment. Governments must hold existing companies accountable and require them to rapidly phase out their emissions. Enforcement will be critical. Legislation without the will – and means – to implement it will fail.
The ICJ ruling offers a new legal and moral foundation for climate action. Whether it marks a genuine turning point or becomes another missed opportunity now depends on us – on whether governments act decisively, and whether we, the citizens, demand that they do.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
No more cigaret butts

Shannon Mead is the founder of No More Butts. No More Butts is a national initiative dedicated to reducing cigarette butt litter across Australia. Through education, clean-up campaigns, and policy advocacy, the organisation aims to create a cleaner, healthier environment for all Australians and for the world
Why are cigarette butts a significant environmental concern?
Cigarette butts are extremely harmful to the environment. Most cigarette filters are made of a type of plastic called cellulose acetate, which is not biodegradable and can take years to break down. After a cigarette is smoked, the filter traps up to 7,000 toxic chemicals, many of which are carcinogenic or harmful to wildlife.
When cigarette butts are littered – which happens billions of times a year – they often end up in waterways and ecosystems. As they degrade, they release toxic substances and microplastics that can be ingested by fish, marine animals, and even birds. These pollutants threaten marine life and can eventually enter the human food chain.
What are the health risks associated with cigarette butt pollution?
As cigarette butts break down, they release micro-plastics and toxic chemicals into marine environments. These can contaminate seafood consumed by humans, potentially impacting diets, human health, and future generations. This is one of the biggest and most overlooked health concerns. Despite wanting to eat healthier, people are disposing of more waste into the very environment we rely on for food.
What action is No More Butts calling for?
No More Butts is urging the Australian Government to:
- Push for a strong and legally binding Global Plastics Treaty,
- Ensure cigarette filters are included in the list of products to be phased out, and
- Continue to show international leadership on plastic pollution.
What is the Global Plastics Treaty?
The Global Plastics Treaty is a proposed international agreement aimed at addressing plastic pollution across the full lifecycle of plastic products – from production and design to waste management and disposal. Negotiations are set to continue in Geneva this August.
Why is international action important on this issue?
Plastic pollution, including cigarette butts, is a global environmental issue. Marine ecosystems, wildlife, and human health are affected across borders. Coordinated international action ensures consistent policies and enforcement to effectively tackle the problem.
Who is supporting this call to action?
No More Butts is joined by 31 First Nations and environmental organisations in advocating for the Australian Government to take bold steps in the upcoming Global Plastics Treaty negotiations.
AMCS, WWF, Sea Shepherd, Clean Up Australia and Take 3, as well as Dhimurru Rangers and other First nations groups are included in the 31 groups who are mobilising and pushing for change now.
What is No More Butts’ mission?
No More Butts is an Australian initiative focused on reducing cigarette butt litter through public education, community clean-ups, and advocacy for stronger policy measures. Their goal is to create a cleaner and healthier environment for future generations.
How can I get involved?
You can support No More Butts by:
- Participating in clean-up events
- Reducing personal littering
- Donating to the cause
- Following No More Butts’ socials and keeping connected with their work, clean up efforts and the health risks that you need to know.
- Raising awareness about cigarette butt pollution, and
- Advocating for government action on plastic waste.
→ Visit nomorebutts.org, or follow nomorebutts.org on their socials. Their email address is: contact@nomorebutts.org
Climate impacts of plastics
Holly Kaufman wrote in a newsletter on 29 July 2025:
Given that the fossil fuel industry is in the midst of a massive expansion of plastics and petrochemicals as they see demand for conventional uses of fossil fuels declining, it’s critical that this expansion be stopped.
- Plastics will account for more than ⅓ global growth of oil demand by 2030 and nearly half by 2050, as well as a huge demand for fracked gas – some plastics are also made of coal
- The plastics industry is on track to release more greenhouse gases than coal plants in the US by 2030, including millions of tons of methane, and already accounts for more GHGs than aviation globally
- The plastics industry is currently responsible for about 5% of GHGs – but that is an underestimate as it does not include all the GHGs from the plastics lifecycle, or the potential interference with carbon sinks or the Earth’s radiation budget.
- Plastics are using more of the carbon budget than currently accounted for
The Plastics & Climate Project recently published our peer-reviewed paper and a summary report, Plastics: Exposing Their Climate Impacts – What We Know, What We Need to Know, & Recommendations for Policy & Research.
More information is available at www.PlasticsAndClimate.com.
See our report, “Plastics: Exposing Their Climate Impacts” here.
Holly Kaufman
Director, the Plastics & Climate Project
Tell your country’s representatives to support a strong international plastic treaty
The Story of Stuff Project wrote:
The UN Global Plastics Treaty presents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to comprehensively address the plastic pollution crisis. Alongside partner organizations from all around the world, we’re demanding that world leaders get it right.
At the end of last year, the United Nations adjourned international plastic treaty negotiations with unfinished business. Now, this August in Geneva, Switzerland,175 countries will be resuming overtime discussions. It’s time to tell your country’s representatives to seal the deal and pass a strong, ambitious, and effective treaty.
The good news is that the majority of countries have expressed their willingness to champion a robust plastic treaty that reduces plastic production, bans toxic chemicals, and safeguards human health and the environment. The momentum is shifting in our favor.
But, a few influential oil and plastic producing countries (and companies) are still insistent on derailing progress. As countries work to finalize terms, the treaty could be watered down and weakened. We need to remind international leaders not to compromise just to benefit a few powerful players.
The time is now, and voices around the world are chiming in. Use this tool to easily message your country’s negotiating delegates. Make even more of an impact by personalizing your note, messaging multiple representatives from different countries, or write to people that care about this issue.
Together, let’s raise our voices as collective citizens of this earth.
We’re glad to be in this alongside you.
The Story of Stuff team
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
→ The Guardian – 27 July 2025:
The attack on Australia’s net zero target is reckless and gutless. Voters expect more than ‘intergenerational bastardry’
“While Barnaby Joyce and Michael McCormack try to ditch the 43% net zero 2030 emissions target, Australia’s net zero target for 2035 has not yet been set.”
→ Associated Press – 27 July 2025:
For hope on climate change, follow the money, UN chief tells AP
“Antonio Guterres hails the power of market forces in what he calls “a battle” to save the planet. He points to two new U.N. reports showing the plummeting cost of solar and wind power and the growing generation and capacity of those green energy sources. He warns those who cling to fossil fuels that they could go broke doing it.”
