New Hope Corporation Limited
GovernanceGovernance
Governance body oversight and management's role
Board and committees (pages 101–102). The Board has ultimate responsibility for overseeing climate-related risks and opportunities, managed holistically with sustainability matters under the Enterprise Risk Management Framework (ERMF). It approves risk appetite and tolerance and major capital expenditure. The Sustainability Committee assists with ERMF oversight; the Audit and Risk Committee reviews the climate-related risk register at least annually; the Nomination and Remuneration Committee maintains the Board skills matrix, including climate transition and resilience skills.
Information, decisions, targets (pages 102–103). The Board receives monthly updates; during the period the Sustainability Committee and the Audit and Risk Committee received quarterly updates. The Board and Executive Leadership Team (ELT) weigh climate-related risks alongside all material risks in capital and project decisions, balancing trade-offs. Target oversight focuses on Safeguard Mechanism compliance. The short term incentive scorecard has a climate-related measure (compliance with emissions and energy reporting and Safeguard Mechanism obligations) weighted at 3%.
Management (page 103). The Executive General Manager & Company Secretary is the senior role responsible for enterprise risk, including climate-related risk. The Enterprise Decarbonisation Working Group reports quarterly to the ELT, the Board, the Sustainability Committee and the Audit and Risk Committee.
StrategyStrategy
Climate-related risks and opportunities
The Group identified five climate-related risks through its Enterprise Risk Management Framework (ERMF), listed on page 107. Each is classed as transition or physical and given a time horizon (pages 108–117).
| Risk | Category | Time horizon |
|---|---|---|
| CR1 Loss of support from key suppliers | Policy, market and reputation transition risk | Long term |
| CR2 Reduced global demand for thermal coal as an energy source | Market and policy transition risk | Medium to long term |
| CR3 Increased conditions or restrictions on right to mine and related activities | Policy and legal transition risk | Medium to long term |
| CR4 Increased decarbonisation regulation or emissions reduction targets | Policy transition risk | Short to medium term |
| CR5 Extreme weather-related events | Acute physical risk | Medium term |
The Group did not identify any climate-related opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect its prospects within the reporting period (page 107).
Time horizons (page 106). Short term is 0 to 3 years, medium term is up to 2040 and long term is beyond 2040, aligned to the Group's operational and capital planning cycles. The Group used reasonable and supportable information available at the reporting date without undue cost or effort (page 99).
Business model and value chain
Business model (pages 106–107). The Group operates primarily in the global seaborne thermal coal market. Its principal operating assets are the Bengalla Mine in Muswellbrook, New South Wales and New Acland Mine in Acland, Queensland, with logistics operations at the Queensland Bulk Handling coal export terminal in Brisbane. The two open-cut thermal mines combined produce approximately 11 to 13 million tonnes of saleable coal annually, with international customers taking 90 to 93 percent and domestic customers 7 to 10 percent. International customers are primarily in Asian countries, including Japan, Taiwan and China.
Current and anticipated effects (page 107). The Group assessed that transition risks and opportunities have not resulted in any material current or anticipated effects to its business model or value chain, or financial performance or position, for the reporting period. Its value chain is exposed to extreme weather events affecting mining operations, rail and port logistics, with no material financial impacts experienced in the period.
Where concentrated (pages 114, 118). Bengalla Mine, New Acland Mine and Queensland Bulk Handling are all exposed to transition and physical risks, representing 100% of revenue. Bengalla Mine is more vulnerable to emissions regulation because it is subject to the Safeguard Mechanism; New Acland Mine is not currently subject to the scheme.
Strategy and decision-making
Transition plan (pages 103, 118). No voluntary climate-related targets have been set. The transition plan is focused on Safeguard Mechanism emissions reduction and compliance obligations for Bengalla Mine: monitoring and forecasting emissions against the baseline, incorporating anticipated compliance costs into mine planning and capital allocation decisions, acquiring and surrendering ACCUs for baseline exceedances, and investigating feasible operational abatement. The Board approves the strategy on a three-year rolling basis and the Enterprise Decarbonisation Working Group conducts the actions. No large-scale operational abatement opportunity has been identified as currently technically and economically feasible, so ACCU use is expected to continue in the short term.
Risk responses (pages 108–116). Fixed-term contracts and direct engagement with key logistics suppliers (CR1); customer engagement, term contracts (CR2); engagement with community, government and industry regulatory bodies (CR3); investigating fuel management, efficiency and methane pre-drainage projects; a soil carbon sequestration investment (CR4); water management preparation and expected rainfall delays in mine planning (CR5).
Resourcing and business model (pages 120, 126). No capital expenditure, financing or investment was deployed directly toward the management of climate-related risks. The Group does not currently consider that material changes to its overall business model are required.
Financial position, financial performance and cash flows
Current effects (pages 98, 107). The Group has not identified any financial impacts from climate-related risks or opportunities that would pose a significant risk of material adjustment to carrying amounts (page 98). It reports no material current or anticipated effects from transition risks and opportunities, or material impacts from extreme weather events (page 107).
Anticipated effects (pages 109, 115). CR1 (long term): effects could be reflected in revenue, operating expenses, inventories, trade receivables and cash flows but cannot currently be quantified with sufficient reliability; measurement uncertainty is so high that a quantitative amount or range would not result in useful information. CR4: an estimated ACCU requirement of approximately 220,000 a year on average in the short term (no material financial effect expected) and a minimum average of approximately 115,000 a year in the medium term.
