Report to The Hon Bob Baldwin, MP & Senator Simon Birmingham

Correspondence with coal industry leaders

BHP Billiton's reply by Mike Henry, President Coal on behalf of Chairman Jac Nasser and CEO Andrew Mackenzie dated 20th January 2015 (PDF 903kb)

Fact: On Thursday, 20th November 2014 ABC radio spread across Australia these words spoken by Jac Nasser, Chairman saying that we at BHP Billiton "accept the IPCC's assessment of climate change science".

From Malcolm's report, page 7: "The epicentre of climate alarm is the UN IPCC that made five reports to national governments and media in 1990, 1995, 2001, 2007 and 2013. UN IPCC Expert Science Reviewer Dr. Vincent Gray reviewed all five reports and personally confirmed that they contain no empirical scientific evidence of human CO2 causing warming. He says UN IPCC reports contain scant, if any, evidence of (statistically) significant warming. His review comments on the 2007 report are available in their entirety and demonstrate his fastidiousness and understanding of science after more than 60 years as a research scientist including more than 22 years on climate. He publicly confirms the UN IPCC is unscientific."

From page 8: "Each of the last three UN IPCC 'science' reports contains only one chapter claiming unusual warming and attributing it to human CO2: 2001/chapter 12, 2007/chapter 9, 2013/chapter 10. My detailed analysis of each chapter reveals that the UN IPCC has no empirical scientific evidence that human CO2 changes global climate. Each chapter carefully and imaginatively implies evidence yet stated 'observations' are in reality output generated by unvalidated computerised numerical models whose projections have already been proven wrong empirically. … In responses to my requests for empirical scientific evidence of human CO2 causing warming, the Lead Author for 2001/chapter 12 and Review Editor for 2007/chapter 9, David Karoly has always and repeatedly failed to provide such evidence."

Malcolm's reply to BHP Billiton dated Tuesday 17th March 2015 (PDF 69kb)

Note: Activist and former coal industry executive Ian Dunlop reportedly sought in 2013 and 2014 to be appointed to the BHP board by saying the board needed to do more to address climate change. On 18 November 2009 Malcolm questioned Ian by email on the basis of his position and Ian responded by saying the empirical evidence was clear and that he would respond further soon. On 14 January 2015, 30 January 2015 and 8 February 2015 Malcolm sent Ian reminders of Ian's undertaking to provide evidence for his activism. In five years Ian has never contacted Malcolm again as Ian had promised in 2009. Ian has not provided any empirical scientific evidence for his claim that we need to cut human production of CO2 produced by combustion of hydrocarbon fuels. The reason is easy to understand: empirical scientific evidence reveals Ian has no such evidence to support his claim and his activism contradicts empirical scientific evidence. By his own actions his environmental commitment is questionable.

BHP Billiton's reply by Mike Henry dated 27th March 2015 (PDF 371kb)

Malcolm's reply to BHP Billiton dated Friday 10th April 2015 (PDF 584kb)

BHP Billiton's reply by Mike Henry dated 23rd April 2015 (PDF 514kb)

BHP Billiton has repeatedly failed to provide any empirical scientific evidence as the basis for its climate position and has failed to provide the location of such evidence.

Letter from BHP shareholder Case Smit dated 6th March 2015 (PDF 52kb)

Anglo American's reply to Malcolm by Mark Cutifane dated 22 December 2014 (PDF 639kb)

Malcolm's reply to Anglo American dated Tuesday 17th March 2015 (PDF 69kb)

Anglo American's reply to Malcolm by Aldo Pennini for Mark Cutifane dated 17th April 2015 (PDF 357kb)

AngloAmerican has repeatedly failed to provide any empirical scientific evidence as the basis for its climate position and has failed to provide the specific location of such evidence.

Malcolm's letter to Brendan Pearson and Michael Roche, Chief Executives of the Minerals Council of Australia and Queensland Resources Council on Tuesday 24th March 2015 (PDF 561kb)

During informal discussion between Malcolm Roberts and Michael Roche on 30th April 2015, the latter admitted that the QRC's position is based on a consensus of members' views with the view of one powerful coal company Chief Executive dominating and very difficult to shift. It seems the herd mentality is alive and well among coal company executives on the QRC board and that science is subordinated to timidity in confronting a powerful individual's views. Is it that mining company representatives are willing to place consensus before truth and science and before their shareholders' interests and their people's livelihoods? It seems so.

Malcolm's letter to heads of Australia's major coal producers Tuesday 24th March 2015 (PDF 840kb)

Future correspondence will be posted as received

More damaging than corporate leaders' ignorance or weakness is the behaviour of Australia's major coal mining union, CFMEU. Its political position supporting and funding activists campaigning to destroy the Australian coal industry is directly destroying members' jobs and livelihoods. Members' dues are being used against members.

All of us need to ask questions and demand answers from people claiming to be our political or industrial leaders.

'Politically correct' leadership contradicting the facts is not leadership, it's abdication.

To access:

• Climate page
• Home
• Report to and correspondence with The Hon Bob Baldwin MP and Senator Simon Birmingham
• CSIROh! report and appendices