Nature Media Centre launches to connect newsmakers with trusted voices, knowledge and solutions for nature
Nature Media Centre launches to connect newsmakers with trusted voices, knowledge and solutions for nature.
Media release – 29 July 2025
A new resource has been launched to support media coverage of Australia’s environmental challenges and what’s needed to reverse the trajectory of decline.
Launched today, the Nature Media Centre is a free, non-partisan service for busy journalists and other high-integrity storytellers to find the voices they need to tell compelling, solution-focussed stories.
“Australia’s environment is in poor and deteriorating health, with at least 19 ecosystems at risk of collapse and over 2,200 species now listed as threatened. Yet many Australians still believe nature is in good shape,” says Director Erin Farley.
“What’s needed isn’t a revolution in how Australians think about nature. It’s an evolution in how nature stories are told, supported, and amplified. The foundation already exists in the journalists who want to cover these issues better, the communities who care about their local environments, and the advocates working for change.”
“Australia’s unique natural environment sits at the core of our national identity and sustains us all. Its fate will largely determine our own.”
The database includes environmental scientists, wildlife experts and carers, Indigenous owners, marine biologists, conservation-driven farmers, and everyday Australians who are actively restoring landscapes and waterways. Crucially, the centre will help journalists find case studies to personalise their stories.
“As a journalist with more than 30 years of experience, I know the pressures that newsrooms are under today,” says Tracey Ferrier, Project Manager.
“We want to help journalists report on this issue with depth and integrity and explore what’s needed to change the trajectory of decline.”
The Nature Media Centre is a free resource for working journalists and other high-integrity, fact-based story tellers, such as podcasters and bloggers who care about nature.
The Nature Media Centre is a joint project of the Biodiversity Council, the Australian Land Conservation Alliance, and the Pew Charitable Trusts.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transcript of The Sustainable Hour no. 559
Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary-General: (00:00)
Now we are on the cusp of a new era. Fossil fuels are running out of roads and the sun is rising on a clean energy age.
Jingle: (00:18)
The Sustainable Hour. For a green, clean, sustainable Geelong: The Sustainable Hour.
Tony Gleeson:
Welcome to The Sustainable Hour. We’d like to acknowledge that we’re broadcasting from the land of the Wadawurrong people. We pay tribute to the elders – past, present, and those that earn that honour in the future. We’re broadcasting from stolen land, land that was never ceded, always was and always will be First Nations land. On that land, they nurtured both their communities and their country for millennia before their land was stolen. And there is so many of the solutions we need to the climate crisis in that ancient wisdom. And we could do well to observe that and to follow that ancient wisdom.
Judge Yuji Iwasawa, President, International Court of Justice:
The court concludes that the duty of states to prevent significant environmental harm applies in the context of climate change and that this duty forms part of the most directly relevant applicable law.
Mik Aidt: (01:36)
This is groundbreaking. This is not only groundbreaking, it’s visionary and at the same time, firmly rooted in the existing law. And it sets a new international standard when we talk about climate safety, for instance, when we talk about climate activism.
Now the turn is back on us here in Australia to fulfil our legal obligations. It’s time to rise to our domestic challenges. It’s time to step up and to change our habits, our cars, our comforts, our current way of life. And to stop the misinformation, stop the lies, the unlawful, illogical arguments that we’re hearing on our TV screens, in the TV news all the time.
We have a new baseline now for climate policy going forward. And that means we need to keep our government honest so we can be on the right side of history, and not be a rogue country in this world.
And don’t forget, this didn’t just ‘happen’. It was pushed forward by the youth of the Pacific. They had the idea, they believed in it, and they battled for six years to reach this moment of incredible victory for all of us, for humanity, for life on planet Earth, nothing less.
So what does that mean? If you ask me, it means that now it’s time for the youth here in Australia to come out of the hiding, step in, catch the baton from the Pacific youth. You know, it can’t be just people like us, 60, 70, 80 years old in The Sustainable Hour who are concerned and talking about this. We need to see the youth step into politics, speak up, push for that change that we need to see.
And enough with just trying politely to influence power. Now we have the rule of law backing us up, so we need to shift gear and not just try to influence power. We need to take power. We need to change the system from inside. Sounds a bit radical? Well, watch this space.
But for now, let’s hear what happened in Denmark last week over to our international global news reporter Colin Mockett OAM. I’m excited to hear what you have for us today.
COLIN MOCKETT’S GLOBAL OUTLOOK: (03:56)
Good morning, Mik. Yes, my roundup of course starts with exactly what you’ve just been talking about. It could only begin in one place and that’s The Hague in the Hook of Holland, where the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion that confirmed that states have binding legal obligations to prevent environmental harm that’s caused by climate change. This includes from fossil fuel production and subsidies.
The case actually began back in March 2023 when the UN General Assembly voted to ask the International Court to clarify the obligations of states in relation to climate change. And this followed a request to the UN by the Vanuatu and youth envoys from the Pacific Islands.
The case drew an astonishing level of global engagement with written submissions from 96 different countries and 11 international organisations. It’s the highest participation ever seen in a case before the court. Now, according to the ICJ, its advisory options “carry great legal weight and moral authority. They are often an instrument of preventive diplomacy and have peace-keeping virtues. Advisory opinions also, in their way, contribute to the development of international law and thereby to the strengthening of peaceful relations between States.”
All of that’s a direct quote from when they handed down the judgment last week. It was last Wednesday, and the landmark advisory opinion mark the first time that the world’s top court has laid out in clear and emphatic terms that failure to act on climate change can result in legal responsibility and reparations. The Court’s rulings affirms that states must not only curb their greenhouse gas emissions, but also regulate activities that drive their emissions, such as supporting fossil fuel industries through subsidies or exploration licenses. Now that was a very clear warning to Australia, especially in view that the case began with our South Pacific neighbours.
Now to New York and the UN General Assembly where the UN Secretary-General António Guterres launched a new report that’s cumbersomely titled ‘Supercharging the New Energy Era of Renewables, Efficiency and Electrification’. In launching the report, the Secretary-General said that ‘We are in the dawn of a new energy era,’ and he added that the ‘fossil fuel age is flailing and failing’.