Scenario effects (page 123). The table (transition risks only, no amounts) rates revenue from coal sales as significant consequence under low warming in the short and medium term. Potential consequence: coal pricing (low warming, both horizons); in the medium term, saleable production (low warming) and the Safeguard Mechanism target (low warming, base case); other cells are limited. The Group sees potential for effects on financial position under low warming in the short term, to be addressed through capital management and financial resources.
Climate resilience and scenario analysis
Assessment (pages 119–120). Using scenario analysis, the Group concluded its strategy and business model remain capable of operating in the short and medium term across the scenarios applied. The analysis primarily validated its existing approach; no material change to the business model is currently considered necessary. Its response includes a low-cost position, financial flexibility through disciplined capital management and operational decarbonization relevant to Safeguard Mechanism obligations. The long term horizon (beyond 2040) extends beyond the scheduled lives of the existing mines and was not intended to assess their continued operation. Significant uncertainties include climate policy and regulation (including the Safeguard Mechanism decline rate), thermal coal demand, carbon pricing and ACCU availability, technology, physical hazard modeling and international policy alignment (page 120).
Scenarios (pages 121–122). Low warming (1.5°C pathway; IPCC SSP1-1.9 transition data, SSP1-2.6 physical), higher warming (IPCC SSP3 with RCP6.0 and RCP8.5 physical data) and a base case (delayed, moderate 2.6–2.8°C transition, no physical risk inputs). The low and higher warming analysis was undertaken in the 2025 financial year; the base case was developed this period. Scope: Bengalla Mine, New Acland Mine and Queensland Bulk Handling. Assumptions are tabulated by scenario; the base case has an indicative near-term coal price floor of approximately US$100/t.
Risk ManagementRisk Management
Processes for identifying, assessing and managing climate-related risks
Climate-related risks and opportunities are identified, assessed, managed and reported through the Enterprise Risk Management Framework (ERMF), under the same criteria as all other enterprise risks (page 104).
Inputs (page 104). Risk registers and assessments are reviewed at least annually with input from key personnel. Inputs include CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology climate projections, combined IPCC AR6 scenarios supplemented by transition scenarios from Commodity Insights and Wood Mackenzie, third-party coal and carbon price forecasts, and internal production, cost, emissions and incident data.
Assessment (page 104). The Group Risk Assessment Criteria combine a consequence rating (quantitative financial ranges plus selected qualitative categories), a five-point likelihood scale (Rare to Almost Certain) and control effectiveness, producing a residual rating of Low, Medium, High or Extreme.
Prioritization, monitoring, integration (page 105). Climate-related risks are not prioritized separately from other enterprise risks; those rated High or Extreme are tracked through governance processes. The Audit and Risk Committee reviews the register at least annually and the Board receives monthly risk reporting. Scenario analysis informs identification, assessment and management of risks. This period the Group developed an internal "base case" climate scenario as an input to the climate risk review.
Metrics & TargetsMetrics and Targets
Climate-related metrics
Scope 1 and 2 only; no comparatives and no Scope 3, under the transitional relief the Group elected (pages 98, 124).
| Emissions category (t CO2-e) | 2026 |
|---|---|
| Absolute gross Scope 1 emissions | 788,371 |
| Absolute gross Scope 2 emissions | 68,753 |
| Total Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions | 857,124 |
Method (pages 124–126). Operational control approach covering the Company and its controlled entities. Scope 2 is location-based; the Group has no contractual instruments that would give a materially different market-based outcome. Sources accounting for 99% of Scope 1 and 2 emissions are measured under the NGER Determination, applying the jurisdiction relief under paragraph 29(a)(ii) of AASB S2; other sources follow the GHG Protocol. Final-month data is estimated.
Other categories. Revenue from assets and activities exposed to transition risks and to physical risks: 100%, $1,767,000,000 (page 118). No capital expenditure, financing or investment was deployed directly toward the management of climate-related risks (page 126). Internal carbon price: ACCU price forecasts with a ceiling price equivalent to the Clean Energy Regulator's cost containment measure unit price; the fixed price for an ACCU was $82.88 for the 2025-26 NGER reporting year (page 126). A climate-related compliance measure carries a 3 percent weighting in the executive short-term incentive; there are no other climate-related incentives (page 126).
Climate-related targets
No voluntary climate-related targets have been set (pages 103, 118). The target disclosed is the Safeguard Mechanism emissions reduction target for Bengalla Mine, required by law (page 127).
| Item (page 127) | Disclosure |
|---|---|
| Metric | Emissions intensity (tCO2e per tonne of production output), monitored as absolute Scope 1 GHG emissions (tCO2e) compared annually with applicable baselines |
| Period | Annual, while the facility exceeds 100,000tCO2e per year of Scope 1 emissions |
| Milestones | None, as targets apply annually |
| Absolute or intensity | Baseline decline rate is absolute at 4.9% until 30 June 2030 |
| Net or gross | Net Scope 1 emissions at or below baseline; no gross target is prescribed |
| Third party validation | Mandated by the Australian Government, considered appropriate by the Group; the site-specific Emissions Intensity Determination applied to Bengalla Mine in the 2024 financial year had reasonable and limited assurance |
| Sectoral approach | Not derived using a coal sector specific carbon budget or decarbonization approach |
Performance and credits (pages 115, 128). 166,766 ACCUs were surrendered for the 2024/25 NGER reporting period, in respect of 166,766 tonnes of CO2-equivalent above the determined baseline; no Safeguard Mechanism Credits were surrendered. The Group relies on the ACCU Scheme as the third-party framework for the units, and ACCU use does not reduce reported absolute gross Scope 1 emissions.