The report outlines how far the global energy landscape has shifted since the Paris Agreement, since that was signed a decade ago. It showed that clean energy investment was $2 trillion last year [AUS$3.06 trillion], US dollars of course, which was $800 billion more than fossil fuels [AUS$ 1,2 billion]. And this was a growth of 70 per cent in the last 10 years.
What’s more, the findings showed a clear economic case for renewables, using data from the International Renewable Energy Agency that more than 90 per cent of new renewable energy projects worldwide are still cheaper than the lowest cost fossil fuel alternatives.
Solar power is now 41 per cent cheaper while onshore wind comes in at less than half the cost of fossil fuel generation. This transformation is fundamentally about energy security and people’s security. It’s about smart economics.
The report noted that some nations are lagging behind, most notably in sub-Saharan Africa, which is home to 85 per cent of the world’s people without electricity, installed renewable capacity in the region averaged just 40 watts per capita. That’s compared to over 1,100 watts in high-income nations like ours. Meanwhile, the number of people without clean cooking in the region is increasing by 14 million annually.
Still, the message from the UN was optimistic. The shift to clean energy is not only inevitable, but well underway. ‘Now’, Antonio Guterres said, ‘now is the time for world leaders to seize the opportunities and scale it up.’
And that leads us to London, where the UK government’s released a report that’s titled, ‘Greening Homes, Creating Growth: Unlocking demand for green home finance’. It basically means that the UK government has picked most of the low-hanging fruit in the renewable energy. They’ve switched to renewables for generating power. Now they’re looking for other methods of cutting emissions. It’s aimed squarely at the financial services sector, and it’s encouraging them to lend money at low rates to people to pay for green home improvements. Now these include energy-efficient heat pumps and cleaner heating sources.
The government has set up a multi-pronged campaign aimed at homeowners, tradespeople and financial institutions, along with public information strategies to build trust in green technology and reduce misinformation. It’s a shame to say it, but that’s absolutely necessary with every step that we’re taking now, because the opposition to greening our planet will use any misinformation they can possibly grab.
Now to Pakistan where the city of Rawalpindi in the Punjabi region has been hit by heavy rains that caused more than 60 deaths in 24 hours at the weekend. This takes the toll to more than 180 since the arrival of the monsoon season in late June.
Rawalpindi is Pakistan’s third largest city. It’s got 5.7 million people, so it’s approximately the size of Melbourne. And torrential rain poured almost without pause for four days last week, causing urban flooding and houses to collapse. More than 70 children died and about 500 were injured since the monsoons began in June.
The monsoons actually began on June 26th, and the figures come from the Pakistan Disaster Agency. The majority of deaths were caused by collapsed houses and sudden flash flooding, while dozens were also electrocuted because nobody switched the power off. Monsoon season brings South Asia 70 to 80 per cent of its annual rainfall and runs from June until September in India and Pakistan. The annual rains are vital for agriculture and food security and livelihoods of millions of farmers, but they also bring destruction, especially when combined with climate change. In 2022, monsoon floods submerged a third of the country, if you remember, and they killed 1,700 people. We’ve still got another six weeks to go.
And my final comment this week comes from the veteran environmentalist David Suzuki, who said that he believed it was ‘too late to stop climate change’ in an interview with the Canadian outlet iPolitics. His actual words were: ‘I’ve never said this before to the media, but it is too late. The focus on politics, economics and law are all destined to fail because they are based around humans.’
While he said he wasn’t giving up his campaigning and vaguely called for a revolution on behalf of the planet, his core message was made clear in the article’s headline: ‘David Suzuki says the fight against climate change is lost’. But there was a heartening reaction from the media’s Instagram account, which had several hundred thousand followers. It’s brief note which said: ‘At 89 years old, David Suzuki says it’s too late to stop climate change. The fight is lost. It’s time to hunker down and prepare for what’s coming.’
Well, that headline alone received more than 100,000 likes inside the first two hours. And that solid message finishes my Roundup for the week.
. . .
Jingle:
Listen to our Sustainable Hour – for the future.
. . .
Tony:
Thanks for that Colin. Yeah, the fight is certainly over for the people that died in the seven days since we’re on last and the people that die in the next seven days. And the ICJ’s decision is going to be really interesting how it pans out. Just being an advisory takes the legal obligation away to some extent, but the moral obligation is certainly strengthened by that decision.
Colin:
Yes. Bear in mind too that the ICJ is the world’s top court. There is nobody else above them for the fossil industry or politicians to appeal to. It stops there. That’s the world’s top court. And they’ve said that states are liable for reparation and suing if they don’t take steps to stop climate change.
Mik: (14:57)
And can I just say that I would like to pick up Suzuki on his little note there about the revolution. I think it’s time for a revolution and I’ll be talking more about my plans in the weeks coming. But first, let’s hear what a corporate lawyer thinks about this decision that was made from the world court. I’ve asked Robert Hinckley, who’s been in our show a number of times, talking about what we can do when it comes to corporate law.
Robert C. Hinkley, former Corporate Lawyer:
I think it is a watershed. It is going to be a turning point in the fight against climate change and global warming. And I say that because the way the decision works. It does two things. It threatens both governments and polluters with the possibility of having to pay monetary damages and reparations if they don’t do something to stop the emission of greenhouse gases quickly. And then it goes on.
The second thing it does is it says: ‘Governments, you have an obligation to pass laws that will regulate these polluters and make sure they do stop.’ And this combination, I think, will have big ramifications down the road.
Australia has now been threatened with the possibility of having to pay monetary damages to the victims of climate change in other countries. Why wouldn’t any Australian government, be it this government or a coalition government, want to guard against that? So in my view, this two-step approach that the court has come up with is simply brilliant.
Tony Burke, Labor, answering a question to the House on 23 July 2025:
Until we’re able to get environmental laws that are fit for purpose, we have a situation where no one wins in terms of business wants to be able to make sure it can get decisions in a timely way and from the environment perspective we want to make sure we’re better able to protect our precious environment and our Australian heritage.
Robert Hinkley:
For the last 30 years, governments have been trying to pass laws to stop greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. And they have been unsuccessful. And why have they been unsuccessful? Because the polluters have been able to create a wedge issue among voters, often using misinformation to delay and frustrate the passage of new laws, which would require them to stop.
And the decision is brilliant in that it tries to put a stop to that. And I think it will. Now the governments have been threatened before they had pledges that they made at the cops. And if they didn’t fulfill the pledges, there was nothing, there were no consequences to them. Now there’s a possibility of governments having to pay real monetary damages to the victims.
So, they’re going to do something now. Now they’re going to try to legislate. The question is, how are they going to try to legislate? Are they going to do what they did for the last 30 years, which is come home from the COPs, sit down with the polluters, and try to negotiate a deal? I think if they try that, they’ll probably end up with the same results that they had over the last 30 years.
I think that what governments should be thinking about doing is not focusing again on regulating business, but on changing corporate governance so that naturally corporations no longer think that they should be allowed to continue to cause severe harm, severe damage to the environment. And there’s a very simple way to do that that I believe the voters will support, and doesn’t have to be negotiated with the big polluters. And that simple way is this: Ask voters, or rather voters should ask candidates in upcoming elections. Do you believe that corporations should have the power to severely damage the environment until government can find a way to pass a law to make them stop?
Our experience over the last 30 years has been that that doesn’t work. So the only solution really is to take away that power. Now we all know that corporations right now, the directors have one duty, to make money for shareholders. But it’s a very simple thing to change that. That’s in the corporate law of every country in the world. The duty of directors is to make money for shareholders.
It’s a very simple change to add, not at the expense of severe damage to the environment. So essentially what you’re doing is you’re asking corporations to lift their game, to give up the crutch that they’ve been able to use to make money in the past, which is basically dump the pollution on everybody else and stop it. Nothing in those 11 words will eliminate the profit motive. The profit motive for them will still apply. They’ll just have to do a better job of how they make it. And making money, but not at the expense of severe damage to the environment is not too much to ask.
Jingle:
Scott Morrison:
This is coal. Don’t be afraid. Don’t be scared.
American senator Sheldon Whitehouse:
At the heart of this conflict is a battle between truth and science and power and lies.
Tony: (21:05)
As part of our investigation of Plastic Free July, I guess we’ve got next is Shannon Mead. He’s the founder of No More Butts. So this is a national initiative dedicated to reducing cigarette butt litter across Australia. So Shannon, welcome to the Sustainable Hour.
Shannon Mead:
Thanks for having me, Tony
Tony:
Pleasure. You’re the founder of No More Buts. Maybe we could start by talking about how that came about?
Shannon:
Yeah, absolutely. We’re five years old relatively recently and it was an initiative probably out of personal action or impact. I was working in the Philippines at the time and noticed a lot of plastic pollution, especially on a lot of these pristine islands when the tide lowers and you’re left with remnants of plastic on the beaches and the sand. that was probably the initial, you know, something’s happened. And then I zoned in on a cigarette butts actually not too long after when on a beach and I sort of… There was a beautiful black beach and I was running my hands through the sand and actually coming up with these clumps of you know white tobacco filters so that’s for me when I kind of zoned in on cigarette butts and I was working in corporate at the time and was already looking for something with a little bit more purpose and impact and a legacy and so I decided to make that happen and during 2020 during the start of COVID, I was in Australia and ended up being stuck in Australia to a certain degree. So I decided to start the initiative there and expand from there.
Tony:
And what did that involve for you?
Shannon:
Yeah, so originally it was actually, I thought, well I’m going to make a personal difference and so I started collecting cigarette butts just off the streets and I was up in North Queensland at the time and you know, beach car parks and beach areas, shopping centers and so on and was able to get a thousand cigarette butts in a bag in an hour.
And then after a few months of that, I kind of realised that something probably needed to be done more, what I now know is upstream. In other words, at the source or even before it becomes an issue. So I sort of switched focus a lot more to advocacy work and then we’ve brought on a board and fully registered as a charity in Australia. Probably have a little bit more weight at an international level in advocacy efforts than just cleaning up.
Mik: (23:41)
What can be done then, upstream?
Shannon:
Well, a couple of the measures that we’re looking at and we think are logical solutions, pragmatic solutions to this issue, even though they seem a little bit radical initially. And if we look back in history, filtered cigarettes weren’t sold as such. They were filterless cigarettes. They didn’t have a filter. And the introduction of that and the very term filter all of a sudden makes people feel a level of comfort and safety and security. So absolutely it was a marketing tactic by tobacco companies to introduce this thing because it introduced all of a sudden textures and flavors, the ability to hold it. It was a cost saving exercise as well.
And fast forward now, depending on the country you’re in 60, 70, 80, 90 years later, where substantially all are sold with a plastic filter and cancer rates haven’t decreased. So it actually hasn’t provided any benefit to human health and yet it has become the most littered item, and in Australia and across the world and it is a plastic.
So we believe actually filterless cigarettes would be the preference and the priority. But there are other interventions and other cost diversions so rather than councils and rate payers paying for the cost of clean up, then absolutely there’s a case for the producers to also be accountable for that which they’re not today.
Tony:
So has there been any pushback from the cigarette industry about that?
Shannon:
None that has been promoted or is, I guess, overtly out there. So the interesting thing is within the last couple of years, the World Health Organisation themselves have suggested that a filter ban is practical and possible. Then there’s a Belgian Superior Health Council, which is essentially their health department, actually done their own investigation and research and concluded the same thing, that from a health perspective, it does not make cigarettes any safer and therefore they become unnecessary redundant.
And we’ve actually worked with a group called Doctors for the Environment and their Australian group who have actually done research into the rates of cancer since the introduction of filtered cigarettes and have made the same conclusion in a scientific, medical, Australian context that cigarette filters do not provide any benefit to human health.
Tony:
Yeah, that knowledge is significant to stop them. What puts you onto that?
Shannon:
I think as an environmental charity, we’re trying not to get involved in the decision to smoke. I think there’s enough evidence to suggest that people probably shouldn’t smoke, but we didn’t want to target smokers themselves. We wanted to make sure that they were responsible for their action and to not lit up, because that’s where the issue is created. So for a long time, we were focusing on environmental groups, environmental departments, and trying to take that angle, which I think is correct. But then we realised that most of the legislation is actually managed through health. So even though it’s an environmental issue, the legislation for anything to do with tobacco products is actually managed through health. We thought it be a lot easier to, at least in parallel, if not to focus, in parallel to actually look at the health impacts. So when we found this, I would say it’s a surprise, but knowing the tobacco playbook, it’s probably not a surprise.
Of course it was new information or a bit of a revelation that hang on a sec, this item which is 8.9 billion litres into the Australian environment every year contaminating at least 40 litres of water creating 12,000 plastic microfibres per cigarette butt. That actually it’s an unnecessary product. It’s problematic, it’s plastic, it’s unnecessary. So let’s look at options to actually remove that.
Mik: (27:26)
Shannon, let’s just take those figures slowly one more time? You said: 8.9 billion cigarette butts per year. Did I hear that right?
Shannon:
Yes you did. 8.9 billion cigarette butt estimated litters in the Australian environment every year.
Mik:
So that’s 8,900 million.
Shannon:
Correct. I used to have the per minute figure in my head but it’s gone now because it was just too hard to remember because it’s so large. But yes, it’s an astounding number. to preface that, guess there’s debate as to whether or not that’s actually 7.5 billion or 8 billion or 8.5 billion. But I think when we’re talking about that, they’re rounding. The point is that there is still a massive issue. And we are talking about billions and the impacts that it actually creates with litter.
Mik:
So it’s interesting that you have sort of moved your focus from blaming the individual smoker who’s, you know, walking in the park and just casually throwing the cigarette butt, you know, in the grass, to the industry that produces this and saying that they’re responsible. But behind that, there’s the whole legislative, you know, the politicians who are making the laws. Are they in reality cowards that they’re not just putting their foot down and saying, ‘Hey, we have to stop, this cannot continue! 8.9 billion, that’s crazy!’
Shannon:
Yeah, the interesting thing is that that number, you know… Again, it’s up for debate how many billions, but we always use 8.9 billion. That number has been around for about three or four years. You know, in that time, there’s been various federal and state interest and initiatives to do something about it. But again, that’s from an environment perspective. And so when we look at a health perspective, we need to make sure that they understand or that it is understood that filters are not necessary, so even though from a health perspective they would want to reduce or eradicate smoking overall, that actually the removal of the filter would not have any human health consequences, i.e. it would not be negative to those that continue to smoke, and in fact it may be less appealing and ultimately go towards their aim of reducing the rate of smoking. So we don’t see any downside for health or the environment within that.
I think it’s just a question of prioritisation from any government. No one has pushed back on it. There’s not a single politician I’ve spoken to from any spectrum from the political side that is against this concept. It’s just a question of is it a priority and what does it take to take to action.
Mik:
And we then ask you that question. What does it take? How do we do it?
Shannon:
I love being asked those questions because I think the answer is actually quite simple. would require health and environment at a federal, if not international, let’s focus on Australia, at a federal level to come together, review the literature, review the analysis, review the recommendations and at minimum put forward through the Office of Impact Analysis at a Commonwealth level.
What does it take? What are the financial implications positive and negative? What are the health implications positive and negative? This is what they do for any proposed bill. So I think by doing that, we’re not saying let’s ban them tomorrow. We’re saying let’s get an informed position across health and environment so that we can actually make those decisions if they fall as part of a harmonised plastics ban within Australia. And we don’t think that is an unrealistic request. It’s just a question of prioritisation.
Australia has done a great job from a health perspective on the smoking rate. You know, we’re below 10 per cent, I would say about 10 per cent if you include casual smokers. So 10 per cent of Australians smoke and we know that anywhere between a third to two-thirds litter, so we give the benefit of the doubt and say half litter. So what we’re seeing is actually five per cent of Australians who smoke in litter that are creating this issue which is the most littered item which is a plastic and it is toxic for us. Others, including those that can’t make decisions for themselves or defend themselves – our flora, our fauna, our marine species – they’re being impacted by this.
So we do think some kind of mobilisation to actually say, ‘The 95 per cent of us say it’s enough, let’s do something about it.’
Tony:
Now, you started out working on this by yourself or the group, No more buts. What’s that looking like now? I’m sure that over time you’ve been collaborating with more and more groups?
Shannon: (32:14)
Yes, so we did start, as mentioned, as an individual way myself picking up cigarette butts and then we grew via volunteer and looking probably for what you’d call skilled volunteer, know someone to help with accounting and someone to help with marketing and and so on and then we’ve now got a board of five including myself and we’re all volunteers. I think that’s important to note including myself is you know, and it’s important when people come on they realise that this is a mission of passion, it’s a mission of justice for the environment. It’s a slow burn, but we dedicate as much time as we do have. Now we’ve got… it flexes – but around about 12 volunteers on board, members of the board who are volunteers. But we really see value in partnerships and collaboration. We didn’t want to be a clean-up organisation vying for the valuable hours that already contribute to other clean up organisations. So we partner with clean up groups. We work closely with Sea Shepherd Marine Debris Group. We work closely with Clean Up Australia as a partner. We engage with Australian Marine Conservation Society and others. So we actually like to come along essentially as a subject matter expert and educate their volunteers without stealing extra time and valuable time away from them. We focus in on our advocacy.
. . .
SONG
‘Butt Hunters Unite’
[Intro – chanting]
Butt Hunters! No more butts! No more butts!
Butt Hunters! World Cleanup Day!
Butt Hunters! Butt Hunters! Butt Hunters!
Butt Hunters! Butt Butt Hunters!
No more butts! Butt Hunters!
World Cleanup Day!
Pick it up, pack it out, lead the way!
[Verse 1]
Relaxing on the beach
in the yellow sand
Playing with the grains
Ten butts in my hand
One, two, three – a thousand in a sack
Picked ‘em all up, never looked back
Just kept plogging along on a hunt
From city streets to the oceanfront
[Chorus]
Butt-hunters unite! Hey! Join this fight!
We pick and we push – we speak and we write
Butt-hunters unite! Hey! Big changes in sight
Freedom from poison is a human right
[Verse 2]
Filters never helped, that’s the twist
Cancer rates stayed on the list
Sold us safety, but it’s a lie
Microplastics where the sea birds fly
Toxic chemicals from our factories
ending up in the soil and the sea
We’re butt-hunters, loud and proud
Raising voices, drawing a crowd
[Chorus]
Butt-hunters unite! Hey! Join this fight!
We pick and we push – we speak and we write
Butt-hunters unite! Hey! Big changes in sight
Freedom from poison is now a human right
[Bridge]
Barbecue tongs, dog by my side
Huntin’ white tips with civic pride
It’s funny, it’s fierce, it’s action, no blame
Though a filter ban would change the game
“Butt-hunters, go! Let’s clean it up!”
[Instrumental section]
[Verse 3]
From Geneva talks to Aussie shores
We’re knockin’ hard on Parliament’s doors
This’s not just trash – it’s a Plastic War
For our flora and fauna, and so much more
Toxic chemicals from our factories
ending up in the soil and the sea
We’re butt-hunters, loud and proud
Raising voices, drawing a crowd
[Chorus]
Butt-hunters unite! Hey! Join this fight!
We pick and we push – we speak and we write
Butt-hunters unite! Hey! Big changes in sight
Freedom from poison is now a human right
[Outro]
Big Butt Hunt – now grab your crew!
No More Butts? It’s up to you!
Pick and push, then speak and write
Butt-hunters aligned – we got this, right?!
It’s not just the smoker dropping one
It’s industry profits on the run
8.9 billion can’t just be ignored
Time for butt justice, cut to the core!
[Chant]
Butt-hunters! Butt-hunters! No more butts!
Butt-hunters! Butt-hunters! No more butts!
Butt-hunters! Butt-hunters! World Clean-Up Day!
Pick it up, pack it out! Lead the way!
. . .
Audio statements:
Shannon Mead:
Anything is possible, you know, when people collaborate through, in fact, coming together.
Be action-oriented, be accountable, collaborate for impact.
We’re saying is actually 5 per cent of us who smoke and litter that are creating this which is the most littered item which is a plastic and it is toxic for others including those that can’t make decisions for themselves or defend themselves. Our flora, our fauna, our marine species are being impacted by this issue.
. . .
Mik: (37:08)
We’re talking to Shannon Mead, who is the founder of No More Bots, and who is calling on the Australian government to take a bold step against cigarette bot pollution in our environment and on our streets and so on.
So Shannon, I’m really keen to become part of your movement actually, because what you might not know about me is that whenever I go for a walk with my dog, I always bring not a poo bag for picking up my dog’s poo, but a whole bucket. And then I have barbecue tongs that I bought for one dollar in a secondhand shop. And I use that to pick up a lot of these butts. Yes, but also any plastic that me and my dog find in the park, you know, here and there. And I’ve trained my dog so he will run and sniff and say: ‘Hey, there’s a blue piece over here!’ ‘And what about that one?’ And sometimes he finds a white feather and I’ll say: ‘No, that’s… we’ll leave that one.’ So me and my dog, we’re having fun with picking up plastic in our park and keeping it clean. At least our little area is very clean and it tends to be like this that once you have cleaned up an area it actually stays clean for quite a while until the wind brings in something new. But people when they see something clean then they don’t throw litter in that area as much as they would otherwise.
So I’m definitely keen on linking up closer to No More Butts and become part of that network.
I’m running a little Facebook page. It has only 20 people, but these are 20 people who are all doing the same as I’m doing in our little town. We call it Tidy Up Geelong.
Shannon:
Fantastic! I guess the whole point is that we’d love to then educate, know, either join the group virtually and then help educate and make sure people understand why it’s important not to walk past cigarette butts. And it’s great that you’ve trained the dog to sniff butts of the cigarette variety.
And then, you know, we can chase them down because each cigarette does actually leach toxic chemicals. There’s 7,000 chemicals and heavy metals which gets absorbed into these cigarette filters. And so when it rains and they leach into the soil or when they make their way into the marine environment, they actually will leach those chemicals as they also degrade themselves into these plastic microfibres. So any action done by an individual or a group, whether that’s eight or 800, is so important and very happy to get engaged with that.
Mik:
And what can our listeners do? Is there a place they can connect with you?
Shannon:
Absolutely, so our website www.nomorebutts.org is probably the best way to get the interface and understand what it is we do. Obviously run by volunteers, it’s not as as schmick as some of the other ones that are out there, but that certainly gives all the contact details and all of the programs that we work on across vaping disposal, across cigarette butt cleanups, across advocacy work, alternatively if they’re on social media, across the different platforms.
NoMoreButts.org is how you can find us across those platforms.
Tony:
One thing we’ve become aware of recently is the international treaty around plastic. There’s a conference coming up on that topic. Will you have a position on that presenting or taking part?
Shannon: (40:33)
Yes, so in August, countries are convening on Geneva for what is called the resumed session or the resumed fifth session to negotiate a global plastics treaty. And essentially this is an attempt at an international level to agree on the parameters of what needs to be done to deal with plastic pollution and everything from looking at limiting plastic production, which is important for relevance across several sectors in industries. We rely so much on plastic and there are other alternatives. So looking at production caps, but also dealing with legacy waste that is still existing.
So whether that be the Pacific Garbage Patch or anywhere else in the world, and how to deal with waste and recycling in the future. So cigarette butts are a small part of that. We will be there and can play a small role.
But it’s also, it’s a much bigger discussion rather than just cigarette filters and we’re well aware of it. But it’s very interesting to watch the outcomes of that. And I think there should be lot of attention come the middle of August when there will be hopefully a decision which is reached on the future of an international response to the plastics crisis.
Mik:
Tell us a little bit about the known alternatives?
Shannon:
Yes, so think for cigarettes we would suggest in the first instance a filter is not required. So, you know, the removal of a filter is the preference and the priority. If through this plastics treaty the discussion is, we can only talk about plastics, then we would of course then, you know, zone in on the removal of plastics in filters or plastic filtered cigarettes. You know, deal with that and see non-regrettable alternatives later.
And for example, there are suggestions about biodegradable materials in cigarettes and we would argue that that only solves half the problem as you rightly mentioned before. Litter creates litter. People see a dirty area and they believe it’s acceptable and they will litter. So if you know something is biodegradable, you are of course likely to litter. So we wouldn’t see it reducing littering rates. So it might solve the plastics part of the issue, but not the littering and the toxic chemicals.
When it comes more broadly to plastics, think again that that precautionary principle or making sure that they aren’t regrettable. So yes, we could talk about compostable items, we can talk about biodegradable items, but only if there are the facilities in the country that can actually process. There’s no point introducing a whole wave of these products onto the supermarket in the hope that the industry will catch up and they can be processed substitutes.
And that’s an issue for a country like ourselves, but when we’re dealing with so many countries from emerging markets and developing markets in the global south in particular, they don’t have the infrastructure. So part of this treaty is making sure there is equity to make sure that there will be the infrastructure to deal with this in the future.
Tony:
Shannon, a lot of people don’t make the connection between the fossil fuel industry and plastics. Can you enlighten us a bit on that?
Shannon:
Yeah, it was an interesting one for me also because I was sitting in the room and all of sudden in my first session, very new to this space, saw some of the countries which of course are petrochemical countries, countries which rely on the extraction of oil and production of oil. And they were pushing back heavily against this concept of coming together to do something positive for the environment.
But it then hit me very quickly in the face that these are all those states which are reliant heavily on economic and subsidies from… And so if there is a move to reduce and curb the production of new plastics, that of course by default would actually reduce the need on these countries producing what they produce today. Now, you and myself and most of your listeners would agree that that’s a great thing. But of course not everyone agrees with that position. And so we’re in these discussions trying to get fossil fuels consensus or groups are pushing for consensus knowing that there’s actually a small but vocal group which are actually pushing back about any meaningful change when it comes to reducing the production of plastics which of course is reliant in most cases on fossil fuels.
On top of that, is a health aspect just as well. We’ve talked about it previously because it’s plastic free July. Micro-plastics go into our bodies and they go into our brains. We are already full of plastic and that causes cancer, inflammation and disease.
Yes, and I think there’s no end, unfortunately, to what may be happening. And if we look at the introduction of plastic, it’s relatively new in the scheme of things. And it’s become so pervasive in our bodies and in our environment. So I think any measures that are looking to reduce that and eliminate unnecessary plastics from the future can only be good for hopefully our generation, but more importantly, ones that come after and also for our environment.
Mik: (45:47)
Shannon, thank you so much for sharing all this. I’m wondering, how do you cope with, you know, this whole thing? It’s so scary and there’s so, it seems like so difficult to overcome this problem. How do you deal with it, you know, personally?
Shannon: (46:07)
No one’s actually asked that specific question. I would say I’m energised by the passion that the volunteers alongside myself are showing for this. This is a solvable problem. The steps that we take and the inches that we take each month and each year to actually edge forward towards that vision, know, world without tobacco waste, is I think what energises me and keeps me positive. The fact that there can be change and there should be change. So I haven’t really got into the negatives of, you know, this is impossible or is this too hard? And I don’t think it is. So it’s an interesting one, I think, upon reflection. We’re full steam ahead to get these solutions in place for people and for the environment.
Tony:
In the near future, do you also do events and things that gather people around this no-butt activity?
Shannon: (47:00)
Yes, so on September 20th, to coincide with World Cleanup Day, we’re actually hosting what we’re calling the big butt hunt. Obviously that cigarette butt. We’re encouraging groups to focus on cigarette butts for that day. Of course not walk past any other item, but focus on cigarette butts on that day to raise the awareness of this specific issue. So we’re collaborating with several groups across the country who will be hosting their own butt hunt. And of course people can go out and collect cigarette butts themselves for greater impact. that’s September 20th this year and the expectation is that would be every year for the Big Butt Hunt.
. . .
Jingle
Mik (47:41)
That’s all we could fit in yet another Sustainable Hour dominated by cigarette butts, but certainly also by this incredible decision from the world’s highest court, which really is a game changer at so many levels.
Colin:
Yes, what it said was governments are liable and can be held liable for not taking action to meet their obligations. And I love the quote from António Guterres… Go on – you say it, Tony, you’ve got the accent.
Tony:
Yeah, the fossil fuel industry is failing and flailing. And I guess the question we continually ask here is at what cost? Like they’re flailing and they’re not real good at giving up. They’re really good at prolonging their demise. At what cost is that going to be to humanity and to the planet?
Colin:
Well, we now can change our ending. We used to always finish with ‘Be the difference’. Now I reckon we ought to take on board the fact that we’ve turned the corner with that decision last week. So now ‘Be aware’ that things are changing really fast.
Mik:
And I would take it a step further and say, Be a revolutionary!
Colin: (49:07)
I think we are now. We suddenly find ourselves at the front of the marches. That’s a place where Tony used to be anyway.
Tony:
A good place to be. A very good place to be.
Mik:
What is going to be your ‘Be…’, Shannon?
Shannon:
I would say be positive and be vocal. Change comes about by those looking at making meaningful change, coming together for impact. I would say be mindful of that. Be action-orientated, be accountable, and I think anything is possible when people collaborate for impact.
Mik:
Be positive.
Tony:
Terrific, that collaboration is so important.
Mik:
And of course, be a Butt Hunter!
. . .
SONG
“Burn Baby Burn”
[Intro]
Oh, you thought we’d fade?
You thought the future was green?
Ha – ha – ha! Think again!
The world runs on oil – and oil is life!
[Verse 1]
We lit the lamp, we turned the wheel
We built your world on stainless steel
We brought you cars and plastic dreams
Jet-set skies and money machines
[Bridge]
You say we’re toxic – I say we’re rich
You say the planet’s burning – well, isn’t life a glitch?!
We pave your roads, we fuel your travel dreams
When LPs make you happy, why talk about mp3’s?
[Chorus]
‘Drill, baby, drill!’ – ’cause oil is The Life
We’re the veins of your economy
So ‘Drill, baby, drill!’ – we’ve got mouths to feed
Quarterly growth? Thank you! That’s all we need!
The figures are real – which is why we say:
Oil will always find its way
[Verse 2]
We love your kids – we sponsor schools
We paint our logos on swimming pools
We do offsets, carbon trade
From lipstick tubes to rocket ships
[Bridge]
We do care about your future.
We’ve got net-zero goals… by 2070.
We’ll keep the dirty engine running
Who wants to go back to living in caves?
[Chorus]
‘Burn, baby, burn!’ – cause oil is The Life!
We’re the gods of your economy
So ‘burn, baby, burn!’ – the Earth can wait
As long as we have ‘captured the state’
The value is real – which is why we say:
Oil will always find its way
[Outro]
Hush now, child – don’t cry, don’t moan!
We tuck you into your smart smartphone
Forget the floods, ignore the heat
We’ve bought your voice, your vote, your seat
We grease the world, we run the script
Oil is the Life! The charts are flipped!
We fight your wars, we shape your fate
And we call it freedom when we dominate
Ha ha ha!
Audio statements:
Sky News Australia host:
The global warming argument is cult as we know it
Malcolm Turnbull:
We are the land of drought and flooding rise
Barnaby Joice: (52:38)
You can believe in the Paris Agreement or can believe in pensioners and lower power prices. You can’t have both.
But, you know, I’ve gone past the swindle factories, swindle fields – solar panels, and wind turbines.
. . .
Vishal Prasad, director, Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, in a speech he held on 25 July 2025: (53:37)
I wanted to start with just setting or grounding us today by talking about or explaining what motivated our campaign or young people to take climate change to the world’s highest court. Simply put, this was an innate duty of care that was shouldered by Pacific Island people. What began as a simple assignment question in their university classes sparked the start of a global campaign to seek definitive clarity from the International Court of Justice on the obligations of states regarding climate change and the consequences for not abiding by those obligations, with special consideration of small island developing states and present and future generations. In essence, the campaign to take the world’s biggest problem to the world’s highest court.
For its founding members, this campaign was more than just precedent and procedure. It was about the weight of belonging to places whose existence hangs in the balance. The duty of carrying the voices of one’s own community with the understanding that the ocean and land are not resources to be consumed, but ancestors to be honoured. For those who joined the movement, the campaign became a vessel for something deeply personal. The refusal to accept that our futures are expendable, that our cultures are collateral damage, and that our future generations will inherit a world diminished by the action of others. The drive behind each intentional move was our fight to close the existing gap of understanding the experiences of people and communities and the normative practices of the international community.
How do you translate the urgency of loss? How do you capture a millennia of experience and practices into a few lines of text? More importantly, why was this required for frontline communities simply to be heard? The answer was never to simplify these realities for convenience, but rather to demand the appropriate utilisation of these experiences. The gap between the visceral reality of climate change in the Pacific, and the abstract deliberations of multilateral spaces is not merely lexical. It is profoundly human and this was the motivation behind the campaign because it required constant effort. And in the constant effort you find what the climate ICJ advisory opinion means to our blue Pacific. For young people from the Pacific, those here and back home, it is the culmination of six years of carrying out our duties to the land and the seas for the Pacific, it is about giving a system that has disregarded our people and giving it one more chance. At its core, this is what the fight for climate justice is to us.
Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland:
Yesterday marked a breakthrough global victory, one that we owe to your leadership, all of you. The International Court of Justice has spoken unequivocally and powerfully. It has made clear that governments and corporations must urgently step up, protect people and take full responsibility for the climate harm they have caused. This moment utters in a new era of accountability for major emitters. Let’s make sure it reverberates around courtrooms worldwide. As climate disasters continue to wreak havoc around the world, displacing families, destroying livelihoods, and eroding hope, this ruling stands as a guiding star. It shows that existing international law is not silent on the climate crisis. Quite the opposite. It demands action.
It defines the path towards a just and livable future, and it makes that path a legal obligation. This ruling gives us a powerful new tool to hold polluters to account. Let’s use it. The era of impunity is ending. There can be no more hiding behind delay, denial, or inaction. Human rights have been unequivocally upheld by the advisory opinion, as the president said.
The court has made it unmistakably clear. States have a vital duty to take bold and ambitious action to protect our environment, especially our climate system. This isn’t just about policies or politics. It’s about ensuring that every person now and in the future can experience effective enjoyment of their human rights. As the court powerfully reminded us, the environment is the very foundation of human life.
It’s what sustains our health, our wellbeing and the future of generations yet to come. Over the next few months, let’s use this ruling to spur stronger nationally determined contributions and energise the negotiations at COP30.
The opinion is particularly strong on states’ mitigation obligations. They found that merely having an NDC is not enough. The content is just as important and must be consistent with the 1.5 degrees Celsius goal. And it could now be an internationally wrongful act to license, produce, or subsidise fossil fuels. Let’s make this count as countries develop their climate plans. In Belem, I hope the ruling will empower the voices of the most vulnerable in every negotiating room. It should help to unlock some of the most contentious issues, particularly on fossil fuels, on finance and on loss and damage. Let’s carry this ruling forward with urgency, with integrity and above all with hope, because justice is no longer a distant demand. It is now the law. Thank you.
. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Events we have talked about in The Sustainable Hour
Events in Victoria
The following is a collation of Victorian climate change events, activities, seminars, exhibitions, meetings and protests. Most are free, many ask for RSVP (which lets the organising group know how many to expect), some ask for donations to cover expenses, and a few require registration and fees. This calendar is provided as a free service by volunteers of the Victorian Climate Action Network. Information is as accurate as possible, but changes may occur.
Petitions
→ List of running petitions where we encourage you to add your name
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Live-streaming on Wednesdays
The Sustainable Hour is streamed live on the Internet and broadcasted on FM airwaves in the Geelong region every Wednesday from 11am to 12pm (Melbourne time).
→ To listen to the program on your computer or phone, go to www.947thepulse.com where you then click on ‘Listen’ on the right.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Podcast archive
Over 570 hours of sustainable podcasts.
Listen to all of The Sustainable Hour radio shows as well as special Regenerative Hours and Climate Revolution episodes in full length.
→ Archive on climatesafety.info – with additional links
→ Archive on podcasts.apple.com – phone friendly archive
Receive our podcast newsletter in your mailbox
We send a newsletter out approximately six times a year. Email address and surname is mandatory – all other fields are optional. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Find and follow The Sustainable Hour in social media
Facebook: www.facebook.com/TheSustainableHour → All podcast front covers
Instagram: www.instagram.com/TheSustainableHour
Blue Sky: www.bsky.app/profile/thesustainablehour.bsky.social
Twitter: www.twitter.com/SustainableHour
(NB: we stopped using X/Twitter after it was hijacked-acquired by climate deniers)
YouTube: www.youtube.com/c/thesustainablehour
Great if you’ll share the news about this podcast in social media.
#TheSustainableHour #559: LEGAL REVOLUTION FOR THE PLANET – AND A CALL FROM THE BUTT HUNTERS → Listen: climatesafety.info/wp-content/u… → Notes: climatesafety.info/thesustainab… Our guests are corporate laywer Robert Hinkley and Shannon Mead, founder of No More Butts.
— The Sustainable Hour (@thesustainablehour.bsky.social) July 30, 2025 at 12:39 PM
[image or embed]
→ Podcasts and posts on this website about the climate emergency and the climate revolution
→ The latest on BBC News about climate change